Parang or no parang, killing an unarmed teen is wrong

YOURSAY | ‘Khalid's adamant stand to refuse apology to the bereaved family is untenable.’

IGP goes after Pua for ‘distorting facts’ in Aminulrasyid tweet

Aries46: This is called 'splitting hairs'. I don't see anything wrong in Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua's tweet. It’s a matter of interpreting the court's ruling where the parang's very existence was in question.

The crux of the issue is that the police gunned down the 14-year-old, parang or no parang, and the inspector-general of police’s (IGP's) defence his men was wrong as found by the court.

Khalid Abu Bakar's adamant stand to refuse apology to the bereaved family is untenable and going after Pua to distract attention further reduces his credibility.

ConstitutionIsSupreme: Khalid, as I understand Pua never claimed you said Amirulrasyid Amzah used the weapon.

From my reading of Pua's and your statement, I believe what he said is exactly as what you said here; so what is there to investigate? Or is it that you have difficulty in understanding English?

Odin Tajué: The English language is very hard to be good at. It can defeat even many native speakers who are well-educated — well-educated in the sense that they have received tertiary education and earned a degree or two, if not more — and never mind non-native speakers like Khalid.

We see this in the misusage of the simple, one-syllable word ‘fact'. ‘Fact' means a thing that is indisputably the case. Its synonyms are actuality, certainty, reality, etc. Many well-educated native speakers themselves say or write ‘get your facts right', ‘you've got your facts wrong', or something along the same line.

If you describe what someone has said or written as ‘fact', then the information imparted is right, indisputable, real, etc. That someone cannot have imparted wrong information. He need not do anything to provide correct information because that which he has given is correct.

Khalid has stated that he would not apologise because his ‘statement was based on the facts of the case at that time'. That a parang had existed in the car driven by the deceased was not a fact, because the tool had not been present in the car.

The only fact in relation to a tool called parang vis-à-vis the case is the claim that it had existed in the particular car. The claim is a fact because someone (obviously from the police department) has indeed made it.

But the claim itself is a fabrication. It is a lie. There was in fact no parang. Therefore, Khalid must tender his apology — and one would expect a sincere one and not mere lip service.

Commentable: This man is carving out a niche for himself out of a feudal dictatorial system that makes him a self-proclaimed sub-dictator after the very top dictator of the chain.

This man also misses the point that any person, what more an elected MP, is entitled to comment on any court judgment and to criticise any civil servant arising out of that court judgment.

The judgment is very clear and no matter how anyone tries to juggle those words, the outcome cannot be so much as "distorting the facts with the aim of confusing the rakyat".

If anything, it is only the IGP who is trying to downplay the severity of the judgment involving his role in trying to get the police officers off the hook.

Caripasal: So IGP, your statement was based on the facts on that day. Indeed, this is even worse. You had apparently issued a statement before a full investigation.

Why did you protect your officer even before conducting a full investigation? How can you be so sure he was not guilty?

Ipohcrite: It's good to protect your men - to show that you are part of the team - but only if they did the right thing. To protect your men, if they did the wrong thing, is called a cover-up.

And I think the court in this case found the latter to be the case. That's why the IGP was found guilty of malfeasance.

As for the parang, the matter was not pursued in the court case. Some cynic might even say that a mysterious donor placed it there.

Dont Just Talk: Khalid, the true colour of a good leader is having the courage to say sorry to the family of Aminulrashid, who was shot dead by the police, and admit that you were wrong with your judgement that a machete was found in the car since the High Court judge found you liable of public misfeasance.

By threatening Pua, it looks like you are abusing your power as IGP and does not look too good on you as the police chief.

Respect has to be earned and being humble in dealing with the rakyat will be one way of achieving it.

Anonymous 2362021442199789: Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is why we should not allow so much power to be concentrated in the hands of just a handful of individuals.

There must be proper checks and balances because human beings are by nature weak, greedy and susceptible to abusing power and corruption. They become arrogant and insolent when they start believing they hold the reins of power.

LR6SO4BK3: So the IGP is admitting that he was protecting his officers at all costs. Will he also admit he has been protecting the PM at all costs?

Gaji Buta: These people make laws as they go? What about 1MDB money which ended up as 'units'? Is that not confusing? -Mkini