Why the urged to demonized zul Noordin?

Why the urged to demonized zul Noordin?

No matter how akward it could be for Anwar and pkr , the bottom line is .. Zul Nordin is entitle to his say.Is it not what Pakatan is propagating all this while , the freedom of expression??

His take on the ‘Allah’ word and several other religous issues maybe unbecoming of a PKR rep. whose party’s torchbeares have a clear stand of distancing themselves away from religous and racist bigotry.

Nonetheless , given the circumstances surrounding recent political and religous developments in the nations front , Zul Nordin took it upon himself to move away from the pack and not shield himself behind Anwar nor his party . If he chooses to howl in the wilderness than it’s his personal wish.Obviously , he is aware of his limits. PKR is free to show Zul the exit door but never try to tame him by imposing dictatorial terms and do a dis-favour to the very essence of democratic liberty!

By all means , Zul Nordin keep on protesting , it’s your democratic right!!

By Danildaud on January 13, 2010 at 1:29 am

” … Zul Nordin took it upon himself to move away from the pack and not shield himself behind Anwar nor his party . If he chooses to howl in the wilderness than it’s his personal wish..” Danildaud

This is what I’m afraid most and you cannot blame me for being cynical of the word ‘change’. This herd mentality if you will has to go. Throughout BN rule MPs in Parliament have been so used to ’speaking with one voice’ on all issues that they think it is the proper way of going about doing the work of the people. What of democracy and the right to free speech??

You can be united on one issue but may have different views on another issue. You represent your constituents and not the entire country. Your constituents may not share the view of the other constituents represented by another MP. However, it is a different matter when it comes to voting. That calls into question the work of the Party Whip.

Someone asked “Who gave this guy the right to speak for the Party?” He is not speaking for the Party. He is speaking for his constituents who elected him to represent their views.

By Mr Bean on January 13, 2010 at 1:46 am

In a mature democracy like that of the U.S. you see voting along party lines sometimes. At others voting goes along bipartisan lines. There are a lot of arm twisting but that’s part and parcel of the working of a democracy.

By Mr Bean on January 13, 2010 at 1:50 am

Over here in the immediate post-11 years mosques were vandalized. In normal times synagogues too. Churches have had their crosses and statues stolen.

In Malaysia they are political statements. They don’t need to actually burn down the entire church. So a fire here and a fire there would do just as well.

By Mr Bean on January 13, 2010 at 1:59 am

ooops
post 9/11

By Mr Bean on January 13, 2010 at 1:59 am

No Danil, this guy has a Messiah complex. And Bean is right about using the party whip (flagellator) – although i will be damned, if the Kulim voters for PKR see eye to eye with him.