图中是一架的到处都可看到的升降机；但它显出不平凡之处，因为它是建在路边，在行人天桥两边；也不是闹市中而是郊外处。
这个建在路边的升降机是提供服务于坐在轮椅上行动不便者，年迈者，孕妇等。
这是我在旅游澳门是看到时所拍的！在槟城我们是不会看到这个情景，槟城政府不要做，不想做，不肯做不是不能做。执政槟城近八年，我们可看到的槟城政府对塑造无障碍环境是漠不关心，始终都是抱着敷衍的态度来应对，还有我们市民也可亲眼看到一些有关当局莫名其妙又矛盾的举动。槟城政府市政局花费成千上万令吉建造可通行无阻的行人道，但建设后却在行人道的两端垒起杆支阻止所有一切可自由行动的流通。
得悉槟州政府建议2016年一月起提高槟州行政议员和州议员的月常津贴近100%。在新津贴制度下，行政议员月常津贴将从每月的六千一百九令吉二十九仙增加至一万二千一百一令吉二十九仙，州议员的津贴从目前的每月六千令吉增加至一万一千两百五十令吉。对于调高月常津贴的理由，槟州政府首长林冠英说是与雪兰莪和砂劳越州政府调整津贴的步伐一致，生活成本提高。
槟州政府首长林冠英的解释简直是典型的政客的举动！
你林冠英需要人民的选票时，你忘记你在台上高喊了甚么？你不时的大声说为了人民，你将不惜再次坐牢，为了人民你会牺牲自己！但今天的当了首长的你，为了维持州政府的开支包括你的每月数万令吉的薪俸，你调高门牌税，小贩的执照费，泊车费，水费等！
你说调整津贴是要与雪兰莪和砂劳越步伐一致，那你为什么不选我国的其它州属如玻璃市，吉兰丹的议员的津贴制度来跟随呢？你告诉大众你会牺牲自己再次坐牢，那你为什么今天要数万令吉的薪俸。坐牢吃什么呀？每月数万令吉的薪俸又吃什么呢？
你说人民是老板？当生活费提高，人民受苦，槟州多间工厂因经济不景栽员时，你还在自我调整津贴，你才是真老板。
马币兑换率下滑，你告诉我们是因为是国阵政府的错，一马公司的关系等。那你是否能告诉我们反对党每天都在媒体介破坏我国，打击外国投资家的信心不会影响我国的经济？
还是老话一句：“为民服务的代议士已绝种，肯为人民牺牲的参政者也成为历史。参政的目的只是为了“自肥”了在英语的 INVERSION（翻转）的文法中， 过去式的had 是可以用（IF）来代替的。
这个用had来代替（IF）的目的是（1）Formal Expression 正式的表达 （2）事情的可能性不大。
看看下列的句子。
1. If I had known the consequence , I would have checked it again.
Had I know the consequence, I would have checked it again.
2. If the authority had discovered it, these trouble makers would have been in trouble.
Had the authority discovered it, these trouble makers would have been in trouble.
3. If you had done the correct thing, this would not have happened.
Had you done the correct thing, this would not have happened.
4. If these convicts were to be hanged , there would be an outcry.
Were these convicts to be hanged, there would be an outcry.
5. If she has come late, she will have to be punished.
Has she come late, she will have to be punished.
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad commented that if Malaysia was fine, he could not reason why Putrajaya arrested people for sabotaging the banking and financial system of the country".
Dr Mahathir wrote in his blog explaining that if everything was fine, why was there a need to arrest people for sabotaging the banking and financial system of the country? If they sabotaged, surely the banking and finance of Malaysia would not be fine. They would be dysfunctional." .
Dr Mahathir was referring to former Batu Kawan Umno division vice-chief Datuk Seri Khairuddin Abu Hassan and his lawyer, Matthias Chang, who were recently charged with attempting to sabotage Malaysia's banking and financial systems.
This is the logical reasoning by our Tun Dr Mahathir. However, if we are to view the statement made by Tun Dr Mahathir without any prejudice on the present government of Malaysia, the country is surely fine. The authority is able to take preventive measures before unwarranted incidence happens Look at the other countries where crisis or chaos prevailed, the police and authority could not catch the culprits. The worst part was that in these countries, the culprits and the saboteurs were so powerful that they could easily get away from the unscrupulous act they had committed.
If the statement by Tun Dr Mahathir was convincing and able to hold water, it would mean that all countries should not have police force as it could be ironically interpreted that by having police force, the security and safety of the countries were not fine at all.
To sum it all, misconception and misperception are always there if prejudice prevails