Where is justice?
I think there's something seriously wrong when … you arrest A on the allegations of person S, and because that A is apparently some threat and a super charismatic orang hebat who goes around telling people he's going to run for elections very very soon.
And you don't arrest N even though person R has sent in so many allegations, possibly because person N is some born-with-a-golden-spoon hebat who also happens to be the secretary of defence.
If you asked me, honestly, I don't think the alleged 'terrible act' of putting a sexual organ into another person's orifice happend at all. And I also don't think that the obviously 'melampau' and 'evil' act of exploding a beautiful person into a liquidified mass was personally dictated by person N (although I don't discount that person N's official spouse could have had a hand in it…). So honestly I personally feel that neither parties are actually guilty at all.
But I think justice should be served lah. If you wanna arrest A on the allegations of S, then you really should arrest N on the allegations of R.
But justice seems so far, far away. Because you see, a prime minister-in-waiting has to respond to the challenge of an information minister, but a prime minister-in-transition does not want to respond to the challenge of the prime minister-in-waiting. While the national debate was awesome, I thought it was sorely lacking because I really hoping to see Pak Lah go up against Anwar. That would be UBER COOL.
But instead we were subjected to seeing Shabery BuihCheek resorting to potshots (oi stupid mainstream media, why your reports so surreal one… siapa yang tengok debat kat Awani / TV9 … dah pun tau who was the better speaker…). I think justice wasn't really served there to either parties. Anwar is way above Strawberry Shabery… but hello, that guy's an ex deputy prime minister lah. Can't you compare apples with apples, for once?
I miss you, justice. Come back boleh?
July 18th, 2008 at 4:09 am
I agree with you. This outrage going on with Anwar Ibrahim is so serious that all of the US newspapers are reporting on it, the NY Times, the Wall Street Journal, etc. There is no true justice/democracy when a government leaders can randomly make up fake charges like that and use that to bring down its opposition. I feel so sorry for you guys.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:28 am
it is indeed a very nice piece of illustration.
July 18th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Come on. That’s rubbish. Why should AAB even face Anwar in the debate? Anwar said that Ahmad Shabery is a small fly and that he wanted to face either Pak Lah or Najib.
Then ask yourself who the hell is Anwar Ibrahim?!
He is not an elected representative of the people. He is neither a ADUN or an MP. He holds no formal position in the party. If at all, the debate should be between the leader of the ruling coalition and the opposition, Pak Lah and Wan Azizah!!
But of course, Wan Azizah has the charisma of a lame duck. Kinda like Pak Lah. Which would make the debate boring as hell.
Who the hell is Anwar Ibrahim? He’s who most political analysts, and the commonfolk-angry at the BN government people, would identify as ‘a prime minister in waiting’. So in my opinion, the debate should be between Pak Lah and Anwar. But I suppose Wan Azizah would work as well - dude have you heard her speak? Where’s that cliche again - assumption is the mother of fuck-ups. Wan Azizah is a better speaker than both you and I and Shabery … just that charisma wise, her hubby has got that ‘I’ve been wronged’ vibe all over him which makes him all the more attractive and people friendly.
And the problematic thing about Pak Lah isn’t the charisma. Its that he can’t talk. Haven’t you heard (or observed?)? Everytime he does a Press Conference, poor reporters have to crouch around the PM to actually hear what he’s saying. And he repeats his words and sentences 10 times in the same statement.
I get it that you made a choice in your choice of government. I am of the opinion that fence sitting like what you say you’re doing, at this point in time has its values - I can respect that. But proving PR’s policies and leaders suck doesn’t prove that therefore BN leaders make better leaders. Loud ducks would probably opt to quack over how PKR leaders suck without explaining therefore why the current BN government should be in place.
Another thing, since we’re on the topic of ducks, I don’t have a problem with you having your lame duck opinions in your blog, but it seems as if you’ve got a problem at me having my lame duck opinions in my own blog. I wonder why…
July 18th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Prime minister in waiting?!
Only the PKR supporters identify him as that. And by political analysts, I presume you mean Malaysiakini columnists? The good thing about my job is that I get to talk to kampung folk (hardcore PAS or hardcore UMNO supporters) about this kinda thing and get the true opinion. Only the urbanites call him prime minister in waiting. The die hard PAS people think he is too liberal and the hardcore UMNO people scoff at that idea.
But still, you may call him ‘Prime Minister in waiting’ but he is at the moment a nobody in the official sense. It is like me forming a party, calling myself the leader and challenging Lim Kit Siang to a debate - to which he has every right to laugh in my face because I am a nobody. Yet.
Of course I have heard Wan Azizah speak. I wasn’t talking about her oratory skills. I was talking about her charisma. She looks like a frail duck too. And so yeah, instead of Anwar Ibrahim, why didn’t she, as the official Opposition Leader take part in the debate? Or, as we suspect, she is nothing more than a proxy for her husband.
Before the election, I was fence sitting. I already said that as of recently, I am with the BN government on this, simply for the reason that I support the fuel hike and I respect that they had the guts to make a difficult and unpopular decision for the benefit of the country.
And you are free to comment on my blog. When have I edited or deleted anything you said. You say, and then we debate la. Nothing new what..