Most Read
Most Commented
Read more like this
mk-logo
News
For Razak Baginda, he is the real victim

YOURSAY ‘It's all about him, his story. Dead Mongolian, rogue cops, so what?’

 

What the hell is Abdul Razak Baginda saying?

 

Turvy: We may not be stupid, but have become helpless. Vile crimes and abuses of power take place before our eyes, we watch helpless. Now our faces are rubbed in the mud of arrogance. Witless remarks and ludicrous comparisons are slugged out.

 

These things happen, we are preached. Who cares if a young woman was picked from a salubrious part of the city, shot in the head and her body blown to bits? Who cares?

 

Maybe, our brains too have been blown out. Thank you, author Kee Thuan Chye for responding. May I say, on all our behalf.

 

Odin: The last paragraph of the Abdul Razak Baginda interview in The Malaysian Insider reads, “To be honest with you, I would come up with the best legal mind and sue the sh*t of anyone who deviates from anything they could not prove. I should have done that, that is my regret.”

 

Whether he meant “deviates” or “deviated”, he should now employ the best legal mind or minds to clear his reputation, which has been besmirched beyond redemption by whatever accusations, insinuations or implications that “those who have deviated/are deviating from that they could not/cannot prove”.

 

I was advised some years ago to be wary of people who say the phrase “to be honest (with you)” - it suggests that they are in the habit of being dishonest (with you), and only in those instances when they say the phrase are they being honest (with you). In that interview alone, there are three instances of him saying the phrase.

 

The bravado, the arrogance, the machismo exhibited and the using of the word “sh*t” freely are synonymous with the character of those from the very low rungs of society's ladder and are crude, unpolished, ill-bred, and who have suddenly come into the money or assumed a position of importance.

 

Kee is absolutely correct in asking what the hell this fellow was talking about. One could describe practically all his arguments or explanations as non-sequiturs; they don't make sense in that they simply do not follow.

 

This fellow must be sufficiently intelligent, as we infer that he has earned a doctorate from an eminent university, but he seems to have become non compos mentis (not of sound mind). And in that state, he has insulted the intelligence of very many.

 

And, yes, his attempt to clear PM Najib Razak is so pathetically edentulous and groundless as to be otiose.

 

Apa Ini?: From Abdul Razak's point of view, the real victim is him - harassment from jilted lover, almost two years in jail, years in exile, and slander and shame heaped upon him. Collateral damage: his good friend Najib.

 

It's all about him, his story. Dead Mongolian, rogue policemen, so what? So what, indeed. Abdul Razak will continue to live in the shadows even if he 'emerges' for an interview. No one believes him. We think he protests too hard, the poor innocent man.

 

Lord Denning: Abdul Razak, you should have kept your mouth shut. As a war studies graduate, you should know - your enemies have already retreated, euphemistically speaking, and now with your interview (which is going to get scrutinised carefully), they are on the move from their beach and heading in your direction.

 

Kee is already asking the questions; soon the whole country will be on your back. Yes, as Kee is fond to say, no more bullsh*t!

 

Bystander: Abdul Razak's explanation of his wife's outburst “Look, he doesn't want to be PM" was because of a two-week postponement of the case was incredulous and did not jive at all.

It was more of a threat by his wife who at one point of time feared for her husband being left in the cold of Siberia to die in the conspiracy that might went wryly wrong.

 

To all Malaysians who have reasonable grey matters, it was more of an insinuation of threats should her husband was not vindicated as promised. Abdul Razak should give more interviews and there would be enough ropes to hang others who were involved, including himself.

 

He even now rubbishes the late private investigator P Balasubramaniam’s statutory declaration. After all, a dead man can't defend himself.

 

A straightforward murder would not entail blowing up an already dead body with C4, and Abdul Razak thinks Malaysians are stupid. I felt insulted.

 

Kingfisher: Considering that he had an adulterous relation with the murdered victim and that she is alleged to have blackmailed him for money at the material time of her murder, any common sense logic would identify him with having a strong motive to see her disappear from the face of this earth.

 

As he has chosen to live a marginalised life abroad away from his country of origin after his acquittal, which some Malaysians still think suspect, it may be suggestive of his discomfort with the ugly murder episode in which he was the central, if not the instrumental figure.

 

And now his wanton defence of Najib's innocence and especially his reference to the convicted policemen as “rogue” killers will marginalise him further from ordinary Malaysians who will invariably continue to suppress a vision of how an allegedly pregnant lady (as reported) was murdered and blown up with explosives in their woods.

 

CQ Muar: Abdul Razak had implied that the two police officers, namely Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azhar Umar, are "rogue cops" just like the cases of wanton killing of those under police custody.

 

Abdul Razak "cooly" blamed the two in order to ward off suspicion he was involved in the C4 murder. For such audacious allegations and charges of the unfortunate two, who are accused and sentenced to death, this is a golden opportunity for them to spill the beans with regard to those who issued the order to get rid of Altantuya.

 

Come on, Azilah and Sirul, don't hesitate and act heroic at this juncture. Just reveal those responsible; doing so will probably revert the death penalty and the gallows.

 

Swipenter: The "innocent" guy had an affair with her and her gruesome murder was just an "accident" which had absolutely nothing to do with him even she was forcibly bundled into a car right in front of his house and the next thing she was found murdered and blown to pieces by C4 by those send to help him get rid of her from harassing him.

 

Rest assured, the consequences of his affair with the Mongolian beauty and her gruesome murder have not ended. In fact, it would not end until and unless justice is done and seen to be done.

 

And justice can come in many forms for all those directly responsible for her gruesome murder.

 

Hang Babeuf: How heartless Razak Baginda “comes across” and so shows himself to be in that interview. Such a lack of compassion and tenderness and pity he shows towards his former girlfriend, the abominably abused victim.

 

His unfeeling attitude is a terrible measure, if not of the man himself, of his vacant soul, then of something else: of “something rotten in the kingdom” of Umno.

 

The whole story, and now this attempt to scare off and drive away the dead woman’s ghost by further abusing her memory, is just awful. Unbelievably awful and vulgar and brutal and inhuman. Simply vile.


The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .

These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.

ADS