It seems the government is hell-bent on propagating a siege mentality to the Malaysian people nowadays. At every point where the government's stranglehold on the people's minds seems threatened, at every juncture where the people seem to want more than an idle life of comforts and materialism, making a bid for freedom of expression and human rights, the government instantly slaps a label of "terrorist" or "threat to the peace and prosperity of the nation" on the offending groups, and ships them away under the ISA, on some vague, so-called evidence that probably would not stand the light of day.

Yes, the ISA was most definitely instrumental in helping to fight the communist menace, but those days are over. Malaysia is no longer a fledgling nation easily overturned by a rag-tag band of guerrillas; we are a peaceful nation at the cusp of a new era. If there are any real 'militant' threats to this country, then the military and police have shown their ability to defuse it without any real need for the ISA, as evidenced by the Al-Ma'unah affair.

The ISA was probably used on that occasion just to give the phony impression that it is still in need... the evidence on that affair was obviously rock-solid enough to press charges against the perpetrators. The latest wave of arrests, those of the Keadilan mainstays and the two students, are on completely arbitrary reasons. The detainees could or could not be truly plotting to disrupt the peace in the country. For all anyone knows, the government could be using the ISA for its own purposes. This is the crux of the opposition against the ISA.

Should there be such strong evidence of such a group of people plotting against the government that would compel the government to take action, by all means bring it to the court, or if there is insufficient evidence, I am sure the Special Branch is more than capable of infiltrating and observing the organisations until more concrete evidence is unearthed.

Indeed, if there was any truly strong evidence that a group should be detained as a threat against the security of the nation, it should be Umno Youth. After all, at the height of the Suqiu affair, they brazenly threatened to burn down the Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall. Is this not a threat to the security to the nation?

As for the Mujahidin, the Afghans were invaded by the Soviet Union in 1979, and replaced by a puppet communist government. As the communist government obviously had no mechanism for peaceful transfer of government, the Afghans were compelled to fight against the invaders. This is nothing to be criticised: It is the duty of every citizen in a country to resist something that threatens their sovereignty. The Taliban are not a guerrilla movement... they are a faction in a conventional civil war, and cannot be considered as 'subversive'.

As the Malaysian government stifles the freedom of the people, they should not be surprised that some belligerent and frustrated people might be tempted to take extreme action. If the government allows more freedom of expression and human rights, they would surely see that any violent tendencies channelled into a more acceptable medium. After all, one does not see armed insurgencies mushrooming up in countries that practise more freedom. After all, when there is a peaceful way of bringing about change, why take to arms?

Another thing is that the government should remember that 'government' and 'nation' are two separate entities completely. A threat to the government does not necessarily constitute a threat to the nation. Hence, if the government uses the ISA or any other laws to stifle a threat to itself, then it is guilty of abuse of power.