The Reason why Malaysians are unsafe

One simple reason, the Inspector General of Police or IGP.

His name is Tan Sri Musa Hassan and he believes ( or he wants everyone else to believe) that the crime rate in Malaysia is very much under control and that it is only the "public's mispeception" that it is unsafe in Malaysia.

Does he have any proof to back that claim up? Of course! His stats say that there are 772 crimes for every 100,000 residents and that this ratio compared favourably with Hong Kong where there were 1,166 cases for every 100,000 residents, Japan 1,569 cases and Australia 4,470 cases.

He goes on to point out then, that Malaysia is SAFER than Hong Kong, Japan and Australia!
Of course the Opposition has called the crime index a lie and claimed that in actual fact...

Homicide(per 100,000): Japan - 1.09, Hong Kong - 0.26, Malaysia - 2.12
Rape(per 100,00): Japan - 1.62, Hong Kong -1.54, Malaysia - 11.47
Robbery(per 100,00) : Japan - 4.78, Hong Kong - 17.56, Malaysia - 90.49

Again who does he think he is fooling? We don't even need statistics to know that Malaysia is way worse than any of those countries. But it seems like the Cabinet Ministers and National Economic Council believed him. What then does that say about them?

Since Musa is so fond of vague statistics, I have one for him. On the date I wrote this article 4th December 2008, I visited three sites. They were the major online newspaper for Malaysia, Japan and Hong Kong. I took the top stories for the day and highlighted the ones which are about crime and criminal activities.

As you can see, out of 24 top stories in Malaysia, 9 of them are about crime as compared to only 3 both in Japan and Hong Kong. Thats 300% more crime in Malaysia! I know this is a silly way to compare crime rate but I still think it is more reliable than Musa's pulled-out-of-the-arse crime index.

Mine is Bigger than Yours - a study

Abstract: A scientific study conducted to compare the absolute size of bodily organs between subject A (me) and subject B (Malaysia’s Inspector General of Police).

Methodology:

PART A

1. Place entire mass of subject B into beaker M (for Malaysia).

2. Carefully remove “Common Sense” as well as remaining “Lateral and Critical Thinking” from subject.

3. Place entire mass of subject A into same beaker.

4. Prepare a liquid mixture of

· 1/2g of acidic politics.

· 5g of unsterilized money.

· 100ml of crime preheated to melting point.

4. Pour the prepared liquid mixture into the beaker at various intervals for 2 years.

5. Monitor and record the response.

PART B

1. Expose beaker M to beaker J (Japan) and beaker HK (Hong Kong)

2. Monitor and record the response.

Results:

After 2 years of continuous exposure, Subject B has shown to posses the ability to react exothermically with the liquid mixture to form a layer of sludge which lets out a pungent odor.

Subject B seems to be able to neutralize the 100ml of crime but has preferred instead to develop a barrier to filter out the amount of crime it can absorb. This barrier has been dubbed “Shield of Ignorance”.

Subject A seems to have been gravely affected by all this but seems determined to grow and develop regardless.

In part B of the experiment, Subject A has shown a great attraction to the particles in beaker J and HK, which is not surprising seeing as they both have a more ideal environment in which to grow in.

Subject B however, produced a statistical study outlining that beaker M has a much better environment compared to J and HK and presented it to everyone.

Discussion:

Subject B has shown very peculiar actions unlike that in which was previously predicted. Subject B has been created solely for the purpose of neutralizing the ingredients in the liquid mixture. But it seems that it is more concerned with protecting itself and allowing Subject A to take the brunt of the damage. It is thought that exposure to the more ideal environments would prompt Subject B to act accordingly but instead it has ignored the other beakers and has gone so far as to further produce a statistical lie to save itself.

Conclusion:

In conclusion Subject B is totally useless and has testosities which are inferior to that of Subject A.

In layman’s term MY BALLS ARE BIGGER THAN TAN SRI MUSA’s. I am not afraid to acknowledge that the crime rate in Malaysia is worsening and I also have the decency to not lie about it. I do not say that high crime rate is “just the perception of the public” and be stupidly complacent with the situation of the country as it stands now. I do not mess with the statistics and say that Malaysia is safer than Hong Kong or Japan! Why is Tan Sri Musa the inspector general of the police anyway? He is just a frail old douche who doesn’t care about public safety. I bet as a kid he was horrible at playing hide-and-seek. When it’s his turn to be seeker instead of looking for the hiders, he would go around convincing his other friends that he found everyone, although he never did.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar. He is the Malaysian epitome of a truly pathetic, foolish and dense man. Furthermore, he is a real threat to the democracy and security of the country! I generally use their real names when referring to people even when they start talking cock, but in this case and throughout this article, I shall refer to Syed Albar as “Dickhead”.



A grand title for a truly deserving man. These are now some examples of Dickhead speaking his mind. Which as evinced through the picture above, is full of cock.



"Police work is police work. They are responsible for maintaining law and order. This is routine police work," - Albar speaking on the catastrophic handling of the peaceful Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih) rally resulting in 23 arrests and alleged police brutality.

You know when a country is entering its dark eras when police are allowed to attack citizens for no reason and have the home minister calling it “routine work”. The gathering was deemed illegal in Malaysia, despite it being a democratic country, so police had to break it up…so far this is all within acceptable boundaries. But why the arrests? Men, women, young and old were arrested. Unless a 53 year old man singing the national anthem is a national threat, no arrests were necessary.

It all just seems like a scare tactic. Arrest them this time so that they won’t go out rallying again. Stupid tactic, and all it does is fire up the people. Thanks Dickhead for not doing anything about it.



"We don't want anything happen to the journalist as her life was under threat," – Albar speaking on the arrest of newspaper reporter Tan Hoon Cheng under the ISA.

This whole incident is just brimming with controversy, blatant discrimination and disregard of fundamental human rights that it deserves an article of its own. But never mind that, we are focused on Dickhead alone for now. So her life was supposedly under threat, what do you do? Arrest her under the INTERNAL SECURITY ACT, which for all intents and purposes used as a measure to “prevent a person from acting in any manner prejudicial to national security”.

During her arrest, there were no inquiries into who threatened her; rather it was all about an article she wrote on Ahmad Ismail, who called the Chinese in Malaysia “squatters”.
Everyone who knew about Dickhead’s statement knew it was a complete lie. Which begs the question, is he and his officials so dumb as to think that a lie like that would convince the public? And he got away with the lie too. Only in Malaysia this…only in Malaysia.



"The police are there to make a place safe. If they themselves are scared and run away, then how can we hope for others to want to be there? It is embarrassing and that is why the criminals will always be there,” – Albar speaking on the reason for relocating a police beat in Chow Kit. To summarize his speech (which seems to always be the case since he likes to drone on and on about irrelevant matters and stray from the topic at hand) what he means to say is that crime rate in the area is so high that it is UNSAFE for the police there.

That’s right, let’s take the police away from the crime infested areas so that they can go back there and find criminals!

Makes no sense? Wait it gets better. He also said the area is “dirty” hence the possibility of police contracting contagious diseases.





“Haven’t reached Red Danger Alert level” – Albar speaking on crime in general in Malaysia.
The statement came about when foreign Taiwanese investors complained about the rising crime level which are shaking investment confidence.

Now we truly see how ignorant Dickhead is. Crime rate is increasing at an alarming rate. I have statistics but there is no need for that to prove this point. While walking when was the last time you didn’t clutch your bag closer when you heard a motorbike approaching. While walking when was the last time your muscles didn’t tense up when a car seems to slow down behind you. Do you trust cab drivers anymore? I don’t only mean in charging honest fares, but trusting them to get you safely to your destination? How many times do you look over your shoulder when withdrawing money from the ATM? How many times have you heard the advice to place your bag on your lap while eating at a cheap restaurant and not on the chair beside you? Do you agree wholeheartedly that a motorbike helmet is a weapon? Do you let your kids wander farther than a few meters away from you in public areas?

Every normal citizen can see that crime rate is on the rise, it seems only Dickhead is ignorant to this fact.

All in all, Dickhead is directly or indirectly responsible for the ruin of many lives. The lives of many Malaysians are deteriorating and no one feels safe anymore. Everyday people get mugged, raped, robbed, harassed, thrown into prison, beaten up by police, and have family members taken away from them. Malaysians are living in constant fear, and the guy obligated to eradicate the fear is the same guy responsible for sustaining the fear. And he gets away with it.


LINKS

Malaysian Insider
m2day
sangkancil
theedgedaily
limkitsiang

Malaysian Politicians Kock Talking

Few can deny that Malaysia is in a state of imbalance. And that’s putting it nicely. Over the years the effects of corruption, cronyism, nepotism and discrimination has shown no signs of fatigue, rather it has been gaining strength and momentum.

The 2008 elections saw Malaysians stand up to deny the ruling coalition for the first time in decades. The event has not been given enough credit. It was a day signifying a change. My hopes is that one day, it will be written in the school history books as the day Malaysians stood up for what is right. Malaysians. Not “The Chinese” or “The Malays”, but MALAYSIANS.

Some people are afraid of change; the thought of stepping out of their comfort zone terrifies them. Like an abused wife who stands by her husband, convincing herself night after night that this is only temporary, that it’s only because he was drunk, that she still loves him. We all know that’s not true…

So what has this change taught us? For one thing it has taught us that when pressed, Malaysian politicians can say the stupidest things (Sarah Palin anyone?). Here are some examples based solely around a particular policy. One that mandates all public listed companies to have at least 30% bumiputera stakes in them.

Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin

“the policy to have 30 per cent Bumiputera equity participation in public companies showed that the community had compromised a lot even though they form 70 per cent of the country's population.”[link]

So in simple terms, what he seems to be implying is that percentage of equity in public companies should be directly proportional to the bumiputera population. So since bumiputeras make up 70% of the population (although that figure itself is grossly exaggerated) then it is a big compromise on their side since the policy only requires 30% bumiputera participation.

Why is this guy “Education Minister”? By his argument, then all public companies should at least have 30% NON-bumiputera equity as well since they make up 30% of the population.

Imagine rocking up to a restaurant and ordering a plate of fried rice, only to be served a dish with 3/4 of it fried rice and the rest char kuey teow. And when you complain the chef says there are lots of kuey teow leftover and so he serves them in every dish. Ridiculous? You bet.

Umno Youth executive council member Datuk Mukhriz Tun Dr Mahathir.

"So long as the Bumiputera are not comfortable and confident with their capabilities, the policy cannot be abolished.” [link]

Seriously? That’s like saying as long as students from a particular school don’t meet the grades, we will continue to pass them regardless.

How about looking into the reason why students are failing instead? Or in this case, the lack of confidence? The logic is so simple that it is scary to think that the politicians have not actually thought of this solution. And it is equally scary to think that they actually have thought of it, but chose to ignore it in favour of the more discriminative and manipulative method.

Entrepreneur and Co-operatives Development Minister Datuk Noh Omar.

“This is proof of the government being flexible.This is evident from 260 companies without the Bumiputera equity operating in the country.”

“All this while we've never denied the rights of others; we give the freedom to embrace the religion of their choice and to build places of worship. Every Malaysian citizen is given protection and equal rights," [link]

First, addressing the obvious, how does company equity and freedom of religion relate to each other? I can think of one way:

It only goes to show what kind of impression some people have regarding the issue. Why so shallow? Does everything have to relate to religion?

Now let us ignore that ridiculous comment and analyze this on a purely economic viewpoint. The ministers, even Dr M himself says that the policy should only be abolished when a target of “30 percent Bumiputeras, 40 per cent for non-bumiputeras and 30 for foreigners is reached”-News Strait Times

So this in turn begs the question time and time again, how do we determine what the percentage is now? Well just recently in 2006 the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (ASLI) submitted a report based on that very topic. Contributors to the study include the likes of Dr Lim Teck Ghee, a former World Bank social scientist, and Dr Terence Gomez, a research coordinator at United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD). The authenticity is far from questionable, given that the findings and methods are released to the public.

What was the government’s response? Tan Sri Muyiddin Hussein called it “rubbish”. UMNO vice-president and Malacca Chief Minister Mohammad Ali Rustam called it “inaccurate”. Why? Because the study places bumiputera corporate equity ownership around 45%, significantly higher than the 18.9% official figure released at that time.

Here’s what Prime Minister Ahmad Badawi had to say about it,

"ASLI adopted an approach based on a survey involving only 1000 companies listed on Bursa Malaysia, unlike the Economic Planning Unit (EPU) which involved 600,000 Malaysian companies in its survey and used government documents."

Compare this to what Datuk Noh Omar claims when he says that the government is "flexible" What is he comparing that 260 non bumiputera companies too? The 1000 listed on Bursa Malaysia, or the 600,000 companies? Paring his figure with 1000 would make his claim believable. But the Prime Minister himself has stated that a figure of 600,000 should be used for such studies instead. They contradict themselves, who do we believe? They screwed themselves either way.

The government has been suppressing the issue for far too long. They have NOT released their own method or calculation prosedure, and the numbers they quote are inconsistent. On a side note, the pressure they put on ASLI finally made them cave in. They retracted their study. The researchers who conducted the study however, stuck by their findings and Dr Lim Teck Ghee himself refused to sign the retraction form, which ultimately led him to quit. [link 1] [link 2]