Tales by an unknown Malaysian. No. 3

1. Before I go discussing about the house arrest , there are a few points left to raise in the SRC case.

2. Somebody from Najib's camp, a sycophant, a groveller, a lickspittle fellow started a story line that red lips Najib was framed.

3. Yet some fools and bloody fools believed in this big lie, this prevarication, this porky. It's meant to deceive and throw a monkey wrench in the works preventing everyone from reaching the inevitable conclusion.

4. Which is , that Najib did steal the money, using a legitimate corporate vehicle to siphon the money for his own purposes. To spend merrily, or buy expensive Birkin or Hermes handbags pay girls to blow him etc. while all these take place play the victim and feigned ignorance.

5. Have we ever thought that all the investigative authorities didn't find anybody who framed Roger rabbit? It is incumbent for the rumour mongerer to identify who the framer/s is,/are. And more important proved the bastard framed Najib. If he/they can't, shut the fuck up and shoved the story line to the place where the sun never shines.

6. If Najib had shown remorse and apologized for his crime, who he be let off?

7. We may not be conscious about it. But that's the entitled Malay thinking. The accused person before the apt sentence, because he is Malay, Muslim and horrors, from UMNO is devinely entitled to do what he did and be excused and forgiven for the crime.

8. We must banish that kind of reactionary thinking and accept this fact. If Najib had apologized and recompense the state, those acts DO NOT erase the fact of the crime. The act of the crime still remains.

9. If I murder someone, and I show remorse and apologized to the family, would those acts make the murdered come back? My virtuous acts do not erase the fact of the murder. So despite the recantations, the crime remains. It's the act that must be punished.

10. Yes , we must moved on. But not by trivialising what Najib did and forgiving him. We move on by having him punished and never to talk about it. What is done, is done. Capiche?

11. Because of these reasons and the earlier ones I gave, I think Najib does not deserve pardon. All the mitigating factors were already accounted for, that Najib is not entitled to another round of minimising the severity of his crime at the pardons board stage.

12. Now, the house arrest. It's an imbroglio, a pickle and mare's nest, isn't it?

13. It's unfortunate we are not able to compare the affidavit submitted by the the Javanese neanderthal with the affidavit submitted by the man who lost in the GE but made a minister by Nana Non

14. Having denied us the liberty to compare the affidavits, the judge has made an error. How can he or she assumed that we, the reasonable man on the Clapham omnibus aren't capable of forming a rational opinion?

15. In the final analysis, it's a question of believability. The affidavit of a man who claimed to have met the invisible Arab donor to Ali babavum Najib and the affidavit of a bean counter who asserted that our economic fundamentals are good. Yet we have dropped from 27th to 34th placing in competitiveness ranking. Where got good econ fundamentals maaa?

16. What if the affidavits contradict each other? Now we won't have that opportunity because the judge rejected zafruls affidavit will we?

17. Isn't relying on a phone message and then recalling from memory constitute hearsay evidence? Knowing Zahid he may have an axe to grind.

18. An accessory to the hearsay evidence and it's subsequent embellishments and fairy tale stories probably concocted is the Pahang MB. Are they liable if the affidavit by Zahid is now found to be untrue?

19. So the existence of the addendum itself is not settled. Was there or wasn't there?

20. We shouldn't even amplify the house arrest issue. It's not provided for in the constitution. Is Najib now entitled to one as a result of some divine intervention?

21.we have been told ad nauseum that Malaysia is a constitutional and not an absolute monarchy. We have also been told that the constitution is above all.

22. Read together ,these principles to me mean that nothing is above the constitution and the king is bounded by the constitution.

23. The inclusion of the house arrest, not provided for in the constitution, constitute a change in the constitution. Any changes to it require 2/3 support in parliament.

24. Aren't we a constitutional monarchy? Not an absolute monarchy? In plain language it means whatever the king does is limited and constrained by the constitution. Right?

25. The king must not be allowed nor encouraged to go on a frolic of his own and does something that undermines and frustrate the constitution.

26. If the king had been given the liberty to frolic on his own, that means the pardons board has not properly advised him. That's a dereliction of its duty .

27. You have therefore a cibai pardons board. Or in the words of the Chinese man, whose elbow I knocked with the handles of my bicycle, puki Lu punya amak!

28. You will have a ridiculous outcome. Why should only Najib avail himself to house arrest? Can the king, as the fountain head of justice refused the application of other prisoners?

29. Let's say he is given the house arrest privilege by the government of Nana Non, then he is found guilty for 1MDB. Will he then be hauled up while enjoying his caramel macchiato courtesy of uncle Sam's Starbucks, to Kajang Hilton or bamboo River resort?

30. You see, Mon Ami, senors, compadre, amigo, paisan...only if you subscribe to the idea that the Putera in the term Bumiputera, the elite, the bourgeoisie and Mary Antoinette are entitled to special privileges, only then you will give effect to the house arrest. Which isn't provided for in the constitution and therefore unconstitutional.

Tales by an unknown Malaysian. No. 2

1. In this article, I want to give my 2 cents opinion on the pardon given to Najib. He is a Malay by race but one who swindled millions thru SRC and billions through 1MDB. His race is of no relevance to the crimes he has committed. Nor does his religion.

2. My opinion is, I repeat is enough for me. I reserved the right to have it defended against any majority of opinions, consensus, any nd conventional opinions. I will defend it, as Karpal Singh says, anytime, anyplace, anywhere (if in court).

3. If anyone does not like it, despises and hates it, they can que up to kiss my ass.

4. I feel nauseous when hearing many lawyers explaining why the pardon is justified and then the disgraced robber in chief can be eligible for house arrest. They will cite all the acts that serve only to intimidate us. Then they will regurgitate all the legal argle bargle to sound so intellectual.

5. These are arguments by inbred lawyers to affirm the privileges of the rich and powerful and to maintain the status quo. The point is to overthrow and dismantle the status quo and to fortify the sentence. Not to use sharp arguments to lessen the punishment of the offender more.

6. These arguments only prompt me to cite a famous phrase. These effers have hitherto mechanically interpreted the world, the point is, to change it.

7. Changing it, to my mind is to break away and decouple ourselves from the stranglehold of retaining the status quo and finding clever ideas to maintain the ideas of the bourgeois class.

8. The foremost member of this bourgeois class is of course Najib and we must do everything to save him and save ourselves.

9. Aren't we all are playing a board game supported by kowtowing masses and if they all stand up, it's game over for us?

10. The whole pardons board is a farce. It's composed of 5 individuals from the upper crust of society of individuals who have arrived. They can't be expected to have proletarian sentiments.

11. Not coming from a section of the real community, they can't be expected to give an unbias advice to HRH.

12. The advice the gave to HRH must by necessity reflect their social station in life. And must by necessity be tilted in favour of the criminal in chief . The fault lies partly in us for believing these nobs by definition, must reflect the higher and virtuous values. Thus giving clemency to a known criminal is an accepted bourgeois value.

13. Our trust in the pardons board, whose composition does not reflect a cross section of the community is misplaced. It is a monumental wrong on our part for believing that the upper crust and arrived people have the people's interest at heart .

14. The people want the chief architect of the crime punished and the judgement of the courts affirmed. Yet the decision of the pardons board negated these very interests.

15. To add insult to injury, the spokesman or rather spokeswoman for the board appears to mock our sensitivities by never answering our questions and by exhorting us to accept any decisions of the pardons board . We shall have none of that. We just want our pound of flesh.

16. The unintelligible noises coming out from the spokeswomans mouth confirmed the truth in this observation.

17. That the less intelligent they are, the more vanity, pride and arrogance they exhibit. And they will always find crowd of fools to applaud them.

18. To many of us, the decisions of the pardons board are unconscionable. They are bias. The board does represent a cross section of the community, the decisions went against the findings of the courts and is also objected because we refused to believe that only these denizens are capable of distinguishing rights from wrongs. We the people claim the ultimate and residual rights.

19. We object the decision by the pardons board because we believe Najib does not deserve any clemency. Here are the reasons for our objection.

20. Stealing money, plundering the country's coffers, using a legitimate vehicle to effectively convert monies is an unpardonable crime. The betrayal of the trust of the people by a leader is more damaging.

21. Claiming the monies were used for orphans, widows and single mothers was deceptive and possibly an outright lie. If the intention was to help the unfortunate beings, why not create an official SPV and budget it officially? Najib was the bloody PM what?

22. What is the basis that allowed Najib to jump que and had his request to be pardoned heard first? What about those whose application for pardon dealt with?

23. Is it because Najib is the Putera in the term Bumiputera, that he is naturally entitled for preferential treatment and privileges?

24. This sense of entitlement is only claimed and falsely owned by UMNO inbreds. The pardons board by kowtowing to Najib's demands is only perpetuating the entitlement myth.

25. It's a myth because an entitlement or a right you fought for, worked for and qualifed for. It's not something falling like manna from heaven.

Tales by an unknown Malaysian. No. 1

1. One of the nicest books I have read was a book called the autobiography of an unknown Indian. It was written by one N. Chaudhuri. It's a narration of his rites of passage . That's the way I looked at it .

2. It has now inspired me to start a series of article in my blog. Fittingly it is called The Views of an Unknown Malaysian.

3. Let me begin with a legal conundrum, a vexed question,a thumper. I am referring to the unexplainable dropping of the 47 charges proffered to the Javanese neanderthal, Zahid Hamidi.

4. He may have been a student and taught by our present PM at Yayasan Anda, the school for 2nd chancers. But that won't stop me from describing him in the most despicable of terms. Hey, whenever he appears on TV explaining the need for healthy living, I change channel. Fearing it can cause me nightmares later. If his posters are strategically placed in the padi fields, they can scare away pests.

5. Whenever the PM says he or his government does not interfere in the judicial process, that statement sent shivers down my spine . There are dark linings in the silver clouds , not noticed by many.

6. Laissez faire in the judicial system? Anwar may have been influenced by a heavily perfumed french A hole who asked a group of industrialists - what can the government do to help them prosper?

7. The answer the industrialists gave was leave us alone- translated into meaning allow them to do as they please. The term in French literally means, allow to do .

8 . It's an economic doctrine that opposes intervention by the government in any forms except intervention in the natural monopolies.

9. The PM applies the same principles to our judicial system, which often leads to absurd and ridiculous results .

10. Well, Mein Fuhrer, there is no absolute non interference. Judicious interference is necessary to correct the wrongs, to moderate the excessive-ness etc.

11. When Lee Kuan Yew was asked whether he believes in the economic isms, he replied no. To him, one should always answer does this particular work? If it does, accept it.

12. Anwar's pompous declaration of wholesale non interference leads to absurd results. First of course it freed the Javanese neanderthal from culpability. It opened a can of worms. It also showed the PM didn't show leadership when it is required. He's a political invertebrate really blowing where the winds blow .

13. It opened a can of worms. Remember, the AG said he does not have to give reasons for the DNAA. Wow, that's a good value to teach the public. You can defiantly say, you are not accountable for anything. That's an axiom of the entitled inbreds .

14. Lawyers, looking out for one another are quick to say, you can't blame the judge, you can't blame the government... ad nauseum

15. What lawyers say are not etched in stone. They are opened to disputations and disagreements. Besides, a predator will generally not attack one of its own kind. That's professional courtesy.

16. We, the public don't care two hoots what lawyer say. We say all is to blame. Including the judge.

17. If one charge is found to be faulty and causes a domino effect on the other 46 charges, the same principle applies to the justice system.

18. If one law practitioner in this case is rougish, the whole gangbang including the judge is.

19. To us, the reasonable man on the Clapham omnibus, the judge should have harshly reprimanded the lawyers from the AGC.

20. Having found that Zahid had a prima facie case to answer, the AGC lawyers did a volte face and gifted the Javanese neanderthal with a DNAA . The judge concurred.sheesh!

21. The conduct of all the judges presiding zahid's cases are hardly commendable. Indeed the deserved disapprobation and opprobrium.

22. The judge at Shah Alam for instance dismissed zahid's case on account of the half past six job done by the prosecution team and on technical grounds.

23. Perhaps that particular judge has not heard of A4 sized envelopes and couldn't count past one .

24. Wasn't there a possibility that more than one A4 sized envelopes were used? And the money denominated in thousand USD or Singapore dollars?

25 . The judge in the 47 charges case froze and acquiesced at the request of the prosecution team. He did not have the testicular fortitude. Sorry sir!

26. That was the time when we expect him to indulge in some judicial activism. That was required to correct the wrongs and mend things. But he did not and his conduct can hardly be said to be blameless. No siree!

27. Many of you think of judges as being priggish, sanctimonious, sacred cows and endowed with superior intellect more than they actually have. Other judges and respectful lawyers refrain from criticizing them. But some members of the public such as I, like Rhett Butler said, don't give a damn.

28. If I think you err or are defficient somewhat, the postman will ring the door. Sorry you cannot reply us publicly, but you know how some of us think of you . You too eat belacan.

29.lets look at the 47 charges. It's mathematically impossible for at least some of the charges to stick. They must be practising some strange maths in the courts .

30. If the prosecution team discovers some charges were flimsy, why not expunge them. Retain the robust ones which can stand assault by the defense team.

31. Finally, it's a case of believability. Do you believe Zahid? Look, here's the man who said he met the invisible Arab donor to najib.if it's proven he lied there, his whole credibility is flushed down the toilet.

32. But here's the man UMNO wants as it's leader. We can only be perplexed. And to exclaim, some people's children. God have mercy on us!

Views of a non-lawyer.

1. I think it was lord Denning who said that the law is not a technical game left to technicians only to administer it.

2. I think the import of the statement means, if left to the technicians only, the law in the hands of tricky lawyers, will turn into a grotesque uncontrollable being.

3. That's where the judges must intervene to prevent the law becoming an enemy to public interests.

4. Public interest at the moment, demand that whomsoever breaks the law must be punished and those who plunder this country must meet the force of the law.

5. With reference to the monies in the 1MDB case, the public would simply ask, how did the billions get into Najib's account or the accounts in which Najib has controlling interests?

6. Did the monies walked on their own there, flew there, brisk walked there, jog or get there by some effing serpentine ways?

7. The answer to that simple question, would demolish any artful , obfuscating and intended to confuse arguments by artful talking and shyster lawyers.

8. Judges can humour the strained and overstretched arguments of these artful lawyer but must remain steadfast in preserving the purpose of the law in this instance, to punish the wrongdoer.

9. So when Najib's lawyers warned the courts that this 1MDB case will spillover to 2026, that self serving assertion raises in us the public, much emotions of despair and utter disbelief. It is capable of making us loose faith in our justice system .

10. First of all, right thinking persons in our society, will take such statement, as blackmailing or holding the Court at ransom. It's saying if you call Najib to enter defense, the case might continue till 2026. So the prudent thing to do, is to drop the charges against najib. if that happens, then the monies walked, jog and flew on their own. Then, it will become a case, an elephant can fly because it's determined so by the courts.

11. Taxpayers time and money have been extraordinarily expended such that an incremental expenditure of time and money is no longer relevant. The law must never lose its purpose, which is to punish the wrongdoers.

12. If the court countenances the assertion of Najib's crafty lawyers, then its giving a wide berth to the rich and powerful while being harshly punitive to the lumpenproletariat .

13. The Court must never take lightly this kind of soft blackmailing and arm twisting. It must be met with the most robust objection by the Court.

14. It will be a crying shame that because of some alarmist assertions, the court will capitulate and does something unjustifiable and non-justiciable. If the price to punish the author of a most heinous crime, the Heist of the century is time overrun, so be it .

15. The lawyer for Ali babavum Najib has chosen to publicize his assertions, so it invites an equal counter assertion. It's the working of Newton's 3rd law of motion my friend, an action invites an equal reaction .

16. Except the manner of the riposte cannot be predetermined by the author of the action. It maybe supportive of his assertion or it maybe not. Roll the dice and see the outcome, brother .

17. The entitled inbred social media, the sychophantic social media and the UMNO DNA-ed busybodies are working overtime to create public opinion that Najib is pristine and super clean.

18. These toady, bootlicking and smarmy online social medias are overzealous in asserting that as the putera in the term Bumiputera, red lips Najib is naturally entitled to special privileges. And his minders are quick to embellish that.

19. Fortunately the number of these obsequious degenerates is few. The majority of the people are law abiding citizens who want to see the full force of the law is judicially applied. Without fear or favour.

20. We, the common people, the reasonable men must stop thinking that only lawyers understand the concept of justice. We the people will always be the reality check on unobstructive and most often self serving legal narratives.

Reading KKB ex post.

1. I believe I have the bragging rights in predicting DAP victory in KKB. In arriving at that conclusion , i didn't read chicken entrails or read tea leaves.
2. Nor did I cut green lemon over a basin of water and decipher the hidden messages therefrom. And proclaim that those who cannot read the messages will have a shortened life .
3. I gave reasons for my opinion. It is a perfectly rationalised opinion if I may say so.
4. My opinion, as Hitchens said, is enough for me. And I reserve the right to have it defended against any consensus, majority opinion any time any place anywhere. those who disagree with me can go and fly kite or better still, kiss my ass.
5. I heard an interview between a Malay centric , entitled inbred online media and Zaid Ibrahim, the Hampstead liberal. Therein is the main problem in our society.
6. It was an ensemble of master race persons singing the song of unmistakably racial supremacy. Disguised by nervous laughter.
7. The online paper , probably consisting of SPM 3rd graders and just reached puberty journalists was overeager to suggest that KKB will be better served by a Malay, albeit mediocre, as long as a Malay.
8. Hence they eagerly prods the DAP to field a Malay candidate.
9. Zaid Ibrahim, on the other hand slyly remarked, that it's a candidate from DAP, it must be a Chinese. And because of that it can win KKB, at the most by 500 votes .
10. Remember, Zaid was the person who said ' I am also a malay'. He disavows the UMNO route of becoming a Malay, but actually wants to be a better ' UMNO Malay '.
11. In a strange way, that's a Frantz Fanon logic. You condemned the oppressor but eventually become one yourself
12. Zaid Ibrahim is my personal friend. I compliment readily but will unhesitatingly criticize him. Like many others, I was and am shocked that he is on the side of the embezzler in chief . Now he is even agitating for the mother effer to be under house arrest. As I understand it, there is no law for it under the constitution. Also, we are a constitutional monarchy. The king does not override the constitution.
13. In discussing KKB, his hypocrisy as a non racist and liberal is exposed. In the final analysis, the man perceived to be a liberal and non racist, regrets that it wasn't a Malay fielded by DAP. His master race politics comes to the fore finally. Sheesh!
14. The voters in KKB refuse to be pigeonholed into racial stereotypes and must therefore be at odds with one another. Tension isn't the way to build a country.
15. As I said earlier, the people in KKB voted for what is good for business. And what's good for business is to vote in a party that propagates inclusion, promises to fight against all forms of social injustices, preaches mutual respect, shared happiness, shared prosperity and most importantly shared responsibility. The last being the awareness that ALL of us, all race, culture and religion are collectively responsible for creating a society that we all want.
16. That means deciding what kind of society we want should not be decided by the politicians alone. As long as they served as our mouthpieces, they are relevant to us. Once they are against us, we the people, reject them .
17. 17. Clearly, with that mindset, the people in KKB reject parties that preach religious bigotry, racial supremacy, social anarchy as a devisive tool etc.
18. The ecclesiastical mullah, aka the spiritual, that he actually is a closet dictator, Hadi of marang spoke like an entitled idiot n that he actually is when he said that a DAP victory in KKB will turn KKB into a Singapore and KKB Malays into Singapore Malays.
19. He is an idiot for wanting us to believe that a DAP victory in KKB will turn Malaysia into a Singapore, which by the way, is a 1st world country. A DAP victory in KKB is like pouring salt in the ocean. Has he not heard of one swallow does not a summer make?
20. But we get it. He is warning the KKB Malays that they will be like the Malays in Singapore.
21. He's got a sad vision of the Malays forever being a sad race. He wants the Malays continue to be freeloaders . A race entitled to having special rights, entitled to preferential treatment, entitled to being stupid and mediocre, entitled to break the law, to steal and to serve time at home and to have breakfast in bed.
22. As progressive Malays, we find this paternalistic and patronizing treatment, abhorrent and repulsive. He can go fly kite off the coast of Rusila .
23. I am glad that his divisive and antiquated argument was rejected by the KKB Malays save for some Malay rednecks and UMNO DNA-ed inbreds.
24. Al fadhil Hadi can continue cavorting with Bersatu and UMNO Ku Klux clan people.
25. Part of being not stupid, as said by one of Malaysia's podcast 2 ronnies, isn't confined only to be able to read through Nga Koh meng's gift but also includes the following:-
26. Empowerment. The threat to manipulative politics is empowerment. With empowerment , people are capable of independent thinking.
27. With independent thinking people can read through and laughed off outrageous claims and manipulative narrations. Such as the outrageous claim by a ecclesiastical clown that a DAP win KKB will start Malaysia becoming a Singapore. Or manipulative statements which are vindictive in nature harping on government adminstrative shortcomings which require time to solve. Hey, even if you want to piss, you have to unzip your pants
28. 28. People don't care two hoots about name calling. You can display photos of the pm or Agung, people just don't care. They have independently decided. The photos are materials of interest to the police only.
29. You are accountable for your deeds or misdeeds. If you sow seeds of deceit and dissension, these will catch up with you. If you steal and plunder from the country you will get the proper comeuppance. There's no such thing as house arrest where you can indulge in your conjugal rights . Only entitled inbreds and their shyster spokesmen think you deserved so .
30. People are protective of their religions and do not take kindly of anyone group mocking, ridiculing or disparaging his religion. Intentionally or not. Take the case of the KK mart socks issue. But they will not respond in the way stormfuhrer Akmal wants. The people responding in the way baby face Nelson Akmal wants are the UMNO inbreds and those spoiling for a fight.
31. People care about food security, about having affordable homes and about preserving racial harmony. Master race politics is out
32. They take the following as given and must be provided by a good government. Health services, security and social amenities including good transport system.
33. What do all these things mean? Collectively it means that voter profile and "ordinal' preferences have changed. Only some parties stick to their ' carnal' utility curve .
34. That should be an object lesson for those parties pursuing ecclesiastical dictatorship and pushing for the creation of an Orwellian society. It's an object lesson too for parties pursuing master race politics. It is particularly of interest to UMNO with its swashbuckling politics. Akmal may think himself as an Erol Flynn at the moment. UMNO that doesn't know how to adapt won't know what hits them.
35. To me, what happened in KKB is a watershed in Malaysian politics. It points to the future of our politics. Certainly the parties that do not adapt will perish. Let's pray it's UMNO.