|Did Malaysia's Anwar Say too|
|Written by John Berthelsen|
|TUESDAY, 23 AUGUST 2011|
He says accuser acknowledged readying himself for sex
Deep into Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim’s hour-long attack Monday on the Malaysian court that is trying him for sodomy, a sentence appeared that seems extremely awkward for both prosecution and defense.Anwar said in his prepared statement that after Saiful went to Anwar’s condo in an exclusive area of Kuala Lumpur, he admitted that “he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it” to get ready to go ahead with the sexual act.
A US diplomatic cable on the WikiLeaks website that was published in Asia Sentinel on Jan. 20, 2011, related that “Singapore's intelligence services and Lee Kuan Yew have told the Australian Office of National Assessments (ONA) that opposition leader Anwar ‘did indeed commit the acts for which he is currently indicted,’ citing unshared technical intelligence. ONA assessed, and their Singapore counterparts concurred, ‘it was a set up job -- and he probably knew that, but walked into it anyway.’"
It is hard not to come to the same conclusion. -
Bru: Got this from Apanama who got it from Sentinel ...
Go over there to READ MORE ...
Rather than giving a mini-ceramah outside the Jalan Duta court about Saiful being "an Umno operative", perhaps Anwar and his lawyers should busy themselves to explain how Male Y's sperm was found on the said operative's underwear and anus.ReplyDelete
Okay, I'll help them with the brainstorming, helpful guy that I am: "Saiful had accidentally sat on it - his cheap pasar malam pants and cipalang-brand underwear couldn't prevent it from seeping D-E-E-P inside."
I don't know about whoever's command of english, but clearly what Anwar said was that Saiful had testified that he (Saiful) had brought along KY Jelly and applied it where the sun don't shine on and in his (Saiful's) nether passageReplyDelete
By no stretch of the imagination can that be contrued as an admission by Anwar that Saiful's version of events actually happened, can it?
As for "unshared technical intelligence" the S'pore Secret Service would not be the first in the world to be misled by selective leaking of misinformation by our OSA info by our own SB and RM100 million paid APCO. Perhaps the AG should be looking to prosecute the loose mouths in our secret service?
we are all of 1 Race, the Human Race
after decades of lying how can anyone look himself in the mirrorReplyDelete
The courts must not distract itself from the fact that he did do it and it is the act that is illegal.ReplyDelete
Boderline IQ Syndrome, itulah penyakit si Anwar Albontoti ....ReplyDelete
Tu lah Anwar, jangan over sangat belit. Kan dah terjerut leher sendiri. BTW, apasal dia punya statement kat court tu dalam Bahasa Inggeris dan bukan Bahasa Malaysia? Memang dia yang draft political speech tu tapi lepas tu dia kena rujuk kat lawyer2 dia. Lawyer2 tu pulak tak berapa fasih bahasa kebangsaan, tu yang kena buat Bahasa Inggeris. Last sekali jadi caca marba. Jadilah statement dia tu lebih kurang macam ni "Saya tidak menyontot Saiful sebab dia sendiri yang datang berjumpa saya bawak KY Jelli dan menyapunya didubur beliau lalu memasukkan zakar saya kedubur beliau. Saya diam dan tak buat apa2 pun. Jadi itu tak boleh la dikatakan saya menyontot beliau." OKlah Anwar, kira engkau tak menyontot Saiful tapi cuma engkau tersontot Saiful je. Kira tak sengaja lah tu.ReplyDelete
come on lah anwarinas! apa kena mengena najib dengan kes liwat? yg bongkar rahsia kejahatan dan kebejatan anwar adalah orang-orang kanan anwar sendiri. just admit what u did lah!ReplyDelete
You mean like when your Puk'mamakthir buggered the Malays for 21 years in a row and is still buggering the Malays today in the name of Bangsa and Negara.
ahahaha..oh bugger indeed!ReplyDelete
i personally think he buggered that jambu boy. i also think that it was a set up but he can not tahan wooo....probabably anwar thinks...oh bugger! bugger the set up, i'm gonna go ahead and bugger the boy...mana tahaaaan....
BUT DESPITE ALL THAT...i still think that Anwar is right for Malaysia... he'd make a much better PM than rosmah's husband or the chauvinistic muhyidin ...in fact bugger BN and bugger you locky!!! i will still vote for PR in the next GE...
Anwar was quoting Saiful's allegation la. Datuk Rocky you don't know how to read kah?ReplyDelete
Fuck you vinan..Fuck you!!ReplyDelete
It's interesting to note how OneRacePundek's ravings on Anwar's slip there, eloquent though it may seem, be soooo clearly and accurately answered by BigCat's extended scenario.ReplyDelete
Sometimes the most complicated of problems can be solved by the most simplest of arguments.
About Vinnan, OneRacePundek's profane Alter Ego, well what can we say: that vulgar Indian better be left alone to drown in his own shit, just as he presently doing now.
Vinnan is right. UMNO under Mamakthir screwed this country for 22 years, and his successors continued to rape this country blind. Funny isn't it when we think that rape and incest is part of a certain culture....ReplyDelete
Creating mixed perception and impression is crucial to Anwar at this point of time... Lets believe it happened that way!!! he heReplyDelete
I propose the Omega China Doll should be made present during all the hearings right across,ReplyDelete
Winking her eyes at him..cepat sikit selesai segalanya.
a. Those who followed this case closely would have noted that at the early stage of the trial proceedings, a question was raised as to why the charge sheet read Section 377 (b) ifor consensual sex and NOT 377 (c) for forced entry or rape. Ancilliary to the first question as raised by counsel and even by the accused himself was: if it was consensual, why wasn’t Saiful charged as well.
What does all this say? In simple English, the defense is NOT contending as to whether the act took place at all or not but the fairness of only charging one party when the act was CONSENSUAL.
In default, this amounts to conceding that the act took place irrespective whether Consensual or via compulsion. In other words, only the "legality" of not charging the accuser was the bone contention not OUTRIGHT DENIAL of the charge. This is significantly telling as it imputes the obvious.
b. In any court of law, a predilection towards an act on the part of the accused is sometimes hinged on his/her past, the nexus being the proclivity towards a similar act now is related to a past event of a similar nature. In simple words, a history of repeat offending. If one recalls correctly, in the 2004 judgement, the learned judges, who allowed the appeal on a mere technicality premised on the date, had this to add in page 52 of their judgement:
“we find evidence to confirm that the appellants were involved in homosexual activities and we are more inclined to believe that the alleged incident at Tivoli Villa did happen………….” (page 52)
“While the testimonies of Dr. Mohd. Fadzil and Tun Haniff and the conduct of the first appellant confirm the appellants’ involvement in homosexual activities, such evidence does not corroborate Azizan’s story that he was sodomised by both the appellants at the place, time and date specified in the charge. (page 52)
The implications from the above observations from the learned bench are self-explanatory.
c. Compiled together, the so-called Turkish embassy invitation which the ambassador subsequently later clarified as an intrusion (the claim : http://anilnetto.com/malaysian-politics/malaysian-elections/anwar-said-to-be-in-turkish-embassy/ and the denial here: http://www.rockybru.com.my/2008/07/whos-friendly-neighbour.html), the declining of DNA submission, the ceaseless contestation of trial procedure, of questions about the bench’s impartiality, of statement and evidence admissibility and of other minor issues through a series of legal filibustering moves designed to buy time, the use of the alternative media to denigrate the accuser and to massage public opinion into believing the existence of a conspiracy, the refusal to be cross-examined all point to the inevitable. (And I don’t need to add the ecclesiastical antics of both as I personally do not condone the use of Islam for any base motivations).
My empirical and objective approach is shaped by the nature of my training as an engineer. The only missing ingredient to prove “beyond doubt” in my mind was an indirect confession. That it inexplicably materializes in the statement from the dock is divinely fortuitous buried as it was a smorgasboard of mumbo-jumbo.
The very nature of the statement raises two related links to the chain of circumstantial evidence:
1. why was the accuser lubricated, was this is in anticipation of the act since this has been the de rigeur SOP in previous episodes?
2. why put an awkwardly incriminating piece of evidence there when there was NO necessity to do so. Is this finally a case of a contrite soul overruling a deceptive self to admit the obvious? A cuckolded conscience resurrecting itself from the debris of self-deception?
Warrior 231 .
Why did saiful meet najib? Why? Can you give a straight answer instead of spinning bullshit?ReplyDelete
So the conclusion is that, it is a setup and Anwar knew it, but do it anyway. That explain Anwar's statement that he knew about that lubricant and why Saiful have connection with Najib. That was a conclusion arrive by Singapore intelligence and after reading that article, I've come to that conclusion too. Now, whether it is a force or not is irrelevant right now, because the most important thing is Anwar is a homo.ReplyDelete
What's wrong with that? he has to do whatever he can to save himself and the country!ReplyDelete
What happened to my Part 1 brother? That is crucial to explain the contents of part 2 and the meaning behind:
"OANA reviewed the technical information and concurred with their Singapore counterparts......"
Did you get it? Or did you decide to nix it as it disclosed sensitive information or is this a sloppy post-Sahur mix-up on your part,,,,hahahaha
Anyway, no hard feelings Bru and if need be, I can put it up again (if it is deemed by you as alright). Waiting for them instructions...hahahaha.
Selamat Berpuasa and Berbuka as always....
Yup, Anwar knew it was a trap, that's why he brought along a plastic dildo, and shoved it up Saiful's ass. As he did so, Anwar shouted "Here's to Mamakthir !"ReplyDelete
When I first read about the Wikileaks cable while in Chicago during my long hiatus from this blogspot in December last year, the wording struck me as odd especially this portion:
“ONA assessed, and their Singapore counterparts concurred, ‘it was a set-up job and he probably knew that, but walked into it anyway’,” the cable states.
Now intel agencies refer to technical information as those information gleaned remotely or surreptitiously via eavesdropping technology like this:
which by the way also has a link to the one below that shows how one can even film the action covertly with the target having no inkling that his presumed secure bee hive is in actuality a honey trap teeming with invisible bugs!
coming on the heels of which was the Apple furore and this:
Yes folks, you can remotely activate the remote camera and recorder on the cellphone as I have done while fooling around in my lab ( I am in the electronics line by the way and have worked with INTEL, Western Digital etc on a number of high tech projects including the recent Ivy Bridge and in devising surveillance gadgets)and as attested in reality by the cases mentioned above. We, people in the field, knew it could be technically effected long ago and the spooks having learnt of that have adopted the technology for their intel gathering and I can safely assume Chingkieporean spooks as are their Malaysian counterparts are not far behind on that score. That much I can divulge...........
Thus when OANA is said to have (quote)“assessed the information”, it means in intelligence jargon as " they reviewed the TECHNICAL data ( conversations, photos, intercepted phone messages/calls etc) and affirmed the veracity of their Chingkieporean counterparts' findings. A sort of reconfirming the obvious if you like.
By itself this amounts to not much by way of evidence in a court of law but when melded with the circumstantial evidence, it is a bombshell. And pray what is that circumstantial data? Let me elaborate the circumstantial evidence I have foraged for after being alerted by that queer statement in that Wikileak and by this nonchalantly gay disclosure from the dock.
Your Part 1 was "lost" in another posting!
But it's here now, bro, belakang mari ...
Anon 7.40 pm...if you kena f..k dgn Anwar..who do you see..you Ketua Kampung ke or Polis ke...ReplyDelete
The lawyers and witnesses for defence are having difficulties in defending Anwar because deep inside they believe he did it! David Wells was a failed attempt by Anwar to discredit Dr Siew and two other doctors. The same will be for Mc Donald. The defence will prolong the examination of Dr McDonald tomorrow. He will returned to Australia and will not come back for cross examination. Anwar will used very excuse then to postpone the case...I do hope I will be proved wrong. Anwar himself could not trust himself to be credible witness. That was the reason he gave the statement from the dock. Who else can testify for him?ReplyDelete
Hahahaha Bru....belakang mari....hahahahahahahahahah......Good one, bru. See even my comment knows the obvious hence it effected its "belakang mari" to ram home the point up the arse of even godfathers if you like.........hahahahahaha (ROTFLMAO).ReplyDelete
Bet when Aljuburi ( a name coined by Mat Sabu: http://en.harakahdaily.net/index.php/berita-utama/2951-sabu-on-pas-shiism-sex-charge-and-anwar.html Why?Go figure ..LOL)was shoving his "plastic dildo" up Saiful' arse, he was probably breathlessly whispering : "one small thrust for me and one giant thrust for godfathers....hahahahaha!(ROTFLMAO). As the saying goes...bird of a feather flock together.....
Bet no matter how erudite Shakespearian and Jonsonian wallahs they may be, the PR smart alecks can never mangle the gem of an extract below to suit their perverted taste even if they die arsetorn trying!:
"“The Australians said that Singapore’s intelligence services and (former prime minister) Lee Kuan Yew have told ONA (Office of National Assessments) in their exchanges that opposition leader Anwar ‘did indeed commit the acts for which he is currently indicted’,” the cable read.
It added that Singapore reached its conclusion based on “technical intelligence,” which a Fairfax report said was likely to involve intercepted communications.
“ONA assessed, and their Singapore counterparts concurred, ‘it was a set-up job and he probably knew that, but walked into it anyway’,” the cable wrote.
Salam Berpuasa and Berbuka Bro, and thanks for the belakang mari laugh...cheers!
Now let's seeReplyDelete
Rocky, any pun intended in your title? :-)ReplyDelete