Friday, February 17, 2012

Anwar Ibrahim and The Malaysian Insider - Two-Faced and Double-Talking

In an update of my previous post I wrote, 'The game is over, Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim. No wonder your boys need to brainstorm'.

It has these connotations. Anwar's has always been playing political games for his personal benefit and the Israel game plan is being scuttled. What is there for PKR to meet? Surely Anwar as supremo, whatever his view and "personal" opinion on policy matters, is the policy of the party. In as far as PKR is concerned it goes without saying, by the party or anybody and everybody else. They can only stand by his official statement in the matter at hand.

Please do note the date of this Anwar detailed official statement, a clarification, for the his support for the security of Israel.

The date is 28 January 2012.

This is important.

The Malaysian Insider reports "Anwar: Nik Aziz merely gave ‘polite’ advice",
In response Anwar today blamed Umno for smearing him and omitting his remarks in the same report that were in support of Palestinians. 

"Umno has slandered me and erased my statement on the rights of the Palestinians ” said Anwar.
Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim is still trying to play games.

Anwar cannot put the blame on UMNO now.

Whether Anwar's "remarks in the same report that were in support of Palestians" were omitted or "erased"  has no bearing on the overwhelming decision by PAS for Anwar to withdraw his statement.

The decision by PAS demanding Anwar to retract his statement is dated 13 Februari 2012, "Dewan Ulamak PAS Menyokong Penuh Kenyataan Mursyidul Am",
Beliau yang juga Menteri Besar Kelantan membuat gesaan itu dengan dipersetujui oleh seluruh ahli Majlis Syura Ulama PAS.

Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) mengulangi pendirian yang berterusan dan tetap dengan prinsip, sekali-kali tidak mengiktiraf negara haram Israel sebagaimana yang juga ditegaskan menerusi pendirian di kalangan gerakan Islam antarabangsa,  serta menyokong sepenuhnya perjuangan rakyat Palestin yang dihina di bumi sendiri.

Keselamatan negara haram Israel juga bukanlah menjadi tanggungjawab yang dipikul oleh orang Arab atau umat Islam, kerana ditegakkan negara haram itu sendiri di atas dasar kezaliman.
Therefor, it is another Anwar gamesmanship to put every blame on UMNO, particularly in this issue, because surely in arriving at a unanimous decision for Anwar to retract his statement, PAS would have already had read Anwar's statement and clarification.

Also therefor, while Anwar confirmed "The Malaysian Insider’s earlier report that he would be meeting Nik Aziz soon to explain his remarks and said further details will be provided later", what is there to explain?

You can appreciate the need for PKR to brainstorm.

"Anwar will be meeting Nik Aziz next Monday and that the matter was decided during PKR’s political bureau meeting last night ". Yes, a brainstorming session for Anwar to wiggle out of his present predicament.

Reading between the lines, I opine Anwar's utterance "Nik Aziz gave me polite soft advice. He suggested that if I had said it, retract; if not, sue" is a tit for tat of sarcasm.

Brother Anwar's penchant to sue, Nik Aziz's characteristic polite demeanour. 

I can also state for a fact that it is not a mere "suggestion" by Nik Aziz. It is a unanimous PAS decision "yang menggesa Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim menarik balik kenyataannya mengenai Israel sepertimana yang dilaporkan di Wall Street Journal (WSJ) atau bertindak menyaman majalah itu". It is compelling.

Typical Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim double-talking.

As for the rabid opposition portal, The Malaysian Insider, it must be paying peanuts to it's reporters.

Reporting in English, one should have an acceptable command of the language, desirous at the very least.

When you have not only qualifications but also proficiency in a language, as required for your profession, you would certainly be more than adequately remunerated.

This Malaysian insider report, "Malaysia two-faced in Saudi blogger saga, says US paper", aptly makes the idiom, "If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys", best suited for the reporter.

The original passage Washington Post item which inspired the reporter to contrive the headline is reproduced here,
"His persecution has been facilitated by another champion of double-talk, the government of Malaysia, which claims to respect the rule of law but bundled Mr. Kashgari onto a private Saudi jet Sunday in spite of a court order prohibiting his deportation"
"Double-talk" to mean "two-faced". Nonsense morphing into deceitful.

What ever the case may be, the reporter would be found wanting, of a serious defect.

If the reporter understands the distinction, then as a reporter, being ethical is not his forte.

If he did not, then he must be being paid peanuts, and must be "scolded" for serious lack of vocabulary.

For all this nonsense and deceit, the reporter reports to the peanut master, The Malaysian Insider.

The peanut master having editorial control, and by allowing a discrepant headline to be published, is the actual two-faced party, guilty as charged.

The gist of the ill conceived headline Malaysian Insider report  is totally unrelated with the Washington Post editorial titled ,"The Saudi king’s hypocrisy", which gives only a passing mention of the Malaysia "double-talk".

While the Malaysian Insider report is critical of the Government in the deportation of a Saudi journalist wanted by the Saudi government, the Washington Post editorial is a criticism of the Saudi ruling monarch, obvious by it's headline, unlike the Malaysian Insider.

Says much for the reporters "ingenuity" and more of Malaysian Insider's deceit, as would be expected of the partisan opposition news portal.

Criticism of the Government to deport the journalist for the crime which he is alleged to have committed is also covered by another alternative news portal, said to be Government friendly, the Mole.

The Mole ran an article, "Saudi journo - check properly before deporting", castigating the Home Minister and questioning the wisdom, or the lack of it, to deport the Saudi journalist for a disputable crime,
"I agree with Dr Mahathir that the Home Ministry should have paid more attention to this matter. It is not everyday that we get requests to deport "Prophet insulting Bloggers" back to a country whose criminal prosecution and punishment are still at the basic jahiliyah level. The Minister of Home Affairs should know his job."
That the Mole carried an article critical of the Government dispels doubt as to it's impartiality and buttresses it's credibility, in more ways than one.

Why the Malaysian Insider took such a circuitous and misleading route is obvious, that is to cater for their mouth frothing opposition addicts, seeing that even main stream media such as the Star made reports such as this with judicial questions of the deportation.

Coming back to the Washington Post editorial, what many in the opposition might be impressed with, is the freedom of the press in the US.

But then again there are those who give a thorough examination of this US freedom of the press. Also critical of the Saudis in the 22 November 2011 Asia Times and relevant for my post, Exposed: US press 'freedom',
If you are an official from a "valuable ally" - such as the House of Saud or the regime in Israeli - you are assured a tough question-free pulpit anywhere you choose, especially if you're fluent in English.

But if you are an official from a "rogue" regime, the maximum you can aspire is to be humiliated in public, as it happened to Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad at Columbia University in New York. Especially if you don't speak English, and most of what you say is lost in translation.

On the other hand, if you are a travelling US corporate media hack, you can get away with murder.

Example. During the Asian financial crisis, in 1997 and 1998, I went to countless press conferences where parachuted US hacks intimidated Asian leaders as if they were a bunch of hooligans (the hacks, not the leaders). Perky chicks emerging from some two-bit journalism school in the flyover states treated then-Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad as if he was a child rapist, because he had established capital controls.

Mahathir turned out to be right - as Malaysia overcame the crisis much earlier than those, such as Indonesia, Thailand and South Korea, that surrendered to the International Monetary Fund's dreadful "adjustments".
Fittingly, we now know why Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim has this sudden need to support the security of Israel at this point in time.

Getting back at The Malaysia Insider, the news portal would be well advised to be cognizant of the word, two-faced, best described in this blogpost, "Two faced Anwar Ibrahim and the infamous Wall Street Journal article", for future usage or reference.

So if "two-faced" and "double-talk" is your cup of tea, The Malaysian Insider is the place to be, just as much as with the PM wannabe

Updated 6.03 pm

I missed Anwar's Media Statement. Result of brainstorming. All the more, why need to meet Nik Aziz?

No comments: