I refer to both Abdullah Junid's Voters still vote along racial lines, and Ramu Rathkum's BN in power by default.

I do not have any problems with Keadilan as a political party per se but rather with its claim as a multiracial or reformist party, and thus meriting my vote. Abdullah, in acknowledging that Keadilan has not stood up to PAS' religious-political agenda, merely confirmed that Keadilan was more interested in the Malay-Muslim votes than Malaysian votes.

And why wouldn't it? After all, like Semangat 46, it is essentially a splinter branch of Umno. As mentioned in my previous letter, if former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim had not fallen by the political wayside, he would be prime minister today and many of his supporters would be (Umno) ministers and powerful personalities in the government.

Perhaps Anwar could have been a very good prime minister, but that is irrelevant to the issue under discussion. More importantly, had Anwar Ibrahim become the prime minister, would we be talking about 'reformasi' today?

Unlike Semangat 46, Keadilan likes to pretend it doesn't have Umno origins and even claims to champion of reform. Initially, there was some hope that its original members may deliver - luminaries like Chandra Muzaffar. Its members also included a scattering of well-intentioned people such as Tian Chua. It also had some Indian Malaysian members, but I believe had left with 'a huff and a puff' to form another party - this tells you something about Keadilan, doesn't it?

Since Keadilan is formed primarily of disaffected former Umno members allied with Mr Anwar Ibrahim, its main aim is to campaign for Anwar's freedom. I have no quarrel with that, but do not tell me that it is for democracy and reformation, etc. At least be honest with that so that it can earn more respect from non-Malay voters.

Until Keadilan can convincingly demonstrate its multiracial and multireligious credentials, as a non-Malay voter I see little difference between it and Umno - with the exception of its relationship with PAS. And this o­ne point matters a lot to me.

Of course, let's be practical - there is no such thing as a perfect (democratic and pristine) political party but if we have to vote, it will go to the solution that will bring about the best possible outcome under the circumstances.

It is illogical to point out that non-Malay votes, crucial in determining electoral outcomes at the last election, had pushed PAS into becoming the strongest opposition by voting BN. The o­nly reason PAS won was because people voted for PAS.

As I averred, PAS was clever in taking advantage of the sympathy for reformasi into votes for itself. PAS won with protest votes.

Despite arguments put forth by Anonymous Academician, I will not be voting for PAS. In its first acts in taking over the state government of Terengganu, it legislated special exemptions for its state assembly members - raising them above ordinary mortals.

I won't go into the details of its policies out of respect for Muslims, but I can say that I feel very marginalised by the political-religious agenda of PAS. Therefore the call for protest votes is a naive or sly ploy to get a vote from someone who wouldn't vote for a particular party in the first place.

We may not like the BN musang that is eating the chicken from the coop but let us make sure we do not substitute in its place a harimau that would gobble us up as well.