1. On 10th October, the pm dissolved parliament. Let's put the fear of God into the hearts of these umno people
2. Fear of god means real and genuine, deep-seated fear. They should be fearful, because ultimately, it's we, the people, who exercise power.
3. We, the people, have the ultimate power to change things, rectify mistakes and remove deadwoods. Kick out umno.
4. Purge them and together with them the racist and supremacist indoctrination, the corrosive corruption, the opportunistic exploitation of the royalty and the fake religiosity.
5.we will continue with that theme later. I don't know if people notice it or not, before announcing the dissolution of parliament, the pm spoke about economics.
6. Let me be brutal about this. Much like anything else, the pm doesn't know what he's talking about. Or his speechwriter is an idiot.
7. He claimed that our economy is growing at 8%, unemployment is down, inflation is down etc.
8. I will not touch on our strategy of combating the covid pandemic. We haven't grilled the health minister as vigorously as we should. The strategy is in the pits. Big pharma, especially those which are umno linked, are making tons of money and people in the health ministry are mired in corruption. We don't ask inconvenient questions, because all we are interested in is to be safe from the pandemic. So, some of us are willing to cope up with the financial duggery.
9. Where does the pm get his figures? Is he on ketum?
10. The UK is growing at 2%, china at 4%, USA at around 3%, Europe is not faring that well. The world is heading to a recession and, touch wood, not stagflation.
11. And here, insignificant Malaysia is growing at an incredulous 8%? Jeepers! The pm was lying.
12. Where are the sources of economic growth? If the advanced economies reduce their imports of our intermediate and finished goods, where do get the 8%?
13. The sources cannot be domestic. These depend on external imports .
14. Our food import may now be 60 to 65b a year, our commodities exports are dampened by worldwide economic downturn. Our export of oil is restricted by OPEC quota, we can't sell at a price we simply want. Our export of exhaustible minerals is also constrained. So where is the 8% growth?
15. Hasn't the pm heard of the department of statistics?
16. His brief but preposterous economic claims, reflect his utter, catastrophic illiteracy in economics.
17. If he had familiarized himself, he would have said something ridiculous about inflation. The cost of everyday goods, foodstuffs and groceries is soaring. Therefore, his claims about inflation being under control are absurd.
18. Likewise, he would not have made imbecilic claims about reduced unemployment. That's hurtful to the millions seeking jobs, unless like regarding 10 people looking after 1 cow as being gainfully employed. That way, as my old professor, the late Harcharan Singh Khera says, there's no unemployment
19. So, as James Carville says, it's the economy, stupid. Every leader of any country direct a large part of their energy to improving their economies. Not about where KJ is contesting or about busying ourselves about the fate of Faisal Azumu or about creating 3 DPMs. By the way, that's stark bribery. That's the cerebral quality of wak jahid. Stupid is what stupid does.
20. So when umno rushes in when angels dare not tread, the pm was off to a bad start. That's an ominous sign for umno. Like bossakau, umno rushes to its peril.
21. Like Fred Flintstone says, yabedabedoo!
Wednesday, 26 October 2022
Saturday, 22 October 2022
Pencerahan pada artikel Sdra. Sukudhev Singh
1. Saya sedang menyiapkan satu artikel mengenai pembubaran parlimen, berhenti dan akan sambung semula.
2. Saya berhenti sebentar kerana seorang kawan menhantar satu artikel yang ditulis oleh Mr Sukudhev Singh. Dia adalah bekas timbalan gabenor bank negara Malaysia.
3. Ada beberapa perkara yang tersirat dalam artikel ringkas tersebut . Berikut adalah beberapa tafsiran saya.
4. Pertama, ialah kebimbangan En Sukudhev yang rakyat akan terus mengundi parti perompak dan parti yang menunggang agama .
5. Tidak syak lagi, parti2 yang saya maksudkan ialah umno dan anjing2 larian nya MCA Dan mic serta beberapa parti Sabah dan Sarawak.
6. Umno parti sebagian orang melayu yang membudidayakan rasuah, yang mebudidayakan perkauman melampau dan jumud, memperkudakan sentimentalism orang melayu kepada institusi raja, pseudo agama.
7. Yang terakhir itu kita jawab bagaimana kita nak percaya umno itu ikhlas pada ugama bila berbuih Ustaz dan ustazah berceramah pasal akhlak dan budi perkerti, sedangkan rasuah itu seolah2 halal?kalau riba itu Haram, rasuah yang hampir sama dengan riba, ok?
8. Pernah kita lihat umno menjadikan pembasmian rasuah satu dari manifesto nya?
9. Asas2 diatas mana umno dibina adalah rosak sebermula dan akan membawa kepada kehancuran.
10. Saya ulangi asas2 tersebut:-bangsa, negara raja Dan agama. Saya sengaja letakkan agama sebagai asas yang terakhir.
11. Ini kerana agama tidak pernah menjadi pedoman dominen umno. Kalau ia, tentu umno menentang korapsi, salah guna kuasa dan pembaziran . Tentu mereka menolak dipimpin oleh crook.
12.yang menjadi pedoman utama umno ialah hate crime, yakni menjadikan kebencian kepada bangsa bukan melayu, terutama bangsa cina .
13. Bangsa cina itu adalah jembalang yang akan menganggu gugat dan mencederakan bangsa melayu. Bangsa cina akan mencuri kekayaan bangsa melayu dan negara melayu ini.
14. Realiti nya, bangsa melayu itu memerlukan bangsa cina. Kita berniaga bersama mereka, mengharapkan kerajinan mereka dan mereka adalah sumber cukai yang besar .
15. Naratif yang diterapkan umno ialah umno itu melindungi bangsa melayu. Dibawah umno melayu mencapai par excellence dan racial triumphalism.
16. Tapi kejayaan apa yang melayu boleh banggakan dibawah umno? Melayu tetap tertinggal dibelakang dalam banyak segi. Sedangkan negara,dari pm, mb, DO, penghulu dan ketua kampung adalah bangsa melayu?
17. Jadi naratif bahawa umno itu melindungi bangsa melayu adalah naratif yang basi. Ia nya rekod lama yang diputarkan pada pau setiap tahun.
18. Maka janganlah kita masuk penghujjahan rabbit hole segini. Kita sendiri melindungi diri kita bukan umno.
19. Mengundi umno bererti mengekalkan keterbelakang bangsa melayu melalui hate crime bermusuhan dengan bangsa lain .
20. Mengembelingkan sokongan melalui menakut nakutkan orang melayu bahawa kedudukan mereka diancam oleh bangsa lain, adalah pembohongan.
21. Tidak lain dan tidak bukan, falsafah Malay supremacist ini adalah suatu weapon of mass delusion. Ia telah brain wash minda bangsa melayu untuk mempercayai bahawa keujudan mereka diancam oleh bangsa bukan melayu. Tujuan nya tidak lain supaya pemimpin2 umno diberi mandat untuk 'melindungi' bangsa melayu yang lemah .
22. Amat menjengkilkan apabila pemimpin2 lapuk umno menganggap segala kritikan2 sahih terhadap dasar2 racist umno sebagai rasis .
23. Jadi apabila anjing gila, tajuddin ramli, mengatan kritikan2 Lim guan eng sebagai perkauman, ianya sangat melucukan. Mengapa tajuddin membisu apa bila jabatan immigration Johor, menghalang cina yang berkerja di Singapore dari pulang untuk mengundi?
24. Atau mengkritik dasar2 umno yang terang2 rasis? Seperti dasar employment dengan jabatan2 kerajaan yang tidak lansung mencerminkan kemajmukan masyarakat Malaysia?
25. Jeritan tajuddin, tidak lebih dari mengata dulang paku serpih, mengata orang aku yang lebih .
26. Demikian juga , mengundi umno akan menggalakkan umno terus memperkudakan agama. Agama akan terus digunakan untuk memasung dan mencandui minda orang melayu.
27. Dan kita tahu sikap hipokrasi umno terhadap institusi raja2 melayu. Umno mengambil kesempatan daripada kesetiaan general orang melayu kepada raja mereka. Itu saja .
28. Faktanya, umno bukan setia kepada raja, tapi hanya setia kepada kepentingan2 nya. Terutama kekal berkuasa.
29. Namun disebalik kebimbangan En Sukudhev, ada pengharapan untuk selamatkan negara ini.
30. Yakni kita semua mempunyai senjata yang paling ditakuti umno. Kita mengundi untuk perubahan .
31. Satu daripada hukuman enggan berpolik, ialah kita akhirnya diperintah oleh orang yang inferior dari kita.
Orang bijak yang tidak mahu memerintah akan menderita diperintah oleh si baghal .
Orang yang mengundi politikus yang korap, pendusta, perompak dan pembelot bukan nya mangsa,..tapi bersubahat.
32. Sekarang saya akan menyiarkan artikel en Sukudhev Singh . Segala kekurangan, saya yang empunya
33. "Zaman pemerintahan oleh mereka yang jujur sudah berakhir. Ia nya diganti oleh pemerintahan sijahat dan penipu.
34. Ketika negara ini diselubungi kegelapan,mereka yang menjalankan tugas secara bermaruah ditekan manakala mereka yang merosak dan mereka yang menolong pencurian dan menyamun khazanah negara ini, di kurniai dengan segala penghormatan . Mereka yang jujur dan berintegriti tidak ada tempat berlindung dalam negara ini . Mereka akan diburui dan dianiayai supaya mereka tidak dapat muncul untuk mencabar penjahat2. Tidak ada siapa yang akan membela mereka dan kalau ada, jumlah mereka terlalu kecil.
35. Mahkamah telah menjadi medan permainan untuk penjahat2 ini. Mereka yang tertunduk tunduk dan menyembah di kaki2 penyamun ini sibuk membelai pingat2 gelaran mereka, setiap waktu membisik "oh sayangku". Mereka tidak memperdulikan nasib rakyat biasa, atau masa depan negara ini. Mereka tidak akan bangun membela golongan yang berintegriti kerana mereka tidak lagi memahami erti integriti. Mereka bertopengkan agama seperti pingat2 gelaran mereka dan roh mereka ketandusan apa2 moraliti.
36. Alat2 kerajaan yang asalnya bertujuan melindungi orang2 yang jujur bertukar menjadi alat2 penganiayaan untuk membantu penjahat2 mendapatkan dan mengekalkan kuasa . Siapakah yang akan melindungi dan membela orang2 yang jujur?
37. Sudah tentu bukan rakyat biasa. Lena mereka tidak terganggu. Mereka terus memimpikan kemakmuran yang berterusan dan pemberian wang percuma yang tak ada batas. Mimpi mereka tidak terganggu oleh treachery dan khianat yang meletakkan negara kita pada jalan yang penuh ranjau .
38. Zaman pemerintahan oleh orang yang jujur serta ikhlas sudah berakhir dan tak ada yang memperdulikan nya . Sungguh2 malang negara tercinta kita. "
39. Perkara 33 hingga 38 adalah terjemahan saya kepada artikel saudara Sukudhev Singh, bekas timbalan gabenor bank negara Malaysia.
Saturday, 8 October 2022
The curious acquittal of Zahid.
1. When I was working for an international oil company, they had a method of estimating your CEP-current estimated potential. What they think now, what you can become at the end offyour career.
2. Your cep changes off and on. Depending on your performance, professional development, good or bad decisions you make.
3. When you make a bad decision, you regress. Your cep is revised downwards. Unless and until you redeem yourself.
4. That's how I see the cep of the judge deciding zahids case. He amounts to nothing. Right now, he's a ten to a penny. The CJ will perhaps evaluate him accordingly.
5. The bad decision he made not only retard his own professional development but more adversely, the judiciary's good reputation. People's trust and respect for the judiciary, goes southwards.
6. He gives a new meaning to the idiom, one bad apple spoils the whole barrel. He will be mentioned en passant or in legal speak, orbiter dicta, in loose conversation among the talking crowd at the Selangor club or any lawyer's watering hole.
7. At the end of his career, people will just say, he's a retired high court judge with an LLB or bar. That's all.
8. The method which I suggest is called the HAIR method .it's used by large corporations like shell.
9. It's also used by leaders like Lee Kuan yew in assessing leaders for Singapore. Evaluated in the parameters, it's clear the particular judge has no hair.
10. The H stands for helicopter view-the ability to see the big picture from the small. To see the forest instead of the trees.
11. The judge should have asked this question. Is my decision going to elevate trust and respect for the judiciary, or diminish it? Is the acquittal of one crook going to destroy the reputation of the judiciary? I am sorry, the judge has no H
12. The A stands for analytical abilities. The judge ought to have this ability to be able to plough through the serpentine money trail created by zahid. Unfortunately, not enough. As the sumatran say, alang2 tukang, membazir kayu. Half baked intelligence is useless after all.
13. Obviously, the judge has not got the next ability. It's the I or imagination. He asked a stupid question which elicit an inane answer.
14. He asked how can you put sd600 thousand in an envelope?
15. Of course, you cannot in a 4x9"envelope. But have he heard of an A4 sized envelope?
16. Can't he imagine spreading the dough in piles and putting them in an A4 sized envelope? Ask your son or daughter to do it.
17. Definitely, the judge lacks the last quality of the quartet acronym. -realistic, the R making HAIR.
18. Was it realistic to acquit Zahid, when the whole world knows the bloody crook became wealthy by corrupt means. Was the acquittal of wak jahid realistic in the context of reducing corruption? I say reducing, not eliminating, unless you bring the death penalty when convicted for corruption.
19. My friend, Zaid Ibrahim once told me lawyers are like eggs. They are graded into A to C.
21. Madam YAA, I am afraid you have a grade C high court judge.
2. Your cep changes off and on. Depending on your performance, professional development, good or bad decisions you make.
3. When you make a bad decision, you regress. Your cep is revised downwards. Unless and until you redeem yourself.
4. That's how I see the cep of the judge deciding zahids case. He amounts to nothing. Right now, he's a ten to a penny. The CJ will perhaps evaluate him accordingly.
5. The bad decision he made not only retard his own professional development but more adversely, the judiciary's good reputation. People's trust and respect for the judiciary, goes southwards.
6. He gives a new meaning to the idiom, one bad apple spoils the whole barrel. He will be mentioned en passant or in legal speak, orbiter dicta, in loose conversation among the talking crowd at the Selangor club or any lawyer's watering hole.
7. At the end of his career, people will just say, he's a retired high court judge with an LLB or bar. That's all.
8. The method which I suggest is called the HAIR method .it's used by large corporations like shell.
9. It's also used by leaders like Lee Kuan yew in assessing leaders for Singapore. Evaluated in the parameters, it's clear the particular judge has no hair.
10. The H stands for helicopter view-the ability to see the big picture from the small. To see the forest instead of the trees.
11. The judge should have asked this question. Is my decision going to elevate trust and respect for the judiciary, or diminish it? Is the acquittal of one crook going to destroy the reputation of the judiciary? I am sorry, the judge has no H
12. The A stands for analytical abilities. The judge ought to have this ability to be able to plough through the serpentine money trail created by zahid. Unfortunately, not enough. As the sumatran say, alang2 tukang, membazir kayu. Half baked intelligence is useless after all.
13. Obviously, the judge has not got the next ability. It's the I or imagination. He asked a stupid question which elicit an inane answer.
14. He asked how can you put sd600 thousand in an envelope?
15. Of course, you cannot in a 4x9"envelope. But have he heard of an A4 sized envelope?
16. Can't he imagine spreading the dough in piles and putting them in an A4 sized envelope? Ask your son or daughter to do it.
17. Definitely, the judge lacks the last quality of the quartet acronym. -realistic, the R making HAIR.
18. Was it realistic to acquit Zahid, when the whole world knows the bloody crook became wealthy by corrupt means. Was the acquittal of wak jahid realistic in the context of reducing corruption? I say reducing, not eliminating, unless you bring the death penalty when convicted for corruption.
19. My friend, Zaid Ibrahim once told me lawyers are like eggs. They are graded into A to C.
21. Madam YAA, I am afraid you have a grade C high court judge.
Friday, 7 October 2022
The Great Dictator in the House.
1. The court cannot enforce its own rulings. It has to depend on others to enforce them.
2. If other parties voluntarily refuse to enforce the sentencing of the supreme court, might as well not have the sentencing itself.
3. We can't expect the CJ or any of the federal court judges to go to the ground and teach the imbeciles how to do their job.
4. We can't expect these esteemed judges to tell the jailors at kajang, the prison director and his Tonto (yes kemosabe), the health minister and home ministers how to their jobs.
5. Recent developments have convinced me that issues of the law such as rule of law, constitution or otherwise general issues of the law, quite apart from specific and technical legal issues, are too important to be left to professional lawyers.
6. Especially if left to the shyster and shylockian ones. We are made into fools. We may be fools, but we are not bloody fools.
7. If other parties do not carry out what is ruled by the court, then they sabotaged and subvert the court.
8. This insubordination amounts to contempt of court of the highest order. It's triable and, if convicted, merits all the legal retributions.
9. I repeat, the people who defy what the courts ruled, are in contempt of the courts just as much as those who disparage the courts in any manner.
10. And by people, I include the jailers, the ministers if they are involved, the police and now the dumb ass speaker of parliament.
11. The last idiot, for entertaining the idea of allowing a convict to attend parliament.
12. Next time if a convict wants to back for hari raya, cny, Christmas and deepavali, boleh ya? If a convict wants to go back to do his husband or wifely duties-can aah?
13. I find the suggestion by an MP, that a convict like Najib can attend parliament a little thoughtless and preposterous.
14. Preposterous because both the mp and the speaker are lawyers who ought to know that allowing a convict to attend parliament is intrinsically wrong and illegal ab initio.
15. That means the speaker cannot cup his hands over his genitals and do an Alfred (of mad magazine) and say 'what me know' or in the Malaysian context, I can't stop Najib from attending parliament.
16. It also means, the mp cannot cover his private parts with his hands and say can come but najibs hands must be handcuffed.
17. Whether Najib the convict can attend parliament or not, does not depend on what the speaker and mp say, but on whether Najib is allowed to, is inherently wrong and against the law.
18. To allow a convict attend parliament would open the floodgates for other degenerates, to attend parliament or DUN.
19. For instance, the Dap adun who was convicted of rape, could now apply to attend the perak DUN. Let the dun speaker show that he is more intelligent than the lapdog in the dewan rakyat.
20. Can the speaker be referred to some committees of the House to have his statement on a convict censured? That was the stand of the speaker not parliament.
21. I am puzzled as to why Najib is still an mp. When Tian Chua was fined 2k, he immediately ceases to be an mp. Whether Najib is still an mp is not a function of whether he is in the process of getting a royal pardon. His status depends on whether he fined more than 2k. That is the first cr criteria. That is the fatal condition not he is getting a pardon or not. As Teresa says, haiyya!
22. So why is the speaker gedebak gedebu here and there?
As the kedahan would say
These people, they come back from Amerika
They think they are very kleva
Gerumal sini, gerumal sana
Semua jadi caca merba.
23. This speaker must be the most hated person in Malaysia. He's only revered by crooks and the followers of Najib. This Kim Jong-un wannabe is a very, very bad nightmare for Malaysia. He runs parliament like North Korea.
24. He gives a new meaning to the proverb, if the mountain will not come to Muhammad, then Muhammad must go the mountain. Fart Harun has indeed found a way to turn parliament into a Papa doc Duvalier's Haiti.
25. We can do a Churchill never in the field of human conflict, was so much owed by so many to so few to never in the history of our parliament has one person brought so much disrepute to one institution. He puts to shame the animal from kebinatangan and the rabbid dog from pasir salak. With a friend like the speaker, who needs an enemy.
26. As to the convict in chief, with friends like the jailers at kajang, the prison directors, possibly some police bad hats, some people in high places and now the small fascist in parliament, who needs enemies?
Wednesday, 5 October 2022
Warning letter, suspend or expel . Nazri's draconian panacea. Burn the whole mosquito net to get rid of one mosquito.
Don't be afraid to take action against ku li nazri tells umno
1. Herr Nazi, I mean, nazri is a lawyer. Not sure if he is in practice, though. But I am sure he has come across the legal adage-those who come into equity, come with clean hands
2. The court refuses to give relief to a complainant, if he is, himself, blemished.
3. In this case, nazri has violated good faith in the claim he has made.
4. We know that nazri himself played a prominent role in installing the leader of the renegades as PM. In deeds, nazri represents the not umno elements in umno.
5. Therefore, his call for umno to take action against ku li is a proposal not to strengthen umno but to get rid of the only sane voice in the party led by mad men.
6. Left to the machinations of the crazy lot, umno will self-destruct. Hurrah!
7. Fortunately, umno is intelligent enough to ignore the braying of a fifth columnist like nazri. The mp of the itchy tree, will remain a saboteur, umno should be wary about.
8. Nazri has no standing whatsoever to ask umno to take action against ku li.
9. He ignores the fact, that umno has only got a bloody 38 mps. Ismail sabri is pm at the pleasure of bersatu and pas and east Malaysian colluding parties.
10. Just what kind of action does nazri propose umno do against n ku li:? A warning letter? Suspend ku li? Expel ku li?
11. It would be interesting to know what the pontian gnome can suggest to the pliant mkt.
12. Suppose umno take any of these actions. Can we then expect ku li to support any resolutions umno makes in or outside parliament?
13. Umno isn't scared to take action against anyone, but it knows to do anything taken as a slight, will make umno implode faster. Ku li is not a person without support.
We salivate at the prospects of umno imploding.
14. Take la action, Mr umno -we are eager to see umno self-destruct.
15. But wait, let us humor vat Herr nazri said. He is asking for umno to take action because by being neutral, ku li opposes the government.
16. It's true that the pm is an umno man, but it's not an umno government. It's an umno plus government.
17. The umno man can stay on as the puppet pm at the pleasure of the ecclesiastical dictators, bersatu mensheviks and others.
18. Indeed, to stay on as part of the gado gado government which nazri supports shows that umno has no sense of self-worth. It has no amour propre.
19. The actions of ku li on the other hand, shows that he is inching away from umno.
20. The indisputable fact is, umno has no future. It is incapable of reforming itself. It's the umno we have lost.
21. Umno survives because it's supported by male and female Malay rednecks, Malay supremacists and the bigoted malays. It will be irrelevant in pru 15.
22. The most logical and foreseeable outcome is the total decoupling of ku li from an incorrigible and irreformable umno.
23. Leave umno and form a new platform. As for umno, go on ...shove the pillow to a sleepy person.
24. In the final analysis, to borrow the analogy from Dennis Skinner, a one time labour mp, 1/3 of umno are not crooks .
1. Herr Nazi, I mean, nazri is a lawyer. Not sure if he is in practice, though. But I am sure he has come across the legal adage-those who come into equity, come with clean hands
2. The court refuses to give relief to a complainant, if he is, himself, blemished.
3. In this case, nazri has violated good faith in the claim he has made.
4. We know that nazri himself played a prominent role in installing the leader of the renegades as PM. In deeds, nazri represents the not umno elements in umno.
5. Therefore, his call for umno to take action against ku li is a proposal not to strengthen umno but to get rid of the only sane voice in the party led by mad men.
6. Left to the machinations of the crazy lot, umno will self-destruct. Hurrah!
7. Fortunately, umno is intelligent enough to ignore the braying of a fifth columnist like nazri. The mp of the itchy tree, will remain a saboteur, umno should be wary about.
8. Nazri has no standing whatsoever to ask umno to take action against ku li.
9. He ignores the fact, that umno has only got a bloody 38 mps. Ismail sabri is pm at the pleasure of bersatu and pas and east Malaysian colluding parties.
10. Just what kind of action does nazri propose umno do against n ku li:? A warning letter? Suspend ku li? Expel ku li?
11. It would be interesting to know what the pontian gnome can suggest to the pliant mkt.
12. Suppose umno take any of these actions. Can we then expect ku li to support any resolutions umno makes in or outside parliament?
13. Umno isn't scared to take action against anyone, but it knows to do anything taken as a slight, will make umno implode faster. Ku li is not a person without support.
We salivate at the prospects of umno imploding.
14. Take la action, Mr umno -we are eager to see umno self-destruct.
15. But wait, let us humor vat Herr nazri said. He is asking for umno to take action because by being neutral, ku li opposes the government.
16. It's true that the pm is an umno man, but it's not an umno government. It's an umno plus government.
17. The umno man can stay on as the puppet pm at the pleasure of the ecclesiastical dictators, bersatu mensheviks and others.
18. Indeed, to stay on as part of the gado gado government which nazri supports shows that umno has no sense of self-worth. It has no amour propre.
19. The actions of ku li on the other hand, shows that he is inching away from umno.
20. The indisputable fact is, umno has no future. It is incapable of reforming itself. It's the umno we have lost.
21. Umno survives because it's supported by male and female Malay rednecks, Malay supremacists and the bigoted malays. It will be irrelevant in pru 15.
22. The most logical and foreseeable outcome is the total decoupling of ku li from an incorrigible and irreformable umno.
23. Leave umno and form a new platform. As for umno, go on ...shove the pillow to a sleepy person.
24. In the final analysis, to borrow the analogy from Dennis Skinner, a one time labour mp, 1/3 of umno are not crooks .
Saturday, 1 October 2022
Review, a substantive forward move in the law,or an abuse of court process?
1. I think, Donald Pleasence, in the film the eagle has landed, as Himmler said it best. It's like the charge of the light brigade.
2. That's what I think of the attempt to have the judgment of the federal court reviewed. It's an exercise in futility. Nice try.
3. I am afraid I am no lawyer and can offer little legal reasoning. I am trained as an analytical economist. I analyse by way of some research. So here is my two cents' worth
4. I have always thought that the federal or supreme court as representing the penultimate finality in the legal process. Apparently not. The supreme court can review its own decisions. To make sure it has not made a mistake.
5. That's saying that it (the supreme court)recognizes its own fallibility. Judges are human, after all. It's possible they make mistakes if that is so, it is imperative for them to correct the mistakes
This gave rise to the judicial saying-to perpetuate an error is no virtue, but to correct is a compulsion of judicial conscience.
6. One judge can make mistakes. But 9 of them, arriving at the same conclusion, as in Ali babavum Najib's case? Impossible!
7. Asking the supreme court to review its own judgments, is like asking the judges to shoot themselves, to put it dramatically.
8. Better to ask the lawyers asking for a review to shoot themselves first, or ask the by now, despondent clients to jump from the Petronas twin towers
9. The threshold to pass, asking for a review is like climbing a vertical rock face, or taking an example from Malay literature, is like preparing 7 pans of hati nyamuk.
10. Thus, asking for a review is like asking sultan Mahmud, 7 conditions to fulfil before bonking puteri gunung ledang.
11. Build a golden bridge from Melaka to Gl.
2. That's what I think of the attempt to have the judgment of the federal court reviewed. It's an exercise in futility. Nice try.
3. I am afraid I am no lawyer and can offer little legal reasoning. I am trained as an analytical economist. I analyse by way of some research. So here is my two cents' worth
4. I have always thought that the federal or supreme court as representing the penultimate finality in the legal process. Apparently not. The supreme court can review its own decisions. To make sure it has not made a mistake.
5. That's saying that it (the supreme court)recognizes its own fallibility. Judges are human, after all. It's possible they make mistakes if that is so, it is imperative for them to correct the mistakes
This gave rise to the judicial saying-to perpetuate an error is no virtue, but to correct is a compulsion of judicial conscience.
6. One judge can make mistakes. But 9 of them, arriving at the same conclusion, as in Ali babavum Najib's case? Impossible!
7. Asking the supreme court to review its own judgments, is like asking the judges to shoot themselves, to put it dramatically.
8. Better to ask the lawyers asking for a review to shoot themselves first, or ask the by now, despondent clients to jump from the Petronas twin towers
9. The threshold to pass, asking for a review is like climbing a vertical rock face, or taking an example from Malay literature, is like preparing 7 pans of hati nyamuk.
10. Thus, asking for a review is like asking sultan Mahmud, 7 conditions to fulfil before bonking puteri gunung ledang.
11. Build a golden bridge from Melaka to Gl.
Build a silver bridge
7 dulangs of hati nyamuk
7 dulangs of hati hama
The tears from melaka virgins 7 tempayan
Juice from virgin beetlenuts
A bowl of blood from the sultans' heir.
7 dulangs of hati nyamuk
7 dulangs of hati hama
The tears from melaka virgins 7 tempayan
Juice from virgin beetlenuts
A bowl of blood from the sultans' heir.
We ask the lawyers to do these conditions. Can aah?
12. The threshold to pass is like pushing a dromedary camel through the eye of a needle.
13. Let me put it more crudely. Asking the supreme judges to review their own judgments is like asking the judges to look at their own genitals. Sorry, mate.
It all started with the blasted Pinochet exception. Confound him!
14. Since the judges are also human, they would see the asking for a review as presumptuous, impudent and cocksure. Now tell me, which judges will entertain this impudence?
15. Nevertheless, since the Pinochet exception, many lawyers have tried this rabbit out of the hat trick. I am happy to report that all failed.
16. Again, as Donald Pleasence says, a review is like a charge of the light brigade. An exercise in futility, belabouring the obvious.
17. A review should be distinguished from an appeal. An appeal is a judicial examination of a higher court of a decision made by a lower court. It is a remedy provided by law to the aggrieved party. It can lead to a substitute of the decision of the lower court.
18. A review is only available to the supreme court. It's asked to see whether mistakes have been made that can lead to a miscarriage of justice. The mistakes must be so glaring, obvious and fatal to the judgment. If they are not, the complainant's lawyers can go fly kite.
19. A review is not a rehearing of a case. It's not a rehearsal to hear a decision made to the supreme court. The supreme court in northern indian caterers ltd vs the lieutenant governor of Delhi said:-
20. It is well settled that a party will not get a review of a decision of this court for the purpose of rehearsing and a new judgment made. The normal rule is, the decision of the supreme court is final.
21. What is the aim of a review, anyway? As I understand it, a review is not going to get a fresh judgment. A review is an acknowledgement of human fallibility only. It's not an appeal disguised as a review.
22. The judges did make mistakes in deciding Najib's case. If the decision is going to be corrected and improved, the areas are:-
23.
12. The threshold to pass is like pushing a dromedary camel through the eye of a needle.
13. Let me put it more crudely. Asking the supreme judges to review their own judgments is like asking the judges to look at their own genitals. Sorry, mate.
It all started with the blasted Pinochet exception. Confound him!
14. Since the judges are also human, they would see the asking for a review as presumptuous, impudent and cocksure. Now tell me, which judges will entertain this impudence?
15. Nevertheless, since the Pinochet exception, many lawyers have tried this rabbit out of the hat trick. I am happy to report that all failed.
16. Again, as Donald Pleasence says, a review is like a charge of the light brigade. An exercise in futility, belabouring the obvious.
17. A review should be distinguished from an appeal. An appeal is a judicial examination of a higher court of a decision made by a lower court. It is a remedy provided by law to the aggrieved party. It can lead to a substitute of the decision of the lower court.
18. A review is only available to the supreme court. It's asked to see whether mistakes have been made that can lead to a miscarriage of justice. The mistakes must be so glaring, obvious and fatal to the judgment. If they are not, the complainant's lawyers can go fly kite.
19. A review is not a rehearing of a case. It's not a rehearsal to hear a decision made to the supreme court. The supreme court in northern indian caterers ltd vs the lieutenant governor of Delhi said:-
20. It is well settled that a party will not get a review of a decision of this court for the purpose of rehearsing and a new judgment made. The normal rule is, the decision of the supreme court is final.
21. What is the aim of a review, anyway? As I understand it, a review is not going to get a fresh judgment. A review is an acknowledgement of human fallibility only. It's not an appeal disguised as a review.
22. The judges did make mistakes in deciding Najib's case. If the decision is going to be corrected and improved, the areas are:-
23.
(A)The fine should be more than rm210m
(B)The jail should be more than 12 years.
(B)The jail should be more than 12 years.
Improve and correct these.
24. The supreme court is extremely careful when it reaches a decision. It's careful not to exclude all the evidences available. Don't tell me within the 4 years, you cannot discover all the evidences to support your case. The supreme court is extremely careful not to make error in fact and law.
So, in my opinion, a review of the judgment of the supreme court is doomed ab initio.
25. There are more complex legal reasoning as to why a review will fail. These are beyond me at the moment. Hey, I am no lawyer, maa.
26. Plus, I am too lazy to read up the Indian cases. Ahlawat vs the state of haryana, Kerala state electricity board vs hitec and hydrogen ltd and many others
27. If there are allegations about the miscarriage of justice, can it be said that a review is just an abuse of court process?
24. The supreme court is extremely careful when it reaches a decision. It's careful not to exclude all the evidences available. Don't tell me within the 4 years, you cannot discover all the evidences to support your case. The supreme court is extremely careful not to make error in fact and law.
So, in my opinion, a review of the judgment of the supreme court is doomed ab initio.
25. There are more complex legal reasoning as to why a review will fail. These are beyond me at the moment. Hey, I am no lawyer, maa.
26. Plus, I am too lazy to read up the Indian cases. Ahlawat vs the state of haryana, Kerala state electricity board vs hitec and hydrogen ltd and many others
27. If there are allegations about the miscarriage of justice, can it be said that a review is just an abuse of court process?