YOURSAY ‘He can’t back away, or people may think he has something to hide.’
Odin Tajué: Lawyer Wan Azmir Wan Majid, here is the sad truth - you and your client have proven to Dow Jones that you both are either imbeciles or citizens of an English-challenged, poverty-stricken, corruption-ridden Third World country unworthy of even a second of its time.
That is the reason why the journal has not bothered to respond to your last letter. Besides, one does not dignify dregs of the human race by entertaining their questions or statements; one simply ignores them completely.
The particular reports published by Dow Jones and the assertions or implications they carried were abundantly clear to anyone with even secondary school education and an average IQ.
You would be well advised to forget about issuing a letter of demand, one which we would assume to require Dow Jones to retract its reports and offer an unconditional apology, but to immediately initiate legal action against it.
Do this, and you will salvage whatever you might have by way of reputation.
Vijay47: “...Dow Jones’ refusal to give any reply or explanation can be construed as an admission of guilt,” said Wan Azmir.
This from a lawyer? Just to humour him and go along his line of logic, pray tell me, Wan Azmir, if this is an admission of guilt, what do you call Najib's refusal to answer that simple question - "What was RM2.6 billion from 1MDB doing in your personal bank account?"
That can be construed as an affirmation of innocence? There is a chance, a small eeny meeny tiny one, that just like The Edge , Dow Jones may be saying, "Sure, brother, bring it on."
Anonymous 2305141436452229: Didn't Dow Jones say that they stood by the story published in The Wall Street Journal ( WSJ)? And does this same principle of silence equals guilt apply to a certain other someone?
Sabahan: WSJ’s silence is from disbelief at the stupidity of Najib's lawyers.
They have published the documents concerning their claims. Najib did not dispute those claims but tried to twist and deviate from the issue.
Anonymous #07443216: Of course, Najib must instruct his lawyers to send Dow Jones a letter of demand.
He cannot back away now; otherwise people may think he has something to hide. He must safeguard his reputation.
Magnus: Here’s a quick SWOT analysis on WSJ:
1. Winner of 35 Pulitzer Prize awards and considered the gold-standard of journalism. It is the industry leader delivering the most crucial news of the day, insightful opinion and fair-minded analysis.
2. Since 1889, readers have trusted WSJ for accurate, objective information to fuel their decisions as well as to enlighten, educate and inspire them.
3. WSJ is the world's leading business publication and the most trusted newspaper in the United States. It reaches the world's most powerful business leaders, active investors, and affluent luxury consumers.
Question: Still want to sue WSJ?
Swipenter: I think the lawyers at WSJ are waiting for Najib's letter of demand. They would love to tear them to pieces in a (impartial and neutral) court of law. Please sue WSJ. Don't let us down.
Anonymous_1391693662: Suing and warning selected party (parties) are a real waste of time for the public and to the government who should be more concerned in improving and developing the country’s economy.
Why can't this government understand this and get the only person who could solve this issue - that is, the prime minister himself - to clear the air on the matter?
I think the public, together with the opposition, should take stern action against the task force for not revealing crucial information with regards to the US$700 million (RM2.6 billion), and RM2 million credited to Najib’s and his wife Rosmah Mansor's accounts respectively.
Need we have all this drama? We have to take action, and not tolerate this nonsense by the ministers and the authorities.
Malaysia Ku: Malaysia, and the whole world, is waiting with bated breath for Najib’s legal letter to sue the WSJ. It should make another interesting read for every newbie lawyer once the contents are made public.
Hang Babeuf: This - "Dow jones’ refusal to give any reply or explanation can be construed as an admission of guilt” - is what happens, and what you get, when you bring a kampung mindset and political culture to bear upon the conduct and interpretation of formal legal process and procedure.
Hmmmmmmmm: I suggest we give WSJ another 30 days to respond.
Refusal to give a reply or explanation can be construed as admission of guilt. How true. We have been waiting for a reply for months now.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .
These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.