Zaid was just giving his personal view
Why is Gobind so upset with Zaid for giving his personal view? If personally Zaid feels that Mahathir is the de facto Opposition Leader then so be it. Zaid is entitled to his personal views. Does DAP not allow someone to have a personal view? If Zaid says he is a Muslim and he believes in Prophet Muhammad and the Qur’an, which is his personal view, does he need DAP’s permission first before saying that?
PAKATAN’S GAME OF THRONES
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Today, Zaid Ibrahim gave his personal view. He said that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is the de facto Opposition Leader, something that Malaysia Today has been saying for the last two years. One DAP leader took offence to Zaid’s declaration and whacked him. It seems Zaid should have first discussed this matter with the party before opening his mouth, and which he did not do.
“I find it strange that Zaid has chosen to make such an announcement as a DAP member without first consulting the party leadership. He should know better,” said Gobind Singh Deo.
READ MORE HERE: DAP leader rubbishes Zaid’s claim Dr M is Opposition Leader
As I said, for two years Malaysia Today has been saying that Mahathir is the de facto Opposition Leader but this has never been denied until today. Even then only one DAP leader has come out to deny this. Mahathir himself, Anwar Ibrahim who Mahathir met in court today, Selangor Menteri Besar Azmin Ali, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, Nurul Izzah Anwar, Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng, Mat Sabu, and so on, have all remained silent and have not contradicted Zaid.
But then Gobind Singh Deo, and his late father, Karpal Singh, have always had different views to the father-and-son Lims. They even disagreed with DAP working with PAS or working with Anwar Ibrahim. The Lim family practices the Machiavellian politics of the end justifies the means (matlamat menghalalkan cara). Karpal, however, played a more principled type of politics, as do his sons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQV2UYiAswQ&t=9s
Zaid has conceded his mistake and said that from now on he will no longer give his personal opinions and he told the media to stop asking him questions. That is the problem with Zaid. If anyone were to ask him a question he just cannot respond with ‘no comment’. He must answer your question and most times his answer will get him into trouble. The other problem is someone may resurrect what you said in the past and compare it with what you are saying today and will point out the contradiction or U-turn in what you say today compared to what you said in the past.
And this is the main problem many politicians all over the world face. But then there will be many people with the small minds of the Pakatuns and the DAPsters who will accept these contradictions and U-turns as positive rather than negative. These people suffer from a disease called DS or Denial Syndrome, which carry the symptoms of mental block. Mental block occurs when facts cannot enter your brain because of certain barriers that have been erected.
Take, for example, those Muslims who support Boko Haram or ISIS and say that what they are doing in Africa and the Middle East is a good thing. These Muslims have the same mind as those Pakatuns and DAPsters who will look at something negative and will declare that it is positive.
Mahathir condemned BERSIH and said the Chinese want to take over the country and now has become their tool
Mahathir is another very classic example. He has said many things in the past, which today he contradicts by saying or doing the opposite. But then not everything he said or did he contradicts today. He still maintains some of the things he said and did when he was in power. The ironical thing is the opposition disagreed with Mahathir when he was in power but today the opposition appoints him the de facto Opposition Leader in spite of the Mahathir of 1981-2003 is still the same Mahathir today.
Has Mahathir ever admitted that what he said and did when he was the Prime Minister was wrong and that he regrets what he said and did and apologises for it? The only ‘mistake’ Mahathir admits to have made was when he said he is a bad judge of character and always appoints the wrong person. Tun Musa Hitam, Anwar Ibrahim, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Najib Tun Razak, Tajudin Ramli, Nor Mohamed Yakcop, Abdullah Ang, Eric Chia, Tan Koon Swan, etc., all handpicked by Mahathir proved ‘the wrong people’.
READ HERE: Politicians leap-frog into history
Mahathir once said some very nasty things about Zaid. He called Zaid a frog, a drunk, and a person with no principles. Mahathir also said Zaid became a multimillionaire and the owner of the largest law firm in Malaysia through Umno and that he would be just a small-town lawyer in Kota Bharu if not because of Umno. In short, Zaid is a perfect example of how Malays join Umno to become filthy rich.
What is even more important is not about what Mahathir said about Zaid but the fact that Mahathir has never taken back what he said or apologised for the nasty things he said about Zaid. Does this mean Mahathir was not wrong and what he said about Zaid was right and still stands until today?
