Monday, January 29, 2007

Are Jeff Ooi and Rocky Bru chooks?

So I am a bit late in blogging on poor Jeff Ooi's and Ahirudin Attan’s predicament, where two of Malaysia’s most influential, if not the two most influential, bloggers have been taken to court for libel. OK, I blame it on my being away ... er ... looking for Mr X ;-)

On the sorry saga, some have written to malaysiakini questioning what’s the bloody big fuss about the two being sued – live by the sword, then die by the sword.

While a couple attempted to preempt any questioning of their motives or allegiances by emphasizing that they are avid readers-fans of Screenshots, they, like one particular anti-Jeff Ooi’s blogsite, said the NST personalities have a right to take court action against Jeff Ooi.

What’s the big deal? Why should Jeff Ooi or Ahirudin Attan be unique to the extent that they should be exempt from the defamation action?

My take is that neither Jeff Ooi nor Ahiridin Attan is unique. But what is unique has been a set of circumstances, as follows:

(1) one particular plaintiff has been conducting a vendetta against Jeff Ooi as far back as, admittedly limited by my memory, the Screenshots’ ‘oil & water’ saga;

(2) Rocky’s Bru was the blog that brought out the luxury yacht exposé. That infuriated the PM who strenuously denied* he had ordered the boat;

* I believe the PM didn’t order the yacht but I wonder who did? I love to have one to participate in the Monsoon Cup and get a chance to rub shoulders with high society

(3) the non-scandal of the yacht was followed by bloggers’ revelation of nasi kandar in Perth while Malaysians were struggling against the ravages of the floods in southern Malaysia;

(4) then there is the new exposé of the luxury jet;

(5) bloggers including myself have been mocking the PM’s lackluster performance and cakap ta’serupa bikin conduct – a Bao Gong redux that’s really an insult to the good Chinese magistrate.

AAB is in reality very thin skin. He cannot take too much criticism, unlike the PMs of western nations. He doesn't seem to understand that criticism of a PM or any elected representatives or non-elected public servants is a natural outcome of a democratic system, an outcome that he should be the 'first' to protect and uphold.

Alas, such an autocratic disdainful attitude is not unique to AAB but to most Asian leaders who would voice democratic principles but believe those principles don’t apply to them. Once elected, Malaysian leaders have a nasty belief in their ‘raja-ness’, expecting the usual daulat’s and ampu tuanku’s.

Add some extra spices like a few sycophants, court jesters and who-else’s and soon the utterly naked Emperor would be walking boldly down the cat walk, assured by the inner-most coterie that he’s in full royal regalia.

“Off with their heads, Tuanku?” simpered the coterie in gleeful anticipation.

“Do it straightaway” his Royal Elegance responded.

Indeed, malaysiakini reported that AAB has accused Malaysians [meaning bloggers] of using the Internet to spread lies about him.

Well, as the democratically-elected [I hope he still remembers this] PM, he has the right to refute those lies.

Then he did the disgraceful thing – he came out in open support of the defamation suit against two Malaysian bloggers by the NST people. During a visit to the UK, he was reported to have said: "They [meaning Jeff and Ahirudin] cannot hope to cover themselves or hide from the laws."

Why does the PM of a nation interfere with a civil suit between two private parties, though admittedly one has close links with him?

malaysiakini reader AM Ubaidah S wrote significantly:
“… there may also be legal reasons why Pak Lah should refrain from commenting on this matter. Australian journalist Michael Backman once commented in his book Inside Knowledge said that (in his view) Malaysian courts are actually quite independent (contrary to popular opinion), but have this annoying habit of typically passing judgement in favour of or in line with what they perceive are the government's desires; the flip-flop on Anwar Ibrahim's conviction and subsequent release on appeal being the case in point.”

I believe AAB has been persuaded (or if you wish 'misled') into believing that unsympathetic bloggers would be detrimental to his rule. That the UMNO-linked NST is involved is significant - it's a case of killing a couple of chicken to frighten the monkeys.


  1. Hi KT,
    Hope you had a fun holiday with Bollywood chicks around :-)

    a)The yacht
    In the narrow legal sense of the term, AB doesn't own the yach. But I can think of a number of cronies who definitely can afford the yacht, would be happy to put it fully at AB's disposal. It's "his" boat in practical terms, and the man loves boating, you know.
    I know an undischarged bankrupt who can still drive a luxury car. The car's owned by someone else, but its "his" car for daily use. Same kind of arrangement with the yacht..

    b) The executive plane.
    I'm an aviation enthusiast, so the Mainstream press can't bluff me on this one.
    The jet in the photo - airframe registration D-AIDR is a real airplane. Airbus A319 - Delivered December 2006, currently undergoing interior finishing. Registered owner - Malaysian Government.

    Every legally registered aeroplane in the world can be traced through its airframe registration number. They can't use the OSA or

    c) Perth Nasi Kandar
    AB, like any other employee in the country has the right to take leave for a rest or to pursue whatever his personal interests are. But the timing sucks..with most of Johor underwater at the time. In theory the government machinery is supposed to function with or without the PM around, but in a crisis, the leader has to be visible, there is no way out of it, otherwise he cannot sit in that chair.

  2. budder kt, fresh from chasing skirts and the mythological mr x?

    becareful hor, be very careful hor what you post ;)


  3. KTemoc,
    After reading your points, I got just a small question. Rocky bru and Jeff Ooi indeed made a lot of expose on PM (emphasized) luxury toys and trips, but are these the reasons (or suggested evidence of defamation by NSTP) why they have been sued libel for? Instead of writing material about NSTP?
    well, we all know bloggers like us "boh song" (dislike) our PM. And he is powerful to "borrow the sword and kill" [hypothetical suggestion]. Just make a crude analogy lar: I know there is this traffic police has personal vedentta on me, and one day he picked on me for speeding and then let others get away. If I am truly guilty of speeding, in term of law, can I get away that speeding ticket by accusing him bias? Still, I have to pay for my ticket, rite? But of course I will report the incidents on his bias to authority by presenting proof. Make sense or not ah?

  4. good to see you back, ktemoc... though you didn't find the elusive mr x. missed your postings!

    i agree with you on your last paragraph. our PM is a person who is easily influenced indeed.

  5. KT,

    did u personally KNOW what's the beef of the suit?
    what were alleged to b the libelous contents??

    without the benefit of the above info, for u to accuse NST (or its controllers) of sinister motive, is tantamount to saying that these bloggers could not have done any wrong.

    would u say the same if they were sued bcos they were COCKY, ARROGANT n MALICIOUS in their attacks on NST???

    u also argued that they were sued bcos of 'prevailing circumstances' n their recent expose. by your logic, no blogger could b legitimately sued so long as they have been doing these expose works in public interests. (agree with mich's analogy above.)

    personal vendetta - u must have forgotten that both jeff n rocky have been pursuing personal vendetta AGAINST NST, especially during the 'plagiarism' issue. y the double standard?

    they can sue doesnt mean they can win. think about it - if the bloggers win??? i guess u would think that these bloggers did nothing wrong, bcos u seemed to suggest they should not have been sued. so, they r LIKELY TO WIN. so y worry?? if they win, NST have to pay THEIR legal expenses.

    plus, their VICTORY would b a victory for the malaysian 'bloggerhood', right?? so wouldn't it b GREAT to have them sued, n then see them WIN?? their victory would mean so much for 'freedom of speech' in malaysia, right??

    NST has a reputation just like everybody else has. your logic n arguments above would essentially deprive it - n all the other big, fat, rich arseholes out there - a right to sue.

    now that's not right, is it?

  6. dear friends, thanks for your views - I did have fun chasing up the elusive mysterious Mr X. The fun was in the chase (not for him lah) rather than the bagging of the target. as for your queries on Jeff and Rocky, please see my new posting. cheers

  7. Jeff ooi keeps on defame people and promote false information is getting him into legal trouble. Beware.