What nonsense is DAP talking about now, “Middle Malaysia”?

It seems that the Chinese Chauvinist DAP is changing its tone of  ‘Malaysian, Malaysia’ to woo the ‘silent majority’ for votes, which rest in the hands of the Malay majority. They are now promoting ‘Middle Malaysia’, as a new battle-cry in the hope that the Malays are now felt being championed by the Chinese Chauvinist DAP, which in the over 40 years tried very hard to undermine the needs of the majority.

NST has the story:

DAP on ‘middle Malaysia’ path



IPOH: DAP promoted “Middle Malaysia” at its national convention yesterday, a concept of a moderate and more tolerant Malaysia, based on cooperation and consultation. The party is seeking a Malaysia that is inclusive and shared.

DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said: “A shared society is one that celebrates diversity and assures everyone a place in it” while guaranteeing democratic participation, respect for diversity and human dignity.

He was addressing some 1,000 delegates at the national DAP convention.

Present were Pas secretary-general Datuk Mustafa Ali, Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) vice-president Dr Lee Boon Chye, former Pakatan Rakyat Perak menteri besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin, DAP chairman Karpal Singh and DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang.

“We are seeking the silent majority and not those on the fringes and extremists. We must not lose sight but take the middle ground.

Middle Malaysia belongs to every Malaysian. It is the firm belief that the country’s wealth, opportunities and resources belong to all Malay-sians,” Guan Eng said.

The Penang chief minister said DAP’s partners — Pas and PKR — shared its views.

To embrace the Middle Malaysia concept, he said Pakatan Rakyat must been seen as moderate and inclusive and distance and differentiate itself from exclusive, racist and extremist opponents.

Later, Guan Eng said the party was not abandoning the Malaysian Malaysia and Malaysian First vision.

“We are talking about political and electoral strategy to win power and unite the people,” he added.


In reality, that is not what is happening on the ground. For a party which is so called championing ‘Malaysian, Malaysia’ and “equality to all, regardless colour and creed”, DAP is actually systematically marginalising the Malays.

The Star has the story:

Monday December 14, 2009

Azhar: Poverty still in Penang

THE latest statistics by the Penang Federal Develop-ment Department showed that there were 1,994 poor families in the state, said Penang Regional Development Authority (Perda) chairman Datuk Azhar Ibrahim.

He said 1,500 families fall in the poor category while 494 families were identified as the destitute poor.

The statistics reveal that there are 818 poor and 272 destitute families in the north Seberang Prai district, 386 poor and 118 destitute families in central Seberang Prai and 208 poor with 76 destitute families in south Seberang Prai.

Over on the island, there are 50 poor families and 17 destitute ones in the South West district and 38 poor with 11 destitute families in the North East.

‘‘Due to the latest data, I am now puzzled that Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng made a claim that destitute poverty in the state had been fully eradicated,’’ Azhar said.

“This shows that Lim allegedly did not do his homework and did not go to the ground to check it out himself,” said Azhar who is the Penaga assemblyman and state opposition leader.

He was speaking after opening a community programme at the Caring Society Complex in Kepala Batas on Saturday.

Azhar claimed that Lim might be taking the easy way out by claiming there was no longer poverty at the destitute level in Penang so the residents would not be pressuring the state to undertake poverty eradication initiatives.


What nonsense are the Chinese Chauvinists DAP talking about?

Since when DAP has been “seen as moderate and inclusive and distance and differentiate itself from exclusive, racist and extremist opponents”?

Even in Pakatan Rakyat controlled states, the DAP could not care less about other ethnic groups but themselves. The ‘Kampung Berjaya Illegal Abatoire’ is a good example that the DAP threatened the Malay-majority-controlled Kedah PAS Government, despite the Chinese operator is illegally and unhygenically conducting his business in a residential area. In the case of ‘Kampung Buah Pala’, the DAP controlled Penang State Government couldn’t be bothered as the affected villagers are of Indian ethnicity and not Chinese.

Of course, DAP was very defiant, bold and abrassive in the defense of the pig cullings in Paya Mengkuang and Bukit Beruang, Melaka. They ‘defend’ lawlessness in their Chinese Chauvinist stance and have very little regard to others and serrounding.

DAP has been very good in manipulating facts and figures, by sensationalising it. The most recent example is the Federal Government annual allocation for Penang Vs income derived. The over sensationalisation and quick-blaming of MACC for DAP State Exco Political Secretary Teoh Beng Hock’s ‘sudden death’ is contradictory against the ‘sudden death’ of a Malay university student recently.

DAP should make a lot of effort to discard their ‘Chinese Chauvinism’ and prove themselves that they are ‘True Malaysians’. They could start by actively promoting Non Malays especially the Chinese to be ensured of comprising at least 30% of the applications into essential services recruitment especially the military, Police, Maritime Agency etc. Their stance on backing Chin “Butcher of Malaya” Peng’s return is not helping to shed their ‘Chinese Chauvinism’-ness. It can only be seen more of being anti-Malay, as majority of th security personnel are Malays and the communist terrorists  are of Chinese ethnicity.

This is no “Middle Malaysia” as far as we are concern. There is only DAP’s way of doing things. When they know they cannot get it, they manipulate circumstance in their favour as if they care. Look at the DAP Politburo and see how many Malay-Muslims (the majority of Malaysians) are being represented. In the DAPSY, it is even worse.



Published in: on January 18, 2010 at 10:16  Comments (34)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2010/01/18/what-nonsense-is-dap-talking-about-now-middle-malaysia/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

34 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Ahh…the “Middle Kingdom” for “Middle Malaysia”; as in the fiction hit story of the Lord of the Rings. Yeah, any Malay folks believing in the fantasies of Middle Kingdom promoted by the DAP spinners ought to be “lynched”; that goes for PAS and PKR Malay members who have been hoodwinked by the fantasy promises of Anwar Ibrahim. I doubt any significant number of Malays will ever truly believe that the DAP chauvinist pigs have a change of hearts and will fight for Malay and Muslim interests foremost– the DAP should walk the talk by telling off the Catholic Church to back off, stop politicking the “Allah” issue. But nay the DAP will never budge from their Malaysian Malaysia stance for they will resort to anarchy to achieve their long term aims under pretext of blame game, oppression of minority, greater freedom and liberty. The DAP is dreaming like when they masturbate about capturing “the Middle Kingdom”.

    • Middle earth la brader. not middle kingdom. And in middle earth, there would be sauron, watching eye.. hooo takutnya..

    • Agree that it’s “Middle Kingdom” that they are after – thru the so-called “Middle Malaysia” sloganeering. They want to follow the “Little Emperor” in the “Little Middle Kigdom” down under.

      Once they have gained power, they’ll try to relocate and re-distribute the population thru various means, try to take over lands (Geylang in Singapore, LGE exhorting the “grab, grab, grab” what the Malays don’t have the means to take, even Tanah Rizab Melayu in Kedah – read the relevant post in “Ideotique” blogspot), then open the floodgates of Malaysia to the huge population surplus in China. DS Najib has just realised this in respect of 30,000 Indians overstaying their VOA passes but haven’t said a word about overstaying Chinese.

      And this is a Population Census year, man. Watch out the figures. Do something about it. If their number increases proportionately, they’ll demand the world in this country.

      DAP apes PAP, looks at LKY in awe, regard him as a demi-god, heck, they even wore the same all-white uniforms at one time. Only God knows what LKY told his worshippers LKS and the goons in private when he last visited this country and Penang in an official capacity recently. Singapore is 75% Chinese now and how LKS and his underlings would love that to happen in Penang, nay, in the whole of Malaysia.

      Watch out, people. Report those who illegally work as cleaners, shop assistants, even hawkers and Pasar Malam vendors, who can’t utter a word of BM or English.

      • Yeah

        and also monitor the truckloads of sand crossing over …

        Be reminded that one water agreement will expire in 2011, preparations for a re-negotiations should start NOW if not last year.

  2. Ayoyo….give the DAP some slack la bro!
    DAP’s Middle Malaysia means DAP is in the middle,PAS on the left and PKR on its right.Itu pun susah nak faham ka? And together they move,DAP as usual a few steps in front with PAS way back at the rear.Those in front will make all the decisions.Yang di belakang tu kerja dia ‘Takbeer!!’- itu jer.

  3. BDDC. Come let me share with you something I received from Dato Chang Ko Youn, State EXCO Perak and Gerakan leader from his Facebook.

    “The DAP Youth National Conference in Ipoh had 130 attendees only when the qualified delegates were 600. The attendance record is 21%, the worst for any political party.”

    It was advertised in Nanyang Siang Pau according to Datuk Chang.

    Hehe … DAP oh DAP. Online news portal and English papers did not report these. Such conspiracy to hide the truth of the DAP Youth Convention.

    Kalau ini berlaku kepada Parti-parti BN, bukan main riuh rendah dan heboh satu negara mereka laporkan !

    • Thanks.

      That is a very useful and yet interesting information.

    • Do give us more of such info, pls.

      They certainly hide these things from us, hoo-haa-ing only those they want the public to hear.

      Heck, they won’t even publish our views in their blogs, MT and MI included.

  4. Aiyoo Middle Malaysian?

    What about these?

    1. DAP promoting SJK and not SK
    2. DAP promoting Mandarin instead of National Language
    3. DAP promoting ‘EVRYTHING FROM CHINA, HK, TAIWAN’ instead of local culture
    4. DAP not promoting MALAYSIAN Chinese or Indian to join armed forces.
    5. DAP promoting hatred towards Police, SPRM and keep on denying the constitution.

    Pendek kata Bigdog… SEMUANYA RACISTs mengenai DAP ni. Mimpinlah Silent Majority nak undi depa. MUNTAHHH

    • Spot on!

      That’s what we have been saying in here. DAP is Chinese Chauvinist to the core.

      • Not only chauvinist, disruptive, too.

        They always try to disrupt confidence in the establishment and anything Malay-dominated – UMNO, the Police, the Army, MACC.

        But they are also disrupting themselves. Look at what they do in the Selangor State Government.

    • becoz umno cultural sux

  5. Dog,

    “Later, Guan Eng said the party was not abandoning the Malaysian Malaysia and Malaysian First vision”.

    The DAP realises that their racist Malaysian Malaysia (aka Chinese first) cannot be accepted by the Malays. So now they have come out with this new trick “Middle Malaysia”. Just like the Catholic Church using the Allah word to con Muslims, the DAP is using ‘Middle Malaysia” to con Malays.

    Why do I say this? Cos Guan Eng has said: “the party was not abandoning the Malaysian Malaysia”.

    They are not abandoning their chauvinist racism.

    Here is an acid test bro. Since there are at least 65% Malays in the country, will the DAP allow 60% of its membership to be Malays? If they are multi racial, then logically their membership should reflect the demographics of the country. 65% Malays, 8% Indians, 25% Chinese, 2% others.

    Will the DAP allow 65% of its membership to be Malays? Can the sun rise in the North bro? He he he.

    • Like hell they will!

      Look at their Politburo; ONLY 2 out of 31 Excos are Malays! (That’s barely 6.5%).

      Look at DAPSY! NONE!

      The majority of Malaysians are Bumiputras, which comprises more than 65% of the citizens. Out of that, more than 85% are Muslims.

      They are hardly reppresented in the party.

      That’s what we are saying in the piece; What bollocks is this ‘Middle Malaysia’ all about?

      To get 65% of the Politburo is really wishful thinking!

      • Bagi tau aku, sepanjang DAPigs ni ujud, ada tak MP Melayu selain dari Ahmad Nor????

        Dlm 40 thn lebih, sekor je MP Melayu?????

        Cam ni nak jadi ‘Middle Malaysia’?????

        BTW, model ini sama dgn model PAP di Singapork!

  6. Should Article 152 be scrapped from the Singapore Constitution?
    Thursday, 3 September 2009, 10:37 am | 5,332 views
    Alfian Sa’at

    The event was a screening of Singapore short films. During the Question & Answer session at the end, a member of the audience, a Korean man, offered an observation: “Despite the fact that Singapore is a multiracial country, why are the films shown tonight all in Chinese?”

    His query provoked an immediate response from a lady in the audience. Before the microphone could be passed to her, she had shouted out, almost defensively, ‘Majority, what!’

    There is of course a certain undeniable logic to the woman’s outburst. The Chinese are an overwhelming 75% of Singapore’s population. This is a very sizeable majority, if we compare it to other ‘multiracial’ countries: Malaysia (65% Malays and Bumiputra groups), Fiji (55% Fiji Islanders) and Guyana (44% Indo-Guyanese). If there were more media representations of the Chinese than the other races in Singapore, it was a matter of simple arithmetic.
    But that was the woman actually saying with that phrase? Was she peeved that this ‘foreigner’ dared to suggest that Singapore’s ‘multi-racial’ ethos was superficial, even fraudulent? At the same time, I couldn’t help but be struck by a glib sense of entitlement that accompanied her prickly response.


    Recently, the Straits Times ran a feature article asking whether minorities in Singapore deserve a ‘special position’. What the article failed to recognize, however, was the ‘special position’ enjoyed by Chinese Singaporeans.

    Simply put, these are the privileges that come from being members of the majority race.

    When I was younger, I used to question why local advertisements rarely featured non-Chinese faces (bank and credit card companies were notorious for projecting images of well-heeled Chinese yuppies). I wondered why TVMobile showed Chinese programmes, which only served to marginalize those of us sitting in the bus who didn’t understand the language. But I came to realize that equal representation was simply not possible in a country where one particular ethnic community formed the bulk of the target market. I began to appreciate the difficulties of any minority, no matter how entrepreneurial, to penetrate communal business networks, where guanxi links have ossified over several generations.

    It’s not simply economic supremacy that the majority enjoys, but also political hegemony. Singapore practices a form of electoral democracy, which by its definition establishes rule by a majority. Because of the HDB quota system, which mandates that the ethnic composition in each estate should mirror that of the nation as a whole, minority communities do not form any significant electoral bloc.

    While areas such as Kembangan, Geylang Serai and the Southern Islands used to be Malay-dominated strongholds, this has been diluted over time. We can contrast this, for example, with the state of Pulau Pinang in Malaysia, where the Chinese actually form the majority. Ironically, the attempt to prevent certain neighborhoods from becoming Malay or Indian enclaves has actually resulted in each ward becoming a Chinese enclave.

    However, it is the privilege of the majority to be exempted from accusations of forming ‘enclaves’ (or for that matter, ‘ghettoes’) in areas where they are concentrated, simply because those words are inextricably linked with minorities.


    Thus it was with a sense of bewilderment that I read Minister Mentor’s agitated rebuttal to NMP Viswa Sadasivan’s speech in Parliament. According to Lee, “Our Constitution states expressly that it is a duty of the Government not to treat everybody as equal.” He made particular reference to Section 152 of the Singapore Constitution, which reads as such:

    ‘Minorities and special position of Malays

    152. —(1) It shall be the responsibility of the Government constantly to care for the interests of the racial and religious minorities in Singapore.


    (2) The Government shall exercise its functions in such manner as to recognise the special position of the Malays, who are the indigenous people of Singapore, and accordingly it shall be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests and the Malay language.’

    The implication is that the ‘special position’ accorded to Malays in Singapore is an obstacle to true racial equality. This was Lee’s argument to supposedly bring the house ‘back to earth’ and demolish Viswa’s ‘highfalutin’ ideals. But it seems as if Lee has got the whole thing backwards.

    While there has been talk about jettisoning Section 152, especially by some Malays who feel that they have been unfairly scapegoated, we should bear in mind that the section consists of two parts. The first part attempts to provide some means of redress for minority communities who are structurally disadvantaged.

    The fact is that inequalities already exist in any society where there is a dominant ethnic majority. In other words, instead of sabotaging the idea of racial equality, this remedial clause actually tries to promote it—by recognizing that minorities do not enjoy the economic and political clout of the majority, and would require special attention and assistance. Lee has labeled Viswa’s speech as ‘false and flawed’. The same should actually be said for his rebuttal.


    A concrete example of this ‘remedial clause’ can be found in the television industry. In Singapore, there are dedicated channels for ethnic minorities, namely the Suria channel for Malays and Vasantham channel for Indians. It would be extremely difficult for these channels to survive on revenue from advertising alone. Not only do they suffer from lower viewership than say, Channel 8 and Channel U (the dedicated Mandarin channels), but advertisers would also recognize that the demographic profile of their viewers is hardly appealing (the Malay community, for example, is predominantly working-class, and for advertisers, this would mean lower purchasing power).

    Thus, much of the budget for programming on Suria and Vasantham is derived from television licensing fees. This is a practice commonly known as public service broadcasting, acknowledged on the website of the Media Development Authority: “These (licensing) fees are essential in helping with the production of public service programmes as they are less commercially viable and require funding support.”

    Without constitutional safeguards for minorities, a multiracial country like Singapore risks sliding into majoritarianism. Sri Lanka is a prime example of a country whose tragic history is a direct result of majoritarian trends. In 1956, 8 years after Independence, the Sinhalese majority (74%) passed an act to recognize Sinhala as the only official language, effectively sidelining the Tamil minority. A new constitution enshrined Buddhism as the state religion, and pro-Sinhalese preferential policies in education and employment were instituted. The result was a protracted civil war that has claimed thousands of lives.


    It is enlightening to revisit the part in Viswa’s speech which addressed the tenet in the pledge which reads as “one united people, regardless of race, language or religion”:

    “…We, as a society, need to address apparent contradictions and mixed signals. Examples are the issue of Malay-Muslims in the SAF, SAP schools and cultural elitism, the need for ethnic based self help groups, the need for us to maintain the current racial distribution in society, and whether Singapore is ready for an ethnic minority Prime Minister.”

    With the exception of ‘ethnic based self-help groups’, all the examples he listed represented the dangers of majoritarian impulses in Singapore. And out of this entire list, the Minister Mentor, in his rebuttal, chose only to respond to the issue of ethnic based self-help groups.

    Lee’s explication of the second part of Section 152 is also notable for its selective omissions. Lily Zubaidah’s ‘The Singapore Dilemma’ provides an excellent analysis on the Singapore government’s ‘minimalist’, rather than ‘interventionist’ approach to Section 152. While the section calls for the government to exercise pro-active measures with regards to the Malay community, it does not detail what these measures should be.

    Thus the government has elected to interpret the clause in narrow terms, restricting this to providing free tertiary education for the Malay minority. A more generous interpretation, for example, might have considered granting a Special Assistance Plan status to Malay-medium schools (such as the Sekolah Menengah Tun Sri Lanang and the Sekolah Menengah Sang Nila Utama), a privilege that was offered to 10 Chinese-medium schools.


    In some instances, one can even argue that the government has acted in violation of Section 152. In the year 2000, the expropriation of Istana Kampong Glam, a symbol of Malay sovereignty on the island, surely did not demonstrate the political will to ‘safeguard (Malay) cultural interests’. The banning of the tudung in national schools in 2002 cannot be considered an act that ‘fosters (Malay) religious interests’. And the fact that the madrasahs in Singapore do not receive adequate funding from the Ministry of Education contravenes an obligation to ‘support (Malay) educational interests’.

    As such, one wonders about the actual constitutional force of Section 152. Lee has raised Section 152 as some kind of stumbling block to equality. Yet the section itself has been subjected to unequal and arbitrary application in state policies.


    As I write this, I find myself wondering why it is so difficult for someone in the majority to appreciate his or her privileged status in Singapore. How is it possible for someone to yell out ‘Majority, what!’, in the same breath unapologetically disclaiming any responsibilities towards fellow citizens who are minorities? I imagine a giant flattening villages as it stomps along its carefree path. When asked to account for his actions, he answers, ‘I can’t help it, I’m big what!’

    I believe there are two factors that can explain this lack of majority-consciousness among Chinese Singaporeans. The first is the fact that the Chinese did not come to the region as colonial settlers. Their arrival was facilitated by colonial capitalism, which often relied on indentured labour. Thus the Chinese do not see themselves as responsible for dispossessing native populations of their status and territories, and exploiting indigenous resources. As such, they do not carry the baggage of what has often been referred to as post-colonial guilt.

    Secondly, there are some who believe that the Chinese-educated community has itself been marginalized, a phenomenon that has led sociologist Chua Beng Huat to coin the term ‘the minoritisation of the Chinese community’. I do have sympathy for such sentiments, although sometimes I wonder if a distinction needs to be made between government subjugation of leftist and communist activities (which tended to be associated with the Chinese-educated) and an actual repression of Chinese culture. Nevertheless, this sense of ‘minoritisation’ has led to a certain attitude in majority-minority relations: ‘how can the Chinese, who are themselves oppressed, be seen as the oppressors?’

    No matter what the Chinese here feel about their status as the majority, the fact remains that this is a status that is not likely to change. Lee Kuan Yew himself has hinted at the need to maintain this ‘racial balance’ in a speech given in mid-August:

    “By race, the fertility rate is 1.91 for Malays, 1.19 for Indians and 1.14 for Chinese. If we continue this way without the new immigrants and PRs and their children doing national service, the composition of our SAF will change. So please remember that”.

    The tendency of any majority, if left unchecked, is towards tyranny. The tendency of any minority, if left unattended, is towards alienation. The presence of Section 152, a constitutional guarantee of minority protection, goes a long way towards alleviating the damaging forces of such vectors in our society. Far from undermining equality, Section 152 is an attempt to rectify asymmetries of power, to achieve parity, among those who are not born equal. It takes a particular form of genius to observe the reverse.


    • Artkel 152 Singapura ini sah menunjukan Chauvinis Cina ni TAK HORMAT PERLEMBAGAAN LANGSUNG!

      Yang terpahat cam batu tu pun mrk tak hormat, nak percaya ‘Middle Malaysia’ ni??????

  7. Lim Guan Eng said :

    Middle Malaysia belongs to every Malaysian. It is the firm belief that the country’s wealth, opportunities and resources belong to all Malay-sians,” Guan Eng said.

    So what are his action plans to increase the wealth of the Malays from 18 per cent to 60 per cent

    What are his plans to increase the Malays per capita to as high as the chinese here in Malaysia?

    Lim Guan Eng is so dumb, he has no answers. Sloganeering again.

    • 1Malaysia tu Bukan Sloganeering Ke?

      Bro Bagi lah Pulak Orang Lain Can nak Sloganeering….

      Tak Kan Nak Sorang Najib Saja Boleh…..
      Malaysia Boleh Kannnnn

    • Setuju sangat!

      DAPigs umumkan ‘Middle Malaysia’ ni sebab mereka dan Fuckatan Riot dah terdesak sangat!

  8. I start my rambling today with the introduction of a new term – chingkify

    You chingkify a country when you introduce all things chinese -chinese language.
    chinese dramas as in tv2,tv8,tv7 and tv3

    The dap wants to `chingkify` all malaysians and the country.

    According to wiki, middle kingdom is a chingky term to reflect the chingkiness
    of the country china. Now the chinamen from dap wants all malaysia chingkified!

    Lo and behold the wiki on middle kingdom

    China is called Zhōngguó (also Romanized as Chung-kuo or Jhongguo) in Mandarin Chinese. The first character zhōng (中) means “central” or “middle,” while guó (国/國) means “kingdom” or “nation”. The term can be literally translated into English as “Middle Kingdom” or “Central Kingdom.”[1]
    The concept of “zhōngguó” – The smallest circle in the middle is the “Tianzi”; surrounding it are two layers of officials. The outmost ring belongs to the vassal states. Outside that is “beyond civilization”, where the Yi, Man, Rong and Di resides.

    The name “zhōngguó” first appeared in the Classic of History as the name for “the centre of civilization” or “Tianxia”, depending on the interpretation.[2]. The general concept of the term “zhōngguó” originates from the belief that the Zhou Dynasty is the “centre of civilization” or “centre of the world”, much like the “Middle Earth” concept of Europeans, while the ethnic groups in the four cardinals are called Eastern Yi, Southern Man, Western Rong and Northern Di respectively. However, there are different uses of the name “zhōngguó” in every period. It could refer to the guó (capital) of the Emperor, to distinguish from the guó of his vassals, as in Western Zhou; or it could refer to states in Central China, to distinguish from states in outer regions. It is also used, in later dynasties, by states who see themselves as the “legitimate” successors of previous dynasties, as in the case of the Southern Song Dynasty. Finally, it is used to mean the sovereignty in the traditional area “zhōngyuán (中原)” or “zhōnghuá (中華)”, which both have the same origins, such as in the case of the Republic of China
    (“Zhōnghuá Mínguó (中华民国/中華民國)”) and the People’s Republic of China (“Zhōnghuá Rénmín Gònghéguó (中华人民共和国/中華人民共和國)”).

    So do not be lulled with the movie stuff from the middle kingdom of Tolkin.

    • Chinkify….hmm short and crystal clear word..so we can call Singapura as chinkified nation….

  9. Baguslah nak sedarkan orang tentang muslihat DAP. Tapi jangan lupa pula, sokongan tidak akan beralih kepada UMNO / BN selagi parti-parti dalam BN pun tidak berubah sebagaimana yang diharapkan. Tak guna jerit-jerit Juara Rakyat (macam Juara Lagu bunyinya). Lebih berkesan jika kerja kuat, dan kemudian rakyat sendiri akui siapa juara sebenarnya. Pilihanraya akan menobatkan juara sebenar. Kalau ditakdirkan jawatan Ahli Parlimen Batu dikosongkan, bolehlah nampak, siapa yang rakyat sana terima sebagai juara. Kalau Perak ditakdirkan pilihanraya, rakyat Perak akan pilihlah siapa yang majoriti sana terima sebagai juara mereka. Zaman ini bukan macam zaman 70-an untuk berslogan sana sini macam Anwar waktu tu. Malaysian Malaysia dah berpuluh tahun, baru dia nak buat Middle Malaysia tapi 1Malaysia baru berapa hari, dah keluar Juara Rakyat. Ada yang jawab nanti, 1Malaysia tu dari kerajaan tapi Juara Rakyat dari UMNO. Barangkali mereka lupa, orang akan lebih ingat bahawa kedua-duanya keluar dari mulut yang sama. Persepsi….

  10. dulu malaysian malaysia, kini 1Malaysia.

    Maybe beberapa tahun lagi, middle malaysia DAP will be adopted by UMNO future leaders (maybe KJ) called central malaysia..


    • Malaysian malaysia kena TENDANG lah dol, jadi chinese singapore.

      Untuk masa depan, harap harap jadi TANAH MELAYU semula.

      Insyallah, doakan amin …

      • Kita kena cari pemimpin yang tidak condong pada depa sebab nakkan sangat undi.

        Masalahnya, bukan boleh dapat undi dari depa yang kepala keras macam batu, yang ikut cara kongsi gelap, penjahat dan gengster sejak nenek moyang depa diChina dan masih buat dinegara ini sekarang – buktinya ialah diIbupejabat Kerajaan Selangor, hubungan “Underworld” Exco DAP saperti kata AFUN PKR dan Ahli Parlimen PKR.

        Kita mesti cari pemimpin Melayu yang boleh bukan sahaja pertahankan tetapi juga majukan hak dan kepentingan Melayu. Saya tak nampak DS Najib berbuat demikian. Dia condong kapada bukan Melayu.

  11. Selagi ada Akhbar China, Tamil, TV Khas untuk Cina NTV7, TV8, Radio Cina..

    And what the dumb ass like Guan Eng did to promote A NATIONAL STREAM? NOTHING, A BIG NOTHING!! Dont call yourself Malaysian. And What the FUCK is Middle Malaysia?

  12. 1Malaysia also full of craps… boleh join adik beladik sama Middle Malaysia. 1Malaysia… Harga barang didahulukan…

  13. So what did Tun Ma and Najib progress so far for the economy pie 30%? Is it steal by mouse? Its been so many years still failed. Why you never question them? UMNO failed Malay again and again.

    • Macamana ko kata UMNO gagal?

      UMNO bukan ada kuasa mutlak dlm kerajaan. Kerajaan berdasarkan sistem raja berperlembagaan. Apa apa perbelanjaan & pernacangan ekonomi, kena Parlimen luluskan. Bukan semua MP tu UMNO!

      Kalau UMNO ada kuasa mutlak (cam PAP!), bolehlah nasionalisasikan semua syarikat Cina. Tapi tidak dibuat begitu. Org Cina berniaga ikut suka dia, takda halangan. Bukak bank, senaraikan co dlm BSKL (masa tu).

      Dlm pada tanpa kuasa mutlak itu, sikit sikit kuasa pada UMNO mampu naikan penguasaan ekonomi org Melayu dari tahap 0.6% pada 1970 kepada 19.8% pada 2000. Itu peningkatan 3200% dalam tempoh 30 tahun!

      Hebat tu!

      Hampir peningkatan purata 100% setahun!

      Ambikla kira syarikat syarikat Cina & asing yg TIDAK LANGSUNG memberi peluang usahawan/syarikat Melayu bertapak, malah lagi mahu bunuh. Contoh industri pembinaan, perniagaan borong, alat ganti, kewangan, peruncitan, F & B, hiburan dsbnya.

    • Kalau UMNO buat cam Idi Amin atau Robert Mugabe, tendang semua pendatang keluo & ambik alih semua perniagaan & harta mereka, bolehlah capai penguasaan ekonomi lebih 30%!

      Tapi pemimpin UMNO cam Tun Razak pakat utk ujudkan ‘besarkan kek ekonomi’ & usahawan Melayu belajor berniaga dari pembesaran itu, sikit demi sikit (dari takda basic langsung!).

    • Why you say laik that one Meester Lee ha? What you mean “steal by mouse” ha? You no know Asian Financial Crisis ha? Many Malay money lost that time, mee.

      Then you dont kira sabotage and no co-operesen by others ha? UMNO gib lots of chance to Chinese long time ha. What you gib to help ha? You dont know in Papua New Guinea they don’t allow Chinese even to open kedai runcit ha? You dont co-opelesen at least dont tly make fun of Malays la Meester ultra kiasu fellow.

    • Hey you forgot Tun Lah.

      Is that a slip of the pen or is it the proof we need that Tun Lah was playing into the anti-Malay camp’s hands.

      No wonder THEY love him and his SIL ssoooo much.

      Your series of questions and ‘jump-to-conclusions’ just show how enormous an IGNORAMUS you are. Unless of course you are just 2 years old.

  14. […] Setiausaha Agung DAP Lim Guan Eng mengenai pendekatan ‘Middle Malaysia’ DAP dalam konvensyen parti Chauvinis Cina itu di Ipoh baru baru ini yang kunun kunun bersifat […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: