One political party's reticence.

It has been months, after mp William Leong, told parliament and the public hears it. The community he heads, will call the two Ronnies, the present AG and his predecessor to explain the DNAAgate.
Until now, there's nothing. Perhaps William Leong is hoping, with the passage of time, all is forgotten.
I was disappointed too, when the MP of kota Melaka seemed apologetic about the DNAA. Instead Of Asking Probing And Robust Questions about a dubious DNAA, he berated opposition MPs for making noises about the DNAA. The issue is the DNAA not the normal conduct of the noisy opposition MPs.
The DAP too had politely asked for an explanation from the AGC. It seems the request is politely swept under the plush carpets of Putrajaya . DAP has since been quiet on the issue.
The public sees the DAP as the bastion and an uncompromising fighter against all forms of social injustices. Don't betray this trust .
The DAP is recalcitrant, obstinate and even evasive about playing its role as the mouthpiece of all law abiding citizens and right thinking members of the public.
It is diffident and unassertive and not robust when asking the government.
For these reasons, I am again posting the article. When will the Two Ronnies be called?

1. I don't care about other political parties, especially the opposition PN, over the vociferous noises they made over zahid's infamous DNAA. They're eager to win brownie points.

2. I am however, disappointed with the DAP, over its overall reticence, restrained articulations, laconic and almost mousy utterances, except for a few truncated typical opposition against jahids DNAA.

3. This kind of submissive behavior is so out of character with DAP. It has been perceived as being the vanguard in the fight against all forms of social injustices, indiscretions, corruption etc. Now, it seems to have accepted as trade off between shutting up and elevating the infamous DNAA to prominence.

4. As my former colleagues in shell would likely say, tiu kaw, tiu nia Seng !

5. DAP is politely and courteously asking the AGC to provide an explanation. In actuality, it doesn't accept the DNAA and yet it's worshipping the DNAA at the altar and for good measure, burning joss sticks

6. For God sake,si Fu, ah soh, ah Kong, this is not a political Phillips curve trade off . You don't pay for the blasted DNAA by zipping up

7. If DAP wants to do that,sit down in a corner, eat Bak kut teh, draw a painting or make an embroidery. Then asks the AGC to come up with for a sanitized explanation of the DNAA .

8. DAP needs to say clearly and emphatically to thick headed AGC, that it doesn't agree with the DNAA. It wants an explanation that convinces DAP and the public.

9. Better still , DAP prepares its own legal reasons opposing the DNAA. But release the document containing its reasons at the same time as the parliamentary committee sees the former and present AG. That way, the 2 AGs cannot prepare their answer tailored to circumvent DAPs objections .

10. Surely, DAP lawyers can list down all the technical arguments for objecting the DNAA. These are necessary but not sufficient. The technical objections must be tempered with wisdom and compassion which can only come from listening to the public. The people find the DNAA repulsive and obnoxious.

11. The statement by mp William Leong is welcomed. He told parliament that the committee he heads, would call the former and present AGs.

12. But we can't help feeling that the committee hearing will be a whitewash. The 2 AGs will come up with cerita Mak nenek .

13. If we are sincere about reaching the truth, why not also call the former head of prosecution, Raja rozela?

14. Perhaps, not only she could enlighten us about the prosecution, but for good measure, tell the committee why she was euphemistically asked to retire?

15. I am however a bit disappointed when the mp from kota Melaka spoke on the matter . What he spoke didn't serve any purpose -does DAP agree with the DNAA or does it not? That is the point.

16. He spoke about the formation of a committee headed by William Leong and the inclusion into that committee, the mischievous noise Maker, shahidan Kassim. For what purpose? Possibly to appear one up over shahidan .

17. I am not even sure whether attendance of the AGs before bill leongs committee is mandatory unlike appearance before the PAC .

18. When kota Melaka spoke about the matter, it's as though he regretted that the thunder of the DNAA issue was mostly monopolized by the opposition instead of the DAP. What to do?

19. If he regrets, then it is justified. People looked upon DAP as the rampart and bulwark in the fight against any forms of social injustices.

20. There is a quote wrongly attributed to e. Burke that reads, there's only one thing necessary for an evil to triumph. That is when good men stand idle. Corruption will triumph, when DAP is hesitant.