Selective Outrage

Putting on bias and tainted glasses.

Recently a political loudspeaker was quick to laung-laungkan that they will use their legal resources to defend the victim of a dispute that involved a Ferrari and a Perodua Aruz driver, which led to a road rage incident and a physical altercation on the North–South Highway.

Some time back, a hearing-impaired e-hailing driver was punched in the face by a security escort officer outside a five-star hotel due to being slow in reacting to a siren warning — come on, he is impaired in hearing — which led to him eventually filing a civil lawsuit in July 2026 against the police and the government for assault, negligence, and mishandling his report. The loudspeaker was nowhere to be seen to employ the legal resources at his disposal to defend justice for this victim. This is what happens when one shouts for justice for the rakyat, but through a biased lens of his own.

The national flag was flown at a dataran in Terengganu without the proper image of what our beloved national flag should appear to be. Again, where is this loudspeaker that laung-laung like no tomorrow and threatened to organise a boycott rally when some netizen accidentally flew our national flag upside down?

Again, typical selective responses by politikus, kononnya in the name of justice and mempertahankan maruah negara, but done through a tainted lens of his choice. If justice is genuinely sought, there should be no double standards being practised.