YOURSAY | ‘This is not the first time the gov’t has sided with the aggressors … and blamed the victims.’
Hang Babeuf: What Bersih is doing is within the law, legal. What the red shirts do is not. It is gross intimidation. The way to stop all this mayhem is to put the fear of the law into Ali Tinju and his Red Devils.
This is not the first time that the government has sided with the aggressors in such matters and blamed the victims.
Does anybody remember the sad, nasty end of the early hopes for more progressive policies during the Abdullah Ahmad Badawi prime ministership?
How peaceful NGOs tried to hold their own off-street meetings on Article 11 rights of religious freedom and on establishing an Interfaith Commission? And how they were attacked by the forerunners of this red shirt thuggery?
Do people remember how nasty things threatened to become? And then how the government clamped down not on the street enforcers and intimidators but on the civic-minded, peaceful NGO people as the source of the trouble?
Go back to school, Deputy Home Minister Nur Jazlan Mohamed, and learn your own ministry’s sorry history!
Anak JB: Nur Jazlan, if a student goes to school and was bullied, do you tell the student to stop going to school?
Trueglitter: We are overwhelmingly astonished and disappointed at Nur Jazlan's colossal stupidity by his failure to compare apples with apples by his heinous intention and mindless desire to demonise the Bersih movement.
Clearly, in his endeavours and unconcealed ambition to be Umno-BN 'fearless warrior', Nur Jazlan's rhetoric and irresponsible comparisons, involving particularly Bersih and the obnoxious and unpopular red shirts movement would undoubtedly be perceived as having no regards for whatever consequences that might ensue.
Playing to the gallery with a hidden agenda, which the scheming Nur Jazlan has done, will be likened to wielding a double-edged sword that might terminate his political career.
Existential Turd: If Bersih is not getting any traction, why the need for the red shirts samseng to disrupt their rallies?
It is clear that the BN government took a lot of flak by using the police to suppress the people's demand, so now they outsource the hackling to a group of ‘gangsters’.
Nur Jazlan's comment shows Umno-BN is the puppeteer that holds the strings of the red shirts.
The government is actively working against Bersih and other NGOs to thwart the people's demand for a fair, just, accountable and transparent government. The government, in short, is anti-rakyat.
Clongviews: Nur Jazlan, you should allow Bersih 5 rally since you say that people are losing interest and the movement is losing traction. Also Jamal/red shirts/Umno should just stop confronting the Bersih supporters.
The Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) allows the citizens to mount peaceful protests and you as well as PDRM (Royal Malaysian Police) are supposed to assist and ensure that there are no untoward incidents.
Asuka: If the elections were clean and fair, there is no need for Bersih. The rakyat don't have to waste their time at the rallies. We can go shopping or watch a movie with our family after the general elections.
Dont Just Talk: Nur Jazlan, why must Bersih rally be stopped just because they are threatened by the red T-shirt rowdies?
Malaysia is a democratic country and those red T-shirt rowdies can hold their rally on separate days, instead of choosing to clash with the yellow shirt Bersih supporters.
In short, they are bent on causing a riot thus giving the PDRM the excuse to take action. The more the red T-shirt rowdies misbehaved, the more the right-thinking, literate Malaysians will vote against BN, especially MCA, Gerakan and MIC.
Grey Matter: If all that is true (that Bersih is not getting traction), why then are the red shirts and Umno worried about it?
The fact that you say if Bersih stops, red shirts will too, means that you confirm that red shirts are a militant arm of Umno.
Oscar Kilo: In other words, the red shirts have no agenda or purpose other than to oppose Bersih. Meaning, the red shirts support dirty and unfair elections.
Odin Tajué: One of the rules in wilderness survival is to not assume that because we see birds and animals eating certain berries, shoots or any other jungle produces, it is safe for us to eat them.
Animal feed can be toxic to, and have adverse effects on, humans. The effects may be relatively mild, such as irrationality and loss of inhibition, or serious, such as paralysis and insanity, or fatal, such as thrashing about wildly as one experiences acute inability to breathe and then collapsing down to the ground.
What we see here is a relatively mild effect of consuming animal feed. The effect will deteriorate, however, as the lost adventurer is consuming more and more of it.- Mkini