Dr. Cheah’s Pages

Blair the Liar?

Chedet.cc

I find it amusing that our former PM should write so passionately about how Blair lied about the reasons for war in Iraq. It is a classical case of the pot calling the kettle black!

How about the lies that the Malaysian Government has told her people under his leadership? Would that not be more of a sin?

Much of these lies remain buried under the Official Secrets Act but I am confident that one day such bigotry will end.

Till today, we know of how the present Government covertly goes about its operation in ensuring they remain at the helm.

The latest of these developments involve the defection of Fairus, former Penang CM from PKR to UMNO. He was forced to resign after facing a probe on alleged corruption by the MACC. However, this charge was dropped recently citing lack of evidence. Subsequently, Fairus joined UMNO. Although the circumstances surrounding his resignation remains unclear, the graft probe certainly triggered this chain of events. The reasons for joining UMNO was again based on a purported fight to defend Islam and the Malay race. Bear in mind, the Allah issue had not then erupted when he resigned.

The current Anwar saga is another classic. Despite a clear lack of evidence, Anwar was previously convicted and jailed. Now a dubious character like Saifool is allowed to take center stage with obvious intentions of ridiculing the intelligence of Malaysians. If Mahathir can have a free hand in commentaries about foreign policies and internal conflicts of other countries, then why can’t a bunch of Australian MPs voice their concern about the perceived persecution of Anwar? The conclusions were reached based on credible and existing facts about the case.

Why is Anwar the only one to be tried for sodomy? Is he the only one with this sexual perversion in this country? If Saifool is not a bugger in this case, how did he know what was to be expected? His testimony reveals that of a habitual homosexual. All this is assuming that his testimony is the truth.

Imagine on one hand, the proponents of Allah is fighting to protect the sanctity of their religion, but on the other, they are making a mockery of Him in the courtrooms.

“Saifool” profile

As his testimony continues, one starts to wonder if there is indeed a shred of truth in this young man.

The casual manner to which Anwar posed his question appears too frank. Even if Anwar was indeed interested, he would have made suggestive advances prior rather than a point blank question. Either Anwar was foolish (hey how many men have approached women asking them ”can I have sex with you?”) or this is entirely a charade.

When Anwar ”popped” the question, the normal response would be that of shock and disbelief. He would not have known what to do or react. If he has never performed carnal intercourse, he will be literally dumbfounded. Conversely, he mentioned that he complied and even went to wash himself. Either he is a habitual homosexual or clearly it was following a script.

For someone that has been sexually violated, he appears too jovial and upbeat. His mannerisms reflect someone who is eager to get on with the job NOT having to relive the mental torture of that fateful day. Most sexual victims will be very reclusive and will certainly be traumatised by the fact that they will have to highlight every single detail of this sexual encounter! From the looks of it, Saifool was eager to give his testimony even if it was in plain view of the court audience and press!

Saifool certainly does not fit the profile of someone who has been forcibly sodomised.

The Drama Continues

Previous related comment
Nothing Adds Up

There is ample evidence to inflict doubt in the sodomy trial of Anwar. From the nature of the accusation to the testimonies of individuals involved, the inconsistencies should have been enough for the judge to dismiss this case.

Let me recap.

Saiful claimed that he was forced upon by Anwar and anal penetration took place. To suggest that another man of equal build forcing himself on another for purposes of anal penetration is too me too far fetched. This practice requires co-operation from both parties, unless more than one individual was involved in this act. We have heard of children being sodomised or in prisons where several individuals would have to hold the unwilling victim down for the perpetrator to commit the act. The scenario described is almost implausible. Moreover, medical reports have cast doubt on anal intercourse when no evidence of penetration-related injuries were found on Saiful.

Saiful was a dropout with extremely poor examination results. In spite of that, he approached the then Deputy Prime Minister, purportedly to request for a scholarship. Not only was he not turned down, the DPM met him more than once and several photographs with the officers from the DPM’s office surfaced. Najib’s initial denial of any meeting prior to the photographs is enough circumstantial proof of an intent to deceive. Anyhow, the DPM’s office should not have been the place to go to request for a scholarship. Why didn’t he approach the Minister of Education or Higher Education?

A school dropout like Saiful, is a perfect candidate for this ‘job’. A failure in his studies would have meant that his future was glum and any role in politics or a high paying job would have been quickly extinguished. He would have to either take on odd jobs or to retrain himself in a vocational school to learn skills usually involving hard labour. This was his break.

Similarly, from the failure to implicate Najib in the earlier Altantuya trial, despite his name being brought up on several occasions from witness testimonies, to the shutting out of Balasubramaniam is testament to some sort of chicanery by unseen forces.

Now, it appears new evidence that may implicate Anwar has surfaced, an information Anwar has no privy to. It appears the prosecuting team has DNA evidence from his semen found on Saiful’s anus. How could the earlier medical officers who examined Saiful missed the fact that semen stains were found in the anus or its vicinity? How could this important information be missed in the earlier reports? In addition, finding semen on the anus, contrary to the prosecutor’s assumptions, does not imply that anal intercourse has taken place.

It will be interesting the note what new ‘factual’ evidence will be conjured in this trial.