The cut affected the three lifts and the pump to the main
water tank, forcing the residents to use the stairs and carry pails of water
from a neighbouring block.

Their ordeal ended on Friday, 49 hours later, when Tenaga
Nasional Bhd (TNB) restored supply to Block D1 after the building management
paid RM3,000, being part of the RM37,000 outstanding bill. TNB has also agreed
to defer its action to disconnect supply to Block D2.

The power cut upset residents who have been promptly
settling their RM50 monthly maintenance fees. TNB's decision to penalise
everyone, including the good paymasters, has gone down badly with law-abiding
residents. Rightly so.

It seems that Joe Public always has to bear the brunt.

Six companies that owe TNB a total of RM852.99mil have
been allowed to pay in instalments over 13 to 15 months.

Defaulters are often served notices to pay up after 60
days of the bill date but much leeway seems to have been given to corporate
giants while the same leniency is not shown to ordinary consumers like the
Taman Teluk Indah flat-dwellers.

When someone does not pay RM200 in arrears, TNB threatens
to cut the supply but when big companies are involved, a different standard is
applied.

Efficiency is certainly needed in TNB – it has debts of
some RM30bil – but it won't be able to recover its losses by going after the
small fry. Errant corporate defaulters should be on top of the list.

While it is easy to hammer TNB, all consumers should make
it a point to pay their electricity bills.

I used to live at a block of walk-up apartments in
Petaling Jaya, where most of the residents were businessmen and white-collar
workers. We clamoured for our strata titles from the developer but when they
were handed to us, a fresh round of problems began.

Managing the apartments ourselves wasn't easy. We found
that the biggest culprits of non-payment of maintenance fees were owners living
overseas or those who had rented out their units.

The management committee found it hard to pay the
security guards, for waste disposal and general maintenance. In fact, there was
no money in the sinking fund for a fresh coat of paint for the apartment
blocks. In the end, I moved out.

I now live in an apartment in Mont Kiara, where you think
the high-heeled would pay their dues promptly. Wrong. The same problem exists
even at high-end condominiums.

Last week, I was told that an expensive gated community
near Kajang had run into similar problems because some rich owners have not
been paying their fees. As a result, the security system is now badly run and
the housing scheme is poorly lit.

Sometimes, the fault lies with the management company
that is quick to demand for payment of fees from apartment owners but slow to
respond to general maintenance needs.

At my apartment unit, the intercom has not been working
for months and my complaints have fallen on deaf ears. Some of the lights at
the swimming pool are on the blink. Again, the management doesn't seem to
bother.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is right
when he said that Malaysians live in first-class facilities but have Third
World mentality. This is reflected not only in the way we maintain
our facilities but the apparent lack of civic consciousness.

Many Malaysians, irrespective of financial standing, are
still not quite ready to share the responsibilities and commitment of living in
a common property.

The sunny weather of summer is regarded as the best time
for any covert operation. It is easier to remain undetected or escape in a
crowd.

Intelligence agencies in many countries increase their
terrorism alert in May each year as the holiday season begins.

In the warped minds of terrorists, a high-profile attack
would be spectacular. In the past, sports or political events were targets but
now there is no preferred target.

In the early hours of Sept 5, 1972, a group of terrorists walked into the Munich
Olympic Village. Their target was the temporary home of the Israeli Olympic team.
Within 24 hours, 11 team members were dead.

At the Atlanta Olympic Games on July 27, 1996, the explosion of a pipe bomb in a
paper bag killed one person and injured over 100 people.

Even schools with innocent children are not spared.

Lorry drivers, merely ekeing out a living in Iraq,
have been arrested by radicals and senselessly beheaded, in the name of
religion.

Journalists have also been abducted because they are easy
targets and maximum publicity is assured.

In Russia,
Chechen terrorists stormed a Moscow
theatre and killed innocent people attending an evening of classical music.

Shopping malls, which are regarded as soft targets, have
also become a favourite of terror groups during summer because they are easily
accessible. Over the past two years, security agencies in the United
States and Europe
have stepped up their operations in these areas.

Analysts believe that terrorists chose to strike during
summer because security was lax. Many security personnel were on vacation with
their families.

While on holiday, most people let their guard down while
the large congregation of people at famous landmarks presents an easy target
for terrorists.

Raising public awareness of the possibility of attacks
during summer months have now been regarded as crucial with greater emphasis on
parallel attacks, as demonstrated on Sept
11, 2001.

As the World Trade
Center in New
York was hit, other targets such as the Pentagon in Washington
DC was also targeted. The series of attacks
would result in widespread panic.

In the United Kingdom,
the police have sent detailed leaflets to every household on how they should
react if their neighbourhood were hit by terrorists. Such awareness is aimed at
preventing Britons from becoming complacent about their safety during summer.

In the US,
various cities have announced plans to link state and local law enforcement to
the FBI to receive real-time information on terrorism threats. Like our Rakan
Cop crime prevention programme, where taxi drivers have been roped in as the
eyes and ears of the police, the US have recruited New York's doormen, janitors
and apartment maintenance workers to provide tip-offs about suspicious
activities.

The security agencies in New York
have reportedly sought the support of their employers to allow these workers to
go through a four-hour security awareness training programme.

We in Malaysia
have been lucky. We fought successfully against the Communist Party of Malaysia
because of the efficiency of our police, especially the Special Branch. We also
had a plan to win the hearts and minds of the people living near the fringes of
the jungles.

While we have dealt with Kumpulan Militan Malaysia and
Jemaah Islamiah, our only real terrorist experience was in 1975 when a Japanese
Red Army group stormed into the ninth floor of the American International
Assurance building in KL which housed the American embassy and held 55
hostages. It ended four days later after they were traded for five comrades
held in Japanese jails.

Despite the criticism against preventive laws such as the
Internal Security Act, similar legislations have now been adopted by the US
and UK. The
intelligence agencies cannot fight terrorism with kid gloves.

But until the West, especially the US,
adopts a serious approach to resolve the root causes in Palestine,
no amount of security measures can help them fight terrorism.

In the case of Russia,
it must find peaceful solutions to the war in the North Caucasus
region. Russia
took almost three centuries to conquer the Muslim-dominated North
Caucasus but, until today, still faces fierce resistance.

It is the most turbulent part of the Russian
Federation. However, Moscow
is not willing to grant independence to the territory because it is
criss-crossed by oil pipelines serving the vast new oil riches of the Caspian
Sea.

September will remain a black month for terrorism in
different ways. For older Palestinians, they will remember the formation of the
Black September terror group, so named because it  was formed in that month after radicals felt
betrayed by Jordan
where they had sought refuge from the Israelis.

BLACK SEPTEMBER

Sept 5, 1972:
11 Israeli Olympic team members die at the Munich Games.

Sept 4, 2000:
Car bomb outside apartment in Dagestan, Russia,
kills 64 people.

Sept 8, 2000:
Bomb in nine-storey building in Moscow
kills 94 people and injures 150 others.

Sept 13, 2000:
Bomb at apartment near Kremlin kills 118 and injures 200.

Sept 11, 2001:
Attack on the World Trade
Center in New
York.

Sept 4, 2004:
Over 300 people, mostly children, die in Beslan,
Russia, in hostage drama.

Sept 9, 2004:
Bomb blast in Jakarta kills nine
people and injures over 100.

The glimmer of hope for Anwar and his family became
stronger in the last 48 hours before the verdict, prompting speculation of some
kind of a deal.

A family friend of Anwar narrated how Datin Seri Dr Wan
Azizah Wan Ismail sent word turning down a weekend dinner invitation because
she would likely be overseas with Anwar after his release.

Then, there was a senior DAP leader who predicted
confidently at a party gathering that Anwar would be released. There was no
second-guessing, not even a cautious qualification, but a bold prediction.

Still, on Wednesday night, as reporters called up Anwar's
lawyer Sankara N. Nair for confirmation on what they had heard over the
grapevine, the former policeman-turned-lawyer was guarded, saying he did not
want to harbour false hopes and he had heard of such talk too many times.

But, as the BBC reported, Nair proceeded to spell out in
detail the next day's schedule of press conferences, passport application and a
possible journey to Germany
for surgery. As the correspondent reported, he certainly did not sound like a
man who would accompany his client back to jail.

Mildly surprised – that was the reaction of Tun Dr
Mahathir Mohamad at a press conference at his Petronas
Towers office on Friday shortly
after Anwar was freed. That, perhaps, best summed up the sentiments of many in
the political and media circles.

Anwar, 57, is now at the crossroads. He has to decide
which direction to take. He has had plenty of time to reflect on the political
avenues before him.

Among the factors he would have considered are the
massive mandate for Abdullah, the humiliating defeat for PAS and the disastrous
outing for Parti Keadilan Nasional in the recent general election.

Some of the key issues of the reformasi movement – such
as fighting corruption and restoring credibility to key institutions – have
been given immediate attention by Abdullah.

Anwar had often complained about the lack of independence
of the judiciary. Ironically, before the Federal Court bench met to decide on
his appeal, Anwar applied to disqualify two judges, Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad
and Justice Tengku Baharudin Shah Tengku Mahmud, from hearing his case.

He felt that Abdul Hamid would be biased while Tengku
Baharudin lacked experience as he was only appointed early this year. In the
end, these two judges decided in his favour.

But the most important factor which would have the
biggest impact on Anwar's political future is the positive sentiment for
Abdullah. With the release of Anwar, the opposition has lost a big issue.

His conviction had, in some ways, clouded foreign opinion
of Malaysia but
with the new development, the perception of Malaysia
would certainly change in the eyes of many foreign leaders and investors.

The immediate indicator was the boost in the stock market
on Friday but let us not discount the buoyant economy. That aside, the world
has been positive towards the reforms being carried out by Abdullah and all
this has been reflected in the endorsement from major leaders.

Anwar can choose to lead a multi-racial opposition with
ties to PAS and DAP but given the Islamist party's conservative stance and
insistence on setting up an orthodox Islamic state, he would have a big
headache. The DAP has learnt its lesson, in the most bitter way, and would shy
away from such a commitment again.

Another option is to rejoin Umno. These are still early
days and the matter has not been brought up, according to sources in Putrajaya,
but nothing is impossible in politics.

After all, Dr Mahathir was once sacked from Umno. The
obstacle this time, however, is a new party ruling that bars members who had
left the party and had campaigned against Umno from rejoining.

Anwar has been a Keadilan adviser but has never held any
post. He can also argue that he never left the party because he was sacked.
Interestingly, his right-hand man, Azmin Ali, said there had been no serious
invitation from Umno while Dr Wan Azizah skirted the subject by saying that
Anwar was released not to join Umno.

Upon his release, Anwar said he must "take cognisance of
the fact that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi must have allowed
some latitude for the judges to act professionally and freely. But this is only
the beginning."

It would not be wrong to suggest that the Malay community
has long wanted the Anwar issue to end. With his acquittal, it has come to a
formal end.

National unity and reconciliation should be the priority
and, given Anwar's appeal and abilities, it would be a waste if these factors
were not taken into account.

No one expects Anwar to retire or go into exile. In all
likelihood, he will be a major political player but he may find himself shut
out for a long time. His corruption conviction, which he finished serving last
year, bars him from holding electoral office until 2008 (elections would likely
be called a year earlier).

Much water has passed under the bridge after six years.
The days of street demonstrations and angry politics are over. A new prime
minister, known for his open ways, non-antagonistic politics and moderate approach,
is at the helm. It is time to move on and, by now, Anwar must have decided
where he wants to go.

Journalism is a tough job. I remember my editors telling
me, when I first joined The Star, to think hard whether I was committed to the
job. For sure, I would not become a rich man.

Journalists, they advised, were also not popular figures.
Politicians and officials would try to impose on, even intimidate, newsmen with
their views to suit their agenda while readers, with their broad range of
views, can never be satisfied.

I have learned that you can get e-mails and letters
heaping praises on you but would also get the same amount of replies from
people who were aghast with what you have written, especially when there are
elements of race and religion.

Over the past 20 years of my career, I have been
threatened, either verbally or in writing, simply because some people do not
agree with what I have written. This unhappy lot included those who professed
to champion the freedom of speech.

On one occasion, a prominent politician openly called me
and a colleague all kinds of names in front of an audience of thousands at a
stadium. But we have regarded such incidents as an occupational hazard.

Police reports have also been lodged and, in some
instances, the police have stepped in and even investigated. One angry reader,
who wrote a series of nasty letters, turned out to be a 65-year-old retired
teacher.

The police traced him even though he hid behind a
pseudonym.

We did not have the heart to pursue the matter and told
the police that we wanted to let the matter rest. But we told the angry reader
that we respected his right to disagree with us as we live in a democratic
country.

That aside, journalism must be the only profession in
Malaysia where reporters have to face a slew of laws – the Printing Presses and
Publications Act, the Official Secrets Act and the Sedition Act, to name a few
– in the course of their daily work.

So last week, the fraternity had a nasty jolt when the
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) announced that it plans to set up
a media complaints committee.

Instead of devoting its resources to helping dismantle
the laws constraining the media, Suhakam has, instead, chosen to put another
barrier on the press. The last thing we need is another monitoring body or
mechanism to watch over the press.

The Home Ministry, through its publications unit, is
already doing that. Now, we have Suhakam wanting to set up another unit to do a
similar job. Hey, we thought we were on the same side!

Suhakam commissioner Prof Datuk Hamdan Adnan, a
journalism lecturer, said there had been complaints of the media violating the
privacy of an individual or a family.

He said these complaints included those from people such
as transvestites, the disabled and orang asli who were unhappy at the way the
media has portrayed them.

A National Press Club official put it aptly: "Suhakam
shouldn't bite off more than it can chew. Suhakam already has too many issues
on its plate that remain unresolved."

The media would prefer to be self-regulating but until
some of these laws are repealed, or at least amended, there are bound to be
objections from the media over the setting up of more monitoring bodies. The
proposed Malaysian Media Council, for example, continued to be debated
precisely because of this reason.

On Aug 7, 2002,
Suhakam chairman Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman reportedly said that the commission
would recommend that the Government review laws governing press freedom as soon
as possible after examining them. Citing the laws involved, he said the
situation was now different and the relevant laws should be reviewed.

It has been more than two years since that statement.
Nobody knows whether Suhakam has managed to work out anything beyond the
rhetoric but the likelihood is that everything has remained very much the same.

The bottom line is that Suhakam has taken the job of
regulating the press without even first consulting the editors. The business of
running the press should be left to the journalists.

Even his bold decision to speak at the world gathering of
church leaders in Kuala Lumpur
raised eyebrows among conservative Muslims.

The presence of a Muslim leader at a Christian function
in the Arab world, particularly in Palestine
and Jordan,
would be normal but in Malaysia
we have become more religiously sensitive over the years. Unnecessarily so, I
may add.

As an example, a young, idealistic non-Muslim lawyer
complained about the blaring of prayers from a nearby mosque. There was a hint
of intolerance, without doubt.

During my first year in Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
I was placed in a first-floor apartment in campus. Moving into my room, I was
happy it came with a balcony, which meant I would have plenty of fresh air.

Later, I noticed that the apartment directly faced the
hostel surau and the speaker was positioned towards my room. For the first few
days, my sleep was interrupted but within a week I was no longer affected.

My Indian roommate and I slept like a log every night. We
accepted the call to prayer as being part of our rich culture rather than a
nuisance.

Growing up in Air Itam, Penang, I
used to go to the Cathay coffee shop in Paya Terubong
for nasi kandar. I still think it serves the best coffee in town.

As the coffee shop was often full, the Malay, Chinese and
Indian customers would share tables for our favourite Penang
fare.

It did not matter that the coffee shop had other stalls;
the Muslim customers would eat at the same table with the Chinese or Indians
who might be eating char koay teow or pork mee.

To the Malay customers, the coffee shop culture was as
part of the diversity in Malaysia.
For sure, their grievances of national issues are the same, even if they come
from different faiths!

Such tolerance continues today but increasingly we hear
of Muslims and non-Muslims showing their reluctance to sit together for a
simple meal.

We receive complaints about local authorities dragging
their feet in granting permission for religious buildings, especially churches,
even in areas where the majority of the residents are non-Muslims.

The position of the Government and political leadership
is clear. So is the Constitution on the rights of non-Muslims, but some middle
and lower-level bureaucrats have made it difficult because of their prejudice
and narrow-mindedness.

Recent court decisions have not helped clear the
confusion over the position of minors being converted to Muslim if a parent
embraces Islam while the partner chooses to retain his or her religion.

Abdullah, displaying his sincerity as a leader of all
Malaysians, had suggested the setting up of an inter-faith council, saying he
was a Muslim who wanted to initiate a dialogue with Christian friends.

It was important, he said, to talk in a world that "has
become increasingly difficult to do so", and we should realise that religious
tolerance went beyond mere co-existence. There was another reminder: promoting
moderation was not easy because many people practised their faith in absolutist
terms.

This is certainly true of some Christian preachers in Malaysia
who can be unnecessarily harsh on some Chinese customary practices, sometimes
causing family discord.

The Prime Minister has said what he has to say. There
have been efforts by many groups to initiate inter-faith dialogue but none has
made any headway.

Non-government organisations such as Aliran and the Bar
Council had arranged seminars on common religious values years ago, including
one on "Belief in God", by the former, in 1980.

Even the book One God Many Paths – that emphasised common
values among major religions – was published by Aliran.

But a credible inter-faith council, represented by
responsible leaders of the various faiths in Malaysia,
still cannot take off.

Such a council could deliberate on prickly issues such as
religious conversion, building places of worship and dissemination of religious
materials in a moderate and consensual manner.

The council could then organise programmes emphasising
national unity, tolerance and common values.

Such effort would cut off the bigots, irrespective of
their religion, who prefer to preach that their religion is more superior than
the others.

These are the disruptive extremists who exploit the
reluctance of the silent majority to speak up.

They place obstacles and conveniently push their agenda
down the throat of moderate Malaysians.

It is obvious that the religious NGOs have failed in
trying to set up an inter-faith council. Perhaps it is time the Government
takes the lead.

Last week, I was in Hong Kong to
watch the 56-year-old Sam entertain a crowd of 12,000 people, mostly
middle-aged, at the Coliseum. With the help of a friend from Hong
Kong, I managed to obtain tickets that were sold out within two
hours months earlier.

Michael, who is trying to make a comeback with his new
movie Three of a Kind, was a guest at the show. Living up to his reputation as
a sharp stand-up comic, he had plenty of political jokes – all targeted at
Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa.

Midway through his routine, Michael announced that China
was trailing 1-2 against archrival Japan
in the Asian Cup final. Japan
went on to win 3-1 in the emotionally charged soccer match.

But at the concert hall, the crowd loudly roared with
approval on hearing China
was losing. In classic Cantonese humour, based largely on cynicism and the play
of tone and words, Michael said the blame fell largely on Tung.

He then urged the crowd to repeat after him as to who
should bear the responsibility for the loss. The crowd chorused "Tung". The
point Michael was trying to make was that Tung symbolises what was wrong with Hong
Kong now, particularly its moribund economy and his handling of
SARS.

Hong Kong is no longer the
financial centre it once was. That status has gone to Shanghai
where most of the Chinese leaders originate.

When Hong Kong clinched the deal
to set up a Disneyland theme park, there was renewed
hope. But it didn't last long because Shanghai
also announced that it, too, had the deal.

Hong Kong folk used to mock the
mainlanders for their lack of finesse and wealth but the territory is now
depending, to a large extent, on the spending power of 30,000 Chinese tourists
who arrive daily.

There were more punches from Michael. He said that 12
years ago when the brothers made their movies, they used to portray the
frustrations of Hong Kong people living in a place where
money was everything.

Times have changed, he said. When motorists get into an
accident, they still get uptight but they no longer fight – they probably blame
Tung for the accident.

Tung and the pro-Beijing politicians are certainly the
most unpopular people around. With Hong Kong holding its
legislative race next month, China
has reason to worry about intense anti-government sentiments.

Analysts expect voter turnout to surge beyond the 43.6%
of 2000. A total of 162 candidates have filed to contest the 60 seats, the
highest so far, in what has been billed as the fight between Beijing
loyalists and democracy champions in the territory. In 2000, 146 candidates
contested the polls.

The Legislative Council (Legco) is Hong Kong's
top lawmaking body – 30 elected directly and 30 chosen by largely pro-Beijing
professional and business groups.

Democrats command 22 seats now while the pro-Beijing
group has more than 30 seats. Voters get to choose 30 of the seats.

Surveys conducted so far show that the pro-democracy
candidates are ahead. Former radio host Albert Cheng – who quit the show after
receiving death threats – has joined the fray, a move that would irk China.

Talk is that the Democrats could end up with 28 seats,
which is not enough to form a majority.

The host of the popular Teacup in a Storm, who was sacked
by his employers, is contesting as an independent candidate but he could split
the votes of the Democratic Party.

The territory's top pro-Beijing party, the Democratic
Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong, has acknowledged it would be a tough
election.

Said David Tang, the founder of China Clubs and Shanghai Tang:
"The most dangerous thing about our government is that Tung and his civil
servants constantly try to second guess what Beijing
wants. But none is smart enough to do so.

"The leadership in China
comes from a revolutionary background. Hong Kong only knows
how to survive in a bourgeois society. How can they think we are at the same
level?"

Mainland officials and pro-Beijing leaders have called
the pro-democracy politicians "traitors" and "pawns of the western powers",
accusing them of fanning separatism and tarnishing the Chinese image.

But the practical people of Hong Kong
prize the economy more than lofty ideals. At the same time, the voters also
want their leaders to stand up to Beijing
but not fight it. That's a tough call, for sure.

In short, these contenders speak their lingo and in the
coming party polls in September their showing would have an impact on their
political careers.

The Umno elections, rightly or wrongly, have been
considered as more important than even the general election.

The showing of Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr
Mohamed Khir Toyo must have surprised many observers. He is second out of the
110 Umno leaders nominated.

Securing 171 nominations, the Universiti Malaya-trained
dentist, who turned 39 on Friday, is said to have laid his groundwork over the
last four years.

In 2000, he scraped through the Umno Youth race, making
him the last candidate to be elected into the 15-member executive committee. He
was then just Tanjung Karang division Youth chief, a virtual unknown.

Barely four years as Mentri Besar of the most developed
state, he seems to have caught the attention of the delegates.

His supporters said his strongest card was the Barisan
Nasional's strong showing in the recent general election, where Umno scored
100% victory.

Except for two seats which went to the DAP, Barisan won
all 54 seats. The two sole PAS state assemblymen – vice-presidents Datuk Dr
Hassan Ali and Dr Shafie Salleh – lost their seats.

Other bright sparks in the supreme council race so far
include Negri Sembilan Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan, who was appointed
to the post after the March polls. The 48-year-old former banker, who spent 30
years in the corporate world, was the managing director of Cycle and Carriage
Bintang Bhd.

Then there is Datuk Dr Awang Adek Husin, the Deputy Rural
and Regional Development Minister. He made his political debut in the March
polls and wrested the Bachok parliamentary seat from PAS.

Despite the robust politics of Kelantan, the former
lecturer was returned unopposed in the Bachok Umno division. With Kelantan Umno
leaders like Datuk Mustapa Mohamad vying for the vice-president's post, Dr
Awang is in 19th spot with 121 nominations.

Also vying for a supreme council seat for the first time
is Datuk Azalina Othman Said, the Youth and Sports Minister. She is in 14th
place with 135 nominations. Just a notch up is Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul
Jalil.

Other notable figures include Deputy Tourism Minister
Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Noh Omar,
who both have more than 100 nominations.

Interestingly, old-timers like Rural Development Minister
Datuk Abdul Aziz Shamsuddin have also made an impressive showing – he leads the
field with 175 nominations.

The other leaders that have taken their places are Datuk
Seri Syed Razak Syed Zain, Datuk Mohamed Khaled Nordin, Datuk Abdul Kadir
Sheikh Fadzir, Datuk Seri Musa Aman, Datuk Seri Tajol Rosli Ghazali and Datuk
Shafie Apdal.

The Umno race has also heated up with party president
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi declaring that vice-president aspirants who
lose may not be appointed into the supreme council.

The contenders include incumbents Tan Sri Muhammad
Muhammad Taib and Tan Sri Muyhiddin Yassin.

The others in the fray are Datuk Seri Mohamed Ali Rustam,
Datuk Mustapa Mohamed, Tan Sri Mohamed Isa Abdul Samad, Datuk Seri Adnan Yaakob
and Datuk Shahrir Samad.

Last week, Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar
declared he was withdrawing from the vice-president's race and would now
concentrate on a supreme council seat, which he has qualified to contest with
23 nominations.

Under the party constitution, Abdullah has the power to
appoint 13 members to the supreme council, including the treasurer, information
chief and secretary-general. In the past, losers were appointed to the supreme
council.

Six of the vice-presidential contenders have obtained the
required nominations to contest for supreme council seats but all eight are
expected to go for broke.

The Umno elections may be more than a month away but, as
the saying goes, a week in politics is a long time – and the nominations need
not necessarily be translated into votes.

It was a depressing start to the day. There has been too
much bad news over the past few months, even for seasoned journalists like me
who are seldom shocked by what we see or hear.

On Thursday, we learned that all the seven people on
board the Bell 206 Hornbill Skyways helicopter that crashed at Mount
Murud on July 12 had been confirmed
dead.

Just a day earlier, the media reported the gruesome
murder of a young couple, Pok Chua Wen and Chong Pui Wan, near an abandoned
pond in Bahau, Negri Sembilan. It was a senseless killing by two robbers.

Police, meanwhile, have yet to arrest those responsible
for the brutal murder of MCA Youth leader Mah Ann Ann. All five people remanded
over the case were freed last week.

Then there was the murder of final-year law student
Darren Kang at a restaurant in Sri Hartamas. A number of people, including
foreigners, have been arrested and charged in court.

At dinner functions, I have been asked why the media
continued to highlight such tragedies. Readers need cheering up, suggested my
fellow diners, adding that there must be more happy news to make newspapers
brighter.

I wish there were. Editors and reporters, at least those
in The Star, have agreed to strive for more feel-good reports that would put a
smile on the faces of readers in the morning. One editor even wanted a page to
be devoted to happy news, although he wasn't sure whether there would be enough
of such news.

Surely, there must be more inspiring stories like the
determination of medical student Lennard Lee who swam across the English
Channel. But, in reality, there are more sad stories to tell than
happy ones.

My friend, Datuk Kalimullah Hassan, the group chief
editor of New Straits Times, wrote recently that he, too, asked his fellow
editors for more happy stories.

I often have people telling me that the world is no
longer as safe as it used to be. This is not necessarily so. History students
would tell you that the world was worse before.

In Malaysia,
during the Japanese Occupation and the Emergency, no one could tell whether
family members would return home in the evening after work. Life was that
unpredictable.

We now have more access to information. We have watched
in horror on the Internet how Islamic militants beheaded their hostages even as
TV stations banned these visuals because they were too gruesome.

Newspapers have been blamed for reporting the spate of
crime but there is no point in shooting the messengers. We in the media also
feel that enough is enough.

It is time for Malaysians to join hands with the police
in fighting crime. We must be more concerned with the source and the root
causes of these crimes. Besides insisting on the presence of policemen
everywhere, Malaysians need to educate themselves on self-protection.

Bureaucrats and politicians should be more concerned
about solving cases instead of complaining about the media reporting on crime.
We should not sweep our problems under the carpet or pretend they don't exist.

Despite the many reports of snatch thefts and the media
printing pictures of bags women should avoid carrying, how many of these crime
prevention reports have been taken seriously by the people?

We advise our young to stay away from isolated and dark
spots but how many young people would heed such advice? We tell our children to
walk away from a fight but you would often encounter the rage of motorists if
you're a little slow in giving way.

More couples, we are told, have given up the institution
of marriage for career and personal pursuits. Families have broken up while
foreign maids have taken over the role of mothers.

Worse, we never had so many foreigners in Malaysia
before. The sadder part is that many seem to be able to obtain permanent
resident status despite being labourers and maids.

But I am an optimist. The news reports for the past
weeks, I believe, must have shocked many Malaysians. Things can improve if we
pray hard enough.

I was a guest on the political talkshow, representing the media. The show, coordinated by KJ and aired by NTV7, was different in many ways. It was in English and the producers invited opposition figures such as Tian Chua and R. Sivarasa to express their views.

Dateline Malaysia enjoyed a following with young political analysts like me believing that Malaysian voters should be allowed to listen to arguments from both sides before they cast their ballots.

I felt that if the speakers representing the Government could not convince the audience, then the votes should go to the Opposition. Barisan Nasional leaders should not shy away from debate – it was as simple as that.

But some ministers, I was given to understand later, did not like the idea of giving opposition figures access to primetime TV. It was also expensive to produce the show because advertisers shied away from sponsorship. In the end, the show was axed, and since then there has been no such programme.

I was struck by Khairy's intelligence, wit and analytical mind. His openness and ability to express his thoughts was refreshing to me, especially when many of us have to deal with graduates who struggle with English.

Khairy gave me a tough time during the interview. When the show was over, we laughed about it. With no age barrier between us, we got along quite well.

He was then not yet the son-in-law of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and certainly no one in Umno took notice of him, except maybe those who watched the talkshow. The Bahasa Malaysia version was conducted by Azalina Othman Said, now the Youth and Sports Minister.

When KJ joined the Prime Minister's Office, he called me about his appointment. I was happy for personal and business reasons: I now had a powerful contact there.

Not long afterwards, I learnt that love was in the air between Nori and Khairy. For a while, I did not broach the matter with him as I respected his private life but soon the couple began going out for dinner with my wife and me.

Thanks also to Dr Vincent Lim, the political secretary to the Prime Minister, who introduced Khairy to Nori. Dr Lim used to work at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies where Nori is now employed. The rest, as they say, is history.

I have stayed away from the debate over the ambitions of the 28-year-old KJ. Some have implied a schism between those with family connections and those without.

His detractors admit that Khairy is very clever but being an Oxford graduate does not necessarily make him future prime minister material. Fair enough.

Last week, an editor of an Internet news website wrote about favoured sons and sons-in-law inheriting positions in Umno. In short, nepotism was prevalent in the party.

I felt it was terribly unfair simply because no one has pointed out that in Parti Keadilan Rakyat, DAP and PAS, we find the immediate family members of these party leaders holding positions and contesting in elections. We do not have to name names but no one bats an eye simply because they are in the opposition.

Despite knowing Khairy for only a short time, we have talked about our concerns for the nation, including corruption, bureaucracy, lack of racial interaction, increasing crime rate and religious intolerance.

Irrespective of our political affiliation, Malaysians, I believe, share the same anxieties over what we see around us. The country needs politicians who are idealistic and committed to fighting the scourge of corruption.

It does not matter whether they are young, inexperienced or are family members of political leaders. What is important is that they are prepared to walk the talk instead of just talking for political expediency.

At a Christmas open house of a journalist friend in Petaling Jaya last year, Khairy pulled me aside and asked whether I had a Christmas wish. I nodded and told him that I would like to see a clean and reformed police force.

He smiled. Not too long later, Abdullah announced the setting up of a Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate the role and responsibility of the police force in maintaining law and order, including in areas like work ethics, abuses, the welfare of policemen and women victims of violence.

I do not know the part about Khairy being the most powerful 28-year-old in the country but Malaysians do not want him to let them down.

He has asked for three years. No one can begrudge him that, since he has won a key political post that will allow him to do something for the country. He should be given that chance.

That dinner was held in honour of Norwich
(pronounced as noh rich) City players and officials who were making their first
visit to Malaysia.
The following day, I watched the team beat our Malaysian side at the National
Stadium in Bukit Jalil.

At the dinner, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who admitted he
knew nothing about football, could not resist taking a swipe at the Malaysian
team: Previously, the Malaysians used to beat the Japanese during the Merdeka
Cup matches but the Japanese are now performing so much better.

A lot of us will surely nod in agreement. The former
prime minister also said Malaysians were so soccer mad that they could rattle
off the names of soccer personalities but not local politicians. More so now
with the many newly created ministries.

Football is big in Malaysia,
especially the EPL which kicks off its season next month.

Proton has certainly scored by sponsoring Norwich
City. It means a global audience of
450 million in 150 countries watching Proton's Tiger logo on the team's
yellow-and-green jersey.

I may be biased but I think the sponsorship of Norwich
City is an even better investment
than Petronas' Formula One commitment because the audience spread is bigger and
we don't have to keep watching the same driver winning most of the time.

Proton's association with Norwich
City began when it bought over Lotus,
the international sports car maker. Norwich
City is the home of Lotus, which
employs almost 1,400 people.

Said Proton CEO Tengku Mahaleel Tengku Arif: "Norwich
City is certainly an underdog and
so is Proton. Both of us are challenging the top players in our respective
field. Not many know us outside of our home base.

"Both of us do not as yet have top names, but as a team
we work and support each other to succeed. This, I believe, is the key factor
for the success of both Norwich City
and Proton.''

Outside the hotel lobby during the dinner, a few cynical
journalists remarked that Norwich City
sounded like "Nowhere" and "No way."  One
of them was a Manchester United die-hard.

I was more sympathetic. I really hope that Norwich
City will stay in the premier
league and not just be a one-season wonder. That should be the realistic target
of the team; I don't think they are thinking of lifting any silverware this
season.

Norwich City's
opening match is against Crystal Palace,
another Division One team that won promotion to the premier league. A victory
would be a morale booster, although Norwich
will have to face Manchester United and Arsenal in the subsequent matches.

The club has had its glory days. It has reached the FA
Cup semi-finals three times in 1959, 1989 and 1992. The team won the League Cup
in 1962 and 1985 and were runners-up in 1973 and 1975.  As for the UEFA Cup, they were champions in
1993-94.

The team had been languishing until Proton-Lotus entered
into a sponsorship agreement with the Canaries during the 2003-2004 season.
Since then, it has gone places.

I was impressed by the attitude of the Norwich
City players when I met some of
them on Thursday night. Unlike the prima donnas of the bigger teams, they were
polite and unassuming.

I could see the young lads having a good time during the
dinner, especially when they saw the lovely Malaysian models in their
tight-fitting kebaya, but their joy was cut short when team manager Nigel
Worthington ordered them to retire for the day at 10.30pm.

The team had chosen the home of its sponsor for
pre-season warm-up. It's only right for us to consider Norwich
City as our home team.