See UPDATES at the end of story
Original piece:
"... RM2 billion belonging to the ruling United Malays National Organization was "pocketed" by a small group of people (and) that about one billion ringgit was taken out of the country last October to a Swiss bank account." - Wall Street Journal, 28 Sept 1998
Malaysians who take WSJ's negative reporting on their own country and Prime Minsiter as gospel truth should try googling and look at some of the paper's old articles that paint Malaysia as a rogue nation. You might just notice the obvious: that this is not the first time the WSJ is accusing a Malaysian PM of stealing billions of ringgit. In Protests against Mahathir continue, despite police warning the WSJ repeated and amplified Anwar Ibrahim's accusaiotn that Dr Mahathir was a thief. Dr M didn't waste his time suing WSJ. Perhaps because it was obvious to him that the foreign newspaper was rooting for Anwar. The RM2 billion + RM1 billion allegation was never proven, not by Anwar not by the WSJ.
Today, a day after Dr M quit Umno for the first time since 2008, the WSJ intensifies its attack on Najib Razak.
Note how the WSJ editors have opted for a "safe" headline ["said to top $1 billion"] in order to safeguard the paper in the even of a lawsuit by the Malaysiam PM. If the WSJ is really serious about journalism, it should drop the word "said to" and go for Najib's jugular.
Obviously it can't because it doesn't have what it takes to back up the allegations.
Just like the 1998 article when it could go to court and say it was just "merely reporting" an allegation made by Anwar Ibrahim ...
p.s As for Dr M's decision to quit Umno again, people probably fell off their chair because they were dozing off. In 2008, when he quit the party because Abdullah Ahmad Badawi wouldn't resign even after BN's dismal performance at the general elections that March, it was a sad affair. Yesterday, it was pathetic. I remember in 2002 when he threatened to resign at the Umno General Assembly, now that was shocking and impactful. But that was a long time ago. Too long.
Updates
Updates
Media statement by 1Malaysia Development BerhadIssued on 01 Mar 2016
Response to Wall Street Journal
1MDB has consistently maintained that it has not paid any funds to the personal accounts of the Prime Minister. This has been reiterated by multiple lawful authorities including the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the Malaysian Attorney General, and various reputable international publications, who have confirmed that these funds came from Saudi Arabia. Despite this, the Wall Street Journal continues to repeat the same disproven allegations. However, not once has the publication offered any conclusive evidence to support its claims, with the only justification for their continued attacks being information that they claim to have obtained from unnamed and anonymous sources. This reliance on anonymous sources, who may or may not exist, betrays a lack of basic journalistic standards on the part of the Wall Street Journal and the fact that the publication has lost all semblance of balanced reporting.
ReplyDelete"Note how the WSJ editors have opted for a "safe" headline ["said to top $1 billion"] in order to safeguard the paper in the even of a lawsuit by the Malaysiam PM. If the WSJ is really serious about journalism, it should drop the word "said to" and go for Najib's jugular. Obviously it can't because it doesn't have what it takes to back up the allegations."
This, sadly, is bullshit.
When they produced detailed diagrams showing the exact flow - about as scientific as you can get - that wasn't "safe" is it? That's showing the murder weapon in hi-res photography with a chemical analysis of the blood as a bonus. Not vague, was it? And from the prime suspect there was a massive fit of outright lying, gelabah, and some nonsense about SWIFT codes that even you swallowed. Then we moved into the 42 lies phase. Or have you forgotten?
Yet despite the threatened lawsuit, it hasn't happened, for the precise reason that yes, they DO "have what it takes to back up the allegations."
Tunggu apa lagi? Sue lah!
You have no idea how weak your spin sounds.
Laughable, actually.
Plenty of dedak is coming in.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteDo read the actual article, Mr Bru.
"The investigators are focusing on an entity they believe was a crucial conduit: a firm with a name almost identical to that of a state-owned Abu Dhabi company called Aabar Investments PJS."
Ring a bell?
Here's the thing:
When this deception was exposed, Kekanda Arul's gang never addressed it directly, using the standard "these are recycled allegations" template, even though the name switch HAD NEVER EVER BEEN EXPOSED BEFORE.
They just sidestepped the issue.
As a journalist, Bru, aren't you going to investigate further on behalf of the rakyat? This is public money, bro. And you ain't some dried-up, passionless, old sell-out reduced to being a payroll hack, after all. We expect great things from you, Mr Bru.
ReplyDeleteWhich other organisation will RockyBru & geng have to run down in order to protect the chief pirate's now non-existent "image"?
a) UK Serious Fraud Office
b) Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA)
c) the FBI
d) Monetary Authority Of Singapore (MAS)
e) the Singapore police
f) Department of Justice Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative
g) IPIC, Abu Dhabi
h) Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC)
i) Hong Kong police
j) Swiss Attorney-General
What you got, Mr Bru?
"Komplot Yahudi"?
Hmmmmmm, not going to work is it?
Added to which, Najib is actually the perfect Malaysian leader from both a US and Singapore point of view, because he's weak and does what he's told. Why would they involve themselves in a 7-country plot to remove a very minor 3rd world dictator with clumsy songlap skills?
Does that even make sense? No, it doesn't.
Methinks your boy is screwed.
Let's make dedak while the farmer runs free, anyway.
Bro bro bro u are pathetic. The issue is present PM... who care abt previous PM or DPM.
ReplyDeletePM golden silence and henchmen rebuttals including you are so idiotics... malu saya bah.
Conclusion, if pak lah or najib can be PM anybody can be PM.
/// You might just notice the obvious: that this is not the first time the WSJ is accusing a Malaysian PM of stealing billions of ringgit. ///
ReplyDeleteWhat a non sequitur. So, the fact is that this is not the first time that a Malaysian PM is corrupt and stole money. And it will not be the last time either. As long as UMNO remains corrupt and requires money politics to remain in power, future PM will also steal.
Malaysian remembered Tun Dr M.
ReplyDeleteSustainability...that's the question. How long? How far?
So mostly shall wait for GE 14.
Sarawak 11th...
50 seats BN..
That's sound disaster..
Watch out!
perhaps this post is a tad too disrespectful of the old man you know. shouldn't do that...
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete"As for Dr M's decision to quit Umno again, people probably fell off their chair because they were dozing off. In 2008, when he quit the party because Abdullah Ahmad Badawi wouldn't resign even after BN's dismal performance at the general elections that March, it was a sad affair."
Ahhhhhh, sweet memories.
Those were the days.
Back in the mid-2000s, people actually thought bloggers had some influence, so I took tonnes of dedak from Dr M in order to undermine Pak Lah.
Later on, the public wised up to the idea of "paid professionals", and basically saw through my crap, but it didn't prevent me from switching camps and starting to attack Dr M. I still got dedak, but from a different farmer (who obviously isn't too bright.)
This is a "cautionary tale", Datuk Rocky.
Please don't become like me.
As I ride my motorbike around town, I have a small, sad empty feeling inside.
What a scumbag I am, truly.
ReplyDelete"1MDB has consistently maintained that it has not paid any funds to the personal accounts of the Prime Minister. This has been reiterated by multiple lawful authorities including the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the Malaysian Attorney General, and various reputable international publications, who have confirmed that these funds came from Saudi Arabia. Despite this, the Wall Street Journal continues to repeat the same disproven allegations."
Big deal.
Be very careful of the Weasel Wording of 1MDB statements.
For example, when FINMA froze various accounts, Arul Kanda was saying "as far as we know, none of our accounts in Switzerland have been frozen". That was a deliberate and misleading half-truth, because the Swiss A-G has "only" frozen accounts where the corrupt gains of 1MBD adventures ended up, not the accounts in the NAME OF 1MDB ITSELF.
See the difference?
Did Najib get kickbacks directly from the French company who sold Scorpenes? Not literally. Terasasi & Perimekar were the intermediate steps.
Did Najib get money directly from SRC? Not literally. The money passed through 2 other companies first.
Did Najib get US$700 million from 1MDB? No. He did not.
There was no payment from a corporation called "1MDB", registered in Malaysia, directly into the AmBank accounts of Najib Razak.
That never happened.
But no-one thinks it happened - that's the whole point.
"In filings, the 1MDB fund has reported paying more than a billion dollars to Aabar — not specifying a full name. Rather than going to the state-owned Abu Dhabi company, investigators believe the money flowed to the similarly named firm, which was registered in the British Virgin Islands, and $681 million made its way circuitously from there to Mr. Najib’s account."
That is what the WSJ is saying, which would be 100% consistent with the laundering techniques used in Scorpene and SRC.
If the WSJ are wrong, sue them.
PS: "…various reputable international publications, who have confirmed that these funds came from Saudi Arabia". Really, Arul? Seriously? The Saudi Foreign Minister says "NOT A DONATION", what do your publications say? Which publications?
jangan tak jilat dato....
ReplyDeleteDear Dato Rocky.
ReplyDeleteOk, I relent. That 2.6 billion was a donation. So let it rest.
But, what about RM2 million that went into Rosmah's personal account?
Wonder why the Police, MACC, Bank Negara, Securities Commission, Tax Authorities or ProJib bloggers dare not mention about it, anywhere.
Rosmah is not a representative of the Rakyat, anywhere in Malaysia. Surely, an investigation into Rosmah's personal account alone, had nothing to do with toppling Najib, UMNO or the government.
ReplyDelete"Note how the WSJ editors have opted for a "safe" headline ["said to top $1 billion"] in order to safeguard the paper in the even of a lawsuit by the Malaysiam PM. If the WSJ is really serious about journalism, it should drop the word "said to" and go for Najib's jugular."
Wrong.
If the suit is brought in the US (assuming Jibby's lawyers find their missing teloq in time - don't hold your breath) - then the law only protects the identity of the source, not the truth or otherwise of the allegation.
Hence if Jibby sued, the WSJ would still need to prove, AS A FACT, that US$ 1 billion went into his accounts.
Judging by the fact that 8 months have passed since the WSJ made very, very detailed factual claims about Jibby's accounts (that pretty much sliced open the jugular), I think the problem is this:
The WSJ actually CAN prove, AS A FACT, that US$ 1 billion went into his accounts.
But the solution's simple:
Jibby's lawyers need to find their missing teloq and sue the WSJ.
And then hope that the FBI have not cracked the identity of Tanore Finance, because at that point, all the fake Saudi sheikhs in the world will be useless.
What is the Bugis Chosen One afraid of?
Assalammualaikum bro
ReplyDeleteYOU SAID:
Note how the WSJ editors have opted for a "safe" headline ["said to top $1 billion"] in order to safeguard the paper in the event of a lawsuit by the Malaysian PM. If the WSJ is really serious about journalism, it should drop the word "said to" and go for Najib's jugular.
MY VIEW:
If PM Najib and his warriors are really serious about ending this most unneeded drama and the continuous insult towards our country's image, they should have sued WSJ long time ago. But all we have witnessed thus far are mere denials and the sacking of some vocal UMNO members for asking for the truth.
dear damansaraman,
ReplyDeletei want Najib to sue WSJ too. but just because I want the PM to sue doesn't mean he should or will. I wanted Dr M to sue them back when he was PM, like Lee Kuan Yew was doing, but Dr M never did. instead he did what you said in your last line, and more!
Dr.M never sued or sacked anybody, except that sodomite. More democratic too. The sodomite was even allowed to defend himself before the MT. But Najib sacked his Deputy, without even a show-cause letter. He cowardly let his sycophant to do the sacking job for him.
ReplyDelete/// xnakdedak said...
ReplyDeleteWhich other organisation will RockyBru & geng have to run down in order to protect the chief pirate's now non-existent "image"? ///
Now you have to add the United Nations to the list.
http://www.sarawakreport.org/2016/03/united-nations-question-malaysian-government-over-the-blocking-and-intimidation-of-sarawak-report/