Who is the real dirty bugger!!

Seputeh MP and DAP publicity secretary Teresa Kok has lashed out at Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein for describing fellow DAP parliamentarian Teo Nie Ching as “dirty” and her visit to a surau as a “disaster” for the Muslim community.

In a statement issued today, the senior Selangor exco (right) said Hishammuddin has sunk to “a new low” and displayed the hypocrisy of his character in the terms he used to describe Teo, who is Serdang member of parliament.

“I question where Hishamuddin received the knowledge and moral authority to judge anyone to be dirty, least of all Teo Nie Ching, who entered the surau in sincerity and with an open heart, and only because the surau leaders invited her in.

“She has already issued a humble public apology to all concerned. I shudder to think (whether) Hishammuddin considers Teo Nie Ching dirty because she is non-Muslim, or simply because she is female.

“Hishamuddin should look in the mirror to check if he himself is spotless and clean before (passing) judgement on others,” said Kok.

Hishammuddin was reported yesterday to have said he was shocked that Teo had the support of PAS spiritual leader Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat over her visit to a surau, voicing concern that the incident could confuse Muslims.

“Teo had no business to be inside Surau Al-Huda as she was deemed dirty but Nik Aziz said its alright, we are modern now.

"What disaster can we expect next?” said the Umno vice-president.

Hishammuddin also said it was clear that DAP was adopting an extreme approach by questioning the rights and privileges defended by Malay leaders and the rulers.

First-term MP Teo drew a firestorm of criticism from Umno politicians, pro-Umno blogs and Malay dailies over her visit to the Al Huda surau in Serdang on Aug 22.

Her critics claimed that she had committed a grave insult to Muslims for speaking in the prayer hall, which is considered off-limits to non-Muslims.

The Selangor Religious Council said it will issue Teo a written reprimand, while Teo said she plans to write to the Selangor sultan to apologise and explain her action.

At least two religious scholars - a former mufti and the current mufti of Selangor - have noted that non-Muslims are not barred by Islam from entering its houses of worship.

Kok said the minister's remarks has not only betrayed his holier-than-thou attitude towards Teo and the 1Malaysia concept of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, but was fanning the flames of discontent among non-Muslims.

“Hishamuddin's statement smacks of a holier-than-thou hypocrisy and is truly shameful for a cabinet minister who propagates this 1Malaysia concept which supposedly espouses unity among all Malaysians.

“With that disparaging statement, Hishammuddin is once again fanning the flames of racial discontent like how he openly supported the Shah Alam cow-head protestors last September. He backtracked later only upon public uproar,” said Kok.

She called for the minister to retract immediately his statement and issue a public apology to Teo.

Failing this, said Kok, he and 1Malaysia will forever have no credibility in the eyes of the public.

I think the real dirty bugger is below!!

Source: Malaysiakini and TK

Happy Merdeka Day!!

A true patriot!

HAPPY MERDEKA DAY!!!

So here is a Merdeka story for all Malaysians.

Police went to the Muar house of young Malaysian rapper Wee Meng Chee 15 minutes before midnight on the eve of the 53rd National Day!

The police denied that song writer and young filmmaker Wee Meng Chee is under arrest.

We are not going to arrest him," said Muar district
police chief Mohammed Nasir Ramli when contacted by Malaysiakini.

Nasir confirmed that the police had indeed go to the youngster's house in Muar yesterday night, but said that it was for other purpose.

"We just want to find out where he is," he tersely said before ending the telephone interview.

Johor Criminal Investigation Department chief Datuk Amer Awal has denied any police plan to arrest Wee, saying that they are still investigating Wee’s case.

The Federal CID chief Datuk Seri Bakri Zinin has however confirmed that Wee was being investigated under the Sedition Actor, after uploading his YouTube video which drew allegations he was stirring up ethnic tensions.

The rapper has seen removed the video from YouTube on Sunday, after criticisms from various parties including Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak who reportedly urged action against those who try to stoke racial tensions.

The question however is why are the Police investigating Wong for sedition when there is nothing seditious in his latest 3-minute rap against the Kulai secondary school principal for making racist slurs against students while the school principal is still scot-free for her seditious racism?

Wong can be faulted for being crude, vulgar, abusive and even obscene as his fury was directed at the school principal of Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra, Kulai, Hajah Siti Inshah binti Mansor, for making racist, derogatory and seditious remarks like: “Pelajar-pelajar Cina tidak diperlukan dan boleh balik ke China ataupun Sekolah Foon Yew. Bagi pelajar India, tali sembahyang yang diikat di pergelangan tangan dan leher pelajar nampak seakan anjing dan hanya anjing akan mengikat seperti itu.”

Just because UMNO Puteri chief Rosnan Rashid Shirlin is offended by Wee’s latest videoclip does not automatically make the rap seditious and an offence under the Sedition Act.

Are the youth wings of Barisan Nasional parties, particularly from Umno, MCA, Gerakan and MIC and all the Barisan Nasional Ministers prepared to take a stand that Wee’s latest video clip may be guilty of being crude, vulgar and abusive but definitely not sedition?

In this connection, the Police should explain the purpose of sending three patrol cars to Wee’s house in Muar just before midnight last night – was it to arrest Wee, to get a statement from Wee or just to create an atmosphere of fear?

If the police had wanted to get a statement from Wee, why was it necessary to send three patrol cars to Wee’s house in Muar 15 minutes before midnight of National Day?

Finally, Malaysians are wondering whether when the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak recently spoke of “zero tolerance for racism”, he was thinking of police action against Wee instead of no-holds-barred action against the real racists and extremists who had made a mockery of his 1Malaysia slogan and policy and blighted the country’s prospects for economic rebound with incessant racist rhetoric.

Source: LKS

DUMBEST MACC Lawyer!

Is this the best lawyer MACC can sent to discredit Porntip??

Hahahahahaha!!! I bet the reason is because no half-decent lawyer will take this case!

Source: LKS

BN restrict freedom of the press while Utusan run amok!

Online news portal Malaysiakini will file for a judicial review to challenge a Home Ministry decision not to consider its application for a permit to publish a daily print version.

In saying this, CEO Premesh Chandran pointed out that the news portal has been around for 10 years and has a proven track record in professionalism and credibility.

“I don't see why we are not granted a permit,” he said in response to a letter from the Home Ministry dated Aug 19.

The ministry, which has sole jurisdiction over serial print publications, did not cite reasons for its decision.

“We applied for the permit in April. As not everyone has access to the Internet, a print version would expand our readership,” said Premesh.

Premesh said there had been no contact with the ministry except for a meeting with a senior member of the Publication and Quranic Texts Control Division two weeks ago.

The officer, who had also signed the letter, could not be reached for comment today.

This was Malaysiakini's second bid to obtain a publishing permit, following the first application in 2002.

After a long silence from the ministry, the matter was raised in a parliamentary question, eliciting the response that it was 'under consideration'.

We need to ask the Home Minister why he refuse to give Malaysiakini printing press license while stupid Utusan can still write all sorts of rubbish and still get away with it!!!

Lingam committing sedition with the help of the Courts!

Lingam on holiday with Eusoff Chin?!?

Two former chief justices Eusoff Chin and Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim along with lawyer VK Lingam have obtain leave (permission) from the appellate court to challenge the findings of the royal commission on the 'Lingam-gate' incident.

Justice Tengku Baharudin Shah Tengku Mahmud and Zaharah Ibrahim ruled in Lingam's favour while Justices Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus ruled against it.

Tengku Baharudin

Zaharah Ibrahim

In May 2008, the inquiry findings had recommended investigation by the authorities on six individuals including the trio over their roles in fixing the appointment of top judges. The others were tycoon Vincent Tan, Umno secretary-general and then minister in the Prime Minister's Department Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor and former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

(from left to right: Mahathir, Eusoff Chin, Tengku Adnan, Lingam, AhmadFairus: Top: Vincent Tan)

Low point in Malaysia's judiciary

Dubbed the 'Lingam tape saga', the disclosure in Sept 2007 by Anwar Ibrahim of a video recording of Lingam in a phone conversation with Fairuz over the brokering of senior judges was one of the lowest points in Malaysia's judicial history after the removal of former lord president Salleh Abbas and four other senior judges in 1988. The royal panel, which called a total of 21 witnesses to testify, found:

• the video clip was authentic;
  
• Lingam was engaged in a phone conversation with Fairuz in the presence of businessman Loh Mui Fah and his son Gwo-Burne (now Kelana Jaya parliamentarian), who took the video;

• Lingam had directly influenced the elevation of judges, including the appointment of Fairuz as president of the Court of Appeal and, possibly, the latter's further appointment as chief justice;
• Lingam to have asked Tan and Adnan to be actively involved in the appointment of judges, in particular the appointment of Fairuz as chief judge of Malaya and subsequently, president of the Court of Appeal;
  
• The phone conversation indicated Lingam's "uncanny knowledge" of what could be considered as matters classified as being under the Official Secrets Act; and

• Adnan could have been Lingam's 'source' in the Prime Minister's Department.

Lingam's Defence

Lingam, who represented himself yesterday, had submitted that he has a right to clear his name (through the judiciary).

However members of the judiciary (judges) should be the last ones qualified to judge because this corruption case involves the judiciary itself!

How much integrity is there for the judges to tell the world that Lingam is innocent when they themselves are corrupted?

This decision by the court of appeal (allowing Lingam to challenge the findings of the royal commission) has made a mockery of justice and it has set a dangerous precedent.

Is the Court of Appeal now saying that the High Court has supervisory jurisdiction over a Royal Commission of Inquiry?

The RCI's powers are derived from a specific Act of Parliament, the Commission of Inquiry Act 1950. It is not an inferior tribunal or administrative body that is amenable to judicial review.

The RCI reports directly to the King. It merely makes recommendations and findings based on its terms of reference and after considering the evidence.

The Government then decides on whether to give effect to the recommendations and findings of the RCI.

These recommendations and findings are not binding on the Government and they do not have the force of law.

They are subject to implementation or enforcement by the Government. Therefore, the recommendations and findings of the RCI being non-binding in nature and not enforceable in law cannot be termed as a decision that affects the rights of aggrieved or interested parties.

Lingam right to be heard should have been at the Royal Commission and not by the courts who are clearly part of the scandal!

By challenging the Royal Commission that was carried out under the King’s order, isn't Lingam committing sedition! It is for the King to accept the findings of the RCI and not Lingam.

If the King does not like the findings, the King can choose to reject the findings! Who is Lingam to challenge this findings?

Under section 3(1) of the Sedition Act, a seditious tendency are acts with a tendency:

(a) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government

I agreed with Kapal Singh, Lingam should be prosecuted for sedition, for bringing the judiciary to disrepute and breaching professional conduct stipulated under the Legal Profession Act and now for challenging the King's findings!

Source from Malaysiakini

Most cruel judgement by Malaysia's Judges to date!

He was detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA), tortured both physically and mentally, forced to drink urine - and now he has to pay RM70,000 to those who tortured him.

Thanks to the President of the Court of Appeal alaudin md sheriff, Federal Court justice hashim yusof and mohd ghazali mohd yusoff!

Abdul Malek was arrested under the ISA on the night of Sept 25, 1998, after addressing a demonstration earlier that day in Masjid Negara following the sacking and arrest of Anwar (right), who was then deputy prime minister.

He was detained for 57 days, and was later released without being charged. He then filed his civil suit in March 1999.

stripped naked in an air-conditioned room,blindfolded during interrogation, andphysically assaulted up to 60 times, beaten until he was unconscious, forced to drink urine and subjected to sexual abuse.

He also told the court he saw the then inspector-general of police Abdul Rahim Noor punching him in his chin in the interrogation room when his blindfold accidentally dropped.

High Court judge Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus also ruled in 2007, that the assault by Rahim did indeed take place as there was no denial and also there was no report lodged against Abdul Malek for falsifying his report.

HOWEVER!!!!

The Federal Court had yesterday (12 Aug 2010) upheld the appellate court's decision to overturn the High Court's rare judgmentto award Abdul Malek RM2.5 million over unlawful detention.

In fact, the apex court also ruled for Abdul Malek to pay RM20,000 to the respondents - special branch officer Borhan Daud, the then inspector-general of police Abdul Rahim Noor (right), and the government.

This is on top of theRM50,000 that the Court of Appeal ordered him to pay in costs back in March.

THAT IS RM70,000 ALTOGETHER!

This judgment that could potentially bankrupt him, and with absolutely no more legal recourse, he will now have to turn to help from the public for funds.

Despite that, former Internal Security Act detainee Abdul Malek Hussin (left) has vowed to soldier on.

"I don't know what I can do now. We may have to set up a fund or get help from the other NGOs.

"I don't like the idea, really. But I cannot be declared bankrupt because it would then mean that I have to forfeit a lot of job responsibility," said Abdul Malek, who is now the parliamentary affairs coordinator for opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim.

He said that he will also be in touch with human rights NGO Suaram and there will be a meeting on Monday to discuss the next course of action.

'Ruling is cruel'
When contacted byMalaysiakini, he also slammed the judgment, calling it "cruel".

"They dismissed my leave application. They wouldn't even listen to my case first. This is so cruel. At leastbagi jalan (give way) to listen lah.
"I think the judiciary is scared," he charged.

"The judiciary is supposed to be a bastion for citizens to seek justice. The idea of citizens going to court is primarily to seek justice. Here, the judiciary backs the authoritarian regime. Gone lah.

"(The courts) have failed in their responsibility to impart justice in defence of human rights and against authoritarianism," he said.

He added that with the judgment, the government's exercise in reviewing the ISA will be merely cosmetic.

News like this just make me ashame of my judiciary system! How I wish the BAR Council would be more vocal against such injustice!

Make me one to track all the idiot injustice done by our judiciary.

So far I can remember are the Anwar Sodomy Cases (with regards to evidence), The Perak Government Case (Sivakumar, Nizar and Menteri Besar), The Election Commision issues. Can't remember the rest. At least there is still this website(and also this website) that gives a good start! If anybody else has anymore to add just leave a comment!

Interestingly these 3 Judges, (alaudin md sheriff, Federal Court justice hashim yusof and mohd ghazali mohd yusoff) has interesting pass.

hashim yusof is the judge that Karpal Singh named as the Federal Court judge who failed to deliver about 35 judgments.
One of the 5 judges that was involved in the Perak bias judgement.
And finally alauddin, the judge that ruled on Apr 16, 2009 that Perak Assembly Speaker V Sivakumar does not have the power to suspend Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Abd Kadir and six state executive council members from attending the assembly. It is a decision that was made in blatant defiance of Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution which says,”The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”.

Source: Malaysiakini

BN Perak govt spend RM30,000 to control the mass media!

In an act of desperation, the BN Perak government has thrown away about RM30,000 of public funds to embarked on a public relations exercise.


Following the contentious one-day legislative assembly sitting to pass a RM80 million supplementary budget bill, which the opposition claims was "rushed", the BN Perak govt took a two full-page advertorials explaining a RM117 million "windfall" for the state government, hence allowing it to come up with a balanced budget, appeared today in Umno-linked NST and Malay daily Sinar Harian.

When contacted on this, one of Zambry's aides refused comment.

Advertorials
- paid advertisement written to look like an article - usually have a phrase to denote that they are merely advertising.

The ones that have been taken up by the BN government are deftly made up to appear as legitimate stories with the term "advertorial" missing.

Additionally, in the case of Sinar Harian, the page-11 article was distinguishable from other articles because the piece was contained within a border.

In the case of NST, the "article" which appeared on page-25 had tell-tale signs which include the omission of any indication whether the page was a home news item, interview, comment or analysis.

Normally, NST would either indicate "prime news" or "nation" on the "strap" at the top of the page. These were all absent.

The NST "article" also carried a quotation from Menteri Besar Zambry Abdul Kadir, along with a chart and photo-caption all in the newspaper's standard format.

In fact, the advertorial in NST carried a picture byline of their journalist, uncharacteristic for a paid advertisement.

The daily had also angled their "report", supplemented with quotes by Zambry (right), to state that the Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers staged a walkout in the middle of the assembly sitting when they were "caught with their pants down after the facts and figures on the supplementary budget were revealed".

"I guess they were really embarrassed as they had made numerous allegations against the BN state government on the supplementary budget," said Zambry as quoted by the "article".

Various sources have confirmed that the advertorials were paid for by the state government yesterday, amounting to nearly RM30,000 in total.

WHY ARE THEY WASTING PUBLIC FUNDS!!??

If the BN Perak Govt had not banned the press and recording devices in the state assembly, they wouldn't have to pay a single sen and the entire sitting would be covered by all the press!

It was previously reported that only journalists from national news agency Bernama and Umno-linked TV3 were allowed into the gallery.

The rest had to watch the proceedings through a window from an "observation room" and could only hear speeches through the PA system.

Several Pakatan leaders had their microphones switched off mid-speech when the debate got too heated.

"They probably thought that TV1 and TV3 could satisfy the masses. And when this didn't work, they would fork out money to pay for it.

And you know that the money is not coming out from the MB's pocket," said Nizar (left).

Nizar himself was given marching orders by the speaker when he refused to obey Speaker R Ganesan's instructions to stop debating.

Nizar was allocated 15 minutes to debate on the supplementary bill but continued to speak for a further 15 minutes although his microphone was turned off.

It was only when Nizar finished giving his speech that he walked out, although he claimed that he was pushed out by one of the sergeants-at-arms, triggering a walkout by other Pakatan assemblypersons.

Source: Malaysiakini