The way of the world

April 2, 2016 at 4:41 pm 18 comments

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is alleged to be secretly very, very rich, corrupt and to have accepted the gift of a yacht from billionaire Roman Abramovich (owner of Chelsea football club), according to a British documentary screened early this year.

The Panorama programme on Putin’s “secret riches” was aired by BBC One on 25 Jan 2016.

Putin’s aide gave an immediate response which was carried by Russia’s official news agency TASS on Jan 26.

“The content of this BBC report is pure speculation and defamation, which has no grounds,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

BELOW: The Kremlin

kremlin

Peskov demanded the US treasury (whose official was quoted by BBC) must provide evidence to support allegations of corruption against Putin or otherwise “it casts a shadow on the reputation of the department”.

Referring to the assertion made by BBC, Peskov categorically denied reports that Putin owns a £40 million (RM221.5m) luxury yacht.

He described the BBC report as “a rush toward gutter news or orchestrated [smear] campaigns”.

“In this case of course we unwittingly notice the reports coincided with quasi-judicial exercises in certain countries,” the Kremlin spokesman added.

The above exchange took place in January. It’s been more than two months since. Putin appears to have shrugged off the documentary and its claims.

It does not appear that Putin will be deposed as president. And nor is Russia being boycotted diplomatically by other countries.

The gleeful doomsayers predicting a nuclear fallout are being overly optimistic, don’t you think?

Advertisements

Entry filed under: Duh. Tags: , .

What kind of Melayu would want to join the DAP? Tun dah jadi kaki rally sekarang nih dah

18 Comments Add your own

  • 1. I am Woman  |  April 2, 2016 at 5:21 pm

    The difference is with the PM there seems to be a letter(s) from the Arabs telling of their donations and also confirmed by the AG that there were monies transferred into the PM’s personal account. In the case of Putin, the stories were exposed not by his countrymen while the PM’s case arose fro questionable transactions of 1MDB

    Sure, some people say donations tak ada masalah, is not a crime. But personally, I find the whole 1MDB-donation issue shows a serious problem in the character of the PM.

    Reply
    • 2. RINA  |  April 2, 2016 at 8:38 pm

      I am woman
      You are accusing my Prime Minister of a very serious crime, you better make sure you have all relevant documents to support tuduhan kamu tu. Otherwise you burung tiong, the mat Salleh are parrots. Show us la, baru kami percaya.

      Nothing comes free in this world. “I am woman” probably thinking those MatSalleh is working so hard to dicredit our PM becos they love her kut?

      Sarawak just discovered a huge cave. Itu Sarawak Report.. mana tau Alladin atau toyol dok bisik kat dia, dalam cave ada hidden treasures?..Alakazoomm. And the tropical forest..terlioq tengok mountain2 bole kasi balak tergolek2 hanyut macam jadi kat Kelantan? Hai ada sekok kat Subang Jaya dah dok pray to move the mountains tau tak!

      They could not care less what happen to rakyat Malaysia tau tak. They telioq for things like this la;

      http://www.theedgemarkets.com/my/article/pm-najib-says-rm8b-pan-borneo-highway-contracts-distribution

      Reply
      • 3. I am Woman  |  April 2, 2016 at 11:30 pm

        I accused the PM of receiving donation. Am I wrong? Did he not receive large sums of money in his personal account? Or are you saying that the PM receiving donations into his personal accounts is a serious crime?

        I am sure he received donations into his personal account. Even the Attorney General said so. http://www.agc.gov.my/agcportal/uploads/files/Publications/Press/Press%20Release%20ENG%20IN%20RELATION%20TO%20THE%20INVESTIGATION%20PAPERS%20RETURNED%20BY%20MACC%20ON%20SRC%20INTERNATIONAL%20AND%20RM2_6%20BILLION.pdf

        And I pointed out the whole donation came out from questions raised about 1MDB. You mean it isn’t so?

        Reply
        • 4. RINA  |  April 3, 2016 at 8:41 am

          Donations? You ada kat situ ke masa penderma lafaz niat sedekah?

          1MDB..semua oghang pun nak tau the real truth. Tapi awak dah very2 sure ya? Babit nama Perdana Menteri pulak tu? Dah tengok ke dokumen2 segalanya – kasi share sini la.

          Reply
          • 5. I am Woman  |  April 3, 2016 at 1:12 pm

            Sometimes you totally contradict yourself. Attorney General himself called the monies transferred to Najib’s personal account donations. Masa dia buat press statement dia and all the Najib supporter were excitedly clearing Najib, kenapa you tak tanya dia orang if they witness lafaz donation pak Arab tu?

            Reply
      • 6. Mad Hatter  |  April 3, 2016 at 3:59 am

        RINA,

        You can research about 1mdb yourself. No one here is going to provide all the links that they’ve read about 1mdb

        Banyak tau

        But knowing your type, you are going to dismiss everyone and everything said about 1mdb as tipu

        Are you saying that Tun M tipu? Muhyiddin tipu? Rafizi tipu? Zaid tipu? Tony tipu? Nazir Razak tipu?

        Are you saying WSJ tipu? Forbes tipu? TIME tipu? Economist tipu? Bloomberg tipu? CNBC tipu?

        Are you saying the investigations in America tipu? Hong Kong tipu? Switzerland tipu? Singapore tipu? Luxembourg tipu? UAE tipu?

        Are you saying they all tipu? Najib and Jho Low is 100% innocent?

        Reply
        • 7. RINA  |  April 3, 2016 at 10:45 am

          Takpa la camtu.. Tapi drama you all tak best sangat.

          I rekomen you tengok Kdrama tajuk “Heard it through the grapevine”, boleh tahan juga ratings dia.

          Reply
          • 8. Orang Perlis  |  April 4, 2016 at 10:51 am

            aku nak tanya hang sama ja mcm aku tanya Helen RINA

            sebab hang konfiden kan PM kita nie takdak salah apa2 pun pasai isu nie…mmg aku tgk hang 100% confident dah there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with this issue at all….

            Kalau in the end lah , tuduhan2 ni betui….

            hang sanggup nak defend lagi dia ka?

            nie i leave you some words from a government defender ….someone from of FB who has been vocal

            ( look him up, Lukman Sheriff)

            “What happened to Najib’s donation / political funding fiasco is …..legally right…but ethically……….. )

            Reply
      • 9. Akim  |  April 3, 2016 at 7:10 am

        The mentality of this RINA woman is such that when IAAW spoke about “questionable transactions of 1MDB”, she gave the link to the Pan Borneo Highway and spoke about toyol, cave treasures.

        Endlessly repeating about parrots and burung tiong, she does not realize she is describing herself. Asking for proofs, evidence and documents, she has no sense of the various types of proofs and evidence that are used and allowed even in the courts.

        As a public service to her and her like-minded, reproduced below are a number of different types of evidence as explained in http://www.inbrief.co.uk/court-proceedings/evidence.htm# :

        Testimony – the oral statement of a witness made on oath in open court

        Hearsay evidence – when a witness, or someone else, makes a statement other than in the course of their testimony, this is referred to as an ‘out of court statement.’ Hearsay evidence is an out of court statement which is being relied upon to prove the truth of its contents.

        Real evidence – this is usually a material object of some kind, which is produced for inspection, either to prove that it exists, or so that the court can make an inference as to its condition or value, for example ripped clothing, a knife or burnt document.

        Original evidence – this is an out of court statement offered for a relevant purpose other than proving the truth of its contents, for example to prove something was said at all.

        Documentary evidence – this consists of documents which have been produced for inspection by the court. These may be items of real evidence, original evidence or hearsay.

        Hopefully from now on she’ll be less of a parrot or burung tiong and understand that there are such things as Testimony and Hearsay evidence accepted by the courts.

        Reply
        • 10. RINA  |  April 3, 2016 at 11:02 am

          Dah masuk court ke? La aa ingatkan baru aje saman Najib. Belum apa2 Najib dah kena hukum?

          Hang dok cerita pasai Court of Venus ke apa ni Akim?

          Reply
  • 11. tebing tinggi  |  April 2, 2016 at 5:23 pm

    If that’s could happened in superpower country like Russia ,it mean to say that what happening in 3rd world country like Malaysia ,kira halal lah Hellen !.

    Reply
  • 12. AYAH  |  April 2, 2016 at 8:32 pm

    What is good for Putin is equally as good for Najib, so it seems. However, although Malaysia does not possess a nuclear capability, I’m inclined to think that we will be witnessing some explosions in the not too distant future.

    Reply
  • 13. siri  |  April 2, 2016 at 10:11 pm

    Ayah lantak pi kat dia lah orang Malaysia ni suka gelap mata apa yang ada didepan mata semua nya dia nak sapu tambah pula dapat buta apa mat salleh kata gullible tak pun geng dedak

    Reply
  • 14. truth  |  April 3, 2016 at 7:31 am

    i have a feeling that the more people sensationalize the 1mdb and 2.6billion donation issues the more it becomes trivial.

    Reply
  • 15. Akim  |  April 3, 2016 at 7:37 am

    That Putin may be very rich does not justify Najib or his tep son suddenly becoming one from sources that can become “testimonies” or “hearsay evidence” as described in my earlier comment.

    Putin runs a communist state and is no way comparable to a democratic Malaysia, though reactions by Najib and his lieutenants to the criticisms and investigations on 1MDB and the RM2.6 billion scandal may indicate otherwise.

    Tun Dr Mahathir wrote in his blog about the apparently fake letter giving Najib “gifts” of large sums of money said to have been written by a Saudi prince. He said there is a discrepancy between the date on the letter and the time when the public found out about and questioned the money in the private accounts of Najib last year.

    Mahathir said the letter – dated Nov 1, 2011 – had answered all the questions which were only asked last year after the Wall Street Journal exposed the US$681 million in Najib’s personal accounts.

    “This letter which is supposed to prove that the money is a gift, is full of inconsistencies with regard to dates, amounts of money and frequency of disbursement.

    “It is as if the writer, purported to be ‘HRH Prince Saudi Abdulaziz Al-Saud’, knew in 2011 that in 2015 the existences of the ‘gifts’ would be discovered, exposed and explanations would be required. It is an amazing case of prescience,” said Mahathir.

    Note: prescience means “knowing something before it takes place.” Better than a toyol.

    Reply
    • 16. Helen Ang  |  April 3, 2016 at 10:10 am

      re:”Putin runs a communist state and is no way comparable to a democratic Malaysia”

      We have a segment of population (Bintang Lima) that behaves worst than communist terrorists (Bintang Tiga) and who are instigating an insurrection. If previously we were under a guided or authoritarian democracy, then it’s obvious there has to be a tightening of law enforcement over their dangerous incitement to violence.

      re: “though reactions by Najib and his lieutenants to the criticisms and investigations on 1MDB and the RM2.6 billion scandal may indicate otherwise”

      The RM2.6b donation and 1MBD travails aside, you must remember that – totally unrelated to Najib – the Council of Rulers lodged a police report against TMI‘s fitnah.

      The Majlis Fatwa also rebuked TMI although not to the extent of making a police report. However two related Australian media withdrew misleading stories from their online versions after it was pointed out to them that the TMI report (on which they based their story) was false. This episode refers to TMI‘s fitnah that the Fatwa Council had issued a ban against Muslims wishing Karpal Singh “RIP”.

      re: “He said there is a discrepancy between the date on the letter and the time when the public found out about and questioned the money in the private accounts of Najib last year.”

      I don’t see any basis for Tun’s charge even if the letter predated the public questioning. If the letter had instead postdated the enquiries, Tun would still be complaining about the date detail.

      re: “Mahathir said the letter – dated Nov 1, 2011 – had answered all the questions which were only asked last year after the Wall Street Journal exposed the US$681 million in Najib’s personal accounts.”

      He is making a supposition (i.e. Tun’s detective theory). His conjecture cannot be made a proof of guilt or forgery/fake.

      re: “This letter which is supposed to prove that the money is a gift, is full of inconsistencies with regard to dates, amounts of money and frequency of disbursement.”

      Exactly like Tun’s accusations against 1MDB! — full of inconsistencies with regard to dates, amounts of money and frequency of disbursement, and Tun’s story keeps changing.

      re: “ ‘It is as if the writer, purported to be ‘HRH Prince Saudi Abdulaziz Al-Saud’, knew in 2011 that in 2015 the existences of the ‘gifts’ would be discovered, exposed and explanations would be required. It is an amazing case of prescience,’ said Mahathir.”

      See point above. This is Tun Sherlock’s not so elementary Watson. He detects “an amazing case of prescience” in the flow of the letter. But what can he prove from his personal fishy feeling that can satisfy a court of law?

      Reply
      • 17. Akim  |  April 3, 2016 at 12:20 pm

        1. Has there been “incitement to violence” in recent times?

        2. TMI aside, what about the summary dismissal of Gani Pattail without giving any notice, not even a doctor’s certification that his kidney problem had supposedly disabled him from performing his duties? Or the “hidden hands” responsible for the sudden and immediate transfer of SPRM and PDRM senior officers involved with the investigations?

        3. You not seeing any basis for Tun’s charge does not invalidate the charge. Many others do see. And politics is perception and it’s voters’ perception that decide PRU14. And Tun has sued Najib. The court case will spill out all those types of evidence I have put out in my earlier comment – testimonies, hearsay and all the types of evidence. The courts will decide. But meanwhile , Najib not berundur-ing or be replaced risks further UMNO chances of winning PRU14. By the day.

        4. Saying Tun’s story keeps changing implying Najib’s and his cohorts’ don’t? Remember the 40 “Questionable Answers” that someone has listed and floating in the internet? The List tells the number of times the answers were changing up to the time of preparing the list. Tun’s story changes in view of new revelations like the said “gift” letter. PMO stories were destructive attempts at justification, like the one on the “legacy of wealth” thingy that was whacked by ALL of Najib’s siblings. Now, the so-called justification of the RM2.6 billion has been hoo hoo-ed not just locally but also overseas.

        5. “what can he prove .. that can satisfy a court of law?” His suit against Najib would tell. But meanwhile, the longer Najib remains intransigent, the more voters will ditch him and UMNO.

        Reply
        • 18. RINA  |  April 3, 2016 at 6:46 pm

          ……But meanwhile, the longer Najib remains intransigent, the more voters will ditch him and UMNO…..

          Ya ke? Nu sapa pulak habaq kat hang macam tu atau hang dok mengoyan sendirian ni?

          Reply

Dijemput memberi komen anda

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


My blog, my like

Helen Ang

Recent Posts

RSS TKO — Tranungkite

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Kalender

April 2016
M T W T F S S
« Mar   May »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Pengunjung

  • 7,641,634 hits

Archives

Feeds


%d bloggers like this: