|Mana lebih tepat, bank atau rafizi?|
Siapa lebih tepat dan benar? Pembaca mahu percaya bank atau seorang ahli politik yang hanya tahu menabur fitnath..Silalah baca artikel yang terbaru ini. Okey..
We thought that to spice it up a little, we are combining two (2) episodes in this article which are 1) Rafizi's wild and wanton allegation and 2) First Hard Evidence (Letter from Public Bank). Enjoy~
RAFIZI’S WILD AND WANTON LIES
In thirteen minutes, a web of lies, distortions and misrepresentations were weaved by Rafizi in wild abandon.
First, Rafizi said that eight loans had been taken to finance the purchase of the eight office properties which had a forced sale value of RM9,688,866.
Second, Rafizi said that Salleh had leveraged the borrowings on a government deposit placed at the bank.
Third, Rafizi said the government deposit was at peril because Salleh had defaulted on the eight loans for a year from March 2011.
Fourth, Rafizi claimed Salleh was not credit worthy as all Salleh had in his personal bank account was a mere RM421.
Fifth, Rafizi said with Salleh having just that paltry sum, the government deposit used as leverage, was believed in jeopardy. He alluded Salleh would likely default on the loans.
Sixth, Rafizi claimed Salleh was not financially sound to have qualified for the eight loans for the KL Eco City properties and therefore, the leveraging.
FIRST HARD EVIDENCE
Today I will show further debunks Rafizi’s claims. First, a Public Bank Berhad correspondence dated 4 January 2012 (see pic) that confirms NO LOANS had been taken from the bank –
In this letter, readers will note the following (please see the writer’s side comments typed in blue):
i. Public Bank Berhad (PBB) had on 23 May 2011, offered loan facilities to Salleh to finance the KL Eco City office property purchase. Note: the date of letter of offer.
ii. It was an offer letter addressed to Salleh and not to NFCorp. Note: NFCorp was not involved.
iii. As the personal loan offer was never taken up by Salleh for more than seven months, PBB cancelled their offer on 4 January 2012. This letter therefore confirms no loans had been taken by Salleh from PBB to finance the KL Eco City office property purchase.
iv. Rafizi brazenly lied that Salleh had taken eight loans for the eight KL Eco City properties. Since the PBB loan offer was cancelled on 4 January 2012, Rafizi’s claim does not make for truth. No loans exist.
v. Rafizi lied when he said the loans were in default. How could loan repayments enter into default when none were taken in the first place?
vi. Rafizi lied Salleh had defaulted on the eight loans from March 2011. No loans exist to enter into default. Also note the PBB letter of offer was made on 23 May 2011. How could anyone default prior to the date of the offer letter? Rafizi claims Salleh defaulted from March 2011??
vii. Rafizi also lied that the government deposit of RM71 million was in jeopardy because of the default. How could there be any jeopardy when no loans exist for the eight KL Eco City properties?
viii. Rafizi lied Salleh was not credit worthy to qualify for loans and that the eight loans given by the bank were suspect. Again, how could anything be suspect when no loans exist nor were any taken?
To be continued tonight for more damning revelation of the lies, distortion and misrepresentation of @rafiziramli ..
Fortunately, we have more dirt to share with our readers of the lies, distortion and misrepresentation of @rafiziramli .. up till the 13th General Election In sya ALLAH...
Yang benar kita tegakkan..