Egypt's new vice president, Omar Suleiman, has long sought to demonize the opposition Muslim Brotherhood in his contacts with skeptical U.S. officials, leaked diplomatic cables show, raising questions whether he can act as an honest broker in the country's political crisis.U.S. Embassy messages from the anti-secrecy WikiLeaks cache of 250,000 State Department documents, which Reuters independently reviewed, also report that the former intelligence chief accused the Brotherhood of spawning armed extremists and warned in 2008 that if Iran ever backed the banned Islamist group, Tehran would become "our enemy."
The disclosure came as Suleiman met on Sunday with opposition groups, including the officially banned Brotherhood, to explore ways to end Egypt's worst political crisis decades.Washington has been exploring options for speeding up President Hosni Mubarak's resignation, including a scenario that calls for turning over power to a transition government headed by Suleiman and backed by the military.Mubarak, who had done without a vice president for 30 years, hurriedly appointed the 74-year-old Suleiman as his deputy on January 29 as protesters demanded the autocratic ruler's ouster.Suleiman privately voicing disdain for the Brotherhood will not surprise Egyptians, used to the Mubarak government's anti-Islamist stance. The comments could stoke suspicions, though, as he seeks to draw the long-banned movement into a broad dialogue on reform in response to mass protests.The clear implication in the cache of State Department cables was that U.S. officials were skeptical of Suleiman's effort to depict the Brotherhood as "the bogey man."Mubarak's government had long cited the Islamist threat to justify its years of authoritarian rule. A more pressing concern for Washington and its ally Israel, however, is what happens to the 1979 peace treaty between Egypt and the Jewish state if the Brotherhood gains political clout in the post-Mubarak era."We decline to comment on any individual classified cable," U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said when asked about the documents seen by Reuters.ACCUSATIONS OF EXTREMISMIn a cable dated February 15, 2006, then-ambassador Francis Ricciardone reported that Suleiman had "asserted that the MB (Muslim Brotherhood) had spawned '11 different Islamist extremist organizations,' most notably the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Gama'a Islamiya (Islamic Group)."Egyptian security forces crushed groups that targeted tourists, Christians, government ministers and other officials in a 1990s campaign for a purist Islamic state, and has kept a tight lid on them since.The Brotherhood once had a secret paramilitary section, but it now says it is committed to promoting its policies through peaceful, democratic means. The government has been unable to prove any serious act of violence orchestrated by the movement's leadership for more than 50 years.Mubarak, in an ABC interview on Thursday, blamed the Brotherhood for violence that erupted on Wednesday during protests in Cairo's central Tahrir Square. [ID:nLDE71029E]Independent witnesses said Mubarak supporters launched the attacks.Suleiman, then Mubarak's top spymaster, was speaking to FBI Director Robert Mueller, who was visiting Cairo in February 2006, the 2006 cable says.The cable, which uses the spelling Soliman, said he had told Mueller that the Brotherhood was "neither a religious organization, nor a social organization, nor a political party, but a combination of all three."The cable went on: "The principal danger, in Soliman's view, was the group's exploitation of religion to influence and mobilize the public.""Soliman termed the MB's recent success in the parliamentary elections as 'unfortunate', adding his view that although the group was technically illegal, existing Egyptian laws were insufficient to keep the MB in check."The cable was referring to parliamentary elections in November and December of 2005 in which the Brotherhood made strong gains, although Mubarak's National Democratic Party kept a big majority.IRANIAN "THREAT"In a cable dated January 2, 2008, Ricciardone reported Suleiman as saying that Iran remained "a significant threat to Egypt".Successive U.S. administrations have seen Mubarak's government as a bulwark against Iran's influence in the Arab world, a perception the Egyptian leader has used to his benefit in securing billions of dollars in military aid."Iran is supporting Jihad and spoiling peace, and has supported extremists in Egypt previously. If they were to support the Muslim Brotherhood this would make them "our enemy," the ambassador reported Suleiman as saying.In a cable dated October 25, 2007, Ricciardone said Suleiman "takes an especially hard line on Tehran" and frequently refers to the Iranians as "devils."The cables suggest U.S. officials have consistently responded skeptically to the Egyptian government's dire warnings about the Brotherhood.In a November 29, 2005, cable to Mueller before his visit, Ricciardone said Egyptian authorities "have a long history of threatening us with the MB bogeyman.""Your counterparts may try to suggest that (then President George W. Bush's) insistence on greater democracy in Egypt is somehow responsible for the MB's electoral success," he wrote. "You should push back that, on the contrary, the MB's rise signals the need for greater democracy and transparency in government.""The images of intimidation and fraud that have emerged from the recent elections favor the extremists both we and the Egyptian government oppose. The best way to counter narrow-minded Islamist politics is to open the system."In a follow up cable on January 29, 2006, Ricciardone seemed to foreshadow the current unrest when he wrote to Mueller: "We do not accept the proposition that Egypt's only choices are a slow-to-reform authoritarian regime or an Islamist extremist one; nor do we see greater democracy in Egypt as leading necessarily to a government under the MB."(Writing by Matt Spetalnick and William Maclean; Editing by Stella Dawson and Sandra Maler)information Communication and Culture Minister Dr Rais Yatim claimed that Parliament was the best place to hold a debate. He said that when people wanted the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Umno Youth head to have a debate, they could only do so in the Dewan Rakyat or Dewan Negara.He said, “The opposition should use the Dewan Rakyat as the place for debates at the highest and most effective level.”Perhaps in Rais’ opinion, Mohamed Aziz (BN-Sri Gading) is at the height of his intellect when in 2000, he opened his speech by saying that “it is unusual for women’s issues to be touched by men” and then smirked “but women are supposed to be touched by men”.How about , Badaruddin Amiruddin MP for Yan, who in 1995, said that former Opposition leader Lim Kit Siang’s debate was akin to “wanita putus haid” (a woman reaching menopause). Badruddin also blamed women for ‘inviting’ rape by wearing “indecent clothes”.Rais said, “Debating outside will only be for publicity and will not bring any decision. But if it is at the Dewan Rakyat, a particular issue will be debated in depth but not with emotion or any other detrimental manner.”Congratulations to the pathetic duo of Radin Bung Mokhtar (BN-Kinabatangan) and Mohd Said Yusuf (BN-Jasin) who must have enthralled Rais with their 'wit'.During a debate about the numerous water seepage in the Parliament building after heavy rain, which many attributed to the lack of maintenance, Radin and Mohd Said were alleged to have said “Where is the leak? The member for Batu Gajah also leaks once a month”, in a sexist remark against the female MP, Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah).Rais, the MP for Jelebu, said that each member of the House should debate in a civilised manner and that the best and appropriate debate belonged in parliament.What does Rais think of Idris Haron’s remark in a parliamentary debate, when Haron said “sexy uniform worn by Malaysia Airlines female cabin staff could arouse sexual desire in male passengers”? Does Rais think this is civilized and appropriate for parliamentary debate?Instead of the Dewan Rakyat being a place which stimulates serious discussion, Rais’ colleagues are stimulated by their high testosterone drive fuelled by their scabby comments.Rais then said, “The facility has been prepared and we must do justice to it in the best way possible. For example, in the United Kingdom, they are not debating outside the House. But during elections, any invitation to debate may be acceptable as the Dewan Rakyat is not in session.”Perhaps Rais practices selective amnesia.Last December, Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia abused his powers and suspended Anwar and three others for six months.Could Rais tell us if he is asking the Speaker to reverse the ban? That would be good because the suspensions imposed on the four politicians (Anwar, Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor), R Sivarasa (PKR-Subang) and Azmin Ali (PKR-Gombak) were politically motivated and designed to damage Pakatan’s prospects in the general election.These men dared criticise the committee's investigation methodology used against Anwar.The Dewan Rakyat is not a place where honourable men are found but is a place for back-stabbing and where dishonorable men plot various schemes.Recently, Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim challenged Prime minister Najib Abdul Razak to a debate about Pakatan’s ’10 point, 100-days reforms plan’.Najib declined, for reasons of his own which many people have rightly or wrongly attributed to his cowardice.To allay our suspicious and cynical minds, Najib tried to deflect criticisms for turning down Anwar’s request for a public debate.He said, “Why should I be afraid of debating with him? I'm prime minister, I have all information. If I expose them... adoi... he will get a fever.”Is this the retort of a Prime minister? His statement has neither gravitas nor intellectual content. There is no hint that it came from someone who is statesmanlike.
Egypt's new vice president, Omar Suleiman, has long sought to demonize the opposition Muslim Brotherhood in his contacts with skeptical U.S. officials, leaked diplomatic cables show, raising questions whether he can act as an honest broker in the country's political crisis.U.S. Embassy messages from the anti-secrecy WikiLeaks cache of 250,000 State Department documents, which Reuters independently reviewed, also report that the former intelligence chief accused the Brotherhood of spawning armed extremists and warned in 2008 that if Iran ever backed the banned Islamist group, Tehran would become "our enemy."
The disclosure came as Suleiman met on Sunday with opposition groups, including the officially banned Brotherhood, to explore ways to end Egypt's worst political crisis decades.
Washington has been exploring options for speeding up President Hosni Mubarak's resignation, including a scenario that calls for turning over power to a transition government headed by Suleiman and backed by the military.
Mubarak, who had done without a vice president for 30 years, hurriedly appointed the 74-year-old Suleiman as his deputy on January 29 as protesters demanded the autocratic ruler's ouster.
Suleiman privately voicing disdain for the Brotherhood will not surprise Egyptians, used to the Mubarak government's anti-Islamist stance. The comments could stoke suspicions, though, as he seeks to draw the long-banned movement into a broad dialogue on reform in response to mass protests.
The clear implication in the cache of State Department cables was that U.S. officials were skeptical of Suleiman's effort to depict the Brotherhood as "the bogey man."
Mubarak's government had long cited the Islamist threat to justify its years of authoritarian rule. A more pressing concern for Washington and its ally Israel, however, is what happens to the 1979 peace treaty between Egypt and the Jewish state if the Brotherhood gains political clout in the post-Mubarak era.
"We decline to comment on any individual classified cable," U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said when asked about the documents seen by Reuters.
ACCUSATIONS OF EXTREMISM
In a cable dated February 15, 2006, then-ambassador Francis Ricciardone reported that Suleiman had "asserted that the MB (Muslim Brotherhood) had spawned '11 different Islamist extremist organizations,' most notably the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Gama'a Islamiya (Islamic Group)."
Egyptian security forces crushed groups that targeted tourists, Christians, government ministers and other officials in a 1990s campaign for a purist Islamic state, and has kept a tight lid on them since.
The Brotherhood once had a secret paramilitary section, but it now says it is committed to promoting its policies through peaceful, democratic means. The government has been unable to prove any serious act of violence orchestrated by the movement's leadership for more than 50 years.
Mubarak, in an ABC interview on Thursday, blamed the Brotherhood for violence that erupted on Wednesday during protests in Cairo's central Tahrir Square. [ID:nLDE71029E]Independent witnesses said Mubarak supporters launched the attacks.
Suleiman, then Mubarak's top spymaster, was speaking to FBI Director Robert Mueller, who was visiting Cairo in February 2006, the 2006 cable says.
The cable, which uses the spelling Soliman, said he had told Mueller that the Brotherhood was "neither a religious organization, nor a social organization, nor a political party, but a combination of all three."
The cable went on: "The principal danger, in Soliman's view, was the group's exploitation of religion to influence and mobilize the public."
"Soliman termed the MB's recent success in the parliamentary elections as 'unfortunate', adding his view that although the group was technically illegal, existing Egyptian laws were insufficient to keep the MB in check."
The cable was referring to parliamentary elections in November and December of 2005 in which the Brotherhood made strong gains, although Mubarak's National Democratic Party kept a big majority.
IRANIAN "THREAT"
In a cable dated January 2, 2008, Ricciardone reported Suleiman as saying that Iran remained "a significant threat to Egypt".
Successive U.S. administrations have seen Mubarak's government as a bulwark against Iran's influence in the Arab world, a perception the Egyptian leader has used to his benefit in securing billions of dollars in military aid.
"Iran is supporting Jihad and spoiling peace, and has supported extremists in Egypt previously. If they were to support the Muslim Brotherhood this would make them "our enemy," the ambassador reported Suleiman as saying.
In a cable dated October 25, 2007, Ricciardone said Suleiman "takes an especially hard line on Tehran" and frequently refers to the Iranians as "devils."
The cables suggest U.S. officials have consistently responded skeptically to the Egyptian government's dire warnings about the Brotherhood.
In a November 29, 2005, cable to Mueller before his visit, Ricciardone said Egyptian authorities "have a long history of threatening us with the MB bogeyman."
"Your counterparts may try to suggest that (then President George W. Bush's) insistence on greater democracy in Egypt is somehow responsible for the MB's electoral success," he wrote. "You should push back that, on the contrary, the MB's rise signals the need for greater democracy and transparency in government."
"The images of intimidation and fraud that have emerged from the recent elections favor the extremists both we and the Egyptian government oppose. The best way to counter narrow-minded Islamist politics is to open the system."
In a follow up cable on January 29, 2006, Ricciardone seemed to foreshadow the current unrest when he wrote to Mueller: "We do not accept the proposition that Egypt's only choices are a slow-to-reform authoritarian regime or an Islamist extremist one; nor do we see greater democracy in Egypt as leading necessarily to a government under the MB."
(Writing by Matt Spetalnick and William Maclean; Editing by Stella Dawson and Sandra Maler)
information Communication and Culture Minister Dr Rais Yatim claimed that Parliament was the best place to hold a debate. He said that when people wanted the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Umno Youth head to have a debate, they could only do so in the Dewan Rakyat or Dewan Negara.
He said, “The opposition should use the Dewan Rakyat as the place for debates at the highest and most effective level.”
Perhaps in Rais’ opinion, Mohamed Aziz (BN-Sri Gading) is at the height of his intellect when in 2000, he opened his speech by saying that “it is unusual for women’s issues to be touched by men” and then smirked “but women are supposed to be touched by men”.
How about , Badaruddin Amiruddin MP for Yan, who in 1995, said that former Opposition leader Lim Kit Siang’s debate was akin to “wanita putus haid” (a woman reaching menopause). Badruddin also blamed women for ‘inviting’ rape by wearing “indecent clothes”.
Rais said, “Debating outside will only be for publicity and will not bring any decision. But if it is at the Dewan Rakyat, a particular issue will be debated in depth but not with emotion or any other detrimental manner.”
Congratulations to the pathetic duo of Radin Bung Mokhtar (BN-Kinabatangan) and Mohd Said Yusuf (BN-Jasin) who must have enthralled Rais with their 'wit'.
During a debate about the numerous water seepage in the Parliament building after heavy rain, which many attributed to the lack of maintenance, Radin and Mohd Said were alleged to have said “Where is the leak? The member for Batu Gajah also leaks once a month”, in a sexist remark against the female MP, Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah).
Rais, the MP for Jelebu, said that each member of the House should debate in a civilised manner and that the best and appropriate debate belonged in parliament.
What does Rais think of Idris Haron’s remark in a parliamentary debate, when Haron said “sexy uniform worn by Malaysia Airlines female cabin staff could arouse sexual desire in male passengers”? Does Rais think this is civilized and appropriate for parliamentary debate?
Instead of the Dewan Rakyat being a place which stimulates serious discussion, Rais’ colleagues are stimulated by their high testosterone drive fuelled by their scabby comments.
Rais then said, “The facility has been prepared and we must do justice to it in the best way possible. For example, in the United Kingdom, they are not debating outside the House. But during elections, any invitation to debate may be acceptable as the Dewan Rakyat is not in session.”
Perhaps Rais practices selective amnesia.
Last December, Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia abused his powers and suspended Anwar and three others for six months.
Could Rais tell us if he is asking the Speaker to reverse the ban? That would be good because the suspensions imposed on the four politicians (Anwar, Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor), R Sivarasa (PKR-Subang) and Azmin Ali (PKR-Gombak) were politically motivated and designed to damage Pakatan’s prospects in the general election.
These men dared criticise the committee's investigation methodology used against Anwar.
The Dewan Rakyat is not a place where honourable men are found but is a place for back-stabbing and where dishonorable men plot various schemes.
Recently, Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim challenged Prime minister Najib Abdul Razak to a debate about Pakatan’s ’10 point, 100-days reforms plan’.
Najib declined, for reasons of his own which many people have rightly or wrongly attributed to his cowardice.
To allay our suspicious and cynical minds, Najib tried to deflect criticisms for turning down Anwar’s request for a public debate.
He said, “Why should I be afraid of debating with him? I'm prime minister, I have all information. If I expose them... adoi... he will get a fever.”
Is this the retort of a Prime minister? His statement has neither gravitas nor intellectual content. There is no hint that it came from someone who is statesmanlike.
THE GREAT MALAY CIRCUS IS IN TOWN NOW SHOWING “Let us not takes these bad characteristics and habits to the grave.”
Umno delegates took to task the party’s “arrogant leadership” and its self-destructive tendencies, which they claimed was responsible for flagging public support.
In the debate following Umno president Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s speech, representatives from Kelantan, Selangor and Melaka fingered arrogance, disunity and even the tried-and-true electoral seat quota as problems the party faced in its fight for votes.
For Kelantan representative Datuk Mohd Alwi Che Ahmad, Umno’s main problem was one of public perception.
Citing the gap between perception and reality, he said it was not that the party had not done enough for the people but its contributions were not recognised.
“The Malaysian government’s success is known the world over... We are full of success stories so why does our party appear weak?” he asked.
“Our problem is a how to manage [this] success.”
Mohd Alwi related a personal story of a boy who hated his father despite being given all he asked for, and warned that if Umno did not address this “promotion problem” and appearance of arrogance, it should not expect gratitude from the people.
“There’s no guarantee that if we give our child a big car and RM1000, our child will give RM1000 back to us. No guarantee,” he said.
Taking his home state as an example, the Kok Lanas state assemblyman complained that PAS was comfortably winning the battle for hearts and minds because Umno had failed to capitalise on its track record, while the Islamist party kept harping on apparent successes.
Mohd Alwi accused the Islamist party of trumpeting non-achievements, specifically, depositing state funds into an Islamic bank to “Islamise” them.
“Their ‘success’ is putting money into a bank. That is Umno’s success. Putting money into a bank is not success, building the bank is. Forming Tabing Haji is a success, not going on hajj. Building boats is a success, getting on a boat is not,” he said.
Melaka representative Datuk Mohd Said Yusof, on the other hand, said disunity caused by power-hungry party leaders more concerned with jockeying for high office was the source of Umno’s problems.
He disagreed with Najib earlier assertion that the Melaka Sultanate had lost to the Portuguese in 1511 because the Europeans used superior weapons, claiming instead that a disunited royal court was the root cause of its defeat.
“Melaka, which at the time was defended by 20,000 warriors, was in the end destroyed due to disunity,” he said.
Mohd Said blamed “arrogant” Umno leaders for this disunity and likened the party to others which had grown complacent on the back of repeated electoral wins, like India’s Congress Party, Japan’s LDP and Golkar in Indonesia.
“After they (parties) won, they thought themselves kings. The people were forgotten and the people rejected them in the end, even though they contributed much to the country,” he said.
The former Jasin MP added that leaders were more likely to promote and enrich “political clowns” in the party who were only good at being sycophants and never helped out at division level.
Taking a broader view of things, Selangor representative Datuk Mohd Bushro Mat Johor suggested that Barisan Nasional’s (BN) “quota system” was an arrangement that hampered the coalition’s chances of winning.
The quota system is an informal arrangement between BN member parties that divvies up federal and state seats according to the size and importance of each parties, taking into account local demographics in each constituency.
“The important thing for us is to win,” Mohd Bushro said. “If we can win in that constituency, we should give it to them (BN parties) regardless of what party [they are from].”
Citing the impasse between federal government and the opposition state government in Selangor’s ongoing water crisis, he said winning was the only priority because Umno and BN would otherwise not be in a position to help people.
“When we have not in power... we will not be able to... fight for the people , regardless of whatever post we hold,” Mohd Bushro stressed.
“THE GOATMILK DEBATES” will be an ongoing series featuring two debaters tackling an interesting or controversial question in a unique, irreverant manner.
Each debater makes their opening argument. They can elect to post a rebuttal.
The winner will be decided by the online audience and judged according to the strength of their argument.
The motion: “The Lord of the Rings Trilogy is Superior to The Star Wars Movies”
For the motion: Willow Wilson. Click here to read her opening argument.
Against the motion: Omer M. Mozaffar
OMER MOZAFFAR – AGAINST THE MOTION -”THE STAR WARS MOVIES ARE SUPERIOR TO LOTR TRILOGY”
Friends, Fanboys, Jedi Council Members, lend me your ears. I come to bury Star Wars, not praise it.
The Dark Side that men embrace lives long after them. The good is often found deep within their midichlorian bones. So, let it be with Star Wars.
The noble Willow Wilson has surely told you that Star Wars was ambitious. And if it were so, it was a general grievous fault. And grievously had Star Wars answered it. For if we were left alone with “A New Hope” alone, we would imagine it to be written in an imagined world. That we have “A New Hope” and “The Empire Strikes Back” leads us to wonder how one man with his 1950s hair style –- George Lucas — could write such ambrosia for the eyes and ears. That we have also half of “Return of the Jedi” leads us into a type of bliss that would yield nothing less than insanity from ecstasy.
The best of medications need often be tempered with other medications to prevent unwanted side effects. That is why we needed the Ewoks. That is why we needed Jar Jar Binks. That is why we needed An Ewok Adventure, Ewoks: Battle for Endor, and that is why we needed the Star Wars Holiday Special. That is why we needed the Prequels: without theStar Wars Prequels, without the Ewoks, without the Wookie Christmas, we would have all lost our minds spinning like Dervishes toward the Death Star. The original 2.5 movies of the original trilogy would be rejected as heretical hocus pocus, for they were too great to be looked at as anything save sorcery and soothsaying. The Ewoks saved not only Endor, but they also saved ourselves from ourselves.
I stand here under the leave of Wajahat Ali, Willow Wilson and the rest. For Willow Wilson is an honorable woman. So are they all, all honorable. The honorable Willow Wilson speaks to us in praise of Middle Earth, where we find the greatest threat coming from, of all possible things, a giant killer eyeball. This nasty eyeball demon stares at people and they lose all their power. If that is not enough, that nasty eyeball demon — heretofore referred to as “Ned” — somehow draws power from a ring. Let me make sure, dear fellow Jedi, that you understand this point correctly. Ned was once a man of mild disposition named Mairon (sounds like “moron”). But, he converted religions, and changed his named to Sauron (sounds worse than “moron”). You would think that if someone converts that he would take on a really happy name; not in Middle Earth. As you can tell from the sour disposition of his new name, Ned fell into the same path of a few too many converts: he became a disgruntled militant. And it is here that we find one of the important lessons of the Lard of the Rings series of books and movies: if you are to convert religions, use two eyes, and smile. Read the rest of this entry »
relatedarticle
related article
MOTHER BATTLE OF PUTRAJAYA:WITH SAIFUL’S ASSHOLE WE’LL KEEP THE TRAITOR AT BAY
RELATED ARTICLE
TUN DR MAHATHIR MOHAMAD SWEATING OVER HYPOTHETICAL PAKATAN TAKEOVER
SEX NEEDS TO BE SPONTANEOUS AND ONLY THEN DOES IT COMPLETELY FULFILL AND PLEASE ONE. HERE ARE THREE STEPS THAT WILL GUARANTEE ULTIMATE SEXUAL PLEASURE.READMOREFARAH
The Umno Youth general assembly ended today with its chief, Khairy Jamaluddin, urging all members to get rid of 10 bad characteristics that can hinder the youth wing's efforts to improve its image and performance.He urged Umno Youth to stop being elitist, two-faced, self-absorbed, perfunctory in performing official duties, opportunistic, saboteurs, provocateurs, publicity hounds and yes men.Taking a leaf from Pakatan Rakyat's (PR) playbook, the Rembau MP also said members must show more “collective responsibility” for the institution and not leave fellow Umno Youth members out twisting in the wind when attacked by the opposition for the sake of political advancement.“If we look at the opposition, even if they don’t support each other within the party, they will rise to protect their own when someone in their party is attacked,” he said in his winding-up speech here.“Let us not takes these bad characteristics and habits to the grave.”Khairy emphasised that the ambitious transformation plans he laid out in his reformist policy speech this morning could only be realised after Umno Youth members transformed their own thoughts and actions first.“When we speak of changes at the top level, big changes... we must also speak of personal change,” he told delegates.“If we demand big changes but forget to demand that we change ourselves... it is certain that those big changes cannot be achieved.”Stressing that love for the party counted above all else, Khairy added that change was a collective effort that depended on the concerted efforts of all members to address the party youth wing’s failings.“Umno Youth excos cannot improve and raise Umno Youth’s performance by themselves. We need support from you all. We need you to stand shoulder-to-shoulder to ensure our future performance is much better than it is now,” he said.
“THE GOATMILK DEBATES” WILL BE AN ONGOING SERIES FEATURING TWO DEBATERS TACKLING AN INTERESTING OR CONTROVERSIAL QUESTION IN A UNIQUE, IRREVERANT MANNER.EACH DEBATER MAKES THEIR OPENING ARGUMENT. THEY CAN ELECT TO POST A REBUTTAL.THE WINNER WILL BE DECIDED BY THE ONLINE AUDIENCE AND JUDGED ACCORDING TO THE STRENGTH OF THEIR ARGUMENT.THE MOTION: “THE LORD OF THE RINGS TRILOGY IS SUPERIOR TO THE STAR WARS MOVIES”FOR THE MOTION: WILLOW WILSONAGAINST THE MOTION: OMER M. MOZAFFAR. CLICK HERE TO READ HIS OPENING ARGUMENT DEFENDING STAR WARS.
FOR THE MOTION: WILLOW WILSON’S OPENING ARGUMENTA MYTH CYLE FOR THE AGES VS. A FAD FOR TEN MINUTESI AM NOT EVEN SURE WHY WE ARE HAVING THIS DEBATE. SERIOUSLY, THE TITLE SAYS IT ALL. EVERYTHING THAT FOLLOWS WILL BE A WASTE OF YOUR TIME, BECAUSE THE SUPERIORITY OF TOLKIEN’S MASTERWORK WILL BE OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WITH TWO BRAIN CELLS TO RUB TOGETHER. THE LORD OF THE RINGS IS A TRILOGY OF BOOKS THAT INSPIRED AN ENTIRE GENRE OF FANTASY LITERATURE, SPAWNING TRIBUTES FROM EVERY MEDIUM OF CULTURE–POP MUSIC, RADIO PLAYS, COMIC BOOKS, OSCAR-WINNING FILMS–PLUS A CONSIDERABLE BODY OF ACADEMIC WORK. STAR WARS, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS THE ENTERTAINING BUT ADDLED BRAINCHILD OF A MAN WHOSE HEAD IS STEADILY BEING DEVOURED BY HIS NECK, AND WHO DITCHED HIS SERVICEABLE TAO-INSPIRED SPACE OPERA FOR CLUMSY PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC DOGGEREL AS SOON AS HE SLIPPED THE LEASH OF HIS POOR PRODUCERS. EPISODE I WOULD HAVE THE AUDIENCE BELIEVE THE UNIVERSE IS CONTROLLED NOT BY AN UNSEEN AND GRANDIOSE FIRST CAUSE, BUT BY LITTLE GREEN PROTOZOA SWIMMING AROUND IN YOUR BLOOD.TO WHICH I SAY, NO THANK YOU.LORD OF THE RINGS WAS THE PRODUCT OF ONE MAN’S BELIEF THAT LITERARY ESCAPISM COULD BE MORE THAN SIMPLE ENTERTAINMENT; THAT IN A TIME WHEN EUROPE WAS REELING FROM THE AFTERSHOCKS OF TWO WORLD WARS, A STORY ABOUT ELVES AND HOBBITS COULD HELP RESTORE A PEOPLE’S FAITH IN THEIR HISTORY AND RELIGION. AN ADULT CONVERT TO CATHOLICISM, TOLKIEN WAS ONE OF THE 20TH CENTURY’S FOREMOST CHRISTIAN APOLOGISTS. HE, ALONG WITH HIS CLOSE FRIEND AUTHOR CS LEWIS, PIONEERED THE IDEA THAT THE TEACHINGS OF RELIGION COULD BE COMMUNICATED WITHOUT ANY DIRECT REFERENCE TO HOLY TEXTS–COULD, INDEED, BE DEMONSTRATED THROUGH INVENTED WORLDS THAT BORE LITTLE RESEMBLANCE TO EARTH. TODAY THIS IS A FORM OF ALLEGORY WE TAKE FOR GRANTED, BUT IN THE MID-TWENTIETH CENTURY, WHEN BOTHTHE LORD OF THE RINGS AND LEWIS’S NARNIA CHRONICLES WERE WRITTEN, IT WAS A VERY NEW IDEA. THE FORM OF THE MODERN NOVEL WAS ITSELF ONLY ABOUT TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS OLD, AND THE SUGGESTION THAT A FANTASY NOVEL COULD BE USED TO TELL GREAT ETHICAL AND RELIGIOUS TRUTHS BORDERED ON HERETICAL.READ THE REST OF THIS ENTRY »
readmore UMNO IT’S NOT ABOUT DECENCY, WHO ESPOUSE BIGOTRY AND HATE.
THE MUSLIM QUESTION 
SEX NEEDS TO BE SPONTANEOUS AND ONLY THEN DOES IT COMPLETELY FULFILL AND PLEASE ONE. HERE ARE THREE STEPS THAT WILL GUARANTEE ULTIMATE SEXUAL PLEASURE.READMOREFARAHThe Umno Youth general assembly ended today with its chief, Khairy Jamaluddin, urging all members to get rid of 10 bad characteristics that can hinder the youth wing's efforts to improve its image and performance.
He urged Umno Youth to stop being elitist, two-faced, self-absorbed, perfunctory in performing official duties, opportunistic, saboteurs, provocateurs, publicity hounds and yes men.
Taking a leaf from Pakatan Rakyat's (PR) playbook, the Rembau MP also said members must show more “collective responsibility” for the institution and not leave fellow Umno Youth members out twisting in the wind when attacked by the opposition for the sake of political advancement.
“If we look at the opposition, even if they don’t support each other within the party, they will rise to protect their own when someone in their party is attacked,” he said in his winding-up speech here.
“Let us not takes these bad characteristics and habits to the grave.”
Khairy emphasised that the ambitious transformation plans he laid out in his reformist policy speech this morning could only be realised after Umno Youth members transformed their own thoughts and actions first.
“When we speak of changes at the top level, big changes... we must also speak of personal change,” he told delegates.
“If we demand big changes but forget to demand that we change ourselves... it is certain that those big changes cannot be achieved.”
Stressing that love for the party counted above all else, Khairy added that change was a collective effort that depended on the concerted efforts of all members to address the party youth wing’s failings.
“Umno Youth excos cannot improve and raise Umno Youth’s performance by themselves. We need support from you all. We need you to stand shoulder-to-shoulder to ensure our future performance is much better than it is now,” he said.
“THE GOATMILK DEBATES” WILL BE AN ONGOING SERIES FEATURING TWO DEBATERS TACKLING AN INTERESTING OR CONTROVERSIAL QUESTION IN A UNIQUE, IRREVERANT MANNER.
EACH DEBATER MAKES THEIR OPENING ARGUMENT. THEY CAN ELECT TO POST A REBUTTAL.
THE WINNER WILL BE DECIDED BY THE ONLINE AUDIENCE AND JUDGED ACCORDING TO THE STRENGTH OF THEIR ARGUMENT.
THE MOTION: “THE LORD OF THE RINGS TRILOGY IS SUPERIOR TO THE STAR WARS MOVIES”
FOR THE MOTION: WILLOW WILSON
AGAINST THE MOTION: OMER M. MOZAFFAR. CLICK HERE TO READ HIS OPENING ARGUMENT DEFENDING STAR WARS.
FOR THE MOTION: WILLOW WILSON’S OPENING ARGUMENT
A MYTH CYLE FOR THE AGES VS. A FAD FOR TEN MINUTES
I AM NOT EVEN SURE WHY WE ARE HAVING THIS DEBATE. SERIOUSLY, THE TITLE SAYS IT ALL. EVERYTHING THAT FOLLOWS WILL BE A WASTE OF YOUR TIME, BECAUSE THE SUPERIORITY OF TOLKIEN’S MASTERWORK WILL BE OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WITH TWO BRAIN CELLS TO RUB TOGETHER. THE LORD OF THE RINGS IS A TRILOGY OF BOOKS THAT INSPIRED AN ENTIRE GENRE OF FANTASY LITERATURE, SPAWNING TRIBUTES FROM EVERY MEDIUM OF CULTURE–POP MUSIC, RADIO PLAYS, COMIC BOOKS, OSCAR-WINNING FILMS–PLUS A CONSIDERABLE BODY OF ACADEMIC WORK. STAR WARS, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS THE ENTERTAINING BUT ADDLED BRAINCHILD OF A MAN WHOSE HEAD IS STEADILY BEING DEVOURED BY HIS NECK, AND WHO DITCHED HIS SERVICEABLE TAO-INSPIRED SPACE OPERA FOR CLUMSY PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC DOGGEREL AS SOON AS HE SLIPPED THE LEASH OF HIS POOR PRODUCERS. EPISODE I WOULD HAVE THE AUDIENCE BELIEVE THE UNIVERSE IS CONTROLLED NOT BY AN UNSEEN AND GRANDIOSE FIRST CAUSE, BUT BY LITTLE GREEN PROTOZOA SWIMMING AROUND IN YOUR BLOOD.
TO WHICH I SAY, NO THANK YOU.
LORD OF THE RINGS WAS THE PRODUCT OF ONE MAN’S BELIEF THAT LITERARY ESCAPISM COULD BE MORE THAN SIMPLE ENTERTAINMENT; THAT IN A TIME WHEN EUROPE WAS REELING FROM THE AFTERSHOCKS OF TWO WORLD WARS, A STORY ABOUT ELVES AND HOBBITS COULD HELP RESTORE A PEOPLE’S FAITH IN THEIR HISTORY AND RELIGION. AN ADULT CONVERT TO CATHOLICISM, TOLKIEN WAS ONE OF THE 20TH CENTURY’S FOREMOST CHRISTIAN APOLOGISTS. HE, ALONG WITH HIS CLOSE FRIEND AUTHOR CS LEWIS, PIONEERED THE IDEA THAT THE TEACHINGS OF RELIGION COULD BE COMMUNICATED WITHOUT ANY DIRECT REFERENCE TO HOLY TEXTS–COULD, INDEED, BE DEMONSTRATED THROUGH INVENTED WORLDS THAT BORE LITTLE RESEMBLANCE TO EARTH. TODAY THIS IS A FORM OF ALLEGORY WE TAKE FOR GRANTED, BUT IN THE MID-TWENTIETH CENTURY, WHEN BOTHTHE LORD OF THE RINGS AND LEWIS’S NARNIA CHRONICLES WERE WRITTEN, IT WAS A VERY NEW IDEA. THE FORM OF THE MODERN NOVEL WAS ITSELF ONLY ABOUT TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS OLD, AND THE SUGGESTION THAT A FANTASY NOVEL COULD BE USED TO TELL GREAT ETHICAL AND RELIGIOUS TRUTHS BORDERED ON HERETICAL.READ THE REST OF THIS ENTRY »
readmore UMNO IT’S NOT ABOUT DECENCY, WHO ESPOUSE BIGOTRY AND HATE.
THE MUSLIM QUESTION | ||
| ||
No comments:
Post a Comment