'It's absurd to believe that after rising to be a brigadier-general, he was found to be inefficient. This PRO actually believes we are fools.'
Brig-gen's sacking unrelated to missing engines
X'roy: This is serious. If the brigadier-general was not sacked because of the engines, then what? When a brigadier-general is sacked, there must be cause for concern. Was a court marshal not carried out because the government has its integrity compromised?
Roki: All the MSM (mainstream media) had reported that the brigadier-general and 40 personnel were sacked because of the theft of the two jet engines. Even the prime minister himself did not deny this, which indirectly confirms the original report. Why the sudden denial by RMAF (Royal Malaysian Air Force).
No high ranking military officer, particularly the rank of brigadier-general, gets sacked due to reasons related to inefficiency and work performance. In fact, in the civil service once a person is confirmed, it's almost impossible to sack them unless they have been convicted of committing a serious crime such as murder, rape, drug trafficking or robbery, etc.
So if this brigadier-general was sacked, he must have committed a very serious crime indeed, so much so that it would affect the image and honour of the whole RMAF.
And what about the brigadier-general's 40 thieves? Don't tell me that they were all sacked due to inefficiency and work performance too? The PRO's statement is too glaring a lie to be believable.
Nil: If the brigadier-general and several other personnel were sacked for inefficiency, that inefficiency must surely have contributed to the theft of the engines. It is still no excuse...
Kba: It's absurd to believe that after rising to be a brigadier-general, he was found to be inefficient. This PRO (public relation officer) actually believes we are fools.
Lau BL: I think everybody knows that when you tell a lie, you end up telling more lies to cover the lie that you have told, and then more lies will have to be told. Eventually, all lies will contradict one another because you end up forgetting what lies you have spewed.
If you want greater transparency, there must be check-and-balance system in place. As it is, everything appears to the public to be "do-what-I-say, don't-do-what-I-do".
Malaysian for Malaysia: Unfortunately I have to agree with Dr Mahathir Mohamad on this. Specifically on the fact that the author works for a Singapore think-tank. Singaporeans generally hate Dr M, and Malaysia in general. I know most of the other readers may dispute my comment here, but living in Johor Bahru definitely gives me an insight on the issue of Singaporean-Malaysian relations.
The author should also write about Lee Kuan Yew (LKY) and Goh Chok Tong - the two previous prime ministers of Singapore. There's a lot to be said about these two PMs especially LKY and his long rule of Singapore. The rest of Dr M's comments.... pooh... paah... old man ranting.
Cala: During the Mahathir's time, the favourite tactics were:
i) Negotiated tenders on the award of contracts
ii) Projects running on super-fast speed so that the normal rates could be multiplied many folds
iii) Turnkey projects under public-private initiatives where they involved the design, built and transfer. Example: PKFZ.
What was the advantage? So that the check-and-balance system which we inherited from our colonial masters was dismantled.
Si Chay Beng: Mahathir is up to his old tricks again, first trying to divert the attention by trying to find faults in Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and now he asks the writer why he did not write on Singapore leaders.
But Mahathir, don't you realise that what we are interested to know is not what other people do, but rather what have you got to say about the RM100 billion that the writer alleged that your actions had cost the nation.
I believe you must have read his book, so please answer them squarely and don't bring in any other issues which we are not interested to know.
Lee Heng Soon: How can we have lop-sided toll concessions with Umno-linked contractors that every single person that drives on Malaysian roads has to pay toll fees for 30 years? For the Kajang-Cheras toll highway, the collection in three years would be enough to pay for the cost of construction. Yet we still have to pay toll fees for another 27 years.
Even my daughter will still have to pay for the toll years after I get to meet the Creator. Her children may still have to pay for the tolled road.