Najib with a complicated problem: how do you rearrange black spaghetti into white straight lines?

I always thought that nobody is invincible and untouchable except the Almighty! The question that invariably accompanies this would be: What HISHAMMUDIN“hold”  has the on NAJIB? 

Najib with a complicated problem: how do you rearrange spaghetti into straight lines?’s misfortune was to encounter an adversary who could out-Twitter him at high noon in the gunfight at UMNO  corral. is writhing between a mistake and a misfortune. Hishammudin  mistake was to gate crash  Najib without an invitation. He thought he could buy entry to prime ministership wth money  from underworld and spin out collateral political benefits by name-association with Mahathir He leapt to take the political credit when Najib won the franchise. He is alleged to have taken financial rewards more surreptitiously. His friend feeble claim that she is not a proxy is silly. You do not get sweat equity in perpetuity, which means free and forever,  inexplicably tried to defend the indefensible before dumping Najib  so hard it virtually broke the warhorse’s back. Mystery repeats itself.


HISHAMMUDIN, MAHATHIR AND MUHYUDDINIS SABOTAGING NAJIB CHANCE TO WIN BIG !!GOOD WE NEED UMNO MEMBERS LIKE HISHAMUDIN TO MAKE MORE MISTAKES SO THAT MORE NAJIB WAIT  THE BOLDER HIS ENEMIES WITHHIN SWING THIER SWORD TO END NAJIB

Is this a Joker or a Joke?

The security of Anwar Ibrahim’s tour ‘is decided by the people of Johor themselves’, says the home minister. This is going to be the dirtiest ever election. Directed by Mahathir who are there  without doub behind  Najib’s murder

With such a remark coming from this shitbrain Joker  , no wonder crime is ever on the increase in this country. If he is not prepared to take care of its citizens, then why should we even pay taxes. No wonder Johore is such a dangerous place and this bonehead just confirmed it  , let us look at the broader picture and answer these few questions. Isn’t Hishammudin sabotaging his cousin brother Najib who will be told to step down soon.?  he is  in Muhideens camp where  Mahathir is the overall director?. Has he applied to register with the Tampoi Mental Hospital for a thorough check up of his big mouth and shit brains?. Will someone from Johore UMNO teach him a good lesson so that he will regret why the hell he became traiter to Najib, you are fit for the garbage only  . , let us look at the broader picture and answer these few questions. Isn’t Hishammudin sabotaging his cousin brother Najib Hishammudin’s statement on ‘no safety guarantee for PKR’ is an endorsement that now he head the  Johor

the Umno leader due to quit on Saturday, speculation is high that it is none other than corporate bigwig Ibrahim Menudin, the former treasurer of Sabah Umno.

The 63-year-old Ibrahim is Chairman of Suria Capital Holdings Berhad, Deputy Chairman of Sabah Forestry Development Authority and the Chairman of Borneo Conversation Trust. He also sits on the board of oil firm SapuraKenchana Petroleum

Ibrahim began his career in the Sabah State Civil Service and became the Accountant General of Sabah from 1976 to 1979. In 1980, he resigned from the Sabah State Civil Service to become the Chief Executive Officer of Bumiputra Investment Fund of Sabah until 1985. During his tenure there, he had also served as the Chairman of Sabah Gas Industries Sdn Bhd, Deputy Chairman of Sabah Forest Industries Sdn Bhd and was a board member of other Sabah Government corporations involved in finance, forestry, manufacturing, plantations, hotel and property development.

Ibrahim was also Group Chief Executive of Malaysia Mining Corporation Berhad (MMC) from March 1986 to 31 October 2001. He was the Chairman of Malaysia Smelting Corporation Berhad from October 1985 to October 2001.

Ibrahim was the Special Advisor to the Chief Minister of Sabah from February 2002 until March 2004. He has been the Chairman of Borneo Conservation Trust (BCT) since 30 November 2009.

Timing is critical in politics. All these are influential guys, so obviously they have to be very careful and be sure that what they are doing is the right thing and endorsed by their constituents. I know the sour grapes in Umno-BN will accuse us of reneging on our call for anti-hopping laws. But let’s get the facts right. Lajim and Bumburing did not join the Pakatan parties but formed their own platforms,”

In the past 2 months, there has been a slew of Sabah BN leaders and members shifting over to the Opposition, if not directly joining the Pakatan parties of DAP, PAS and PKR, then to Pakatan-friendly platforms such as the Sabah Reform Front.

Two Members of Parliament – Wilfred Bumburing of Tuaran and Lajim Ukin of Beaufort – and Senator Maijol Mahap are among the senior Umno-BN leaders to resign from their parties. Wilfred was the deputy president of Upko, Maijol the Upko vice president while Lajim an Umno supreme council member.

Their departure sent a shudder down the Umno-BN line with Prime Minister Najib Razak blamed for not nipping in the bud their grouses and allowing the power equation in Parliament to shift favorably in the Opposition’s direction.

Sabah and Sarawak are key states, holding a combined 25% of the total 222 seats in the Malaysian Parliament. In the 2008 election, the Umno-BN managed to stave off the Opposition’s advance but in the next general election, widely expected to be in November this year, both Sabah and Sarawak are expected to swing crucial seats helping the Pakatan to topple Umno-BN.

If Pakatan succeeds, it will be the first regime change ever experienced in the country since it gained independence from British rulers in 1957.

Mat Zain, former senior police officer, states there is no other body that is qualified to adjudicate on the present attorney-general than a tribunal.

He said HISHAMMUDIN   had last March rejected the calls for a tribunal although many credible exposures had been made over Gani’s misconduct in the public domain.

Mat Zain Ibrahim, in his open letter sent to Najib  said HISHAMMUDIN IS SHIELDING CHANI PATAIL , also revealed another possible misconduct by Gani with regard to documents relating to Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) investigations into the bank accounts of former Malacca chief minister Rahim Tamby Chik.

I always thought that nobody is invincible and untouchable except the Almighty! The question that invariably accompanies this would be: What HISHAMMUDIN“hold”  has the on NAJIB?

The Supreme Court ruling that only present or former judges of apex court and chief justices of high courts should be heading the information commissions under the Right to Information Act hits at the very spirit of the law. Besides sounding suspiciously like strengthening the old boys’ network, the ruling takes the working of the law away from larger society.

It also effectively amends the RTI Act judicially, not on the grounds of it being in transgression of some constitutional principle but on the grounds of efficacy. This is clearly not the court’s domain. It is supposed to interpret the law. Judicial review should be to check if a law violates any basic rights of the citizens or is foul of any constitutional principle. The founding fathers never intended the judiciary to be improving upon the laws as it deemed fit.

If, in its wisdom, the legislature decided that the right to information would be best served by having information commissioners from diverse backgrounds, then so be it. The judges, like other citizens, have a right to disagree but they have no right to direct that only legally trained and qualified persons could serve on the post.

Even on merits, the ruling is open to criticism. The judges have rightly noted that information commissioners have to “undertake an adjudicatory process involving critical legal questions and niceties of law” including conflict between the right to privacy and right to information. Where they err is in thinking that only “legally qualified and trained mind possessing requisite experience” would be up to the task.

The law at present provides for appointment of “persons of eminence in public life with wide knowledge and experience of law, science and technology, social service, management, journalism, mass media, or administration and governance.” Most people who fit this definition are exposed to issues of sufficient complexities and are experienced enough to decide on competing claims. In fact, they would have been taking such decisions in course of their work.

It is extraordinarily arrogant to assume that only those who have studied and practised law and sat on judicial benches would be able to deal with legal complexities. With due respect, law is not rocket science. It is not even accountancy. It is one thing to mandate that only qualified surgeons will undertake kidney transplant operation, quite another to think that only lawyers and judges would be able to deal with legal principles. The entire modern stress towards alternative dispute resolution mechanism like arbitration, mediation, and resolving disputes at bodies like panchayats is based on the belief that ordinary people are perfectly capable of adjudicatory role.

Law is only organized common sense and reflection of collective thinking of the society. That is why the task of making and amending laws is left to the legislature. It is supposed to reflect popular thinking. If that were not so, the world’s constitutions could have simply created a bench of brilliant legal minds to enact laws. In any case, the recourse to regular courts was always there in case any information commissioner erred grievously.

It could just as easily be argued-actually, that was indeed the philosophy of RTI Act-that people with non-judicial background would bring in a wider and fresher perspective while deciding appeals and cases. They could have gone beyond the technicalities of law and applied wider principles of fairness, justice, and common good that the so-called legally qualified and judicially trained minds have often been incapable of. The governments, both state and central, erred in appointing only former bureaucrats as information commissioners so far. The ends of the Act would have been better served if the net were cast wider and many persons as envisaged in the original law had been appointed. Now the Supreme Court ruling will reverse that spirit. The ruling, indeed, is a step back in evolution of both jurisprudence and India as a mature democracy.

Advertisements