Pakatan Harapan Rakyat Sabah

Ahad, 4 Disember 2016

As More Action Is Taken By Singapore Najib Demands Blind Loyalty From UMNO

As More Action Is Taken By Singapore Najib Demands Blind Loyalty From UMNO

3 December 2016


Najib Razak has been desperately seeking to instil military discipline into his UMNO ‘troops’ during their recent Assembly, decking all of them out in different coloured uniforms each day like Rosmah’s handbags, as if he were some mad dictator.

This is not least, of cause, because he is a mad dictator.  He has ditched the requirement to re-elect him to his party position until after the next election, precisely because he fears they would take the opportunity to replace him.



UMNO accessories – different day, different colour

Indeed, whilst he yesterday made ‘cleansing the party of traitors’ his prime target before facing the electorate, there are those who believe that voters would prefer to see a cleansing of the party.

Even the opposition believe that keeping dirty Najib in post is by far their best option for the threatened snap poll.

Najib’s big message therefore was that UMNO party members must obey him. Forget obeying the law, forget obeying the principles of right and wrong or indeed obeying the constitutional authority of the public who elected them. They must only obey him.

And, since he pays them, they all were happy to shout and wave and applaud as one corrupt leader after another was paraded up on stage and as Najib issued blood curdling Jihadist threats against political opponents and minority communities, as if they were an opposing army instead of neighbours with democratic rights.

This is what Najib has done to his party and to Malaysia, simply because he cannot give a straight answer to the question ‘What did you do with the money from 1MDB?’.

Singapore moves on banks

Meanwhile, neighbouring Singapore heaped yet more international humiliation on the Prime Minister, who had to sack his own Attorney General and Deputy (and many more besides) in order to pretend he didn’t steal billions from the public.

As the UMNO goons (all decked out in blue today) whooped and cheered, Singapore fined Coutts Bank and Standard Chartered, both for transferring money that the Monetary Authority described as having been misappropriated by 1MDB.


“The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has imposed multi-million dollar fines on the Singapore branches of Standard Chartered bank and Coutts & Cofor breaching anti-money laundering regulations in relation to 1MDB-related fund flows through these banks, it said in a release on Friday (Dec 2).

StanChart was fined S$5.2 million and Coutts was fined S$2.4 million. [Singapore Straits Times]



Najib has, as we all know, has declared that no money was misappropriated from 1MDB. He has also said that the $681 million that popped up in his personal account, which the US Dept of Justice traced back to 1MDB, in fact came from a secret Saudi Sheikh.

Cheers and claps from UMNO (more dedak please).

What are genuine good Muslims or good Christians or good anybody to make of such behaviour?

It seems not only has this man made his country financially bankrupt, he has made his party morally bankrupt.

Bonuses – what do ‘Fat Mike Sherwood and Najib have in common?

Indeed, there is good reason to believe that Najib’s sudden fighting talk about a snap early election is precisely because he is fearful of further damning revelations from the international investigations into the world’s biggest ever kleptocracy scandal.



Bogus ‘Dr’ Tim Leissner, GSI wizz kid SE Asia boss, who faked his CV and qualifications

Singapore has not only moved against these two banks.  The Monetary Authority also inflicted a ten year ban on the former Asia boss of Goldman Sachs.

Tim Leissner, the personal friend of Najib’s and Jho Low fixed up all the dodgy 1MDB bond deals totalling $6.5 billion, through the agency of corrupt collaboration with two Abu Dhabi fund managers working for Aabar.

The bank had already sacked Leissner and he is said to be cooperating with the US financial authorities, who are also investigating this, the world’s biggest single kleptocracy scandal ever, in a relentless fashion.

Few observers of 1MDB are in any doubt but that thedistinctly fishy Goldman commission on those bond issues hides further dirty corrupt practices that appear to have involved more massive kickbacks for Jho Low’s ring of fraudsters serving Najib and rich payments to those who collaborated from other outfits.

The grilling of Leissner and others ought flush out the truth, sooner rather than later.

So was it coincidental that just last week that Goldman Sachs’ International boss, ‘Fat Mike Sherwood’ caused consternation by resigning his powerful position unexpectedly, with few reasons given?

Fat Mike was till that moment considered a major contender to take over the top post at the bank, having built up its ’emerging markets’ business in a quite spectacular fashion in those lean post-crash years, just as 1MDB was getting going.

A big part of those fantastic profits were owing to 1MDB and today Singapore’s Monetary Affairs Authority confirmed that Sherwood signed off on those bond deals:

“Mr Leissner, who left Goldman Sachs in February, managed the client relationship with 1MDB for all of its three bond issues from 2012-13.

A team of Goldman Sachs staff, mainly from Hong Kong but also from Singapore, Malaysia and the United Arab Emirates, arranged the bond issues and they were fully underwritten by London-based Goldman Sachs International, the MAS said.[Financial Times]



Should Sherwood have judged differently on touching such a deal and indeed on releasing an offer document that praised 1MDB for having a ‘robust three tier management structure free from political influence’ when in fact the fund was completely controlled by Najib and half the money raised was stolen on day one?

Perhaps, if this was not the actual reason Fat Mike resigned, then it should have been and perhaps soon we will receive the opinion of US regulators on the matter also?

Consider the news that made Fat Mike so famous back in the UK in the first place.  It was the fact that in the depth of a belt tightening recession for everyone else (as a result of a financial crash for which Goldman Sachs was in very large measure responsible) he and his UK international team issued the biggest bonuses ever in the winter of 2014.

Sherwood himself clinched no less that £13 million on top of his normal salary papers estimated.  Significantly, this hand-out was not for profits made that year, but the previous year of 2013 – exactly when GSI was reaping in its nearly $700 million reward, purely for having raised three dodgy bond deals for 1MDB:



Fat Mike Sherwood – did he bow out before the news about his 2013 bonus comes out?

So, like Sherwood, has Najib also decided to move before things get worse and to throw caution to the winds with a snap election before even more gets out about 1MDB?



http://sarawakreport.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=57b26bbe9d2acafa19363b0d2&id=d20181db33&e=d806eda40a


Selasa, 29 November 2016

"Malaysians Underestimate The Trouble Their Country Is In" - The Economist Spells It Out Over The 1MDB Issue

"Malaysians Underestimate The Trouble Their Country Is In" - The Economist Spells It Out Over The 1MDB Issue

29 November 2016


Tainted analysts with vested interests in managing Malaysia’s corruption, like the ‘Asia Wealth Management’ boss for the bank UBS, have been putting themselves about the media in recent days, trying to talk up the ringgit.

But, it isn’t working. Excuses are being made for the continuing decline of the currency, such as ‘The Trump Effect’, when everyone knows the real problem is ‘The Najib/1MDB Effect’.

For the past fortnight the true dire state of the ringgit has been disguised by Najib’s tame new Central Bank Governor, who has been wasting the country’s reserves by throwing huge sums at buying up the currency, which everyone else is sensibly getting out of.

He has made it fundamentally worse by lecturing banks that they must stop the frantic selling, thereby proving the desperate nature of the crisis.

The fact of the matter is that no one wants to invest in a country which is run by a coven of criminals, who are locking up people left, right and centre in an arbitrary fashion for complaining that the rule of law is not being upheld.

No one wants to invest in a country where all respectable people from all sides of the political divide have been forced to unite in condemnation of a thief Prime Minister, who refuses to quit office.

It is particularly telling for observers of Malaysia that this is a country where it remains possible for a man to remain in office, despite having been exposed as a kleptocrat billionaire – who on earth can consider their money safe under the jurisdiction of such a man and his bought and corrupted cohorts, who are making up the rules as they go along to  slap down anyone who points out the truth?

Because the UMNO leadership control the local media, these goons are still living in a mental bubble, telling themselves that they can keep up their crackdown and eventually obedience and order will reassert itself in their favour.  But, this is not Operation Lalang, not least because Mahathir was competent and everyone can see that Najib is not.

Najib may succeed in continuing to hold on to power by attacking protestors, locking up the opposition, encouraging extremism and violence and then cheating the election, but the price will be a tumbling ringgit and poverty for all. Malaysians are used to a better life and they will not thank UMNO for this.



Hard copy version

See the leader below in the UK’s respected ECONOMIST magazine – followed by its financial comment:

Malaysians underestimate the damage caused by the 1MDB scandal



Nov 26th 2016 

FORTY thousand people wearing yellow shirts gathered in Malaysia’s capital on November 19th, to protest against corruption and impunity in government. The rally was orderly and restrained; the response of the authorities was not. On the eve of the protest, police arrested Maria Chin Abdullah, leader of a coalition of human-rights groups that organised the event. She was placed in solitary confinement, and can be held there for 28 days. Even by Malaysia’s dismal recent standards this marked a fresh low. Ordinary Malaysians should not stand by while their leaders undermine the rule of law so casually.

Ms Chin Abdullah’s detention was justified by an anti-terrorism law which the government had promised would never be used against political opponents. The true motivation was to stifle outrage over 1MDB, a state-owned investment firm from which billions have gone missing. In July American government investigators said they thought that $3.5bn had been taken from the firm and that hundreds of millions of dollars went to the prime minister, Najib Razak (who says he has never taken public funds for personal gain). The investigators’ findings corroborated exposés written by local and foreign journalists, who have been unravelling the saga for several years.

Elsewhere the scandal would have sparked a swift change in government. But the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) has held power for six decades and enjoys broad support from Malaysia’s ethnic-Malay majority, some of whom resent their ethnic-Chinese and Indian compatriots. The party has devised many ways to protect its leaders from internal revolts, so Mr Najib found it easy to purge critics, delay a parliamentary investigation and replace an attorney-general said to have been preparing charges against him.

No one in Malaysia has been charged over 1MDB’s missing money. But a court has handed a prison sentence to an opposition politician who frustrated efforts to hush up the affair. The editor and publisher of one of Malaysia’s last independent news organisations face jail under a rule which forbids certain content published with “intent to annoy”. A competitor closed in March after authorities ordered its website blocked.

Mr Najib’s party is carelessly widening Malaysia’s ethnic and religious splits. Seeking to bolster support among conservative Malay Muslims, it is toying with a proposal to intensify the whippings which may be meted out by sharia courts. It has failed properly to condemn pro-government gangs that last year menacingly gathered in a Chinese part of the capital. Their leaders paint ethnic Malays as victims of sinister conspiracies—dangerous rumour-mongering in a country where politics is still defined by the racial violence of the 1960s.

Easily broken, hard to fix

Until now foreign investors have been fairly sanguine about the economy. But they are growing rattled. The ringgit has depreciated faster than other emerging-market currencies (see article). Last week the authorities asked foreign banks to stop some ringgit trading abroad, raising fears of harsher controls.

Rural ethnic Malays, a crucial constituency, feel that the scandal is a remote affair. Even some educated urbanites still favour Mr Najib’s government over the opposition, underestimating the damage being done by the scandal. If change is to come, the disparate opposition needs to do a better job of winning such people over; its fractious parties must overcome their divisions and present a plausible candidate to replace Mr Najib in a general election that could be held as soon as next year. Malaysia has always been an imperfect democracy, but the rot eating at its institutions is harming its international standing and its economic prospects alike.

Forward and backward

Malaysia’s central bank tries to stem a slide in the ringgit

The ringgit is underperforming other emerging-market currencies

Nov 26th 2016 



“THERE is no new policy on capital flows. There is no proxy capital control either,” insisted Muhammad Ibrahim, governor of Malaysia’s central bank, in a dinner speech on November 18th. This echoed a similar central-bank promise 15 months ago. For those hoping to bring money in and out of Malaysia, the commitments are reassuring. The frequency with which they need reiterating is less so.

It is no secret that the central bank is worried about the sharp drop in Malaysia’s exchange rate. Like other emerging-market currencies, the ringgit has suffered from China’s slowdown in the past two years and Donald Trump’s upset victory on November 8th. But, like Malaysia’s politics, beset by lurid tales of financial malfeasance, the currency has been unusually skittish (see chart).

Mr Muhammad blames what he calls “the arbitrary and unpredictable devices of the offshore markets”. Whereas China has been keen to “internationalise” the yuan, Malaysia’s central bank has an equally determined policy of “non-internationalisation”. It prohibits the trading of ringgit assets outside of its jurisdiction.

International investors can nonetheless bet against the currency offshore, settling the bets in dollars rather than ringgit. These “non-deliverable forward” contracts (NDFs) allow foreign investors, who own over a third of Malaysia’s government bonds, to hedge their exposure to the currency. But the NDF market can also be turned to speculative ends. And this speculation, Mr Muhammad believes, is contaminating the onshore markets as well.

If the offshore side-bets all point in one, bearish, direction, the onshore markets tend to follow their lead. And foreign banks that take the other, bullish, side of these offshore trades might try to hedge by selling ringgit in the onshore market. A 2013 study of nine NDF markets by the Bank for International Settlements found that the offshore and onshore markets both influenced each other, except in Malaysia, where onshore followed off.

Malaysia’s central bank has instructed onshore institutions not to take part in the NDF market or help others to do so. Foreign banks with operations in Malaysia seem to be deferring to the central bank’s wishes, notes Stephen Innes of Oanda, a foreign-exchange broker, to preserve their good name in Malaysia. “They are not aggressively selling the ringgit right now.”

But one reason the offshore market is so spiky is because trading is thin. That illiquidity may worsen if banks retreat. And if foreign investors cannot easily hedge their exposure to the ringgit, they will be less willing to buy ringgit assets. That might leave Malaysia with a weaker currency over the long term even if it is more stable from day to day. “No one from the banks is willing to discuss the ramifications,” Mr Innes says. “I find that quite unique.” Others may find it worrying. Silencing the markets is not the same as calming them.



Read the story on Sarawalk Report

 


http://sarawakreport.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=57b26bbe9d2acafa19363b0d2&id=5f1f13517b&e=d806eda40a


Isnin, 28 November 2016

Sebab hitler membunuh yahudi

Sebab hitler membunuh yahudi




saya boleh bunuh semua yahudi ketika saya berkuasa. Saya tinggalkan sedikit kepada kamu agar kamu kenal siapa yahudi dan cari jawapan kenapa saya membunuh mereka

Seringkali, tabiat, perilaku dan pendirian seseorang adalah hasil dari pengalaman masa lalunya. Semasa kecil Hitler adalah seorang anak yang dibuang, ayahnya sangat membencinya dan menganggap perilakunya yang “antisosial” itu adalah sebuah hinaan kerana Alois Hitler (Ayah Hitler) mengawini saudaranya sendiri. Adi (nama kecil Adolf Hitler) dilahirkan pada tanggal 20 April 1889 di sebuah kota kecil di Austria dekat perbatasan Jerman. Ayahnya adalah seorang yang keras dalam mendidik anak sedang ibunya baik kepadanya.

Ibunya adalah salah seorang dari sedikit orang yang benar-benar disayangi oleh Adolf. Ibunya sangat percaya bahawa anaknya adalah seorang pintar dan selalu menganggap anaknya normal, walaupun sejak kecil sudah menunjukkan gejala destruktif dan antisosial. Umur 18 tahun, Adolf sudah menjadi seorang yatim piatu setelah ibunya meninggal dunia sedangkan ayahnya sudah meninggal terlebih dahulu sebelumnya. Masa kecil yang diliputi dengan kebencian dan perlakuan tidak adil dari ayahnya ini memberikan pengaruh besar dalam mental dan kejiwaan Hitler dewasa.

Ada hal yang harus kita fahami bahawa, jangan meremehkan “dendam masa kecil”. Contoh lain juga boleh kita dapati dari kisah Mao Tse Tung. Mao kecil pernah bersekolah di sekolah yang didirikan oleh para pendakwah dari Eropah, oleh sebab suatu hal Mao dimaki oleh salah satu pengajar dengan makian yang bersifat perkauman “anjing kuning!” dan mulai saat itu Mao tidak pernah kembali ke sekolah itu.

Membenci kaum agamawan. Kemudian menjadi pemimpim komunis terbesar di China, juga menjadi pembunuh tegar, jutaan kaum terpelajar dan seniman tewas dibunuh dan dihukum buruh paksa dalam Revolusi Kebudayaan 1965. tidak kalah sadis dengan Hitler Sebuah dendam masa kecil; inilah bahayanya jika itu dialami oleh seorang pemimpin!

Hitler awalnya bercita-cita menjadi seorang seniman (bukan menjadi tentara/ ahli politik). Sebagai pencinta seni, maka dia mencuba mendaftar ke sebuah fakulti seni di Wina, Austria, tetapi ditolak. Penolakan ini memiliki kesan besar bagi dirinya.

tekanan, yatim-piatu, tidak ada wang, sehingga dia selama kira-kira setahun menjadi kebiasaan, hidup dari belas kasihan orang lain di jalanan. Selama itu, dia juga mulai benci terhadap orang Yahudi, kaum pendatang yang hidup lebih mewah, dan ini dikuatkan dengan pendengaran dari ceramah yang sifatnya “Antisemit” oleh Walikota Vienna Karl Lueger.

Teori Lueger yang menyalahkan kekacauan ekonomi dan politik kepada kaum Yahudi, mengispirasinya menjadi pembenci kaum Yahudi sepanjang hidupnya. Ini pula yang membangun ideologinya dan menganggap bangsa Arya adalah ras tertinggi. Banyak orang berkata, seandainya saja dia diterima di sekolah seni tersebut, mungkin Hitler hanya akan menjadi seniman seperti Picasso misalnya, mungkin sejarah juga akan lain ceritanya. Disinilah salah satu titik pentingnya Hitler, dia mengubah sejarah (meskipun ke jalan yang dianggap salah). Garis hidupnya bagaikan takdir yang tidak boleh diubah.

Di tahun 1914, Jerman ikut serta dalam Perang Dunia 1 dan Hitler masuk tentera. Sewaktu perang di garis depan, dia terluka, dipulangkan dan mendapatkan anugerah untuk keberaniannya. Selama perang, Hitler berangsur-angsur menjadi seorang patriot untuk Jerman meskipun dia sendiri bukan warga negara Jerman (dia lahir di Austria). Maka dari itu, sewaktu Jerman kalah perang, dia tidak mampu menerima kenyataan, kerana bagi Hitler, Jerman adalah yang terkuat. Dia lalu menyalahkan para 'pengkhianat', terutama orang Yahudi sebagai penyebab Jerman kalah perang.

Jerman setelah kalah perang porak poranda. Keadaannya sangat tegang dengan kota-kota yang hancur, harga barang tinggi ditambah lagi dengan datangnya gerakan-gerakan revolusi komunis. Hitler sendiri tetap berdiam di tentera. Hitler membenci orang-orang dari berbagai ideologi, termasuk komunis (Karl Marx adalah seorang Yahudi), sosialis kapitalis dan liberal. Sebenarnya pangkat tentera Hitler hanya sampai Kopral, boleh dibayangkan betapa hebatnya orang ini, dia menjadi Army Commander yang ditakuti seluruh dunia pada Perang Dunia 2.

Tahun 1919 Hitler lalu bergabung dengan sebuah partii kecil bernama Parti Pekerja Jerman dan meninggalkan pasukan tenteranya. Saat berhasil menjadi pemimpin dan akhirnya mengubah namanya menjadi parti NAZI. Tahun 1920, Hitler menerbitkan simbol Swastika dan Tahun 1921 Parti ini semakin kukuh dengan didukung oleh kelompok ketenteraan Amerika.

Disinilah kita boleh melihat salah satu kepintaran Hitler, berorganisasi dan berpidato. Apapun yang Hitler katakan adalah seperti sebuah “Religion’s order” yang membuat pengikutnya menjadi super fanatic.

Maka sebab utama kenapa Adolf Hitler membunuh bangsa yahudi kerana mereka menjadi pengkhianat Negara Jerman walaupun yahudi dilayan baik dan hidup mewah sedangkan mereka cuma pelarian.



http://kekoh.blogspot.my/2010/07/sebab-hitler-membunuh-yahudi.html?m=1


KENAPA NAJIB PAYAH SANGAT NAK LETAK JAWATAN?

Suatu ketika dahulu, pertanyaan yang setiap hari biasa didengar ialah "bila Najib nak letak jawatan?"


Tetapi sekarang ini, yang paling kerap ditanyakan pula ialah "kenapa Najib susah sangat nak letak jawatan?"


Jika di negara-negara lain, pemimpin yang terpalit dengan skandal kewangan seperti Najib ini, lumrahnya mereka akan mengundurkan diri dengan senang hati kerana tidak mahu nama baik sendiri, keluarga parti dan negara terus bertambah buruk kerananya.


Di negara kita pula, jangankan disebabkan ada skandal, malah hanya kerana gagal mendapat kemenangan selesa pun mereka akan mengundurkan diri demi sayangkan parti dan negara.


Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Alhaj meletak jawatan selepas keputusan buruk pilihanraya yang diikuti dengan tragedi 13 Mei 1969, manakala Tun Abdullah Badawi juga berundur selepas hilang dua pertiga pada pilihanraya 2008.


Tetapi Najib bukan saja tidak mahu berundur meskipun keputusan pilihanraya 2013 pimpinannya berkurangan tujuh kerusi berbanding pilihanraya 2008, lebih buruk lagi meskipun setelah terpalit dengan kemelut 1MDB, derma RM2,600 juta dan dana RM42 juta SRC International, beliau masih juga mahu menggagahkan dirinya bertahan di kerusi kuasa Perdana Menterinya.


Najib bukan saja tidak mahu mengikut contoh teladan yang ditunjukkan oleh Tunku Abdul Rahman dan Tun Abdullah Badawi, malah juga berbeza dengan Tun Mahathir Mohamad.  


Meskipun Tun Mahathir juga menghadapi beberapa penentangan ketika eranya, tetapi bukan saja semua persoalan dijawab dengan sebaiknya, malah beliau menutup mulut mereka yang mengkritiknya dengan kejayaan melepasi dua pertiga setiap kali pilihanraya.


Itulah antara sebabnya apabila beliau mengumumkan untuk berundur daripada jawatannya pada 2002, ramai yang menangis dan memujuknya. Dan kemudian apabila peralihan kuasa kepada Tun Abdullah Badawi berlaku pada 2003, kehilangannya begitu dirasai.


Dengan keinginan Najib untuk terus bertahan sedangkan banyak persoalan mengenai dirinya terbiar tidak mampu dijawab, UMNO dan negara pastilah akan menjadi korbannya.


Najib ketika ini bukan saja menjadi tadahan kebencian rakyat dan masyarakat antarabangsa, malah imej negara di bawah kepimpinannya tidak lagi seharum seperti dulu.


Dalam keadaan ini, bukankah berundur lebih baik demi kebaikan UMNO dan juga negara?


Tetapi, kenapa payah sangat Najib mahu berundur? Apa lagi yang mahu dipertahankannya? 


Daripada anak Perdana Menteri kini sudah pun merasa menjadi Perdana Menteri, lalu pencapaian apa lagi yang mahu ditunggunya?


Apakah Najib sebenarnya bimbang tindakan undang-undang dan penjara akan menantinya jika mengundurkan diri ketika ini?


Namun tidakkah, kiranya UMNO dan BN kalah pilihanraya nanti, undang-undang tetap juga akan mengejarnya?


Berapa peratus keyakinan Najib terhadap kemampuan untuk terus mengekalkan kuasa sedangkan setiap hari suara penolakan semakin bergema di mana-mana?


Dengan Tun Mahathir bersama beberapa bekas pemimpin UMNO dan kerajaan sudah bersama pembangkang dalam Deklarasi Rakyat untuk menolak Najib, jika ia berterusan sehingga PRU 14, siapakah lagi yang mampu menyelamatkan masa depan parti itu daripada tertanggal kuasanya?


Sebagai rujukan paling mudah, isu Najib ini boleh saja diumpamakan seperti seorang suami yang kantoi berskandal dengan wanita lain. Menyelesaikannya hanya perlu mengaku dan meminta maaf. Jika maafnya dapat diterima, kembali dan kukuhkanlah rumahtangga semula.


Jika maafnya ditolak, undur diri tetapi yang pentingnya, isteri dan anak-anak boleh mencari kebahagiaan sendiri selepas itu.


Namun dengan terus mempertahankankan diri seolah-olah tiada skandal, sedangkan sudah ada anak sebagai bukti dan jiran-jiran juga bercakap mengenainya, hubungan dengan isteri, anak dan keluarga bukan saja terus mencuka, silap-silap "anunya" suami juga boleh dipotong ketika sedang tidur lena. (SH 21/03/2016).



http://shahbudindotcom.blogspot.my/2016/03/kenapa-najib-payah-sangat-nak-letak.html?m=1


How Petro Saudi's Tarek Obaid Nabbed $43 Million From 1MDB's Energy Langat Heist!

How PetroSaudi's Tarek Obaid Nabbed $43 Million From 1MDB's Energy Langat Heist!

24 NOV 2016

Why did Jho Low use stolen money from 1MDB's 'Aabar/BVI Phase' in 2012 to pay PetroSaudi's Tarek Obaid via a secretive off-shore company in BVI?......


Official photo Tarek Obaid

Bank details released by the Singapore Court in the case of BSI banker Yak Yew Chee give a telling insight into how the plunderers from 1MDB were laundering and spending their stolen money.

Yak has pleaded guilty to a number of money-laundering charges carried out for 1MDB’s Jho Low, which included lying to other banks on his behalf.

Prosecutors said one of the key accounts used for distributing money siphoned out of the fund in 2012 was a company named Alsen Chance Holdings, held at Standard Chartered Bank in Singapore and managed for Low by his agent Eric Tan.

Sarawak Report has identified that one of the payments made from that account was $43 million dollars sent on 30th October 2012 to the off-shore company Maplehill Properties BVI, which is owned by the PetroSaudi Director Tarek Obaid.

According to the Singapore investigations, this $43 million payment came straight from a massive theft from 1MDB’s Energy Langat the day after a total of $260 million arrived in the Alsen Chance account.

PetroSaudi was the company involved in a separate, earlier controversial venture with 1MDB in 2009, from which billions also went missing.

Obaid joins entertainer Swizz Beatz, already revealed to have received $800,000 from the same account. That money is believed to be linked to a performance Beatz was due to give at Jho’s Birthday bash in Vegas the following month, said to be the most lavish event ever seen in the gambling town.


Tarek, like ‘KAQ’ was paid immediately after the 1MDB Energy Langat money entered the Blackstone/Alsen Chance accounts

How the money travelled

The paper trail produced by the Singapore prosecutors shows that no less than $790 million had been immediately siphoned out of 1MDB subsidiary company Energy (Langat) after it raised a $1,75 billion bond in October 2012, through Goldman Sachs, ostensibly to invest in power plants.


Khadem Al Qubaisi passed the stolen $790 million through a bogus Aabar account and then creamed off $129 million via a later backhander from Jho Low’s Blackstone Asia Real Estate Partners Limited

That payment was later accounted for on the spurious notion that it was a “refundable deposit” to the Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund Aabar, paid as security for its co-guarantee on the loan.

In fact, the entire amount was channelled 19th October into a bogus Aabar subsidiary company in the British Virgin Islands, called Aabar Investments PJS Limited, which had been set up by two Directors of Aabar, who were co-conspirators in the heist.

From there $442 million was rapidly transferred (via two bogus Curacao-based investment funds called Cistenique and Enterprise Emerging Markets) to another hub company controlled by Low named Blackstone Real Estate Partners Limited BVI, which also had an account at Standard Chartered Singapore.

A week later, on 31st October, Blackstone transferred $129,000,000 back to the Aabar Chairman, Khadem Al Qubaisi, using his Edmond de Rothschild Vasco Trust account in Luxembourg.

Meanwhile, $260 million had been flipped on 29th October to Alsen Chance (which like Blackstone was set up by Eric Tan at the same Standard Chartered Bank branch in Singapore). The following day Alsen Chance sent Tarek Obaid’s Maplehill Properties the $43 million.


Bank statement for Alsen was included in Singapore Court papers

It can be seen that Eric Tan (Tan Kim Loong) was also paid a cool million dollars out of 1MDB’s stolen money for his pains in running these accounts. $5 million went to a company called Strategic Markets amongst a number of other recipients.

Payment to PetroSaudi?

Sarawak Report has already established that Maplehill Properties is entirely owned by Tarek Obaid and it was through this off-shore company that he held his share in the Hong Kong company Plato One, which is in turn the major shareholder of Bellevue Education, which controls several private schools in the UK and also in Switzerland

So, why was this director of PetroSaudi receiving secretive payments into his off-shore account, from money filched from the 1MDB Energy (Langat) deal and how much of it is now sitting in top private schools in the UK and Switzerland?

The money came from ‘Aabar Phase’ not ‘Good Star Phase’!

The US Dept of Justice/FBI investigation into money stolen from 1MDB identified PetroSaudi as being involved in facilitating the first major theft from the Malaysian development fund, which it dubbed ‘The Good Star Phase’ in its 136 report in July.

However, by November 2012 the arrangement with PetroSaudi had been allegedly terminated, 1MDB having claimed it sold its share in the joint venture arrangement for $2.3 billion.


Mohammed Al Husseiny CEO of Aabar

The bond issue for 1MDB Energy (Langat) was then raised as part of what the DOJ/FBI described as the second “Aabar/BVI Phase” of the scam, conducted in collusion with Aabar Chairman Khadem Al Qubaisi and his CEO Mohamed Al Husseiny (both now in jail in Abu Dhabi).

Given that the PetroSaudi Directors are continuing to argue, via teams of expensive lawyers in Switzerland and the US, that they themselves were merely innocent victims also of the shennanigans in 1MDB (having originally denied there was any wrong doing) we ask why was Obaid accepting this concealed payment?

Surely, if there had been a genuine debt related to his earlier business with 1MDB, it should have been paid up front to one of the companies in the PetroSaudi group not through Jho Low, who claimed to have no connection with 1MDB anyway?

Earlier payment to Tarek was through Good Star

Jho Low has continued to deny that he is the owner of the company Good Star Limited, which siphoned out over a billion dollars from the original joint venture with PetroSaudi and paid Tarek $85 million straight after.

Likewise, PetroSaudi still publicly maintain that it is indeed they who own Good Star, even though the Singapore and US authorities have now confirmed through documentation that the owner was Jho Low.


Jho opened the Good Star Account at Coutts – Documents in Singapore court case

So, isn’t it time Tarek and PetroSaudi finally came straight and told Malaysians what has been going on…. or time somebody arrested the lot of them?

The Singapore statements also show that Good Star Limited paid $33 million into the Alsen Chance account on 17th October, replenishing the account which had just dropped beneath one million dollars. Immediately after several multi-million dollar payments were made (including to Cinema Archives, a company likely to have been used by Red Granite in the making of Wolf of Wall Street at that time).

Wind up payment?

It a matter of record that the 1MDB PetroSaudi engagement had finally been wrapped up the previous month in September 2012, with the alleged ‘buy out’ of 1MDB’s PetroSaudi shares by an obscure company named Bridge Global. Bridge Global then ‘invested’ 1MDB’s purported proceeds in an opaque Cayman Islands fund.

So, was this $43 million some kind of termination payment to Tarek and if so on what basis was it agreed and what did it have to do with Jho Low?

If PetroSaudi still maintain they own Good Star Limited, which they were continuing to claim just weeks ago, what is the connection to Alsen Chance and Jho Low?

Victim or Voleur? Time to explain!

Tarek Obaid and his partner Patrick Mahony have threatened to sue numerous press organisations, employing lawyers at great expense over very many months, in order to deter coverage of their ‘innocent dealings’ with 1MDB. Yet we can confirm they have still failed to contact Sarawak Report, which has been publishing numerous articles, which have received millions of hits.

Instead, they have commissioned PR people, such as the Swiss Marc Comina to orchestrate black PR and shadowy online defamation campaigns against this blog. We suggest this is because they fear a confrontation in court about the facts.

However, now the whole matter has been settled in open court in Singapore, Tarek Obaid can no longer shy away from an explanation to the Malaysian public as to why he received this payment…. after all it was their stolen money and he is now proven to have repeatedly lied on the 1MDB’s behalf.


If Tarek Obaid is a ‘victim’ he owes a public explanation to Malaysians.


Sabtu, 19 November 2016


posted from Bloggeroid


posted from Bloggeroid


posted from Bloggeroid

BERSIH5 - JAMAL ANTARA TAHAN TERBARU OLEH POLIS

BERSIH5 - JAMAL ANTARA TAHAN TERBARU OLEH POLIS

Posted: 18 Nov 2016 10:57 AM PST




Pengerusi Gabungan NGO Malaysia, Datuk Seri Jamal Md. Yunos ditahan oleh polis awal pagi ini menjadikan sejauh ini seramai 14 orang ditahan.


Utusan Malaysia melaporkan Jamal ditahan di rumahnya di Ampang sementara Berita Harian melaporkan dia ditahan di sebuah hotel, di  Jalan Tun Razak.


Jamal, ditahan oleh Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah (JSJ) Kontinjen Selangor, sekitar jam 1.30 pagi, ketika berada dalam bilik hotel berkenaan.


Sumber - Malaysiakini

Jamal yang juga Ketua UMNO Bahagian Sungai Besar dibawa ke Ibu Pejabat Polis Kontinjen Selangor, Shah Alam bagi membantu siasatan.


Penahanan tersebut sekaligus menjadikan 13 individu ditahan berhubung penganjuran himpunan haram di sekitar Dataran Merdeka hari ini.


Sebelum ditahan, malam tadi Jmal menyifatkan penangkapan Pengerusi BERSIH 2.0 Maria Chin Abdullah dan pegawai sekretariat gabungan itu yang juga Ahli Sekretariat Bersih,  Mandeep Singh adalah perkara yang sepatutnya dilakukan polis dalam memelihara keamanan.


Pemimpin Baju Merah itu berkata sememangnya BERSIH mempunyai “agenda jahat” menghasut rakyat turun ke jalan raya untuk menjatuhkan kerajaan pimpinan Datuk Seri Najib Razak yang dipilih secara demokrasi menerusi sistem pilihan raya.


Dalam kenyataan malam semalam, Jamal juga berkata kumpulannya akan memastikan BERSIH gagal meneruskan demonstrasi hari ini.


Dengan penangkapan Jamal, kini seramai 14 individu yang dipercayai bakal terbabit dengan perhimpunan di sekitar ibu negara, sudah ditahan sejak jam 5 petang semalam.


Tangkapan membabitkan pemimpin kumpulan Bersih 5 dan Gerakan Merah.

Sementara itu, Maria Chin Abdullah dan, Mandeep Singh direman di Ibu Pejabat Polis Kontinjen (IPK) Kuala Lumpur esok.





Peguam yang mewakili mereka, Eric Paulsen dan Melissa Sasidaran berkata, Maria ditahan di bawah Seksyen 124C Kanun Keseksaan kerana cuba untuk melakukan aktiviti yang memudaratkan demokrasi berparlimen.


"Mandeep ditahan di bawah Seksyen 147 Kanun Keseksaan kerana merusuh.


"Kedua-dua mereka dipindahkan ke Kuala Lumpur dan akan direman pada Sabtu," kata Eric pada Sabtu.


Sejauh ini, selain Jamal,  Maria Chin dan Mandeep Singh, pemimpin lain yang juga ditahan adalah Ahli Parlimen Seremban, Anthony Loke; bekas Exco Selangor, Ronnie Liu dan pemimpin parti PSM, S Arutchelvan.


Turut ditahan adalah dua aktivis, Luqman Nul Hakim Zul Razali dan Jurucakap Gabungan Tangkap MO1, Anis Syafiqah Md YusofAnis Syafiqah serta dua ahli DAP, Jimmy Wong dan Lee Khai Ming.


Beberapa yang lain termasuk dari Baju Merah, Baju Hitam dan aktivis masyarakat turut ditahan.


Sementara itu, kira-kira 7,000 anggota polis akan bertugas pada perhimpunan Bersih 5 dan Gerakan Merah di ibu negara hari ini.





Timbalan Ketua Polis Negara, Datuk Seri Noor Rashid Ibrahim berkata, polis juga bersedia untuk bertindak jika ada peserta perhimpunan yang melanggar undang-undang dan ingkar arahan polis.


"Tujuh ribu anggota polis akan turun ke padang bagi memastikan tiada sebarang ancaman atau perkara tidak diingini berlaku esok (hari in) ," katanya kepada pemberita pada majlis prebiu dan pelancaran buku 'Coffee Table' PDRM semalam.


Beliau berkata, tanggungjawab polis adalah untuk memastikan keselamatan, ketenteraman awam dan menegakkan undang-undang yang ada di negara ini. 


"Kami akan jalankan tanggungjawab sebagai anggota polis dan saya seru agar sebaiknya orang ramai tidak terlibat dengan mana-mana pihak pada perhimpunan esok," katanya.



Dalam pada itu, polis trafik dalam satu kenyataan  menyebut 58 jalan utama di beberapa lokasi sekitar Dataran Merdeka akan dilencongkan manakala 12 laluan ditutup bermula pukul 7 pagi hingga perhimpunan selesai hari ini.



http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/YGbI/~3/5wj620zMoxk/bersih5-jamal-antara-tahan-terbaru-oleh.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email

posted from Bloggeroid

Jumaat, 18 November 2016

HIMPUNAN BERSIH5 'TIDAK HARAM', IKUT PERLEMBAGAAN PERSEKUTUAN?

Posted: 17 Nov 2016 10:16 AM PST
Kempen yang disebarkan supaya orang ramai menyertai BERSIH5.
Penjawat awam itu siapa? Guru itu siapa? Pensyarah dan pelajar itu siapa? Juga,  belia itu siapa?

Bukankah mereka rakyat yang dijamin Perlembagaan untuk bebas menyuarakan pendapat dalam negara demokrasi seperti Malaysia?

Menyekat kebebasan rakyat adalah zalim. Dan zalim juga bagi rakyat yang melanggar peraturan ditetapkan dalam menyuarakan pendapat dan pandangan mereka.

Namun jika menyuarakan pendapat secara mematuhi peraturan seperti menyertai perhimpunan yang terkawal, apakah ia suatu ‘dosa besar’ yang perlu dikenakan tindakan dan hukuman berat?

Mereka hanya mahu menyuarakan pendapat dan pandangan. Kenapa mesti ada tindak balas yang berlebihan?

Sewajarnya tidak ada provoksi sama ada oleh pihak yang berhimpun, mahupun yang ‘menentang perhimpunan itu diadakan’.

Pihak berkuasa cukup jentera untuk kawal keselamatan sepanjang perhimpunan itu. Tindakan secara peribadi atau kumpulan lain terhadap BERSIH5 tidak perlu sama sekali.

Jika ada pihak umpamanya Barisan Nasional, UMNO atau badan bukan kerajaan (NGO) lain, termasuk Baju Merah,  mahu mengadakan perhimpunan untuk agenda mereka, carilah tarikh lain.

Jangan haling mereka, lihat setakat mana BERSIH5 mahu menyuarakan pandangan.

Kerajaan mempunyai jentera penerangan dan ‘serangan siber’ yang canggih untuk melawan mereka.

Jelas dan terangkan kepada rakyat apa yang tidak benar dibawa oleh BERSIH5. Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya (SPR) juga ada jentera maklumatnya.

Apa nak dihairankan dengan perhimpunan seperti itu. Mudah untuk dipatahkan hujah mereka jika kerajaan menggunakan ‘kebijaksanaan jentera penerangan dan maklumatnya.”

Lagipun, jelas BERSIH5 bukan perhimpunan haram. Ia sesuatu yang dibenarkan.

Berasaskan kepada keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur petang semalam, jelas perhimpunan BERSIH5 Sabtu ini bukan haram..

Lewat petang semalam, mahkamah berkenaan  menolak permohonan tiga kumpulan untuk menghalang BERSIH5 dan perhimpunan Baju Merah, Sabtu ini.

Mahkamah tidak dapat mengisytiharkan sesebuah perhimpunan itu sebagai haram selepas permohonan dibuat oleh  persatuan peniaga di Jalan Masjid India, Lorong Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman dan Medan Mara di Kuala Lumpur supaya mengisytiharkannya ‘haram’.

Persatuan itu  mendakwa mewakili kira-kira 1,000 peniaga.

Hakim S Nantha Balan berkata plaintif dalam permohonan injuksiinter-parte tidak menunjukkan merit. Jesteru itu, beliau menolaknya. Beliau terkejut apabila peguam BERSIH dan Baju Merah sama-sama menolak permohonan itu.

“Luar biasa sekali Baju Kuning dan Baju Merah boleh sepakat terhadap permohonan injuksi peniaga-peniaga di dan sekitar Dataran Merdeka,” katanya, ketika memulakan keputusannya.

Penghakiman Mahkamah Tinggi itu disampaikan pada 7.20 petang semalam dan tamat 15 minit kemudian.

Ketua Setiausaha Negara Tan Sri Dr Ali Hamsa semalam turut mengeluatkan amaran kepada penjawat awam dengan menegaskan, lazimnya penjawat awam tahu yang mereka tidak boleh menyertai mana-mana perhimpunan haram dan beliau berharap mereka tidak akan menyertai perhimpunan kali ini.

Berikutan itu beliau mengingatkan penjawat awam supaya tidak menyertai sebarang kumpulan atau perhimpunan yang tidak diluluskan di ibu negara Sabtu ini.

Mereka berdepan tindakan tatatertib termasuk buang kerja atau potong gaji.

Penjawat awam perlu ‘berkecuali’ – tidak menyertai Bersih5 yang memilih warna kuning sebagai lambang perjuangan mereka, atau satu lagi pergerakan, yang menamakan mereka kumpulan Baju Merah.

Pada ketika Bersih5 menuntut pilihan raya yang bersih, Baju Merah mendakwa Bersih menggerakkan agenda asing untuk menjatuhkan kerajaan sedia ada.

Baju merah mengugut untuk menganjurkan perhimpunan balas di tempat sama dan pada hari yang sama.

Tegasnya, Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam (JPA) juga akan mengambil tindakan terhadap penjawat awam yang sekiranya gambar mereka terlibat dalam perhimpunan tidak sah itu tersiar dalam mana-mana media.yang memberikan amaran itu.

Bagi penjawat awam yang menyokong BERSIH5 atau Baju Merah, mereka wajar tinggal di rumah sepanjang hari (lusa)  atau melakukan aktiviti lain tetapi jangan sertai perhimpunan.

Jika membantah atau tidak bersetuju, pendamkan sahaja di dalam hati. Islam ada cara menolak sesuatu perkara sehingga memendamkan di dalam hati dan menolaknya secara niat atau menyerahkan kepada Allah untuk menentukannya.

Dalam proses demokrasi, rakyat boleh menolaknya pada hari mengundi. Di hadapan kertas undi mereka boleh menyokong dan membantah.

Ali Hamsa tidak menyebut secara jelas, apa peruntukan undang-undang boleh digunakan terhadap penjawat awam yang menyertainya tetapi cara beliau mengeluarkan arahan akan menyebabkan penjawat awam yang menentang akan memendam rasa dan meluahnya melalui kertas undi.


Selain KSN, Menteri Pelajaran Datuk Seri Mahdzir Khalid turut menghalang guru menyertai perhimpunan pada Sabtu ini di Kuala Lumpur dan beberapa bandar besar lain.

Katanya semua guru dilarang menyertai BERSIH5 atau berdepan tindakan disiplin. Mereka boleh dihukum ‘gantung dari tugas’.

‘Selain guru, pegawai dan kakitangan kementerian, pegawai Jabatan Pelajaran Negeri dan daerah yang menyertai perhimpunan berdepan tindakan yang sama,” katanya kelmarin.

Malah beliau meminta ibu bapa dan penjara, jangan benarkan pelajar sekolah menyertai perhimpuan berkenaan.

Pandangan Ali Hamsa serta Mahadzir itu jelas bertentangan dengan apa yang disebut oleh bekas penjawat awam yang berpengalaman, Tan Sri Razali Ismail yang kini menjawat  Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (SUHAKAM).


Sangat bertentangan dengan pendapat KSN kerana menurut Razali, larangan dan ugutan itu menjadi pelanggaran terhadap Artikel 10(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan jika hak kebebasan berhimpun secara aman disekat.


 “SUHAKAM mengulangi lagi iaitu menerusi Akta Perhimpunan Aman 2012 (APA), semua rakyat Malaysia ada hak untuk berhimpun secara aman dan tanpa senjata,” katanya dalam satu kenyataan.

Walaupun demikian Razali menekankan,  sementara hak untuk mengadakan demonstrasi balas perlu dikekalkan, polis dan pihak berkuasa perlu memastikan tindakan peserta tidak berubah menjadi ugutan dan merusuh.

Beliau berkata SUHAKAM menyokong usaha polis menunjukkan disiplin dan melaksanakan penguatkuasaan undang-undang.

“Ini ialah ciri kematangan politik,” katanya.


Selain itu, katanya SUHAKAM akan memantau perhimpunan berkenaan dan jabatan aduannya akan menerima laporan daripada orang awam.

Daripada Blog : Suara Rakyat Malaysia
Suara Pakatan Harapan Rakyat Sabah

Jumaat, 21 Oktober 2016

I Only Just Found Out - Says DiCaprio

I Only Just Found Out - Says DiCaprio


Leonardo DiCaprio has finally, after months and years of denial, come out to say he will hand back donations funded by 1MDB.

In a statement (his first on the subject) he said:


“Several months ago in July, Mr. DiCaprio first learned through press reports of the [U.S.] government’s civil action against some of the parties involved in the making of ‘The Wolf of Wall Street’,” an LDF spokesperson said in a statement. “He immediately had his representatives reach out to the Department of Justice to determine whether he or his foundation, the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation (LDF), ever received any gifts or charitable donations directly or indirectly related to these parties, and if so, to return those gifts or donations as soon as possible.”



We appreciate Mr DiCaprio’s first step, disingenuous though it clearly is. The wealthy actor ought, of course, to tot up the various monies and favours he has received from projects and parties funded by 1MDB, at least from the date that extensive publicity in Hollywood made it plain there were serious problems with the company Red Granite and his palm oil pals from Malaysia.

To pretend he only just found out about the problem is merely bad acting, at a time when full sincerity was needed. For example, take this article from Deadline (read throughout Hollywood) about DiCaprio over two years in 2014, which was one of many to highlight the issues being raised by Sarawak Report over his film Wolf of Wall Street:

‘Wolf Of Wall Street’ Producers Send Second Cease & Desist To Former UK PM’s Sister-In-Law Over Blog Posts Alleging Corruption

January 27, 2014 3:56pm

EXCLUSIVE: The legal war of words over where the money to make The Wolf Of Wall Street came from has just heated up again. Late last week, lawyers for financiers Red Granite and principals Riza Aziz and Joey McFarland sent another dense cease and desist letter to UK-based blogger Clare Rewcastle Brown and her Sarawak Report over her alleged “recent unlawful and outrageous activities in violation of our clients’ rights, including your persistent fabrication and dissemination of false information about our clients and their business.” As of yet, no official legal action has been taken against Brown over her numerous posts about Red Granite, where its money comes from, and who its investors really are. Still, in a 7-page letter (read it here) sent Friday, Red Granite attorney Sunny Brenner of Santa Monica firm Loeb & Loeb says: “Make no mistake: Our clients will not hesitate to take whatever steps they deem necessary or appropriate to safeguard their rights and protect their reputations, and your time to take the necessary corrective action is rapidly running out.”

Brown, sister-in-law of former UK PM Gordon Brown, told me today from the UK that she has no intention of pulling down her posts, which have been published over the past month. “I believe the substance of my articles are correct and much of what I have printed is drawn from already published material in the United States,” she said. “If there are any unintentional inaccuracies, I am always willing to address and correct and indeed apologize for them. However, the pages of blanket and contradictory criticisms from Mr. Aziz’s lawyers only have one objective, which is to threaten and intimidate me into withdrawing my articles in their entirety. This I have no intention of doing.”

Red Granite was first announced in 2011 with a Kanye West concert and a big Cannes party. The producers behind Friends With Kids and Out Of The Furnace provided all of the approximate $100 million budget for the Martin Scorsese-directed Wolf. After winning the Lead Actor in a Comedy/Musical at the Golden Globes, Leonardo DiCaprio singled out producers Aziz and McFarland with thanks “for not only being collaborators but for taking a risk on this movie.”

Like the previous letter sent January 2, Friday’s Loeb & Loeb letter details a litany of allegations against the the Sarawak Report posts slamming Red Granite, which includes that Aziz finances movies partially through “illicit funds emanating from the Malaysian government” where his stepdad is PM and that McFarland was a party planner for Paris Hilton and others on the celebrity circuit. Needless to say, lawyers for Red Granite deny all the “untruths,” as the January 24 letter calls them. Both letters demand that Brown retract “all of the false and misleading statements concerning our clients that Sarawak Report has published” and post corrections, pay legal fees, stop trying to get on the company’s property and take down any pics from Wolf or screen shots. It also incorrectly cites a Deadline article by my colleague Pete Hammond as being by Brown. The January 22 Sarawak Report post was called “Dumped From The Oscars” and refers to our piece on the Academy finalizing the producer credits on Wolf from the day before.

With all that, where would Red Granite actually go after Brown if it  were to sue? The most likely jurisdiction is the UK, where libel laws are considerably more favorable to the allegedly defamed than in the U.S. However, changes that took effect on January 1 tightened up British law to reduce what was seen as a rising tide of libel chill. A new “serious harm threshold” requires claimants to determine whether they have actually suffered defamation and not just been lipped off. Additionally — and which could be significant for a UK website writing on Malaysian matters concerning an American company — so-called libel tourism measures now require a strong British connection before bringing a matter to the courts. Lastly, the Defamation Act of 2013 has a specific mechanism outside the courts for handling cases where someone believes they have been attacked online.  The process funnels would-be victims to try to settle the matter with the individual(s) who posted the material in question. All of which is to say it might be a while before Red Granite is hauling Brown and Sarawak into court here or over there.



http://sarawakreport.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=57b26bbe9d2acafa19363b0d2&id=9643a6bf6a&e=d806eda40a


Selasa, 18 Oktober 2016

Speakers Ought Speak For Parliament

Speakers Ought Speak For Parliament


Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia today said questions related to the United States Department of Justice’s (DoJ) civil complaint on 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) should not be answered in the present sitting as it is tantamount to subjudice.

He said the issue is still a court matter and therefore, the minister involved (Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak) should not answer related questions.

Pandikar said he would instead give a written explanation on his decision today to those who had submitted questions on DoJ’s civil complaint. “I have made my decision, unless there is a private motion (on the issue). “I did not make the decision in haste, but it was made after taking into account the legal implications on the country involved. “Whatever decision made in this sitting will also be known by those in other countries due the advancement of information technology,” he said.

His decision however, was questioned by Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Gelang Patah) and Gobind Singh Deo (DAP-Puchong), who claimed that the proceedings were not in Malaysia and Pandikar’s controversial ruling would set a precedent to similar cases in the future.

In his firm response, Pandikar said both DAP members of parliament should first read the written answer before making any allegations against him. “We do not want to create a negative perception before the time comes for the minister involved to answer the questions,” he said.



Source:Speakers Ought Speak For Parliament, New Straits Times

Comment

One assumes that the holder of the august office of Speaker cannot be ignorant or that at least his advisors cannot be so.

Therefore, one can only lament that he is exploiting ignorance in others and cultivating the dissemination of false information about the law.

Sub-judice rulings exist to prevent the influencing of juries in criminal cases. As Malaysian Government officials have repeatedly said, so far the 1MDB case in America is not a criminal case.

Furthermore, although the vast majority of Malaysians rightfully believe there ought to be a case under way in Malaysia relating to this matter, there is not.  So, it is not sub-judice on those grounds either.

So, sadly the Speaker is talking nonsense and it is plain it is in order to slap silence on a subject that ought to be of primary importance in Parliament and which the Prime Minister ought to answer to.

The reason for his behaviour is obvious. In real Parliamentary democracies the Speaker is chosen by MPs to represent them and ensure fair play.

In Malaysia the Speaker is appointed by none other than the Prime Minister himself, to represent him and to shut up anybody causing difficulties to him by doing their job in representing the people in Parliament.

By silencing Parliamentarians on the subject of primary importance of the day the Speaker is indulging in Activities Detrimental to Democracy, which is the charge Najib has laid against this blog for exposing his own criminal thefts.


http://sarawakreport.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=57b26bbe9d2acafa19363b0d2&id=00bcff5e07&e=d806eda40a


Rabu, 12 Oktober 2016

SHAME ON 'SCUMNO'! As Singapore And Swiss Point Finger At Najib Once More

SHAME ON 'SCUMNO'! As Singapore And Swiss Point Finger At Najib Once More

12 October 2016




Politically exposed person

There were more shockwaves created by 1MDB on Tuesday with a series of coordinated announcements by Switzerland’s regulatory agency FINMA and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS).

These included another banking shutdown; more arrests in Singapore; threatened arrests in Switzerland and for the first time the formal naming of Jho Low and his father in the BSI affair.

At the centre of all these charges and accusations lay the glaring, monster-payments, stolen from the Malaysian development fund and then channelled by these guilty parties into the KL bank accounts of Prime Minister Najib Razak.

The CEO of FINMA, Mark Branson, was quoted calling 1MDB:


“one of the largest cases of suspected corruption in recent times. The global financial system has been blatantly misused. Suspect financial flows in the billions have been shifted through banks of multiple nationalities and financial centers on three continents, and warning signals ignored.” [FINMA Statement]



However, as everyone in Malaysia knows, Najib’s UMNO party will claim that ‘no wrong-doing has been proven’ and that the Prime Minister ‘was not mentioned by name’ as the politically exposed person, described as having received $681 million into his bank account in March 2013 and then returned $620 million from KL to Singapore following the GE13 election (as admitted by Najib).

FINMA/ MAS Statements Decoded

As actions continue to be taken to clean up and punish the facilitators of Najib’s thefts officials have made little effort to disguise the transactions they are referring to.

Just last month SR had predicted that the sudden resignation of Falcon Bank CEO Eduardo Leemann signalled a chaotic situation at the bank, owned by Abu Dhabi’s Aabar fund, whose own top managers had been exposed as key collaborators in Najib’s removal of billions from Malaysia in the US Department of Justice suit of July 20th.



First arrest of a European banker over 1MDB – BSI’s HansPeter Brunner remains grounded in Singapore following questioning, his passport confiscated.

Today MAS shut down Falcon’s Singapore branch; fined the bank US$4.3 million for 14 separate breeches of money laundering regulations and sensationally announced that the Commercial Affairs Department had arrested its Swiss Manager Jens Sturzenegger.

There had been a repeated pattern of failings when it came to due diligence and Anti-Money Laundering procedures at the bank, MAS said, not only at branch level but Head Office in Switzerland.

It was then that MAS pointed its finger directly at the focal 1MDB case in this affair and at the Prime Minister’s relationship with the two Aabar fund bosses, Chairman Khadem Al Qubaisi and CEO Mohammed Al Husseiny, both arrested in Abu Dhabi on evidence of having conspired in the looting of 1MDB.

Al Husseiny was Chairman of the Board of Falcon during the period in 2013 when $681 million was passed into Najib’s KL account and then $620 million received back again a few months after the May election. And, according to MAS:

“[Falcon’s] Head Office failed to guard against conflicts of interest when managing the account of a customer who was associated with the bank’s former Board Chairman Mohamed Ahmed Badawy Al-Husseiny. The former Chairman misled and influenced the Singapore Branch into processing the customer’s unusually large transactions despite multiple red flags.” [MAS Statement]



That customer (as any ‘idiot’ can tell, in the words of Rahman Dahlan) was Jho Low’s agent, Eric Tan, who was sending hundreds of millions of dollars to Najib Razak.

FINMA’s own parallel statement on Falcon Bank filled the gaps on MAS’s story. The Swiss said their own investigation covered the period from 2012 – 2015, identified by Sarawak Report as the period during which Aabar first assisted in the theft of billions from 1MDB, then the laundering of the money:

Falcon Private Bank Ltd. has seriously breached money laundering regulations by failing to carry out adequate background checks into transactions and business relationships associated with Malaysian sovereign wealth fund 1MDB which were booked in Switzerland, Singapore and Hong Kong…. The breaches in question relate to business relationships and transactions in the context of the alleged corruption scandal surrounding the Malaysian sovereign wealth fund 1MDB.”





Original 2012  power purchase loans by 1MDB were funnelled through Falcon – Jho Low’s side-kick Jasmine Loo received her kickback into an account at Falcon  Anyone with links to political figures is considered a ‘PEP’, including Jho Low, his father, Jasmine Loo, Eric Tan, Al Husseiny, Al Qubaisi

Not only has FINMA therefore fined Falcon CHF 2.5 million; banned the bank from entering into relationships with ‘foreign politically exposed persons’ for three years and threatened it will remove its banking licence at any further breech, the regulator also equally sensationally announced that it has launched ‘law enforcement proceedings against two of the bank’s former executive office holders’ back in Zurich.

Potential candidates for such a prosecution include the former CEO of the bank Eduardo Leemann, who had earlier lectured journalists that what the banking industry needed was less regulation not more:



In the frame? Leemann was anxious to please his Aabar bosses

The responsible Falcon top managers, FINMA explained, failed to take appropriate action over suspicious 1MDB transactions involving around $3.8 billion dollars, which triggered standard banking ‘red alerts’, even when asked by staff to do so [red alert points added in bold]

“Assets amounting to approximately USD 3.8 billion were transferred to accounts at Falcon and associated with the 1MDB Group during that period. These funds were generallymoved on quickly. The business relationships and transactions booked in Switzerland and at Falcon’s Singapore and Hong Kong branches were unusual and involved a high level of risk for the bank both through their nature and theamounts transacted. Although management’s attention was drawn to these matters, it repeatedly failed to properly investigate the business relationships, specifically those with politically exposed persons (PEPs), and high-risk transactions; “





Second major Falcon Bank transaction involved Tanore Finance Corporation’s transfers to Najib

Again FINMA focused on the known transactions related to Najib, managed by a Malaysian agent of Jho Low, called Eric Tan.

Tan was also referred to in the US Department of Justice indictment in July as the stated beneficial owner of the Tanore Finance Corporation account in Singapore, which passed the US$ 681 million to Najib in March 2013.

According to FINMA:

“Falcon also had a client relationship with a young Malaysian businessman [ERIC TAN] with links to individuals in Malaysian government circles [JHO LOW]. The bank did not verify how this individual had been able to acquire assets of USD 135 million in an extremely short period of time or why a total of USD 1.2 billion was transferred to his accounts at a later date – a transaction which was clearly at variance with the information he had provided when opening the account. Falcon also failed to adequately investigate the commercial background to pass-through transactions amounting to USD 681 million and the repayment six months later of USD 620 million via these accounts despite conflicting evidence.”[FINMA Statement]



Sarawak Report has identified the transactions referred to in this case as those linked to Tanore Finance Corporation, which passed money raised by a Goldman Sachs bond issue for 1MDB raised in March 2013 straight through to Najib’s KL bank account in one single day… ready to finance UMNO expenses for the election Najib was about to announce.

The Department of Justice has already detailed how the money raised by Goldman was transferred in the course of a single day – 21st March – through a complex financial path on to Najib. From Goldman it had been transferred to New York Mellon bank, then all on the  21st March $1.5 billion was sent to first BSI Lugano (now also closed by regulators owing to breeches linked to 1MDB); then distributed amongst three off-shore investment funds; then sent to Eric Tan’s Tanore Finance Corporation account at Falcon Bank in Singapore and then finally (all on the same day) forwarded to Najib’s AmBank account in KL

Staff at lower levels in Falcon Bank immediately raised the red alert with their senior management about this huge and suspicious transaction, says FINMA.  But, their rightful protests were ignored at the highest levels in the bank, purely because of pressure from the Najib’s Aabar co-conspirators on the Board.

“Falcon ..failed to adequately investigate the commercial background to pass-through transactions amounting to USD 681 million and the repayment six months later of USD 620 million via these accounts despite conflicting evidence. In this context, an internal Falcon email states: “We started this six months ago and now we have to go through with it – somehow”…. A number of bank employees expressed serious concerns to their managers about the relationship with the Malaysian businessman because of numerous suspicious factors and key questions remaining unanswered. One internal email relating to the transfer of USD 1.2 billion states: “We can’t find any reason/motivation/statement why this transaction has to pass through FPB [Falcon] and not from [Bank X] directly to the respective parties […].” Nevertheless, these internal warnings were not followed up satisfactorily.  Although the bank’s decision-makers were aware of these internal concerns, they decided to carry out the transactions. The focus was always on trying to process the transactions on time. One senior manager warned the Singapore branch carrying out the transactions: “Head Office is watching you”.



The DOJ indictment has already confirmed that both the Falcon Bank ex-Board Members involved, Aabar CEO Al Husseiny and Aabar Chairman Al Qubaisi received kickbacks from the 1MDB stolen money for utilising Falcon in this way.  The banks Swiss management were willing to allow it, FINMA says.

Members of the board of directors initiated the business relationships

Two representatives of the bank’s owners who were on the board of directors initiated business relationships with the 1MDB Group and with individuals from their immediate circle. The managers responsible for these relationships therefore attached great significance to them and were concerned to ensure that they operated smoothly.
According to their own statements, they assumed that the two board members represented the will of the bank’s owners as far as these relationships were concerned. Both board members pursued their own illegitimate purposes.”



Again, whilst all these parties are now facing the destruction of their careers, fines and far worse punishments, the author of the crime remains Najib Razak, protected by UMNO in KL.

Further major announcements point to Najib also

Further 1MDB related announcements the same day emphasised the criminal nature of the enterprise set up and orchestrated by Prime Minister/ Finance Minister Najib and managed through his agent Jho Taek Low.

In July Sarawak Report broke the news that UBS Bank had handled major transfers for 1MDB, through an account in the name of the fake off-shore Aabar PJS Investments Limited BVI, held in Singapore.

Sarawak Report illustrated how this UBS account was used tofunnel hundreds of millions of dollars in fast transfers (often the money remained for less than one day in the account) of 1MDB related money – the purpose being to fool the fund’s accountants that money had been returned from a bogus Cayman fund investment of non-existent profits from 1MDB’s original PetroSaudi deal.

The Monetary Authority of Singapore has announced that as a consequence of its negligence, apparently over this ’round-tripping”, UBS has been fined US$1.3 million for 13 breaches of MAS Notice 626:

“The inspections revealed several breaches of AML requirements and control lapses.  There were deficiencies in the on-boarding of new accounts, weaknesses in corroborating the source of funds, inadequate scrutiny of customers’ transactions and activities, and failure to file timely suspicious transaction reports.





UBS did not file suspiscious transaction reports on these fast flow transactions until long after

Also in the frame is the Singapore Bank, fined $10 million for ten similar breaches linked to 1MDB (Sarawak Report has yet to obtain the details).

The MAS made clear that it has yet to complete its findings on Standard Chartered Bank, which also acted as a clearing bank and receiving bank on a number of these deals and also hosted the vast Jho Low account for the bogus off-shore company Blackstone Asia Real Estate Partners, which funnelled large sums to Khadem Al Qubaisi’s Rothschild account in Luxemboug and into further kickbacks to Najib’s AmBank account, to Jasmine Loo and to Al Husseiny.

Jho Low and his Dad cited in further BSI arrests



Yak Yew Chee, ex-BSI manager finally arrested for his handling of suspicious Jho Low accounts as well as SRC and 1MDB/Brazen Sky transactions

For the first time also the welter of Singapore announcements included direct referrals to the lynch-pin Jho Low and his father’s roles in the 1MDB money-laundering system as two more arrests were also made relating to the now defunct BSI.

Yak Yew Chee, who has faced questioning for months and a colleague, Yvonne Seah Yew Foong were finally arrested, making the total of employees arrested from the former bank to four. They are charged with failing to alert to suspicious transactions on Low’s account and to forgery of references for Low.

The suspicious transactions related to the $700 million stolen from 1MDB’s joint venture from PetroSaudi, according to court papers. This was the money, which had been siphoned into Low’s Good Star account in RBS Coutts Zurich. Low and his father later transferred the money a number of times before using it to buy investments in the United States under the guise of ‘family’ money, according to the DOJ.

The charges against Yak and Seah relate to the transfer on Nov 2, 2012 of US$153 million from a Coutts Zurich account of Good Star, a firm Mr Low controlled, to the BSI Singapore account of Abu Dhabi-Kuwait-Malaysia Investment Corp. Three days later, the US$153 million was moved to Mr Low Hock Peng’s BSI account. On Nov 7, US$150 million was moved to another BSI account held by Mr Jho Low. And from his account, US$110 million was transferred to a Swiss account of Selune, a firm he beneficially owned. [Straits Times]



However, whilst authorities the world over are prosecuting in all directions over 1MDB’s vast web of stolen money, Najib remains in KL ‘cleared’ of all charges by his own appointed Attorney General and UMNO party stalwarts.

Much of Malaysia’s stolen money has been spent on keeping UMNO big wigs quiet, as this global scandal just grows and grows.






http://sarawakreport.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=57b26bbe9d2acafa19363b0d2&id=06d7af78ba&e=d806eda40a