Sensasi dalam dunia Forex! Cepat dapatkan tawaran terbaru daripada InstaForex - bonus 45% untuk setiap deposit! Bonus 45% untuk keuntungan yang maksimum!


     
All banners are advertisements only. CG does not endorse or vouch for any advertisers. Read Disclaimer HERE


Go Back   CariGold Forum > GENERAL DISCUSSION > General Chat > Info, Debate

Info, Debate Perkongsian info bermanfaat untuk semua. Perdebatan mengenai sesuatu isu. Semuanya di sini. NO OFFTOPIC.

CG Sponsors



Recommended Brokers

CG Updates
0 Forum rules improvised
Last Post: CariGold
Posted On: 05-02-2014
Replies: 0
Views: 6,078
0 Social Group is now based on request
Last Post: CariGold
Posted On: 11-12-2012
Replies: 0
Views: 30,188
0 Unscheduled maintenance
Last Post: CariGold
Posted On: 26-11-2012
Replies: 0
Views: 22,592
More...
Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:37 PM
jamtulenmurah jamtulenmurah is offline
Permanently Banned - Multiple ID

 
Trader Rating: (94)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: But here I stand lost and all alone
Posts: 25,449
Poster Rank: #47
Blog Entries: 6
Thanked 3,137 Times
Active Level
My Mood:
Exclamation Sabah MILIK Siapa??? Satu penceritaan oleh warga Sabahan sendiri.......






Jika ada benar-benar adalah satu serangan, bagaimana datang saya tidak nampak Menteri Luar kita terbang ke Filipina atau Setiausaha Luar mereka di sini di Sabah untuk berunding berundur?


Saya telah diminta untuk pandangan pena saya pada kebuntuan dikatakan berterusan antara Angkatan Tentera Malaysia dan kononnya Sulu penceroboh di sebuah kampung Lahad Datu di Sabah.
Saya akan menyentuh mengenai sejarah Sabah diikuti oleh ketibaan saya membuat kesimpulan tentang kebarangkalian kejadian sebenarnya berlaku dalam realiti.

Borneo Utara

Ia telah ditulis bahawa pada Jan 23, 1878, Raja Sulu, Sultan Jamalul Alam dipajak Sabah (dahulunya dikenali sebagai Borneo Utara) untuk Gustavus Von Overbeck untuk sewa tahunan 5000 bersamaan dolar melalui Dent perdagangan Von Overbeck Alfred pasangan. Ia juga mencatatkan bahawa jumlah ini wang (USD1, 500 setahun) masih dibayar kepada waris Sultan Sulu oleh Kedutaan Malaysia di Filipina sehingga hari ini.

Kata kunci dalam perjanjian bertulis "Cukai" yang jika diterjemahkan secara literal bermaksud "Pajakan". Ia juga jelas bertulis bahawa hak ke Sabah tidak boleh dipindahkan ke mana-mana negara lain atau sesiapa sahaja tanpa kebenaran ekspres Sultan Sulu.

Sepanyol di Manila akhirnya mengambil kawalan Kesultanan Sulu keseluruhan; dan pada tahun 1885, Great Britain, Jerman, dan Sepanyol menandatangani Protokol Madrid mengesahkan pengaruh Sepanyol ke atas segala-galanya di Filipina kecuali Sabah yang dimiliki oleh Kesultanan.

Great Britain telah diingatkan oleh Amerika dalam hitam dan putih rasmi pada tahun 1906 dan 1920 bahawa Sabah tidak tergolong kepada Great Britain; dan dan pada semua masa material bahagian sisi undang-undang dan sah dan bungkusan Kesultanan Sulu.

Kerajaan British, bagaimanapun seperti yang kita semua tahu, kezaliman dan unilateral menjadikan Sabah ke Colony Mahkota dipajak pada 10 Julai, 1946 walaupun terdapat satu deklarasi oleh Ketua Hakim CFC Makaskie Mahkamah Tinggi Borneo Utara pada Dis 19, 1939 dalam saman sivil yang difailkan oleh Dayang Dayang Hadji Piandao dan 8 waris-waris yang lain daripada Sultan Sulu termasuk Putlih Tarhata Kiram bahawa pengganti Sultan Sulu dalam wilayah Sabah adalah Punjungan Kiram dan tidak Great Britain!

Terdahulu, pada tahun 1941 Perlembagaan negeri Filipina khusus bahawa wilayah kebangsaan di Filipina termasuk "semua kawasan-kawasan lain yang tergolong ke Filipina atas dasar hak sejarah atau tuntutan undang-undang" yang bermaksud bahawa Filipina tidak pernah melepaskan tuntutan mereka ke atas Sabah .

Malah sebelum Sabah menyertai Malaya, Sarawak, dan Singapura untuk membentuk Malaysia pada 16 Sept, 1963, delegasi banyak telah dihantar oleh Filipina ke London mengingatkan kerajaan British bahawa Sabah milik ke Filipina.

Pada 12 Sept 1962, wilayah Sabah dan kedaulatan penuh, tajuk dan kekuasaan ke atas wilayah telah diserah oleh Sulu bertahan Raja, Sultan Muhammad Esmail E. Kiram 1 ke Republik di Filipina semasa Presiden Diosdado Macapagal.

Penyerahan hak berkesan memberikan pihak berkuasa Filipina penuh kerajaan untuk meneruskan tuntutan mereka di Mahkamah Keadilan Antarabangsa di The Hague. Tetapi sehingga hari ini, Malaysia terus konsisten menolak panggilan di Filipina untuk merujuk perkara itu kepada ICJ.

Sebaik sebelum pembentukan Malaysia, dua suruhanjaya siasatan melawat Sabah dan Sarawak dalam usaha untuk mewujudkan keadaan pendapat awam mengenai penggabungan dengan Malaya dan Singapura. Walau bagaimanapun, komisen tidak pernah diberi mandat untuk menangani status undang-undang Sabah mahupun mereka referendums dalam erti kata yang sebenarnya.

Komisen pertama yang dikenali sebagai Suruhanjaya Cobbold telah ditubuhkan oleh Malaya dan kerajaan British dan telah diketuai oleh Lord Cobbold, bersama-sama dengan dua orang wakil dari Malaya dan Britain - tetapi tidak seorang pun daripada wilayah-wilayah di bawah penyiasatan.

Suruhanjaya mendapati bahawa kira-kira satu pertiga daripada penduduk setiap wilayah iaitu Sabah dan Sarawak amat nikmat kesedaran awal Malaysia tanpa kebimbangan terlalu banyak ke atas terma-terma dan syarat-syarat. Satu lagi ketiga, ramai di antara mereka memihak kepada projek Malaysia, bertanya, dengan pelbagai darjah penekanan, untuk keadaan dan perlindungan.

Ketiga selebihnya dibahagikan antara mereka yang mendesak kemerdekaan sebelum Malaysia dianggap dan orang-orang yang amat suka untuk melihat pemerintahan British terus untuk beberapa tahun akan datang.

Indonesia dan Filipina menolak penemuan Suruhanjaya Cobbold dan pada tahun 1963, mesyuarat tiga pihak telah diadakan di Manila antara Presiden Indonesia Soekarno, Presiden Filipina, Diosdado Macapagal dan Perdana Menteri Malaya, Tunku Abdul Rahman.

Mesyuarat itu bersetuju untuk petisyen PBB untuk menghantar satu lagi suruhanjaya siasatan dan Filipina dan Indonesia bersetuju untuk menggugurkan bantahan mereka terhadap pembentukan Malaysia jika pelakuan baru mendapati pendapat yang popular dalam wilayah memihak.

The Misi PBB ke Borneo mendapati "satu majoriti besar rakyat" dubiously dalam memihak menyertai Malaysia dan seperti yang dijangkakan Indonesia dan Filipina kemudiannya menolak penemuan laporan dan Indonesia terus dasar semi-tentera yang "Konfrontasi" terhadap Malaysia - itu laporan dipertikaikan di kesan dimeteraikan penciptaan Malaysia.

Keadaan keseluruhan secara ringkas

Untuk memberi orang biasa biasa di jalan satu gambaran yang lebih mudah untuk dihadam, analogi berikut yang terbaik menerangkan situasi keseluruhan:

Seseorang tuan rumah yang dipanggil Jamalul dipajak sebidang tanah kepada penyewa yang dipanggil Overbeck untuk sewa tahunan sebanyak $ 5,000. Perjanjian bertulis menyatakan bahawa Overbeck tidak boleh sub-biarkan tanah atau menjual pajakan tanpa kebenaran Jamalul.

Tetapi penyewa walaupun larangan itu secara haram dijual pajakan sub penyewa dipanggil Great Britain yang kemudiannya juga haram dijual pajakan kepada sub-sub penyewa yang bernama Malaysia.

Dan di antara semua transaksi haram yang dilakukan oleh Overbeck, Great Britain dan Malaysia, Jamalul memindahkan semua hak dan kepentingan kepada tuan rumah baru dipanggil Filipina. Tuan tanah baru kini mahu kembali tanah tetapi Malaysia dan sub-penyewa enggan untuk meninggalkan. Tuan tanah baru mahu mengambil perkara itu kepada Mahkamah Keadilan Antarabangsa di The Hague tetapi Malaysia dan sub-penyewa juga enggan untuk pergi ke sana.

Bolehkah tuntutan sub-penyewa Malaysia untuk menjadi mangsa yang tidak bersalah apabila beliau mengambil alih pajakan dari sub-penyewa Great Britain?

Pada pendapat saya merendah diri: undang-undang sama ada antarabangsa atau mana-mana negara bertamadun adalah bahawa jika pembeli memperoleh harta dengan pengetahuan terlebih dahulu bahawa harta dalam soalan adalah sebenarnya dicuri atau bahawa penjual tidak mempunyai tajuk undang-undang atau yang sah untuk harta pada masa urusniaga adalah sama bersalah jenayah kecurian. Urus niaga tersebut adalah bukan sahaja batal dan tidak sah dan tiada kesan, tajuk kepada harta berkenaan masih terletakhak dengan pemilik asal.

ICJ hanya mengendalikan kes di antara negeri-negeri dan negara-negara yang mesti bersetuju untuk datang secara sukarela untuk diputuskan dan akan terikat dengan keputusan yang dibuat oleh Lembaga Pengarah, saya percaya yang berani Malaysia tidak pergi ke Mahkamah Keadilan Antarabangsa untuk menghadapi Filipina kerana bekas meramalkan kemungkinan yang tinggi kehilangan.

Berabad-abad lamanya Great Britain adalah punca banyak masalah dunia hari ini, sejarah akan memberitahu anda penderitaan rakyat di Timur Tengah, Afrika, India Sub-Benua, Falklands Argentina dan banyak lagi. Malah dalam United Kingdom, rakyat Scotland, Wales, dan Ireland yang benar-benar mabuk benar dengan England.

Hong Kong adalah bernasib baik apabila mendiang Deng Xiao Ping memberitahu Margaret Thatcher swasta bahawa jika Great Britain tidak meninggalkan Hong Kong selepas setinggan di sana selama lebih daripada 150 tahun, tentera Cina akan ditakluki Hong Kong dalam satu hari. Beliau akhirnya kembali ke China pada 1 Julai 1997 dan kini dinikmati autonomi.

Bagaimana pula dengan suara penduduk pada zaman penyewa pertama Overbeck dan sub-penyewa Great Britain yang telah bersetuju untuk membiarkan Malaysia sub-penyewa mengambil alih?

Izinkan saya memberi analogi lain: Saya pemilik berdaftar undang-undang dan sah bas. Satu hari seseorang dipajak bas dari saya dan memandu di sekitar bandar mengambil dan menurunkan penumpang di sepanjang jalan untuk keuntungan. Marilah kita mengatakan bahawa penumpang suka memandu beliau begitu banyak bahawa mereka mahu mengunjungi beliau untuk hidup. Adakah bahawa dalam apa-apa cara bermakna dia boleh menjual bas saya atau merawat sama seperti harta-bendanya?

Untuk menjawab soalan saya sebelum ini: penumpang boleh memilih untuk menaiki mana-mana bas yang mereka mahu, tetapi kedaulatan Sabah terletakhak di Filipina. Dan ini juga bermakna bahawa walaupun rakyat Sabah hari ini mungkin masih mahu kekal dengan Malaysia, Sabah masih wilayah undang-undang dan sah di Filipina di bawah undang-undang antarabangsa jika prinsip yang sama digunakan sebagai satu Penghakiman Mahkamah Antarabangsa Keadilan berhubung kes Kepulauan Sipadan dan Ligitan dan Pulau Batu Puteh atau Pedra Branca.

Kesultanan Sulu telah terhenti wujud apabila setiap inci wilayah diserah pada 12 Sept 1962 kepada kerajaan di Filipina dan sebagai pengganti hak milik kesultanan tidak berfungsi lagi, ia berhak untuk menuntut Sabah yang pada semua masa material hak mereka.
Perkara IV Perjanjian Malaysia tahun 1963 * berbunyi seperti berikut:

Kerajaan United Kingdom akan mengambil apa-apa langkah sebagai mungkin menjadi yang sesuai dan tersedia kepada mereka untuk mendapatkan enakmen itu oleh Parlimen itu Kingdom United Akta satu menyediakan bagi pelepasan itu, mulai dari Hari Malaysia, kedaulatan dan bidang kuasa Kebawah Duli Yang Maha Mulia Paduka Seri Britannic beliau itu dalam berkenaan dengan Borneo Utara, Sarawak dan Singapura supaya kedaulatan dan bidang kuasa hendaklah terletakhak pelepasan itu selaras dengan Perjanjian ini dan instrumen perlembagaan dilampirkan kepada Perjanjian ini.
Kerana ia telah menyatakan bahawa satu bahagian Sabah ** milik Kesultanan Brunei dan bahagian yang lain kepada Kesultanan Sulu, dan manakala Brunei telah menyerahkan sebahagian kedaulatan Sabah, Sulu (kini sebahagian daripada Filipina) hanya dipajak bahagian Sabah , tidak Britannic Majesty Her mempunyai kedaulatan ke atas keseluruhan atau hanya satu sebahagian daripada Sabah?
Ia adalah jelas bahawa jawapannya adalah hanya satu sebahagian daripada Sabah, maka Perkara IV adalah batal dan tidak sah sekali gus menjadikan keseluruhan Perjanjian Malaysia tahun 1963 haram dan tiada kesan ...!

Terdapat pepatah undang-undang "nemodat memenjarakan non habet" yang bermaksud "anda tidak boleh memberikan apa yang anda tidak mempunyai".

Kemerdekaan atau autonomi bagi sebahagian yang salah satu daripada Sabah yang telah dipajak daripada Kesultanan Sulu yang sah dan undang-undang hanya boleh datang dari Filipina.


Lahad Datu

Ia kini lebih daripada dua minggu sejak pencerobohan yang didakwa berlaku dan tidak walaupun satu sekeping gambar boleh dipercayai diambil penceroboh telah ditunjukkan kepada orang ramai.
Akal memberitahu saya bahawa jika kejadian sebenar, sebab hanya pasukan keselamatan kita tidak berani kebakaran terbuka pada perompak sama ada lelaki kami mengatasi atau senjata mereka outsized.

Jika ada benar-benar adalah satu serangan, bagaimana datang saya tidak nampak Menteri Luar kita terbang ke Filipina atau Setiausaha Luar mereka di sini di Sabah untuk berunding berundur?
Seperti hantu Mei 13 yang telah digunakan untuk menakutkan pengundi Cina di Semenanjung, ini juga boleh menjadi satu lagi "sandiwara" untuk menakut-nakutkan pengundi Sabah dan menunjukkan kepada kita bahawa hanya Barisan Nasional akan dapat melindungi kita daripada pencerobohan asing.


Nota:
Perjanjian Malaysia 1963
http://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume% 20750/volume-750-I-10760-English.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Borneo_dispute
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sabah
Penulis ialah bekas ahli industri pelancongan Sabah pudar; suka makanan dan kelajuan; dan blog di http://legalandprudent.blogspot.com memberikan tiada suku.

Walaupun pandangan dan penemuan yang terkandung dalam artikel di atas tergolong kepadanya, dia ingin untuk menggalakkan individu yang bijak untuk mencari dan membentuk jawapan sendiri dan pertimbangan mereka dalam perbandingan dengan.


SUMBER

PS: Artikel asal bahasa ingeris sudah translate kasik kaurang semua pahamkan. Klik untuk artikel asal sumber tu.


Quote:

Ori version.

I was asked to pen my views on the alleged ongoing standoff between the Malaysian armed forces and the so-called Sulu intruders at a Lahad Datu village in Sabah.
I will touch on the history of Sabah followed by my arrival to the conclusion on the probability of the incident actually happening in reality.

North Borneo

It was written that on Jan 23, 1878, the Ruler of Sulu, Sultan Jamalul Alam leased Sabah (formerly known as North Borneo) to Gustavus Von Overbeck for an annual rent of equivalent 5,000 dollars through Von Overbeck’s trading partner Alfred Dent. It was also recorded that this amount of money (USD1,500 per year) is still being paid to the heirs of the Sulu Sultan by the Malaysian Embassy in the Philippines until today.

The keyword in the written agreement was “Pajak” which if translated literally means “Lease”. It was also explicitly written that the rights to Sabah cannot be transferred to any other nation or anyone else without the Sulu Sultan’s express consent.

The Spaniards in Manila eventually took control of the entire Sulu Sultanate; and in 1885, Great Britain, Germany, and Spain signed the Madrid Protocol confirming Spanish influence over everything in the Philippines except Sabah which belongs to the Sultanate.

Great Britain was reminded by America in official black and white in 1906 and 1920 that Sabah does not belong to Great Britain; and was and is at all material times legally and legitimately part and parcel of the Sulu Sultanate.
The British government, however as we all know, arrogantly and unilaterally did turn Sabah into a Crown-leased Colony on July 10, 1946 even though there was a declaration by Chief Justice CFC Makaskie of the High Court of North Borneo on Dec 19, 1939 in a civil suit filed by Dayang Dayang Hadji Piandao and 8 other heirs of the Sulu Sultan including Putlih Tarhata Kiram that the successor of the Sulu Sultan in the territory of Sabah was Punjungan Kiram and not Great Britain!

Earlier on in 1941 the Constitution of the Philippines states specifically that the national territory of the Philippines includes “all other areas which belong to the Philippines on the basis of historical rights or legal claims” which means that the Philippines have never relinquished their claim on Sabah.

Even before Sabah joined Malaya, Sarawak, and Singapore to form Malaysia on Sept 16, 1963, numerous delegations were sent by the Philippines to London reminding the British government that Sabah belongs to the Philippines.

On Sept 12, 1962, the territory of Sabah and the full sovereignty, title and dominion over the territory were ceded by the then reigning Sulu Ruler, Sultan Muhammad Esmail E. Kiram 1 to the Republic of the Philippines during the Presidency of Diosdado Macapagal.

The cession effectively gave the Philippines government full authority to pursue their claim in the International Court of Justice at The Hague. But until today, Malaysia continues to consistently reject the Philippines’s calls to refer the matter to the ICJ.

Immediately preceding the formation of Malaysia, two commissions of enquiry visited Sabah and Sarawak in order to establish the state of public opinion regarding merger with Malaya and Singapore. However, the commissions were never mandated to address the legal status of Sabah nor were they referendums in the proper sense.

The first commission known as the Cobbold Commission was established by the Malayan and British governments and was headed by Lord Cobbold, along with two representatives from Malaya and Britain – but none from the territories under investigation.

The Commission found that about one third of the population of each territory i.e. Sabah and Sarawak strongly favours early realisation of Malaysia without too much concern over terms and conditions. Another third, many of them favourable to the Malaysia project, ask, with varying degrees of emphasis, for conditions and safeguards. The remaining third is divided between those who insist upon independence before Malaysia is considered and those who would strongly prefer to see British rule continue for some years to come.

Indonesia and the Philippines rejected the findings of the Cobbold Commission and in 1963, a tripartite meeting was held in Manila between Indonesian President Soekarno, Philippines President Diosdado Macapagal and Malayan Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman. The meeting agreed to petition the UN to send another commission of enquiry and the Philippines and Indonesia agreed to drop their objection to the formation of Malaysia if the new commission found popular opinion in the territories in favour.

The UN Mission to Borneo found “a sizeable majority of the people” dubiously in favour of joining Malaysia and as expected Indonesia and the Philippines subsequently rejected the report’s findings and Indonesia continued its semi-military policy of “konfrontasi” towards Malaysia – the disputed report in effect sealed the creation of Malaysia.
The whole situation in a nutshell

To give the ordinary layman on the street an easier picture to digest, the following analogy best describes the whole situation:
A landlord called Jamalul leased a piece of land to a tenant called Overbeck for a yearly rent of $5,000. The written agreement stated that Overbeck cannot sub-let the land or sell the lease without Jamalul’s permission.
But the tenant despite the prohibition illegally sold the lease to a sub-tenant called Great Britain who later also illegally sold the lease to a sub-sub-tenant called Malaysia.

And in between all the illegal transactions perpetrated by Overbeck, Great Britain and Malaysia, Jamalul transferred all his rights and interests to a new landlord called the Philippines. The new landlord now wants back the land but the sub-sub-tenant Malaysia refuses to leave. The new landlord wants to take the matter to the International Court of Justice at The Hague but the sub-sub-tenant Malaysia also refuses to go there.
Can the sub-sub-tenant Malaysia claim to be an innocent victim when she took over the lease from the sub-tenant Great Britain?

In my humble opinion: the law be it either international or of any civilized country is that if a purchaser acquires a property with prior knowledge that the property in question is in fact stolen or that the seller does not have a legal or legitimate title to the property at the time of transaction is equally guilty of the crime of theft. Such transaction is not only null and void and of no effect, the title to the property in question is still vested with the original owner.

The ICJ only handles cases between states and nations which must agree to come voluntarily to be adjudged and be bound by its decisions; I strongly believe that Malaysia dares not go to the International Court of Justice to face the Philippines because the former foresee the high possibility of losing.

For centuries Great Britain was the cause of a lot of world problems today, history will tell you the sufferings of people in the Middle East, Africa, Indian Sub-Continent, Argentine Falklands and many more. Even within the United Kingdom, the Scottish, Welsh, and Irish people are really pissed with England.

Hong Kong was fortunate when the late Deng Xiao Ping told Margaret Thatcher in private that if Great Britain does not leave Hong Kong after squatting there for more than 150 years, the Chinese Army will overrun Hong Kong in one day. She was eventually returned to China on July 1, 1997 and now enjoyed autonomy.

What about the voices of the population during the times of the first tenant Overbeck and sub-tenant Great Britain who agree to let the sub-sub-tenant Malaysia take over?
Let me give another analogy: I am the registered legal and legitimate owner of a bus. One day someone leased the bus from me and drove around town picking up and dropping off passengers along the way for profit. Let us say that the passengers love his driving so much that they want to patronize him for life. Does that in any way mean he can sell my bus or treat the same as his property?

To answer my earlier question: the passengers can choose to ride whichever bus they want to, but the sovereignty of Sabah is vested in the Philippines. And this also means that even if the people of Sabah today might still want to stay on with Malaysia, Sabah is still the legal and legitimate territory of the Philippines under international law if the same principles are applied as per the Judgments of the International Court of Justice with regards to the cases of Sipadan and Ligitan Islands, and Pulau Batu Puteh or Pedra Branca.

The Sultanate of Sulu had ceased to exist when every inch of its territory was ceded on Sept 12, 1962 to the government of the Philippines and as the successor-in-title of the defunct sultanate, it is entitled to reclaim Sabah which is at all material times rightfully theirs.

Article IV of the Malaysia Agreement of 1963* reads as follows:

The Government of the United Kingdom will take such steps as may be appropriate and available to them to secure the enactment by the Parliament of the United Kingdom of an Act providing for the relinquishment, as from Malaysia Day, of Her Britannic Majesty’s sovereignty and jurisdiction in respect of North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore so that the said sovereignty and jurisdiction shall on such relinquishment vest in accordance with this Agreement and the constitutional instruments annexed to this Agreement.

Because it was stated that one part of Sabah** belonged to the Brunei Sultanate and the other part to the Sulu Sultanate, and while Brunei had ceded her part of Sabah’s sovereignty, Sulu (now part of the Philippines) only leased her part of Sabah, does Her Britannic Majesty had sovereignty over the whole or only one part of Sabah?
It is obvious that the answer is only one part of Sabah, therefore Article IV is null and void thereby rendering the entire Malaysia Agreement of 1963 illegal and of no effect…!

There is a legal maxim “nemodat quod non habet” which means “you cannot give what you do not have”.
Legitimate and legal independence or autonomy for that one part of Sabah that was leased from the Sulu Sultanate can only come from the Philippines.

Lahad Datu

It is now more than two weeks since the alleged intrusion took place and not even one piece of credible picture taken of the invaders was shown to the public.

Common sense tells me that if the occurrence was real, the only reason our security forces dare not open fire on the raiders is either our boys are outnumbered or their guns outsized.

If there really was an incursion, how come I do not see our Foreign Minister flying off to the Philippines or their Foreign Secretary here in Sabah to negotiate the retreat?

Like the May 13 bogeyman that was used to frighten the Chinese voters of Peninsular, this could well be another “sandiwara” to scare the voters of Sabah and show us that only the Barisan Nasional will be able to protect us from foreign invasion.


__________________
[URL="http://carigold.com/portal/forums/showthread.php?t=372882"][SIZE="3"][B][COLOR="BLUE"][CENTER]ΩΩΩ <GEMPAR> MADU HERBA PENAWAR Batuk Kahak, Asma, Kesihatan Dalaman! Testi Page 1!!!Meh sini Beli MADU HERBA HIMALAYA Kualiti TINGGI!!! ΩΩΩ[URL="http://carigold.com/portal/forums/showthread.php?t=369990"][COLOR="Red"]JAM TULEN HARGA MURAH!!![/COLOR][/URL][/CENTER][/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][/URL]

Last edited by jamtulenmurah; 25-02-2013 at 01:59 PM..
Reply With Quote
Paid Advertisement
  #2  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:42 PM
G.Spicy G.Spicy is offline
Super Active Member

G.Spicy's Avatar
 
Trader Rating: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,134
Poster Rank: #876
Thanked 58 Times
Active Level
Default

Pajak pakai wang kertas? ****** gile.
Pajaklah 1tan emas setahun ke.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:44 PM
usahOne usahOne is offline
Well-Known
Member

usahOne's Avatar
 
Trader Rating: (0)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,044
Poster Rank: #443
Thanked 7 Times
Active Level
Default

semua tergdai d bwh pemerintah umnO dari satu ke satu umno bg pd yg tidak berhak..x mustahil jln terakhir pok jeb akan jual pd kesultanan sulu alaahiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
__________________
RASUAH MENTERI MELAYU ISLAM JATUHKAN MARUAH UMAT ISLAM
Ekonomi Bumiputera hanya untuk elit Melayu
"(Tun) Dr Mahathir (Mohamad) kata, Umno 'sudah tua dan bakal mati'.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:45 PM
jamtulenmurah jamtulenmurah is offline
Permanently Banned - Multiple ID

 
Trader Rating: (94)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: But here I stand lost and all alone
Posts: 25,449
Poster Rank: #47
Blog Entries: 6
Thanked 3,137 Times
Active Level
My Mood:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G.Spicy View Post
Pajak pakai wang kertas? ****** gile.
Pajaklah 1tan emas setahun ke.
kekekee..... Selagi ada Bulan dan Bintang terms pajakan tu......

Mesti menyesal anak cucu soltan sulu yg sain agreement tamak tu. X cukup punye kes tu yg kena cucuk nak klem sabahan ni. Walhal empire sulu dulu tahun 1700an takde la mencakupi seluruh sabah. Banyak kepada pulau2 kecil atas sabah sampai pilipin je.
__________________
[URL="http://carigold.com/portal/forums/showthread.php?t=372882"][SIZE="3"][B][COLOR="BLUE"][CENTER]ΩΩΩ <GEMPAR> MADU HERBA PENAWAR Batuk Kahak, Asma, Kesihatan Dalaman! Testi Page 1!!!Meh sini Beli MADU HERBA HIMALAYA Kualiti TINGGI!!! ΩΩΩ[URL="http://carigold.com/portal/forums/showthread.php?t=369990"][COLOR="Red"]JAM TULEN HARGA MURAH!!![/COLOR][/URL][/CENTER][/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][/URL]
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:45 PM
nazrirazra nazrirazra is offline
Well-Known
Member

nazrirazra's Avatar
 
Trader Rating: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 8,145
Poster Rank: #355
Blog Entries: 1
Thanked 108 Times
Active Level
My Mood:
Default

Sultan Sulu dah tersalah ke?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:46 PM
joee joee is online now
CG Top Poster Club

joee's Avatar
 
Trader Rating: (21)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kulim - JB -S.Bridge
Posts: 24,310
Poster Rank: #53
Thanked 474 Times
Active Level
My Mood:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G.Spicy View Post
Pajak pakai wang kertas? ****** gile.
Pajaklah 1tan emas setahun ke.
lebih kurang kes seberang perai yg dipajak..kedah cuma dpt 10ribu je setahun..nk amik balik tak boleh..tp harga pajak tak masuk akal
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:48 PM
Pittrich Pittrich is offline
Active Member

Pittrich's Avatar
 
Trader Rating: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Today Amsterdam...Tomorrow I Don't Know
Posts: 1,081
Poster Rank: #3183
Thanked 5 Times
Active Level
My Mood:
Default

good job tt.. dah jumpa note perjanjian tu ya
__________________
[[ YOUNG CORPORATE MALAYSIANS LEGACY ]]
LaLaLaLaLaLa....you can sang the song..
High Voltage

PANERAI PAM 190 FOR 16.5K ONLY!!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:50 PM
jamtulenmurah jamtulenmurah is offline
Permanently Banned - Multiple ID

 
Trader Rating: (94)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: But here I stand lost and all alone
Posts: 25,449
Poster Rank: #47
Blog Entries: 6
Thanked 3,137 Times
Active Level
My Mood:
Default

here is a legal maxim “nemodat quod non habet” which means “you cannot give what you do not have”.
__________________
[URL="http://carigold.com/portal/forums/showthread.php?t=372882"][SIZE="3"][B][COLOR="BLUE"][CENTER]ΩΩΩ <GEMPAR> MADU HERBA PENAWAR Batuk Kahak, Asma, Kesihatan Dalaman! Testi Page 1!!!Meh sini Beli MADU HERBA HIMALAYA Kualiti TINGGI!!! ΩΩΩ[URL="http://carigold.com/portal/forums/showthread.php?t=369990"][COLOR="Red"]JAM TULEN HARGA MURAH!!![/COLOR][/URL][/CENTER][/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][/URL]

Last edited by jamtulenmurah; 25-02-2013 at 01:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:52 PM
erro_sennin erro_sennin is offline
Active Member

erro_sennin's Avatar
 
Trader Rating: (3)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: in the parallel universe
Posts: 785
Poster Rank: #4054
Thanked 43 Times
Active Level
Default

ptt la pening aku membacanya, gtranslate rupanya.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 25-02-2013, 01:53 PM
eizjoe eizjoe is offline
Super Active Member

eizjoe's Avatar
 
Trader Rating: (0)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,620
Poster Rank: #1010
Thanked 8 Times
Active Level
My Mood:
Default

susah nak faham tulisan ni weh
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +8. The time now is 12:57 PM.


Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Disclaimer : All posts made by either members or mods even admins on CariGold.com are just only individual opinions, not necessarily or specifically those of CariGold.com or it's owner. CariGold does neither support, endorse nor vouch any programs and/or opportunities discussed here. We also does not give/offer investment advice and we does not research the opportunities discussed here. We simply provide a place for discussion. YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY IF YOU LOSE SUM OF MONEY IN ANY PROGRAMS DISCUSSED HERE