Posted on by Kit

RCI on Lingam Tape – Tsu Koon should show more backbone to tell PM not “if need be” but “very necessary, now!”

On his tenth day as the fifth Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi made an electrifying call to Barisan Nasional leaders and members which came as a breath of fresh air, raising the hopes of 25 million Malaysians sky-high that the country was going to have a fully hands-on and people-oriented Prime Minister.

Speaking at the opening of the MIC branch chairmen convention on November 9, 2003, Abdullah told Barisan Nasional component party leaders and members to give him correct information to enable the government to respond appropriately to the people’s needs.

He said:

“Tell me the truth.

“Sometimes people do not provide truthful information for fear that I will cry, worry or lose sleep over it. But as a leader, I have to know the truth.

“If we (leaders) are not prepared to hear the truth, then we should not become leaders.”

Almost four years later yesterday, Abdullah made a similar call at the Gerakan National Delegates Conference, declaring:

“We do not want to pretend and say that everything is okay. We do not want to be in a state of denial. Tell the truth, even if it is painful.

“The prime minister must have the courage and readiness to listen even to the worst stories, whether it is related to the country or himself. Never allow yourself to sink in a hole of denial and feel that everything is alright.”

However, this time the Prime Minister’s call to end the state of denial and face the truth is incapable of having any electrifying effect as it has all the stale air from the long catalogue of failed promises of the least hands-on Prime Minister in the nation’s history in the past four years to “hear the truth” and “walk the talk” to deliver political and government reforms.

Abdullah should himself end the very terminal state of denial of his four-year administration by setting up a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam Tape scandal and the rot of the judiciary in the past 19 years since 1988 to demonstrate that he has the political will and courage to address the long-standing crisis of public confidence in the judiciary which has taken central stage following the revelation of the Lingam Tape.

The Haidar panel inquiry into the authenticity of the Lingam Tape must be disbanded immediately as it lacks the important attributes of independence and public confidence in comprising members who cannot act or be seen to be acting independently because of their past antecedents or present conflict-of-interest situations.

Last Wednesday, the Haider Inquiry Panel relished in its “power of the powerless” quandary, admitting to “Five No’s” – no power to administer oaths, no power to compel witnesses to come forward, no power to commit anybody for contempt, no immunity under the law and no power to protect witnesses.

Yet it had the temerity to demand that those with information should come forward as witnesses although the Panel could give them no protection whatsoever with one panel member, Datuk Mahadev Shanker, saying:

“Somebody out there (has) the original video. Does he have the responsibility (to come forward)? There may have been others who were there (during the incident). Have they got the responsibility?

“If you don’t come, don’t complain, because at the end of the day, our report is based on the material made available to us.”

Mahadev seemed to have overlooked the vital fact that the inquiry into the truth of the Lingam Tape is not for the sake of the makers of the videotape or the whistleblowers but for the sake of the people and nation in having an impeccable system of justice with a judiciary whose independence, integrity and meritocracy cannot be doubted.

But has the three-man Inquiry Panel the powers even to receive witnesses? This is because the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak said on the same day that the Panel could not call witnesses and was to depend on reports prepared by various agencies such as the Anti-Corruption Agency and the police.

Najib’s statement was reported by various media, including New Straits Times, Utusan Malaysia and Bernama. New Straits Times quoted Najib as follows:

“I already told them (the panel) of their terms of reference. They know about it and they are supposed to work within it. They are not supposed to call any witnesses.”

Gerakan Acting President Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon deserves both praise and criticism for his speech at the Gerakan national delegates conference that “If need be, a royal commission should be seriously considered” into the Lingam Tape scandal and the rot in the judiciary.

Praise because he has gone further than any other Barisan Nasional leader in asking the government to keep open the option of a Royal Commission of Inquiry, but criticism because of his continued state of denial that drastic steps are urgently needed to restore national and international confidence in the independence, integrity and meritocracy of the judiciary since the 1988 judicial crisis — which was openly admitted by former Court of Appeal Judge Datuk Shaik Daud Md. Ismail in an interview with Mingguan Malaysia today.

This is what Shaik Daud said:

“Tahun 1988 berlaku pencemaran yang besar dalam institusi kehakiman apabila Ketua Hakim Negara dipecat. Selepas itu, pemulihan berlaku sedikit demi sedikit. Semua orang berharap jabatan kehakiman boleh pulih semula. Tetapi timbul pula masalah ini. Dan kita kembali kepada asal. Usaha untuk mencuci, membersihkan imej ini sangat sukar.”

Tsu Koon should show more backbone and take up the invitation of Abdullah to Barisan Nasional leaders to “tell him the truth” that it is not “if need be” but “very necessary, NOW!” to have a Royal Commission of Inquiry and to inform the Prime Minister the following:

  • that the Haidar Inquiry Panel is totally unacceptable and should be replaced by a Royal Commission of Inqury into the Lingam Tape as well as the rot in the judiciary in the past 19 years since 1988;
  • that the present focus to fish out the “whistleblowers” of the Lingam Tape instead of investigating the truth of the allegations of perversion of the course of justice concerning the fixing of judicial appointments and fixing of court decisions is deplorable and the threat by the ACA to prosecute Parti Keadilan Rakyat vice president and party adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s political co-ordinator Sim Tse Tzin for failing to reveal the source of the Lingam Tape must be condemned and withdrawn forthwith; and
  • the public concern that the government was only looking for an excuse, such as the technical reason on the inability to prove the authenticity of the Lingam Tape, to avert a full-scale inquiry into the rot of the judiciary in the past 19 years, making the Haidar Inquiry Panel the biggest judicial whitewash scandal of the century.
CategoriesUncategorized

49 Replies to “RCI on Lingam Tape – Tsu Koon should show more backbone to tell PM not “if need be” but “very necessary, now!””

  2. He’s just a one-term blinking idiot who, once he has served his purpose, will be pushed aside by his own party and left alone to tend to his goats in a few months’ time. He is like John Major, the former British PM who lost the general election to Tony Blair’s Labour party. This was one of the worst electoral defeats in British politics. After the defeat he was replaced as leader of the party

  3. Uncle Lim, Tsu Koon’s capability should be very clear for you. He has been a spineless dude for a while. Do you expect him to change overnight? Is just like asking Uncle Mahathir to admit he is at fault in the Anwar case. So no way that is going to happen. Tsu Koon will just play it save with his CYA attitude along the way. So dont waste your breathe putting your hopes on him.

  5. To me this Mr PM Dunno is an UMNO joke!

    I’ve been laughing reading the comments from one blog to another and honestly, if UMNO does nothing to get rid of this guy, UMNO is doomed forever and so will this country if we do nothing and allow BN to win again in the coming General Election!

    He knows Malaysians have short memories. Either he is trying to insult the intellect and integrity of the people or he is so blur, still sleep talking or an idiot. Does he not realise that he just made a speech that was in actual fact referring himself, his short-comings, his family and his gang of goblok BN Cabinet Ministers?

    Wake up Malaysians, we are in a very depressing and worrisome state. If we do nothing, we deserve the government we get!

  6. Almost four years later yesterday, Abdullah made a similar call at the Gerakan National Delegates Conference….

    ————————————–
    Looks like the sleepy PM just read the speech written by some one.

    Does he really understand what he read ??????

    Or he thinks that we all are stupid?????

  7. 1. “Tell me the truth.”

    2. “Tell me the truth.”

    this sounds like the bodoh parrot reapeating itself for the peanut reward. and to tell you the truth, when oft reapeated, it really sounds boring and annoying.

    Dear Mr Pee-Am,
    Open up your eyes, if you have them, look around you, see for yourself, for your answer to your quetions lies within you.

    Open up your heart (if there is one), feel the beat and pulse of this nation, feel the rythm of the people that put you into office, all people, not just your bodek kaki like some demented UMNOPOLOGIST.

    Open up your ears, for there is always two sides to the story that you are hearing, DO NOT listen to BODEK kaki of your UMNOPOLOGIST and neglect the Rakyat, for you are intelligent enough to know that one sided story is not real.

    And should any UMNOPOLOGIST reads this, SOD off.

  9. Either our PM has a short term memory or the spin doctors have been changed thus they didnt know that the same lie has been sued before 4 years ago!

    GO do the rite thing Mr Pm! Go stand in a corner!

  10. “We will investigate everything.” Sleeping Beauty, 2007 commenting on the Auditor General’s latest report.

    “We are not in the business of cheating the people.” Sleeping Beauty 2006.

    “Work with me, not work for me.” Sleeping Beauty 2004.

    “I am fair, I will always be fair.” Sleeping Beauty, 2007 at the Mute Chinese Association convention.

  13. Koh Tsu Koon – the guy who asked people to join the Gerakan so that they can change the National Front from within but got himself changed in the end.

    Tsu Koon is as opportunistic as they come. The history of China is replete with such creatures of opportunism.

    And look at what he has reaped on his own domestic front. They call it karma. How sad, how very sad.

  14. Give chance lah to Gerakan Acting President from whom there is normally not even a squeak of demurrer about any thing done by big brother UMNO. His “if need be” is already a deafening shout in the ear of “very necessary now”!

    So the PM wants to hear the Truth. The truth is that the very fact that Tsu Koon could mention the word “Royal Commission” means that the government’s Haidar panel can no longer sustain the ’sandiwara’ that it is not a white wash measure.

    It means that when a BN component party president broke ranks, the chinks in the fortress of the great Barisan Nasional are beginning to crack under the strain of sham and pretensions.

    Who will be convinced that Haidar panel could investigate the truth impartially? Their members themselves admitted their limitations in compelling witnesses to testify under immunity.

    Three illustrious former members of the Bench (Datuk Shaik Daud Ismail, Datuk K.C. Vohrah and Datuk V.C. George) have added their voices to demand for a Royal Commission.

    The Bar Council and the Malaysian Bar have supported the Royal Commission.

    Even a prominent member of the Establishment like corporate figure and former IGP Tun Haniff in his column ‘Point of View’ in The Star of 7th Oct now questioned of what use was the Panel of Enquiry if DPM reportedly had said that the panel could not call for witnesses but (only) access reports prepared by various agencies such as the ACA and PDRM.

    So the question is why is the PM giving so much leeway to his number 2 who had fumbled by appointing this powerless Haidar panel constituted of members directly or indirectly associated with him when the PM was away?

    (It is the same no 2 whom Dr. Chen Man Hin said in the last thread “Quo Vadis Malaysia?” who supported/accepted last UMNO general assembly’s proposal to jettison Bangsa Malaysia for Ketuanan Melayu).

    The truth is that your problem is the no. 2 and if you don’t rein in the number 2, and assert the course which you think is right, you’d be dragged down by what others are doing for their own agendas for which you alone have to answer for because the buck stops at No. 1.

    That’s the truth, deal with it.

  15. Dear Mr PM,

    You want to hear the truth? Actually the truth has been around for quite as while but i guess, you must had been busy with your travels and sleep, you must have had missed it the last time around.

    Nevertheless I am going to repeat it for you once more,

    RESIGN !

  19. “Tell me the truth. Sometimes people do not provide truthful information for fear that I will cry, worry or lose sleep over it. But as a leader, I have to know the truth.” Abdullah Badawi – 2003

    ““We do not want to pretend and say that everything is okay. We do not want to be in a state of denial. Tell the truth, even if it is painful.The prime minister must have the courage and readiness to listen even to the worst stories, whether it is related to the country or himself. Never allow yourself to sink in a hole of denial and feel that everything is alright.” Abdullah Badawi – 2007

    I really think this Prime Minister ought to employ a better speech writer. Clearly he is not getting his money’s worth!

    However, I cannot help feel that in the last two lines above, his speech writer is referring to him! One cheeky bugger! As usual this PM is too dumb to realize it.

  20. PERSONAL NOTE TO OUR BELOVED PRIME MINISTER

    Mr. Badawi,

    From the speech you just made, it is obvious to your people that you are struggling with your own personal demons within you. But Sir, your own personal demons are yours to keep, For us demons like Najib, Musa, Fairuz and V.K. Lingam are not among those demons and are of a more dangerous variety.

    What say you, Mr. Prime Minister?

    To quote you, “Never allow yourself to sink in a hole of denial and feel that everything is alright.”

    What hole are you talking about?? The only hole is the one in your head. This you must realize. You must work hard to plug that hole or else Malaysians are doomed.

    Your no-longer-humble servant,

    Offshore Malaysian

  21. Yucky Tsu Koon was already like that with doublespeak while in school, haha! Born with a silver spoon in his mouth as a scion of the rich, he wasn’t exposed to any difficulties like most of us encountered in kind. Amazing that people don’t really change over the years. Indeed why should a protected wimp find cause to change?

  22. “Koh Tsu Koon – the guy who asked people to join the Gerakan so that they can change the National Front from within but got himself changed in the end.” Tulip Crescent

    I would include the above among the “quotable quotes” of the Year.

    ‘Freshie’ politicians who say ‘change’ is best worked from the inside underestimate the dynamics of change i.e. the continous interaction between forces of change and forces of inertia to change. The end result may be a victory to neither.

  23. If you look at the photos of a particular Chief Minister these days, you will notice he is beginning to look more and more like Homer Simpson.

    Take a goooood look.

    Its scary to have Homer to be in charge. Duuuhhhhhnnnnut!

  28. what is so difficult about finding out who the whistleblowers are? The whistleblowers have said they will surface to a royal commission. So why not have a royal commission? the whistleblowers bluff, if any, will be called. QED.

    It really begs the question whether the government truly wants to know who the whistleblowers are?

    Of course, this will not happen if the government for its own reason are afraid to have a royal commission. The public can draw its own conclusions from the government actions or non actions then.

  29. The speech by the PM at the opening of the Greakan meeting shows that the PM is good at mouthing slogans. He has said many times that he likes to hear the “truth”. That may be so but he has never acted on any of the many “truths” presented to him. All words – meaningless words – which do not carry any meaningful action by the PM. He is an empty barrel.

  31. one upon a time, there were this 7 bangladeshis came to malaysia to cari makan. they were very thrifty and cook and eat porridge every day -7 days a week. so everyday one of them will take turn to pour porridge for the members. hence, all 7 will have equal chance to pour the porridge for a day in a week. after a while, the one who distributes will often be blamed to give himself a biggest portion.

    so to avoid misunderstanding they employ an outsider to distribute the porridge for them. this has been fair for a while. but all the 7 of them tried hard to “buy” or corrupt the outsider/distributor so that he will get a bigger portion from him. so this system ended up with so much hatred and politics among the seven of them. they find that this distributing system for the porridge fail also.

    then they try to set two 3-member and 4-member porridge distributing committees to distribute the porridge. but very often they ended up with never ending discussion and arguing and before they can distribute the porridge the food is cold and has to be wasted. the system fails again… suddenly one of them came up with a brilliant idea to have a fairer distributing system…

    they revert back to each one taking turn to distribute every day. but this time whoever distributes will get last. so the six member can choose the best first and then left the last bowl one for the person who distribute. thus, to ensure he will get a fairer share so he is so careful in to pour into all the 7 bowls in EQUAL SHARES in all the 7 bowls. so even if he would to be the last one to take it will still be same!!!

    came then the umno who distribute the porridge take the last!!!

  32. 1. a comparatively thin, flat piece of wood or the like, as a large piece of plywood.

    2. a group of persons gathered to conduct a public discussion, judge a contest, serve as advisers, be players on a radio or television game, or the like: a panel of political scientists meeting to discuss foreign policy.

    thin no substance, just discusion only, nothing done in the end.

  33. PM Abdullah has spoken about the Lingam Clip:
    “Sometimes the public are too quick to express the wrong view about the Government’s intention. The Government’s intention is not to delay; the Government’s intention is not to do something that is not fair. We want to be fair”
    and what did Naib said on the TV:
    “No, No, No they are not supposed to call witnesses. They know the terms of reference. There is no ambiguity. They will work within the terms of reference. They will work very closely with the appropriate Government agencies”
    Is this fair, when the probe panel is under the control of the Legal Affairs Department in the PM Department? Are they are directing the probe? The Panel met for the first time and AG Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan and ACA Director-General Datuk Ahmad Said Hamdan met the panel separately and gave the assurance of full cooperation. Then the Panel takes a 2-week break and waits for this feedback

    Meanwhile further clarification from Nazri more or less predicts the outcome of the probe – Authenticity not verified, No further Action.
    “If they do not cooperate, then the authenticity cannot be determined and this will prevent the panel from discharging its responsibility. As such, it is important for them to reveal the source failing which we can conclude that they are lying” More details at:
    http://powerpresent.blogspot.com/2007/10/pm-denies-whistleblowers-targeted.html

  34. “Up till now, Lingam has maintained an inelegant silence. One suspects that the second installment of the tape is on his mind because he cannot afford to contradict himself or be inconsistent if he makes a statement now. ” Adcin – Malaysiakini

    The statement he made to the ACA is not evidence in a court of law. His testimony in court is the evidence. Inconsistencies between the statement he now made to ACA and his in-court testimony only serves to prove his lack of credibility – a useful tool in the event of his impeachment, assuming impeachement is necessary.

  35. I think there may be a lot of in fightings for “a bigger piece of cake or a better position” going on inside BN and the various heads are obviously very eager to get to the unhappy ‘whistleblower/s’ (but not long ago they were comrades) to settle some “uneven account/s”.

    How else can one explains a video clip taken in 2002 only surfaced now????? They all know exactly who the blower/s are. They just want to make “contact” with them!

    You just hope these blowers won’t turn their backs on Anwar if they get a “massive deal” from you know who.
    What a saga! I hope we get to know the truth! The only way is through a Royal Commission!

    BTW, don’t lose sight of PKFZ4.6B; the submarine;the boats & the jets!

  36. Waiting also with unabated breath is a whistleblower for the Altantuya Shaariibuu’s case. It may be good for a “responsible” whistle blower culture to develop here.

    The boundary conditions for such “responsible” whistle blowing are that the disclosure corrects or prevents official, political or even private sector’s wrong doing in a manner doing more public good than harm and made in a responsible manner based on facts rather than fabricated evidence.

    We need more “Deep Throats” for exposure of just not LingamGate but also AltantuyaGate, PKFZ Gate, etc including less politically less dramatic case of (say) a civil engineer believing that a certain bridge is unsafe, reports this to (say) Malaysiakini, Opposition or RPK in MT…..

    Admittedly, whistle blowing will not so easily become a fad considering that reprisals are expected and we do not have a whistleblowing legislation to protect the person(s) making disclosure.

    Although often whistleblower’s action in exposing corruption may be based on moral indignation, in our prevailing ‘corrupt culture’ it may ironically be motivated by financial incentive as well.

    As RPK told the police recording his statement on how he accessed his sources of information within the power structure, he said that he just paid them RM1,000 and they “would sing like a canary”.

    As financial incentive is basically corrupting the whistleblower to in turn snitch on the corrupt, the information procured from such method of obtaining it may be inherently suspect as to reliability and hence it becomes incumbent upon the person obtaining it to check and verify thoroughly the facts and evidence bought and ensure that it meets the basic boundary conditions of “responsible” whistle blowing earlier mentioned prior to making the disclosure public.

  37. According to The Star & The Sun reports 8th Oct it was reported that “the government will protect the source of the video recording purportedly showing a lawyer talking to a senior judge over an appointment if the person becomes a witness in the ongoing investigation”.

    In obvious rebuttal of Anwar Ibrahim’s saying that his whistleblowers would testify if granted protection, it was reported that “Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohd Nazri Aziz said the witness will not only be protected by the government but will also be given a new identity and a new face through cosmetic surgery….The protection is stated under the Witness Protection Act,” he said when commenting on the refusal by the source of the video recording to assist the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) and the special panel to investigate the authenticity of the recording, fearing his safety. Nazri said the source should not use safety as an excuse as the government has guaranteed his safety.” We have an Act to protect witnesses. If we do not have trust in the government to protect the witness whom can we trust. Surely not Anwar (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim),” he told reporters after giving Aidilfitri goodies at Lubuk Merbau.
    See link to Bernama’s report here – http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/news.php?id=288984

    Trust in the government…hmmmmm.

    YB Kit, is there really a Witness Protection Act passed as law in Parliament and gazetted here for legal effect as Nazri Aziz reportedly said? If there were really this legislation whereby whistle blower will be given by the government “a new identity and a new face through cosmetic surgery”, I am not aware of it, are you? I thought the AG Chambers was still looking at it since the time AG sometime back mentioned about the expedience of witness protection programs. Is it true this Witness Protection Act or the Minister has been watching too many late night Hollywood crime busters movies on Astro?

    This matter is becoming hilarious: all that has been asked is a simple undertaking to grant immunity to the whistleblower of the video/clip and what we have here by way of upping ante is the government’s preparedness to grant the witness to its 3 man Haidar Panel a “new identity and a new face through cosmetic surgery”! :)

    [Witness Protection Act or Witness Protection Bill – not aware of either although some laws have specific references to witnesses. Point at issue is Whistleblowers Protection Act which the government has been dragging its feet for considerable time. – kit]

  39. This is about Koh Tsu Koon’s leadership in Gerakan more than anything else. He has managed to convince Gerakan members that he deserve to be their President. It does not mean much of anything else.

    KTK must have perceived that the PM want to diffuse the building cry over this issue and he gave an ‘out’ to the PM but at the same time, covered himself by not going all out for it. He gets points for taking Gerakan away from sentiments on this issue but for the fact that he did not get shut out by the PM, is viewed as not being outside the favour of the PM.

    If the PM decide that the Royal Commission is not to be, then KTK can actually still say that the independent panel did a good enough job. Its bodekism at its best…

  40. A bunch of thieves proposing whistleblower protection legislation ? You got to be kidding. “Trust me” says the leader of the den of thieves. Just as he tells everyone “I am fair, I will always be fair..”.

  41. YB, thanks for the clarification. Then I have to ask if there were no such thing as a Witness Protection Act enacted, how can the Minister say all these which is reported in maintream papers? This issue about whether the whistle blower is protected when coming out to testify before the panel is an important public issue which should not be trivilised. He may well be mocking but it didn’t come across that way when reported in our newspapers.

  43. Put the blame on Mahathir (long may he live to see the country go down the drain). His modus operandi depended on whistleblowers being silenced or cowed into submission. Instead of legislating whistleblower protection legislation, he instead tried to protect the criminals through the Official Secrets Act. Of course now that the Sleepy Head is in power, he has found the present situation to be very convenient for political survival.

  45. “And you think that our esteemed reporters know the difference between reality and sarcasm ?” – Godfather.

    No sarcasm involved here.

    I am sure the reporters know the difference between reality and sarcasm but not sure they know the difference between an Act of Parliament and a bill!

    Bernama’s report of 7th , The Sun and The Star of 8th October reported that Nazri Aziz referred to the Witness Protection ACT : http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/10/8/nation/19108187&sec=nation

    The NST report of 8th Oct reported that Nazri referred to the Witness Protection BILL tabled recently in parliament. See : http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Monday/Frontpage/20071008072543/Article/index_html

    YB said that he was “not aware of either Witness Protection Act or Witness Protection” so how does it reconcile with what Nazri reportedly said that the Witness Protection BILL was “tabled recently in parliament”?

    How could the Witness Protection Bill be tabled, if true, without our Leader of Opposition being informed about it?

    That’s the question.

  46. Good riddance to Koh TK and the gerakan party?
    http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/index.php?itemid=8922
    One distinguished veteran activist got up to the mike and promptly declared that he for one would not be voting for the Barisan Nasional in the coming general election.

    Aliran president P Ramakrishnan then followed up by saying that it was not enough to say “No to the PGCC!” but Penangites should also say “No to the BN!” – as that was the only language it would understand: the message of the ballot box.

    Another veteran activist said the PGCC was the worst project he had seen in all his 40 years of public service in terms of the horrendous implications for the urban environment.

  48. When gomen ask for truth, they only interested to know how deep do the people know about their ‘truth’.

    This is their acid test. Just like what nazri did to assure the safety and identity of the whistleblower based on the law which does not exist.

    The ministerial actions keep losing their credibility. going after election now will only increase the votes for the opposition.

  49. Quote: Nazri

    “If we do not have trust in the government to protect the witness whom can we trust. Surely not Anwar (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim),”

    My answer to this is that I will trust almost anyone before this government!! This is my opinion of this govenment. Remember Lee Kuan Yew was shocked when he visited Malaysia and remarked that he could not believe how malaysians do not tryust what their government says!!

Leave a Reply