Whether Court of Appeal in Nizar vs Zambry have a five-minute shotgun unanimous decision or 3 or 100 page written jugment will make no difference to wrinkled/fossilised/bias minds having neither the interest nor the capacity to understand the rationale/merits of judgment but only interested in the outcome – whether the party they like/favour won or lost the case.

Had their party won, a five-minute shotgun unanimous decision will be a distillation of pure legal and judicial wisdom. Why ? Because, they would say, the law/facts are so obviously in their party’s favour that to deliver anything longer than 5 minute is long winded and superfluous.

However if Court of Appeal judgment delivers a judgment against the party they favour , then even 3 separate well researched and well reasoned and argued judgment delivered (with dissenting judgment) over 5 hours, replete with judicial citations and learned analysis, would be a legal “sandiwara” and mumbo jumbo. (If the Bar Council agrees with such a judgment then it must be that BN agents have indiltrated the Bar Council and the independence of the Bar has been compromised. If a law lecturer agrees, then he must be promised professorship or deanship by Ministry by higher authorities).

For wrinkled/fossilised/bias minds are interested only in result of a judgment – whether it favours their party – if “yes” it is good judgment, there is justice and if “no” it is bad jugment and there is injustice, it is as simple as that – and never its rationale, merits or how long it takes to deliver the judgment etc though they pretend otherwise.

///Only those who do not deny that they write eloquently would make a foot-long posting to claim that I have political bias/// – Godpapa.

If not political bias entirely, then maybe also dyslexia, a pathological problem of dealing with syllables and putting them together in coherent manner, and having a problem with those not similarly so afflicted.

“Hackneyed” means in relation to certain allegations and retorts like “on the one hand…. but on the other hand”, they are repeated so often and overfamiliar through overuse (like a broken record) that causes one to yawn….

Views on PAS are not expo-facto rationalisation (ie arguing for points to support a bias decision)?

Views are borned out by subsequent events. That is not bias. it is forsight.

Today even Kit admitted Pakatan Rakyat faced crisis of Confidence by PAS’s actions (Unity Talk & call to ban SIS). Malaysiakini reports Lim Guan Eng concurred with his father that PR hit by a confidence crisis. “At the same time, Guan Eng also slammed PAS’ hypocrisy of playing a dual-faced political game by rubbing shoulders with Umno on one side while picking up a fight with it on the other. DAP has never been told, nor it ever agreed, with the unity talks between PAS and Umno. We have never discussed it in any Pakatan meetings,” said the DAP secretary-general.

So are Kit or Guan Eng bias? You’d say not because their views are supported by present events. Then you’d say Lee wang yen and I expressed our negative views a year ago when facts had then not unfolded yet, that the views were unsupported and therefore bias.

This is a wrong understanding of bias.

Bias is a partiality that prevents objective consideration of the facts.

Objective consideration of the facts had been done – the facts of the nature of PAS’s world view and ideology that it could not genuinely in the longer run permit accomodation of pluralistic or other ‘live and let live’ considerations that they view inconsistent with their core beliefs that all morality and law are derived from the Almighty and it is their mission to establish his State. Their ideological leanings can be discerned from various forms as are practised throughout large swathes of Middle East if you care to look.

One does not need to come to the river, like you tend to do, to then only realise that there is no bridge.

That would be, as what I said, having a vision equal to the distance from your eyes to the tip of your nose.

As one progresses in age, Hyperopia is a commoner condition than (say) Myopia that affects the few whose thought patterns and mind-sets become crystallized and inflexible though they are not aware of it.

Have you studied the ideology of a theocratic Islamic state?

It is not just political rhetoric. It is based on a sincere belief that it is the ideal state required by the Almighty to be eventually established in which Islamic principles – both as a matter of law (sharia) and Islamic morality – are embracive of all aspects of life within the state making no demarcation between what is private sphere/domain and public sphere/domain and tolerating no exercise of personal freedoms of actions and behaviour inconsistent or contravening Islamic precepts of law and morality.

In the premises the people fit to rule will be ulamas and scholars well versed in Islamic laws/morality which are derived from and based on sovereignty of God rather than man made in parliament.

So to the faithfuls, how can these premises be ever changed by man’s interpretation or interpretation of those of other or no faiths?

These are some of the fundamental precepts that PAS believes. There are more but in a nut shell this sufices.

Tell me I am wrong or that these values are consistent with or can accomodate the liberal tolerance of pluralistic ideas and moralities of other races/cultures in this diverse society.

definition of “show-off” ?

The preconception of a man of no show.

//The definition of a show-off is a person who persistently juggles something in between his two hands when in fact there is nothing….// is a validation of my earlier observation that you are perenially obsessed with what’s between two hands, and an ever ready attempt to resort to profanity or hints suggestive of it, when words and reason fail to fill in the spaces of exchange.