The right of reply

Enough is enough. People who proclaim to fight for freedom of expression and free media but censors other's legitimate reply based on their whims and fancy, must realise that on the internet, they cannot suppress peoples' legitimate right to reply and express contrarian views. This blog welcomes all views. ~ Ellese

Not so proud2bmalaysian


It has been an interesting skirmish with Proud2bmalaysian. (He has a blog by the same name). What started to be a very promising debate turned out to be a non stater. I must admit that I like his style of writing and civility. However the manner he argued was totally wrong and dishonest.

I guess its part of my fault. I had hoped it would be a dialectic discussion but it turned out that he is so densely partisan that he didn’t know what is right and what is wrong. I contemplated whether I should write a piece of him but as I’ve encountered him elsewhere, I think others must be aware of his manner. Also I want to articulate some grounds for having a proper discourse. Of course there are others unable to have dialectic discourse, for example those who name call me or accuse me without prove being a paid cyber trooper. For these type of people I reserve my right to reply in kind and not resort to a dialectic discourse. They can’t understand anyway. In the mains most Malaysians I’ve encountered fall in this category. However I have encountered a few who are sincere thought provoking and able to enlighten us with their knowledge and perspectives. To these people I reply with respect they accorded.

Now what did p2b did wrong or things which we shouldn’t do to have a proper discourse.

1) be consistent and don’t change goal posts. If you change admit it. That’s honesty in having intellectual discussion. P2b’s write on 98 issues jump from one end to the other end. He disagreed with what I said initially but at the end came to my earlier position. Yet he still failed to admit his various positions. When this was pointed out he feigned he didn’t know my position.

2) put a position of principles and apply to the facts. P2b agreed to my general principles and when put the facts he refused to apply it saying its not science. He quoted an article which also repeated my statement of fact. But he simply refused to apply the facts since he is partisan. But strange he can condemn others based on the same subject matter “which is not science”

3) don’t lie and spread falsehood. P2b has been caught with this. But there was no remorse and he tried to justify himself. This is a no no.

4) don’t ask others to prove but you yourself make unproven allegation.

5) don’t argue that you cannot rely on public information because you have personal and private information which negates public information. In a dialectic discourse you must base on public information. Then you argue the accuracy of it. If you don’t rely on public info how can we even argue on the same basis.

P2b initial attack on ETP is like that. He thumbs down public info. His argument on money supply was worse. When he couldn’t defend himself he argued its because there’s no public info available. But there’s plethora of public info on Malaysian money supplies by third parties. You know how they obtain this? Bnm publishes this info to the public at least annually. P2b must stop this manner of argument. We must rely on public info. If he has personal or private info he should use it to counter the public information.

6) in any event never argue a position as true based on private information which you cannot disclose. This is one of the most low down method of discussion. It’s worse when p2b has argued before that we cannot rely on public information because he has personal and private information to the contrary. And when asked to disclose he argued its private and confidential. This is the lowest form of argument in a dialectic debate. It’s dishonesty pure and simple. And worse he tried to turn the table to ask me to prove things which I don’t allege, to deviate.

I find p2b highly appalling. A dishonest guy willing to resort to lies to spread falsehood. Unless he learns his lesson to have integrity I will not engage him dialectically. I will treat him like most pro pr supporter who attack me without basis. That is with scorn.

And further he had refused to publish my commentary criticizing his write. Previously he condemns MSM for not publishing contrarian views but now he himself does what he condemns. I’m very sorry for my language, but Ill be blunt. I find p2b not only hypocritical but [utterly reprehensible]. He got his values and moralities inside out.


75 thoughts on “Not so proud2bmalaysian

  1. Old habit dies hard. Still going around doing personal attack.

    Memang keras kepala. Suka fitnah sangat.

    Well, when is your next issue coming out, here are your favourite list which you love to “gate crash” on other people blogs. Cepat lah…

    Ellese, for you, personal attack takes priority over national issue. It is campaigning period now, national issue please. We have less than 14 days left.

    1. Anwar instill violence in Bersih 2.0
    2. Water crisis in Selangor
    3. Vernacular school
    4. Fair press
    5. How to be a saint in Malaysia.
    6. How to be a prosecutor, judge and jury in your blog.

    Salam. May peace be with you.

  2. Ellese

    I am honored that you dedicated an entire article to me and justifying all your rantings. Cool.

    But I don’t think I will retort. I shall leave it to your readers to decide.

    However, I too join Wave33 to encourage you to put up your issues relevant to GE13 so that we can all have a go at it.

    Tick tock, before 5 May hopefully.


  3. Below is Ellese’s comment in TNG, i hope he dont mind if i copy it over here, perhaps we can have a meaningful discourse. I choose not to comment in TNG because they are pretty slow when doing moderation, and censor my comment.


    • I find PR propaganda for change is fraught with risk. They know it’s very unlikely or near impossible to win but pushing for it makes a lot of fence-sitters think whether PR can rule and administer our nation better than BN. Their politics of hate and ABU can work on many but it does not address the fact of how they intend to run. From the basic question of who is going to be PM and the constant reminder of incessant fights on ideology to the dearth of real policies and play on racial Chinese sentiments, all these make fence-sitters wonder if they can govern. Populist policies like low petrol [prices] and utilities cost, though appealing to hard core, make fence-sitters wonder whether they are responsible, sincere and able to govern. On the other hand, BN has proven beyond doubt their capability to govern and manage the economy despite the shortcomings.
      PR could have scored a convincing victory by taking a real position on consistency. Time and again [we] were astound by a duplicitous stand on issues. For example they condemn BN of having a budget deficit that will increase debt and bankrupt our nation. But PR had no qualms in having a deficit budget that increased our debt. Or condemn Umno of playing racial sentiments but have no qualms about DAP playing the Chinese sentiment. Or condemn and promise to abolish toll but just promised to add a new tunnel toll having the same rate as their condemned BN toll rates. There are too many to quote. Had they addressed these it would be a comfortable victory.

      • HY,

        I would prefer the host to do the initiative. I hope Ellese would repaste his write in TNG in a new post for us to debate. I have always encourage Ellese to act on it, but you know… he is one keras kepala guy.

        I really given Ellese a reply in TNG, waiting for the slow moderator to approve and censor too. I always says pleasant things about Ellese in TNG, I dunno why TNG want to censor all my compliments and pleasant remarks.

        Tough luck for me. 🙂

      • wave, we must take a proactive step knowing that ellese is now without the support from moderator, tng is over protective to bn fellow for our liking hehehe, and we have only 12 days left 🙂

        my only concern is some might accuse us for bully since the pro pr number here is many times more than pro bn, similar to what happen at the ground. 🙂

        • But there ‘many’ two protaganists in one…. perhaps you can see a lot of them Indian movies. 🙂 And from history one cannot thrust ZhengHe after all. Btw I am considering of changing my handle to zhu ha san. 🙂

          • “Had the Chinese, Dap in particular, stood with Waytha and Hindraf Makkal Sakthi, he wouldn’t have signed the MOU with Najib.” i read above in mt from one joe fernandez and i truly impress with some indian sophistry (dumb) skill and yes, indian movie 🙂

            I play play input Zhu Ha San (朱哈三) and below appear in google :


            And maybe i shd use the handle Hannah Yeoh when i am back to Helen’s site again, most probably after GE. I watch Hannah giving speech in Sunway, via tayangan from Media Rakyat in our khemah (no bilik gerakan, GS provide 2 khemah), i first time listen to her speech, she actually speak very well no wonder she got many fans, not sure if Helen could match her.

          • HY,

            I sincerely think, it not proper to post anything more on this post with heading such as…
            “Not so proud2bmalaysian”

            Please let the highly virtuous host to create another post for us to debate on.


            hasan, bro okay?

          • Under civil norm its call fair comment and justification. Truth can never be defamatory. Anyway he has plenty of opportunity to reply but he didn’t except to make broad based irrelevant remark. So the record stays. Anyway he’s proud and honoured be in the roll call of infamy with the others. Biarlah. Dia kan ok and want everybody to decide. Tak payah lah sibuk wave. 🙂

          • Ps. Wave you have unwittingly added up comments under this post. Kata tak nak write comments here.

      • Not sure of your intent. I do hope people read the TNG article and see the context. I wrote this after reading JW.

        What point do you want to discuss?

        • I did mention “perhaps we can have a meaningful discourse.”.

          Below 2 topics lead me to ponder, hope i can read more from you.

          1) PR could have scored a convincing victory by taking a real position on consistency.

          I rarely see consistency in politics could result in convincing victory, do you truly believe with this assertion?

          2) play on racial Chinese sentiments

          Unlike JWT and P2BM, i might agree with you on this, but everyone is doing the same, i am just curious why you seem to stress only DAP and Chinese, you repeated this quite a number of times, and i read the same assertion in JMD as well, do you know something i don’t? Or you see the manner DAP did this is at vast difference with the rest?

          • Unfortunately, our society remains split thanks to the Govt who has be very hardworking keeping us like that. The voter banks are viewed like that and perhaps each has their own set of issues to tackle.

            So when you play to the gallery of one vote bank, you can be accused of playing the racial sentiment card. Again, it should be issue based and not race base. Maybe the distinction is hard to comprehend.

            Until the issues become truly Malaysian and not focused on a racial grouping, we must acknowledge the reality that this practice will continue until we behave truly as 1Malaysia, being Malaysians first.

          • 1) on this score, i Can agree. I dont see much difference between pr and bn. But thought PR could or should be better than BN. Focus more on issues rather than personalities. Forming shadow cabinet would have addressed many of these grievances. Alas where were in now.

            2) on Chinese sentiment of DAP, I want to push through the hypocritical stand of many contrary to what they think otherwise. Similar with Chinese education issue. Thus my focus on these examples. My stand have always been that this applies to all. Need to knock down the hypocritical moral high ground.

  4. Fantastic. Let me have a go at this for a change.

    1. PR know it’s very unlikely or near impossible to win – Please read all the press reports, MSM and AM, that they are very bullish for a win, whether marginal or larger than expected. Maybe Ellese mistook BN comments for PR. In fact, it is generally accepted that this is PR’s best chance to win the General Election after all these years and a very real possibility that BN may lose. However, this is all speculative. The incumbent Govt with control over delineation, media and EC can stack its own advantage unfairly which we can clearly see.

    2. Doubtful whether PR can rule and administer our nation better than BN – please study the governance of Penang and Selangor and read the Auditor General’s report for all the years PR has governed the 4 states. Then you can see that they have governed it far better than BN ever could for the past 50+ years.

    3. Politics of hate – please quote sources. I have never, ever heard them say anything of hate against the people, not in print, internet or ceramahs. I condemn such practice.

    4. ABU – this is really not a PR theme but a civil movement theme. However, PR may have chosen to ride on this for convenience. By the way, I found another one called ABCD – Anything But Cap Dacing 😉

    5. How will PR run the Government – refer to #2. Given their resume in Penang and Selangor and also their willingness to include expertise into their fold, we shall see how well they can actually run a Federal Govt. A few policies do not make a Govt.

    6. Who is going to be PM – this is a moot question that is not that important. We are not having a US-style Presidential Election but a party based election. If the candidates thought to be PM do not win their Parliamentary seats, it does not matter who likes them. Since it is party based, the winning coalition must decide how they will nominate the PM. It can come from PKR or PAS or even somebody outside as long as majority feels he is competent. It will never come from DAP for the moment. As for BN, can you guarantee that it is going to be Najib and not replaced by Muhyiddin or somebody else? If Najib does not win back the 2/3 majority, Tun M has said that he may well be replaced. Moot point.

    7. Incessant fight on ideology – it is true that discord has been made public but that’s the nature of 3 unlike parties. Natural for differences and agree to be different. They are showing themselves to be real but they are no disunited. Case in point – when DAP got news they can’t use the Rocket symbol, PAS gave them the watiqahs the next day all signed to stand under the PAS banner. In BN, all kept quiet, news blackout on any differences, and only Umno says goes. There is the same fight in BN but stamped out by big brother Umno.

    8. Dearth of real policies – please quote references since PR has made clear in many instances. Then we can have a clearer understanding of your position and not a sweeping opinion. I can learn from you here, perhaps.

    9. Play on racial Chinese sentiments – please quote references. May I know that when Najib pow wows with Dong Jong or have the grand banquet in Penang with Michelle Yeoh and Eric Moo, party with Jackie Chan in Kuantan, etc that he is NOT playing on racial Chinese sentiments?

    10. Populist policies like low petrol prices and utilities cost – please show how these policies are irresponsible. TNB has been complaining that the IPPs charge higher than their own production. I would like to point out that it is not LOW petrol prices but LOWER petrol prices than today. However, I am not a big fan on subsidies so there must be a way to level out the subsidies eventually without shocking and impacting the people too greatly.

    11. BN has proven beyond doubt their capability to govern and manage the economy – are you referring to your views of capital control? I am sure you know that governance and management of economy is beyond that. Can you show with examples how the BN performance is BEYOND DOUBT they can do it? Anyone can run the Govt like BN but can PR do better should be the question in my opinion.

    12. BN has shortcomings – that’s a mild way of putting things. What may these shortcomings be? Any examples? I have not read anything along these lines in your writings yet. Maybe I must have missed them.

    13. PR could have scored a convincing victory by taking a real position on consistency – your opinion, OK. What victory are you referring to? Victory over the fence sitters? Are you saying that PR has lost it and BN has taken the victory? I do not wish to be presumptuous here.

    14. PR condemns BN on a deficit budget that will increase debt and bankrupt the nation – BN also condemns PR on exactly the same. Political rhetorics? Or fact? I do not disagree on a deficit budget but how to balance the income and be responsible for the spending. By the way, the BN Govt has never come clean on the total debt which should also include everything they stood guarantee for.

    15. Condemn Umno of playing racial sentiments, no qualms of DAP playing Chinese sentiments – please quote source and examples. What about playing on religious sentiments or slurs? I am very keen to know how DAP plays the Chinese sentiments. I must have missed it.

    16. Condemn and promise to abolish toll but impose toll on new tunnel – was the abolishment of toll on the new constructions or old constructions? Did you read how the older highway operators are milking both the Govt and people on toll when they have more than made a fair profit? All new constructions need toll to pay for costs but out-of-the-universe profit must be curbed. I can agree on this stance.

    Hope this format is clearer.

    • Rubbish. Pr not playing hate politics and racial sentiment?

      Anyway no dialectic discourse until you agree to the comments above.

      So when can you print my comments? I have asked this many times. You’ve not understood a thing what I said.

      • Strangely, I can’t see the point of publishing your incessant rant of name calling and wild accusations.

        You can state your case without being emotional and without being derogatory, then I will reconsider publishing your comments.

        So far, you have attempted to portray yourself as the saint and everybody else is the devil. Is this how you define yourself? 😉

        Anyways, you have NOT given a single shred of evidence on your claims that PR is playing hate politics and racial sentiments. I have stated in #15. Perhaps I may not be aware they are doing that. What did they say or do to provoke such remarks?

  5. p2b,

    I would prefer not to reply on a post that defame you. Please give Ellese the saint, the opportunity to create a new post for us to have a jolly good time.

    Ellese, will you let us have the fun? 🙂

    • Bull. No defamation. It’s justification under the law you fool. Every bit of it, I can defend under the law.

      • Ellese

        1. You wrote a judgment piece with no real substantiations of what I wrote that invoked your emotional outburst.

        2. Bull? Is that what you will retort when others take a different position than yourself?

        3. HY feels it is defaming me and rightly so because you only made your judgment and opinions of how you feel, not factual as you always claimed. Hence, it is defamation because of the accusations that are not supported in your article.

        4. You fool? Again, your style of calling names when you can’t put your facts together.

        Have I stirred the hornet’s nest or opened the Pandora’s box here?


        • Sorry, it should be Wave33, not HY. Apologies for the incorrect reference.

          • Go lah with wave. Even better join n altantunya of my previous post. All of you have similar character. You seemed to be honoured to join this “respectable” club and won’t restrain your exercise of freedom to associate.

          • I presume you don’t mean the Altantuya who was blown to bits.

            Anyway, I notice that you resort to name calling when you can’t present your case and that is a result of frustration.

          • Bull lagi. You ask them lah. I can go deep. I’m not like you who runs away from position to another and think everybody don’t know about it. Then when can’t defend say its personal info. The worst dishonest kind of argument ever.

            So when are you going to publish the truth? I allowed your lie to be printed. Test me at your blog who can or cannot prove.

          • Jangan Malas men baca. Read my posting of the past on n altantunya lah. All these I’m convinced are by pro pr sicktroopers.

        • Why do you lie? You know why it’s justified under the law? Coz its fair comment. All my conclusion came from your wishy washy stands which you somehow pretend not to get it. I put it to you that a reasonable man on a clapham bus would have deduced the same thing. Alamak! I wrote to much already and spent useless time. Must have wave like discourse with you. I must remember this.

          By the way when are you going to publish my truth. I’ve published your lies here and tak censor pun.

          • Again you like to accuse others. When did I lie? If I can help you to show, it should be:

            a) on this date, you said this
            b) on this date, you said that

            If this and that are both factually untrue, that is a lie.

            If either one was true, that is an apparent contradiction.

            Care to elaborate?

            So you are a lawyer. I also put it to you that if you ask anyone reading this that they will not have the same conclusion you are perpetuating.

          • Bull lagi. I’ve substantiated my position, I even have stated all those in chronical order and even have admission by you.

            Go and read lah. Don’t forget you have until now fail to rebut. You deviated adalah.

            So when are you going to print the truth? You’re not tolerant of contrarion view aren’t you. I criticise your double standard kan.

            I’ve been requesting for publication many times. You’re just like many pr blogger who cannot accept contrarion views.

        • Kahkahkah. Don’t you realise that I’ve treated you just like wave. If you like to be in this so call respectable club join them. When you can be honest and stand by integrity, tell me then.

          Anyway when are you going to publish the truth. I have printed your lies here.

  6. Wave33

    Sure. I await and repost my comments above for an interesting but civil exchange.


  7. Ellese has gone hysterical. Ladies and Gentlemen, please do not post anything on this post. This post heading is really a defamation to p2b. It is Ellese personal issue.

    It is Ellese common trademark, when Ellese cannot win an argument, he goes ballistic and attacks the person.

    I am still waiting Ellese to post a new post on national issue to debate on. We are more keen to debate on national issue.

    Cepat la… Ellese. Aysik sibuk fitnah orang saja.

    • Kahkahkah. You don’t even know what defamatory means pun. You give me funny bones when you portray your ignorance. Thanks for the good laugh. You know what, probably unless there’s worthy issue, I think i should stop writing new post. Amacam? I can post elsewhere. Jeng jeng jeng.

    • Wave33

      You are absolutely right about Ellese getting hysterical.

      But I am not so sure that Ellese is a “he”. From all the outbursts and name calling, it does appear that Ellese may actually be a “she”.

      Furthermore, again you are right that Ellese does not have the gall to put a national issue with his/her position for us to critique.

      We shall wait and see if that will change.

      • Wave, there, no one listens to you including the one who has been so called defamed. Can you reply to this under this posting and go against your stand and calling? Don’t worry I already know you’re double standard. You n proud2bm are alike.

      • p2b,

        Ellese is a male, as stated in the MyKad. I know what you mean, he has a sissy nick. But the way Ellese writes sounds like a she when she whines all the time and likes nagging too, over and over again.

        Most commentators are confused, because Ellese writes likes a women. I am not sure whether it is by “default” or on purpose. Only Ellese can answer that.

        Men sometimes likes a good fight of words with female, especially intellect women. Sorry to break the news to the drooling guys, get over it.

        p2b, no need to pasang kaki at Ellese, not worth it. 😉

        My appologies…

        • Wave33

          OMG he has a very feminine style of writing indeed. LOL

          Felt like a perpetual period or menopausal rantings. 😉

          He doesn’t post his basis but makes sweeping remarks and loves to call names.

          Oh RUBBISH! BULL! LIAR! Actually never can go deep except in name calling.

          • You can make sexist and personal remark pula. We remember who told a lie that money supply info is not available to the public but refused to google for it. Lie again.

  8. Sudah la… Ellese, belum puas lagi.

    • Takpelah Wave33…. kita semua tahu bahawasanya Ellese ini adalah seorang ‘advocatus diaboli’. We are more to ‘promotor of institiae’ or ‘advocatus Dei’… re ‘’…

      Let there be a market place of ideas. All people are born good. They know which one to choose and what believe…

  9. Wave33, HY, Hasan,

    Come over to my blog and let’s have some fun on some major national issues. Make some proposals and we will strip that down and beat it up. Or anywhere else that we can do the same is fine by me.


  10. I suppose you don’t understand what I wrote so I will use simple English.

    I will publish your comments if you

    a) write in a civil manner
    b) no calling names or uncivil remarks
    c) stay on the issue, not the person

    I have been very clear that contrary position is fine as long long as it is civil, unemotional, impersonal debate. Substantiate yourself is best. Else I am fine with your opinions.

    To make it even clearer, let me give you examples.

    a) Rubbish! You are a liar! – deleted
    b) I disagree because these are the published facts – accepted
    c) Bull. You are lying – deleted
    d) Your position has changed from this to that – accepted

    So, I can’t be anymore clearer than this. Anyway, I have posted some national issues already and still writing more as updates. Feel free to critique and comment.

    I really don’t care if it is pro PR or pro BN. Just take a position on the matter, not the person. And don’t attack the people who comment.


    • No go. I’ll be civil and dialectic if one is honest. If anyone argue with lies, unproven facts or based on secret info they must be condemned. You to date have not even agreed to the ground rules. And when I cursorily look at your major issues you are miles away. My stand on all your issues are known by many here. You can even ask Wave. For example the water issue would not have happened if selangor don’t play politics. Selangor screw big time and if there’s water shortage ill kick the ass of Khalid. On Chinese education, what is racist you don’t call it racist coz you’re partisan. I need to question your own values on other things. You justify racism based on constitution but Malays cannot justify the same based on constitution.

      You don’t get it. All the issues have been the same for donkey years. I’ve written so much about this. See even my postings here. My problem in debating with you is your dishonesty method. You agree not to do it, I’m fine. But if you start it, I have every right to attack you for breaching your promise. You have no problem of condemning bn due to integrity and so I will exercise the same against those with no integrity.

      Comprende? No selective censorship.

      • Dear Ellese,

        Ellese quote: My stand on all your issues are known by many here. You can even ask Wave.

        That is the reason, we want to debate with you. But unfortunately, you REFUSE to create a new post to talk on it. Your own interest is on personal attack and belittling other people, as if you have the highest IQ among us. Yalah.. syoik sendiri.

        You have the same kind of attitude as your paymaster, Rosmah Mansor whom refuses to allow her spouse to debate with Anwar Ibrahim. The same kind of tactical move of character assassination done on Anwar, instead of talking about issue that the nation is facing. So, Ellese, have you C4ed anyone lately? Since, you guys graduated from the same UMNO college.

        Kenapa tak berani nak berdebat? Cepat la… buat post baru.

        • Bodoh. You accuse me falsely in nutgraph and now here. Why should I argue with idiots like you. My position is already clear. You go follow the ass of your Anwar the great leader lah.

          I don’t want to follow p2b ridiculous style coz he always change position. Understand tak? Last time kata no public info on money supply. I said ada. Google ajelah. He refused. Then now say there’s public infor because he’s found one of the most stupidest pro pr article. Im not following this dishonest manner. He follows honest intellectual method or otherwise I treat him like you. I’ve got more than enough ammunition against him.

          You are hurling baseless accusation against me again which in the past years you have failed to prove. You may be comforted with p2b support (idiots of the same kind flocks together) but I’m warning you, you accuse me without basis again ill treat you like the rest of PR forgers eg N altantunya.

          Ps: btw whatever you do won’t derail me commenting on things at other blogs. As usual you can hunt me down but after the first level of argument you have no depth to rebut and people see that your arguments falls and are simply personal.

          • Ellese

            The only position we are clear is your name calling and brush other people’s views as rubbish or call them lies, etc.

            You have said nada nor showed anything substantial to rebut.

            Care to post something substantial?


          • p2b,

            Again a correct observation from you, p2b.

            I am waiting for the post too from our highly virtuous host, Ellese.

            Janganlah… merajuk, cepat lagi. Perangai macam perempuan.

          • Wave33

            Either Ellese is right or we are all wrong. But that doesn’t matter. He is too scared to put up his positions in a separate posting while calling everyone names and sweeping contrary positions as rubbish.

            Perhaps he has nothing to show??

            Come give your comments here while we await Ellese to wake up from slumber.


          • You have been posting lies after lies. And refuse to acknowledge one. Once you give up this bad dishonest habit, I will entertain you in a civil manner. The loyar buruk article is appalling to say the least.

  11. Ellese

    And finally, I shall introduce you to this link to show you that based on BNM’s report since 1993, our Govt has been printing money causing a massive inflation. This study was prepared by Rickard Oberg published here:

    Perhaps, you can study this and refute him. I am no expert but I believe he is correct.

    Now, who said Malaysia never printed money? In fact, over the past 20 years, over a trillion ringgit was added into circulation. The largest increase was seen in 2011 and 2012 which saw over RM100 billion added into circulation.

    Watch his video as he shows you where in the BNM report he fetches the data and constructs the table showing an astounding 822% inflation since 1993.

    I rest my case.


    • I know you have commented but I too ask you for your table to refute him. Don’t just say rubbish la.

    • Sorry. You’re really dumb and ignorant. I told you kan its available public info. You’re the one who said its not available. I even ask you to google it. But you’re totally dishonest. You don’t want to admit your fault. Arrogant gila.

      I was trying to bring you to that argument. Money supply must be adequate to contribute to growth. Worse you can’t show its used for debt.

      Now this fella you quote is a typical fella who simply is trying to show off ignorance. He measures inflation by money supplies increase. This is dumb. Money supply increases inflation but to measure inflation purely by money supply is absurdly ridiculous. You measure inflation by price of goods. Every ringgit increase of money supply does not tantamount rm1 increase in price.

      That’s why it’s utterly dumb. You apparently want to buy into pro pr article aje. That’s sick. Read the source. Read independent books. But you’re lazy to even google. That’s why I’m against your way of argument. Kata no public info. Admit you lie again.

      • Ellese

        Go post your counter argument and shut up if you can’t. You keep saying you have ammunition, sources, etc but we haven’t seen a single factual, civil rebuttal from you except name calling and saying everything is rubbish.

        Show us what you got.


        • I did you fool. I didn’t know you wrote there. You can give without basis nak cakap banyak.

          • I suppose you are the fool. Post your rebuttal with the full works and we shall give you the same critique. If you call names and make sweeping opinions by saying rubbish or fool, then perhaps you are made of nothing after all.

        • But why Im angry is because you refuse to google and sekarang cakap banyak. Bengang betul with your method of deceitful argument.

          • And you think your are a saint doing name calling and rubbishing contrary positions? Put up or shut up, Ellese.

            You have posted nothing substantial to demonstrate your self proclaimed knowledge.

            Go ahead, we are all waiting.

          • Bull. Who in the first place said money supply was not public info. You kan. I told you its AVAILABLE. Asked you to google it. You refused. Then now say there’s public info.

            Rubbish betul. It’s not about contrarion position. I always deal with contrarion position. Thats not the problem with you. It’s the dishonest way you argue. I’m not a fool to be taken on a joyride. I can see a fool and when you promise not to do it I will engage lah with you. What’s so difficult with my terms of engagement. Is it so hard to be honest?

  12. I just want to make it very basic and simple.

    The increase in the supply of money without 100% reserve backing is not permitted in an Islamic Economy; simply because it will affect the value of money and will lead to price instability. The value of money should be constant, so that role of money as a unit of measurement and a store of value becomes more justifiable. The valuation of goods and commodities should be influenced purely by the supply and demand situation and should not be related or influenced to the changing value in the measurement base. If we were to agree with the aforesaid analysis there is no need to invest in Mike Maloney gold or silver, whatsoever.

    Mike Maloney said: “Where the US goes, so go the rest of the world”. Perhaps, so goes Ellese too. 🙂

    • hasan,

      I am not posting any matter or national issue on this post and waiting Ellese to open up a new post for us to debate on. Heading of this post is defaming.

      Ellese refuses to open up a new post for us to debate on.

      Ellese ne tak berani, cakap saja lebih, sama seperti tuannya, yang tak berani nak berdebat dengan Anwar. Tapi belakang, macam macam fitnah yang dilemparkan. Sama perangai je.

      Takut kerana salah, berani kerana benar.

      • It’s defamatory when you accuse me of being paid especially linking me with Rosmah you fool. But what i wrote is with basis and justification. It’s not defamatory. Since you don’t have a blinking idea about law then shut up.

        • Granted, it is not defamatory. But I think it is just sheer arrogant effrontery to continuously drawing abusive terms on him, just to open him to odium and contempt. We should actually tap on each others’ knowledge and experience with synthesis and mutual respect. Although P2bM is not an economist I do not think he is a person untutored in economic ideas.

          • I’m fine if you’re not an economist. I’m not either. But its the way it was argued. It has nothing to do with substance. If he doesn’t know its ok. But he made a claim theres no public info. When I ask to google he didn’t want to arguing there’s no public info. I don’t mind if you don’t know but the sheer arrogance thinking he is right and didn’t bother to google. It was a simple google. I knew its available in bnm report and when I do a simple google search it was easily made available by third parties. Theres data for decades. But I stop then saying we could have gone on a deeper discourse.

            But now he suddenly argued there’s public info and he wants to make a case based on some ridiculous article. It’s the manner he does it. Never realised he changes position.

            What I ask I believe is very reasonable. Dont do it again. It’s frustrating and upsetting to deal with people who change position and when ask to put position give a general statement there’s no public info or the private info is secret.

            I’m sorry for the outburst. On my part at some point I thought I need to stop. I don’t enjoy it either. I think it serves no purpose coz he’s never going to change and realise it. I’ve tried many ways from being nice and civil initially, to direct criticism to condemnation to outright abuse. He is either very blur or pure dishonest or both.

            I will not engage him here until he agrees to be honest. I will start a new post. And whatever his rant I’m going to leave them in this post until he can agree to write on an honest basis. That’s my thinking now.

          • Hasan

            You are truly a gentleman. 🙂


          • Afwan. P2bM, anta lateef…

  13. P2bm,

    Apologise for the delay. As promise, I am inserting all your comments here as this post is most suitable for your dishonest style.

    Submitted on 2013/06/09 at 9:39 am | In reply to Ellese.
    So your observation is only on your children. Others have their observations on different groups. Are you saying your observation is truth and others are not?
    By the way, what is your definition of “racist”? You have not said a word but bashed others only
    Submitted on 2013/06/09 at 9:35 am | In reply to Ellese.
    Just as you support segregation by accepting Mara, Malay Colleges, etc to say that is ok for National Unity.
    I never heard you say you are Malaysian First though.
    And you choose your strawman to bash. Vernacular schools seem to be a pet blame while you steer away from saying anything about Mara, Malay Colleges, Religious Schools, etc.
    Either you mean vernacular schools are awful for being Malaysian first or you mean others can’t but Malays can. Now doesn’t that sound racist to you?
    Submitted on 2013/06/08 at 10:57 am | In reply to hasan.
    Ha Ha yes Ellese is doing moderation. It’s not your memory going bonkers…
    Submitted on 2013/06/08 at 10:52 am | In reply to Ellese.
    If you don’t like to refer to me by my nick, then don’t but calling names makes you sound really uncouth.
    You have never shown what the rubbish really is but keeps making general sweeping statements to accuse and not substantiated. Another round against “Racists” (DAP definition) people
    137View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/08 at 10:48 am | In reply to Ellese.
    So your observation is only on your children. Others have their observations on different groups. Are you saying your observation is truth and others are not?
    By the way, what is your definition of “racist”? You have not said a word but bashed others only. Another round against “Racists” (DAP definition) people
    137View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/08 at 10:43 am | In reply to Ellese.
    This must be the joke of the day. Another round against “Racists” (DAP definition) people
    137View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/08 at 10:43 am | In reply to Ellese.
    Well let your readers be the judge, not you. A fraud is a fraud is a fraud but you just won’t admit it. So this is how you want it, selective accusation, name calling but when it comes to you, you’re the saint in blogger land.
    I can stand by what I write. Since you want to read with bias, I can’t force you either. Another round against “Racists” (DAP definition) people
    137View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/07 at 9:19 am | In reply to HY.
    Fully agree with you. That’s what BN has been playing on, mixing patriotism with supporting BN, confusing everybody. They are doing that to stay in power and hope Malaysians remain blind and stupid.
    JW has a very good point. This Malay first thing is absolute nonsense. How can one pit race against country? Both are important and very different. Perhaps people see race also as a subset of country but I feel that the two should just stay apart. We are just kicking a fuss for a nonsensical issue. It’s like Father before Family. Then you argue isn’t Mother more important? The Family Unit more important? Why pick straws for no reason?
    Malaysia before self. We are all citizens and we should all serve the country.
    And stop debating any race issues. It should be needs first above all else.
    As for race, it should only limit to the pride of the culture, not skin color. Pride to be shared, not comparative superiority.
    These three cannot be pitted against each other. What a silly nonsense to demand which comes first. Crazy.
    With this, we will have no more debate on this again and Ellese will not have to write his opinions about DAP being racist and Umno, MIC, MCA and Perkasa not racist (since he remains inconspicuously silent about them.)
    Waste of time. Can’t help move the country forward. Then again, what can our little debate here do for the good of the country except we have saved some trees and done it eco friendly.
    Perhaps instead of beating the vernacular school issue, it should be how the overall education system can be improved to forge national unity and give the definition clarity before we begin else we will be fighting with Ellese on his blinkered view and he accuse us of being idiots. Another round against “Racists” (DAP definition) people
    137View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/07 at 12:05 am | In reply to JW Tan.
    Good point. The US makes people want to be proud to call themselves Americans, not German American, Italian American or Afro American. Just American.
    Malaysians outside of Malaysia calls themselves Malaysians and proudly too. That should be the way when inside Malaysia but we are faced with many bigoted challenges of people who has never been abroad and felt proud to call themselves Malaysians instead of their ethnic group.
    Calling Malay first, Malaysian second, on the surface is not racist. But what does it mean really? The Malay identity is more important or more superior? That makes the difference between racist and not racist. Nobody ever came forth to declare what that means and Najib is too weak to step up to his definiton of 1Malaysia.
    Regardless what anybody says, I am Malaysian first and last. My ethnic group and culture is something that enriches Malaysia, not to be superior over others. My vision is to make Malaysia great and make everybody, regardless of race and creed, to be the best they can for the betterment of Malaysia.
    So am I racist or a hopeless idealist? It is Malaysia against the world, not Malaysians against each other.
    Reading the news these days makes me sad when the Govt plays up one race against another and then say national unity and reconciliation at the same time. This puts Malaysia on a hopeless place. So who says the Govt wants national unity? Baloney! Another round against “Racists” (DAP definition) people
    137View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/06 at 6:14 pm | In reply to Ellese.
    Again for the 10th time, give us the clear reference of your claims of DAP racism that you have been beating and I will give you the clear condemnation or vindication. You probably made it up else you would have long posted as support for your articles or replies to comments but you have never made an attempt either way.
    Put up or shut up as they say.
    I have been very clear what racism is.
    If you claim support for vernacular school is racist, you are not using the common understanding of racist. You have not supported the reasons why it is racist either except claims and accusations that it is.
    Hasan and Husin have given excellent points that you have ignored other similar schools but you kept harping only on vernacular. Blinker on? or selective accusation? Another round against “Racists” (DAP definition) people
    137View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/06 at 9:15 am | In reply to Ellese.
    The problem is that YOU don’t apply it consistent at all. You make general sweeping statements to accuse without any basis and without applying to all non-Kebangsaan schools. You never said a word. You completely avoided that because it will knock the leg off your stool and you will have no leg to stand on your argument. Another round against “Racists” (DAP definition) people
    137View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/06 at 9:13 am | In reply to Ellese.
    Having vernacular schools is not racist unless the schools teach them to look down on others. So a Malay attending a Chinese school makes him a racist? You got to be joking.
    This is no different from having religious schools, Malay colleges, boarding schools for Malays, Mara, etc. You are being selective and vindictive of vernacular schools but ignore the rest. Update your piece to declare all NON-KEBANGSAAN schools are obstacles to national unity then we talk.
    Else you can play with your own straw man creating a fictitious issue and think you are smart.
    Ah, not forgetting the racist BTN operated by the same Govt who tout national unity by destroying it at the same time.
    And of course, Ellese will ignore and say blah blah blah. Another round against “Racists” (DAP definition) people
    137View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/06 at 9:09 am | In reply to Ellese.
    Your trying to sweep away your own ignorance is very glaring. Taktik kotor Pakatan Rakyat
    94View Post
    Submitted on 2013/06/06 at 9:08 am | In reply to Ellese.
    Again you have different definitions of racist applied to different situations. Ha Ha Ha.. you are a selective racist then, cannot be consistent and never define your own position but only knows how to condemn others.
    Self serving definition.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s