NO PROBLEM.... De facto law apportion Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz pronounced which he sees no complaint with his son driving businessman Michael Chia's Hummer SUV.
HE SAID which if a sure antithesis figure (name withheld due to authorised reasons) is not disturbed about a leaked video purportedly depicting himself carrying a tryst with a foreign sex worker, afterwards there is no reason given he should be.
Reporters had questioned Mohd Nazri during his bureau after a allegation upon a Hummer was unprotected by PKR leaders during a Parliament lobby today.
The full transcript follows:
Nazri: He (Rafizi Ramli) got no area standi.
Reporters: (Batu MP) Tian Chua as well as (Ampang MP) Zuraida (Kamaruddin) were there also.
Then bring him to Parliament lah.
We can uncover a things which they (PKR) have done.
we saw. If it is an offence... Ask Tian Chua to ask me... If it is an corruption inform to a police... If we have finished any offence, inform me to a MACC.
Basically they usually pronounced it is a dispute of interest.
Who asked a questions?
No, no, in Parliament, who asked a question?
First time was Tian Chua (who raised a issue) in question-and-answer session.
Then who is a apportion in-charge of... so, who give me a question?
They have been observant if your son has links with Michael Chia, afterwards we should not have stood up as well as defend them...
No, no, no. I'm a minister. I've got no personal interest. When he asked which question, we didn't even know what subject was coming. It was (the) committee-level debate.
There was additionally (a) written answer if I'm not mistaken.
That (question was answered) underneath my name, of course, as well as what dispute of seductiveness do we have? we do not have any dispute of interest.
And we have no carry out of a MACC. we can't tell a MACC to dump cases. They have been independent.
So given we have no power to do that, how can we be bribed? we cannot do something which they wish me to do.
And in Parliament, we contingency understand, answers come from a MACC, not from me. we do not even know that... when they asked about Michael Chia, a answer came from a MACC, we do not even know which Michael Chia was not arrested, though a answer came from a MACC. we do not know anything.
What about a explain which we were articulate upon behalf of (Hong Kong's) Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), observant which a ICAC has privileged them of a charges?
< em>
That's a answer from a MACC. You see, our system, we know what, initial of all, we do not even know a questions which were starting to be asked given it was not planned, it was committee-level debate.
When we was answering, they stood up as well as asked me. So I'm a minister, we have to answer. The answer all came from a MACC.
Okay, all things aside, either or not a automobile is registered underneath Michael Chia's name...
we do not know. It is in between my son as well as Michael Chia... Anyway, if my son drives a automobile of Michael Chia, what has which got to do with me? What has which got to do with me? He is not a child below twenty-one years old, he is an adult.
They have been observant which Dato Seri Shahrizat has claimed a same thing as well as now it has caused her...
Yeah, that's what they have been trying to do... though what have we done? we do not know.
But a thing is, we see, even though we can contend which it is not your fault, zero to do with we as well as all that, though when it comes out in media, we know how a open would perspective this kind of... it doesn't receptive to advice nice...
It doesn't worry me a bit. (laughs)
Like Shahrizat's case, she said: "I do not know anything about my husband "
That's husband as well as wife. we do not sleep with my son. I'm not happy (reporters laugh). My son is not my wife, my son is not my lover, we do not sleep with him.
What he does, he doesn't tell me. It is opposite from husband as well as wife, okay? Why have been we so wor! ried?
Not to contend worried; I'm usually observant which it does not receptive to advice great in public, afterwards a public... as well as people will start talking.
Let it be, let it be. You press Wikipedia, 'Nazri Aziz', what come out? All sorts of things. I'm still a minister, my friend, okay? It is not starting to hurt me one bit. I'm not influenced by passageway for liquid politics.
Do we know Michael Chia?
we know him also. You see, there contingency be this difference, okay. If I'm a High Court judge, as well as Michael Chia appears before me as well as my son drives his car, afterwards I'm in trouble.
I'm not a decider in Michael Chia's case. I'm not even a investigator. The MACC is (the investigator) in Michael Chia's case. I'm a apportion replying in Parliament.
They claimed which a ICAC has not privileged (Michael Chia), as well as a ICAC sealed a box given they didn't get any cooperation from Malaysia, from a MACC.
No, no, it was a donation... This one, we do not ask me. You contingency ask a Attorney-General's Chambers, we contingency ask a MACC.
You know I'm not their spokesperson. we usually replied what they gave me. They have been independent body, we got no carry out over a MACC, we got no carry out over a AG. So how can we be influencing them?
we can't as well as all those replies in Parliament, we know, have been answers given by a MACC, not my personal answers.
You contingency assimilate a system. The AG as well as a chief government official of a MACC, they cannot appear in Parliament, they have got no area standi.
You! have be en a spokesperson?
With their consent. All my answers, anything about a MACC as well as AG's Chambers, all from them similar to people who get indignant with me (when) we pronounced secular state. That's AG.
People get indignant with me given we contend Pati (illegal migrants) in Sabah is not a threat. That is confidence council punya jawab (answer). Kalau PM jawab, PM kena marah. I'm okay, we have no problem. It's partial as well as parcel of my job.
As de facto law minister, although usually reading out answer from opposite agencies, do we see yourself successful given your reply carries weight... ?
I'm a unequivocally successful person. I'm a unequivocally successful man. There's no doubt about it, unequivocally important too.
I'm not frightened during all, we did zero wrong. Those replies came from Parliament. we was merely we do my job, discharging my duties as well as responsibility.
So we won't cruise suing Rafizi then?
What for? Let him be a trumpet blower. Anyway, we do not unequivocally wish to answer him given he's not an MP.
we consider if Tian Chua was there usually to let him (Rafizi) have a matter during (the) council (lobby), given he's not a part of of Parliament, he cannot have a matter here, he's usually a wannabe. Make sure you're an MP first, afterwards come to speak to me.
Anyway, even in a Parliament, (during) debates... Ketua Pembangkang (Opposition Leader), that's my level. But of course, MPs ask me, they ask. But this guy, no way.
If one day, he enters Parliament as an MP, he'll whack you.
Suruh dia masuk council dulu la. (Tell me him to come in Parliament first). we do not wish to stoop low as well as understanding with him, okay?
But given we all come as well as ask, we usually contend lah. It's not even a butterfly bite. I'm sorry. If we all come here meditative I'll be upset, far from it.
But do we know about a Hummer?
That's in between my son as well as Michael Chia. we know Michael Chia.
So we endorse Hummer unequivocally exists...
Kalau dia nak bagi Hummer ke, Ferrari ke, itu Michael Chia punya pasal lah, bukan bagi dekat we (If he wants to give a Hummer, or a Ferrari, that's Michael Chia's business. He's not giving it to me). I'm a minister, not my son, okay?
So we endorse which a Hummer unequivocally exists.
Buat apa nak confirm. Gambar dah ada. You pergi tanya anak I. (Why should we endorse it? The cinema have been there. You go ask my son.)
As I've said, we do not sleep with my son, okay? I'm not happy as well as I'm not incestuous.
Do we see a complaint (with a fact) which your son (drives) Michael Chia's car?
Why is it a problem? It's in between him as well as Michael. Go as well as find Michael lah. Go as well as find Michael.
Is there a problem?
You can ask him lah if there's a problem. we do not expostulate a car. Mine is WVJ 6. Everyday we come here, WVJ 6. Wealth, victory as w! ell as j ustice. Some people contend 'wisdom', we do not wish (wisdom).
You cite wealth to wisdom?
we cite wealth. That's given I'm rich. we can afford a lot of things though certainly it's not NFC's (National Feedlot Corporation's) money.
I know we do not caring about passageway for liquid politics as well as which this is not even a butterfly bite to you. But do we consider this issue would mistreat BN in a election?
Why mistreat BN? Why BN? What about (an antithesis figure's) design screwing (a) Chinese prostitute oneself as well as all that? That one do not harm... is what is happening to me worse than that? Huh? Is it worse ah? Is it worse?
If (the antithesis figure) is not worried, given should we be disturbed about this? Your design all over town, in a cyber world, f***ing this prostitute oneself from China. He's not worried, given should we be concerned about this. You can allude to me upon this.
You ask me if I'm worried, upon either it will mistreat BN. What I'm observant is which this design of (the antithesis figure) screwing this Chinese prostitute oneself starting all over a cyberworld, he's not worried. My subject is: should we be worried?
(Question inaudible, muffled by alternative reporters' chatter) The way we answer ...
we do not care. Why have been we so worried?
I need to endorse again, we know (of) a Hummer?
No need, a cinema have been there. You go ask my son. we cannot be responsible for my son. we do not screw him, we do not sleep with him. He sleeps with his w! ife, he' s got a kid. So whatever he does, we do not know. we know Michael Chia, I'm not worried.
If a allegations unequivocally exist?
Go inform military lah. Why do we (hold) a Personal Computer (press conference)? Right or not? You know anything about me, given we have PC? Publicity seeker lah, poor publicity. Go inform military lah, MACC.
If your son is unequivocally guilty...
Guilty of what?
If he unequivocally committed...
Committed what? Do we know what we have been articulate about? Committed what? Kiss a girl?
Conflict of interest?
Conflict of interest? But he is not a minister.
But he is associated to you.
He's my son. we have no power over MACC. we have no power upon AG's Chambers. How can I? And all those questions, answers, came from MACC. How can we be compromised? we cannot be compromised.
It's not my answer, it's a answer of SPRM. You contingency assimilate that. It's not my answer, all these answers have been from MACC. If we pronounced Michael Chia was not arrested, which was a answer from MACC, not me. I'm not a investigator, we didn't investigate.
If AG said, if we answer in Parliament which ICAC has already sealed a case, which is a answer from AG's Chambers. Not my answer.
I see your point.
So do not worry, I'll still be around.
More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
But you're not starting to mount in elections, right?
What has this got to do with ... aiyo ... It's not connected, a question.
That's given when we see me, when someone asks (me a subject in Parliament), we mount up as well as a we look around, given I'm waiting for a answer from a officers. It's not my answer.
Are we concerned which your son as well as his family have been being followed?
I'm a abounding man, I'm powerful, great looking. (reporters giggle) Wealthy. So what can we do? My son ask, 'Pa, is it...' we say, 'Look, we have been my son.'
Will we lodge a military upon your son being followed?
Why should I? It doesn't worry me. I'm popular, we have a movie star punya status here we know? Celebrity. Bukan movie star local, Hollywood punya (laughs).
No, though there is zero we can do, (if) they wish to follow.
And if Rafizi lodges a inform with MACC?
What kind of subject it that? He wants to report, he inform lah. You know, he's a clarinet player, he told me in his tweet.
In Malay College (Kuala Kangsar), when he (enrolled), we was not around, though those who fool around a clarinet have been jambu, we know. Ni jambu punya character la.
Read More @ Source More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
Courtesy of Bonology.com Politically Incorrect Buzz & Buzz
No comments:
Post a Comment