Total Pageviews

Wednesday, 15 July 2015

Case unraveling, walls closing in. Desperation leads to mistakes.

In recent days, three events have severely rattled Tony Pua, The Edge Group, Sarawak Report and the rest of the opposition.

1) The first was the interview by The Malay Mail with Protection Group International (PGI) managing director Brian Lord OBE titled "Sarawak Report data on 1MDB ‘unreliable’, says PGI chief"

“There are many inconsistencies between the published data and the data which still exists on files within PetroSaudi relating to that period of time. Simply put, it is incomplete data, creatively selected and edited to fit a desired narrative.   
Lord added investigations by PGI revealed Sarawak Report had a “subtract of some emails chain and some documentation”. He, however, stopped short of divulging the contents of the emails and data Sarawak Report received. 
“It is a combination of all those three things; inconsistency between the original and published reports, substitutable communication and the whole private information claim into Sarawak Report … I can firmly say the information is unreliable and, therefore, it is unfair for anybody to draw judgments on it.

2) The Second was "Xavier Andre Justo and the clandestine Singapore meeting" which was reported by all the major dailies and online portals including initially The Malaysian Insider. 

Singapore's Govt's official newspaper, The Straits Times also reported the same.

Former PetroSaudi executive Xavier Justo allegedly met several (Malaysian) opposition leaders and the owner of a media group prior to his arrest, according to a Malay daily. Quoting a source, the Utusan Malaysia newspaper said Thai police had received confirmation that a clandestine meeting took place at the Fullerton Hotel in Singapore. 
"Thai police have received confirmation from their Singaporean counterparts that there was a secret meeting between Justo and several individuals from the Opposition, as well as the owner of a media group. 
"In fact, the Thai police have admitted that these individuals were involved in stealing, falsifying, and altering the PetroSaudi documents,
Interestingly, The Malaysian Insider initially carried this report too but strangely the article was pulled and replaced by a broken page.

Does the fact that The Edge owns The Malaysian Insider have anything to do with the page suddenly disappearing?

Is this some sort of cover-up?

3) The third was a statement by Malaysian Finance Minister II Datuk Seri Husni Hanadzlah where it was stated that the preliminary Auditor-General Report (AG) on 1MDB sent to Parliament "shows no wrongdoings".

The reckless allegations by some parties pertaining to 1Malaysia Development Board (1MBD) should be put to rest, as preliminary report by the Auditor-General (AG) investigating its activities found no evidence of any wrongdoings. 
Second Finance Minister Datuk Seri Husni Hanadzlah said these allegations including the ‘disappearance’ of RM42 billion and transfer of US$700 million should no longer arise following the report. 
“It is my hope that all these baseless allegations will be put to rest. “We have to remain patient and look forward to the final report by AG and the Public Accounts Committee (PAC),” he said in a statement, here, today.

Case unraveling - walls closing in.  Desperation leads to mistakes.

As Tony Pua, Sarawak Report, The Edge Group and the various opposition leader's many allegations against 1MDB and PM Najib Razak starts to unravel, the walls are now closing in on them that they could be involved in a conspiracy with local and foreign media to tamper with stolen data or at least be in possession of stolen data.

All this to harm the Malaysian Government and our economy!

In response, both Sarawak Report and Tony Pua seems to have lost the plot and started to attack the credibility of 1MDB, Protection Group International, Mr Brian Lords, Singapore and Thailand governments and of course, 1MDB.

However, compared to their attacks before, this time these attacks are very irrational and seems desperate.

1) Sarawak Report attacks the credibility of the Singapore Government (Thailand and Switzerland too).

Amazingly, days ago Sarawak Report came out with an article titled "Singapre - A Sin City Who Spies On Foreign Journalists While Hiding Stolen Billions?"

SIN CITY? Singapore? wow! 

What happened to you, Sarawak Report?
Why are you panicking and hitting out at TWO other countries now?  Three, if you include Malaysia. Four, if you include Switzerland which you whacked a month ago regarding the Xavier Justo arrest.

Yes. Other than Singapore, Sarawak Report also called Thailand police as corrupt and alleged they have collaborated with Malaysia. In that same article, Sarawak Report, in an open letter to Switzerland, also slammed Switzerland for not investigating the PetroSaudi-1MDB deal involving their citizen.
Sarawak Report wrote: "I strongly believe that this Swiss national is being made subject to revenge and harassment regarding a matter over which the Thai courts have no valid jurisdiction. 
I am concerned that corruption and or the misleading of the Thai authorities are behind this malicious arrest."
Sarawak Report now sensationally also accused Singapore of succumbing to pressure from Malaysia government to hide alleged crimes.

Seems like Sarawak Report has suddenly came out to condemn Thailand and Singapore government and suggesting that these two countries have now conspired with Malaysia to frame them and their collaborators.
Najib Razak visited Singapore on 5th May and it is believed the Prime Minister put pressure in terms of bi-lateral relations on the city state to withhold further information that is plainly available to the Singapore authorities about the 1MDB money trail. 
Delays from Singapore would seriously hamper the investigation into 1MDB and undermine its banking credibility, if proven to be the case. 
Yet so far there is no sign that Singapore have been willing to impart this information, despite their obligations under global anti-money laundering regulations. This raises the question if they are being pressured at the highest level by Najib to obstruct the due course of investigations?
Looks like Malaysia Govt is getting more and more powerful. Thailand, Singapore and Switzerland are now accused by Sarawak Report to be under Malaysia Govt thumb.

Soon, Malaysia can control the world, if Sarawak Report is to be believed.

2) Sarawak Report attacks the credibility of PGI, Brian Lord, OBE and the UK GCHQ

In a post titled "Going Rogue - Brian Lord and Protection Group International" just yesterday, Sarawak Report then went on the attack on the cyber-security firm engaged by PetroSaudi to investigate Xavier Justo and the stolen data of Sarawak Report. 

In yesterday's article, Sarawak Report claimed that PGI is not-partial as they are owned by a Middle Eastern businessman.
Sarawak Report wrote "Omani businessman, Mohamed Al Bawani bought a majority share in the company last autumn..."
So, Sarawak Report's reasoning is that PGI is biased since it is owned by a person from Oman whereas PetroSaudi International is from Saudi Arabia. And since Saudi Arabia and Oman are in the same Middle-East region thus they all pakat together.

Great logic!

Sarawak Report also backed up this allegation of being sold to "Middle-Eastern interests" by posting a screenshot of an anonymous comment from an ex-employee of PGI.

Circle in red by Sarawak Report. Underlines in blue by me.
Somehow, Sarawak Report missed out the comments that said PGI had managers who are great in their job and that PGI has "Military Prowess". Yes, it appears that they are not very good salesperson but I think Military Prowess and being good in their job is even more important than selling!

Sarawak Report then went on to slam Brian Lord as well as the UK GCHQ service by writing this:

"Before that, Mr Lord spent his entire working life travelling from the bottom up at the UK listening service GCHQ, which has nothing to do with servicing private companies on computer protection nor analysing news journalism. 
Mr Lord’s was a typical civil service grind by the look of his CV – 23 years of step by step promotions, before finally getting one of the deputy jobs that abound at such establishments. 
Mr Lord will have started at the bottom, because he didn’t hold a degree. So, all power to him for his progress, but he is clearly now determined to cash in on his retirement and standard-issue OBE, in order to make as much money as he can out of the cache of having worked at GCHQ."
It is shocking that Sarawak Report dismisses Brian Lord as a "typical civil service" who has worked 23 years at GCHQ, which Sarawak Report calls a mere "listening service" and that OBEs are standard issue. 

Come on, OBE stands for Order of the British Empire. Unlike Malaysia, the British government doesn't simply hand those out unless they are truly distinguished.

OBE stands for "Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire". 

Football fans would know that Sir Alex Ferguson, Arsene Wenger and David Beckham are all OBE recipients. And these people are certainly not standard issue.

In the entire history of the British Empire, only 2,202 individuals have ever received the OBE - Clare Brown certainly isn't one of them and neither was her title-less brother-in-law, ex-UK Prime Minister of just three years, the mediocre Gordon Brown.

And plus, when Brian Lord, OBE left the UK GCHQ, he left in the position of Deputy Director for Intelligence and Cyber Operations.

The cheek of Sarawak Report claiming that Brian Lord is not credible and just a civil servant!

As for the UK GCHQ whom Sarawak Report dismissed as a mere "UK listening service", you would be shocked to find out what the GCHQ does.

GCHQ is a security and intelligence organisation tasked by Government to protect the nation from threats like these. Working with our partners in SIS (Secret Intelligence Service MI6) and MI5 (yes, of James Bond fame), we are responsible for giving the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary the information needed for their decisions, and I personally attend the National Security Council to ensure that happens. 
Our predecessors were providing this intelligence as early as 1919, and in WW2 it was the tenacious and ingenious code-breakers of Bletchley Park whose work on the communications systems of the Axis powers was crucial to the Allied victory. Today, we are at the cutting edge of modern technology, delivering intelligence in the challenging communications environment of the cyber age.

The Internet brings numerous blessings for society and for business, but it has a darker side as a refuge, resource and recruitment tool for terrorists and criminals. As well as our work against these threats, we help to halt the spread of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons; and support our troops wherever they are deployed. It is GCHQ’s job to stay one step ahead of those who would do us harm. 
As these adversaries work in secret, so too must GCHQ. We cannot reveal publicly everything that we do, but we remain fully accountable. Indeed, GCHQ, MI5 and the Secret Intelligence Service are subject to one of the most stringent legal and oversight regimes in the world.
Yes, James Bond spy stuff - but in the areas of information intelligence.

Read more about what the UK GCHQ is.  Also, read "MI5, MI6, GCHQ: a matter of trust"

Certainly not just a "UK Listening Service" as Sarawak Report claims.

It is certainly really desperate of Clare Brown of Sarawak Report to discredit her own government in this way. Downright silly!

3) Tony Pua claims that 1MDB tampered with documents submitted to banks

Yesterday, Tony Pua accused 1MDB of altering ONE WORD of their March 2014 financial statements - where he claimed the word "substantially utilised" was altered to "substantially set-aside" in documents submitted to the banks for loan purposes.

Sarawak Report claims that 1MDB deceived certain local banks by changing one word
Tony Pua shockingly claims this one word change will have misled bankers and could cost banks billions of dollars of losses!

Tony Pua was essentially referring to 1MDB's March 30 2014 Audited Financial Report which carried the "utilized" and comparing to documents submitted to banks which possibly contained "set-aside".

Well, firstly Tony Pua should have known that although the Audited Financial Report had stated March 30th 2014 but the actual report was completed and submitted on Sept 30, 2014.

It is clearly stated in the audited report that the Board only authorized the redemption in August 2014 and at the date of the report (Sept 30th 2014 and not March 30th). the 1st tranche redemption fund was redeemed AND utilized at Sept 30th 2014.

Sarawak Report wrote: 

"Tony Pua has revealed that in the copies received by a number of Malaysian banks (Maybank, RHB, Alliance and HwangDBS Bank) from 1MDB the wording had been subtly but crucially changed:"

This could only mean the May 2014 restructuring of the RM2 billion bridging loan led by Maybank in the following proportions: 

Maybank has 58.99% of the RM2 billion loan while RHB has 32.41%. The other lenders are Alliance Investment Bank Bhd (4.06%), Malaysia Building Society Bhd (3.24%) and Hwang DBS Investment Bhd (1.29%). 
This May 2014 loan was further confirmed in a Reuters report which said:
"In May (2014), the state fund restructured a 5.5 billion ringgit bridging loan into two tranches: a 3.5 billion loan due after 123 months and a 2 billion loan due in November, according to data from LPC, a Thomson Reuters unit specialising in loans."

Basically, this means:

  • As end Mar 2014- USD2.3 billion was in the Cayman funds April-May 2014 - Restructuring of Loan with Maybank, RHB, Alliance, Hwang where the unaudited accounts would have been submitted.
  • August to Sept: USD1.22 billionof the Funds in process of being redeemed and set aside. And in the process of being utilised.
  • Sept 30 Audit report released and in notes, subsequent events say USD1.22b funds redeemed and utilised.
Therefore, 1MDB was correct in using "set aside" when applying for that May 2014 bridging loan. If they had used "utilised" instead then, they would have been guilty of fraud.

Even if true that the words are different by saying "set aside and used for other purposes" or "utilized" gives the exact same meaning - that the funds are no longer available for use for any other purpose. It is just a timing issue.


Same meaning. Means the funds are not available for use. So, how are banks cheated and could lose billions? There is NO MATERIAL EFFECT in this change and 1MDB was being truthful. 

And 1MDB was correct in their press statement yesterday to answer Tony Pua's completely illogical and baseless accusation which stated:
" Furthermore, 1MDB's official financial statements are publicly available at the Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) website. With a few clicks of a mouse, any concerned party can access the documents for verification purposes."
These are multi-billion loans. Do you think the banks won't double-check? Duh!

And to think Sarawak Report was so proud to also post Tony Pua's article.

I suspect why YB Tony Pua and Sarawak Report are resorting to such nonsense just to have the headline "1MDB doctored statements" coz Zombies don't know any better, will just read the headlines and come away with a conclusion.

Well, they won't be fooling any corporate types or bankers or people with even the most basic understanding of English.

Also, this RM2billion loan from Maybank RHB, Alliance Investment Bank, Malaysia Building Society Bhd and Hwang DBS Investment Bhd has already been paid back - so, where is the loss? Moot point, Tony Pua.

Walls are closing in. Sheer utter desperation is making Tony Pua and Sarawak Report commit basic mistakes and make increasingly weak claims over the past week.

As I was writing this, the following news broke.

I finally understood why Tony Pua and Sarawak Report have started to get desperate.

If it is true that Sarawak Report, Tony Pua, certain opposition portals and opposition members did indeed meet at Fullerton Hotel Singapore and have forged or tampered with evidence as what has been alleged, many people are in serious trouble with the law - perhaps in multiple countries - UK, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia.

My advice to them: "Sendiri Jaga Sendiri".


  1. "Well, firstly Tony Pua should have known that although the Audited Financial Report had stated March 30th 2014 but the actual report was completed and submitted on Sept 30, 2014."

    Whilst I am no fan of Tony Pua, still a report dated 30th March 2014 should maintain its chronological context, just like a company's annual or quarterly report must do, so in this regard he has a point.

    Any developments subsequent to its date could be included in notes clearly indicated as subsequent developments.

    Whilst Im neither a fan of GHCQ, MI5 or MI6 for what they do in the service of British imperialism, I do not trivialise the capabilities of their operatives or former operatives.

    Anyway, what will GHCQ, MI5 or MI6 do to being organisations such as Sarawak report to book?

    Besides that, your article raises many good points.

    1. If you read the accounts notes where the part highlighted by Tony is, these are "SUBSEQUENT EVENTS" that happened after the financial years close that auditors normally put in their audited accounts. It's a common practise - especially for large companies that take some time to audit.