I am recording this interesting case in my blog by highlighting what I think is relevant news report and press releases that I found from the internet:
AG: Wrong to say Khairuddin, Chang charged under Sosma
So it comes to a question that perhaps everyone who reads and follow the case would like to ask which Blogger SatD have expressed quite clearly in his latest twit:
I know what Khairuddin and Mattias did last summer
Do you? pic.twitter.com/Jgp9x5eihP
— satD (@satD) November 3, 2015
 |
| Enlarged for clarity |
I presume that all this information and others would be material to be adduced in court as evidence in due time.
Anyway, here is the latest report on the case:
Khairuddin-Chang case goes back to High Court over Sosma
In the mean time something to ponder from DrM's blog:
SABOTAGE
2 Nov 2015 | 1MDB
1. I am confused by the AG’s statement that Dato Seri Khairuddin and Matthias Chang are being charged with sabotage of the nation’s banking and financial system.
2. I assume that their reports to the police authorities in the UK, Switzerland and Hong Kong, where the transactions took place, are the basis of these sabotage charges which if convicted may land them in jail for up to 15 years.
3. But the publication by the foreign press of the shenanigans in the investments by 1MDB came out long before Khairuddin reported. These news reports were not casual reports but were very detailed descriptions of what and who were involved. They were reporting on what is well known to the whole world.
4. Why were these newspaper reports not satisfactorily rebutted by 1MDB or the MOF since the impression created about Malaysia’s alleged abuses of the financial and banking systems could result ultimately in the loss of confidence in Malaysia’s political and economic health and its financials?
5. But had there been no 1MDB and no 42 billion Ringgit being borrowed, the press would not report nor would there be any police reports. Wouldn’t these press reports then be considered as sabotage?
6. 1MDB may sell the 60 Ringgit p.s.f. land that it bought from the Government at 5000% above the purchase price and repay the loans. But the fact remains that had 1MDB not been created, the huge sum of borrowed money would not have disappeared. For this 1MDB and those responsible must still be charged for abuses of the banking and financial system, repayment of the loans notwithstanding. The creators of 1MDB and the managers are the people who sabotaged this country, which before this had a good record for financial management and a sound banking system. They are the people who should be charged in court for sabotage of the Malaysian banking and financial systems. Since it was Najib who created 1MDB, borrow 42 billion Ringgit and invested the money and losing it, Najib should also be charged with sabotage.
7. Alternatively everyone, from the initial set-up of 1MDB to the borrowing, to the newspaper reporters and the reports to the police should all be charged with sabotage of Malaysia’s financial and banking systems.
VERSI BM
SABOTAJ
1. Saya keliru dengan kenyataan Peguam Negara bahawa Dato Seri Khairuddin dan Matthias Chang sedang didakwa kerana sabotaj sistem perbankan dan kewangan negara.
2. Saya menganggap bahawa laporan mereka kepada pihak berkuasa polis di UK, Switzerland dan Hong Kong, di mana urus niaga itu berlaku, adalah asas kepada caj-caj sabotaj yang jika disabitkan kesalahan boleh dikenakan hukuman penjara sehingga 15 tahun.
3. Tetapi penerbitan oleh akhbar asing mengenai tipu helah dalam pelaburan oleh 1MDB keluar lebih lama sebelum Khairuddin melaporkannya. Laporan-laporan berita ini bukan laporan sambil lewa tetapi penerangan yang sangat terperinci mengenai apa dan siapa yang terlibat. Mereka melaporkan apa yang sudah diketahui umum di seluruh dunia.
4. Kenapa laporan-laporan akhbar ini tidak disangkal dengan memuaskan oleh 1MDB atau MOF sedangkan tanggapan yang telah terujud mengenai pendakwaan penyalahgunaan sistem kewangan dan perbankan Malaysia boleh akhirnya mengakibatkan kehilangan keyakinan terhadap kesihatan politik dan ekonomi Malaysia dan kewangannya?
5. Jika sekiranya tidak wujud 1MDB dan tiada RM42 bilion yang dipinjam, akhbar tidak akan melaporkan dan tidak akan ada laporan-laporan polis. Tidakkah laporan-laporan akhbar itu dianggap sebagai sabotaj?
6. 1MDB boleh menjual tanah yang dibeli dengan harga RM60 kaki persegi daripada Kerajaan pada kadar 5000% atas harga pembelian dan membayar balik pinjaman. Tetapi pada hakikat seandainya 1MDB tidak dicipta, jumlah besar wang yang dipinjam itu tidak akan lesap. Untuk ini 1MDB dan mereka yang bertanggungjawab masih perlu didakwa kerana penyalahgunaan sistem perbankan dan kewangan, tidak terkecuali juga pembayaran balik pinjaman. Pencipta 1MDB dan pengurus-pengurusnya adalah mereka yang mensabotaj negara ini, yang sebelum ini mempunyai rekod yang baik bagi pengurusan kewangan dan sistem perbankan yang kukuh. Mereka adalah orang-orang yang patut didakwa di mahkamah kerana sabotaj sistem kewangan dan perbankan Malaysia. Oleh sebab Najiblah yang mencipta 1MDB, meminjam RM42 bilion, melabur wang itu dan menghilangkannya, Najib juga sepatutnya didakwa kerana sabotaj.
7. Atau sebagai alternatif semua orang, dari awal penubuhan 1MDB hingga pinjamannya, pemberita-pemberita akhbar dan laporan kepada polis, semuanya harus didakwa kerana sabotaj sistem kewangan dan perbankan Malaysia.
End.
In the mean time something to ponder from DrM's blog:
SABOTAGE
2 Nov 2015 | 1MDB
1. I am confused by the AG’s statement that Dato Seri Khairuddin and Matthias Chang are being charged with sabotage of the nation’s banking and financial system.
2. I assume that their reports to the police authorities in the UK, Switzerland and Hong Kong, where the transactions took place, are the basis of these sabotage charges which if convicted may land them in jail for up to 15 years.
3. But the publication by the foreign press of the shenanigans in the investments by 1MDB came out long before Khairuddin reported. These news reports were not casual reports but were very detailed descriptions of what and who were involved. They were reporting on what is well known to the whole world.
4. Why were these newspaper reports not satisfactorily rebutted by 1MDB or the MOF since the impression created about Malaysia’s alleged abuses of the financial and banking systems could result ultimately in the loss of confidence in Malaysia’s political and economic health and its financials?
5. But had there been no 1MDB and no 42 billion Ringgit being borrowed, the press would not report nor would there be any police reports. Wouldn’t these press reports then be considered as sabotage?
6. 1MDB may sell the 60 Ringgit p.s.f. land that it bought from the Government at 5000% above the purchase price and repay the loans. But the fact remains that had 1MDB not been created, the huge sum of borrowed money would not have disappeared. For this 1MDB and those responsible must still be charged for abuses of the banking and financial system, repayment of the loans notwithstanding. The creators of 1MDB and the managers are the people who sabotaged this country, which before this had a good record for financial management and a sound banking system. They are the people who should be charged in court for sabotage of the Malaysian banking and financial systems. Since it was Najib who created 1MDB, borrow 42 billion Ringgit and invested the money and losing it, Najib should also be charged with sabotage.
7. Alternatively everyone, from the initial set-up of 1MDB to the borrowing, to the newspaper reporters and the reports to the police should all be charged with sabotage of Malaysia’s financial and banking systems.
VERSI BM
SABOTAJ
1. Saya keliru dengan kenyataan Peguam Negara bahawa Dato Seri Khairuddin dan Matthias Chang sedang didakwa kerana sabotaj sistem perbankan dan kewangan negara.
2. Saya menganggap bahawa laporan mereka kepada pihak berkuasa polis di UK, Switzerland dan Hong Kong, di mana urus niaga itu berlaku, adalah asas kepada caj-caj sabotaj yang jika disabitkan kesalahan boleh dikenakan hukuman penjara sehingga 15 tahun.
3. Tetapi penerbitan oleh akhbar asing mengenai tipu helah dalam pelaburan oleh 1MDB keluar lebih lama sebelum Khairuddin melaporkannya. Laporan-laporan berita ini bukan laporan sambil lewa tetapi penerangan yang sangat terperinci mengenai apa dan siapa yang terlibat. Mereka melaporkan apa yang sudah diketahui umum di seluruh dunia.
4. Kenapa laporan-laporan akhbar ini tidak disangkal dengan memuaskan oleh 1MDB atau MOF sedangkan tanggapan yang telah terujud mengenai pendakwaan penyalahgunaan sistem kewangan dan perbankan Malaysia boleh akhirnya mengakibatkan kehilangan keyakinan terhadap kesihatan politik dan ekonomi Malaysia dan kewangannya?
5. Jika sekiranya tidak wujud 1MDB dan tiada RM42 bilion yang dipinjam, akhbar tidak akan melaporkan dan tidak akan ada laporan-laporan polis. Tidakkah laporan-laporan akhbar itu dianggap sebagai sabotaj?
6. 1MDB boleh menjual tanah yang dibeli dengan harga RM60 kaki persegi daripada Kerajaan pada kadar 5000% atas harga pembelian dan membayar balik pinjaman. Tetapi pada hakikat seandainya 1MDB tidak dicipta, jumlah besar wang yang dipinjam itu tidak akan lesap. Untuk ini 1MDB dan mereka yang bertanggungjawab masih perlu didakwa kerana penyalahgunaan sistem perbankan dan kewangan, tidak terkecuali juga pembayaran balik pinjaman. Pencipta 1MDB dan pengurus-pengurusnya adalah mereka yang mensabotaj negara ini, yang sebelum ini mempunyai rekod yang baik bagi pengurusan kewangan dan sistem perbankan yang kukuh. Mereka adalah orang-orang yang patut didakwa di mahkamah kerana sabotaj sistem kewangan dan perbankan Malaysia. Oleh sebab Najiblah yang mencipta 1MDB, meminjam RM42 bilion, melabur wang itu dan menghilangkannya, Najib juga sepatutnya didakwa kerana sabotaj.
7. Atau sebagai alternatif semua orang, dari awal penubuhan 1MDB hingga pinjamannya, pemberita-pemberita akhbar dan laporan kepada polis, semuanya harus didakwa kerana sabotaj sistem kewangan dan perbankan Malaysia.
End.
No comments:
Post a Comment