It appears that the political survival and demise of politicians and or their parties is now being force-wedged into the stinking gutter of sex and porn.
Malaysians were rudely awakened and shocked when they were fed with the titilating stories of Sodomy I. If that was not sedating enough, a sequel re-appeared called Sodomy II.
The tides of sex and sin did not stop there. It went on with one lady threatening that she would not hestitate to expose it all even if it meant severing ties with kin and family.
And now, the topping on the ice cream - for the time being, is the stellar Datuk T & Trio porn stuff. Even school kids are eager to watch it given the senstional peddling by certain political machineries.
Well, since sex, porn and sin are the favored ammunitions of political battles as expressly marketed by BN and or their compatriorts these days, why not have a no-holds-barred spill into the public foyer of all such incidents of similar sins these past two decades.
The new media for example has been repeatedly talking about some encrypted sagas of sex and sin. Some of these are The Port Dickson affair; An Underaged girl's rape; The Mongolian beauty episode; the ministerial extra-marital affairs; and many others.
So since this is the season for Sins of Sex in the Open, let us have all of it out for all to read and finally decide what future they want for themselves and their children's children.
Let us take an inventory count of which political party has produced the largest number of sex and sin incidents. And let the public know what happened to all these sinners till this day.
That will be very interesting and most edifying for all citizens who want to take a more responsible role in ensuring the future of the nation. At least they can then vote with a clear conscience come the GE or even in the Sarawak Elections.
Any new media operator willing to take on this responsibility of providing a no-holds-barred researched effort to tell the truth and nothing but the truth and tell all accounts of sex and sin these past two decades or so?
KTB, Realmild-Umno (MRCB). Ageless, timeless, limitless It takes one mother crook to identify anak crooks question of billions in Umno assets
related articles
Malays are always asking for handout they are always asking whythe goverment didn’t help them. When are we going to see them standing on their own?
File photo of Abdul Rahman (right) and Khalid (seated, left) at an earlier hearing.
CLICK HERE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE STORY
question of billions in Umno assets including Umno media empire, of Kadir’s own credibility as a journalist and his performance in leading the
In taking their quarrel over the sale price of Realmild’s shares from a decade ago, former company directors Datuk Khalid Ahmad and Datuk Seri Abdul Rahman Maidin have showed how the political giant has fed and sustained its tight grip on power through control of several conglomerates starting from the early 1990s.
The suit was mooted by Khalid in March 2005 against his successor, Abdul Rahman, to claim RM10 million in payment for a block of the company’s shares.
But Abdul Rahman made a counter-claim to be refunded the RM5 million he already paid, after being told by former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad that Umno owned all Realmild’s shares and the appointed directors were only nominees acting in the party’s trust.
The nexus between Umno and certain conglomerates has been revealed in the court hearing that started in August this year involving the past shareholders of Realmild, the shadowy company that took over media giant The New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd in 1993, and Malaysian Resources Corporation Berhad (MRCB).
A number of high-flying corporate figures have entered the witness stand, most notably Tan Sri Syed Anwar Jamalullail, younger brother to the Raja of Perlis Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin Ibni Al-Marhum Tuanku Syed Putra Jamalullail who also held the position of Yang di-Pertuan Agong at the time of the contentious takeover.
Khalid is suing Abdul Rahman for RM10 million over the sale of a five per cent stake in the company in 1999, which took place during a shake-up and buy-out related to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sacking from government.
Abdul Rahman had paid RM5 million but later reneged on the remainder.
The silver-haired industry captain testified in court that Dr Mahathir, who was prime minister at the time of the buy-out, told him that the shares actually belonged to Umno.
Abdul Rahman, a former Malay Chamber of Commerce Penang president, also claimed to have received instructions from Tun Daim Zainuddin and Tan Sri Nor Mohamad Yakcop had previously instructed him to undertake a management buy-out of MRCB by purchasing the 7,101,001 ordinary shares in Realmild.
But Khalid maintained the five per cent stake was his own although he acknowledged that the majority stake was part of an “Umno trust”.
The other directors in Realmild then were former Berita Harian group editor Datuk Ahmad Nazri Abdullah, New Straits Times group editor Datuk Abdul Kadir Jasin, and Mohd Noor Mutalib, who replaced Khalid as NSTP managing director in February 1993.
Realmild, originally a RM2 company, was then already the majority shareholder of MRCB, which is now developing the KL Sentral commercial and transport hub in Brickfields.
Representing Khalid is lawyer Ahmad Fadzil Mohd Perdaus.
Alex De Silva and Eugene Jeyaraj Williams acted for Abdul Rahman.
Anda mungkin juga meminati:
Whitest Kid Redneck Christopher Badeaux of New York Times ...
Malaysia's Flipflop History Conflicting Testimony Witness ...
Can we get Mahatir now for saying “How dare you raid my ...
The Doctor in the House Doing Overtime The Predictability ...
UMNO Compulsive/Pathological Liars : A Silent Crisis That ...
Since Elizabeth Taylor's death last week, much has been said about her illustrious career and colorful personal life. And while tributes highlighted her many movies and marriages, it's probably fair to say that a lot of us will remember her for her exquisite beauty: those violet eyes, her creamy skin and thick, black hair.
With Taylor's iconic image in mind, I was interested in reading Robert Tornambe's article, "What Is Beauty? A Plastic Surgeon's Perspective." The piece intrigued me not only because of my own research on this topic, but because I was interested in how his point of view (as a male and a surgeon) might differ from mine (a female and a psychologist). My work focuses more on raising questions about our beauty culture (e.g., "Under the Knife and Under Scrutiny," and "Cosmetic Drugs Gone Too Far"), but I was pleasantly surprised that we both shared a similar perspective: that a woman's attractiveness is based more on perception than the sum of her biological parts. I particularly resonated with these words: "We must stop sending the wrong, unhealthy superficial message to our daughters and granddaughters about the definition of beauty."
Unlike others reacting to Dr. Tornambe's post, I didn't take issue with it being authored by a plastic surgeon. Clearly, there are many doctors whose moral compasses guide their practice, as appears to be the case with Dr. Tornambe. There are cosmetic surgeons who truly want to understand women and do right by them. They hesitate to perform repeated cosmetic surgeries on their female patients, and they turn away young girls who come for Botox, even if their parents approve. Some make concerted efforts to talk to their patients about the difference between fantasy and reality -- how much pain is involved, the cost of procedures (and their upkeep) and the long-term expectations, including the possible need for further surgery. I know, because some of these doctors have asked for my help in understanding the psychological ramifications of their work (see "The Psychological Factors Surrounding Plastic Surgery").
It wasn't even Dr. Tornambe's gender that bothered me. I realize that it's hard to find female plastic surgeons (around 98 percent are men), let alone one who is willing to write about her work. The rarity of women in this field likely reflects the years of demanding training required, making family life difficult, but ambivalence over performing cosmetic procedures (mostly on other women) may also play a role. In fact, I applaud Dr. Tornambe's thoughtful article on a topic few plastic surgeons write for the general public. No, it was neither his being a plastic surgeon nor his being male that made me uneasy; rather, it is that word "beauty." It is how easily practitioners use it to mean so many different things, and how easily it is misinterpreted.
Dr. Tornambe started his piece by correctly stating, "Beauty is the most overused, misunderstood, poorly defined word in the English language," but he goes on to use the word throughout his piece, applying it to his description of the "Beauty Quotient." While I agree that personal appearance, physical and psychological health contribute to a woman's sense of well-being, I take issue with his identifying these as "the three categories that define a woman's beauty." Perhaps I'm making a big deal over the use of a word -- a matter of semantics, some might say -- but if we recognize that we live in a culture that leaves women, as Dr. Tornambe himself writes, "unduly influenced into negative opinions about themselves and forced to chase an illusion," we professionals need to do all that we can to shift that experience.
Take a look at Webster's definition of beauty: "A pleasing physical quality. An assemblage of properties pleasing to the five senses." In today's culture, its meaning has been narrowed mostly to the visual sense, and further still, applied often to youthful looks. Synonyms include prettiness, cuteness, loveliness, exquisiteness and splendor. Webster's definition of attractiveness, on the other hand, is, "The quality that arouses interest and pleasure. The power to attract." Synonyms include appealing, captivating, charismatic, charming and engaging. Notice anything in the latter that is directly attributed to physical features or youth?
Clearly, most of us know that beauty and attractiveness are not one and the same. Women who have graced the covers of magazines tell us that they do not necessarily feel attractive. And there are women who are attractive that would never be cover girls. I know this to be true, not only from the models, dancers and screen actors that I work with in psychotherapy, but from the women I interviewed for my book, "Face It: What Women Really Feel as Their Looks Change" (Hay House, 2011).
You see, there is a beauty paradox that many men -- and even some women -- find hard to fully comprehend. "Perfect" physical features -- the ones some are willing to go under the knife to achieve -- may be viewed as beautiful, but those who have them do not necessarilyexperience themselves as beautiful. In fact, when the goal of looking attractive is confused with achieving "beauty," it often creates the very opposite: women who feel inadequate and frustrated as they fall short of an unattainable standard. Beauty is a rigid, static physical image. Attractiveness is a fluid, variable psychological experience, one that moves from the inside, out and back again. Beauty can be inherited, Photoshopped or surgically attained. Attractiveness develops, evolves over time and can be ageless. One can be attractive to others or simply feel that way about oneself. Beauty leads women toward the pursuit of the physical features associated with the word. Attractiveness is an attainable goal for those who take care of their bodies, enjoy their lives, maintain sensuality and engage with others.
My suggestion? Whether you are a surgeon, psychologist, life coach or stylist, talk aboutattractiveness instead of beauty and you will foster more positive experiences in the women you advise. As parents, raise your daughters and granddaughters to truly understand the difference. Beauty is, and will always be, a word associated with icons throughout history -- from Cleopatra to the actress who so famously portrayed her. It works well as a goal for those competing in pageants, whose professions are on screen and in magazines, whose lives revolve around being admired and scrutinized primarily for their physical beings. As Dr. Tornambe suggests, "We must educate our children to recognize that physical characteristics alone do not make a woman beautiful."
We need only look at another Huffington Post piece that appeared on the same day as Tornambe's, entitled, "Mother Claims To Inject 8-year-old With Botox." I thought, "Therein lies the problem": A "licensed beautician" was using the very tools of Dr. Tornambe's trade on her daughter, so that she could make her a "beauty." According to that piece, mother Kerry was obsessed with daughter Britney becoming a future Hollywood "star" and was giving her all the advantages early on to reach that goal. This story comes from a questionable journal source (The Sun), but when considered alongside a more reliable one (from The New York Times) discussing a similar topic, teen "toxing", we recognize that our girls -- and their mothers -- are confused and in trouble.
Practitioners who study beauty, like Dr. Tornambe and I do, have a responsibility and opportunity to alter our younger generation's view on what it means to be attractive. To do so, we have to keep physical beauty from being equated with the experience of attractiveness. We need to leave the former to those whose genetics naturally endow them the physical qualities associated with what society deems the "Holy Grail" -- perfect, baby-faced features; blue eyes; thick hair; straight, white teeth; small nose; thin body; long legs -- and let them devote themselves to maintaining their youthful looks as they age. The rest of us need to feel free to be attractive in our own unique ways and maintain that enjoyable experience at any age.
How would you describe the difference between beauty and attractiveness?
Twelve years ago, I read "Recovery of Your Inner Child." The book opened up a whole new world for me. Technically, it was my right brain (the creative, intuitive, instinctive hemisphere) that I opened up. It was like turning on the proverbial light switch. More than any self-help book I had read before, the exercises helped me break through barriers to turbo-charge my life. The progress was not limited to my personal life; the lessons also helped me in my business career.
It is almost uncanny how simple the process is, and equally amazing are the profound results. I decided to track down the author who set me forth on this amazing journey. Dr. Lucia Capacchione is a bestselling author and has written 15 books. To my surprise, I was able to locate her website and contact information. She was gracious enough to answer my questions for this interview.
Bill Donius: How did you discover writing with your non-dominant hand as a way of tapping into a different part of your brain?
Dr. Capacchione: Out of sheer life and death necessity. Not something I planned to do. I was struggling with a mysterious and completely debilitating illness. Later it was diagnosed as a collagen disease, in the family of Lupus. I had serious side effects from medication being prescribed in a hit-or-miss fashion. I was pretty desperate when I began drawing and writing my feelings out in my sketch pads. (I was both a professional designer and early childhood educator at the time of this illness.) The end result was a complete recovery, a new life and a new career as an art therapist.
Bill Donius: What has been your most important discovery?
Dr. Capacchione: My first therapist put a crayon in my non-dominant hand (for me it is the left) and asked me to write with it. I had no idea this would change my life forever. A child-like self within spoke to me who had been buried under a mountain of responsibility and five years of continual crises. At home, I spontaneously began dialogues in my journal between that inner child (non-dominant hand, the one we don't normally write with) and my adult self or my inner critic (dominant hand). As a result, my physical energy increased dramatically, as well as my will to live.
My therapist encouraged me to develop this style of journaling, especially using both hands alternately. Someone who tried my method told Cal Tech's Roger Sperry [the brain research pioneer] about my technique. He said this was opening the right brain and integrating the hemispheres. I took his word for it. He later won the Nobel Prize in 1981.
Bill Donius:How do lives change using your methods?
Dr Capacchione: Most people report that they have found their inner child: emotions, playfulness, creativity, physical stamina, intuition, gut instinct, creativity. This is the most common experience. And it is real. Not a cliché, or a theory. They also find inner guidance from a higher power or spiritual source of wisdom. They become more creative problem-solvers in all areas of life. And they apply these techniques to everyday challenges with amazing results. Relationships get healed or resolved. New career directions evolve.
Bill Donius: Have you needed or wanted endorsement from the scientific community?
Dr. Capacchione: Scientist Dr. Valerie Hunt [formerly of UCLA] read my book, "The Power of Your Other Hand," when it was published in the late 1980s. She explained how she thought my techniques accessed right-brain processing and integrated both hemispheres. However, she encouraged me to continue with clinical work since I was "an artist" and a keen observer of people, and was helping so many to heal. She felt that the instrumentation would eventually be there to measure what was happening in the brain while one is engaged in these methods.
Bill Donius: What exactly is the advantage of writing with the non-dominant hand?
Dr. Capacchione: The new aspects of personality, the abilities and forms of expressions listed above are what we see clinically when people write with the non-dominant hand. They are functions described by Jill Bolte Taylor in her book, "My Stroke of Insight," describing her loss of left-brain functions and immersion in the right brain after a stroke. According to Dr. Hunt, writing with the non-dominant hand integrated the hemispheres and opens up new neuronal pathways between the two sides of the brain. This is what people report that if feels like, using their intuition and inner sense of perceiving their brain. They can actually feel a buzzing in the right brain while writing with the non-dominant hand.
ng Comm
