Malaysia’s Day: Death of the Psychopathic God (Final Part)

I deal with the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs a lot in my job, as behaviour affects one’s decision and motivation to do or achieve something, and especially with regards to safety. Let us have a look at it for a moment:

20130928-115106.jpg

It shows that a normal human being is more motivated to satisfy his most basic needs first. Therefore, what you want would be at the top of your subconscious list while the good of the common would come on the fifth rung.

So when Chin Peng had had the opportunity to return to his place of birth, one would imagine that that would have been the apex of his personal needs. In the agreement signed between the Government of Malaysia and the Communist Party of Malaya on 2nd December, 1989, it mentioned that the CPM would have to give a list of those wanting to return to Malaysia, to the Government, within a year of the signing of the agreement.

20130928-120011.jpg

With only 1,188 remaining members, I would give three months for the CPM members to decide, and a further three to produce the list. Those who would have really missed their families, I am sure, would have applied almost immediately. Let us now look at the list of CPM office-bearers who applied to return, and when the application was made. Bear in mind, the cut-off date was 1st December, 1990.

20130928-120529.jpg

Was Chin Peng desperate to return to Sitiawan? I let you be the judge. But of the 1,188, 431 applied to be allowed to return to Malaysia. Only 338 were allowed home while 93 were denied for reasons that include them not being citizens and/or did not fulfil the conditions of the peace agreement. Those who returned were each given RM8,000 in subsidies and RM300 as subsistence allowance to help them through the normalisation process. You must also remember that among the 1,188 remaining members of the CPM, only 694 were Malaysian, Indonesian and Singaporean nationals, while two were former members of the Imperial Japanese Army who were here since the Second World War. The remaining 492 were Thai nationals.

Where do you think Chin Peng would have fitted in? He was born in Sitiawan to China-born parents in what was the Malayan state of Perak; took up arms and rebelled against the government in June 1948, while the Identity Card was only issued to registered citizens in 1949. The answer lies in his letter to the Prime Minister cum Home Affairs Minister on 27th August 2003:

20130928-122732.jpg

Chin Peng was an alien with a Thai identity card. A bit like the yet-to-be-seen-anywhere 40,000 Banglas with MyKad during the 13th General Elections. Only that Chin Peng was a real person.

Therefore, for those wanting to return then they must fulfil the requirements of the peace agreement i.e. supply of personal particulars for verification as to identity and status (Malaysian citizen, of Malaysian origin – born post Merdeka, or post signing of the formation of Malaysia in 1963, or spouse, or child of either, or if you are an alien), then each applicant must have stayed in a designated place in Southern Thailand for at least six months prior to the application. Chin Peng must have failed at least one of the agreed-upon requirements, like the other 92 applicants. It was not as simple as “you apply in time, you get the automatic right to return.” If I am wrong, then we should give automatic citizenship to the children of homeless Bajaus in Sabah. Why complain?

Even with Chin Peng being over in Thailand, there were many fans of his, including characters such as Nga Kor Ming, Teresa Kok, Ronnie Liu et al already clamouring for his return, hero-worship him, and praise the Communist Party of Malaya, an organisation banned under Section 5 of the Societies Act, 1966. However, some self-proclaimed patriots from Malaysia continue to uphold and worship the atrocities committed by the CPM, in violation of Sections 47 and 50 of the Societies Act, 1966. This is evident in the recent arrest of two persons at an airport for being in possession of materials banned under Section 50 of the above mentioned Act, having returned from attending Chin Peng’s funeral in. Bangkok.

Coincidentally, the Germans have similar laws banning anything that could remind them of their Nazi past. Section 86 of the
Strafgesetzbuch prescribes the ban on logos, materials, propaganda, books, data storage of such material, dissemination or the possession of said materials whether domestic or abroad, are liable to imprisonment and fines. And this was made because the Nazis committed atrocities on ONE group of people in Germany for five years. Chin Peng and his men slaughtered Malayans/Malaysians for 41 years. Not just Malays, but also Chinese, Indians and other Malayans/Malaysians as well!

Some even tried to justify that atrocities were committed by both sides during the Emergency. Can they answer who slaughtered the British planters first? Another even said it was a civil war. Was it one? Civil wars are fought by and between citizens of the same nation. This was fought by 694 Malaysians, Indonesians and Singaporeans, 492 Thais, and two soldiers from the Imperial Japanese Army with the aim of setting up a satellite communist state by removing the Malay Rulers and their British advisers, and rule the masses using communist ideology. That, my dear idiot, is called an insurgency.

If Chin Peng’s ashes should be allowed back on the basis that he was born in Sitiawan albeit being non-citizen, for being a “nationalist” (doubtful), go tell the Jews and Germany a statue of German-citizen Hitler, who definitely was a nationalist, should be allowed to be built near the Brandenburg Gate or the Reichstag.

Malaysia’s Day: Death of the Psychopathic God (Part 2)

20130925-001101.jpg

I blame the skewed understanding of history among Malaysians, as well as attempts to rewrite history, on the Malaysian education system. The best way to get the nation together is to say that Malaya was colonised. The only times Malaya was wholly colonised was between 1942 and 1945, then again in 1946 until 1948. The Portuguese colonised Malacca, so did the Dutch. The rest of the Malay Peninsula were divided into various sovereign states.

Let me give you a brief history lesson on the MALAY peninsula:

The British came here for want of economic materials, and as a result of the various treaties with the respective states’ Sultan and Raja, the various states in Malaya became protectorates, administered by British Residents who were employed by the various Sultans and Rajas. Save for the Strait Settlements, the rest of the Malay Peninsula were never British colonies. Initially, the states of Perak, Selangor, Pahang and Negeri Sembilan all had their own Resident, but decided to have a common Resident as mentioned in Clause 4 of the Treaty of the Federation, 1895:

The above named Rulers agree to accept a British officer, to be styled the Resident General as the agent and representative of the British government under the government of the Straits Settlement. They undertake to provide him with a suitable accommodation with such salary as determined by Her Majesty’s government and to follow his advice in all matters of administration other than those touching the Mohammadan religion. The appointment of the Resident General will not affect the obligations of the Rulers towards the British Resident now existing or hereafter to be appointed to offices in the above mentioned protected states.

In return for the access to economic gains, Britain promised the states protection against threats. The protectorate over the Malay states does not amount to colonisation and sovereignty but prevents occupation or conquest of the protectorate by other nations (as evident during the Japanese invasion of Malaya). This differs from a colony in that the protectorates do not form an integral part of the territories of Great Britain.

As mentioned, the Malay states were made up of nine sovereign states, headed by the Sultan/Raja, and advised by a British adviser, with Negeri Sembilan, Selangor, Pahang and Perak forming the Federated Malay States, while the rest were termed as the Unfederated Malay States with individual treaties with the British. Malacca, Penang and Singapore became part of the colonies as part of the Straits Settlement. Three legal cases became the test for the independent-nature of the sovereign states, namely the Mighell vs Sultan of Johore (1894), Duff Development Co. Ltd vs Kerajaan Negeri Kelantan & Anor (1924), and the Pahang Consolidated Co. Ltd vs State of Pahang (1931-32).

Therefore, on 31st August, 1957, the independence we gained was from feudalism, and not colonialism as we were brought up to believe in. On that day, the Sultans and Rajas were removed of their British advisers who administered their state on their behalf, and were now advised by the Prime Minister and the Cabinet (Chief Minister and Executive Councillors on state level). The constitution of rulership was continued but modified to include parliamentary democracy.

Since the independence we gained on 31st August, 1957 was from feudalism (the governing of the nation by a government elected by the people as opposed to British-appointed advisers), when did the nationalist movement for this independence actually began? It was upon the formation of the Malayan Union of 1946, an idea conceived during the Second World War and first presented to the British War Cabinet in May 1944 which required the Malay rulers to concede ALL powers to the British Crown, another indicator of the independent nature of the Malay states before the Japanese occupation. That started the ball rolling for the independence we now have.

Characters such as Burhanuddin Helmi, Ibrahim Yaacob, Hassan Manan, Mokhtaruddin Lasso, Ahmad Boestamam, Shamsiah Fakeh all fought for an independent Malaya under Javanese rule under the banner of Melayu Raya. You can read more on this in my posting The Road to Merdeka: Persekutuan Tanah China dated 6th September 2013. There you can read more about the characters mentioned, and also how that movement is linked to Chin Peng’s attempt to turn Peninsular Malaysia/Malaya into a communist state aligned with China.

The question whether Chin Peng was a contributor to the independence does not arise at all; he only assumed command of the Communist Party of Malaya when his predecessor, Loi Tak a.k.a Loi Tek a.k.a Lai Teck absconded with the movement’s funds in 1947. Why would the staunchly anti-communist British regard the Communist Party of Malaya as brothers-in-arms fighting the Japanese? Loi Tak, the Secretary-General of the CPM was a spy for the French colonial authorities in Vietnam to penetrate the Vietnamese freedom fighters and communists. You can read more in British Intrigue & The CPM: Some Characters.

And the remark made by Mariam Mokhtar that without the CPM, the Japanese in Malaya would not have been defeated is a feeble and shallow attempt to rewrite history. On 13th August 1945, Sukarno and Drs Hatta met up with Burhanuddin Helmi and Ibrahim Yaakob in Taiping to discuss the independence of Malaya under Javanese rule. In attendance was Major General Hirokichi Umezu of the Imperial Japanese Army. Ibrahim Yaakob was a Lieutenant Colonel in the Japanese Volunteer Army (Giyuugun). That effectively says that from that date, until the formal surrender of the Japanese military on 2nd September 1945, the Imperial Japanese Army remained undefeated.

Chin Peng fought against a collectively independent Malaya in 1948, a Malaya that was not colonised. Therefore, what was he fighting for? Was he planning to drive out the British advisers and become advisers in turn to the Malay rulers? According to Prof Dr Cheah Boon Kheng, the ratio of Chinese to Malays in communist-front organisations was 15:1, and as high as 50:1 in the CPM itself (The Star, Red Star Over Malaya, Sunda, 29th November, 2009). Do we honestly think they had the support of the whole population of Malaya? Whose interests would have been protected or preserved had they gotten their way then? Therefore the label “Chinese communists” as mentioned by Mariam Mokhtar is an apt description.

Mariam Mokhtar should also get her facts right (Chin Peng Has The Last Laugh, Malaysiakini, 23rd September 2013). Because of the ratio above, the Emergency was in essence a battle between the Malays who were trying to preserve their identity and religion, and the non-Malays who were against the CPM, against the Chinese-majority CPM that was bent on setting up a satellite communists state here. Mariam mentioned that atrocities were not just committed by Chin. Peng, but by both sides because “Malaya was on a war footing”. Since when was Malaya on a war footing? Who committed the first atrocity in 1948? Why was he fighting against an independent Malaya? And why did he not stop after the Tunku had announced our independence in 1956?

Chin Peng betrayed the people of Malaya. At the Baling talks, he promised the Tunku that the CPM would lay down their arms immediately if the British agreed to transfer power over internal security and defence into the hands of the Tunku’s Umno-MCA-MIC Alliance Government. Did he do it? No. He continued to kill Malayans/Malaysians for a further 34 years after the talks.

Chin Peng may be gone. And on every 16th September, Malaysia Day would be more meaningful – the day the man who butchered 10,000 of the people he had wanted to liberate, finally kicked the bucket on foreign soil.

Good riddance to bad rubbish!

In the final instalment, I will cover non-Malaysian Chin Peng’s request to be allowed to visit Sitiawan.

Malaysia’s Day: Death of the Psychopathic God (Part 1)

20130923-193724.jpg

The greatest news I received on Malaysia Day was of Chin Peng’s death. I was some 250 nautical miles from Kuantan and had been sailing for more than a week without receiving any form of news from home, so imagine my feeling of jubilation.

Yes, it has almost been 24 years since the signing of the peace treaty in Hatyai between the Government of the Federation of Malaysia and the Communist Party of Malaya. I will cover more on the treaty in the second part. Many do not understand that the treaty was about the ending of hostilities between the two parties, but not about the CPM having to give their ideology up. So, when The Sunday Star decided to ask 19-year olds if the thought the communist is still a threat my mind instinctively asked, “what is the purpose of asking those who were still swimming inside testicles when the treaty was signed?” It just hinted malicious intent. Of late, the popular mainstream daily and ASTRO’s Awani sound like some leftist publications.

Many in KL would not remember the bombings, and shootings of police officers that occurred in KL itself. The last I heard of a gun-battle between the police and the CPM was in May 1983 on the old trunk road between Gombak and Janda Baik, near Mimaland. One policeman died, the other wounded but managed to kill both Min Yuens.

I read with disgust both on the mainstream media as well as on the online social media how sympathisers asked the government to allow for Chin Peng’s ashes be brought back to Sitiawan. After all, “the man is more a threat alive than when he is dead” quoted a member of a BN component party. If that was supposed to have moved me, then it had failed miserably.

Equally disgusting was the comparisons made between the bodies of the Sulu terrorists, bomb-making terrorists Azahari and Nordin Mat top, with Chin Peng. Nobody ever claimed the bodies of the Sulu terrorists, Azahari and Nordin Mat Top were Malaysian citizens and never did they wage war against their people – unlike Chin Peng whom I believe was never a citizen of the Federation of Malaysia, nor was he a citizen of the Federation of Malaya, as described in Part 1.1 (a) of the Second Schedule of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. I doubt Malaysian-born Kamahl calls Malaysia home!

Worst is when PAS members also went to Bangkok to attend the wake of the man so determined to eradicate the Malays and their religion. I suppose in the name of politics and power, God comes second. After all, God is intangible, unlike Chin Peng.

And the statement made by a former Inspector-General of Police on the matter saying that the world would laugh at us if we do not allow Chin Peng’s ashes to be brought back for final rites is an insult to us servicemen (police and military), especially to those who continue to suffer as a result of the loss of limbs, or loss of a father, husband, or son. Perhaps this is why an ex-IGP was made an Ambassador while this ex-IGP continue to find recognition for the things he had done; but all he was famous for was punching Anwar Ibrahim while in custody!

20130923-205026.jpg

Hitler killed Jews for only five years. Chin Peng waged war against the people he was supposed to liberate for 41 years. Why did not Chin Peng stop as soon as the Tunku had announced Malaya’s independence in Melaka in 1956? Why did he continue to wage war against this nation and her people? The British government servants were all serving the Sultans and Rajas and were answerable to the latter, with the exception of Penang, Melaka and Singapore that were colonies of the British Empire. So Chin Peng was not interested in fighting against colonialism, the Japanese also did that in Malaya!

20130923-205217.jpg

Chin Peng was more interested in assuming this nation under communism, as a satellite nation to the People’s Republic of China. And thousands died fighting this man who was adamant to destroy their religion and way of life.

20130923-205129.jpg

To those who continue to ask for Chin Peng’s ashes to be allowed a final trip to Malaysia, and ask others to move on, forgive and forget, do ask the Jews to forgive Hitler for the five years of atrocities committed against them. Then we should be able to move on eight times the amount of time taken for the Jews to forgive Hitler.

Chin Peng never showed any compassion, nor did he ever exhibit remorse. He was a psychopath worshipped by idiots who deserves not even a single whiff of sympathy.

Therefore, he should just stay out forever and not tarnish the soil of this beloved nation.

Malaysia: Fatigue At 50

Photo by Patrick Coston
Photo by Patrick Coston

As Malaysia approaches its 50th year, I cannot help but think that while being in its infancy this nation is ageing far too fast and is fast being tired of itself. The cohesiveness of its people in the run up to the events on the 31st August, 1957 and 16th September, 1963 is fast coming undone. Many a times have I written on how far more cohesive we were immediately after the 13th May, 1969 tragedy than we are now, despite claims of how far more mature we are in the political sense. That may be true, but we behave like immature kids behaving like we are politically mature.

Elements once found destructive, such as Communism, is now being looked up to. A few days ago, left-leaning students were audience in a forum that had a former member of the all-but-defunct Communist Party of Indonesia, and students were seen wearing t-shirts glorifying Tan Malaka, a Marxist who once lived in Indonesia. To add insult to injury, Karpal Singh has also been reported as supporting the move to allow former leader of the Communist Party of Malaya, Chin Peng, to return to Malaysia. Of course, humanitarians would argue that there is nothing wrong with allowing an octogenarian back to the land he was born in, and liberals would think the same. I hope these same people would also condemn Israel for still hunting former Nazis and tell the people of Cambodia they should forgive the Khmer Rouge.

For whatever reasons too did the police not act previously on criminal elements. The removal of the ISA and the Emergency Ordinance rendered the police virtually helpless in its fight against crime, let alone be able to maintain peace and order and breathe at the same time. Kudos to the good teamwork of the present Inspector-General of Police and the new Minister of Home Affairs. We have not seen this kind of teamwork since the days of Tun Dr Ismail – Tun Salleh, and Tun Ghazali Shafie – Tun Haniff days.

I have read comments from politicians from both sides of the political fence who are against giving the police emergency powers and say that the police should learn from their British counterparts on how to police the law without having firearms. Britain, for those who did not study geography, is an island, unlike Malaysia that has land borders with neighbours. A simple ferry or train ride from the European continent requires passengers and luggages to be scanned. My former college mate who is now a Chief Inspector in the Thames Valley Police lamented how he sometimes wish he was given a gun, especially in the wake of the two incidents where two women constables were gunned down by armed criminals. Imagine our police fighting crime with porous borders.

The introduction of the proposed Criminal Prevention Act should hopefully allow the police to conduct interdiction strikes on hardcore crime gangs. This Act will allow the police to hold criminal elements for up to 70 days pending trial. I have not seen the draft in full but I am sure it will uphold the rights of those who want peace.

Was there political interference in the police’s operations before the new Minister and Inspector-General came into office? I would leave that to the former Inspector-Generals to answer. But I know a gangster was awarded one of the highest Federal titles. How his name had made it through police vetting definitely puzzles me.

I know for sure there are politicians from both sides of the political fence whom have been seen with criminal elements, and photographs of these politicians meeting with criminals exist. These are prominent politicians and I know the police has full knowledge of this. Whether their presence with the criminals is for political or for personal reasons, only they and the police can answer this.

Former IGP Tun Haniff Omar once remarked that the BERSIH rally had communist elements involved. I would not be at all surprised if there are members of the CPM whom have made it into political parties, as they did before 13th May, 1969. Today, we have former police Director of CID Tan Sri Zaman Khan saying that an ex-convict who was a triad chief is also holding a lower office in a political party in Penang (NST, Nation page 25, 5th September 2013).

I particularly like Ben Tan’s article “Youth gangs today lack ‘basic values’.” (NST, Comments page 18, 5th September 2013). Ben, NST’s Johor bureau chief wrote:

GANGSTER’S LIFE: The members just crave money and power.

Ironically, the same can be said of the young politicians mentioned above, and of most politicians too. I certainly hope the Home Minister will give all the support the police needs in making this nation a safer place to live in.

At 50, Malaysia is already more divisive than it should be. Political fanatics are to be blamed. With the underworld and subversive elements making a breakthrough, it will not be long before our children begin to face the mistakes we have all made. Criminals, subversive elements, politicians with links to the underworld should never be allowed to represent the people of Malaysia, and I urge the Malaysian people to reject them and reject those who protect them. If we don’t, we won’t see Malaysia living past 100.