tumpang sekole...?: Peguam WSJ minta Najib bezakan artikel & pendapat...

Dow Jones mahu peguam PM 'sekolah' anak guam...

Dow Jones and Company, yang memiliki akhbar The Wall Street Journal, memberitahu peguam yang mewakili Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak agar menjelaskan kepada anak guamnya mengenai perbezaan antara artikel berita dan pendapat.

Dow Jones berkata tidak perlu juga bagi WSJ untuk menjelaskan pendiriannya mengenai laporan yang mendakwa sejumlah RM2.6 bilion dana yang dikaitkan dengan 1MDB didepositkan ke dalam akaun bank peribadi Najib.

Dalam surat peguam Dow Jones, memetik Najib meminta pengesahan WSJ sama ada ia mempertahankan laporan yang mendakwa bahawa beliau menyalahgunakan hampir AS$700 juta yang dimiliki oleh 1MDB.

"Kami percaya permintaan anda tidak perlu kerana artikel berita dan pendapat bercakap bagi diri mereka sendiri," kata peguam Dow Jones dan ketua pegawai pematuhan Jason P Conti menulis dalam suratnya kepada peguam Najib.

Najib menghantar surat kepada WSJ menuntut penerbitan ini bagi menjelaskan pendiriannya mengenai laporan berita 2 Julai bertajuk "Malaysia leader's accounts probed" dan pendapat pada 6 Julai bertajuk "Scandal in Malaysia".

Barisan peguam mahu WSJ untuk menjelaskan jika ia bermaksud dakwaan RM2.6 bilion yang didakwa disalurkan ke akaun Najib datang dari 1MDB atau sumber yang tidak diketahui. - mk

Dow Jones tells PM's lawyers to school client...

Dow Jones and Company, which owns The Wall Street Journal, has told lawyers representing Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to explain to their client the difference between a news article and an opinion.

Dow Jones said there was also no need for the WSJ to explain its stance on reports alleging that RM2.6 billion of 1MDB-linked funds had been deposited into Najib's personal bank accounts.

"In your letter you 'seek confirmation as to whether it is [our] position as taken in [The News Article and The Opinion] that [your] Client misappropriated nearly US$700 million belonging to 1Malaysia Development Berhad'.

"We believe your request is unnecessary as The News Article and The Opinion speak for themselves," Dow Jones' counsel and chief compliance officer Jason P Conti wrote in a letter to the prime minister's lawyers.

Najib sent a letter to WSJ demanding the publication to clarify its stance on a July 2 news report titled "Malaysia leader's accounts probed" and an opinion piece on July 6 titled "Scandal in Malaysia".

The lawyers had wanted WSJ to clarify if it meant the alleged RM2.6 billion in Najib's accounts had come from 1MDB or unknown sources.

'Fair and accurate summary'

The Dow Jones letter, sighted by Malay Mail Online, pointed out the July 2 piece was a news article reporting facts, which said the source of the money was unknown. It also pointed out that the July 6 article is a commentary on those facts.

"As a result, it is quite clear The News Article is a fair and accurate summary of current events, and The Opinion includes reasonable commentary based on those facts.

"Any suggestion otherwise is misplaced and baseless," Conti said.

The letter also said Dow Jones would only appoint a legal representative in Malaysia if Najib takes action against it.

Dow Jones' reply was sent on Tuesday, the deadline set by Najib's lawyers.

Najib's legal letter to WSJ had been panned by lawyers as bizarre.

Umno lawyer Mohd Hafarizam Harun defended the letter, saying it was needed so as not to file a suit based on conjecture.

Najib has thus far denied using 1MDB money for personal gain, and said the allegations against him were political sabotage.

A special task force is currently investigating the allegations, and has so far remanded two directors of 1MDB-linked companies to assist with the investigations. - mk

Jawapan yang masih kita tunggu...

Marilah kita mendapatkan beberapa jawapan benar dan terus terang kepada beberapa soalan mudah, ditanya dalam Bahasa yang mudah dari kerajaan krook lagi membohong ; sebuah kerajaan dimana Rosmah memakai celana dan Najib pakai kain. Soalan2 nya:-

1. Apakah sumber RM2.6 billion yang disalurkan kedalam akaun peribadi PM? Wang pinjaman? Sumbangan? Wang haram? Dari mana ia datang? Adakah ianya dari dana perang yang disimpan dalam bank luar pantai yang dikendalikan oleh UMNO? Jika dana perang- siapa yang sumbang? Tauke judi? Tauke babi? Kutipan rasuah? Atau ianya suatu jumlah yang dipinjam untuk sementara dari 1MDB yang akan diganti kemudian. Sedikit dana berjumlah RM2.6 billion untuk kerja2 membeli undi? Sogok sana? Sogok sini? Hulur sana? Hulur sini?

2. Kenapa RM2.6 billion disalurkan kedalam akaun peribadi? Mengapa? Kenapa? Why? Wei-sha-ma?

3. Jika seperti yang diistiharkan oleh PM, duit itu bukan untuk kegunaan peribadi, bagaimanakah pengunaan RM2.6 billion untuk tujuan yang hanya PM tahu, tidak boleh dianggap, paling tidak, perbuatan money-laundering? Ini suatu kesalahan yang boleh menyebabkan PM dijel paling kurang 5 tahun. Dan bagaimana mahu kata PM tidak dapat faedah dari penggunaan RM2.6 billion ini sedangkan wang tersebut diguna untuk membeli undi dan kemenangan? Kemenangan itu bukan faedah?

4. Siapa lagi yang dapat durian runtuh dari RM2.6 billion ini. Ada 222 kawasan parlimen. Kalau wang RM2.6 billion dibahagikan sama rata sama rasa atas nama keadilan UMNO, maka setiap kawasan parlimen patut dapat RM11.7 juta. Maka setiap ketua bahagian UMNO yang ada dalam setiap kawasan parlimen, cuba cek, ada dapat tak RM11.7 juta seorang? Atau seperti biasa, boss dapat, anak buah gigit jari dan terpaksa berkelahi dan baling kerusi meja , bakar balai raya nak dapat duit?

5. Bagaimana wang RM2.6 billion digunakan? Untuk apa? Beli kapal terbang? Helicopter? Kapal layar? Sponsor kahwin bini muda? Pakai sikit untuk kahwin anak? Beli intan berlian? Baju bertatahkan ma’nikam?

6. Maka jika RM2.6 billion diguna untuk membiayai pilihanraya BN, untuk beli undi dan beli lawan, tidakkah ini bermakna kemenangan UMNO dan BN adalah akibat rasuah dan oleh kerana itu kemenangan mereka dibatalkan semua? Ini cukup untuk membatalkan pendaftaran UMNO dan parti BN yang lain dan semua yang mendapat agihan dari RM2.6 billion diheret dan dihantar kedalam jel dan di haramkan untuk bertanding dalam pru yang akan datang?

7. Adakah PM berani untuk menyaman WSJ, Sarawak Report, Clare Rewcastle-Brown atau The Edge? Saya tidak fikir PM berani. Ada telur atau tidak? Apa lagi yang dinantikan?

Soalan tambahan untuk 1MDB:

1. Kenapa kah PM tidak bercakap benar mengenai jumlah wang dan tanggungan sebenar 1MDB iaitu sebanyak RM46 billion? Menteri kewangan lupa menyebut perihal hutang dan bayaran faedah RM4 billion yang diambil alih oleh MOF, tapi mesti dibayar oleh pembayar cukai kepada suatu dana pencen? Mengapa tak kira hutang ini?

2. Kenapa 1MDB membayar RM18billion untuk sejumlah IPP termasuk ambil alih hutang IPP sebanyak RM$6 billion dan kemudian meluput-nilai RM RM3 billion sebagai impairment goodwill? Kemudian menerima sumbangan RM250juta dari pihak penjual IPP? Mengapa tidak sebagai pelabur yang bijak, bersabar beberapa tahun, baru beli memandangkan IPP tersebut nak tamat tempoh kontrak dan boleh dibeli pada harga yang murah? Kita bukan berada dalam darurat kegelapan. Dan antara IPP tersebut yang mana ada pinjaman RM6 billion?

3. Kenapa bayar Goldman Sachs yuran sebanyak 12%- suatu peratusan luar biasa? Dan apa maksud GS yang menyatakan 1MDB dan PM mahukan wang RM2.6 billion dengan segera?

4. Bagaimanakah menteri kewangan berbohong dalam parlimen menyatakan bahawa wang RM3.5 billion dalam bentuk tunai disimpan dalam sebuah bank di Singapura, sedangkan transaksi tersebut, yakni deposit tunai tidak berlaku? Kemudian bila terperangkap bagaimana kah menteri kewangan 1 dan 2 meneruskan bohong mereka dan bercakap mengenai assets dan units? Tidakah menteri kewangan ada perasaan malu dan ada maruah? Tentu ini bukan nilai orang Bugis yang ada integrity dan harga diri.

5. Kalau kerajaan meminjam RM46 billion, "melabur" RM18 billion membeli IPP yang dipalsuharga, beli pulak tanah pada kos RM2 billion dan belanja RMRM6 billion lagi dalam kos overhead dan kewangan, bolehkah kerajaan menyenaraikan dan menerangkan dalam Bahasa yang mudah, dimanakah sebetulnya pergi baki RM20 billion? Nyatakan baki ini dalam imbangan bayaran atau balance sheet 1MDB atau MOF. Jangan putar belit- nyatakan kepada rakyat kemana pergi nya baki RM20 billion itu? Masuk poket sapa? Beli apa? - Mohd.Ariff Sabri bin Hj. Abdul Aziz@sakmongkol ak47

We're still waiting for answers...

So, let's try and get some straight answers to some simple questions, in layman's language from the crooked, bent and illegal government of PM Grossmajib who wears the pants, and her husband who wears the skirt:

1. What is the source of $2.6 billion that was deposited in your personal bank accounts? Was it from a slush fund maintained illegally off-shore by BUMNO/SCUMNO? Or "borrowed" temporarily from 1GDB and then replaced later. A "little" $2.6 berbelyon teeming and lading con job?

2. Why was the $2.6 billion transferred to your personal bank accounts?

3. If, as claimed by you, you did not gain personally from the disbursement of this $2.6 billion, nevertheless, how is this, at the very least, not money-laundering, for which you should go to prison for at least 5 years, since you are also the Finance Minister? How could you not have gained personally even if the money was used only for CSR projects, given that you boasted about it during the campaigning at the general elections, to gain votes, and won?

4. Who were the parties to whom this $2.6 billion was transferred to?

5. What did these parties use the $2.6 billion for?

6. If the $2.6 billion was used to finance BUMNO/SCUMNO's general election campaign, and to buy and rig votes, should not the general election be declared null and void? Should not BUMNO/SCUMNO be de-registere and all those involved sent to prison and barred from ever again standing for elections or working for or be associated with government, in any capacity?

7. Do you really dare sue WSJ, Sarawak Report, Clare Rewcastle-Brown or The Edge? I don't think so. Got cojones or not? If truth is on your side, what are you waiting for?

With regard to 1GDB:

1. Why do you crookedly and publicly lie that you only borrowed $42 billion, when it was actually $46 billion? You forgot the $4 billion debt + interest taken over (bailout) by the MOF, but which still has to be paid (by the taxpayer) back to a certain pension fund?

2. Why did you pay $18 billion for "investment" in IPPs including $6 billion debt, and then write-off $3 billion in goodwill impairment, and receive "donations" of some $250 million from parties who "sold" you their IPPs? Why could you not wait a few years and acquire expiring IPPs at much, much, lower written-down book values? Which IPPs had bank borrowings of $6 billions?

3. Why did you pay Goldman Sachs an internationally abnormal 12% in fees? What does GS mean when it said you wanted $2.6 billion in a hurry?

4.How could your conscience, given that you are prime minister, minister of finance, chief advisor and signatory of 1GDB, let you lie that $3.5 billion cash was placed with a bank in Singapore, when no such transaction took place? When caught with your pants down, how could you, your CEO and your Ministers continue to lie about "assets" and "units"? You have no shame? What happened to Bugis integrity and honesty? It's all Bogus, not Bugis?

5. If you borrowed $46 billion, "invested" $18 billion in over-inflated IPPs, $2 billion in land and blew $6 billion in overhead and finance cost, can you list and explain in simple English, what exactly the balance of $20 billion is "invested" in, regardless of whether it is reflected in 1GDB's or the MOF's balance sheet? Do not talk mumbo jumbo about GIL or Brazen Sky or Aabar "funds". Just tell us exactly what shares, type of fund or other precise investments the cash of $20 billion has gone to, and their current market values.- donplaypuks.blogspot

Prospect of travel ban rattles Mahathir not...

Dr Mahathir Mohamad is not rattled by the prospect of being slapped with a travel ban similar to the one imposed on an opposition lawmaker and media baron.

"Gentar apalah (What is there to fear)?" he was quoted as saying by Sin Chew Daily.

Reporters had quizzed the former premier on this when he attended his son, Kedah Menteri Besar Mukhriz’s Hari Raya open house.

Yesterday, it was revealed that DAP MP Tony Pua and The Edge media group owner Tong Kooi Ong were restricted from travelling abroad.

Police sources had told Malaysiakini that the two are being investigated under Section 124 of the Penal Code for activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy.

This is in connection with allegations of documents pertaining to 1MDB being fabricated and tampered with.

Checks with the Immigration Department website showed that Mahathir, whom Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak had accused of masterminding his ouster, has not been imposed with a travel ban.

However, veteran opposition leader and DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang did not rule out Mahathir being slapped with a similar ban as these were “strange times”.

Meanwhile, Mahathir, according to the Sin Chew Daily report, once again reiterated there is no conspiracy to topple Najib.

He also pointed out that many others are also openly calling on the prime minister to step down.

"If he (Najib) reads blogs and (what is said) on Twitter, he would know that everyone is asking him to resign," he added. - mk