Denial
Yes, in their eagerness to prove me wrong (that the building cost RM30 million and not RM60 million), they raised other and more important issues — not telling us where the money came from, not telling us how much money was collected, not telling us since the money was not in Umno’s account then whose account it was in, not telling us how they obtained the land, and not telling us where the balance of the land went to.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Denial (also called abnegation) is a defence mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence. The subject may use:
1. Simple denial: deny the reality of the unpleasant fact altogether.
2. Minimisation: admit the fact but deny its seriousness (a combination of denial and rationalisation).
3. Projection: admit both the fact and seriousness but deny responsibility.
Unlike some other defence mechanisms postulated by psychoanalytic theory (for instance, repression), the general existence of denial is fairly easy to verify, even for non-specialists. On the other hand, denial is one of the most controversial defence mechanisms, since it can be easily used to create unfalsifiable theories: anything the subject says or does that appears to disprove the interpreter’s theory is explained, not as evidence that the interpreter’s theory is wrong, but as the subject’s being “in denial”.
Denial of fact
In this form of denial, someone avoids a fact by lying. This lying can take the form of an outright falsehood (commission), leaving out certain details to tailor a story (omission), or by falsely agreeing to something (assent, also referred to as “yessing” behavior). Someone who is in denial of fact is typically using lies to avoid facts they think may be painful to themselves or others.
Denial of responsibility
This form of denial involves avoiding personal responsibility by:
1. Blaming: a direct statement shifting culpability and may overlap with denial of fact.
2. Minimizing: an attempt to make the effects or results of an action appear to be less harmful than they may actually be.
3. Justifying: when someone takes a choice and attempts to make that choice look okay due to their perception of what is “right” in a situation.
Someone using denial of responsibility is usually attempting to avoid potential harm or pain by shifting attention away from themselves.
The above was lifted from Wikipedia and was not written by me.
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad denied that Anwar Ibrahim’s Sodomy 1 trial was actually political persecution in spite of the many flaws in the trial where even I, a non-lawyer, could see just by attending the trial in the public gallery (and which the Federal Court later ruled that the Prosecution had failed to prove Anwar’s guilt).
Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak denied knowing or meeting ‘that Mongolian woman’ without explaining the involvement of his office (his aids, bodyguards, best friend Razak Baginda, etc.) in the murder, the deleted immigration records, the testimony of witnesses during the trial, the admission by the convicted police personnel, and much, much more.
First Lady Rosmah Mansor denied buying (or receiving as a gift) the USD24-million diamond ring in spite of the Customs documents showing that the ring WAS brought into the country and was done so in her name (and later declared that it had been ‘returned to sender’).
The head of the Negeri Sembilan religious department went before the nation on primetime TV news to deny that a certain VVIP had been caught for khalwat with a well-known singer in a hotel room in Port Dickson without explaining why the need to do such a thing if not because of the talk in town and without explaining whether the incident did happen and if so who were the persons involved.
Zainuddin Maideen denied he had an affair with his Indonesian maid.
Abu Hassan Omar denied he was having an affair with his sister-in-law without explaining why he was forced to relinquish his post of Menteri Besar.
Shahidan Kassim denied having affairs with students and underage girls and made them pregnant without explaining why the Raja of Perlis refused to accept him as the Menteri Besar due to these allegations (which the Raja of Perlis confirmed by talking to the girls concerned).
Idris Jusoh denied the many allegations of corruption without explaining why the Sultan of Terengganu refused to accept him as Menteri Besar due to these allegations (after the Sultan personally saw the evidence).
Khir Toyo denied the many allegations of corruption without explaining how he accumulated all that wealth on his Menteri Besar’s salary and without explaining how the court could then find him guilty of corruption.
The ex-IGP, Musa Hassan, denied being the patriarch of the Chinese underworld and crime syndicate without explaining the eight Affidavits signed by senior police officers and underworld bosses that implicated him as the boss of the crime syndicate.
Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi denied he was planning to marry Jeanne Danker in spite of spending Christmas with her in Australia (and later did marry her).
Umno denies it is a racist party in spite of backing Perkasa and Pekida and in spite of the Umno leaders heading Pekida and Ibrahim Ali being Tun Dr Mahathir’s very close friend.
PKR denies sabotaging Zaid Ibrahim in the Ulu Selangor by-election in spite of the reporters who leaked the story confirming that the doctored photograph of Zaid with the beer bottle was handed to them by Azmin Ali and not by Umno.
I, Raja Petra Kamarudin, denied the charge of sedition in spite of admitting that I am the man behind Malaysia Today and in spite of my name being on the article, ‘Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell’, that was published in Malaysia Today and asked the government to prove it in court (so they took me to court).
Yes, I too play the game of denial. And then I ask the accusers to prove it. We all play that same game. But if PKR also plays that game then they will be no better than all those others mentioned above.
PKR leaders deny any wrongdoing in Selangor without showing us the list of lawyers who have been given legal work and the amounts involved.
PKR needs to claim the moral high ground. This is because PKR is offering itself as a better, cleaner, more transparent, etc., government compared to Umno. So mere denial would be no better than Umno.
PKR needs to prove me wrong. And if I am wrong then I will tender a public apology. Maybe my Deep Throats are wrong. Or maybe they intentionally set me up with a Red Herring.
Whatever it may be, only by revealing the list of lawyers who had been given work and the amounts involved can PKR claim the moral high ground. Mere denial would be the stuff that Umno is made of.
However, be warned of one thing.
Some years back I alleged that Umno Sabah had collected RM100 million in donations from business people to finance the construction of their RM60 million Umno Sabah headquarters. I then asked: what happened to the balance RM40 million?
That was a Red Herring.
Rahim Ismail then issued a press statement saying that the building cost RM30 million and not RM60 million. I knew it was RM30 million. But by saying that it was RM60 million I anticipated they would correct me and call me a liar.
I was not concerned about the figure. What I wanted them to confirm was that they did in fact build a multi-million ringgit building. But they totally avoided the subject of where the money came from and how much it was. Umno Sabah’s accounts did not show that they owned a building, whether RM30 million or RM60 million. So who then actually owns that building?
Furthermore, that building was built on a piece of state land that was alienated to Umno. Yes, land owned by the rakyat given to Umno. That was the important issue.
What is even more important is that only PART of that huge piece land was used for the Umno building. What happened to the balance of the land? Who was it transferred to? And we are talking about prime land here.
Yes, in their eagerness to prove me wrong (that the building cost RM30 million and not RM60 million), they raised other and more important issues — not telling us where the money came from, not telling us how much money was collected, not telling us since the money was not in Umno’s account then whose account it was in, not telling us how they obtained the land, and not telling us where the balance of the land went to.
As I always said: watch my left hand hidden behind my back, not my right hand raised in front of your face. That’s how magicians perform their tricks and make you believe what you see, which are mere illusions.
