In Malaysiakini Terence Netto wrote Crucial to know the difference, mildly chiding Anwar Ibrahim for his poor judgement but generally or indirectly sympathetic to his political volte face on issues related to the Israeli notorious attack against the recent peace flotilla.
To discuss this, I will leave aside Anwar’s revelation of Najib’s PR consultant Apco, also considered by some as an attack by Anwar against Israel, though Netto's article attempted to clarify this as not. I feel that Netto’s article has added confussion by including the Apco issue, so I won't in this post.
I want to discuss the dilemma Anwar Ibrahim now faces, following his (initial) public raging against Israeli aggression against the peace flotilla including leading a demo against the US Embassy in KL for the American’s blind support for a vicious criminal Israel.
Anwar was of course making political hay then. That by itself is okay, and in fact expected of any politician except for the very glaring fact that Anwar subsequently apologised to neo-con Zionists in Washington for his seemingly anti-Zionist or anti-Israeli conduct in Malaysia.
* note that a Zionist needn’t necessarily be an Israeli or Jew but may well be a gentile or a goyim (kaffir)
Apparently the event (Anwar’s apology) was reported by The Washington Post. Additionally, his matey Paul Wolfowitz told American neo-cons to “cut Anwar some slack” because he (Anwar) was facing humongous persecution in Malaysia.
Wolfowitz was a deputy secretary in the 1st Bush Administration who urged the US to attack and invade Iraq. Even before the dust from the Twin Towers had settled he was already calling for attacks against Iraq. He was also asked to vacate his post as chairperson of the World Bank in disgrace, a scandalous episode in which Anwar's name was involved.
Apart from Anwar's volte face (belakang pusing) regarding his original condemnation of Israel & the USA but subsequent apology to the pro Zionists in Washinton, which has been very damaging to his credibility with the heartland at home, Wolfowitz has NOT help Anwar at all because UMNO will (if they haven’t yet) seize on his call to “cut Anwar some slack” as a clear indication of Anwar’s close ties with those the heartland considers as ‘ungodly’.
I admit that I haven't been very sympathetic to Anwar though in March this year I did defend him against KJ's jeering of Anwar dancing with the daughter of Lim Goh Tong, the late boss of the Genting Highland group - see my post Defending Anwar Ibrahim - wakakaka.
But on Anwar’s current predicament I am not as sympathetic as Netto has been for him.
The truth is Anwar has politically (vis-à-vis Israel & the USA) hunted with the hounds and ran with the hare.
Of course UMNO people have done the same.
So … does that make Anwar as bad or as good as an UMNO leader?