If it was Anwar, so what?
This was the TITLE of a letter by P Ramakrishnan, the President of Aliran, to Free Malaysia Today, on the ANWAR IBRAHIM SEX VIDEO, which has turned most Malaysians into some kind of FRENZY.
Among other things, P Ramachrishnan stated that: “Malaysians are sick and tired of the pornographic tape that has been kept alive as if the very life of our nation depended on it! There seems to be no let up. There is this obsession with this voyeurism….The motive is to implant the impression in the minds of Malaysians that the performer in the sex tape is Anwar…….Just for argument’s sake, so what if it was Anwar? ……”
When I came across the letter, my first impression was….Mr Ramachrishnan must be pro-opposition…..and therefore, unavoidably pro-opposition-biased.
Its interesting to observe how POLITICS have divided Malaysian not only into different political camps, but also into different OPTICAL VISION. By and large, pro-BN supporters who have viewed the ANWAR IBRAHIM SEX VIDEO would not think twice before confirming that the MAN FUCKING THE CHINA DOLL was none other than Anwar Ibrahim, the country’s opposition leader. On the other hand, by and large, pro-opposition supporters would RELENTLESSLY deny that the man in the video was the de-facto leader of PKR.
Somehow, I wonder, what would be the reaction of opposition supporters, including Ramachrishnan, had the ‘male in the video’ looked like Najib, Muhyiddin or Hishamuddin? It would not be hard to imagine their reaction. In 1989, when the former Deputy Speaker of Dewan Negara, Vijandran, was implicated in a sex video, the opposition leaders and supporters wasted no time in making BIG MEALS out of the matter, which eventually forced Vijandran to resign. At that time, nobody from Aliran came out with questions like, ‘if it was Vijandran, so what?’.
Knowing HOW the opposition would drag the whole country into it, the former MCA Health Minister, Datuk Chua Soi Lek, took the GENTLEMAN step of resigning from all his cabinet and party posts when a video of him having sex with his girldfriend in a Batu Pahat Hotel was posted in the internet months before the 2008 General Election. In term of LAWS, Chua Soi Lek had not broken any laws, not even syariah laws, as both he and his girldfriends were non-Muslims. His GENTLEMAN move paid dividen when he was elected MCA President in a three-cornered fight for the post two years later.
The expectations that political leaders caught in SHAMEFUL ACTS like SEXUAL SCANDALS are to resign their posts have been a NORM either in Malaysia, a Muslim country, and other countries across the world, including non-Muslim countries. In 1998, the Americans were in some kind of FRENZY too when the former American President Bill Clinton, while still in office as President of America, was EXPOSED of having SEX SCANDAL with a White House intern. As far as the country’s laws, Bill Clinton had not broken any laws, let alone criminal laws. Despite that, the world witnessed months of IMPEACHMENT PROCESSES taken against him, then the serving President of America, which he eventually narowly escaped.
Using INTERNATIONAL NORMS in determining the STANDARDS OF MORALITY expected of political leaders across the globe, its very strange for Mr Ramachrishnan of Aliran to ask, ‘If it was Anwar, so what?’.