The Lowyat presumption was because those commenters that I hadn’t come across before (i.e. non-regular commenters) the last couple of days have been from Lowyat due to the flame war that the forum has launched on my war.

My mistake.

The development being the coroner ruling the baby’s death was dingo caused after so many years. I was ignorant of her guilt overturned earlier but I find it’s interesting that it’s not only that, after all this time they fought hard not only to assert their innocence but also to say that the dingo killed the baby. Probably to make the public more aware of the danger but then seems to me like Australia has a lot of those dangerous animals. And that’s just to decide on the species, you can’t do the same with homo sapiens, you need to get the exact individual, would anyone even have the strength to do the same with a case involving a possible human culprit?Like that Nurul Jazlin case, or the MACC deaths case, or any other similar cases.

I’m ashamed to admit what little I heard of it is based from that one movie I didn’t even watch and I didn’t follow the case or ever came across to the exoneration details. Can’t give you any excuse other than that.

Serious question: Consider it a customer survey questionaire.

I’m presuming that you’ve come from Lowyat and if you’ll let me know, it’ll help give me an idea of the blanks in public perception.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/12/dingo-baby-azaria-lindy-chamberlain

This reminds me of some recent case in Jakarta where a little 11 year old girl was admitted to hospital sick, then it was found out she got ill from STD complications from being raped. She died and people were angry all around.

The parents got some compensation from the new Jakarta mayor but someone posed as police and stole the money. And the biggest surprise was when the father himself became the prime suspect.

Hopefully it’s not the same here. Sometimes the culprit would be the closest one like spouse or parents. Like that one case with the Australian dingo baby.

Soal pondan ke tak pondan itu cerita lain. Yang paling merisaukan adalah portfolio KDN itu sangat penting dan kritikal. Perlu ada Pak Menteri yang pandai mengimbangi kuasa AGC, hakim, polis, kastam dll. Kena ada orang yang faham undang-undang dan rule of law. Perlu tegas dan jangan termakan bodek atau percaturan populariti. Masa Tun buat Ops Lalang semua riuh, tapi suhu politik jelas menurun dan dikawal. Sekarang macam-macam kerja fitnah dan hasutan terlepas begitu saja.

Saya ingat sangat-sangat masa awal atas kerahan Najib, polis kita aktif turun padang dan meronda. Baru-baru ini, dah kurang nampak pulak polis peronda. Tak-kan semua kena dipahat dan ditukul. Kerja bos kena pastikan strategi itu berjalan dan diteruskan. Setiap kali ada isu bersabit, pak menteri kita senyap saja dan hanya bersuara selepas satu kampung dah berkokok. Ini bukan leadership namanya.

Rakyat jelata risau sebab ramai menteri-menteri kita tak sempurnakan tugasnya dengan baik. Tak ada ciri kepimpinan langsung.

What is it with Hishamudin that he simply refuses to fullfil his obligation; that is as Minister of Home affair.

Anyone who uses brain straight away will realise that Nizar was lying. Had the Japanese Govt paid RM207 billion during the tenure of Dr Mahathir, it would have become a world news.

Besides, this will create a new precedent. consider how much Tokyo have to pay say to China for cruelty it inflicted when it conquered China in 1930s.

The funny point is that Tokyo has already helped Malaysia by denying the allegation. What credible evidence more that hishamudin expects.

Charge Nizar for slandering. susah sangat ke. “Tak kan tiada satu pegawai pun dalam Kementerian dalam negeri yang tahu peruntukan undang undang mana yang boleh dipakai”. said one irate UMNO member in Ampang. He was very upset as hishamudin was simply sleeping on the job,

“aku rasa macam nak terajang Hishamudin ni’, another irate UMNO member said