Tuesday 23 October 2012

'Having to tell a thousand lies to cover one'

YOURSAY ‘How did someone in Hong Kong get so much money and why it was channelled through Switzerland via Hong Kong, and then to Sabah?'

RM40mil - ICAC quizzed Sabah CM and cleared him

Multi Racial: ICAC is looking from the perspective of Hong Kong. As far as they are concerned, they want to find out whether there is any wrongdoing of Hong Kong people on this RM40 million.

If the money is clean why not just deliver in the form of a cheque or TT into Umno Sabah's account instead of carrying cash?

Umno knows Malaysians do not trust the MACC. So they ride on the credibility of ICAC. But we all know ICAC's objective is to find whether there is any wrongdoing on the part of their government, businessmen and people.

Their findings basically confirmed no Hong Kong people were involved in this corruption. That's all. But there is still "blood" all over Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman, Umno Sabah and Umno, which cannot simply be flushed away.

As far as Malaysians are concerned, someone is, or many within Umno, are involved in this corruption. MACC has to get to the bottom of it, but can we expect it to do that?

Malaysians have to take it upon themselves to put things right by voting the right government into power.

Broken Foot: This is a prime example of "having to tell a thousand lies to cover one lie". We have been told many stories about the RM40 million and yet we are nowhere near the truth.

The tales will probably get more bizarre. There are many transactions that deal with cash but none, save one that deals with enormous amounts. That will be dealing in illicit drugs.

Q..!: Let's assume Musa is not guilty. But do explain the source of the money and why it was couriered viaMichael Chia. If the money was legitimate, why not deposit in a proper Umno Sabah account and make a statement about it?

Stop spinning that Musa is not guilty... somewhere along the line something fishy has taken place. Just explain it. PKR, good job!

Headhunter: Since when has Malaysia been under the Hong Kong/Chinese government?

Democrat: Guys, there was a philanthropist from Hong Kong. One day he just felt that Umno was such a great party helping the people that he wanted it in power for life. So he just decided to give RM40 million without expecting anything in return.

Since Sabah Umno was the cleanest and greatest political party that was doing so much great things, he chose to give it to Umno. In cash!

So, why so much fuss, guys? Just leave it to the voters to decide how someone in Hong Kong could have got so much money and why it was channelled through Switzerland via Hong Kong and then Sabah. Let us decide if it was mere help by some unknown donor or a kickback for some favour.

You know who my vote goes to.

3rdEye: MP for KB said, "There was never any arrest at the airport, or bringing millions in bags or smuggling into Sabah. This is all the imagination of Ipoh Timor. It never happened... There never was any smuggling of physical cash."

Is he denying Chia was detained at the HK airport carrying S$16 million in cash? Is he living in Alice's Wonderland or BN's Bluffoland?

There are two issues here: 1. Corruption: ICAC is only interested in corrupt activities in Hong Kong, not in Malaysia or elsewhere. Once it found that the cash was not part of any corrupt activity in Hong Kong, it withdrew.

2. There's the issue of unlawfully taking out a large amount of cash without declaration (proper paperwork). For this, Chia may still be charged and found guilty - unless of course the Malaysian government had intervened diplomatically, behind the scenes, to work things out. Malaysia could have claimed that it was government money, and Chia was an ignorant or a forgetful officer, etc.

Asamko: It is not the business of ICAC to come to Malaysia to clear Musa of corruption. It is outside of its jurisdiction. I believe ICAC came here just to corroborate what Chia said - that the unusual amount of cash caught in his possession belonged to Musa.

Once Musa explained that the cash was legitimate donations for him or Umno Sabah, ICAC would have to take Musa's word for it.

Then the legitimacy, origin and corruption aspects will fall squarely on our MACC, which once again has failed the rakyat completely.

Telestai!: 1. ICAC doesn't give a pooh about corruption outside of Hong Kong. 2. MACC cannot be trusted to properly investigate corruption involving the leader of a "fixed deposit" state. So don't be so eager to declare that there is no corruption.

HYL: RM40 million and cleared by MACC after being "quizzed". But Teoh Beng Hock, just for a paltry sum and not even a fraction of RM40 million, was grilled and detained overnight and the next thing was his death, which is still a myster. And the culprits have been left off the hook.

Justice is indeed blind in the hands of the BN and their cronies.

Opah: Total hogwash! The ICAC is only interested in corruption in Hong Kong. Its mission statement reads: "With the community, the ICAC is committed to fighting corruption through effective law enforcement, education and prevention to help keep Hong Kong fair, just, stable and prosperous."

ICAC does not care two hoots about corruption in Malaysia, so when it became clear that the corruption did not occur in Hong Kong, it closed its books. It is not ICAC's job to keep Malaysia corruption-free!

Wira: Can you believe that Putrajaya will cooperate in the investigation by a foreign body against one of its top Umno leaders?

If so, why do we see so much hostility to the proposed appearance before a French court in the Scorpene investigation?

2LAN: I would like to hear from ICAC, for I am sure there is more to it. So, if it is a political donation, then it does not matter where the money comes from, legal or not or even if it's drug money?

Perhaps in the BN culture it is not a crime, like corruption.

Pl3gm4tic: Where's ICAC's declaration that the case is closed? At least there should be an official notice in paper and the reason for the closure?

Bystander: For a start ICAC doesn't have the locus standi to investigate, whether there is any element of corruption or not. It merely acted on the infringement of RM40 million undeclared, which is against Customs laws that require anyone who brings in more than US$10,000 to make a declaration - which Chia failed to do so for whatever reason or reasons best known to himself.

Of course MACC is empowered to give a verdict of corruption-free status to this RM40 million without assigning any reason or reasons whatsoever. Let's see if MACC will take it kindly if this happens to Pakatan?

No comments:

Post a Comment