Seeing things from the right perspective

Actually I know who that third party is but I am not sure whether I should reveal his name. What happens if that person sues me? No one is going to help pay for my legal costs and if I lose the case no one is going to help pay for whatever damages the court awards to the person suing me. So I have to think carefully whether to help Rafizi out by revealing the name of the person. Since Rafizi has the party behind him maybe I should leave it to him to reveal the name of this third party — although he also appears to be reluctant to do so.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Over the last few days I have read a few comments calling Rafizi Ramli a liar and accusing him of politicising the Deepak Jaikishan issue. First of all, so what if Rafizi is politicising issues? Is that not what politicians are supposed to do? You mean all those others in Pakatan Rakyat are not also politicising issues? You mean all those Umno and Barisan Nasional people are not also politicising issues?

Accusing Rafizi of politicising issues is so stupid. It is like accusing a fox that is hanging around the chicken run of trying to whack the chickens. That is why God made foxes, to whack chickens. Whacking chickens is in the job specification of foxes. Why else do you think God made foxes? Do you think God made foxes so that sugar daddies can buy a fox fur coat for their mistresses?

Foxes were created so that they can whack chickens. And politicians were created so that they can politicise issues. And all this talk that politicians are the result of anal sex is utter bullshit and very unfair because you cannot get pregnant from anal sex and for sure no one can get born through the arsehole.

Politicians are born just like you and me, the normal way, and politics is a career just like any other career.

In fact, politics allows postmen and railway crossing guards attain career heights that postmen and railway crossing guards could never attain if they did not become politicians. It is like going to America, the land of opportunity. Where else can simple farmers or descendants of slaves become ‘big people’ if not in America? And if you can’t migrate to America to become a ‘big person’ then you become a politician and get called YangBerhormat or The Respected One.

We must remember that everything in Malaysia is politicised. Even the Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnibenevolent, etc., God is politicised. Even with all that power that God possesses He cannot prevent his name from being politicised. And if the all-powerful God cannot stop his name from being politicised do you think Deepak Jaikishan can prevent his name from being politicised even if he imagines himself as a Sex God?

Now, why do you say that Rafizi Ramli lied? What did he say that makes you come to a conclusion that he lied? Did Rafizi say he was there, say, when Deepak Jaikishan was alleged to have bought RM13 million worth of jewellery for First Lady Rosmah Mansor? Did Rafizi say he personally saw the jewellery and/or held them in his hand?

He never said that. What he said was he has seen the documents and the documents were handed to him by someone he personally knows. He apparently trusts this person and probably has a relationship of sorts with this person. And this person handed him some documents that were supposed to be evidence that Deepak had bought RM13 million worth of jewellery for Rosmah. So, based on this, he held a press conference to reveal the existence of these documents and that these documents are evidence that Deepak had bought RM13 million worth of jewellery for Rosmah.

And the purpose Rafizi held that press conference to reveal the existence of these documents is so that the MACC or PDRM can investigate the matter and find out whether all this is true or false. It could be true or it could be false. But Rafizi would not know whether it is true or false. He can only hold a press conference to reveal the existence of these documents and leave it to the authorities to authenticate the documents and tell us whether the allegations are true or not.

Some of you ask: why hold a press conference? Why not make a police report or sign a Statutory Declaration instead? If you are really sincere about seeing justice done then you should make a police report or sign a Statutory Declaration. Holding a press conference makes it appear like all you want to do is to politicise the issue.

True, a police report or Statutory Declaration would be better than a press conference. A police report or Statutory Declaration looks less political than a press conference. But maybe you have forgotten that back in 1998 Anwar Ibrahim made a police report and he ended up getting arrested and was sent to jail for a long time. Ten years later, in 2008, I signed a Statutory Declaration and I too was arrested and charged for that. I was also detained without trial.

So, do you really think a police report or Statutory Declaration is wise? So far no one has been arrested and sent to jail for holding a press conference. At worse you may be subjected to a civil suit. However, since the press conference is a party press conference, then when you get sued the party will come out with the money to pay for a lawyer to represent you in court.

Can you remember that I was sued by many people — UUM V.C. Nordin Kardi, Umno lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, Lt Col Abdul Aziz Buyong and Lt Col Norhayati Hassan, etc. And I was sued because I made allegations against them.

Now I have been declared bankrupt and yet still more civil suits are piling up against me. Has any Malaysian from 28 million Malaysians offered to help me out financially?

When you write bad things about the government or about those who walk in the corridors of power everyone will clap and cheer you on. But when you get sued you have to carry that problem all by yourself. No one from all those people who clapped and cheered you on is going to come forward to volunteer to help you out financially.

I am fortunate that I have some friends who are lawyers who volunteered to help represent me free of charge. In the Nordin Kardi case, however, no one came forward to help me out. So the court awarded him an uncontested win and I now have to pay Nordin Kardi RM2.5 million. But I do not have RM2.5 million and can’t pay that amount. So I have to be declared a bankrupt, as I was in the earlier case involving an Umno Minister where the court asked me to pay RM1.3 million.

Actually, it is now no longer worth anything to help me out unless you can afford to pay RM60 million, which is what I have hanging over my head — and which is increasing every time I lose a case.

Do you know I recently had to pay the government RM215,000 to get my house released? In the end, with tax and legal fees included, I had to pay about RM250,000 or else I would lose my house.

And none of those people who clapped and cheered when I whacked the government came forward to help me settle that RM250,000. So my daughter had to go to the bank to borrow the money to help me out. Luckily I have a daughter who can qualify for a bank loan of RM250,000 or else my house would be gone.

So you face a great risk when you whack the government. No doubt people will clap and cheer when you whack the government. But that is all you receive — claps and cheers. If you make a police report, sign a Statutory Declaration, or write an article in your Blog, you will get arrested and will get sent to jail. And you not only get arrested but will get sued as well and then will be hit with millions in damages. Hence the safest thing to do would be to do what Rafizi Ramli did — hold a press conference in the party’s name.

So I think you have to be a bit fair with Rafizi. He has no choice but to politicise the issues so that he can get the protection of the party when people sue him. If not Rafizi would end up like me if he does things outside the party. And he did not lie. He never said he was there or that he saw everything. What he said was that he was reliably informed, like what I said on my Statutory Declaration.

And I know it appears like Rafizi has done a U-turn. Yesterday he never said that the information or documents he received came from a third party. But now that Deepak has denied meeting him and/or denied giving him any documents, Rafizi turns around and says that the evidence came from a third party.

Actually I know who that third party is but I am not sure whether I should reveal his name. What happens if that person sues me? No one is going to help pay for my legal costs and if I lose the case no one is going to help pay for whatever damages the court awards to the person suing me. So I have to think carefully whether to help Rafizi out by revealing the name of the person. Since Rafizi has the party behind him maybe I should leave it to him to reveal the name of this third party — although he also appears to be reluctant to do so.

Maybe Rafizi is worried that if he declares that he was not actually a witness but that the evidence was given to him by a third party then people will accuse him of doing a U-turn. Rafizi knows that that happened to me when I explained during my TV3 interview that I was not a witness but was informed about the matter by a third party. Everyone accused me of doing a U-turn even though I did not. Hence, understandably, Rafizi needs to be very careful here or else he will suffer the same fate that befell me.

Rafizi is not only a product of the Malay College Kuala Kangsar (MCKK). He is also a product of a UK university education. That makes him very clever. Most MCKK cum UK educated people are very clever. And, being very clever, he would most certainly be aware that most Malaysians are not very bright. In fact, some Malaysians — those not from MCKK and a UK education — can sometimes be downright stupid. Hence Rafizi has to be very careful with what he says. People will even accuse him of saying what he never said — unless you are from MCKK and armed with a UK education (then you will not be stupid enough to accuse people of saying what they did not say).

I am sorry if I sound like I am defending Rafizi. Even if I am defending Rafizi so what? Is it a crime to defend someone from your alma mater? Yes, I am defending Rafizi. I do not deny that and I am not apologetic or embarrassed about it. When someone deserves defending then you must defend that person.

And if you are not happy with that then sue me. It is, after all, a free country. Anyone can sue anyone.

Even the Christians are free to sue the government for not allowing them to use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible. And if Pakatan Rakyat comes out with a statement next week also agreeing that Christians should not use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible then the Christians should sue Pakatan Rakyat as well.

But wait first until next week and see what Pakatan Rakyat has to say because they will be meeting only next week to make a decision as to whether Christians can use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible. And if Pakatan Rakyat were to agree with the government that Christians should not use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible only then sue them. But I am confident Pakatan Rakyat will not agree with the government.

Read also :