Nazri, tried very hard to use linguistic philosophy to circumvent His Highness proposition. Not to be seen to be rude, he coquetted his response by phrasing his sentence of words: "it was a good speech". He tried to inked his approval to a selective few specific short phrase with CnP, culling a few words from a para to suit his guile. Nazri said he agreed with the Sultan's statement that judges had to be independent and competent, and resist socialising with business patronage and well connected people.
However, Nazri scorns on the crux of the key issues such as those regarding loss of public confidence and the recent disturbing events.
Commenting on the issue of recent disturbing events and serious criticism against the judiciary made by His Royal Highness, Nazri said it is "only the Sultan's perception". According to Nazri, His Highness perception may not necessary be his perception (or that of the government): Emphasis added. The Sultan can have his perception and who cares? ..."that is always his (Raja Azlan's) perception".
On loss of public confidence highlighted by the Sultan, Nazri asked: "What is the public? Does the public mean 1,000 or 2,000 people or the whole nation? It can be observed that Nazri was ostracizing its deleterious effects... he could be seen to corelate the recent lawyers protest - the Walk for Justice at Putrajaya which involves about 2,000 people - the figure is relative small if compared with the population of the nation as a whole, or, with the bunch of YESMEN parliamentarians that includes the prominent Minister and his coterie of ministers which numbers many thousands too. Maybe, to the guile and nefarious Nazri, the public must mean, at least include, the 2 million UMNO members, and the criticism must come from within the ruling party, to the exclusion of "outsiders".
"When you talk about crisis, it has to be something that is really big", says Nazri. "Really Big"? What's Really Big? Does it mean that the whole nation must go to Parliament to protest to indicate that it is "Big Enough"? Does it mean that the nation must go to war with the judiciary or the government to indicate that "things are really bad and in need for reform"? Or, does it mean that the people must go to war such as those Burmese monks?
Tan Sri Norma Yaakob, the retired Chief Judge of Malaya was asked to comment on the Sultan speech and this is what she said:
"He is the right person to point out the current state of the Malaysian judiciary. He was straightforward and to the point. We all got the message very clearly."
Did we? Yes, we, the commoners did.
Did Nazri? I don't think so!
Did Fairuz? Did Pak Lah? I had doubts...
Nazri is browbeating the people into a contradiction - he is obfuscating the whole issue; he is trying hard to be porcine and preposterous ... or is he already a calcified one?
He is after all, a sycophant!