The Last Communist: Umno supreme council to view film and advise on ban

I just love the heading in the New Straits Times 23 May 2006.

Some excerpts:

"Radzi said even the title 'Lelaki Komunis Terakhir' had caused quite a stir among the people.

"When you mention the title, many will react to it. Some will ask why we are championing an issue that caused the sufferings of our forefathers. It is not right," he said."

So, the title is the crucial point. That means Amir, the director of the said film must take note of this observation from the honourable minister himself. Next time he makes a movie, he must use that very apt title 'Senario Cinta Mawi' as mentioned in his own blog lastcommunist.blogspot.com. But that title itself might give the wrong connotation. So please play safe. As a very bright person, I'm sure he'll be able to come up with something along the lines of Gerak Khas or Man Laksa.

"Asked if he had watched the documentary, Radzi said he had. However, he declined to say what he thought of it. He only said it depended 'on circumstances'."

An action that shows transparency of the highest order? Is big brother watching? He declined to say what he thought as it will also depend on circumstances. A classic example of survival of the fittest and the bottomline is, we must take care of our rice bowl. So please do not rock the boat. A very good and prudent move. Ten brownie points and may more of his ilk be in the cabinet...

The abandoned forum in Penang

The New Sunday Times 21 May 2006 had an interview with one of those who protested against the forum.
Some comments...

"Q: But Muslims were among panelists at the forum?

A: Unfortunately, other Muslims do not see them as representative of the community. They have their own secular, liberal, understanding of Islam. They want Syariah to be placed along with universal values and are in favour of a secular society in a secular state.

Because they are not representing the Muslim community, they are actually representing a secular minority group. We feel that what they stand for is their own perception of Islam.

They want Islam to be just a private matter and that Syariah law should only be used in handling private matters. They do not represent the community or what Islam stands for in this country."

I guess everything is already cast in stone. We can't even discuss certain issues among Muslims. If one authority has declared that his interpretation is the correct version, everyone has to follow. Haven't we learnt from history itself that Islam went through a lot of upheavals. There were lots of views, interpretations and discussions. Shouldn't that be the norm rather than the exception?

"Q: What should Article 11 do to defuse the situation?

A: There are mechanisms to address their grievances. They can meet the Attorney-General since some of the cases they discussed included conversion.

The forum touched on issues that have already been decided upon. If people don’t agree, they have to meet the A-G and see if there is a mechanism to settle it.

That is better as you don’t need to arouse the sentiments of Muslims. But they start going around saying that Syariah is not protecting the rights of non-Muslims. This is absurd."

Isn't it an assumed conclusion that once someone had converted to Islam in Malaysia he is governed by the Syariah courts. What recourse does the non-Muslim family have in the Syariah courts? Usually the Syariah court judges are dismissive of those who seek the court's help as evidenced by the many instances of single mothers going countless times to get their rightful dues. What more someone of a different faith. Even a Muslim woman unveiled is asked to veil herself first before any proceeding will continue????

The controversy of conversions will continue as long as those in power do not show any compassion towards the non-Muslim family. I'm certain that Islam does not condone breaking families due to the conversion of one family member to the religion. This is where discussion is vital. The protesters can say what they want, but the responsibility is squarely on their shoulders to ensure that justice is meted out equally to the non-Muslim family. I wonder if they have ever thought of being in the other person's shoes???

Australian's 'last wish' is to get PR status

That was one of the headlines in New Straits Times 3 May 2006.

This is interesting to say the least. A non-Malaysian who fell in love with the country and wants to spend the rest of his days here. I hope he gets his wish. There have been countless cases previously which tell almost the same story. A non-Malaysian falling for the charms that this country has and willing to uproot themselves from their country of origin in order to spend their life here.

This is in contrast to the reluctance shown by Malaysians who have made it good abroad and are in two minds about coming back here. Their only existing ties might still be some family and friends. I'm sure there are a multitude of factors which made them make that decision.

The government's efforts to stem this brain drain is pointless if the target does not feel attached to the country. No amount of incentive would change their mind since this country is not attractive to them anymore.

Maybe the government should look into giving better treatment to those who have stayed behind. They are the ones who have made the country what it is today through thick and thin. What we see now is still not perfect and no one country can claim that distinction.

With all its flaws, this country is what it is now through the efforts of those who stayed behind. This group of people should get better recognition for their contributions. This would surely make better economic sense that trying to woo those who have always been reluctant to come back from the beginning.

Why is he so angry?

The headline "Dr Mahathir: Malaysia a ‘half-past-six country with no guts’ if ... " in the New Straits Times 2 May 2006 is very intriguing.

“He said as a citizen, he had a right to do so if the country’s sovereignty was surrendered.”

When did the present leadership surrender our country's sovereignty? The moment the decision was made to abandon the bridge project? There was nothing wrong with the project per se, but the extra baggage that went with the ambitious plans made us a laughing stock. The plan to have that half bridge seems very childish, just to spite the neighbour. If he was still the PM and the project went ahead, it will not help in improving the traffic or the water flow.

"Even if I were to give it to you to publish, you will not do it.

"Even if you do, Kalimullah will chop it," he said, referring to New Straits Times Press deputy chairman and editorial adviser Datuk Kalimullah Hassan.”

This seems to be a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black. Didn’t he use his power to prevent others from publishing their opinion in the mainstream media? At least his rantings are still published. So there is no reason to complain.

He is still a very angry man after all these years. After more than 20 years in power. There must more than what we see from this whole episode and through his previous his outbursts. Is he really concerned about the country or speaking up more on behalf of those near and dear who have lost their opportunity to make their pot of gold.