NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
- Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad wants his ‘Crooked Bridge’ to Singapore continued while Najib Tun Razak wants it aborted. Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had actually aborted it soon after he became Prime Minister in 2003 — much to Dr Mahathir’s annoyance who complained that the cost to abort the bridge is higher than the cost to build it.
- Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad alleges that Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has been implicated in the ‘Oil for Food’ scandal, according to the United Nations investigation. Dr Mahathir said that action should be taken against Abdullah Badawi — as what happened to India’s Finance Minister who had also been implicated in the same scandal and was forced to resign from his post.
- Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad alleges that Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi spent RM200 million of the taxpayers’ money to buy a new luxury jet whereas when he (Dr Mahathir) was Prime Minister he did not buy a new plane but used the old, small one to move around.
- Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad alleges that Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was not running the country and that the country was actually being run by the ‘fourth floor boys’ led by his son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, who is close to Singapore and allows ‘that little red dot in the south’ to decide how the country is run.
- A Mongolian national by the name of Altantuya Shaariibuu entered the country and was subsequently murdered but there are no immigration records to show she has entered the country and two police officers have been found guilty of murdering her although there is no evidence she ever entered Malaysia since there are no immigration records of her ever having entered the country.
- One of those initially charged for Altantuya’s murder, Abdul Razak Baginda, is close to Najib Tun Razak but he was later acquitted of the murder without his defence being called.
- When Razak Baginda was first charged for murder he was allowed bail although bail is not provided for in cases that attract capital punishment, such as murder — while the co-accused, the two police officers, were not allowed bail.
- When Razak Baginda’s bail was revoked he applied for bail and supported the bail application with an Affidavit that alleged he had never met the two police officers before until they were sent to him by Najib Tun Razak’s police officer ADC called Musa Safri but Musa was never called to testify in the murder trial to confirm or deny Razak’s allegation.
- The judge in the murder trial at first refused to accept Razak Baginda’s Affidavit and advised the lawyer to withdraw it as it may be damaging to his client’s case. The lawyer, however, insisted that they submit the Affidavit and the judge had no choice but to accept it and after reading it actually made adverse comments and said that after reading the Affidavit he is even more convinced that Razak should not be granted bail. The senior judge was subsequently removed from the case and replaced with a junior judicial commissioner.
- Razak Baginda’s wife, a lawyer and ex-magistrate, went berserk during the trial and shouted that it is not her husband who wishes to become the Prime Minister. There was also an incident outside court when Razak Baginda’s wife kicked Altantuya’s father and her lawyer complained to the court and asked the court to instruct her from further accosting the father.
- After Razak Baginda and the two police officers were charged for Altantuya’s murder, the Attorney General made an unprecedented announcement to the media that only three people and no others are involved in the murder although the trial had not even started yet and no one knows what the witnesses would be saying during the trial.
- After Razak Baginda was acquitted of the charge of murder the Attorney General announced that the government would not be filing an appeal like it would normally do, while at the same time, as soon as the court ruled that my Internal Security Act detention was illegal and ordered my release, the government filed an appeal.
- The judge who acquitted Razak Baginda of murder ruled that he believed Razak is not guilty based on the Affidavit he filed to support his bail application although the Affidavit was never tendered as evidence during the trial. Therefore, while the Affidavit is not strong enough to convince the court that Razak deserves bail it is, however, strong enough to convince the court that he is innocent of the charge of murder.
- The Petroleum Development Act was passed by Parliament in 1974 whereby the state’s oil and gas activities would be nationalised and a national agency called Petronas would be set up to manage these oil and gas activities while the state’s would be entitled to 5% of the revenue and which would be called ‘royalty’. Agreements were subsequently signed between Petronas and all the states in Malaysia to legalise this arrangement.
- Under the Petroleum Development Act 1974, Petronas is to report only to the Prime Minister and to no one else and not even Parliament can question Petronas about its affairs, activities and financial matters.
- In 2000, the federal government withdrew the 5% oil royalty due to the state of Terengganu and the management of the money was handed over to Umno. Furthermore, how the money is to be spent lay in the hands of the Prime Minister’s Department so that the state no longer had control of the money or could decide what happens to the money.
- It is estimated that at least RM1,000 billion or probably even as high as RM2,000 billion has been earned through the oil and gas activities over more than 35 years since 1975 but only a few people know what the real figure is and what happened to all that money.
- It is estimated that at least 6,000 people or probably even as high as 10,000 have been detained without trial over 50 years since 1960 but no official figures have been released and neither has the full list of names been released nor information about what the alleged crimes of these detainees are.
- It is estimated that thousands of Malaysians have died under extrajudicial circumstances either for ‘resisting arrest’, while being interrogated, or during remand awaiting trial and human rights groups have protested these killings and have expressed anxiety that many died under suspicious circumstances.
- Umno is of the opinion that Malaysia’s economy is controlled by the non-Malays and that the Malays are being left behind. Umno is further of the opinion that the Malays are also losing political power and would one day become second-class citizens in their own country unless the Malays all unite under the banner of just one political party rather than be split under so many political parties.
- Umno is of the opinion that while it appears like some states are headed by multi-racial governments in truth it is the Chinese who are the power in those states and the Malays are merely the running dogs of the Chinese.
- Umno is of the opinion that it is the largest Islamist political party in the world and that Malaysia is already an Islamic country so here is no need for another Islamist party like PAS — who after all, being the opposition, can only talk without being able to do anything whereas Umno is in power and can do what PAS can only talk about.
So there you are. The above are only 22 items in a list that can run into 100 items. However, 40% of the above are supposed to be true while 60% are lies. Since I am not able to figure out which falls into the 40% category and which falls into the 60% maybe you can help me out here.