Most people are wondering about the stark contrast in treatment between an unarmed Australian independent Senator and a group of armed Filipino invaders. The following article by Calvin Kabaron is just one of many...
Where's the logic, Hisham?
Could this be the real reason? ...
According to Hussein Hamid,
'There is no record of the number of Filipinos, mostly Tausogs, in Sabah.
But a friend of mine who used to be in the Philippine military intelligence estimates that one-third of the population in the Malaysian state is Tausog.
Many of the people in Sulu and Tawi-Tawi have relatives in Sabah, which is just one hour by speedboat from Simunul in Tawi-Tawi.
If the Tausogs in Sabah rise up in revolt against the Malaysian government, their relatives in Sulu and Tawi-Tawi will go to Sabah and fight with them.
To the Tausogs, the claim of the group purporting to represent the Sultanate of Sulu that Sabah belongs to the sultanate is legitimate...'
He was referring to the following article...
Sabah standoff: Karma
By Ramon Tulfo
Philippine Daily Inquirer
'If Malaysia is clumsy about handling the Sabah standoff, it will have the same problem the Philippine government had when it fought a Muslim rebellion in the South in the 1970s up to the 1980s.
Malaysia is in a no-win situation as a result of the standoff in Sabah.
If it uses deadly force on a small group of armed Filipino Muslims now holed up in the village of Tanduo in Lahad Datu town in Sabah, members of the fiercest of Philippine Moro tribe, the Tausogs of Sulu and Tawi-Tawi, will retaliate.
If, on the other hand, Malaysia compromises with the armed group purportedly belonging to the Sultanate of Sulu, it will be perceived as a weakling by its neighbors.
Which will Malaysia choose, fighting a rebellion in the Sabah state or swallowing its pride and compromise with the Sultanate of Sulu?
Better to be perceived as a weakling rather than have a bloody civil war in Sabah.'