First, there was the Pensioner . Now we have Maidin Bacha who swallowed K Temoc 's misrepresentation of what Manjit Bhatia said hook, line and sinker.

Bhatia was not 'outraged at the refusal of the majority of non-Malays to join in' the street protests of 1998. Bhatia did not view the street protests as a clarion call to protest against a repressive regime. He just said that in 1998, there was a chance for all races to bring about real and fundamental change. He thought Malaysian in general blew it when they had the chance.

Bhatia's comments are incisive, deliberate and passionate even but never emotional. They are not 'an outburst'. For outburst, read Maidin's comment. Perhaps to undermine Bhatia's credibility, suddenly we are told that Bhatia has an immense hatred for Dr Mahathir Mohamad. How did this come about is anyone's guess. There is only one reference to Mahathir in Bhatia's recent letters. Temoc must be a psychic.

Fallacious ascribing is bad enough. More repugnant is the spin - the non-Malays, especially the Chinese, are not committed to politics or to the opposition. Non-Malays stayed away from the 'reformasi' so it failed.

It is always someone else's fault. This takes the 'blame syndrome' that is so prevalent in Malaysia, to a new level. Even the failure of the 'reformasi' is some else's fault. It is easy to blame others so you do not have to change. Temoc is dead wrong about the non-Malays commitment to opposition politics.

Look at the recent Machap by-election. Before that, there was the Sarawak state elections. In both instances it was the non-Malays who voted for the opposition. In every general election since independence, a sizable number of non-Malays have consistently voted for the opposition.

It is true, as a general rule and for good reasons, non-Malays do not take part in street protests; not since May 13, 1969 anyway. However, street protests do not equate a commitment to opposition politics. In any case, the 'reformasi' movement had nothing to do with the gross inequities that exist in Malaysia. The groundswell of support for that movement was the revulsion towards the perceived blatant corruption within the Mahathir administration. It culminated with the sacking of Anwar.

The street demonstrations were triggered by Anwar's sacking. As a reaction, the 1999 general elections saw a big swing among the Malays voters to the opposition. PAS and Keadilan made big gains. Still the BN won the election. BN was embarrassed, that was all.

In the period between 1999 and 2004, the furore died down. There was no uproar when the government withheld oil royalties from the PAS-controlled state government of Terengganu. All was quiet when the government took control of the religious schools. Malay journalists were silent when the government restricted Harakah 's circulation.

The national service was implemented without a whimper of protest. When opposition supporters were blacklisted from government contracts there was quiet resignation. There was no boycott of the 'Jom Heboh' carnivals nor was there any mass refusal to accept PTPTN loans.

By 2004, the reformists were scurrying back to Umno's fold. In the general election that year, PAS and Keadilan were decimated. It was a total rout. It was the first general election led by the non-descript Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. He achieved a historic landslide victory. Even better than all the general elections that Mahathir led. The great 'reformasi' spirit staying power brought to mind the Malay proverb about the warmth of chicken droppings..

PAS did not know what hit them. They were doing what they had done previously. They had ruled Kelantan and Terengganu credibly. They did nothing really wrong. So what gives? The BN just dangled the ringgit notes and the reformists went sheepishly back in the flock.

On hindsight, the non-Malays were right to stay away from the 'reformasi' movement. It was a temporary collective outburst of disaffection with the Mahathir-led Umno. That was all. Tan Chee Yoon , it was not burying one's head in the sand. It was the pragmatic thing to do based on past experience. It is nothing to be ashamed of.

Another thing about Temoc is that he does not like Anwar. He claims that the whole Chinese community looks askance at Anwar. How could he know? Did he conduct a comprehensive survey? This another of his spin. Nobody knows what the Chinese really think.

Temoc would have us believe that Anwar is a sort of a political changeling because one obscure journalist say so. When Anwar was in power, I thought he was a trifle pompous, idealistic and sometimes impractical. He popular and ambitious. He had a reputation as an 'ultra' when he joined Umno.

However, I cannot remember him doing anything close to Hishammuddin Hussein Onn's 'keris' waving stunt neither does he appeal to the base populist sentiment of the Umno hardcore as Khairy Jamaluddin is so wont to do.

Whatever anyone says about Anwar, they cannot deny that he is a brave man. He stood up for what he believed in and paid the price. I have been to the Sungai Buloh prison for a visit. I did not like it one bit. Anwar spent six years there. A politician who has ideals and is prepared to pay the price. He has my vote.