YOURSAY | ‘Abdul Rahman must be singing to headless sycophants.’

WSJ's baseless accusations to damage M’sia, says Abdul Rahman

Kingfisher: BN strategic communications director Abdul Rahman Dahlan's vehement defence of his boss is understandable.

But it requires much more than his repeated references to "donation" and the "exoneration" by the attorney-generals here and in Switzerland to convince many critics.

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission's finding and recommendations is a case in point. This local investigation has suggested wrongdoing needs to be resolved satisfactorily it would seem, considering the very recent observation of the MACC's operations review panel.

Abdul Rahman should be wary of his continued criticism of the Wall Street Journal as it may prompt and prod the WSJ, which claims that it has "loads of evidence" in respect to possible “ criminal misappropriation ”, to unleash another damaging set of new evidence.

Pemerhati: Abdul Rahman said, "The foreign minister of Saudi Arabia has confirmed the funds came from Saudi Arabia. He has also agreed with our attorney-general's decision and concurred there was no wrongdoing on the part of our prime minister.”

He also pointed out that the attorney-general of Switzerland had also confirmed that PM Najib Razak was not being investigated .

Abdul Rahman conveniently left out the very important fact that the foreign minister had said that it was an investment . That means that the assertion by Najib and his lackeys that the fund was a donation is a blatant lie.

Najib is not investigated because the crooked transactions were done by Najib’s lackeys, but the transactions would not have been carried out without the instruction and approval of Najib.

Odin Tajué: Abdul Rahman, the manner in which you and Communications and Multimedia Minister Salleh Said Keruak (among very many others) argue your case in support of Najib is just pathetic.

It indicates the intellect of a village idiot’s. Those who are slow on the uptake and are ignorant of many things surrounding the matter might believe you.

What both of you have been doing is like standing on the drawbridge to defend your lord in the castle behind and are armed with toy swords in the hope to ward off hordes of Huns galloping furiously towards you and are armed with real battle axes, heavy broadswords, maces, polearms and sundry other weapons.

I have sufficient materials to write a piece that can demolish your puerile attempt. But me writing it would be a sheer waste of my time and effort. Because you both are like spoiled brats obstinately, continuously reciting ‘I want'.

So I shall only say this: if WSJ and others are wrong and Najib is right, then Najib must take them to court for defamation.

Since Najib has no guts at all to take any of those parties to court, then the utterly simple fact is that he is guilty of the charges, implied or stated directly, that he has took vast sums of money indirectly from 1MDB and SRC International.

I trust you have sufficient intelligence to understand that.

Quigonbond: Abdul Rahman must be singing to headless sycophants. Repeated denial won't help repair the PM or Malaysia's reputation. Only suing WSJ will do so. Not suing will damage Malaysia.

He should take one for Malaysia if he loves Malaysia so much, and sue WSJ where they are domiciled. Imagine being cleared by US courts - now that's the best whitewash he can ever dream of getting.

Versey: According to the BBC report by Frank Gardner, it also mentioned that: "A British corporate investigator with extensive experience of the Middle East told the BBC that the US$681 million was paid through the Singapore branch of a Swiss bank owned by the rulers of Abu Dhabi.”

This British corporate investigator also said: "It is very murky" and "This case will never be fully cleared up until the Saudis and the Malaysians release all the transaction data, and that has not happened."

Now, Abdul Rahman, please give some thought to it, if what your saying is true that "it had been proven time and time again that there was no link between 1MDB and the donation to the PM", why did the British corporate investigator told the BBC that the case is “very murky”?

Maplesyrup: We are not idiots, we are not looking at BBC or WSJ or Bloomberg , we are looking to see how bold the accused party is in proving his innocence, if indeed he is innocent.

So, stop telling us how bad WSJ is, just please go sue the pants off them.

Anonymous 23651434356067: How many fingers do you have to keep on pointing fingers all over. How long can you do it?

The best is to address the problem at home. Once the problem is resolved you need not have to point fingers at anyone since everyone will have nothing more to say.

As long as the main problem keeps on lingering, you cannot put any lid on it.

Roar For Truth: Abdul Rahman, please publish all the facts in MSM (mainstream media) so that Malaysians can shame WSJ for their “unethical” and “erroneous” reporting or take up a lawsuit on behalf of all our ministers and PM who are too busy to sue.

Such BS!: Perhaps WSJ is too big a fish to go after, but tell us why you can't get tycoon Jho Low to appear before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC)?

And what about those SRC directors and Bank Negara executives - are they all living in luxury abroad?

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.