The Fiction of Shay Adora Ram
from 書 政 shuzheng
Conspiracy, Manufacture, Sale & Resale of a Baby Sham
Fabricating Grievances:
The story Hannah hatched (part 1) &
the news Steven Gan made from the concoction (part 2)
PART 1
Hannah Yeoh’s grievance against the National Registration Department (NRD) is two-fold, back-to-back, and might be summed up in the moralistic term, racial discrimination.
First, says Hannah, the NRD refused the new ‘race’ classification Anak Malaysia that she herself made up, arbitrarily. Second, and this flows from the first, it acted with prejudice for refusing her insistence that Shay was neither Chinese nor Indian although she was herself objectively wrong. Shay is both.
In Shay’s birth registration is clear evidence into how Hannah, along with her political party the DAP, deliberately and with calculated malice manufactured a grievance against the NRD: racial discrimination. And, after which, to turn it into a political controversy. Steven Gan’s Malaysiakini offered itself as the locus of distribution in the grievance manufacture and subsequently the spread of its controversy. Part 2 tells how; part 1 speaks of the manufacture which begins with an innocuous application form, a borang that everybody pretty much takes for granted.
The image above, supplied by Hannah to Malaysiakini, captures the borang, nearly empty, except for area circled red that she used as evidence in driving her grievance case. This suggests she copied the form solely for the information on the writing, after which she filled in the details. Or, she kept the incomplete original then submitted another completed application. Either way, shows the malice.
The points of contention is in the circled area.
I. Forced to be ‘Cina’. Shay, Hannah says, was made Chinese, not by her but by the clerk writing the word ‘Cina’ over the crossed out ‘Anak Malaysia’. That is Hannah was forced, an assertion her party mate Boo Cheng Hua repeats, falsely and with shocking irrationality.
Why would the clerk forced ‘Cina’ on Hannah onward to Shay? If the clerk forced Cina on Shay then it is equally legitimate in her position to make her Kristian. Since the NRD is racist, why not choose Muslim? Or Hindu? Swing the logic around. If the clerk didn’t forced Christianity on Shay, how is it probable she made her Chinese? In any case, how do you force the Cina word on a full-grown adult such as Hannah? Or Christian?
Throughout, Hannah said nothing about who wrote down ‘Kristian’.
In the dotted blank for religion (agama) it doesn’t state ‘Agama Malaysia’, which would naturally tally with ‘Anak Malaysia’. It would square with her Malaysian First principle, also DAP’s, that throws down race and religion to second place while hoisting up Malaysia above everything else in the world.
Hannah made no complaint about the class ‘Kristian’, so the clerk wrote it down or she did. Either way is inconsequential to the outcome: ‘Kristian’ was accepted by both Hannah and the clerk. This is because Shay, at 6 days old, could not possibly make an individual, personal claim of faith.
Because Hannah professed Christianity on Shay’s behalf, the clerk’s response is to accept the parent’s word, any parent, say nothing, and move on. That is, mutual agreement between the NRD and parent over a child’s faith is unnecessary since this is not a matter of objective fact or empirical reality. A claim over belief which, unlike empiricism, is not verifiable as objective truth especially on a six-day-old. It can’t be falsified either, so that religion or matters related to it is simply what you say it is. (This is how PAS Muslims and DAP Christians always get away with many political, religious and ethical claims, e.g. Najib is racist; Hannah is a saint.) They’re unverifiable one way or the other.
The ‘Kristian’ claim also means this: by and through a formal and legal act, Hannah made Shay Christian just as she tried and failed to make the baby ‘Anak Malaysia’. This says Hannah forced Christianity on Shay: freedom of religion, Hanny? Hannah could do that, of course: parental jurisdiction. There’s little or nothing for the clerk to say or do; recall empiricism vs faith. Not, however, when it came to ‘Anak Malaysia’ because a first question to the clerk, anybody in fact, is: what is it really?
The clerk’s dilemma is akin to a parent who at the NRD counter claims orally or writes in the dotted space ‘monkey’. Or the parent writes ‘Adoran’ or ‘Duran’, names from a Jewish and Palestinian town respectively. A clerk’s response, any clerk, to the word ‘monkey’ in place of Cina is that Hanny is insane.
In case of Adoran or Dura, the clerk will want that established as true, with evidence naturally. In another way of telling the same thing: once the question ‘what is it’ pops up, empiricism enters into the claim. It is no longer a claim of faith or belief. Instead, it has to be established, as empirical true or false. Is the child Adoran? What is an Adoran? Where is Dura?
Likewise, being ‘Cina’ is not a belief. Whether Shay is Chinese or not Chinese is a matter of verifiable fact of parentage, that is, an objective truth. It’s not even up to Hannah to decide on the veracity of being Chinese, nor the clerk. An objective fact stands alone and independent to itself.
How then is the clerk to know if Shay as Chinese is true or false? Look at the mother. If ethnicity is a toss between two parents, then Chinese for Shay would still be true, only incomplete.
All this suggests Hannah lied that Shay was forced (by the clerk?) to be Chinese, just as she lied over Shay’s religion because Shay can’t profess anything at the age of 6 days. She especially lied that Shay is of ‘Anak Malaysia’ race or has ‘Anak Malaysia’ keturunan – which is the issue next.
II. Racial discrimination. Forced to be Chinese, Hannah adds to say that Shay or her or both faced racial discrimination at the NRD, happening in spite of her repeated insistence, erroneously, the child is ‘not Chinese or Indian’ (her words in Malaysiakini).
Further into the inference, according to her, is that the NRD procedural demand to state race in the application is ‘racism’ so that to write ‘Cina’ is also racism. This is as opposed to ‘Anak Malaysia’ which is race neutral. Boo Cheng Hau of DAP Johore says ‘Anak Malaysia’ connotes anti-racism but doesn’t say how a straight declaration of race is racism or leads to it.
Equally spiteful in Hannah’s grievance manufacture are these unanswered questions: How was Hannah discriminated, racially? How had stating ‘Cina’ disadvantaged her mother’s claim for Shay to be Malaysian national? Did she or Shay suffer any loss? How had they suffered?
In the Malay language race translates commonly and formally as ‘bangsa‘, less popularly as ‘kaum‘. Associated with racism is the word ‘ketuanan‘ (dominance or supremacy), hence ketuanan Melayu.
Return to the circled area in the borang image above.
The application form asked for neither ‘bangsa‘ nor ‘kaum‘. It asked to fill in ‘keturunan‘ which is Malay word for ‘descent’; its root word ‘turun‘ (to lower, to go down) suggests transferring or passing on something.
Question: is Shay of Malaysia descent that is suggested in the term ‘Anak Malaysia’? This, at first read, seems intuitively true. Shay is born to Hannah and by publicly declared, formal marriage to Ramachandran, both Malaysians. If it’s true that Shay is Malaysian descent, then Lim Kit Siang, born to parents not native to Malaysia but were naturalised after immigrating from Dongshan in Fujian, China, cannot be an ‘anak Malaysia’. Kit Siang might insists he is ‘not Chinese’ by race but he is definitely ‘Anak Tongsan’ on the same virtue of nationality descent that puts Shay as Anak Malaysia.
The same goes with descendants of people born outside Malaysia, before 1957, plus those immigrant parents themselves, many still alive today, in all totalling millions. Push far back enough and apply the same jus sanguinis (by blood) principle to Hannah and Ramachandran, it is almost certain they are not ‘Anak Malaysia’ descent as well. If not Anak Malaysia, Shay can’t be.
Unlike the nebulous term race which is so much maligned by Anglophiles, the use of ‘keturunan‘ is an accurate and a verifiable objective-term use for Shay who is descended from the Chinese (and Indian) unless Hannah tells the world tomorrow she does not ‘turun‘ from Chinese parents, after which she has also to say her parents are not Chinese, nor grandparents, nor great grandparents, and so on backwards. Regardless, where is the racism in ‘keturunan‘?
Conversely, how is stating Anak Malaysia race neutral when it sets Malaysia apart from the rest of the world, that is, the human race which Malaysiakini pontificates over and over and over? Anak Malaysia would be national racism par excellence – of a fascist kind.
Clearly, Hannah had tried to squeeze blood from stone: (a) arbitrarily adopting jus sanguinis as the only principle for nationality, then on a mere whim (b) converts nationality (i.e. citizenship) into descent or keturunan which she in turns (c) twist it to mean racism. Ethically worse than Ibrahim Ali and equal to Mahathir Mohamad, Hannah reveals why and how she is such a despicable woman.
If Hannah and the DAP have their way – adopting Anak Malaysia bloodline as the literal criterion for nationality – millions of people, the poor Chinese stuck in the country and especially the estate Indians along with the Melayus arriving from Indonesia will never register as Malaysians. Hannah’s fondness for talking blood reflects not just her deeply-rooted racism, DAP’s as well; she is, to borrow her Christian term, the devil reincarnate herself, vicious and filthy.
Hannah lied over and over again. To the NRD she lied. She lied Shay is Malaysia descent, keturunan. She lied omitting keturunan, she lied it means racism. She lied Anak Malaysia is race. She lied Shay is Christian. She lied Shay was forced to be Chinese. She lied Shay is not Chinese or Indian. She lied she or Shay or both faced racial discrimination at the department. She lied even about being a loyal Malaysian First, race and religion second.
To Malaysiakini she also lied and Steven Gan let her to spread it. Found out later, she again lied. In all of which, she invented and piled grievance upon grievance after which Malaysiakini happily went along with her to paint a picture of a racist department, with a racist practice, a racist agenda, whereas she – the Saint of Subang Jaya, of the DAP, of Malaysia, all Malaysia – is the victim of a serious, 50-year-long discrimination along with her baby. Poor St Hannah. But she would write to the PM, an act of reminder that she has her Subang constituents at heart. So vote for her…. Put a tick beside the rocket, which will take all our anaks to a new, happy, united Malaysia.
If that future is so good, so rosy, why won’t everybody buy her Sham, which Dr Boo Cheng Hau insists is the medicine for national salvation. Or, is it actually a Boo brand snake oil Dr Boo is peddling?
*******
PART 2
Party Propaganda in Malaysiakini News: Its Creation & Evolution
1957, Aug 31: Merdeka. The birth of Malaya registered the Constitution, with rules for citizenship, that is, being Malaysian nationals.
Then, nearly 54 years later….
2011 June 1: The birth of the DAP political creature named Shay Adora Ram to party members Yeoh Tseow Suan alias Hannah and M. Ramachandran alias Ram.
June 6: Parents of Shay register child for Malaysian citizenship, and makes Shay ‘Chinese for the time being’. Presumably, the registration was accepted and, hence successful. Shay is Malaysian.
June 6: Hannah complains to Steven Gan, Prem Chandran, and their Malaysiakini insisting Shay is ‘not Chinese or Indian’ although she is both.
June 7: Malaysiakini publicize the registration as a failure although Shay would be Malaysian and inflates Hannah’s complaint she was racially discriminated all because ‘Anak Malaysia’ is rejected as ‘race’ in the application.
June 7: Hannah threatens to sue NRD, and promises a letter to the prime minister Najib Razak with the suggestion Shay had been discriminated by race. Hannah wants for her the new ‘race’.
June 9: Hannah’s DAP boss Lim Guan Eng (LGE) steps in and Steven Gan duly pumps up the legal threat. How? Below…
June 9: Steven brandishes ‘statement’ from LGE, offering legal support, presumably free lawyers. He insists Shay remain as party symbol of its new race, Malaysian First.
June 10-20: Outside Malaysiakini’s blanket cover of Hanah, an entirely new level of discourse emerges, such as in three consecutive letters to Free Malaysia Today, the only media willing to call Hannah’s bluff as sham (this, this, and this). Hannah, Steven, LGE and the DAP are heavily criticized and exposed as charlatans, fascists and fraudsters. Those points in essence:
- Shay got that which is hers rightfully, Malaysian nationality, but this was fraudulently turned around into a birth registration failure and an exercise in racism.
- Hannah is racist, hiding the father’s Ramachandran name in the word Ram and projecting the baby as white Christian and western in especially the name Adora.
- LGE is fascist, first for turning a baby into a political symbol then raising the ante by baptizing Shay as the party’s organ-creature, a new race.
- Steven is a charlatan. After pontificating about the morality of independent, accurate and fair reporting in Malaysiakini, he goes about doing the exact opposite in every step of Shay’s case: fabricating news, i.e. a event that never happened; spreading a falsity, the illusion that Shay or Hannah were racially discriminated; never questioning motives; publishing information selectively; outright racist promotion, inferring through the foreign name Adora that it is better, even superior, as race neutral to Ramachandran or Suan; disguising as ‘news’ and ‘comments’ on what is essentially political party propaganda.
Since they had been found out, Steven couldn’t stopped, and he knows he mustn’t. Enters…
Kuer the Quack, Loony Susan & Boo the Snake Oil Salesman
Jun 14: DAP’s Selangor chairman Teresa Kok joins the fray, saying the term ‘lain-lain is an insult’.
Jun 14: Steven’s Malaysiakini duly regurgitates: ‘lain-lain is an insult’, which suggests DAP doesn’t mind having race in birth registrations. Only don’t call it ‘lain-lain‘, a position in perverse contradiction to the party’s.
Jun 22: Malaysiakini reporter Kuer Ser Kuang Keng (KKK) comes in on Steven’s behalf with: ‘race-free birth certificates were once issued‘. Which is to imply that Hannah’s racial morality had been previously recognised but now dumped. KKK lied. Birth registration since Aug 1957 had included parental ethnicity, a fact he ignores. No certificates were ever race-free, for constitutional reasons. It’s the only a baby’s identity that’s in question. In Shay’s case, race, that is bangsa, is not a demand in her application. It asked for ‘keturunan‘ which translates as descent. That requires a demonstration of an objective fact in order to support a Malaysian nationality claim. Descent is not a belief or a morality that the KKK Quack is entitled to claim (see part 1, above). It is or it isn’t.
Jun 23: Malaysiakini inflames the situation with Susan Loone’s, ‘NRD chose race, religion for DAP rep’s child’. Its clear intent was to suggest a racial pacification exercise ongoing at the NRD, as a continuation of Hannah’s racial discrimination complaint, inter alia Shay was forced to be Chinese (see part 1). Shay was also forced to be Christian which Hannah kept silent about. Loony Susan also omits the religion part about baby Shay, nor does she say who had actually ‘chose’ Christianity for Shay. Steven was looking to back up Hannah with evidences to infer a Nazification campaign to which Shay was sacrificed.
Jun 23: Steven’s digs up a Chindian, but on a trail different to the grievance manufacturing, which is racial discrimination and Nazification (forcing Shay to be Chinese). This Chindian’s name is a mouthful: Temily Tianmay Jaya Gopan (image above). Her testimony published as ‘comment’ by Steven attempts to give meat to Hannah’s racial discrimination charge. But, Temily, if discriminated, was discriminated not as Chinese; it was as Chindian and that was not by the NRD.
In any case, Temily’s ‘comment’, which continues where Hannah left off in Steven’s race campaign, is a truckload of infantile contradictions: ‘I’m not Chinese‘ vs ‘I feel guilty leaving out my Chinese heritage‘; Malays are Chindians because they the ‘same skin colour‘ vs there are ‘fair Malays‘. There is another problem in Temily’s ‘comment’ dressed up in Christian-style church testimony: it was probably exaggerated or it is the consequence of her own making. All her whining says exactly why Shay’s future might get lucky not being Chindian.
There is another, insidious point buried inside the Steven-led narratives.
Temily, like Hannah et al, personifies the ultimate racism that they conceal in their own lives. She tells how she and the others are endlessly bellyaching about skin colour. That is, they are so concerned about physical features they think nothing else. What they live by and what they think through is that which they in turn project onto others. It is a projection of their own individual bigotry, and physical features are the not least of it.
What physical features is Hannah concerned with?
The answer is contained in the name: Shay Adora Ram. It does two things simultaneously: projects Hannah’s own anti-Chinese, anti-Indian racism and it compensates for the kind of physical attributes she like to have for the baby but can’t give her, Ramachandran being a part of the cause as well. Lu Xun calls these characters the ‘imitation foreign devil’.
The clerk should have let Hannah be, to let her keep her ‘Anak Malaysia’ instead of goading and persuading her to fill in the blanks correctly that would ease the registration of Shay into Malaysian nationality. No, the clerk should have left Hannah alone, then wait and watch her run around for 12 months, in and out of the NRD, to prove Shay is entitled to Malaysian citizenship:
- on a racial criterion she invented with her DAP,
- since Shay is not Chinese and not Indian, and
- by proving to the department the child named Shay Adora Ram is not an Orang Putih born to an Orang Putih but quietly given to a Yeoh Tseow Suan and a Ramachandran for registration as Malaysian.
But it normally doesn’t happen that way although when it does the Indians get the raw end of the stick. Malaysians are generally a docile lot. Like the clerk, some in positions of power, others lowly, they tend to be forbearing and generous not because of the government or the Hannahs but in spite of them; it is an attitude they take even to Anglo racists such as Hannah, the Steven Gans and the Lim Guan Engs, none of who help to improve conditions. They make things worse.
All this makes for an issue as old as Merdeka. Yet, here’s Steven, Hannah, LGE, Kuer, Susan, Teresa, a Dr Boo – all Anglophiles – manufacturing, drumming up, stirring and inflaming an issue that’s is largely a settled matter, even for Chindians.
Below, in summary, is the step-by-step evolution of a propaganda by news:
- A child is produced: Shay.
- A grievance of race is manufactured: Shay is discriminated by race.
- The news is manufactured: They forced Shay into being Chinese.
- The morality is manufactured: Anak Malaysia is good, being Chinese is wrong.
- The politics is manufactured: The government is racist.
- The new pure breed race is manufactured: Anak Malaysia.
- The new politics is manufactured: DAP represents the new race.
- The old politics is resurrected: Barisan discriminates by race therefore evil.
- The new race is good: evil is all other races, even Chindians are discriminated.
In those three weeks of Malaysiakini narrative, Steven Gan picked on Chinese, Indians, Chindians, then lain-lain for the lynching, the ridicule, but mostly for hoisting up as victims to a callous state. That is, he picked any and all of them except one group that he wouldn’t touch. The Malays. He knows the price for picking on Malays.
To paraphrase their Anglophile vocabulary on the state of Malaysia: evil abounds.
Comments