Share |

Friday, 6 May 2011

The Internet did not kill Kugan or Aminulrasyid


'How can the Internet be used to tarnish the police if the police force is impartial and serves the rakyat instead of the politicians in power.'

'Internet being used to tarnish police image'

Cannon: PDRM (Royal Malaysian Police) ought to take a hard look at itself and do some honest self-examination.

It ought to evaluate the public conduct and discharge of duty by its personnel from top down, from the IGP (inspector-general of police) to the rank and file. University bodies are available to carry out attitude-perception surveys for PDRM to gauge how the force is being viewed by the public.

Our police are partial and selective in law enforcement. It comes down hard on peaceful, civil demonstrators, NGOs and the opposition, while it turns a blind eye to demonstrations by Umno/Perkasa/Pembela hoods and bigots.

It hinders opposition election rallies and blocks them from entering villages. Whereas it escorts lawbreakers bringing obscenity into the mosque to frame and accuse a rival in Allah's name.

What image is PDRM talking about? The police force is its own worst enemy. PDRM has trashed its uniform and shredded its own credibility. The reputation of the police needs no tarnishing, and it should not threaten and blame the bad-news bearer.

Cala: Kuala Lumpur police chief Zulkifli Abdullah has erred for not differentiating "lies" from "facts" as carried in the Internet. The Internet is a force to be reckoned with for its facilitating role in giving a more balanced view on matters not picked up by the MSM (mainstream media).

Without the Internet, many incidents of police brutality would have swept under the carpet. What is there to be afraid of if the police have been acting professionally?

Tbala: One need not resort to independent surveys to gauge the image of the police. It is written on the wall. We dare the police to undertake an independent survey to prove the existence of its good name before they even talk about defending it.

By Election Fan: How can the Internet be used to tarnish the police if the force is impartial and serves the rakyat instead of the politicians in power.

Can you explain why the 'cow head' protesters were allowed to march with intention of insulting Hindus and those who gathered to campaign for minimum wages were arrested? Why was the reporter (Sin Chew Daily's Tan Hoon Cheng) detained under the ISA and the party which uttered racist remarks left off?

Dood: It is the police force itself that is tarnishing its own image by its irresponsible, unjust, and partisan behaviour.
It's a pity we have people like Zulkifli leading the force, because only a fool will blame others for "manipulating" issues like deaths in custody, causing the public to lose faith in the police force, rather than realise that if not for the police causing those issues in the first place (for example, allowing deaths in its custody to happen), there wouldn't be any issue to "manipulate".

Lim Chong Leong: What nonsense coming from the police. The Internet did not kill the many Kugans and Aminulrasyids. The Internet did not rob picture-frame makers or pregnant storekeepers.
The Internet did not have its special forces kill and bomb a Mongolian girl. The Internet did not offer protection to cow-head protestors and racist Perkasa or even porn producers.

The Internet also did not arrest candlelight 'vigilians' and their lawyers. And the Internet did not make stupid statements like this to make itself look even more stupid. So, the image of the PRDM (sic) being an Umno personal security guard is projected by them.

Petestop: It is not the Internet that tarnishes their image, it is police actions. What with the protection given to the Datuk T, who showed porn to the press and probably leaked it to the public (YouTube) since they claim they have the only copy of the sex video.

It is really weird to see these three jokers wearing bullet-proof vests and guarded by police when doing the 'sumpah laknat'. Is that what the police force is used for nowadays - to guard criminals so that it could gain political points?

The police actions tarnish their image and the Internet is just a medium to spread the information.

Anonymous222: There's no smoke without fire.

P Dev Anand Pillai: The police are pleading with the people not to simply judge them? What a joke! Actions speak louder than words and the police show it everyday.

When a group of students wanted to 'welcome' the visiting Chinese premier, why were they arrested for just holding out a cloth banner? Why was PSM secretary-general S Arutchelvan arrested when all he was doing was to give the press their feed on what was happening on May Day.

The police force has now become the uniformed and armed unit of Umno-BN, it is no more the force that the British left us with. It has now become an armed force used by the government to threaten the people into submission instead of caring for and protecting them.

This was clearly displayed during the cow-head demonstration, Perkasa's loud demonstrations every now and then and during the Perak coup by the BN. Reputation and respect can only be earned not by force or threats.

Glocal: I would like to remind Zulkifli that the Internet had been an eye opener for the uninformed. The newspapers and the TV stations in this country are not telling us the truth. In fact, they are the culprits tarnishing the police image by falsifying reports of the actual situation. I think you have got the whole idea of the Internet wrong.

Ttloo: If the police image is tarnished by the Internet, there must be some truth in it as most of the articles that appear online come from the press, either locally or overseas. Only a small portion come from irresponsible Net users.

To sum it up, if the police image is good, an RCI (royal commission of inquiry) would not have been called before and until today the key recommendations from RCI had failed to take off. Does that answer your questions on the police image?

No comments: