YOURSAY | ‘In it, he seems to have covered all queries from the Malaysian public.’

Do as you please with US$375m gift, Saudi prince says in letter to Najib

Odin Tajué: I have the greatest respect for Najib Abdul Razak, the prime minister of Malaysia who has a sterling record of bringing far greater prosperity to his country and people than any of Malaysia's former prime ministers, honouring all the promises he has made, very much concerned for the happiness and dignity of the practitioners of faiths other than Islam in his country, leading a frugal, almost spartan life, and known to be habitually working like some 36 hours a day, if not more, in his quest for bettering the quality of life of his beloved people.

It pains me greatly that at the very least 20 foreign news agents and purveyors have fabricated highly incriminating fiction to portray Najib as nothing less than a big-time crook, adulterer, and murderer.

These are Agence France-Presse, Reuters, Aljazeera, Asia Sentinel, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Bloomberg, CNBC, Financial Times, International Business Times, New York Post, New York Times, Sarawak Report, South China Morning Post, Sydney Morning Herald, The Telegraph, The Wall Street Journal, The London Sunday Times, The Economist, The Australian, and the Washington Post.

The claims by the ABC that we hear now are utterly ridiculous, the height of absurdity; the insinuations, most deplorable.

The over US$1 billion that the blue-blooded of Saudi Arabia had given to Najib was indeed nothing more than a no-cable-attached, as-innocent-as-a-newborn-baby gift.

But Najib, being the most forgiving, totally tolerant soul that has ever walked this earth, has stoically borne the pain of the ignominy, and will continue to do so.

I am angry. Very angry. I shall take my leave now and gnash my teeth into microscopic calciferous bits.

Malaccan: Is the ABC’s publication of the purported letter to force a response from Prince Saud Abdulaziz Majid Al-Saud, either to affirm or deny it?

However, it doesn't alter the fact that such a huge sum of money coming from a foreigner and one who is integrally linked to another nation, begs the question of its appropriateness.

Did the money come in with hidden conditions and why was it not channelled through official channels since the purported donation was given to the PM for his actions as the PM, and not as a private citizen?

It will be interesting to see the developments in the days to come. But as it is, it is hard to ignore and dismiss the high stink that is coming from the mountain under the carpet.

If there was inappropriateness and there if there were laws broken, it will be more than the PM who will have to face the music.

There can't be denials then by those whom have been rabidly supporting him.

RM2.6 Billion Turkey Haram: Do you write an explanatory letter to the receiver of a gift telling him that you do not hope for benefit anything in return and at the same time telling that it is not corruption? Very weird.

And looking at the amount of donation received, it is mind boggling. Why, of all world leaders, many are far better than him, Najib is so special that he attracted such huge donations into his private account?

Any other leaders, of course honest ones, would shudder at the sight of such huge sums of money deposited into his account for no rhymes and reasons. But not for Najib, the chosen one.

Ipohcrite: Even a casual reading of the purported letter from a Saudi prince would give one the unmistakable impression that it was clearly scripted, post-discovery of the purported RM2.6 billion in the prime minister's personal account, to legitimise and authenticate the donation story.

Yet, nobody is fooled, except the smart aleck who so brilliantly thought of this pathetic caper to con the gullible.

Mushiro: Indeed, this is a very suspicious letter written by the prince as the prince seems to have covered all the queries from the Malaysian public. I wonder if Umno have 'drafted' the letter for the prince.

Maplesyrup: If the money is above board, any leader of any salt will declare it voluntarily to avoid being misunderstood. Shrouding it in secrecy does not speak well of the integrity of all concerned - donor or beneficiary alike.

God Save Us: So it’s okay for all civil servants to receive gratifications in the course of their dealings with the public, if they also receive an accompanying letter saying the gift was given in appreciation of services rendered and should not be considered a bribe, which would be wrong and against the principles of the law?

What is good for the PM should be good for the rest of us, right? The attorney-general himself, in all his wisdom, suggested the same by decrying that accepting massive "donation" does not constitute an act of corruption.

Anonymous 1890491455255851: Yes, this is just so bizarre. There is no way in hell that anyone gives millions of dollars to a leader of another nation and say “do as you please”.

I can only repeat this - bizarre!

Dalvik: Anyway, let's not forget that Najib once claimed that he did not use those 'donation' for personal gain. But ABC's revelation on the credit card spending had proved otherwise.

Anonymous 122461436161429: And so the Pandora's box is opened. The money was allegedly given to do as he pleased. We can now see what allegedly pleased the PM - cars, jewellery, holidays, textiles, etc.

If indeed it was a donation to the country, please tell us how the jewellery benefitted the country. If it was donation to the PM, isn't he taking bribes and gratification which ought to have been disclosed?

This is getting sicker and sicker by the minute.

So now, there’s not one prince but many princes

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.