Tuesday, January 27, 2015

CHARLIE HEBDO OF PARIS AND CHARLIE CHAN OF HOLLYWOOD

…AND THE ONE MILLION IN THE UNITY MARCH IN PARIS (TO NOWHERE), LED BY HOLLANDE AND SOME OTHER EUROPEAN LEADERS…
By Mansor Puteh



This is what is happening in Paris and France in recent times; the French had discovered that their own definition and concept of the Freedom of Speech and Expression to be wanting and it is not perfect.

This is what the whole of France and the world did not see; they refused to see it because their eyes are blinkered; they are too close to the happenings that they had all failed to be intellectual and realistic or real.

All of them are thinking of Charlie Hebdo of Paris and none of them seemed to be aware of Charlie Chan of Hollywood. Both the Charlies are in the same boat, involved in the same issues and controversies.

Charlie Chan is ‘dead’, long live Charlie Hebdo…?

And the National Front of France leader Marien le Pen was not invited to attend the march in Paris so she had to organize one her own elsewhere? Long live, ‘Liberte, Egalite and Fraternite’ (Liberty, Equality and Fraternity)??

Yet, Charlie Hebdo cartoonists did not consider these national slogans or philosophy when they decided to make fun of the Prophet knocking off ‘Equalite and Fraternate’ as they pleased.  


Friday, January 23, 2015

ARAB TERROR SUSPECTS AND TERRORISTS AND MILITANTS HAVE STRONG AND DIRECT LINKS TO HOLLYOOD!

…HOLLYWOOD MOMENTS AND TAKING THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND SPEECH TO THE UTMOST EXTREME – AND ATTACKS ON THE CHARLIE HEBDO OFFICE AND THE KOSHER SUPERMARKET IN PARIS AND THE LINDT CAFÉ IN SYDNEY.
By Mansor Puteh



The French government or police did not like it that one of the newspapers in France on Saturday, 10 January, 2015 had published a photo on the front-page showing a terrorist gunning down to kill an injured policeman who was lying on the sidewalk, who happens to be an Arab, too, like his attacker. 

Here is how the French practice their so-called Freedom of speech and expression by supporting the publishing of some sketches depicting the Prophet yet on the other hand they frowned upon another newspaper from publishing the photo which they thought was insensitive.

This is happening even before the woman, Hayat, who is said to be linked to the hostage crisis in the Kosher Supermarket (Hyper Cacher) is arrested and the dramas of the two attacks on it and Charlie Hebdo are fully digested. 


Even the attackers of the Twin Towers of Lower Manhattan might have got inspiration from watching an earlier Hollywood called ‘Independence Day’ which saw the White House being bombed to smithereens. 

Monday, January 19, 2015

CARTOONS AND CARNAGE AND CHAOS:

HOW CARTOONISTS MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO DEFINE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND SPEECH, THE EFFECTS CAN BE DEADLY, THEY WHO CANNOT BE TRUSTED WITH THEIR PENS AS MUCH AS SOME OTHERS WITH THEIR FIREARMS AND ALSO VETO POWER IN THE UNITED NATIONS.
By Mansor Puteh


A reckless man with a gun can be as harmful as an irresponsible cartoonist with a pen…

Some cartoonists of Charlie Hebdo in Paris found this out and paid for it dearly with their own lives.

They subscribed to the false impression and their own version and definition of Freedom of speech and expression and did not care for the sentiments of the others who they poke fun of and paid the price for it with their lives.


Thursday, January 15, 2015

FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION AND THE FAKERY OF THE FRENCH’, EUROPEANS’ AND AMERICANS’ EXHORTATIONS ON THESE.

…WHY EVEN ON OSCAR NIGHT NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO WEAR SIMPLY, THE FOUR-LETTER WORD IS STILL NOT ALLOWED TO BE BROADCAST OR PUBLISHED IN THE MEDIA!
By Mansor Puteh



I first visited Paris in January, 1981 and the second time in June, 2013. I had fond memories of the city I visited the first time.

Paris has not changed the second time I saw it again recently with the Eiffel Tower still standing proudly and can be seen from all over the city.

The only start difference that I could see is the sight of the many colored people especially Arabs and Muslims from African countries that had been colonized by France earlier, who are now there, especially at the Eiffel Tower and the train station, Gard du Nord which was where I had put up in a hotel at.


Sunday, January 11, 2015

HAS THE STAR NEWSPAPER BECOME THE LAUGHING STOCK OF WORLD JOURNALISM?

…CAN THE STAR PRODUCE A DOCUMENTARY ON THE HISTORY OF THEIR NEWSPAPER?
By Mansor Puteh


This is one definition on who may be a nationalist and a chauvinist: A Malaysian nationalist is a person who studies and studied in the national schools; a chauvinist is one who studies and studied in the vernacular schools who grow up depending on the charity of the Melayu for his commercial business while not having any fascination for Malaysian culture and arts, choosing only those from China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and India.

And a Chinese chauvinist newspaper promotes not Malaysian culture but China, Hong Kong and Taiwan culture with the Indian or Tamil chauvinist newspaper promoting India culture and not highlighting the participation of Chinese-Malaysians in the arts and film in Malaysia.

Normally some newspapers like to charge some agencies or individuals for becoming ‘the laughing stock’ of the country. They do that all the time, with the editors and journalists who also sometimes use their readers to say similar things.

But surprisingly, this charge can now be leveled at one newspaper in Malaysia which seems to believe too much in what they say, especially when they want to redefine ‘moderation’ and ‘extremism’ to suit their political agendas, whatever they are without realizing that these two words in the English language not only have negative meanings but also positive ones that they did not care to ask what they are.

How could a reputable English language newspaper not know this? That one can be extremely kind and also moderately evil!

So what’s the point in asking for everybody not to be extremists and to get them to be moderates?

The Star indeed can be charged for being the laughing stock of world journalism.

For a mere newspaper, the Star can be charged for misusing the medium to express the politics of their editors.

Have they gone too far with the word, with their views?

No other newspaper in the world has come anywhere near to them. They are indeed in a class of their own.

Of course the Washington Post had caused President Richard Nixon to be forced to resign over the Watergate scandal. But in this instance, it is the Stargate scandal or controversy that the Star has found it embroiled in.

But alas not many in Malaysian will care about this newspaper which will go on insisting that they are right that they have the right to report and criticize as they please.  

Is the Star taken the Malaysian and their readers and especially their non-readers for granted for too long?

The most disgusting part is how they have the gumption to want to do whatever they are doing to achieve what they have not bothered or dared to say other than being vague about it.

They also have the veracity to insist that they are right. They won’t buckle; they will continue on with their quest to push for the moderation campaign.

The moderate criminals, rapists and liars will welcome that for they have a lot of sentiments to share.

But the people who are extremely kind and generous will not think much about them. They have been made to feel like they had done something wrong for being extremists in the eyes of some people who did not know any better than to charge them for being ‘extremists’.  

So now the criminals will go on robbing and hurting others but they can do that only moderately. And those who are extremely kind and generously will also want to consider to be less so.

Last year’s bonuses for the Star staff will therefore be moderate; and instead of them getting a few months’ bonus, they will get just half a month!

This will make the staff of the newspaper organization extremely happy for being able to do their part to prove that they also practice what their paper is preaching to everybody.

And in the international front, the Zionists will not want to completely destroy Palestinian towns and villages but partially.

This also caused those who are said and reported by this paper to be supporting their cause, without any of them now actually knowing why and what they are supporting.

The strategy used by the Star is not unique; they write and insist on being right until they come to the extent that they began to believe in their own filth, however ridiculous it may be.

No wonder not many Malaysians are giving their support to their cause.

The silent majority does not care with their politics and continue to read what they say just to see how ridiculous it is.

They want everybody to be moderate. Do their editors, sub-editors and journalists want to do what they are trying to preach, i.e. by getting moderate wages, which is a third of what have been getting now, just to show to everybody and mostly their readers and those who support their cause that they mean what they say?

And will the Star dare to get someone to produce a documentary on its history and also a book on how this newspaper first appeared and how it expanded to become a national newspaper, and if they had supported the cause of Independence or Merdeka of the country?

But can the Star prove to everybody that they are capable of doing what they are doing with their moderation and extremism campaign?

Do they have the history to back that?

Do they dare to get an independent agency to help them come up with a special documentary to document how their newspaper started and how it expanded and what they have been doing all these years to prove that they have been moderates and had also shun extremism?

They have been promoting the English Premier League (EPL) to the extreme, everyday, giving them many pages in the sports section.

They continue to do that even though they have not been given any due recognition by the EPL or even one EPL football team in England.

England has also not offered any of their editors due recognition much less a knighthood for helping to promote the EPL.

The Star newspaper therefore can be charged for being the laughing stock of world of journalism because they are serving the cause of the other countries in this way.

And no newspaper in the world has said they also endorse what this newspaper is doing, much less to want to report on it and to also recommend to the selection committee of the Pulitzer’s Prize to give due recognition to them.

No newspaper in England is devoting even a single column on Malaysian football; even the Wimbledon badminton finals are not covered extensively by any newspaper in England, the reason being no English player has made it to the finals in ages.  




Wednesday, January 7, 2015

THE STAR, MODERATION, EXTREMISM AND THE MELAYU DECOYS OF THE LEFT…

By Mansor Puteh


I have been following the campaign by the Star to encourage moderation by Malaysians and am feeling confused as to what it means and what the Star wants to achieve.

Everything is written in doublespeak and statements made by its originators and unofficial creators are laced with hidden meanings.

How could some mere journalists of a newspaper publishing in English who are not so well-educated on many matters dare to trust themselves to the fore in such a campaign or movement and unabashedly push aside the many others who are better educated than them?

They have failed miserably to definite what they exactly mean by moderation and extremism.

They have in one swipe charged Melayu nationalists as ‘extremists’, they who lead organizations simply to uphold the National Constitution, and nothing more.

They are no more like Mahatma Gandhi who promoted independence of his country, India, or the nationalists of Indonesia who wanted to cause their Dutch colonial masters to leave their country.    

Many Melayu privately wonder if this is nothing but a silly ploy to slowly and moderately change the political system of the country?  

The first Melayu nationalists led by Umno and other Melayu organizations had been recognized for their campaigns and support that led the country to its independence.

They who fought against the implementation of the Malayan Union are ‘extremists’. If they were moderates, chances are Malayan Union would have been implemented.

The newspaper of Malaysia which had championed the cause of Merdeka or Independence of the country was Utusan Melayu; the Chinese newspapers especially did not care too much about helping the leaders of the country on the struggle to achieve Merdeka.

The Star did not exist then.

It is so convenient for the Star to charge Perkasa and the Melayu groups for being ‘extremists’ when they are nationalist organizations.

It is also strange how the campaign to promote moderation and to condemn extremism by the Star has not become a national past-time by most Malaysians of all races and backgrounds; those who had stood up to be counted are mostly those who had retired or pensioned who wanted to be seen to be active.

But alas, they have only managed to get so few people to support their move. Those who offer their support do not seem to have written or said much on the matter

I am confused by what the Star means by 'moderation' and also 'extremism' and who are ‘moderates’ and ‘extremists’.

Therefore one would hope for the newspaper to define what they mean by that instead of using the definition as found in some dictionaries.

I am wondering if the Star condones those who want to be terrorists or militants just moderately? The Moderate Terrorists? The Moderate Racists? The Moderate Criminals, etc?

And is it any bad if one just wants to be extremely kind and generous?

Surely one can now also wonder if the Malaysian football team Harimau Melayu (Malaya?) lost to Thailand in the AFF Suzuki Cup finals simply because they decided to play less agressively to the extreme, but moderately?

Does the Star also want the law enforcement officers and agencies to enforce the law moderately? Does the Star also want the judges to adminster the law moderately? Does the Star want students to study less agressively but moderately?

Did the Star assume that the Malaysian government has not been moderate in their actions?

Tunku Abdul Rahman had been quoted by the Star for being a leader who adopted moderate actions. Is that so?

If Tunku had done so, then surely it could mean that he had agreed to give the Chinese and Indian immigrants citizenship and allowing the Mandarin and Tamil vernacular schools, which have now become one of the reasons for the whole country not being able to develop fully for the full benefit of its citizen.

And is the Star charging the Malaysian government for not adopting a moderate stance so much so that the moderation movement has to be launched and more and more voices from the so-called moderate Melayu and other Malaysians have to be solicited?

Bear in mind that those who have done so including Musa Hitam had not said much on the matter; they said they are moderates. But what exactly have they done to show that they are so?

The Star says it supports the Vision School which the chauvinist Chinese organizations and groups and leaders do not.

For your information the Vision Schools which see schools from the different education systems – Sekolah Melayu, Mandarin and Tamil schools – located in the same area, may be an idea which I had first mooted.

I wrote about it long ago and was asked how such a system be introduced and I said what the government would later describe as the Vision Schools or Sekolah Wawasan.

To me the Melayu who have voiced their support for the movement for the moderates led by the Star to be nothing but decoys to confuse the Chinese even more; they who comprise mostly of people who once held high office but who have not done much upon their retirement and who wants to be counted.

All Melayu know that the shape of the country has changed so much so that in less than a decade Chinese economy and politics that they had tried to exemplify will collapse.

Everywhere the Melayu are present where at an earlier time the Chinese dominated those economic activities.

More and more Chinese have started to accept this as a fact that cannot be denied; that more and more young Chinese have also realized that Sekolah Melayu are their only guarantee for a future.

Those Chinese and Indian kids who do not speak in Melayu will be left behind; unless if they want to be sidelined by the majority Melayu in the country who cannot earn a living if they cannot converse in the Melayu language.

Did Faridah Noor who is one of the twenty-five ‘prominent’ Melayu who support the Star’s moderation movement know what she is talking about?

Wasn’t she who had led the Malaysian team at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Pulau Batu Hitam (Pedra Branca) dispute with Singapore which saw Malaysia lost the islands, because she had conducted the case on behalf of Malaysia moderately?








Saturday, January 3, 2015

WHO IS THE MASTER OF TRIBUTES OF MALAYSIA…HE WHO CRIES CROCODILE TEARS EACH TIME WHEN SOMEONE RELATED TO THE FILM INDUSTRY AND LITERATURE DIES?

…AND WHO WILL WRITE A TRIBUTE FOR THE ‘MASTER OF TRIBUTES’ – BECAUSE HE IS A JOKER?
By Mansor Puteh


There is a person who has written more tributes to dead film actors, directors and authors in Malaysia than anyone else.

It is a pity that there is no special mention of this feat or achievement in the Malaysia Book of Records, or he will definitely get a mention in the book that no one else in Malaysia can better.

It is an achievement not many will want to better, anyway…

Maybe the person who can be described as the Master of Tributes had not written that many tributes to be given this recognition.

He has to wait a while before that happens, and he can achieve this feat when more authors and film folks die; his achievement depends greatly on how many of them die – the sooner the better.   

Normally tributes for the dead are written by someone close to the deceased. But in Malaysia those who are closed to the deceased authors or film folks generally do not do that.

The chore has thus been given to anyone who had the propensity to misuse the word to express emotions that look and sound to be fake.

He was never known to be close to anyone in the film industry and literary scene in Malaysia.

He had not been known to have written anything interesting about them in the form of essays much less in books.

And he had also not been known to have spoken in any length with any of them, much less to pose for photos with them.

However, when one of them dies, he is quick – very quick – to put pen to paper or hit his fingers on the keyboard of his computer to write a tribute on him, calling them ‘his friend’ who had just passed away and which is also a loss to the film and literary scene in the country.

He seems to have developed or created a template in which he can just change the names of the persons and circumstances he had died from and also some details on his artistic or literary backgrounds and he has got yet another tribute to publish.

One thing’s for sure is that he writes not with passion or personal interests but to attract attention to himself so he can show to all Malaysians that he cared. He did not care about the persons he had written when they were alive.

He only cares about them when they are dead.

Who is this person? What is he trying to pull?

He can probably publish an anthology of tributes if there are enough people in these fields had died. But it won’t be anytime soon as those who go away do not go in droves but one at a time.

And for any given year, there are at the most two or three such persons who die, mostly due to old age.

It is also good that his view of things do not extend to very far; he is not known to have written on the arts, since there are some famous but relatively popular painters who had gone on.

Yet, there are also some literary figures who had passed away but they did not get the Master of Tribute’s attention because they are seen to be small figures, not worthy of his attention.

He would deem it unnecessary and below him to come up with a tribute on such personalities.

The Master of Tributes only concentrates on those who are much larger in size and who commanded a certain degree of attention in their fields.

No one can be faulted if he thinks the ‘Master of Tributes’ is nothing but a JOKER!

He is indeed a JOKER.

He is indeed a JOKER because he does not write on personal anecdotes on the ‘victims’, which proves that he did not have any personal relationship with them when they were still alive.

He only writes what is obvious about the person who has become his ‘victim’ by saying about things that everybody knows about him and his works – books he had written or films that he had acted or starred in and how they first met to sit and talk about them, etc, etc.

There is none of that.

Normally, a person paying a tribute to a dead film star or director or author will have something more personal or intimate to share with his readers of his column to show how close they were.

This is also to show how he could and had better understood the inner thinking of the author and film star.

But none of these had appeared and could appear in the tribute simply because it is written by someone who is misusing the dead author and film actor to serve his own self-interests which is to show how much he remembers them and had cared for them and their works, when in fact he did not bother with them when they were still alive.

The Master of Tributes knew no one else would want to write tributes to the dead authors or film folks, so he took it upon himself to do it.

He won’t dare or would want to write tributes of dead national politicians or figures from the government ministries and agencies or corporate sector, because his true colors would be exposed since he did not know any of them to be able to write much on them.

The task normally fell on the newspapers and media to do so and they would normally seek the views of those who were close to the persons.

How could the Master of Tribute want to write on prime ministers who had died? His words will ring hollow because his perspective will be severely restricted. They can only come from his peers and those who knew him, leaders of foreign countries and also party leaders in the Barisan Nasional coalition.  

Let’s see who will write a special tribute if the Master of Tribute dies finally?







Sunday, December 28, 2014

DISADVANTAGES IN STUDYING IN THE SO-CALLED PRIVATE AND INTERNATIONAL SCHOOLS IN MALAYSIA: HAVE ALL THESE SCHOOLS BEEN OVER-RATED?

…SO WHERE ARE THE FORMER STUDENTS OF SUCH SCHOOLS?
By Mansor Puteh



Parents send their children to the so-called private and international schools because they thought they were more superior compared to the Sekolah Melayu.

But the truth is that this may not be so.

The only reason why these parents send their children to these schools is because they are exclusive and mostly, because they can afford it.

There are many hidden and unaccepted disadvantages of such schools and these parents do not want to be fully aware of what they are. They want to be aloof from them and continue to assume that these schools can give their children the best education in the country.

There are even some who sent their children to Singapore and also to England.

So far no one has ever tried to study what are the advantages and also mostly the disadvantages of such schools and what they can do to the students when they are studying in them and mostly when they are done with studying there and have to be on their own joining the hoi polloi in the universities in the country and also abroad.

Chances are the students are not able to relate with the simple things and the normal persons they would meet at the universities and in the societies they are in.

And they may grow up feeling detached from the society and country and also the world.

Worse, despite them having studied using English as the medium of instruction, some of them may not be able to speak in the language or write much in it later on in their lives other than to use the language for social communication.

A lot of misconceptions have been created of the private and international schools where the medium of instruction is English.

Some of them were established to cater the needs of students who came to live in the country with their parents from abroad who are here to work in international companies or embassies.

But over the years, some Malaysian parents found it expedient and convenient to send their own children to study there, even when the fees charged by such schools are exorbitant.

The students are said to be getting first class education and when the medium of instruction is English, many assume they speak the best English in the country compared to the students who study in the sekolah kebangsaan or national schools or more exactly the Melayu schools.

And the students are said to be better of academically and they are able to converse in English more fluently and expressively.

And better, they are also said to be very liberal and who often manage to obtain better results in their examinations compared to the students of the Sekolah Melayu.

These are mere misconceptions.

And one can’t blame anyone for harboring such misconceptions. Because they had been misled into thinking that they are so.

The truth will shock many.

The truth is that most of the Malaysians who had studied in such schools are not outstanding. They are not able to get better grades in the national examinations compared to those who studied in the Sekolah Melayu, even if they are from the rural and remote areas.

Most, if not all of the students of the private and international schools have parents who are better off economically and socially so they are able to afford to be sent to such schools.

On top of that they are also able to use the latest electronic gadgets and take tuition to supplement their education.

But this does not mean that they are any better than the students of the Sekolah Melayu in many ways.

The shocking truth is that the top students in any national examination are those who studied in the Sekolah Melayu, with some from those in the rural and remote areas and whose parents are simple kampung folks who operate food stalls or tap rubber and so son.

The children of the wealthy in the urban areas and other exclusive residential areas in Lembah Kelang including the children of the titled, seldom, if ever, managed to get a string of As for their examinations.

And most of those who went on to pursue their education at the master’s and doctoral degree levels are the students from Sekolah Melayu.

In fact, most of the scholars that we have in the country are those students from such schools.

So where are the former students of the private and international schools in education? Nowhere.

Most of them go into the private sector by getting their first degrees and this is when they stopped studying altogether.

They have no need to further their education.

They end up no excelling in their own chosen profession.

None of them are capable of excelling in the arts. None became artistes or are engaged in the creation of literature and art.

Some of them may have taken music lessons, but they also do not excel.

And what can they do with their English that they are said to be fluent and proficient in? Nothing.

They use English for social communication and not to acquire further knowledge; worse they are also not able to impress anyone in England and America and the other countries where English are the main medium of everyday communication.

Some of them do English language theater but not in those countries but in Malaysia for a small crowd.

Many of the former students of such schools seem to have lost touch with reality. They live in a world of their own amongst themselves and cannot relate with the majority.

In fact, most of them speak in pidgin or Funny English amongst themselves. They write better than they speak since they have to abide with grammar and the dictates of the language, which they do not have to do if they are communicating amongst themselves when they discard linguistic propriety.



Wednesday, December 24, 2014

‘THE INTERVIEW’, ‘DAY OF THE JACKAL’, SALMAN RUSHDIE’S ‘SATANIC VERSUS’ AND THE NEW FILM CRITICISM 101

– A US$44 MILLION-LESSON HOLLYWOOD WILL NOT FORGET. …MOST HOLLYWOOD FILM PRODUCERS AND DIRECTORS ARE NOT SO WELL EDUCATED.
By Mansor Puteh


Times have changed. Hollywood too has to accept the fact that they alone do not dictate how the cinema is appreciated, their cinema that had failed to fully develop because it was hijacked by so few who had narrow views on what it can be used for, not to chastised others but to promote better understanding amongst Americans and the rest of the world.

And how film criticism has changed so much over the years especially with the advent of the internet when almost everybody is a film critic.

But so far film criticism has got its best supporters, in the North Koreans, who was charged without they ever been put to trial for having hacked into Sony Entertainment Pictures and causing their latest Christmas offering ‘The Interview’ to be shelved.

The North Koreans have been described as ruthless and backwards when it was convenient for anyone in America to do so; yet, when hacking is mentioned, they are said to be the best in the world.

The world, and especially America, too, has a lot to learn from them just as much as the North Koreans have something to learn from the rest of the world and America.

This has come in the wake of the recent announcement by Barack Obama on the thawing of the diplomatic relations between his country and Cuba.

Yet, with the North Koreans, he has upped the ante against them, by issuing threats no one knows if they would ultimately be realized. They could be empty threats.  

When Salman Rushdie wrote ‘Satanic Versus’ which caused the ire of Imam Khomeini who ordered his book banned and he, killed.

Salman went on to be knighted. Rise Sir Salman.

V S Naipaul, the Nobel Prize for Literature winner remarked how the edict passed by Imam Khomeini was the most extreme form of literary criticism.

Maybe it was Salman’s idea of trying to try his luck with the Nobel Prize selection committee. But so far he has failed to do that.

But he should be happy being knighted, despite the protests by some Muslims who were against him being given such an honor for not doing much to develop world literature much less to use literature and the power of the world to bring peoples together.

One thing’s for certain is that if one wishes to be so knighted, he has to defame Islam.

Taslima Nasrim of Bangladesh wrote poems and some novels which are hitherto unrecognized but she was given political exile status by Sweden.

But if one wants to get the ire of the White House, one has to order the banning of a third rate Hollywood film which would otherwise had been shown and taken off from the cinemas without anyone realizing that it was there in the first place.

‘The Interview’ does not look like a funny film, despite it being touted as a comedy. Their producers cannot say or admit that it is a serious film.

There had been some films set in Iran produced by third rate producers from Hollywood; they had all gone unnoticed when Iran refused to give credence to them by totally ignoring them.

What if North Korea had also done the same, would ‘The Interview’ get its audiences all over America during the long Christmas and New Year holidays? One doubts it.

This film could even be passed by the critics in America and spawned by the viewers in the country.

But now with the brouhaha over this film, if it is finally released in whatever media, then surely, there will be some who would otherwise not want to watch it will want to do so, simply to see what it looks like.

But the difference between the Hollywood films set in Iran and ‘The Interview’ is that the later is on North Korean President Kim Jong-Un.

If the films were set in Iran was on Imam Khomeini, then surely, Iran too would not want to sit idle while the viewers in America watch it.

But the truth is that no one knows if North Korea was involved in hacking into Sony. It could be an inside job, as some has alleged.

The prime minister of Singapore’s official website had just been hacked, but a local Melayu person had been arrested, charged and sentenced.

But what about the hacking into the computer system of the Iranian nuclear plant which caused their system to be stunted for a year or two, and leaving some Iranians dead.

Worse, five Iranian scientists were assassinated by people who were on the pay of Mossad.

No film will be made on this episode, even by the Iranians themselves. Unlike the one on the attack on the Zionist athletes in the Munich Olympics in 1972 by none other than Steven Spielberg who had earlier produced films which disparage people of color in his ‘Indiana Jones’ series starting with ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’. It is pure Zionist propaganda.  

‘The Day of the Jackal’, a film on how someone using the fake name or pseudonym of ‘the Jackal’ wanted to kill French President Charles de Gaulle which was produced by Hollywood some years ago.

The film went on to be shown in America and elsewhere to muted response and no reaction from the French and their government.

Former American President George W. Bush too had been shown to have died in a feature film produced by Hollywood.

There was some debate on this when someone said that it was the first time a sitting president of their country had been given such a reception in a film.

They had only seen their former presidents being given such treatment, but not when George W. Bush was still alive and their president.

Fortunately and unfortunately, the film went on to the cinemas and was not given any hoot by the viewers in America and elsewhere.

But Kim Jong-Un is not like George W. Bush and Charles de Gaulle. And North Korea is not like America or France.

Even if Fidel Carlos of Cuba had been shown to have been assassinated by a gunman who had sneaked from America, even if it is in a film produced by Hollywood, there would have been severe repercussion by some hardline Castro supporters and diehards.

So no wonder such a film on the assassination of Castro and also Imam Khomeini has not been produced by Hollywood.

Hollywood knew better not to deal with such men and topics.

But they did not know better when Sony decided to spend US$44 million to produce ‘The Interview’ which they now regretted.

The main problem is: most Hollywood producers and directors are people who are not so well educated, including Spielberg whose knowledge of the world does not extend to very far.

No wonder, he and his colleagues look at the other cultures, history and peoples especially their honored political and other leaders through blinkered vision, using them purely for their entertainment.

They call such works, parody or satire and to express their creative urges and also to use creative license, whatever that means.

But to Sony, it means US$44 million down the drain…and to those in Old Hollywood, a slap in their faces.

North Korea won; Hollywood lost. And the White House is not trying to up their ante to try and make sure Sony and Hollywood are protected by executive order.

What a shame! Because this is purely a creative and intellectual activity. Sony and Hollywood must be brave enough to handle the matter without call ‘Papa! White House stay out of this!’





Thursday, December 18, 2014

IF BROWN IS WHITE, WOULD HE BE SHOT AT FOR CARRYING A TOY RIFLE BY THE WHITE POLICEMAN?

…AND WHY BROWN AND GARNER OUGHT TO HAVE KNOWN IT BETTER BEING BLACKS IN WHITE AMERICA TODAY – AND A TRIBUTE TO APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICA AND PRE-CIVIL LAWS AMERICA…AND HOW MANY WHITES HAD DIED IN THE HANDS OF THE BLACKS!?
By Mansor Puteh



Many Blacks only learn their errors when they are sentenced to jail, where they learn about Islam. Prislam!

And being Christians do not mean anything to the Black Christians as the White Christians still do not give them respect and accord them brethren status.

They were goods to be traded.

What is the psychological profile of the police officers in Ferguson and New York City who were involved with the two high-profile cases? You know which cases!

Someone must insist that a study on their psychology be done to determine if they had done what they did deliberately.

Better, to supplement the results of the findings or research, the two officers too must be subjected to a lie detector test so there is some facts that can be put down in black-and-white for everybody to see which can erase all the many white-lies that had been formed to allow the two to go away scot-free.

Who knows if the two might have some psychological urges to want to do ‘a service’ to their White community for doing what they had done.

And this is not an emotional matter; but a psychological one.  

Many Blacks in America blame the police force in America for having some White officers who did not know how to relate with the Blacks in the country, with some of them who had actually been killed or attacked by some White officers.

The White officers were blamed for not being sensitive to the Blacks. But the Blacks too should accept part of the blame themselves.

But unfortunately for Brown and Garner, it would be too late now for them, because they had been killed or died.

The other Blacks especially those who live in the fringes of society ought to take better care of themselves so that they do not attract the wrong attention from the police officers especially the White ones.

America is still in a state of Black-and-White.

One has not heard of similar incidents involving the Orientals and Arabs who had been given similar treatment as Brown and Garner.

Maybe the Orientals knew how to behave themselves, and the Arabs often look like the Whites and they also do not behave or misbehave themselves in the same fashion as some of the Blacks.

So in this way, the Orientals and Arabs and other people of color do not get themselves embroiled with the police in America ending in the same way as some of the unlucky and hapless Blacks do, getting killed.

The Oriental and Arab kids do not carry toy guns anywhere. In fact, from my own guess, most of the people in America who own guns are the Whites.

The Blacks have them not to protect themselves but to use them as weapons for their criminal activities.

The Orientals and Arabs and the other people of color do not generally own guns for leisure or for personal protection.

This is my general observation of the situation in America. And I may be wrong. 

An eleven-year-old Black guy called Brown was shot in a park by a White guy in Ferguson, America, who is a policeman who ought to know better not to fire his pistol at him, for carrying a toy rifle.

Brown should not have also carried a toy rifle in public especially if he is in America at this time.

And the White policeman too ought to know better not to be trigger-happy and used better judgment in dealing with young men who are careless.

But the problem is not with the toy rifle or real rifle. It may be just a matter of skin or skin color.

The main problem is that Michael Brown is Black. If Brown is White, the settler-cum-policeman would definitely used his better judgment and not fire his pistol at him, killing him.

The White Settler was thus spared any action for his indiscretion.

Brown is like the many Palestinian kids who had been shot at and killed by the Zionist settlers-cum IDF soldiers.

Now, even a minister in the Palestinian authority cabinet had been killed, over a fracas with the Israel Defense Force (IDF) soldiers who are too trigger-happy. Their motto seems to be: Kill now and find any excuses later.

One can also compare what had happened to Brown and Garner with the many Blacks in South Africa when the country was under Apartheid rule for many decades.

And also how many Whites in America had died in the hands of the Blacks who rob them?

This should also explain why there are more Blacks in the prisons in America than the Whites despite the allegation by some Black leaders on how Blacks who are arrested would most likely be charged and given long jail terms compared to the Whites.

Where are the White leaders? Why are they also not listing down all the types of crimes the Blacks do on them and why.

And where are the Black leaders on this matter?

But what I want to ask is: Just how many of the Blacks who have been killed or who were involved in crimes are Muslim ones.

My take is that there are so few of them.

And ironically, the many Blacks who have been sentenced to jail, many or some eventually will revert to Islam so much so that they are called Prislam.

Religion does not matter in America; the history of the country has ample proof that despite the early Blacks converting to Christianity to be just like their slave-masters, they were not given same treatment and were still their slaves.

Even today being a Christian does not mean anything; the country is still very much divided by the Whites and Blacks.

There is no such a thing as a Christian brethren status amongst the White and Black Christians in America or anywhere in the world.

Unlike Muslims, they can do away with color.

But sectarian strife was introduced by the west in order to cause Muslims or Arabs to be at arms with each other as what is happening in the many Arab countries today.


The reason is expediency; for the enemies of the Arabs and Islam to have it easy. 

Sunday, December 14, 2014

MICHAEL JACKSON, BILL COSBY, BILL CLINTON, JIMMY SAVILE.

…AND ALSO MALAYSIA’S OWN ANWAR IBRAHIM.
By Mansor Puteh


When Michael Jackson was charged for molesting a young White boy, the White prosecutors were quick to take swift action against him. They even stripped him in a police station and have his genitals photographed.

Bill Cosby is now facing some charges of sexual misconduct by some women who alleged that he had done that to them decades ago.

Yet, the American public was quick to take action against them even before the cases were brought to the court or with the women not yet filing police reports against him.

Bill is now on a tour for a series of comedy shows, and some of them had been canceled.

This is America, where the morals of many of the people there are said to be low compared to those in Malaysia which is an Islamic state.

Yet, when Anwar Ibrahim was charged for sodomy which is not a crime in America, the police could not even force him to give blood samples to check his DNA to compare with those that had been found in the semen in Saiful’s anus, much less to force him to pose for photos to of his genitals, like what their American counterparts had done to Michael.

And worse, Anwar is able to go all over the country and abroad as though he did not fear the outcome of the case, which he had initially won, but lost in the appeal in the Sodomy II trial and is now waiting for the outcome of the appeal in the Federal Court.

He was found guilty by the Appeals Court and sentenced to five years in jail.

But he was never held in remand for Sodomy II, while the lesser mortals are given the treatment.

Jimmy Savile (Sir Jimmy) had died many years ago but his body cannot rest peacefully in his grave which is said to be placed below a very thick concrete slap to discourage anyone from defacing it.

Bill Clinton, had his presidency stained by semen and shame by a mere White House intern, Monica Lewinsky who even said how the authorities had seized her laptop or computer and recovered the emails she had exchanged with Bill that she had deleted.

She must be naïve not to know that this can be done by using a simply data recovery software that is sold online.

In Malaysia, Anwar’s and Saiful’s laptop or computer or even smartphones have not been known to have been seized by the authorities so they can see if there are SMSes and emails that the pair had sent to each other that contain incriminating information to prove that they had had a long relationship leading to sodomy.

Why were the prosecutors not able to get the court order to force Anwar give blood samples to prove that the DNA that was found in the semen in Saiful’s anus does not or does match?

The prosecutors had to find some DNA samples of Anwar from items that he had left in the cell where he was held in remand and also sentenced in the Sodomy I case.

They were lucky because he was not put in a cell with few other convicts but was given ‘special treatment’ and put in a room in the prison clinic so he was alone and the items could be proven to belong to him alone that the prosecutors in Sodomy II are using to prove that the DNA samples in the semen found in Saiful’s anus and those found in the personal items belonging to Anwar indeed matched. 

Many in the Left and also the opposition often like to compare Malaysia with America and the other so-called developed countries in the west on anything.

But strangely, on this matter, they tried their level best to look elsewhere and not even want to compare how Michael Clinton, Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, Jimmy Savile and the others had been treated by the authorities in their respective countries.

They did not demand that Anwar be subjected to DNA tests with or without the approval of his lawyers.

Now Bill Cosby is being persecuted by mere allegations by some women who alleged to have been sexually abused, decades ago, with his shows canceled and tickets sold refunded to those who had bought them.

Yet, none of the women had dared to take the matter further other than to make the charges, since the incidents had happened too long ago when they were in the teens.

And their legal counsel are trying to get Bill Cosby to waive the six-year time limit to allow him to face the women in the court.

Meanwhile, Bill would only utter, ‘No response’ each time he is asked to comment on the allegations.

Bill Cosby could have taken legal action for defamation against the women because only then the cases against him could be properly disposed with in the courts in the country but chances are he would not take this course as he will also expose himself to all the charges.

If this is not done, than the allegations shall remain just that.

In Malaysia no layperson had been acquitted for sodomy. Anwar won an appeal on Sodomy I, as he awaits the outcome of the Federal Court on his appeal on Sodomy II.

As for Bill Clinton, his fate was sealed without any action taken against him.

But why did he have to be subjected to any sort of pressure, if what he had done with Monica was by mutual consent? 

This is America. And their level of morality is generally not very high compared to those of Malaysia and the Arab and Muslim countries.

But when it comes to their political leaders, they expect them to be pure.

Whereas in Malaysia, Anwar has not actually suffered for the two Sodomy cases he was embroiled in, when the whole country must have rejected him long ago when the Sodomy I case came up in 1998. But this did not happen.

Is there any further development on the Jimmy Savile case whose case appeared after he died?

And suddenly, after he died, no other cases of sexual misconduct had been leveled against Michael Jackson.

However, the Sultan of Selangor, however, recently withdrew the Datukship that was given to Anwar by his father.


And Bill Cosby’s Star on the Hollywood of Fame had been defaced while Jimmy Savile’s friend had been found guilty for some charge.  

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

‘FAKE’ MARIA CAREY AND JENNIFER LOPEZ AND THEIR MALAYSIAN PAYMASTERS.

…THE TRUTH IS ONLY THE MALAYSIANS WHO HAD NOT STUDIED AND LIVED IN AMERICA WOULD GO FOR THEM.
By Mansor Puteh


I would not pay a sen to watch any Maria Carey or Jennifer Lopez concert, or even if it is free of charge.

I did not care for American entertainers of such type when I was studying and living in America. I had better things to do other than school to worry about.

Why must I pay so much and spend so much time listening to any of them sing and shake their bodies anyway and be their paymaster? Don’t I have better things to do?

But there are some in Malaysia who wouldn’t mind doing that. They did not know how they had been manipulated by the American entertainment propaganda that likes to make many Malaysians feel inferior if they do not know to appreciate their performers and even films.

And they did not even care a hoot if the performers are real or just ‘fake’ ones.

Even if I did not have a degree in advertising I would not want to spend any sen or minute on them.

In fact, I don’t even listen to their songs. I prefer to listen to those I like which are closer to me than those sung by them.

It seems that many Malaysians are willing to pay a lot and believe they are watching the real Maria Carey and Jennifer Lopez and the other entertainers from America when they came here to perform.

They did not know better who had caused or forced them to misbehave themselves and allow themselves to become the paymasters for the American performers and entertainers as well as Hollywood producers, directors, screenwriters and also actors listening songs and watching films which are all alien to their own culture.

And unbeknownst to them, these are not the real Maria Carey or Jannifer Lopez but ‘fake’ ones; what the Malaysian audiences see may be their imposters or look-alikes, for all they care.

How so?

Because do not give their all, but a faint reflection of their true selves or image. And they could very well get their look-alikes to represent them, since they are so far away on the stage in the large stadium that no one would notice the difference and if they are singing or just miming to a pre-recorded tape which is being played.

Whatever it is, the Maria and Jennifer and the other American performers who had come to Kuala Lumpur to perform, did not give their all. They are not allowed to give their all, or they would be charged for gross indecency for wearing inappropriately and more so for behaving inappropriate gyrating and moving about in vulgar ways or fashion that they are known to do when they perform in America and the other countries that do not care what they show to the audiences.

But Malaysia is not like those countries.

Malaysia can force the American performers to behave themselves and wear appropriately; so they had to bend backwards to accommodate some Islamic values and principles merely for them to get some Malaysians to become their paymasters for a while.

And if one sees the expensive clothes they wear and the expensive houses they live in and expensive cars they are driven in, Malaysians can be proud to say they had helped to contribute to them to get those, too, as much as the others in America and the other countries the American performers had performed at.

The same is true for all the Hollywood producers, directors and actors who live lavishly, who have not been known to remember how they are being supported by many Malaysians who did not care who they had indeed enriched, while they live frugally and not being able to pay their monthly bills on some things, sometimes.    

But to them, they are better than watching them perform on video and or on television which they do sometimes or to read about them in the many gossip columns that are available in all the English language newspapers.

Maria Carey and Jennifer Lopez and the other American performers all have personal principles that they hold dear to their hearts, being Americans as they can ever be.

But when they wanted to perform here in Malaysia, they throw aside some of them, just so that they can perform in the country.

And they can also make the ten to twelve thousand Malaysians who come to see them at their concerts to be their paymasters, too.

So some Malaysian ringgit or MYR can cause them to lose themselves even though they are still not able to loose their minds and make their bodies become loose while performing.

They had to cover themselves up and not move their bodies or even gyrate when performing anywhere in Malaysia.

Yes, there are some Malaysians who are willing to be their paymasters.

And ironically and not surprisingly, most of those who admire them enough to want and be willing to part with some cash they had earned simply because they had not been to America before or had studied there.

Most Malaysians who had studied and also lived anywhere in America are not too keen to do what their countrymen who had done managed or could afford to do so, do not come in droves to see concerts by any American performer. They have better things to do.

American performers and other pop acts are not the America they know about.

But to those Malaysians who have not been to the country, and who only see it in films and television programs, this is America that they want to know.

The editors of the newspapers are to be blamed for continuing to allow themselves to be used as promoters and propagandists for American entertainers and popular arts. They did not realize that their predecessors had been manipulated to do that task which they are now doing themselves.