Right or Wrong ~ who has the "right" to say?

Who can actually say?

Over the centuries, people have been led (misled) and governed by beliefs, customs, and rules that were set by the majority. Sometimes by the select few. But then again, those few are normally and commonly regarded as regimes or dictatorships.

A monk may be believed to be religious and a Datuk (a title bestowed locally to those who have contributed to the public, state, and nation) to be respectable. But are they always what they seem to be or made out to be? I believe that a person IS ALWAYS RIGHT as long as he THINKS himself to be; unless of course its an undeniable factual truth. An example of an undeniable factual truth is a stone will free fall by gravity pull to the ground when thrown up in the air and no matter how hard the mind alone thinks otherwise, it will still fall.

The latest political storm in Malaysia is about the Bukit Bendera Umno division chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail. Ahmad was questioned by local police over his alleged seditious remarks on the Chinese community. During a ceramah in Permatang Pauh on Aug 25, Ahmad was alleged to have said that the Chinese community were "penumpang" (meaning: squatters) and thus were not entitled to equal rights in Malaysia. The label he allegedly used in his speech on the Chinese community in Malaysia was definitely not "right". An apology from UMNO is not required. Why should UMNO apologize over the fault of one person unless they agreed with Ahmad's shallow thoughts and still consider him as one of their many leaders?

However, an apology from Ahmad is just not enough. If he had actually used that word "penumpang" whether in context or lack of understanding (which is unlikely given the fact that he is a prominent politician and what more a Datuk), he should be charged in court for making a seditious statement. The party may also withdraw all support and take disciplinary action against him.

If he had used the word "immigrant", it would at least be a partial truth as the forefathers of the Chinese community today were indeed immigrants who came from China to seek better life in the then Malaya. Many were foreign labour brought in to work in the tin mining industry and were the expatriates of that era - returning to China after their contract expired. But those who stayed, stayed back to start a new life in the country. Are they so different? Why should skin color or the origins of our ancestors matter? Whatever the Chinese are, they are definitely not "penumpang" as they have contributed immensely to nation building in their course of life in Malaysia. Some say, "born and bred" in Malaysia. I don't just see and listen. I think as well and I love this country we call Malaysia.