Sebelum 30,000 Polis Meletak Jawatan, rasanya "MOLEK" benar kalau Hisshamuddin yang kosongkan KDN terlebih dahulu
The images of Bersih 3.0 is marred with supporters going after the barricades, chanting abusive words towards against police, damaging police car, overturning police car, and injuring a pillion traffic police into a comma, etc.
They will try to make up excuses and spin the police had been high handed in carrying out their jobs under the law. The video and pictures will show they were instigators irrespective of the comment by pro-gay foreign observer or Bar Council.
Before and during the event, these Bersih 3.0 supporters were claiming they have rights to hold a peaceful "Duduk dan Bantah" sit-in at the Dataran Merdeka. They argued that if a concert can be held there, why not a peaceful demonstration to call for a clean election.
The reason was finally expressed by Minister for "Domestic Affair", Dato Hishamuddin Tun Hussein Onn as security reasons. Any demonstration with opposition hands in has planned chaos. This particularly so with Hishamuddin Rais, Tian Chua, Shamsul Iskandar Akin, "Chegu Bard" etc. conspiring it.
They argued that it is their God given rights under their holy scripture, the UNITED NATION'S UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (UN Declaration) to have an opinion and to assembly peacefully at Dataran Merdeka.
It is as though their rights to assemble is ABSOLUTE. Do the authorities have no rights under the same UN Declaration? Do the majority who are not for such security risky gathering have no rights?
As it is, the opposition and Bersih 3.0 organisers are working hard to come out with excuses and spins to cover for the negative perception their aggressive supporters have put them in such spot.
It does not help that the Twitters and Media coverage from the pro-opposition mainstream and alternative media.
They know these images are just the beginning:
There will be more detailed videos and pictures coming out as the try to spin excuses.
Let's talk of their claimed rights under Article 19 and 20 of the Declaration. Taken from the whole Declaration here, the articles are below:
Do these Bersih and pro-opposition supporters really embodies the spirit of Article 19 and 20? Can they "agree to disagree"?
Among us bloggers of the pre-2008, pro-opposition friends like Zorro, Shar, Harris Ibrahim (who happen to be in the Bersih 3.0 committee) and many more react badly to differences in stand and position. They are quick to smear us negatively in the same paint as others within UMNO or BN which we ourselves do not agree to.
While we do have some agreement on certain issues, but they can't accept losing their usually prejudicial arguments based on unsubstantiated perception against our factual based arguments. In this respect, Raja Petra is still a fair and true gentlemen worthy of intellectual duels.
Try this with your pro-opposition friends and family to see how they turn from defensive to aggressive when you can't agree to their perception and prejudicial arguments.
So much for article 19 and 20.
So .. does the UNITED NATION'S UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS accord these hooligans the rights to supercede the authority in the matter of public order?
Let's go through the Declaration and see few articles.
When Hishamuddin said Bersih 3.0 can't be held for security reasons, he is protecting the rights to security of many others - shopkeepers, office workers, and non participating public.
This will be their argument against the more than 300 detained.
How about that traffic policeman being thrown a brick and beaten by six angry mobs? Does he have no rights in carrying out his duty as provide under the law?
How about the feeling of the police man when they were inhumanely jeered "anjing" the night before?
Where are those human rights lawyers sympathetic to the human rights cause like Harris Ibrahim, Edmond Bon, etc.?
Yes, Harris claimed to be a human rights lawyer. Would have thought that he better control his temper to a human level before thinking of the rights of other human. Otherwise he is a relatively nice guy, though we beg to differ on many issues.
Article 6, 7 and 8 talks of the rights under the law. It means all and not just one side which the human rights activist tend to do. Police have rights to under the law.
Talking about the law, don't the police as the one responsible for enforcing the law have the protection of the law against such attacks both physically and on their honour and reputation (by the fact they are being called "anjing!").
Sounds like a spin but think about them and not just for oneself only. They have spouse or love ones too. The Bersih supporters tend to think simply that they are the rakyat and they can order anyone in Government service as their peon. Read somewhere in Malaysiakini's MY SAY I think.
That peon they are ordering around is also a rakyat, asshole!
The UN Declaration described the participation of the people in Government is through election.
They can participate in the Governmental process through their elected representative and Government take their command through the established chain of command from elected officials to Government high officials.
Not directly from these yellow *ssh*les!
Police do not carry orders from people, more so minority but from their superiors. The Government is empowered through the electoral process, thus police is empowered.
Now for more serious stuff. Article 28 talk of rights to a social order.
What is social order?
Order in society can come in the form of cultural, religion and community consensus.
The most clear cut social order and also empowered is law and constitution. It is a rights to have law and order.
As citizen, the majority has agreed to the Constitution and the rights and freedom of the minority is protected. That social order comes with law and order and police is an agent of that accorded authority.
Will bet this anarchist have problem understanding that.
In any argument that used human rights as basis, article 29 is a powerful answer. Article 29 (2) acknowledged the law as the limit to unbridled rights and freedom.
If Bersih and opposition wants an anarchic Government without detailed law and that means we do not need lawyers and Bar Council, win the election and amend the law.
Otherwise *ssh*les, the UN Declaration admits the legal limitation to their own declared rights and freedom.
Article 30 basically say that group within Bersih out to create chaos and destroy public order is a destruction of human rights and freedom, thus they do not have any such rights accorded under this UN Declaration.
The conclusion this untrained in law can simply read with honesty, without the putarbelit of a lawyer, is that the police have every rights under the UN Declaration too.
So shut the f*ck up to all those yellow *ssh*les using it for sexual pleasures! My rights too to call unnamed others names.
Someone should make a report to SUHAKAM against Bersih for denying the rights of the majority and against police for dereliction of duties as accorded under human rights. The police should have used their power to belasah those dickh*ads!
amukanmelayu - SUHAKAM dah lama terkunci "MULUT" kerana penuh dengan "Janji Manis Mu"