Saturday, January 23, 2010

With all due respect

I have to say, Tun Dr Mahathir is surely living true to his title by Barry Wain - Malaysian Maverick. I haven't got a chance to read the book though, thanks to our living democracy Well, just look at his latest remarks in his speech and blog! Before continuing on further, first let me say that I respect Tun for all he's done for our country.

Anyway, I'd like to share a commentary by a reader of http://www.debunking911.com/, well you'd already figured out what that website's for. Here's the comment:
"WHY would the government do it? I don’t mean Iraq , oil etc I mean why would they do it in this way ? just to help a pal with his insurance?
Why use a plane at all . Why crash your own airline industry and every other countries { Swissair etc}, damage your financial markets { just when you are going to need some war funds} destroy very very valuable property, panic the WORLD, kill your own citizens etc. Could all this not be achieved by a ‘foiled’ plot. Terrorists were 15 minutes from the murder of thousands… a president would certainly come out better having stopped an attack than permitted one. Or if you needed a big attack why not just the anthrax that came after. Everyone panicking over any white powder. Far far easier to plant Anthrax or similar in the towers or Disneyland, have a panic, then capture your suspects who blow themselves up or whatever you want.

If you were going to do this, would you do it this way?’ There are cheaper, better, easier and safer ways to get into a war.. Also why pick Osama as the fall guy if the target is Hussein. Why not just pick Saddam and ‘plant’ evidence to show it was him all along, thereby never needing to go to Afghanistan at all .After all if you can plan the attack why not the culprit.. no need to go scratching for evidence of a link to Iraq AFTER the attack , set it up before.

Funny how the authorities are both all powerful, all seeing, all knowing, and completely incompetent at the same time...

The good old Pearl Harbor theory always struck me the same way . Why destroy your fleet just as you are planning war. Discover the jap carriers 500 miles out while on manouevers’ and the impact on public opinion would be similar to a attack.

Why sink your whole fleet ? Especially if you could sink theirs .. take a few years off the war if they lost 6 carriers day 1 !!"

The last two paragraphs have got to do with the Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory. Maybe some people thought the kamikaze planes were devised by/ purposely ignored by US intels just to find a cause to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I think.

Anyway, read the comment above again. Take note: (1) why not a 'foiled' plot? (2) why not Anthrax? (3) why not go for Saddam, if Iraq was their target?These are just some hypothetical questions. But I think it's alright to ask them for such a hypothetical theory.



Anyway, they've set up an investigation, public hearing etc. for the 911 attacks. Maybe if we (Malaysia) were a little bit advanced (recognized), our experts would be summoned to carry out the investigation or get involved in the hearing. Alas, as we marvelled at James Cameron's Avatar, it's too bad that we could only relate this outstading film to America's ability to devise such grandiose plan to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. Yet another hasty and simplistic conclusion.

Even if that's true, where would it leave us? Go on then - set up fires at Surau, bomb churches, stone temples. If we stay ignorant from taking charge and develop our country, our survival will be at the mercy of those 'evil hands' behind 911 attacks.

Please visit http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1230517.html if you still believe in Science. Otherwise, peace!

Before I end my post, I'd like to send my condolences to the Johor Royal Family and to all my Johorean mates for the lost of our king, Sultan Iskandar Ibni Almarhum Sultan Ismail.

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Making Conclusions 2

I can't help it but to get annoyed with the simplistic conclusions that some sick people are making regarding various issues in our country, and abroad. Have you read the people's comments in Malaysiakini? Biro's comment is actually not suprising, as he/she blames it all on BTN, saying that its grand plan is to promote breaking of temples, churches and deny Chinese and Indian from working in the Government. And Habib RAK's statement 'don't mess with the Sikhs [,UMNO/BN]' is realling demeaning.

And yeah, it also boggles the mind to find out about the attack on a Sikh temple. Although we should not speculate on the latest temple attack, we should be suprised that this tragedy had occured amidst the current dispute about reversal of ban on The Herald. If it's true that the Sikhs has been using that term to describe God, why attack now? And where was His Majesty, Sultan of Selangor's decree before this, to deter the Sikhs' from using the term 'Allah'? Maybe I just missed it.

And talking about MAIS. I have a question. Do we have to get too technical, for example in terms of who is superior, the Majlis Fatwa or the Courts? If the fatwa is that Allah is for Islam, can we go against the High Court ruling and protest, firebomb and stone any non-Muslims around who are adamant in using that term? (Of course not). Or what about working against the fatwa and say that we respect the Court's order. Maybe these two are not only separate entities, but being so they will never conflict each other. As Malaysian Muslims, I believe we have to respect them both.

Let's look at U.K. What's going on there is what they call the 'Iraq Inquiry'. Here's to quote the Chair of the Inquiry's statement about the Inquiry's Terms of Reference:
"We will therefore be considering the UK's involvement in Iraq, including the way decisions were made and actions taken, to establish, as accurately as possible, what happened and to identify the lessons that can be learned. Those lessons will help ensure that, if we face similar situations in future, the government of the day is best equipped to respond to those situations in the most effective manner in the best interests of the country."

This inquiry has so far brought multiple evidence to work against Tony Blair and his government's support of a military action by the US in Iraq. I hope that by establishing, as accurately as possible, what happened, those whom they'll find has done something against the Law, will be put on trial.

Finally, yet another roof/structure collapses in Terengganu! If you have read Gladwell's Outliers, I bet you would also be tempted to conclude that this collapse is much more than a mere sloppy workmanship. There might be other cultural or environmental factors that have cost this State this many roof/structure collapses. Then again, to make such conclusions we need more proof.

Friday, January 8, 2010

What's with the bombings?

The worst has yet to happen. Let's pray to GOD so that the stupid ones amongst us (who are too emotional on 'Allah'-term issue and perpetrate injustice) to be guided if He wills or be paid retribution immediately. Our peaceful country must not suffer from their sinful acts of instigating hatred between fellow citizens from different faiths who have been living in peace and harmony. I condemn all attacks on churches as reported by the media - no matter who's responsible and what was their intention. But does this mean we just cross our arms and only utter condemnation? Let's get to the root of the problem and extinguish the fires of hate with a diplomatic solution.
“(They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,-(for no cause) except that they say, "our Lord is Allah.. Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily Allah is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will)”.( Quran 22:40)

Saturday, January 2, 2010

Making Conclusions

I'm sure most of us have heard about the KL High Court's order to reverse the ban on the use of the term "ALLAH" in Herald (A Christian publication). And as expected we could already see the negative reaction from most Muslims who are taken aback or 'rasa tercabar' with the verdict (and some even suggested Majlis Raja-Raja to respond!). While some (if not many) of us just don't mind with Malaysian Christian publications using the term "ALLAH" in their newsletters, like in one commentary h e r e, where the author is actually happy that Christians and Muslims in Malaysia can now share the word Allah. Now, i took my stand on the minaret issue in Switzerland h e r e, and since this 'ALLAH'-term issue is in our beloved country (but not in any other countries like Switzerland), let me shy away from making any comments or drawing hasty conclusions regarding this rather 'sensitive' and 'controversial' issue. That's because I'm a medical student who is sponsored by our generous government, so I don't want to have my scholarship reversed or even worse end up in Kamunting! (Yes, although we embrace freedom of speech, I think my opinion on this matter is not that of great importance that I have to 'proclaim' it ever so openly in this mischievously free-to-write blogging world.) What (i think) i can say is that we should all await future events that'll unfold - appeal in Courts, protests, name-calling, nasty commentaries, political opportunist taking centre stage, public condemnation, and other nasty things which I hope would never happen. So let me warn you that we should never simply draw conclusions out of these issues like how Tun has tempted to talk about double-standards in religious matters by Westerners in the Swiss-minaret issue and French headscarf ban. To me, the Swiss and French has the prerogative to ban minarets and headscarves because they are 'negara-negara yang berdaulat'. Hey, even people who'd like to celebrate 2010 in Times Square New York were banned from bringing alcohol! (for security reasons of course). My point is that we should reason out with facts and figures. If Tun said that the Westerners would condemn us if we disallow statues for Hindu temples, let me ask him this, why would we want to ban the statues in the first place? Yes, that was just an example, still, to use that as an example means we have to fully reason out our deductions and conclusions from it if it were true. The fact is that there are only 4 minarets in Switzerland (like Tun said, I'm not so sure but that might be true). And another fact is that we don't worship minarets. And of course, these minarets were only banned because it was agreed upon a referendum for whatever reason the Swiss might think of the minaret. So we don't have to be delusional and overreact to a Court's order. Let's be reasonable. We still have ALLAH on our side, that's if we believe in Him.

"Do not argue with the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) except in the nicest possible manner - unless they transgress - and say, "We believe in what was revealed to us and in what was revealed to you, and our god and your god is one and the same; to Him we are submitters." Quran [29:46]

Happy new year 2010!

About Me

My photo
Medical practitioner. Amateur philosopher, pianist and composer.