cookie-cutter comments

I suppose when you have grand, long-term goals, you try to coach it in the most general terms possible to allow for a breadth of interpretation. The problem with repeating yourself again and again is, if what you say isn’t backed up with concrete proposals for action, everything remains up in the air and unresolved.

Which essentially means, no one knows what you’re talking about. It’s very much like envisioning More’s Utopia, or Plato’s Republic, except nothing specific is said about it. In the end, this “vision” appears to be nothing more than a Shangri-La shrouded in obscure declarations and descriptive statements about what “it will be like” rather than “how we’re going to get there”. [more..]

En Zainul Arifin has written some remarks regarding the whole Police abuse scandal in the NST today, and you can find the link to the article here: “Let’s not miss the wood for the trees“. I’m wondering whether any of his points are fair; I’m sure they are, if we read his remarks without qualification. I tend to believe that the truth is stranger than fiction, and that when examined properly, it does appear that generalizations have a basis in some truth (who woulda thought I’d say this…), that is to say, confirming the perception of the people who either make these generalizations or believe these generalizations.

Anyway, I’ve got some spare time, so I thought I’d look at his article properly (or as much as my liquified brains can tahan).

[more..]

Section 12 of the Amnesty International report has a series of recommendations for the reform of the Police in Malaysia, starting right at the top with calls for the reform and/or repeal of restrictive laws that help maintain the oppressive regime perpetrated by the police.

Let’s suppose, for a while, that the general reasons for the continued oppression by the police is a function of a lack of transparency and the overt threat of force against citizens.

This overt threat of force is maintained by, among others, the ISA and the various emergency laws still in effect in Malaysia. There is also no oversight, and/or no avenues provided for legal representatives and/or NGOs, for repressive practices such as torture or ill-treatment. [more..]

I kicked up the dirt with my safety boots, walking through the puffs of sand and dust. It was overcast and the air smelled of rain, and the day was still young. I shuffled through a stack of papers on my clipboard, thinking about the sheer drama some people are willing to put up with - most of all in themselves. Hyperbole I can take: I’m prone to impressing little cousins and grand cousins that way. Melodramatizing the issue I cannot take.

Enter offending article A: Mrs B, let’s call her. Cute in that 40-plus, worn out way with highlighted hair and the usual layer of gunk on her face. She looked like she still had a body to impress, but knowing how elegantly-cut clothes and push-up bras do wonders, I remained skeptical. That doesn’t mean I didn’t pay close attention to her, of course. She had her hair tied up and wisps fell across her eyes as she frowned in the effort to speak BBC english: mangled, accented and completely ah lian. Endearing, ya? [more..]

Cowardice is defined as an ignoble fear in the face of danger or pain. An ignoble fear, a base, mean fear in the face of danger or pain. It surprised me. I don’t know anything enobling about fear; it turns your knees to water; you feel your stomach churn; your mouth goes dry, not an ounce of spittle left. If you have loved ones, your fear turns into fear for them.

I wonder how far outrage really outpaces fear. Outrage is all well and good, but when you’re allowed to think things through, I wonder how fast conclusions are drawn about your own fate. I wonder how long the government will continue to encumber us with outrage, but maybe I’m more concerned about how long the government intends for us to fear them.

[more..]

Some comments and thoughts on what I’ve read so far of the Amnesty International report “Malaysia: Towards Human Rights Policing” which I think we should all give a look through. Among the things mentioned is something I’ve tried putting into words in my previous post here and elsewhere. The same sentiment is worded more clearly in the above report:

“It is widely acknowledged in studies of police that they cannot be effective unless they have the consent of the people being policed. This is achieved when society believes that policing is impartial and carried out on behalf of all the community, rather than favouring certain groups within it. Further, a police service will be most effective, and will maintain the confidence, trust and respect of the public, when it is representative of the community.”

And,

“The [UN General Assembly] Resolution [34/169] and the [UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials 1979], by setting out that ‘every law enforcement agency should be representative of and responsive and accountable to the community as a whole‘, establishes a fundamental standard on the nature of human rights-based policing, and the relationship police should have with the communities they serve and the political system within which they function”

[more..]

For those interested, Amnesty International had posted a rather long document on their recommendations for police reform in Malaysia. Isn’t it sad? We’ve had a Royal Commission to examine our police force, and outsiders making benign recommendations and still nothing seems to change. You can find a link over here:

Malaysia: Towards Human Rights-based Policing

[more..]

Just considering some things, more speculation and nothing concrete. I’ve been thinking about the current police abuse situation and trying to piece together some events that have occurred. I make some general statements, true, but more in the vein of speculation, so forgive me if I offend.

1. Playing Kingmaker
The by-election in Pengkalan Pasir. According to this post and a Malaysiakini report, Anwar Ibrahim is out playing Kingmaker for a PAS candidate. It sounds strange, or does it? Maybe it doesn’t. It allows En Anwar a way out of his own political desert, it makes dead certain he won’t be wandering about for 40 years. The problem with Kingmakers, I gather, is the fact that if they themselves do not have solid footing, their dependence on their favoured’s largesse tends to be precarious. Imagine campaigning for everybody and discovering all of them to be sharks in disguise, unless, that is, he’s sure about his ability to appeal to the masses: harried ex-PM-designate and now demagogue. This will be very interesting to watch.

[more..]

You get caught in the same haze. It’s so hollywood-movie, so very normal. I’ve been here before, and it seems these days I walk in circles. No pretensions of a superficial Return with a capital ‘R’, surely. Just jaundiced mummery reaching for some certainty in the everyday.

Something luthien said struck me as being completely true: “this is what this job can do to you. all your perspectives turn hayewire. but you know what the worst consequence of this job? overt self-importance. you think you’re invincible (quite honestly, you’re quite invincible to a certain extent), you think you rule.”

[more..]

And the grand answer to that is: “I don’t know”. This afternoon while juggling several assignments, I began wondering about this while reminiscing about some heated arguments I’ve had with Singaporeans over the usefulness of an opposition party in parliament: what really is the use of an opposition party? You know the host of answers to these, which basically boil down to one or more of the following:-

1. As a check and balance to Big Brother
2. To present an alternative solution to issues
3. To represent minority interests (huh.. if at all)
4. To present a veneer of the democratic process…

[more..]

Maybe I’m looking at the problem in an obtuse way. Well, firstly goals are necessary. The goal or set of goals defines the area in which the scenario should be planned. For example, if I want to rise in ranks, then the situation is, automatically, the office. If I want to ensure the safety of some X, then the situation in which X arises is the situation to consider. Hmm.. no, that’s wrong.

[more..]

When I was in my late teens, I was begining to get into strategy games on the computer. My friend, through our examinations, had this addictive game running but I can’t remember its name. You played the part of a Russian president making decisions that had an impact on your relations with the rest of the world in the quest to become the most powerful nation.

Before that I was really into the then-revolutionary Dune 2, the first strategy game I’ve played to really layout tactical combat on a larger scale. Ever since then, I’ve loved watching out for consequences and trying to map them in my head for given situations.

[more..]

It always boils down to the smell.

The smell of stale coffee, bad breath and bodily odours. A long night last night, too much work and exasperation: I entertained thoughts of a mini-riot but decided to hunker down and get the work done, so what the heck. I’ve been assimilated, and spent hours last night performing Borg-like tasks and functions. Ugh.

Take a total opposite situation in Paris. Almost two weeks of rioting by “disenfranchised” youth and immigrants. If you’re looking for an interesting take on the situation, head here. I browsed through some of the articles he had compiled and found myself reading this. Check this out, it’ll sound familiar:
[more..]

It’s like a sound you hear. Like being Max Cohen, a point of view staring at a mirror. Feedback knifing through that space between your ears: white noise, white noise and pi. On the brink of a discovery, but the answers are elusive. It’s not a trick of sound. It’s a trick of your blood vessels dilating under pressure.
[more..]

I was over at Percolator’s blog going through some comments that a Ms Lucia had left, slightly tangential to the issue under discussion there, and found my self here.

I typed up a long-assed comment, replete with quick assumptions to form an argument (not a very safe way to start debates, I’m sure) to see how far we can take arguments about imposing rules, and by what measure we impose certain rules.

Below is a comment I’ve tried posting in En Aizuddin’s blog:

[more..]