‘This is not the first time that allegations are rebutted by him without the need for an investigation. His reaction is immediate and dismissive.'

On Minister rejects human trafficking claims

CH Siew: I am really amazed with our Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar. This is not the first time that allegations are rebutted without the need for an investigation.

Similar to his handling of complaints on police behaviour, the treatment of the opposition and the NGO Jerit teen cyclists. His reaction is immediate and dismissive.

Does our beloved home ministers have psychic powers that he knows exactly what happened? Or does he already have a strong team of professionals looking into each and every allegation before they even surface?

Either way, it shows that he seems to have great divine power and there is no flaw under his management.

One warning that Brother Syed needs to take is the recent KT by-election. The red light from the latest election is blinking so ever brightly that even a blind man can see it.

All our home minister did is to demonstrate the type of people that BN is placing in to govern the country.

To me, it shows that incompetent people are in important positions and their strategies are bringing down the country.

The rakyat are seeing more clearly than ever that change is no longer a luxury, but is a must since it is obvious now that our BN is the only one not changing with time.

On Action against sexist MPs lauded

Vijay Vela Nair: Although this affirmative remains only but a thought on the minister's mind, the fact that it is being thought of is commendable.

But how long will it take for this minister and parliamentarian himself to realise that his own racist behaviour should be denounced in all forms?

Perhaps it is a tad bit difficult for one who does not sincerely believe that all mankind is equal and to realise that in Malaysia people are not treated equally.

The whole cyber-savvy nation saw how he went into an epileptic fit in parliament and hurled racist abuse at ‘lowly' opposition members with an air of conviction that he is supreme.

We have all the right to suspect that he is not alone on this. He is just the voice of the government of the day, a government who still lives in the pre-independence era.

The government not only has to realise but it has to pack up and bid farewell. Its ethos may be based on racial harmony but its existence is based on racial disharmony.

As for the minister, if he truly believes in what he has said, then he should put his actions where his mouth is and execute the ultimate ‘sacrifice' - himself.

On 'I've proof MIC branches were formed overnight'

Pathma Devi Veerasingam: Mr Muthu, this is 2009. What were you doing in 1994? All these statements now are just like spitting to the sky.

On Alarm bells as dengue cases double

Anne Matews: This has been a routine for the ministry of health - saying that the dengue situation is alarming. But what has been done? Till today nothing has been done but people are dying and suffering.

The health authorities on the top level are only delegating their jobs to the lower-rung staff. Are they going down to the ground to see what is being done?

I have seen health department staff sitting around at mamak shops with their teh tarik . What are the department's directors doing?

The health ministry should employ a capable and experienced person, let it be if he is retired, as a consultant.

The ministry should also take over fogging operations and house-to-house checks from the local councils.

On No 40km rule on distances between airports

Fong: The distance from London Heathrow to Gatwick airport is 48.27km or approximately 30 miles.

On Recognising Israel legitimises their atrocities

Dawei Shine: This is another example of letters giving one-sided account of the Middle-East conflict. I do not have a firsthand experience of what happened in 1948, but I suspect neither has the writer of the letter.

He gave the one side of the story which he prefers to believe for whatever reasons, so let me give another side based on what I heard.

At the end of 1947, the UN approved a plan to partitition Palestine into two states, one Jewish and the other Arab. The plan was generally accepted by the Jews who were only too happy to have a state of their own.

The Arabs were dissatisfied with the UN plan, as they were given less than 50 percent of the land. The discontent among the Arabs soon gave in to violence, with many people on both sides killed.

Further intervention by neighbouring Arab states resulted in a full-scale war which eventually led to Jewish forces occupying land that was allocated to the Palestinians under the UN plan.

Arab countries like Jordan and Egypt had their own political agenda in the conflict and were not keen to resolve the problem of Palestine refugees in the aftermath of the war.

The writer wrote as though only Palestinians were killed and massacred in the Middle-East conflict. In the Palestinian uprising in 1929, both Jews and Arabs were killed.

When the Arab forces captured the Kfar Etzion kibbutz in May 1947, most of the Jewish prisoners were massacred.

Atrocities were committed by both sides in this conflict and they would go on endlessly in a vicious cycle if both sides do not attempt to work for peace. Negotiation for peace is not possible until both sides recognise the right of each other to coexist.