Anwar’s secret accounts

ARCHIVES 2013

By admin-s On Jul 21, 2013

The party that has capacity to investigate the existence of the secret accounts is the government. They would not waste a single second if they have evidence to pounce on Anwar. The fact they did not, means they are just fabrications.

Sakmongkol AK47

Anwar Ibrahim is accused of having 20 secret accounts all over the world. The amount of money in these accounts totalled RM332 million. In exchange for that money, what has Anwar given in return? According to the BN storyline- our national security may have been exposed. We are not told how. Because that is the usual BN style- they create a storyline and ask us to deal with it. So, we will humour the storytellers.

Is Anwar selling secrets about the country to foreign powers? The BN people want to believe that is what Anwar is doing and therefore Anwar has committed treason. Anwar is a traitor. Has Anwar Ibrahim done an Edward Snowden feat? Which is, expose some highly sensitive and secretive government covert action and by so doing, compromised our security?

Razak Baginda sold military secrets to the French firm that sold our scorpene submarines. He has committed treason. But he is free enjoying a life of perpetual salad days in England. Why isn’t he tried for treason? He sold navy secrets to French submarine makers. He also got more than RM500 million in commissions which is more than RM332 million.

Yes let’s persecute and prosecute Anwar Ibrahim for treason so that we can bring back Razak Baginda and try him on charges of selling Malaysian Navy’s secrets. Let us humour the BN people on attempts to goal Anwar Ibrahim and see where it ends.

On the 18th of July, the BN MPs voted against the motion to commit the MP from Simpang Renggam to the Rights and Privileges Committee. They have claimed ownership over a wrong doing and therefore must defend it at all cost.

To me the MP has misled parliament. The acid test would have been straight forward. Ask Wikileaks to verify whether they published the story about the accounts. Because the MP claimed that is his source of information. If they have not then clearly the MP has lied. He did not even read Wikileaks but to lend some legitimacy to his claim, he cited Wikileaks as his source of information.