Malaysian Head of State Agong served more practical purpose than SG President

In comparison between Singaporean and Malaysian Head of States, today the Malaysian Agong had demonstrated a practical purposed served and fulfilled a crucial national needs - for once at least. For that big political show down between opposition led by Mr. Anwar & BN led by PM Najib.

Agong played a neutral role and brought a more peaceful settlement to the impending major Bersih show down. This is also their election year.

In the comparison this is also SG's Presidential & General Election year, and famiLEE LEEgime only repeatedly stress to the people that Elected President is essentially their puppet and eunuch. Practically useless.

Malaysia Boleh! LEEgime mati!
;)

ABC News URL

King heads off feared Malaysia violence

By Cameron Wilson for Radio Australia

Posted 2 hours 0 minutes ago

Malaysia's king has headed off a potentially violent confrontation of protest groups on the streets of Kuala Lumpur.

An Australian observer, Professor Clive Kessler, told Radio Australia's Connect Asia program the country had "stepped back from the brink" with the royal intervention.

In a rare intervention in politics, sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin called on an electoral reform group, Bersih, to call off a street protest.

Bersih's plans to hold anti-government protests on Saturday had stirred other groups, including the ruling UMNO party, to say that they would hold counter rallies - raising fears of possible riots.

After an audience with the king, Bersih, the Coalition for Free and Fair Election, has decided to hold the weekend march in a stadium, allaying fears of chaos.

Professor Kessler, from the University of NSW, says it was "a remarkable intervention".

"The last two weeks in Malaysia have been astounding and gripping and all one can say is that Malaysia has, at least for the moment, stepped back from the brink," he said from Kuala Lumpur.

He says the calling out of other groups in counter-rallies came after the government refused to sanction the Bersih march.

"The government basically said no and authorised the use of violence by surrogate, by vigilante groups, against the marchers and was pleading in advance self-defence in doing so," he said.

"In other words, blaming the Bersih sympathisers and Bersih for the violence that was to be unleashed upon them, and that was a terrifying prospect."

After complicated negotiations, the Bersih group agreed to meet in a stadium in Shah Alam, the state capital a little outside Kuala Lumpur.

"The march is officially off, but a very large number of people can be expected to attend the [rally] since it's no longer forbidden. It now has royal blessing," Professor Kessler said.

Tags: world-politics, malaysia

Sammyboy.Com Thread

Bilingual article from Sammyboy.Com forum

English URL:

Re: Your money worries and your democratic rights

I urge Singaporeans to learn and be clear about Rights & Ability, or the rather Rights vs Ability.

Confusion between the 2 is very bad.

Rights is a logical matter, Ability is a physical. Difference is big here.

If you are on your death bed, lost 99% of your ability, you will still have 100% of your rights as long as the rest in this world still respect your rights. You would even have your rights as a DEAD MAN totally with zero ability, as long as the others would uphold your rights for you.

If you had your physical Ability to enforce and guard your what is rightfully yours, it is a very different thing, because you don't need to depend on any others to uphold your own Rights, and if any of them violated your Rights, you physically put them to the places they belong.

As activists we help people by inspiring them and encouraging them to acquire their physical Abilities to empower themselves, to guard their own logical rights.

When people's Rights had been violated and compromised / undermined, helplessly, that means they lack the ability to uphold and guard their own Rights, or defending against the violators.

Hence talking about Rights in these cases is just merely Account the amount of losses suffered at the most, if you just merely talk about Rights. By that we know that the violators will only continue to exploit, unless your talks alone can stop them via embarrassment. If that is the case it is too easy, and these lucky people don't really need any activists to do anything.

In most cases, if you really want to Reclaim the losses suffered, you really need quite some Physical Ability, that is whatever form of Damages, Pressure, Pain, Losses, Distress, Hurt, Death etc you can cause to the violators to defend your violated Rights.

Talks are cheap. And most likely not very helpful.

Because in the 1st place the violators did not accidentally violated people rights, they calculated and prepared and intentionally / purposefully did it.



They neglected and disrespected and violated the people's right for their own gains, in most cases.

If Singaporeans had absolutely no Ability to inflict something wonderful on the LEEgime, you think Ass Loong Son will apologize like he did in GE2011. You really think so?


I strongly believe otherwise.

uy..

中文链接：

【权】 与 【 能】


绝对有必要清楚的认知两者的分别和作用。

两者绝对不相等，搞错了搞混了，麻烦就可以很大。

【权】仅是人为的逻辑性存在的。 只有人为的承认和维护它，它才存在。它人为的存在也可以人为的消逝，或者人为的被改变（增/减/扩/缩）。

决定的人为因素通常包括：法律；宗教；信念；政治理论；学术理论。。等等。 皆为人为因素。

【 能】必须是实体的；实践性；物理性的存在的。必须有实际的效果。而非理论性；逻辑性；或凭空想像的。空谈不能包括在这里 面。

例如老虎有能力吃掉你。但它未必有权这样做。
老虎吃你的时候，你有权自卫。但是你未必有能力做到。

因为【权】是人为存在的，老虎它当然就是不懂，它不懂得人为的东西嘛。
老虎它有的是【 能】而，你知道你有自卫【权】，因为你被人为的教育了，你知道其他人会承认/支持你的自卫【权】。

如果老虎被你关在笼子里面了。你可能会要把它送到餐桌上尝一尝，你可能有这个【能】力。但是，你未必有【权】这样做。你可以争议自己有【权】，但是这要看地方的法律。各地方的法律不相同，这完全是人为的因素。这不影响你的【能】力。你有本事把虎烹吃了，不管法律是否允许。你本事大些，执法的人不知道你把虎烹吃了。你本事再大些，执法 的人即使知道你把虎烹吃了也告不了你。你本事再更大些，你把法律改了！

这就是你自己的【 能】的分别。只有实践性的【能】力，才能改变人为的【权】。空谈无用。


【权】是人为的所有可以争论不休，没完没了。人的看法无法一致，这问题当然没完没了。

【 能】的实践性就很直接了当。马上实践证明就完了。到底是老虎吃你还是你吃它，很快就有答案。老虎饿了吃你，5分 钟下肚子，几小时後消化拉屎。你就变成虎粪了。活不回来了。跟理论分别巨大。你把老虎烹吃了可能1或2小时 。同样会消化拉屎。煮不卫生的话，你拉肚子。老虎吃你多数不拉肚子。因为它的适应消化能力和你 不同。这是【 能】的分别。

吃下去就么有什么子争论啦。

uy..

Thais vs Singaporeans

Cut & Pasted from Sammyboy.com forum - my own message.

Re: Yingluck Shinawatra wins by a landslide as Abhisit conceded defeat

The vote is only a poll.

It is not final - as far as Thais are concerned especially.

There are many possibilities depending on weather the other camp accept this result or not:

• They may go to court citing frauds and cheating. Demand to void this result.
• They may find fault with legitimacy of candidate Yingluck & the party.
• They may initiate a military coupe against this poll out come.
• They may initiate a Yellow Shirt Campaign to oust Yingluck.

None of the above is new, they had all happened before.

Very narrow and limited minds of Singaporeans may not be able to cope with the such reality like Thailand. Which is sad for Singaporeans not the Thais.

I can safely state that even if Abhisit won this poll, his position isn't final unless Red Shirt gave up. They did it before, they can do again, any time, deaths isn't stopping them.

This is what I call vigour & persistent political spirit. Defiance against arbitrary (alien) un-native system and political culture - aka election system. This is something that Thai people are respectable about.

They don't blindly follow rules and system, especially western (foreign) political culture. They know their own interest, and they won't compromise their interest, just to respect a foreign system. Their own historic political system is feudalism dynasty, they love their king - but this is beside the point.

The point is, and on the contrary to Thais in SG, our peasants will blindly follow any system imposed on them, weather it is from LEEgime or remained from previous colonial masters. Unlike Singaporeans, Thais gives priority to their own interest and own tradition, and most importantly - own NEEDS, the Election System (foreign political tradition) is secondary (and experimental) to them. They will try to conduct election and see if that can solve their problems or not, if it does not, they will retract back to their own traditional ways.

On the other hand, Singaporeans just constantly seek rules to follow, and without rules, Singaporeans are at total lost! And they start to complain that "OMG! There is no rule, no system!" If LEEgime did not impose a system to rule them in certain aspects, they will comply with any foreign system or rule especially Western - BLINDLY! Even when they had made themselves total suckers, they will still suck on, happily feeling satisfied and secure - sucking.