The focus should be…. (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)
Is the opposition to APCO merely because it was behind 1 Israel? Would it be okay if APCO were Muslim owned and headquartered in a Muslim country? Or is the real issue the wastage of RM80 million of the people’s money?
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
It is good to debate. Debating clears the air and allows both sides to present their views. But there are some who are experts at muddling things. These people are not debating with good faith. Their aim is merely to throw the cat amongst the pigeons and throw red herrings into the ring to create utter confusion.
I do not spare these types of people. I will be very brutal and will hit back hard, below the belt if necessary since hitting below the belt is what they do anyway. I will not turn the other cheek. I will not take an eye for an eye. I will take out both their eyes for the one they take from me.
Does that make me a bastard? Hey, I never said I am an angel so whatever gave you that impression? Sure I too fight dirty when the situation demands that I fight dirty. I can be as dirty and brutal as the next guy if need be.
Ultimately you decide. Is it going to be Queensbury rules or Thai boxing? Both I am equally comfortable with. You play the tune and I will dance to your tempo.
Let us look at the issue of APCO and I Israel. How do we debate this issue? The focus of the APCO issue is that this is the outfit behind both I Israel and 1 Malaysia. Is that how we want to debate the issue?
Now APCO has come out with documents that appear to point to the fact that this is not true. So how do we want to now debate the issue?
In the first place, so what if APCO was behind 1 Israel and now they are also behind 1 Malaysia? Is that so bad? If APCO is the best brains in the business then surely we would want to employ the best brains to plan our strategy.
Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s officers did not go to Israel. They went to the U.S. APCO may be an Israeli owned company. But then there are many other companies also operating in Israel. And there are many non-Israeli companies based in the U.S. and elsewhere that are Jewish owned. Do we ban Coca Cola for the same reason — that it also operates in Israel?
It was very dangerous to embark on an anti-APCO campaign on grounds that it was behind the 1 Israel idea. Not all Jews are Zionists. Many Israeli citizens also oppose Zionism and have openly demonstrated against it.
How do Muslims feel when the world whacks Islam for what the Taliban in Afghanistan does? The Taliban may be Muslims but not all Muslims are Taliban. The same argument applies that Zionists might be Jews but not all Jews are Zionists and not all Jews are Israeli citizens.
The enemy might be Zionism but Jews and Israelis should not be painted with the same brush just like I resent all Muslims being painted with the Taliban brush.
The focus should be on the almost RM80 million that was paid to APCO. This is the people’s money. Why was the people’s money used for the benefit of the Prime Minister or Umno? What benefit is this to the taxpayers?
Even if APCO happens to be a company owned by Muslims with its headquarters in Saudi Arabia it is still wrong to spend RM80 million of the people’s money in that manner. It should have nothing to do with the fact that APCO is Jewish or Israeli or that it is behind 1 Israel.
Another example would be the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) issue. There is strong opposition to the MCLM. Why?
The argument is that MCLM is a spoiler. It will diminish the chances of the opposition Pakatan Rakyat if MCLM engages in three-corner contests in the next election.
That is the issue and that is what is being debated. MCLM must work with Pakatan Rakyat, argue those opposed to MCLM.
Okay, then an announcement is made that MCLM does not intend to sabotage Pakatan Rakyat’s chances of forming the next government. It does, in fact, intend to work with Pakatan Rakyat.
Does that settle the matter? Are they now satisfied? They are not. Now they argue: what makes you think Pakatan Rakyat wants to work with MCLM? Another group says if MCLM wants to be seen as an independent ‘third force’ then it should not announce that it intends to work with Pakatan Rakyat. It should not close its doors to Barisan Nasional. Only then will it be seen as independent.
I begin to wonder whether these people are sincere in wanting to debate the issue or they just want to oppose for the sake of opposing. If we say we are independent they have something to say. If we say we intend to work with Pakatan Rakyat they also have something to say.
I say yes, you say no, you say yes, I say no, no, no…..sounds like a song does it not?
And that is how they want to debate, whether it is APCO or MCLM or whatever. I just take the opposite stand to you and when you swing one way I will swing the other way. Do we really need to waste any time arguing with such people? It really does not matter what you say. They will just take the opposite view.
Back to the APCO issue. Is the opposition to APCO merely because it was behind 1 Israel? Would it be okay if APCO were Muslim owned and headquartered in a Muslim country? Or is the real issue the wastage of RM80 million of the people’s money?
Even if we argue that the issue is the RM80 million and not the company behind 1 Israel there would still be people who will argue why focus on a small amount like RM80 million when billions are being wasted on other things and no one talks about it? Better talk about the billions then the mere RM80 million spent on APCO.
Yes, you can never debate when they are not genuine about the issue but they merely want to take the opposite view to yours.
Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2010/12/blog-post_24.html
