Style In The Substance

Style In The Substance:
Ronnie Liu: What’s desiltation? You see, flood water being flood water, it’ s not clean. In fact, it is always full of mud (silt) and rubbish. That’s why after every flood, the biggest headache is washing the mud away (desiltation).
Comment: Even those who like to think they are good are emotional and condescending.
Does he need to tell others that flood water is flood water? Is he courting future madness by speaking the meaningless? Because what he said is meaningless it is the style in speech to impress others. Because others are very stupid he is very smart.

The person who lets be yes only as Jesus commanded says: Flood water is full of mud and rubbish which is why the biggest headache after a flood is washing away the mud.
All stylish postures are stressful:
Compared to equivalent non stylish postures all stylish postures are significantly more stressful, restless and distracting. Thus sitting slouched in a posture to express casualness that you want others to admire is more stressful than sitting properly upright alert in a gravity-neutral but not ramrod stiff posture.
The postures people adopt in standing, sitting and lying are partly a reflection of style to impress, intimidate or dominate others and partly driven by innate stress, restlessness and distraction. Because there is significant tension in their minds they have an irresistible urge to adopt tensed postures that also accommodate their desire for style.
You can sit in a given chair in many different ways and the resident stress associated with each style of sitting is objective not subjective and only the postures that are without style generate the least stress, restlessness and distraction.
When there is unnecessary tensing of the muscles, twisting or bending or pulling to one side of body parts, the posture is said to be without style and no matter how you may dispute it is the least stressful, restless and distracting position. In terms of sitting, the lotus position as adopted by the body is the most easeful posture for sitting. If you have not tried it you have no right to doubt it.
Razak Not Najib Is The Principal Villain:
Based on the letter Altanturya wrote in the event anything untoward happened to her, Razak and not Najib is linked to her. Razak made promises to help her but when she came to Malaysia, she was threatened with an engineered suicide by being thrown out of a building that may have been aborted for lack of volunteers to carry out and fear of witnesses since the other girls would not leave Altanturya alone.
In the name of getting what they want for instance the heart of a girl, many make promises that they forget or never fulfil not realizing that they would be made to eat their words and fulfil their promises in a way that is far more painful than they dream possible. So the next time you are seized by an emotional urge to make promises, think twice, you may be asked to fulfil and if you renege and even harm the person you made promises of assistance, you are asking for even more pain yourself.
Here you have Razak and his wife and daughter showing affection publicly (daughter kissed him as he was in transit) but it is just for show and such people are not capable of true love but intense liking for persons they have vested interests in or identify with. People might feel touched but it is all hypocrisy and if you think maybe their affection is genuine you are deluded and in danger of being conned by others.
Conditioning, mutual reinforcement to agony:
A person who is restless will shake his leg with constant acceleration and deceleration in speed and strength of force that will reinforce his restlessness that will cause him to continue shaking with even more intensity and speed that can become agonizing at times.
In the same way, constant changing in speed and strength of force in one’s thoughts, motions and speech (perhaps initially deliberate because it is deemed stylish and in imitation of everyone else) causes restlessness that seizes one’s mind to conduct whatever activities that mind undertake with constant changes in speed and strength of force that is not just escalating the suffering but conditions and degrades that mind that people do not realize will end in loss of control and insanity, mad stress, mad restlessness and mad inability to concentrate.
Again a combination of a desire to be stylish and resident stress causes the foolish person adopt stylish poses that demand multiple bending of body parts eg head tilted to one side, left shoulder and hip presented forward, increased tone or tensing of muscles more than is required (eg to fabricate a stern, aggressive look) and torsion or twisting of body parts around their axes. Such contorted unnatural stylish postures consumes greater energy to produce greater stress, restlessness and distraction that promotes the continuation of such postures because the body is experiencing stress and a stressed body automatically adopts contorted postures.
Overwhelming Incriminating Evidence:
To some people, perhaps reflecting partisanship or antagonism (they will automatically say A if I say B) unless they saw what happened or there is concrete evidence (eg the two policemen incriminated Razak or there is written or audio evidence incriminating Razak) he is innocent in their eyes and because this may not be possible they will insist you cannot make any conclusion based on the evidence produced.
The fact is Altanturya however nasty she may be was murdered by policemen who were bodyguards to the deputy PM with explosives that are available to the Defence Ministry. She was taken away by policemen in front of Razak’s house whom she was desperate to see and she suddenly decided to go back that led to her disappearance after just returning upon receipt of a phone message.
Razak has reason to kill her because of her ‘pestering’ him for money and through his private investigators had made many death threats.
SO WHAT IS THE CHANCE DUE TO COINCIDENCE THAT A WOMAN WHO HAD AN ACKNOWLEDGED AFFAIR WITH RAZAK WHO WAS IN SOME WAY PESTERING HIM THAT HE REPEATEDLY AVOIDED SEEING, WHO HIRED NASTY PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS TO INTIMIDATE AND THREATENED TO KILL HER MANY TIMES BY THROWING HER DOWN THE HOTEL SHOULD SUDDENLY GO TO RAZAK’S HOUSE AND NOBODY ELSE’S HOUSE THAT NIGHT WHERE SHE WAS MET BY NOT JUST POLICEMEN BUT BODYGUARDS OF THE DEPUTY PM WHO TOOK HER AWAY AND SHE WAS FOUND SHOT AND BLOWN TO BITS WITH EXPLOSIVES ONLY AVAILABLE TO THE MINISTRY OF DEFENCE THAT NAJIB HIS CLOSE FRIEND PRESIDED AND HER IMMIGRATION RECORDS DELETED?
IF RAZAK DID NOT DO IT, THE PERSON WHO ORDERED IT MUST BE PRETTY WELL CONNECTED TO HAVE THE DEPUTY PM’S GUARDS DO THE DIRTY WORK FOR HIM AND HAVE IMMIGRATION RECORDS TAMPERED. NAJIB APPEARED NOT TO BE OVERTLY INTIMATELY INVOLVED WITH HER AND THEREFORE IF RAZAK DID NOT DO IT, THE PERSON WHO DID IT MUST BE CLOSE TO HIM FOR THE KIDNAP TO BE DONE IN FRONT OF HIS HOUSE. THE REASON WHY HE WAS SO FOOLISH AS TO DISAPPEAR HER IN FRONT OF HIS HOUSE WAS BECAUSE HE DID NOT EXPECT THE MURDER TO BE PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE.
PUT IT ANOTHER WAY, WHOEVER KILLED HER MUST HAVE MOTIVE TO KILL HER (NOBODY KILLS FOR FUN WITHOUT REASON UNLESS THEY ARE MAD, RAZAK HAS STRONG ENOUGH MOTIVE AND DECLARED HIS INTENTION TO KILL THROUGH HIS UNSAVOURY PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS), HE MUST BE WELL CONNECTED IN ORDER TO HAVE GUARDS ASSIGNED TO THE DEPUTY PM TO DO THE DIRTY WORK FOR HIM AND EXCLUSIVE EXPLOSIVES TO DO THE JOB AND IF IT WAS NOT RAZAK, IT MUST BE SOME SHEER COINCIDENCE THAT SHE SHOULD DISAPPEAR IN FRONT OF HIS HOUSE AFTER RETURNING ALONE SHORTLY AFTER SHE HAD LEFT PREVIOUSLY UPON RECEIPT OF A PHONE MESSAGE.
CRITERIA FOR ASPIRANTS TO BE ALTANTURYA’S MURDERER:
THERE ARE CRITERIA THAT MUST BE ALL MET FOR ANYONE WHO ASPIRES TO BE ALTANTURYA’S MURDERER:
MOTIVE: HE MUST HAVE MOTIVE TO KILL HER. APART FROM RAZAK THERE IS NO ONE ELSE WITH MOTIVE TO HAVE HER KILLED. HE HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THROUGH HIS PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS HIS INTENTION TO KILL.
DECLARED INTENTION TO KILL HER IS AN OPTION AND RAZAK HAD A DECLARED INTENTION.
CONNECTIONS: WHOEVER ORDERED HER KILLED MUST BE WELL CONNECTED TO HAVE GUARDS OF THE DEPUTY PM AND EXCLUSIVE EXPLOSIVES TO DO IT, MUST HAVE ACCESS TO IMMIGRATION PERSONNEL TO DELETE RECORD OF HER ENTRY.
CONNECTED TO ABDUL RAZAK BECAUSE THE ABDUCTION TOOK PLACE IN FRONT OF HIS HOUSE AND NOBODY ELSE’S HOUSE. WHY SHOULD A MURDERER WHO IS UNCONNECTED TO RAZAK ARRANGE FOR HER TO BE TAKEN AWAY BY SPECIAL POLICEMEN AT THE HOUSE OF RAZAK WHERE IT COULD BE OBSERVED BY SECURITY GUARDS AND RAZAK HIMSELF? IF IT WAS NOT RAZAK SURELY THE PERSON SHOULD ARRANGE FOR THE KIDNAP TO BE DONE IN A LESS OBTRUSIVE SPOT. IT IS BECAUSE IT WAS RAZAK AND HE ARROGANTLY EXPECTED TO GO SCOT FREE, THE DISAPPEARANCE TO BE WITHOUT TRACE THAT HE DID NOT BOTHER TO ARRANGE FOR A MORE DISCREET SITE FOR ABDUCTION.
Celebrity Can Count Against You:
(If I am not mistaken, Razak’s private investigator or his security guards kept Altanturya engaged whilst they awaited the arrival of the police to take her away. It was testified that the police informed the relevant personnel at Razak’s front gate to keep her engaged until they arrive. It would be a sheer astronomical coincidence that Razak was not involved when he had motive and professed threat to kill her, it was at his house that she was taken away by policemen who were later found to have killed her and his security personnel had been instructed by these policemen to engage her.)
It may seem marvellous to be a celebrity with friends in high places who can arrange everything for you, to go on frequent overseas junkets and have exotic Mongolian girlfriends but sometimes celebrity can also count against you badly.
Altanturya was not a luckless victim of random street crime because she was taken away by policemen and destroyed with explosives not available to ordinary people. Therefore she is a victim of a premeditated murder with motive.
If the person who wanted Altanturya dead was not Razak surely it would be foolish to carry it out in front of Razak’s house instead of some more discreet place that was not incriminating. Instead Razak’s place appear to be a rendezvous because the same police who ended up murdering her were informed about her presence and they instructed that she should be kept busy until they arrived.
Altanturya is not a local woman who may have known many men or people who could have wanted to kill her. How many local men or women of high standing who had access to bodyguards of the deputy prime minister and defence ministry explosives can arrange for her to go to Razak’s house so that the same police who ended up killing her could be informed to come and take her away?
It would be an astronomical coincidence if there exist another Malaysian apart from Razak who has motive to kill her, a foreigner from an exotic country and can also engage killers who used explosives not readily available and are bodyguards of the deputy PM and could get her immigration records deleted. This same person who is not Razak must be able to get Razak’s security men to call the police to go to Razak’s house to take her away.
THUS THE CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS DAMNING OR INCRIMINATING:
RAZAK HAS MOTIVE AND DECLARED INTENTION THROUGH HIS PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS TO KILL HER BY CREDIBLE MEANS.
THE TWO POLICEMEN WHO ENDED UP KILLING HER WAS SECONDED TO HIM AND HE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM.
ALTANTURYA WAS ‘DISAPPEARED’ IN FRONT OF RAZAK’S HOUSE AFTER THE POLICE OFFICERS WERE INFORMED AND THEY INSTRUCTED RAZAK’S SECURITY MEN TO KEEP HER THERE.
SHE APPEARED TO HAVE BEEN SET UP BY A PHONE CALL TO GO ALONE TO RAZAK’S HOUSE AFTER SHE HAD JUST LEFT SO THAT SHE COULD BE TAKEN AWAY WITHOUT HOSTILE WITNESSES.
CELEBRITY CAN COUNT AGAINST YOU AS IN THIS CASE BECAUSE ALTANTURYA IS SPECIAL EXOTIC FOREIGN GIRL FRIEND THAT FEW MALAYSIANS WOULD HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF HAVING, THE PERSONS GUILTY OF CARRYING OUT THE KILLING ARE LINKED CLOSELY TO THE DEPUTY PM AS FEW PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO CALL UPON, THE KILLER MUST KNOW OF PEOPLE IN HIGH PLACES WHO CAN GET IMMIGRATION RECORDS DELETED AND THE PLACE WHERE SHE DISAPPEARED IS INCRIMINATING.
Mad lawyer:
The lawyer and even Razak may gloat about this message that they delighted in having the person who sent it read out in court not realizing this message is not really relevant to the case.
If you think the message is relevant to the case you have false perception that will end in mad perception.
What this message actually demonstrates is that there is bad blood between the Razak and Altanturya camps and therefore indicates Razak has motive to kill her.
What does the lawyer want to prove by asking her to read it in court? He is trying to cast her in bad light, trying to say that Altanturya and her camp are nasty people who deserve to die and nobody should shed a tear for them. So if she deserves to die, did Razak kill her?
Wong Kian Kheong, counsel for Abdul Razak, first asked her to confirm whether she had sent the text message to private eye P. Balasubramaniam.
Burmaa, who appeared shocked to see the SMS in print, tried to laugh it off before she confirmed that she had sent it.
Wong then repeatedly asked her to read the message aloud, reminding her to be serious as she was under oath.
“Just read it. My client is facing a capital offence. Please read it since you sent it,” the lawyer said in a stern voice.
Burmaa then read the message in a hushed tone of voice but was told by Justice Mohd Zaki Md Yasin to re-read the SMS again in a louder tone.
“You must read it with the same tone as you did with the other notes you read earlier. You must be fair,” said Wong, referring to several notes purportedly written by Altantuya that were tendered by the prosecution.
Burmaa then did as she was instructed and read the following (reproduced verbatim):
“You sick f*****s, listen to me carefull ... I’m gonna call his wife ... already report to Mongolian Consulate in Malay ... you chicken s***s are in big problem ... i’ll do my best i promise.”
It Is Razak’s Own Affidavit That Fatally Incriminates Him:
It is Razak’s own unwarranted foolish affidavit he submitted in the hope of getting bail that fatally incriminates him and no one else in Altanturya’s murder.
It is now come to light he has made serious harassment (his private investigators repeatedly intruding in the early hours of the morning into her room), death threats were conveyed through them that even suggests how her suicide could be engineered. This allied to his acknowledgement he had sought unofficial police help ‘to patrol around his house’ and how she appeared that night at his house and his guards informed the two police officers who instructed them to keep her engaged whilst they came to take her away indicates he had intention to get rid of her by killing her and he or his guards (and nobody else) were instrumental in delivering her to the police officers who subsequently killed her. His defense is that he merely asked them to patrol around the house and they went beyond their brief to kill her (something preposterous). It has now come to light that it may have not been an accident but a set up Altanturya arrived alone at the house that night but she had been there earlier with her companions to see Razak and had received a message that Razak would see her if she returned alone.
Piecing all the pieces of information together a person of true logic must conclude it is irrefutable Razak who had expressed intention to kill her is responsible for her being handled to the police who committed the extra judiciary killing and therefore responsible for her death.
IT WAS RAZAK WHO HAD EXPRESSED THROUGH HIS PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS A DESIRE TO KILL HER IF SHE DID NOT LEAVE MALAYSIA.
IT WAS RAZAK AS HE HIMSELF ADMITTED WHO SOUGHT UNOFFICIAL POLICE HELP THAT RESULTED IN THESE TWO POLICEMEN WHO WERE GUARDS FOR NAJIB KILLING HER.
IT WAS RAZAK’S GUARDS AS HE HIMSELF ADMITTED WHO INFORMED THESE TWO POLICE OFFICERS OF ALTANTURYA’S PRESENCE AT RAZAK’S HOUSE AND IT WAS THEY WHO KEPT HER THERE WAITING FOR POLICE TO ARRIVE.
WHAT REMAINS TO BE RESOLVED IS WHETHER HE ORDERED THE POLICE TO GET RID OF HER PERMANENTLY OR THE POLICE OFFICERS TOOK IT ON THEIR OWN INITIATIVE WITHOUT PECUNIARY INCENTIVES TO PLAN AND KILL HER.
Why Razak Is Guilty:
Whether there are other undisclosed parties involved in Altanturya’s death, Razak is guilty based objectively on evidence tendered so far. If you think one cannot be sure then you may have false logic and mad doubt and uncertainty that cannot be assuaged.
No man will admit more guilt than he is in truth guilty of (unless he is acting as the sacrificial goat for someone) but he will admit less than he is guilty of to get away as much as he can.
In his affidavit he has already admitted that he had an affair with Altanturya and he asked for and got the policemen who ended up killing her to patrol around the house. Therefore he is linked to Altanturya and may have asked more of the policemen who killed her than is disclosed.
That he merely asked them to patrol around his house and not harm her contradicts with his employment of two unsavory private investigators who persistently hounded her in the wee hours of the morning and said Razak wanted to kill her and they could be thrown down through the hotel window. Rather than Altanturya purely pestering him, the evidence that she had departed with her companions from Razak’s house but conveniently returned alone on receipt of a telephone message and her belief that Razak will see her alone indicates companions allied to Razak were not just happy to see her go away but was setting her up to be taken away by police.
Even though Altanturya and her companions may not be innocent, she may have blackmailed him, they are far more credible witnesses than Razak and his companions eg the private investigators.
The outburst that Razak’s lawyer was so ‘cock a hoop’ about has nothing to do with the case and is understandable considering the agitated angry emotional state she was in with her friend’s disappearance.
Quote: “You sick f*****s, listen to me carefull ... I’m gonna call his wife ... already report to Mongolian Consulate in Malay ... you chicken s***s are in big problem ... i’ll do my best i promise.”
What the lawyer is trying to paint is that Altanturya and company are nasty people but does this justify killing her or did she kill Razak? If they have been nasty to Razak it actually is supporting evidence of possible motive for Razak to kill her. The lawyer (and even judge) has false logic and perception (that they never dream will end in mad logic and perception) that such innuendos about Altanturya are relevant to the case when it is not and even incriminates Razak giving him cause to eliminate her. The question before the court is who unlawfully her not whether she is bad and deserved to be killed.
Why policemen did not do it on their own initiative:
It is incredible that policemen who were trained bodyguards for the deputy PM will kill Altanturya on their own initiative without clarifying or seeking financial rewards.
If they had abducted her, raped her and disposed of her to cover their crime, how could they as policemen have obtained explosives that are only available to the defense ministry and how did they get immigration department to delete records of her entry into the country. By trying to be too smart in using special explosives and deleting immigration records, the perpetrators point the finger even more incriminating at powerful people and not lesser beings being involved.
BECAUSE IT IS INCREDIBLE AND IMPOSSIBLE THAT THE POLICEMEN WOULD HAVE DONE IT ON THEIR OWN BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE SPECIAL EXPLOSIVES AND DELETING IMMIGRATION RECORDS AND IT WAS RAZAK WHO BROUGHT THEM INTO THIS AFFAIR AND HE HAD DECLARED INTENTION TO KILL THROUGH HIS INVESTIGATORS, HE MUST BE INVOLVED.
Razak Must Be Guilty:
Notwithstanding the involvement of other undisclosed figures, it must be Razak who is involved with Altanturya’s case because he admitted he had an affair with her, he has admitted she pestered him for money (he has motive) and he hired private investigators who intimidated her and told her Razak will kill her and how they might engineer her suicide (declared intention to kill) and it was he who sought the assistance of the policemen who ultimately killed her. It cannot be killing done by the policemen on their own initiative because they cannot have access to special explosives and the deletion of immigration records and it is incredible that policemen told to patrol a house and not harm her without financial inducements, will end up killing, blowing her body up and deleting her immigration records.
BECAUSE RAZAK WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING IN THE POLICEMEN WHO COULD NOT HAVE DONE IT ON THEIR OWN BEHALF OR BY MISTAKE BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT THEN HAVE ACCESS TO SPECIAL EXPLOSIVES AND DELETION OF IMMIGRATION RECORDS, RAZAK MUST BE INVOLVED EVEN IF THERE ARE OTHERS INVOLVED UNDISCLOSED.
Wrong View:
Wrong view is deadly because if you have wrong view how can be in accord with the Father in heaven and the Buddha said that wrong view leads to hell or the animal womb.
If it is possible to conclude based on evidence available that Razak must have done it and you refute or believe it is not possible, you have mad doubt and uncertainty or perception and is headed for future woe.
Razak has admitted in his affidavit that Altanturya has taken from the front of his house by the two policemen who are charged with killing her. Thus if the policemen deny killing her they must account for what happened to her in their custody. If they or others killed her, how can they access explosives that are only available by the Defence Ministry and deleted the immigration records? Therefore whoever responsible for her death must have access to the special explosives and immigration records that suggest they must be people in high places.
Therefore the policemen could not have done it on their own initiative but with the direction of people in high places. They were brought into the affair by Razak who had demonstrated motive to kill her (extortion and pestering him) and declared intention to kill (private investigators employed by him warned her Razak will kill her). If this does not convince you he is involved notwithstanding others being also involved, what else can convince you or do you have mad doubt and uncertainty that cannot be assuaged?
Heinous Crimes Without Perpetrators:
It was Lim Kit Siang who liked (attracted emotionally) to speak of the many heinous crimes without perpetrators in this country of which the Perwaja Affair, Maminco, the British pound devaluation betting fiasco, BMF and many others come to mind.
Such crimes without perpetrators do not only involve financial matters but where human lives are involved in which the most prominent are the cases of Noritta Shamsuddin where someone was charged but he was acquitted and her sexual murder remains a crime without perpetrators perhaps because some high standing people are involved and the case of the Chinese boy who was murdered in the custody of his wealthy guardian where the guard took pictures but he was acquitted.
(In the Noritta case, if there was the accused’s sperm present on her thighs or mattress, the accused must be present when she was last alive because she never got up after the intercourse even if there are traces of others’ sperm in her vagina. Is it so hard to find traces of sperm on items on the room?)
Thus one would be presumptuous that in the case under deliberation the court will convict those charged because it may not be the judge but puppet masters behind the scene that will decide what the verdict is.
The judge may decide that because no one actually saw the crime committed, there is no concrete evidence linking those accused with the crime and the accused all deny they did it, there may be risk in convicting people who may be innocent so the judicious verdict is ‘we don’t know’.
Najib told a lie:
Apparently Najib has denied knowing or ever meeting Altanturya. If the photo of her attending dinner with Najib & Razak is true then he has told a lie and if he can tell a lie here he can tell a lie anywhere else.
If you think he and other politicians are people of wonderful fidelity you may be a deluded fool. Therefore anyone who sides with them, who testifies for them saying they have some decency may be in grave danger of following them into eternity of punishment.
Why dancing is insanity:
The Buddha said that singing is crying and dancing is insanity in the teaching of the Noble Ones.
What productive work are you doing (eg cook rice, sweep the floor) are you doing when you dance? The gratifications in dancing are emotional, you think all the girls are attracted to you because of your suave dancing, you have emotional deluded liking for the particular sequence of movements in the dance or being socially competent or demonstrating your proficiency say in the rumba or cha cha cha or just exercising your body.
A dance is nothing more than a standardized sequence of movements of both feet on the dance floor accompanied by music that may include standardized swaying of the torso and movements of the upper limbs that is entirely for show, it is a ritual that does not communicate any true meaning.
The repeated forceful practice (force must always be used to move your body in dancing) of something that is unnecessary even to levels of great violence is practicing controlled insanity in the name of impressing and pleasing others that with loss of control results in uncontrollable madness as disco dropouts can attest in their maddening writhing in psychiatric wards. You think you are not as stupid as them, you dance in moderation but you may be a fool whose time to be mad has not come yet.
Why disagreeing with the counselor is not forgiven:
Jesus said that if he had not come and spoken you would not have sinned.
Thus if the counselor comes and he speaks in a way that spells out sin precisely that no one has done and yet you disagree, you think it is wonderful to like and dislike, to smile and have style and be nice to others, then you have affirmed you are a man of this world even if you believe you are Jesus’ most fervent disciple who is denying himself and therefore you should be allowed to go your way wherever it takes you, dead end with a ferocious demon in wait or heaven.
Jesus said don’t throw pearls before swine lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you and he also spoke of those who are chosen out of this world that implies that many are incorrigible, will not be denied and it is no use to teach them because their father is the devil and their will is to do their father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and has nothing to do with the truth because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
It is not that life here is not very stressful, restless and distracting to ALL here but tough goats will not be denied or daunted, until they run into a brick wall or make a mess of themselves and others they put on their silly smile masks that they think is meaningful and think they are fine and the benefactors of this world. They fake so well they are enjoying themselves they think they are enjoying themselves and want you to join in with their ‘fun’. Anyone who is emotional, who likes and dislikes is subjecting his mind to force and has an unsteady mind under the total influence of force and cannot be truly happy and if you are not happy and try and convert another who is happy to your brand of emotional, excited ‘happiness’, you are heaping karma on yourself.

The Significance Of Altanturya’s Police Report:
I think Altanturya made a police report on the eve of her disappearance saying she feared for her life and that Razak wanted to kill her.
The significance of this report is that unless she is paranoid (and events have borne her fears out), the reports that the private investigators conveyed to her in no uncertain terms many times Razak wants to kill her has credence. This means Razak is lying when he said he only told the policemen to patrol around his house and not harm her.
It is impossible that rogue policemen could have killed her on their own initiative because rogue policemen have no access to C4 explosives nor would want to or can delete immigration records.
Now that police testimony acknowledges that Altanturya was taken into custody it means it is true Altanturya was taken from Razak’s house by policemen and somehow thereafter she was murdered by persons that the police must account for and who could not have done it by themselves for the fact that special explosives were used and immigration records deleted.
How many Malaysians of such high standing capable of procuring C4 explosives, ordering the deletion of immigration records, have links to special policemen assigned to the deputy PM to be able to get them to take her away from Razak’s house and know she will be there at Razak’s house alone that night, does Altanturya, a Mongolian national, knows that would want to harm her? The odds must be astronomical that Razak is not involved.
So many high standing Malaysians want to kill her at the same time?
How could Altanturya, a Mongolian citizen who must know very few people in this country know more than one high standing person (including someone who is in collusion with this person) who would at the same time want to eliminate her as she has informed the police that Razak may be trying? This hypothetical high standing person apart from Razak, who is not in collusion with Razak must be able to get Najib’s bodyguards to go to Razak’s house to fetch her knowing she will be there alone that night and able to procure C4 explosives and get immigration records deleted.
WHAT ARE THE ODDS THAT THERE IS ANOTHER MALAYSIAN OF HIGH STANDING WHO IS INDEPENDENT, NOT IN COHORT WITH RAZAK WHO KNOWS ALTANTURYA, A MONGOLIAN CITIZEN WITH FEW FRIENDS LET ALONE HIGH STANDING FRIENDS IN MALAYSIA, AT THE SAME TIME WANT TO ELIMINATE HER AS ALTANTURYA HAS PROFESSED RAZAK WANTED TO IN HER POLICE REPORT? THIS HYPOTHETICAL HIGH STANDING MALAYSIAN MUST BE ABLE TO GET NAJIB’S BODYGUARDS TO FETCH HER FROM RAZAK’S HOUSE KNOWING SHE WILL BE THERE THAT NIGHT AND PROVIDE SPECIAL EXPLOSIVES AND DELETE IMMIGRATIONS RECORDS.
Quote Altanturya in police report: That Indian guy told me Mr Razak is rich man, he knows many people here so can easyly put me to jail. They say Malaysia is different from Mongolia and said they know people in police so can easy get me to jail.
If Malaysia law goes like that I cant complane. But true is I didnt nothing to him. Im just normal girl trying to meet my lover who lied to me and promised many things but now want to put me to jail or kill...
If I made mistake Ill never do again. But if something happened to me please check that person.”
Courting Madness:
Razak and those siding with him (eg family, lawyers and friends, even those observing on the sidelines) might emotionally, repeatedly want to believe that despite such overwhelming (even irrefutable) evidence that Razak is seriously involved, it is still possible that it may be someone else who killed her that has nothing to do with Razak.
This is willful forceful or emotional courting false logic and thence perception that what is false (that Razak may not have done it) is true.
AS A RESULT OF SELF INTEREST (RAZAK’S NECK IS AT STAKE HERE) OR PARTISANSHIP ORDINARY PEOPLE HAVE WILLED THEMSELVES TO BELIEVE WHAT IS FALSE, CANNOT HAPPEN EVEN WHEN THERE IS OVERWHELMING OR IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE MAY NEVERTHELESS BE TRUE OR POSSIBLY HAPPENED. TO CONTEMPLATE WHAT IS FALSE OR CANNOT HAPPEN CAN HAPPEN IS FALSE LOGIC THAT INCREASINGLY MAKES ONE PERCEIVE WHAT ONE THINKS WITH FALSE LOGIC IS TRUE OR CAN HAPPEN IS TRUE OR FALSE PERCEPTION. THE INEVITABLE END POINT, NO MATTER HOW RELIGIOUS OR GOOD YOU THINK YOU ARE IS UNCONTROLLABLE MAD LOGIC AND PERCEPTION THAT MANY ALREADY HAVE ADVANCED VERSIONS THAT THEY IGNORE OR CAN STILL SHRUG OFF OR SUPPRESS TEMPORARILY.
IF YOU ARE FREQUENTLY COURTING MADNESS BY WANTING TO BELIEVE WHAT IS FALSE IS TRUE, WHAT IS IMPOSSIBLE IS POSSIBLE THEN YOUR WISH WILL BE FULFILLED WHEN YOU FINALLY GO MAD.
Unimaginably Good:
Quote: The BBC's Gaza correspondent Alan Johnston says it is "unimaginably good" to be free after 114 days in captivity.
ANYTHING THAT CAN BE IMAGINED IS IMAGINABLE AND TO SAY THAT TO BE FREED IS UNIMAGINABLY GOOD IS SAYING WHAT IS ABSURD AND COURTING MADNESS. IT IS TO HYPE OR EXAGGERATE HOW GOOD IT IS. YOU MEAN TO BE FREED IS ETERNAL LIFE IN HEAVEN?
HOWEVER GOOD IT IS TO BE FREED IT CAN BE IMAGINED BY HIM AND OTHERS AND IT IS MISCHIEVOUS MISLEADING OTHERS TO SAY IT IS UNIMAGINABLE.
HE IS NOT INNOCENT FROM PICTURES OF HIM AND HIS RELEASE AND ESCAPE FROM DEATH IS ONLY A TEMPORARY REPRIEVE IN THE DIVINE SCHEME OF THINGS.
There are truly unimaginable things:
There are things that are imaginable and things that are truly unimaginable.
The consciousness changes after 1977 and in recent years are truly unimaginable because no one could imagine that they are possible before they happened. I certainly could not imagine the consciousness changes that I initiated on both occasions were possible.
If you should argue that similarly the goodness of his release is truly unimaginable to him, you may be right or have advanced false perception and argumentative or antagonistic that will end in doom.
He may feel extremely emotionally delighted to be released but that is still imaginable by him and others.
What can & cannot be imagined:
It is not arbitrary whether something is imaginable or not but what can and cannot be imagined can be clearly objectively defined.
Whatever can occur or are regularly occurring in the existing scheme of things can be imagined by some if not all. If there are some in the community who have experienced captivity and certain death and then been released, the spectrum of elation that they felt can be imagined by them if not by all others in the community and if there are some who can imagine then it is clearly not unimaginable which is used to falsely exaggerate and falsely elevate one’s feat.
In contrast the consciousness changes after 1977 and in recent years which have never been acknowledged by anyone has never been experienced in the scheme of things by inhabitants trapped in earthly existence, that no one could imagine can happen beforehand otherwise they or I would have brought about the change much earlier. Because the consciousness change is an unmistakable change and no one on earth had experienced it before it is truly unimaginable and that is no hype or delusion.