The point of Dr M is that the law suit is meaningless and an act of cowardice.
Will one's reputation be enhanced after the court case? If the answer is NO, what is the purpose of suing someone who is alleged to tarnish one's reputation?
Therefore, to sue a party for tarnishing a perceived image is a meaningless activity, particularly so if it is quite plain that one is not in dire straits and needing the money from the law suit.
I totally agree with Dr Mahatir that only cowards do such kind of meaningless activities.
After reading comments here, does it mean our local leaders who have been suing, especially suing foreign newspaper writers, are cowards or bullies. It is more likely they are very thin-skinned and paranoid, or having an inferiority complex, forever having to look over their shoulders.
I find Dr M not a reliable social commentator, he is to me a sour grape with little intergrity.
My reading of his comment is that obvioulsy there is some element of truth in that book, as such his sudden realisation of the need for 'freedom' of speech....is quite laughable!
On the other hand, initially I thought it was necessary for our leaders to challenge the defamation statements made by the foreign media essential to the well being of our country BUT I now believe they have overdone it with a hint to kill off All critism.
The purpose of suing is never about getting monetary compensation. Suing you and bankrupting you is a form of violence - financial violence - which is more effective than physical violence because the aim is to hurt you and even your loved ones, and in some case destroy you politically.
Many who know Dr M find him a 'hypocrite'. Others call him a 'cunning old man'. The former Prime Minister of Australia labels him a 'recalcitrant' person. He is smart but after 22 years of ruling by him, Malaysia is still a very corrupt nation and the crime rate is pretty high. Many Malaysians do not find it safe to live in their country. So what so great about Dr. M? It is NO LKY.
"During the 22 years when he retained a tight grip on power, Mahathir was hardly a friend of press freedom, outlawing various publications and ensuring that the mainstream media was effectively controlled by the state."
He has no locus standi to be critical.
It's like someone selling whole life policy all the while and when lost power, start peddling "buy term invest the rest"
Perhaps is due to mellowing or genuine change. But we'll never know eh... pish posh
Dr M is more smarter and democratic in this respect.
ReplyDeleteDr. M knows that, no longer PM, he will not get the preference treatment from the court.
ReplyDeleteSame with our old man. Just watch and see. He will stop suing when he is no longer MM or PM father.
Rex comments as follows,
ReplyDeleteThe point of Dr M is that the law suit is meaningless and an act of cowardice.
Will one's reputation be enhanced after the court case? If the answer is NO, what is the purpose of suing someone who is alleged to tarnish one's reputation?
Therefore, to sue a party for tarnishing a perceived image
is a meaningless activity, particularly so if it is quite plain that one is not in dire straits and needing the money from the law suit.
I totally agree with Dr Mahatir that only cowards do such kind of meaningless activities.
rex
In SG, it is wiser to keep your mouth shut.
ReplyDeleteDr. M said that the leader who sues critics is a coward. I would refer to him as a bully.
ReplyDeleteThere are many wiser men than the man known as demi-god in sin.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading comments here, does it mean our local leaders who have been suing, especially suing foreign newspaper writers, are cowards or bullies.
ReplyDeleteIt is more likely they are very thin-skinned and paranoid, or having an inferiority complex, forever having to look over their shoulders.
Rex comments on Jun 16 poster.
ReplyDeleteThe answer is "all of the above".
coward + bully + thin skinned + paranoid + inferiority complex.
A truly wise and righteous person doesn't bother about such issues. Mahatir is a smart guy.
rex
I find Dr M not a reliable social commentator, he is to me a sour grape with little intergrity.
ReplyDeleteMy reading of his comment is that obvioulsy there is some element of truth in that book, as such his sudden realisation of the need for 'freedom' of speech....is quite laughable!
On the other hand, initially I thought it was necessary for our leaders to challenge the defamation statements made by the foreign media essential to the well being of our country BUT I now believe they have overdone it with a hint to kill off All critism.
Absolutely concur with rex.
ReplyDeleteIt is stooping even lower when the Law is manipulated shamelessly !
The purpose of suing is never about getting monetary compensation. Suing you and bankrupting you is a form of violence - financial violence - which is more effective than physical violence because the aim is to hurt you and even your loved ones, and in some case destroy you politically.
ReplyDeleteMany who know Dr M find him a 'hypocrite'. Others call him a 'cunning old man'. The former Prime Minister of Australia labels him a 'recalcitrant' person. He is smart but after 22 years of ruling by him, Malaysia is still a very corrupt nation and the crime rate is pretty high. Many Malaysians do not find it safe to live in their country. So what so great about Dr. M? It is NO LKY.
ReplyDeleteDr Mahathir is no lky and that is exactly why the Doctor is respectable.
ReplyDelete"During the 22 years when he retained a tight grip on power, Mahathir was hardly a friend of press freedom, outlawing various publications and ensuring that the mainstream media was effectively controlled by the state."
ReplyDeleteHe has no locus standi to be critical.
It's like someone selling whole life policy all the while and when lost power, start peddling "buy term invest the rest"
Perhaps is due to mellowing or genuine change.
But we'll never know eh... pish posh