Author: Hafiz Noor Shams

For more about me, please read this.

Categories
Humor Sports

[769] Of Ajax is off to the playoff!

Ajax Amsterdam has confirmed a place in the playoff for the second Dutch slot for next season’s Champions’ League. In last league game against RKC Waalwijk Ajax won 4 to 2, hence guaranteeing fourth place.

I’m still unclear whether Ajax will face Feyenoord or AZ but either way, Ajax will be facing a rival. Yes. You heard that right. For ages, there were the Big Three – Ajax, Feyenoord and PSV. With AZ, it’s becoming a Big Four instead and AZ has a real grudge against Ajax. Well, just it’s Chairman Dirk Schering. But he does really hates Ajax. And that rivalry has gone off the pitch.

Ajax’s Technical Director Martin van Geel has been handed a 5-year stadium ban. That means van Geel can’t be at AZ’s homeground. It’s ridiculous – even the Dutch soccer association, the KNVB commented on it:

KNVB director Henk Kesler has made crystal clear how he feels about the incident in today’s issue of De Telegraaf: “I was in my car when I heard about the stadium ban for Van Geel and I laughed so loud I almost crashed into a lamppost. For a second I thought it was an April Fool’s Day joke, but it’s a bit late for that. It is pretty absurd for a football club to hand a stadium ban to the technical director of another club. Was Martin van Geel involved in criminal activities for which a ban would normally be appropriate? This makes no sense whatsoever and Mr Scheringa is making a complete fool out of himself. Perhaps we should hand him a stadium ban for the remaining 37 stadiums in Dutch professional football.”

Regardless, it shows that this little rivalry is brewing up.

For the record, van Geel was AZ’s TD before he joins Ajax. To spice it up further, AZ’s current coach, Louis van Gaal was Ajax’s former TD. Sweet, eh?

Whatever it is, I feel it’s better for Ajax to kick Feyenoord’s ass instead. I don’t hate AZ as much as I hate Feyenoord or PSV, yet. Hence, the sweetness of kicking Feyenoord’s ass is greater than the sweetness of kicking AZ’s.

Categories
ASEAN Politics & government This blog

[768] Of bridge of euphemism: another take

As I’ve written before, I’m extremely disappointed with the way the Malaysian government handled the bridge issue. I’m disappointed and angry because the whole fiasco seems to prove that the Malaysian government had failed to explore all contingencies regarding this matter.

The Prime Minister states the legal ramification due to the need to severe and reconnect the water lines and the railway track that go to Singapore as the reason for the bridge cancellation. The problem is, why now? Why offer such reason only now? Did the policymakers fail to give such detail a visit in the earlier stages of planning? It’s a preposterous idea but yet, it’s one of the most possible explanations, if not the only. If that is the case, then God save Malaysia.

If Malaysian government was so worried with legal implications that would arise, why did the Malaysian government give a green light to Gerbang Perdana, the bridge contractor in the first place? Wouldn’t it make more sense to go to the international court, be it the International Court of Justice at The Hague or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg, whichever relevant, before going ahead with the project if the government was honestly concerned with legality? Why stating such reason after pressing the start button? Why initiate the project and kill it off soon after and in so, having to compensate a private entity with RM100 million needlessly? Why not cancel it before iniatiate the project? Why the earlier gung-ho attitude and therefore putting a facade that blatantly misled many Malaysians?

Why? Why? Why?

If the government had explored all avenues, this issue would have been resolved much earlier. If the government had done its homework, Malaysia could have saved resources that would be better spent elsewhere. If the Malaysian government had called the project off before construction actually had begun, maybe I wouldn’t be so infuriated. Maybe, a lot less people would have been agitated.

Concerning the media, it’s amazing how popular opinion in the mainstream media changes at a finger snap, blink of an eye. Just weeks ago, the MSM was 100% behind the bridge. Hell! 101% if it is at all sensible. But when the Prime Minister changes his mind, so does the MSM without pause. Where is the sincerity in us all? This is not honesty. This is merely kow-towing to the power-that-be.

Yet, I can’t pretend to be shocked. The MSM is a dog on leash with the kris looms above after all. Some of them are even downright suckers.

In his column today in the New Straits Times, Khairy Jamaluddin – the PM’s son-in-law with grand political ambition – while supporting his father-in-law, quotes Sir John Maynard Keynes: “When the facts change, I changed my mind.” I don’t mind pragmatism but in this case, the facts haven’t changed. It’s still fact that we need to cut the pipes, the track and – surprise, surprise – the Causeway! On top of that, Singapore’s position has already been known right from the start. The only way the facts could have had changed is if the government had failed to explore all contingencies.

Finally, our beloved Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is an indecisive man. I hope the common people will be as indecisive as him in 2008 about voting for his party. Let’s see how well he likes indecisiveness.

I feel cheated by my own government and I don’t like that.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p/s – touching on ReCom.org, I’ve said earlier that it would be back within 24 hours. At first, it was thought that it was a billing issue. However, it is not. Given that I’ve received some search result with the word “recom” on it, I feel it’s important to inform those that wanted to know what’s going on.

Here’s the story. The operator of the server that hosts ReCom.org informs “us” that ReCom is consuming too much resources and it’s starting to affect the server stability. Some of the admins say that something is not right and that ReCom shouldn’t experience the level of traffic according to the host. So now, ReCom.org has several option.

One is to try to reduce traffic. I doubt this will be so. Two, subscribe to greater resources. That’s most likely mean paying USD45 per month and in the long run, USD540 for the year. Somebody has already pledged USD100 for ReCom but I really don’t like option two. But hell…

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

pp/s – housekeeping! From now on, I’ll place arabesque-like icons to separate my main entry and all of those postscripts.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

ppp/s – as of April 16, ReCom is back.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p4/s – Mahathir is a dissenter. Maybe now he feels how Tunku felt back in the 1980s. Regardless, from Bernama:

JOHOR BAHARU, April 15 (Bernama) — Malaysia has the right under its agreement with Singapore to relocate the pipelines supplying water to the island for specified reasons but only after giving about six months notice, said former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

He said the provision for relocation was proven valid because Malaysia had relocated the Singapore pipelines on land during the construction of the new road and railway station for the Integrated Southern Gateway project.

Another article by Bernama, syndicated by Singaporean Straits Times:

JOHOR BARU – IN AN open attack on his successor, former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad yesterday suggested holding a referendum in Johor to see if there was backing in the state for the government decision to cancel the bridge project.

I can’t find the same article at Bernama.

Categories
Politics & government Sports

[767] Of differing point of view and non-existing NPOV

In Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, Obi Wan Kenobi says “So what I have told you was true… from a certain point of view.” That scene along with the quote is a tribute to relativism.

The truth in that is undeniable (at risk of committing circular reasoning), especially when it concerns Parti Sosialis Malaysia‘s current case in the Court of Appeal of Malaysia. Utusan Malaysia says:

‘ROS wajar tolak permohonan PSM’

Oleh NORZAINAH NORDIN

PUTRAJAYA 12 April – Mahkamah Rayuan hari ini diberitahu bahawa Pendaftar Pertuduhan (ROS) bertindak wajar ketika menolak permohonan Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) untuk didaftarkan sebagai parti politik peringkat kebangsaan atas alasan PSM gagal mengemukakan dokumen dan maklumat yang lengkap.

It practically means Registrar of Societies is right to reject PSM’s application because the party didn’t have representative from at least seven states. The title of the article itself roughly translates into “ROS is right to reject PSM’s application”.

In The Star however:

ROS policy on party invalid, court hears

PUTRAJAYA: The Registrar of Societies’ policy requiring Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) to have representatives in seven states before it could be registered as a national political party was an invalid criterion, the Court of Appeal heard yesterday.

I first read The Star’s version. When I saw Utusan’s, I was about to shout “liar!” Only after I read both articles carefully did I realized that The Star was quoting PSM’s counsel while Utusan was quoting ROS’ instead. Neither are lying but both are telling half of the truth.

Because both are not reporting from a neutral point of view, this makes me wonder – does Utusan suffer from phobia of socialism? Is The Star a commiephone? Stretching it further, is UMNO still stuck in Malayan Emergency worldview? Is MCA a commie wannabe?

Ridiculous questions but what else is there to conclude from the two radically differing pieces that report on the same subject?

p/s – w00t! Ajax won against Vitesse while Utrecht lost to Groningen! This enables Ajax to climb up to fourth and force Utrecht to go down to fifth. Ajax needs fourth placing in order to qualify for UEFA Champions Leauge playoff. One more game to go and all Ajax needs is a draw against Willem II Tilburg to secure a spot in the playoff. Sweet!

Categories
ASEAN Politics & government

[766] Of crooked bridge cancelled

While I’m relieved that the Malaysian government has stopped the bridge talks with Singapore and directly crossed out the possibility of Malaysia acceding to unacceptable Singaporean demands, I’m extremely disappointed with the Malaysian government’s decision to cancel the bridge altogether . I found it out through TV3. Bernama has more:

KUALA LUMPUR, April 12 (Bernama) — The government has decided to stop the construction of the bridge to replace the Johor Causeway that links Malaysia and Singapore, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced Wednesday.

He said the government had also decided to stop all negotiations pertaining to the bridge. Construction of the bridge, also known as the “scenic bridge” began early this year, to replace half of the Johor Causeway on the Malaysian side.

Though the reason for quitting the negotiation has been given, reason for the bridge cancelation is still a mystery. Hence, tomorrow’s local papers will be of extraordinary interest. The Malaysian government must clear out the air.

Before tomorrow comes, I’d like to say, historical heritage is not a proper reason and I will not accept such incoherent reasoning.

As stated earlier, I’m for a bridge, straight or otherwise. And no, if there’s still anybody that thinks the bridge would be a cul-de-sac, it is not. At the same time, I’m against bowing to Singaporean impossible demands. You could say, I’m being hawkish on this matter.

p/s – ReCom.org is down (again!) but it should be back up in less than a day.

pp/s – as if one disappointment is not enough, Malaysia lost 1 – 0 to Japan in Hockey World Cup Qualifier in Changzhou, China. This makes it hard for Malaysia to qualify for the World Cup.

ppp/s – the Prime Minister answers the mystery:

PUTRAJAYA, April 12 (Bernama) — Malaysia decided to stop the construction of the “scenic bridge” meant to replace the Malaysian half of the Johor Causeway because of its legal implications and complications, said Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi Wednesday.

The Prime Minister said the Cabinet deliberated on the project at its weekly meeting today and felt that there would still be legal implications and complications to resolve afterward should Malaysia proceed with the project.

“Problems will arise when we have to cut the causeway, the water pipes and railway track and connected them to the new bridge. The problems will continue,” he told Bernama when asked to explain why Malaysia did not just build the bridge in its own territory without negotiating with Singapore.

So, does this mean we could only have a bridge in 2060 when the water contract ends?

Categories
Environment

[765] Of polluters may face death penalty

On TV a few hours ago was a report on Akta Industri Perkhidmatan Air (Water Services Industry Bill) and it is set for approval soon . The report on TV3 highlighted that a water polluter that causes death on purpose may face death penalty. I haven’t had the chance to take a look at the bill since I can’t find it on the net. The most relevant result is an article at Bernama. The Bernama’s report dated yesterday:

KUALA LUMPUR, April 10 (Bernama) — Those who pollute the drainage or the water supply system may face death penalty when the Water Services Industry Bill 2006 is approved and enforced.

The bill tabled by the Communication, Water and Energy Minister Datuk Seri Dr Lim Keng Yaik for the first reading in Dewan Rakyat here also listed the acts considered as polluting drinking water and its penalties.

Dr Lim who also tabled the Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara Bill (SPAN) 2006 to create a commission to oversee and regulate the water supply and sewerage services in Peninsula said the second reading of both the bills would be done during the current sitting.

Under the Water Services Industry Bill, anyone found guilty with the intention of causing the death face a death penalty or jail up to 20 years and rotan.

If the death is caused by radioactive and toxic pollutants discarded in the water, those found guilty can be jailed not more than 10 years or fined not more than RM500,000 or whipping or all three.

I’m all for stricter environmental code but death penalty doesn’t quite sound right. This is even more so since the death penalty is applicable only when the polluter pollutes with the “intention of causing” death. It sounds as if it belongs to some other act that deals with treason or sabotage.

Let’s think about it. When a typical person or an entity pollutes, do they intent to cause death?

I doubt it. Typically, it’s about externality; the polluters don’t bare the cost of pollution and pass the cost of pollution to society instead. I have never heard a profit-seeking entity pollutes with the intention of killing somebody else. Even there’s death, these people don’t intent to kill. They intent to cut cost instead. It’s cheaper to pollute. For this reason, I feel this clause is meaningless. It gives so much leeway to polluters that it doesn’t really matter if the clause is included in the bill. It is ineffective.

The punishment clause should be rewritten. The phrase with the intention of causing death should be removed and while the death penalty dropped. Instead, it would be better if the bill states that anybody – with or without intention of polluting – found guilty of polluting our water supplies will face prison time or heavy monetary penalty.

For a person that commits murder on purpose – by whatsoever mean – we don’t need a new bill to deal with that, do we? Much less do we expect to deal with that in a water bill, in my humble opinion.