Most Read
Most Commented
Read more like this

Was Khairy Jamaludin's over-the-top, vehement and passionate protest against the US government during the recent 39th Asean ministerial meeting in Kuala Lumpur a carefully staged act to show that he and his father-in-law do not see eye-to-eye politically, much less are in an 'unholy' alliance?

It seems odd that while his important father-in-law welcomed the American delegation to the meeting, his son-in-law did the exact opposite. If the intention was to show the world that the two could not have been any more different from one another, then the message was made very loud and clear.

While one put aside political differences and acted every inch the graceful diplomat with aplomb, the other behaved like a fist-raising, rabble-rousing street hooligan. Oh, and lest anyone should doubt Khairy's 'militant credibility', that black and white chequered scarf he 'strategically' draped across his shoulders on Friday, with its very familiar design caught on camera for all to see, will no doubt help complete the image. The only thing missing were small stones clenched in the fist.

Khairy's statements were made in English, ensuring that images and speeches reached an international audience.

Why the melodramatics? Could Khairy not have, out of respect at least, appointed someone in his place? Why choose to be in the forefront, openly 'defying' Abdullah, who coincidentally was also in the limelight, although for different reasons?

Whether or not Khairy and Abdullah are in fact two peas in a pod is up to anyone's conjecture. But if Abdullah's statement to the press denying such a collusion, followed by Khairy's notorious protest displays are anything to go by, one cannot blame the public for indulging in coffee-shop talk and political guessing games.

ADS