RPK sued..AGAIN!?!

I’ve lost count of the number of cases against this man.

This time though, RPK has been delivered an order to reveal (1) his sources, and (2) the identity of the commentators.

It’s difficult for me to imagine RPK doing any of the actions required of him. After all, he has never been one to do as he is told, unless it suits him.

I’m actually waiting for a first-hand reaction from him to be posted on Malaysia-Today. Or at least, I’m expecting that he will give some sort of response.

(10:41pm Update: Sure enough, he has responded. And sure enough as well, he’s said that he’s not going to reveal anything. At all. Brave man, this Raja Petra Kamarudin. LINK HERE.)

If RPK were a journalist, revealing his sources would be tantamount to breach of a journalist’s ethics. A journalist NEVER reveals his sources. Or so I am told.

RPK is no journalist, now is he? But then again, is a blogger an online journalist?

And the order to reveal the identities of his commentators. I wonder if it’s the right thing to do. I know you’ve got to be responsible in posting comments, because ultimately you’ve got to answer for them. But for RPK to reveal their identities? Somehow it just doesn’t sit right with me.

Sure, sure, nobody is above the law.

And besides, if it’s a court order, I would probably reveal the identities of my commentators, no matter how unwilling I would be. So consider this a “warning”, lest anyone decides to leave ridiculous comments here. 🙂

But then again, like I said, RPK is not known for being submissive. I doubt he’s going to start now.

Let’s wait and see how things unfold.

Read Malaysian Insider for more details.

Advertisements

8 Comments on “RPK sued..AGAIN!?!”

  1. Patricia says:

    Hahaha, good one. Warning us to behave here, ah?

    I volunteering the info that I am a registered commentor on Malaysia Today. I seldom comment. There is always someone more gung ho than me, who’s said all I ever thought of saying! But I do remember commenting once or twice.

    If he gives them my name, they can visit my blog and read all about my dogs!!! I hope they don’t perceive that to be a national threat 😉

    Cheers,

    Pat

  2. KevinP says:

    He has… and a good one too…

    http://us3.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/11393/84/
    ___________
    What timing, KevinP! I JUST updated. Thanks anyway.

  3. humm says:

    I for one believe that if what we are saying is the truth, and something that we can prove, then we shouldn’t be afraid to say it. Of course, the problem with ‘the truth’ on the other hand is sometimes confused with ‘our opinion’ of the truth. You and your good neighbour could be observing a crime through your room windows which are tinted differently. One will say green, and the other blue, to the same account of what had just happened. ‘The truth’ therefore could be seen differently depending on ones point of observation. Surely ‘the truth’ is therefore nothing more that the ‘accepted’ sum of all individual compilation of the individual truth. This is not the end of it. ‘The truth’ is also subject to test of time which either reinforced the ‘accepted’ version or require new evaluation of it.

    Anyway, what ever our version of the truth is we should not be worried of it if we can justify what we said. After all, the authority can and should come to my room to see what I have just observed. The problem is sometimes, we report what ever our neighbour said he/she had observed. Unless we know for sure that the source is definitely from our neighbour, a good trustable neighbour that is, then we must be prepared to prove and be responsible for what we have said. After all, if the degree of what we said caused someone a great deal of distress, then it is only fair that ‘the ultimate truth’ must always be accompanied with its twin ‘the supported facts’ with it!
    _________
    Yup. As long as we can justify what we claim to be the truth. Can’t just spout whatever that comes to mind without caring about the consequences.

    If we’re talking about RPK here though, you’re going to have to make your own opinion of the man, and what he writes about.

  4. humm says:

    Let’s try not to judge the man. Any man for that matters. Let’s try not to jump to conclusion based on very short facts. It reminds me about the four blind guys who touched different parts on an elephant and say what it is. The first guy who held the legs says its like a conconut tree, the second that touched the ears say like a carpet and so on. They are all right given their own observation. Verily the ultimate truth is the combination of all the facts.

    As far as RPK or any of us that matters, we may all be saying the same thing, right in our own ways. The problem sometimes is that we tend to agree only with our version of the truth. I say, have a little humility that the other side might also be interested with the truth, even if they have a different opinion on things. There are just so many writings on the net that suggest that some people will go all the way in defending their opinion. People will start to loose their sensibility, loosing their sense of what is right or wrong, using words that I believe they themselves do not believe it. It just brings out the worst of people. I for one will not participate in those sites because it is just against what ever ‘good’ that we are trying to promote.

    As for RPK, DSAI, NTR, LKS, ..etc they are all humans too. They too have their version of ‘truth’, some i agree and some don’t. The thing is, we should always evaluate each situation at hand independently rather than just blind faith!

  5. cikjoi says:

    I used to be RPK’s fan. I got disillusioned after his SD episode against Rosmah and Altantuya. I don’t like Rosmah, but his claim is so ridiculous. The worst part is he ruthlessly give false hope/info to Altantuya’s family, just to refuse to substantiate his claim.

    RPK understands the system. he knew that a trial against him (civil or criminal) would take time. He is confident his good buddy anwar would be in control of Malaysia well before his trial begin. It would be interesting to see if all the charges against him will be dropped if anwar came into power.

    Shudder the thought….

  6. KevinP says:

    I use to read and is still reading RPK’s works with a pinch of salt. I also think that he writes 80% factual and 20% illusion. That adds to the conspiracy and heightened sensation.. hehe… maybe thats why I like reading his stuff…

    Insofar I am inclined to believe there are a lot of truths in what he is writing as those implicated are so reluctant in sueing him for slander and defamation.
    _________
    I am of similar opinion.

  7. humm says:

    I love statistics. Why not, you can paint the world the way you liked and made it sound so intelligent and scientific.

    So if I say 50% of malaysians is racist, statistically that would be very true if I had asked only two people, one sounded very racist the other not. If I had asked 10 people and 8 out of 10 is very much against the government, then we say 80% of malaysians is now in the opposition and that would still be true. The fact we sometimes conveniently ignore about statistics which also leads to a lot of people not familiar with numbers confused is that you need a good number of samplings (or data) before we can say it is representative of the trend that we are trying to depict. Two data for example is too small to suggest anything. Even 10 is still very small. Furthermore, statistics can be very skewed. That means, if we surveyed a group of internet sites that are oppositions, we expect the results to be very against the government. A skewed statistics does not represents the whole population.

    So when we say 80% factual and 20% illusion, I hope we mean chances are 80% factual and 20% illusion. Without knowing what is fact and what is illusion on the first place is hard to make any statistical conclusion.

    Problem sometimes is that a wrong conclusion get echoed elsewhere and supported until it became an accepted truth. Based on skewed data, personal opinion, limited information, conclusion after conclusions are made an accepted by someone who happens to have the same ‘opinion’. Less we are careful with what we say, we can only but promote false ideas to the mass. And, everyone seems happy to be among the ‘majority’ without knowing what it really means.

  8. bow says:

    The reason our MP draft and pass legislation like defamation law and personal libel law, so that the wrongly accused can seek recourse in our court of law. If someone malicious statement online resulted in me suffering monetarily or physically, he or she will have a day with me in court, it ‘s that simple.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s