The Lingam Charade
October 31, 2009
The Lingam Charade ends at Judiciary’s Expense
by Daniel Albert
October 29, 2009
The refusal by the Attorney-General’s Chambers to take any further action or proffer charges against any of the six named individuals involved in the Lingam video clip fiasco has received scathing criticism from the public – and rightly so.
This pre-mature attempt to close official investigations into this matter is an affront to the judiciary and a slap in the face to us all.
The refusal to prosecute in effect means that the implications of blatant judicial manipulation and improper interference surrounding this affair, which were reinforced by the findings of the Royal Commission, will be left to linger and fester without any finality or conclusion.
Despite the public fury stirred by the contents of the video clip, no basis or reasons were given for the AG’s decision. Only a blanket statement was offered to the effect that investigations into the affair had failed to turn up sufficient evidence to bring charges.
So smug are our government officials and leaders that despite the decision going completely against the findings and recommendations of the Royal Commission, no attempt has been made to provide any further explanation or give reasons for their decision to the rakyat.
It is significant that the findings of the Royal Commission were not merely made by lay individuals devoid of any knowledge of the law. The panel was headed by a former Chief Judge of Malaya and also included a former Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak, a former Court of Appeal Judge and a former solicitor-general. The panel was not only highly proficient in the law, but in addition, possessed valuable experience in the workings of the judiciary and AG’s Chambers.
Their specific findings that there was “sufficient cause to invoke the Sedition Act 1948, the Prevention of Corruption 1961, the Legal Profession Act 1976, the Official Secrets Act 1972 and the Penal Code against some of the principal individuals involved” would therefore have been made with a thorough understanding of the application of these laws and the requisite burdens and standards of proof entailed in invoking these laws.
Identities of witnesses not shrouded in secrecy
It is also significant the entire process that led to the commission’s findings were transparent and open to public scrutiny. The identities of the witnesses called were not shrouded in secrecy. Neither was witness testimony extracted behind closed doors by unknown means. Evidence presented was adequately tested by a host of lawyers that represented the interests of all parties concerned. The quality of the inquiry conducted and the evidence obtained as a result was apparent to all.
Over and above all this, what is of utmost significance is that there was basis provided for the findings of the commission. The reasons for their findings were detailed in a report that was disclosed to the public. The conclusions and recommendations made were justified with their interpretation of the evidence obtained.
All this adds credibility to the findings of the commission; a quality sorely lacking in the AG’s decision. What investigations were carried out? Were they sufficiently thorough? What was the outcome of these investigations? What kind of legal expertise were used? Surely, the rakyat is entitled to such answers. It is absurd that a matter of this significance is now being swept under the carpet in such cavalier fashion.
Should we be surprised by such action? Sadly, no. The manner in which this matter had been dealt with, from the very start, was indicative of the fashion by which it would be concluded.
When the video clip was first disclosed, whilst the rakyat were livid at the contents of the clip, our then prime minister instead chose to warn those that reported the video clip that action will be taken against them if the allegations that surfaced as a result of the video clip were proven untrue.
Calls for a royal commission were immediately rejected. Instead, a cabinet appointed panel was instead set up. The legal basis of this panel was vague and it was unclear if the panel had the necessary powers to conduct a proper fact-finding inquiry.
Thereafter, the focus was skewed towards identifying the maker and source of the video clip; the contents were made secondary. Curiously, whilst their identities were fastidiously pursued, all mention of the lead actor and his likely conversation partner was carefully avoided by the authorities. Continued calls for a royal commission to be set up fell on deaf ears. The entire time, the de facto law minister had the gall to maintain that the matter had been blown up and there was no crisis within the judiciary.
A royal commission was only set up after almost two months of unabated public outcry and more footage of the video clip revealed – and even then, the terms of reference of the royal commission were exceedingly confined.
Whilst the motivation for such conduct is open to speculation, it is clear that the integrity and sanctity of the judiciary has taken a back seat. As opposed to immediately making every effort to fully investigate the allegations surrounding the video clip and thereafter undertaking the appropriate remedial measures to restore the integrity of the judiciary and public confidence, there have been concerted efforts to play down and where possible avoid the issue all together. Avoiding the issue does not resolve the issue. This however is a solution our leaders seem quite content with.
Scant regard for judicial institution is nothing new
This scant regard for the judicial institution is sadly nothing new. This willingness to prostitute the judiciary has been consistently demonstrated time and time again by our leaders. The integrity and independence of the judiciary is simply not a priority. In fact, it does appear that many of our politicians perceive a strong judiciary as plain trouble.
These sentiments have manifested in the form of continued attacks by our leaders on the judiciary. Attacks, whether by means of controversial appointments and removal of judges or ousting the court’s jurisdiction so that certain governmental action is beyond judicial scrutiny, have undeniably led to the continued erosion and decline of the judicial institution and the state of affairs present.
It was against this backdrop that the Lingam video clip was disclosed. Hence, the public distrust and immediate presumption that many of the allegations surrounding the video may be credible. The hue and cry that ensued and demands for the video clip to be thoroughly investigated was understandable. Had the video clip been disclosed against a backdrop of a strong independent judiciary with a sterling track record, perhaps the AG’s decision, given without reason, would be easier to swallow.
And at what costs is this to the rakyat? Most significantly, the decline of our judiciary has resulted in its inability to function as an effective watchdog on the executive and legislative.
The doctrine of separation of powers dictates that all three organs of the state (executive, legislative and judiciary) act as watchdogs on each other to carry out a process of ‘check and balance’. This is a safeguard to ensure that none of the organs abuses its constitutional power or oversteps its mandate. The reality however is that because the composition of the legislative (Parliament) and executive (government) overlaps and both organs are effectively controlled by the prime minister, the process rarely is effective. This emphasises the role of the judiciary.
Ills of corruption allowed to fester
This failure of the judiciary to carry out this process has allowed avoidance of accountability and transparency in the country’ governing. The ills of corruption, abuse of public funds and excesses of power have been allowed to fester and become constant features in our political landscape.
The disclosure of the video clip presented a golden opportunity to our leadership reform the judiciary; to clean up everything that was wrong and perceived to be wrong with the judiciary and start afresh. Sadly, this now looks unlikely.
It is clear that unless and until there is sincere political will for reform, things will not change. We, the rakyat, must 
provide the impetus for that change in political will. We need to make clear to our leaders, regardless of political divide, that a strong judiciary is a priority and we will accept nothing less. It is for this very reason we cannot allow this matter to be put to sleep quietly.
Malaysia Boleh! Malaysia model Perundangan Ulung! Malaysia Model Sex Se Dunia! Semua Boleh! C4 Boleh!
Abdollah - October 31, 2009 at 12:44 pm
It is a big insult and a big slap to the face of voters and taxpayers as well as the general public for the AG to make such a decision to close this case without even bothered to explain. It just goes to show how arrogant this fella is – just like the rest of the senior government officials of this Najib Administration. Their boss is the government / party of the day – not the people. But truth has a way to prevail and in this case, truth will prevail.
p.s. Ilham – if you are a paid cybertrooper, I must say that they should find a better one than you because you’re not worth the money they pay you. Your command of the language is bad. Secondly, just like the people who hires you for your service, you shout (since u write in capital letters). Third, your comments does not carry much water coz you can’t differentiate between facts and the untruths you are trying to spin.
Sentinel - October 31, 2009 at 1:48 pm
The racist Kerismudin and jack boot-stomping Nazi will engage in semantic spin and still succeed in making jackasses of themselves, nationally and internationally!
IF NFA does not mean that the AG WILL NOT not press charges, what else can it mean? After the RCI, what more evidence can they possibly wish for?
It’s inconceivable that the Police, MACC and AG’s office cannot contact or locate MP Leo Gwo Burne or Shanti, Lingam’s secretary or Lingam’s driver and brother, isn’t it?
But if Leo were to be accused of cows and cars, they’d be up his ass with a thorny protoscope before you could say “Auckland Zoo.”
Between Lingam and Chin, prosecuting Chin should be a piece of cake. The old ACA gave Chin complete clearance when he claimed some years ago that he had paid for his NZ holiday credit card charges with his own money. The ACA probably took him at his word (‘One of us. He wouldn’t lie to save his butt, would he?) and did not check with the credit card company or retrieve the canceleld cheque from the issuing bank to see who paid the bill. That’s as much as Lingam’s sec testified and implied at the RCI as she shot to pieces Chin’s claims of accidental and coincidental holiday.
Have the MACC not investigated whether Chin bought and paid for his own house or was it financed by a certain local chinese tycoon as was revealed at the RCI? How difficult can that be to be investigated, pronto?
Yet the AG dithers where there is an open and shut case!
Who are they kidding?
1 Nation, 2 Rules. Some more equal than others!
dpp
We are all of 1 race, the Human Race
donplaypuks - October 31, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Sentinel, for you to ponder.
VERY STRANGE THING HAPPENING.
LATEST FROM RAJA PETRA KAMARUDDIN.
===========================
Dari artikel Raja Petra Kamarudin bertajuk “Whither and hither Anwar?” 28/10/09:
Anwar Ibrahim and many of the opposition leaders have this false feeling of grandeur about themselves. But they are not grand, and certainly far from great. They did not make 8 March 2008 happen. The people made it happen. And what the people make the people can break. And the people are of the opinion that the opposition leaders, Anwar Ibrahim included, have lost their direction.
KAH…KAH…KAH…..HEHEHEHEHEHEHE…
VERY STRANGE THING HAPPENING.
MUTINY EVERYWHERE….
ilham - October 31, 2009 at 3:31 pm
This is a reply to ilham.
What do you mean by no evidence ? Then how did the RCI came to their conclusion ?
Well, the prosecution did not want to dig that much deeper, otherwise all the dirt and scum from Tun M’s era will be shoved out.
The very fact that Lingam and the ex-Chief Justice were together in NZ for the trip and followed the same route and itineary ( with photos to show as well ) and their families very buddy is already an infringement on the credibility and integrity of a Chief Judge.
The trip was paid by Lingam and testified by his former secretary is sufficient to cast doubts on the ex-CJ’s integrity.
You chose to ignore this. There were sufficient evidence to bring this correct, correct , correct group of conspirators to book and the AG chose not to for reasons known to him.
My learned judges in the judiciary will never attempt to appear in public with me more so having a dinner together.
fangseang - October 31, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Sentinel, for you to ponder.
VERY STRANGE THING HAPPENING.
LATEST FROM RAJA PETRA KAMARUDDIN.
===========================
Saturday, October 31, 2009
When Raja Petra presumes Anwar as ”Alexander The Great”
Anwar Ibrahim and many of the opposition leaders have this false feeling of grandeur about themselves. But they are not grand, and certainly far from great. They did not make 8 March 2008 happen. The people made it happen. And what the people make the people can break.
THE GAY LOVERS OF ALEXANDER III OF MACEDON,
known as ‘THE GREAT’
ANWAR IBRAHIM IS NOT ONLY ALEXANDER THE GREAT BUT ALSO A JOHN EDGAR HOOVER DIRECTOR OF FBI (USA)
READ HERE ” Hoover was a lifelong bachelor and since at least the 1940s, that he was homosexual”
J.EDGAR HOOVER DIED COMMITING SUICIDE AND ANWAR WILL BE SENTENCE TO 25 YEARS IMPRISONMENT FOR SODOMISING SAIFUL.
SEE HOW GREAT IS ANWAR……
ilham - October 31, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Ilham….your comments make me laugh! Is that all you can do? How shallow can you be. Please do not publish your ignorance and embarrass your illiteracy.
pat ling - October 31, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Ilham
If you want to be a smart-ass to debate an issue, be a real smart ass. Otherwise you disgrace UMNO/BN. That’s the last thing UMNO wants, a dumb smart-ass championing their cause. It will make UMNO-BN more stupid than they really are.
There is another smart-ass who champions a Mahathir or rather now the Mukhriz faction in UMNO, you might want to join him in his blog at the canine blog. He calls himself big dog.
Frank - October 31, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Hi pat ling,
“Mimickry is a sure sign of idiocy.”
Ilham is the type of robots they produce en masse – cheap, defective and unreliable.
Their greatness is a metaphor for mediocrity, and their truth is undefinable. Just ignore.
As for the RCI and other musings of dear leader, they are all false ‘tonics’ and eyewashers for the dullards. One can almost be sure that the rallying cry for them will be “NFA! NFA!”, except when it comes to the opposition…
Menyalak-er - October 31, 2009 at 5:41 pm
What do you mean by no evidence ? Then how did the RCI came to their conclusion ?
The very fact that Lingam and the ex-Chief Justice were together in NZ for the trip and followed the same route and itineary ( with photos to show as well ) and their families very buddy is already an infringement on the credibility and integrity of a Chief Judge.
The trip was paid by Lingam and testified by his former secretary is sufficient to cast doubts on the ex-CJ’s integrity.
fangseang – October 31, 2009 at 3:57 pm
TRUE, TRUE, BUT IF THAT IS THE EVIDENCE AND IT’S AGAINST THE LAW, THAN I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU GUYS THAT LINGAM AND THE JUDGES SHOULD BE CHARGE.
BUT WHAT WILL BE THE CHARGES AGAINST LINGAM AND THE JUDGES BECAUSE OF THEM BEING SEEING TOGETHER ON A HOLIDAY AND WAS FULLY PAID BY LINGAM.
LIKE YOU SAID “already an infringement on the credibility and integrity of a Chief Judge. The trip was paid by Lingam and testified by his former secretary is sufficient to cast doubts on the ex-CJ’s integrity.”
IS AN INFRINGEMENT ON THE CREDIBILITY AND INTERGRITY OF A CHIEF JUDGE AND CASTING DOUBTS ON THE EX-CJ’S INTERGRITY
IS AN OFFENCE UNDER THE PENAL CODE OR UNDER THE CORRUPTION ACT.
CAN SOME SMART ALECK FROM PKR OR PR OR MAY BE DIN MERICAN CAN ENLIGHTEN ME OF MY IGNORANT OF THE LAW AND EVIDENCE TO CHARGE AND TO PROSECUTE BASE ON CASTING DOUBTS AND INTERGRITY OF A PERSON.
CARE TO COMMENT ANGSEANG.
ilham - October 31, 2009 at 10:13 pm
“A judge should be careful in making social contacts and friends. A judge should carefully handle the contacts with the parties, lawyers and other persons who are possible to influence the image of the judge, so as to avoid the impression of public that the judge is not impartial or not honest and avoid the possible confusion and embarrassment in the performance of his functions”
Based on these pictures alone, and on Judges’ Ethics, this judge will have to recuse himself from all cases even remotely connected to this lawyer – certainly when this lawyer appears as counsel for the litigant(s).
All cases that came before him would have to be examined, and some decisions may have to be vacated. But apart from that what law has he broken?
Carl T. Bogus describes the crisis within this once honorable profession thus:
The legal profession is dead or dying. It is rotting away into an occupation.
“The law has become a business like any other,” writes another. “The loss of this culture is final and the only choice that lawyers now have is whether to struggle futilely against their fate or accept it with a measure of dignity.” Yet another writes, “The profession is sinking fast, to be sure. It is a short span in the life of traditions that have been evolving since the thirteenth century, when lawyers began to congregate in inns near the King’s Courts at Westminster.”
In the case of V.K. Lingam, memories of him licking on the ‘Lingham Hot Chllie’ sauce and downing a glass of sweet red wine served from tiny port glasses as dessert at the Inns in compliance with English tradition, are still fresh
Mr Bean - October 31, 2009 at 10:33 pm
p.s. Ilham – if you are a paid cybertrooper, I must say that they should find a better one than you because you’re not worth the money they pay you. Your command of the language is bad. Secondly, just like the people who hires you for your service, you shout (since u write in capital letters). Third, your comments does not carry much water coz you can’t differentiate between facts and the untruths you are trying to spin.
Sentinel – October 31, 2009 at 1:48 pm
1) I’m not a paid cybertrooper and i don’t stoop so low to earn a living. I don’t need UMNO money or ANWAR money or PKR money, most importantly Sentinel, i will never allowed myself to be used as tool’s for any politicians like you guys do.
I have enough money, if you need some let me know. Afterall what is friend for ? right?, Sentinel.
2) I fully agree with you that my command of the language is bad.
I’m really happy that it has attract your attention and thanks for pointing to me and i will make remedy for my shortcoming.
3) My comments may not carry much water but i’m glad that it has
caught your attention. Also, i’m wise enough to differntiate
between the truth and untruth and i’m not a spinners.
Sentinel, if you care to carefully read my comments, i’m very consitent with my comments and they come from my heart and i’m not easily influence.
You guy’s and all the politicians can never influence me.
I make my own decision base on facts and logics.
Finally, Sentinel, the demise of PKR is imminent.
SEMOGA MALAYSIA MAJU JAYA, AMAN MAKMUR TANPA PKR DAN PAKATAN JAHAT.
ilham - October 31, 2009 at 11:01 pm
Mr Bean – October 31, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Reading your lengthy explaination, i found nothing to suggest that it is a criminal offence for judges to be seen with parties or lawyers
except to say that the ” learned judges should excuse himself if the case before him could create the public impression that the judge is not impartial or not honest and to avoid the possible confusion and embarrassment in the performance of his functions”
So if my conclusion of what you said is right, then I would suggest that you as a resposible citizens should educate your fellow opposition supporters of the truth in what i said.
So long Mr. Bean, i hope you are much more intelligent that Mr. Bean
( Professor Sir Rowan Atkinson )
ilham - October 31, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Instead of putting this Chin into cold storage and retiring the guy, they fast tracked him to become the country’s next Chief Justice! Still no law has been broken.
Mr Bean - October 31, 2009 at 11:21 pm
Then comes trotting Abang Aki.
Lowyar Abang Aki appeared on numerous occasions before judge Chin (when he was judge at the High Court) in election cases on behalf of his master UMNO. Could Abang Aki have lost any of those cases?
Not by a chinny chinchin.
Mr Bean - October 31, 2009 at 11:36 pm
“(Sentinel) ….. if you care to carefully read my comments, i’m very consitent with my comments and they come from my heart and i’m not easily influence” Abang ILHAM
Ilham may think we’re trying to con him into buying a garbage dispenser, but when you put garbage in you could only hope to get garbage out.
Mr Bean - October 31, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Foreign embassies who are based in KL have already picked up this red flag and conveyed this to their counterparts back home.
This red flag will be glowing on their radar screens warning their countrymen about thinking twice if they want to invest in Malaysia.
It is only in this country of ours whereby the executive is so bloody thick skin that they don’t care what the international communities think as long as they hold on to power and gets to rape the land.
Who would want to invest their money in Malaysia whose gomen is corrupted and covers up its shit such that the guilty is protected while the innocent is made the victim? Investors know they have no recourse when and if matters are brought before the Malaysian judiciary.
Why did a middle east investor pulled out of PKFTZ? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why there is no interest shown in the much hyped southern corridor in Johor. And we hope it stays that way as a reminder to the gomen that their actions has wide implications on the investment front.
Expose - November 1, 2009 at 12:27 am
Ilham may think we’re trying to con him into buying a garbage dispenser, but when you put garbage in you could only hope to get garbage out.
Mr Bean – October 31, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Well Mr. Bean, i’m not easily con into buying gold or diamond what more with a garbage dispenser..
Mr. Bean, thanks for looking into the garbage bin.
You found any garbage that can be recycle.? You can make fortune out of this garbage Mr. Bean.
I can understand why after reading all my comments you found it’s
all garbage that you read.
You know what Mr. Bean, it hurts when you read the truth
of what i said.
Truth is like a bitter pill to swallow Mr. Bean but bitter pill cures ailment faster.
Finally Mr. Bean, garbage to you, money to a karung guni man.
THE DEMISE OF PKR IS IMMINENT.
ilham - November 1, 2009 at 1:08 am
Expose – November 1, 2009 at 12:27 am
You know why they don’t want to invest in Malaysia like you said if really.?
It’s another attempt by the PKR in particular Anwar Ibrahim to pressure the Government of Malaysia not to prosecute him (Anwar) on the sodomy charges brought by Saiful.
But i believe the Malaysian Government is not easily dictate by this action.
Why they the middle east investor pulled out of PKFTZ? The answer is very simple.
In any investment calculation, the rate of return and time frame in every investment is very critical in making a decision.
Aiyah Apek or Nyonya or Ahmad or Abu or Anwar Ibrahim this is simple logic in any investment calculation.
INI PUN TAK BOLEH FAHAM BANYAK SUSAH LO.
ilham - November 1, 2009 at 1:38 am
Lingam and Chin were demonstrating not only that racial harmony really does flourished in bolehland but more importantly matters prejudicial are best left in the confines of the courts . Elsewhere it is all about merry-making.. In line with the 1 malaysia concept.
Danildaud - November 1, 2009 at 1:52 am
Well, Ilham
Let me engage with you for the first and probably the last time in a rational discourse in a civil manner – and only on that single issue i.e. whether any law has been broken when a judge and his family were seen holidaying in a foreign country with a lawyer and his family. Never mind about who paid for the expenses and why etc.
Was there any law broken? No.
Mr Bean - November 1, 2009 at 2:53 am
But that is not the issue. You missed the issue. And that issue is the issue of circumstantial evidence.
Mr Bean - November 1, 2009 at 3:05 am
The crime? The alleged crime has to do with the perversion of the course of justice. This guy is said to have actually written judgments for him. Why would a judge want to let a lawyer who appeared for the litigant in a case before him do that?? Are the rest of us to believe that the judge is just lazy and that being lazy is not a crime??
Mr Bean - November 1, 2009 at 3:17 am
Mr. Bean
I would not waste my time and the bandwith to have a rational discourse with Ilham. His intentions are not to have a rational discourse but to spew garbage since Din, with due respect to him, allows garbage to be strewn in his blog in the name of free speech.
In the beginning, I thought I could have a rational discourse, perhaps learn a thing or two on alternatiive view, but soon I found he is more interested in spitting garbage than engaging in proper discussion.
I have seen many of his kind among the commenters in other blogs, cybertrooping the internet. His kind belongs to the canine group ie the BIG DOG blogging fraternity whose mentor is Mahathir and include a former pretender of unbiased blogger and now Chief Editor of Malay Mail.
Frank - November 1, 2009 at 3:45 am
Mr Bean,
And to let you know to make it more annoying is that he is laughing with glee for the very fact that he knows there are idiots like us who still feel smarty engaging him on what he wrote.
If Din still allows him to around, best is to disengage him totally. You know, a child’s tantrum is silenced when it is totally ignored!!
Frank - November 1, 2009 at 3:51 am
Precisely, Frank.
Irrationality must have it’s limits. The thinking is circular and without substance, and what we will call anal retentive especially with his ‘saiful’ (shit=sai, in hokkien) assertions. The Biro Tetanga Negara have done a disservice to yet another human being.
Despite denials on the contrary, all CTs from the other side are paid a stipend. Some can be devious, but most are ‘in your face’ flurs without any grace. They do not bark… they cackle like hyenas.
Menyalak-er - November 1, 2009 at 4:08 am
Frank,
Everybody deserves their fifteen mnutes in the sun (over here the sun does not always appear). Some use those precious minutes to spew hatred and vile. This one has exhausted his fifteen minutes of fame. He is now on overtime. Over staying the blog host’s hospitality in the process. I just gave him another opportunity to make a fool of himself. Let’s hope he takes it or will he go away with his tail between his legs?
I’m curious what he’ll say, in his bad English, to the points raised.
Apart from that it is clear to all and sundry that he is suffering from ADS.
Mr Bean - November 1, 2009 at 4:21 am
Mr Bean
Don’t get hoodwinked by his pretense in writing bad English. No, he has the ability to write good english… and I believe he (or his cohort sharing the same entry point into Din’s blog) sought to disguise. Read through all postings under “Ilham”. Can’t be sure if the name belongs to one person although with the same “entry point” after all it needs only an email address and a password to be shared by paid cybertroopers.
__________
Frank,
No body reads Ilham. I don’t employ a team. I operate alone. I personally delete his comments when I see that he is over the top. Maybe I should be tougher on him since being nice does not help. He is too UMNO and beyond help. I also believe he is one of the paid cybertroopers and has a team since his postings are made when I am not at the computer.–Din Merican.
Frank - November 1, 2009 at 5:29 am
Mr. Bean
Some of these UMNO-funded cybertroopers have more than one webmail addresses and they go round various blogs under different nicknames. In some a few share one webmail address and a password to log into the various blogs using the same nickname.
Malaysia-Today has a crack IT team to track these scumbags around through their IP addresses. Not sure if Din has a team working for him, otherwise his blog will be a victim of these cybertroopers. There are smart ones who start by trying to engage intellectually before they start vomitting out their bile.
And some does it quite subtlely like the current Chief Editor of Malay Mail who took malaysian bloggers on a ride in his blog prior to the March 2008 election, but whose real intention was to remove Badawi and put in place a Mahathir-friendly PM. He does not go around to other blogs, he has his own blog. He was rewarded by the new PM and DPM to return to his old job when he was forced to quit 2-3 years ago. This is one class act, I have to say,and he has a good buddy to help him along, the big canine whose blog goes for the jugular, while the Chief Editor of the Malay Mail’s blog will inject slow poison into the minds of blog readers.
Frank - November 1, 2009 at 5:43 am
Interesting, Frank. Interesting. But what do they hope to gain? The gullible will remain gullible notwithstanding.
Mr Bean - November 1, 2009 at 6:04 am
That aside. I think it is time our blog host restricts readers to the use of one ‘handle’.
Mr Bean - November 1, 2009 at 6:07 am
Frank,
Pasquale of French Revolution fame??
Mr Bean - November 1, 2009 at 6:13 am
“Pasquale of French Revolution fame??” – Mr. Bean
Perhaps. But unfortunately, in the end both he and Napoleon were exiled, one voluntarily to England and died there and the other forced into exile by the Brits to St Helena and died there too. They rise up again and again like a phoenix but always end up disgraced,don’t they?
Frank - November 1, 2009 at 6:39 am
Independence of the PDRM and the AG are absolutely neccessary for the proper functioning of a Parliamentary System of Government. Right before our eyes the drama is playing out in Zimbabwe. Having won a questionable elections the Ruling Party entered into a power sharing government to avoid further examination of the flawed elections concluded one year ago. To day the oppositon half of the government is subjected to all kinds of legal harassement to the point that the Prime Minister has now decided to boycott Cabinet meetings.
I do not want my country to go down the low road taken by Zimbabwe. We have a Constitution, Rukun Negara and the Rule of Law in this country and the country must be run in accordance to what is stipulated in those documents . And all government officials, I speak as a former Civi Servant, must honour the oath taken by them on their own free will to serve the government of the day that was duly elected by the people. If these simple rules of the Parliamentary System of Government are not observed we will be like playing football with one team using its hands and the referee doing nothing about it.
Thumb Logic - November 1, 2009 at 4:54 pm
“I do not want my country to go down the low road taken by Zimbabwe._ – Thumb Logic
We already have, my friend.
Civil servants taking what ? -They took the oath to protect UMNO, or else they will not get the promotions, the datukships that come with it and the plum jobs after they retire.
Constitution? It only exists on paper. The former Lord President and who is now Sultan treated it like toilet paper and the UMNO-BN Govt then flushed it down the toilet.
Rukuna Negara? Nobody cares about and it had become a museum piece.
Rule of Law? Look how they appointed the Chief Justice.. and who is he? Or Who was he in UMNO before becoming the Chief Justice? It is Rule Out of Law.
PDRM – paid by Malaysians to protect the interest of UMNO leaders, UMNO Ministers and UMNO politicians. Teargas and water canons are bought with tax payers money to shoot at Malaysian taxpayers demonstrating peacefully on the streets.
AG – He is a govt appointee. And an UMNO appointee.
So, don’t cry over spilled milk.
To stop all that, organize Malaysians who can vote and explain why and how we are now on the same road as Zimbabwe… and pray these Malaysians do actually vote and used their brains when they vote. Especially the Malay votes.
Frank - November 1, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Mr Bean,
And to let you know to make it more annoying is that he is laughing with glee for the very fact that he knows there are idiots like us who still feel smarty engaging him on what he wrote.
If Din still allows him to around, best is to disengage him totally. You know, a child’s tantrum is silenced when it is totally ignored!!
Frank – November 1, 2009 at 3:51 am
I’M SORRY FRANK IF YOU FELT OFFENDED AFTER READING THE TRUTH OF WHAT I COMMENT.
HOWEVER, I HAVE NOT A SINGLE INCLINATION TO THINK THAT YOU GUY’S OUT THERE ARE IDIOTS AS WHAT YOU THINK.
LETS CONTINUE TO ENGAGE RATIONALLY FOR THE SAKE OF THIS BLESS MALAYSIA.
ilham - November 1, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Very well said, Ilham. Now how about some answers:
But that is not the issue. You missed the issue. And that issue is the issue of circumstantial evidence.
Mr Bean – November 1, 2009 at 3:05 am
The crime? The alleged crime has to do with the perversion of the course of justice. This guy is said to have actually written judgments for him. Why would a judge want to let a lawyer who appeared for the litigant in a case before him do that?? Are the rest of us to believe that the judge is just lazy and that being lazy is not a crime??
Mr Bean - November 1, 2009 at 8:20 pm