Politics and Shrines

I cannot understand why Shinzo Abe, the front-runner to succeed Koizumi as Prime Minister of Japan, says that he will visit the Yasukuni Shrine where many of Japan's Class 1 war criminals from WWII are interred. Koizumi says he did it because of a campaign promise he made to the electorate, but Abe says he will be doing it to keep up the practice. Obviously, Abe sees these visits as advancing his political cause, if nothing else. It doesn't matter if the visit is official or unofficial, as Abe promised the latter. As far as the Chinese and Koreans are concerned, paying homage to War Criminals in any guise is criminal enough.

Well, it looks to me that Abe does not really need to keep up appearances at the cost of good relations with its neighbours, Korea and China, as well as continue to hurt the sensitivities of many in Southeast Asia. It would be an unwise, unnecessary and possibly a suicidal policy given that Korea and China are becoming major powers in their own rights and that Japan will become increasingly isolated in the process. While we do not want to forever remind Japan about its war past, we also do not want them to forget.

Image origin: http://www.journeythroughjapan.org/

Shotgun religion

Islam continues to be plagued by extremists among its midst who very loudly and insistently push their religious agenda through the barrel of a gun, or should we, in keeping with the times and reality say, 'the cannister of a bomb'? With September 11 around the corner, we can expect these religious fanatics to want to commemorate the occasion with a couple of their own bombing exploits to hasten their entry into heavenly bliss.

Besides death and destruction, some of these extremists also wish to convert people to Islam through the barrel of the same gun. American Fox News journalists, Mr Steve Centanni, 60, an American correspondent, and his freelance cameraman Olaf Wiig, 36, a New Zealander, who were later released, were reportedly at the wrong end of a gun when they 'converted' to Islam. I am not sure that both reporters have the conviction to remain Muslims, unless they are forced to look down the barrel of a gun again.

Adherents of Islam are exhibiting some rather oppressive behaviour in recent times. But since most of them are extremists to start off with, though one cannot understand their worldview, their actions are not surprising. What is surprising is that Islam can be oppressive even when it arises from the law of the land.

It was reported recently in Malaysia that a woman, aged 26, had renounced her Muslim faith to become a Christian. Nothing wrong with that in a country that professes freedom of religious beliefs. She legally changed her name to Lina Joy, but the State would not allow her to change her stated religion on its records, which remains Islam. Well, one can live with that too, I suppose. If one's faith is true, it really doesn't matter what others say, or what the National Records office states. Well, that is turning out to be a nightmare, it seems. Because her official religion is still recorded as Islam, she cannot marry a non-Muslim. Sadly, we are not talking about an extremist body anymore, but the Islamic Courts in Malaysia. What can be more legitimate than that? According to Syariah Law (Islamic Law Court), a Muslim cannot marry a non-Muslim. So we have a situation where a Christian cannot marry a non-Muslim because she is deemed still a Muslim although the law granted her a name change to reflect her new religious beliefs.

Islam is suffering from multiple identity disorder today. Do we ever wonder why Islam, both of the extremist and state-sponsored types, conjures up suspicion and distrust nowadays? It is not a Western-worldview problem anymore. Before it sets out to rule the world, it had better sort out its identity and existence in its own back yard first.

Image origin: http://www.claybennett.com/

Hornet's nest

From the peacekeeping point of view, I cannot understand how the Malaysian and Indonesian Armed Forces can send soldiers to Lebanon. These countries, especially Indonesia, has one of the loudest supporters of the Hizbollah cause. Even though the soldiers may not be as fanatic (one assumes), there is always the perception (and a fact) that they come from a country that is against Israel. Both Malaysia and Indonesia do not have diplomatic relations with Israel. So if the UN accepts their offers of troops for the peacekeeping contingent in Lebanon, it would be nothing short of waiting for a disaster to happen.

Even on this issue, Indonesia wants to argue against Ehud Olmert's objections that the peacekeeping force not include soldiers from countries that do not have diplomatic ties with Israel. This goes to show that Indonesia is not a neutral party after all. As few weeks ago, it was reported in the press that a number of Indonesian Jihadist - extremist Muslim - were preparing to fight the 'Zionists' over the recent conflict with the Hizbollahs in Lebanon. Even if the Indonesian army and the government were to dis-associate itself from these extremists elements, prudence dictates it not send any Indonesians to Lebanon. This is after all, a peacekeeping effort, not a 'Brother for Brother' party. Lebanon and Israel have had enough of the Hizbollahs without the injection of more terrorists on their soil.

Having 'won' the peace, the UN must act with extreme caution and prudence in ensuring that the peacekeeping force can and will keep the peace.

Image origin: http://old.gulfnews.com/

War and diplomacy

At last, both sides, the Israelis and the Lebanese (or should I say, the Hizbollah?) have finally agreed to a UN brokered ceasefire, effective Monday, 14 August 2006 at 0500 GMT. Even so, it is reported that both sides are still lobbing bombs at each other even after the accepting the agreement. We now hear that there are problems in the Lebanese government cabinet, where the Hizbollah has two representatives, about the implementation of the terms of the ceasefire.

Yes, all of us want to believe that the ceasefire agreement will end the bloodshed and bring permanent respite to the innocent Lebanese citizens. But the reality is that both sides are still simmering, ready to start the war all over again at the slightest opportunity or provocation. Both sides will view the ceasefire as a chance to regroup, relocate and rearm for another day. Fundamentally, no peace agreement has been reached, only a ceasefire. And when the war starts again, as it inevitably will, the world will see that nothing has been resolved. Diplomacy has merely won a stay of execution. The final solution will only be reached until one side destroys, or at least neutralizes, the other side permanently.

So yes, Mr Kofi Annan can claim a sort of belated diplomatic victory, but the UN, being the UN, can never bring lasting peace to the two sides. What is tragic about the whole incident is that the duly constituted and elected government of Lebanon was never able to exert any meaningful influence and control over the Hizbollah faction, in spite of the fact that it has at least 15,000 troops under its command. A government that cannot, or will not, govern and control the country and the various factions among it must ultimately take responsibility for the death of its people and destruction of its property. If it still does not recognize this fact, and take action to bring the Hizbollah under its control, then it should cede control totally to the Hizbollah. It should not continue with a pretense that serves to hoodwink charitable souls of the world, including the Lebanese women and children.

The Hizbollah, by some combination of warped logic and delusion, are claiming a victory in this conflict. It has sustained 900 over deaths (probably mostly civilians - which do not matter much?) on the Lebanese side versus 150 odd deaths on Israel's side. Much of their homes are buried in rubble and it will take a lot of charity from the rest of the world to rebuild their homes and feed their people. It is a strange victory when you have to depend on charity.

Israel, on the other hand, is more subdued over this war and is certainly not over the moon regarding the achievements (or lack) of its original objectives - the return of its two soldiers.

Do we now wonder why the fight is not over yet? Dare I say that the diplomatic world is facilitating a conflict more destructive than the first?

Image origin: http://www.opceasefire.org/

God and History

In a world that is in chaos politically, socially and environmentally, how can the human race sustain another 100 years?

So ask Britain's most significant scientist since Isaac Newton. Dr Stephen Hawking posed the question but admitted that he does not have the answer. 25,000 people reportedly weighed in on the question. My take on this issue although it is now closed in Yahoo Answers?

The human race has sustained thousands of years through wars, natural disasters, famine and political intrigue more complex than today's. Some social upheavals in the past are even more revolutionary than today's, yet history has shown that these ebb and flow with the sands of time, many discredited and forgotten, only to be resurrected under another name in another time. As King Solomon, the wisest man that ever walked the earth was to write, in the Book of Ecclesiastes, that

Vanity of vanities, all is vanity. Ecclesiastes 1:2

He made the observation that

The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.
All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.
All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.
There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after. Ecclesiastes 1:5-11

Solomon's answer to the question posed by Dr Hawking, is that, yes, God willing, the human race can be sustained for another 100 years, 1000 years even. We give too little credit to the creator with this so-called conundrum. Let us not over-rate Dr Hawking here at the expense of the Almighty.

The discussion:
Yahoo answers on the conundrum
The rest of the chatter

Image origin: http://library.thinkquest.org/

Cycle of Tragedy

Once again, the tragedy of war was brought home with the death of more than 50 civilians in Lebanon, including women and children, all of whom were taking shelter from a bombardment launched by Israeli planes. The Israelis claimed that they had given prior warning for residents to flee. Indeed many did, but this extended family chose to stay. Apparently, the Hezbollah 'martyrs' are again hiding behind women's skirts and children's cots when they launched missiles against Israel in the vicinity of these now collapsed houses.

War is never pleasant, it is destructive of lives and property, of a livelihood and opportunities. The world admits that the Hezbollah provoked the conflict first where they continue to lob bombs into Israeli residential areas. So what happened to the women and children in Lebanon today could very well happen to Israel's women and children tomorrow. I think the Israelis want to stop, but if stopping means that the Hezbollah can re-group in Southern Lebanon to fight another day, then any such armistice, such respite from the carnage, can only be temporary.

Can the world community, and the UN in particular, which already has its hands full with Iran's and N Korea's nuclear ambitions, stay focused on keeping the two sides apart when the guns stop and rebuilding takes place? Is there political will in Lebanon and the rest of the world that is calling for a stop to the current conflict to rein in the Hezbollah and their openly avowed mission to destroy Israel? Will Iran and Syria stop fighting via proxy?

If the answers are NO, then, sadly, tragically, the war will go on, must go on for otherwise, it will just be a reprieve to salve the souls of participants and onlookers before another war begins. It is well to remember that this conflict was started by the Hezbollah for no good reason than to join in the kidnapping game than the Hamas first started in the Gaza Strip. Hezbolla never expected such as ferocious response from the Israelis. Thus was the relative peace and development for more than a decade in Lebanon broken, engulfing innocent women and children into a conflict which the Hezbollah was and remains trigger happy about. As much as bombs are lobbed into Southern Lebanon, missiles continue to rain down on Israel, though, fortunately for the Hezbollah, their missiles have not had been as accurate nor destructive as the Israelis'.

The Hezbollah was in Lebanon 10 years ago. If the Hezbollah is given a reprieve and peace comes again, how long will it last before they break the peace again? Another 10 years? The key question to ask, after all is said and done is, who broke the peace? and so who should mend it - permanently?

Image origin: http://www.graphicwitness.org/

Damned if you do and damned if you don't

The press went to town gleefully telling everyone who would listen (and of course everybody loves a juicy story) of how they got recordings of private conversations at the dinner table by Mr George W Bush and Mr Tony Blair, amongst others. Mr Bush reportedly said "Hezbollah to stop doing this shit", referring to the weeklong conflict in the Middle East between Israel and the Hezbollah.

Well, I think its refreshing to hear that, because most of the sentiments that we express privately isn't all that different from the US President's - at least not mine. Many others would hold a diametrically opposite view, but few would want to be open about it - not that Mr Bush is - he was caught unawares.

While the G8 did issue a statement regarding the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, it got interpreted in a 1001 ways, so much for the usefulness of such joint statements. Nobody takes them seriously, and worse, they are not actionable.

As Israel continues to pound Southern Lebanon, I am hearing people condemn the US for not getting into the region to stop the conflict. Well, well, well. And I thought that people were condemning the US for going into Iraq. Damn if you do and damn if you don't. Foreign policy and adventures are always fraught with danger, but I would say the greatest danger lies with people who cannot decide one way or another. At least Mr Bush is staying the course and trying to complete the job that was left hanging in Operation Desert Storm. By the same token, I'd say let Israel complete its job so that Hezbollah will not soon stir the hornets' nest again any time soon.

Image Origin - http://www.ceosforcities.org/

The tragedy of war

As the bombs drop from Israeli planes onto Lebanon, I feel a tinge of nostalgia. I remember twenty years ago, when I was still in my youth, the names of places such as Sabra and Shatilla where Israel met with infamy, and the almost incessant news and reports of bombings and conflicts in Lebanon. Today, after 20 years of relative peace, war in Lebanon is again rearing its ugly head.

War is, obviously, never pleasant. And while self-righteous people go about provoking war, it is the ordinary people who bear the brunt of war. Their lives are suddenly disrupted, their homes subject to damage, if not destruction, their kith and kin separated, their livelihood adversely affected. I remember my mother relating how her life and opportunities were disrupted due to the Second World War in this part of the world. It was truely a tragedy.

And yet, people still provoke war. The Hizbollah and the Hamas have thrown the entire Middle-East yet again into a conflagration that will not soon go away. Whatever trust and opportunities that have been built-up over the last fews years with the eventual establishment of the Palestinian Authority is all but gone. Old foes such as Syria and Iran are working behind the scenes to further stoke the fire. More innocent lives will be lost.

Can Israel be blamed for protecting itself? After all, the incidents that provoked their present response were the blatant kidnap and capture of their own people by the Hamas and the Hizbollah. For Israel to continue holding the olive branch is nothing but suicidal policy. Can the Islamic world blame the Israelis, as the OIC under the leadership of Malaysia, has done? What if the role were reversed, that Israelis kidnap the Hamas and Hizbollah terrorists for ransom? What would the OIC say then?

Surely there must be impartiality and justice? But this has never characterised the relation between Israel and the Muslim world. What can anybody say that can bring this latest conflict to an end? Simply NOTHING, because the relationship has never been built on trust, if at all. Only the barrel of the gun will broker a truce, but peace will never come.

Painting is "The Visage of War" by Salvador Dali. Refer to http://clogic.eserver.org/

A teacher who destroys

Predictably, some Indonesia Muslims have jumped into the worsening Palestinian situation in the Gaza by urging its adherents to take up arms in Palestine. And the biggest 'head' in this rallying call is reportedly non other that Abu Bakar Bashir - he who protested and vehemently denied his role in the Bali bombing in open court. I don't know what kind of Muslim he is, but obviously he is a liar, a cheat and by any standards, an immoral person. Now, he wants to reprise his role as murderer as well. There is a Chinese saying - "Borrow a knife to kill people". Bashir is bent on borrowing, yet again, the young lives of Muslim youth to do his dirty work in the name of Allah. Does he want to rise to the seventh heaven on the coattails of the young and pliable Muslims in the schools that he runs?

The teachers' vocation has always been an honourable one. But in him, we see a teacher not as a shaper of lives for the better, but a teacher bent on destroying lives. It is unfortunate that he was even released from prison so early. Now he has the freedom to go about committing more crimes against humanity. Going by what he is doing now, he should have been locked up for good.

Image origin - http://www.aijac.org.au/

Moderates need to play ball

And you thought you've heard it all. About the extreme 'moral' requirements that extreme Muslims practice and enforce on others. An example from recent months is the no-kissing/ no-hugging / no-touching rule between male and female in public, and therefore no public display of affection. In Iraq, extremists have gone even further. The Associated Press reported, about 3 hours ago, that in Baghdad, gunmen stopped a car carrying the Sunni Arab coach and his two Shiite players, asked them to step out and then shot them.
And their 'crime'? This, according to leaflets distributed by these extremists:

Wearing shorts by youth are prohibited because it violates the principals of Islamic religion when showing forbidden parts of the body. Also women should wear the veil...

As expected, moderate Muslims and clerics have come out to condemn this act and state that there is nothing wrong in wearing shorts like those than an athlete would wear during training and competition. The problem is that the Islamic religious agenda has effectively been hijacked by these extremists for some time now. The moderates are now seen to be forever playing catchup and apologising for the actions of their fellow religious brothers. In the long run, this will not do. Justice must be seen to be done, not just talked about and verbally condemned.

Mere pronouncements without the active pursuit and prosecution of these extremist factions do no good in righting the increasing perception that Islam is a religion of hatred, revenge, and even worst - lawlessness. We need to see action in the pursuit and elimination of these factions worldwide, wherever Islamic extremists ply their brand of hate religion and moralistic judgements. Continued inaction will lead to gradual erosion of adherents and condemn the religion to defections and desertions, for who can live under a cloud where what he/she believes in is equated to violence, hate, and selective lawlessness.

The ball has long been on the moderates' court. The way I see it, either they do something concrete to right this wrong quickly, or they join those whom they refuse to actively discipline - a guilt by association. The third alternative is to abandon a religion that has gone horribly wrong.

Opiate of the masses

Karl Marx, that father of communism and its chief atheist, called religion the "Opiate of the masses". I suppose what he believes is that religion is a drug that the masses are driven to take and in the process, becomes addicted to it. Non-religion is therefore the only rational process and thought that mankind should adopt, if not believe in. I do not agree with this sage (as some still consider him to be one). His own 'religion' today is in shambles. It has not withstood the test of time.

On the other hand, I am horrified to learn that schools in Saudi Arabia, which is supposedly friendly to the West, routinely teaches its young ones to, among other things, hate Christians and Jews, and advocates Jihad, or Holy War against all infidels, of which Christians and Jews are identified as. If this is what is being taught systematically in Saudi Arabia's public schools, then I cannot imagine what schools in Iran teach their young. In fact, I am now paranoid of every Muslim school, official nor non-official, sanctioned by the state or not and even if that school is located and administered in Muslim countries that are considered to be moderate in the practice of Islam. It is no wonder that terrorists run amok so freely nowadays and this will not abate so long as young, impressionable kids are taught routinely to hate, that Allah wants Muslims to hate. The message I am getting is that Islam teaches hate, is intolerant of other beliefs and peoples, and is a law unto itself.

All the defences thrown up by countries to defend themselves from terrorist attacks will be ineffective so long as you have waves of youths who are ready to die for their Islamic religion the way they are being trained and intoxicated in schools in Islamic countries. What can you do when leaders in the community, the teachers, the adults, use a religion's holy book to teach such frightening things, not only sanctioning acts of violence against infidels, but actively promoting it? The only problem with Osama Bin Laden is that he brought Islam's teachings to its only logical realisation. With generations of Muslim youth raised on these beliefs, it is not difficult to see that peace will never come to Israel, not in my lifetime, not ever, in spite of the bests efforts of sincere, peace-loving peoples.

Perhaps Karl Marx was right, in some cases, after all.

Band of Brothers

It is reported that Iran has gotten support for its Nuclear Programme from fellow Muslim states of Pakistan, Nigeria, Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia and Bangladesh, which together constitute the Developing Eight (D-8), in their summit in Indonesia over the weekend. Well, of course they will support Iran. Getting nuclear technology has been the ambition of many countries if only because it provides one with International recognition in terms of scientific and technological achievement, not to mention the potential military might that will endow it with a strong bargaining position anywhere in the world where muscle flexing is required.

To their credit, they did say that the support is for peaceful purposes, which is to be expected anyway. However, Iran is still openly against the existence of Israel (or to put it more 'positively', for the destruction of Israel) and any forces aligned with it. It must be pointed out that this support for Iran's nuclear technology is not universal among Muslim countries in the world. I believe Iraq is non too happy at this development, having fought a near decade war with Iran back in the 1980's. I am not sure about the Gulf countries either. So far they have chosen to remain silent on the matter. The US and Europe believe that Iran's ultimate aim is the production of nuclear weapons. Given Iran's their belligerence towards Israel and the fact that it has the world's second largest proven reserves of oil, only a fool will believe that Iran's nuclear ambitions are anything but peaceful. I fear that those whom it calls its brothers today may live to regret the day that it did not exert friendly pressure on its 'brother' to stay away from nuclear weapons production.

Even brothers quarrel, with some ending up betraying and killing each other. Look no further than Cain and Abel. This fact is almost as old as history itself.

A more dangerous world

The price of oil is soaring again, hitting US$70 a barrel, no thanks to events in Iran. Iran has very smugly announced success in producing Uranium and they are not going to bother about International community urging them, on pain of un-specified sanctions, to abandon their nuclear programme. Compared to North Korea, this threat seems more real. The world is now a much more dangerous place to live in today. From the looks of things, it will not get any better. Iranian youths are primed to commit suicide bombings (using conventional bombs as a start, I suppose) on enemies of Iran and Palestine and Islam and who knows what else.

To these Iranians, the principle of MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction), which has held back the old USSR and USA from ever using their nuclear arsenal for over 60 years, means exactly that - real MADness. Post 911, Iran doesn't seem to want to understand the contradiction in possessing nuclear weapons. Neither do its leaders, who, I am sure, are all too ready to drop a couple of nuclear bombs on middle-eastern and western soil, come what may, to make their point that they can no longer be bullied. Western soil also includes Australia and Japan, erstwhile friends and allies of the US. So the threat is felt worldwide.

It is at this time that moderate Muslim nations (through the OIC?) must band together to get Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions. It alone, among the world community, has the leverage to do so. My worry is that these nations are secretly happy that one of their members now has nuclear capabilities, so they will not do anything at all to rock the Iranian nuclear boat. Perhaps they think that one day, through their brethren, they too can possess nuclear weapons that will enable them to force others to kowtow to their demands, whatever these may be. The frightening things is that Muslim countries are not all agreed among themselves, which the Iraq-Iran conflict more than 10 years ago has demonstrated and the conflict between Shiite and Shia Muslim sects have shown today in Iraq.

May God help us.

Little Entrepreneurs of China

We have heard of Little Emperors before. These refer to the children of parents who live in China. These children are typically pampered because, for many couples, that's the only child that the State will ever allow them to have.

Now, we hear that children as young as 5 years old in China are taking MBA (or Early MBA as they are called) type classes to master business at a very very young age. Modules on economics and business sense are covered in these courses. And the place most prevalent with these classes? Unsurprising, it is Shanghai.

My worry is that parents are placing the cart before the horse. Not in terms of skills, for we know how gifted some children are, but in terms of ethics and values. If so much of a child's time is spent 'educating' them on the technical aspects of life that they neglect values and society, morality and ethics, etc., we might end up seeing very wealthy, perhaps 'successful' individuals, but individuals who may not understand how to do the right thing the right way. Worst still, we might end up seeing more psyschiatric cases given the early onset of stress so typical in the business world of dog-eat-dog. Ultimately, society is going to suffer. Worst, if children are not taught how to value and respect their elders, etc., the parents who so eagerly send their children to such classes may end up reaping the effects of their neglect in critical aspects of a child's upbringing.

Triumph of the mob over democracy

Mr Thaksin Shinawatra announced his resignation as Thailand's Prime Minister yesterday. Ironically, his TRT party won Thailand's snap elections held on 2 April 2006, but it proved to be a hollow one given that three of the main opposition parties boycotted the elections. So here, we see the triumph of mob pressure over the democratic process. Things are never going to be the same in Thailand anymore. I think that Thailand, economically, socially and politically, will enter into a period of uncertainty. I don't think there is a political figure at the moment that can take over Thai politics the way Thaksin has. If so, people would not have had to march and live on the streets of Bangkok for over three weeks now.

Sondhi, Chamlong and others are good protest organisers, but they have yet to prove themselves in ruling a country and bringing prosperity to that country. So far, their loose alliance is based on a common aim to unseat Thaksin. Beyond that, their agendas are quite different and will most likely conflict with one another's. That the opposition parties had to ride on the coat-tails of the protesting Thai public speaks volumes about their credibility, or lack of it. So if the opposition today sanctions protest of the type seen in Bangkok over the last 3 weeks, then when and if they become the ruling party and form the government, they in turn must also sanction any opposition to their rule in like fashion.

The democratic process is a severely wounded animal in Thailand. We do not know if it will ever recover.

New Yahoo UI

Yahoo is upgrading its User Interface - you know - the page you get when you url into www.yahoo.com. My homepage is set to yahoo.com. When I was surfing the web last Saturday, I hit on the new Yahoo.com interface and was asked to evaluate and provide feedback. Since then, the old Yahoo.com has been restored.

Its a pity I didn't take a snapshot of the new UI. It's more organised (anything other than the present UI must be more organised!). It has three panes across the screen, with all the Yahoo services (such as 360, Auto, Finance, Games, Geocities, etc. grouped in a vertical directory list on the left side. Mail, My Yahoo, Messenger, etc. are also grouped together in a box on the right, although Mail is also located at the top banner location, signifying perhaps that Yahoo Mail is the most popular link on Yahoo's homepage.

There are a lot more UI changes, but I cannot remember them all. It's looking more like My Yahoo! UI, but I am sure there will be more changes I will not have seen. Users who saw the experimental UI were invited to leave comments on improving the interface. I am not sure if Yahoo plans to make the UI user-configurable, like My Yahoo, or Google (www.google.com/ig). I have a feeling that it won't be user-definable, or at least not as extensible as the two.

I believe in...

It is sad to read that an Afghan national, a Mr Abdul Rahman, is facing the death penalty because he chose to become a Christian 16 years ago. The strength of his beliefs is evidenced by his willingless to face death rather than renounce the religion which he has come to accept. Unfortunately, Afghan Muslims do not see it this way. They see it as a case of apostasy, as if race or nationality has anything to do with religion.

Islam practices proselytising their religion. It welcomes one and all into their religious fold, even if this involves (as it must, unless that person has no prior religious beliefs) the convert renouncing his/her former religion. I wonder if they do not see the conflict and contradiction in their stance? But of course, Islamic Extremism is again rearing its ugly head, but judging from the recent past, it is unlikely that moderate Muslims will come to the rescue of their fellow national, even in a matter of life and death.

This is so very sad.

Netherlands, here we come

The Netherlands is now screening potential immigrants with pictures of homosexual men kissing and topless female bathing (See Today, 14 March 2006, page 14). With the runnaway success of Brokeback Mountain (and the many copy-cat pictures that typically follow a proven formula in the months to come), as well as the ever popular bare-breasted female form, I'd expect to see a bee-line, especially men, for Dutch citizenship!

Ironically the Dutch are adopting this strategy to try to keep people out of their country. You'd wonder what warped sense of logic this is, until you also read that scenes of crime-ridden ghettos are shown along with these titilating video scenes. Dutch Immigration authorities hope that this will evoke horrors and extreme discomfort and thereby discourage would-be immigrants. Usually, nations want to project a rosy image of their country, the attractions and its pleasant people to demonstrate the beauty and successes of their country. Here, the Dutch are doing the opposite. I say again, what a warp sense of logic.

Of course, there are those who speculate that the Dutch wants to keep out purantical people, especially extremist Muslims, from their country. I think they have learnt a lesson from their neighbours, the Danes, about people who would break windows and demonstrate on the streets just because of a couple of cartoons in the newspapers. Well, this is certainly a novel solution, though I don't know if it will lead to another round of demonstrations or stampede for the doors to the country!

Polarising Positions

A Debate is defined as

A formal, public political discussion involving two or more candidates for office. In a debate, candidates state and defend their positions on major issues.

The political situation in Thailand continues unabated, with the opposition forces that are arrayed against Thaksin's government adamant that nothing but a public debate will do to resolve the situation. A debate will not resolve anything. If nothing, it will serve to polarise the parties even further in this political quarrel and make the situation even worse than today. So it is disingenuos for the opposition to insist that a public debate will resolve the situation. The opposition hopes to push Thaksin to the edge of the cliff and thereby score points, if not effect an coup. Clearly, they are not prepared to meet Thaksin halfway and negotiate a settlement to their differences. They just want to win at all costs.

Of course, they don't trust Thaksin in a closed-door negotiation, which is what Thaksin offers, but I suggest that that is the only peaceful way forward. If they think that Thaksin will 'do them in' in close-door pow-wows, then they lack confidence in themselves and in the validity of their positions. Lest readers of this blog think that I am pro-Thaksin, let me clarify that I am for the rule of law. That rule of law says that any political legitimacy can only be obtained through the ballot box. Any injustice can only be righted through the court of law. Circumventing these internationally accepted norms is to invite ridicule from the international community.

There is a Chinese saying, jia chou bu ke wai yang, meaning, settle your family's differences internally or behind closed doors. Thailand should do that today.

Nuclear Terrorists

I think terrorists today, with their penchant for making and exploding bombs, would love it if they have an atom bomb in their hands. It'll be equivalent to seventh heaven for them - the ultimate possession of ultimate power to wipe out the mother of all infidels that walk the earth. If they can blow up such as bomb in the White House, a la Independence Day style, no less, it will certainly promote them to the highest seats in heaven. Immortality of the highest order awaits them, and their names will perpetuate forever. I do not doubt that this course - Martyrdom 101, is being taught somewhere in the world today, and that Iran presents the best opportunity now to getting their hands on an actual atomic bomb.

What does Iran wants with nuclear energy anyway? Nuclear energy presents a lot of problems in the long run, least of which is the disposal of spent nuclear fuel. It also poses a danger to the people and the environment. It wouldn't be pleasant if there is a nuclear meltdown, to put it mildly. Look at Chernobyl. On the other hand, Iran is blessed with the world's 2nd largest proven reserves of oil under its soil today.

So what's the rationale? Has Iran got too much money in the bank? It doesn't know how else to deploy its brilliant scientists and engineers? Then why doesn't Iran do some good by donating some of it to poverty stricken parts of the world where people, especially children, are dying of poverty, hunger and disease, where people suffer from natural disasters? Why doesn't its brilliant people spend time researching and finding cures for diseases that plague the planet? Don't tell me that only 'westerners' are capable of charity?

Iran has stated openly that it wants to destroy Israel. So far, all conventional forces thrown at Israel by the Arab countries have been rebuffed successfully by Israel. It doesn't take a person with a PhD to figure how a nuclear bomb can advance an age-old ambition - the destruction of the State of Israel - an aim which has been publicly stated by the President of Iran.