Copyright Notice

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the author, at the address below.

Sakmongkol ak 47

Wednesday 30 September 2009

The immorality of the moral high ground-2

The morality underpinnings of writings regarding Isa's nomination come in various forms. The DAP old warhorse Lim Kit Siang viewed Isa's nomination as a contest between the country's political past and future – between the politics of corruption, injustice and oppression prevalent before March 8, 2008 and the politics of integrity, justice and freedom struggling to be born after the March 8 political tsunami.

Isa is a tainted fellow who has been convicted by the UMNO court as someone who bought votes. Suddenly what UMNO says become binding on self righteous people. That UMNO did not remit its disciplinary board's findings to official authorities such as MACC or even brought them before the courts shall forever remain a sore point. It is, not only for those outside UMNO but within UMNO itself. How do you explain this absent –mindedness on the part of UMNO?

Very likely, the findings of the disciplinary board are meant for internal discipline. The dos and don'ts it listed were meant as club rules and those who violate them, were punished in accordance to forms of punishment provided for. In Isa's case he was punished with the harshest of punishment for a politician- banished from the flock, forced to resign from all official posts. Having served the punishment, we, the moral police now want to step in and punish Isa once again? We took his flesh and now we want his blood too? To make things worse, we do that via the tortured definitions of morality. The depraved past vs. the pristine future, penny wise and pound foolish etc.

The form of punishment given to Isa is nothing other than a version of enforced sabbatical? We are more severe in our judgments- a person who has endured his punishment has no means for salvation. He is a sinner until he dies.

By doing so, what are we doing? We arrogate upon ourselves the status of the morally pristine. We consciously adopt this touch me not status that lends some semblance of religious immunity from the rational investigation normally applied to other sources of authority. The issue is what is the social impact of our 'method'? What are the grounds on which we condemn Isa Samad? The wrongs done by UMNO politicians and the punishments given them are open book see-all. We have evidence, we punish. Only with that evidence to hand can some kind of judgment - moral, political or whatever -be made.

But for those acting as moral gendarme, what do we offer? We offer some vague reference to a higher moral order. We may discover actually the grounds on which we eternally condemn Isa Samad is nothing but just an extension of our private pieties and our own version of moral celibacy. Well intention (conforms to our self interest) but not necessarily good (meant for society) intention. But strangely, in that reservoir of private piety, there isn't room for forgiveness. The punishment given by UMNO D-Board did not mean anything as it does not conform to our OWN private morality standards.

How, can the leaders of our opposition justify not condemning miscreants in their own ranks? The case of Elizabeth Wong is an example- yes we are all appalled at the intrusion of her privacy. But this person is also a contributor to her own misfortune. How can the immorality of her private life exposed, be forgiveable and tolerable because she was a victim? Admitting in private that they are appalled by these activities, while keeping silent in public, makes them complicit in all the excesses. They have a moral responsibility, to come out in the open and say these actions are wrong.

Why do you think the opposition and its supporters and their moral carabinieri restrain themselves? Because to unrestraint themselves would remove the cloak that protects their high moral ground from criticism, and this would make their own positions vulnerable.

So we the moral policemen and gendarmes confer on ourselves the audacity of religious-like built-in immunity from criticism and serious investigation of the grounds of judging Isa Samad. We guard our own private values jealously from open discussion. That's an immunity eerily borrowed from an encompassing immunity encapsulated in the mystical apophatic tradition that nothing can be known about God. In our case, the moral policemen are saying- your lot is to obey our moral precepts, not to question them. Don't question. That's dreadful!

We have to accept them because WE SAY SO without having to justify the grounds on which our judgments are made. How then are we to take the moral basis of judging Isa Samad seriously when we are prevented on knowing the grounds on which you condemn Isa?


Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 16:17  


You are an intelligent man with persuasive arguments in the many postings that I have read. I feel you have more credibility than many of the current office holders. But it saddens me that you are using your credibility to defend the actions of UMNO and to rationalise UNMO's decisions.

There is no comparison between Eli Wong's incident and Isa. Eli Wong was not a willing partner in those photos and PDRM has still not done anything against the perpetrator. Isa was responsible for giving out the money (the DB said so). All things being equal, which is a chargeable offense ? That should be the yardstick. How flexible should this yardstick be ?

But if you were to compare Chua Soi Lek's adventures with Isa, it would be more equitable. So should CSL be given another chance to lead MCA, even though what he did is not a chargeable offense ? This would be the ultimate moral high ground for Malaysian politics.


Frank,  30 September 2009 at 16:35  

Dato Sak

I tried to agree with your arguments. But the more I read into your comments, the more I think it is a political spin woven into the fabric of intellectual discourse.

Unfortunately you exposed yourself the moment you brought in the Elizabeth Wong case.

I have admired your tough arguments and had stood your ground well.

But somehow of late, your articles are sounding like subtle apologies for UMNO's wrongdoings.

Kind of reminds us of another high profile blogger who showed his true self after being made the chief of one of UMNO's mainstream papers middle of this year.

I just hope the saying that You can take a UMNO member/supporter out of UMNO but you can't take UMNO out of that person .

I hope you are made of sterner stuff.

Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 16:40  


Ikuti perbualan berikut:

Rakyat: Adakah kamu berbangga dan rela kalau Pas duduk kat kerusi PM?

DAP: "he, he..langkah mayat kami dulu"

Rakyat: "Kalau PKR yang duduk kat kerusi PM, apakah kamu semua berbangga dan rela?"

Pas: "kami tak kisah, kami ikut saja cakap Tok Guru kami, hitam kata dia hitamlah kata kami."

Rakyat: "Bagaimana dengan kamu, pek"?

DAP: "Kami memang sukakan babi, ia haiwan yang comel dan kuat menyondol tetapi kalau BABI yang satu lagi, apa yang kami boleh katakan buat dia ialah: go to hell!"

Rakyat: "Kalau DAPasik duduk kat kerusi PM, apa pandangan anda"

Pas: "Kalau depa gologan fasik memang kami tak akan bersetuju. Cumanya depa bukan fasik kerana mereka sendiri kurang faham perkataan fasik, jadinya kapiaq itu bukanlah golongan fasik, jadinya kami tak bantahlah."

Rakyat: "Hmmm...Kamu pula lagu mana Anwar?"

PKR: "Kalau apek-apek tu sanggup kena sondol dek 'babi', cuba-cubalah!"


besi buruk,  30 September 2009 at 16:46  

Honorable Dato
Whatever it is The PR has scored a point and all in the name of this monkey business and they only need to strategize upon reducing the winning votes if not a grand victory albeit the very few numbers in advantage. It may be inappropriate for my lowly self to vociferate about the futility of philosophizing after the fact but that's exactly what we must inadvertently avoid. You seemed to be so dynamic before, why the apologies now, again forgive me for the impudence but it does show Anwar as a master tactician and Zaid even voiced out for Dato' Isa much like you are doing now but the objectives being in reverse. Ploys and plots all along. Salam.

Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 16:49  


I have read many of your postings.
For this post, I have to disagree with you.
How can you compare Eli Wong case with Isa case?
Eli is the victim.
For Isa case, Isa is the perpetrator

Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 17:02  

Sorry, I beg to differ.

You said "The dos and don'ts it listed were meant as club rules and those who violate them, were punished in accordance to forms of punishment provided for".

I say, by winning positions in UMNO, Isa is not just serving club(UMNO) members only. He was made minister and therfore is serving the rakyat as well not just UMNO goons. So you got it all wrong. But never mind, I don't think UMNO will ever change.

You said "In Isa's case he was punished with the harshest of punishment for a politician- banished from the flock, forced to resign from all official posts".

I say, that is not harsh enough, in other countries, they were sent to prison for a few years for corruption. Unless you say money politics is not corruption.

You said "The case of Elizabeth Wong is an example- yes we are all appalled at the intrusion of her privacy".

I say, Eli Wong does not bribe and steal peoples money. What she does in private with her boyfriend that does not affect society, it is between her and GOD. Stealing people's money and corruption breaks down society and increase the cost of living. Ultimately it will destroy a nation as a result the generation to come will suffer. And that includes your children and mine as well. As an economics graduate, I am sure you can fugure that out.

UMNO will win Bagan Pinang as you wish. The fact remains that the winning will be due to postal votes. Already your ketua bahagian@PM is going round meeting the soldiers in the camp which something the opposition cannot do.

However UMNO must remember, there are many other state/parliment seats where voters composition are not like BP. UMNO must think long term not short term gain.

Any other suitable UMNO candidate apart from Isa, can win the sit for UMNO in BP. But UMNO leaders are scared from the possible backlash/boycot from the warlords.
In a feudal party like UMNO, the warlords are super powerful.

Also UMNO is suffering from phobia, after loosing all but one of the by-elections so far. So it must win at all costs.

Again, I don't believe UMNO will change. We can agree to disagree. Sorry. Within UMNO, take Tengku Razaleigh as PM or offer him influential post then we can expect some changes for the better.

Richard Cranium 30 September 2009 at 17:03  

Folks, Dato here has no choice. The candidate has been decided, and against Dato's hopeful suggestion.

Once the die is cast, everyone in Umno needs to fall behind the arrowhead and push in the same direction. With this apologetic post, he's doing just that.

I agree with some commenters here that its a little disappointing coming from Dato.

Umno will win this by-election. If the majority % is smaller than the last election, then both sides will still spin it every which way.

In my mind, Umno is still same-old, same-old.

walla 30 September 2009 at 17:11  

A: 'This is splendid news. Bagan Pinang is open tank territory. Guderian's panzer forces will roll out from the forests of the Ardennes at the crack of dawn and blitzkrieg all the way to the shores of Dunkirk.'

B: 'Are you sure it'll be Dunkirk and not Waterloo, dear Sophia? And by the way, it might have been Guderian at the gun turret but it was von Manstein's battle plan.'

A: 'Von Manstein?'

B: 'Yes, the most brilliant of them all. The one who wrote Lost Victories. You can add that to the pyrrhic victory that will be this by-election.'

A: 'Why do you think the victory will not only be pyrrhic but also lost?'

B: 'Simple. See it one more step. If Isa wins, Umno will repeat again and again what will be known as the Bagan Pinang success formula. If something works when one is clueless and hapless, why change what works?

You must understand what is Umno. It's not just any cat. It's a man-eating tiger. And one that not only can't change its stripes it actually takes weekends off to add a few more.'

A: 'But success is all that counts and Umno needs success.'

B: 'Then why did the Tun say it's a bad idea to field Isa? You must know this Tun. He said he sees only Umno the party and not the people in it. His singular focus is the party. So he wouldn't have made that remark unless he has concluded that the interests of the party won't be served by fielding Isa to win. Whether those interests are short-term or long-term he didn't say but it could be both. Now i am saying he wouldn't have Umno lose this seat so it means that if Isa is already the given, this win is therefore the short-term interest which means it must be the long-term interest he's concerned about. So i ask you what long-term interest of Umno is not served by winning this seat? And my answer is it will lock Umno into its success formula.'

A: 'I'm intrigued. What formula is that?'

B: 'The At-All-Costs formula, my friend. Now i am not saying out what at-all-costs means. It could mean anything.

It could even mean, for example, the uncharacteristic withdrawal by a parent of a charge against someone implicated in the still unexplained motive behind terminating someone else with extreme prejudice.

Or, it could mean someone having a nap in the vicinity of someone she implicitly trusted only to have him betray her trust by publicly humiliating her with photos that he must have known would impugn her career so much so that when the rakyat rose in anger, the authorities had to go after him but without appealing to the same Interpol that they were in a hurry to use to try and catch another personage charged with les majeste whose very foundations were earlier on shaken by the very same party which now can be seen to have vested interest against both personages so alluded.'

A: 'Err, are you indirectly hinting that if Umno wins Bagan Pinang, it will be using any means to justify its specific ends in other elections, including possibly the big one?'

B: 'Umno didn't come so far without exercising single-minded focus. It is an MBO organization. Management by objective. If the objective is Z, then it will use and harness anything from A to Y to reach and achieve it. If that can be done on such a big thing as institutional integrity that presumably forms the pillar of democracies like ours, it requires no stretch of imagination to conclude it will be even more easily done on such a trifling exercise as winning a small seat.

Let me give you another example to show that Umno hasn't changed one bit. It dispenses federal funds to opposition-run states and agencies but through its own organizations and under obscure criteria. Isn't that mocking the wishes of the rakyat who had not voted for it? And doesn't that reflect a sore loser? Now i ask you - should the rakyat support sore losers even if they are not the ones which will curse those they had paid off for not voting for them in the end?'

walla 30 September 2009 at 17:12  

A: 'But Umno must win this seat. That's all that counts. It's of historical import. Otherwise it will be like a half-cut sports convertible trying to rev its engine to zoom to the finishing line only to find to its horror that the back half of the car has broken off and is rolling down the hill. Without Umno, there will be no government. Without government, there will be chaos.'

B: 'Exactly what type of ciggie have you been smokin', woman? You said historical. You said government. Let me ask you rhetorically what is government and what is history.

Does Government mean of the people, by the people and for the people? Let's assume it does. Is Umno of the people? You get Umno's official stand that Isa is nominated because the people want him and since Umno preaches people first, therefore Isa is nominated. Let me ask you back - how do you know the people want him? Has the by-election already taken place?

By people, does Umno mean all the people of Bagan Pinang or does it mean some and if some, which some? Those who posted those banners threatening to boycott if it is not Isa? So, if Isa denigrates those banners, doesn't that imply he is against the voice of the people whom Umno says want him?

See what i mean? Sophia, does 'of the people' here, there and everywhere mean 'Umno warlords'? In which case what does by the people and for the people mean? Which comes to what is Government really all about.

Is government all about a fairly elected institution that provides services to the people? If you say that's a fair and simple definition, then you must agree with me a doctor is also an individual institution in his own right, innit?

A doctor provides service to the patients independent of his employer the hospital. He can be working for Hospital A or Hospital B. It doesn't matter. When he sees his patient, he treats the symptoms of the patient. When the patient sees him, the patient doesn't see the hospital. The diagnosis and treatment that form the service are all that matter.

Now, if you argue that it depends on which hospital that will make that service better, i will ask you back whether you are talking about a service or a business. And if you say it is a business in order to extend the service, then i will ask you back where the money for the business comes from and what is the motivation of those who will be providing the service.

So we come back to one thing. What is the motivation?

If those who support Isa are so exclusionarily gungho to support him, what is their motivation for doing so? Is it because he has been providing good service to the people? If they are only concerned that good service should be provided to the people, won't it make more sense to see more competition to provide the service?

After all, an election is like a tender. May the best provider win. So, if they are only willing to support Isa on threat of boycott, doesn't that mean in nominating only Isa, Umno is bending to the Bagan Pinang success formula? Closed-tender nominations?

And if that is so, what's with Umno GA going around expanding the Umno election quota? And if that quota is expanded from 2.5K to a few thousand more, don't you think that expanded warlordom will magnify the problem of this BP success formula even more? Thereby expanding, instead of eliminating, money politics on top of contaminating all the institutions that fall into the supply chain of at-all-costs means-to-ends? Now do you understand why I say it is not only a pyrrhic victory but also a lost victory? After all, you’re the one who postulated that Umno is government without which is chaos.'

walla 30 September 2009 at 17:12  

A: 'Ok, let's say i humor you. What about the historical sentiment for Umno?'

B: 'That's fine if the world is static. But the world is not static. And the records show that Umno has changed from its original spirit. It's like a company, B. When it starts, it learns, builds and grows. It rewards its shareholders and staff. Then as success settles, it grows an inner circle that sits within an outer circle that circumnavigates round the staff that spins public relations to the customers that entrenches its own invincibility and combativeness. As the world becomes more complex and the company grows in tandem, its circles will widen more and more. In turn, this will make the core more self-important in order to distinguish itself. It breeds its own aura and therefore its own blindspots. That’s how the subprime scandals started. The cores corrupted governance of the shareholder interests.

The Umno today you are talking about is exactly at that point in its evolution where it realizes its core is no longer relevant to the furthest reaches of the outermost circle. It realizes that all along it has been spinning and the only people listening to that spin are those nearest the loudspeakers they created - the core.

Now, what is that core to do? Spin some more and hope to do the rock? Or, spin less and bring down the swingin' party?

The history you are alluding to, Sophia, has changed. So too must the subject of its attention.'

A: 'That's beautifully said, B. I want to ask you something. What do you do for a living, just out of curiosity?'

B: 'You can address me as Your Honor. Something apparently in deathly dearth these days. Fulltime? prosecutor. Part-time? executor.'

A: (cough): 'Glad you didn't say executioner, B.'

B: 'In this country? That can be arranged, my dear.'

A: 'Last question. Are you Umno, PAS, PKR, DAP, what?'

B: 'You really want to know, Sophia? I am ONMU supreme council.'

A: 'What's that?!'

B: 'Used to be by the rakyat, of the rakyat and for the rakyat. Isn't that sad beyond reprieve, Sophia?'

A: 'Don't worry. Tomorrow will be a better day.'

B: 'I wish i can share your optimism. But when the Miti minister said he hoped the next quarter will be better, and then corrects himself by saying oh that's next month, i harbor less than hope these days.

It’s not that one loves Umno less but one really should love the rakyat more. All of them, Sophia.’

Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 17:23  

In USA, you are finished if you commit adultery. In Japan, you are finished if you make a mistake. You resign and quietly leave the stage.

Only in 'Uniquely Malaysia' is corruption tolerated and only given a slap on the wrist if you are in UMNO. Where is the resolve to cut out corruption ? How to show leadership by example ?

'Barang dimana pun pantat periuk itu hitam juga.' This has nothing to do with PAS, PKR or DAP or any other opposition party but with your own integrity and what you believe in.

Two other former MBs with tremendous wealth were also tolerated. What Isa did is probably pale in comparison to those two (only based on what is known publicly). Yet they are still holding office.

If everyone believes that it is normal for politicians to have loose morals, then we are doomed. That would be the standard for our politicians. If Isa is the only one who can bring salvation to UMNO in BP, then UMNO deserve to be in the opposition come next PRU.

Kala Jengking,  30 September 2009 at 17:40  

I wanted to put some comments here. But after reading opinions and comments from the others, I don't think I need to write anymore. The comments by Ex-M 16.17, Frank, Anon 16.49 and especially Anon 17.02 about sums it all.

No. UMNO will never change. But I think Sakmongkol has changed. He is being more of those "typical" UMNO guy now. Not the same guy than he used to be a couple of months back, I think.

The fact is UMNO is a feudal party, controlled by the powerful warlords like the drugs barons in latin America.The top leaders are scared shit of these warlords. That is the problem when only 2,500warlords in UMNO are allowed to vote and determine their leaders. So, they listen to these warlords and not the rakyat because the warlords are capable of pulling them down. Period.

By the way Walla, as usual good write up.

Ariff Sabri 30 September 2009 at 18:09  

its easy to know on which side you fall into. once you disagree with their viewpoints and defend your side, you have 'changed'. you see the hypocrivy of it all? you are cool as long as you share their viewpoints.
for eg: we are talking here about the concept of moral high ground and the false foundation on which its built. some prefer to go into porno details which i dont want to.i am not here discussing whether this lady is a willing partner or not- she was certainly a willing partner to the conduct which took place before her boyfrnd took the pictures. she was unwiling as regards the picture taken yes. Chua soi lek was certainly not agreable to have his tryst videotaped. it msut also be seen as a matter between him and god as one comentator piously puts it.
after this election, if any UMNO people commit wrong, i shall not hestitate to berate them here.
i am surprised to hear that the UMNO in me cannot be taken out. i make no apologies on being UMNO. but i dance to my own beat. you are speaking as though UMNO is some depsicable thing. sorry- i dont accept that. i can say the same thing about PKR. but i wont because pKR is not relevant to me.

Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 18:46  

dear dato,

eli wong had an affair with a married man and had her pictures taken unwillingly..the affair is morally wrong and lets assume it has hurt the bf's family deeply..and although the bf is a willing partner he is not an mp and therefore eli should get more flak coz shes a public figure.

we can say the same about csl, caught on tape unwillingly doing something that's hurting his family and his public image.

now lets get to isa..the man was found guilty of buying votes to enable him to gain a high position in the biggest party in our ruling coalition. the man is buying votes to gain power, to be a leader..

dear dato, some wrongs are mistakes that hurts people close to us but some wrongs are possibly acts of crime that should be punished, at least not glorified..while i respect your stance/hopes as an umno man i hope u can see the differences between eli, csl n isa.


Frank,  30 September 2009 at 20:50  

Dato Sak

Re your response to our comments here:

Don't get us wrong. You have defended some of UMNO's positions in the past and we, at least myself, agreed with you on those positions.

This is being non-partisan. It is not a case of which side one is on.

On this particular case , you defended the indefensible and in doing so, you came across as taking a blind partisan position as your arguments a critical analysis.

It is not like the other UMNO blogger, BigDog who we had accepted as a blind UMNO supporter without much intellectual substance in his postings.

In your case, we found you have substance. But not of late. Sorry, in this current posting we part company.

Perhaps in your quest to defend UMNO's acceptance of Isa Samad as a right choice, you failed to see your own arguments.

For a moment, I thought you are among the very few who have the best chance to reform UMNO from WITHIN. I don't think so now. Sorry for saying so.

Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 21:10  

Dear Sir,

I fully agree with you that Isa has been convicted by UMNO court rather than MACC or Malaysia court. So can I conclude that Isa is not guilty as per se in malaysia court?

If this is a case, UMNO must have the highest ethics and code policies in Malaysia.

A good case for discussion: A morally guilty person without obtaining judgement in court, it is still not guilty.

I'm so amused by your comments on this issue. An intelligent person who is trying to defend UMNO position.

The sequence events of UMNO by filling a tainted candidate is the act of desparation. It is not about Isa, Elizabeth, or Dr.Chua. It is about UMNO, the biggest party in BN coalition. As a leader, UMNO should be leading by example in fighting corruption.

A simple person like me needs a simple answer from you.

Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 21:18  

A very poor attempt to somewhat "soften" the public perception on the selection of a corrupt politician as the UMNO Candidate.

We respect your decision to remain an UMNO Member but what your readers would find most disappointing is your increasing attempt to spin. As your fellow UMNO Blogger Rocky Bru had said "Bagan Pinang is not a party election, it is a national election. It's not just about Umno or Isa Samad's supporters, it's about the people. So even if Isa Samad wins big at Bagan Pinang, it will be an absurd victory"

Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 22:43  

Dato got a very valid point...Isa was convicted within UMNO rules..not as a criminal in the traditional context of the law of the country.

Its like a footballer who gets sent off for a vicious tackle..can we brand him as a "violent and unruly" person.You don't cos the circumstances of the "crime" is confined to within a 90 minutes of special set of circumstances.

Its similar to Isa's crime..its only a wrong doing/corruption within the rules set by UMNO.He was not charged in a criminal court.Even his morality can't be questioned as the full evidence is only privy to a few.

Isa is as honest and god fearing person as the PAS candidate for Bagan Pinang.

One should be impartial enough to judge him beyond the UMNO disciplinary courts.One should look at his long and successful service record to the rakyat and specifically the people of BP.

Dato Sak have closed the circle..through his persuasive and logical elaborations.PR will have the hopeless task of finding the weakest links within his arguements...and try they will.But eventually the stature of ISA as a leader and servant of the rakyat of BP will win the day.

Anonymous,  30 September 2009 at 22:47  

Do not be disheartened. You have criticized UMNO where necessary and when needed.That made many very happy.
However, even though you said you do not agree with Isa as a candidate, you are trying your best to help your partyman.

For your strong loyalty and defensive arguments UMNO should never ever doubt that you will betray the party like some 'frogs' or power hungry perverts.

Keep up the excellent work!

Anonymous,  1 October 2009 at 00:02  


Seems like many posters are disappointed with your stance. But not me. I always thought you are a sack of contradictions and this is a very common trait amongst politicians.

Strangely, I do enjoy your writings. Some makes no sense, again because of the contradictions, some are powerfully unreal, coming from an UMNO party member, but many are of substance unlike those typically found in run-of-the-mill-lets-say-something silly blogs by other pro-UMNO bloggers.

Am I making sense? Am I contradicting myself? If I'm guilty of both, then perhaps I've been spending too much time on this site.


Kala Jengking,  1 October 2009 at 00:27  

I admire your guts to criticize UMNO for the wrong doings it has committed...calling a spade a spade. You have also given credit to UMNO when it is due. And many times I do agree with you on this as well.

However, you are getting us wrong on this Isa thing. Not agreeing to Isa does mean we 'despise' UMNO because the name is UMNO and condone the wrong doings of PR.

I also wrote against the Behrang and Chankat Jering PR assemblymen as well. Asking them to be sacked. But UMNO seems fit to get them to their side just to grab power in Perak. I personally feel this is not a right thing to do.

We are talking about policies and leadership. UMNO has strayed far from its original struggle. I am sure you can agree on this. Some of us are just putting our opinions on how we see things as a non partisan citizen.

UMNO talk about change. You were also talking about change for UMNO to remain relevant. UMNO were adamant to stop money politics/corruption imposing various rules and regulations on its members. But by fielding Isa, UMNO is sending the wrong signal that it can accept tainted people as winning is all that matters. Yes, winning is important. But UMNO has to also look at the bigger picture. Not all constituencies are like BP. In as much as I respect your opinion and intellectuality, I cannot agree with you on this one. That is all.
Sorry. We have to agree to disagree on this one.

Anyway, if UMNO field other suitable candidate apart from Isa, I think the candidate will also win as far a BP is concern. And the win will be more meaningful and sweeter. It is not about winning at all costs.But unfortunately UMNO bows to the pressure from the warlords.

Anyway, since Isa has been chosen, let the rakyat decides. I hope Isa can improve the majority to justify his selection. Anything less is a failure.

Dato, let's move on to other topics. Too much already on B Pinang. Let us visit BP after the election results.

Anonymous,  1 October 2009 at 00:43  

UMNO's final decision to choose Isa as the candidate was a tainted one, being forced upon by the UMNO grassroot supporters in Bagan Pinang.

Given a choice, UMNO will field another candidate of unblemished integrity, but it's Hobson's choice to accept Isa's candidacy, for fear of receiving potential backlash by the UMNO voters.

In this respect, UMNO's integrity is being compromised.

UMNO's addiction to corruption is a foregone conclusion, in which ever way you spin the story.

Anonymous,  1 October 2009 at 01:11

Come across this interesting new blog for your perusal

Anonymous,  1 October 2009 at 03:08  

If morality was a none issue in Eli's case, why was it bothering PR so much to the extend a piety's cloak was badly needed to hide the shameful incident?

In the beginning was it not Eli that made the decision to opt for early exit from the political battle field when her purportedly private issue turned public surfacing on the Net?

But then after so much hedonistic political drama taken to the air, in the end was it not PR that created a sense of anti-climax? In other word these scumbag simply changed the sort of ending that people would very much like to see into one of their version.

Notwithstanding the decision was legally right, the reason for PR refusal to except Eli's premature withdrawal was actually beyond people's comprehension!

In the context of comparing the moral high ground, by right there should be a fairly uniform and standardize judgment applicable for all and sundry. So, in this case PR have set a dangerous precedent.


Suci Dalam Debu 1 October 2009 at 06:07  


Of all your pieces, this one scores the lowest. You just need to put forward better points of argument.We are not seeking perfection here,just distinction.

No matter what, I do enjoy your writings tremendously. Can agree to disagree.

Unknown 1 October 2009 at 21:48  

No, UMNO will never change. First deny and then justify is what you are writing. Sign of a hypocrite and this has been going on in UMNO since TDM took over.

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by 2008

Back to TOP