Excerpt:
I don’t really know who Rachel Motte is, or why she suddenly has become an expert on Malaysia in the past year. But I do know that she wrote an article about me recently, saying that I am “a pet” of Anwar Ibrahim, who – according to her – has “direct connections to terrorist organizations” and a long history of being an anti-Semite.
I also know that – to her credit – when I contacted Rachel on February 12 and told her that I believed that her article was inaccurate and potentially libelous, she immediately took it down for review. It no longer is on her website, and I thank her for that.
But I also know that Utusan Malaysia has reported her article verbatim – and even went to the trouble of translating it into Malay. And thanks to Dato Din Merican, now I know that the NST has chosen to print it as well.
When I took a look at Rachel’s article, I had two major areas of concern. First, Rachel characterized my relationship with Anwar as being his “pet.” This is offensive to me, as I served my nation for over 30 years as an Ambassador, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, and Consul General under seven Presidents.
I also know that – to her credit – when I contacted Rachel on February 12 and told her that I believed that her article was inaccurate and potentially libelous, she immediately took it down for review. It no longer is on her website, and I thank her for that.
But I also know that Utusan Malaysia has reported her article verbatim – and even went to the trouble of translating it into Malay. And thanks to Dato Din Merican, now I know that the NST has chosen to print it as well.
When I took a look at Rachel’s article, I had two major areas of concern. First, Rachel characterized my relationship with Anwar as being his “pet.” This is offensive to me, as I served my nation for over 30 years as an Ambassador, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, and Consul General under seven Presidents.
Second, there were many statements that to my mind are libelous:
(a) that I am defending “a man with direct ties to terrorist organizations, and a man whose anti-Semitic comments and conspiracy theories are too long to discuss;”
(b) that “rational thinking men and women are able to discern the difference between good and bad individuals, people you should support, versus those you should distance yourself from,” implying that I am not a rational thinking person; and
(c) that I am “blinded by [my] support of an anti-Semite with clear and undeniable ties to an organization that supports terrorism.”
Full details which should be read to get a full picture of his statement:
(b) that “rational thinking men and women are able to discern the difference between good and bad individuals, people you should support, versus those you should distance yourself from,” implying that I am not a rational thinking person; and
(c) that I am “blinded by [my] support of an anti-Semite with clear and undeniable ties to an organization that supports terrorism.”
Full details which should be read to get a full picture of his statement:
No comments:
Post a Comment