The move by the government to study whether the Printing Presses and Publications Act should be amended to include the Internet media draws a furious response from our readers who want to know the rationale behind such a proposal. One reader points out that the move, if implemented would send the wrong signal to the world in this age of globalisation. Another said that if the mainstream press, as alleged, is complaining about their Internet counterparts, then they should quit whining and adapt fast. Other topics that readers respond to include the gag order on Article 11, Dr M's meet-the-people session in Kelantan and the man behind Bank Negara's forex losses.


On Print media: Leash internet media too

Joe: This trend of regression in our country is very alarming. In a world where borders are being broken down and globalisation knocks bringing competition at our doors, we need to wake up and get going.

Why would the mainstream media editors and journalists want to stifle their fellow journalists in the Internet media screaming double standards? Is this not ridiculous? At least the Internet media is reporting with some integrity and is not influenced (controlled) by politicians with their personal agendas.

I refuse to believe these `mainstream journalists` are asking for this. What is the purpose? How is the Internet media affecting them? Is it affecting their sales?

I don't think the Internet penetration in our country is sufficient to replace or even dent their sales. Why the sour grapes? Are the politicians behind this?

Shufiyan: How silly these print media folks are.

They themselves should embrace the Internet, revamp their current dismal Internet versions with functions like reader participation, electronic feeds, breaking and current news and include blogs by their journalists - copy what publications like Guardian Unlimited are doing.

Current news should be available 'real-time', not a day late.

Them daring to suggest that online media should also be controlled by the Printing Presses and Publications Act is a shameful act of betrayal of the principal that journalism should be free from draconian laws.

Raymond Woo: When there are differences between two standards, there are three options:

1. Maintain the status quo

2. Enforce the same standards for both media.

3. Repeal the PPPA

However as the MSC Bill of Guarantee states that the online media is protected within this bill The only way forward it option number three, that is repealing the PPPA.

If government is going for option number one, it would be very dangerous as it would frighten away foreign direct investment.

Saying that, the online media could move out of country as mostly are on the dot com domain and not the dot my domain.

Alternatively, maintain the status quo.


On Article 11 wants to meet PM

Syed Akbar Ali: Yes, let's not beat around the bush. The issue now really revolves around the freedom of a Muslim to exit Islam for another religion. No one is concerned, if say, a Hindu converts to Christianity because both Hinduism and Christianity do not work up a sweat over conversions.

In my view, again both sides of the argument are acting out of some ignorance. The anti-IFC Muslims are acting out of ignorance of what is written in their holy book the Quran, while the pro-Article 11 folks are rebutting them also out of ignorance of what is in the Quran.

The Quran is very clear. It says, 'Those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe, then disbelieve and persist in disbelief, God will not forgive them nor show them the way' - Chapter 4, verse 137.

Clearly then, a person has the freedom to believe, then disbelieve, believe again, then disbelieve again and continue in disbelief. Obviously, he has to remain alive throughout all this 'in and out' of belief. Meaning there is no death penalty in the Quran if anyone 'apostasises'.

Please use this very simple and clear verse from the Quran to the maximum. May I suggest that someone put this verse to the anti-IFC folks and seek an explanation from them. Keep pressing the matter.

May I suggest another NGO called '4:137'.

PT Tan: The only people that need to shut up are those that participated in the mobs and demonstrations. People who cannot sit down and agree to disagree.

From May 13 to Kg Medan to the East Timor conference to Article 11 these mobs should be shackled and thrown in with long jail terms to reflect their mob mentality.

Why is it that these groups are so easily incited? There must be something wrong with the values that make them behave like gangsters. If they cannot grow up, then they must be locked away.

The government must be firm with these hooligans, whoever they are, whether they are PAS, Umno, Keadilan or DAP members or anyone else.

Then the rest will wake up and agree to disagree. Now they know they can get away scot-free because the police will not yield the strong arm of the law.

Malaysia might as well be ruled by a mob head instead of a duly elected and instituted body.

Anonymous: Sad state of affairs when the people of Malaysia have no place to voice their opinions on matters that concern them the most. I read with disgust the headlines putting a halt on the Article 11 forums.

A question to the government: 'What are you afraid of?' The people protesting are the ones breaking the law, you have laws for these kinds of situations, why not enforce them?

The people who held the forums are trying to say something, something very important and pertinent for the future of Malaysia, please listen!

They are talking, not demonstrating. Any laws being broken here?

The PM said that these forums were causing tension among the different religious and racial communities in the country so his next mode of action is to silence the forums, sweep it under the carpet.

Don't listen to them so that certain parties get the upper hand and break the law and get away with it. Tut, tut ... is this Islam Hadhari?

Abdul Rahman B Adi: Tun Mahathir, pls comeback

On Umno K'tan didakwa tegah ahli hadiri majlis Dr M esok

Meng S Yee: Hypocrites. Anwar took the streets eight years ago and when tens of thousands of people came from all over the country, the police panicked and arrested him that evening, commando style from his house in front of his children.

They came in masks and broke down the front door. Umno's contention is that he took to the streets just because he was sacked and did not leave quietly like all the previous leaders. He did not have the party's interest first.

Today, Tun Mahathir is sowing seeds of dissension in Umno. Potentially, five thousand people will turn up at Kota Bahru where he will no doubt openly declare his disdian over the current administration.

If PM Abdullah is as vindictive as Mahathir himself, he would call for the FRU to break up the crowd and use that as an excuse to arrest Mahathir.

But fortunately for the former PM, Pak Lah is not quite the street fighter as his predecessor. Mahathir will be given the due respect as an elder to speak and speak he will.

If only Mahathir gave the same respect to our beloved Tunku.


On Minister promoted despite being on Bank Negara's blacklist

Be Transparent: Mahathir has admitted that there were 'some' losses. However, he absolves himself and his fellow speculators from the losses by saying that no one makes any comment when profits are made.

That may be true but, then, they were employed and paid to do their job honestly and not to make losses. They were employed and paid to act as trustees of taxpayers' money to protect the taxpayers' interest in accordance with the law.

It seems that Mahathir does not understand the position and duties of a trustee. Obviously, he thinks a trustee can use the funds under his trust to speculate and gamble at his pleasure.

That is, in fact, the worrying part. He has no understanding of wrong or remorse in that he used taxpayers' money to gamble. He did this more than once, remember, Maminco?

If a company director behaved as Mahathir did, he would be charged as having committed a criminal offence of breach of trust of the shareholders funds.

If guilty he would have been jailed. What is the government going to do with Mahathir, Daim and the present second finance minister on this issue?