Footballers

Though I fell in love with football only recently (circa 2003), it has not taken me long to hate footballers. Generally, of course. There will always be a few shining lustruous pearls amidst an ocean of shite. Now I hate them because most of them now have absolutely no loyalty whatsoever to the club. Those bygone days where footballers were proud of their clubs, even if they didn't win anything, and stayed on year after year in the hope that they did is now becoming the type of ancient history that doesn't make it to the history books. For example, even though I hate Manchester United and think most of their fans are a bunch of twats (except for Art, of course *chuckle*), you gotta respect some of their players like Ryan Giggs who spent his entire career at the club. I don't think we are ever going to see the likes of him anymore. More and more, I see footballers who have one singular good season (despite the earlier ones being shite or mediocre) being proclaimed by the English press as the next Pele or Maradona and then because of all the bloody media attention, they get poached by the Italian or Spanish leagues (read Juventus, AC Milan, Inter Milan and Real Madrid or Barcalona, respectively - bunch of non-English speaking twats). To use the Manchester United example again, in the last season 2007/08, Cristiano Ronaldo had by any standards an outstanding year. He won the European Championship and the Premiership Championship this year. He's 23. So he's got a lot of years left and you would think, he would stay with Manchester United which is as much as I hate to admit it the top club in Europe right now. But then as usual those fuckers Real Madrid then screw all these footballers up by indicating that they are 'interested' (I've got beef with them as well because they are making it a yearly habit to declare their love for Fabregas, may you never leave us!) and the worse part is these footballers then become 'unsettled'. How you can have a 4 year contract or whatever with the club, play so well for a few years, get on with everybody and then at the mere mention of an interest become 'unsettled'. These bastards are paid something like upwards of 50,000 pounds a week and they are unsettled. You pay me that kinda money, I settle wherever the fuck you like Mister and I love you long time oso! And of course you be nice to me then I no reason to leave sorta shite.

Sure you get the usual argument like - footballers have a limited earning time period - about 10 years or so, so they have to make the most of it. So we have to understand that even though they signed a 5 year contract, if some other club is willing to pay more and buy out their contract, they should be allowed to leave so that they can have enough for their retirement. What happened to loyalty? What happened to the contract which basically is a promise in exchange for obscene amounts of money that they would stay at the club for the duration of their contract? A footballers contract is now so meaningless - you can sign up for a 10 year contract, but if the player wants to leave and the buying club is willing to fork out the money, they are sold. And what happened to professionalism on the footballers part? Being professional means that you honour your contract instead of (i) claiming you want to play for your childhood club (do it after you finished your contract asshole) and the engineer to leave (ii) try to buy out your own contract (which apparently is now allowed). Professionalism for a footballer should not be limited to the football field, where most of them fail this test too. So often do you see big strapping lads with limbs like timber diving like a happy dolphin on the ground at the merest touch. Then they are usually clutching their legs or face or wherever it was there were last touched and clutching it and rolling around like a shot gun blew it off complete with the agonized looks. And after their supposed offender is shown a yellow card or reprimanded they're up and about like a happy lamb and back to being their usual arsehole selves.

So where does this leave us when more and more footballers adopt such attitudes - an utter lack of professionalism both on the field and in their contracts? I think it will in time turn off 'neutrals', those who just enjoy watching good football. Clubs and football then will be crushed by the financial expectations of men who really are paid obscene amounts of money for kicking the ball around on a field for the display. They do not create food. They do not solve people's problems. They contribute nothing to science (and being a subject for medical/sports science is not a pro-active contribution but a mere passive one). They do not contribute to the intellectual progress (and on the contrary by their very actions tend to hold back this sort of progress). They kick a ball well and make it enjoyable for us. That they are paid so much for so little, (especially in terms of professionalism), really makes me wonder what our priorities are as a human race. It would seem that pure entertainment is our priority instead of encouraging each other to do as good a job as possible and getting along with one another.

Happy Navel #1

I've decided to take pictures of any willing navels around and put them up in here.

June 2008

Mont Kiara, Kuala Lumpur

The Fall of the Giant Rambutan Pudding

June 2008

Somewhere in Bukit Bintang, Kuala Lumpur

a very big storm in a very small espresso cup

I am talking about the Statutory Declaration dated 18.6.2008 by Raja Petra bin Raja Kamarudin which was published by Malaysiakini on 20.6.2008. It was "mindboggling", as Beh Lih Yi of Malaysiakini described it. Reactions from the netizens were swift. Some believed the truth of the contents and some of course laughed it off as another stunt by Raja Petra.

The Attorney General quickly said that it amounts to criminal defamation. He then lodged a police report against Raja Petra. Malik Imtiaz, in his ever so precise observation of the whole episode expressed his concern at the actions being taken by the Attorney General as it seemed that "the focus of the exercise will be Raja Petra rather than the substance of his allegations in a manner reminiscent of the Irene Fernandez affair", to quote him.

Elsewhere, Karpal Singh urged the Attorney General to investigate the claim made by Raja Petra in the SD. Lim Kit Siang even moved the Parliament to discuss the same. Needless to say, the Speaker of the House found there was nothing to discuss.

The mainstream media of course went to sleep and was loudly snoring, in the blissful, albeit wishful, thoughts that the Malaysian public are ignorant of the whole thing. When the matter was reported about 2 days later, of course, the name of the characters in the SD were blanked out. Rosmah, who was at the centre of the whole thing, was only referred to as "the wife of a VIP" or in Malay, "isteri seorang kenamaan". Contrast that to any guy who is caught for shoplifting. The news will read "Ali bin Sudin, aged 34, from Flat Bahagia, Cheras, was yesterday caught for shoplifting"! Hmmm...the Malaysian mainstream media, love them, hate them, but you will surely be able to live without them.

Najib Razak, Abdullah Ahmad, Khairy Jamaluddin, the characters mentioned in the SD stayed mum for 5 days. Yesterday, they all came out with guns blazing to deny the contents of the SD. 5 days. FIVE days. My cat had bolted out of the house and went to Putrajaya and back. That was how long they took to come out and deny it. Dr Mahathir, in a rare display of public agreement with Abdullah Ahmad, has reportedly said that Raja Petra's accusation was a political ploy.

The police, in the meantime, had stated that they would be questioning Raja Petra. Whether that has been done at the time of writing is unknown. Najib meanwhile was quoted by Malaysiakini as saying that Rosmah had been questioned by the police. Today, mainstream newspapers screamed out the denial by Abdullah Ahmad and Najib Razak.Total lies, they say.

Everybody who is somebody seems to be hot and bothered. They jumped. Some even flipped. It seems that all rationale has been lost. Nobody seems to have any intelligence. All are emotional. A very big storm indeed. Over nothing.

The SD proves, if ever it proves anything, that Malaysians love rumours and unsubstantiated claims. But that is all to be expected in a country where freedom of speech and media are an alien concept although its Federal Constitution guarantees the same. Malaysians can't get accurate reporting of events from the media and so nobody is to blame when rumours are regarded as not true until they are expressly denied. That is our fate, fellow Malaysians. It is sad, I know, but that is the truth. So life goes on.

Has anybody asked what is the probative value of the SD. Zero. That is the answer. What the deponent (Raja Petra) is saying in the SD is that he was reliably informed by someone or some people that Rosmah, together with 2 other persons, were present at the crime scene. He also said he was reliably informed that, among others, a military intelligence report on the matter was given to Abdullah Ahmad, who then gave the same to Khairy Jamaludin for safe keeping. The said report was also given to a Malay Ruler.

That's it. He did not reveal who his informer is. He did not even say that he believes his informer other than to say that he had been "reliably" informed. To be "reliably informed" is one thing but to believe an information is another thing altogether.

The position under the law is simple. This is hearsay. Raja Petra did not and does not have personal knowledge of the matters he was alluding to in the SD. He is relying on an information. Therefore that piece of evidence is hearsay. Being hearsay, it will not be admissible in a court of law for the purpose of proving the fact that Rosmah was at the crime scene or the fact relating to the existence of the military report.

However, although it is hearsay, it could be admitted by the Court to prove Raja Petra's belief in those matters. But what Raja Petra's belief is not relevant. An irrelevant evidence is also not admissible in Court. I may say that I believe Altantuya killed herself. I can swear 4 Statutory Declaration to that effect. But my opinion or belief is not relevant. Because they don't matter. The same goes with Raja Petra's belief. It is not relevant and therefore not admissible. And so we are back to square one.

The question is, why the hoo-haa over something which is so irrelevant and unsubstantiated? And to the Honourable Attorney General and the IGP, why are you all investigating Raja Petra for what he believes? What makes his belief so relevant?

Or is there something more to all these? One wonders.

Speculations About The Mind

Bodleian Library, Oxford
Courtesy of National Geographic

I have recently begun to wonder what the architecture of my mind looks like. For those that you use the word mind interchangeably with brain, I am referring to the latter and we all have a fairly workable idea about the latter. So whilst there are many things that could easily stand as a metaphor for the mind, I think it helpful for my present purpose of pontification (sorry, couldn't help myself) it as that of an estate. For you Malaysians out there, I am certain that the mention of the word 'estates' immediately evokes scenes of rubber trees standing tall and silent in the morning darkness and the chanting cicadas, and if you hold the imagery long enough, a thin wiry man dressed neatly in a light blue t-shirt and a sarong bunched up around his thighs carrying a pail carefully making his way around the trees comes into view. I usually stop around here because he actually goes to take a dump so you might wanna stop here too. But anyway, if you thought something like that, you would not be too (cue: constipated pout and hard squinting of eyes) off the mark.

By estate I mean a plot of land of a particular shape, size, location and usually with the attendant natural wildlife, or human construct on it. For example, with those terribly clever chaps that have their information so well organized in their head and are able to effortlessly present complicated and difficult arguments systematically, coherently and understandably, I imagine their minds to be perhaps something like the Bodleian Library, complete with its knowledgeable and helpful staff, humming along or a vast stately English 20-room manor with its battalion of servants and butlers, resting on a sprawling few thousand acres of beautiful forests, lakes, hills and wildlife. As much as I would fancy myself in that intellectual class (in my wildest and raunchiest dreams), I find it difficult to avoid the fact that mine is at best a mud hut with only a dining table in the middle with a few torn up and halved books, and stacks of pages ripped from books here and there, maybe a page here and ten there with large rocks holding them down. On a good day, there would be a chair thrown in, but it would be broken. And occasionally there'd be a stray dog or cat that would wander in and once content that there is no food to be found, leave.

Now there are some things that can be drawn from thinking about the mind as a kind of estate or structure. Firstly, there is the idea of change or alteration. A house can be renovated to become bigger and wider, or smaller as the case may be. Land can be tilled, raised or lowered. Lakes and rivers created or dammed. That means ones mind can always be improved or it can also deteriorate. Secondly, since these are objects of great longevity (human constructs such as brick houses, the land itself) it lends to the idea of permanence. But this is a limited permanence. Our minds are permanent to us and is from which we think and act through. Thirdly, deterioration and longevity implies time which in turn suggests ageing and wear and tear, and the occasional break down, where applicable. And the longer the disuse, the quicker the deterioration. This leads to the idea of maintenance and the regular review because a lot of junk can accumulate and clutter the thinking. Sometimes its nice to clear the deck, or at least, part of it. Finally, the best and most important trait about it is that it our very own. This means we should necessarily take good care of it and to use it often, and take special care not to simply surrender it to or for the use of others, because it would be the surrender of ourselves.

Keropok Oh Keropok!

If you are an unfortunate white man that never had a frivolous reason to visit Malaysia, you will most probably have missed out on one of the greatest instant snacks ever created by the human race, until of course you were fortunate to read this article. If you're Malaysian, you know what I'm talking about. And if you don't, please email me your home address because you've just won 5 free vouchers of the Backdoor Madras Special (for definition, see posting here).

Yes, you have your Twisties (Chicken, Cheese, Curry and some of the new funky stuff, Salmon Terikyaki and Tandoori Flavoured), Mamee (the standard and the extra spice), Double Decker Range (the Prawn Fries and the Chicken Flavoured Chips), Jack and Jill Chips (which are actual potato chips flavoured with Tomato and Spicy), Cap Tangan Peanuts, Yaws, all sorts of muesli bars, chocolate, ice cream, Chickadees, and those Tortilla Chips and the optional dips, but for me the Keropok is the Daddy of Them All. Do you know who your Daddy is?

Keropok is generally made out of fish or prawns, which is massaged with flour and a bit of salt. It is then either drawn out into a shape similar to that of a sausage (kerepok lekor, second above) or cut in to strips (keropop keping, as first above) or round in shape, although this is less common these days, or keropok sira (chili-flavoured fish). If the ingredient is prawn then the keropok will tend to have a tinge of red on the sides and the cream will have splotches of red here and there, or sometimes uniformly red (as seen below). The ones made of fish are more commonly a dark to light dull brown to a quite light grey depending on the fish used.

The popular one is uses an ikan parang base which is more or less like the one up there (in the first picture) although sometimes it could be lighter. The one I adore is the one made out of ikan tamban where they pretty much throw the whole thing in which causes it to be 'gatal'. A direct translation of that word is 'itchy' does not quite capture the sensation which is more akin to a very faint tingling sensation around the mouth, as if you have eaten chillies but without the spice. It's also the cheaper one and to my chagrin it is not the type vendors normally stock.

Although I am pleased to say I have found my future supplier for the goods stuff on what I call the Keropok Stretch around the Cherating area. If you love keropok, you have to check this place out. I think it's about a few kilometers of road around the Cherating area where many of the stalls dot both the sides of the road. They've got freshly made keropok lekor for ya, with their own special house sauce with the usual teh tarik, etc. and the bigger ones tend to have a slightly wider range than the mere stall. They also have more further up in Terengganu around the Dungun area as well. I am happy to find that sometimes some of them take pride in making their own chili sauce. Although it must be said, this stuff goes especially with the Lingam Chili Sauce too. Oh baby. Now that's a piece of heaven right there when you combine the two. Although to my personal taste, I think the Lingam goes better with the Tamban or Parang but not so well with the prawn based ones, there's a sense of spice and urgency in taste with the former as compared to the rather uncomfortable taste in between.

As with all snacks it can be eaten any time but the advantage here is that this snack is in one way healthy for you. As I've mentioned earlier, keropok is mainly just fish and flour. And you can tell how much flour there is in the keropok after you've fried it. The harder it is, the more flour there is in the mix. But the point here is that we all know how fish is good for us right? If ya don't, click on the link. And if you eat enough, why it could serve as a meal. The flour takes the place of the rice, if you are so rice inclined as I thoughly and unashamedly am. So you can eat as much of it as you like without feeling to guilty as compared to eating chocolate, ice cream or those other more processed junk food like Twisties, Chickadees, etc. (or so I try to convince myself). And please, be sure not to confuse this with the papadam with is made out of chickpea flour, generally a yellow or light yellow, and oval or circular in shape. Below is an illustration of one of the genrally types of papadams. So if you still get it wrong after this, may the curse of the white pubes be upon thee sorta thang.

Demahacracy - the warped democracy

 

Shortly  after I published my open reply to Dr Mahathir on the Salleh Abas saga, Justice Ian Chin made his shocking revelation about how Dr Mahathir had allegedly threatened Judges at a conference. Justice Ian Chin further alleged that he was sent to a "boot camp".  According to His Lordship, the boot camp was without doubt  "an attempt to indoctrinate those attending the boot camp to hold the view that the government interest as being more important than all else when we are considering our judgement”.

Dr Mahathir of course denied the accusation. A startling revelation however came out from his denial. He somewhat candidly revealed that Judges were actually made to attend "courses on Tatanegara or National Creed at work camps". For ease of reference, the followings are what he actually said:

"As for the boot camp, our military forces may have it. But what we did have were courses on "Tata Negara" or "National Creed" at work camps. At such courses the speakers try to explain Malaysia's political system with particular reference to the BN concept, ethics and moral values and democracy in Malaysia. Participants included civil servants, corporate leaders, politicians and university staff. I suppose judges also attended. For three to five days the participants stayed at the camps and followed certain programs. This included getting up very early in the morning (for prayers for Muslims), physical exercises and many hours of lectures. One of the chores was to wash your own dirty plates after a simple meal. When I gave talks at these work camps I too wash my dirty dishes. It was part of leadership by example. Thousands of people from all walks of life attended these work camps. There were hardly any complaints. I was told by a judge who was in the same batch as Chin J that he absconded before the course was over. Perhaps he did not like getting up early and washing his own dirty plates".

How very interesting. I have hinted in my open reply to Dr Mahathir that he had at least misunderstood the doctrine of separation of powers. To ask Judges to attend a work camp together with civil servants, corporate leaders, politicians and university staffs where they are made to hear lectures on "Malaysia's political system with particular reference to the BN concept, ethics and moral values and democracy in Malaysia" is demeaning to say the least. Quite why Judges needed to be lectured on "BN's concept, ethics and moral values" at a work camp together with civil servants and others is just beyond me. Call it by any other name, but to me, it sounds like an indoctrination to the ways of the BN in general, and UMNO in particular. To lump the Judges in a basket together with civil servants is in itself a display of complete lack of understanding, if not education, of the doctrine of separation of powers and democracy in general. In fact, it is arguably contemptuous of our judicial system.

I can imagine days will come when Judges are made to attend "work camp" organised by Bank Negara together with CEOs of CIMB, Maybank, Public Bank et al where they will be lectured on "Malaysia's banking system with particular reference to BN concept, ethics and moral values and Islamic banking in Malaysia". Or how about a work camp organised by Polis Di Raja Malaysia where Judges will be lectured on "Malaysia's detention without trial law with particular reference to BN concept, ethics and moral values". 

To make it more interesting, let's have a role reversal. May I suggest that the Chief Justice invite the cabinet Ministers, politicians (present ones and also retired ones), UMNO leaders (present and past), corporate leaders and civil servants to a work camp at Istana Keadilan (ooops...sorry, it should be Palace Of Justice) where they could be lectured on "Malaysia's democracy system with particular reference to the doctrine of separation of powers and the concept of ethical leadership and moral values in government practices". I am sure Dr Mahathir would be pleased to attend and learn something entirely new. Or would he abscond after the first day?

A couple of days later, a former Supreme Court Judge, Azmi Kamarudin, who was one of the Judges who were suspended by Dr Mahathir in the 1988 judiciary debacle, was quoted by Malaysiakini as saying that Dr Mahathir had wanted to control the judiciary. He was reported as saying:

"I felt that he wanted to rule like a dictator. He (Mahathir) was already the head of legislature (and) he wanted the judiciary to be under his control as well. That was his intention."

The ex Supreme Court Judge also said that Dr Mahathir had wanted to amend Article 121 of the Federal Constitution. For the benefit of readers who are not familiar with the Federal Constitution, Article 121 of the Federal Constitution deals with the establishment of the Courts in Malaysia. It also spells out the powers of the Courts in general term. I will touch on this later in this post.

Meanwhile, Salleh Abas, while accepting the ex gratia payment from the present administration, in an obvious reference to the 1988 judicial debacle, said in a video interview with Malaysiakini, that "if you destroy the judiciary, you destroy democracy, and if you destroy democracy, you usher in a dictatorship, clothed with the cloth of rule of law and justice, but in reality, it is like a hungry tiger, clothed in a lamb skin".

Dr Mahathir was obviously unhappy with the statements made by Azmi and Salleh. Of course he had to response. In true Mahathir fashion, he let go a reply which is as ridiculous as it is ludicrous. According to him, the Judges were bribed to say bad things about him!

Well, I should have prefaced this post by saying that I am not paid by any party to write this article. Just for the avoidance of any doubt.

Anyway, what can we expect from Dr Mahathir other than senseless vitriolic nowadays. The man is desperate for support for his own twisted agenda. He has tried criticising and he failed. He has tried to appear at the UMNO General Assembly last year but he was thwarted, wrongly or rightly. He has left UMNO altogether and he failed to get any supports except from his wife and one of his sons. Even his own son, Mukhriz, defies him. And now he  tries blogging. From the comments he is getting, we all could conclude that he is rather loved by his readers. In fact, "love" is a understatement. "Idolise" is more like it. And guess what, he is also on Facebook nowadays. Like, oh wow!

And so, it would appear, at least in Mahathirsville that Azmi Kamaruddin and Salleh Abas have been bribed by the present government to say bad things about him. But history never lies. History is replete with facts. And facts are undeniable. Because they are there for all to see. Let's all of us look at the facts and decide whether Dr Mahathir and his government had in fact amended Article 121 of the Federal Constitution. And if so, what was, and still is, the nett result of such amendment?

Article 121 of the Federal Constitution deals with the establishment of the Court in Malaysia. Not too long ago, in a land where everybody knows their respective rights, Article 121 used to look like this:

Article 121:

(1)     Subject to Clause (2) the judicial power of the Federation shall be vested into High Courts of co- ordinate jurisdiction and status, namely-

(a) one of the States of Malaya, which shall be known as the High Court in Malaya and shall have its principle registry in Kuala Lumpur; and

(b) one in the States of Sabah and Sarawak, which shall be known as the High Court in Borneo and shall have its principle registry at such place in the States of Sabah and Sarawak as the Yang di- Pertuan Agong may determine; (emphasis added by me).

Note above that the original Article 121 vests judicial powers with the High Court. That means judicial powers is within the realm of the High Courts and this is provided for by the Federal Constitution, which is the mother of all the laws in our country. A part of the judicial powers which is very important in any democratic country within the Commonwealth is the power of judicial review. This is the power of the High Courts to review any decision taken by the government against its citizen. There are 4 powers of judicial review, namely, certiorari (the power to reverse and quash any government decision); mandamus (the power to compel the government to do certain act); prohibition (the power to stop the government from doing certain act) and habeas corpus (the power to order the production and release of a citizen who has been wrongly detained). It doesn't take a genius to note that these powers are essential in order the check any exercise of powers or abuse thereof by any government. Without this powers, the government would be in a position to do anything it likes. There wouldn't be any check and balances. This is definitely the bulwark of any democracy.

Even in non-Commonwealth country, judicial powers are vested in the Courts. America for example has the same provision in Article iii of its Constitution. It provides as follows:

"The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish… The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution".

In my open reply to Dr Mahathir, I had referred to the case of the 2 journalists of the Asian Wall Street Journal, whose work permits were canceled by Dr Mahathir because he was obviously not happy with what they were writing about him and his government. The 2 journalists filed for judicial review. The Supreme Court held that Dr Mahathir's cancellation of their work permits were illegal and void. That case is an illustration of how the Courts exercised its judicial powers to check the exercise of powers by the government (or in legal parlance, the executive).

Dr Mahathir of course did not like this power very much. During Operasi Lalang for example, the Court had also issued a writ of habeas corpus for Karpal Singh to be produced in Court and released. Dr Mahathir of course viewed this as a transgression by the judiciary of his executive powers when what the Court was merely doing was to carry out its Constitutional functions of providing check and balance against the powers of the executive. This Dr Mahathir did not like one bit.

He, or rather, his government, amended Article 121 of the Federal Constitution to achieve his control over the judiciary. Article 121 now reads like this:

Article 121:

1) There shall be two High Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction and status, namely -

(a) one in the States of Malaya, which shall be known as the High Court in Malaya and shall have its principal registry at such place in the States of Malaya as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may determine; and

(b) one in the States of Sabah and Sarawak, which shall be known as the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak and shall have its principal registry at such place in the States of Sabah and Sarawak as the Yang di- Pertuan Agong may determine;

(c)(Repealed),

and such inferior courts as may be provided by federal law and the High Courts and inferior courts shall have such jurisdiction and powers as may be conferred by or under federal law. (emphasis added by me).

So, it can be seen  that the Courts  now only have powers as specified by the federal law. Judicial powers are no more vested in the Courts. What it simply means is that the Courts now do not have the power of judicial review unless it is specifically said so by any law passed by the parliament (or the legistlature).  And who controlled the parliament during Dr Mahathir's rule? I will not waste my time in answering that question.

So, Dr Mahathir and his government controlled the legislature. Dr Mahathir and his party also controlled the executive. And the Federal Constitution was amended to provide that the Courts only have such powers as shall be conferred by the legislature. So, indirectly, the Courts can only do things which are allowed to be done by Dr Mahathir and his government who occupy the legistlature.

What is that called? It is called Demahacracy.

 

 

Okin of the Twilight Kingdom: Maro (Part 4)

Warm. Cozy. Tucked in. Ready for sleep to claim me. It was the best of times which meant the worse of times was just around the corner. Though I could feel the hardness of my wooden bed through the razor thin mattress, gently, ever so gently they were turning into a sheaf of feathers, carrying me up into oblivion. When out of the darkness there was an ominous gentle rapping at my door. Instantly, I silently and quickly made went to the door and opened it. Beautiful Juna, stood before me in her dark brown robes holding a flickering candle. Her eyes were bright and large like the moon, although tonight the spectre of fear shone from them.

'I am sorry to trouble you so late, Maro. The Elder has bid me to ask that you be quickly dressed for a long and difficult journey. You are to pack as lightly as you can carrying only the essential. You are also to wear the karank. Once you are done, you are to meet him at the Temple,' she said quietly though clearly, her voice trembling with fear. 'Oh Maro, I have never seen or heard of The Elder so distraught. And now you are to leave us.'
Ah, Beautiful Juna! The concern in your voice does fill my heart with courage and elation. So long have I admired you from afar, afraid to speak my love for you, for fear that I may offend; for you are bethrothed to another. We had caught each other's glances every now and again, and confined ourselves to matters mundane, but now suddenly I had to know. Did she feel anything for me? Might it be more than mere friendship? It now became more important than my impending journey.
'Dear Juna, I am certain that my leave should not distress you.'
She made no move to my words though a tear escaped her glassy large eyes.
'Oh Maro! I am thoroughly distressed! I love you. I have always loved you. Now you are to leave perhaps never to come back! I feel so foolish now to keep my feelings for you, only to tell you now,' she cried as she suddenly hugged me tightly. 'Oh Maro, you may not return!'
I was complete. My heart instead of beating wildly became intsensely calm. Death could have claimed me. I would not have resisted. I held her finally in my arms, feeling her warmth, her softness against me.
'Is it so dangerous a journey?' I asked.

'Yes. I overheard a little just before I entered the room. I think you are to take the Obayamaashi to Great Ankura in Suissen. The journey there is long and dangerous. From what I heard Great Ankura is more dangerous than the journey there Maro!'
'I have heard similarly. But I care nothing for that now. You have spoken of your love for me. So let me now confess that I too have loved you from afar, like a poet the moon. But what of your betrothal?'
'I shall never be with him so long as you dwell in my love, Maro.'
'Then I shall return to claim our love.'
Her grip around me tightened as she sobbed into my chest. Finally, her sobbing stopped and she looked up at me with her wet tear streaked face.
'This is beyond our love, my love. And already I have detained you too long.'

Strangers in the House

Even as I walk through these familiar corridors, I see a few unfamiliar corners and nooks that I have not visited, or escaped my notice every now and again. There are those doors that I open often and others not. There are those I keep open because the passages are used so often. And there are those that I have yet to open even once. I am afraid of some of them. Though some of them disinterest me too. Some I feel I never have to open. The funny thing though is that with all of them the more time that passes, the more I become fearful of opening them, afraid of what I might or might not confront.

Silly boy, a soft menacing raspy voice whispers in my ear, what makes you think this flimsy door can keep me in? And what makes you think I haven't been out? What makes you think I have not entered your room and held your neck in my jaws, feeling the warmth pulsating through your veins, had you one bite from death? The door is an illusion, my boy.

That's what I hear in the intense silence that envelopes me every time I stand in front of those doors I haven't opened as I contemplate whether to open them. There is never anybody in the long corridors to my left or right.

Behind one once, I heard a raging yell roar over the thudding sound of something being beaten when occasionally a whimper may bubble up only to disintegrate upon surfacing. Behind another, I heard measured deliberate footsteps which never seemed to stop or turn away because the volume of footsteps did not decrease no matter how many steps were taken. Behind another, I heard a loud heartbeat beating amidst Beethoven's Fifth.

Who or what are these and how did they get in? What are they doing in my house?

Or do I need to imagine them?

The Beast

He's a right bastard, I tell you. Sometimes he can be logical, calm, cool and so between the two of us, the more reasonable and level headed, the firm restraining hand holding me back from rushing into where even angels fear to tread. And yet sometimes, he can be the worse of the two, scheming twisted and dangerous thoughts and wicked suggestions, tantalizing me with their possibilities. It's during those times that I feel he harbours murderous intent for me, though I am certain it shall not be his hands that carries out the deed. Though we hardly speak to each other, for the most part we both know each other only too well; save for that bit of darkness in our soul of which no one will ever know of save for ourselves. He calls that 'The Beast' and tells me that we all have our own Beasts. He is smiling as he tells me this, as if in relief. Don't let it consume you, he cautioned cheerily.

I asked him once, How is it we know each other so well and communicate almost telepathically, and yet are so different in thought?
That is not the question, he replied.
What is then? I asked back.
It is, How do we deal with situations given our predicament? he asked.
But I wanted to ask the question, I replied. Upset.
If you don't know the question, you cannot ask, he answered.

missing the concept 1.0

warning: cheapskate crossing!

I mean, wtf? One of the richest man in Malaysia. Owned an airline. A cheap flight airline, albeit. Owned a hotel line. And yet he enjoys 75% discount on economy seats and 50% discount on business and first class seats from MAS. Like, duh? Fucking cheapskate!

What? Just because he runs a cheap-flight-no-frill airlines, he would be entitled to cheap flights from other airlines also, is it? What about me? I don't get finking discount from MAS. Why? Because I don't look like a cheapskate in my jeans and a fucking red cap, is it? Fuck you!

And to the shithead in MAS who granted this character Tuney Fernandez the privilege of these discounts, are you out of your blinking mind? You should be tied up to a kitchen table, stretched, disemboweled and quartered! You fucking moron. Discounts should be granted to poor people. Not rich people. They don't need it. Grasp the concept please.

What is wrong with Malaysia? And I thought only Singaporean are kiasu.

Really Heavy Metal

No. This is not an outpouring in praise of the world's best and foremost adult illustrated science fiction/fantasy magazine to which I am a subscriber. If you are adventurous in your graphic novel forays, then this is the place to be. Cutting edge. I concede that not everything in there is good, and I will not go on save to say that each issue is a treasure chest with many true gems worth more than the gold, silver and copper it lay beside. But let us not forget some of the greats that honed and displayed their craft in that magazine such as Frank Frazetta, Moebius, Enki Bilal, Richard Corben Pepe Moreno, and H.R. Giger would do covers for it. Muahs. But no. This is about music.

I'm not terribly educated about music. Far from the academic Art is (If this is your first time here, I humbly beg of you to check out Art's awesomevoyages of rock and roll music history and scintillating analysis here: American Pie Revisited and Shine On You Crazy Diamond) but I know what I like even if I am not always able to explain to you why I like it. And it took me a long time to get to this stage of my life with regard to listening to music: to try finding something worth while in a song no matter what the song, to enjoy it for what it is, to not be overly concerned about what people may think of my musical tastefulness and finally to keep broadening my listening experience and expanding my musical appreciation vocabulary from the only 2 that I am capable of at the moment: 'Wah, damn good man!' and 'Eyer, damn shit man!'

I have to say that the music that I have listened to since acquiring that attitude has broadened a great deal so much so that I am now enjoying music I never imagined I would like about oh 3 years ago such as Indonesian bands (4 out of the 6 slots in my car are Indobands right now which is amazing for someone whose Malay is so craporama) and Latin American bands (although I have been quite into Cuban music for some time now right before the Buena Vista Social Club became huge! and caught them with Omara Portuendo when they hit KL some years back and threw an immensely satisfying show for all of those fortunate enough to attend).

But this liberal, reasonable and worldly attitude comes to a crashing halt where it concerns what I know it as: Really Heavy Metal (RHM). You know the one where you hear chugging guitars riffing out a wall of sound with the chap on lead guitar having a good plank spanking session there by himself, the drummer smashing away a steady pounding relentless beat and there's a 'singer' who screams, roars or could be belching the National Budget for this year for all I know and who tries to induce whiplash by whipping their head back and forth or doing the seizure thing with their head. And most of them will have huge heads of hair. Not stuff like Metallica, Led Zep, and the like. Those bands bother with the lyrics and melody.

I wanted to like it. I tried to like it. I really did. A family friend of mine once said to me, if somebody cooks something for me and tells me it is nice or good, in good faith of course, I will eat it no matter how disgusting it looks. That pretty much sums up my attitude towards music (and yeah food as well!). So I tried. But I just couldn't get it. I mean in terms of precision and tightness, there was no doubt about it. They could come to a grinding halt even at full chug but there was no subtlety. There is not much in the way of texture either. Lyrics were merely a sorry excuse for screaming something. One of my good friends is into it. He told me it was about the feeling. Perhaps. I guess. Hmm. Hee. Haw. I didn't get any feeling except, I need to listen to some good music fast!

I used to be a bit chuffed about it. Silly. I know. It was the whole 'if other people can, why can't I get it?' sort of thing. But I've come to terms with it. I'm not too bothered about the fact that it's harder to get into heavy metal as opposed to say someone like Britney Spears (she's got great producers) or Mariah Carey (she's got talent for the pop song and massive tits, so she must be ... oh sorry and a great voice, so she's got the goods) or even Take That (you gotta like 'Pray' at least). And I'm not bothered that you may catch me lip synching and doing those backstreet moves too or that I can't play as far as those really heavy metal bastards. And you know what? I've reached a certain measure of confidence in my tastes and appreciation of music that I am now able to say with utmost confidence that I abhor really heavy metal and if it is to be classified as music then it should be thrown into the category of burping and farting, because it sounds little better than that.

The unintended effects of the technological revolution

Technology makes the difficult convenient. And then makes the convenient effortless. To the point it becomes shameful. Allow me to illustrate for you what I mean, let's take my Ipod (Classic, 160GB if ya has to knowtz), Teri. Now, Teri tells me she has 9576 items on her at the moment which guarantees me 59.5 days straight worth of entertainment. There is going to be virtually no repeat of any of that entertainment either. And all that takes up a mere 46GB off Teri (which means I've got another 120GB of entertainment goodness to go!). She's hardly breaking a sweat! Just look at her. Still looking, all slim and sexy. mmm... I love it when she wears her skin tight outfit. Oh baby, who's your... uh, sorry about that. If you had your own Teri, you'd understand. Anyway, where was I?

Oh yeah, Teri has more ways than a real pro of of keeping me entertained. First there's what she's also renowned for - it's music playing capabilities and podcasts. If that doesn't do it for you, she can play movies and video for ya know on her bigger bust. She's built for widescreen too. So damn considerate Apple is. And if all that is just too much for you, there's also photos storing and viewing capabilities. You can also hook her up to an AV system and have her do a full blown presentation on a wall. And if you like to fondle your Teri a lot you can also play the games they give as courtesy like: iPod Quiz, Klondike , and Vortax.Okay, I know it sounds like I'm trying to pimp my Teri but that ain't it. Na'ah. Not my baby!

But the point I'm trying to make here is the numerous ways this gadget can keep us occupied by entertaining us visually and aurally. And you can take her any where. Even your mama won't mind. And when I mean anywhere. I mean, I could now do all these things while I'm taking a shit, or discreetly when I'm in the middle of a boring family dinner (okay your mama may mind on this one), or when perhaps I'm lying down in the back of a car or in the middle of the jungle (if your battery lasts).

Now any 'loose' time can be entertained. You shall never be bored. You shall never be without opportunity to occupy yourself. Entertainment is a click away. As long as the battery lasts, anyway. And now more and more phones are being able to do this. My Mobile/PDA Phone can do all this. I can play a movie off Teri's SD Card. Some cars ICE (that's In-Car Entertainment) can do that too. In the future maybe you could play it off your stomach or your girlfriend's arse (if it's large enough). Can you just imagine how far we've come from the past when we used to live in caves, draw pictures of hunters and mammoths on its walls, shit at a big tree 20 meters from our cave and make stone flints? Damn far! If you think it's not far enough hand me that 3000 word essay of yours. What I'd really like to know though is what they must think of us, if they could comprehend us.

Other thoughts on Love

Some people think that it is enough to be in love with someone and for that someone to love us back. That finding someone to love is the hard part. That once you have achieved that the rest is supposed to take care of itself. That the intensity of love for each other is the most important. That its riding into the sunset from there on. As with all things that are supposed, it is not like that.

A very important component left out of the common idea of love is learning and understanding how to love someone. Each person has a unique way they need to be loved. Some need to be seized by their lover and die in their arms. Some need to be teased playfully. Some need to feel the heat of jealousy. Some need to be in complete agreement. Some find contentment with a peck on the cheek once a day.

Whatever that way be, you must find it. Your love depends on it. Once you have found it, possess it and walk upon it so often until it is only you that travels upon it. On doing this would you would be able to discover, identify and turn out any brigands upon it. If you do not find their way of love, then your love will not be able to reach your lover's heart. Your impoverished lover would be damned to only seeing your love as if through a bulletproofed window, unable to feel its heat, from the outside looking in.

Of Sex Objects

Betty Paige
World Renowned Sex Object

There are some women that vent about how derogatory it is for women to be treated as sex objects. I have for some time found this terribly annoying and am hereby submitting my riposte. Now a distinction needs first be drawn between a 'sex object' and 'an object for sex'. These are 2 different things. The latter is generally comprised of those offering sexual services either voluntarily or as a result of duress. They transform themselves into an object to be used for the sexual pleasure of others, to which their own sexual pleasure is of no consequence. A sex object is often mistaken for an object for sex. So what then is a sex object? It is someone who is able to symbolize not just sex but sexuality and sexiness.

Though a person often has to be beautiful/handsome or cum-in-your-pants HAWT, this singular feature does not a sex object make. More is necessarily required. I've seen lots of nova hot but clueless cardboard women. These women are lacking an important quality: sensuality (say it with me now), which intensifies, deepens, broadens, and infuses one's natural beauty (being what it is, not necessarily CIYPH) with sexuality. Just so you get an idea of what I'm talking about, go find some plants that have not yet been watered (better yet find a garden). Now ejaculate water on to it and take a hard look at it again. Do you see how fresh it looks? Do you notice how it looks almost horny as it drips with fresh cool water on its tender leaves? Do you see how the branches and trunk glisten in the sunlight, as if cleansed and ready for some action? If you don't you shouldn't be reading this. Go back and sleep with your parents you waste of carbon material. And if you do, that's what I'm talking about.

And in that sensuality is firmness to the softness, there is a familiarity at once both intensely familiar and intimate and yet at the same time distant and cool, there is an innocence to her coquettishness, there is a lover's touch in each social or friendly physical interaction, there is provocation of your fantasies as much as it forces you to suppress it, there is maturity and confidence as there is ignorance and reticence. Sensuality can be honed or refined but one must first possess it. Yet it is uncommon and even those that possess it often know little about how to develop it. It is a condemnation of our culture and society that there is now so little sensuality and too much sex. The difference can be illustrated thus: a striptease is sensuality, whipping off your clothes as if jumping into a river to save someone's life is sex. And there is just too many people jumping into the river. The problem is that they ain't saving anybody!

And because women who are able to combine raw beauty with refined sensuality are so uncommon, they should be celebrated and be offered a spot in Playboy instead of being dissed by their own sex. I mean let's face it, how many of us reading here have really come across a sex object or has ever been described as one? (If you are a sex object reading this, please email me immediately) If somebody told me I was a sex object, I'd reply thank you, ma'am/miss, but if it's a he then it'll be no thank you, sir (with nasty look). And then I'd immediately tell all my friends about it but will in all probability be laughed at by them and be accused as being delusional and making the whole thing up (I didn't you bastards!). So object not to the sex object. Because when you do you make an object out of u and me.

The Tun Salleh Saga - an open reply to Dr Mahathir

Dr Mahathir, I read with considerable interest your blog on the Tun Salleh Saga. To a certain degree, I must confess, I am happy for you have obviously regained your memory after having a momentary lapse of the same during the proceeding of the Royal Commission on the Linggam tape.

I must confess that I was not moved to post anything about the Tun Salleh issue as everybody and his dog has apparently written about it. However, after having read your latest boot-leg version, I am compelled to write this reply, just to put things on record and proper perspective.

It is quite obvious that you have mastered the fine art of manipulation. When everything else fails, what better than to stoke racial sentiment in order to gain support. That was what you were doing in Johore Bahru recently when you quite irresponsible pointed out that the Malays are the ones who would lose out if the IDR project were to continue. You than quickly followed it up in Japan when you reminded the Malays to unite and be strong because, according to you, other races are now asking for many things and questioning Malay rights. Samuel Johnson's "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" would normally be a cliche to repeat, but in your case, I would make an exception. Just change the word "patriotism" to "racialism" and you would, hopefully, catch my drift.

When the issue of an apology to Salleh Abas was started by Zaid Ibrahim, I remember you were quoted as saying that Salleh Abas was sacked by the tribunal and so an apology should be sought from the tribunal. How very convenient of you DrM. Of course you had conveniently overlooked the fact that the tribunal was established at your advice as the then Prime Minister. And so now, in your blog, you have revealed the truth. The truth, according to you, is that the King had wanted Salleh Abas be removed because His Majesty was angry with Salleh Abas' letter complaining about His Majesty's renovation work. So, are you now blaming the King, may I ask?

That is the first question which came across my mind while reading your post. The second question is this. Since when have you become a royalist so much so that you were almost paralysingly subservient to the King? The King had wanted Salleh Abas, the Lord President, sacked because of a letter over some noises made in a renovation work, and you followed it up with a tribunal established under our primary law, the Federal Constitution? You wanted us to believe that you, the then Prime Minister, the very same Prime Minister who amended the Federal Constitution to curb the powers of the King and the Malay Rulers, had agreed to establish the tribunal at the behest of the King? Since when has Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the fearless Prime Minister, who took away the necessity for Royal assents to any bill of law before it could effectively be the law of the country by amending the Federal Constitution, had suddenly be so subservient to the King in relation to the sacking of Salleh Abas?

The third question is glaring to people in the know. It is of course not there for every supporters of yours to see, as we could well surmise from the majority of the comments made in your blog on the issue. The question is this. Why was it that Salleh Abas was not charged over THAT letter? If what you said was true, why wasn't Salleh Abas charged for writin such a letter to the King and carbon copying it to all the Rulers? WHY? If the King had wanted Salleh Abas sacked for being rude to His Majesty, why is it that Salleh Abas not charged for being rude to our King? W.H.Y.??? Why is it that only now, 20 years later, suddenly, this letter has appeared and become an issue? Is it a case of you forgetting about that letter in 1988, just as you have forgotten about some events during the Linggam tape hearing, and suddenly rediscovering your memory last week about the same letter? Coincidently, your former secretary, Matthias Chang, has spoken about this letter in his blog sometime in the past weeks. Coincidently, I wrote.

By the way, during the constitutional crisis caused by your beligerent attitude towards the King and the Malay Rulers, I remember the state mass media, the newspapers and RTM, had even belittled the King and the Malays Rulers. The whole propaganda machines were used to smear the King and the Malay Rulers. Pictures of their palaces and mansions were shown on TV and in the newspapers. Stories about their wrongdoings were splashed in newspapers. Even Sultan of Kedah's house in Penang did not escape your propaganda machine. RTM would proceed to air old Malay movies about how stupid the Malay Rulers in ancient days were. Films like Nujum Pak Belalang, Hang Tuah and Dang Anum were aired just to shape the people's thoughts about how bad the King and the Malay Rulers were or could be. And yet, you now want us to believe that you were just doing what the King had wanted you to do by establishing the tribunal against Salleh Abas? Stretching your argument that Salleh Abas had to go because the King said so, why didn't you sack yourself, your whole cabinet and everybody else who had then partaken in the whole process of smearing the good name and dignity of our King and the Malay Rulers? Why only Salleh Abas?

DrM, sometimes, one's stupidity is most glaring in one's thought that everybody else is stupid!

You then mention in your blog that it was your opinion that Salleh Abas had committed wrongdoings and that he was not fit to be a Judge. If that was the case, may I respectfully ask why is it that you had not deemed it fit to establish a tribunal against a certain Lord President who was photographed with a certain lawyer oversea? Wouldn't that constitute a wrongdoing? That fact was, I am sure, known to you as it was widely discussed in the media during your premiership. It was even investigated by the ACA. Or how about the ACA investigation which showed that a certain lawyer had written a certain judgment for a certain Judge? Wouldn't that be a wrongdoing which would, if substantiated, render the Judge unfit to continue be a Judge? Why only Salleh Abas? Why not these Judges? Or is it a case of you having forgotten what they did just as you have forgotten several events during the Linggam tape proceedings, again?

You now charged, as you have always charged, that the judiciary, had interfered in the administration of the country. Your disdain for the law, lawyers and judiciary is well documented Dr M. I remember clearly in one speech, you liken the lawyers to vultures. But of course, you would now say it was all in jest. Your contempt for the law and judiciary, every time the judiciary made a decision against you or your government is almost peerless. You would deem such decision as interference with the administration. Although you know that the administration consists of 3 different, but essential, arms, namely, the legislature, executive and judiciary, you failed miserably to understand their respective functions and duties. The phrase "check and balance" was missing from your administrative dictionary which was probably reprinted with an express instruction from you to delete the same.

Thus, history will show that you were so upset and angry with the judiciary that you had instigated another Constitutional amendment to take away "judicial powers" from the judiciary! May I point out Dr M, that Malaysia, would be the only country in the whole Commonwealth ( I say Commonwealth because I am not accustomed to non-Commonwealth systems) whose judiciary does not have judicial powers unless the legislature says so. Coincidentally of course, who controlled the legislature? That was, and I surmise, still is, your idea of a democracy.

Remember what I said above about stupidity? Let me repeat it. One's stupidity is most glaring in one's thought that everybody else is stupid!

You some what denies that the sacking of Salleh Abas had anything to do with the UMNO 11 appeal which was then fixed by Salleh Abas to be heard by a full bench of 9 Judges on 13.6.1988. Events will show, at least on a balance of probability, otherwise. Salleh Abas was served with a letter of suspension on 27.5.1988. Abdul Hamid Omar became the Acting Lord President. I will come back to this character later in this post. On that very day, namely, 27.5.1988, on which Salleh Abas was suspended, Abdul Hamid Omar, as Acting Lord President, acting without any application by any party named in the UMNO 11 appeal, adjourned the appeal to a date to be fixed later. Why? For what reason? Why the haste? Nobody knows. That appeal was later fixed for hearing on 8.8.1988 before only 5 judges comprising of 3 Supreme Court Judges, including Abdul Hamid Omar himself and 2 High Court Judges. Not 9 as originally fixed by Salleh Abas. How could a valid decision by a Lord President, which was made prior to his suspension, be reversed by an Acting Lord President is quite beyond me or my intelect to comprehend, let alone answer. And quite why the appeal was to be heard by a corum of 3 Supreme Court Judges and 2 High Court Judges, instead of all Supreme Court Judges, is also beyond my tiny brain's ability to understand. I am sure you wouldn't remember this fact Dr M. Otherwise, I am sure you would have stated it in your post. I am sure.

If the sacking had nothing to do with the UMNO 11 appeal, why, may I ask, is that the first official act of the Acting Lord President was to postpone the hearing of that particular appeal? Why did he then proceed to overturn a valid act of the Lord President, who was then still a Lord President, albeit the fact that he was suspended? Why?

Salleh Abas made a statement to the press after his suspension. In the statement, he alluded to a meeting on 25.5.1998 with you, in the presence of the Chief Secretary, Salehuddin Mohamad, where you allegedly told him (Salleh Abas) that he was to be removed because, among others, of his bias in the UMNO 11 appeal. Salehuddin Mohamad was a witness at the tribunal. He said he was taking notes during the said meeting. While he could remember writing down only 2 matters in the note book during the meeting, namely, Salleh Abas' speech and his letter to the King (about your attack of the judiciary and not about the renovation issue), he only managed to say that he cannot remember that you had mentioned the UMNO case during the meeting when asked by the tribunal members. If he was so sure that he only took down notes about the aforesaid 2 matters in his notebook, why then he could not EXPRESSLY deny that you had mentioned about the UMNO case during the said meeting? Why can't he remember? And, in a show of embarrassing shallowness on the part of the tribunal, it FAILED to ask Salehuddin to produce the notebook! Why? It would appear that your Chief Secretary was clearly suffering from the same disease as yours namely, partial and momentary lapse of memory.

On the balance of probability therefore, your contention that the sacking of Salleh Abas did not have anything to do with the UMNO case under appeal is flawed, to say the least. Why don't you state all these facts in your blog Dr M? And let the people who read it to judge the matter after having been fed with al relevant facts. Not with facts which you think are relevant. Not with facts which you choose to remember for your own purpose and objectives.

I have reserved my comment about Abdul Hamid Omar. Now is the time form me to say something about him. This was the man who was effectively Salleh Abas' subordinate. He became Acting Lord President when Salleh Abas was suspended. He was also next in line to be the Lord President, in the event Salleh Abas was sacked. History will show that he did replace Salleh Abas after his sacking. How could he then head the tribunal? He was obviously conflicted out from being in the tribunal. Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done. Haven't you heard of that? Or have you forgotten about it? Or is it a case that you did not really care?

Salleh Abas was then charged, among others, for writing a letter to the King dated 26.3 1988. For the benefit of those readers who don't really know the facts, this was not the letter complaining about the renovation. As I had said it, the renovation letter was never mentioned in any of the charges. The letter dated 26.3.1988 was a letter by Salleh Abas to the King to inform the King that Dr M had been attacking the judiciary. I will not touch on the merit or demerit of this letter. But what Dr M had failed to realise, or rather, what Dr M had ignored was the fact that this letter was written by Salleh Abas after all the Judges had a meeting on 25.3.1988. Even the Chairman of the tribunal, the aforesaid Abdul Hamid Omar, was present during the said meeting. In more ways than one, the said letter was a collective result of the Judges' meeting, including that of Abdul Hamid Omar, the Chairman of the tribunal. Two questions arise here Dr M. Firstly, stretching your contention that Salleh Abas had to be removed because of that letter as well as the renovation letter to its own logical conclusion, why didn't you suspend all the Judges who attended the meeting of 25.3.1988 and institute the same proceeding, with a view of dismissing all of them? That would be its reasonable conclusion as the letter was a collective result. Secondly, how could Abdul Hamid Omar, be a part of the tribunal, let alone its Chairman when he was obviously a potential witness? But then again, the 2nd question is borne out of a legal point, and so I don't expect you to understand it, let alone grasp it.

Allow me to also set out the exact facts and events around the same time Salleh Abas was charged. In 1986, you, as Home Minister cancelled the work permit of 2 Asian Wall Street Journal journalists in Malaysia. They brought the matter to the Court and the Supreme Court held that your action was illegal and therefore invalid. You were upset. IN TIME magazine (issue of 24.11.1986), you expressed your displeasure. Contempt proceedings were brought against you by the opposition. You escaped as the proceedings were dismissed by the Court. However, the learned Judge remarked in his judgment that you were confused at the doctrine of separation of powers. Later, in a speech to law students, the same Judge said that the process of appointing senators should be by way of an election. You mistook, as usual, this speech as a challenge and interference in politics when all the learned Judge was doing was expressing his own personal opinion over a matter which was not entirely political but also legal as well. Of course you then had to accuse "certain Judges" as interfering with politics. You then began a series of unwarranted attacks against the judiciary at a level and intensity as yet unseen in Malaysian history. What would you do if you were Salleh Abas, the Lord President? Take all the attacks lying down while waiting for pension?

You failed to appreciate his duty as the Lord President. He was the chief of the judiciary, an essential branch of the country's administration system. AS much as you were the head of the executive, so was Salleh Abas the head of the judiciary. He had to defend the very institution which he then headed. He convened a meeting of Judges on 25.3.1988 and collectively they decided to write a letter to the King about all the attacks leveled against the judiciary. What was so wrong with that? Why, you wanted him to lodge a police report over the matter?

By the way, in the present climate when every other Malay politicain is trying to be more Islam than every other Malay and his pussy cats, you of course forgot to mention one of the charges against Salleh Abas in your blog for obvious reason. The charge was that Salleh Abas had advocated the acceptance of the Islamic legal system in Malaysia and had re-stated the law along Islamic legal principles with against the multi-racial and multi-religious character of our country. Why didn't you mention this in your blog? You forgot? Or is it simply a case of you being afraid of losing the Malay support among your Malay readers if that was published by you in your blog?

Dr M, I am not your supporter. Nor am I Anwar Ibrahim or Abdullah Badawi's supporter. I am a supporter of truth. In this matter, nobody would know the truth. But if you are persuading people that your version is the truth, I would at least, expect you to lay out the whole story. And let the people, and history, be the judge.

Do you know what the beauty of the Common Law (which we practise)? The beauty is that it is a set of law common to all the people. That means, when a matter is wrong or right, ultimately, the common people would know. The common people. Me, and your readers.

Kind regards,

Art Harun

Pre-Marital Sex

Note: All puns are intended unless notified otherwise. Definition: Navel Gazing categorizes 'sex' as the complete act of copulation until ejaculation (whether premature or mature) or orgasm (multiple or otherwise). So even if there's a whole lot of bed shaking but no crash, we won't count it (even though we'd be quite happy to watch or assist in the video recording). It also does not include foreplay no matter how heavy such as blow jobs, cunnilingus and any form of masturbation,(mutual or otherwise).

Every now and again some unsuspecting fool will ask me, 'Do you believe in pre-marital sex?' I always wonder about such people. Were they dropped on their head when they were young? I tell them, 'I don't just believe in it, I pray feverishly for it (optional: you stupid fool!)'.

Why they use the word 'believe' never ceases to baffle me. And what is there to 'believe' about pre-marital sex? It happens. It happens a lot. As it should. Except to people who want it most. ... And you know what, it's probably happening all over the world in all sorts of funky places as you are reading this - in some nearby secondary jungle, in some filthy public toilet, in the backseat of a car, on the bosses' office desk, at the 7th floor of an internal fire escape of a building. Not that I would know but those 3gp video clips that get passed around sure help verify this (so thank you all of you selfless exhibitionists in Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore, and occasionally the Middle East)! And that's just counting the humans.

Don't forget animals always have pre-marital sex because there's nobody to marry those poor godless things. Bloody sinful heathens that they are! It's bad enough that as compared to humans they are naked most of the time or have their pubes cover their whole body and can have a riotous bout of sex in public without having to worry about on lookers or the local state religious departments raiding them. So that they get lots of pre-marital sex (granted its the only kind) is quite unfair and smells like the big H putting one over us humans. Sure we get opposable thumbs and big brains but hey, them animals get only pre-marital sex (which I understand from my assiduous analysis of voluminous literature both fiction and non-fiction about this category of sex is the best of its kind as opposed to virgin sex [homosexual or heterosexual], post-marital sex and lousy sex). That's probably the only reason why the big H made animals incomprehensible to us because they would be lording it all over us. I mean, that's why birds sing, hyenas laugh, horses' neigh and cows moo. They're gloating. If we had lots of that, we'd be doing a lot more singing, laughing, neighing and uh... mooing.

If I could enact legislation as easily as I could some really kinky sex fantasy and then pass it as easily as I answer Nature's routine call, you would by now be governed by the Compulsory Pre-Marital Sex Act 2008. This sexcellent Act would require all couples seeking to be married to have sex about 4 weeks before their marriage registration or nikah date with their intended lifelong partner. You could do it with someone else but complications are very likely to arise.

The first 2 weeks is to be spent having lots of sex in as many ways they can think of. The remaining 2 weeks is for the couple to decide whether to go through with their mutual lifelong commitment. If they are virgins that is. If they are not then the first 2 weeks is an encouraged option, unless of course they had already boned their brains out earlier in their courtship. Then only the first week is compulsory. Both are then to fill in a form setting out what they enjoyed, what they want more of, what other positions they want to try, which public places they would like to enact those fonky positions and any suggestions on equipment which will have to thereafter be affirmed before a Commissioner of Oaths. That's right - statutory declarations will be compulsory and must be submitted to the newly formed Ministry of Sexual Pleasure and Sexuality, which I fully expected to be appointed as both First and Second Minister.

The reason for this very pressing Act is to firstly establish sexual affinity between the couple. Trust me when I tell you that you don't want to marry this hot hoochie mama only to discover that she likes eating the carpet after she takes one look at your lamp (and lamp shade, where applicable). Or once your clothes are off, she realizes that she actually likes guys with lots of hair, especially on their back or ass (the disgusting bastards!). Or that she dislikes the smell of your body odour around your privies and needs to wear a gas mask to give you the Australian kiss. Or that he screams excitedly, 'I won! I won!' when he comes 2 minutes after he sticks in her. Loser.

Secondly, it is to ensure sexual compatibility in terms of performance and interests. Sure you may have the affinity but do you want to do the same things, the same positions? I mean, if you like only straightforward missionary sex (you uncreative bastard!) and she can only get going when you have a 12" spiked dildo up your ass, you got a problem. How big the problem is depends entirely on size of dildo and how roughly she manipulates it. Or perhaps she may have this awful habit of pulling out her magazine to read while you're 3 minutes in. It's not uncommon okay! The trouble with modern women is everything is a job and sex is their 5 minute power nap break. So you definitely wanna check this stuff out lest you be prepping for your bout of sexual dalliance by arranging the magazines on the bed. Loser.

Thirdly but not the least important, is to gauge your future partner's sexual desire not just for you but for sex as well. I know for a fact that there are a race of people walking the earth that have no interest in sex whatsoever. Though they may indulge in it 3 or 4 times in their life time, they could quite comfortably and calmly do without it. They sound human, they look human, hell they even eat what we do but don't be fooled my friend. Don't be fooled for a second.

They are fucking aliens. Only aliens don't like sex and well filmed and acted porn. And no they are probably not from Uranus (you immature bastard!). You don't want to tie the knot only to realize you've got to tie up your space shuttle as well. That first 2 weeks (or week depending on which is applicable to you) is therefore very important. These aliens may fool us for the 1st week but their alien inhibition cannot hold out that long provided inflict awesome bouts of fornication upon them. I know this because Pentagon knows this and have yet to declassify the documents on alien visitation but watch out for it in 2024.

Now that you know why you need me to be Prime Minister of Malaysia, please vote wisely in the next elections. I'll be in one of those independent parties with a strong sexual policy for government. So now go out there and register to vote and convert some of them aliens. They're taking over the world as we know it. And if you're an alien reading this, do us all a favour - go fuck yourself.

Barely Legal

Dungun, Terengganu
Malaysia
June 2008

A Songpiracy

This may sound very cliche but I think it is neither the Djs nor radio stations that decide the songs on the airplay list. The master controller is the universe. The universe could sense how you feel and it conspires to send you messages as to console you when you feel down and lift your spirits up so that you do not give up.

Now, I am not a prophet but if I were one, I think I would be the only prophet who receives his "wahyu" from songs.

I believe that the universe communicates through songs that you listen to. The conspiracy part comes when a particular song started to play at the time when you need it the most. The fact that the DJ played it was just a coincidence. It is all part of a bigger picture, a conspiracy that you cannot solve.

If you did not believe me, just turn on the radio and start listening. I believe for messages to come accross, your mind has to work with your heart and sub- conscience. Sometimes you notice these messages but sometimes the wrong ones get sent.Then you realised that you just lost your mind. hehe. So you turn on the radio, listen to songs. Slowly, your thoughts swim, stroke after stroke, defying winds and cruel waves. You drift away then water started to lead, you struggled and when you cried for help, words from the songs you listen to started playing in your head. How they make you feel depends on you. If you listened to them wrongly, you would drown and listening right, you would swim.

I remember feeling very depressed a couple of years ago. Alright, so I am depressed by default but circa April to July 2005, I was really down, lower and deeper than anything else that is low and deep in this world. It was the most terrible feeling because I was heartbroken. Work too was no consolotion.

For the whole of that period, no song could pick me up. Rob Thomas' Lonely no more" became lonely. There was another song, about a guy who finally fell in love but only the words "even the best fall down sometimes" continued to play in my head. I cried when listening to Akon's Lonely and wondered why the stations like to play depressing songs.

Then my mum told me to try out and audition to be a DJ. I did and I think the auditioners knew that I was depressed. When told that I was going to introduce Rob Thomas' song, they kept correcting that the correct title is Lonely NO MORE and not lonely. They then asked whether I like Akon's Lonely, I did not give an answer so they started to dance to the song. I was too blur to notice but while driving home, I realised I was listening to all these songs the wrong way!

I never notice the effect of songs again until recently, more precisely since two weeks ago. I felt depressed again, not due to any matters of the heart but more towards fear and disappointment. Reality has finally set in at work and I was thinking of too many negatives.

So I turned on the radio and cried, not one but many many nights and all the time, many songs were played but only these words came flashing "No stress" and "whatever it takes". I suddenly felt dumb and started thinking about what I want to do. I turned on the radio and coincidentally, the songs were on the playlist again. Oh yes, universe I know what to do.

DESERT ROSE

The Child is born.

The Mother feels anger towards the Child.

Fourteen hours of pain. Not like the Firstborn. Easy that was. Beautiful, the Firstborn was. This one ... she does not like.

The Child knows instinctively. The Mother does not love her.

The Child cries.

The Mother drugs her to sleep. Easier that way.

The Child wakes. The Child cries.

The Mother pinches the Child hard when she thinks no one is looking.

The Child is three.

The Child has a male nanny. The nanny loves the Child. The nanny knows the Child is not loved by those who should love the Child. The nanny gives as much love as he can.

The Mother is angry with the Child.

The Mother makes the Child stand in the bathtub. Naked. The Mother turns on the hot water. Only.

The Child screams. In pain.

The Child cries : "Mama please stop".

The nanny cries. The Mother stands and watches. Her face set. Hard as stone. Lips a thin line. Anger and satisfaction in her eyes. The nanny goes down on his knees. Begging the Mother to stop. The Mother cannot feel the anguish of the Child. Physical, emotional and mental. To be harmed by one's own Mother.

The Child is scalded. For life.

The family moves.

The nanny is left behind.

A maid and a manservant join the family.

The manservant molests the maid. The maid complains to the Mother. The maid leaves. The manservant stays. The Mother does not think that one day the manservant may molest the Child too. The Mother never thinks of the Child's well being.

The Child is twelve.

The parents are divorced. The Mother leaves. The Child with the Father. The Father is never at home. The manservant is in charge.

The manservant molests the Child. Repeatedly.

The Child is damaged. For life.

The Child is eighteen.

The Child is studying in England. The Child has a boyfriend. The boyfriend loses his temper. The boyfriend picks up the Child and throws her across the room. The Child crashes to the floor. The boyfriend kicks her in the stomach. The Child is bleeding. Internally. For two months.

The Child is scarred. For life.

The Child returns.

The Child is working.

The Boss asks her to be his mistress. The Child says no. The Boss says she is insubordinate. The Child is sacked.

The Child is maligned. For life.

The Child is weary.

The Child goes home. The Child opens the family album. To see her family. There are many photos. Her beautiful Mother. Her handsome Father. The Firstborn. Many photos of the Firstborn. When he was a baby. When he was one. When he was two. And so on. Many. A beautiful boy. Light brown hair. Big brown eyes. Fair skin. Happy face.

No photos of the Child.

Maybe the parents forgot. The Child searches. Still no photo. The Child remembers. The disappointment. The conversations of the aunties: "Oh what a pity the Child looks like that. Her Mother is so beautiful. What a waste." Even without the photo the Child remembers. What she looked like. The toothless grin. The "tempurung" cropped hair.

As she sits there she realises:

"Nobody loves me. From the time I was born. Until today. Nobody loves me".

The Child collapses.

The Child is sobbing. Her body full of lacerations. Inflicted by those who should have loved her. The Child hears. Her name being called. The Child looks up. And stares into. The kindest eyes. The most loving face.

"I love you."

He says. He extends his hand. "Follow me". The Child reaches out and holds the hand. He lifts her up. With her hand still grasped in his. She follows him. The One who loves her. From the time she was born to the time she leaves this temporal world. She follows him. The Child is healed. The Child is loved. Forever.

You are my Desert Rose.

The rare and beautiful rose that grows in the harsh desert. Alone. Strong. Waiting for someone worthy to discover it.

I love you my Child. My Desert Rose. Her heart fills with joy. Her being immersed with love. The Child follows him. The Prophet.

Author's note: This piece is dedicated to all the children who have suffered in this world. Those who are not loved as they should have been loved. Those who are not protected as they should have been protected. I send you all my deepest love.