The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has opted for a "safe" headline in their fresh allegations against Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak because they do not have what it takes to back up the allegations, said veteran newsman Ahiruddin Atan.

"Note how the WSJ editors have opted for a 'safe' headline in order to safeguard the paper in the event of a lawsuit by the Malaysian prime minister," he said on his blog Rocky's Bru today.

WSJ published an article earlier today titled '1MDB Scandal: Deposits in Malaysian leader's accounts said to top US$1 billion', where they alleged that deposits into Najib's personal bank accounts totalled more than US$1 billion.

"If the WSJ is really serious about journalism, it should drop the word 'said to' and go for Najib's jugular.

"Obviously it can't because it doesn't have what it takes to back up the allegations," Ahiruddin said.

The US$1 billion allegedly deposited into Najib's account also reportedly include the RM2.6 billion which has been identified by Najib and local authorities as a political donation from the Middle East.

WSJ had also claimed that most of the US$1 billion originated from 1MDB, and not from Saudi Arabia, as the attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali had claimed.

Ahiruddin ( photo ) advised Malaysians to dig into old WSJ articles before believing everything they read from the US daily.

"Malaysians who take WSJ's negative reporting on their own country and prime minister as gospel truth should try Googling and look at some of the paper's old articles that paint Malaysia as a rogue nation.

"You might just notice the obvious: that this is not the first time WSJ is accusing a Malaysian prime minister of stealing billions of ringgit," he said.

He pointed out that back in 1998, WSJ had repeated then recently deposed deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim's accusations that then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad was a thief.

Mahathir did not waste time in suing WSJ, Ahiruddin said, perhaps because it was obvious that WSJ was on Anwar's side, he noted.

Those allegations were never proven, he added, "not by Anwar nor by WSJ".

Meanwhile, he also commented on Mahathir's announcement yesterday that he was planning to quit Umno.

"As for Mahathir's decision to quit Umno again, people probably fell off their chair because they were dozing off," he said.

It was sad when the former premier first quit in 2008 to protest against then prime minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, he said, and "shocking and impactful" when Mahathir threatened to resign in 2002.

"But that was a long time ago. Too long," Ahiruddin mused.

Yesterday's announcement was merely "pathetic", he added.