Reply to Ratnam

I am indeed surprised at Mr Kelvin Ratnam's reply to a letter written by Mr W. Chang questioning the Constitutional position of MSSA.

Mr Ratnam avoided the real issue and instead gave a rather vulgar reply, all filled with spite. Mr Chang never mentioned anything about any 'dinners' with Razak, etc. but, Mr Ratnam took an opportunity to "condemn" MSA. If one analyses his letter properly, one can only realise (it's too obvious!) that it's a simple case of "sour grapes"!

One further point, why was there no mention of Mr Chang, contention that there was no quorum last year (1974) too? It is submitted that Mr Ratnam seems to accept that fact. If so, then the amendment which was passed last year is invalid!