I refer to the letters by Siong Ping and K Temoc , which were in response to Australian Manjit Bhatia's article . I must say that Siong sadly typifies the very type of Chinese Malaysian who would prefer to bury his head in the sand when faced with criticism by a foreigner.

As for Temoc, all I can say is that while his take on the non-Malays attitude towards the reformasi movement may be true, like Siong he, too, deliberately distorts Bhatia's argument.

I have read Bhatia's and even for someone like me who retired from the civil service 10 years ago, I can still read clearly what Bhatia is not saying. Bhatia never said he supported Anwar Ibrahim or the Anwar-led reformasi movement.

Once can see that Bhatia has, many times in fact, criticised Anwar, although not as openly and boldly as he has Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Bhatia never said we should all join the reformasi movement. He only said Malaysians of all races, but especially the Chinese and Indians, turned their backs on a larger issue: the assault on the basic rights of all Malaysian citizens.

His argument is this: if the Umno regime can assault Anwar - who was then one of their very own establishment men - and a Malay and a Muslim, then the Umno regime can assault any one of us. And it has, time and again.

Which is why all of you write to malaysiakini under false names because you have no other channel to air your frustrations of the government. And that is all that we do, me included. We grumble and complain and then we sit on our hands and hope somebody else will carry on the fight for us against all of the regime's injustices.

We conclude that the Anwar affair was basically a fight between two Umno factions. Isn't that the same as burying one's head in the sand?

Bhatia has very possibly touched a raw nerve of some Malaysians in that some of us do not have the stomach to face criticisms, however constructive and true these criticisms may be, especially if they are from a foreigner. It's a case of shooting the messenger.

Yet they amply illustrate the very attitude Bhatia has been pointing out all along that of the 'kiasu' Malaysian, especially Chinese Malaysians, and even of the Indian Malaysians (but he also hit out at the majority of Malay Malaysians) who have become very narrow-minded and self-interested.

Siong's narrow-mindedness is dismaying. If Siong claims there are people working hard to bring real changes to Malaysia, I have not seen any evidence of it. In fact, as Bhatia argues, there's nothing new about Malaysia, just more of the same old stuff. It is getting worse by the day because Malaysians continue to bury their heads in the sand.

Bhatia is right. I don't think Malaysians are particularly brave, sophisticated and mature, politically. And whenever a foreigner like Bhatia turns his critical eye to Malaysia, it is refreshing to see what a foreigner sees and thinks of the sad state of affairs in Malaysia, rightly or wrongly.

But I don't think Bhatia is far off the mark in his analysis and criticisms. He certainly knows Malaysia inside-out, and far better than most Malaysians do. This is possibly why his critics are hopping mad, because Bhatia is showing them up at every turn. Unlike Temoc, I don't think Bhatia's writing equates with an 'outburst'. Because Bhatia knows Malaysia better than many Malaysians do. Worse for them, Bhatia is an Australian, and one who confronts Malaysians about their own apparently sacred turf.

To Bhatia's critics, why don't you say what you want to say (about your sacred turf) to the Umno regime and see what kind of response you get. See if the regime will respect your basic democratic and human rights, and see if they'll upgrade you from second-class citizens to first- class citizens.

You are a sad and sorry lot, full of talk and no action. Bhatia is dead right.