New bottles, old wine ?

That ex-PM Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and his supporters like lawyer Matthias Chang who disagree with this or that aspect of the "crooked" or "scenic" bridge decision made by PM Abdullah are gagged by the Umno- and Government-controlled mainstream media is a well-known fact now.

But even former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim who agrees with some reasonable aspects of PM Abdullah's decision on the bridge has also been totally blacked out or only selectively reported by those media, especially the self-styled "cosmopolitan" and "liberal" English-language New Straits Times. Why?

Has Pak Lah himself ordered the gag or blackout? Or have his officials and 'Little Mahathirs' secretly usurped his power to order the gag or blackout without the master's knowledge, instruction or approval?

If Pak Lah's cabinet really thinks its decision is absolutely correct and right and enjoy the full support of "the People", then why is it afraid of public discussion and debate on the subject from all points of view and perspectives, including those of Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and Anwar Ibrahim?

(by the way, my advice to the Parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang and other DAP MPs, including Karpal Singh, is that if and when your statements, speeches, articles or pictures appear in the New Straits Times or other Umno-controlled media, it is not that you have suddenly been recognised by a 'world-class media' as 'world-class opposition' but merely considered, for the moment, harmlessly useful to be co-opted to serve legitimizing or window-dressing, ad hoc alliance-building and divide-and-rule functions for certain or particular issues; that is why DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng's very good statement in support of Dr. Mahathir Mohamad's call for referendum was not published by the New Straits Times)

What is the diffrence between Dr. Mahathir Mohamad's regime from that of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's which claims to be 'new' and 'more liberal' under Islam Hadhari and what not?

Anwar: Blunders began with Mahathir
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/49982

Mahathir attacks government in cyberspace
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/50184

KMU Dot Net
http://www.kmu.net.my

Tun Dr. Mahathir's open letter (English-language Executive Summary)
http://www.jeffooi.com/2006/04/dr_mahathirs_open_letter_a_sum.php

Tun Dr.Mahathir's open letter (Chinese-language Executive Summary)
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/50181

The Scribe A Kadir Jasin
http://kadirjasin.blogspot.com/

DAP backs Mahathir's call for referendum
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/49868

PKR pushes ministry for permit
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/49924

p/s: Uncle Leong from Ipoh's Canning Garden said he enjoyed reading one of my earlier entries What if another abrupt U-turn occurs ? (18 April, 2006) so much that he repeatedly requested me to re-run it for his grandchildren now studying in Melbourne and Sydney.

What if another abrupt U-turn occurs ?

Assuming, for the twin purposes of social behaviourial analysis and revolusi minda, that tomorrow Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, for whatever reasons, ceases to be the prime minister and his successor, whoever he or she is, decides to restore the plan of building the "crooked" or "scenic" bridge. What would happen?

I think, more likely than not, the same cabinet ministers, BN component parties's leaders and the usual 'pom-pom girls' for all seasons and regimes embedded in the mainstream media who now support the cancellation would line up again to proclaim their support for the restoration of the plan to build the "crooked" or "scenic" bridge, saying that the restoration is decided upon by the (new) prime minister and his cabinet " in the national interest " after " listening to the views and opinions of the people (or 'the silent majority') " and to praise the "wisdom" and "maturity" of the new prime minister.

Some would privately condemn ex-PM Abdullah Ahmad Badawi for being "crazy" to scrap the bridge while publicly saying berpura-pura that, under the more "liberal" and "moderate" new prime minister, citizen Abdullah Ahmad Badawi enjoys the freedom of speech.

Feeling very bitter and humiliated, private citizen Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his hardcore supporters would publicly criticise the mainstream media, particularly the New Straits Times, for not publishing or giving due weight to his opinion why he had scrapped the bridge earlier. The same Parliamentary Opposition Leader since 1970s Lim Kit Siang would publicly remind citizen Abdullah Ahmad Badawi that under his reign, he (Abdullah) was no great champion of media freedom as two senior editors of China Press were axed and Sarawak Tribute's publishing license was revoked.

Ordinary Malaysians would still be asking why the building of the bridge was first conceived, implemented, cancelled and then restored, and also calculating the public fund lost in the process.

Meanwhile, the Internal Security Act, Official Secret Act, Universities and University Colleges Act, Police Act and Sedition Act remain in force and peaceful protests would still be cracked down by the FRU armed with sub-machine guns, water cannons, dogs, tear gas, batons and clubs under yet another "more liberal and tolerant" prime minister in the post-Abdullah Ahmad Badawi era.