China Press: It’s our fault, not Chew’s

China Press today carried a note of apology, claiming that Chew Mei Fun did not “concretely” (emphasis mine) mention the May 13 incident throughout the [MCA Crisis Squad] function.

china press on chew

We misinterpreted her words, the Chinese daily said, Chew did not say,”If there is insufficient Chinese representation in the Barisan Nasional, it is not a good thing, the Chinese community cannot afford another May 13 incident.”

China Press apologized to all relevant parties.

So, what did Chew say?

“If we do not have enough representation in the Barisan Nasional, then to the Chinese community, the lesson of 1969 is sufficient. I think we cannot afford another such scenario.”

I am sorry for Ms Chew if it is indeed the China Press’ fault. However, I wonder why she did not seek correction and apology by the China Press immediately on the next day (Tueaday) after its publication (Monday)? If civil society hasn’t spoken up, would we see such clarification and apology today (Wednesday)?

China Press mentioned in the apology note that the news report has “caused Chew being condemned by some groups”. For all who have endorsed the joint statement “Say no to Spectre of May 13”, I believe that we speaking-up has sent a strong signal to any politician who tries to play with fire and monger fear.

Because Ms Chew has not clarified the China Press’ report at once, I think she still owes her electorate and the public an official response. She may accept China Press’ apology and at the same time categorically make a statement like this: “All voters can and must vote freely for whichever political party or candidate they prefer. Their safety is completely guaranteed.”

We must also read carefully into China Press’ carefully-worded clarification: “Chew Mei Fun did not “concretely” (emphasis mine) mention the May 13 incident throughout the [MCA Crisis Squad] function.”

Can Ms Chew explain to us what “the lesson of 1969” is? While it did not “concretely” mean May 13, what did it “abstractly” mean then?

3 responses to “China Press: It’s our fault, not Chew’s

  1. Pingback: Malaysian Politics » Blog Archive » Media’s fault? Not Chew’s?

  2. As I like to say: Malaysian politicians will not apologize for their mistakes, lest they suffer the fates of Chua Soi Lek and the author of Negarakuku — apology not accepted.

    What they first do is blame the press for misquoting, then blame the assistant, then hypothesize a possible apology (“if part of what I said had hurt a tiny bit of some people’s feeling, then I may consider saying sorry …”) to be miscontrued by the media as an actual apology, or just hide behind BN big UMNO brother for a pat on the back for whatever indecency they utter.

    I hope Chew Mei Fun’s suddenly renewed high profile is not part of a plot by BN to prepare for a “surprise” last minute (empty) promise that Damansara primary school would be reopened “soon.”

    I hope our electorates are immunized ahead of time so that any such election-eve “surprise” tactic will not win the BN any extra votes.

  3. lesson 1969 means that if mca (thru bn) did not get majority seats, pm cum umno will remove all chinese as cabinet minsters, and threaten to kick them out as what dpm father did to mca in 1969. it makes sense with this statement.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s