Malaysiakini tells us that none other than - to borrow a sweetie’s WMD (Weapon of Marvellous Dismissal), gasp, gawd, omigosh - Raja Bodek called on the government to ‘seriously consider’ the setting up of a royal commission to investigate the volcanic matter erupted by the Lingam videotape.
With that, Gerakan claims pole position among BN component parties to come out strongly on the videoclip than just having a mere independent investigation panel, which has limited powers under its very narrow terms of reference.
Hmmm, very unusual yet ... yet, yes yet not so strange if we consider Raja’s action against the backdrop of the approaching general elections. Has this been a Gerakan pre-emptive strike against its BN rival, the MCA, rather than a genuine call for a more comprehensive and empowered investigation?
Ok, let’s leave that aside and continue with the second part of The necessary demonization of Lee Lam Thye.
This is kaytee’s defence of Lee Lam Thye rather than a defence of the independent investigation panel, though I must point out that by contrast to a particular political party, the Bar Council, which organised the protest march to Putrajaya, has agreed to give the 3-member panel a chance.
Bar vice president K Ragunath: “We have agreed to let the panel carry out its inquiry. We’ve agreed to cooperate with them when needed. We shall attend the inquiry or hold a watching brief, we’ve got a team set up.”
The Bar Council has taken the stand of ‘let’s see what the panel will do’, yet why is one particular party and its supporters trying to rubbish the panel. Why indeed is the demonization of Lee necessary?
Let me just go through some probable 'sins' of Lee so that I can arrive at a reasonable conclusion.
Well, perhaps Lee, an opposition politician, on retirement from politics, has the bloody nerve to participate in government activities, for example,becoming Chairperson of the NS (mind you, ‘government’ or ‘national’ activity and not BN).
Unlike in the West, there is no room for civility outside (or stand down from) politics, where politicians from both sides of the House could sit down and have a drink or two and laugh about matters ‘off the record’ as colleagues rather than as political adversaries - not even for retired politician who has not taken up politics but wants or is willing to do some public service work.
Such is the Hang Tuah-ish mentality that we in Malaysia have inherited, that unless an opposition politician remains in perpetual opposition, he is a ‘traitor’, to be killed like Jebat (though 'traitorous' to whom, I am still wondering?)
Damn it, doesn’t Lee realise that once in opposition politics or in an NGO activist group like, say, ABIM, one must never ever betray one’s original organisation? One should stay forever in the Opposition or an NGO like ABIM and never hop around to the despised BN.
And then Lee compounds his ‘sin’ by becoming ‘successful’. The damn nerve, how dare he! As a retired opposition politician, he should remain poor like a Spartan warrior, Shaolin monk or an ascetic sadhu living in a Himalayan cave, and leave wealth making to us the general high-opinated know-all public who of course expect him to be forever against the ruling party.
OK, apart from us public, perhaps only ‘some people’ not in government are allowed to be successful, so successful that they can live in palatial mansion and be chaffeured around in powerful expensive imported cars, but certainly Lee Lam Thye mustn't be allowed, oh no, we aren't going to accept any of Lee's de facto monkeying around in the business world, no, not once we have decided for him a life of (opposition) political asceticism.
And if that former DAP bastard can justify his acquired wealth, why, he will be rubbished nonetheless, by unsubstantiated poo flinging all around, like, for example, he acquired 10 million from somewhere, and f-the facts or proof, who cares anyway, besides, unsubstantiated facts are the best because they spread even quicker.
Then of course how dare he heads a company that does business with – gasp, gawd, omigosh – the government (mind you, the 'government' and not the BN, but wtf, who cares).
Oh now, btw who was it who complained that those UMNO people can't distinguish between the government and the party? Maybe ex-UMNO-istas who aren't sharing the trough anymore?
Indeed how dare Lee sits on the independent panel? He should have refused, yes, refused.
Yes, yes, he didn’t offer his service and was asked – but he could have refused, couldn’t he?
Eh ... what? Who, who was not asked but offer his service?
WHAT??? WTF you’re talking about?
What’s this nonsense about someone, by contrast to Lee, wasn’t asked but offered his service to the AAB government?
WHAT? Who in April last year offered unsolicited assistance to the government on issues involving bilateral ties [with Singapore], saying he could draw from his experience in the government, and who declared:
“I would not discount any possible meeting with Abdullah if he were to ask my views on the issues ... like the negotiations with Singapore on the bridge and even information on the negotiations with Indonesia on border issues.”
“I will not be serving the government. But I am a Malaysian and very loyal to the country and will do my best to serve.”
So, what we have is ... one didn't offer his service but was asked to, while another was not asked but offered anyway ... OK, you work out the significance, you wondrous whining, whinging. wailing, whimpering warriors.
Hahaha, now, who was it who said of Lee Lam Thye that “He is a political opportunist. If he is a person of high principles, he should quit the panel. He is a disappointment to his past supporters.”
Principle? Does this only apply to Lee Lam Thye but not to He who walks on water?
OK then, next, who was it who said Lee Lam Thye is a brown noser?
Was he the one who said on Australian TV of AAB being a - gasp, gawd, omigosh - 'compassionate’ person. And who was it who praised AAB for abandoning that bridge to Singapore while of course condemning Dr Mahathir, and who expressed full support for AAB’s decision to abandon the project as a commendable decision – yes, 'twas so commendable that abandoning the project cost more than the building of the bridge. Indeed who praised AAB as follows:
“It takes a lot of courage and wisdom ... after weeks of massive campaigns against Singapore ... (for Abdullah) to suddenly say that the decision (to build the bridge) was faulty and that we have to scrap the project ... it’s commendable.”
“It takes a lot of courage and wisdom ..... it’s commendable.” Ain't that just pukish!
Jeez, could it be that brown noser, Lee Lam Thye? Or, no, no, surely it can't be ... He who walks on water?
Er ... before I end this post with a 'To be continued ...', as I said before, don't you dare practise double standards now, don't you bloody hypocrites f-dare!
To be continued ... and it won't be pretty again.