Monday, February 1, 2010
Hookway (WSJ) and Anwar are more than buddies
When James Hookway of the Wall Street Journal (a dear friend of Anwar Ibrahim) described Malaysia as a race-based politics, I sent WSJ an e-mail but I wonder whether he read it of give a damn about it.
I wrote that when he finds it's okay to give such a description about Malaysian politics, then I would be free to say that the American politics is actually 'color-based'. The only colors most Americans (notably their leaders) are black and white.
When Barack Obama became the first black President of the United States of America, many cast their confidence that he would perform better than any of the white presidents. However, his heart is darker than his skin when he failed to deliver what he promised more than a year ago during his run-up to the presidential election.
Hookway is a typical white with a black brain. He sees Anwar as his subject to gain prominence. His articles and writings about Anwar are actually biased and contain to substance of jurisdiction in journalism. He is close to Anwar, alrite and gota first hand news and comment from him but the rest of it came from unreliable sources.
Just like Peter Arnett whom I met in Baghdad during my first war assignment in 1982. While most members of the Press were at the warfronts like Suleimaniyah (north of Iraq) and Basrah (south) to report what they saw and observed, he was reporting from the lobby of el-Rashid hotel (he was there once again when the US launched the Desert Storm in late 1990).
Manipulation is what they were taught of in journalism.
Hookway chose to be radical about outburst. How long has he been with Anwar, is another thing but he always portray Anwar as the king of news. I doubt it that more than half a million Americans know who Anwar is.
And now that Anwar's sodomy trial commences tomorow, just wait what Hookway will write about it.
The question I got in mind - why do WSJ give so much attention to Anwar. Does he hold any stakes in that publication?