You know, the great thing about evidence (in the real world, at least, not the crap we see in make-believe shows such as CSI), is that it can be fabricated at the will of whomever needs it to support their case. I learned this lesson quite aptly during my debating career when i had statistics flung to me by my opponents that were so patently false, i could hardly keep myself seated in my chair from holding back by laughter. It happened to me in at least 74% of all the international debates i participated in. See how easy that was?
The not-so-laughing part of my story is that i actually lost quite a few debates because of these questionable “facts”. I mean, i know Africa is not a country, but does the judge know it? The ICC and the ICJ are two different bodies, right? It all came down to how well the the lie was presented. If its done right, there is just no denying it. A slick debater could tell us that the earth revolved around the moon, and the House would buy it.
Similarly, when i hear things like this from our Parliament, on the issue of he-said-she-said of APCO, Anwar’s proof (still waiting for it that to appear, by the way), Nazri’s “proof”, a notarized statement from Robert Shrum (what a name), i just can’t help by wonder whether i’m back on the debating floor again. Who knows who is telling the truth, which pieces of evidence are real, and which are not.
PR have been screaming bloody murder that the APCO documents were made under pressure from the Najib administration, and Shrum’s letter is suspicious because it appeared out of nowhere. Conspiracy theories, left right and center. It’s almost tiring to have to decipher it all.
There is rule that i follow that i think applies cases like this. When it doubt, believe no one. Assume everyone is lying, and go from there.
Assuming that Nazri is lying, does that mean APCO was responsible for the One Israel idea? Not necessarily. Similarly, assuming that Anwar is lying does that mean that Malaysia’s model is a copy of the Zionist states’. The question everyone should be asking is whether it even matters. Is the 1Malaysia concept such an “evil” thing that it needs to be so heavily discredited, that PR sees it as such a threat, it would risk the suspension of its senior members from Parliament at such a critical time?
There is a certain validity to 1Malaysia that even the cynics have to agree — there is something comforting when someone says, “Salam satu Malaysia”. The concept is what we’ve needed for years, to bring unity to a divided nation that has never really recovered from the clashes of 1969. While abject failures such as BTN still exist, it doesn’t mean that the principles of 1Malaysia are wrong, or unneeded. To me, it just doesn’t make any sense why PR is making such a big deal about it, even getting the Selangor state government to ban its promotion in the state.
Unless of course, it’s working. The efforts of 1Malaysia are bringing the people together, slowly perhaps, imperfectly for sure, but surely nonetheless. God forbid the BN government did something right. That would be a disaster for PR come GE13.