If Suqui was extremist, why did Mahathir and the cabinet agreed to go along with their 'demands' in 1999, asked a reader.

On MPs up in arms, Mustapa grilled over textbook

May 13 Witness: Mustapa said: Suqui demands were extreme as it had questioned the position of Islam as the official religion and that it questioned bumiputera rights. Suqui had withdrawn seven of its demands.

If it was so, then why did Mahathir and the cabinet agreed to go along with their 'demands' in 1999? Why didn't Mahathir shot the so-called demands down and have the Suqui group detained under the ISA, if it was also true that Suqui questioned the position of Islam. Was it also mentioned in the ethnic relations textbook that a group of university students met with Suqui officials at the Chinese Assembly Hall and later told reporters that there was nothing offensive at all in the various points raised by Suqui? Why did Mahathir brand the group as extremist or even liken them to al-Maunah? This is very defamatory as these people are not terrorists.

Did the book identify who's who in Suqui, which made up of senior community leaders, businessmen, traders and educationists, and do you think for one moment these elderly men would take the chance to create problems for society, thus jeapordising their own welfare as well as the community? Did the book also clarify the meaning of Suqui which means "appeal" and not "demand". Since it was an appeal, then it could be turned down or rejected. Why didn't Mahathir and Umno do that in the first place?

Mustapa said: DAP's participation in the procession that triggered the May 13 riots was a "widely known fact" and that the book referred DAP as "one of the opposition parties" that caused the riots.

DAP was not the party involved but Gerakan. Remember what happened at the Jalan Travers police station and the crude language used that day? So since Mustapa said that DAP was 'one of the parties', can we have the names of the others. Why just pinpoint DAP alone?

Mustapa said: The blame on Indian youths for causing the Kampung Medan incident was according to a seminar paper written by Dr Denison Jayasooria, the executive director of the MIC-linked Yayasan Strategik Sosial.

The textbook must highlight the cause of the event and if this Dr Denison Jayasooria was so quick to blame the Indians themselves, then he is not fit to be in MIC. The Indians may be at fault but something led to triggering off the event. We would like to know what it was. Until today, no one in the government has come out with a detailed report on the Kampung Medan incident and it is because of this, you get reckless writers like the authors of this textbook shifting blame to others without any empathy.

PT Tan: The victor gets to write the history... after all, it is 'his story', not 'my story'. But in this case, the writer ought to be charged for sedition and for inciting racial hatred. So is the minister who uttered nonsense. Well, come next election, I know where my vote will go. Looks like we can pretend no more.

On 'He was not a Muslim' - body released

Scared To Die: Yet another bungle by NRD. How many more can we tolerate this "graveyard" mistake? The deceased families ought to be compensated for the trauma they went through. To eliminate this error from re-occurring, remove 'religion' from MyKad.

NN: It's high time the authorities concerned, ie Registration Department, wake up to rectify their weaknesses immediately! Either they get the public to declare their religion when applying for the MyKad or else do away with such a requirement.

It's such a tragedy that a simple procedure to overcome these mistakes is yet not resolved. It seems like the person at the registration counter has taken upon herself/himself to declare one's religion arbitrary merely by looking at the name in the old identity card. Such stupidity and incompetence is simply absurd!

On Shamala case adjourned pending Lina Joy decision

Jane Abdullah: I agree with the MCCBCHS counsel that the all-Muslim coram to hear the Shamala and Jeyanagesh appeals would affect the public perception that justice should be seen to be done. I am surprised that such a matter was not taken into consideration after noting that the case is sensitive in nature. Justice Mokhtar Sidin said this as much.

I think the chief justice or chief judge, whoever may be in charge, should have considered the matter without it having been raised in public. I think the late Lord President Suffian would certainly have taken steps to ensure this.

On Half-bridge: Gov't does not intend to bare all

Dhammika: I hope the government will declassify more of the documents in relation to the half-bridge issue. There is obviously some more secrecy that has to come out so that the wrong can be put right.

I am very sure that Tun knows what was communicated and agreed on with Singapore, otherwise he is just going to lose peoples' trust and respect for him. So let everything pertinent come out because a precedence has already been set in the partial declassification of the documents. Please be brave and face the situation once and for all, and let the issue rest.

Simon Anak Tong: There is already a bridge in the Johor Causeway which serves the needs of the two countries well. Why was it necessary for the government to spend so much money to build a new bridge when there is already a second bridge at Tuas to connect to Singapore? Furthermore, if it was necessary to build the so-called scenic bridge, why was there no tender? Who awarded the project to Gerbang Perdana? Who are the shareholders/directors of the company?

On Say 'tak nak' to lavish complex, PM told

Sad Malaysian: I am surprised that Pak Lah is silent on this issue of wasting RM490 million on a sports complex in London when the Malaysian people have been subjected to increased prices in fuel, utilities and essential goods.

I find it disturbing that ministers and government officials can actually condone this blatant abuse of the rakyat's money. I guess this is because these ministers do not face the same hardships as ordinary Malaysians in juggling a meager income to make ends meet almost on a daily basis. It is sickening and hypocritical of these ministers when they use the poor and marginalised for photo opportunities but never does it occur to them that the RM490million can go along way in to ease the suffering of these very people.

As someone said to me recently, we have the government that we deserve. We were all fooled by the promises made by Pak Lah during the last elections. I guess the question is what are we going to do about this?

Murugan: What is the rational of selecting UK to have the centre? Are we just concentrating on certain games that UK excel in? I believe having to maintain the centre is costly enough in view of the currency exchange rate. We have tried hiring the best coaches in the world yet we are still still 'jagoh kampung' only. It's not a centre that matters but it very much depends on the attitude of the players who has basically been spoiled and pampered.

I have been a sportsman before and I can vividly remember that it was indeed a proud moment for me having been chosen to represent a state team and not only that we had to buy and pay for our own apparels, ie boots, shin pads, etc. Today, all is being provided for and yet these players are not thankful and before winning and achieving, they are talking about monetary rewards and it proves that their involvement is not to make the nation proud but otherwise. It's about time we just concentrate at grassroot levels and start at primary school and ensure qualified and specialised teachers are engaged to teach these students and ensure the games are being played for the duration of the year and not just seasonal.

Come on minister, the answer to the rot in Malaysian sports is not having a complex in UK. It starts at home so let's address the issue in the correct perspective. What has happened to the sports schools and is the Education Ministry and Sports Ministry really talking about improvement and ensure selection is based on merits and other similar criteria?

On August wedding for pop icon Siti Nurhaliza

MSY: It is a shame that an artiste of such fame would show our young teenagers that it is okay to break up a family. The young lady should remember that while "the endearing qualities of Datuk Khalid is his love for his children", they are another woman's children.

I am honestly surprised that conservative Malaysia have shown so much publicity and spotlight in the relationship ala Hollywood. We had Yusri and Erra's divorce last month and now this. In my mind, this should make every Malaysian woman insecure that their husbands are not off-limits especially when they are far away in London or elsewhere.

As the wedding makes headlines, can you imagine what Datuk Khalid's children have to go through? Is it me or is the society breaking down? War in Lebanon and hundreds of people die in China due to floods and tsunami in Indonesia - all are secondary to this wedding.

On Ka Ting: Govt still mulling over Broga incinerator

Ng Tze Yeng: I can't believe that they are still unconvinced that this project's costs outweighs the short-term benefits. And they are still mulling over environmentally safe alternatives, ie, efficiently enforceable resource and waste management programmes? Stop mulling! Enforce!

It's so typical to want to just take the easy way out and burn the problems away, to look good to have solved the lack of landfills problem in order to get re-elected. Who cares about the long-term impact? Let the next generation burn. A question, minister - if it's so safe, do you think your neighbours in Damansara Jaya will support you if it were to relocate there?

Also, kudos to malaysiakini for keeping us in the loop on this issue.