It is curious but refreshing to hear an American like John R Malott accusing

others of hyprocrisy and double standards. I will probably never agree with him but I give him credit for caring rather passionately about the goings-on in this country well beyond the call of duty.

That being the case, he certainly deserves a fair hearing as his position as a former ambassador to this country presumably gives him some residual influence in a Washington somewhat broadly interested again about Malaysia, post-Sept 11.

But in order to allow us to take him seriously, he needs to clarify his post-Sept 11 stand. For one, is he in general agreement with some of our own compatriots who are quick to fault their own government over the Internal Security Act and are in an equally unseemly haste to come to the defence of the US over its Patriot Act?

Secondly, will he also condemn his own government for its unilateralist tendency to act first and talk later (and let international democracy be damned) just as he seems all too eager to fault the Malaysian government for its "authoritarian" tendencies?

Finally, I would want Malott to help square the circle wherein perceived "bullying" of people by their own governments which otherwise provide adequately for all their needs is deemed an unpardonable infringement of human rights while "bullying" of other peoples by some governments, including the US, is sometimes defined rather hideously as "defending freedom".