TR EMERITUS

A wacky dance from a wedding in Guangxi, China, has gone global, with billions of people across the world learning it. The curious thing is that both the dance steps and the music have a strong rural Chinese flavor, yet are still enjoyed planet-wide, from Asia to Europe to Africa to North America. The dance is called Kemusan (科目三), meaning "Subject Three". 科目三 PK Guangxi residents interviewed say the dance originated from a learner driver who did the dance after passing the third subject of the driving test. In China, there are 4 sbjects to pass before a driver's license can be issued, 2 theory and 2 practical. 科目三refers to the 3rd test, a practical on-the-road test. Interesting to note, the entire test is mostly computer-monitored and the tester is not allowed to say or do anything to/for the student. Any such act will result in an immediate fail. The passing mark for the test is minimum 80 out of 100.    Read More →

Not everyone is happy with Najib’s pardon outcome. His family is not. Nooryana Najib, his daughter, lamented: “While we appreciate the reduction of sentence from 12 years to six years by Pardons Board, we are disappointed that Datuk Seri Najib was not granted a full pardon and was not immediately released.” For context, the Pardon Board halved his 12 years to 6 years, which means that he will be freed sometime in August 2026, for good behaviour. That’s just about 2.5 years later. As for the fine, he got a reduction from RM210m to RM50m. I guess money is not his greatest worry. Freedom is. And he is not out of the kampong yet. So far Najib has served 17 months after being convicted of graft linked to RM42m, belonging to a former subsidiary company of 1MDB. He is currently facing three ongoing criminal trials for illicitly receiving US681m of 1MDB funds via British Virgin Islands shell company. Second, Najib is also charged with laundering RM27m belong to a former 1MDB subsidiary and third, a CBT charge amounting to RM6.6m is yet to be concluded. Will he go the way of his deputy Zahid Hamidi, who walked free of 47 graft charges mid-trial after being granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal? Fingers crossed. The Pardon Board didn’t give any cogent justification for the decision. It just released a 5-sentence statement, claiming that they have weighed opinion and advice from relevant authorities. Nothing substantial was said. It kept everyone holding their breath for nothing. Most are still reeling in a state of shock. One citizen said, “We voted for Najib and trusted him, but our money was stolen for his family’s enjoyment.” All PM Anwar could say was this: “Whatever one feels, of course, it is very political - some support, some didn’t. But they cannot ignore the fact that you must respect the right of everyone convicted to appeal to the Pardons Board.” And for some trivia knowledge, you may like to know that a private Umno FB user had invoked higher powers: “Pray for Datuk Seri Najib Razak to be released so it can help to increase the country’s economy.” Well, he did increase the country’s economy. That’s not the issue. The issue is its distribution. Lesson? With all due respect, PM Anwar’s words are puzzling. He said it was all “very political”. Isn’t he voted in to clean up that realm of government? Maybe it’s all very privileged? Anyway, I believe it is about the rule of law. The law is fixed (or else, democracy is hopeless. But the Nuremberg Racist Laws are another kettle of fish altogether, and it’s for another day of discussion). We know that you do the crime, you do the time. The time ranges, but the time ought to fit the crime. As far as Najib’s ordeal is concerned, the law did its job, as best as it can, within the penal code. He was and is held accountable. He still faces the court, charged for the millions he had siphoned to line his pockets, which he once admitted was a gift from royalty. The issue is what rule governs the law? What are the limits to these rule? No one is above it. But yet, some are above it, it seems. And the handful above it hold power to lower the bar for some and raise the bar for others? Or, put it another way, equality for all is the rule of rules, but with exception? Is there fair and equal representation then? Or some just warrants special (exceptional) attention, because of some un-utterable reasons? Let me end with Aunty Bersih, the lady of liberty. Many Malaysians know her. She come by another name, Anne Ooi. She is in her late sixties now. She was a school teacher. She is a frail old lady, determined to make a difference, regardless of age, language and religion. At 64, she was the symbol of the Bersih movement (“Operation Erase Bersih”). She was fired at, stung and gassed, at the 9 July 2011 protest; the most violent protest in Malaysian history. Aunty Bersih said: “I cannot stand rubbish. The country today has become like a house full of dirty things. We need to clean our house, clear up the mess.” “An old woman like me had lived a full life. I’m not scared because I have nothing else to lose. But the young people still have a future ahead of them. They have everything to lose.” That sums it up, right? The young borrow wisdom from the old, and draw strength from their courage or defiance. Never underestimate the power of weakness, because people like Aunty Ooi, can move even the most entrenched mountains. Some history ought to be repeated, like the indefatigable spirit of Aunty Ooi, the lady of liberty. Others, well, should not, or never. But I guess it’s wishful thinking, because mankind is really one kind. But the spirit of Aunty Ooi will always be our lodestar, our guiding light even in the darkest skies. For the weak is made strong by the young and the poor is always rich in the youthful spirit. No mountain stands before them will remain standing for long in the wake of their borrowed courage and prevailing wisdom. Across the generations, we are a force of nature to reckon.   Michael Han    Read More →

Bertha Henson bemoans the declining quality of the Straits Times. But is there any incentive for a person or organisation to innovate and improve when it is handed an iron rice bowl by the government? And isn’t this in effect what is happening when this PAP government has pledged $900 million of taxpayers’s money to keep ST and the other associated newspapers and media afloat? I mince no words when I say the ST is amongst the worst newspapers I have read in my life. There is not a single redeeming feature I find in the newspaper. But I am not surprised because the only ambition of the ST seems to be to be the mouthpiece of the government and authorities. A government that is always admonishing Singaporeans to be self-reliant, and is miserly when it comes to assisting Singaporeans in need,but which is willing to indulge in profligate spending,to prop up a failing newspaper which cannot even stand on its own two feet despite the monopolistic position it enjoys.That is the sickening reality of PAP’s Singapore. So my advice to Bertha Henson is not to have any hope that the organisation she once belonged to, will improve and recover. A person or organisation on life support, which is how I see the local MSM, very rarely do.   Lim Tean    Read More →