For the life of me, I just cannot understand why Bernama would misreport that the ex-CPM leaders praised and supported the Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad on his tough stand against militancy when they did not. What is the propaganda value here?

Ex-CPM leader Rashid Maidin said that "Compared with the first prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra and second prime minister Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, he [Mahathir] is a little better as he was prepared to negotiate with us".

Is the propaganda designed to give a cue to Islamist militants that militancy does not pay and that eventually they would only end up being rehabilitated and praising the PM like the ex-CPM leaders? Is it to show that the Malaysian reality does not support militancy?

Or it is to show that the PM transcends ideology against the background of growing Malaysian trade ties with communist countries like Cuba, Republic of China and Russia and opposition to capitalist currency rogue traders?

If communists too support the PM, then who would serve as the bogeyman?

The next time around when the PM is unhappy with an organisation like Suqiu, it is obviously less expedient for him to brand it as "communists" who are also his supporters now.

Yet the need on the part of our pro-government media to portray the support by this group of people for the country's leadership is not matched by any attempt on government's part to assist them regain entry into and settle in the country as provided in the peace agreement of 1989 ("Chin Peng and other communist leaders, not coming home" of April 2).

While ex-CPM leaders and members have been given an amnesty by the 1989 peace agreement, they are basically in exile contrary to the terms therein.

This attempt to get propaganda value from them and yet renege on giving them their fair due to rehabilitate within the country is manipulative duplicity.

Considering that their militancy was a thing of the past, they are no security threat but they are still part of the country's history and heritage. As Rashid Maidin said, "We gave our life and blood to the struggle for independence". Shouldn't this be considered in their favour?