| In Port Dickson an unprincipled Rear Admiral is about to be replaced by a "King Cobra"
| Friday, September 14, 2018
In 1998, he the King Cobra had all Messes in the Military, especially the Ranger Corps ban alcoholic beverages in their respective messes. He did not respect the Non Muslims in the Corps of Rangers. It was a bitter blow for a Regiment well known for it's prowess on the battle fields of Malaysia. From then on tradition went down the drain. The majority of East Malaysians serve in this Corps.
Unknown Source : To me a leopard cannot change its spots. Same with Anwar Ibrahim. I'm apolitical but I do support Mahathir and his government.
When Anwar was the Education Minister in the late 80s it was him that started the pro-islamic movements in Universities that trickled down to schools. The radicalization of the Malay Muslims was the brain child of Anwar Ibrahim. The removal of the crucifixes in Mission Schools and school badges, the replacing of nuns and brothers in mission schools was his agenda, the starting of pro-islzamic ideology and terrorism in UiTM also started with Anwar Ibrahim.
Now ask yourself this question can a leopard change its spots. Do you think this man will be an honest worthy PM. East Malaysian have already rejected Anwar when the question was asked, "Why did you give the go- ahead to remove our crucifixes from our Mission Schools and school badges. Anwar could not answer. The mistakes of yesterday comes back to haunt you today. Anwar was power crazy then what makes you think he has changed. Think again people a leopard cannot change its spots.
Farish Noor : For was it not the same radical Islamist-turned-liberal Anwar Ibrahim who openly supported the revolutionary movement in Iran while parroting the slogans of the Iranian revolutionaries who then condemned the United States (and the West in general) as the 'Great Satan'? (The systematic extermination of thousands of secular intellectuals, unionists, activists and the Mujahideen by the revolutionary regime was something that many of their fans in other parts of the Muslim world turned a blind eye to soon after.)
Was it not the same Anwar Ibrahim who was once honoured by the 'Islamic' dictator of Pakistan, General Zia 'ul Haq, for his services to Islam? Anwar was quite willing to accept such decorations, despite the fact that General Zia was himself a willing recipient of American military aid and he had used the radical Islamist movements to wipe out the secular opposition in Pakistan. (2) And was it not the very same Anwar Ibrahim - who today calls for a culture of tolerance and pluralism - who lead the Islamist activists as they 'cleaned out' the local university campuses of leftist students, 'secular' ideas and everything they regarded as un-Islamic in the 1970s?
Was it mere bitterness and alienation that compelled Anwar's party to form an instrumental alliance with the Islamist Party PAS, which today has called on the Muslims of Malaysia to support a jihad (holy war) against the United States and the West? How, in short, could Anwar present himself to the West as a defender of liberal values, democratic culture, civil society and toleration when his own party has worked with an Islamist opposition party that is clearly bent on creating an Islamic state in Malaysia according to the narrow understanding of Islam as espoused by some of its Wahhabi-inclined leaders?
(In fact, not only has Keadilan worked with PAS, its leaders have even endorsed some of the more controversial positions taken by them.
Witness, for instance, their early endorsement of PAS' initial decision to introduce strict dress codes for women in Terengganu.) To ask the question 'who hijacked Islam' is indeed timely and necessary at this juncture of Muslim history. Who indeed, Mr Anwar? The sad thing is, we all know the answer - except for some of us who continue to delude ourselves. More...............
Kua Kia Soong : Thus, in November 1994, it was revealed that relatives of prominent Umno politicians had been profiting from the preferential share-allocation scheme originally designed to help ordinary Malays under the NEP. Among these were Mirzan Mahathir, son of the prime minister; Marzuki Ibrahim, brother of then deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim, and Fazrin Azwar, son-in-law of then International Trade and Industry minister Rafidah Aziz, who happened to chair the allocation committee.
This information was only leaked to the public by Rafidah Aziz because she wanted to show that it was not just her son-in-law who had gained from the allocations. (Asiaweek, Nov 30, 1994)
When Anwar Ibrahim had met his fate at the hands of Mahathir in 1998, the firms linked to the former deputy prime minister were either taken over by pro-Mahathir management or those who had switched allegiance to Mahathir. Likewise, after the Mahathir-Daim split in 2001, Halim Saad lost control of Renong. This has typified the vagaries of power struggles in Umno and the economic consequences for these bumiputera capitalists.
Thus, the fortunes of bumiputera capitalists did not rest on their “success” as entrepreneurs as the prime minister claims.
Serious historians have not forgotten the time how, after Anwar Ibrahim had been arrested, the Umno-owned New Straits Times began to spill the beans regarding his cronyism. The newspaper revealed that one of Anwar’s allies, former Penang Umno youth chief, Abdul Rahim Ghouse was a director and/or shareholder of 44 companies. Continued here...............
Malaysia Today : And then it was Anwar who:
as Education Minister, in 1988 allowed the termination of non-Muslim school principals aged 55 and above;
allowed Christian religious education in our schools to be replaced with “moral education”;
allowed the removal of crucifixes and crosses from the buildings and badges of mission schools;
allowed the revision of history books used in our schools so as to promote Islam;
made “Islamic Civilisation” a compulsory subject for all university students;
promoted and enhanced shariah laws throughout the country and gave a much more Muslim character to our laws;
began the prurient obsession with moral surveillance, enforcement and punitive measures against Muslims.
The present government is not without fault either, and some may argue that the choice is about who represents the lesser of two evils. Continued here..................
|posted by D.Swami Gwekanandam @ 4:44 PM