From: sa2263263@ntuvax.ntu.ac.sg (ROLAND U)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.singapore,soc.culture.asean
Subject: Re: Discussion on Malaysian sultanate amendments
Date: 27 Jan 93 05:40:00 GMT
Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1993Jan27.022443.26974@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>, eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad) writes...
>ROLAND U (sa2263263@v9000) wrote:
>: In article <1993Jan26.083149.27461@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>, eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad) writes... 
>    ^
>You think is definitely your invention. It is not the way I heard it.
> 
Ok..alllow me to rephrase it. i've read and now remember it being published in 
the Strait Times that the wards reserved for the royalty will now be open to the
public as they are unused most of the time. 
> 
>Do you know that there are equipments in Miri that is reserved only for
>Shell staff? I believe the same is true in Trengganu.
>: 	The properties of the kings are the property of the state governments.
>: >By letting the property rot, will be a great disservice to the state.
>: Not true. The properties of the royalty can only be used by the royalty and is
>: considered by them to be theirs. By not allocating money, the onus to upkeep
> 
Ri^ht, as you say, Mahatir has been allocated one. However, the Sultans have only
been allocated 8 or 9, but how many do they have ? 20 to 30 luxury cars..not to
include those for thier bodyguards and so on and so forth.
> 
>: their properti will be on the royalty. This will encourage them to have fewer
>I wonder how Dr. Mahathir will feel if he were required to maintain his
>allocated cars. How about all the other government officers? Even the 
>company officers?

It would be reasonable if they government were to maintain the cars that were
allocated to them but not the excess inventory. I sure the government did
not allocate private jets and yachts.
> 
>: palaces, cars, etc etc
>: > 
>: >How about the governers, the yang di pertuan negaras of Sabah, Sarawak, are
>: >they also not entittled for the privileges?
>: >	Why should the kings be the only ones targeted? Shouldn't the other
>: >heads of states also affected?
>: > 
>: This "targeting" only started because the royalty have gone too far in their
>                                            ^^^^^^^
>So you want all chinese to be deported just because of the actions of a few
>chinese gangsters.
> 
If want to counter-argue in this childish manner, be my guest. it has already
been reported in the papers, that all with the exception of one ruler, have
been accused of misdeeds. If it were only one ruler, this crisis would not
arise.

>: abuses. Although, some may doubt the authencity of this allegations, like
>: the folks say " Ain't no smoke without fire ". If the governers or other
> 

>Same thing with other allegations. Just because some government officers are
>corrupt, do not mean that all of them must be punished.
>Rule of law:
>	Innocent until proven guilty,
>	Guilt cannot be inherited.
> 
>Obviously you've broken both laws but then you're not alone.
Like I said, majority has been accused and found guilty by the masses.

> 
>: high figure were to misuse ther authority, they will most definately be targetted
>: and in their case, sacked.
>                     ^^^^^^
>To sacked is fair, but to remove the POST entirely? Just because there are
>corrupt custom officers, should we abolish/reduce the number of custom 
>officers?
> 
The royalty still does exist. it is only their immunity to prosecution that is
gone. Immunity to prosecution is not the royalty.

>: >Question of immunity only during official duties is very hard to establish so
>: >was not implemented in all other countries. Do you know that the President of
>: >Singapore also have full immunity? So are the other heads of state in Malaysia,
>: >and other commonwealth nations, and even all the royalty of the Britain, unlike
>: >Malaysia where the immunity is only for the Sultans.
>: > 
>: The head of states are elected by the people and the people feel that they
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^
>This is a blatant lie. You should check with your facts first.
Not really. The president of Singapore is elected by the government who is 
elected by the people. It is not inherited or decreed .
> 
>: have done wrong, believe me, they will force the wrong doers to go..e.g Brazil's
>: ex-president. The royalty of Britain is only existing because of Queen Elizabeth
>: and because of their entertainment value..;]
> 
>How come they have more power than even our present kings? EVen much richer?
Richer ? Perhaps. More power ?? Certainly not. If they had more power, the
papers there are most definately not going to get away with their reporting.
Besides, the royalty there do not interfere with the government at all.
> 
>: > 
>: >: There have been tales of manslaughter and in one case, murder, with
>: >: allegations made in parliment that a sultan killed his golf caddie.
>: >This was a very old story but only come out now. You may wonder why?
>: > 
>: If I were fighting a war of words and trust, anything I can use for ammo
>: will be used.
	So your motive is just grudge and nothing to do with justice or even
>common sense.

And so comes the purpose of the word IF. Besides, even IF i begrudge them, I'm
most definately not in any position to do anything about it. 
>	With the removal of the immunity, don't you think that the kings are
>redundant?  We should just get rid of them, they are just a waste of money.
>People with no power should not be given any money. At least now they still
>have power so their salary is worth keeping.
>	Who should replace them?
> 
Power ? To do what ? Abuse people ? 
>	Democracy is worth billions. How many lives will be lost if there were
>dictatorship in Malaysia? How many billions will be lost in a dictatorships?
> 
>Look at Burma and Phillippines. They were the richest and what happens to thenm
>now. Tell me how many billions have they lost? 
> 
Burma is under a military yoke at the moment while Phillippines is reeling
from several economic and physical disasters. It's a matter of running the
country. There is no dictatorship in Phillippines.


Roland U.
sa2263263@ntuvax.ntu.ac.sg " Darkness is merely the absence of Light "
Newsgroups: soc.culture.singapore