|
Written by Ong Tee Keat
|
|
Wednesday, 15 April 2009 |
|
Today, many newspapers and Internet portals have highlighted the Deputy Prime Minister's remarks which mentioned my name. I have clarified my stance on the subject matter in a blog posting yesterday.
I wish to reiterate that in the spirit of democracy and freedom of speech, everyone is entitled to his or her own views. I agree that Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin has a right to speak his mind on why he thinks the Barisan Nasional was defeated in the two recent by-elections. That doesn't mean that I agree with his statement that the Chinese are ungrateful. To me, it is the BN's obligation to help the people, whether during campaigning period or otherwise. As I said in my blog posting yesterday, the issue of being grateful does not arise at all.
I will not allow myself to fall into the trap set by individuals bent on using me to pit a particular community against certain national leaders. My main priority now is to win back the peoples' support for the Barisan Nasional come the next general election. Such support will not come just because we dish out election goodies at the eleventh hour, but rather it involves long process of winning back the people's confidence and goodwill.
|
It is good you thay you have clarified your earlier statement. You should have earlier make clear concerning your stand that you do not agree with the DPM's statement that the Chinese are ungrateful. However you just stop here.
You should have also done the following:
1. Tell the DPM that his statement involving your alleged statement was not correct.
2. Tell the DPM not to finger-point the Chinese press about the twisting of words and to look down of their command of Malay language. Rather it seemed that the DPM himself is twisting his words and also "boasted" himself of his command of Malay language.
If such unwarranted statement is from the PR leaders you would have hammered them outrightly; calling them racists, liars, hypocrates, arrogant, etc. Even some BN leaders may take court actions against them.
However you tried to "soften or justify or cover-up" the unwarranted statement. Isn't this action a kind of hypocrisy?
You have taken a step forward by clarifying that you do not agree with the DPM's statement. However your hypocrisy pushed you two steps backward.
regards,