Possibilities

The events that had been unfolding in Perak over the past few months would only be over if and only if the state dissolves its State Legislative Assembly and seek a fresh mandate from the people of Perak.

Baba Yetu - Christopher Tin

Baba yetu, Yesu uliye
Mbinguni yetu, Yesu, amina!
Baba yetu, Yesu, uliye
Jina lako litukuzwe

Baba yetu, Yesu uliye
Mbinguni yetu, Yesu, amina!
Baba yetu, Yesu, uliye
Jina lako litukuzwe

Utupe leo chakula chetu
Tunachohitaji utusamehe
Makosa yetu, hey!
Kama nasi tunavyowasamehe
Waliotukosea usitutie
Katika majaribu, lakini
Utuokoe, na yule, milelea milele!

Baba yetu, Yesu uliye
Mbinguni yetu, Yesu, amina!
Baba yetu, Yesu, uliye
Jina lako litukuzwe

Baba yetu, Yesu uliye
Mbinguni yetu, Yesu, amina!
Baba yetu, Yesu, uliye
Jina lako litukuzwe

Ufalme wako ufike utakalo
Lifanyike duniani kama mbinguni (Amina)

Baba yetu, Yesu uliye
Mbinguni yetu, Yesu, amina!
Baba yetu, Yesu, uliye
Jina lako litukuzwe

Baba yetu, Yesu uliye
Mbinguni yetu, Yesu, amina!
Baba yetu, Yesu, uliye
Jina lako litukuzwe

Utupe leo chakula chetu
Tunachohitaji utusamehe
Makosa yetu, hey!
Kama nasi tunavyowasamehe
Waliotukosea usitutie
Katika majaribu, lakini
Utuokoe, na yule, simama mwehu

Baba yetu, Yesu, uliye
Jina lako litukuzwe
Baba yetu, Yesu, uliye
Jina lako litukuzwe

What if We - Chiara

Words of wisdom
Prophets and Quotes
Wise men talking
Tales from the old

I reach for the stars
Wherever they are
In darkness

We're lost
Fading away

What if we
Could be free?

Mystify
Our wisdom in time
And one day we'll see

What if we
Found the key?

Throw the dice
Unravel our lies
And learn how to be

All the madness
Feeding our soul
Take a wild guess
Out of control

There will be a star
No matter how far
Shining

One day
We'll sail away

What if we
Could be free?

Mystify
Our wisdom in time
And one day we'll see

What if we
Found the key?

Throw the dice
Unravel our lies
And learn how to be

If you don't know your destination
Who determines your destiny?

What if we
Could be free?

Mystify
Our wisdom in time
And one day we'll see

What if we
Found the key?

Throw the dice
Unravel our lies
And learn how to be

Hymn to Red October - Basil Poledouris

Холодно, хмуро...
И мрачно в душе
Как мог знать я
что ты умрёшь?

До свиданья, берег родной!
Как нам трудно представить, что это не сон...
Родина, дом родной,
До свиданья, Родина!

Эй! И в поход, и в поход!
Нас волна морская ждёт не дождётся.
Нас зовёт морская даль
И прибой!

Салют отцам и нашим дедам -
Заветам их всегда верны.
Теперь ничто не остановит
Победный шаг родной страны!

Ты плыви, плыви бесстрашно,
Гордость северных морей,
Революции надежда,
Сгусток веры всех людей.

Ты плыви, плыви бесстрашно,
Гордость северных морей,
Революции надежда,
Сгусток веры всех людей.

Салют отцам и нашим дедам -
Заветам их всегда верны.
Теперь ничто не остановит
Победный шаг родной страны!

Ты плыви, плыви бесстрашно,
Гордость северных морей,
Революции надежда,
Сгусток веры всех людей.

В октябре, в октябре
Рапортуем мы наши победы.
В октябре, в октябре
Новый мир дали нам наши деды!

Ты плыви, плыви бесстрашно,
Гордость северных морей,
Революции надежда,
Сгусток веры всех людей.

Салют отцам и нашим дедам -
Заветам их всегда верны.
Теперь ничто не остановит
Победный шаг родной страны!

В октябре, в октябре
Рапортуем мы наши победы.
В октябре...
Новый мир...

So it seems another death had happened in Nanyang Technological University when a Project Officer was found hanged in his apartment at Nanyang Heights, barely a week after an Indonesian student allegedly stabbed his professor and fell to his death. Before the dust had settled over the first incident, the talk of town had now focused on this second incident as well. As it is now, nothing much had came out of the official investigation. The President of NTU, Dr Su Guaning, sent out an email to all students and staff regarding this incident, but nothing was on the cause of death (beyond the obvious fact that he was found hanged). It might perhaps be the best move the President could make at this point, considering nothing had been released by the investigators yet.

However, as investigation is still ongoing, the debates online about the true cause of this incident had taken a turn from discussing facts to discussing conspiracies and hidden agendas. Thus far, many remarks online, which I strongly believe to have been made by Indonesians, perhaps even friends of the Indonesian student who died, claimed that there is a hidden, unrevealed truth. Some claimed that the stabbed professor had something to do with both incidents, while some had even gone to the extent of incriminating him for the death of the Indonesian. The fact that the Project Officer, a Chinese national, died provided a stronger platform for these individuals to promote their causes and reasons. And they do this under the guise of getting the authorities of revealing the truth.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking for the truth to be revealed. In fact, the truth will probably benefit NTU more than if they cover the case up. But the problem that NTU is now faced with is not really about people wanting the truth (and nothing but the truth), but people who wants to implicate someone else in place of the Indonesian student for causing injury and his own death just because they cannot believe that he is capable of such things. And here, with the Chinese national's death, the call for such implication grows. This immediately begs a question - what happens if and when the truth is revealed, it was shown that the Indonesian student is responsible for stabbing his professor and causing his own death, or even the death of this Chinese national. What then would these people say. That the truth is nothing but a lie? That the Indonesian, Mr David Hartanto Widjaja, can never kill or attempt to kill someone? This question remains open, and until now nobody had posted this question to those that vehemently claimed that the Indonesian is innocent, and all guilt lies with someone else.

In fact, things are getting ugly when these individuals, who instead of just posting their conspiracy theories, also posted remarks on how others are wrong (including the Singapore media), and that everyone else should stop spreading what they term as "lies and slander". Instead of discussing, they are now forcing down the throats of unbelievers that they are right. This immature behaviour only strengthens the perception that these individuals are not interested in the truth, but to implicate someone else in the Indonesian's place, blind to the fact that it might just be possible that he is the perpetrator of everything.

Therefore with those irresponsible remarks posted online, it is no longer about getting down to the truth. It is about denying the truth in order to put in place a picture of what happened as concocted by those who could never believe that the Indonesian student could do such a thing. And when they used whatever source and platform (i.e. Indonesian media, self-proclaimed expert analysis, etc.) they can find just to back themselves up, it goes to show the desperation to maintain that idea, even though nothing of the actual truth had surfaced yet. And when the truth surfaces, it could either make or break them. Which is where all those "what happens then" question comes in.

This is an open message to everyone reading - it might be true that the Indonesian is innocent, but it might also be equally true that the Indonesian is guilty of all charges.

On Monday, a student from Nanyang Technological University stabbed his final year project supervisor, cut his wrist, and then fell to his death off the campus building. The professor was injured but survived the incident. Much had been talked about the incident, and much information had been released.

Some questioned the stressful environment of university life in Singapore. Some had said that the student was a nice person, and would not have done so without a reason. And some blatantly claimed that perhaps it was the professor who pushed the student too hard.

Nanyang Technological University had confirmed that the student had lost his scholarship about two weeks ago. That was after serving three warning letters over the previous year to the student.

However as of now, what's important isn't really the reason, but what happened. The fact that the student stabbed the professor is that of attempting to cause harm or death, and no reason whatsoever could justify such an act. Unless of course the student was proven to be mentally ill, which was never the case prior to the incident.

Some would say that putting it such, void of emotion, is not a proper way to look at the situation. But the situation was exactly what it is, and under the Laws of Singapore, there is no justifiable reason that one could use to harm, take, or attempt to take the life of another. Yet this was what exactly the student did.

So this is not about voiding emotions in the analysis of the case. This is about looking at the bare facts presented before us.

Amazing Grace - Sarah Brightman

Amazing grace, how sweet the sound
That sav'd a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.

The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God, who call'd me here below,
Will be forever mine.

Thro' many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
'Tis grace has brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

Abdullah: 'Anyone can be PM' - The Star, 6 November 2008

Perhaps what one must ask when this statement was made was what would it cost to put a non-Malay as the Prime Minister of Malaysia. Yet the answer could not be any simpler - that we must discard racial politics, and it must first start with killing UMNO, therefore demonstrating a show of force that racial politics must come to an end.

Ultimately, time and time again it has been proven that UMNO is a domineering force within the ruling coalition which merely uses their coalition partners as rubber stamps for the racist policies they need in place in order to maintain their grip on the corridors of power.

Therefore, if the cost is indeed equal that of bringing down UMNO before we can see a change in Malaysia, then it's something worth paying for, not just for us, but for the generations of Malaysians to come.

The people of the United States of America created history today by voting in their first African American President. It was a symbol of change - bold change that discarded the notion of race when it comes to electing the most capable person in their opinion to run their country.

Yet somehow, I can't help thinking of the implications that the event would bring to Malaysia. Barack Obama is what our Malaysian government would call a child of an immigrant. And given how Malaysia treats its citizens that are of non-Malay origin, it is not hard to see what the government stand would be on this issue.

The problem is, no matter how Barack Obama performs as President, his tenure would and can be manipulated by the UMNO dominated government for its own propaganda of racial supremacy and dominance. If Obama does a good job, runs for re-election and gets re-elected, UMNO would leverage on that to antagonize the non-Malay population. They would move along the idea that perhaps Malays would lose their political dominance in Malaysia and it could be irreversible, if Malay supremacy is not projected on the non-Malays. Yet on the other hand, if Obama does a bad job, then UMNO would have it easy and could say that non-Malays would wreck the country if given leadership. Either way, it is political mileage for UMNO.

We may think that the reasons used and the lines towed by UMNO are superficial at best, and that any educated person who are able to think would be able to see pass the smokescreen. Yet in Malaysia, the majority of the educated are not trained to think. The education system is such that it encourages conformance to the established system, which is biased in favour to the ruling coalition dominated by UMNO and projects the Malay supremacy and dominance mindset.

Whatever it is, we need to prepare ourselves for the eventuality that UMNO leverages on the election results to further their racist agenda.

The following is an open letter by Zaid Ibrahim, former minister in the Prime Minister's Department, to the Prime Minister of Malaysia, calling for the abolishment of the Internal Security Act (ISA) 1960:

ZAID IBRAHIM'S OPEN LETTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER.

29 September 2008

YAB Dato' Seri Abdullah Badawi Prime Minister of Malaysia
5th Floor, East Wing
Perdana Putra Building
Putrajaya
Malaysia

Dear Mr Prime Minister

In our proclamation of independence, our first Prime Minister gave voice to the lofty aspirations and dreams of the people of Malaya: that Malaya was founded on the principles of liberty and justice, and the promise that collectively we would always strive to improve the welfare and happiness of its people.

Many years have passed since that momentous occasion and those aspirations and dreams remain true and are as relevant to us today as they were then. This was made possible by a strong grasp of fundamentals in the early period of this nation. The Federal Constitution and the laws made pursuant to it were well founded; they embodied the key elements of a democracy built on the Rule of Law. The Malaysian Judiciary once commanded great respect from Malaysians and was hailed as a beacon for other nations. Our earlier Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn were truly leaders of integrity, patriots in their own right and most importantly, men of humility. They believed in and built this nation on the principles and values enunciated in our Constitution.

Even when they had to enact the Internal Security Act (ISA) 1960, they were very cautious and apologetic about it. Tunku stated clearly that the Act was passed to deal with the communist threat. "My cabinet colleagues and I gave a solemn promise to Parliament and the nation that the immense powers given to the Government under the ISA would never be used to stifle legitimate opposition and silent lawful dissent", was what the Tunku said. Our third Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn reinforced this position by saying that the ISA was not intended to repress lawful political opposition and democratic activity on the part of the citizenry.

The events of the last three weeks have compelled me to review the way in which the ISA has been used. This exercise has sadly led me to the conclusion that the Government has time and time again failed the people of this country in repeatedly reneging on that solemn promise made by Tunku Abdul Rahman. This has been made possible because the Government and the law have mistakenly allowed the Minister of Home Affairs to detain anyone for whatever reason he thinks fit. This subjective discretion has been abused to further certain political interests.

History is the great teacher and speaks volumes in this regard. Even a cursory examination of the manner in which the ISA has been used almost from its inception would reveal the extent to which its intended purpose has been subjugated to the politics of the day.

Regrettably, Tunku Abdul Rahman himself reneged on his promise. In 1965, his administration detained Burhanuddin Helmi, the truly towering Malay intellectual, a nationalist who happened to be a PAS leader. He was kept in detention until his death in 1969. Helmi was a political opponent and could by no stretch of the imagination be considered to have been involved in the armed rebellion or communism that the ISA was designed to deal with. This detention was an aberration, a regrettable moment where politics had been permitted to trump the rule of law. It unfortunately appears to have set a precedent and many detentions of persons viewed as having been threatening to the incumbent administration followed through the years. Even our literary giant, 'sasterawan negara' the late Tan Sri A Samad Ismail was subjected to the ISA in 1976. How could he have been a threat to national security?

I need not remind you of the terrible impact of the 1987 Operasi Lalang. Its spectre haunts the Government as much as it does the peace loving people of this nation, casting a gloom over all of us. There were and still are many unanswered questions about those dark hours when more than a hundred persons were detained for purportedly being threats to national security. Why they were detained has never been made clear to Malaysians. Similarly, no explanation has been forthcoming as to why they were never charged in court. Those detainees included amongst their numbers senior opposition Members of Parliament who are still active in Parliament today. The only thing that is certain about that period was that UMNO was facing a leadership crisis. Isn't it coincidental that the recent spate of ISA arrests has occurred when UMNO is again having a leadership crisis?

In 2001, Keadilan 'reformasi' activists were detained in an exercise that the Federal Court declared was in bad faith and unlawful. The continued detention of those that were not released earlier in the Kamunting detention facility was made possible only by the fact that the ISA had been questionably amended in 1988 to preclude judicial review of the Minister's order to detain. Malaysians were told that these detainees had been attempting to overthrow the Government via militant means and violent demonstrations. Seven years have gone and yet no evidence in support of this assertion has been presented. Compounding the confusion even further, one of these so-called militants, Ezam Mohamad Noor, recently rejoined UMNO to great fanfare, as a prized catch it would seem.

At around the same time, members of PAS were also detained for purportedly being militant and allegedly having links to international terrorist networks. Those detained included Nik Adli, the son of Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat the Menteri Besar of Kelantan. Malaysians were made a promise by the Government that evidence of the alleged terrorist activities and links of these detainees would be disclosed. To date no such evidence has been produced.

The same formula was used in late 2007 when the HINDRAF 5 were detained. Malaysians were told once again that these individuals were involved in efforts to overthrow the Government and had links with the militant Liberation Tiger of Tamil Eelam of Sri Lanka. To date no concrete evidence have been presented to support this assertion. It would seem therefore that the five were detained for their involvement in efforts that led to a mobilisation of Malaysian Indians to express, through peaceful means, their frustration against the way in which their community had been allowed to be marginalised. This cause has since been recognised as a legitimate one. The HINDRAF demonstration is nothing extraordinary as such assemblies are universally recognised as being a legitimate means of expression.

In the same vein, the grounds advanced in support of the most recent detentions of Tan Hoon Cheng, Teresa Kok and Raja Petra Kamarudin leave much to be desired. The explanation that Tan Hoon Cheng was detained for her own safety was farcical. The suggestion that Teresa Kok had been inciting religious sentiments was unfounded as was evinced by her subsequent release.

As for Raja Petra Kamarudin, the prominent critic of the Government, a perusal of his writings would show that he might have been insulting of the Government and certain individuals within it. However, being critical and insulting could not in any way amount to a threat to national security. If his writings are viewed as being insulting of Islam, Muslims or the Holy Prophet (pbuh), he should instead be charged under the Penal Code and not under the ISA. In any event, he had already been charged for sedition and criminal defamation in respect of some of his statements. He had claimed trial, indicating as such his readiness and ability to defend himself. Justice would best be served by allowing him his day in court more so where, in the minds of the public, the Government is in a position of conflict for having been the target of his strident criticism.

The instances cited above strongly suggest that the Government is undemocratic. It is this perspective that has over the last 25 plus years led to the Government seemingly arbitrarily detaining political opponents, civil society and consumer advocates, writers, businessmen, students, journalists whose crime, if it could be called that, was to have been critical of the Government. How it is these individuals can be perceived as being threats to national security is beyond my comprehension. The self-evident reality is that legitimate dissent was and is quashed through the heavy-handed use of the ISA.

There are those who support and advocate this carte-blanche reading of the ISA. They will seek to persuade you that the interests of the country demand that such power be retained, that Malaysians owe their peace and stability to laws such as the ISA. This overlooks the simple truth that Malaysians of all races cherish peace. We lived together harmoniously for the last 400 years, not because of these laws but in spite of them.

I believe the people of this country are mature and intelligent enough to distinguish actions that constitute a 'real' threat to the country from those that threaten political interests. Malaysians have come know that the ISA is used against political opponents and, it would seem, when the leadership is under challenge either from within the ruling party or from external elements.

Malaysians today want to see a Government that is committed to the court process to determine guilt or innocence even for alleged acts of incitement of racial or religious sentiment. They are less willing to believe, as they once did, that a single individual, namely the Minister of Home Affairs, knows best about matters of national security. They value freedom and the protection of civil liberties and this is true of people of other nations too.

Mr Prime Minister, the results of the last General Election are clear indication that the people of Malaysia are demanding a reinstatement of the Rule of Law. I was appointed as your, albeit short-lived, Minister in charge of legal affairs and judicial reform. In that capacity, I came to understand more keenly how many of us want reform, not for the sake of it, but for the extent to which our institutions have been undermined by events and the impact this has had on society.

With your blessing, I attempted to push for reform. High on my list of priorities was a reinstatement of the inherent right of judicial review that could be enabled through a reversion of the key constitutional provision to its form prior to the controversial amendment in 1988. I need not remind you that that constitutional amendment was prompted by the same series of events that led not only to Operasi Lalang but the sacking of the then Lord President and two supreme court justices. Chief amongst my concerns was the way in which the jurisdiction and the power of the Courts to grant remedy against unconstitutional and arbitrary action of the Executive had been removed by Parliament and the extent to which this had permitted an erosion of the civil liberties of Malaysians. It was this constitutional amendment that paved the way for the ouster provision in the ISA that virtually immunises the Minister from judicial review, a provision which exemplifies the injustice the constitutional amendment of 1988 has lent itself.

I also sought to introduce means by which steps could be taken to assist the Judiciary to regain the reputation for independence and competence it once had. Unfortunately, this was viewed as undesirable by some since an independent Judiciary would mean that the Executive would be less 'influential'.

I attempted to do these things and more because of the realisation that Malaysia's democratic traditions and the Rule of Law are under siege. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with giving everyone an independent Judiciary and the opportunity to a fair trial. This is consistent with the universal norms of human rights as it is with the tenets of Islam, the religion of the Federation. Unchecked power to detain at the whim of one man is oppressiveness at its highest. Even in Israel, a nation that is perpetually at war, the power to detain is not vested in one man and detention orders require endorsement from a judge.

If there are national security considerations, then these can be approached without jettisoning the safeguards intended to protect individual citizens from being penalised wrongfully. In other jurisdictions involved in armed conflicts, trials are held in camera to allow for judicial scrutiny of evidence considered too sensitive for public disclosure so as to satisfy the ends of justice. If this can be done in these jurisdictions, why not here where the last armed struggle we saw, the very one that precipitated the need for the ISA, came to an end in the 1980s? Any doubts as to the continued relevance of the ISA in its present form should have been put to rest by the recommendation by the National Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) that the ISA be repealed and an anti-terror legislation suited to the times enacted in its place. Containing as it did a sunset clause in its original times, the ISA was never intended to be a permanent feature on the Malaysian legal landscape.

Through its continued use in the manner described above and in the face of public sentiment, it is only natural that the ISA has become in the mind of the people an instrument of oppression and the Government is one that lends itself to oppressiveness. Its continued use does not bode well for a society that is struggling to find its place in the global arena. It does not bode well for the democracy that is so vital for us to develop sustainably.

Mr Prime Minister, I remember very clearly what you once said; that if one has the opportunity to do what is good and right for the country, then he must take on the task. I respect you deeply for that and if I were confident that I would have been able to do some good for Malaysia, I would have remained on your team. Sir, you are still the Prime Minister and you still have the opportunity to leave your footprint in Malaysian history. I urge you to do so by repealing the ISA once and for all.

Let us attempt to fulfil that solemn promise made by our beloved first Prime Minister to the people of this country.

Yours sincerely

ZAID IBRAHIM
Kuala Lumpur

手紙 ～拝啓 十五の君へ～ - アンジェラ·アキ

拝啓　この手紙読んでいるあなたは　どこで何をしているのだろう

十五の僕には誰にも話せない　悩みの種があるのです

未来の自分に宛てて書く手紙なら

きっと素直に打ち明けられるだろう
今　負けそうで　泣きそうで　消えてしまいそうな僕は
誰の言葉を信じ歩けばいいの？
ひとつしかないこの胸が何度もばらばらに割れて
苦しい中で今を生きている
今を生きている

拝啓　ありがとう　十五のあなたに伝えたい事があるのです

自分とは何でどこへ向かうべきか　問い続ければ見えてくる
荒れた青春の海は厳しいけれど
明日の岸辺へと　夢の舟よ進め
今　負けないで　泣かないで　消えてしまいそうな時は
自分の声を信じ歩けばいいの
大人の僕も傷ついて眠れない夜はあるけど
苦くて甘い今を生きている

人生の全てに意味があるから　恐れずにあなたの夢を育てて
Keep on beliving

負けそうで　泣きそうで　消えてしまいそうな僕は
誰の言葉を信じ歩けばいいの？

ああ　負けないで　泣かないで　消えてしまいそうな時は
自分の声を信じ歩けばいいの
いつの時代も悲しみを避けては通れないけれど
笑顔を見せて　今を生きていこう
今を生きていこう

拝啓　この手紙読んでいるあなたが
幸せな事を願います

Tegami ~Haikei Juugo No Kimi E~ - Angela Aki

Haikei kono tegami yondeiru anata wa
Doko de nani wo shiteiru no darou

Juugo no boku ni wa dare ni mo hanasenai
Nayami no kanae ga aru no desu

Mirai no jibun ni atete kaku tegami nara
Kitto sunao ni uchiake rareru darou

Ima makesou de nakisou de
Kieteshimaisou na boku wa
Dare no kotoba wo
Shinji arukeba ii no?
Hitotsu shika nai kono mune ga nando mo barabara ni warete
Kurushii naka de ima wo ikiteiru
Ima wo ikiteiru

Haikei arigatou juugo no anata ni
Tsutaetai koto ga aru no desu
Jibun to wa nani de doko e mukau beki ka
Toitsu dzukereeba mietekuru

Areta seishun no umi wa kibishii keredo
Asu no kishibe e to yume no fune yo susume

Ima makenai de nakanai de
Kieteshimaisou na toki wa
Jibun no koe wo shinjiaru keba ii no?
Otona no boku mo kizutsuite
Nemurenai yoru wa aru kedo
Nigakute amai ima ikiteiru

Jinsei no subete ni imi ga aru kara
Osorezu ni anata no yume wo sodatete
La la la, la la la, la la la
Keep on believing
La la la, la la la, la la la
Keep on believing, keep on believing, keep on believing

Makesou de nakisou de
Kieteshimaisou boku wa
Dare no kotoba wo shinji arukeba ii no?
Aa Makenai de nakanai de
Kieteshimaisou na toki wa
Jibun no koe wo shinjiarukeba ii no
Itsu no jidai mo kanashimi mo
Sakete wa torenai keredo
Egao wo misete ima wo ikite yukou
Ima wo ikite yukou

Haikei kono tegami yondeiru anata ga
Shiawase na koto wo negaimasu...

"Because I cannot bear to tell my children, or the children of the people I know, that they are second class citizens within their own country because they are born that way." - Why I Fight

If the nation is in good order, there is no need for some of us to fly the flag of Malaysia upside down. But somehow it doesn't seem right for the government that we do so.

It seems that what is right and wrong is not what is defined by the people, but by the few whose interest lies with maintaining their place in the current government. What I am against now is the notion that sedition is what is defined by a small majority from the ruling coalition's main party. When they say something is seditious, it is immediately looked at and action taken, like the incident where a blogger was arrested for asking us to fly the flag of Malaysia upside down as symbol of distress. Yet when they do something that the majority thinks is seditious, the perpetrators are often set free without major punishments.

This imbalance within the system, as well as other problems plaguing the people of Malaysia, is what's causing us to declare a nation in distress. Flying the flag upside down is not a symbol of disrespect. If we were to want to disrespect the flag, much more could have been done. We could have trampled on the flag, burned it, or even desecrate it, just to name a few ways.

But that is not what we want to do. We want to show a sign - one to the government, and the other to the world - that we are in trouble. In trouble because those who walk the corridors of power seem hell bent on retaining power while trying to silence any form of opposition using draconian laws like the Internal Security Act (ISA) and the Sedition Act.

Perhaps it is time we made it clear to the government - that we the people, are not idiots. We see things going wrong. We experience things going wrong. And when the government tells us that everything is fine, we know that it's nothing but a lie.

A challenge should be mounted against the government. Not by opposition Members of Parliaments, but by the people. It is time to take back the power that we had freely gave to the government, that which had been misused especially in the past few years under the disguise of maintaining order. It's clear that order is nowhere in sight. Recent events proved it, from the remarks made by the former de facto Law Minister, to the arrest of civilians under the ISA.

A question that most ask is whether we are prepared to face the consequences of our actions which may lead to regression. The answer would lie within the individuals. It gives rise to a series of questions. Are we prepared to live under a regime that is oppressive and discriminative? Are we willing to trade our freedom for security that is biased towards the ruling coalition? Are we ready to face hardship if and when the government falls and drags our nation, its economy, and the people, with them?

In the past, an individual had commented on my previous blog that the people may not be ready to rock the boat as of yet. That was two years ago. Yet at that time, my answer was simple, although I didn't put it down then - if we do not rock the boat, then the boat will forever stay still. No change will happen, and no progress will happen if the captain is incapable of effecting progress, which is the case of our Prime Minister now.

We see now the people's readiness to rock that boat. For 51 years, that boat had not been utilized to its full potential, given that it is helmed by less than capable individuals. But on March, the people rocked the boat - sending a clear signal that they want change.

Anwar Ibrahim set a target date of September 16 to overthrow the government and bring about change. That day came and went without the government overthrown. But we shouldn't stop believing in change. Anwar's deadline is not about results - it's about hope. It's about maintaining our belief that the government can, and will, eventually fall. It's not about the date September 16 being the date that he will overthrow the government, but about having something for us to believe in.

It's past D-Day for Anwar. More arrests would possibly be made, and Anwar may be one of the targeted. Yet we the people must show that even without Anwar as our leader, we will, and shall effect change. We will overthrow this government regardless, for failure to do so will result in dire consequences for all of us, and our future generation.

In the meantime, the flag of Malaysia will be flown upside down, until a possibility of a new dawn is seen. And I encourage all of us who care about our nation to do so as well, for if we stand united, there is nothing the government can do to harm us regardless of how they want to define the notion of flying the flag of Malaysia upside down.

We are inherently taught to hate, in one way or another. But what will happen when the elements we hate are eliminated?

How do we define trust?

"We are all explorers, driven to know what's over the horizon - what's beyond our own shores. Yet the more I've experienced, the more I've learnt that no matter how far we travel, or how fast we get there, the most profound discoveries are not necessarily beyond that next star, but they're within us, woven into the thread that binds us - all of us, to each other. The final frontier begins in this hall - lets' explore it together."

- Captain Jonathan Archer, lead character in Star Trek: Enterprise