[UPDATED on 14 October 2010: Thank you everyone for stopping by LoyarBurok and caring to comment on this episode. It has been an educational experience for all of us. If you are new here, kindly take time to read our Terms of Use. Loyarburok does not moderate or monitor comments unless we are informed and directed to particular comments which may need to be edited, deleted or categorised as spam.

In the case of Pamela’s video, LoyarBurok had no alternative but to edit the original video which showed Pamela’s personal details. We took this step after numerous comments inciting hatred were published while at the same time exposing the said details, and our attention was directed to these comments.

On the issue of the editor’s voice raised by Jen Li, Pete and others, kindly note that there is only ONE Lord Bobo Barnabus, The Wonder Typewriting Monkey, who is the General Chief Editor of this blawg (see again our Terms of Use). We have a team of LoyarBurokkers who regularly work behind the scenes by curating and posting new material, updating this blawg etc. However, no one writes or speaks as the editor of this blawg save for Lord Bobo, and no one may usurp the Lord’s great powers!

Happy LoyarBurokking!]

A commentary on the intimidatory responses that made police intimidation look tame.

up4grabs_just a

Of late, there is a lot of talk about civil society movements gaining momentum and mass in Malaysia. It’s heralded as the coming of a third force, the keeper of checks and balances, social justice championed by society. I was very hopeful until I saw the utterly uncivilised comments in response to Pamela’s police intimidation video.

As part of the editorial team here, I was pleasantly surprised at the record breaking speed at which the video was gaining circulation and comments. The purpose of making public such a video, especially on a site like LoyarBurok, is to encourage public debate and discussion. Comments/brick-bats, supporters/detractors are all part and parcel of the free and open discourse we seek. However, two things about the bulk of the negative responses perturbed me: (i) The violence and intimation by fellow citizens. (ii) The narrow view taken in contextualising the video.

Shut-up you stupid bitch, you should be raped!

Many of the comments are fine examples of violence against women. Browse through the comments on this blawg alone and you will see the gender-based violence in the words. The use of derogatory labels amounted to sexually harassment. The intimidatory tone worse than that inflicted by the police.

I wonder if the video was taken by a Peter and not a Pamela, would there be this much personal attacks, threats, sexual jibes, and harassment? No doubt, there will still be people of the opinion that the civilian should have been more “respectful”, but ever stop to wonder would the critical comments be more objective and focused on the incident? Would it still be fuelled by the indoctrination of women as the second sex? Do you expect a woman to be more of a “lady”? Would you think “This rude bitch damn cari pasal la.” or “This guy should’ve not lost his cool la.”

On the surface it may be just words on the internet posted by a faceless nickname. But online harassment and violence is just violence against women taking on the latest platform. Women have long been fighting to be heard, to have a voice, to not be a labelled “bitch” when a fellow male doing the same is called “assertive.”

Ooh reality video, let’s lynch the bad guy!

When I uploaded this “fragmented” video, I did not expect it to be become a contest of who’s right and who’s wrong. This finger-pointing paints a certain representation that Malaysians in general do not know how to agree to disagree nor can we discuss differing views in a civilised manner without attacking each other. (No wonder things get ridiculously extreme when discussing matters related  to race) We seem to be locked in zero-sum assessments.

The video raises many points of debate and it would be a shame if it was viewed solely with the intention of picking who is in the wrong and ending the discussion there. What can we do when in doubt of whether the person is actually a policeman? Should we just apologise whenever we are flagged by police to increase our chances of being let off? What if we chose to insist on our innocence? What if apologising didn’t work? Where do we draw the line between kow-tow and being respectful? Do authorities deserve extra respect? I’m sure there are other more astute points of debate, unfortunately even these simple ones I posed were hardly touched by commentators.

The video also did not show what the situation was like before the civilian decided to record the incident. Being stopped by the police, unsure of whether you had actually broken the law, unsure of whether you are hearing hints for bribery – can be an unnerving episode to some if not most people. Understandably one of the questions raised by such a video, would be who was in the right. What was surprising is the speed and decisiveness in which this “judgment” was dispensed inspite of the many unknowns to the viewer of the video. In most countries, it is the police that are held on a higher standard, not the civilians that they have been entrusted with the duty of “policing.”

LB: Ong Jo-Lene really doesn’t know how to describe herself but she has plenty to say at Seksualiti Merdeka.

ideologically promiscuous, morally flexible, gender variant, militant atheist.

124 replies on “[UPDATED] Citizen Intimidation”

  1. "Food for thought: Some poor innocent girl looking at this video and reading what people like you and Pamela say might actually try it themselves the next time they are in such a situation. Let me ask you just one thing, what are you going to tell the mother of the girl when she is found raped and bloodily murdered because she angered the wrong guy? – she did the right thing?"

    Bravo…

    To educate the public (especially woman) when being in such situation "konon"…

    I Know My Right Not to be brainless and stupid…

  2. I was really going to cop out but I changed my mind and decided to spent a little more of my time to do a similar analysis as to what a professional police should behave in the case of Pamela’s offense.

    Pamela despite her condescending tone of voice did exactly what was advised here:
    http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/7/18/nation/6685972&sec=nation
    Note that in the advice on the part when stopped by uniform police we are suppose to take note of their name and ID number on their uniform? Now, would you able to take down the ID number of the two real police men in the video? Why are they not wearing their ID number on their uniform?

    In the news peace the advice given was also, if you are not arrested, you do not have to follow the police men anywhere! Not even to a police station, because cases like this had happened:
    http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/legal/general_news/held_over_rape_in_police_station.html

    But people like Shanee viewed it differently and choose to focus entirely on that Pamela had provoked the police officer. And how she shouldn’t behave in the way she did and that she had done a public a big bad thing by posting the video online. But really, these people simply cannot differentiate between standing up for your own right and provoking the police. Worse yet is that they can not or refuse to see the questionable conduct of the two police men when Shanee said:”The police did nothing out of the ordinary until provoked.” But they did, they didn’t wear their ID number tag on their uniform. If this is acceptable behavior to Shanee or if she refuses to see that this as an unacceptable behavior, then I do not know what else to say to convince her that the police conduct was questionable on the start. I have highlighted this in my posts but Shanee had deliberately ignored this point and instead concentrated on how Pamela should comply and control the situation.

    In my view, the two police men were already up to no good when they were going out and about in their uniform but without their ID number tag. That is the main reason, I believed that the Police department issue an apology. Given the rampant police Impostor cases reported in the news, police men should really conduct themselves professionally. And we the public should really scrutinize their behavior closely, not condoning their misconduct.

    After reading the comments again, I bet Shanee is very proud of herself as there are really many more who choose to condemn Pamela in her video post there. But the many company she kept are those who issued threats that are bordering criminal intimidation with callings like “rape, Fallopian tube clamped, gang rape, tits clamped and such”. And this is exactly what Ong Jo-Lene was talking about in this post.

    So, how should a police behave in a routine traffic stop? First make sure you are wearing your uniform properly. The two police men obviously didn’t.

    And this is my expectation of how a police should behave in a routine traffic stop:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyHMbHHtArE

    No agitated posture, calmly explain the offense and the fine, when Pamela made another offense, just cite her for the offense. There is really no need to behave like thugs as shown in the video.

  3. @IsayNo2ISA, nice cop out, sorry you couldn’t hold your ground better.

    Make me happier for you to admit you are small minded? LOL..
    Take a good look and you will see that I have infact admitted that that our cops can tend to abuse their power, and that yes the ‘cops’ in this video if they were infact cops should have handled the situation better. However my stand is that while all that is true, Pamela needs to realise her mistakes too. I am not trying to diregard what you are saying. I’m merely asking you to try and also see it from our point of view.

    But of course you are too arrogant, and obviously here just arguing for the sake of arguing and just refuse to see it any other way. And as such, then yes harping is what I will do to drill it in.

    One last thing [sorry but I just can’t stand people putting words into my mouth]

    You said:
    But do read back at your own comment. You are constantly harping on Pamela’s arrogant behavior, which is exactly my point. It is in your own word that the police behavior is acceptable when you commented that they did nothing out of the ordinary. Hence condoning their misconduct.

    Please learn the difference between the phrases ‘nothing out of the ordinary until provoked’ and ‘condoning their behaviour’. What I said is that they did what most cops would do initially and there is nothing threatening about it. Yes after they were angered and they begin shouting but only because Pamela provoked them to and THAT is why I say in this case it is unfair to hold the cops solely responsible. Pamela and people like you who think it’s ok to go around talking like that, regardless of situation need to learn this and not be teaching others the wrost things they could possibly do in that situation.

    Food for thought: Some poor innocent girl looking at this video and reading what people like you and Pamela say might actually try it themselves the next time they are in such a situation. Let me ask you just one thing, what are you going to tell the mother of the girl when she is found raped and bloodily murdered because she angered the wrong guy? – she did the right thing?

  4. @Shanee,

    Thank you for you quick response. You are right and I am wrong. I shouldn't have argue for your behalf to hold the police force to a higher standard of behavior which I would also admit that I am repeating like a broken record. But do read back at your own comment. You are constantly harping on Pamela's arrogant behavior, which is exactly my point. It is in your own word that the police behavior is acceptable when you commented that they did nothing out of the ordinary. Hence condoning their misconduct. The only time when I bring out police brutality is that since you condone police misconduct you should not cry foul when you become the victim of police brutality in the future. I never said that the video posted by Pamela is police brutality, I merely pointed out that by condoning their bad behavior you are laying such a future not only for yourself but the whole society of Malaysia.

    If it would make you happier, I would admit that I am being small minded for refusing to see how condoning police bad behavior is doing a good service to our society. Since I have wasted so much of your time on my pettiness. I apologize and this would be my last reply to your comment here. Have a good day.

  5. @IsayNo2ISA, lol, you are a piece of work.

    I honestly don't know why I bother with a waste of time like you, but honestly. It is amusing to see how you are so easily intimidated into resorting to calling people of opinion "dumb" and "small minded" – which brings me back to my first post, if you have no solid argument, don't try to be a hero, you'll only embarass yourself.

    But anyways, as comic relief on this mundane Monday I shall amuse you.

    Fisrt let's go back to what I said

    "This is not an attack on Pamela, (if she and all other ‘defending’ her feel like it is – you ask yourselves why)"

    NOTE:The term 'defending' was associated to 'all others' not you

    The quote above was a rebuttal your previous comment as quoted below:

    "Even after I have lamented on the small mindedness of some Malaysians there are still people harping on the most petty issue of whether Pamela had posted the video with the right title, or whether she had handled the situation wisely, focusing purely on Pamela’s attitude while choose to completely overlooked the bigger and the more urgent issue of the police questionable conduct."

    And might I add, that as you mentioned "Whereas in my comment this is the first time I’m directing a reply to you." – That has been my whole point the entire time. That you are harping on those with negative comments but fail to address those who are actually trying to point out valid points.

    Which brings me to your second point:

    "That is the point that I am raising. You have consistently avoided my question:”Why are people like you want to hold Pamela to a higher standard of behavior, and condoning the unruly actions of the police?”"

    Again, your neglect to read my posts before jumping to conclusions is another exmaple of heroics gone wrong. I never condone the acts of the two cops in the video, in-fact i agreed that it's possible the two may have been posers:

    "Yes we all acknowledge that the two men may not have been legit policemen. Thats why I say, if so, just apologise for the mistake (even if you feel you have done anything wrong)and politely request for the summons (if they we’re not legit, the summons can’t be legit either). Posers would at this point feel like they have been cornered and they may react in two ways.

    1. Just issue you the fake summons and take off (which from the video I can see that the cops did exactly that, except Pamela had to be smart and scribble on the book which is what provoked them)

    2. They pull out excuses for you to follow them to the balai. In which case, you tell them you will comply and request that you drive yourself there. (Which also happened in Pamela’s case after much provocation to which she refused to budge which only made things worse.)"

    Infact, I then go on to explain how what she did was potentially dangerous for herself and that is the reason why I feel she shouldn't have acted that way:

    "Imagine if they were indeed up to no good and not really cops, by trying to be smart, you anger them further and all they really needed to do was reach in through your window, unlock your doors while the other gets-in on the passenger side and rams a weapon into your side immediately forcing you to essentially slave for them from this point on."

    Coming to your third point:

    "Now using your own logic to go against you, even the police department admitted that the conduct of their police men were questionable, why are you still choose to harp on Pamela’s action?"

    You must be really proud of yourslef for thinking you used "my logic to go against me"? :)

    I apologise if my arguments intimidate you hence disabling you from truly understanding them. But this is what I meant:

    Yes, the 'cops' (if they we're indeed cops) did not handle the situation well. But in my opinion, they do what all cops do, pull over an offender, offer a summon and try hinting for a bribe. They at no point showed 'brutality' towards her. Even after she disrespected them with her arrogance, yes they were angered, but at no point was there 'brutality' evident. Hence rebutting to your cry for police brutality.

    Infact I even disaproved of the possible hint for bribery in my initial post on the other thread by stating that if they did insunuate bribery, that she should politely decline and report them to the 'anti-rasua'h hotline.

    And I continue to harp on Pamela's mistakes becuase netiher she, nor her 'representatives' have yet to acknowledge them. If the PDRM can issue a public statement of apology admitting to their mistakes, why can't she so much as acknowledge hers? As I said before, once one admitts their mistake and apologises, the issue ends.

    In a nut shell, my point is that, while the police had their share of mistakes in this video, it would not have occured, had Pamela not been so arrogant and taken and offensive approach with them. Hence uploading this video and crying intimidation and police brutality is completely uncalled for. Also, she preaches this as a guide for other female citizens when faced with cops in future – now this is where I really, whole-heartedly OPPOSE the notion, simply becuase not only did she almost get herslef into trouble, she is misguinding others into potential risks!

    As for your point (being repeated like a broken record) "What I am saying is, rather than holding Pamela to a higher standard of behavior in the altercation shown in the video, the police men should be the one expected to conduct themselves in a higher standard of civility and professionalism" – We get it! But we don't agree with it, and here is why… (refer to all arguments posted before) Now you in turn are suppose to say, "ok fine but this why I thikn your argument is not valid (supported with weighted argument)" – That my frein,d is how a debate works. Not by name calling and patronozing.

    And from the looks of things, seems to me like you are the one refusing to see what so many of us have to trying to get across to you and the likes. So i suppose that makes you the one with the small mind? :)

  6. @Shanee,

    What? You never singled me out? Read your comment on 15 October, 2010 at 12:12 pm again, you were directing your comment to ME!! Keep your "Sape makan cili sape rasa pedas" to yourself. Whereas in my comment this is the first time I'm directing a reply to you.

    Even PDRM acknowledges that their men were not professional which I am trying to make people like you to see that there was clearly something wrong with the conduct of the two police men. It matters not to me how Pamela conduct herself as that is her personal problem. But the action of the two police men could affect the society for they are being entrusted to carry firearm and to uphold the law. That is the point that I am raising. You have consistently avoided my question:"Why are people like you want to hold Pamela to a higher standard of behavior, and condoning the unruly actions of the police?"

    In your post on 18 October, 2010 at 3:12 pm, you have missed my points again. You are accusing me of "it is the ‘ketam’ mentality that refuses to see the good and potential growth and insists or just being negative and harping on the bad and past – and THAT is what will cause regress." I am not harping on the bad, I am harping on people like you who refuse to see the bigger impact of police bad behavior but focuses on attacking Pamela's personal problem. That is what I am harping on.

    Now using your own logic to go against you, even the police department admitted that the conduct of their police men were questionable, why are you still choose to harp on Pamela's action? The police had admitted wrong, which IMO they should. The police admitting wrong is not what I am taking issue with. What I am taking issue with is people like you condoning their bad behavior even they have admitted that two of their own have misbehave. Don't say I put these into your mouth this is in your comment on 15 October, 2010 at 12:12 pm "The cops did nothing out of the ordinary until provoked by her actions."

    Let me repeat. What I am saying is, rather than holding Pamela to a higher standard of behavior in the altercation shown in the video, the police men should be the one expected to conduct themselves in a higher standard of civility and professionalism because they are the one having the authority to arrest and use their fire arm.

    And yes, I will call you small minded IF you refuse to see the bigger impact of police misconduct but focuses on Pamela's personal issue of her arrogant behavior.

  7. @IsayNo2ISA

    "I do not know if these people are dumb or they just refuse to see the points I am raising. Let’s me put it clearer."

    One would you think that was directed at yourself. you talk about people not seeing your points, yet you go ahead and ramble on about what you see without giving thought for the arguments posed by others.

    I re-iterate, PDRM have admitted their mistake and apologised. Thats the first step to making things better. But it is the 'ketam' mentality that refuses to see the good and potential growth and insists or just being negative and harping on the bad and past – and THAT is what will cause regress. I suggest you re-read my initial post. (You will also see that i never singled you out as one of those defending Pamela, but as we say here in Malaysia 'Siape makan cili, dia yang rase pedas')

    Here is food for thought, work out the statistics of the people who feel there was no police brutality in this situation versus those who thikn so – then ask yourself who is the "dumb" one

    P/S: Since you were on the subject of crying foul, I'd like to see Pamela or you go crying to the cops the next time you fall victim to criminal activity.

    Learn to give credit where credit is due.

  8. Worthless piece of article I’ve read in a while. Now that the racial card can’t be used anymore, since most Malaysians here (especially Chinese) are against Pam’s action, you just had to use the feminist’s trademark ‘violence against women’ card to defend your precious friend, only to be shot down quickly by Shanee (who is also a woman herself).

    Why not use your precious time to educate your friend Pamela? She was being a nuisance. That was not a proper way to talk to a Police officer. Fake or not, it’s suicidal and she was totally asking for it. The worst part of all, she claimed the purpose of her putting up that video is to educate people (especially women) how to react in such situation. It brings more harm than good to anyone ESPECIALLY women. (please refer to what Pete and Shanee commented)

    Now that the video has been made public, I’m sure PDRM will take necessary actions on this matter. The next time someone behaves like Pam, don’t expect any nice treatment from no rookie cops.

    p/s : I can’t help but to laugh at the fact that she’s using a high tone talking to those cops while filming them. Man, as much as I hate cops, I wouldn’t even dare to talk like that, let alone taking videos and yelling “ARE YOU TRYING TO INTIMIDATE ME???”. It’s almost like she’s the one holding the gun there and intimidate them by saying words they could barely understand. If those Policemen were indeed real cops, that’s really shameful and unprofessional to say the least.. so I’m just going to assume they were rookies. Pam wouldn’t be so lucky if they were experienced cops.

  9. the whole sad thing about the comments is that the ppl who are ok with the way the police acted are saying that it is ok to behave that way. that is the way they would behave when put in a similar situation. and that is a sad reflection of the gangster mentality that is prevalent in our society today. all the fights, knifings, assaults, incidents of small misunderstanding then bawak geng dengan kayu. this is the 'emo' driving ppl, whose capacity for empathy and patience are just non-existent. so…pam was rude? wat about all the dead ppl…were they more rude?

  10. @IsayNO2ISA

    1) Heh. Ingat baju polis tu satu jenis je ka. Tak tau undang2 kata violation of Police Conduct.

    Tengok sample:
    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_zeFeiilHItQ/TEe3SvAq-FI

    itu baju polis baru. polis pun banyak jenis seragam, kena tengok kod seragam apa. Otak dah ketinggalan zaman, baju tu dah ada sejak tahun 2008 lagi, sekarang dah 2010.

    Tengok sini untuk artikel, dari the star,
    http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/3

    Ni sample baju polis lagi
    http://info-wars.org/2010/07/18/malaysia-holds-te

    2) dan 3) jangan nak pusing pusing cakap macam semua orang ni budak2 tadika. Anda tetiba je fokus pam ni kena marah sebab kamera.

    Ingat semua orang bodoh sangat, hey, video kan ada, polis tu betul2 marah sebab pam ni conteng saman lah.

    Orang awam jangan la nak belagak jadi polis, enforce the law kan tugas polis tu. Pam ni kalau dah ingat dia bijak sangat tugas2 polis, jadi la polis.

    4) anda ni bodoh. Sebelum anda nak kata polis ni tak ikut undang2, silalah anda kaji dulu. Polis ni cara pakaian dia macam mana, kod pakaian dia macam mana, undang2 dia macam mana dan lain2. Anda sendiri ulang berkali2 pasal benda ni, bukan BAR siap tulis buku lagi (RED BOOK yang digembar gembur tu), baca betul2. Dah tulis kat nombor 1 dalam buku tu pun, anda tak baca. Tanyalah pengenalan polis kat polis tu, kan anda ada hak.

    tambahan:

    anda nak marah polis.

    tapi otak awak ni tak kaji betul2 undang2.

    tapi claim pandai undang2, cakap banyak pasal RED book tapi macam tak pernah baca.

    jangan ingat provocation tu tak boleh dibawa ke mahkamah.

    Kepada lawyer yang tak tau pasal provocation silalah belajar balik kat universiti, pasal benda ni asas pelajaran law.

    IsayNo2ISA kaji betul2, buka buku law, dan pastikan betul2. Jika kita tak habis2 menegakkan benang basah ni, dah tentu blawg ni penuh dengan makian yang tak akan habis2 ni.

    lainlah jika ada video police mmg cakap dia minta rasuah ke, dan lain2 bolehlah orang terima.

    tulis kat loyarburuk artikel2 yang mcm tu. Kalau artikel macam artikel tetang orang asli tu, best juga nak baca. ni artikel tak guna letak dalam ni. buat jatuh standard loyarburuk blawg je.

  11. Pamela is very lucky this is Malaysia and not the USA. If she had pulled this stunt there she would have found herself sprawled on the road mouth full of tar with a cop's knees pinning her head down and trussed up like a thanksgiving turkey. Have you guys never watched COPS on Tv? Now THAT'S police brutality! But our M'sian police? Nah…gentle people they are. Instead, shit heads like Pamela are the brutal ones.

    I've been to New York a few times and to have a policeman give you even the stare is scary enough to make you want to piss in your pants.

    I propose the PDRM train their people the American style. Be ready to kick some butt. Plenty of people here needs some major kick up their arses. Like IsayNo. Then baru tau langit tu tinggi atau rendah.

  12. @IsayNo2ISA

    We are not dumb. We merely reject your reality in place of our own.

    Pam deserves to be spanked and tit clamped.

    The pigs in blue deserve a two month bonus for avoiding fist-to-face. Simple.

    SOP is for dummies and Bolehland pig enforcers are a joke. I say again, get with the programme! Be a Pam basher! The internet needs you! Make the pie higher! (sorry wrong channel…)

    Stop being an uptight, idealistic, politically correct, liberal, retard. We have enough of them in Bolehland.

    What we really need, is some anarchy.

  13. I do not know if these people are dumb or they just refuse to see the points I am raising. Let's me put it clearer.

    1) The two police men obviously removed their ID tag number on their uniform while on duty for reason best known by them. I think that is a violation of a Police Conduct.

    2) They were obviously agitated not because of Pamela's attitude but more on the reason that they were being caught on Camera (for doing something they themselves know that they are wrong.)

    3) They are obviously not well verse on the letter of the law and yet they are being entrusted to enforce the law.

    4) If we allowed unruly police men whom are not properly dressing their uniform to enforce the law, in this case a traffic offense. How on earth could we identify if they were not fake police men?

    So, if you still cannot see these points that I am raising, don't ever cry foul in the future if you were a victim of police brutality. You have had a hand in encouraging the deterioration of police professionalism by openly supporting their bad behavior here.

  14. Ong Jo-Lene : Ooh reality video, let’s lynch the bad guy!

    By calling the person getting "lynched" –> the bad guy. You are not really supporting the person getting "lynched". A part of you really does think of that person as "the bad guy". Or else you would have used the term "someone" instead.

    I think even a ten-year old can tell who was getting "lynched" there. So at least we all know in your heart of hearts that your opinion of that person is –> "the bad guy". Even though on the surface, you have to sound supportive of said person because of reasons only you know why. That is, of course, based on the assumption that you are not under ten.

    It's like not telling a fellow contestant at a beauty pageant that there's poop-smeared toilet paper stuck to her butt and letting the audience laugh at her and then scold the audience after the incident for their inconsideration so you seem like "the good guy" … and who knows? Maybe you will be the first to wear the tiara?

    Ong Jo-Lene : Shut-up you stupid bitch, you should be raped!

    Hmmm… less than 5% of 700+ comments. Yet interesting you should see it fit to articulate this topic. What were you thinking? Oh… I get it… Never mind…

  15. or once, I don’t see why PDRM apologised. They were not in the wrong. They were merely acting the way any pig in blue would act when you put a camera in their face and turn on the bitch talk.

    stupid kataks bawah tempurung. ia this malaysian standards? obviously never been to a more civilsed world. police are expected to show restraint in all circuMStances. part of job. ok to behave like them? those who accept it are the reason for the problems in the country today,,,shout , scream, condemn, blame. WHEN FACED WITH DIFFICULT PPL, SMILE, ISSUE SUMMONS. IF THINK SHE IS RUDE, ISSUE MORE SUMMONS. IF THINK SHE IS UN COOPERATIVE, ISSUE ANOTHER SUMMON.

  16. @IsayNo2ISA

    When were these officers acting like gangsters? There was no police misconduct. No intimidation. And professional standards? They used words and not their fists on her face. They gave her a scolding (which is in their job description by the way) and Pam decided to act tough. They issued her a summon, and she vandalised it!

    And yet, they didn't beat her up. I call that living up to professional standards. A police officer has every right to be aggressive verbally against an offender when there is reasonable suspicion of a crime committed.

    Although it was a traffic stop, who's not to say she might be hiding a weapon/contraband or intoxicated? Her actions/demeanour would warrant a stop and search of her vehicle. Just because she's a woman does not mean she cannot be a danger to an officer.

    She was not even arrested for being combative with the officers and failing to obey given instructions. I call that lucky.

    If I was on duty that day, I would have arrested her for being a menace to other road users and intimidating an officer of the law. I would also send her for tox screening, suspicion DUI and/or charged her with being combative and intimidating an officer on a routine traffic stop. The reason? She was combative and dismissive of the seriousness of the offence, which suggests altered state of mind/perception.

    So just be grateful Pam (and you) don't get stopped by someone like me. And one more thing, even if the police get paid peanuts, not all of them are monkeys ok?!

  17. to IsayNo2ISA.

    Sorry to say but a lot of hole there.

    That she said she read the RED BOOK. She may know how to act when she found the police that unidentified.

  18. Not speaking up to police unprofessional conduct is one that would make us regress. Where in my comment that I have defended Pamela? Those who felt that I am defending Pamela are the one that should check themselves why they are feeling so. I am lamenting about the your small mindedness in focusing on Pamela's personal problem rather than the bigger issue of Police misconduct. Yet some are putting words in my mouth for their inability to argue and focus on my point of argument to challenge the points that I have raised.

    The point that I am raising is why is Pamela being held at a higher standard of behavior instead of the Police men who are entrusted with the duty to maintain peace and order. The point that I am raising is it the conducts of the two police man is acceptable to you, and some even failed to notice what is wrong with the conduct of the two police men whom are not properly dressed with their uniform on unmarked vehicle acting like thugs. These people are arguing that it's ok that police are acting like gangster but Pamela should behave. What I am raising is why is some Malaysians do not expect a higher standard of performance from our police men? If we do not demand the police force to be more professional as I am trying to do here. How are we going to progress together as put up by Shanee? HOw are the police force to improve if we always condone their bad behavior?

  19. @Shanee

    I agree. There is NO police brutality here. In fact I salute these officers for showing restraint. If it was me, I would have gone postal on her!

    For once, I don't see why PDRM apologised. They were not in the wrong. They were merely acting the way any pig in blue would act when you put a camera in their face and turn on the bitch talk.

    But I was pleasantly surprised when they did and their letter of apology was well crafted. So Kudos to them- this time.

    As for WhamBamThankYouPam, the woman is a menace on the road and should have her license revoked, car confiscated and fallopian tubes clamped.

  20. @ISayNo2ISA, you keep using the phrase "small minded Malaysians" who are "not addressing the bigger issue"

    Let me just point out, that there would not have been anything to video or talk about if it wasn't for the way Pamela reacted. The cops did nothing out of the ordinary until provoked by her actions.

    Hence the ROOT issue is how to not get yourself in a thick mess like Pamela did. The BIGGER issue is, women learning how to NOT put themselves in hairy situations by being arrogant.

    This is not an attack on Pamela, (if she and all other 'defending' her feel like it is – you ask yourselves why)

    This is also NOT a "issue of the police questionable conduct" as PDRM has openly apologised for the way the 2 cops handled the situation. Once someone admits their mistake and apologises the issue ends. Too bad we can't say the same for Pamela.

    And for the record, a nation cannot progress by blindly fighting the system. We fight when there is reason to fight supported by weighted arguments and not baseless accusations.

    So if you want a safer Malaysia, then unless you have a secret warehouse of highly trained individuals that you plan to have overthrow our cops, you better start working WITH the ones we have so that we can progress TOGETHER.

    I don't deny that there are cases of police brutality, and those need to be fought. But in this situation i'm sorry, but that just doesn't fly. To persist will only drive the wedge between the people & the system even deeper which will cause us to regress.

  21. @ISayNo2ISA Police conduct is not at question here. It's common sense that if you start giving lip to the swines in blue ANYWHERE in the world, you're only asking for a truncheon up your bum.

    The question at stake here is whether Pam has gotten laid in the last 6 months. Get with the programme!

    So consider her fortunate to escape with her colon intact.

  22. To IsayNo2ISA

    If you or Pam want to address "the bigger and the more urgent issue of the police questionable conduct." Please go make a police report and use the video as a evidence.

    Why need to come comment here… make a media frenzie get the local newspaper/TV/make a press conference…

    Then you would able to address "the bigger and the more urgent issue of the police questionable conduct."

    Cheers

  23. Sorry shamadz72 for not making thing clear…

    "But regardless of how irritating she is, she is NOT a threat to the police. You cannot intimidate people unless you have power. Obviously she being a female (not being sexist here) she posed no physical threat to the officers."

    this was quoted from KF Chan post. I was replying to his logic.

    Hence I say "The policemen got intimated not because of physical threat. Intimation don’t necessary need to come from physical threat."

    Me and you agree with each other…

  24. Even after I have lamented on the small mindedness of some Malaysians there are still people harping on the most petty issue of whether Pamela had posted the video with the right title, or whether she had handled the situation wisely, focusing purely on Pamela's attitude while choose to completely overlooked the bigger and the more urgent issue of the police questionable conduct.

    No wonder Malaysia is becoming a police state. It's thanks to these people that Police brutality is on the rise in Malaysia. Thanks folks a real good job in making us "safer" in Malaysia.

  25. Hi 'TheRightThingToDo',

    Threat can come in many ways bro. By taking a video, the 2 poor policeman (irrespective of whether they are right or wrong) might thought she knows somebody who is capable to pull a string and cost them trouble (i.e cold storage, transfer to other places etc). You know how the system works here in Malaysia.

  26. Mike – spot on!

    Pete – nicely said!

    Likewise to everyone else who has made very viable arguments here.

    Just to add Ong Jo-lene, I can't help but feel that there is more behind this article then you let on. This can't solely be a campaign on sexual discrimination.

    I commented on that video too, I am a woman and I know what it feel like to be discriminated against. But that doesn't change the fact that Pamela didn't help herself in that situation.

    Also, why are you harping on the derogatory comments left when there are plenty of other posts that are filled with positive criticism, and those that are debating the opposite point of view? Didn't you say in your article that this blogs are meant for debate? A debate doesn't consists of just one argument.

    If you did put up this video for discussion, then reply to the posts that actually carry some weight instead of getting emotionally caught up in those that don't

    Regardless of what the issues is, there will always be haters, with hateful words. It doesn't only happen to videos by females, it happens to anyone who these haters think have acted out of line.

    Let me tell you something about sexual harassment/discrimination – sometime women can tend to bring onto themselves witht heir big EGO. Sometimes cowering under power is the very thing that saves lives, it doesn't make you weak, it makes you the smarter one, the one in control of the situation.

    Yes we all acknowledge that the two men may not have been legit policemen. Thats why I say, if so, just apologise for the mistake (even if you feel you have done anything wrong)and politely request for the summons (if they we're not legit, the summons can't be legit either). Posers would at this point feel like they have been cornered and they may react in two ways.

    1. Just issue you the fake summons and take off (which from the video I can see that the cops did exactly that, except Pamela had to be smart and scribble on the book which is what provoked them)

    2. They pull out excuses for you to follow them to the balai. In which case, you tell them you will comply and request that you drive yourself there. (Which also happened in Pamela's case after much provocation to which she refused to budge which only made things worse.)

    Imagine if they were indeed up to no good and not really cops, by trying to be smart, you anger them further and all they really needed to do was reach in through your window, unlock your doors while the other gets-in on the passenger side and rams a weapon into your side immediately forcing you to essentially slave for them from this point on.

    Thats why I said in my comment, Pamela was way out of line from what we can see in the video. Yes things might have gone differently before she begin recording, but behavorial patterns don't change that drastically. unless she is suffering forma split personality disorder and was over come by her alter ego just as she switched to record mode. So in that light, most of us can't really say that she was a victim in this situation much as she'd like to portray it as such.

    And please, don't rebut this with weak link about how the comments are filled with violence against women. It's about time someone started addressing the real issues.

    For example, why Pamela doesn't consider driving while holding your phone an offence. Why she thinks a HANDS-free kit would require her hand to not be free while she activated loud speaker and place the phone back on her holster while she is taking a turn on very busy highway.

  27. Dear Ong

    You post a meaty piece on Pam, the faceless yet annoying wench that broke the law, in an open forum, and expect the piranhas to go easy on her?

    How naive are you? What are you, twelve?

    And yes, anonymity brings out the feminist, the mysogynist, the racist, the apologist, the morons and the scum of pond life. Get over it you lesbian whore. ;)

  28. To IsayNo2ISA

    If the video original posted was "Police Un-profesionalism Caught on Video" then we can concentrate on the Police Profesionalism on their dress code/not following standard procedure/not showing Badge ID etc…

    But the video posted was "Police Intimidation Caught on Video", hence the subject is around "Intimidation".

    To Pam and also some of you, I believe you already have the mindset that any Police is initimidating with they having a gun by keep repeating they are threatening becuz they have guns. I think police should carry a water pistol then… lol

    And Pam have the chance to reconcile her wrong doing on the second post but she didn't eat a humble pie and do it. She refuse to clearly state she broke a traffic law and just apologize for it. Instead just keep spinning and spinning telling grandmother story turning the whole thing into race/gender-biased issue.

    The right words to use from Pam on the second post. "Firstly I like to apologize for my attitude toward the policemen and apologize for breaking a traffic laws, but if we were look at the profesionalism of both policemen…" and so on and son on…

    This is clearly a misguide video to educate the public on how to react when stop by a police, bogus or not. " I have decided to make this video public not to seek publicity but to educate the public " Quoted by Pam… EPIC FAIL!!!

    PDRM had came out with the statement of apologize on their own force un-profesionalism… Will Pam come out with her statement of apologize on her attitude? Doubt so… instead we got some other thread that trying to defend her action…

  29. Malaysians have the tendency to see the little things and completely missed the more important bigger issue. The comments here reflected that again.

    Which one is a bigger issue here? Pamela's "insolence" against the policemen or improperly dressed uniform Policemen on unmarked vehicle that is acting unprofessionally?

    Those whom concentrated on Pamela's attitude problem had chosen to completely over see the professionalism of the two police men. Are these people condoning that police men should act unprofessionally? Don't these people know that it is because police are human being too, we should demand them to act in professional manner and to hold them in a higher standard so that they would not abuse their power?

    Clearly, the police have acted out of their line when they were doing law enforcement with improperly dressed uniform by not showing their police ID badge on their uniform. You cannot blame Pamela for suspicious of these police's identity and be fearful of her own safety because if you have bothered to check, you would noticed that both police men did not wear their police ID number tag on their uniform! Yes, now we know that they are police but at that moment how would Pamela know?

    What if they are not real police? It has happened in Malaysia before where women were raped by fake police.

    Those who continue to harp on Pamela's so called "attitude" problem, while conveniently oversee the bigger issue of Police professional conducts should not cry foul if they were the victim of police brutality in the future, for they have a hand in encouraging the police to be unruly. Because they have choose to turn a blind eye to gangster like behavior of the police force.

    Some of these people use the argument that speaking English to police is intimidating the police. This is utter nonsense. Intimidation is achieved with unspoken threat of harm to another person. How can speaking English be threatening to another person? Let's take a look at the scenario again. Who is more threatening? Two men in a uniform with pistol in their holster or a woman with her handbag and her handphone shooting video? Be real people, unless you want to invent a new meaning to the word: intimidation.

  30. AgreeToDisagree,

    When did I ever mention anything about race? These are purely matters between a citizen of Malaysia and the Police Force.

  31. First and foremost, I think some of real Lawyers would probably won't be defending Pamela for her action.

    Being GungHo against authority is not an example to set for others; no matter how angry then can.

    Try to go console Pam for her being sad because of her wrongdoing instead.

    I agree, no one should fucking insult her on her fucking gender.

    Gender discrimination is so fucking wrong.

    For the fucking wrong reason, everyone's feeling fucked up.

    So hey, she's feeling fucked up too.

    Anyway, what the fuck was I on about?

    Oh yeah, I was angry at something which I fucking forgot.

    I think it was angry that this article failed to acknowledge her fucking wrongdoing, fuckers!

    Fuck yeah!

  32. (1) Should we just apologise whenever we are flagged by police to increase our chances of being let off?

    (2) What if we chose to insist on our innocence?

    (3) What if apologising didn’t work?

    (4) Where do we draw the line between kow-tow and being respectful?

    (5) Do authorities deserve extra respect?

    The answer for this question is:

    (1) Yes. Be polite. Do you want teach people to say to a police to "fuck off" when you getting a summon?

    (2) When you are caught then you are guilty. You also cannot prove what you say. Prove if you can, if you are innocent. There are two police there. They saw it. If you really polite, you may say oh, i am sorry. maybe he may go with a warning.

    (3) If apologizing is not work, take the summon already. And you are saying "if", "if" there and anywhere "if", but you dont apply if for a test. IF means not applied before.

    (4) We do "kow-tow" to police first before being respected by the police. Police may not kow-tow you. If police kow-tow to you then, you must have more power than the police.

    You kow-tow to god, eh but think why, because god is powerful.

    (5) People may need extra respect but people must respect police first. If police is rude then, take his number if you want and report to the other police. KPN may take you statement if you want. But this is the last choice.

    Think again. a lawyer use law to apply. if many people dont want to abide to law, we take it as sosilawati case, and lawyer betray us, how to get help.

    If you find police to get help. please dont find one because you also hate police.Thing you may apply is: ah police malaslah, polis lambatlah, polis tak gunalah, polis tak buat kerjalah.

    Police pun boleh jadi bengang jika kena marah hari-hari. Lawyer juga sama.

    Anywhere also same.

  33. This exchange between Samad and KF Chan has undeniable undertones of retention of racial hegemony via a mostly Malay dominated police and the 'right' to gloss over the fact. It is a racial matter to a degree so long as the APARTHEID of Bumiputraism exists.

    Not a single academic has the honesty to bring this up to study? Pam was addressing this but in a clumsy manner. She is simply exercising her right to pro-human rights activism in this case and will indeed sound out many subconscious crypto-racists among Malaysians who are termed Bumiputra who are equally unable to self examine as well.

  34. But regardless of how irritating she is, she is NOT a threat to the police. You cannot intimidate people unless you have power. Obviously she being a female (not being sexist here) she posed no physical threat to the officers.

    Nice… being a 80+KG male myself even if 100+KG with perfect body. I wouldn't think myself being a physical threat to the two police. The two policemen wouldn't think that either, they have guns!!!!

    The policemen got intimated not because of physical threat. Intimation don't necessary need to come from physical threat. Intimated by saying "I know my Right!!!", "I'll make a police report". Intimated by taking video etc. Threaten because she'll might get them into troubles. To make a big meal media frenzy out of the whole situation. (Which she had already done.)

    The policemen themselve don't know whether she have the right to "conteng" on the summon book. (Well 99% of us don't know either…) So they ask her to follow them to police station. If they were to call backup for police car to come over. A bigger media frenzie would emerge and certainly both of the policemen do not wish that to happen.

    Lets step back and see what should be the right thing to do or normal for a common "Law Abiding Citizen" that have a little knowledge of "I know my Right" would do in such situation…

    If one thinks that h/she stop by bogus police or is in a dangerous situation, or anytime during the 10 minutes long incident feel uncomfortable…

    Just tell the police you want to settle in "balai" (is being offered at first) and drive straight to nearest police station you know. Either if it is a female or male.

    In putting the video into youtube and trying to condemn the police profesionalism. (Which is not perfect…) Pam is inviting criticism on her attitude/behaviour as well. So Pam can critics on the police behaviour but being confronted by the comments Pam became so defensive until bringing up gender/race issues and stating out who her grand ansector was… do Pam really need to go there??? lol

  35. shamadz72,

    Obviously Pam was not under arrest. If it is, they most likely will cuffed her.

    And you are right, they did not use the word "tangkap". In fact that is the problem. She is not under arrest but when many officers tell citizens to follow them back to balai, they always used very strong words and tone that makes it sounds threatening. Many civilians not familiar with their rights, after hearing threatening words like "balik balai" will be shivering and "kow tow" immediately and most likely belanja them minum kopi already.

    If one is not under arrest then "follow balik balai" is a REQUEST. When you request anything from anyone, don't you do it politely? But when you demand something, you are demanding your rights and not a request.

    Request, you ask.

    Your Rights, you demand.

  36. Hi KF Chan,

    In your comment, "But if I am a police officer with enforcement power, it is absolutely inappropriate to threaten a citizen with arrest just because one is pissed by someone’s attitude."

    Where did you get the idea that the police is threating Pam with an arrest? Do you know the meaning of "Kamu ikut saya ke balai"?

    It means that the policeman want her to follow them to 'balai polis' for further investigation (Which is perfectly within the law, where they can subject her for urine test to check for drugs abuse or driving under alcohol influence etc. You are correct only if the policeman has said "Saya terpaksa tangkap kamu dan sila ikut saya ke balai". Do you agree with me on this? If you don't please highlighted to me at what point did the police threaten her with the word "tangkap"?

  37. As unrealistic as I'm about to sound, I'm sure I can relate to the boys who were imagining all the trouble they would get from their ASP or ACP if they cuffed Pam, called for a patrol car and booked her for scribbling on the summon. I'm not siding the cops here, I'm siding the more logical situation. Even at work we often find ourselves not following protocol simply to save time or effort whenever necessary. But it doesn't mean that we are wrong! The same can be assumed about the two cops as well. By the way, I never meant it as a threat, I meant it as a humiliation that she had to speak in that immature tone and use big words with somebody who wasn't brought up to speak English.

    As a matter of fact, yes, I have been asked to follow a copper back to the station before. Because my number plates fell off and I had no other explanation for him. Never had to be forced, never had to record my experience and never really heard anything about being "under arrest". Ah well, you'll just say it's because I'm a co-operative guy..

    This debate goes nowhere (like most) so I sincerely apologize if my brand of humour doesn't appeal to you. I find it pointless to be rambling non stop about the non-responsive blog poster so once in a while it's fun to communicate with intellectuals like you.

  38. Ong,

    nice piece but lets not play the oh-women-r-always-victim role, ok. It;s true what Pete said, there's nothing sexist and racial in this situation. I'm sorry bur I personally think that u guys take it waaaayyyyy too emotional. I must say that there r comments made by the commentators r quite offensive such as 'u should be rape', that's just plain rude! But most of all, it's just our malaysian cakap pasar only, bitch etc. it's not like they r saying that Pam is a prostitute or something. Just like malays say babi, it;s not like they r referring their friends babi. It's nothing but words.

    I must say that, what Pam did is very brave though. If i were there, i would just pay the summons and leave. it's very unlikely for a young lass to refuse to pay as she didn't do anything wrong atthe first place. She record the situation for HER OWN SAFETY, and i don't think it's provoking the police. y would the police provocked?

  39. Dear matt.k,

    Of course i have limited understanding of what people like yourself are saying about Pam. Perhaps you can be more direct instead of screaming vulgarity.

    What's the point of saying Pam is wrong to "literally spit" in the officers' face when you are also "literally spiting" at Pam's face.

    I agreed with many here that Pam's attitude reflects a person of poor character. But regardless of how irritating she is, she is NOT a threat to the police. You cannot intimidate people unless you have power. Obviously she being a female (not being sexist here) she posed no physical threat to the officers. Being an ordinary citizen, she has no enforcement power to scare the officers. I mean, c'mon.. just because she is spewing a few big english words she is posing a threat to the officers? How can the police be so easily intimidated?

    I would think the officers were pissed as many of us. Do not think that I am siding Pam. But if I am a police officer with enforcement power, it is absolutely inappropriate to threaten a citizen with arrest just because one is pissed by someone's attitude.

    Haven't you realized how often we heard stories of police officers threatening to arrest someone just because they don't like your face (or whatever is it they don't like) and NOT because you have actually broken some law? Should anyone be threatened with ARREST (regardless of how rude or irritating their attitude maybe) at the whims and fancies of the police force?

    If we think that scribbling on other's property is an offence (which I have to agree it is) but isn't the abuse of police power a bigger offence?

  40. Chan, you're missing a really big point here. I think you should refer to your first comment, I was merely being sarcastic about you with the whole suing part :P

    I think you have a very limited understanding of what people like myself are trying to say about Pamela. That summon won't be any more valid even if an officer scribbled "she was using a loudspeaker but not handsfree".. etc. The fact of the matter is the summon is there to say OK Pamela Lim, you have committed the offense of using a mobile phone while driving without a handsfree kit (surely you are an intellectual person that understands what a handsfree kit truly is.. unlike Pamela) and for anyone to jot down irrelevant notes on it is nonsensical! It is a legal document enforceable by law ok brother?

    You cock, don't you get it. I called you a cock, big deal, it's just a type of young bird that doesn't fly. She literally spitted in the officers face with foreign words that they couldn't understand. I mean, it's like me calling you a dumb cock. Up to you lah if I'm still more rude than Pamela. Peace!

  41. @ Ong Jo-Lene

    1. Me too, i was very proud and hopeful of the constructive, progressive, brainy piece of work these independent websites, blogs such as Malaysia today, chrocnicle, loyar burok etc until I stumble upon this piece by Ong Jo-Lene. Even more dissapointing to find out that this is written by loyarburok's editorial team member.

    2. You have to know this, that this is about Pamela's "attitudes" we are talking and comments about. Yes, lot of comments might be aggresive and provocative, save a few for being racist and irrelevance, but nevertheless, many of this comments if you read between the line, and try to understand the core point behind it, they are taking a jab at Pamela's attitudes, highhandedness of the situation etc. They (including me) are unhappy, furious, angry at Pamela's handling of situations. Please, don't use gender discrimination and all that to justify Pam's actions and deeds. Don't be naive. Being ordinary Joe in Malaysia, of any race, any walk of life, of any level of society, we all will condemn Pam's with the same meaning, regardless of language because of her attitudes, not because she's a women. If Pam today is an senior citizen, or Datuk's niece, or PKR's vice president, Pam will get the same amount of bash from the commentators. So yes, it's nothing gender here. Don't take the "bitch" word per se as an insult to gender, like i said, if Pam is a man, expect the same commentators to call him bastard, assh*ole, f*kcer, pariah etc…so what would we be seeing you writing similar piece of article justifying everything in the name of gender against man (bastard), against certain race (pariah) etc? so you get my point? Ong Jo-Lene and Pam shld scrutinize people's aggresive and negative comments in a positive way. The fuel of responces had been ignited by nothing else but Pam's attitudes and highhandedness, stiff upper lips a.k.a "eksyenness/ sombong". Thats how i look at it.

    3. To make matter worse, she wrote the 2nd article trying to undo the damages, alter the perceptions of the general masses, which by the comments of it, failed miserably!! Invoking issues like pendatang, prostitudes doesnt hold water. Its a simple straight direct case- Pam and the police. Don't because of some ignorant politician calling us pendatang, will give Pamela to act the way she were acting…

    4. By writing the way she wrote in the 2nd article, there were a lot of assumptions, and prejudices that Pam had on the police. And she tried to justified her acts with her own prejudices like police will trying to lead her to unknown places to rape or hurt her. Oh sorry, can i say the word rape?? lest i been accuse of gender bias by Ong Jo-Lene ?? Pam also assume that all police takes bribes and basically in Pam's little mind- ALL polices are slimeball punk thieves, rapist etc…

    5. And please la, what shit about her assumptions that police were trying to force Pam to offer bribes?? Don't be naive la. Let me requote this from Pamela's own mouth (not horses mouth mind you) in the video- "How do you normally settle this"?? I see it as she trying to coerce the policeman into taking bribes and she can finally realizing her dream to be MP Loh Gwo Burne on Lingam! You are the loyar burok lawyer, don't tell me you dont know how to settle with the policeman when you break traffic law??? So much of you knowing you right, reading redbook and crying like a b*tch (oh sorry, can I say that word)

    6. I would expect someone like Ong Jo-Lene, being in editorial team of loyarburok would be smart and intellectual enough to undestand and interpret commentator's harsh comments including the f word and the b word into commentator's actual point of views rather than call them racist, gender biased etc. For example if i were to say "stop acting like a b*tch", it doesnt mean I am against all women (Ong Jo-Lene would believe that I am). It means that stop being ridiculous, or something to that extent…so pls, read and understand the comments in this context.

  42. @matt.k:

    Cheers mate love the way you finished off that rant!

    @Ong Jo-Lene:

    Well hello, welcome to the internet. It amuses me that you, in all your holier-than-thouness, expect the online public to start a meaningful discussion on this so called "expose" video, when Pamela's repulsive behavior can't help but overshadow everything else.

    The truth (and I can't believe I even have to spell it out for you) is simple – Pamela comes across as an extremely unlikeable person in this video. The rudeness. The fake accent. The condescension.

    But the final nail in the coffin is the very fact that she *thought* this video would put everyone on her side. There's nothing more unlikeable than an irritating person who *thinks* they're being smart.

    As for the "bigger issues" in the video itself, there's really nothing new or shocking here. Police incompetence? Bribery? Yawn. In other news, the sky is blue…

  43. Dear matt.k,

    Even if I think you are rude, I will not sue you. Do you mean to say that you are they type of person who will sue someone because they are rude to you? Is that how you behave in real life?

    You are using the wrong analogy. It is not about me scribbling on a cheque and expect the bank to honour them. It is more like… if YOU scribble on my cheque, does it mean that I can sue you or that the police can summon you for SCRIBBLING on my cheque, that would be a more relevant analogy. On the other hand, if you stole my cheque and falsify my signature, that would certainly be an offence. But if all you do is "content" my cheque… hahaha.. why would anyone bother to sue you or ask the police to summon you.

    Pam may have sounded rude but did you hear her calling the police "cock" or use any obscenity ? You one the other hand.. tsk tsk tsk.

  44. KF Chan you cock, if you wrote a cheque and scribbled on it do you think the bank will accept? But alas the paper used to make the cheque cost even less than 5 cents. So means when your cheque bounce already you justify yourself innocent using the cost of making the document? What kinda cock story you talking oso I dunno. Come on la brother, don't be so biased. I am not saying the cops are right all the way, but you got to agak-agak your accusations also right. Damn lopsided one, just shows how much of a cock you are.

    If you think I'm rude, then sue me lah, but then I think I read somewhere that it's not a punishable offence.. :D

  45. Firstly, congratulations on a well written article Ms. Ong.

    I also commented on the video as I did not agree that it was police intimidation, it appeared to me more like Ms. Pamela Lim provoked the police with her tone and actions.

    However, I am truly appalled to read the vicious, sexist comments that this video generated. I have repeatedly appealed for people to stick to the facts and issues, but time and again it goes unheeded. No one and I emphasize, NO ONE deserves the kind of verbal abuse that Ms. Pamela Lim received.

    People should keep in mind that Pamela is a real person. She is someone's daughter, sister, loved one. Would these people who sexually abused her verbally tolerate the same on one of their own? I guarantee not! And for those who still dont get it, RAPE is never funny. It is not something to be used as a threat or joked about. It is the most heinous crime that can be perpetuated against a woman.

    The internet offers all of us anonymity and some people hide behind this to be disrespectful and demeaning to others. Would they dare to do this in a face-to-face situation? I very much doubt it. Cyber-bullying is on the rise in Malaysia and we have no laws to protect the victims and punish the bullies. After all as any pyschologist would be able to tell you, a bully is nothing but a coward. The internet is a perfect playground for bullies.

    IMHO, Malaysians have a long way to go before they can consider themselves a mature society capable of intelligent and rational discourse.

Comments are closed.