Najib says that everything is concoctedPosted: July 4, 2008
First, watch this video:
Watch it till the very end, because there’s where he goes: “Why should I be investigated?”
He goes on to say: “The police have investigated the entire Altantuya case. So they know everything.”
I’m not the only one who thinks it’s ridiculous to retort in this manner. Susan has her own take here. In response to Najib’s retort: “Give me one good reason why I should be investigated.”, Susan has this to say:
God, there had been several reasons. But he chose to dismiss them all as “concocted claims” out to tarnish his reputation.
His claim that the police “know everything” is somewhat unagreeable to me. How can he claim that the police know EVERYTHING? Would the police claim the same? That Bala made a Statutory Declaration saying that there was information omitted from his statement points, at the very least, towards a POSSIBILITY that there might be some facts “lost in transmission”.
The first SD that made headlines was RPK’s SD, claiming that Rosmah, Aziz Buyong and Norhayati were at the scene of “explosion”. All the people named in the SD denied having anything to do with the case, and have all efficiently called RPK a liar, and his motives malicious.
But investigations have been carried out anyway. The people mentioned in the SD were asked to give statements anyway. When something as “explosive” as that was made public knowledge, it was only common sense that at least SOME investigation was to be made. That is, if the police were still in any way a working system.
This second SD, to me, is more believable than that of RPK’s. Not that I don’t trust the man, and nor is it because I have a personal dislike of Najib. (I’m not saying I like him, of course, but that’s not the reason why I find Bala’s SD more believable.) What Bala has sworn is what he has heard from the people DIRECTLY INVOLVED in the case. He has sworn what was told to him by (1) the accused, and (2) the victim.
Like what some people are saying, Bala’s SD is similar to that of RPK’s SD, in that both are based on hearsay. Meaning that both Bala and RPK have not seen with their own eyes, and cannot be asked to swear that it is the truth, because they don’t know if it is the truth. They can only swear that it was what they were told.
While RPK’s SD remains “mysterious” in more ways than one, Bala’s SD is something that can seriously be investigated on. Because he had named names. Najib’s name was not the only one.
There was Razak Baginda‘s name, from the beginning till the end. Investigations should be held to see if he can confirm that he had indeed told these things to Bala. There were also a few other police officers. Can they not be called up for investigations as well? Surely the police should also have a record of who it was that took down Bala’s statement from the 7-day interrogation. They should investigate that person too. And then there’s Bala’s assistant, Suras (a dodgy fella, in my opinion), and the lawyer to Razak Baginda who allegedly read the SMS from Najib as well.
So many names, so many ways to investigate and truly get to the bottom of it. This SD does not solve the case. In fact, it has thrown more questions than answers into the equation. But that is also the reason why investigations should be carried out, (1) to find out if there is any credit to the questions that arised, and (2) to find the answers to those questions.
Are these not reasons enough for Najib to be investigated?
Apparently, he doesn’t think so. Because to him, it is more important for us Malaysians to know if it is true that Anwar did sodomise Saiful.
Which to me is sick. The Altantuya case is a murder case. How does a murder case compare to a case of “illicit sex”? Someone, enlighten me.
But since he brought it up, I might as well have my day too.
He said, sometime in the middle of the questioning about Najib’s involvement according to Bala’s SD, that it was all an attempt to pull the attention away from the sodomy allegation against Anwar. And then he goes on to say that he had met Saiful “a few days before” Saiful lodged the report against Anwar.
This, of course, is totally in contradiction with his earlier claims that he had never met the man before. Which again, just says the exact same thing of Najib: he is a liar.
Or wait. Maybe he just wanted to keep his name away from the case, so that he isn’t pinned with the accusation of the issue being a conspiracy. After all, he did reiterate that it is not a conspiracy.
But then again, thinking back, Saiful made the report on Saturday. He alleged that he was sodomised by Anwar on Thursday. Meaning that there was only Friday and Saturday morning in between the “time of crime”, and the time of the report.
But Najib said Saiful went to see him “for help” a few days before he made the report, and appeared to be very traumatised. I would assume that one cannot be traumatised before something actually happens.
To go to Najib “for help” is laughable. And to go to his RESIDENCE? Be serious.
But it should be easy to prove if Saiful did go to Najib’s house, because I assume that there would be guards who can testify when exactly that happened, if it did.
But one question still remains, one that Najib seems fond of, and one that should also be bounced back to him: WHY NOW?
He asked, why did Anwar make that police report against the AG and IGP only after the sodomy accusation? Why did Bala make that SD only after the prosecution is about to wrap up the case? Why now, he asked.
But then, why is Najib only saying that he did meet with Saiful before he made the police report against Anwar? Why NOW?