funny cats so cute!!

Posted by jai on Friday, May 18, 2007




Cat can talk?




Talking cat found via: | funny cat |

10 great people comments here:
tim said... at 5/23/2007 6:57 PM  

I refer to the explanation for the 'reluctant apologies' by these two guys. They say they were defending the BN and its leader.

I say, Pak Lah, I am sure you have better guys to defend you than these two 'mouth leaking' political monkeys.

Now the whole world is laughing at us. How unfair just because I am a Malaysian.

Now, I hope no pea-brained ministers or political monkeys will become so sensitive to tell us not to even mention the word 'bocor' because it symbolises Malaysia.

If BN continues to bring in these type of 'bocor' people into their fold, it shows they don't have much talents in their team. I think this is the beginning of their end.

yuking said... at 5/23/2007 7:02 PM  

If we read the Malaysia Federal Constitution of 1957, we will not find the word "bumiputera" - hence some would say the origin of the word is grounded in the political agenda of some politicians to discriminate against citizens not of malay ethnicity.

In short there is no constitutional legitimacy in the use of the term "bumiputera" except for its purpose which is to discriminate for the sake of discriminating.

Some fifty years after independence from the British, the demographic profile of its population has changed. Most of the Chinese/Indians today are no longer foreign born, and through the principle of "jus soli" (Latin meaning "right of the soil") are citizens by birth.

The word "bumiputera" (Sanskrit meaning "son of the soil") which came into popular use after the riots of 1969, is a convenient term not grounded in the science of anthropology but in the politics of race - in other words its use is a convenient invention by malay politicians and malay leaders to justify the policies of Umno which dominated the ruling alliance, which came to be known as the New Economic Policy (NEP).

It could have been called "The Great Affirmative Action Policy" but the architects of the NEP are visionary leaders whose motives go beyond affirmative action.

It is not a coincidence that post-1969 saw the rise of business oriented leaders in Umno and the political demise of the malay school teachers whose hold over power in the party suffered a setback. The labeling is important as events many years later are to demonstrate to us that more is envisaged rather than just affirmative action.

Let there only be one class or let Malaysia be a nation of the "classless". Malaysians do not need a caste system like we find in India.

Enough is enough. The word "bumiputera" creates a class of Malaysians based not on ethnicity but on some dubious criteria with religion factored into it.

It is conceptualized for the convenience of policy makers who rode on the wave of malay nationalism unleashed after May 13, 1969 to maintain their position of power and influence.

The faster we do away with the word "bumiputera" the better it will be. The use of the term "bumiputera" post-1969, I submit, has less to do with affirmative actions but more to do with politicians who see in it the opportunity to maintain their hold over power.

It is time power be handed over to a fresh breed of Malaysians who think less in terms of Malay, Indian and Chinese or "bumiputera" and "non-bumiputera" but more in terms of Malaysians of different ethnic descent.

But let us not lose our perspective. The United States has been independent for more than 200 years but is still today struggling with racism. Malaysia is still politically a toddler learning to walk. Success is about what happens when we fall rather than in the walking.

reek said... at 5/23/2007 10:38 PM  

If anybody who thinks that corruption and racial discrimination is not wrong then there will be nothing that is wrong.

This is what actually happening in Umno. They love the two evils:

(i) corruption to enrich themselves (ii) racial discrimination to make them feel good and superior to other races (when they do not know that they still need to be spoon fed and the tongkat) and deceive the poor kampung folks that they are heroes to their race who keep on voting for them.

They are actually robbing the country by making everybody poorer, malays and other races alike. Petrol prices are raised with hundred and one excuse, and tolls are raised without any transparency, and everything has gone up making the poor becoming poorer.

I do not see anything that they can be proud of, and nothing superior about them. Even to rob, they are all given assistance and tongkat to do it by having two set of laws, one for them and one for the ordinary citizens.

samp said... at 5/23/2007 10:49 PM  

It seems to me that BN is a fellowship of cheats and thieves, corrupted and unprincipled idiots, morons, sexists, tyrants who steal from public coffers.

God, with 90% BN members in parliament, who needs a parliament?

kok said... at 5/23/2007 11:05 PM  

As a post-independence-born Malaysian, I would like to offer my thoughts on Article 153 of the federal constitution which mentions the special position of the malays. Please note that there is no mention of the words 'special privileges' or 'special rights' in the constitution.

For too long, there has been a lack of understanding of what our forefathers had in mind when they included this clause in our much talked about social contract. To gain a better understanding, let us take a trip back in time to 1957 to actually visualise the scene then.

In a scenario where the immigrant Chinese and Indians were seeking citizenship rights in Malaysia, it is reasonable to presume that they would have had to understand and acknowledge the difficulties faced by the majority malays.

And this is where the meaning of the words 'special position' comes into focus. What did our forefathers mean by the special position of the malays? Did they mean that the malays would enjoy a higher status than all the other races? Did they mean that the malays would have special rights and privileges in perpetuity?

If this is what our forefathers had intended, then our constitution would have mentioned this specifically. However, the constitution or social contract does not say so.

What then, could the words 'special position' mean? It is reasonable to infer that our forefathers were concerned first by the fact that the malays were left behind economically despite being the indigenous majority in the country.

Secondly, they were concerned by the fact that, despite being immigrants, the Chinese and a small segment of the Indian community were relatively much better off.

The clause was therefore more so of an acknowledgment by the non-malays of the disadvantageous economic situation of the malays. The consideration given by the former to the latter when entering into the social contract for citizenship rights was agree to provide some measure of support for the malays to improve their economic standing.

If our forefathers had meant for these preferences to last in perpetuity, then there would not have been a request for a review in 15 years.

When I see the compulsory requirement for non-malay companies to hand over a certain portion of their equity to the malays for no input at all, I am tempted to ask: Is this what our forefathers had in mind? I can go on listing the abuses forever because there are plenty of them.

It is intriguing to hear senior BN and Umno leaders repeatedly asking the people to adhere to the social contract. What contract they are referring to? It cannot be the federal constitution. It is most probably some contract that they have entered into unilaterally without the agreement of the non-malays.

So it seems to be incorrect to firstly equate the words 'special position' with 'special rights and privileges'. Secondly, it also seems incorrect to suggest that the malays have special rights and privileges in perpetuity and therefore, that they have a higher status than everyone else.

The non-malays only agreed to allow them preferences over the others for a finite period of time. It has now been almost 50 years since independent but has such a meaningful review of those preferences taken place at all? Absolutely not.

In fact what has happened is that successive BN governments, dominated by Umno, and especially after the 1969 tragedy, have taken the liberty to very liberally interpret Article 153. This has led to the wholesale abuse of the consideration provided by the non-malays in 1957 for their citizenship rights.

It seems to me that the real social contract of 1957 was torn up long ago by the BN government with the way in which the NEP was implemented from the 1970s onwards.

To me, the real social contract of 1957 has long been dead. I hope the day will come when the people of Malaysia in the true independent spirit will make it live again.

Then perhaps, we would not have to spend hundreds of millions ringgit on nonsensical projects like the National Service to inculcate unity amongst the races.

vesewe said... at 5/23/2007 11:12 PM  

That is why malay is the most arrogant, corrupted, racist and terrorist race in the world. To the world population, malay is only a minority. And yet, still keep on talking about Islam, Muslim, Syariah law. Shame on you!

vesewe said... at 5/23/2007 11:15 PM  

That is why malay is the most arrogant, corrupted, racist and terrorist race in the world. To the world population, malay is only a minority. And yet, still keep on talking about Islam, Muslim, Syariah law. Shame on you!

San said... at 5/23/2007 11:34 PM  

The facts:

(1) Orang Asli Negritos are the first inhabitants in this land

(2) Proto malays came from Yunan in China

(3) Deutro malays came from Indonesia

(4) Malays are Hindus/Buddhists for 2000 years

(5) Harun and Razak plot the 1969 riot

(6) Social contract rewriting after 1969 riot

(7) Bumis term never exist before 1969 riot

(8) lie - Blame Chinese control economic 70%

(9) lie - Blame Chinese/Tamil schools for national disunity

(10) lie - Blame Singapore government suppress malays

(Many more.)

ruyom said... at 5/23/2007 11:40 PM  

Dear Bung and Said, I will not address you by your titles as they are meant to be honorific titles.

Apparently, sometimes it takes an eye for an eye to realise the mistakes you clowns made. Let me ask you this and after my question, I would like to quickly apologise for it - would you be not be angry if someone posed the same question to your wives?

My question posed is in jest (as defended by Najib) and if it offends you, I would like to perhaps retract the question or quite possibly even apologise for it (without any pressure).

Our sleepy prime minister as usual will not take any actions against these clowns. What can you expect from a corrupt, racist, sexist and poor performing government! Folks, why do we still put up with these clowns?

Time to vote for DAP, PKR and PAS. We have a democracy in place but yet we have failed to exercise it.

I would like to air my bit on our two buffoons if I may. It shows the class and the mentality of our elected representatives. The speaker managed to drop the issue like a hot potato after searching for a technicality.

The prime minister conveniently 'hears no evil, sees no evil'. The women's minister is happy with a 'closure'. So tell me what else is new. After all the fuss we are back to square one. A very unique Malaysia solution. God helps us all.

@depot said... at 5/24/2007 12:25 AM  

hello guys..

no political comment on nonpolitical post!!!