but thats not his fault the law punish ppl for belittling brutally murdered cops as lackeys

He was simply asked to give an expert opinion in court on history... and tats what he did.. his view we were not a colony but a protectorate. Tats not perversion of history IMO because as I wrote both views are accurate depending on ur definitions of colony..

This post has been edited by rolling2014: Apr 16 2015, 04:19 PM

The MAN pun cari makan. That is why knowledge and application is entirely different.

Most follow the angin.

Yes, it's debatable but if you say Malaya was never a colony, why do we need to get Britain's approval for our independence?

TLDR...

Sorry la I thought typo.

she saying prof khoo kay kim is a no-good two-faced lying sonovabitch.

Well what Mat Sabu say is technically not wrong too. If you consider the communist as freedom fighter, what they are doing is not wrong. Remember it's 1950 and we are still under British rule.

Communist were just a bunch of people who fought based on what they think was right at that time. Their tactics might be wrong and method brutal but we should discuss this matter with an open mind. It's already part of our country history and we must acknowledge their contribution too.

3K need to retain his position...

sanggup menipu...

Bugima, hancur mouse aku ni scrolling scrolling

LMAO,

malaya never be colonized? what on earth 'dinaung'? It is just stupid.

during colonial time in malaya, british call the shot here.

they even have a battleship named after malaya, just like Australia and New Zealand.

so, all this whitewashing of history will let their e-penor grow how many miliinches?

Heh. During my orientation in UM, I had to listen to Prof Khoo talk. I'd heard about how great and knowledgeable he was from my mom, and was expecting pearls of wisdom from the man. Instead, what I got was a tirade against how modern students didn't respect the establishment, how doing politics and going against the government was bad (this was during the height of the crackdown on political movements in unis, back in the early 2000s). I stuffed my earbuds in my ear, turned on some music, and went to sleep. How's that for me disrespecting the establishment?

She post her thesis!

Not legally a colony =/= full sovereignty

as a protectorate,we listened to what big brother say but we regained our full sovereignty from the brits at independence.

some might argue tat already means we r colony.. but as I said both opinions are accurate depending on ur definition of colony.

They may be freedom fighters but they killed civilians and police personnel who was just keeping the peace (ie not fighting communists). So hard to see them as national heros in the same way as tunku abd rahman.. tats how i see it..

This post has been edited by rolling2014: Apr 16 2015, 05:42 PM

KKK !

but sejarah in form 4 form 5 said we are colonized.......

Simplely put...the police tu at the time on who's payroll?

if Sultan then you can say they serve the Sultan..but if they are on brits payroll then...well....means they work for brits

Apparently..everyone is missing the point that Rachel put..if Khoo Kay Kim's view is taken true..it would also mean that countries like India or Burma was never colonized..

I shudder to think what the Indians will say if you tell them that...

you retards can not quote OP in full or not? or at least put spoilers?

The first page is the longest page in kopitiam history

nia ma ge chow hai you all

thats the ISIS argument.. anybody associated to Britian is its lackey and is a legitimate military target eventho that person is innocent. The real world is not that black and white

the actual problem with rachel's letter is that on one end she agrees "...the fact that there are structural differences between a protectorate and colony" but on another criticize Khoo for highlighting that the Malay sultanates (by structure) were not British colonies but instead were British protectorates. Khoo defined being colonized as being a colony but she is judging him based on another definition (ie handing over administrative control in whatever structure means you are colonized). Khoo also never disputed that British ruled by proxy, he wrote "policy of ruling the Malays through their sultan" but he didnt call it colonization. At most she has a terminology dispute with Khoo. Her accusation that Khoo presented a perversed version of history is overblown.

From the definition used by Khoo, British India like Malaya too consist of British colony (directly ruled by Britain like Penang, Malacca) and protectorates (ie Princely States).

This post has been edited by rolling2014: Apr 17 2015, 07:58 AM