Archive for November 6th, 2007

Hishammuddin’s keris desensitization and the Boiling-Frog syndrome

National unity is one of the challenges of the Prime Minister’s Department but it is sad and scandalous that on the occasion of the 50th Merdeka anniversary celebration, there have been an escalation of incidents which further undermine national unity and polarize race and religious relations.

The most recent incident was the demolition of a 40-year-old Hindu temple at Kampung Rimba Jaya in Shah Alam, Selangor last week, showing utter contempt of the Selangor State and Shah Alam Municipal authorities for legitimate and constitutional rights and sensitivities to the extent that even the MIC President, Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu had yesterday to momentarily announce the cancellation of all MIC Deepavali Open Houses, to be reversed a few hours later.

Why couldn’t the demolition of the Kampung Rimba Jaya Hindu temple wait for a week for Deepavali to be celebrated by the Hindu devotees? Why couldn’t the Selangor and Shah Alam municipal authorities allow time for the Hindu temple to be relocated?

What action would be taken against the Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohamad Khir Toyo and the Shah Alam Municipal authorities for their insensitivities in demolishing the Hindu temple in Shah Alam, seriously damaging the process of nation-building?

Another grave setback to national unity and nation-building took place just today — at the Umno Youth General Assembly, where for the third year consecutively, the Umno Youth leader and Education Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein wielded the keris and attacked those who had criticized him for his keris-antics in the past two years as “real racists”.

Last week, Hishammuddin said that despite nation-wide controversy and protests he would continue to unsheath the keris at the Umno Youth general assembly this year until the non-Malays become “desensitized” to it.

I am reminded of the Boiling-Frog Syndrome. If you put a frog into boiling water, the frog will immediately jump out. But if you put the frog in cold war and increase the heat of the water slowly, it will get accustomed to the increasing heat. Read the rest of this entry »


In the six mintues sequel of Lingam Tape, Lingam admitted he was talking to Fairuz

The three-man Haidar Panel to determine the authenticity of the Lingam Tape has come out with a shock decision to submit three separate reports to the government.

This is the explanation given by the Panel Chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohd Noor for this extraordinary turn of events: “In view of the time constraints, it would not be fair to load one member with the task of preparing the report. That is why we have decided to submit separate reports instead.”

Even a school-child can see that Haidar is not telling the truth, and that the real reason is that the three-man panel cannot reach agreement on its finding and recommendation.

As no witness had appeared before the Haidar Panel, which had only the report of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA to go by, what is the heavy task about preparing the report which Haidar is talking about? It must be the easiest report in the nation’s 50 year history for any inquiry committee to write, as there is very little to say — since all that is required of the Panel is to determine whether the Lingam Tape is authentic or not.

There are only three possible answers to the very narrow and restricted terms of reference of the Haidar Panel, that the Lingam Tape is authentic, not authentic or no way to establish either way.

If all the three members are agreed that the Lingam Tape agreed on anyone of these three answers, and that is all they want to say, then there is no need for three separate reports.

It is only when there is disagreement among the three members that there is need for three separate reports.

I can envisage the following scenarios to warrant the writing of three separate reports:

Scenario One — The three-man Panel divided into two camps, whether two-one or one-two, with one camp holding a position on these three variations different from that of another.

Scenario Two — The panel divided into two camps — one holding that although the Panel cannot determine whether the tape is authentic, the government should nonetheless, in view of overriding national interests, establish a Royal Commission of Inquiry into it and the serious allegations of perversion of the course of justice on fixing of judicial appointments, particularly in view of the recent proceedings of the 14th Law Conference and the opening speech by the former Lord President and Perak Sultan Azlan Shah calling for return of the judiciary to its former golden days. The other camp objecting to such a recommendation. Read the rest of this entry »