(1) CH Siew: I am very amazed that Pak Lah does not even need to conduct any investigation over the allegation before coming to conclusion that Najib and his wife are not involved in this scandal. He is so quick to know that the allegation is not true and pin point the source of the problem as RPK.
I really admire his ‘improvements’ in handling the matters because it shows the effectiveness of having a parliament of multiple representations. While I applaud the improvements, I can't help but wonder how he did it? Was there any information that he had prior to this RPK revelation? Is he trying to cover up the whole thing? How does he know Najib and Rosmah are not involved? This revelation from a third party as such will cause more harm to Pak Lah than any benefit which I suspect is the reason for such drastic action to cover it up. It seems that his scheme is backfiring on him. The more he denies such allegations, the more it shows that there is something fishy about the whole issue.
(2) Vijay Kumar Murugavell: If it were me, I would make a police report and not use the attorney- general as an errand boy. The next thing I would do is sue for defamation - that would be the reaction of an innocent person wrongfully accused.
More so if the accuser has a gall to risk two years imprisonment for giving a false declaration. Based on his (Najib’s) propensity to deny, lack of visible anger and operating from a distance while the AG and police seemingly do his bidding, I would wager that many do not see his denial as sincere.
In fact he appears cool and calculative - which reminds me of this quote: ‘Denial is a common tactic that substitutes deliberate ignorance for thoughtful planning’. (Charles Tremper)
(3) Ibrahim Musa K: This is a very serious matter. Who is to be believed, Pak Lah the premier or Raja Petra the blogger? Pak Lah categorically asserts that Najib’s wife was not involved in Altantuya’s murder, yet Raja Petra vowed that she was at the scene when the killing took place.
What Pak Lah said could mean that Najib’s wife was not involved in the plot of the murder, but it did not rule out the fact that she was a bystander to the heinous crime (as in Raja Petra’s statutory declaration). This itself would have made her a pivotal witness in court.
Granted whether Raja Petra is trustworthy, the implication of his words would be far and wide if not extraordinary critical to the already chaotic national political scene. It casts an eerie dark shadow that may completely destroy the integrity of the nation’s imminent would-be premier.
(4) Ahmad Kamal: In any case, I think Petra - if he should be detained at all as an accused - should not be detained under any preventive detention law. He should have a very good day in open court as an alleged accused or an important witness. I hope there are enough of us out there to see that justice is done and be seen to be done.
(5) Ko-han Wai: I must say, Raja Petra have some guts signing a statutory declaration (and paying RM4 for the endorsement too..hehehe!!!) on new info in the Altantuya (may she rest in peace) murder case.
Our country needs more people like this. Kudos and salutations to him. However, in this case - again - it is the case of the whistle-blower getting the end of the stick/rod. Insults and threats of jail time are hurled towards Raja Petra.
And still the BN wonders why most of the public voted against them last March. Well, so much for the Whistle-blowers Act proposed by that someone (don't need to say who) in the PM's department. The act will most probably contain a whole lot of nonsensical procedures against the whistle-blower just to keep them away.
Puzzled: "If parties implicated in statutory declaration made by Raja Petra Kamarudin claim that allegations directed at them are garbage and fabricated, then they themselves should sue Raja Petra Kamaruddin for defamation. Just giving statements to the authorities would not convinced the public on their innocence". - INTeResTiNG CoMMeNTs FRoM MaLaYSiaKiNi
TFW2005’s Titans Return Roadburn Gallery
5 hours ago