DAP's Karpal Singh must be speaking from his party's bitter experience when he criticised his Keadilan and PRM counterparts for supporting PAS despite the latter's attempt to enact hudud laws ( Get your head out of the sand, Karpal tells Keadilan, PRM over hudud )

We recall that DAP lost many seats in the last general election despite the 'Anwar backlash' against Barisan Nasional. This could only have occurred because of its ill-fated alliance with PAS.

To be fair to the DAP, I myself thought at the time their partnership was a great way to deny the ruling party their crippling two-third majority and usher in a genuine two-party democracy.

But after witnessing the grim determination of PAS to pursue their undemocratic ideas of theocracy and their enactment of hudud laws in the face of much opposition by various groups of people, I had to reverse my opinion.

I think we have Karpal to thank for being the first opposition leader to alert his party (and us) on the danger of trying to accommodate Islamic state ideas within the struggle for genuine democracy. Like oil and water, they don't mix.

The reactions of Keadilan's Ng Lum Yong and PRM's Ang Hiok Gai to Karpal's advice, albeit unsolicited, are somewhat incoherent. I find them disappointing especially since they come from parties that espouse multi-racialism, a concept I believe in and which we need very badly in Malaysia.

Ng questioned what the DAP has done about PAS' insistence on setting up an Islamic state. I believe DAP has done much to create public awareness by highlighting the issue in public forums and the media.

Ng says Keadilan has had dialogues with PAS leaders but refrains from criticising it in the media. And I thought this proclivity for closed-door horse-trading on issues that impacts the public only existed among the BN component parties.

PRM assistant secretary-general Ang criticised DAP as a "hypocritical and opportunistic" party. But Ang should be aware of the proverb that people in glass houses should not throw stones.

When your party partners another party (whose policies you oppose) in order to garner more votes, isn't that opportunism? Riding a tiger may carry you farther than if you go on foot but when you reach your destination you have to worry about the tiger. But by then it may be too late.