Thursday, May 12, 2011

2012 ? Aligning Of The Planets On The Ecliptic Path Beginning Today

Good thing President Obama released his long-form birth certificate. Now we can all go back to worrying about an even greater threat than the possibility that the President is a Kenyan double agent: the much buzzed-about reports that the world is going to end in 2012.

It was the Mayans — or maybe the Romans or the Greeks or the Sumerians — who called the shot this time, evidently on a day Nostradamus phoned in sick. Apparently, a rogue planet named Nibiru (which frankly sounds more like a new Honda than a new world) is headed our way, with a cosmic crack-up set for next year. No matter who's behind the current prediction, there are enough people ready to spread and believe in this kind of end-of-the-world hooey that you have to wonder if the earth isn't starting to take things personally. (PHOTOS: an illustrated history of the planet Earth.)

Regrettably, the Nibiru yarn got a boost in recent days with the very real announcement that an alignment of several of the very real planets will be taking place this month, offering a fleeting treat for stargazers willing to get up before sunrise and take a look. Even this genuine cosmic phenomenon, however, may be a bit less than it appears.

Beginning today and lasting for a few weeks, Mercury, Venus, Jupiter and Mars will be visible in the early morning sky, aligned roughly along the ecliptic — or the path the sun travels throughout the day. Uranus and Neptune, much fainter but there all the same, should be visible through binoculars. What gives the end-of-the-worlders shivers is that just such a configuration is supposed to occur on Dec. 21, 2012, and contribute in some unspecified way to the demolition of the planet. But what makes that especially nonsensical — apart from the fact that it's, you know, nonsense — is that astronomers say no remotely similar alignment will occur next year.

"Nothing bad will happen to the earth in 2012," NASA explains patiently — if wearily — on its website. "Our planet has been getting along just fine for more than 4 billion years, and credible scientists worldwide know of no threat associated with 2012." (See pictures of Earth from space.)

What's more, even this month's apparent planetary lineup is as much illusion as fact. In the same way a group of people scattered randomly across the room can appear to be aligned depending on your angle of sight, so too can planets that seem tidily arranged from one point of view turn out to be nothing of the kind when you look at them another way. The same question of perspective is true for our familiar constellations. View Orion from Earth, and he's a hunter; view him from the other side of the galaxy, and he's a frog or a tree or just a jumble of stars.


Read more:

Why Singapore's Election Didn't Live Up to the Hype

The campaign leading to Singapore's May 7 general election had the trappings of a larger political drama. Before the thronged gates of a suburban sports stadium, where a rally for the opposition Workers' Party (WP) was under way one hot night, vendors hurriedly pressed ice cream sandwiches into the hands of the thousands pouring inside. Encircling the lighted stadium were high-rise public-housing blocks, from whose open windows and crowded outdoor passageways hundreds more were listening to the boisterous speeches. Across Singapore, the pages of Facebook crackled with jubilation about the prospect of more political opposition. The mood was one of incipient and sweeping change.

A few days later, on election day, the ruling People's Action Party's (PAP) share of the popular vote did in fact drop to a historic low of 60.1% It was a disquieting number for the PAP, which has swept every general election in Singapore since 1959, winning the past five with an average 66.1% share of the popular vote. Yet this election appeared to have caught the PAP off guard. Frustrated by Singapore's rising cost of living, many lower-income voters criticized the ruling party for pushing economic growth at all costs, claiming this had led to higher prices of basic necessities like food and housing. Voters were unhappy too with the island's increasingly congested roads, buses and subway carriages, clogged at least partly, they felt, by a rapid influx of immigrants into Singapore, in particular between 2004 and '08. Add to this a recent loosening of electioneering laws in Singapore, allowing political messages and videos to circulate on the Internet, and conditions appeared ripe for the opposition. Indeed, one of the PAP's main rivals, the WP, won an unprecedented six parliamentary seats. (See pictures of technology in Singapore.)

In doing so, the WP rose to the PAP's long-standing challenge to the opposition to field high-caliber candidates capable of governing Singapore. One of the WP's winning candidates, Chen Show Mao, is a Stanford-educated lawyer who works for white-shoe New York City legal firm Davis Polk & Wardwell in Beijing, where he has advised on some of China's largest share offerings. Chen was part of a slate of WP candidates who unseated Singapore's Foreign Minister. "This is a watershed general election," declared Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at a predawn press conference after the ballots were counted. WP chief Low Thia Khiang similarly called the election "a political landmark in modern Singapore." His party's wins, Low said, were a sign that voters wanted "a more responsive, inclusive, transparent and accountable government."

Even so, by the time all the votes were counted, the drama promised by the campaign's enthusiastic crowds had fizzled. Despite the dip in their share of the popular vote, the PAP retained 81 out of 87 parliamentary seats. And though Singaporeans had elected six opposition members to Parliament to check the power of the ruling party, and the opposition's modest inroads on May 7 may one day pave the way to bigger wins, anyone outside Singapore would regard the election result as a handsome victory for the government.

In the end, therefore, the status quo was quietly affirmed. Economists, political scientists and no doubt Singapore's political parties themselves will offer their own varied theories as to why. To me, though, part of the explanation lies in the Canadian new-wave group Men Without Hats' 1982 hit single "Safety Dance," a slightly melancholy pop song that enjoys a ghostly afterlife on Singapore's radio airwaves and in its riverside pubs. Like the brave new world the song beckons at ("We can go where we want to/ A place where they will never find") but finally hesitates to enter, "Safety Dance" seems to capture Singapore's tentative attitude toward political change.

The caution may stem from the power of government in Singapore, a power that dives deeply into the lives of ordinary citizens. The government, for instance, usually both builds and helps maintain the single most valuable asset of Singaporeans: their home. Some 85% of Singaporeans live in sprawling ocher-colored apartment blocks that have been built by the state's Housing Development Board, or HDB, which a PAP government created in 1960. Surrounded by food stalls, clinics, community clubs, and tied to public transport systems like the island's subway or bus grid, public housing in Singapore has risen so much in value that their lofty prices now worry first-time buyers. The question that must haunt every HDB homeowner is, Will another party protect the value of my home as well as the PAP has done?

Education is another area in which government influence is pervasive. With a few notable exceptions, all Singaporean children residing in the country must attend local public schools, and the government often has its eye on students from elite high schools like Raffles Institution or Anglo-Chinese Junior College (whose students are screened for admission by exam results). At graduation, many star students are awarded state scholarships to study at top universities overseas. If they return home, a sizable number of these are lured into the civil service, and some civil servants, in turn, are eventually nudged into politics, usually under the PAP banner. It is a process that creams off the top academic achievers for the state, often leaving Singapore's private sector starved of leadership and innovation. Yet it is also one of the reasons the country's bureaucracy works so well, and why the country's best and brightest may feel tethered to the status quo.


Read more:

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Question For The Lawyers: Letter Of The Law or Spirit Of The Law ?

Hantu Laut

The United Kingdom has no codified constitution.Much of the British constitution is embodied in the written form, within statutes, court judgments and treaties and in other unwritten sources such as, constitutional convention and royal prerogatives.

Unlike Malaysia and most other countries of the world the U.K has no written constitution. She ran by convention. In layman's term it means " a way in which something is usually done".

Can we say the U.K has no constitution whatsoever?

Here, a lawyer, a so called constitutional expert and a member of the Bar Council and who has probably wasted a couple of years at law school says Malaysia has no official religion because the word "official" is missing from Article 3 of the Malaysian constitution in which Islam was prescribed as the state's religion.

Article 3 of the Malaysian constitution, should it be "letter of the law or spirit of the law"? A question for the legal fraternity.

Are lawyers trained to differentiate between the two or were just taught to parrot everything they learned from the law book.

On the other hand, we have dummies who says the prime minister of Malaysia must be a Muslim and a Malay.These dummies probably do not have a copy or have never seen a copy of the Malaysian constitution, let alone read it, but got enough balls to go to the press and say their piece.

Malaysia has a written constitution.We are not governed by convention.Just because historically we had only Malay/Muslim prime ministers it does not mean that is the law of the land.Person of any faith can become prime minister if he enjoyed majority support in Parliament.However, such anomaly is not likely to happen in the near future.

Of course, there are smart lawyers and and not so smart lawyers.

They say, smart lawyers go into private practice and make lots of money and the not so smart lawyers joined politics and make even more money than the smart lawyers.The worst of the lot are bad lawyers, those pretty useless ones in private practice, wanting to keep up with the Joneses but can ill afford it, next thing you know they were doing shady deals and some would run away with their client's money.

So, not all lawyers are smart.

Abraham Lincoln, a self-educated man, who became a lawyer and went on to become the 16th
President of the United States said in one of his famous speeches "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt"

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

It's Time To Bring Out The ISA

Hantu Laut

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's feeble warning on the worsening religious and race relations would not be effective enough to stop the troublemakers of wanting to turn this nation into a state of chaos by fanning religious fervour.

By now the government should realise Malaysians are incapable of handling freedom of expression responsibly.Elements from both the oppositions and the ruling party are equally responsible for the deteriorating inter-racial and religious relations.

As much as I hate to say it, former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad was right when he said such racial polarisation and religious conflicts did not happen under his watch.Say what you like about this misunderstood man, we had 22 years of peaceful co-existence under his regime.There were no religious issues or racial polarisation that we see is building up now which could ignite at any moment into something more unpleasant, unless, drastic actions are taken forthwith to arrest it before it gets out of hand.

Mahathir was prepared to take unpopular decision to protect the delicate membrane that separate the different religions and races in the country, which has kept the nation alive in peace and harmony for 22 years.He responded quickly, though at time harshly, to any attempt to undermine our peaceful society that have co-existed for many decades in the harsh realities of religious and ethnic differences.

Hated by politician and loved by the rabble, Mahathir had used the carrot and stick approach to ensure peace and prosperity.His detractors may not agree with his less than desirable approach but it certainly has been for the greater good......keeping the nation at peace.

Though, I am no supporter of the opposition I do not believe the recent claim that the DAP was conspiring with Christian leaders to make Christianity the official religion of the country and to install a Christian prime minister.It is highly improbable and was nothing but mischievous attempt to cause civil unrest.

The bloggers that started the rumours should be investigated, if found guilty, arrested and thrown in the slammer.

Utusan Malaysia that propagate the rumours without checking its facts first should be given a show cause letter why its publishing permit should not be suspended or withdrawn unless it come up with reasonable explanation or give material evidence that such allegations were true.

I believe the leaders in DAP are not that stupid to trot on such improbable and sensitive subjects.No one in their right mind could have believed that the minority Christians have such ambitions and DAP toying with such an idea seemed preposterous.

Is Najib in a Catch 22 situation? Why has he not acted against the troublemakers and show them he meant business.His 1 Malaysia would remained a mere slogan and a sham if he continues to allow such disemboweling of religious issues for political mileage.Is he maintaining his elegant silence because he is afraid of losing the Malay supports if he slammed Utusan and pro-UMNO blogs for the spectre they have created .

The opposition DAP are equally guilty of raising sensitive religious issues for political mileage. The Allah and Malay Bible issues were boldly and loudly accentuated by DAP in their political campaigns in the Sarawak state elections.They were hoping to turn the Christians in Sarawak to vote massively against the BN. However, the swing was not enough to dethrone Taib and the BN. DAP, not Pakatan, was the winner.

Here, another moron from the Bar Council seeking cheap publicity says Malaysia has no official religion.He cited Article 3 as stating “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation” and pointed out the word “official” was nowhere in the provision.

This learned fool is worse than the man in the street, is he splitting hairs, or just plain stupid? Was it necessary to mention the word "official" in every articles in the Constitution, is it not sufficient that Islam was explicitly mentioned as religion of the Federation.

Malaysia is not the only country with such provision in its Constitution, many Christian nations particularly in Latin America and Europe and Muslim nations in Middle East have the same provision in their constitutions.

If it was not so, why the need to mention Islam as religion of the Federation. Article 3 (1) would be simply written as shown below.

"All religions can be practised freely in the Federation"

The learned joker failed to widen the scope of interpretation of Article 3 (2), (3), (4) and (5) which officially makes the rulers of the states and by extension the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as head of Islam.

Article 3 of the Malaysian Constitution is reproduced below:
1. Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.
2. In every State other than States not having a Ruler the position of the Ruler as the Head of the religion of Islam in his State in the manner and to the extent acknowledged and declared by the Constitution, all rights, privileges, prerogatives and powers enjoyed by him as Head of that religion, are unaffected and unimpaired; but in any acts, observance or ceremonies with respect to which the Conference of Rulers has agreed that they should extend to the Federation as a whole each of the other Rulers shall in his capacity of Head of the religion of Islam authorize the Yang di-pertuan Agong to represent him.
3. The Constitution of the States of Malacca, Penang, Sabah and Sarawak shall each make provision for conferring on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall be Head of the religion of Islam in that State.
4. Nothing in this Article derogates from any other provision of this Constitution.
5. Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall be the Head of the religion of Islam in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan; and for this purpose Parliament may by law make provisions for regulating Islamic religious affairs and for constituting a Council to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in matters relating to the religion of Islam.
It's about time Najib use his absolute discretion to invoke the ISA, fairly and squarely, on the troublemakers from both sides of the political divide.

This is the time to bring out the ISA
, without fear or favour.