Few will forget July 17 2008, the date when investigating officer Jude Pereira said he took a statement from the First Lady Rosmah Mansor over Saiful Bukhari Azlan complaint's that he was allegedly sodomised by Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim in June 2008.No doubt, Saiful denies he ever met Rosmah. And government prosecutors solemnly assure us this 'fact' is correct - he never met her! But then, Saiful and her husband Prime Minister Najib also once said they never met each other. But later, they admitted they did - i.e. Najib did meet Saiful and Saiful did meet Najib!
Will Saiful and Rosmah later recant? After all, why should the police take her statement if she is not involved?
The sorry plot thickens. This time the First Lady is implicated in this most farcical of trials in Malaysian history. She is like the rabbit which is caught in the headlights of a car. Her involvement which was disclosed via Pereira’s admission, adds a new twist to this sorry saga.
Is Pereira foolhardy or simply doing his job in telling the truth so that he will not commit perjury? Others before him have lied through their teeth and been awarded inducements behind the scenes. Is this the first breakthrough in Sodomy II?
Those who have been following the trial will agree that Saiful sounds like a person who should be put in a straight jacket, then committed and have the key to his padded cell thrown away. He seems to revel in telling the whole world that he has been sodomised and conveniently points his finger at Anwar.
But when the medical examinations are done, his own semen is found in his rectum along with a whole load of other people’s semen. Apart from the distasteful disclosures of ejaculate being found on the outside of his clothes, does this guy have hair-trigger problems?
The First Lady’s statement must mean her involvement is damning. It is puzzling that someone who is nothing more than a teaboy in the office can be whisked straight away to meet the First Lady. And her husband.
Saiful who claims to have been sodomised was reported to have run into the arms of the First Lady. She may deny it but is her home that accessible to members of the public who have something to complain about? Is she the mother of all compassionate counselors? Otherwise what is so special about Saiful then? Is she his protector or has she designs on younger men?
Few people believe that Saiful can be sodomised by a man with a bad back. Never mind the ludicrous plot, even the actors are wrongly picked.
Is there anything that the First Lady does not involve herself in? She has been criss-crossing the globe and covering all those events that do not need her presence at all. Even her specially dedicated team called the F.L.O.M. attracted criticism that her hubby had to withdraw it from his website.
The First Lady went to the Middle East and talked about all the talented children but ignored all those girls who had been raped in the Sarawak rainforest.
She stood in for her husband when he had chicken pox and met the Australian premier and the US Secretary of State.
Now that we are told the First Lady has some sort of involvement in Sodomy II, perhaps Prime minister Najib Abdul Razak was never ill with chicken pox. Perhaps she told him to be isolated in the ICU so that she could have an excuse to meet the Julia Gillard and Hillary Clinton.
The odd appearance at the last round of by-election campaigning to ask the public if she had the "face of a liar" is a stupid act. If she accepted the crowd’s silence as an agreement, then she is more foolish than she looks. Of course no one will admit that to her face.
The First Lady has been involved in some dicey scams before – who is to know she actually phoned up her so called buddy the King of Saudi Arabia? All this name dropping is so pat as we have no means to verify if this is true or not. Perhaps it was done to make us think she is important, with friends in high places.
Other incidents like making the Hollywood actor Robert De Niro come into the country incognito is another publicity stunt. It is to increase the First Lady’s popularity ratings, principally among the rural voters.
How many other pies has the First Lady got her finger in? And will this First Lady score a first by being asked to appear in the witness stand?
No comments:
Post a Comment