Rudyard Kipling"
āWhen you're left wounded on Afganistan's plains and
the women come out to cut up what remains, Just roll to your rifle
and blow out your brains,
And go to your God like a soldierā
General Douglas MacArthur"
āWe are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction.ā
āIt is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it.ā āOld soldiers never die; they just fade away.
āThe soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and be the deepest wounds and scars of war.ā
āMay God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't .ā āThe object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.
āNobody ever defended, there is only attack and attack and attack some more.
āIt is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.
The Soldier stood and faced God
Which must always come to pass
He hoped his shoes were shining
Just as bright as his brass
"Step forward you Soldier,
How shall I deal with you?
Have you always turned the other cheek?
To My Church have you been true?"
"No, Lord, I guess I ain't
Because those of us who carry guns
Can't always be a saint."
I've had to work on Sundays
And at times my talk was tough,
And sometimes I've been violent,
Because the world is awfully rough.
But, I never took a penny
That wasn't mine to keep.
Though I worked a lot of overtime
When the bills got just too steep,
The Soldier squared his shoulders and said
And I never passed a cry for help
Though at times I shook with fear,
And sometimes, God forgive me,
I've wept unmanly tears.
I know I don't deserve a place
Among the people here.
They never wanted me around
Except to calm their fears.
If you've a place for me here,
Lord, It needn't be so grand,
I never expected or had too much,
But if you don't, I'll understand."
There was silence all around the throne
Where the saints had often trod
As the Soldier waited quietly,
For the judgment of his God.
"Step forward now, you Soldier,
You've borne your burden well.
Walk peacefully on Heaven's streets,
You've done your time in Hell."
Stop pussyfooting - just prosecute the wrongdoers By R Nadeswaran
Tuesday, July 18, 2023
Malaysiakini : The key words in the mantra to gullible Malaysians then were āArab
Princeā and ādonationā, which have since been blown to smithereens with
the revelations as evidence in various court cases.
One from then communications minister Salleh Said Keruak
who said ā1MDB has been the subject of unprecedented
politically-motivated attack, the objective of which was to unseat a
democratically-elected head of government.ā
Equally brazen was ex-minister Abdul Rahman Dahlan who declared the DOJās announcement of its lawsuits related to 1MDB was āheavy-handedā.
āIt
could be motivated by politics rather than the law. The manner in which
they announce the case is unbecoming. The language that was used was
heavy-handed. The case has not been brought to court, yet they make
statements that imply certain facts. If it is still being investigated,
why do they make conclusions?ā he was quoted as saying.
Entering the fray was then and is still minister for law in the Prime
Ministerās Department Azalina Othman Said who echoed
then-attorney-general Apandi Aliās call for a heavier penalty - life imprisonment for those who leaked secrets.
Too many details of Najibās involvement were emerging and they needed a sledgehammer to swat the fly.
These days, Azalina is making headlines
again, suggesting a new act to impose civil penalties on those who play
up 3R (religion, royalty, and race) sentiments, as if there are not
enough existing laws.
Such cases can be prosecuted under Sections
504 and 500 of the Penal Code, as well as Section 233 of the
Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.
Section 504 of the Penal
Code pertains to intentional insult with intent to provoke a breach of
the peace, while Section 500 concerns criminal defamation.
Section
233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, meanwhile, concerns
the improper use of telecommunication network facilities.
No Further Action
Why cannot existing laws be used instead of looking across the Seven Seas for new legislation?
The answer is simple ā there is no political will to put an end to
such utterances because they sometimes become useful tools in
politicking and influencing people and getting more supporters for the
cause.
Remember former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassinās infamous rant last year against Christians and Jews, claiming Pakatan Harapan was involved in an agenda to āChristianiseā the country?
In a recording of a ceramah
in Johor, he claimed a group of Jews want Harapan to win the elections
and alleged the coalition was working with Jews and Christians to
ācoloniseā the country.
Police reports were made but what happened? Nothing. Zero. Zilch.
Why?
The answer was provided in court proceedings the previous year. Part of
the blame for the surge of such statements should fall on the police
and to a certain extent, the Attorney-Generalās Chambers (AGC).
This
is because both these organisations have declared in court proceedings
that they had no plans to prosecute two people who were reported to have
made provocative statements.
This opened the floodgates and we are now facing increasingly provocative comments.
In
April 2021, appearing on behalf of the AGC, deputy public prosecutor
Ainul Amirah said the AGC was unwilling to prosecute Perlis-based
preacher Zamri Vinoth Kalimuthu and Multiracial Reverted Muslims founder
and president Firdaus Wong Wai Hung as police had classified their
cases as āno further actionā (NFA).
The duo is allegedly linked to
controversial preacher Zakir Naik. Global Human Rights Federation
(GHRF) president S Shashi Kumar had said over 1,000 police reports were
lodged against Zamri for insulting non-Islamic faiths and their
religious practices.
A free-for-all
So,
what messages were being conveyed to the purveyors of untruths and
half-truths who were causing unnecessary annoyance to the populace?
Two days after the 15th general election (GE15), then-inspector-general of police Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani warned social media users against uploading content that would threaten public safety and order.
In
a statement, he told social media users to stop misusing the platforms
to spread content that is considered provocative in nature because it
will cause public disturbances.
Nothing happened but the immunity
enjoyed and the invulnerability of some have resulted in a free-for-all
of sorts and nothing is beyond approach or comment.
It has been like giving them carte blanche to say and do as they please, defying the laws, let alone practise decorum and sedateness.
Why
do we need new laws when the many existing laws which are sufficient
are selectively used? Why do people jump over fences in the middle of
the night to arrest some people while a few are treated with velvet
gloves?