"The good thing is that even under all that pressure, Abdullah respected the process of democracy and did not use the Internal Security Act (ISA). He should be commended for that."
Because he did not use the ISA, he is commended? So, if he use the ISA, what does it mean?
The article in The Star today is about the squabble between Abdullah and Mahathir. The statement must be read in the context of the subject matter. What is Joceline suggesting when that statement is appended? It seems to suggest the fact that despite Mahathir's vociferous attack on Pak Lah, Pak Lah had yet, or, did not, use the ISA. Use ISA on Mahathir? That's oxymoronic, even if it was just a suggestion and implying, isn't it,?
Why should ISA be used against an ex-prime minister just because he criticised the PM? What was the objective of the ISA? It was a piece of legislation passed at a time of security threats from the communist insurgents and infiltration and is used only on those people that posed a threat to the nation's security and peace. The squabble is purely about policy matters and about executive decision making that were purported to be wrong.
Mahathir did not raise an insurgency to attack the government with the intend to topple a legitimate government. The Government believes that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has no intention to destroy the country, Foreign Ministry parliamentary secretary Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek said. What Mahathir was seeking is answers to the questions posed by him to the Prime Minister Pak Lah. Would that be sufficient for the Prime Minister Pak Lah to consider the use of ISA to arrest and detain Mahathir?
Why should ISA be used against an ex-prime minister just because he criticised the PM? What was the objective of the ISA? It was a piece of legislation passed at a time of security threats from the communist insurgents and infiltration and is used only on those people that posed a threat to the nation's security and peace. The squabble is purely about policy matters and about executive decision making that were purported to be wrong.
Mahathir did not raise an insurgency to attack the government with the intend to topple a legitimate government. The Government believes that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has no intention to destroy the country, Foreign Ministry parliamentary secretary Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek said. What Mahathir was seeking is answers to the questions posed by him to the Prime Minister Pak Lah. Would that be sufficient for the Prime Minister Pak Lah to consider the use of ISA to arrest and detain Mahathir?Absolutely oxymoronic and statements from dim-wits.
Could we also say that "it was a good thing the lecturer only molest the student, touched her breast and hugged her. He has a respect for the process of democracy as he did not rape her and only asked her to consider to take him as her boyfriend.
Is it reasonable analogy?
4 comments:
Lecturers and teachers need a code of ethics.
It's also the way lecturers are hired. The conditions are lax.
I thought you are on holiday?
Investigate both the student's claims and the lecturer's defence thoroughly. Go through their respective backgrounds and history with a piece of fine comb. I am not siding with or blaming anyone but some of the students we have nowadays are the scum and dregs of society who would do anything, repeat, anything to bring down the career of anyone against whom they bear a grudge, imagined or otherwise.
Bayi, I am on holiday but the itch to blog is unbearable. So, on to log in to cyber-space anywhere...
Anonymous, I agree with you.
Post a Comment