Save Selangor !!

FROM UMNO's CORRUPT LEADERS!!!!

Another victim of Police Shooting wants actions against police!

Noodle seller Ho Chei Hang, who survived after being shot four times by policemen, wants action to be taken against the cops who he said discharged their firearms at him without justification.

Ho (right), 32, who was shot by plainclothes police officers near his home in Kepong Baru on Nov 16, said the police did not identify themselves, nor did they fire warning shots. "I want the police officers involved in shooting me to be identified and their details given to me, so that I can take legal action against them." "I also urge the officers involved be investigated for attempted murder and abuse of power without being protected or given special treatment," he said in a memorandum handed over to the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) at the commission's headquarters in Kuala Lumpur today. Ho described how two unidentified Malay men suddenly yelled at him as he was driving away from a field near his house about 6pm, after meeting with a friend.

Lost control of car after being shot

When he did not stop the car, the men shot at him. Injured, he lost control of his car and rammed into a nearby home. After the car stopped, he opened the door and stepped out, but fell into a monsoon drain that his car had run over. Weakened from his injuries, Ho climbed out to the roadside and was accosted by the two men, who were now joined by two others. Ho said his wallet, mobile phone, cash and other belongings were seized by the men who claimed to be from the police, all of which they are yet to return. He complained that he was left at the roadside, without being given any medical aid, and was forced to wait for the ambulance, despite the officers having their own transport. Lying by the side of the road and bleeding from his injuries, Ho said, he heard the officers talking about how they were expecting to intercept a white Honda Civic driven by a drug suspect who was potentially armed with a pistol. As his Honda Civic was black, Ho is puzzled as to why he was targeted. However, he said, it might have been a case of mistaken identity. "But that does not excuse the misuse of firearms and excessive use of force by the police," said Ho's lawyer Keppi Wong, who accompanied him today to file his complaint. Ho, who was warded for 11 days in the intensive care unit of the Kuala Lumpur Hospital and was discharged on Monday, handed the memorandum to Suhakam vice-chairperson Khaw Lake Tee. Still weak from his injuries and unable to stand or walk, he was wheeled to the commission's office by family members. Of the four bullets that hit his back and shoulder, one is still lodged in his shoulder blade. Doctors have been unable to remove this remaining bullet, which is lodged too deep in his bone. Ho is also too weak to undergo another operation this soon. The noodle seller, who is currently out on police bail, operates several stalls in Kepong and Jinjang. He also complained that he was handcuffed to his bed in the hospital. He is also being investigated by police under section 307 of the Penal Code for attempting to murder the police officers who shot him. Six points The six-point memorandum calls on Suhakam to:

• Investigate and look into the abuse of power and improper use of firearms by police;
• Urge police investigation into the matter to be handled by Bukit Aman;
• Ensure that the identities of the officers involved be made known;
• Urge police to investigate the officers for attempted murder.
• Urge the government to implement a code of practice on the use of fireams by police; and
• Urge the government to form the IPCMC to handle public complaints against the police.

Khaw (left, in picture below) in accepting the memorandum gave her assurance to the family that the matter would be looked into by the commission. "Suhakam takes notice of the issues brought up by the victim, the concerns of his father and of Suaram. We will investigate the matter and take whatever action that is appropriate," she said. Other than his lawyer, Ho was accompanied to the Suhakam office by his wife, parents and Suaram's Rights to Justice coordinator Lucas Yap. Quizzed by Khaw on the family's next course of action, Wong replied that he was in the midst of receiving instructions from the family in pursuing legal action against the police force. Ho also lodged a police report over the incident yesterday.

More ridicules judgement from Judges in Malaysia!

Judge throws out Anwar's defamation suit against Mahathir because it was written in English and not BM! However the bias judgement was written in delivered in ENGLISH!! DAMN!!

So Anwar appeals against this! But...

In delivering the ruling today (24 Nov), the Federal Court dismissed Anwar Ibrahim's preliminary objection to a Court of Appeal judgment over a defamation suit he had filed in 2006 against Dr Mahathir Mohamad because it was in English.

The appellate court judgment was however written in English.

Chief Judge of Malaya Justice Arifin Zakaria (left)said this morning that the grounds of judgment do not constitute part of a judgment.

Judges have wide discretion to write their grounds of judgment either in the national language Bahasa Malaysia or English.

Quoting the Law Lexicon, he said the reasons for judgment are not themselves judgments though they may furnish the court's reasons for the decision and thus form a precedent.

“Thus it is clear that 'judgment' must be distinguished from 'reasons for judgment' or what we commonly refer to as grounds of judgment,” he said.

He nonetheless declared that the court views seriously the use of the national language in courts.

Justice Arifin also cited a 1990 circular by former Chief Judge of Malaya, Justice Hashim Yeop Sani, directing judges and judicial commissioners of the High Courts, Session Courts and Magistrate's Courts to submit to him at least one written grounds of judgment in the national language each month.

This was to identify problems arising out of the implementation of the use of the national language in courts.

“This circular reinforces our view that judges indeed have a discretion to deliver the grounds of judgment either in the national language or the English language,” said Justice Arifin.

“For the above reasons we hold that it is not contrary to Article 152 (of the federal constitution) and Section 8 of the National Language Act.”

Following the decision - which led to the appeal being struck out - Arifin ordered Anwar to pay costs of RM70,000, although Mahathir's lawyer VK Lingam had applied for RM100,000.

Lingam said he had to prepare more than 6,000 pages of documentation with two other lawyers.

He further said a benchmark must be set for leave applications in Federal Court cases, citing a decision where the apex court had agreed to award RM100,000. Karpal asked for costs be set at RM20,000.

Anwar appeared resentful of the decision.

"He (Lingam) is a multi-millionaire. I lost the case. He is Mahathir's lawyer, so how can we win?" he said outside the court room.

His lawyer Karpal Singh said he would consider filing a review.

Arifin led a three-member panel also comprising Federal Court judge Justice James Foong and Court of Appeal judge Justice Suriyadi Halim Omar.

Constitutional issue

Karpal had raised a novel constitutional issue at the apex court on Sept 27, when he said all written judgments should be in Bahasa Malaysia.

This was in the preliminary objection after the Court of Appeal dismissed Anwar's appeal last December on the grounds that it was not submitted in the national language. Ironically, the court's judgment itself was rendered in English.

Karpal then asked the apex court to compel the Court of Appeal to write its judgment in Bahasa Malaysia, after which Anwar's appeal application could proceed.

“Most of the written judgments in civil or criminal cases are in English at all levels of the court,” he said.

“Hence, this brings into question the validity in the jurisdiction of all those judgments which are written in English.”

Karpal said Section 8 of the National Language Act states that all proceedings (other than the giving of evidence) in the Federal Court, Court of Appeal, the High Court or any subordinate court shall be in the national language.

“This provision also applies to judges, as this does not provide them with the exception of writing judgments in English,” he said.

Section 8 also says the court may either of its own motion or on the application of any party to any proceedings - and after considering the interests of justice in those proceedings - order that the proceedings (other than the giving of evidence by a witness) shall be partly in the national language and partly in the English language.

The lawyer was attempting to turn the tables on Court of Appeal judge, Justice Abdul Malik Ishak, who in dismissing Anwar's appeal, had said all court documents must be in the national language because the supremacy of Bahasa Malaysia is enshrined in the federal constitution.

Justice Malik, who ironically wrote the judgment in English, said Article 152 of the constitution, read together with the National Language Act, states that all proceedings other than the giving of evidence shall be in the national language.

Mostly taken from Malaysiakini

Army and Navy Veterans answer back our Defense Minister! With style!!!!

Taken from Malaysiakini

When Rear Admiral (Rtd) K Thanabalasingam ascended to the position of the nation's first ever local chief of Navy, it would have never crossed his mind that his loyalty to the country would be questioned.

Having spearheaded the Navy's mission to protect Malaysia from numerous threats that arose in the 1960s-1970s period, the former naval chief spoke in disbelief at Defence Minister Zahid Hamid's recent statement that patriotism among non-Malays was "not strong enough" for being reluctant to sign up with the Armed Forces.

"I don't understand how such a statement came about... I've been through a lot, and I don't care who says it, it hurts me. I am a Malaysian born and bred, and I intend to die here," Thanabalasingam (left) said when contacted by Malaysiakini.

The 75-year-old veteran who retired in January 1977 after holding the top naval post for nine years and one month, stressed that there has never been a lack of patriotism among non-Malays in defending the nation from threats within, and without.

He recounted how they, along with their Malay brothers-in-arms, fought side-by-side regardless of whether they were in the navy, air force, army or police field force to push back the communist insurgency that spanned some three decades from the 1950s until it ended in 1989, and the perils they braved over the four years of the 1963-1966 Confrontation from Indonesia.

"Even during the Confrontation, there was a lot of action in the Singapore Straits and Malacca Straits.

"At that time, two of my officers were awarded the PGB (Panglima Gagah Berani), which is the highest award for bravery, for blowing up KKOs (Indonesian Korps Komando Operasi) during an attack.

"One officer was an Indian who eventually retired as a commodore, and the other a Eurasian who also later retired as a commodore too.

"Why were they awarded PGBs? Because of their bravery in the line of duty," he said in driving home his point.

Zahid's barking up the wrong tree

Retired airman, Brig Gen (Rtd) Goh Seng Toh (right) was more severe in his rebuke of Zahid's statement, calling it "unfair, stupid and racist".

Goh, 65, said before anyone starts accusing non-Malays of being unwilling to serve the country in the military, the nation's leaders themselves should set an example if they insist on such talk.

"He's (Zahid) barking up the wrong tree... if you talk of patriotism, then I have one question; do any of our ministers have children in the Armed Forces?

"If not, then the same argument applies to them, so why only look at the Chinaman?

"I was shot at twice by communist terrorists in Betong at the Thai-Malaysia border. I nearly lost my life on more than one occasion, and I never chickened out. If anyone queries my patriotism, I get very angry," said the 35-year veteran.

All about being practical

Both men, however, agreed that the crux of the matter lies not in the loyalty of non-Malays to the country, but the challenge of surviving in the modern world.

Thanabalasingam stressed that far from being an issue of patriotism, what concerns non-Malays when it comes to enlisting in the Armed Forces is their career prospects should they choose to lay their lives on the line for the country.

He pointed out that public perception of the armed forces is mired in the notion that non-Malays, more often than not, are left behind when it comes to career advancement.

"Today people are more interested in careers. Gone are the days when you just join and follow orders.

"People want to see what's in it for them, can they raise a family, educate their children... they want to be able to raise their family comfortably instead of having to struggle to make ends meet

"If the conditions are correct, they will join. It has to be proven that they have got a good future and prospects, and there is no discrimination in promotions or selection for senior defence posts or special courses overseas," he said.

Goh went so far as to say that the Armed Forces have done nothing to disprove the perception of race being a key factor for advancement.

"There is an element of truth, unless you say all the Chinese who join the Armed Forces are sub-standard. But this cannot be true, because there are many good people, but they leave because they do not see their career path being very bright."

'You must be Malay'

Goh, who earned his one star in 1997 - three years before retirement - blamed the low ratio of non-Malay soldiers on the current make-up of the Armed Forces, the bulk made up of the Royal Malay Regiment.

"Not a single non-Malay can be part of it. No Chinese, Indians, Ibans, or any other can join these regiments. You must be Malay.

"I can't say exactly how many regiments there are, but assuming that they take up around 50 percent of our forces, that only leaves 50 percent open to multi-racial (participation), and this would only be for the services and supporting arms," he said.

No matter what the situation, however, Thanabalasingam said he believes that Malaysians will stand up and be counted among the country's defenders when needed, regardless of race or creed.

"If we had a war today, I would volunteer to do whatever I can, even with my condition with a walking stick... many would rally to the cause to defend the nation," he said.

What are Utusan Malaysia writers up to???

Malay language daily Utusan Malaysia described the 1969 May 13 racial riots as a 'sacred day' for Malaysia.

The daily's deputy editor-in-chief Zaini Hassan (below) described the riots as a blessing in disguise in his weekly column. He also warned DAP to recognise the significance of that day.

Otherwise "wealthy businesses and the professional classes would be controlled by one race only," he wrote.

THIS IS UMNO CONTROLLED NEWSPAPER!

Will Home ministry come after them for printing such bullshit?!?!

Are MCA Gerakan or MIC doing anything about this?!?!

Do you need anymore reason to vote against Barisan National?!?!?

DAMN!

Defense Minister, UMNO Leader Shoots himself in the foot!

The Defense Minister, Ahmad Zahid Hamidi announced that one of the possible reasons for the low intake of non-Malays in the armed forces is that their "patriotism spirit is not high enough"!!!

If that is the case he should then asked WHY!??!

Why are non-Malays not patriotic to Malaysia?!?!

Is it because we they are treated like second class citizen?!?

Is it because the ruling UMNO party once in a while ask them to return to India and China?!?

Is it because of Biro TataNegara??

Let me say it as it is! These are reasons most, if not all Malaysian know but either do not want to admit it or are acting dumb!

Reasons why non-Malays don't join the armed forces!

1. Bias!!! We are know that in govt services which ethnic and religious background get to moved up the ranks first!

2. Corruption! We know that if you don't get with the corrupt programme you will be sideline and may even be place in the line of fire!!!

3. Pay is not high enough for the non-Malays (as they might have better opportunities outside the armed forces)

4.Damn Lousy publicity and recruitement drive!!! I wanted to joined the army once when I was a kid! (Thanks to GI Joe!) But I had no idea how to joined the army! I still don't know how to joined the army!

How many people know how to join the army and what are the benefits and career pathway for joining the army?!?!?

There dumb ass minister! Those are the real reason why non-Malays don't join the army!!!

Now stop shooting yourself in the foot!!

You are making me worried for our national defense if this is the brains behind out armed forces!!

God HELP US!!!

P.I. Bala Mocks Malaysia's AG Gani Patail

Former private investigator P Balasubramaniam is making a mockery of our Malaysian government and our AG for closing the case of his double statutory declarations.

After months of investigations on the part of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the Attorney-General's chambers, Minister in Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz announced in Parliament on Wednesday that the case was closed.

In an open letter to attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail, Balasubramaniam said that he was “surprised” that despite having conceded to signing a false statutory declaration, the police could not find evidence of any wrongdoing.

“The police, I believe, have investigated the circumstances surrounding the making of these two statutory declarations under section 199 of the Penal Code, for an offence which carries a sentence of three years' imprisonment and a fine. This is not a trivial offence.

“It has therefore come as a great surprise to me to discover that you have been unable to decipher any wrongdoing from the enormous amount of evidence the police must have been able to accumulate from their investigations,” he said.

Insisting that his second statutory declaration was false, he urged the authorities to reopen the case.

“The first one was entirely truthful. The second one was a complete pack of lies. I admit this,” he said.

He also challenged the attorney-general to charge him for making a false statement in the second statutory declaration.

“I do however reserve the right to plead not guilty to the charge as I believe I have a very good defence,” said Balasubramaniam.

“I will be more than happy to return to Malaysia to defend myself but you will have to ensure that my safety is guaranteed as there are some people who would prefer that I was not around,” he said.

Private eye hired by Razak Baginda
Balasubramaniam - better known as PI Bala - became a household name when it was revealed at the murder trial of Mongolian translator Altantuya Shaariibuu that he was the private investigator hired by one of the accused, former political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda (below).

In the bodyguard's cautioned statement, it emerged that Altantuya, almost with her last words, told her two assailants that she was pregnant and begged them not to kill her. That has led to speculation that her body was blown up with C4 explosives to hide any DNA evidence of who the father might be.

PI Bala's open letter to AG Gani Patail

Dear Tan Sri (Abdul Gani Patail), (from Malaysiakini)

My name is Balasubramaniam Perumal. I think you may have heard of me.

I was Abdul Razak Baginda's private investigator hired by him to protect him from his ex-girlfriend, Altantuya Shaaribu (deceased), sometime in 2006.

Remember you charged him for her murder but he got off. Instead, two of the prime minister's bodyguards got convicted. Stranger things have happened, I am sure you would agree.

But I digress. Let me come to the point.

I have been made to understand that you have decided to close the case involving two statutory declarations I signed sometime at the beginning of July 2008 in Kuala Lumpur.

The contents of these statutory declarations were diametrically opposed. Both could not have been true and therefore one of them was false. I trust that makes sense to you.

The police, I believe, have investigated the circumstances surrounding the making of these two statutory declarations under section 199 of the Penal Code, for an offence which carries a sentence of three years' imprisonment and a fine. This is not a trivial offence.

The police must have interviewed my lawyer, Americk Sidhu, his secretary, the commissioner of oaths who attested my signature and a variety of other witnesses you have mentioned who were somehow intrinsically interwoven in the construction and affirmation of both statutory declarations, one way or another.

It has therefore come as a great surprise to me to discover that you have been unable to decipher any wrongdoing from the enormous amount of evidence the police must have been able to accumulate from their investigations.

Please permit me to assist you. Firstly, may I suggest that you re-open this file immediately. I will make it easy for you.

Let me admit to you that I did sign a false statutory declaration. Yes, I did. I signed a false statutory declaration. It was the second one, not the first one. The first one was entirely truthful. The second one was a complete pack of lies. I admit this.

This statutory declaration was prepared by some unknown person(s) and I was forced by very thinly veiled threats and intimidation to sign it. I have already made this known to the world at large and I am surprised your office has not picked this up as yet. Everyone else has.

If you are unable to ascertain this information which I have just provided to you directly, please feel free to contact me at this email address bala.p.i@hotmail.com and I shall forward to you a copy of the video recorded interview I had in the presence of my lawyers in Singapore last November, and a copy of the transcript thereof.

Otherwise you can find this information on all the blogs worth reading (such as Raja Petra Kamarudin's Malaysia Today) and also on 'YouTube' (just type in 'PI Bala' into the search column and you will be surprised what comes up).

So you may now consider charging me for making the false second statutory declaration after the clues I have given you. I do however reserve the right to plead not guilty to the charge as I believe I have a very good defence.

Your prosecutors will also have to make sure they call all the necessary witnesses to prove their case against me. These witnesses will have to include the following personalities:

i) A lawyer named Arunampalam Mariam Pillai (who coincidentally does legal work for Deepak Jayakishan and Rosmah Mansor's personal companies).

ii) A commissioner of oaths (Zainal Abidin Muhayat) who works in the office of Zul Rafique and Partners (Advocates & Solicitors) and who attested my signature when he came to the room in which I was being held at the Hilton Hotel Kuala Lumpur.

iii) Deepak and Dinesh Jaikishan (very good friends and confidantes of Rosmah Mansor).

iv) Nazim Razak (younger brother of the prime minister), and his wife.

v) ASP Suresh (a suspended police officer formerly attached to the IPK headquarters in KL).

vi) Officers from the Immigration Department Damansara (who assisted in obtaining urgent passports for my family).

vii) A host of journalists and reporters who were present in the lobby of the Prince Hotel Kuala Lumpur when a lawyer called Arunampalam released my second statutory declaration without my permission.

These are just some of the witnesses I can think of but I am sure you know how to do your job so that should be not a problem. I don't want to be accused of trying to teach an old dog new tricks.

If for some strange reason my defence is called, I will also be able to provide witnesses to support what I have to say. I need not disclose who these witnesses are at this stage and I am sure you know that as well.

I shall now wait for the charge against me to be laid.

I will be more than happy to return to Malaysia to defend myself but you will have to ensure that my safety is guaranteed as there are some people who would prefer that I was not around.

Bala! Another case with No Further Action Taken!

There will be no further investigations on private investigator P. Balasubramaniam’s conflicting statutory declarations (SDs) as the case is now closed, according to the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

Defacto Law Minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, in a written reply in Parliament, said that the A-G’s Chambers’ decision to close the case was because Balasubramaniam’s conflicting SDs did not affect the high-profile trial of murdered Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu. (That is the most lame reason I have ever heard!)

Under Section 199 of the Penal Code for providing “false statements.”, offenders are liable to a maximum jail term of three years and a fine.

“Although there are contradictions between the two SDS, the contradictions do not affect the outcome of the trial of Altantuya. Moreover, the individual (Balasubramaniam) is still believed to be abroad,” said Nazri.

The investigations against Balasubramaniam took place after he retracted a statutory declaration in July 2008, which implicated Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak and wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor in the murder of Altantuya.

Balasubramaniam, a private investigator hired by Abdul Razak Baginda, who was also Altantuya’s lover, has made many controversial allegations including linking Najib to Altantuya’s murder.

According to Bala’s lawyer Americk Sidhu, the Attorney-General's decision to close the file was aimed at halting embarrassing information from surfacing to implicate Nizam, Rosmah’s business associate Deepak Jaikishan and his brother and a police officer named Inspector Suresh.

This group is believed to have acted with the motive of trying to protect Najib, then the deputy prime minister, and destroy the credibility of the information contained in a previous statutory declaration.

“The A-G can't afford to investigate further as a whole can of worms would be opened up. That is the reason why he AG closed the file,” Americk told Malaysia Chronicle.

“Nothing is going to happen to the culprits because they are all sitting on the correct divide of the political fence. I don't think it is a good outcome. It is another attempt at sweeping stuff under the carpet again. This is something they are experts at.”

Powerful hands behind her killing

The murder of the beautiful 28-year old Altantuya, whom Bala had revealed in his first statutory declaration was Najib’s mistress before he passed her on to his close associate Razak Baginda, has gripped Malaysians for years now.

She was killed in a remote jungle clearing in Selangor in 2006 in a most horrific way. Despite telling her killers she was pregnant, two of Najib’s former bodyguards shot her in the head and blew her body with C4 explosives to prevent identification.

Months after the discovery of her body, rumors began circulating of powerful hands behind her killing. Altantuya, who speaks four languages including Russian and French, had played a role in helping Razak Baginda close a multi-billion ringgit submarines purchase for Najib, who was then the Defense minister.

Bala had been hired by Razak Baginda to stop Altantuya from harassing him for what she had said was her share of the submarines commission paid by French vendor DCNS. It amounted to US$500,000 while Baginda’s firm was allegedly benefitted with a 214 million euros side-deal.

In 2008, after harassment over his police statement which had contained some of these details, Bala decided to blow the whistle. With the help of his lawyers, he made a statutory declaration detailing all the information that had come to his hand while working for Baginda.

For more details!

1 Malaysia my @ss!!!

This video of Titiwangsa UMNO head speak for itself!!!

So much for 1 Malaysia!!