In the current frenzied debate over education, some unworthy words have been bandied about without much thought.

Progressive Bumi wrote: 'I understand the prime minister's youngish, twenty-something son-in-law had his education in Cambridge. Why not at UKM, UPM, UiTM or USM?'

First of all, Khairy has no connection with the Malaysian cabinet. So why should where he studied be a matter of concern to anyone outside his family?

Secondly, he went to St Hugh's College, part of Oxford University. Not Cambridge.

Thirdly, in this day and age certain institutions are globally renowned for their excellence. Oxford and Cambridge have both remained at the top for many hundreds of years.

To be able to gain admittance into them is, by itself, an achievement. To prefer, say UKM to Oxford in the name of patriotism and nationalism is rather daft.

Bill Clinton went to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar and his countrymen did not think him any less patriotic and even returned him to the highest elected office of US.