Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> -, -

views
     
lorrydriverrocks
post Apr 22 2015, 11:02 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
230 posts

Joined: May 2014
padan muka kroni...
lorrydriverrocks
post Apr 22 2015, 11:18 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
230 posts

Joined: May 2014
QUOTE(sad_ticket @ Apr 22 2015, 11:17 PM)
What if Robert Kuok is Government puppet. They dump all the money to him so nobody question the money  icon_idea.gif .

Then the government ask Robert Kuok to make  fake success story so nobody will ever want to question the wealth.

In the end the money wealth protect.
*
sounds like weed story
lorrydriverrocks
post Apr 22 2015, 11:45 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
230 posts

Joined: May 2014
in b4 BN macai

QUOTE
Pakatan politicians must be getting desperate in having to spread lies to try and get elected. They hope that by telling fairy tales and falsely accusing BN, people will vote for them and go against BN. They should be ashamed of themselves. They are only insulting the intelligence of ordinary Malaysians.

We do not have to be on anyone’s side except to be on the side of truth and honesty. Malaysians want to know the truth, good or bad, about political leaders, whether in BN or Pakatan. We do not want to hear more lies. The article about Robert Kuok and the Malaysian government is more of such lies at election time. It had been passed around by email before, but now it is going round again, hoping people will believe it.

The article contains so many lies that it will take a lot of space to list them all and show them to be untrue. The factual points mentioned below are just 10 of them. The facts expose the claims made in the article as rubbish. These facts are in various public records, and anyone spending some time to check the details can obtain them too. Facts don’t take sides, they just reveal the truth.

1. The article says the UMNO-led government asked Robert Kuok’s father to help set up Malaysia Airlines, and was ungrateful to him afterwards. How could that happen? British businessmen had incorporated Malayan Airways Limited in Singapore in 1937, involving the Ocean Steamship Company of Liverpool, England, the Straits Steamship Company and Imperial Airways. The first commercial flight came later only in 1947. Technical assistance came from airlines of Commonwealth countries, such as BOAC and Qantas Imperial Airways. Robert Kuok’s father died in 1948. He was a commodities trader from Fujian province in China, not an aviation expert. Only in 1957 did the airline become a government-owned company. Malaya became independent (Merdeka) only in that year!

2. The article also claims that Robert Kuok became so fed up with PM Najib’s BN government that “he was forced to leave his own country, etc.” Again, more fairy stories. Robert Kuok first invested in property in Hong Kong in 1977, and with growing businesses there and on the mainland (China), it made sense for him to be based there. His main office has been in Hong Kong for many years. Previously he was based in Kuala Lumpur, then London, and then Singapore. Here in Malaysia, Najib became Prime Minister only in 2009. It is nonsense to say because of PM Najib, Kuok became “fed up” with Malaysia and left.

3. The article further claims that Robert Kuok is “the world’s sugar emperor.” What? Robert Kuok owned the biggest sugar interests in Malaysia but not in the world. His businesses are highly diversified, including property, construction, publishing, shipping, hotels, palm oil, rice, beverages, chemicals, cinemas, etc. Most of the world’s sugar interests are owned by other people and had always been owned by others.

4. The article falsely claims that if only Najib had asked nicely, it would be no problem for China to increase its import of Malaysian palm oil by 1 million tonnes a day. Any sane or honest business person, trader or economist will know such a claim is nonsense. If as the article says China is already importing 10 million tonnes of palm oil from Malaysia each month, this comes to an average of 333,000 tonnes a day. No country can suddenly expand such imports to 1 million tonnes a day as the article says, as this would be a tripling (additional increase of 200%) when the market demand is not enough to take up this volume. Also, edible oils cannot be stockpiled/stored for long before being consumed.

5. The article also says the Malaysian government asked for Robert Kuok’s help to develop the shipping industry in the 1970s, which later resulted in the Malaysian International Shipping Corporation (MISC). Again, false. MISC had already been established in 1968. Robert Kuok did not need to be asked by any government to start a shipping line. He started shipping operations on his own to provide transport for his sugar and other businesses because his international investments involved a lot of sea freight.

6. The article also says that Indonesian palm oil producers are now doing better than Malaysian ones. False. Although Indonesia and Malaysia together produce about 90% of the world’s palm oil, more palm oil is produced in Indonesia than Malaysia only BECAUSE of the huge investments in oil palm cultivation there by Malaysian companies. HALF of Indonesia’s oil palm plantations are Malaysian-owned, by more than 50 Malaysian companies such as Kuala Lumpur Kepong Bhd, Sime Darby, United Plantations Bhd, Asiatic Development Bhd, IJM Plantations Bhd and IOI Corp Bhd. This, together with oil palm plantations in Malaysia, makes Malaysians and Malaysian companies still the largest oil palm producers in the world.

7. The article falsely accuses the Malaysian government of “stealing” Robert Kuok’s sugar business, which then resulted in the loss of uncountable billions. False again. In 2009 Robert Kuok’s Perlis Plantations Bhd decided to sell its sugar interests and related land to FELDA for RM1.29 billion. (That’s a total of less than RM2 billion for the two related businesses.) So, no such thing as “tens of billions” or a so-called “national loss of hundreds of billions.” There was no “arm-twisting” either. Although the sum was just over one billion ringgit, it still meant profits for PPB. (Refer to Bursa Malaysia records, etc.)

8. The article tells lies again in saying that the Beijing Shangrila Hotel built by Robert Kuok in 1987 is the first five-star hotel in China. Not so. Others before it, which continue to operate as five-star luxury hotels today, include the Shanghai Peace Hotel from 1929 used by Charlie Chaplin, George Bernard Shaw and other VIPs, the Raffles Beijing (the former Peking Hotel) around the same time used by Chairman Mao and others at official functions, and the White Swan Hotel in Guangzhou since 1983, used by dozens of international VIPs including Queen Elizabeth just to name a few. There are also 5-star hotels in Hong Kong and Macao, which are part of China, before Kuok’s Beijing Shangrila, such as Hong Kong’s Peninsula Hotel (since 1928).

9. The governments of China and Malaysia have been on good terms for many years. Robert Kuok himself has personally been on good terms with all governments in countries where he does business. Senior Chinese and Malaysian leaders deal directly with one another without going through third parties like private businessmen, however influential the latter may be. National leaders have political reasons for dealing with one another, not personal ones. Robert Kuok has been very influential, he may even be the most politically influential foreign businessman in China, but he knows better than to become an obstacle in official diplomatic relations between two countries. He is smarter than some people who would risk making enemies today or tomorrow simply out of spite or ego reasons.

10. Robert Kuok has been described as shy, choosing not to draw attention to himself in the media or internationally. Like fellow Malaysian billionaire T. Ananda Krishnan, he is modest and avoids unnecessary public attention. They have also been awarded and have accepted the Tan Sri title, although they often do not use it. This is the same with some others with the Datuk/Dato’ title, unlike some who use their royal titles everywhere. Tan Sri Robert Kuok and Tan Sri Ananda Krishnan do not seek to gain anything through their titles, which they have. It is therefore false of the article to say that they had refused the title from the Agung/King.

In July last year there was also a rumour that Robert Kuok was the mysterious billionaire who had spent US$4.8 billion on a solid gold yacht. Of course, that was soon revealed as false. How could such a heavy yacht even float? But at least that rumour was not making use of the man and his name for political reasons. The article this time about Robert Kuok and the Malaysian government is different, since it is cunningly making false accusations in trying to win support for the opposition.

Robert Kuok will be 89 years old this October, and his father had died a long time ago. Have some respect for them. Do not drag the family through the opposition’s cheap election campaign tricks. If Pakatan politicians are so desperate to get elected, they should do good things for the people and the country. But if they cannot say anything that is good and true about themselves, they should not say bad things that are untrue about other people.

From their lies that falsely accuse others, we can see that these Pakatan politicians do not deserve any support. We are not so dumb as to believe their tall tales, however much they may want our votes. What they do is shameful and sinful. Right now they are telling more and bigger lies than BN. A Chinese leader once said: “Seek truth from facts.” What these opposition politicians are doing is “seek votes from lies.” For that alone they deserve to LOSE.


Bump Topic Add ReplyOptions New Topic
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0186sec    0.62    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 21st October 2021 - 02:07 PM