PRIME MINISTER’S PRESS SECRETARY STATEMENT ON DONATION CONFIRMATION BY SAUDI ARABIAN FOREIGN MINISTER

15 April 2016

We note yesterday’s statement by Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister, who said that their donation to the Prime Minister was genuine, that nothing was expected in return, that the Attorney General has thoroughly investigated the matter and found no wrongdoing, and that Saudi Arabia considers the matter closed.‎


 This confirms what the Prime Minister maintained all along, and what multiple lawful authorities concluded after exhaustive investigations: the funds were a donation from Saudi Arabia.

 This also proves that the wild allegations pushed for one year by Tun Mahathir Mohamad and his Anti-Najib Campaign are completely false.

 Tun Mahathir’s lies were motivated by personal interest, not care for Malaysia or the people. It was an attempt to use deception to unseat a democratically-elected government, just to save the political career of Tun Mahathir’s son, Dato' Seri Mukhriz Mahathir.

 Western media who allowed themselves to be used to propagate false politically-motivated allegations should apologise to the Malaysian people.

 And Tun Mahathir should held responsible for the damage he has inflicted on Malaysia’s reputation.”



DATUK SERI TENGKU SARIFFUDDIN

PRESS SECRETARY TO THE PRIME MINISTER

Continue reading

My final word to Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the ANC, Clare Rewcastle Brown and Sarawak Report is: do your worst. We have both now crossed the Rubicon and there is no longer any turning back. And as much as they may try to oust Najib Tun Razak, he is still going to be the Prime Minister of Malaysia long after I come out of jail.

NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin

The Anti-Najib Campaign (ANC) throughSarawak Report wants to send me to jail. They have sent me a legal notice and have given me a week to remove all articles about Clare Rewcastle Brown andSarawak Report from Malaysia Today.And if I refuse they are going to obtain a court injunction to compel me to do so.

After losing the battle in the court of public opinion, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the ANC, Clare Rewcastle Brown and Sarawak Report now want to use the court system to silence me and to prevent me from writing.

This has happened a number of times in the past.

However, each time I was asked to remove articles from Malaysia Today I have always refused to do so. And this has resulted in me being charged and/or sued. I have been sued so many times that I have lost count, not to mention the numerous times my house has been raided and my computers, files, documents, etc., confiscated.

So they know that sending me a legal notice to remove articles from Malaysia Today is not going to work. And that would mean they would then need to go to court to obtain an injunction. And if I still refuse to remove those articles, they will say I have committed contempt of court, and then I would be sent to jail.

That, the ANC and Sarawak Report know, is going to be the final outcome to this whole thing.Further to that, they want me to publish an apology, which they will draft, and for me to give them a promise in writing that I will never publish any articles about Clare andSarawak Report again.

In short, I must agree to not only an apology but to a gag order for the rest of my life.

Sarawak Report wants the freedom to say what they like, whether what they say about Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and Malaysia is true or not. If they are prevented or blocked from publishing, they will scream about how Malaysia is a dictatorship and how Umno does not respect freedom of speech and so on.

However, they will not allow me that same freedom and want to send me to jail unless I remove all articles about them from Malaysian

Today, issue an apology, pay a huge compensation, and agree to a permanent gag.If I do what they want me to do, then I will be admitting that they are right and that I am wrong.

And this would also mean everything they said about Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is true as well while what I said about Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the ANC and Sarawak Report are false.

In that case I might as well just publish a confession saying that Najib did steal RM42 billion of 1MDB’s money (or probably even more than RM50 billion) and that RM2.6 billion of that money (or probably even RM4.2 billion) was transferred to Najib’s personal bank account — because this would tantamount to the same thing.

This is absolutely unacceptable because then everything we have been fighting for over more than a year would in the end all have come to naught.

Hence, based on principle, I have to defend my position and not bow to their demands by conceding defeat even if that would mean time in jail.

While the ANC and Sarawak Report want me to remove articles from Malaysia Today, apologise for these articles, pay a huge compensation, and promise to no longer publish any articles regarding them on Malaysia Today, are they prepared to do the same?

They still insist that Najib stole RM42 billion (or maybe even more than RM50 billion, they now say) of 1MDB’s money while RM2.6 billion (or maybe RM4.2 billion) of this money was transferred to Najib’s personal bank account.

In the final analysis, that is what all this boils down to.

My final word to Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the ANC, Clare Rewcastle Brown and Sarawak Report is: do your worst. We have both now crossed the Rubicon and there is no longer any turning back.

And as much as they may try to oust Najib Tun Razak, he is still going to be the Prime Minister of Malaysia long after I come out of jail.

Source:

http://www.malaysia-today.net/the-anc-and-sarawak-report-want-to-send-me-to-jail/

Continue reading

From Malaysia Today:

By Raja Petra Kamarudin

For those of you who do not quite understand Bahasa Malaysia and cannot quite follow what A. Kadir Jasin is saying in the piece below, no need to fret.

The long and the short of it is he is telling us that he knows something but he cannot tell us what it is and we shall very soon know what that something which he cannot tell us is.

This is sort of like when we were kids and a friend would tell us that he or she knows a secret but he or she cannot tell us what that secret is.

And then our friend would smirk with satisfaction knowing that he or she knows something we all do not know.

So what is it that Kadir knows which we do not know and which he cannot tell us and which in the near future we are going to find out? It is supposed to be something earth shattering. It is supposed to be the mother of all stories. It is supposed to be an event to overshadow all events.

Well, actually I know what Kadir knows and which he will not tell us and which we are supposed to find out in the near future and which is an event that is going to move the earth and heaven (and probably hell as well).

And since Kadir will not tell you then let me tell you instead.

Now, Kadir being Kadir, meaning Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s horse and a key player in the ANC (Anti-Najib Campaign), whatever secret he is keeping close to his chest can only be something favourable to the ANC and not good for Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

Is this going to be the end of Najib? Are we going to see Mukhriz closer to the office of the Prime Minister? Kadir told his friends that this month of April is the final month for Najib.

I have heard that before.

First it was July 2015, then August, then September, then October, then November, then December.

And now it is supposed to be April 2016.But why the hurry? If it is true that if Najib remains Prime Minister then Barisan Nasional and Umno are going to get kicked out in the next general election in 2018, why not just wait another two years and then Barisan Nasional and Umno will get kicked out and in that same process Najib will get kicked out together with his party?

Well they cannot wait for two reasons.

The first reason is they do not want Barisan Nasional and Umno to get kicked out.

“But then Mahathir and the ANC are working with the opposition?” you may ask.

Wrong. Mahathir is not working with the opposition. He is just using the opposition to oust Najib. And the opposition thinks it is using Mahathir instead to kick out Barisan Nasional and Umno.

Let me put it another way to make it clearer.

Normally, a client goes to a prostitute and pays the prostitute for a screw. In Mahathir’s case, he gets to screw the prostitute and the prostitute pays him. And that is what Pakatan Rakayat is: a prostitute that gets screwed and then pays for it.

Anyway, the second reason for the hurry is because the Bank Negara Governor has only about a month to go before she retires. So, if they want to act, they have to do it within this next month. And that was why Kadir said we do not have long to wait to find out what the secret that he is keeping and which he cannot tell us is.

Before that, let me flashback to what I told you in the middle of last year about the four very senior officers of Bank Negara who are involved in the conspiracy to oust Najib.

I even mentioned their names.The very next day, Bank Negara issued a press statement denying that allegation. They then lodged a police report and called in their lawyers for a meeting. The plan was they were going to sue me for slander.According to my fly on the wall in the meeting room, the lawyers advised Bank Negara to sue me only if they have nothing to hide.

However, if their hands are not really clean, then they should reconsider the plan to sue me or else it will backfire.

Bank Negara then made a decision to drop the plan to sue me.

So what does that tell you?

Are their hands clean or dirty? If their hands are clean why did they back off from suing me? And why did the lawyer even bring this up? Does the lawyer know that Bank Negara’s hands are not clean and was that why he advised Bank Negara to think very carefully before suing me?

Anyway, on 2nd July 2015, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) ran a story based on what they claim were documents related to an investigation on RM2.6 billion of 1MDB’s money being transferred to Najib’s personal bank account.


Please click here for the rest of this post:

http://www.malaysia-today.net/the-reason-for-the-hurry-to-finish-off-najib/

Continue reading

The following article is from The Malay Mail.

KUALA LUMPUR, June 15 — The Tunku Bendahara of Johor has claimed that his father, the late Sultan Iskandar Ismail had been “used” by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad to remove the country’s top judge in the late 1980s.

Nearly three decades on, Tunku Abdul Majid Idris Ibni Sultan Iskandar sought to reignite debate over the controversial sacking of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President by holding the former prime minister accountable for the act that triggered the 1988 judicial crisis.

“Mahathir used my father to remove Tun Salleh, period.

“Tun Salleh is a good man and my father acknowledged that. He has already made his peace with Tun Salleh,” the 44-year-old wrote in a short Facebook post yesterday, taking a leaf from another Johor prince’s playbook.

“Mahathir, please don’t blame people who can’t defend themselves anymore,” he added.

Tunku Abdul Majid’s remarks follows Dr Mahathir’s assertion Saturday that the late Sultan Iskandar had disliked Salleh and was instrumental in removing the judge from office after the latter complained about the noise from the king’s house that was being renovated.


“The Sultan of Johor, who was Agong, was very annoyed. This was a wrong thing to do, and he asked me to dismiss Salleh Abas,” Dr Mahathir told a forum at the Cooler Lumpur Festival here over the weekend.

The 89-year-old said a tribunal was then set up, adding that the Attorney-General at the time did not want to mention the Agong’s name, but made Dr Mahathir out to be the main complainant against Salleh instead.

Dr Mahathir, who was in office from 1981 to 2003, said he has never restricted judges and denied ever talking to them, except to the Lord President who would inform him about official matters like promotions and appointments.

Dr Mahathir first made the claim that Salleh was sacked for complaining about the noisy construction work at the Agong’s house in his first autobiography, “A Doctor In The House: The Memoirs of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad”, published in 2011.

The former Umno president had denied removing the former Lord President, along with five Supreme Court judges, in retaliation when the court declared the party illegal after the 1987 Umno election that saw Dr Mahathir narrowly defeating Kelantan prince Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah.

“I’ve explained this over and over again – I did not interfere. I’m prepared to go as a Muslim – we swear before Quran and all that.... I didn’t ask anybody to dismiss Salleh Abas. But I got that reputation,” Dr Mahathir said.

- The Malay Mail -

Continue reading

1. THE DESTRUCTION OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

Mahathir was continually upset with the Judiciary because the verdicts in a number of cases went against the Government. According to Deputy  PM, Datuk Musa Hitam, one of  his favourite slogans was "Hang the Lawyers! Hang the Judges!" From 1987, he intensified his verbal attacks against the Judiciary in the news media, making damaging statements which clearly demonstrated that he did not understand the role of the Judiciary as being independent from the Executive and Legislative arms of Government. That the Judiciary exists as a check-and-balance against the excesses of the Executive appeared to have been a concept he never fully grasped. Instead, he accused judges of the sort of political interference that would result in confusion and loss of public confidence in the Government. Hence, to curtail the powers of the Judiciary and subsume it beneath the Executive became one of his cherished dreams.

In April 1987, after an UMNO leadership contest in which Mahathir very nearly lost to Finance Minister Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, there were allegations that several delegates who had voted were drawn from branches not properly registered under the Societies Act 1966. An appeal was filed by eleven UMNO delegates to have the elections declared null and void. This was a very serious matter for Mahathir because if the appeal succeeded, fresh elections would have to be held and he might lose. The matter finally came before Justice Harun Hashim of KL High Court who ruled that under the existing law, he had no choice but to declare not just the elections invalid, but the whole of UMNO an unlawful society as well. The country and, more particularly, UMNO, went into a state of shock.

In most modern democracies, a political catastrophe of this magnitude would have result in the immediate resignation of the party's President and Prime Minister. But Mahathir did not resign. He informed the country that the Government would continue running the country. Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang and Tunku Abdul Rahman called for a vote in Parliament to establish Mahathir's legitimacy but those calls were ignored. Mahathir then set in motion the machinery to form a new surrogate party called UMNO Baru. His opponents, however, wanted the old party revived. The eleven UMNO delegates then launched an appeal in the Supreme Court to have the 1987 elections alone declared illegal and the party not an unlawful society.

Mahathir fully understood the danger to him of this pending appeal. He had to act quickly. In October 1987, he launched the notorious Operation Lalang in which at least 106 people were arrested and detained without trial under the ISA, including three very articulate critics, the Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang, political scientist Dr. Chandra Muzaffar and leading lawyer Karpal Singh. The official reason for the arrests was that a highly dangerous security situation had arisen but this has been strongly disputed as nothing more than a shameless fabrication. The broad sweep included even environmentalists and Consumer Association spokesmen. Four of the most outspoken newspapers -The Star, The Sunday Star, Watan and Sin Chew Jit Poh - had their publishing licences suspended. When, after five months, the papers were free to publish again, they were no longer the same.

Mahathir's next move was to push through Parliament far-reaching amendments to the Constitution so that the Executive gained in power enormously at the expense of the Judiciary. There was general indignation at this rude behaviour which shocked a good many people. The indecent haste and the fact that the amendments were made at a time when the Government's main critics were in detention, including the Opposition Leader and six vocal MPs and outspoken newspapers demoralized added further to the appalling injustice of the situation. Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia's beloved first Prime Minister, put it succinctly: "It was legal, but was it just?" Others noted angrily that the Constitution had been raped once again. In a speech, the outgoing President of the Bar Council, Param Cumaraswamy, said:

"The Prime Ministe's vile and contemptuous allegations, and the accusations levelled at the Judiciary and our judges left many shocked beyond belief. His speech which was full of venom, hate and spite with no substance whatsoever, illustrated his complete and total ignorance of the role of the Judiciary and the judicial process itself. He has indeed defiled and defaced the Constitution. It is surprising that those 142 MPs who voted in favour, after taking the oath that they would preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, had no compunction about destroying one of its basic structures."

One visiting parliamentarian was astonished at the lack of public debate. In his own country, he said, such amendments would have taken years.

Next, after having curbed the independence of the Judiciary, Mahathir set about destroying its integrity. This was the removal of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President in 1988, a move which Tunku Abdul Rahman described as "the most shocking story in modern legal and judicial history,"

2. THE DESTRUCTION OF JUDICIAL INTEGRITY

Tun Salleh Abas was a man of humble origins - his father was a sailor and small village trader - who rose to become Lord President, the highest judge in the land and head of the Judiciary while remaining a deeply religious man.

By March 1988, Mahathir's scandalous and violent public attacks on the Judiciary had so provoked the judges that Tun Salleh was obliged to call a conference. Twenty judges met in the Supreme Court one week after the debilitating and shameful Constitutional amendments were made. By unanimous agreement, a letter was drafted to the King (also the Sultan of Johore) and copied to all Sultans, expressing disquiet over various comments made by the Prime Minister. 

The letter was delivered on 25 March and Tun Salleh left soon after for medical treatment in the United States followed by a pilgrimage to Mecca. He had a most important duty to perform upon his return: he fixed the hearing of the crucial UMNO Eleven appeal for June and, because of its overwhelming significance, decided that a full coram of nine Supreme Court judges should hear this. 

Three days later, Tun Salleh was suspended from his official capacity by the King on recommendation of the Prime Minister. In the same hour that he received the suspension letter, the Acting Lord President, Tan Sri Abdul Hamid took the UMNO Eleven case out of the calendar so that the link between the two was difficult to deny.

Tun Salleh's suspension came after he refused to bow to Mahathir's pressure to either resign or retire, even though financial inducements were offered, including mention of a lucrative job in the International Development Bank in Jeddah. The initial reason given for the suspension was that the King had taken great displeasure over the letter Tun Salleh had written on behalf of all judges. According to official records prepared by the Attorney General, the King had requested Tun Salleh's removal in an audience with the Prime Minister on the "Wednesday morning of 1 May 1988" after the weekly Cabinet Meeting.

There are serious doubts as to whether this audience actually took place. The first of May 1988 fell on a Sunday, not Wednesday as the Attorney General recorded. Even if the day of week were corrected, there can be no Cabinet meeting on a Sunday. That the King expressed great displeasure only on 1 May, when he had in fact received the letter on 25 March cast further doubt over this assertion. It is difficult to believe that the King wanted Tun Salleh removed purely because he had protested about the public insults directed against the entire Judiciary by the head of the Executive. 

In any event, royal displeasure would not be a constitutionally valid ground for dismissal. Indeed, Mahathir advised the King as much in a letter written four days after this probably fictitious audience; however, the Prime Minister went further in the same letter to say that he would investigate Tun Salleh for any evidence of misbehaviour. In any event, the King did not clear up the mystery and, in an audience with Tun Salleh, actually asked the latter to step down without giving reasons although the Conference of Rulers had already asked for his reinstatement. Amazingly, Tun Salleh was suspended and a Tribunal set up to determine his fate before any formal charges were laid.

The Constitution does not provide for the removal of a Lord President. While the Tribunal need not be an inappropriate means, its composition was to say the least, disgraceful. It was composed of six acting and retired judges, although the Constitution required an odd number to prevent deadlock. Of these -four from Malaysia, one from Sri Lanka and one from Singapore -only the Sri Lankan enjoyed a rank comparable to Tun Salleh's. This was contrary to the very reasonable dictum that one should be tried by one's peers rather than one's juniors. The fact that two retired Lord Presidents of Malaysia were available but not invited was glaring. There were grave conflicts of interest with three of the Malaysian judges that should have disqualified them from sitting: Tan Sri Abdul Hamid who was next in line to succeed as Lord President and who had also participated in the conference of 20 judges which resulted in the letter to the King; Tan Sri Zahir who, being also the Speaker of the Lower House, was beholden to Mahathir, the principal complainant in the matter at hand; and Tan Sri Abdul Aziz who, although a former judge, was then a practising lawyer and, more incredibly, had two suits pending against him at that time. But Tun Salleh's objections were ignored and when the Bar Council issued a statement calling for the Tribunal to be re-constituted, both the New Straits Times and The Star refused to publish it. Further, it was decided that the Tribunal would sit in closed sessions although Tun Salleh had requested a public hearing.

The charges, when finally published, were manifestly absurd. Running over 12 sheets of paper, it was clear that quantity had been substituted where quality was lacking, and some of them actually related to Tun Salleh's behaviour after suspension. Many of them related to his speeches and press interviews, whereby sinister meanings were imputed to various innocuous comments that he had made. To cite an instance, in a speech at the University of Malaya, he had said: "The role of the courts is very important to bring about public order. If there is no public order there will be chaos in this country and if there is chaos, no one can feel safe" On this basis, Tun Salleh was charged with making statements criticizing the Government which displayed prejudice and bias against the latter. Another statement of his, "In a democratic system, the courts play a prominent role as agent of stability but they can perform this function only if judges are trusted," resulted in the charge that he had ridiculed the Government by imputing that it did not trust the judges. These charges were doubly ludicrous in the light of Mahathir's many poisonous attacks against the Judiciary.

It is not surprising that Tun Salleh, after reading this catalogue of fantasy crimes, refused to appear before what was so evidently a kangaroo court. The Tribunal, after refusing representations made by Raja Aziz, Tun Salleh's leading counsel, that it had no constitutional validity to sit, chose instead to proceed so hastily that it wound up deliberations, including the examination of witnesses with just four hours work. As it prepared to issue its Report, Tun Salleh's lawyers sought an urgent stay of proceedings in the High Court. This would normally be granted immediately at the least possibility that an injustice may be about to be done but, here, events turned into utter farce.

Instead of immediately reaching a decision as expected, the presiding judge, Datuk Ajaib Singh, after the court had been in languorous session the whole day that Friday, adjourned hearings for 9.30 am the next day. On Saturday however, the judge emerged in court only at 11.50 am and, even then, postponed hearings again for the Monday! In desperation, Tun Salleh's lawyers, knowing that the Tribunal could easily release its Report before then, sought the assistance of Supreme Court judge, Tan Sri Wan Suleiman, in his Chambers. The latter agreed to hear them in open court in half an hour's time and called a coram of all remaining Supreme Court, one of whom, Tan Sri Hashim Yeop, refused to sit. The soap opera reached an apogee of ridiculousness when Tan Sri Abdul Hamid, head of the Tribunal and Acting Lord President, gave orders for the doors of Supreme Court to be locked and for the seal of the Supreme Court to be secreted away!

Undeterred, the five Supreme Court judges ordered the policeman on duty to open the door forthwith. After less than half an hour, the Court ordered the Tribunal not to submit any recommendation, report or advice to the King. Tun Salleh's lawyers were typing the Order to serve personally to the Tribunal at Parliament House when news arrived that the gates of Parliament House had been locked! At this point, Justice Wan Suleiman rose to the occasion and, calling the office of the Inspector General of Police, told a senior officer that any impediment to serving the Order would constitute contempt of court. The gates of Parliament swung open and, at 4 pm, Raja Aziz and his team served the Order to the Tribunal members who were found to be still hard at work on a word-processor that Saturday afternoon. All six members accepted service without complaint.

It would appear that justice had at last prevailed but, four days later, all five Supreme Court judges were suspended. Almost every rule that was broken to suspend Tun Salleh was broken again to suspend them. The prohibition order they had made were revoked within days. A second Tribunal eventually reinstated three of the judge: Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin, Tan Sri Eusoff Abdoolcader and Tan Sri Wan Hamzah but Tan Sri Wan Suleiman and Datuk George Edward Seah were removed from office.

The UMNO Eleven case was quickly dismissed. The removal of Tun Salleh also saw the resignation of Deputy PM Datuk Musa Hitam who, according to popular wisdom, could no longer stomach Mahathir's ways.

The facts in this summary are derived from the book "May Day for Justice" by Tun Salleh Abas with K. Das, Magnus Book Kuala Lumpur, 1989.

The above post is extracted from Anwarite.

Continue reading

Reading back, what he did then was really over the top.

Getting his own party declared illegal, phantom voters, used and slander the Agong, change the constitution, threw more than a hundred people in jail, paralysed the courts systems.

All because one man wanted to remain president.

Today there was a statement that slammed Tun Mahathir's blog post a few days back and correctly pointing out that it was seditious.

Annuar: Is Mahathir courting a sedition rap? 

Tan Sri Annuar Musa has raised the possibility that former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad was deliberately courting a sedition charge by making remarks about the appointment of the Attorney-General, Apandi Ali. 

In a statement today, Annuar said it was clear that Dr Mahathir’s blog article on Wednesday had contained “words seditious in nature.”  

Annuar said it could be that Dr Mahathir “being a shrewd political strategist” was trying to mobilise support for his cause to oust Prime Minister Najib Razak by inciting the authorities to act against him and hence garner public sympathy.  

“Having been a Prime Minister for a very long time, Tun Dr Mahathir must have known that those words are seditious in nature, what more when the Federal Government under his stewardship used to very frequently charge people for the same offence,” Annuar said.  

“But it could also be that Tun Dr Mahathir thinks that him being a former Prime Minister and a former Umno President may make him immune from the power of law, hence his boldness in going against the law in his attempt to try to get the PM removed.”  

However, Annuar pointed out that the authorities would have to act if police reports were lodged against Dr Mahathir, lest the government be perceived as being selective.
Annuar charged that Dr Mahathir was laying himself open by his writing about “the improper dismissal of the previous Malaysian AG (Gani Patail) just before he was expected to bring a charge against the PM” and that “the current AG was appointed by the PM through false representation made to the King.”  

He said Mahathir’s claim that Apandi was appointed through false representation made to the King was not only seditious, it was an insult to the King.  

He pointed out that even the usually pro-opposition law experts such as Professor Gurdial Singh Nijar of University of Malaya, and “fiercely independent law experts” such as Emeritus Professor Shad Saleem Faruqi of UiTM were of the opinion that Gani Patail’s dismissal was constitutional, unlike Mahathir’s dismissal of top judges.  

He said Gani had never challenged his dismissal, and the Bar Council had also fully recognised Apandi.  

“It naturally goes that if the previous AG’s dismissal is constitutional then the current AG’s appointment is also constitutional, as simple as that,” Annuar said.  

Annuar turned the spotlight on Dr Mahathir’s past, pointing out that the premier had removed the Lord President of the Federal Court, Tun Salleh Abas, and fellow Federal Court Justices, Wan Suleiman Pawanteh and George Seah, in 1988 in order to save his own position. 

Dr Mahathir had no moral standing to preach or complain about the ruining of the Malaysian judicial and legal system, he said.  

“If there’s any fault with the current system, he should blame himself”, Annuar added, saying Mahathir had created and perpetuated the situation.

The last part about Mahathir having no moral standing to comment on this is especially hurtful to Tun Mahathir.

CLICK HERE for the rest of this post written by Lim Sian See.

Continue reading

Here is an exclusive NST interview with G25 member Tawfik Ismail:

Continue reading

ATTORNEY GENERAL MEDIA STATEMENT
Charges Against Khairuddin Abu Hassan and Matthias Chang

On Monday, 12 October 2015, Khairuddin Abu Hassan and his lawyer, Matthias Chang were charged under section 124L of the Penal Code, read with Section 34 of the Penal Code for attempting to sabotage Malaysia’s banking and financial systems.

The action has been questioned by certain parties, including in the article published in the Star on 12 October 2015, titled ‘Dr M, Ku Li team up to slam Sosma detention of 1MDB critics,’ as being an abuse of the government powers.

The Attorney General’s Chambers clarifies that both Khairuddin Abu Hassan and his lawyer, Matthias Chang are charged under section 124L of the Penal Code and not the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA).

The Attorney General’s Chambers further clarifies that the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA) is a procedural law that provides special measures to facilitate the investigation and prosecution ‘security offences”. The definition of ‘security offences’ makes it clear that the SOSMA is not limited to terrorism or terrorists.

The ‘security offences’ to which the Act applies are those listed in the First Schedule to the SOSMA. When SOSMA was enacted, the listed ‘security offences’ were offences under Chapter VII of the Penal Code (Offences against the State) and Chapter VIA of the Penal Code (Offences related to terrorism).

In 2014, the list was extended to include Chapter VIB of the Penal Code (Organised Crime) as well as offences under Part IIIA of the Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007. The list was further extended in June 2015 to include the Special Measures Against Terrorism in Foreign Countries Act 2015.

Section 124L, of the Penal Code is an offence under Chapter VI of the Penal Code. It was one of seven new offences introduced into Chapter VI of the Penal Code in 2012 through Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2012. It is therefore a ‘security offence’ to which SOSMA applies.

The seven new offences are namely:

Activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy (section 124B)
Attempt to commit activity detrimental to parliamentary democracy (section 124C)
Dissemination of information (section 124H)
Sabotage (section 124K)
Attempt to commit sabotage (section 124L)
Espionage (section 124M)
Attempt to commit espionage (section 124N)
These offences were in addition to the reenactment with modifications of certain offences which used to be in the Internal Security Act 1960, namely the new sections 124D, 124E, 124F, 124G, 124L and 124J. The above explanation can be seen in the Explanatory Statement to the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill 2012.

Section 124L, of the Penal Code provides that ‘Whoever attempts t commit sabotage or does any act preparatory thereto shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which extend to fifteen years.’

In this regard, section 130A of the Penal Code defines the term ‘sabotage’ to mean an act or omission intending to cause harm, among others, to the maintenance of ‘essential services’ while the term ‘essential services’ is defined to include banking and financial services.

The Attorney General’s Chambers provides this clarification on the provisions of law that have been applied in the case of Khairuddin Abu Hassan and Matthias Chang to prevent any further misleading statements, regarding the relevant provisions of law.

However, the Attorney General’s Chambers is not at liberty to divulge any facts pertaining to their cases as the matters are pending before the court.

ATTORNEY GENERAL’S CHAMBERS MALAYSIA
13 October 2015

Continue reading

Today's Malaysian headline was dominated by an article by The New York Times that PM Najib is apparently under investigations by a federal grand jury for allegations of corruption.

The New York Times was also the same newspaper that published Tun Mahathir's interview back in June 2015 which slammed PM Najib, UMNO and the Malaysian Govt and was published on the same day that Foreign Minister Anifah Aman was supposed to attend and address the United Nations Security Council meeting.  This lead to Anifah Aman writing an open letter to the New York Times and slamming Tun Mahathir for his indiscretion saying it is regrettable to sere Tun M undermining Malaysia in the foreign press.

Amazingly, today the UN Security Council is again in session - the first time since June. In fact, PM Najib is on the way to New York now for the UN's General Assembly and their 70th anniversary celebrations.

The timing.of the publication of this article is very suspicious and seems designed to embarrass PM Najib and Malaysia at the UN.

Why I came to this conclusion is based on the following points from today's New York Times article:

1) The persons investigated are Najib's step-son (Rosmah's natural son from her previous marriage) Riza Aziz and also his buddy Jho Low.

New York Times are saying that Najib is also investigated because presumably Reza is related by marriage to Najib while Jho Low is presumably also Najib's friend.

It is important to note that Najib is not personally being investigated himself for corruption as he has no known properties in the USA.

At this point, it is important to note that Jho Low has been listed companies in Malaysia since the year 2007 and 2008 - before Najib became Prime Minister and 1MDB was not even in existence. He was already wealthy then and also had access to serious Middle-Eastern money via his friendship and partnerships with the various royal families even then.

On the other hand, Riza has been producing movies since 2010,

And before this, Riza holds a BS degree in Government & Economics and an MS in Politics from the London School of Economics. He is also a registered authorized person with the UK Financial Services Authority and worked as an investment banker for many years in London.

As a producer, Riza is also in charge of getting investors for their movie projects. It does not mean he himself funded the entire project - that is not what a producer does. Riza had said that there are quite a list of investors who funded his film projects.

But Riza has indeed been successful in producing the Wolf of Wall Street, which grossed more than USD400 million in worldwide ticket and DVD sales - one of the top 200 most commercially successful films of all time and beat out films such as Superman Returns, Ice Age, Mad Max Fury Road, Batman Begins and many others.

Riza's next firm Dumb and Dumber II was also commercially successful and grossed USD170m in ticket sales.

It is clear that Riza has the means and the smarts to make money too and we should not begrudge him this as he is playing in the biggest game of all - Hollywood.

2) The property purchases in questions date back to Oct 2012. But somehow, the New York Times links this to the USD681m (the famous RM2.6b) deposited by a Middle-East campaign contributor to Najib's accounts - which was only deposited in March 2013 - a month before GE13..

Therefore, it is weird for New York Times to link this later deposit with the earlier purchase of apartments much earlier - unless you can hutang first (buku 555 style) when buying properties in the USA.

3) This property purchase was then exposed by the New York Times on February 8 this year around the time that Anwar Ibrahim was sentenced to jail for sodomy. Amazingly, New York Times also took the trouble to translate their article on their website to Chinese and Bahasa Malaysia - presumably because there must be a large population of Malays staying in New York.

This is very strange because not a single other article in the New York Times have a Bahasa Malaysia version.

3) The investigations in the USA appears to have been started by Sarawak Report making a complaint in the USA in March 2015 where Sarawak Report seems to be accusing the USA authorities of not taking things seriously and letting these "criminals" like Jho Low and Najib run free and not taking any action.

Further complaints against Najib to the USA were also apparently made by selfie-fan and Tun Mahathir stalwart Khairuddin Abu Hassan and Tun Mahathir's ex-political secretary Matthias Chang.

Mathhias has revealed that both of them had been talking to the USA embassy and were schedueld to be in New York this week to meet with the FBI regarding 1MDB.

Both of them had gone all around the world lodging cases against Najib and 1MDB with Switzerland, France, England, Singapore and Hong Kong authorities.

When you lodge a case, by law the authorities there are obliged to open an investigation.

This was the same case when Sarawak Report played up the matter Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman being investigated by Hong Kong's famed ICAC related to the case of businessman Michael Chia who was caught in the year 2008 for carrying RM40mil of cash into Hong Kong.

Sarawak Report even came up with lots of documents and flow charts in their so-called expose of Musa Aman in their article titled ""Hold On Trust For Aman" - More Devastating Evidence From The ICAC Investigation!

With such "detailed" evidence and documents, anyone reading that Sarawak Report would have been convinced of Musa Aman's guilt and ICAC would have thrown Musa Aman in jail.

Instead, in December 2012, the ICAC wrote to Musa Aman that he that he was no longer under probe for corruption for a RM40 million donation to the state Umno chapter.

ICAC explained to Musa Aman that it had started the probe after receiving a complaint against him, saying that this was required by Hong Kong’s laws on corruption.

But the agency said that upon completing investigations and filing a report with its Operations Review Committee (ORC), both the committee and the ICAC Commissioner had agreed not to take further investigative action “on the basis of the facts now known”.

The letter, which bore the ICAC’s letterhead, was signed off by principal investigator Tso Wai-Yan and was addressed solely to Musa at his office in Kota Kinabalu.

It took ICAC all of 4 years to clear Musa Aman but Sarawak Report and the now-dead Pakatan Rakyat played this Musa Aman corruption issue for years and frequently cited he is now under ICAC investigations and cannot escape due to overwhelming evidence - hence Musa will be going to jail soon.

But yet today, Musa Aman has been cleared by both ICAC and MACC and still remains Chief Minister of Sabah today.

Similarly, the pro-opposition NGO SUARAM filed a complaint on the Scorpene case to the French courts in the year 2010 which compelled the French authorities to start an inquiry.

In fact, in May 2012, SUARAM proudly announced that the French courts will be asking Najib to appear for questioning in the French Courts and that France will soon issue an Interpol Red Notice to arrest Najib if he refuses to attend.

Three years later, and 5 years after the initial report to France was lodged by SUARAM, we are still waiting for the France court to supposedly haul Najib in for questioning which they said was imminent.

In fact, this investigation actually worked against Pakatan and Suaram as it was determined by the French courts that Najib, Razak Baginda and Altantuya was never in France at the same time and that Altantuya was never hired as a translator as all meetings were held in English.

Even today's New York Times article admitted that the Federal Grand Jury investigations into Najib was at the very preliminary stage and will likely take many years to complete.

It appears that it has now become a favorite tactic by those with vested interest against the government to lodge report against our country's leaders overseas since by law, those countries have to act on any complaints and start investigations.

These investigations take years but during this period, they can continue to feed the frenzy and play up this issue -both with locally and overseas.

It makes for very good headlines - especially in the foreign press - which the opposition would then play up the issue saying it is an international embarrassment and that the evidence is so overwhelming that even the foreign governments have to investigate and that our leaders will be caught and jailed overseas if they travel abroad.

The opposition fails to reveal, however, that it was they who made those complaints overseas which prompted the investigations to start and hence all the fancy and damaging overseas headlines - all designed to cause harm and damage the credibility of Malaysia and our leaders.

Foreign governments don't simply start investigations on another govt or country unless an official complaint was lodged by someone else.

But these people don't care. They are not interested to find out the truth but merely interested in toppling others. Malaysia's reputation and credibility is not their concern.

Also, Tun Mahathir is also wrong for suggesting that Najib is afraid to go overseas now as he may be arrested. In fact, as we speak, Najib is overseas in UK for some meetings and will then travel to the USA for the UN celebrations in a few days.

Tun Mahathir is naughty for saying this as he forgot about the immunity granted to heads of states and also the fact that any investigations overseas will take years.

As we write, Khairuddin Abu Hassan is still in jail for a week under remand and is now under police questioning.


Khairuddin with Tun Mahathir take center-stage at the Nothing2lose forum in June 2015

Perhaps soon we will find out who ordered and funded him and Matthias Chang to travel all around the world to lodge reports against Najib and linked him up with all the foreign press for his interviews.

Eight months ago, Khairuddin was still a bankrupt and his penthouse apartment got auctioned off in January 2015. But strangely, months later after Khairuddin started attacking 1MDB, he managed to pay off all his debts and even went all around the world lodging police reports - Switzerland, France, UK, Singapore, Hong Kong and the aborted USA trip.

It seems that these people have no problems inviting foreign interference into Malaysia's own investigations and our sovereignty as long as they and their political masters' objective is met.


Bankruptcy search confirming that Khairuddin has been bankrupt since May 2014


Auction of Khairuddin's house in Jan 2015

This will be an interesting story - depending on who or what Khairuddin Abu Hassan reveals under questioning by PDRM in this one week jail period.

As for Najib, if those famous authorities from USA, HK, Switzerland, Singapore, France and UK clears him from these RM2.6b and 1MDB allegations years later, then no one should question him on these anymore.

But it would be years later. By then, I am sure Najib's enemies will come out with newer allegations and continue the same practise of filing reports overseas and working with foreign media in order to embarrass and pressure him.

They have done it before, they are doing it now and they will do it again in future coz its cheap, easy and you get a few years worth of political bullets to use to attack your opponent.

Whether it is fair or not is an entirely different matter.

Written by LSS and sourced from HERE

Continue reading

Press Statement by Datuk Huan Cheng Guan,
Vice-President, Parti Cinta Malaysia

For Immediate Release

The Diversity of Political Compromise

Just how far is Mahathir willing to bend backwards in his bid to oust Najib?

The answer is a backbending exercise beginning with Clare Rewcastle-Brown that ballooned into a miscalculated political move with his Bersih debut.

Far from the apologist articles spewn around the media glorifying Mahathir as a repentant hero, I would see him as a desperado, ready to sacrifice his remaining ideals all for a personal crusade.

It confounds logic that some argue Mahathir's presence tipped the scale of perception that Bersih 4 was a “Chinese thing”. Despite the fact that majority of Bersih attendees were Chinese,  Mahathir's presence showed how he did not care about UMNO sentiments about Bersih and hypocritically attempted to legitimise Bersih by virtue of his attendance.

Life does not work that way.

It was a serious political blunder as Mahathir forgot many Malays still, despite all his failings, look up to him as a formidable statesman. And yet, this appearance not once but twice at Bersih, has show how Mahathir is ready to throw caution to the wind with complete disregard for the government which he had controlled for 22 years to ride on the glory of Bersih just so he can spit at the status quo by saying how he does not support Bersih but supports the rakyat.

We are not as stupid as he thinks.

One does not need to make a cameo appearance just to support the rakyat.

A plain and simple press statement or press conference would suffice.

But no, Mahathir could not resist that one minute of glory by showing up at Bersih and making such a contentious speech at Central Market.

And he could not be bothered that he is once again sleeping with the enemy, even to the extent of doing what he himself condemned when he was Prime Minister.

And so, he is always right. Whether or not one has the right to express dissent, Mahathir has the last say. And whether Bersih is legitimate or not, again Mahathir has the last say.

Such is the diversity of Mahathir's political compromise - a selfish old man indeed.

Continue reading

Here is an interesting post in Greater Malaysia.

Click here to read.

Continue reading

If one constantly runs down the country, does such a person have the moral ground to say he does not 'enjoy being asked about Malaysia" when abroad?

If corruption reared its ugly head decades ago under a different leadership and became entrenched from then, one cannot turn a blind eye to that point of time and fast forward to the present to pin the blame on 1MDB and Najib.

It is quite absurd to reach a conclusion solely based on reports by The Edge that power plants had been bought "above market price and borrowed money paying commissions of 10% and interest rate of 5.9%".

To say the absence of any denial by the government about that report is indicative of something amiss is illogical. The authorities do not have the time nor purpose to deny or address the thousands of attacks launched against it daily. There are more important tasks at hand.

The constant references to the negative reports about 1MDB has been brainwashed people against the government. A lie when repeated becomes truth. And who is to blame?

One would have thought that the man who holds the record of being the longest serving Prime Minister would be the first to defend this country from any mudslinging attacks but no. He joined the fray and has been going to town with his rants, even supporting a report from a foreign media with alleged Jewish links.

On top of that, he has now also attacked personal expenses of the PM and his family. What about his own son's car collection and amassed wealth?

And he went on to label "The Wolf of Wall Street" as pornographic. Since he is so detached from reality, I want to remind him that that Robbie Collin of The Telegraph referred to that film as "Martin Scorsese's visceral, Oscar-nominated film shows him and his powerhouse star Leonardo DiCaprio at the very top of their game".

To constantly give commentaries about the goings-on in the political landscape so negatively that people develop anti-establishment feelings is very damaging indeed.

The sum of all these serve to reinforce the negative perception people have of the government.

And then he goes on to blame the government, adding fuel to the fire, deepening conspiracy theories and what would be the end-result? More negatives.

The most outrageous part is how he has the 'freedom' to make slanderous accusations including:

With the huge funds at his disposal he would be in a position to bribe his way to victory. He may also use the money to rig the election.

If anyone had made such a statement during his rule, that 'hero' would have been incarcerated under the ISA.

But no.

What he is doing is unprecedented in Malaysia.

Of course with him at his best, people would be at a loss as to what to do.

He should ask himself if he could have ruled had such a scenario existed when he was at the helm of the government.

Would he have taken it all in his stride like our PM?

And he has the gall to say democracy is dead.

Hello! Reality strikes.

He killed democracy years ago. Practising selective retention of facts, he seems to be oblivious to the fact that he sacked the Lord President and Supreme Court judges years ago.

And he claims democracy is dead.

Yes, it died when he was in control but PM Najib rejuvenated it and now, he is abusing his freedom of speech by his daily bitter dose of rants, shamelessly slamming the government he used to lead with an iron fist.

The man with the iron mask chooses to forget all he did and to be blind to all he is doing now.

As always, he rules in his little kingdom called chedet.cc, flexing his tech muscles with words dished out so freely with complete disregard for respect, decorum, principles and ethics.

Time he does a reality check and state what he can do for Malaysia.

After he has done and reaped from his 22-year old 'reign', apa lagi dia mahu?

By Datuk Huan Cheng Guan
Vice-President
Parti Cinta Malaysia

Continue reading

Results speak for themselves.

GE10
When Tun M caused a split in 1998 by sacking Anwar, UMNO lost 24.5% of UMNO seats in GE10 (UMNO lost 22 out of their previous 93 seats won in GE9) and lost Terengganu.
---
GE12
When Tun M next caused a split in 2007 by leading a campaign to remove Pak Lah because Pak Lah didn't listen to him, UMNO lost 27.5% of their seats (30 out of 119 UMNO seats which they previously won in GE11) and lost an additional 4 states - Penang, Perak, Selangor and Kedah.

From wining the biggest landslide ever in 2004 GE11, UMNO lost a staggering 27.5% of their seats and lost 5 states - and this allowed Pakatan to govern and build their funds, support base and strength.
----
GE14
Now Tun M is causing another split in 2015  by leading a campaign to remove Najib because Najib didn't listen to him, how many seats and states will UMNO lose in GE14?
---

GE10, GE12, GE14 - Tun M's causing splits seems to happen EVERY OTHER election.

And you blame Najib for weakening UMNO and BN?

I am sure you know who is the real underlying cause.

Note: The 1MDB issue is just a tool used by Tun M to attack Najib. Before Tun M used this as a tool, Pakatan had been using it for years and years and the effect was very limited. It is only when Tun M started using it that people started to beleive the worst - even though all the international auditors and the interim AG report could not find any money missing or stolen.

In 2008, do you remember what were the reasons why Pak Lah HAD to be removed and was corrupt to the core? What were those issues then since it was SO SERIOUS and what happened to those issues now?

Continue reading

The twists and turns in the current 1MDB-SR-Mahathir spate is very good material for a Hollywood blockbuster. Daily, Malaysians check updates in news sites while moonlighting as WhatsApp news broadcasters forwarding links or updates.

One never knows what might happen round the corner.

What's the motivation behind all the intrique? Is it all about money or what?

Just when you think you have understood the issue, comes another blog post that throws you off-balance.

Here is one by RPK that does just that!

WAS THE RM2.6 BILLION A DONATION AFTER ALL?

I doubt Najib can reveal that just like Dr Mahathir will not reveal those donors to Umno and/or Barisan Nasional when he was Prime Minister for 22 years and five general elections or Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi when he was Prime Minister for six years and two general elections.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Dr M: Money in private account went for polls

(Malaysiakini) – Dr Mahathir Mohamad has claimed Umno was told that the money purportedly deposited into a private bank account was used in the last general election.

“There is no denial the money was deposited in the private account. The explanation to Umno is that it was for the elections. Umno seems satisfied.”

“Don’t they know that government money cannot be used to help a political party win elections?” Mahathir asked in his blog today.

“But the money was from donation. Who donated the RM2 billion? No answer,” he added.

Although Mahathir did not specify whose account he was referring to, it is believed that his remarks were aimed at Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak.

READ MORE HERE http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/305620

***************************************************

I have written about this many times but it appears like no one is paying any attention. Since years back I had been saying that the general elections cost at least RM1.5 billion to RM2 billion each time. And someone has to pay this cost.

Tun Dr Mahathir knows this. He has known this long before he became Prime Minister in 1981. It actually became more costly since the 1982 general election and has increased every general election since then.

Eventually, even the Umno party elections became as costly as the general elections. That started during the time when Anwar Ibrahim took on Tun Ghafar Baba and ousted him as the Deputy President and later as the Deputy Prime Minister. (Sabah alone cost Anwar RM200 million).

In fact, Dr Mahathir blamed Anwar for the ‘money politics’ in Umno, which is a polite term for vote buying or corruption. And once the party adopts this culture of money politics it is very difficult to get rid of it after that.

During Dr Mahathir’s time they obtained funding through projects, contracts, concessions, privatisation, and so on, plus donations from businessmen, of course. In fact, the Hatibudi Sdn Bhd, United Engineers (UEM), Renong, the North-South Highway, Commerce Asset Holdings Bhd (now CIMB), and many more, were all fund raising exercises to finance the elections.

Then there was the privatisation of the rail transport system in the Federal Territory, the privatisation of the toll highways in the Kelang Valley, the privatisation of water concessionaires all over Malaysia, the privatisation of independent power plants all over Malaysia, etc. Either they were privatised to Umno companies, to Umno people, or to Umno cronies of all races.

Ultimately, many were actually nominees who held all these investments and assets in trust for Umno (while taking a cut of the action, of course, which was the deal). And all these, even the cash in personal bank accounts, belonged to Umno.

Dr Mahathir is giving an impression that he is surprised and was not aware of this. He makes it appear like it is news to him that the Prime Minister could be holding large sums of cash in his personal name on behalf of Umno, which is then used to finance the general elections.

How can he be surprised when it was he who started this practice of not using Umno directly but of using nominees to hold Umno’s estimated RM100 billion fortune in cash, investments and assets?

In the past, during the time of Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak Hussein and Tun Hussein Onn, Umno financed the general elections through donations from Chinese businessmen or towkays. (At that time there were no Malay tycoons. Then Dr Mahathir decided to create Malay tycoons as nominees of Umno).

That would work if you were talking about just a few hundred million Ringgit. But when it touched billions that would no longer be possible. They needed other ways to get money and that was when Dr Mahathir created the Umno nominees and parked all the assets, projects, investments, and so on, under these nominees.

Tun Daim Zainuddin knows this because he created many of these nominees. Anwar Ibrahim, too, knows this because he, too, created many nominees, some who today are in PAS and PKR. And, of course, Dr Mahathir created his nominees as well. (Maybe Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah can tell us more about this because during his Semangat 46 days he had already spilled the beans).

So can we stop this drama and pretending? You know what went on for more than 30 years. I know what went on for more than 30 years. So do not pretend and act as if you are shocked that Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak may have, or may have had, RM2.6 billion in his personal bank account that may have been used to finance the 2013 general election.

That is how Umno does things and has been doing so since the beginning of general elections in Malaysia in 1955, 60 years ago. The amounts may have changed. The methods may have changed. But the way Umno does business has not changed.

So, Umno is corrupted and therefore must be kicked out and replaced with Pakatan Rakyat. Maybe so, but many of those you regard as ‘criminals’ who used to be in Umno (and who raised money through such methods) are now in the opposition. And are you telling me that Pakatan Rakyat does not also do the same to raise money for the elections?

If you believe that then you probably also believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy. Every fooking political party does it, both in Barisan Nasional as well as in Pakatan Rakyat. Ask all those ex-Umno people in Pakatan Rakyat. Ask Zaid Ibrahim who is screaming for clean politics. Every fooking political party does it, both in Barisan Nasional as well as in Pakatan Rakyat.

“Don’t they know that government money cannot be used to help a political party win elections? But the money was from donation. Who donated the RM2 billion? No answer,” said Dr Mahathir.

What the fook is Dr Mahathir trying to say? Umno has been using the government to make money to finance the general elections since he became Prime Minister in 1981. What do you think all those projects, contracts, water and highway concessions, privatisation of power plants, etc., were all about if not to use the government to make money?

Dr Mahathir is suggesting that the RM2.6 billion may not have been 1MDB’s money after all but a donation from someone. And Dr Mahathir wants to know who this donor is.

Will Dr Mahathir reveal those donors to Umno and/or Barisan Nasional when he was Prime Minister for 22 years and five general elections or when Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was Prime Minister for six years and two general elections?

Maybe Najib can tell Dr Mahathir, “Show me yours and I will show you mine.” I don’t mean show their dicks but show where the money to finance the general elections came from and the full list of donors over 34 years from 1981 to 2015.

Source: Malaysia Today

Continue reading

Just after Tun Dr Mahathir celebrated his 90th birthday, he wrote a blog entry titled Conspiracy.

Basically, what he says in a generalised manner is that since everything is out in the open, there is no conspiracy.

I truly beg to differ.

The term 'Conspiracy' refers to:

1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.

2. A group of conspirators.

3. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.

4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design

So tell me now. Is there a conspiracy or not?

Another blogger LSS has written at length about this:

Conspiracy is no stranger to Tun Mahathir

Happy belated 90th birthday, Tun M.

I would like to share a few opinion of mine on your latest blog post today titled "Conspiracy" - from one rakyat blogger (me) to another blogger (Che Det).

The numbered points in italics are what Tun M wrote:

1. There has been much talk by certain people of a conspiracy to overthrow Dato Sri Najib as Prime Minister. 

2. Is there a conspiracy? Is there someone or some group conspiring i.e moving in secret in the underground to overthrow Najib. There could have been before but apart from people complaining privately about their dissatisfaction with Najib’s administration, no one was planning his overthrow. That is not to say that they did welcome the idea of his resigning or vacating his post. But active underground planning and action there was none. 

3. What we do know now is that I had openly called for his stepping down. No conspiracy. Just open declaration to the whole nation that I would like to see Najib cease to be Prime Minister. 

4 So if any investigation is to be made, there is no need for detectives or special agents. That there is a move or push for Dato Sri Najib to step down is known to everyone. 

5. So again where is the conspiracy!! It is all in the open. There is no need to conspire. There is open campaigning for his ceasing to be Prime Minister.No. I am sure there are no conspiracies, whatsoever.

Just a bunch of old friends who happens to catching up for old time sakes. I am sure you and your friends have been best of buddies with British National Clare Brown, - who so happens to run the Sarawak Report who has been critical of Government since it was started in 2011 -  for a long long time.

Here are some happy pictures from the January 14th 2015 "catch-up session" at Tun M's own office which was proudly published by Sarawak Report itself.

At the start of article, Brown claimed it was Dr Mahathir who made the first move. “Dr Mahathir... had invited the editor of Sarawak Report to the Perdana Leadership Foundation in Putrajaya to discuss issues relating to Sarawak’s environmental and human rights record.”

No conspiracy either - just a Wefie of a catch-up session between two very dear old friends who were never critical of each other and always on the same side of truth, justice and fairness.

It is just pure coincidence that within a month of this catch up at Tun M's office, Sarawak Report then published their "Heist of the Century" article with a bunch of (apparently tampered) documents about 1MDB and PetroSaudi's deal.

And of course, the legally bankrupt Datuk Khairuddin Abu Hassan also happened to make a MACC report against 1MDB the next day on Jan 15th after your catch-up with Clare Brown.

5th June 2015: Secara kebetulan, Khairuddin and Tun M at Nothing2Lose forum

Of course, Khairuddin and Tun M are just normal friends and they happened to bump into each other at the Nothing2Lose forum a few months later and happened to be sitted next to each other.

So happens that Khairuddin and Sarawak Report's Clare Brown are also common friends (it's a small small world after all) and Khairuddin then went to London and met Clare Brown a few days before 1st July 2015 - probably for tea with biscuits and scones too. Khairuddin in his FB post said it was "Secara kebetulan saya sempat berjumpa dengan kawan baik iaitu claire rewcastle brown; editor sarawak report di london beberapa hari yang lepas.".

RM100 big and RM100 small please: Can start buying 4D already. Who knows? So happen to bumping into by chance that 1 person out of 8.3 million in London is 830,000 times better odds than the 1 out of 10,000 that you get with striking top price in 4D.

Of course secara kebetulan since London is a small city of 8.31 million people only and just a mere 5.5 times bigger than Kuala Lumpur. Little bit bigger only. Not much.

What a coincidence ! Secara kebetulan we manage to meet in London. It must be fate!

Of course it was again another amazing "kebetulan" that just the next day after Khairuddin posted that he had secara kebetulan met Clare Brown a few days earlier, Wall Street Journal and Sarawak Report so happens to get their hands on some documents of unknown origins which Sarawak Report then posted "Sensational findings".

Yup. More "kebetulan". It's Magnum 4D time for sure.

However, luck is not always on your side.

It's just a bit of bad luck that Sarawak Report's Clare Brown may be in a bit of trouble right now since Thai Police have pretty much confirmed that stolen documents sold by Xavier Justo, which after having left Justo's hands to Sarawak Report had been tampered with in minor but important ways to led to significant change in meaning.

Now, before you shout ... but hey! Free Malaysia Today quoted New Straits Times, the UMNO-BN crony mainstream paper, it is important to note that:

Thailand's major newspaper, Bangkok Post had reported this earlier - even BEFORE NST came out with their article:

"This wrongdoing took place in Singapore," he said, adding that police found traces of the data being tampered with by the buyer."

And Singapore's top newspaper The Straits Times ALSO reported this earlier - again, even BEFORE NST came out with their article:

Thai police Chief said "The data on the *Sarawak Report) blog has been TAMPERED WITH to discredit PM Najib."

Ever skeptical, MalaysiaKini probably did not believe those crony-crony newspapers from around the region and later on the same day, MalaysiaKini decided to personally contact Thailand Police spokesperson Major-General Prawut Tavornsiri only to be told by the Major General the following:

"Asked whether the tampering was extensive, Thai police spokesperson major-general Prawut Tavornsiri told Malaysiakini: "The changes are small, but important".

He said Thai police had made this deduction after interviewing Justo, who insisted to them that only the original documents from PSI were passed on to others.

Oops!! Re-confirmation that after the documents left Xavier Justo, someone had made "small but important" changes.

As a side-note and "secara kebetulan", Thailand Police Chief also said at least one out of the 10 persons who had made contact with Xavier Justo is from UMNO. Thailand English newspaper, The Nation had reported that this person includes a "former key politician" in Malaysia.

How key and how former?

And since Datuk Khairuddin has such good fortune to bump into Clare Brown in the 8.3million population London, perhaps he could use his extra-ordinary luck to help us guess who this "former key politician" is?

It gets worse! Singapore authorties could be getting involved too as apparently Justo's case also involves money-laundering.

The spokesman also offered to share information with the Singapore police. "This case should be reported in Singapore because the money laundering to attack the PM started in Singapore," he said. "If the Singapore police ask me for evidence (through) the foreign affairs protocol, I can send it."

Just so you know, the penalties for money laundering in Singapore is up to ten years jail. Good luck!

Anyway, Tun Mahathir is definitely incapable of lying since he is apparently "Anugerah Allah" (according to PERKASA's Ibrahim Ali) and we do believe him when he said he there is no conspiracy. - just heck of a lot of kebetulan and tampered documents only.

Definitely, we also believe Tun Mahathir when he repeated many times recently that Malaysia is in the top ten most corrupt countries in the world - despite the fact that Malaysia is ranked by Transparency International in their 2014 Corruption Perceptions Index at the top 30% least corrupt in the world at number 50th place out of 174 countries.

NOT EDITED!!! (not) : As you can see in the Transparency International 2014 table Malaysia is most corrupted in the world - we are not 50th out of 174 least corrupt - but at number 175th out of 174 most corrupt.

Of course ordinary Malaysians brought up on a steady diet of DAP's lies and propaganda would know that Malaysians are worse-off than happy places such as Syria, North Korea, Somalia etc..

Okay... let's continue with Tun M's blog post:

6. Lately we are seeing many funny statements. The Utusan loudly proclaimed that the Prime Minister had taken action against the Wall Street Journal.

7. Actually it was not legal action or suing for defamation. Just politely asking the Wall Street Journal why do they publish the article.

8. Is there a need to ask that silly question? Isn’t it obvious that as a newspaper the information obtained by Wall Street Journal was sensational. Any newspaper, convinced of the authenticity of the information would have printed it. Of course the local mainstream papers will not for obvious reasons.

9. To ingratiate themselves with the Prime Minister they would rather mislead people. The sub-editors are good at writing misleading headlines. For example when a statement is made to let the task force of four do their work this is headlined as support for the Prime Minister.

Sorry Tun M, you may be mistaken here again or perhaps did not read Najib's lawyer letter to WSJ properly..

Najib's lawyer letter did not ask WHY the Wall Street Journal published the article. Najib's letter, please understand that this is just the first step in the process and is necessary before a specific defamation charge can be filed.

This is because WSJ was a bit cowardly in their article and Najib's lawyers want to nail their position.

WSJ had said in their very same article that they did not know where the funds comes from but on the other hand they said the funds comes from 1MDB.

It's like WSJ saying we are not sure whether the ball is blue or whether it is indeed a ball and then saying the ball is blue.

So, which is which? Did WSJ say Najib stole the RM2.6b from 1MDB and masuk poket or not? WSJ needs to confirm this.

Najib's lawyer letter stated this: "In the circumstances, we are instructed by our Client to seek confirmation as to whether it is your position as taken in the Articles that our Client misappropriated nearly USD 700 million from 1Malaysia Development Berhad?"

Therefore, Najib's letter is to nail down WSJ's position before they can proceed to the next stage.

If Najib sued WSJ saying that WSJ defamed Najib by saying he stole money from 1MDB, WSJ could easily say This is to prevent WSJ from saying "but we also said we don't know where the funds were from".

The last part of the letter is also very good:

"please let us know whether you have appointed solicitors in Malaysia to accept service of legal proceedings on your behalf and on behalf of the reporters who wrote the Articles".

Looks like Najib is following Singapore's advice and suing under Malaysian laws and courts which are much stricter.

Remember that this is a first step. Najib has never stopped his legal proceedings against Mkini, Tony Pua and Rafizi and definitely won't be pulling back this time on WSJ.

And even more shocking! of all people, Anwar Ibrahim's Chief legal council Sankaran Nair also agrees with my view and Najib lawyer's legal letter to WSJ.

Lawyer who is no stranger to "U ulang, I saman" defamation cases agrees with Najib's lawyers' letter to WSJ

And this lawyer is famous for representing Anwar in many of his famous RM50 million or RM100 million "you ulang, I saman" defamation suits against others.

Lawyer S.N. Nair was of the view that it was not an exception to ask for clarification and particulars before filing a civil action.

"I have adopted this step before making demands and instituting lawsuits on behalf of my clients," he added.

Nair, who has represented former opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in defamation suits, said he would expect a responsible lawyer to act prudently.

"In the course of carrying out one's professional duty, a lawyer must also ensure his or her reputation is not at stake," he added.

Unless Tun M is a lawyer or have vast experience in defamation cases, perhaps Tun M should not have called the lawyer letter as silly.

For the record, Tun M apparently has never sued anyone for defamation in his life - he either suspends all the Supreme Court judges, throws people in ISA or just ignores all those very very nasty things said about him by foreign media and DAP over the past decades and pretends not to hear them.

10. Then there was a minister who, after saying that the interim report shows nothing wrong with 1MDB, then went on to advise people not to say anything about 1MDB until the report is out. But he himself had made a premature statement.

11. To all comments made against 1MDB, the standard answer is to deny, to say “No it is not true.” It is like somebody upon being asked whether he had stolen the money as alleged, simply denies that he had stolen, expecting the judge to acquit him simply because he denied.

12. There is no denial that money was deposited in the private account. The explanation to UMNO is that it was for the elections. UMNO seems satisfied. Don’t they know that Government money cannot be used to help a political party to win elections? But the money was from donation. Who donated 2 billion Ringgit? No answer.

Since the report and investigations have not come out now, how did Tun M come to the conclusion that the alleged money is from government?

Already the Auditor-General's preliminary report and the international auditor Deloitte also cannot find proof of any money missing from 1MDB.

So, if no money is missing from 1MDB then how did 1MDB money get stolen? Strange.

Is Tun M suggesting that UMNO is now a poor party after he left it and all those alleged UMNO-linked or allegedly UMNO-owned firms of the past such as Renong, KUB, Tanjung, Media Prima, Peremba, Time, TRI etc have all ceased to exist?

What happened to all their money and their companies?

And how the heck did Tun M fund past General elections before? Out of your own pocket?

And are you sure there are no companies or tycoons willing to donate money to the ruling party, UMNO-BN for the purpose of elections?

And do you seriously believe that we should list out the names of all the donors who probably wants to keep their donations private for fear of public boycotts?

Even DAP disagrees with making political donors transparent at the moment.

DAP election strategist Dr Ong Kian Ming, who is also Serdang MP, says the proposal to regulate political finances would only be viable if there is a genuinely level playing field.“My fear is that this may be used as a tool to ‘scare’ people off from contributing to opposition parties.

It is truly astonishing that Tun M is now asking for all the donors to be listed publicly right now - it's just not going to happen, is unrealistic and Tun M understands the reasons why.

Anyway, since Tun M says that UMNO members seem to accept this reason now, then I see no reason why Najib needs to resign as UMNO president and Prime Minister right now.

Okay, let's continue with Tun M's blog. It's getting a bit long now.

13. But what about BR1M? Isn’t it Government money, all 7 billion Ringgit and more. That was clever. It is not for elections but given before any election, with the promise of more if the party wins, isn’t it about using Government money to win elections?14. Truly cash is king!!

BR1M was given in 2012 (not election year), in 2013 (election year), 2014 (not election year), 2015 (not election year) and will probably be given in 2016 (probably not election year) and in 2012 (probably not election year) - therefore Tun M's dissertation that BR1M is given just before election is WRONG!

How can BR1M be an election bribe by BN if it is paid every year and not just on election year?

How can BR1M be an election bribe by BN if Pakatan had already said that they will continue BR1M if they win and hence remove any advantage that the govt has with just one statement?

Many countries have BR1M like schemes - such as the USA's famous food stamps program which they have been running for decades.

There is no doubt that programs such as BR1M helps in transferring money from the rich to the poor directly and can assist in reducing our income inequality.

Only very deluded people thinks that BR1M is a replacement for a normal salary and makes the people dependent on govt or makes them lazy. How can anyone or any family live with RM600 a year or RM1.65 per day?

BR1M is not meant to be a salary replacement but a supplement to their normal salary so that they can live better!

Yes, there could be abuses in BR1M where money could have been given to people that don't deserve it but with so many people avoiding income tax and properly declaring their assets, how can we 100% avoid such abuses?

Even in the unlikely event that up to 5% of the people are abusing this system, the fact that 95% of the people are receiving much needed help is more than enough reason to continue with BR1M. Govt just needs to continually tighten up monitoring and weed out the abusers.

Do we punish the 95% of those who needs it most for the actions of the 5%?

That would be kejam.

Tun M, as you can see from above, BR1M is a policy tool to re-distribute income already used in many countries and has now been proven effective in Malaysia..

As policy measures such as BR1M and minimum wages take effect, Income inequality is on the decline in Malaysia while all income groups experience significant yearly growth in income levels.

As a result, the Gini co-efficient that monitors income equality has seen a drop from 0.441 in 2009 to 0.401 in 2014. The lower the Gini score, the more equal it is.

No prizes for guessing who made income inequality so high before Najib became PM and implemented all these policy measures to improve equality.

Maybe you should ask Tun M or his friends, Daim, Halim Saad, Tajuddin Ramli, Ananda Krishnan etc why it was so unequal in the past.

15. Then there is this insistence that since Najib was elected, no one has any right to demand he should step down.

16. How short is their memory. Don’t they remember Abdullah who was also elected being asked by Najib to step down. And he did.

17. And I myself, also an elected PM, did step down in 2003.

18. All over the world elected Presidents and Prime Ministers have been asked or forced to step down and they all did. In fact in some countries, if something untoward happens, Ministers, Prime Ministers step down.

19. So don’t be silly and demand that since Najib was elected, no one has a right to ask him to step down. Abdullah won more seats in 2008 than Najib in 2013. If Abdullah was prepared to step down, Najib after his poor performance in the general election should not even offer to be the PM. He should resign from being President of UMNO and head of BN and let somebody else lead and become PM.

Well, I am not sure if PM Najib ever asked Pak Lah to step down as Prime Minister since all the public pressure for Pak Lah to step down seemed to have come from Tun M.

And Pak Lah has never accused Najib of asking him to step down and continues to blame Tun M until this day.

If I listened to Mahathir, Malaysia would be bankrupt said Pak Lah.

“Perhaps I should have been more vehement in defending and explaining these issues. I could have retaliated by exposing Mahathir. But what good would have come out of this for the government and party?” he said.

If not for Tun M being the patronage of PERKASA and driving away the majority of non-Malay votes (thank you Tun and Ibrahim Ali), PM Najib did relatively well in GE 13:

• He won back Perak and Kedah state governments which was lost in GE12
• He did not lose any state govt. Tun M had lost Kelantan and Terengganu state govts in the past and he never won them back - ever.
• Najib also won 10 additional seats for UMNO compared to GE12

Hence, Najib actually did pretty well for UMNO in GE13 and hence as President of UMNO, he becomes president of BN and by default, the Prime Minister.

I guess UMNO is relatively happy with Najib and hence UMNO leaders agree to postpone their party elections to 2018 after GE14 and you yourself say it is normal.

Glad you agree, Tun M and glad that Tun M respects the decision of UMNO leaders.

And due to the systems that Tun M have put in place before, then there is certainly no need for PM Najib to resign if he does not want to resign - just because you felt ignored and wants him to resign.

Interview by The Weekend Australian with Tun Mahathir 13th June 2015

Although Tun M may feel that "They still owe it all to you" as per your recent interview in Australia, I think PM Najib owes it to Malaysia to complete his transformation journey and implement unpopular but necessary and urgent policies such as BR1M, Minimum wages, subsidy rationalization, tax reforms such as GST and others.

Policies that are unpopular now but necessary for long-term growth and sustainability of Malaysia's future. No economist in the world would say that Najib's policies above are wrong.

I am sure Tun M understands this.

20. There is this suggestion that the amendment to the election rules in UMNO was meant to make it more democratic. Very many more members would vote in the UMNO elections than the 2,000 or so delegates to the UMNO General Assembly.

21. Actually the intention is to limit the number of entities involved in the election. The winners would be those getting the biggest number of divisions voting for. Effectively this means the real electors have been reduced from 2,000 to about 190 UMNO divisions.

The number of members voting for a candidate is nullified. Far from making UMNO elections more democratic, Najib has actually restricted the right to vote from ordinary members to just the divisions. And Najib has a strangle-hold over most of the division heads.

22. So much for more democracy in UMNO.

The previous bonus votes and quota system in the UMNO party elections and how it kept Tun M in power for 22 years.

Bonus votes? got such things? I thought 1 person 1 vote. lo - unless the bonus votes comes from the non-existent 40k Banglas.

Turns out the bonus votes are not like bonuslink points and the quota was not actually Bumi quotas when in the context of the UMNO party elections.

Undemocratic Bonus system in the past - a bonus only to the incumbents and makes it hard for challengers to even get nominated.

After the 1987 Team A vs Team B fight where Tun M won with only 43 votes against Ku Li despite receiving more nominations from the divisions, Tun M decided to change the way the party elections are determined.

Using the excuse to of preventing “fake nominations”, Tun M then introduced the bonus-vote system in which 10 bonus votes would be automatically added to those contesting for party president for every nomination they receive.

Definitely during the nominations stage, division leaders will be pressured to nominate the incumbent - hence this system essentially guarantees a win for the incumbent.

Obviously this flaky bonus-vote system was not democratic. Thus, UMNO abolished this in 1998 and replaced it with an equally iffy quota system.

This quota system requires those contesting for president to receive at least 30% of all divisions nominations BEFORE they even have the right to contest.

This means that you require at least 63 divisions (out of 210 divisions then) to officially nominate you before you even qualify to challenge the president.

Essentially, your fate depended on just 210 division heads that the President could easily control. Chances were not that good, of course.

In essence, the "Bonus votes" and "Quota system" were cowardly undemocratic systems put in place by Tun M to prevent any challenge to him.

However, Najib did not wish to hide behind the quota system and scrapped it in Oct 2009 - meaning that anyone who received a nomination from any division can challenge for any post within UMNO.

Also in an effort to curb money politics, Najib increased the number of people qualified to vote from just 2,500 to 146,500 UMNO members.

Compared to the nomination and quota system previously which depended on just 210 persons to determine who can be President, trying to control and buy votes from 146,500 people is much much harder.

Najib was this brave enough to transform the party and also democratic enough to put the fate of his PM and party president position in the hands of 146,500 party members - which he did in the 2013 UMNO party elections.

This new UMNO party elections system introduced by UMNO in 2009 is called the electoral college system - the very same system used in the USA presidential elections.

I am sure you don't really want to accuse the USA of having unfair elections system.

UMNO Sec-Gen Tengku Adnan said the system was chosen for the party elections, which for the first time will see about 150,000 members voting for supreme council members, as it was deemed the most practical due to the large number of voters involved.

“We have explained to party members how the system works. Although each division represents one vote, the grassroots will still be the deciders because it is they who will first vote to determine candidates their division will support,”

It is certainly insulting to all UMNO membes when Tun M says that the division leaders of 190 division will determine the votes for that division.

Assoc Prof Shaharuddin Badaruddin from Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) said that while division chiefs sympathetic towards certain candidates could attempt to sway their members’ sentiments by organising activities for the candidates, they would still not be able to guarantee votes because of the large number of branch members who will be voting.

Please respect the large number of UMNO branch members and give them credit - their votes now make a difference and is what counts and they should be independent to vote who they want without having to follow the orders of the branch leaders blindly.

Hence, Tun M is mistaken again. UMNO party elections have become more democratic and less about money politics.

At least after PM Najib's UMNO elections reforms, people actually gets a chance to be nominated (all you need is one nomination) and to contest - unlike your dodgy bonus votes and quota nomination system which stopped candidates from even being nominated and even before they had a chance to run.

SOURCE: LSS REPORT HERE

Continue reading