I read Khoo Kay Peng's letter No room for personal agenda behind peace efforts

with much interest. I also spoke to some people, particularly a personality who supported the Peace Malaysia Movement but could not do so for the peaceful Feb 15 demonstration organised by the Stop War Coaltion, even though, as the writer said, "in the name of world peace and harmony" the differences should not matter.

Some of the reasons given by that personality were that the street demonstration would cause 'fear' in the US embassy staff and would further contribute to the general anti-US-anti-all-white-people mindset in the Malaysian public. This personality cited his conversations with people from the US embassy and a few 'insulting' incidents in KLCC by locals against Caucasians.

Now, let us be clear here. The Stop War Coalition were o­nly exercising their freedom of assembly, association and speech in demonstrating against US aggression of Iraq, as guaranteed by the constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The peaceful demonstration was directed at the US administration, not at the non-decision making staff of the US embassy, much less at all Caucasians. Caucasians can still go around in peace in KLCC and Bangsar.

But to be more concerned with the staff of the US embassy than the people of Iraq, and to link the likely rise of anti-US-anti-all-white-people to the Stop War Coalition demonstration - surely must reek of personal agendas than just '"world peace and harmony". The first reason shows just where the personality's priority lies and whom he would like to 'dance' with. The second reason especially, is tenuous, as there is just no link, much like saying that the banning of the movie Daredevil would prevent the rise of crime and social problems.

I did not support the Umno Youth-led Peace Malaysia Movement simply because it was Umno Youth-led. Similarly I would also not support any peace movements if they were to be led by Ariel Sharon, Saddam Hussein, Ku Klux Klan, the US National Rifle Association or Pauline Hanson, simply because these people do not believe in peace or peaceful resolution, much less democracy and human rights.

An alliance can be made o­n particular issues - even if the parties are uncomfortable and cannot agree o­n all matters, provided that they know what they are getting into, after all, he who sups with the Devil sups with a long spoon. The US had made alliances with the Shah of Iran, Pinochet of Chile, Marcos of the Philippines, to name a few, and all parties profited until it was time for the US to 'move o­n' and orchestrated their downfall.

Franklin Roosevelt was accused of "dancing with dictators" when his government supported Anastasio Somoza of Nicaragua, and he offered no apologies for it, but replied: "He may be a son of a bitch. But he's our son of a bitch."

The question now must be "Who is whose son of a bitch?"