There are some issues that cannot be resolved in the short term and one of them is religious dispute. For that matter, human beings have been quarrelling over religion, in one form or another, for centuries and without satisfactory answers. 

The line has been stretched a little thin over the past six months. From calls for individual constitutional rights to claims of the big number of apostates to suggestions that Kongsi Raya should be discontinued, I think we have heard enough. 

Be it in organised forums, newspaper reports and commentaries, letters to the editor, postings on the Internet, or even idle chatter at the neighbourhood mamak shops, there is a sense of uncertainty over where all this will eventually lead to. We have to move on. 

Just take a look at the comments posted on certain websites. While some bloggers have taken pains to remove remarks deemed seditious, many have slipped through and not only remained on these sites but taken a life of their own as they are circulated all over the Internet. 

These reckless online comments, often racist, have been allowed to appear without a thought that people of all races and religions read them. It leads to a lot of unnecessary damage and strong reactions. 

In the name of free expression, we have allowed people to make hurtful remarks without giving a thought to the implications. 

When the right to speak is abused, the issue takes on a different perspective. The right of expression does not mean the right to hurt others. 

We take a stand without realising that there would also be opposing views, whether liberal, secular or conservative.  

When a statement is made by any individual or group, it leads to a reaction. If this goes on, it will never end. But it has to come to an end. 

While some of us are able to take part in an intellectual discourse in a mature manner, many others are unable to do so. That is a fact, unfortunately. 

There is a need for Malaysia to stress on our common ground. That must be our national mission. Haven't we wasted enough time on inconsequential issues that have bogged us down and drained our energy? 

Malaysia is in the news for the wrong reasons. The political spat and religious tangle have made good news reading for our neighbours and in a competitive regional economy, I am sure they would want us to remain that way. 

But we are in a race. There is this distinct frustration among many Malaysians that we are losing our strides. There is this fear that if we do not get our act together, we will fall behind and, if that happens, it would be difficult to catch up. 

They are right to have such anxieties because time waits for no one. Malaysia has a good thing going. We should be putting our talents and strengths together to compete with our economic rivals, not looking for differences among ourselves. 

There has to be a wake-up call, at some point. It would not be wrong to believe that the Prime Minister is losing his patience, even tolerance, on elements who want to disrupt the country's political and economic stability. 

There is excessive politicking in this country. We keep going back to the past, seemingly obsessed in digging out issues which Malaysians are simply no longer interested in. 

What Malaysians would like to know is how the Government can make it easier for them to cope with the increasing cost of living. For many middle-class Malaysians with housing and car loans, speculation of another interest rate hike is worrisome. 

Yes, we do sympathise with the attacks by the Israelis on Lebanon but we are equally concerned that the price of oil will go up again, given the uncertainties in the region.  

The Government has given us an assurance that there would no petrol price hike for this year but the war has serious bearing on the economy in other ways. 

But much more that, for many older Malaysians, we are sad that the word "muhibbah" has lost its meaning. The word isn't even used any more. 

We take great pride in telling the world that Malaysia is truly Asia. That we are multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural. That means pluralism has to be re-affirmed. 

Pluralism is not a word to be used only during annual festivals or in brochures for tourists. It is about Malaysians of different races coming together. No one, especially in government, should tolerate attempts by anyone to remove the multi-racial facet of this land. And that means safeguarding the rights of all Malaysians. 

We celebrate our National Day next month. It is time we remind ourselves how and what the three main major races have achieved because they worked together for Malaysia. 

We are Malaysians at home, not just when we are overseas. 

If we wish to show sensitivity and sensibility to one another, let the same be done by our politicians. Be leaders of Malaysians, not just one race. 

To check out reports on The Web of Terror, please click here.

 On the trail of the second wave

May 30, 2006

            By WONG CHUN WAI and LOURDES CHARLES

            MASRAN Arshad keeps to himself, mostly, at the Kamunting
Detention Centre, where he is now being detained under the Internal Security
Act. 

            There is little indication that the name of this 32-year-old man
from Semanggol, a small town in Perak, has been on the radar screen of every
major intelligence agency.

            He has tried to impress upon his fellow detainees and
interrogators that he is a tough man. To them, he is a firebrand who is
proud of his background.

            Masran has led a double life. He has travelled to Pakistan and
Afghanistan, spending his time in countless religious schools, which dot the
two countries.

            In Afghanistan, he met one man who changed his entire life –
Osama bin Laden, head of the al-Qaeda network of terrorists, who is now on
the run.

            Fired up by the passionate sermons of Osama, Masran decided to
dedicate his life to the shadowy work of al-Qaeda. More than that, he swore
his allegiance to the Saudi Arabian prince, who had given up his wealth for
his jihad.

            Together with Masran were three other Malaysians – Nik Abdul
Rahman Mustaffa, Mohd Farik Amin @ Zubair and Nazir Lep @ Lilie.

            Burning with idealism, Masran was ready to please Osama.
Watching his movements closely, the al-Qaeda operatives in the Taliban
capital of Kandahar found Masran to be hard-working and trustworthy.

            "Masran impressed them further when they found out that he is
also the son-in-law of a former top Jemaah Islamiah (JI) leader. His
father-in-law has since been arrested and sentenced to prison in Indonesia,"
said sources.

            To try him out, he acted as a courier for the al-Qaeda,
travelling through the mountains, to pass money and material to al-Qaeda
operatives in Pakistan.

            In South-East Asia, Hambali, the 39-year-old key al-Qaeda man
for the region, was their contact person. The Indonesian terrorist has since
been arrested by the CIA and detained in an unknown detention centre.

            Soon, the al-Qaeda set their eyes on Masran for a bigger job. It
was a mission Masran could never have imagined – to head a team to crash a
plane, which they would hijack, into the 73-storey Library Tower/US Bank
Tower, the tallest building in downtown Los Angeles.

            No date was given for the mission but the plan, which has now
been termed Project California, was supposed to be the biggest after the
Sept 11, 2001, attack on the Twin Towers in New York.

            "His main task was to carry C4 (plastic explosives) with him and
to take control of the plane by overpowering the cockpit crew," said one
intelligence official.

            Terrorism experts have described the plan as the "Second Wave"
to mean the follow-up attacks by the various al-Qaeda suicide bombers
worldwide after Sept 11.

            The fifth Malaysian – Zaini Zakaria – was given the job of
piloting the plane and to crash into the US Bank Tower in the central
business district in downtown Los Angeles.

            "It was to be an act which would get international attention
because it would be so awesome. This was supposed to be al-Qaeda's grandest
act of terror after Sept 11," another official added.

            Last month, Bush named Zaini, an electrical engineering graduate
from Western New College, Massachusetts, as being one of those picked for
the attack.

            Regional intelligence sources said Khaled Sheikh Mohamed, a top
al-Qaeda leader, personally chose the five Malaysians for the mission, with
blessings from Osama.

            According to security expert Ken Conboy in the book, The Second
Front, the Malaysians were chosen for al-Qaeda's second wave of attacks
because the movement was aware that intelligence forces were already keeping
an eye on Middle Eastern men.

            In what could possibly be an all-Malaysian terrorist team,
intelligence sources said their ability to speak English, although not
perfect, was an added advantage.

            Zaini, 39, was among the first Jemaah Islamiah members to be
selected by the al-Qaeda for formal training for foreign fighters in
Afghanistan.

            Although all were recruited before 2001, no date was given for
Project California, but the plan began to fall apart after that.

            "The Americans started attacking Kandahar and many al-Qaeda
leaders were on the run. Hambali started to set his eyes on less grandiose
attacks in South-East Asia," said intelligence sources.

            By then, regional intelligence officers had stepped up their
surveillance. The arrests of key al-Qaeda operatives shed more light on what
the Malaysians had planned to do and they began watching closely the five
Malaysians.

            Masran and Nik Abdul Rahman sneaked back into the country in
2002 and were immediately arrested.

            "Upon interrogation the authorities learnt that they were
involved in planning a second wave attack on the US.

            "The swift action by the Malaysian intelligence officers
prevented what would have been a similar incident to 9/11," the sources
said.

            It is learnt that acting on the information the Thai police
picked up Mohd Farik and Nazir in Ayutthaya, Bangkok before arresting
Hambali a couple of days later. They were handed over to the CIA.

            Like Hambali, the whereabouts of the two Malaysians remained
unknown, although there is talk that he is being held in a US facility in a
West Asian country.

            Hambali has been regarded as one of the planners of the
nightclub bombings in Bali in 2002 and the 2003 bomb attack on the JW
Marriot Hotel in Jakarta. 

            

Right way to handle campus politicIT would have been hushed up by Universiti Putra Malaysia if it hadn't been captured on video and circulated on the Internet.  

Without the visual impact, the scuffle involving a group of UPM students reported in the newspapers would not have stirred so much interest and unhappiness. 

It would have been dismissed as a minor incident unworthy of national interest but the circulation of the video clip, recorded on a video camera, kept the issue alive. 

Last week, gangsterism reared its ugly head when about 50 "pro-establishment" students intimidated and manhandled seven students belonging to the Gerakan Mahasiswa Maju UPM (UPM Student Progressive Front) said to be linked to Keadilan. 

The pro-government students, who call themselves Kumpulan Aspirasi, were said to be unhappy with the presence of the students who had set up a help counter for new students at the campus canteen. 

The Kumpulan Aspirasi group, led by an elected student council leader, wanted the SPF to leave because it was not a registered body. 

When the SPF students refused, the situation turned rowdy with the Kumpulan Aspirasi students seen pushing, shouting and intimidating the SPF group. Luckily, the ugly spat did not turn physical. 

A police report has been lodged but the police have left the case to be handled by the university authorities. 

Although students are not allowed to group themselves, whether along political, racial or religious line under the University and University Colleges Act, the fact is that they do. Sometimes, with the support of outside political help. 

The Umno and PAS influence is particularly strong on students, especially those from Kelantan, who are the most active in campus politics. 

For the minorities – the Chinese and Indians – who are keen to be involved, they are either pro-government backers, as in the MCA and MIC, or they are with the opposition. 

In the case of the UPM SPF students, they are perceived to be Keadilan supporters, and thus found themselves in a tight spot because the student council is controlled by the pro-government group. It is, in a way, a territorial squabble. 

For Chinese students in predominantly Malay universities, it has never been easy getting elected into the student council because the sad reality is that voting is on racial lines. 

It may be easier in Universiti Malaya and Universiti Sains Malaysia but not in UPM or Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Thus, the setting up of unregistered student bodies like the SPF and the Chinese Consultative Council (CCC) in UKM. 

Unlike the SPF, the CCC enjoyed much influence in UKM in the 1980s until the then Education Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim banned it, saying it was communal. 

But the CCC was accepted by the PAS and Umno-inclined groups, with both sides attempting to woo the crucial Chinese vote in student polls. 

They were regarded as the "kingmakers" and the CCC cleverly played that role and gained acceptance as a group. Although it was unregistered, it came under the ambit of the student council. 

I know because I was involved in the formation of the CCC together with several others, including now MCA Youth chief Datuk Liow Tiong Lai, Kelana Jaya MP Loh Seng Kok and Kulim state assemblyman Boey Chin Gan. 

We did not hide the fact that we were supportive of the MCA. The 2,000 Chinese students in the campus knew where we stood and came out in full force to vote for the CCC in a separate election.  

It was illegal but the student council turned up to endorse the poll, which must have given the university authorities a headache. 

In functions organised by the CCC, such as the mooncake festival, the CCC even managed to get MCA leaders and UKM officials to attend, thus giving these activities the seal of approval although it was an unregistered body. 

We could even secure the setting up of a pork-free Chinese food section at the canteen. Armed with written support from the Malay students, the CCC met UKM officials who approved it. 

Although it was hardly an ideal situation, it was an exercise in the sharing of political power and how the different races needed to work together. 

The then Malay student leaders, including many now holding key positions in politics and business, worked well with us. 

In the case of the Kumpulan Aspirasi students, it is obvious that maturity and political finesse is missing. The student leader, seen on video, behaved in an outrageous manner and certainly unbecoming of an elected student leader. 

The SPF students, on the other hand, failed to realise their potential as a decisive factor, and had chosen, instead, to limit their role. Their affiliation to the opposition, if correct, has surely not endeared them in a place where they are a minority. 

But the Higher Education Ministry and UPM must never allow those involved in the bullying to be left unpunished, no matter what their political inclination may be. 

It is not for the student council to take the law into their own hands. An inquiry must be conducted and the culprits involved, particularly the elected student leader, must be suspended. If no action is taken, UPM would be sending the wrong signal. 

The university is a place for students to study and broaden their knowledge. It is also a place for students, who are interested in politics, to sharpen their interaction skills, especially with the other races. 

It is also a place for them to cultivate relationships with their fellow students, regardless of race, which would help in their network, when they graduate. 

Differences in opinion and political inclination must be accepted as a fact of life. The immaturity of the UPM students has not helped those pushing for the repeal of the UCCA but may even push the Government to rethink its earlier plan to relax the rules.

STRESS the common values shared by Malaysians and highlight those
similarities in the Ethnic Relations course in all local universities. 

We should spend more time talking about our common values and beliefs instead
of stressing on our differences. 

The Higher Education Ministry had good intentions when it introduced the
Ethnic Relations course in Universiti Putra Malaysia and, subsequently, in all
universities. But whether it is a module, guidebook or textbook, there is
nothing wrong in taking another look at the contents of the course. 

The Cabinet has rightly withdrawn the controversial guidebook. There is
nothing wrong in admitting that there are flaws in our work. Life is not just
about scoring points – whether from a political or communal perspective.  

Regardless of our race, religion and culture, we all believe in the
importance of compassion and truth.  

We can be Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus or Christians, but we respect each other
and our faiths – that is the hallmark of Malaysia. 

A temple, a church and a mosque can exist next to each other and that is
wholly acceptable in Malaysia. We don't even think about it. We call our God by
many names and pray differently. But ultimately, we believe in the Almighty.  

And all religions teach us to be moral, charitable, selfless and tolerant.
That is the core of all religions.  

Our religions expect us to be morally upright, and we certainly should not
tolerate corrupt figures even as they work hard at projecting themselves as
pious and God-fearing pillars of society. 

We see no differences when it comes to issues such as social greed, abuse of
power, economic disparity, racial polarisation and democratic rights. But what
have we done?  

Instead of focusing on universal values, which all Malaysians share, some of
us prefer to point fingers at one another. That is not the way to build good
ethnic relations.  

There is nothing wrong in using historical events to remind us of the need to
be sensitive in a plural society, but old wounds are unnecessarily opened when
we start blaming each other for events that are long over. 

It would be more appropriate for our universities to recommend that our
students read books and newspaper reports on the May 13 and the Kampung Medan
incidents as part of their tutorial work.  

Let our students draw their own conclusions based on the various sources
available to them so that they can enrich their minds. Don't force on them our
prejudices and views.  

We must learn from those shameful incidents, especially the younger
generation. But let us not plant seeds of discontent and hatred in the minds of
our young.  

It does not matter who struck the first blow. It is more important that we
accept that violence is wrong. 

We need to remind our young that peace in the country cannot be taken for
granted. We have to work at it.  

Reminders to exercise restraint in our statements may sometimes be regarded
as old-fashioned in this cyber age when nothing is sacred and nothing is
censored. But the price of democracy can be costly if we only choose to see an
issue from our own perspective or, even, prejudice.  

Tolerance and compromise are strengths, not weaknesses. Common sense, in the
larger interest of all Malaysians, must never be under-estimated. 

It is bad enough that many of our prejudices, which are stumbling blocks to
nation-building, are being perpetuated by some quarters. 

We cannot expect our young to listen to politicians preaching national unity
the whole year round but churning out racial remarks at their annual party
assemblies. That is hypocrisy. 

As we debate this issue, it may be timely for the Cabinet to also direct the
Education Ministry to look at the contents of our school history books or the
textbook for new civil servants. 

Is it true that Sybil Kathigesu, the heroic woman who lost her doctor husband
and child while providing help to the people during the Japanese Occupation, has
vanished from our books as claimed? 

Can the ministry verify a news report that Yap Ah Loy, the Kapitan China,
too, has lost his place in the development of Kuala Lumpur? 

Is Malaysian history being re-written by textbook writers without the
knowledge of our Government? 

Similarly, religion should not be used to emphasise ethnic differences. No
one should attempt to use religion to keep Malaysians apart, as this is against
the spirit and philosophy of every religion. 

I remember having to sit for the Islamic Civilisation course in Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia, or ZI, as it was called. Some of my non-Muslim course mates
felt uneasy, assuming that it was a subtle attempt to convert us. But there was
little reason to fear.  

If one's faith is strong, why should it be shaken when one learns about
another religion? 

Comparative religions is not a subject encouraged in Malaysia. But if
properly handled, it can help all of us know each other's religion better.  

The problem, however, starts when we grow suspicious, believing it is an
attempt to convert us. Sometimes it is real but sometimes it is imagined, due to
prejudices.  

Unfortunately, the quest for knowledge is lost when we shut our minds. As a
result, we lose the opportunity to know more about the religions of our fellow
Malaysians. 

I enjoyed the lectures of the late Datuk Dr Fadzil Noor, who later became PAS
president, and Datuk Dr Harun Din in UKM. I did not convert but learnt to
appreciate Islam more. 

But in courses like this, great care must be accorded to the sensitivities of
students of other faiths.  

As an example, Jesus is a prophet to Muslims but to Christians, he is also
God. No attempt must be made to ask a student whether Jesus is God or merely a
Prophet in an examination, as that would put a Christian student in an awkward
position. 

We celebrate 50 years of independence next year. Despite the complexities of
our country, we have been able to come this far because of our high level of
tolerance. 

Our politics of consensus, despite being communal-based, has worked well for
us. If the three main races – Malays, Chinese and Indians – had not worked
together, we would not have been able to achieve independence.  

We needed each other then and we need each other still today. This is our
only country. This is where we were born, where we live and where we are likely
to die.  

I looked up the book The May 13 Tragedy by the National Operations
Council, published on Oct 9, 1969, to refresh my memory of the tragedy. 

There are enough details in the report for those interested in finding out
more, including the names of the political parties and main politicians
involved. Of course, there are other versions of what happened. 

But more importantly, it was the foreword by the then Director of Operations,
Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, which struck me. 

He wrote: "If the events of May 13 are not to occur again, if this nation is
to survive, we must make sure that subjects which are likely to engender racial
tensions are not exploited by irresponsible opportunists." 

His advice remains relevant.  

Inter-religious and inter-ethnic harmony can be cultivated if we identify and
stress the common values that exist, in one form or another, in all religions
and races. 

WHAT'S the rush really? The Government seems dead-set on pushing through its plan to
build the controversial sports training centre in England despite criticisms
from the public.  

The unhappiness must surely be the cost, with Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang
putting the figure at RM490mil while Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun
Razak said it was not confirmed and that only a small sum was budgeted for the
first phase. 

Malaysians cannot be faulted for being angry. Assuming that Lim had inflated
the figure for political reasons, surely the public has the right to know how
much of their money would be used for the proposed project in Brickendonbury,
just outside of London. 

National Sports Council director-general Datuk Dr Ramlan Abdul Aziz earlier
said the RM490mil figure is a projection of the total cost the Government would
spend over the next 10 years, and not for building the infrastructure. In a
special press conference on Friday, he said no figure was ever mentioned in any
of their deliberations or decisions.  

"Whatever has been stated so far is merely speculative and from other
parties," he said. 

Deputy Youth and Sports Minister Datuk Liow Tiong Lai also reportedly said
the figure from Lim "did not come from the ministry" while National Sports
Council's Philip Chan said it "is not definite" and "is likely to be lower". 

These contradictory statements have not helped clear the air. In fact, the
public would probably have more questions now and, as taxpayers, they should
rightly do so.  

The Government has a moral duty to tell us how the project will benefit
Malaysian athletes and how much money will be involved.  

We can assume that the project will not involve any purchase of land since it
will sit on a site belonging to the Malaysian Rubber Board, where the Tun Abdul
Razak Research Centre is located. The centre was founded as the British Rubber
Producers' Research Association (BRPRA) in 1938. 

Brickendonbury estate has a long and colourful history dating back to Saxon
times (approximately 500 AD) and has passed through many tenants, either leased
or let. During the Second World War, it was used to train agents and resistance
workers in industrial sabotage. 

The centre moved into the estate in 1974 and restored the mansion, which now
has elegant working accommodation, according to the centre's website, and the
grounds have well-built laboratories, library and development areas housing the
centre's work. It was given its current name in 1977. 

It sounds like a good place for our athletes, given its huge area. That means
the Government need only build the sports centre on that piece of land. If that
is the case, it would be helpful if the Government can, at least, show us what
the centre would look like, what kind of facilities would be available, the
staff cost and how much it would cost to maintain. 

The public must be convinced and, as an elected government, surely the
leadership must be sensitive to the wishes of the people. It is our money after
all, and at a time when we have to grapple with the increasing cost of living,
not many of us are in the mood to read about an extravagant project. 

We cannot be told to tighten our belts and change our lifestyle and yet have
to cough out our money on the multi-million ringgit project. That is something
we cannot accept. 

But half the battle would be won if the Government can justify the long-term
benefits of the so-called "high performance training centre". The public must be
convinced that having this sports centre will help Malaysians win medals at
international competitions such as the Olympics.  

From the bits of information that have come out, the proposed sports centre
is to groom and train our future athletes in a temperate country for temperate
sports. 

That would, presumably, involve allowing selected sports persons to stay,
train and compete in Europe. It would be good if the Government can inform us of
the kinds of sports that have been identified to produce these elite Malaysian
athletes who will grab international headlines.  

We are not talking about winning gold medals in sports that involve four or
five countries, like badminton or sepak takraw, but real international
sports, since millions of ringgit would have been committed to the project. 

That must be the intention of the Cabinet Committee on Sports headed by
Najib. It is noble and ambitious. Besides putting up the building, which our
Government seems to be fond of, we would like to know the real plan – how to
make champions of Malaysians in the UK. 

It would be nice to know, just for argument's sake, whether the Socceroos
built a multi-million soccer complex Down Under and whether Trinidad and Tobago
committed their entire GDP to gear their players for the World Cup so they could
make the English players look like sissies.  

And certainly, the long-distance runners from Kenya did not have this kind of
RM490mil luxury. 

You don't need a sports expert to tell you that buildings do not produce
sportsmen. Instead, what you need are good planning, good strategies, good
trainers and committed athletes. Most of all, let's get real and put our limited
resources to sports that we can win. 

A good sports programme, beginning at school level, is essential because
producing champions takes time. Trainers, whether local or foreign, also need
time to build these talents. 

We cannot expect instant results after signing a foreign coach for a year.
More importantly, they should be freed from interfering politicians masquerading
as managers and officials. 

It might be cheaper to pick selected athletes in certain sports and have them
trained here and overseas. Squash player Nicol David, for example, has picked
Holland as her base and in the hands of a foreign trainer, who is more exposed
to newer techniques, she has progressed to be a world champion beater. 

Let's be realistic. Given our physique, the penchant for nasi lemak
and teh tarik and our humid weather, we are not going to win the World
Cup. We can bring Alex Ferguson to train our boys in a trillion-ringgit soccer
complex and we still won't win. Maybe we can beat the Koreans and Japanese.  

Neither can we compete against the Japanese, Fijians and Samoans in sumo
wrestling because we can never bloat up like them, even if we build a sumo
complex there. 

So, Malaysians might as well focus on shooting, bowling, lawn bowling, table
tennis, squash, golf, hockey, sailing and volleyball, where we have more
realistic chances of triumphing, even if not at the Olympics, at least at the
Commonwealth Games. 

There have been cynical remarks, especially on the Internet websites, on how
the proposed academy will benefit us. Some of the allegations have been grossly
unfair but the Government owes it to us to justify the project and provide the
costs. That's not asking too much.  

The Government must also explain the need for the 100m dash for a project
that would cost Malaysia a bomb. Surely, the Government must have good reasons
for the decision and Malaysians would like to know. That's the first hurdle that
the Government needs to clear.

OUR politicians and bureaucrats love turning towns into cities. The city
status, for some reasons best known to them, seems to evoke a sense of urban
sophistication and the perception that development has reached its pinnacle. 

But beyond the elevation to bandaraya status and the prestigious
appointment of a Datuk Bandar who most likely would previously have been a
municipal council president, most of us have found that the authorities have not
been able to deliver even the most basic requirements for the city folks. 

The newest city in the country, Petaling Jaya, is known as the Billboard City
while Georgetown, the country's oldest city (never mind the technical dispute
over its status), does not even have a decent transportation system.  

Then, there is Johor Baru which is seen as a city trying hard to dispel the
image that it is unruly, dirty and has a bad crime rate. 

Some of us may remember that a few years ago, Johor Baru promoted itself as
the Healthy City where religious and moral values were embedded in a healthy
environment free from violence. 

The trouble with our politicians and bureaucrats is that they love these big
words and lofty ideals. Campaigns are launched and prizes are given for the
winning slogans which are often difficult to remember, much less practised. And
once the city is declared, there is always the standard pledge of wanting to
make the city world-class. These promises are often made with a straight face by
the Mentri Besar, Chief Minister and Datuk Bandar.

But seriously, all Malaysians expect from their city councils is a commitment to
deal with problems like flash floods, basic maintenance of public facilities,
and haphazard planning. In fact, we will be quite satisfied if they can collect
our rubbish efficiently. 

Put simply, we all yearn for our cities to have a safe and healthy
environment with good infrastructure and facilities. That's basic. 

But there are also legitimate reasons for Malaysians to demand more from City
Hall. As Malaysians become more affluent and travel the world (even if via the
excellent documentaries on satellite TV), they are bound to compare Malaysian
cities with the foreign ones. We expect our cities to have some of the qualities
we have seen in European and even Asian cities. 

Our politicians talk endlessly about attaining developed status and give us
statistics to show that we have already reached a certain economic benchmark
even though the ordinary rakyat may think otherwise. 

But surely, it cannot be that unreasonable for us to demand for higher
standards of public facilities such as pedestrian walks, efficient and clean
public transportation, parks, pleasant housing and culturally vibrant centres? 

We see the Europeans and Americans enjoying concerts in the parks, and surely
we want the same. Being able to relax in the park is part of urban living
although in Kuala Lumpur, it has been cynically said that couples can get
arrested by nosy enforcement officers for holding hands. 

Our politicians continue to tell us that we have done relatively well
economically and we have no reason to doubt that. We have returned the same
political party to power since independence. But in return, we expect to enjoy a
quality of life that is commensurate with our stature. 

Malaysia turns 50 next year. Surely, we should go beyond dreaming of having
parks, museums, art centres and flea markets with great eateries? We have a rich
historical and cultural heritage, but can our cities stand out and reflect our
rich tapestry of life? 

Our cities may be fairly well-run but let's not compare ourselves with
Karachi, Phnom Penh, Jakarta or Yangon. Let's set higher benchmarks for
ourselves. 

Georgetown, for example, has been sadly neglected. The politicians can
continue to defend themselves and say how well they have run the city. 

They can issue statements, cleverly backed with figures, to defend their hard
work but the perception and sentiments of the people cannot be ignored. 

Georgetown's rich architectural heritage is in serious decline, especially in
the inner city, because of the lack of positive incentives and development
control. 

Kuala Lumpur, even with the best attention from the powers-that-be, suffers
flash floods each time there is a downpour. If we cannot even resolve this
perennial problem, why are we boasting about world-class facilities? 

In fairness, KL has managed to solve much of its traffic jam. It has managed
to get rid of the ubiquitous mini-buses and there is at least a decent mass
rapid transport system in place via the Star and Putra LRT lines and the Rapid
Bus system. 

Urban planner Dr Goh Ban Lee has proposed a standardised urban quality index
for Malaysia to provide a consistent time-series data to allow for better
formulation of strategies and policies. 

Most of us have dreams of what a city should be like but the reality is that
most Malaysians regard local councils as lackadaisical, unimaginative and
incompetent. 

It may not be a fair assessment of the local authorities but the mounting
complaints through the years have certainly contributed to that negative
image.

IT'S that silly season of the year again. Each time Parliament is in session, we can be guaranteed that at least two or three Yang Berhormats will either infuriate us or make us laugh with their remarks and antics. 

The current Dewan Rakyat session, which started last week, will only
end on July 18, but it has the makings of a circus already. We are not
sure if it's the act of calling each other animals or the politicians
themselves who quite fit the description. 

But one thing is for sure, the Dewan Rakyat must be one of the rudest
legislative chambers in the world. After all, Kuala Lumpur has been
ranked as the third rudest city in the world by a magazine. So if there
is such a ranking, we can be sure our legislators will not let us down,
in the true tradition of Malaysia Boleh. 

Fortunately, apart from the verbal jousting, our YBs have not resorted
to physical drama like punching, kicking and hair pulling, which the
Taiwanese lawmakers seem to be quite proud of. 

After all, we do believe in kesopanan dan kesusilaan
(mutual respect and good social behaviour), which our politicians like
to preach about, since they learned this Rukunegara principle from a
young age. The rest is fair game. It is a jantan (manly) thing to do, one may say. 

Last week, the bad boy of the Dewan Rakyat, Datuk Bung Moktar Radin
(Kinabatangan-BN) was in the news again. He is the kind of politician
whose behaviour has become fairly predictable. Malaysians and the press
can expect him to display political cockiness and unparliamentary
language when putting down his opponents. 

But does he care? I don't think so. He has his name in the news and I am sure that is all that matters to him. 

Coming from Kinabatangan, where the media has shown little interest,
except when trees are illegally chopped down or when dead freshwater
dolphins are found, he is a virtual unknown the whole year round. 

So, when Mr MP comes to town, he has to make sure his name is mentioned
and noticed by his political bosses. The rest of us, the people and the
media, are really not his concern. 

The House turned into a verbal war zone on Wednesday when a shouting
match erupted between BN and Opposition MPs over a factual error in a
question answered by Deputy Internal Minister Datuk Mohd Johari
Baharum.  

In the free-for-all that ensued, MPs traded insults, comparing each other with animals and even questioning their sanity. 

The MP for Jelutong, Karpal Singh, who can also be depended upon for
parliamentary humour, accused Bung Moktar of creating division in the
House, saying "dia otak tak centre (the MP is insane)." 

As the row continued, Bung Moktar responded: "You should keep quiet.
It's a lucky thing that you are in wheelchair. You almost died once (in
an accident last year)."  

Not to be outdone, Karpal Singh asked "to shoo the animal out of the House. You are nothing more than a big fool from Sabah." 

Since proceedings are now videotaped, we are able to watch as the MPs
slugged and bullied each other, like what schoolboys do these days. The
tactic seems to be that if one loses in a debate, the best approach
would be to intimidate or to disrupt the proceedings. It also works for
MPs who have not prepared their speeches well. 

The hardworking MPs, who have spent hours on research, unfortunately
find themselves "hijacked" by these rude MPs the next day. The press,
after all, also look for such fights in Parliament. 

But not to be outdone, the Close-One-Eye Jasin MP Datuk Mohd Said Yusuf
accused certain top Customs officials of selling confiscated luxury
cars cheaply to their "friends" in the palaces and other government
departments.  

He further claimed that the officials had abused their power by selling
the cars meant for open auction to their royalty friends in return for
Datukships. 

But until now, he has not produced a shred of evidence to back up his
claims. In fact, after whacking Customs, knowing he would be fully
protected by parliamentary privilege, he has astonishingly said he
would not lodge any police report. 

No one is suggesting that the Customs officers are angels, when many
enforcement agencies are perceived to be corrupt by Malaysians, but as
a lawmaker, isn't it his duty to submit evidence of wrongdoings to the
authorities?  

He should know better. By withholding such information, he risks being accused of wanting to get back at Customs. 

Really, what kind of examples are our MPs setting? To curse a fellow MP
or, for that matter, anybody who has been injured, must have baffled
any decent and fair-minded Malaysian.  

By now, Malaysians are used to the racist and sexist remarks of certain
MPs but they never fail to amaze us with more of their outbursts. 

What is terribly missing from Parliament is quality debates with witty
repartee. They should perhaps read up the Hansards from our early years
and learn how the Tunku and his contemporaries from both sides of the
political divide debated.We wish there would be more MPs like Datuk
Shahrir Samad (BN-Johor Baru), Datuk Zaid Ibrahim (BN-Kota Baru), Dr
Wee Ka Siong (BN-Air Hitam) and Loh Seng Kok (BN-Kelana Jaya) who have
displayed much intelligence, even courage, in their delivery. 

For the opposition figures, Datuk Kamaruddin Jaafar (PAS-Tumpat) has
managed to project an image of moderation, which is so lacking in the
Islamist party. 

The DAP women MPs have also made a name for themselves but they need to
refrain from joining in the jeering and name-calling, which take away
the shine from them. 

There are plenty of reasons to telecast the Dewan Rakyat sessions on
television. Malaysians would then know whether they have elected a
hard-working MP or a clown to represent them.