Tuesday, November 04, 2014

Consensual or non consensual?

There have been two issues very close to the hearts of PKR people that I haven't followed from the very beginning, though in one I did try to catch up much later, which was the Altantuyaa Shaariibuu case.

Hey, I even penned two poems for Altantuyaa, and my blogging matey, Susan Loone who was on friendly terms with Steve (father of the dead model) informed me that he liked the poem she handed over to him, and would take it back with him to Mongolia. The one Susan gave him was titled Remembering Altantuyaa Shaariibuu.

The other was Murdering Altantuyaa Shaariibuu Again, and it was fortunate Susan didn't hand this one to Steve for it would have shown how hypocritical and exploitative some Malaysians have been.

PKR mourners for Altantuyaa

Why didn't they do same for Preeshena Varshiny
or Nurin Jazlin Jazimin?

The other issue I haven't followed from the very beginning and which I have to admit I haven't blogged on much, perhaps a few posts here and there about the actors rather than the act, has been the Sodomy issue, both Parts I and II.

But I admit I have been so disgusted by the daily grubby revelations in court, eg. almost everyday we get to hear of K-Y gel and other yucky stuff.

Back in August 2011 I posted Tadpoles on trial, wakakaka. As one of my blog visitors said, one needed to take a bath after reading of the alleged going-on's in the sodomy trials.

Anyway, I'll take a reckless risk and present my prediction as to what will happen to Anwar, though I am not sure whether it'll be sub judice and land me into lots of hot water, wakakaka.

I believe he will be found NOT guilty of non-consensual sodomy (or rape of Saiful) but in the process found as having participated in sodomy.

As I mentioned, I haven't followed the case closely but I recall vaguely there are two possible charges, one being under Penal Code yadda yadda 377B and the other 377C, respectively for non-consensual and consensual sodomy. Yes, in Malaysia it's a crime even for consensual sodomy. But if consensual then Saiful should be co-charged as well.

Nonetheless, I reckon he'll be released but with his reputation smeared as far as the Heartland will be informed.

But what has troubled me since Sodomy II, yes only personally, has been Anwar's refusal to take an oath on the Quran that he didn't sodomize Saiful. He even imported his matey Gus Dur (former and late President of Indonesia and a Muslim scholar) to support his refusal to take the oath on the Quran, as Saiful had done on the issue of being sodomized.

Mind, a pro PKR junior kathi who conducted Saiful oath-taking attempted to diminish Saiful's oath by saying the bloke didn't or couldn't pronounce some Arabic words properly.

If my recall is not too far off, I think our well-known and popular former mufti of Perlis, Dr Asri did once say that taking an oath on the Quran regarding the issue should have been done.

When I was a wee laddie, my late mum used to frighten me that if I told lies I would have my tongue ripped out or forced to kiss a red-hot burning pillar in Hades. I have to admit I haven't told lies since, well, not much anyway, wakakaka.


  1. While Saiful claimed that he was forced, the prosecution claimed that it was consensual as charged. So, either one of them must be lying right? If a judge says that Saiful is a credible witness, then the prosecution would have been not credible. If a judge says the prosecution is to be believed, then Saiful is not a credible withness and the whole complaint will fall part. If Saiful is not credible, then his meetings with the top people(you know who) before making his first police report would be viewed as a conspiracy. If it is a conspiracy, then this sodomy may not have happened.
    The defense team is practically causing the the prosecution of planting DNA of Anwar into the 3 items taken from his lock up as well as in Saifu's anus by way of a conspiracy.
    Anwar, although not taking an oath, had file a complaint against Saiful for force accusations against Anwar. This is also an Islamic tradition. To that, Saiful had not replied either.
    Every day, in the sharia courts all over Malaysia, Muslims are accusing each other under oath of the Quran. This means that at least half of them were lying if the other parties won their cases right? This shows how much value we can attach to an oath swearing in Malaysia.
    Did not the 2 accused policemen in AT muder case swear that they were innocent verses those witnesses who sworn that they did it to AT? All were under oath in court.

  2. As far as I'm concerned Anwar's Sodomy trial is one of those "only in Malaysia" bullshit, which would have been thrown into the trash basket years ago.

    I disagree on Anwar taking an oath on the Quran.
    A Quranic oath should only be introduced on matters touching on Islamic faith.

    I would resist any attempt to Islamize the proceedings of the secular Judicial system - and would be the first to criticize Anwar if he went down that path.

    This is a very serious criminal trial, where the merits of the case should only involve the Penal Code and the principles of Common Law.

  3. the gaffe guy who know's10:06 pm, November 04, 2014

    Kaytee,by the submissions and arguments by Anwar's consuls about consensual sex in this sodomy case,definitely Anwar did fucked Saiful.Consensual or non consensual (rape) sodomy is sodomy.Hehehe.

  4. Why don't Anwar come out like a real man he thinks he is,and say it out loud."Yes,I fucked Saiful and he damn well liked and loved it".

  5. No Sex please, we are Muslims.....akakakakakakak

  6. http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/279138

    Why always Anwar, asks veteran Aussie ex-judge....
    I have wondered why too....

    All these negative-Anwar comments here are because of the author / commentator's deep dislike for Anwar Ibrahim.

    But they never stop to consider the man may be innocent, no matter how deep and strong is their antipathy towards Anwar.

  7. Islam may consider Sodomy a grave offence, but many Muslim societies actually create conditions which tend to promote homosexual activity among adolescent boys and young men.

    - lack of socialization with girls/women of their age
    - segregation into boys / men-only activities
    - boys only schools, especially boarding schools where adolescent boys study, fraternize, play and sleep together without any female contact.

    - severe constraints on young men/women dating and showing affection in public.
    - on the contrary, men showing affection in public e.g. holding hands is common and accepted.
    - lack of female inspirational figures
    - low status of women in society

    Any one of these factors may be innocent enough, but taken all together, they serve as incubators for homosexual activity. Most boys grow out of it and become normal heterosexuals, but some become addicted to homosexuality.

    Arabs were / are quite notorious backside players, even as Islam severely frowns on homosexuality.

    Another version of this, reportedly quite popular among Arab visitors in KL is to get a female prostitute , but do it from the Back Some of the girls simply refuse such activity, some girls will agree but charge a lot more for such "unnatural" action.

    BTW, Britain at one time had many similar social conditions among upper-class boys, and British Public Schools were notorious breeding grounds for Backside Boys.
    One well-known group were the Cold War spies who betrayed their country to the Soviets - Burgess, MacLean, Philby and Blunt.

    1. In the foreword to T.E. Lawrence's (more famously known as Lawrence of Arabia) book - Seven Pillars of Wisdom - mention was made of numerous passages describing "gay play" among his Arab companions. That was in the first draft of the book which he sent to his good friend, George Bernard Shaw, for review and suggestions. It seems that Shaw was quite a prudish fellow and advised excising all those homosexual passages. Thus, when the book was finally published all the descriptions of homosexual behaviour were expunged.

      In David Lean's bio-pic of Lawrence, namely Lawrence of Arabia, viewers may be able to discern a suggestion of homosexual undercurrent, especially in the interaction between the two young Arab boys who followed him in the guerrilla campaign against the Turks.

  8. Wasn't it one of your earlier post visitors who contrasted between Singapore , reaching a GDP perCapita exceeding that of Switzerland, and Malay-sai - its future dependent on Saiful's Arse.

  9. the new kampung man9:49 am, November 05, 2014

    Fuck those bastardly PKR imposter mourners.They will sell their mothers,wives and daughters for political gains.Anwar clones,100%.

  10. Altantuya....what a sad tragedy....

    Worst of all, Altantuya's murder is now officially a crime without punishment.....

    Both Azilah and Sirul Azhar are walking around free as a bird, after being aquitted by the Court of Appeals......

    Plenty of people have privately concluded why Altantuya's murder has no perpetrator......because the true perpetrator, the one who gave the orders, can never be brought to justice......not under the current political system.

    Only a thorough change in the political system can bring justice to Altantuya.

    And one man is vital to continue leading the struggle for a new political system.......Anwar Ibrahim...

  11. anti bigots fighter10:46 am, November 05, 2014

    What the fuck are these Pkr assholes doing? To mourn for a beauty all the way from Mongolia?In this fucking case they better mourn for all every Tom,Dick and Jenny in their neighbor hood.Blurdy shameless humans.All for a few votes here and there.

    1. How many Tom, Dick and Jenny were blown up by military grade C4 explosives ?
      How many Tom, Dick and Jenny have their accused murderers (now acquitted) whose day job was as the (then) Deputy Prime Minister's bodyguards ?
      How many Tom, Dick and Jenny have their immigration records wiped out ?

      Still think this is a "normal" murder ?

  12. If we need revert to "oath-taking" to prove one's innocence, then we don't need any law court la....or maybe as it is, we don't need any?

  13. 1. since the act whether suka sama suka or non-consensual is a criminal offense, why bother to have 377B (suka sama suka) and 377C (tak rela). saiful (victim?) testified that the act was non-consensual but pak syeikh was charged under section 377B and not 377C. can't we SEE what kind of game they are playing?
    2. why saiful has not been charged? will the following be the answer?
    section 377A states that ‘any person who has sexual connection with another person by the INTRODUCTION OF THE PENIS IN THE ANUS OR MOUTH of the other person is said to commit carnal intercourse against the order of nature’.
    3. a. saiful has taken the oath holding the kitab ALONE. was the condition stipulated in the quran complied? b. if the accused were to do it (taking the oath together with the victim i.e. same place & same time), will the case be dropped by the civil court?

  14. Al Jubur is irrelevant.
    Why waste so much energy over a useless argument ?

  15. Section 377A of the Penal Code defines criminal sexual relationship between two persons. Section 377B of the Penal Code is concerning consensual criminal sexual act between two persons. Section 377C of the Penal Code is about non-consensual criminal sexual act between two persons.

    In this on-going case, the charge is specifically under 377B of the Penal Code, which is consensual criminal sexual act: BUT with only one party now being criminalized and prosecuted for the aforesaid consensual sexual act.

    My Verdict: Guilty as charged. Appeal disallowed. Imprisonment disallowed. He is a free man. This punishment is quite sufficient for him: That their secret criminal offence in regard to their homosexual tendencies is being divulged in public; indeed, for both he and his partner have been disgraced and humiliated in the eyes of all. Wakakaka…

    - hasan

    1. The topic here is consensual or non consensual. According to the Umno Lawyer aka DPP argument in court yesterday, he claimed that Saiful had a homosexual relationship with Anwar for quite awhile, before this complaint. Shafee also said that Saiful received cash, designer cloths and trips purportedly as rewards for such homosexual acts more than once.

      The impression I get from the above claims is that Shafee is saying that Saiful prostituted himself to Anwar for all the mentioned rewards. Prostitution is giving sexual favor for cash or kind in return. This is very cruel to Saiful's wife as well as Anwar's.

      Then I can't believe that he also argued that Saiful is a victim(like one having been raped). This in itself contradicts his "relationship" argument.
      Victim mean non consensual while " relationship" mean consensual. Why such a prominent lawyer make this kind of self-contradiction among others?
      I am inclined to think that he wants to loose the prosecution's case for some reason untold.