Now, some news organisations are saying they would not cover Jones if he decides to proceed with his original plan. Even CNN commentators have said that this rabble-rouser does not deserve media coverage.

They have described him as an idiot and a jerk and that they (the media) should simply switch off the microphones and lighting outside his church. Well said.

Jones’ hysterical plan has placed minority Christians in many countries in a precarious position. Their lives are in danger if the government in their countries remain indifferent to angry Muslims who lump any Christian in the same category as Jones.

President Barack Obama is right in saying that the plan by Jones has been a “recruitment bonanza” for al-Qaeda.

In Malaysia, we have our fair share of extremists who fan racial emotions with their hurtful words and statements.

Obviously, these egomaniacs enjoy reading about themselves in newspapers and online portals but the question is whether the media need to encourage these communal champions by giving them the platform.

Some would say that they are entitled to express their views, no matter how much we disagree with them, in the name of freedom of speech. It’s a tough call to make, some leaders admit, when it comes to question of expression.

That was precisely the initial argument forwarded by many on the position of Jones. Even the US president was totally helpless in dealing with the situation since the right to freedom of expression is clearly stipulated in the US Constitution.

The consequences of Jones’ actions were never thought of until angry reactions broke out worldwide. Only then did the Americans realise that their lives could be in danger if there was a backlash from Muslims.

In short, terrible things could happen and the thought of standing up for an idiot’s right of expression no longer seemed so noble and practical.

Suddenly, it dawned on the media that the idea of giving Jones the platform wasn’t so clever after all, no matter how good his sound bites have been, particularly in giving the annual Sept 11 anniversary coverage a fresh spin.

For sure, Jones has made good copy for the media and right-wing politicians have also been quick to jump on the bandwagon. But the point is that extremists, religious fanatics and racial bigots must never be allowed to hijack the platform.

No level-headed Christian would agree with the Florida pastor. It is good that the majority of Christian groups have spoken up clearly and strongly against him.

We must stand together to speak for what we believe in. There is no need to be apologetic even if those that we speak up against could be members of our faith or race. There is only right and wrong.

The extremists in Malaysia are the same. We need to dissociate ourselves unequivocally from those who preach hatred and trample on goodwill instead of building bridges to bring Malaysians together.

It is encouraging to hear top leaders from Umno openly saying “no” to Perkasa on the eve of Hari Raya. It is the strongest ever statement from Umno leaders in distancing themselves from the group that has caused much concern among Malaysians.

Malaysia was built on the politics of moderation and accommodation. It has kept the nation glued even during times that we seem so flawed.

But we have managed race relations reasonably well and Malaysians live amicably together, taking better care of this themselves than politicians and the self-appointed champions of our races.

Similarly, it is good to hear the majority of Christians saying that they would not condone Quran-burning pastors and churches.

And certainly, for the first time ever, media organisations are asking themselves whether religious extremists deserve space and air time in their newspapers, online portals and television.

Most of us would agree – don’t encourage them.

Frankly, some of these figures, who now also include obscure academics, have been created by the media. Without this platform, they would otherwise be just nobodies. In fact, most Malaysians would prefer for them to stay that way as their actions have created ill feelings and polarisation.

Their racially warped writings and statements, which may seem supportive of the government, have not helped the ruling party.

They may like to think that they are doing the national leaders a service, but the truth is they are held in disgust and contempt by most Malaysians. They have, in fact, inflicted serious damage to the government.

The media, both mainstream and alternative, should downplay their racist statements: better still, spike it – or delete it, as the modern journalist would say.

After 53 years of independence, Malaysian politicians and community leaders, by right, should be more confident, outward looking and politically mature but the perception is that we have gone downhill.

The ugly side, or more aptly the darker side, of some politicians seems to have emerged, which must be one of the dampeners to the National Day celebrations.

How can we remain indifferent when politicians, people we used to hold with high regard, suddenly start to beat the racial drum instead of passing the pipe of peace around?

What has shaken many Malaysians is that the appalling actions of some of these racists seem to have garnered a following.

Otherwise, how does one explain reports of Perkasa expressing support for the headmistress from Johor who purportedly made racist remarks or the outpouring of support for her in her Facebook page?

Most of us have been brought up by our parents to believe that there can be only be right or wrong. They also taught us that there are only good and bad people.

But there are also the ugly people now. Racism in whatever form is sickening. We have all experienced it in one form or another.

None of these experiences were pleasant, even if they seemed minor and were not worth getting upset about.

But we need to stand up at some point and say that we cannot tolerate racism and will not allow politicians to get away with statements which cause unhappiness.

Neither should the government be seen to be dragging its feet when taking action against people such as the headmistress. Why in the world do we need a task force to investigate the simple case of a headmistress? It’s either she did it or she didn’t.

If she didn’t, and that the issue has been hyped up unnecessarily, let her enjoy her holidays in peace. If she is guilty, then act against her. Let’s get this case over and done with so the nation can move on.

The Education Ministry must also issue notices to all schools to stress that racist statements cannot be accepted nor tolerated and that action, including expulsion of students, would be carried out if anyone is found violating these rules.

This is a normal practice in many British schools and we should adopt this disciplinary code if we are committed to zero tolerance. It will be a mockery to have the 1Malaysian slogan painted on the school walls if the teachers or students within do not practise it.

We must be brave enough to confront racist bullies. We must be ready to tell those who claim to champion the cause of our community that their myopic line will not benefit Malaysia.

It is when some of us remain silent that we unwittingly allow these self-appointed community leaders to hijack our national goals. We must realise that by choosing to close an eye, we may well give the impression that we are silent racists.

The coming weeks will be a time when Malaysians come together to celebrate Hari Raya. It will be a time for sharing and, more importantly, for forgiving. Let politics take a back seat and use the opportunity to turn down the political decibel.

Malaysians cannot afford to be bogged down by inconsequential debates which put the country in a bad light. If Malaysia is seen to be divisive, racial, unsure and insecure, how can we expect investors to come here?

Just think.

Even when the situation looked dangerous, they appeared to be nonchalant and seemingly unconcerned about how the deadly kidnapping could end.

The police negotiators were seen joking and laughing with the disgruntled former cop who demanded to be reinstated in his job in return for releasing the hostages.

In fact, it even had the CNN newscaster asking at some point why the authorities were taking the whole situation so lightly.

Right from the beginning, most of the world seemed to have the feeling that the whole episode would have an ugly ending. A tragedy was just waiting to happen, maybe because the Filipino police have a record of being incompetent.

Never mind the corrupt part. Some Malay­sians are critical of our police but when it comes to serious crimes involving drug kingpins, dangerous criminals and terrorists, most of us believe they can do their job well.

But the same cannot be said in the case of the Philippines. The whole hostage crisis appeared to be mismanaged from the start. And the fiasco continued until the end.

The former cop should have been shot dead when food was delivered to him. If that decision had been taken, a lot of innocent lives could have been saved.

There were other missed opportunities – the hostage taker had, at one point, opened the door of the bus and peered out.

We watched in horror when the commandos failed to get into the bus for more than an hour after smashing its windows with sledgehammers. Yes, an hour.

But what has outraged the world is that this is not the first time abductions of tourists have taken place in that country.

Last week, it was reported that gunmen had killed a South Korean man and kidnapped two of his companions in a pre-dawn attack in Manila.

In the case of Malaysians, in 2000, Abu Sayyaf terrorists raided the resort island of Sipadan and took away 21 hostages comprising 10 tourists and 11 workers.

More recently, two Malaysian seaweed farm workers from Sabah were kidnapped in February and until now, their fate is still unknown. The two were taken away from Pulau Sebangkat near Semporna and are believed to have been brought to Jolo, the haven for radical terrorists.

It’s been more than six months but there is little news about their conditions even as authorities from both countries say they were exchanging information about their whereabouts.

From lawless groups like the Abu Sayyaf to a lone nutcase ex-policeman, the Philippines cannot hope to instil confidence among tourists and investors with these criminals around. Visitors who bring money to the country must have some sense of security and personal safety.

I remember accompanying then Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar on a trip to Manila when the Sipadan incident took place. I was walking out of a five-star hotel to a shopping mall across the street when I was suddenly grabbed by two strangers.

Badly shaken, I managed to break free and run into a crowded McDonald’s outlet. That did not deter the two men, who acted like abductors, from pursuing me.

Seeing the dangerous situation, I ran back to the hotel and told the desk manager what had taken place.

The desk manager nonchalantly told me they had heard similar stories from their guests and that they had informed the police but there was nothing much they could do.

The abductors are targeting Japanese tourists and others from Malaysia or Singapore.

In another incident, a fellow journalist who could speak Tagalog and has interviewed Nur Misuari, the Moro National Liberation Front founder, found himself accosted in a taxi. Although he considered himself an old hand in the Philippines, he had entered into a taxi only to find himself joined by another “passenger” a little while later.

The bottom line is, after the hostage-taking incident in Manila, the perception that the Philippines isn’t safe will be reinforced. The damage to tourism will be tremendous.

Filipinos are very nice people but the hoodlums and criminals in their country have ruined their image. It doesn’t help that President Benigno Aquino himself handled the situation badly.

In Malaysia, we do not expect to see tourists being taken as hostages but there are petty criminals here who prey on locals and tourists.

The presence of tourist police who can speak English, Chinese or Arabic sufficiently needs to be increased in specific areas.

At the KLIA and LCCT, they should be on patrol to advise airport users to watch out for their bags, especially those with computers, as is done at London Heathrow Airport. They should walk the extra mile to seek the views of tourists and airline passengers and help promote Malaysia as a safe destination.

Tourism is one of our biggest revenue earners and these are small investments.

There are lessons to be learnt from what happened in Manila in terms of crisis management and the rest of the world, especially law enforcers, should study that case carefully.

We need leaders who speak of enlarging the economic cake – not those who merely want to cut the slices for their own communities – even when foreign direct investments are falling.

The country needs leaders who dare to talk about our economic weaknesses, and even excessiveness, which has made other countries more attractive than Malaysia, even if it means rattling the emotions of myopic nationalists who cannot see that the world has changed.

Instead of pandering to the demands of these people to be popular and politically safe, these leaders – whether in politics or business – have had the courage to point out the wrongs in our economic system.

They did it with good intentions and love for Malaysia. They have got themselves burnt and may not even get the votes they truly deserve but they have spoken up. Certainly, they can hold their heads up high regardless of the political outcome later.

Malaysia is at a crossroads. Five decades after independence, many issues should have been settled. We should have moved on and compete globally.

Yet, it looks as if we are caught in a time warp with many of our politicians and self-declared community leaders quarrelling over issues of the 1960s.

In fact, the leaders of the Alliance conducted themselves better in the 1950s and did not need to make racial threats to stifle public discourse.

They did not just talk, they listened – and that is the difference between a great leader and a politician who is just out there to get elected, even if it is at the expense of the nation and the future.

They reached consensus, which made a lot of sense during that time, and they forged national unity and brought the country its independence.

They looked at the larger picture and did not succumb to the demands of their communities; they understood the importance of consensus and accommodation.

More important, they understood that for Malaysia to live, the Government must be represented by all races. It was more than just a question of legitimacy but the coalition of Umno, MCA and MIC was a strong political statement that all races would have a place in this country – including in the Government and, certainly by extension, in the civil service.

For sure, these founders would be horrified, if they are alive today, to hear Malaysians – those who were born here and would die here – being labelled as pendatang (immigrants) or penumpang (passengers) by politicians or headmasters.

Neither would they be amused if the people who made such seditious remarks are just given a slap on the wrist.

Malaysians want to see politicians promptly condemning the racists who utter such remarks. It is disturbing that some have chosen to keep silent, which can send the wrong impression – that they tolerate such nonsense.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has aptly reminded political leaders to be sensitive to all races, saying, “I hope everyone realises that those listening to what we are saying are citizens of the whole country”.

Our founders would be shocked to hear of any suggestions, no matter how subtle, that election should be won by just making one community happy and ignoring another simply because they are seemingly not supportive. Election is about winning every vote, that is Political Science 101.

The increase in the number of racially-mixed constituencies should be a reminder to all aspiring candidates in the next general election that race rhetorics will not help their cause if the fight against their opponents is close.

National Day is a time for review and reflection. It’s not merely about flying the flag, watching the parade and shooting fireworks. For ordinary Malaysians, it should not be about waiting for the free mini Jalur Gemilang before we hoist it on our vehicles. Flying the national flag is not a demonstration of patriotism. It is a state of the heart and mind.

This is the time to look back proudly at what we have achieved and also ask where we have gone wrong so we can improve ourselves and move on.

This is also the time to ask where and how we want Malaysia to be in the next decades. As citizens of a country that is turning 53, all of us should be confident, mature and forward-looking, not insecure and seeing the ghosts of communalism and past tragedies.

In this age of competitive globalisation, do we want to shut our eyes, preferring to believe that nothing has changed and should be changed? Or should we start to accept that the world has changed and that if we don’t change, we would be left behind?

If the former happens, there would be no cake to talk about. We cannot and should not refrain from talking about history in the run-up to National Day. We must never forget what our forefathers have done.

But it is equally important that we do not become stuck in the past. We have to move on and we all have to come together as one Malaysia and one nation to chart a common destiny. We don’t have a choice.

If Kelantan has introduced it, then we can assume that Kedah would follow suit as the leadership is also PAS.

In simple language, what the Kelantan state government has done is this – you can now use their self-minted gold and silver coins to pay for purchases there.

It is a practice from the early Islamic societies which PAS wants to revive in present-day Kelantan to show its religious credentials. The dinar was the official currency of Islamic societies for centuries.

Nik Mahani Mohamed, executive director of the state-owned Kelantan Gold Trade Sdn Bhd, which mints the coins, has reportedly said that over 1,000 stores would be using the coins. He has described the circulation of the coins, which started on Thursday, as a “great, great moment”. Each dinar is worth RM180 and one dirham is RM4.

Kelantan state executive committee member Datuk Huzam Musa has downplayed the issue, saying syariah currency should be seen as an alternative currency for barter trade. He has been quoted as saying that the dinar had been around since the beginning of Islam.

A check with the Kelantan Gold Trade website has shown that the currency-maker has proudly declared that “this is the first time in the last 100 years, since the collapse of the Ottoman Caliphate, when a Muslim government introduces the syariah currency”.

It also said this would be “the return of a medium of exchange that has been known for 1,400 years” and encouraged religiously.

What has set the Kelantan dinar apart from other countries such as Algeria, Iraq, Bahrain, Libya and Tunisia, which all use dinar as a currency, is that theirs are paper money.

Indeed, in 2002, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had pushed for the gold-based dinar system to be used as an international currency to prevent currency manipulation, which had sparked off the 1997 Asian financial crisis. He had wanted the dinar to replace the US dollar but, as expected, he could not convince the other countries.

The former premier was presumably looking at the issue from an international perspective as he did not talk about replacing the ringgit or seeing another system in a Malay­sian state.

Bank Negara is, as expected, peeved. It has said that the ringgit is the only legal tender for payment of goods and services in this country.

While the Kelantan dinar could be used as payment of zakat and dowries, for example, it still needs to be proven how it could be used for daily transactions. For practical reasons, how much of the currency can be minted and circulated widely?

It has been reported that staff of the state administration would be paid with the dinar. If this is so, how will this be worked out and would banks want to be involved in the transaction since Bank Negara has said that the ringgit is the only legal tender?

Kelantan Mentri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat had said the state would strive to expand the use of the currency in its transactions, including in the remuneration of civil servants.

We can expect more denominations to be worked out along the way and since these would be coins instead of notes, Kelantanese who support the move would need bags or pouches to carry these heavy things around. Their pockets just won’t do.

Whatever the intention of the PAS state government, it would be regarded as a political ploy ahead of the next general election to win over the Malay voters.

PAS, which has never moved away from its ambition of setting up an Islamic state, obviously wants to prove its commitment to institutionalising its religious programmes and agenda. The latest currency decision is just one of the many that would come.

MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek has challenged the other Pakatan members – namely PKR and the DAP – to state their stand on the Islamic currency, saying the issue should be handled properly as it would affect the confidence of foreign investors and entrepreneurs.

A quick look on the blogs and Twitter has shown many negative reactions among non-Muslims to the move by the Kelantan government. Many have expressed incredulous comments, with some saying the decision was a case of “one upmanship” in Malay politics that would not help the country in the long run.

Dr Chua also told the gathering that the party had at most 18 months to prepare for the next general election.

So convinced is he of his prediction, the straight-talking politician said the MCA would hold a briefing at its headquarters for party leaders and members next week.

There are good reasons why many believe that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak would want to call for a general election.

The two transformation plans would surely accelerate the momentum for public support in an election year as the people would be able to see a properly drawn-up programme to govern the country.

Based on surveys carried out by the Barisan Nasional, there are also good reasons to believe that there is a shift in Malay and Indian votes, with them going back to the ruling coalition.

Chinese votes, especially in the urban areas, have remained in anti-establishment mood and the challenge of the Barisan would be to convince these voters to change their sentiments.

These unhappy voters would be the biggest headache for the Barisan leaders in the delicate game of ethnic balancing.

If the Prime Minister is seen to be too accommodating to the interests of the Chinese, it could result in a political backlash, even within Umno, if the much needed Chinese votes are not secured.

There is every likelihood that in the Sarawak state election, the Barisan will win in all the bumiputra majority seats but not in the Chinese areas.

It is not wrong to say that for most sections of the Chinese community, Najib is hugely respected and admired. But the same cannot be said about his party.

It is often suggested that if there is a presidential election, Najib would win hands down but, unfortunately, ours is modelled upon the British electoral system.

Najib has continued to surge in the popularity surveys conducted by independent research houses, which put him in a comfortable position.

But he needs a mandate from a general election to push through his programmes. That is the reality any leader has to face.

In Malaysia, the Prime Minister’s job is much harder because he has to be the leader of all Malaysians, even if he is the head of a Malay-based party.

Competing forces, especially those who advocate the Malay agenda, have cast aspersions on the 1Malaysia concept.

Others, like Perkasa, have emerged to send the message that the other communities should know the limits of their demands. This mood is reflected in the Bahasa Malaysia newspapers and blogs.

Against this political backdrop, the Barisan, especially the MCA and Gerakan, has to work very hard to convince Chinese voters that they would lose their clout in government if the two parties continue to decline.

It is unlikely that the two parties would be able to keep the same number of positions in the next Cabinet if the Chinese voters conti­nue to shun the ruling coalition. That would be difficult for the PM to justify.

While the MCA still enjoys good standing in states like Johor, Perlis, Kedah and Pahang, Gerakan has the almost impossible task of dislodging the DAP in Penang.

In Selangor, the Barisan has gone on the offensive and finally acted as an opposition – by taking daily pot shots at the state government.

The Selangor Barisan is determined to wrest the state back from Pakatan Rakyat, which has a majority of 14 state assemblymen. The Barisan has 21 seats against Pakatan’s 35.

The leadership obviously needs to resolve several contentious issues before it can call for a general election.

The public must also be satisfied with the decisions taken on these issues so that they will not be raised again in the general election.

Malaysians also need to feel that the Government has successfully carried out its various programmes before the polls. Statistics alone would not be enough.

Cases of snatch theft have dropped drastically for sure, but Malaysians cannot expect the country to be free of crime. Crime cannot be eradicated but can be reduced and even managed.

There is another reason why some think that Najib would call the general election in 2011: eleven is his lucky number.

His house address is 11, Jalan Langgak Duta; his father, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, was born on March 11; his mother Tun Rahah Mohd Nooh on June 11; and one of Najib’s sons was born on May 11.

LET’S admit it – a lot of us would like to be in the shoes of businessman Jho Low. He is flush with cash, parties with Hollywood celebrities and rubs shoulders with the most influential and powerful.

You either love or loathe the 28-year-old businessman who has been dubbed the international mystery man by the world media for his parties with Paris Hilton and Megan Fox and his penchant for expensive champagne.

I had the opportunity to meet this chubby Penangite last week at his office in one of the top floors of Petronas Twin Towers.

He was more interested in talking about how he made his money, mostly in the Middle East, and his friendship with Arab princes who studied with him at Harrow, an English boarding school that has produced seven prime ministers, and the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.

I was more interested in asking him about his exploits, if the word is appropriate, with Paris Hilton and his Hollywood friends.

It was obvious that Low Taek Jho wanted to clear the many media stories, mostly fabricated, that had been reported about him.

He tried to play down the hefty bills for his champagne, his parties and the limousines at his New York apartment, which he said he shares with 11 others.

But I couldn’t help feeling that Low wanted to say that as a single, young man who has made millions, he has the right to be a party animal.

Never mind if he is using his own money – or that of his Arab friends. His lifestyle may be seen as excessive and a waste by others in conservative Malaysia.

Low, who described himself as a businessman and entrepreneur, makes his money by making money for his clients. That’s what people who handle funds do, and he has a portfolio of rich clients.

He puts deals together for businessmen and even governments, using his extensive networking and mostly friendships from his school and university days.

No one can dispute his link with powerful Arab figures like Yousef Al Otaiba, who is currently the ambassador for the UAE to the United States and Mexico.

He talked about certain Hollywood celebrities as if they are his drinking buddies, which they are.

When asked if he had invited Mick Jagger, the Rolling Stones legend, to watch the World Cup in South Africa, his reply was: “I didn’t. I invited Leonardo (Dicaprio) who in turn invited Mick Jagger.”

Are actor Daniel Craig, who plays James Bond, and multi-millionaire rapper Sean “P. Diddy” Combs his neighbours at his apartments?

His reply was: “I don’t know but I have been inside the lift with Sean Combs.”

He denied having any romantic links with Paris Hilton nor any interest in her sister Nicole, saying he was a family friend of the Hiltons and that he handled their investment portfolio.

Low talked of bringing his Hollywood friends to visit Malaysia to promote the country, saying these people had millions of followers on their Twitter.

“Can you imagine the impact they can create for tourism when they promote Malaysia on their Tweets with their millions of followers?”

That would certainly be cheaper than placing advertisements on billboards and in the media, particularly when the international media would also follow these celebrities here.

An advocate of the Blue Ocean Strategy, he has put that on his status message of his Blackberry.

He also sees West Asia and China as massive markets.

Low sees himself as a loyal Malaysian who wants to bring Arab investors to his country, including to Johor’s Iskandar Development project.

But he has also invited criticism with his new-found fame.

His detractors have questioned his credibility and integrity and there are unflattering comments about how he conducts himself and his business deals.

Some have said he is hardly the brilliant financial strategist he has made himself out to be, brushing him off as merely a good salesman. They were outraged by the media prominence accorded to him, including by this newspaper.

But many of these critics have also admitted that they do not know him personally but picked up the negative remarks from friends or friends of friends or the blogs.

His friends, including some powerful figures, say he does not need to open himself to these criticisms as he could choose to stay away. After all, New York and Abu Dhabi are his two working bases.

Malaysians, and the world, will continue to hear about him if his present flamboyant lifestyle continues. He will make good copy for the media.

Hate him or love him, he has attracted attention. This writer has received endless telephone calls from media and business people who want to know him personally, and they include those who hate his guts.