Evidence obtained from a seemingly fake blog to present to court (evidence included)
Singapore November 20th, 2007
Apparently, Malaysia had to resort to obtain a photograph from a blog to present their case in court over the ownership of Pedra Branca. However, the blog looked somewhat like a fly-by-night blog create specially for the International Court case that seems to aid Malaysia in their fight for the island. You really have to see it to know what I mean.
I was somewhat wondering - how can Malaysia - such a big country with so much resources (including good photographers), rely on a photograph from a blog to present their case to the courts? So I visited the site, and the first post (earliest) where there was was just a picture of Pedra Branca, highlighted the proximity of the island to Malaysia (first picture). Another picture that had the same landmark in the photo had an opposite effect (second picture).
Here are the photos for your comments:
The first one was the evidence submitted by the Malaysian side, with a photo supposedly obtained from http://www.leuchtturm3.blogspot.com/. The first and last post of the blog showed pictures of Pedra Branca with its Malaysian name.
The second picture was the photo submitted by the Singapore side, that showed a diminished island in the background.
In view of such discrepancies, Simply Jean decided to do some investigative work. So, she searched the Internet for sentences located in the middle of a paragraph for plagarism. Heh heh… people who plagarise usually change the fronts and ends of a paragraph of *insignificant* portions - and this is where the evidence lies!!!
This was what I found from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lighthouse):
This is what’s from the blog :
There’s nothing wrong with copying from Wikipedia, but when you decide to copy from Wikipedia, and don’t credit it, and changed the wordings, then that’s… not very right.
Can you sport the differences between the highlight paragraphs?
Answer: the author of the blog changed the name of Cape May Lighthouse to Pulau Batu Puteh Lighthouse. Actually, if you click on the link at Pulau Batu Puteh Lightouse, it goes to Cape May Lighthouse at Wikipedia. That’s where the cat is out of the bag.
Well, I actually have not much interest in this court case, but, when they decided to bring the blogosphere into the news, then I felt that I had to do some justification for the community.
To the author (and all other implied parties), you suck.
IN THE HAGUE - AT A glance, the two pictures look alike. Both have Horsburgh Lighthouse and Pedra Branca in the foreground.
But look again - at the background which shows the Johor mainland, with Point Romania and a hill named Mount Berbukit. In one picture the hill is highly visible; in the other, it is hardly visible.
Therein lies the photographic illusion that Malaysia had created to exaggerate the closeness of Pedra Branca to Johor, Singapore said yesterday at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague.
The first photograph, which Malaysia had shown the court last week, was taken by a camera using a telephoto lens.
The second photograph was taken by Singapore, using a camera lens that approximates what the human eye sees. As a result, the Malaysian photograph exaggerated the height of Mount Berbukit by about seven times, Singapore’s Attorney-General Chao Hick Tin said when he presented the two photos before the court.
He described it as ‘an attempt to convey a subliminal message of proximity between Pedra Branca and the coast of Johor’.But it was not an accurate reflection of what visitors to Pedra Branca would see if they were looking towardsthe Johor mainland, he said.
Mr Chao was speaking before the ICJ as the hearing over the Pedra Branca dispute enters the third week. Yesterday was the first day of Singapore’s rebuttals against Malaysia’s oral arguments made last week.
Both countries are appearing at the ICJ to resolve their dispute over the sovereignty of the island 40km east of Singapore and which stands at the eastern entrance of the Singapore Strait.
Last week, Malaysia had also claimed the photo in question was taken from an online blog or weblog. The implication was the photo came from an independent source.
But yesterday, Mr Chao raised questions about the blog.
‘This blog site is a most unusual one. It was created only last month. There is no information on the identity of the blogger and the photograph used by Malaysia was only put on the website on Nov 2 2007, four days before the start of these oral proceedings,’ he said.
Mr Chao also sought to debunk Malaysia’s claim that Pedra Branca was near Point Romania in Johor. The phrase ‘near Point Romania’ was used in an 1844 letter from the Temenggong of Johor to Governor Butterworth in Singapore.
In that letter, the Temenggong gave permission for the British to build a lighthouse on any island near Point Romania.
Malaysia claimed the phrase included Pedra Branca, and that the letter showed Britain acknowledged Johor’s sovereignty over the island.
Mr Chao said the letter did not refer to Pedra Branca but to Peak Rock which, in 1844, was where the British planned to build a lighthouse.
He pointed out the distance between Pedra Branca and Point Romania was six times that between the latter and Peak Rock.
In an 1846 letter, Governor Butterworth explained his original preference for Peak Rock as the site of a lighthouse because Pedra Branca was ‘at so great a distance from the main land’.
Singapore’s rebuttals yesterday were launched by Deputy Prime Minister S. Jayakumar. He highlighted five ‘baseless allegations and insinuations’ that Malaysia had lobbed against Singapore and rebutted each in turn.
Among them was Malaysia’s charge that Singapore wished to ’subvert’ long-established arrangements in the Singapore Strait.
On the contrary, he said, it was Kuala Lumpur that tried to alter the status quo through the publication of a map in 1979 that altered its maritime boundaries with seven of its neighbours.
That was also the map that sparked the current dispute.
Prof Jayakumar said he was disappointed that Malaysia had resorted to such allegations in its bid to win the case. ‘We should seek to win by stating objective facts and submitting persuasive legal arguments, and not by resorting to unfounded political statements and making insinuations damaging to the integrity of the opposite party,’ he said.
lydia@sph.com.sg
Article obtained from straitstimes.com on 20th November 2007
About
The horsburg lighthouse or pedra banca lighthouse is of utmost importance to singapore’s soverignity.
i figure we only went to court because we were confident of winning the case.
if malaysia wins, they threaten our lifeline—Shipping. because of international territorial law, if we lose PB, singapore will be unable to lay claim to the entrance of the singapore straits.
being malaysia waters, the malaysians can very simply place warships at the entrance of the singapore straits and start firing live rounds and call it a wargame, every merchant vessel will avoid singapore like a plague.
then the only way into singapre will be the malaccan straits and no prizes for guessing who controls that….
Methinks the malaysians are using a “photoshopped” photograph.No way a telephoto lens can show the background so closed whilst keeping the lighthouse etc in the same perspective as the photo released by singapore
Why present information from a blog in a highly important legal case? You need an expert, not a blogger to argue their case.
Really out of the world…
coz in malaysia, blogger is more credible than the politicians n government
jangan jangan jangan diskriminasi kami
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketuanan_Melayu
Ketuanan Melayu (Malay for Malay supremacy or Malay dominance) is the racialist belief that the Malay people are the “tuan” (masters) of Malaysia. The Chinese- and Indian-Malaysians who form a significant minority in Malaysia, are considered beholden to the Malays for granting them citizenship in return for special privileges as set out in Article 153 of the Constitution of Malaysia. This quid pro quo arrangement is usually referred to as the Malaysian social contract. The concept of ketuanan Melayu is usually referenced by politicians, particularly those from the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), the most influential political party in Malaysia.
———-
jangan jangan jangan bunuh burung dodo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodo
Malay sailors held the bird in high regard and killed them only to make head dressings used in religious ceremonies.
hal ini juga ada di buku James, Bradly. 1998. The History of Mauritius. Lowell House: Boston. 34-35.
Msia is soooooo lame! LOL
As a Malaysian, I feel very ashame and embarass that my government, who dissmissed bloggers merely as ‘monkeys’, would use ‘evidence’ from a blog by an anynomous to preset its case.
Shame on you PakLah, Son In Law (sorry to say, Singapore agent in Malaysia), and his ‘half past six’ government.
i am a malaysian too, my government lead by UMNO is a joke, the only thing they talk about is race and religion.
“coz in malaysia, blogger is more credible than the politicians n government”
how fucking true lol
“As a Malaysian, I feel very ashame and embarass that my government, who dissmissed bloggers merely as ‘monkeys’, would use ‘evidence’ from a blog by an anynomous to preset its case.”
Malaysia and Singapore make a perfect companion because
one is monkey court and another is kangaroo court.
No wonder LKY talking of merging with Malaysia. Together they will rule Asia. Before that, make sure I migrate first.
Whoever win or lose I hope will not tarnish the good relationship within the people.
[…] Branca case - Sophie’s World: Pictures don’t tell a thousand words! - Simply Jean: Evidence obtained from a seemingly fake blog to present to court (evidence included) - The Void Deck: What Others Are Saying: Msia Pwned in […]
Malaysia and Singapore are buddies.
Buddies do fight and argue once in a while
But should not end up arch enemies
Be practicle, be positive, be subjective, be objective and be conclusive
[…] the reason why I brought up the issue in the previous post is not to take sides, but rather, to highlight the possibility dangers of people using […]
I am a Malaysian, for 50 years, we have been lead and ruled by a bunch of idiotic jokers. They control the media and everything, They have been manupulating fact and figures to suit them, and are very used to twist & turn in everything they say. Therefore not surpirising, they are at this again this time working on the Pualu Puteh issue.
T S Lim, the same thing can be said of Singapore too.
They shouldn’t kill each other over an island afterall
both are the same kind. Just another wayang show.
[…] all the news about Pedra Branca, I missed this one entire. Heh. Apparently, Temasek is charged with anti-monopoly laws in Indonesia […]
Malaysia should rightfully own Pedra Branca. The first lighthouse administrator or guard was never a Singaporean. Singapore was no man’s land before the independence given by Malaysia.
Malaysia’s fucked up. Nuff said.
The Argument for Lighthouse aside this is a very great piece of blog that I read. Good work Jean
wow… seems like we got quite a few people who think the govt are stu***. Just thinking, how the world will change for a better if the countries were run by us =)
Can I just say, as another Malaysian, good work, Jean. So shy, so shy. Beyond shy.
aih, my lovely country Malaysia, they thought they are in Malaysia court and fighting with opposition party (Annuar?)….
Please, you are dealing with Singapore ok?
Malaysia Gemilang? Malaysia Cemerlang? Malaysia really is a boleh-land
Singapore assembles a dream team of a Chief Justice, Attorney Generals, and the Minister for Law.
Lol its like watching Man U play against Division 2 Digham.
If Singapore loses this one i “tok” lol.
lol chan sek keong used to be from ipoh somemore. came over from the dark side yea
Well done Jean
Malaysia Boleh?
yeap, Boleh Balik Kampung & tanah jagung!
Buat Malu aje!
from a full blooded Malaysian!
er … that’s tanam jagung!
Quote:Malaysia should rightfully own Pedra Branca. The first lighthouse administrator or guard was never a Singaporean. Singapore was no man’s land before the independence given by Malaysia.
Whether or not owned by Malaysia is still far from conclusion.
Remember someone ask Singapore to join only to asked to leave later? Speak for yourself dude..Live in the real world n not in your dreams… dreamer…
[…] don’t think the 2 photos from the previous post are really doctored, but they are indeed taken with cameras of different F-stop. I am not really a […]
As a Malaysian, I humbly apologize to Singaporeans for the way the govt handled this case. As a [casual] blogger, I feel like I’m having shit pasted on my face by this act.
It’s not entirely the fault of Malaysians that the Malaysian parliament is mostly populated by children with underdeveloped mental faculties.
*thinks of youtube videos of the parliament bickerings*
Yeah.
aiks… so shy lah to be a malaysian today. what is going to happen to this country? tsk tsk….. cheh… we have such a lame government. i cannot face a singaporean ever again.
Bravo Malaysia. What a show~
klau nk klh tu mcm2 pael la Singaporean nii..
Simply Jean, your blog has drawn the attention of Singapore media. There is an article on your blog regarding the fake blog to present to the International Court of Justice in the Thursday’s The Straits Times.
Other blogs are also mentioned in the article. Bravo!
I’d like to know whether any party in the ICJ can be punished for willful distortion of evidence with the intent to pervert the course of justice. We’ve seen a similar case recently with the poisoning of ISO by Microsoft regarding the push for ISO certification of OOXML, and while it was unsuccessful, they escaped without any penalties. But does it apply in a court of law?
[…] been pandemonium on the blogsphere. The plagiarism was originally discovered by one blogger here; and Jeff Ooi - a well-regarded Malaysian blogger - entry is probably the best read of the lot at […]
[…] /2007/11/20/evidence-obtained- from-a-seemingly-fake-blog-to- present-to-court-evidence-incl uded/ (F) […]
Last year Malaysian government stated that bloggers are liars, remember that Indon tv reporters case who wrote about her bad experiences during visiting Malaysia in her blog???
Now they rely on bloggers for evidence in ICJ ? sucks .. what suck is they pretend to be a blogger … ROFL ….
Malaysia Boleh , ….. menciplak ajer
[…] http://blog.simplyjean.com/2007/11/20/evidence-obtained-from-a-seemingly-fake-blog-to-present-to-cou… […]
Quick someone cache the leuchtturm guy’s blog before it’s removed. I have this feeling it is going to be removed quite soon.
On a side note: Even Wikipedia doesn’t accept the usage of blogs as a reliable source for edits. And using blogs in the ICJ? What a joke.
I’m disgusted. Is’nt it peculiar that the author posted the photo of the the lighthouse just a few days before M’sia’s oral presentation? It seems too much of a coincidence. I’m not trying to accuse anyone of anything here (least i may be summoned!), but the fella who provided the photo to the M’sian camp must be an avid “Blogger” who managed to find the photo so soon before the presentation (yah rite). The author of the blog http://leuchtturm3.blogspot.com/ claims to be “someone from the outside”, yet he/she refers to Horsburgh Lighthouse as Pulau Batu Putih Lighthouse.. Such irony that he/she should call it P.B.P Lighthouse, when its known as Horsburgh, some “interested in lighthouse guy” indeed! Whatever the case, this incident has defintely reduced the credibility of the M’sian camp. Prepare to rejoice My beloved S’pore! Huat ah!
The island is 7km from Malaysia .. 7km is not a long distance.. I think 7km is relevant for the first pic.. 2nd one is maybe mist problem.. Just my 8 cent..
Well, for some obvious reason I am named as soon to be ex bolehsian. Hey SG take over that piece of granite, and make it painful for those clowns!
[…] And just like the dishonesty in the above cases, this particular made-in-Malaysia fraud was exposed by a blogger - Singaporean Simply Jean. […]
As Sammy would have said ‘kemaluan saya banyak besar’.
The misleading picture issue does not carry much weight in either countries’ cases.
Why did it become an issue at all?
One key thrust of the Malaysian legal team’s case is aimed to show that the British did receive explicit permission to use PB/PBP from the Johor sultanate thereby proving that the British had recognised Johor’s sovereignty over PB/PBP all along.
The Malaysian legal team submitted that there existed an important letter which had requested for explicit permission. This letter was said to have been sent from the British governor of Singapore to the Johor sultanate. However, the legal team said that Malaysia does not have possession of the letter and alleged that it is in the possession of Singapore’s National Archives which had not replied to their requests for the letter. As Malaysia could not produce the evidence (the letter), this allegation actually counts for very little weight in the overall consideration of sovereignty over PB/PBP.
However, this insinuated that Singapore’s National Archives had been dishonest. This is unfair because if such a letter did exist, it should be in the possession of Johor’s archives as the Johor sultanate was the receipient. The Singapore legal team expressed dissappointment with prinicpally this insinuation. See report - http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne+News/Singapore/Story/A1Story20071119-37527.html.
In retaliation, the Singapore legal team highlighted the inconsequential but juicy misleading picture issue.
Clearly, it was just a case of tit-for-tat.
The misleading picture issue does not carry much weight in either countries’ cases.
Why did it become an issue at all?
One key thrust of the Malaysian legal team’s case is aimed to show that the British did receive explicit permission to use PB/PBP from the Johor sultanate thereby proving that the British had recognised Johor’s sovereignty over PB/PBP all along.
The Malaysian legal team submitted that there existed an important letter which had requested for explicit permission. This letter was said to have been sent from the British governor of Singapore to the Johor sultanate. However, the legal team said that Malaysia does not have possession of the letter and alleged that it is in the possession of Singapore’s National Archives which had not replied to their requests for the letter. As Malaysia could not produce the evidence (the letter), this allegation actually counts for very little weight in the overall consideration of sovereignty over PB/PBP.
However, this insinuated that Singapore’s National Archives had been dishonest. This is unfair because if such a letter did exist, it should be in the possession of Johor’s archives as the Johor sultanate was the receipient. The Singapore legal team expressed dissappointment with prinicpally this insinuation. See report - http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20071119-37527.html
In retaliation, the Singapore legal team highlighted the inconsequential but juicy misleading picture issue.
Clearly, it was just a case of tit-for-tat.
The mentioned letter was said to be in the archive in a file called “Letter to the Natives” as recorded in ICJ hearing.
Even the Malaysians knew the name of the file. Most probably they hit the nail by saying the it was hidden by Singapore’s National Archives.
How could Singapore exercise full sovereignty on Pedra Branca since 1852? Singapore was given independence by Malaysia and became a nation for only 42 years. Furthermore, Singapore is still paying allowances to the descendents of Temenggong. You call that sovereignty?
No Union Jack or the Singapore flag has been flown on Pedra Branca to claim the ownership of the island from then Sultanate of Johore or Malaysia after the erection of the lighthouse. In fact, the Temenggong and his 30 or more supporters were present for the brick laying official opening ceremony. Moreover, the British did not officially claim the lighthouse as theirs by flying the Union Jack.
seethelight, does it not make more sense for such a letter whose receipient was the Sultan and Temengong of Johor to be in Johor’s archives?
seethelight, you must be in the tunnel all this while. I think you still have a long way to go before you see the real light.
Singapore is not “given” independence by Malaysia; Singapore gained independence by kicking Malaysia out because of Malaysia’s racist policies.
ngyt, it definitely makes more sense that the letter (if it really exist) to be in Johor’s possession. Accusing Singapore for hidding the letter makes no sense. But making sense is not what the Malaysian team is good at. They are better off making accusation.
Will they perpetrator of the fake blog and fauxtography - and his slavemasters - be detained pending investigation? ABDULLAH BADAWI himself said that this is what should be done!
http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2006/08/02/pm-those-who-spread-untruths-on-the-net-will-be-detained/
malaysia team not only use a misleading photo… they even openly doctored boundary maps to suit their allegations… check the picture below.
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e352/shadow200671/vlcsnap-284378.jpg
[…] Unfortunately, it turns out that their source used material plagiarised from Wikipedia for one of the blog entries, and the blog was suspiciously created very recently and has only got a few posts. This was uncovered by blogger Simply Jean. […]
After all is said and done. As
one minister commented on the
successful holiday trip of our
angkasawan, “Kami bersyukur,
angkasawan yang telah MENINGGAL
DUNIA sudah selamat di KEBUMI”.
We the citizens of both countries
will forever be friends and leave
the politicians to hammer each
other senseless. Peace and out!
The dude had removed ALL the comments…
http://www.leuchtturm3.blogspot.com/
Yeah, this is a very very cool blog.
I just added you to my favorites.
Thanx,
Mikey
[…] 29, 2007 by pleinelune I was looking up the Pedra Banca for International Law, and I came across this and this. I think it has already made its rounds in the bloggosphere, but I must have missed it. I […]
Deat jean, i really enjoyed ur blog! well done. i know im a bit late abt this. im doing a research on my project abt pedra branca. so any more info abt plse, plse put it up. i really enjoyed tis site. the people as also sarcastically funny n there r the serious one. good. it shows the equality of speaking up for each country. well done. pardon for my “ketinggalan zaman”
peace.
oh btw, am supposed to do “cross media” abt this issue. any ideas anyone where i can get my sources? i want to see more of u people’s comments. its fun n mind-opening.
very interesting, but I don’t agree with you
Idetrorce
[…] bloggers have been having a field day. The plagiarism was originally discovered by one blogger here; and Jeff Ooi - a well-regarded Malaysian blogger - entry is probably the best read of the lot at […]
[…] that was tendered as pictorial evidence to support the Malaysian claim, was found out by blogger Simply Jean. What ensued was a storm in the blogoshere […]
[…] verdict on the Pedra Branca case (yes, the one where I wrote about the other side using a fake blog). Of course, the blog has since became a "private blog" which was still […]
Finally the dispute is over.
The news has just release:
Sovereignty of Pedra Branca island to Singapore.
Sovereignty of Middle Rocks and South Ledge to Malaysia.
[…] I think our legal team should be blamed for the lost with the infamous fake photo incident still ringing in my mind. Although the picture might not be carrying much weight in the case, as […]
I can’t imagine an island with a ‘foreign’ name got stuck somewhere in the middle of the malay’s archipelago region. It just doesn’t add up……….Who is this smark aleck, who changed the name ?
I think Pulau Batu Putih sounds more realistic.
[…] blog and alarm bells started ringing immediately. The blog post in question was the one about the seemingly fake evidence on Pedra Branca. Now, "nal" wrote that: I can’t imagine an island with a ‘foreign’ name […]
Ha Ha! I guess it’s difficult
to win case when you can’t
buy the judges, right DR M?
AG Abdul Gani should stick to
doing what he does best - sticking
opposition members in jail
and sedition act on bloggers.
[…] Gani Patail and his son Federal Counsel Faezul Adzra Gani Patail had to resort to using a blog’s unverified photo of Pedra Branca (Right) to present their case to the judges at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The blog was said […]
[…] not sure what I can give you guys, but I’d do more insightful stuffs =P and uncovering more Pedra Branca bluffs. =) Leave a comment Comment RSS Previous: Grab your (almost) free […]