Day +804 : Need safety? Ask for ISA

I am fine today.

Our home minister, Syed Hamid, cited the necessity for detaining the journalist under the draconian ISA is to ensure her safety. This is an utterly ridiculous and unacceptable reason. If this is true, then the very first person that needs to be detained under ISA is our dear Prime Minister as he is the one who need security most. And the second one might be the minister himself :-)

“The whole thing was started by her, (so) it was best that we talked to her,” another reason as explained by Syed Hamid later.

Only the most unsound mind would not realize that the issue was brought up by Ahmad. The reporter was merely reporting it. So in this case, the messenger was captured, not the source of message.

In Teresa Kok’s case, the police said that they received intelligence that she might be a national security threat, so they need to detain her to confirm the intelligence. But if the government uphold the principle that the reporter need to be detained, then the one that should be detained should be the “intelligent agent” or the one that tell the police that Teresa Kok is a threat, not Teresa Kok.

On why Ahmad was treated so specially, Syed Hamid said, “I don’t think we treat politicians differently. We have taken action. That politician has been suspended three years by the party. He loses all his position. At the same time, there is a (police) report of sedition (against Ahmad).”

If this reason holds, don’t expect justice and peace in this country. Why? Let me give you a simple example.

If I don’t like someone, I simply ask my son to kill him/her. When police wanted to take action against my son, I would tell them, “I don’t think you should take against my son. I have taken action. My son has been spanked 20 times by me. He loses his ability to sit comfortably. At the same time, he is barred to play computer games for three weeks.”

Do you think that the above reason is acceptable for not taking action against my son? I believe your answer is negative, but the government as represented by Syed Hamid was giving the exact reason for not taking action against Ahmad :-(

If a minister that rules our country can’t even get the very basic reasoning right, what future can we expect of this country?

See you next post :-)