Does DAP national chairperson Lim Kit Siang have any evidence that the government is soliciting "obscure, fringe extremist right-wing American groups for its international media campaign to bolster its domestic sticks and befriend the Bush presidency" or is this a pure speculation produced by his over-stimulated imagination?

According the American Defense Council (ADC), Malaysia's future was a choice between (1) a forward-looking state characterised by toleration, blessed by prosperity and devoted to democracy or (2) a theocratic regime helmed by clerics whose rule was grounded on their claim to know God's will.

So why does Lim Kit Siang pay more emphasis on this so-called American lobby group being a "fringe outfit" (because it does not even "maintain a website") rather than the merits of the contents of what had been said?

This is a classic example of using the technique of suggestion to circumvent or discredit the merits of the contents of what had being said - not by contradicting or exposing it as fallacious but by attacking the credibility of the person or organisation that said it by speculation that it was in some mysterious way a "fringe outfit" without website and by reason thereof must be somehow tied to the propaganda machinery of the Malaysian government - allegations made without production of an iota of evidence.

One must not forget that on the sole issue of veracity of what has been said - never mind who said it or the motive for saying it - Lim Kit Siang may not agree with part (1) of ADC's statement but he had himself on record certainly expressed misgivings similar to the lines expressed in part (2) of ADC's statement in the last DAP Congress meeting.

So what is the message Lim Kit Siang is now trying to convey to the public?

That ADC's opinion is wrong - or is it partly right - or even if it is wholly right, it is wrong for the government to canvass its support or wrong for Bernama to quote it - or what?

Lim Kit Siang should not by being so affected by his present antipathy towards the government to have lost all semblance of reason, balance and consistency that had been the distinguishing marks of his criticism of the government in the earlier stages of his political career.