Bastards thinking their parents wed

Bastards, glorifying the flag of those who supported ‘Butchers of Malaya’.

Malaysians, especially the younger generation, have the responsibility to learn history properly. Failure will just make them people without remembering, let alone understanding what happened to them the day before, last week, last month, last year, last decade and even last century (if they lived that long). The neo PUTERA-AMCJA flag they flew on the eve of Malaysians celebrated Merdeka, was about them glorifying Malayans who casted a dark period on our history.

Tuesday September 4, 2012

Blogger sparks uproar

KUALA LUMPUR: A blogger has claimed responsibility for the “new Malaysian flag” controversy, saying it was done to honour the country’s early freedom fighters.

Muhammad Nasir confessed in his blog Singaselatan, which attracted instant flak from local historians and sparked an uproar among Netizens.

Historian Tan Sri Prof Khoo Kay Kim questioned the motive of Muhammad, who said he was responsible for unveiling the flag with his friend Zairi Shafai during the Janji Demokrasi gathering at Dataran Merdeka here last Thursday.

“Do they really know the struggle of Kesatuan Melayu Muda (KMM) and what it represented? If they are not happy with the country, they should give up their citizenship and migrate elsewhere,” Khoo said.

Prof Khoo, one of the co-authors of the Rukun Negara, said KMM was formed in 1938 for the purpose of overthrowing the then British rulers in Malaya.

He noted that a large number of KMM members were Indonesians, hence the leftist movement’s goal of forming Panji Melayu Raya or Greater Indonesia which called for the unification of Malaya and Indonesia.

Datuk Dr Ramlah Adam, the author of over 30 books on local history, questioned the group’s motive for glorifying KMM.

“They are trying to create their own version of history without really understanding the details behind KMM, which was against the Malay rulers.

“Some may treat their actions as young boys being mischievous but I worry that there may be a greater plan by the Opposition to cause disunity,” she said.

Blogger Aesheh Adlina Karim drew attention to the similarities of the group’s flag to the Singaporean and Indonesian national flags.

“Do they (Pakatan) mean to make Malaysia a republic because both Indonesia and Singapore are republics?” she asked in her blog.

Meanwhile, PKR deputy information youth chief Najwan Halimi said he modified a 1947 AMCJA-Putera leftist movement 12-star flag in 2007, adding that this flag design was mistakenly used by the group.

************

In being objective, a renowned and eminently respected historian Professor Khoo uttered a very strong statement to supporters of the radicals who are against what the Federation of Malaysia’s Constitution spirit and provisions, be it then or now. They tried to resurrect a failed struggle and skew our nation’s history, to fit their ongoing ‘revolution’ against the will of the majority.

In their sordid attempt as minority trying to impose themselves against the aspirations and will of the majority, just like KMM in the past, they want to glorify the leftist-turned-communists as “true heroes of Independece”, instead live with the proven successes by the right wing nationalists. However, their version of these “heroes” were never sincere.

Kesatuan Melayu Muda (KMM) pro-actively aided the Japanese invasion in the planning and ground work that led to the landings in Kelantan on 8 December 1941.

There on, Malayans were humiliated, treated like slaves and unequivocally, suffered from atrocities and brutalities. There were communities which were massacred. Those who are spared, suffered from lack of food, medicine, dissease and even worse living conditions compared to when the British ruled. The Japanese even changed Sultans in many of the Malay states.

KMM leadership wanted Malaya’s Independence to be part of Greater Indonesia and they wanted a republic. It was against the will of the majority of Malayans, which is the Malays. The Malays then, adored the position and roles of the HRH Rulers in their socio-political system.

Post World War II, the same people then formed Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (PKMM) which in the leftist and radical frame of mind supported communism. The communists, who should be known as ‘Butchers of Malaya’, also terrorized this blessed land and brutalized Malayans in their effort to gain power and control of the Tanah Melayu against the will of the majority.

Malayans live in fear and properties and infrastructure were destroyed. The Malayan economy declined. 18,000 lives were lost in the 12 years they terrorized Malaya. They were part of a movement to franchise internationally organized rebellion.

When the Japanese were defeated, the British came and had a grand plan to formalize Malay as a crown colony known as Malayan Union. The High Comminssioner convinced at Malay Rulers to sign it. That got the common Malays together and 31 Malay NGOs formed UMNO on 11 May 1946 with the consent of the Sultan of Johor, to stop the Malayan Union. As the will of the Malayans, particularly the Malays move forward along the political lines of the nationalists which is more structured, the Malayan Union failed.

The failure of Malayan Union got the British to sit down and negotiate with all HRH Rulersm where else UMNO was accorded the observer status. After a series of negotiations, the two parties signed an agreement ‘Tanah Melayu Treaty’ dated 27 January 1948 and enforced on 1 February 1948. The treaty was about laying the foundations for a full blown Federated of Malaya Constitution, some day. The most important article in the Treaty was provisions to ‘citizenship’.

The Federation of Malaya Constitution was formed based on the ‘Treaty of the Federation’ which was negotiated as a consequence to the failure and revocation of Sir Harold MacMichael’s Malayan Union, which actually came into effect with Sir Edward Gent assuming the position and role of Governor on 1 April 1946. Subsequently the British sat down in a series of meetings and negotiations with HRH Rulers and UMNO representatives were present as observers and witnesses. As a result, 0n 21 Jan 1948 the Treaty of the Federation was signed and sealed (and eventually came to force on 1 Feb 1948) by the British High Commissioner, representatives of HRH Rulers and UMNO and adopted the pre-1941 status quo.

The most important bit of the Treaty of the Federation 1 Feb 1948 is Article 12. There was a specific mention of Article 12 on citizenship, item (a) “Any subjects of HRH Malay Rulers who were born on on before the date”, (b) “Any British subjects who were born in the Strait Settlements on or before that date”, (c) “Any persons which was born on or before the date in any of the Malay States within the Federation who is practicing the Malay culture and speak the Malay language”. There was specific provision for the application to be citizens, which clearly state the requirement to be verse in Malay. No provisions for the rights of the Non Malays were mentioned.

The spirit and essence in form and substance of the ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ was preserved and enshrined in the Federation of Malaya Constitution 31 August 1957. The specific mention is best reflected in Article 153:

  • It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.
  • Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, but subject to the provisions of Article 40 and of this Article, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall exercise his functions under this Constitution and federal law in such manner as may be necessary to safeguard the special provision of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and to ensure the reservation for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak of such proportion as he may deem reasonable of positions in the public service (other than the public service of a State) and of scholarships, exhibitions and other similar educational or training privileges or special facilities given or accorded by the Federal Government and, when any permit or licence for the operation of any trade or business is required by federal law, then, subject to the provisions of that law and this Article, of such permits and licences.
  • The Yang di-Pertuan Agong may, in order to ensure in accordance with Clause (2) the reservation to Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak of positions in the public service and of scholarships, exhibitions and other educational or training privileges or special facilities, give such general directions as may be required for that purpose to any Commission to which Part X applies or to any authority charged with responsibility for the grant of such scholarships, exhibitions or other educational or training privileges or special facilities; and the Commission or authority shall duly comply with the directions.
  • In exercising his functions under this Constitution and federal law in accordance with Clauses (1) to (3) the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall not deprive any person of any public office held by him or of the continuance of any scholarship, exhibition or other educational or training privileges or special facilities enjoyed by him.
  • This Article does not derogate from the provisions of Article 136.
  • Where by existing federal law a permit or licence is required for the operation of any trade or business the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may exercise his functions under that law in such manner, or give such general directions to any authority charged under that law with the grant of such permits or licences, as may be required to ensure the reservation of such proportion of such permits or licences for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may deem reasonable, and the authority shall duly comply with the directions.
  • Nothing in this Article shall operate to deprive or authorise the deprivation of any person of any right, privilege, permit or licence accrued to or enjoyed or held by him or to authorised a refusal to renew to any person any such permit or licence or a refusal to grant to the heirs, successors or assigns of a person any permit or licence when the renewal or grant might reasonably be expected in the ordinary course of events.
  • Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, where by any federal law any permit or licence is required for the operation of any trade or business, that law may provide for the reservation of a proportion of such permits or licences for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak; but no such law shall for the purpose of ensuring such a reservation-
    • (a) deprive or authorise the deprivation of any person of any right, privilege, permit or licence accrued to or enjoyed or held by him;
    • (b) authorise a refusal to renew to any person any such permit or licence or a refusal to grant to the heirs, successors or assigns of any person any permit or licence when the renewal or grant might in accordance with he other provisions of the law reasonably be expected in the ordinary course of events, or prevent any person from transferring together with his business any transferable licence to operate that business; or
    • (c) where no permit or licence was previously required for the operation of the trade or business, authorise a refusal to grant a permit or licence to any person for the operation of any trade or business which immediately before the coming into force of the law he had been bona fide carrying on, or authorise a refusal subsequently to renew to any such person any permit or licence, or a refusal to grant to the heirs, successors or assigns of any such person any such permit or licence when the renewal or grant might in accordance with the other provisions of that law reasonably be expected in the ordinary course of events.
    1. (8A) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, where in any University, College and other educational institution providing education after Malaysian Certificate of Education or its equivalent, the number of places offered by the authority responsible for the management of the University, College or such educational institution to candidates for any course of study is less than the number of candidates qualified for such places, it shall be lawful for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong by virtue of this Article to give such directions to the authority as may be required to ensure the reservation of such proportion of such places for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak as the Yank di-Pertuan Agong may deem reasonable, and the authority shall duly comply with the directions.
  • (9) Nothing in this Article shall empower Parliament to restrict business or trade solely for the purpose of reservations for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak.
    1. (9A) In this Article the expression “natives” in relation to the State of Sabah or Sarawak shall have the meaning assigned to it in Article 161A.
  • The Constitution of the State of any Ruler may make provision corresponding (with the necessary modifications) to the provisions of this Article.

‘Ketuanan Melayu’ should not be mistaken and translate on and about ‘Malay Supremacy’. ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ is about ‘Malay Dominance’, especially the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawk is the majority of the citizens of this nation. The fact is that ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ which is the basis and enshrined in the Federation of Malaysia Constitution which is the Supreme Law, is about the preservation of the rights and position of the Malays as the majority of the population. However, it does not mean that the Malays have the right or authority to take what is accorded for the Non Malays like the right to vote, own properties and own businesses. ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ is never about repressing others, in spirit, form or substance.

The essence of the wisdom, fairness and goodwill of Malay Leaders led by Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra in 1956 who negotiated first with HRH Rulers (to allow for constitutional monarchy) and then with the British to unconditionally and with grace accept the near 1 million ‘stateless’ Non Malays (they were then neither subjects of HM Queen of Great Britian of United Kingdom and Eire nor any of HRH Rulers, as stipulated by the ‘Treaty of the Federation’, 1 Feb 1948) to be automatically granted citizenship of the soon to be born Federation of Malaya, must be understood, respected and most of all preserved as the single most important fundamental point and blueprint of being what Malaysia is today. That cannot be denied, changed or erased.

The DAP, which is a spin of from Singapore born PAP in 1967, vowed to fight these specific provisions for Malay Rights in the Federal Constitution as one of the thrust core in their political struggle having a Chinese Chauvinist party. Many believed that it is a platform as the political arm for Min Yuen radicals when their struggle to win support of the Chinese via armed rebellion faced the slow but almost certain death after Emergency was declared over in 1960.

DAP, which is the integral partner of the Opposition’s ‘Politics of Hatred’ strategy, is consistent about their support for the ‘Butchers of Malaya’. They carried on their ‘subversive movement’ when the Communist Party of Malaya struggle waned in the 60s via radicals, which was clearly transpired in the bloody 13 May 1969 racial riots.

Senior writer with NST thinks its about bankrupt politicians’ sordid attempt to grab attention with a ‘political mischievous’ stunt.

04 September 2012 | last updated at 08:44AM

Contentious flag raising stunt reads political mischief and crassness

By Azmi Anshar 0 comments

SO, a couple of undergraduates — jazzed up with reverence for a post-war, pre-independence moment — chose the eve of Aug 31 to unleash a political statement teeming with so-called historical awakening.

.
Those behind the unfurling of the ‘Sang Saka Malaya’ at Dataran Merdeka have a dubious motive for their brazen act.

1 / 1

Initiated by the blogger who dubs himself Serigala Selatan (Southern Wolf), who writes at a blog called Singa Selatan (Southern Lion), and one Zairi Shafai thought that unfurling the horizontally equidistant red-white flag with a yellow crescent and 11-point star nestled on the top left corner was the enlightening way to inform people about a particular lost historical episode that demands equal billing with the 55th commemoration of Merdeka.

Sang Serigala’s idea of this symbol he calls Sang Saka Malaya, with its uncanny resemblance to the Republic of Singapore and Republic of Indonesia flags, was to re-open a long-forgotten era, the salad days of the country’s pre-war left wing political parties battling against British rule.

Sang Serigala’s unbridled (some would say misguided) youthful enthusiasm has propelled him straight into trouble with the authorities.

The poser is, why now? Why not last year? Or before March 2008? Or during the past 30 years? Why bother?

Even if the undergraduate simply stumbled upon this historical anecdote in the course of his studies, what is the compulsion to turn it into a political sideshow that has now escalated into a circus?

Sang Saka Malaya’s grandiloquence would have a relevant point in History books, maybe a lecture by a professor or a forum by historical societies, but their in-your-face aggressive assault at Dataran Merdeka on the Malaysian sensibility exposes a dubious motive.

The flag bearers quickly denied any political association while opposition parties reportedly did not want anything to do with the flag bearing stunt, claiming also to have no inkling to the posts that made its way to the blogosphere that accused them of wanting to replace the Jalur Gemilang.

However, their denials seemed shallow and deceptive. Utusan Malaysia is nailing PKR Youth’s deputy publicity chief Najwan Halimi as the designer of the Sang Saka Malaya, based on an article he posted in 2009 that contended a tenuous notion — Malaysians were reluctant to raise the national flag because the Jalur Gemilang was adapted from the Stars and Stripes, the national flag of the United States of America.

After half-a-century’s worth of water under the bridge, where the Jalur Gemilang has been the official flag flown in official buildings and in Malaysian embassies and high commissions, and waved in march-pasts at the Olympics and prided in just about everywhere Malaysians won prizes and clocked up achievements (including the tip of Mount Everest and the expanse of Antarctica), there are still misgivings about the national flag? That another flag of a distant past should stand side by side?

This political caper, masked as a symbolic gesture to cast aspersion on the verity of the Jalur Gemilang, is not historical revisionism or a cry to reclaim what had faded into a distant timeline. It is plain mischief.

Opposition leaders like to pontificate that they have nothing to do with this sort of mischief but they have done little to discourage its incurrence.

Just like the mischief fired by DAP assemblyman for Kota Alam Shah M. Manoharan, a lawyer of such crassitude that he committed an unforgiveable faux pas last year, after he threatened to change the Jalur Gemilang if Pakatan Rakyat conquers Putrajaya (let’s not get into a hissy fit over Manoharan’s unbelievable twits that insulted silver Olympic medallist Datuk Lee Chong Wei).

Manoharan was roundly and rightly condemned as an “unpatriotic idiot”, even by his party leadership who slapped a six-month ban, which was surprisingly mitigated to a “severe reprimand” after he was forced to apologise. There you are.

The flag’s unfurling might be considered as a risqué pursuit on any other day or year, but with the general election looming, the opposition, which is steadily losing points on a daily basis, have to perform political alchemy to recover that sagging support as it hits rock bottom.

Devising this particular mischievous political gambit undoubtedly makes for great newsbytes: newspapers, websites and blogs are already crackling in outrage but think this one out, it might have been manipulated to help turn the tide.

But also consider the other plausible motive of unfurling that wretched flag: it is the boys’ quick route to infamy and stardom, a cynical marketing gimmick to rake in the hits by applying the timeless tactic of crass controversy.

**************

Actually, its not. It is an extension to the Opposition’s strategy of ‘Politics of Hate’ and ‘Politics of Hatred’, which in the past transgressed via attempts to create anarchy. It is the premise of their politics. Infact ‘Janji Bersih’ was all along designed to create anarchy chain reaction towards the ‘Malaysian Spring’.

The Oppositions have been dwelling, planning and even openly talking about it. They are nothing but Neo Min Yuens.

In the past fourteen years, we have seen how Oppositions’ sordid agenda ‘Politics of Hatred’ and demonisation of any law enforcement agencies and the authorities, even though it is within the provisions in the Federal Constitution. Particularly, Anwar Ibrahim’s ability to stir up sentiments and emotions which from time to time sent Malaysian youths into stunts without them understanding that they were made used as a bunch of anarchists, if not gorillas. Their lawlessness is really shameful and simply anti constitutional.

Some believed that the Oppostions have things to hide. Needless to mention, they have been consistent in their insults to the symbols of this nation.

For these monkeys who got sucked into this sordid game by politicians who will never get the support and mandate from the majority of Malaysians, please make the effort to learn and understand who did what, when and how, for this land to achieve the independence as we all know it, on 31 August 1957. Their gross lack of understanding of their own history is actually pathetically beyond redemption, where George Santayana’s immortal words on being condemned for repeating past mistakes, no longer apply.

Otherwise, they would be parroting a perpetuated lie. It is just like bastards who all the while thought their parents were married.

Published in: on September 5, 2012 at 02:00  Comments (25)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2012/09/05/bastards-thinking-their-parents-wed/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

25 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Track the money trail and the answers will be there. These teenagers may be rewarded with materialistic incentives to “display such despicable acts”.

    The more despicable, the bigger the reward – especially when foreign funds flow in like water (smoother flow than the water supply in Selangor).

    • Another glaring fact is the multiracial mix of these hooligans – must have been very carefully “chosen” to depict the “unified” push against the present government.

      Anwar and Najib knows one another very well and that knowledge is giving rise to the panic by pakatan.

  2. *Comments deleted

    Pls take your thoughts elsewhere!

    • … and descendant of the caste system like vinnan cannot handle 1Malaysia concept where Janji ditepati.

      Like I said before vinnan, ambiga, dpp should campaign for the abolishment of the human fights abuses, inherent in the caste system still practised till TODAY even by highly “educated” indians.

      • Correction = “human fights abuses” should read as human RIGHTS abuses.

        Correction = Ketuanan Melayu is not racist (as you had wished) but a validation of FACTUAL history, much like the aborigines of Australia and America.

        Correction = The concept and essence of Ketuanan Melayu is CEMENTED in the constitution.

        Correction = I am not an UMNO member.

        Correction = “Simply too stupid and racist” describes vinnan caste descendant very well.

        Advice = Go seek a psychiatrist for urgent treatment. We can feel the cancerous toxic cells multiplying in your spirit and physical self.

  3. Vinnan of hatred direspectful and rude…bravo for new generation of so called malaysian….

  4. hey vinnan! after saying all kinds of nonsense you are still in this country enjoying yourself.

  5. Org2 yang membaca dan terpengaruh dengan buku tulisan Kua Kia Song terbitan Suaram pada 2011 tentang sejarah kemerdekaan negara sudah tentu akan bertindak sedemikian. Kononnya sejarah yang ada sekarang dipesongkan oleh UMNO dan sekutunya. Seolah-olah sejarah yang ditulisnya adalah yang betul. Dulu Kua jugalah yang menulis mengenai 13 Mei 1969 yang menurutnya berdasarkan fail dari risikan British. Sama juga bukunya yang diterbit pada 2011 itu. Walhal beliau membuat tafsiran sendiri dan memesongkan pula sejarah dengan hanya memberi tumpuan kepada satu pihak semata-mata. Kononnya sekiranya kontrak sosial yang dirangka oleh PUERA AMCJA dijadikan asas Perlembagaan, negara tidak akan menghadapi masalah polarisasi kaum sepertimana sekarang.
    Malangnya, bagi yang buta sejarah dan mudah terpengaruh, mereka mengiyakan terus dakwaan Kua dalam bukunya itu. Merasakan diri mereka merdeka, sedangkan merekalah yang terjajah mindanya oleh seorang bekas tahanan ISA, Kua Kia Song yang menggunakan sebuah syarikat, Suaram sebagai NGO.
    Di mana dan mengapa intelektual yang ribuan ramainya tidak bangun untuk menjawab dan membetulkan segala dakwaan menyeleweng Kia melalui bukunya itu?

  6. memang sial habis puak2 pr ni krn suka memesongkan fakta sejarah. jika mrk Islamm mrk tergolong dlm golongan ini: “summunbukmun’umyunfahumlayarji’uunn”
    mrk sengaja membutakan mata, memekakkan telinga & menutup hati utk menerima kebenaran….

    yg sedihnya mrk anak2muda melayu Islam yg sepatutnya tenang BERIMAN…

  7. Good that History will be a compulsory subject in schools beginning 2013. Hopefully no more kurang ajar to the national flag, the national anthem and such in the years to come.

    Meanwhile, the authorities must deal with those subversive and seditious blokes. Subversive because they try to undermine the integrity of the country and respect for the national flag, seditious because they create ill feelings among those who love their country.

    Good that the Police are taking action. I next want to see the Attorney General prosecute them in court. The Photographs alone are strong and solid evidence. The others must be deterred from such acts of disloyalty to the country.

  8. The New Straits Times earlier today said, “The act of trampling on a picture of the prime minister and flying a new flag, in place of the Malaysian flag, reflects the immaturity of opposition supporters and only intensifies the people’s hatred against them.”

    I fully agree. I want to emphasize the words “intensifies the people’s hatred against them.” Damn them.

  9. Tepat sekali, Tuan Blogger!

    Puak puak Pembangkang aka Petualang Revolusi ni & mereka yg menyokong mereka layak digelar sebagai ANAK HARAM!!!!

    Golongan muda terutama mereka dalam IPT yg menyokong mereka wajib disingkirkan serta merta dari universiti/kolej/politeknik! Jangan kompromi langsung!

    Tolonglah

    • (Sambungan!)

      Tolonglah tentukan AG dakwa kesemua Petualang Revolusi yg ditangkap semasa terlibat dlm Bersih 2.0, Bersih 3.0, Janji Bersih, DUMC!

      Kembalikan keadilan & kesaksamaan utk majoriti. Negara ini tanah air berdaulat, ada Perlembagaan & ada undang undang. Kembalikan integriti Kerajaan yg dapat mandat majoriti!

  10. Politic of hatred ,
    They hate the party or the nation , it’s does show the true colour of Pakatan leaders .

  11. The Police said they are calling for Maria Chin and Samad to give their statements. Good.

    I hope the Attorney General would prosecute them and would result in prison terms for them.

    Clearly they broke the law. The Police have said so – they did not apply for a permit or gave notice within the 10 day period, and the gathering was illegal.

    Maria Chin was more culpable – she was the one who went to see the Police and was therefore the organizer of the event.

    And the participants brought pamphlets regarding changing the national flag. Again breaking the rule stipulated by the Police. Marina Chin must be made responsible, must be prosecuted to deter others from doing the same in the future.

    • I was ‘reliably informed’ that Marina Chin is a daughter of a communist terrorist. If its true, then he conviction to start a ‘revolution’ is clearly attributed to that.

      Even if she’s not, then she’s behaving in a classic example of BD’s Neo Min Yuens.

      There are other so called “intellectuals” who are using the same approach, to start the revolution. Namely Dr Kua Kia Soong, Harris Ibrahim, N Surendran, Sivarasa, Syed Hussein etc.

      However, there are other idiot monkeys such as Mat Sabu, M Manoharan etc.

      Now we can use Prof Tan Sri Khoo Kay Kim immortal words to tell off these ungrateful bastards!

      • http://www.thenutgraph.com/maria-chin-abdullah-its-not-about-race-anymore/ publishes an interview where Maria Chin Abdullah talks about her family’s Hakka-Cantonese ancestry and growing up in a tin-mining family in Perak where males were treated as more special than females.

        TNG: When and where were you born, and where did you grow up?

        I was born in Paddington, London in the UK in 1956. My parents were the privileged ones who made it to the UK to study. My mother did hairdressing and my father studied engineering at Imperial College.

        They came back immediately [after they were done] and we went to Singapore, where my father worked with the government. When the separation (between Malaysia and Singapore) happened (in 1965), he had to return to Peninsular Malaysia.
        [I grew up mainly] in Petaling Jaya (PJ). But because my father was a government servant (with the Public Works Department), we’ve lived in Seremban, Klang, Kuala Lumpur and Ipoh.

        Can you trace your ancestry?

        All of them – [my paternal] grandparents and granduncles, even my great-grandfather and great-grandmother – came from southern China from a Hakka village called Chin. They came as dulang washers and became tin miners. I grew up in a tin-mine environment, spending most of my school holidays in my paternal grandparents’ house in Kampar.

        My mother’s side, which is Cantonese, was also in the tin-mining business in Menglembu (in Perak).

        My paternal great-grandfather actually had two wives. One was from Thailand. My great-grandmother, his other wife from China, was alive until she was 99 years old. I remember playing the card game Fishing with her in Kampar.

        My grandmother was actually sold as a wife, and that’s how she came from China to Malaya to marry my grandfather. The belief at the time was that if you wanted [to conceive] a male [child], you gave away your female child. The thinking then was very traditional in that the boys were most important.

        Maria’s paternal great-grandmother, who is the second wife, sits fourth from right with the first wife’s children. She did not bear any children herself.

        During the school holidays, special food like birds’ nest and chicken legs would be for the boys only. We didn’t feel anything then because we were so small. But now, upon reflection, that was real discrimination. It was a very patriarchal family.

        Whenever we ate together, the boys would eat at one table and the girls and women would be at a separate table. The men would sit at the main table.

        Because we came from this tin-mining background, three families stayed together. There was my grandfather, who was the eldest, then the second granduncle and the fourth one. There were about 30 people staying in the same house. About 20 of us cousins grew up in that house. We spent our holidays going early in the morning to the tin mine.

        There were three patriarchs in my father’s family, but it wasn’t the three men who controlled the money. It was actually my grandmother who was very fierce. She was able to ensure that everyone was well-fed and educated. She was unique in that sense. She was in charge of their tin-mining business, but she knew where she was in the male hierarchy and maintained that.

        And your dad was born in Malaya?

        Yes. My mother’s side also came from China. She was born in China. She came over and didn’t have any IC or birth certificate for many years until she was about to go overseas. She doesn’t even know which year exactly she was born in. But at that time, the registrar would register whatever year you told them. So, that’s how she got her birth certificate from Malaya.

        So, you would be second-generation Malaysian from your father’s side and first-generation on your mother’s side?

        Yes.

        COMMENT: She of course would not reveal any link with communists during the Emergency. The family may have connections with the communists – those who demanded money on the threat of death or destruction of property, businesses etc.

      • Here are excerpts of comments appearing elsewhere:

        “Maria talks about her family’s Hakka-Cantonese ancestry. Now, that in itself shows contradictions in her person. Historically, the Hakkas and the Cantonese do not inter-marry. Professor C.P Fitzgerald who spent 5 years in China to do research, said in his book, “A Short Cultural History of China” (600+ pages), that after 2,000 years of marked distinction among the Chinese according to locations, dialects etc, differences of temperament still exist up to now.

        In Kuantung, the province of which Canton is the capital, there is a large community called the Hakka. Fitzgerald says, “They speak a peculiar dialect, do not marry Cantonese – by whom they are despised ..”

        Marked distinction and different temperament, said the Professor. Now of two different social and dialect groups when Maria Chin’s ancestors arrived in this country. She has a Hakka father and a Cantonese mother. Perhaps that helps to explain the contradiction in her personality and her going against the norms of society. Perhaps a complex, a rebellious streak from the “despised” (Fitzgerald’s word) Hakka lineage. Breaking the law, demonstrating even after the Police said Bersih and Janji Merdeka were illegal.

        … people like Maria Chin Abdullah and Ambiga. As lawyers, they are also “officers of the law”, are expected to protect the law, yet they break the law. They may defend law breakers but they should not break the law. When they do, others get emboldened to do so, and the moral fiber of society breaks down.

        Maria Chin appears to be the bigger culprit than Ambiga. She has been doing the “steering” work, being on the Bersih “Steering Committee” and running around, including to meet the Police asking for the Janji Demokrasi gathering be allowed etc. The Police have said that the Bersih rally was illegal, so was the Janji Demokrasi affair. Yet they carried on gathering. Pure arrogance, defiance of Police authority, disrespect of the Merdeka spirit and disregard of the public interest in enjoying the Merdeka eve atmosphere at Dataran Merdeka.

        COMMENT: The post title “Bastards ..” is an apt one. And one cannot expect much from Maria who came from a “selling-wife” ancestry – “My grandmother was actually sold as a wife,” said she.

        And she married a Muslim (deceased), claimed her 3 children are Bumiputeras but she is not happy with Bumiputera privileges etc under Article 153.

        Good that the Police have announced Maria and Samad being called to make their statement on the Janji Demokrasi thing. I urge the authorities to prosecute her in court to deter others from breaking laws with impunity.

  12. Agreed Marina Chin must take responsibility for breaking the rule stipulated and creating the chaos during merdeka eve 2012. Just strip her of Malaysia citizenship.

  13. […] recent ‘Janji Bersih’ do on 30 August, Opposition’s expressed intent of ‘Malaysian Spring’, Seksualiti Merdeka, […]

  14. […] Even younger Malaysians openly demonstrated their Anti Constitutional tendencies, due to the ‘Politics of Hatred” strategy. […]

  15. […] first time the nation saw this sordid stunt was when some bastards who thought their parents wed on the eve of 55th Independence […]

  16. […] in the 13GE polls, they have demonstrated their willingness to even distort history and screw the mind of young Malaysians, back-stabbed ‘kongsi-kuasa’ and defied the tolerance, understanding and good working […]

  17. […] in the 13GE polls, they have demonstrated their willingness to even distort history and screw the mind of young Malaysians, back-stabbed ‘kongsi-kuasa’ and defied the tolerance, understanding and good working […]

  18. […] lies, in the intention that the position of UMNO and the Malays are weakened. This is their only sordid hope to get the minority to overpower the majority and gain control over […]


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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: