Most Read
Most Commented
Read more like this
mk-logo
News
Another reason why IPCMC should be hastened
Published:  Mar 23, 2007 12:55 PM
Updated: Jan 29, 2008 10:21 AM

A neighbour's experience with the police after losing his car suggests why the IPCMC should be implemented immediately, argues a reader.

On Reveal revised IPCMC bill, Pak Lah told

Silent Majority: Let me relate a recent incident which convinced me that the IPCMC must not be delayed any further. My neighbour recently lost his car in a robbery but later, his car was recovered. However, when he went to the police station to claim his car, he was asked to pay RM300. The reason given was that the police had found his car.

My neighbour refused to pay as he had lost everything in the robbery. In the end, he paid RM50 to the police officer concerned for the release of his car.

I urge the IGP and all the honest police officers - and I believe the majority are honest - not to let the corrupt few amongst them tarnish the image of the force by encouraging Pak Lah to speed up the implementation of the IPCMC before the next election.

We, the 'silent majority', have been asked many times to speak up but many of us are reluctant to do so because we may be accused of being unpatriotic and anti-government, and worse still, be slapped with an arrest warrant.

I am relating this now though I believe my neighbour will not admit and owe up to what was mentioned to me because after all, he has already got his car back. I also urge Parliament to pass a whistleblower protection act so that more of the 'silent majority' will come forward to help Pak Lah fight and wipe out corruption before it destroys this beautiful country of ours.

On Election date: Be transparent, PM told

Venze Chern: Why is our prime minister so anxious in calling an early poll when it is only due in 2009? One reason is because he has been unable to fulfill his promise after being given an overwhelming mandate in the last election.

He swore to get rid of corruption. Unfortunately, hardly any big gun was prosecuted or convicted. Instead, bribery and embezzlement continue under his very nose and the very eyes of the public. He argued strongly to curb nepotism and cronyism. Sadly, these 'isms' continue to raise their ugly heads.

The PM knows what is happening. It is just that his hands are tied, he cannot exercise his power to the full. In short, he simply hasn't got the grassroots support in Umno to implement his multiple objectives.

Will calling a new election allow him to redeem his image, which has been rather badly tarnished by his less-than-efficient and effective administration in the past few years? The answer is an emphatic no. Sad to say, he would not be able to garner enough "support" to do what he really wants even given another parliament majority in the new election.

On DAP-PKR: The unspoken fear

Aaron Yap: Come on guys, please stay united for the sake of a better tomorrow for our beloved country. If opposition parties start shooting among themselves, it'll just present another opportunity for the ruling government to hit back easily.

Our fate and hope for a better tomorrow lies in your hands with the upcoming general elections, so please stay united, focused and committed to ensure that better days are ahead of us, the Malaysian citizens.

On Non-bumis doomed to repeat mistake of 69?

PT Tan: LCH's assumption on the mistakes of 1969 is completely wrong and he is trying to play onto the Chinese fear of chaos. 2007 is very different from1969. Today, not many will be willing to riot. As my friend puts it, in '1969, semua tak ada, sekarang semua ada'.

Umno has been riding roughshod over all of us based on this fear and we have seen life getting eroded bit by bit because of this fear. Today with the Internet and the fast spread of news, the rumours and their mongering that led to the1969 riots will not happen.

Just like the strategies that Zhuge Liang employed centuries ago. They will not work anymore today simply because of the mobile phone and the Internet. Malaysians have grown up quite a bit since 1969 and to evoke the circumstances then and plead for inaction is an insult to all Malaysians.

On Give non-Muslims civil law recourse

Peter Ooi: I am no lawyer but a simple layman. In my simple view, a marriage between two persons is an agreement to unite together for better and for worse. Among the unwritten agreements between them is that the woman would bear children for the family.

Of course, the understanding is that the children must follow the religion they profess at the time of the marriage. If one of the parties back tracks on the agreement, he or she would forgo the right to determine the children's religion.

In the case of R Subshini, the husband is the one who did not honour the agreement by sticking to their religion at marriage. Therefore, he forfeits his right to the children's religion. Also if Subshini could look into the future at the time of marriage that her husband would want to convert to Islam, I bet my last dollar the former would not even want to consummate the marriage, let alone bear children for him.

If all things are equal, I still maintain that women have more rights to the children for the simple reason that it is the women who have to carry the child for nine months and then have to bear the intense labour pain at childbirth. On top of that, they have to breast feed the children as long as nature permits.

The Chinese song - "A child with mother is like a gem but a child without mother is like grass being trampled under the feet" - aptly sum up the greatest and unselfish love of a mother.

ADS