Thursday, November 08, 2007

Malaysia to reclaim Pedra Branca?

Will Malaysia or Singapore win in the court tussle over a overlapping claim for an islet the size of a football field in the South China Sea?

Both governments are crossing swords at the International Court of Justice in The Hague in the Netherlands to settle ownership of Pedra Branca (its name to Singapore) or Pulau Batu Putih (according to Malaysia).

So far, media of the the two countries, which used to be one nation briefly in the 1960s, have backed their political masters. Malaysia's The Star cited the Foreign Minister as saying that the team was the one Malaysia sent to handle the sovereignty dispute over Pulau Sipadan and Pulau Ligitan which Malaysia won over Indonesia. Malaysia's New Straits Times reiterated the country's stand that Malaysia was not making a claim over the island as it was always part of her territory.

Singapore's The Straits Times said Singapore has exercised sovereignty and administered the island since the 1840s, when the British colonial government built the Horsburgh Lighthouse there.


And Singapore is likely to depend on similar arguments used by Malaysia in its successful claim over Indonesia in the fight for Sipadan and Ligatan, two islands to the east of Borneo, five years ago. Malaysia won because it had effectively exercised state functions over the two islands. These actions ranged from building lighthouses to regulating the collection of turtle eggs, according to ST. Hmmm, now I understand why people collect turtle eggs! :-)

Similarly, ST pointed out that Singapore has built other facilities, including a water desalination plant and a helicopter pad on Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Putih.

Many people would probably think that Singapore will win this round, based on the general concept of adverse possession.

But Sophie's World takes a different view on this. Although Singapore and its former colonial master had exercised control of the islet for more than a century, the situation is not so straight forward in the case of Malaysia and Singapore.

For a start, the little rock is nearer to Malaysia. It sounds reasonable for Malaysia to say that it didn't make any claim on the island earlier because it has always regarded it as part of Malaysia.

Second, Singapura was once part of the Malay sultanate. The old Singapore was given away to the British by the Johor sultanate for a song. Hence, one can argue that the Johor Sultan transferred ownership of Singapore but not Pulau Batu Putih to the British.

Sophie's World is betting on Malaysia emerging triumphant in the tussle for Pedra Branca.


Related posting: Singapore, Malaysia going to court again?

67 comments:

Anonymous said...

From the map u posted here, Pedra Branca is too far from Singapore Coast. It is nearer to Johor coast and somewhere in the centre of Johor and Bintan. But, Indonesian does not claim sovereignty over Pedra Branca.

So, I believe Malaysia has better chance to win. But, I predict ICJ will come to a decision that Pedra Brance belongs to 'no one'. Why? Because it is situated in an important sea lane, the 'light house' is significant to the safety of the users. Final decision : UN take over.

Simon Templar said...

Hello, I think what Tommy Koh said is right: silences means a lot. Would you allow another country to build infrastructure on your land, especially on land belonging to Malaysia who has always been sensitive towards Singapore's moves in the region.

I also don't agree that the island should be given based on geographical alone. After all, the Falklands don't belong to Argentina.

I think your argument is kind of one-sided don't you think? Face it, Malaysia will lose because they just don't have enough documentary proof to support their claim.

James Chia said...

I think Singapore should win the case . If I am not wrong, Singapore has been operating on the island and Malaysia has not protested against it for the entire 150 years. I think proximity of the island to a country is not a top criteria to consider in the award of sovereignty by the international courts. Just my opinion. I am not a legal expert so I may be wrong :)

Anonymous said...

This is me giving my two cents, historically the area is called Johor-Riau which was under the control of the Johor Sultan which covers pretty much three countries which are now Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. If you have been to these three countries within the Johor-Riau Empire you will find land still owned by the Johor Sultanate. Since the Johor Sultan is one of the Sultans ruling in Malaysia, I would think Malaysia has a legitimate claim. Singapore's history is very much embedded in Malaya's and Johor, you cannot claim something that was not yours to begin with.

Pradeep said...

I am in India and ever since my visit to Malaysia in June, I have been a frequent reader of your blog. Like other posts, this too is quite informative. I didn't know of this tussle. There are lots of small territories which are disputed by two or more countries. Such disputes should be decided one way or the other and the matter closed for ever.

Victor said...

What a waste of tax money, they should settle it with a round of Rock,Paper&Scissors and get over it.

Anonymous said...

I feel that Malaysia has a better chance, due to historical reasons. Whoever wins will incur costs to maintain that piece of rock though.

Anonymous said...

Malaysia will win. AFter observing all the relevant documents and history of Pulau Batu Puteh, Msia will win.The British never took it away from Johor and no agreement was even made to take over the lil island. The British only asked permission to build a lighthouse.Msia never said anything when the Spore wanted to maintain the lighthouse becoz they knew it was theirs and they thought Sopre would be as honest as the British..that is to request permission to maintain the lighthouse.Boo to Spore for making a stupid claim

Singapore Soldier said...

Lawyers for Malaysia claimed that :
1) Malaysia owns Pulau Batu Puteh (Pedra Branca) since the time of
the Johore sultanate. In the Malay Annals the Johore Sultanate ruled over vast area of land & sea stretching all the way from Natunas to Riau Lingga archipelago including Pedra Branca, Middle Rocks & South Ledge under dispute. This proved ownership belong to Malaysia.

2) Since Singapore has NO ownership rights over the islands, any activities on the island is totally irrelevant & cannot be taken as proof of sovereignty over the island.

3) Given the opportunity, Singapore would destroy the ecology of the islands by land reclamation. Therefore it is better to award the islands to Malaysia in order to preserve
the natural environment.

At first glance, Malaysia appeared to have put up a strong case.
Before awarding the islands, any judge would have to consider the
merit of their arguments.

Have the Malaysian argument any merits? Let's see.

On historical ownership, is it a valid ground for the Malaysian
claim ? Assuming the Johore Sultanate did own the empire as presented, can Malaysia claim ownership NOW, based on historical ownership? For example, does Malaysia has valid claim over the whole of Riau Lingga archipelago now? The Mongols ruled over Russia, Middle East & part of Europe during Genghis Khan's time. Can Mongolia claim ownership NOW over all the land stretching from China to Europe? Claims based on historical ownership is ludicrous! Can the judge made awards based on such ludicrous grounds?

On the second argument, Singapore activities on the island cannot be
taken as exercising sovereignty over the island since the British time as it is completely irrelevant. This is NOT exactly a solid argument as it depends whether Malaysia could prove ownership over the islands. Since Malaysia's claim, based on historical ownership is invalid, all Singapore activities on the
island can be construed as exercising sovereignty.

On the environment destruction by reclamation to be undertaken by
Singapore, it is a red herring.
Singapore could easily counter this argument by confirming that it will not embark on land reclamation around the islands.
Singapore could also counter argue that, with proper care & planning, land reclamation need NOT necessarily result in the
destruction of the natural environment. It can provide solid proof on this; eg, in East Coast Park (about 15 km long by 1 km wide) the land was reclaimed. It is now a beautiful place enjoyed by Singaporeans & foreigners alike. The sea become a natural habitat for sea life & hundreds of Singaporean enjoy fishing on every weekends at the jetty.

The Malaysian case appear to be rather weak as a whole.

Sophie said...

wow, everyone has given plenty of refreshing thoughts about the whole issue. keep 'em coming!!!

woof woof

MalaysiaBoleh said...

the historical agreement that was made by the Temenggong and the British is a valid statement stating that the Johor Sultanate gave permission for the British to build a lighthouse for safety reasons. Pulau Batu Puteh isnt the only place where the British built such lighthouse.To name a few, Pulau Pisang is another lighthouse built by the British and was granted permission from the Johor Sultanate and until today IT IS A PART OF MSIA. Unlike the other lighthouse built in the Spore territory such as Raffles Lighthouse and until today it remains a part of Singapore.

The only reason Spore is so eager questioning over Pulau Batu Puteh is nevertheless for land reclamation!! Remember their 2001 Concept Plan.

Let me put it in simple words: I own an orchard but I dont have a car. So I go to my orchard once in a while with my cousin and riding his car. Does that make him the owner of the orchard? Spore argued that the Temenggong visited Pulau Batu Puteh on the Governor's boat and that doesnt make the Temenggong the owner of the island.Like Prof Eli said zero times zero is ZERO=NOTHING

kirua said...

To malaysiaboleh, try this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession

I think it's rather 50-50, any wouldn't care both ways except for the fact that Singapore has already built a heliport, some military installation and placed additional naval navigation equipment there.

It's more like:
I don't own an orchard, I don't own the land, so I find a piece of land, plant the seeds, grow the orchard, built my house there, and many years later, someone says, "My land, and therefore the orchard and house is mine."

50-50.

zero nm said...

1. The bet is 100000000 to 1 for Singapore to win.
2. Malaysia side so far has not shown any proof. And the legal team knows that, and possibly trying to claim for one of the two smaller rocks to keep the Singapore-bashing alive in Malaysia.
3. The latest proof of using doctored photograph show how desperate the legal team is, and warrants a very serious punishment as this is a very serious matter.
4. Now, one wonders were the same tricks played on Indonesia in the last trial.

Robert said...

Malysia case is weak because she only made her claim after 1979 when it redrew it's map. By redrawing her map she had dispute with 6 other countries such as China, Indonesia, Thailand,philippines, Vietnam, and Brunei. Singapore did not ask permission from Johore when she built the lighthouse a few hundred years ago. Malaysia did not protest when the lighthouse was built. Malaysia did not protest when Singapore patrol boat patrol the areas. Johore sent a note to the british that she did not own Pedra Branca.Malaysia cannot produce any document to show that she owns Pedra Branca.Basically Malaysia just hates Singapore success.

Be Rational said...

If it is based on history alone, the red indians will still own America and they will be the richest people in the world.

If you read on the New Strait Time (Malaysia paper) Johor Govt itself told the Brit that the land does not belong to them.

As for any agreement for Johor to give the Brit to build the lighthouse, it is merely an urban legend started by those with no strong grounds - if that is the truth the Malaysia will have documents to show it and not wait until 1979 to stake a claim.


Malaysiaboleh is talking nonsense and stirring up emotions for no reason but to lead the forum from a rational one to an emotional one -if any of you actually look at Concept Plan 2001 (here - link provided) http://www.ura.gov.sg/gallery/images/2001YearXConceptPlanA3.pdf, you can clearly see there is no reclamation at Pedra Branca. It is sad when the truth get twisted by those who merely wants to win an argument and whose stir up nationalistic sentiments against others.

Be Rational said...

In response to anonymous on distance and territorial ownership, Alaska will belong to Canada and not America and Hawaii will belong to some tribes in the Pacific. UK need not fight the Falklands War with Argentina since Falkland is clearly nearer to Argentina.

Sophie said...

be rational, u referring to this malaysian article? -- http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Saturday/National/2080650/Article

it is singapore's claim as reported by nst. it doesnt sound like an admission by malaysia tt Johor Govt itself told the Brit that the land does not belong to them.

maybe i missed the report u referred to. pls send me the nst report u mentioned. tks

Anonymous said...

Hi....

Remember Pulau Pisang????? Singapore also operate a LIGHTHOUSE in Pulau Pisang... The lighthouse is yours..... But Pulau Pisang belong to MALAYSIA. The same goes with Pulau Batu Putih.... The LIGHTHOUSE is yours... but this does not make the ISLAND belong to Singapore.... By the way.... since Singapore operate the lighthouse... why not introduce a bigger LIGHT on it.. Don't put a RADAR base on IT!!!!!! It belong to Johor... Long Ago....

Bye..

kirua said...

Pulau Pisang is a great example. The difference with that island is that there is an existing agreement between the two countries for Singapore to run the lighthouse there, although the island belongs to Malaysia. Pulau Batu Putih has no such thing.

Singapore Soldier said...

Ehh Malaysians, Stop dreaming.. Pedra Branca is different from Singapore's lighthouse in Pulau Pisang.. The lighthouse in Pulau Pisang is owned by Singapore by the island belong to Malaysia whereas Pedra Branca, its lighthouse, Middle Rocks & South Ledge belong to Singapore!!

I'm ready to fight for my homeland!!

Anonymous said...

malaysia legal argument is so full of holes.... singapore teams are having their hands full just pulling out all the worms in their argument, from misquotes from letters, misinterpretations of documents, incomplete quotations from books and articles, misrepresentations of expert opinion, doctored photos and maps... this is crazy!

in fact... one of their legal expert in the malaysian team even collapsed during trial.

Be Rational said...

Hi Sophie,

The article you quoted is right one that I pointed out (which says that Singapore said that Johor disclaim ownership of the island.)

I am responding to Malaysiaboleh argument that Johor gave permission to the Brit to build the lighthouse and therefore, the land is Malaysia because this point is still be disputed and there is no evidence provided by Malaysia. So far, Malaysia did not dispute Singapore's assertions to this letter from Johor.

Singapore Soldier, Please do not turn this into a war. You does Singapore no favour with your rhetoric and Malaysians reading this blog will think less of the facts and be focused on the wrong issue e.g. they should fight for the island as well and in the end, we are breeding hostility.

Anonymous said...

Hi...

Dear Kirua:

Pulau Pisang is really a good example... It is true that due to clear agreement, Pulau Pisang is owned by Malaysia, and Pulau Batu Putih has no such agreement as pulau pisang. But let face it... for sovereignty.. I think its clear that from the start.... it belong to the Sultanate of Johore.... The British does not directly conquered it.. they just built the lighthouse... in fact... they asked to built it in 1844... from the Sultanate of Johore... that it... not much for "no man's land" arguement I think....... ...
In fact... pulau pisang agreement just appear on 1905 I think...
Bye...

Anon 8.23pm

Singapore Soldier said...

Hi Sophie,

I apologise for my remarks. It was struck by misintepretations of facts by some Malaysian readers as well as recollections of Singapore-bashing remarks in the Malaysian media & politicians currently and in the past..

Anyway, I'm a Soldier..

Sophie said...

hey singapore soldier, it's cool. dont worry about it. let's all be calm, regardless of the outcome of the trial.

after all, malaysians and singaporeans are practically one family despite the political divide.

woof woof

Anonymous said...

The first person to operate the lighthouse is most unlikely to be a Singaporean.

Singapore only becomes a nation after splitting from Malaysia.

Therefore, it is most likely that the first lighthouse operator was born in Malaya.

Sovereignty of Pedra Branca should therefore be given based on the nationality of the lighthouse operator. Who bothers about Pedra Branca then?

Anonymous said...

Singapore Tommy Koh was ignorant of history. Singapore was only a sovereign state after given independence from Malaysia. Therefore, Singapore has never exercised sovereignty on Pedra Branca before it gained independence from Malaysia.

Till today, Singapore govt has been paying allowances to Temenggong's decendents in Singapore. You call that sovereignty?

Phua Chu Lat said...

Anonymous said...
Singapore Tommy Koh was ignorant of history. Singapore was only a sovereign state after given independence from Malaysia. Therefore, Singapore has never exercised sovereignty on Pedra Branca before it gained independence from Malaysia.

Till today, Singapore govt has been paying allowances to Temenggong's decendents in Singapore. You call that sovereignty

And for Annoymous, Perhaps Malaysia can have Singapore back. Wrap the whole issue back into one bag,.. There is no such things as Spore Sovereign.. Spore is part of Malaysia.

By and large, most of the contribution are ill-inform or are not following the issues. Ultimately, these land should goes into the hand of ones who can best managed and not politicise by majority emotional excersise but by logical and technical address .

We only have one mother earth, and the human race through their greed is splitting her at the core with green house gas, over-fishing ,, destructive managements and a collosive and nepotism mangement system . I do not favour either goverment to win . Let me explain why.,

Just drive throught the 2nd link and the old causeway, and notice the charges and the rates we pay and the congestion we have to face. First impression I will find the the public of in Msia and Spore are serve not by public servants but by colluded policy of politician , We is the spirit of public servant when our poor motorcylist have to fight the morning rain to get to earn their days keeping with the authourity sitting with folded arms and just watching. ? What about the Spore - KL flights which is a reap off by the two goverment own airlines..

Well if this is in Europe or Even in Korea we will see arm-band coming in droves to get the message across.

So my vote,, give the Pedra Banca to a Trustee of united nation and companies with track record of non-poliferation and intervention.

So open you eyes,, if the politician want to bicker a rock,, they better tie the rock to themselve and swim around Pedra Banca and feed the shark, if they do not change their attitude.

Phua Chua Kang and Team Lad.

Anonymous said...

****[Quote: Phua Chu Lat

Singapore Tommy Koh was ignorant of history. Singapore was only a sovereign state after given independence from Malaysia. Therefore, Singapore has never exercised sovereignty on Pedra Branca before it gained independence from Malaysia.

By and large, most of the contribution are ill-inform or are not following the issues. ]****

Right .... and you are well informed and are following the issues.

Then perhaps you should know that when Singapore attained self-governance from the British in 1959, She inherited all titles and entitlements of the British-Singapore government.

Try reading the memorials and transcripts on the icj website if you really want to stay informed of the issues.

Anonymous said...

"Then perhaps you should know that when Singapore attained self-governance from the British in 1959, She inherited all titles and entitlements of the British-Singapore government."

What does that mean? It does mean one thing: that KTM land remains Malaysian.. amongst other things.

Anonymous said...

"So my vote,, give the Pedra Banca to a Trustee of united nation and companies with track record of non-poliferation and intervention."

There is already a trustee on this planet Earth. Descendents of Abraham's first wife are the Jews, descendents of Abraham's second wife are the Arabs, and descendents of Abraham's third wife are the Malays.

Malay kings are the descendents of Alexander the Great. Sultanate of Johor hold the original title of Pedra Branca.. no question about this!!

pb said...

I think this thread is going to end soon with the ICJ announcing its decision (next yr?)

Anyway, I dunno which legal team is stronger, I only know one is paid in S$ and the other in RM (just kidding)...

Anonymous said...

Are you jesting..

ICJ = International Corrupt Judges

Anonymous said...

lol i;m now wondering wht excuses e UMNOputras will come up with for losing pedra branca

Anonymous said...

I am afraid that Singapore will definitely lose Peda Branca.

On October 27, 1969, the Government of Malaysia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia entered into an Agreement dividing the continental shelf between the two countries. Ratifications were exchanged on November 7, 1969.

The agreement included Pedra Branca and middle rocks as territory of Malaysia. Singapore never protest.

Also included Pedra Branca and middle rocks as territory of Malaysia in 1970 Indonesia/Malaysia Teritorial sea agreement and 1973 Singapore/Indonesia Agreement.

From these agreements, Indonesia never thought that another country other than Malaysia has sovereignty over Pedra Branca and the middle rocks.

These are legal documents. Singapore MFA team never really studied the documents and gave away sovereignty of Pedra Branca and middle rocks to Malaysia.

one said...

Pulau batu puteh is once a malayan and will always be a malaysians..Singapore was a steward and will always b a steward..They can take d ligthouse but nt d island...

Neutral said...

If so, then why is it that Malaysian maps prior to 1979 showed that Pedra Branca belonged to Singapore ? Unilaterally re-drawing a map surely cannot be taken as a legitimate means of asserting sovereignty. Pls explain, if it has always been Malaysian property, why does Pedra Branca appear as Singaporean property in Malaysian printed maps prior to 1979 ? Typo, is it ?

Mr HeartBroken said...

hey......but Singapore had taking care this island since independent and the British put singapore in control of Pedra Branca

one said...

Well both of u might b rite..but hey at that time msia just being pity 2 singapore n who knows maybe spore will come back 2 msia one day..so msia dont want 2 act 2 over d limit which can harm d relationship btween msia n spore..But then both country had developed so its time 2 change some policy..chill out

Mr HeartBroken said...

so?m'sia afraid that sg will take over m'sia it only make the line closer to u this is same as christmas island british put sg in control of it and sg sell it to aus

Ei Myat said...

i dont understand why both countries are fighting for the lighthouse on tiny island(actually should be called rock).I am neither Singaporean nor Malaysian so i wont side with anyone but but i have a feeling Singapore will win.if malaysia considered it to be part of their territory,then they should had claimed it long long ago why now? i dont get it why malaysia is now protesting which they should had done earlier. Anyway Singapore

Kofi Annan said...

The International Court of Justice has to date, placed a lot of value in what they call "persistent objectors". In other words if a state objects to another state physically occupying a particular territory, it has to from day one, raise its arms and cry foul. You may think this is fair, or you may not, but this has featured heavily in previous cases before the ICJ.

When Singapore got independence from what Malaysia then as we knew it, KL had 40 years to object,and take Singapore to court.Call it Malaysian(in)efficiency or what you will, but 30 years acquiescence is quite a lengthy period of time to raise an objection.

Arguments of distance meanwhile carry as much weight as arguments for fairness, in allowing the country with extremely little land to have a bit more. In other words, zip.

On another note, Singapore'll win cos we always win anyway. Unless this were a battle for a badminton court that is...

Kofi Annan said...

Here's some interesting trivia.

The person representing Malaysia at trial was Sir Elihu Lauterpacht, whose father, Sir Hersch, was a Jewish international lawyer, and heavily involved with the founding of Israel.
Malaysia meanwhile does not even recognise the state of Israel!

Yet when faced with a legal battle, and suffering a brain drain due to years of stifling meritocracy thanks to a racist bumiputra policy, Malaysia now get on their knees and turn to a Zionist professor's son to win them land.... Malaysia Bodeh!

Mr HeartBroken said...

malaysia is trying alot of ways to win la

one said...

Well i think that is just too much but i still think that the msian does not really need 2 claim it earlier as knowing the fact that it as already apart of msian and the singapore is only a steward there..i dont know who will win but i hope it would b malaysia..an irresponsible statement will not b comment as it depend solely on emotional thinking..May god bless all of us..

Anonymous said...

Arguments aside, I think the ICJ should consider the precedent it might set by ruling in favor of Singapore.

http://forumforforeignaffairs.blogspot.com/2008/02/icj-case-malaysia-singapore-dispute.html

badrul said...

hi there,
I'm from Brunai


2 Singapore soldier,
don't make this vvvvlittle problem
become a war kk?

2 ei myat,
becoming quiet not meant that agree. in my opinions mlysia
is a good good country. they give permissin but what singaporean do is very very over. after have permission 2 build lighthouse now they want batu putih?

Lastly, in my opinion, ITS MALAYSIA TERRITORY.

X said...

attention 2 all ASEAN COUNTRY!!

THIS IS A NEW WAY OF SINGAPOREAN "EXTENTIONAL COUNTRY"
THEY DO THIS IN SILENCE..


AND MALAYSIA THE FIRST VICTIMS.

Anonymous said...

i just hope singapore would become a better neighbour, rather than showing off and being so defensive, like Malaysia want to bombard their tiny island..congratz for the winning of the white stone island.

Anonymous said...

And definitely for M'sia to be less offensive ....

Ben said...

Yo Rockers!

M'sia got Middle Rock. S'pore got White Rock. I suggest both parties build a Hard Rock Kopi Tiam on the third island laaaa... Peace and keep Rocking dudes!

Saloma Ishak said...

hi there,

im from isreal. you people do not have anything better to do? Childishly quarelling over a few rocks!

Saloma Ishak

Malaysian Lethal MAHAGURU said...

ICJ verdict is out. The judges are biased. Pedra Branca has military potential. Setting up lighthouse does not constitute ownership. And setting up military installation an act of invasion. Its far from over. No way..... Get off Pedra Branca !!!

Shafee Ramli aka Chief said...

what the hell, singaporeans owns big chunk of Johore now!!!

Anonymous said...

What many posters here did not realise is that Singapore DID REQUEST MALAYSIA TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE AS NEIGHBOURS. OVER THE YEARS.

But since Malaysia refused to, insisting on **HISTORICAL** facts and claims and blah blah, Singapore had no choice but to go to the World Court to settle the case.

Read what the local papers did not report: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/05/23/europe/EU-GEN-World-Court-Singapore-Malaysia.php

"But its final decision, by a 12-4 majority, rested largely on Singapore's consistent conduct over the last 100 years.

It took charge of investigating accidents in the surrounding waters, installed naval communications equipment in 1977 and published a series of six maps from 1962 to 1975 that showed Pulau Batu as Singaporean territory. Malaysia did not protest the maps."

See the words "TOOK CHARGE OF INVESTIGATING ACCIDENTS IN THE SURROUNDING WATERS?"

And where the hell were the Malaysian Police/Navy then? Did they ever once co-operate with Singapore in investigating accidents??

Don't keep banging on about history blah blah since the time of the Johor Sultanate blah blah. C'mon lah, the Johor Sultans back then only know how to collect money and concubines. Until two descendant heirs must fight over the throne. And that's how they lost Singapore to the cunning British.

And to so-called Israeli Saloma Ishak -- you don't even know a f*ck about Singapore/Malaysia History, I suggest you keep that shithole trap of yours shut.

With a name like **Ishak**, I doubt you are even Israeli. Muslim Arabs don't go around with a name like Ishak. Want to bluff oso don't know how to bluff.

Anonymous said...

chanced upon a particular website and i was shocked to read this very rude comment made by a particular malaysian :

"KALAU TAK DAPAT PULAU BATU PUTIH....KITA MESTI LANCARKAN GERAKAN GANYANG SINGAPORE!!!!ATAU KITA SABOTAJ LETUPKAN ITU PULAU KASI TENGGELAM....ANDAIKATA KITA DAPAT ITU PULAU..KITA MESTI PIJAK BENDERA SINGAPORE DAN CABAR MEREKA....HAHAHAHAHA "

this just shows the lack of intelligence some malaysians are.

come on, you don't have to actually post such comments, do you?
or is it true that malaysians are really a bunch of inspiteful people?

Whatver. said...

Well. Not all malaysians are like that and so are singaporeans.

Just let the time will tell.

Maybe in the future nobody really care about that small rock.

People just creating reason to fight cause basicly they just human who are very bored.

Anonymous said...

I give birth to interpret a insufficient of the articles on your website now, and I extremely like your style of blogging. I added it to my favorites web age list and last will and testament be checking stand behind soon. Divert check out of order my orientation as ok and fail me conscious what you think. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Great website, looks very clean and organized. Keep up the good work! antibacterial Read a useful article about tramadol tramadol

sports handicapping software said...

in my opinion is a very good site I like the topics are covered congratulations

Anonymous said...

said a lot of people settle their fiscal loans in time as well as free of bank charges
A number one unsecured debt nonprofit desires the volume of men and women looking toward all of them meant for support finished cash advance bills in order to increase this specific. debt charitable organization affirms near buy that short-run, high attention financial loans the year 2010. The actual charitable trust claims 36 months previously the sheer number of consumers using them seemed to be minor.
pożyczka na dowód
pożyczka gotówkowa us
szybka pożyczka
kredyty bez bik bez formalności
pożyczki bez bik wałbrzych

http://kredyty-bez-bik.org.pl
http://pozyczkanadowod24.org.pl
http://kredyty-bez-bik.org.pl

Anonymous said...

The Ten MostInsane nike shoes Secrets... And The Way To Use them !|Compact study tells you the details on adidas shoes in addition to what you ought to do right away.}[url=http://www.nikejapan.asia/]ナイキ air [/url] Discover who is writing about adidas shoes and the key reasons why you ought to fear. [url=http://www.adidasjapan.biz/]アディダス スニーカー[/url] Update- adidas shoes Can Have Substantial role In Any Management The Astonishing Clandestine Of Methods One Can Crush gucci Without Past experiences! [url=http://www.guccijp.asia/]gucci 財布[/url] Advanced chloe Publication Clearly shows The Right Way To Rule The chloe bags World [url=http://www.chloejp.biz/]chloe 財布[/url] The Spectacular chanel Cheat That Are Able To Fool Virtually all [url=http://www.chaneljp.biz/]シャネル バッグ[/url] Precisely how to comprehend pretty much everything there is to find concerning chanel in six basic steps.How come all people are absolute wrong around adidas shoes and as a consequence reasons why you should certainly look at this guide. [url=http://www.adidasjapan.asia/]アディダス スニーカー[/url] A superb double twist on adidas shoes [url=http://www.nikejp.biz/]nike ランニング[/url] The Only Easy Methods To Develop nike shoes And How One Could Become a member of The nike shoes Top dogs

Anonymous said...

They must have been forced to face several uncomfortable issues as
far as the use of their i - Phone is concerned.

The rival has been bundled with replaceable Li-ion
battery of 1500 m - Ah with the music playback time about 60 hours
and also video playback time about 8 hours. Like the Apple i - Pad Keyboard
Dock listed above, the Logitech Android Keyboard has
many tablet-friendly features.

My weblog :: samsung galaxy tab 2

Anonymous said...

Look at the user remarks in places like Amazon and B&H photo.
National Space News Examiner - National Photography Examiner - Cleveland Astronomy Examiner.
This comes in specially handy when driving a car and
you have a i - Pod Touch stand with you so you can easily slip
your phone into that and not worry about it getting
damaged in any manner.

Also visit my web site: 5d mark iii

Anonymous said...

mod files to acceptable videos by most media player including i - Phone, i - Pod, Apple TV, PSP, Zune, Blackberry, Creative Zen, etc with no
quality loss. Click the "Start" button to convert 3GP to Apple
TV on Mac. The phone is allied with the some advanced
sensors such as three-axis gyro, accelerometer, proximity
sensor and ambient light sensor.

Look at my blog; new apple tv

chenlina said...

chenlina20160608
cheap toms
coach factory outlet
oakley sunglasses cheap
michael kors outlet
kd 8 shoes
michael kors outlet online
louis vuitton handbags
hollister kids
coach outlet store online
kobe 9
north face outlet
nike uk
supra shoes
celine handbags
replica watches
michael kors outlet online
michael kors outlet
air huarache
mont blanc pens
abercrombie outlet
oakley sunglasses
louis vuitton outlet
cheap ray ban sunglasses
abercrombie and fitch new york
coach factory outlet
coach outlet store online clearances
ray ban sunglasses outlet
adidas originals store
louis vuitton handbags
true religion
louis vuitton outlet
ralph lauren uk
lebron 11
ray bans
gucci outlet
louis vuitton outlet stores
hollister uk
air force 1
supra sneakers
louboutin pas cher
as

Cindy Dy said...

So happy to be given a privilege to post a comment here. You have a wonderful site. Thank you for the effort to publish this.

www.gofastek.com