I refer to the letter Samy never asked Sambanthan to quit .

The author mentions that post-1969 general elections, many in MIC Selangor begun to agitate for a change and that many included Samy Vellu’. They even had decided who should be the replacement.

He further mentions: "Samy Vellu together with Athi Nahappan, NS Maniam, S Govindaraj and others merely supported the candidacy of Manickavasagam and, of course, Samy Vellu played a leading role in the election campaign. He was one of the outstanding speakers during the campaign’.

So I wonder how one can state that, ‘Samy never asked Sambanthan to quit’ when for all intent and purposes, all of Samy’s actions with a few others was aimed towards that end.

Samy may not have been the one that ‘pulled the trigger’ in this political assassination but the fact that he was involved is so blatant for anyone to see.

On the allegation of Sambanthan wanting to get Samy suspended from the Batu Caves branch, if true, only underscores defensive action taken by a leader under siege to protect himself.

What difference is that to what happened to Mugilan and KP Samy?

One other thing, what was there for Samy in this deal of getting Sambanthan out. I mean what was the ‘quid pro quo’?

Well, Sambanthan was the MP for Sungei Siput. No prizes for guessing, who replaced him.

Finally, Sambanthan won his seat in 1969 but was pressured to go, Samy lost his seat in 2008 but refuses to go. What an irony.