Ismail Merican! What a Low Down Dirty Shame!!

Reveal The Names of The 10-man Committee, Ismail.
We need to know who these "experts" are, and their credentials!
Please publish the report and make it available to the public.

Kugan’s post mortem files seized from UMMC

By Neville Spykerman, The Malaysian Insider

All files, pictures and samples in relation to A. Kugan, who died in custody, were seized by police from a hospital which had carried out a second post mortem on Jan 25.

A search warrant was issued to the University Malaya Medical Centre here before policemen took away the items.

Kugan was arrested on suspicion of car theft on Jan 15 but died at the police lockup five days later.

Federal Criminal Investigation Director Datuk Seri Bakri Zinin told The Malaysian Insider police were instructed to make the seizures by the Attorney-General and the move was part of ongoing investigations into the case.

Lawyer N Surendren, who is representing Kugan’s family, said he was shocked with the latest development adding police had been at UMMC the whole morning.

“I have been informed in writing by the hospital because Kugan’s family had sought the second post mortem which was carried out there.”

Meanwhile Surendren also slammed the findings of an independent committee formed by the Health Ministry today which concluded he died due to water in the lungs or acute pulmonary edema, inflammation of heart muscles or acute myocarditis which was compounded by blunt force.

Surendren said the committee has effectively found a third cause of death which is inflammation of the heart, which was never found by either pathologist who carried out the first and second post mortem.

The first post mortem carried out at the Serdang Hospital by Dr Karim Tajuddin on Jan 21 stated Kugan’s casue of death as “acute pulmonary edema” or fluid in the lungs.

A second post mortem was carried out by Dr Prashant N. Samberkar and he found Kugan died from a condition known as rhabdomyolysis, which is the rapid break-down of skeletal muscle tissue which will lead to kidney failure.

Other discrepancies, peviously reported were V-shaped marks which were described as abrasions in the Serdang Hospital report but burn wounds with a heated object in the second report.

The first report only found 22 external injuries on his body while the second found 40 such injuries.

The second post-mortem revealed congested blood vessels in Kugan’s brain haemorrhage in his neck muscles, heart and spleen, and contradicts the Serdang Hospital report which found these organs were normal.

The Serdang Hospital report says other organs in Kugan’s body were examined and were normal but the second findings showed that the organs were intact and not even removed for dissection, before the second post-mortem was conducted.

Surendren said the committee had “second guessed” the findings of the two doctors without the benefit of carrying out a post mortem and labelled the committee a whitewash.

He said unlike an on going inquiry by the Malaysian Medical Council into the case, the government independent inquiry had not called in family members or himself to give evidence or observe proceedings.

Earlier at a press conference in Putrajaya, Health Director-General Tan Sri Dr Ismail Merican disclosed the findings of the committee which was formed to investigate the discrepancies in the two post mortems. An eight page report was released to the press.

The 10-men committee unanimously agreed there was no evidence to show that the deceased had been ‘branded’ or been given repeated application of heat with an instrument or object as reported in the second post mortem.

In their opinion the injuries were the result of repeated trauma by a blunt and flexible object, like a rubber hose.

The committee found that all injuries on Kugan were insufficient to directly cause death and the discrepancies in the two reports were due to the absence of communication between the two pathologists, the misinterpretation of post mortem changes and some of the injuries by the second pathologist.

They concluded the discrepancy was not because of any foul reporting, misleading of information and there was no intention to hide information.

Dr Ismail said the differences in the number of external injuries found on Kugan, was because of different methodology used by the doctors. Dr Karim had tabulated 22 external injuries because he had grouped them by regions while Dr Prashant had listed some individually and some in groups, on the body.

He said the findings will be handed to the Attorney-General’s Chambers tomorrow.

And Mahathir now Supports Samy's candidate?

========================

========================

Heeby -'Jibbies' in the MSM .......

Despite the fact that not all are too keen on shaking Jibby's hand, the same cannot be said of our MSM.
Feet/@$$ kissing appears to be the trade of some NaSTy "journalists".
And they taken to superstition in a big way to consolidate their "evidence" about their success at politicking - it is the way way to go (at least the MSM thinks so).

All these appear to reinforce the general opinion that the Jibocracy we have now will depend a lot on "soothsayer analysis". With a couple of billions down the drain, Voodoo will probably go big-time in handling our economy, and deciding our future as a nation.
We had Talismans under tables/chairs. We have EC giving the PKR candidate No.4, and BN candidate No. 8.

Then, look at what appeared in NST (after Zubaidah's Lucky No. 11, story) ....
The walkabout in Petaling street by Jibby was greeted by rain - which was deemed a "good omen" worth reporting yesterday!!

In line with "Vision 2020", and the "1-Malaysia" campaigns, today they go one step further - they picked on a caged bird-brain to be a reliable "pundit"!!!

"Analysts contacted by the NST are split. The ultimate "analyst", Murugan the parakeet at the Sri Muneswara temple in Jalan Baru, took the middle road, picking cards that showed Barisan Nasional's Datuk S. Ganesan and Parti Keadilan Rakyat's S. Manikumar running neck and neck.".....

"Pressed further to pick a winner, Kanthasamy asked the bird to pick a card to show who was leading.
The parakeet picked a card with pictures of Lord Ganesha (also known as Lord Ganesan) and Goddess Laxmi (goddess of wealth).

"Ganesan's chances are better than Manikumar because he has better wealth and power," he explained."
- Too close to call, says Murugan the parakeet, NST Online, Local "News"

This Jibby's brand of progressive leadership promoted by the MSM.
This is the opinion that the Govt has of Malaysians .......
So if you are wondering what to make of leaders who "Walk the Talk" by walking the streets,
fear no more - JUST ASK YOUR BOMOH!!!!

Quotable Quotes on Malaysia's "Jib-cracy".

Yesterday one of the countries Australia and its friends have long seen as a pillar of regional stability took another big step towards becoming a pariah nation....... On top of a trade collapse, it now risks new sanctions against tax havens agreed upon at this week's Group of 20 meeting.
-Party machine trumps morality — Hamish McDonald

Even so, there is a palpable fin de régime air around Umno. Abdullah,Dr Mahathir and other leaders are publicly lamenting how corruption and cronyism are rife in the party. But his opponents say Najib is hardly the man to restore confidence. In the latest scandal to which they are linking him, the Defence Ministry (which he oversaw until recently) has deferred a big order for helicopters following questions about their high price. A parliamentary committee recently cleared the government of wrongdoing, but admitted not investigating whether “commissions” were paid.
-Enter Najib, with baggage — The Economist

The Umno assembly, at the end of March, which was monitored with great interest across the region, confirmed that Malaysia’s “ethnocracy” — rulership through privileging ethnicity — appears to be well and alive and showed no signs of mortality..... The power grab in the hitherto opposition-held state of Perak, which already saw the hand of a Najib political leadership style, is bound to backfire when the Bukit Gantang parliamentary by-election is held on Tuesday. Umno seems to know no better than to employ the worn-out political strategies and tactics of “buying” elections or money politics that recently failed in Permatang Pauh and Kuala Terengganu. Another tactic is to split opposition votes with multiple candidates, which seemingly has afflicted another by-election on Tuesday as well in Bukit Selambau, with its 15 contenders — unprecedented in Malaysian history! In sum, a paradigmatic shift has occurred in Malaysian politics while Umno and its partners are still mired in a fading ethnocracy. Malaysia’s new leader Najib does not appear to have any mandate nor appetite to change this nor would he be in a position to reform his party or the BN.
-Najib’s rise to power and limits to ethnocracy in Malaysia — Johan Saravanamuttu

In terms of intellectual promise, Abdullah and Najib are virtually on par ....
Those expecting Najib’s capabilities to exceed Abdullah’s are, I fear, mistaken. While it is true that unlike Abdullah, Najib is not a career civil servant, it is also true that his career in government has been distinguished by its complete lack of remarkable achievements. Like all prime ministers except our first, he had a stint at the Education Ministry — can anyone name a single thing he did as education minister?...
As defence minister, Najib’s tenure was characterised by corruption and scandal; while he was rarely directly implicated, this certainly suggests that those hoping for a change in the tone of politics and administration under Najib shouldn’t expect much. And as finance minister, Najib has unveiled a lacklustre stimulus package that mostly comprises ill-advised infrastructure projects.
There is not a single sign of promise here.
-Don’t expect much from Najib, John Lee

The Pakatan Dilemma?

The following was my response to a letter from "batsman" published on Malaysia Today entitled "Is Pakatan Capable?"

written by cruzeiro, April 04, 2009 17:40:50
This is why Pakatan must defend both the Sultans and Islam fiercely and sincerely.
====================================

Absolutely!
They not only have to do this, but they also have to be seen to be doing this.

Karpal Singh's words of late, didn't help one bit- although he was right in every word that he uttered about the Perak Sultan. This fact appears to be lost on Karpal/ DAP in their self-righteousness. Before they qualify to make such statements, they should first learn to endear themselves to the parties that are affected, namely the Malays - so that it will not be perceived as a challenge to the Malay character of the nation (although, considering the demographics that is such a brain-dead idea).
Don't they know that for now, such words can only be uttered by a Malay (at the most, an Umno qualified ma-mak/Mahathir) or those who hold the mantle of power. With the racist mindset of most Malaysians/ Malays, it could easily be perceived as a "republican" attack against the royalty/ Malays by a "Non" - and can even be twisted into an "attack on Islam".
(Speaking of "republicanism", I believe that the Malays themselves would be having second thoughts about the monarchy in due time - probably in 20yrs time or so)

In saying that, we gotta be aware that there is a significant element in the Pakatan that wishes to backslide into the dark ages of "Arab Desert Politics" disguised as Islam and an "Islamic State" - just for political mileage. PAS with its politicians masquerading as ulama faction in power, has yet to present the open and intellectual face of Islam, despite all their skullcaps and flowing robes.

Herein lies the danger of those who claim to "defend" Islam for political mileage. In turn, DAP under the mantle of the "old guard" reacts by stating the exact opposite which gives rise to the perception of "conflict" within. To make matters worse we have PAS subscribing to the idea of a Unity Govt with Umno which has once booted it out of the alliance of BN.

The Pakatan cannot afford to do this kind of double-talk and create uncertainty among its electorate, if it is to give the impression that it has what it takes to lead the nation. Moreover, they cannot be going around claiming that they "have the numbers" and are ready to take over the federal Govt, when they have yet to prove themselves in the five states economically.

One year is no measure of achievement, although they did fairly well. they need to work at consolidating their position, instead of creating bushfires for Umno, to which Umno can respond by creating more - twice as well! They cannot only go around simply using damning rhetoric against the ruling elite, although there may be much truth in them.

They have to move their govt machinery as a cohesive force by have a line of consistent ideas that is easy for the people to understand and accept. Anwar's economic policy has all but failed to impress the people (especially the less "enlightened") with his high-flung ideas. One glaring weakness in PKR appears to be its lack of credible leadership - although they are saddled with the problem of a solid number of trojans among them. This is one matter which PKR needs to address with urgency.

PAS has yet to accept non-Muslim membership, or accept the fact that progress cannot be achieved with their hardline Islamist stance which conflicts with that of secularist PKR & DAP, and a vast majority of Malaysians. They cannot afford to go around having demos against entertainment which are apparently "unislamic" just because they don't like it. They cannot be going around being the moral police among the vulnerable. They cannot impose their standards upon those who advocate a liberal lifestyle, just because they believe they are right.

Having said all this, Pakatan has one thing working for them - their non-racist platform. If they cannot use it to their advantage and capture the imagination of the people, they definitely are made up of a bunch of flunkies. Meanwhile PKR has yet to address that intellectual amoeba, Zul's discipline problem - while they obsessively play the fireman who puts out bushfires created by all around them (within and without).
For now, they are just working on the premise that they have to address a common enemy - and that alone will not get them anywhere.

Are they capable? Sure - why not.
The only problem here is if they have their priorities right.

Election Goodies at Dawn - For reality, lets WAIT till dusk.

"... the government has decided with immediate effect,
to remove the temporary ban on TWO news publications,
release 13 detainees from ISA detention,
and conduct a comprehensive review of the Internal Security Act. "
-Najib in his maiden speech
=============================

But what a 'sec here - Altantuya's Ghost asks what her name has done to deserve being banned. Forgot about that Jibby?
You cannot ban a name Jib - that's outright Bodoh Bin Sombong lah, Joe!!!
The speech - Takes your breath away is it?
No so fast, guys - there'll be more goodies to tempt the electorate and Malaysians into accepting "Mr. Goody-two-shoes" as the PM. Under-DOGs need plenty of brownie points before they start out. This reminds me a lot of the "Bersih, Cekap, Amanah" days of the Proton Car-Tun.

Yes - nothing less will do, considering his and the fat lady's "impeccable reputation and compassionate nature". Next he will probably say they'll get rid of OSA, PPPA, UUCA, Police Act and C4 from the "arsenal" they've hoarded over the years.
He may even say that Zambry the Perak pretender MB, and "that someone" who was caught on tape confessing to attempting to corrupt the courts are dismissed- just as his mentor once did!
Anyways - just two out of five, plus 8 "Islamic Militants" were released, and that is much appreciated (although we don't know what the conditions are). So sad actually - Uthaya, who needs the freedom most, isn't freed.

Seriously - I really think this is a belated April Fool joke he's playing on the Bkt. Selambau guys (and Malaysians at large), just to take some punch out of the Pakatan campagn.
Soon you may see that Ganabathirau & Kengatharan in Bkt Selambau with Semi Value, promising that Uthaya will be next to be out should they vote Umno's lapdog - Ganesan.
This is just "c@&k-teasing" at its best - pending outcome of the elections. This guy is so DESPERATE, he'll probably morph into a godzilla of sorts the moment he sees that the people aren't fooled.
Hope the voters realize that without their anti-BN stance, there would've been no way that these guys would've been released!!

The Car-Tun did once say that a vote for BN means that you want ISA.
So Bkt Selambau voters - remember that a vote for BN is a vote for ISA and to keep Uthaya incarcerated!!!

As of now, we (officially) still need a permit to go for a picnic or throw a party - or else!!

Also, don't forget - Malaysians don't qualify to compete in The World's Funniest Home Videos.
Now Jibby, hand me the very legal video of your swearing in - that may win me a prize!!!

All said and done, considering the stories of Talismans, Bomohs, Mongolian shamans, a recent NST article about Jibby's numerological "lucky No. 11" - I wouldn't place much hope on a party that places premium value on superstitious mindsets. Just take a look at the images above (the numbers- from a "chinese" perspective) and tell me it was just a coincidence .........
So, under the Jibby regime, if you have a question of National security or economy don't wait for Jibby - just ..... ASK YOUR BOMOH!!!

RELATED

• DON'T TAKE US FOR FOOLS!....ALTHOUGH SOME OF US CAN BE FOOLED.

Democracy, Sovereigns and Political Authority

When the body of the people is possessed of the supreme power, it is called a democracy. When the supreme power is lodged in the hands of a part of the people, it is then an aristocracy.

In a democracy the people are in some respects the sovereign, and in others the subject.

There can be no exercise of sovereignty but by their suffrages, which are their own will; now, the sovereign's will is the sovereign himself. The laws, therefore, which establish the right of suffrage are fundamental to this government. .....

The people, in whom the supreme power resides, ought to have the management of everything within their reach: that which exceeds their abilities must be conducted by their ministers.
But they cannot properly be said to have their ministers, without the power of nominating them: it is, therefore, a fundamental maxim in this government, that the people should choose their ministers--that is, their magistrates.
-Montesquieu, Spirit of Laws, bk. 2, CH. 2 (Of the Republican Government, and the Laws in relation to Democracy)

The following is an except from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy -
Authority
by Tom Christiano

1.2 Political Authority and Different Kinds of Duties of Obedience

To the extent that a duty of obedience is included in the concept of political authority, there can be different forms of obedience on the part of subjects. This implies a very distinct dimension of political authority. When a political authority issues a command and the subject has a duty to obey, what is the nature of this duty? One might have a duty to obey a command merely because it commands the subject to do something that is just and any alternative action would be unjust. Here the duty to obey would depend on the content of the command. Commands that are unjust or perhaps even commands that require actions that are not exclusively just may not involve duties at all.

The commands of a legitimate political authority are usually thought to involve something more than this. The duty of the subject is grounded not in the content of the command itself but in the nature of the source issuing the command. The duty to obey is then automatically generated when the command is issued by the appropriate authority and when it has the right form and provenance. In this respect, the duty to obey is content independent or independent of the content of the particular command. One must obey because one has been commanded and not because of the particular content of the command. One must do it because one has been told to do it. This kind of duty seems to be the most central kind of duty involved in the duty to obey. It is the idea that one must obey the authority because it is the authority. It does not imply of itself that one owes the duty of obedience to the authority so it does not imply that there is a right to rule on the part of the authority.

Here we must distinguish a duty that is owed to the authority and a duty that is merely the result of the authoritative command. The duty that is owed to the authority is grounded in the fact that the authority possesses a feature that gives it a right to command and that it is in virtue of that right that one owes obedience. The idea is that there is something just in itself that the authority be obeyed.

One other distinction that is worth making in this connection is the distinction between a preemptive duty to obey and a duty that is not preemptive. A preemptive duty is one that replaces other duties. It puts other duties out of play when it comes into play. A preemptive duty is not weighed against other duties that might relate to what one is thinking of doing. Of course, a preemptive duty may not preempt all other considerations, its preemption may operate only with a limited scope and thus preempt only some limited set of considerations.

An example of a preemptive duty is the case of a promissory obligation. If I have agreed to do something for you and I suddenly see some pleasurable alternative to fulfilling my obligation, most people would think that I ought to exclude the consideration of pleasure altogether from my deliberations even though the pleasure would be a consideration had I made no promise. It is simply not something that I can legitimately weigh in the balance against the promissory obligation. So if an authority issues a command and the duty to obey is a preemptive duty, then the subject does not weigh the other duties that might otherwise apply to him in the balance with the preemptive duty. The preemptive duty simply excludes the other duties. By contrast, if a duty is not preemptive, then when it comes time to comply with it, one must balance it with other duties that weigh for and against acting in accord with the duty.

Most think that the duties associated with authority are content independent in the sense that one must do what one is told even if one is skeptical about the merits of the command. There is some skepticism, however, about the claim that legitimate political authorities impose preemptive duties on subjects. These people have questioned the rationality of preemptive duties or reasons for action. Surely, there are times when what appear to be preempted considerations all add up to a consideration that outweighs the preempting consideration. How can this be understood on the preemption model? Some have argued that authoritative commands simply give especially weighty content independent duties, which can be balanced against other duties (Shapiro 2002). The discussion of instrumentalism will say a bit more about these criticisms below.

The most demanding notion of authority is the idea of a political authority that has a right to rule that correlates with a duty to obey that is owed to the authority and that is a content independent and preemptive duty.

(for more, click here)