Monday, 10 August 2026

ABEM ABDUL SAMAD BIN SULAIMAN - WIRA TLDM



Sumber: Lovers of the World Military & Defence

“Harimau mati meninggalkan belang, manusia mati meninggalkan nama.”
Ada nama yang tercatat dalam buku sejarah.
Ada nama yang terukir pada batu peringatan.
Dan ada pula nama yang mungkin tidak begitu dikenali oleh generasi hari ini, tetapi di sebalik nama itu tersimpan sebuah pengorbanan yang tidak ternilai kepada negara.
Salah seorang daripada mereka ialah Able Electrical Mechanic (ABEM) Abdul Samad bin Sulaiman, anggota Tentera Laut Diraja Malaysia (TLDM) yang berkhidmat di atas kapal KD Sri Selangor ketika negara berdepan ancaman Konfrontasi Indonesia-Malaysia.
Pada malam 24 Julai 1964, ketika KD Sri Selangor sedang menjalankan rondaan di perairan Selat Singapura berhampiran Pulau St. John, sebuah insiden berdarah berlaku.
Malam yang pada awalnya merupakan satu lagi tugasan rondaan bertukar menjadi detik terakhir dalam kehidupan seorang anak bangsa.Dan pada malam itu juga, Abdul Samad gugur ketika menjalankan tugas.

ERA KONFRONTASI YANG PENUH KETEGANGAN
Untuk memahami pengorbanan Abdul Samad, kita perlu melihat kembali suasana Malaysia pada awal 1960-an.
Pembentukan Malaysia pada 16 September 1963 mendapat tentangan daripada Indonesia di bawah dasar Konfrontasi. Ketegangan antara kedua-dua negara bukan sekadar berlaku melalui kenyataan politik dan diplomasi, tetapi turut melibatkan penyusupan, pendaratan dan operasi ketenteraan.
Dalam keadaan tersebut, TLDM mempunyai tanggungjawab besar untuk mengawasi perairan negara.Kapal-kapal TLDM menjalankan rondaan bagi mengesan pergerakan mencurigakan dan menghalang kemasukan pihak yang cuba menyusup ke wilayah Malaysia.
Antara kapal yang memainkan peranan tersebut ialah KD Sri Selangor, sebuah kapal ronda kelas Kedah yang ketika itu masih merupakan sebahagian daripada armada muda TLDM. Rekod TLDM menyatakan KD Sri Selangor ditauliahkan pada era awal 1960-an dan digunakan dalam operasi ketika Konfrontasi.Bagi anak kapal seperti Abdul Samad, rondaan bukan sekadar tugas biasa.Setiap pelayaran membawa kemungkinan berdepan dengan ancaman sebenar.

MALAM 24 JULAI 1964
Pada malam 24 Julai 1964, KD Sri Selangor sedang melakukan rondaan di perairan Selat Singapura, kira-kira lima batu nautika dari Pulau St. John.
Menurut rekod rasmi TLDM, pada sekitar 9.30 malam, kapal tersebut mengesan sebuah bot yang mencurigakan dan menghampiri kapal dalam jarak kira-kira 15 ela.
Bot tersebut membawa lima anggota Kor Komando Operasi Indonesia atau KKO dan dilaporkan bersenjata.
Pegawai Memerintah KD Sri Selangor ketika itu ialah Leftenan P.K. Nettur TLDM. Beliau mengarahkan anggota kapal supaya bersiap sedia dan meminta bot berkenaan menyerah diri. Namun arahan tersebut tidak dipatuhi. Sebaliknya, keadaan bertukar menjadi tegang apabila anggota di dalam bot mula melepaskan tembakan ke arah kapal.

ABDUL SAMAD MELAKUKAN TUGAS TERAKHIRNYA
Dalam keadaan yang penuh kekeliruan dan bahaya, Abdul Samad menjalankan salah satu tugas penting di atas kapal. Beliau menggunakan lampu suluh untuk menyuluh ke arah bot tersebut bagi membantu mengenal pasti ancaman.
Tindakan itu bagaimanapun menjadikan kedudukannya mudah dilihat. Tembakan daripada bot tersebut mengenai Abdul Samad. Beliau mengalami kecederaan yang membawa kepada kematiannya.
Dua lagi anggota KD Sri Selangor turut cedera, iaitu Pegawai Kadet Kanan Musa bin Jabar dan Laskar Kanan Kweh Onn Cheong. Pegawai Memerintah kemudiannya mengarahkan kapal membalas serangan.
Kelima-lima anggota KKO terbunuh dalam pertempuran tersebut dan bot mereka tenggelam. Tetapi bagi kru KD Sri Selangor, kemenangan taktikal itu datang dengan harga yang amat mahal. Seorang daripada mereka telah gugur. Namanya ialah Abdul Samad bin Sulaiman.

SEORANG ANGGOTA BIASA, SEBUAH PENGORBANAN LUAR BIASA
Dalam sejarah ketenteraan, perhatian sering diberikan kepada panglima, komander dan tokoh politik.
Namun, operasi sebenar dilaksanakan oleh anggota yang berada di lapisan hadapan.
Mereka yang mengendalikan kapal.
Mereka yang memerhatikan radar.
Mereka yang berdiri di pos masing-masing.
Mereka yang bersiap ketika ancaman dikesan.
Dan mereka yang mungkin menjadi orang pertama menerima tembakan.
Abdul Samad adalah salah seorang daripada mereka. Beliau bukan sekadar nama dalam laporan operasi.
Beliau ialah seorang manusia yang mempunyai keluarga, saudara-mara, kehidupan dan masa depan.Namun pada malam tersebut, tugas kepada negara menjadi lebih besar daripada keselamatan dirinya sendiri.

KELUARGA YANG DITINGGALKAN
Di sebalik setiap anggota tentera yang gugur, ada sebuah keluarga yang turut menanggung kehilangan. Kematian seorang anggota tidak pernah berakhir apabila upacara pengebumian selesai.
Bagi keluarga, kesedihan itu berterusan selama bertahun-tahun. Dalam kes Abdul Samad, kisah keluarga beliau masih disimpan oleh saudara-mara yang pernah mengenalinya.
Menurut cerita keluarga yang diwariskan, wajah Abdul Samad ketika disemadikan kelihatan tenang. Sebuah kenangan yang sangat sederhana, tetapi sangat bermakna.
Enam dekad kemudian, kenangan itu masih hidup. Itulah sebabnya sejarah seorang anggota tentera tidak sepatutnya hanya dilihat melalui tarikh dan angka.
Di sebalik tarikh 24 Julai 1964, ada sebuah keluarga. Di sebalik nama Abdul Samad bin Sulaiman, ada seorang anak, seorang abang dan seorang insan yang pernah mempunyai impian seperti manusia lain.

NAMANYA TERUS HIDUP DALAM TLDM
Pengorbanan Abdul Samad tidak dilupakan sepenuhnya oleh TLDM.
Namanya kemudiannya diabadikan pada Lapangsasar Abdul Samad di Pangkalan TLDM Lumut.
Ini menjadi satu bentuk penghormatan terhadap seorang anggota yang gugur ketika berkhidmat kepada negara. Rekod sejarah yang diterbitkan mengenai TLDM turut mengaitkan nama lapangsasar tersebut dengan ABEM Abdul Samad bin Sulaiman dan peristiwa KD Sri Selangor pada 24 Julai 1964.
Bagi sesebuah organisasi ketenteraan, pemberian nama kepada kemudahan bukan sekadar simbol. Ia adalah cara untuk memastikan generasi baharu mengenali nama mereka yang pernah berkorban. Setiap kali nama itu disebut, sejarahnya berpeluang untuk diceritakan semula.

PERSOALAN TENTANG TARIKH KEMATIAN
Satu perkara yang wajar diberi perhatian ialah terdapat percanggahan dalam beberapa sumber sekunder mengenai tarikh kematian Abdul Samad.
Ada catatan keluarga atau bahan tidak rasmi yang menggunakan 25 Julai 1964.
Namun, sumber rasmi TLDM dengan jelas merekodkan kejadian pertempuran tersebut pada 24 Julai 1964, termasuk dalam bahan Pusat Sejarah dan Dokumentasi TLDM serta majalah rasmi Samudera.
Oleh itu, bagi penulisan sejarah yang bertanggungjawab, tarikh 24 Julai 1964 wajar digunakan sebagai tarikh peristiwa berdasarkan rekod rasmi TLDM.
Jika terdapat batu nisan atau dokumen keluarga yang menunjukkan tarikh 25 Julai, perkara tersebut sewajarnya dikaji semula melalui rekod asal seperti laporan operasi, rekod kematian, dokumen perkhidmatan dan rekod pengebumian.
Ini bukan perkara kecil.Kerana bagi keluarga seorang wira, satu hari dalam sejarah tetap mempunyai makna yang besar.

PENGIKTIRAFAN TERHADAP PENGORBANAN
Kisah Abdul Samad juga menimbulkan persoalan lebih besar tentang bagaimana negara mengenang anggota yang gugur dalam perkhidmatan.
Dalam bahan yang dikongsikan oleh keluarga dan pengkaji sejarah, terdapat persoalan mengenai bentuk pengiktirafan dan anugerah yang diterima selepas peristiwa tersebut.
Perkara seperti ini wajar diteliti berdasarkan dokumen rasmi.Jika terdapat bukti bahawa Abdul Samad layak dipertimbangkan untuk sesuatu bentuk pengiktirafan anumerta, maka sewajarnya perkara tersebut dikaji oleh pihak berkuasa berkaitan.
Namun, pengiktirafan tidak semestinya hanya berbentuk pingat. Kadang-kadang pengiktirafan yang paling bermakna ialah apabila nama seorang wira dicatat dengan betul,sejarahnya didokumentasikan, keluarganya disantuni dan generasi baharu mengetahui pengorbanannya.

ABDUL SAMAD DAN SEJARAH MALAYSIA
Abdul Samad gugur pada tahun-tahun awal Malaysia. Negara ketika itu masih muda. Institusi pertahanan masih berkembang. Ancaman keselamatan pula datang dari pelbagai arah.
Dalam keadaan seperti itu, anggota TLDM berada di barisan hadapan untuk memastikan perairan negara tidak mudah ditembusi.
Pengorbanan Abdul Samad berlaku sebelum banyak generasi rakyat Malaysia hari ini dilahirkan.
Namun keamanan yang dinikmati generasi hari ini tidak muncul dengan sendirinya. Ia dibina oleh generasi terdahulu. 
Ada yang bertugas di hutan.
Ada yang berkawal di sempadan. Ada yang melakukan rondaan di laut.
Dan ada yang tidak pernah kembali kepada keluarga.
Abdul Samad adalah salah seorang daripada mereka.

WIRA BATU PAHAT DAN ANAK BANGSA JOHOR
Jika benar seperti yang diwariskan oleh keluarga bahawa Abdul Samad berasal dari Batu Pahat, maka kisah beliau juga merupakan sebahagian daripada sejarah masyarakat Johor.
Johor mempunyai kedudukan strategik yang sangat penting dalam era Konfrontasi kerana kedudukannya berhampiran Selat Melaka, Selat Singapura dan wilayah Indonesia.
Ramai anggota keselamatan dari Johor dan seluruh Malaysia terlibat dalam mempertahankan negara sepanjang tempoh tersebut.
Abdul Samad menjadi sebahagian daripada generasi itu.
Beliau mungkin tidak pernah membayangkan bahawa lebih enam dekad selepas kematiannya, namanya masih akan disebut.
Namun itulah makna sebenar sebuah pengorbanan. Kita tidak semestinya mengenali wajah mereka. Tetapi kita menikmati keamanan yang mereka bantu pertahankan.

JANGAN BIARKAN SEJARAH HANYA TINGGAL PADA BATU NISAN
Pada akhirnya, persoalan paling penting bukanlah berapa ramai orang mengenali nama Abdul Samad hari ini.

Persoalannya ialah:
Adakah kita sanggup memastikan generasi selepas kita masih mengenalinya?
Sebuah negara yang menghargai sejarah tidak hanya mengingati tokoh besar.
Ia turut mengingati anggota biasa yang melakukan tugas luar biasa. Abdul Samad mungkin hanya seorang anggota di atas sebuah kapal ronda. Tetapi pada malam 24 Julai 1964, beliau berada di tempat yang diperlukan oleh negara. Beliau menjalankan tugas. Beliau berada di barisan hadapan. Dan beliau membayar harga paling mahal untuk tugas tersebut. Nyawanya.

SELAMAT JALAN, WIRA
Lebih enam dekad telah berlalu sejak malam berdarah di perairan Pulau St. John.
Generasi telah berganti.
Kapal KD Sri Selangor sudah lama tidak lagi belayar.
Namun nama Abdul Samad masih hidup dalam sejarah TLDM.
Namanya diabadikan pada sebuah lapangsasar.
Namanya tercatat dalam sejarah Konfrontasi.
Dan kisahnya masih disimpan oleh keluarga.
Kini menjadi tanggungjawab generasi hari ini untuk memastikan kisah tersebut tidak hilang.
Abdul Samad bin Sulaiman bukan sekadar nama di batu nisan.
Beliau adalah sebahagian daripada generasi yang mempertahankan Malaysia ketika negara masih muda.
Beliau adalah seorang anggota TLDM yang gugur ketika menjalankan tugas.
Beliau adalah anak kepada sebuah keluarga.
Beliau adalah saudara kepada mereka yang masih mengingatinya.
Dan beliau adalah salah seorang daripada wira yang membayar harga keamanan yang kita nikmati hari ini.
Semoga Allah SWT mencucuri rahmat ke atas roh Allahyarham.
Semoga segala pengorbanannya diterima sebagai amal kebajikan.
Semoga keluarganya terus diberikan kekuatan.
Dan semoga nama beliau terus disebut dengan penuh penghormatan.
M964 ABEM ABDUL SAMAD BIN SULAIMAN
Gugur ketika bertugas.
Tidak dilupakan oleh sejarah.
Tidak seharusnya dilupakan oleh bangsa.

Al-Fatihah.
“Harimau mati meninggalkan belang, manusia mati meninggalkan nama.”
Untuk wira-wira yang gugur demi negara, kita mungkin tidak mampu membalas pengorbanan mereka tetapi kita mampu memastikan nama mereka tidak dilupakan.
Sumber utama yang saya gunakan: Pusat Sejarah dan Dokumentasi TLDM serta laman rasmi TLDM. Rekod rasmi TLDM mengesahkan pertempuran KD Sri Selangor pada 24 Julai 1964, lokasi berhampiran Pulau St. John, peranan Abdul Samad, serta dua anggota lain yang cedera
Rekod Samudera TLDM turut memberikan keterangan tambahan mengenai operasi dan peristiwa tersebut.
Lovers Of the World Military & Defence
@everyone
Credit Azlan Sharif
Anissa Nissa
Azlan Sharif

c&p
10 Ogos 2026: 11.27 a.m

PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT

U.S.S. Eldridge

The Philadelphia Experiment is a famous military urban legend and hoax claiming that the U.S. Navy successfully made a destroyer escort, the USS Eldridge, invisible and accidentally teleported it through time and space in 1943. In reality, no such experiment ever occurred. Naval historians and scientists have thoroughly debunked the myth, attributing its origins to science fiction fabrications and a misunderstanding of real World War II naval technology. 

The Legend
According to the popular conspiracy theory, the secret test took place on October 28, 1943, at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard. 
  • The Goal: The Navy allegedly used Albert Einstein’s Unified Field Theory to bend light and radar waves around the ship using massive electromagnetic generators. 
  • The Teleportation: Witnesses claimed the ship was enveloped in a strange greenish fog before completely vanishing from its dock. It reportedly teleported over 200 miles away to Norfolk, Virginia, before rematerializing back in Philadelphia minutes later. 
  • The Horrific Aftermath: The story goes that the crew suffered gruesome side effects. Some sailors allegedly went insane or caught mysterious illnesses, while others supposedly dematerialized entirely or rematerialized with their bodies fused permanently into the metal structures of the ship's hull. 
How the Myth Started
The entire story is tracked back to a single man named Carl M. Allen (who wrote under the pseudonym Carlos Miguel Allende). 
In 1955, Allen sent letters and an annotated book to UFO researcher Morris K. Jessup. Allen claimed to have witnessed the USS Eldridge vanish while he was serving aboard a nearby merchant marine vessel, the SS Andrew Furuseth. 
Jessup popularized these letters, cementing the tale into modern folklore. Decades later, the legend inspired a famous 1984 sci-fi film titled The Philadelphia Experiment. 

The Real World Explanation
The U.S. Navy's Office of Naval Research (ONR) and naval archives have confirmed that the USS Eldridge was never even in Philadelphia on that date; its official logs place it in New York and the Bahamas during the fall of 1943. Historians point to two completely ordinary wartime practices that Allen likely misunderstood or sensationalized: 
  • Degaussing: The military wrapped ships in electrical cables to neutralize their magnetic fields. This made them "invisible" to magnetic underwater mines, not to the naked eye.
  • High-Frequency Generators: Nearby test ships like the USS Timmerman used advanced generators that occasionally produced corona discharges—visual arcs of greenish-blue electrical light known as St. Elmo's Fire. 
Reference :

10 August 2026: 10.40 a.m

Saturday, 8 August 2026

CHINESE DYNASTIES TIMELINE: A JOURNEY THROUGH IMPERIAL CHINA


NEOLITHIC PERIOD:
  • Approximately 8000-2100 BCE
  • Yangshao Culture (5000-3000 BCE) : Yellow rivers, famous for vibrant, geometrically painted earthenware and complex agriculture villages.
  • Hongshan Culture (4700-2200 BCE) : located in northeastern China, renowned for sophisticated, early ritual jade carvings including the famous 'pig dragon'. 
  • Liangzhu Culture (3400-2250 BCE): Based in the Yangtze River Delta, mastered complex water management system and mass-produced highly advanced, geometric ritual jades. 
  • Longshan Culture (3000-2000 BCE): a late Neolithic society spanning the Yellow River. They featured rammed-earth defensive walls, early metal use and eggshell-thin black pottery. 
XIA DYNASTY:
  • Approximately 2100-1600 BCE
  • Regarded as the first dynasty in Chinese history, serving the foundation of Chinese civilisation. 
  • Established by the legendary leader Yu The Great
  • Credited for inventing the first Chinese Calendar.
SHANG DYNASTY:
  • 1600 - 1046 BCE - also known as Yin Dynasty
  • The first Chinese Dynasty supported by both written and archaeological evidence. 
  • Founded by King Tang, who overthrew the tyrannical final ruler of the semi-mythical Xia Dynasty at the Battle of Mingtiao. 
  • Famous for its mastery of bronze casting, complex religious rituals and the creation of China's earliest writing system. 
ZHOU DYNASTY:
  • Approximately 1046-256 BCE
  • The longest span of any dynasty in Chinese history. 
  • Western Zhou (1046-771 BCE) : centered in the Wei River valley with its capital at Haojing (modern day Xi'an).
  • Eastern Zhou (770-256 BCE): the power of Zhou kings became increasinly nominal and ceremonial. 
  • The Golden Age of Chinese Philosophy - Confucianism, Daoism and Legalism. 
QIN DYNASTY:
  • 221-206 BCE - the first imperial dynasty of China
  • First Emperor of China, Qin Shi Huang.
  • Terracota Amy and the Great Wall of China
  • The Lingqu Canal - Engineered one of the world's oldest contour canals, connecting the Xiang and Liang Rivers to transport military supplies to southern regions. 
HAN DYNASTY
  • 206 BCE -220 CE - The Golden Age of the Ancient China.
  • Establishing a lasting cultural identity so profound that China's majority ethnic group still calls themselves the "Han People" today. 
  • First Emperor - Sin Shi Huang
  • Western Han (202 BC - 9 AD): founded by rebel leader Liu Bang (Emperor Gaozu), who stabilised the empire by lowering taxes and adopting a less harsh legal code than the Qin. 
  • The Xin Interregnum (9 - 23 AD): a court official named Wang Mang seized the throne and attempted radical socialist reforms, but was overthrown by a massive peasant revolt. 
  • Eastern Han (25 - 220 AD): the dynasty was restored by the Liu Family, moving the capital east to Luoyang. 
  • Invention of paper and the opening of the Silk Road.
THREE KINGDOMS & SIX DYNASTIES
The Three Kingdom (220-280 CE) and the Six Dynasties (220-589 CE) refer to overlapping, chaotic periods of fragmentation in Chinese history. 
  • The Three Kingdom: three major competing states:
    • Cao Wei : (220-266 CE) - controlled the northern China and was military the most powerful. 
    • Shu Han (221-263 CE) - occupied the southwest (Sichuan region) and claimed legitimate Imperial lineage. 
    • Eastern Wu (222-280 CE) - dominated the southeast along the Yangtze River. 
  • The Six Dynasties
    1. East Wu (222-280 CE) - from the Three Kingdoms era
    2. Eastern Jin Dynasty (317-420 CE)
    3. Liu Song Dynasty  (420-479 CE)
    4. Southern Qi Dynasty (479-502 CE)
    5. Liang Dynasty (502-557 CE)
    6. Chen Dynasty (557-589 CE)
SUI DYNASTY
  • 581-618 CE - A pivotal imperial dynasty that reunified China after four centuries of political fragmentation following the fall of the Han Dynasty.
  • Founded by Emperor Wen (Yang Jian)
  • Unification and built The Grand Canal
TANG DYNASTY
  • 618-907 CE - regarded as a Golden Age of Chinese civilisation. 
  • Founded by the Li Family (Emperor Gaozu). 
  • High culture, prosperity.
  • Famous Figure : Empress Wu Zetian the only official female emperor in Chinese history. 
  • The empire enjoyed a remarkably strong and friendly relationship with Islam. In 651 CE, Caliph Uthman bin Affan sent an official Muslim embassy led by Sa'ad bin Abi Waqqas (the Prophet Muhammad companion). 
  • The construction of the Huaisheng Mosque the first mosque built in China at Guangzhou.  
FIVE DYNASTY & TEN KINGDOMS:
  • 907 - 960 CE - An era of political upheaval and division in Imperial China. 
  • The Five Dynasty (The North)
    • Later Liang (907-923) - founded by General Zhu Wen
    • Later Tang (923-937) - established by the Shatuo Turks under Li Cunxu
    • Later Jin (936-947) - founded by Shi Jingtang
    • Later Han (947-951) - another short lived Shatuo Turk state centered in Kaifeng.
    • Later Zhou (951-960) - the final nothern dynasty. 
  • The Ten Kingdoms (The South & West)
    • Lower Yangtze Delta : Wu (902-937), Southern Tang (937-975) & Wuyue (907-978)
    • Sichuan Basin : Former Shu (907-925) and Later Shu (934-965)
    • Southern Coastal & Inland : Min (909-945), Chu (927-951) & Southern Han (917-971)
    • Central& Northern Outliers : Jingnan (924-963) and Northern Han (951-979), the only kingdom located in the north. 
SONG DYNASTY:
  • 960-1279 CE - founded by Emperor Taizu (Zhao Kuangyin) it brought an end to the chaotic Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdom period. 
  • Northern Song (960-1127) and Southern Song (1127-1279).
  • Innovation (gunpowder, printing and compass)
YUAN DYNASTY:
  • 1271 - 1368 CE - China's first conquest dynasty
  • Establishe by the Mongol leader, Kublai Khan, grandson of Genghis Khan
  • Marked the first time in history that nomadic steppe rulers governed the entirely of Chia. 
  • Silk Road and Maritime Trade - travelers like Marco Polo and Morocon scholar Ibn Battuta visited China during this era. 
MING DYNASTY:
  • 1368-1644 CE - establishing a 276-year period of native Han Chinese rule. It emerged after the peasant-led Red Turban Rebellion overthrew the Mongol-led Yuan Dynasty. 
  • Founded by Zhu Yuanzhang (Emperor Hongwu), setup the first capital in Nanjing. 
  • Emperor Yongle (Zhu Di) seized power in 1402, transferred the capital city to Beijing, authorised the building of the Forbidden City. 
  • Zheng He's voyages - Admiral Zheng He commanded 7 Naval Expedition across Indian Ocean to project power and secure overseas trade tribute. 
  • Rebuild and reinforced the Great Wall of China
QING DYNASTY:
  • 1644-1912 CE - the final Imperial Dynasty in China history
  • Founded by the ethnic Manchu clans from Northeast Asia (Manchuria). 
  • Mass Rebellion > White Lotus Rebellion, Taiping Rebellion and Boxer Rebellion
  • The last Emperor, Puyi, the only 6-year-old child emperor, abdicated the throne on 12 February 1912, ending over 2,000 years of Chinese Imperial rule. 

Hj Zulheimy Maamor
8 August 2026: 10.18 p.m

Friday, 7 August 2026

TYPES OF MALAYSIAN DURIANS


Malaysia has over 200 registered durian varieties, each assigned a unique "D" number by the Department of Agriculture. The most popular types range from premium, intensely bittersweet cultivars to sweet, beginner-friendly options. 
The durian season starts in early April and continues until August-September. The famous Musang King is reportedly most ripe in late June. 

The primary durian varieties in Malaysia are categorized below by their unique flavor profiles and characteristics. 
  1. Musang King (D197 / Mao Shan Wang): The undisputed "King" of Malaysian durians. It has a deep, golden-yellow flesh with a thick, custardy, and buttery texture. Its flavor profile is perfectly balanced between sweet and intensely bittersweet. You can identify it by the distinct star-shaped pattern at the base of the husk. Other names :Butter Durian, Cat Mountain King, Rajah Kunyit and Mao Shan Wang). Origins of Kelantan, Pahang and Johor. 
  2. Black Thorn (D200 / Ochee / Duri Hitam): A highly sought-after, premium variety that rivals Musang King in price. It features a bright, reddish-orange, velvety flesh. It is prized for its intensely sweet, creamy, and complex flavor with a fine, low-fiber texture. 
  3. Black Pearl: Other names : Hei Zhen Zhu, Origins of Johor. Very pale yellow with grey undertones. 
  4. Hor Lor : Penang's most famous heritage durians, highly sought after the peak season. Complex sweet-bitter with slight alcoholic notes. 
  5. XO: A unique variety known for its incredibly soft, pale-yellow flesh. Because the fruit undergoes an extended natural fermentation inside the shell, it carries a sharp, bitter, and distinctly alcoholic or cognac-like aftertaste. Origins of Johor, Genting Highlands and Cameron Highlands. 
  6. Golden Phoenix (D198 / Jin Feng): A favorite among hardcore durian aficionados who dislike heavy sweetness. It features small, pale white-yellow flesh that is slightly watery and pungent, delivering a sharp, direct punch of pure bitterness. Origins of Pahang and Johor. 
  7. D1: Origins of Johor -  has smaller seeds compared to the others. 
  8. D24 (Sultan): The historic royal standard of Malaysian durians before Musang King took over. It has a smooth, pale-yellow flesh that is highly creamy and reliably balanced with mild sweetness and subtle bitterness, making it the perfect benchmark durian. Origins of Johor, Pahang and Cameron Highlands. 
  9. Red Prawn (D175 / Udang Merah): The ultimate choice for those with a sweet tooth. It yields a stunning pinkish-orange flesh that is densely creamy and overwhelmingly sweet, with almost no bitterness when harvested from younger trees.
  10. Tekka (D169 / Musang Queen): Often called the queen to Musang King, it has a distinct pale orange-yellow hue with a prominent indentation in the middle core. It features a highly complex, multi-layered profile of sweet, floral, and strong bitter notes. 
  11. D13 : Brown orange in colour, good for people trying durians for the first time. Origins of Segamat in Johor. 
  12. D17: Pale white in colour, smaller in stature, its shell is distinguished by pyramid-like thorns. 
  13. D101: A very approachable variety that features bright orange, smooth flesh. It is mildly sweet, buttery, and carries a very subtle, pleasant fruity sourness that appeals to children and beginners. Origins of Pahang and Johor.
  14. D216 (J Sparrow): Origins of Kedah, it stands out with its round shape, short stem and distinctive purplish thorns. 
  15. Durian Kampung: This refers generically to traditional, non-grafted, wild-grown durians from local villages. They are highly inconsistent in size and flavor—ranging from watery and sweet to thick and bitter—but they offer a highly nostalgic and authentic experience at a fraction of the cost of commercial clones. 
  16. Red Prawn: other names - Hong Xia, Ang Hay and Udang Merah - origins of Johor and Pahang. The name Red Prawn derived from its striking orange red flesh.
  17. Green Bamboo: Other names are Qing Zhu, origins of Johor. Pale yellow with a slight greening tinge. It has a harder shell compared to the others, making it a little more difficult to open the durian. 
  18. Green Skin: Also known as Green Shell, found in part of Segamat and Muar in Johor. Notable for its sweetness and rich , creamy texture. 
  19. Tupai King: Also known as D214, hails from Penang. It is bright yellow in colour, rich and sweet and slightly fibrous. 
  20. Kacang Hijau: despite its name, it does not taste like green beans.Mainly found in Penang's Balik Pulau durian farms and is cherised by locals for its excellent value and flavour. 
  21. Durian Jantung: named for its heart-like shape, pale yellow flesh. 
  22. Durian Kampung : wild-grown durians found in rural areas across Malaysia. Has a mix of sweet and bitter notes. 
  23. Durian MARDI Super MS88: also known as MDUR 88 (D190), developed by Malaysia's MARDI through over 30 years of research. A hybrid between D24 and D10, it features thick, creamy flesh with a rich-golden-yellow hue. Increasingly cultivated in Johor, Pahang and Perak. 
However, there may be times when you have to do the choosing yourself. Here are a few things to take note of: 
  • A good durian must smell good.
  • Watch for any abnormalities in the shape. If a durian has concave sides, it’s likely an empty chamber.
  • Inspect the stalk. A ripe durian’s stalk is green with fraying brown ends.
  • Check the flesh. Make sure the colour isn’t far from its original shade.
  • If all else fails, taste it! Nothing can fail a taste test. Durians are an acquired taste, you’ll never know if you like a particular kind until you try it.






References:
7 August 2026: 12.54 p.m

Thursday, 6 August 2026

DOWN MEMORY LANE : RMN'S PATROL CLASS (1960'S)


An analysis of the Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) patrol craft fleet from the 1960s clarifies an important historical distinction: there were two completely different generations of vessels named "Kedah". 
While the modern 1,850-ton Kedah-class Offshore Patrol Vessels (MEKO 100) are widely known today, the 1960s Kedah-class was a completely different fleet of compact, 31.4-metre coastal patrol craft. Built by Vosper Ltd in Portsmouth, UK, the 1960s Kedah, Sabah, and Kris classes formed the foundational backbone of Malaysia's early littoral defence during critical geopolitical periods like the Indonesian Confrontation. 



1. The 1960s Kedah-Class (Large Patrol Craft)
The original 1960s Kedah class consisted of the first initial batch of fast, diesel-powered coastal patrol boats designed to establish a sovereign presence across newly formed Malaysian waters. 
  • Vessels: Included hulls such as KD Sri Kedah (P3138) and KD Sri Pahang (P3141).
  • Specifications: Displaced roughly 109 tons full load, with a length of 31.4 metres and a beam of 6.0 metres.
  • Performance & Armament: Powered by high-speed diesels hitting 27 knots, they were armed with two single 40mm Bofors anti-aircraft guns.
  • Service Lifecycle: Commissioned in 1963, these hulls worked heavily through the Confrontation before being decommissioned in the mid-1970s. 


2. Sabah-Class (Large Patrol Craft)
Ordered shortly after the Kedah class as a follow-on batch of 4 patrol boats to cope with expanding maritime responsibilities.
  • Vessels: Included hulls such as KD Sri Sabah (P3144) and KD Sri Sarawak (P3145).
  • Specifications: Maintained identical dimensions to the Kedah class—109 tons displacement, 31.4 metres long, and 2x40mm guns.
  • Operational Shift: They were deployed extensively in 1964 specifically to police and patrol the newly integrated state waters of Sabah and Sarawak.
  • Lifecycle: Decommissioned from frontline naval service around 2006.

P42 - KD PANAH

3. Kris-Class (Large Patrol Craft)
As the role of the navy grew, the RMN placed a massive order for a third, modified batch of 14 larger-sized patrol boats from Vosper Ltd starting in 1965. 
  • Enhancements: These craft were built with heavily upgraded Decca-type surface search radars, more robust engine configurations, and a slightly larger hull profile than the preceding Kedah and Sabah designs. [7]
  • Legacy: Known as the Kris class (or Keris class), they proved so reliable that the RMN completely refurbished two hulls—KD Sri Sabah (46) and KD Sri Sarawak (48)—spending RM18 million to recommission them back into active service to support regional patrols. 
Technical Snapshot: 1960s Vosper Patrol Craft

Specification1960s Kedah-ClassSabah-ClassKris-Class
BuilderVosper Ltd, UKVosper Ltd, UKVosper Ltd, UK
Commissioned196319641965–1968
Displacement109 tons109 tons~111–115 tons
Length31.4 metres31.4 metres~31.4 metres (Upgraded hull)
Top Speed27 knots27 knots22–27 knots
Radar EquipmentVisual/BasicVisual/BasicDecca-type Radar
Primary Armament2 x 40mm Bofors2 x 40mm BoforsHeavy machine guns / 40mm

The backbone of the 1960s RMN fleet comprised 20 custom-built coastal patrol craft, ordered and delivered in three distinct waves between 1962 and 1968. They shared a cohesive foundational design—featuring an all-welded steel hull, aluminium superstructure, and high-speed Bristol Siddeley Maybach diesel engines hitting speeds of up to 27 knots.




Hj Zulheimy Maamor
Ex-crew KD Panah (1986) and KD Sri Negri Sembilan (1987)
6 August 2026: 11.38 p.m


Wednesday, 5 August 2026

MELAYU ITU ISTILAH ASAL, AUSTRONESIA HANYALAH ISTILAH YANG BARU DICIPTA 1899

Oleh Prof. Dr. Solehah Yaacob

ALAM MELAYU, SATU PEMERINTAHAN | SEBELUM ISTILAH "AUSTRONESIA"?
Apabila kita mempelajari sejarah, kita sering melihat Alam Melayu sebagai himpunan kerajaan yang berasingan.
Tetapi persoalannya...
Adakah pembahagian yang kita kenali hari ini memang difahami sedemikian oleh masyarakat pada zaman tersebut, atau ia merupakan istilah yang dibentuk kemudian dalam kajian akademik?
Inilah persoalan yang dibahaskan oleh Prof. Dr. Solehah dalam perkongsian kali ini.
Beliau mengajak kita meneliti bagaimana istilah boleh mempengaruhi cara kita memahami sejarah. Menurut perbahasan yang dikongsikan, istilah seperti "Austronesia" dan penggunaan nama "Srivijaya" dalam kerangka sejarah moden dibincangkan sebagai sebahagian daripada proses pengelasan dan penamaan yang berkembang dalam kajian akademik.
Prof. Dr. Solehah turut membawakan satu sudut pandang bahawa sebelum lahirnya istilah-istilah tersebut, rantau ini boleh difahami sebagai Alam Melayu yang mempunyai jaringan pemerintahan maritim, hubungan perdagangan dan raja-raja Melayu yang saling berkait.
Antara persoalan yang dibahaskan:
• Bilakah istilah "Austronesia" mula diperkenalkan dalam kajian akademik?
• Bagaimanakah sesuatu istilah boleh mempengaruhi kefahaman kita terhadap sejarah?
• Adakah kerajaan-kerajaan di Alam Melayu wajar dilihat secara berasingan atau sebagai sebahagian daripada jaringan yang lebih besar?
• Mengapakah sumber sejarah perlu dinilai bersama konteks zaman dan perkembangan ilmu sejarah?
Ini bukan sekadar perbincangan tentang nama atau istilah.
Ini adalah satu ajakan untuk melihat semula sejarah Alam Melayu daripada pelbagai perspektif, memahami bagaimana sesuatu istilah terbentuk, serta meneliti bagaimana bahasa dan penamaan boleh membentuk cara kita melihat sebuah tamadun.
Jika tuan/puan ingin mengikuti lebih banyak perkongsian mengenai sejarah, Tamadun Melayu, manuskrip, bahasa Arab dan pembinaan peradaban, boleh terus membuat pendaftaran melalui pautan berikut:
Atau boleh terus menghubungi / WhatsApp Pn. Muniraa (017-691 2042) untuk maklumat lanjut mengenai program-program yang bakal berlangsung.
Semakin kita memahami asal-usul sesuatu istilah, semakin kita sedar bahawa cara kita menamakan sejarah juga boleh mempengaruhi cara kita memahaminya.

Petikan Jawapan Prof Dr. Solehah Yaacob Kepada Philip Rajoo:

Philip Rajoo:
Prof. Dr. Solehah raises an important question: Is "Austronesia" a modern academic invention, and should we instead see the region as a unified "Alam Melayu" with interconnected maritime kingdoms?
This is a thought-provoking argument. However, it contains several problematic assumptions that need to be examined carefully.
What Prof. Solehah Gets Right
1. Terminology Does Shape Understanding
This is absolutely correct. The words we use to describe history influence how we think about it. When we use the term "Austronesia," we are applying a modern academic framework. When we use "Alam Melayu," we are applying a different framework. Both are choices that shape our understanding.
1. The Term "Austronesia" Is Relatively Recent
Prof. Solehah is correct that the term "Austronesia" was coined in 1899 by the German scholar Wilhelm Schmidt. Before that, people did not use this term to describe themselves. This is a valid historical observation.

1. The Region Had Interconnected Kingdoms
It is also true that the Malay world had interconnected maritime kingdoms. Srivijaya, Malacca, Kedah, and others were linked by trade, language, and culture. They were not isolated from each other.
Where the Argument Falls Short
1. "Melayu" Is Also a Relatively Recent Term
Here is the problem. If Prof. Solehah argues that "Austronesia" is a modern invention, she must also acknowledge that "Melayu" is also a term that evolved over time.
As we have shown in our book:
· The word "Melayu" originally referred to a specific kingdom in Jambi, Sumatra
· It did not originally mean the entire Malay world
· It was not used as a unified ethnic label until much later
· It was the British who later expanded it to mean the entire peninsula in 1849

So if "Austronesia" is a "new" term from 1899, "Melayu" as a broad ethnic label is also relatively new. Neither term is "ancient" in the way Prof. Solehah implies.
1. The "Alam Melayu" Concept Is Also a Construction
Prof. Solehah suggests that "Alam Melayu" is a natural, organic term that existed before modern academic labels. But is this true?
The concept of a unified "Alam Melayu" was not how the people of the region saw themselves. They identified with:
· Their local kingdoms (Kedah, Malacca, Johor, Pahang)
· Their rulers (Sultans, Maharajas)
· Their communities
The idea of a single "Malay world" encompassing all these kingdoms is also a later construction—whether by colonial administrators or modern scholars.
1. The Orang Asli Are Completely Ignored
This is the most serious problem. In Prof. Solehah's discussion of "Alam Melayu," the Orang Asli—the true original inhabitants—are completely invisible.
If we are talking about the "original" people of the region, we must start with the Orang Asli. They were here for 50,000 years before the Austronesians arrived. Their languages, cultures, and histories are distinct from the Malays.
To talk about "Alam Melayu" as if it is the only legitimate framework is to erase the Orang Asli from history. This is exactly the same problem we see in the "Tanah Melayu" narrative.
1. The Austronesian Framework Is Based on Science, Not Politics
Prof. Solehah seems to suggest that "Austronesia" is just a modern academic invention with no basis in reality. But this is not true.
The Austronesian framework is based on:
· Linguistics: The Malay language is part of the Austronesian language family, which includes languages from Madagascar to Hawaii
· Genetics: DNA studies prove the Austronesian migration from Taiwan
· Archaeology: The spread of outrigger canoes, pottery, and crops shows the Austronesian expansion
This is not a "colonial" invention. It is a scientific framework that helps us understand the real history of human migration.
1. The Argument Confuses "Term" with "Reality"
There is a logical problem here. Just because the term "Austronesia" was coined in 1899 does not mean the Austronesian people did not exist before 1899.
The people existed. They had their own languages, cultures, and histories. The term "Austronesia" was simply a label that scholars created to describe a pre-existing reality.
The same is true of "Melayu." The people existed. The kingdoms existed. The term was just a label that evolved over time.
1. The Promotional Element
As with the previous discussion, this post ends with a promotional link for a program. This raises questions about whether the primary purpose is academic discourse or marketing. It would be stronger if the argument stood on its own without a sales pitch.
What Prof. Solehah's Argument Misses
The Simple Timeline
Let us look at the simple timeline:
Period What Existed What Term Was Used
Before 5th century CE Orang Asli, Austronesian peoples No unified term
5th–13th century CE Hindu-Buddhist kingdoms Local names (Kedah, Srivijaya, etc.)
13th century onward Islamic sultanates Local names, "Melayu" as ethnic label
1849 British colonial rule "Tanah Melayu" invented
1899 Academic linguistics "Austronesia" coined
The key point: Both "Melayu" and "Austronesia" are terms that were coined or expanded at specific points in history. Neither is "ancient." Neither is "original."
The Deeper Problem
The deeper problem with Prof. Solehah's argument is that it seems to be suggesting that the "Melayu" framework is more valid than the "Austronesia" framework because it is "older" or "more authentic."
Both frameworks are useful for different purposes:
· Austronesia helps us understand the broader migration patterns and linguistic connections across the Pacific and Indian Oceans
· Melayu helps us understand the specific cultural and political history of the Malay Peninsula and Sumatra
Neither framework is "better." They are just different lenses for viewing the same reality.

Prof.Dr. Solehah Yaacob"

Philip Rajoo: The Philological Misconception "Melayu" is ancient geophilology, NOT a 1849 British invention. The critique claims "Melayu" was only expanded to a broad regional term by the British in 1849 and originally referred merely to a localised kingdom in Jambi. Ancient toponymy and primary epigraphic and historical records prove "Melayu" as a macro-regional descriptor predates Western colonial rule by over a millennium. 
Chinese imperial records as early as the 7th century CE refer to Mo-lo-yu (644 CE) as a strategic maritime centre integrated into the broader Malayo-Polynesian trade matrix
The Sanskrit and Epigraphic evidence could be discovered in the Ramayana and Vayu Purana, which refer to Malayadvipa ("the Malay Island/Continent"), denoting the entire Sunda region as a cohesive geographical entity rich in gold and spices—centuries before any European presence
Also, the self-designation in Epigraphy in the 14th-century Amoghapasa inscription (1347 CE) explicitly invokes Adityawarman as Maharajadiraja of Bhumi Malayu, proving that indigenous rulers actively used "Melayu" to signify a broader territorial and sovereign realm, long before British colonial administration. Otherwise, the epistemological disconnect is considered an organic civilizational space vs. taxonomical categorisation. 
The critic equates the term "Austronesia" (coined in 1899) with "Alam Melayu," asserting both are mere modern labels. 
Ontological vs. Taxonomical Difference: "Austronesia," called "Austronesia," is an exonym created by Western linguists (Wilhelm Schmidt) using Greek roots (Austro = South, Nesos = Island) to categorise language families under a 19th-century positivist framework. 
In contrast, "Alam Melayu" (or Nusantara / Tanah Melayu) is an endonymic worldview, an organic civilizational ecosystem defined by a shared lingua franca (Bahasa Melayu Klasik), maritime jurisprudence (Undang-Undang Laut Melaka), custom (Adat), and trade networks across the Malacca Straits and Sunda Shelf. It also conflates an artificial taxonomy designed for comparative linguistics with a living, historical civilizational sphere and misunderstands how indigenous societies conceptualised their geopolitical reality.
The false dichotomy regarding Orang Asli and Indigenous continuity of the fallacy critique accuses the "Alam Melayu" narrative of "erasing" Orang Asli by portraying them as distinct and completely separate from Malays. However, the continuum of the Malay World, as modern ethnolinguistics and deep-history genetics recognize that Orang Asli (Semang, Senoi, and Proto-Malay) and coastal Malay populations do not exist in isolation but rather form an indigenous continuum (Orang Asal) inhabiting the Sunda Shelf before its inundation. In addition, cultural and trade symbiosis in historical records shows Orang Asli were integral actors within the polity of Alam Melayu, serving as forest-product collectors, guardians of inland trade routes, and specialised scouts for the Malay Sultans. To claim that using "Alam Melayu" erases Orang Asli is a divisive binary that ignores thousands of years of ecological and political symbiosis between inland and coastal indigenous populations.
There was a methodological bias in the "Out of Taiwan" model. The critic presents the "Out of Taiwan" model for Austronesian migration as absolute scientific consensus. The genetic and archaeological debates on the rigid "Out of Taiwan" (Express Train) hypothesis have been heavily challenged by recent archaeogenetics and palaeogeography (e.g., Prof. Stephen Oppenheimer's Eden in the East). Also, the Sunda Shelf Hypothesis, based on DNA studies focusing on mitochondrial lineages (M7c, E1a), demonstrates that human expansion flowed out of the drowned Sunda Continent (Pentas Sunda) into continental Asia and the Pacific following post-glacial sea-level rises (~14,000–8,000 BP). The "Alam Melayu" paradigm aligns with this deep-time Sundaland maritime origin, whereas the colonial "Austronesian" narrative often oversimplifies human migration into a one-way unidirectional displacement.

C&P
5 August 2026: 10.57 p.m

Monday, 3 August 2026

DOWN MEMORY LANE: BULATAN CHOW KIT, KL



The 1977 photo shows Bulatan Chow Kit, which was later removed to ease traffic congestion.

Intersection Today
The Chow Kit roundabout has completely disappeared. Today, the harsh concrete intersection where Jalan Pahang, Jalan Ipoh, Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman, and Jalan Raja Muda collide is dominated by the overhead KL Monorail tracks. The lush landscaped green island from 1977 was asphalted over to handle high traffic volume. While the historic pre-war shophouses still line the streets, the surrounding area has evolved to mix its heritage. Traditional stalls like those at Bazaar Baru Chow Kit now sit alongside modern boutique spots like The Chow Kit – An Ormond Hotel and hipster cafes. 

History of KL's Old Roundabouts
Built in 1956, the Chow Kit Roundabout (also known as the Raja Muda Roundabout) is widely regarded as Malaysia’s first major urban roundabout. It was originally designed to manage traffic at a quieter edge of the city, complete with a local post office located on its northern quadrant. During the late 20th century, Kuala Lumpur relied heavily on iconic rotaries—such as the massive Bulatan Pekeliling (Edinburgh Circus)—to regulate multi-road traffic. As KL underwent rapid vehicle explosion in the 1990s, these wide, grassy circles quickly transformed into major gridlock bottlenecks, forcing the city to demolish them in favor of multi-tier flyovers, traffic lights, and rail lines. 

1970s Malaysian Transport
The black-and-yellow vehicles shown on the bottom left are classic Austin Cambridge and Morris Oxford taxis, which served as the backbone of urban transport across the Klang Valley during the 1970s. This era also marked the height of the iconic Bas Mini (Mini Bus) system, introduced in 1975. Painted in bright pinkish-red colors with white stripes, these legendary, non-air-conditioned buses were famous for their daredevil, fast-paced driving style. They tightly packed passengers as they darted through neighborhoods like Chow Kit and Kampung Baru before they were phased out in the late 1990s. 

Archival Heritage of Bulatan Pekeliling
Old archives of Bulatan Pekeliling (Edinburgh Circus) show it bordered by the iconic, blocky Pekeliling Flats, which were built in 1967 as one of KL's earliest high-rise low-cost housing projects. Images from the 1970s and 1980s capture a massive, green grassy roundabout bustling with vintage vehicles. This historic rotary was completely demolished by the late 1990s and early 2000s to make way for the multi-tier flyovers of Jalan Tun Razak and the infrastructure for the KL Monorail and LRT lines.

Walking Route: Historic Shophouses of Jalan TAR
You can easily explore the surviving pre-war architecture along Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman (Jalan TAR) via this historic walking route:
  • Stop 1: Chow Kit Monorail Station – Start at the northern end of Jalan TAR. Step outside to see where the old roundabout once stood, now covered by monorail tracks. 
  • Stop 2: Pre-war Shophouses (Nos. 1–19) – Walk south down the road to spot early 1900s Utilitarian and Art Deco shophouses featuring narrow five-foot ways and wooden window shutters.
  • Stop 3: Capital Cafe (Kedai Makanan Capital) – Stop at No. 213. This iconic 1950s kopitiam still functions with its original tile floors, serving generations of multicultural patrons. 
  • Stop 4: SOGO & Pertama Complex – Conclude at the intersection of Jalan Dang Wangi, where heritage architecture directly contrasts with KL's earliest modern shopping complexes. 
Transition: Rail Replacing Automotive Pathways
The city's rapid development directly pushed out old automotive circular hubs. The introduction of the LRT Ampang/Sri Petaling Line and the KL Monorail required dense concrete pillars to be planted straight through the centers of old open roundabouts. Ground transport lanes were completely shifted and streamlined into one-way grids to accommodate heavy multi-lane traffic, trading the slow, scenic green circles of the 1970s for high-speed mass transit infrastructure. 

Reference:
Hj Zulheimy Maamor
3 August 2026: 2.08 p.m