Thursday, July 29, 2010

SINGAPURA: DARI KESULTANAN ISLAM-MELAYU KE REPUBLIK. – BAHAGIAN I.

…BILA JUMLAH MELAYU MENJADI KURANG, NEGARA SENDIRI DIAMBIL ORANG.
Oleh Mansor Puteh.



SULTAN SINGAPURA PERTAMA, SULTAN HUSSAIN SHAH DISINGIR – APA IKHTIBAR YANG BOLEH DIPELAJARI DARI PERISTIWA INI?

INILAH NASIB MALANG SULTAN SINGAPURA YANG PERTAMA.

IA ADALAH SEBUAH KISAH YANG BOLEH DIJADIKAN TELADAN, SEBAB IA ADALAH SEBUAH PERISTIWA PENTING UNTUK BANGSA MELAYU DI NUSANTARA MELAYU…BUKAN SAHAJA TENTANG BAGAIMANA SEORANG SULTAN MELAYU BOLEH DISINGKIR BILA JUMLAH BUKAN MELAYU BERTAMBAH DAN KUASA EKONOMI MEREKA MENINGKAT.

Tetapi ia boleh dijadikan iktibar untuk Orang Melayu di Malaysia dan diseluruh Nusantara Melayu supaya peristiwa yang sama tidak berulang lagi khususnya di masa sekarang.

Ia adalah juga tentang bagaimana Inggeris dan Belanda yang mahu pecahkan Nusantara Melayu atau Dunia Melayu di Tenggara Asia sejak berzaman-zaman dahulu. Mereka gagal untuk melakukannya.

Kedua kuasa Barat menyebar ugama mereka, tetapi gagal untuk menguasainya kecuali Filipina yang dulunya sebuah kesultanan Melayu dan Islam tetapi kini sebuah republik dengan kebanyak penduduk berugama katholik, dengan segelintir Islam-Melayu terhumban di sebuah daerah kecil di selatan negara dan terbiar tanpa sebarang pembangunan yang ketara.

Sebelum ini, mereka telah memecah-belahkan Dunia Arab dengan menuduh mereka bermazhab Sunni dan Syiah. Maka, orang Arabpun bergaduhlah sehingga sekarang. Yang rugi mereka. Dan yang untuk adalah Barat dan Yahudi.

Jadi cara ‘bahagi dan pecah’ atau ‘divide and rule’ ini diguna sebaik mungkin untuk melagakan Umar Islam dan Orang Melayu sesame sendiri, dengan membawa kaum asing sebagai penyendal bagi menwujudkan perbalahan yang tidak berakhir sehingga kini.

Jadi, al-kisah Sultan Singapura itu tidaklah sia-sia. Ia memberi banyak pengajaran yang harus disedar oleh semua Orang Melayu sekarang.

Tetapi, mujur Bangsa Melayu khususnya di Malaysia dan Indonesia tidak terikut-ikut dengan apa yang mahu dilakukan oleh Inggeris dan Belanda bila mereka menandakan perjanjian pelik bernama Perjanjian Inggeris-Belanda atau ‘Anglo-Dutch Treaty’ dalam tahun 1824 bila mereka dengan sendiri memilih negara mana yang mereka mahu taklukki.

Inilah satu perbuatan kejam yang telah hampir memusnahkan Bangsa Melayu dan Dunia Melayu yang sehingga mereka datang, menyaksikan perhubungan erat dengan perdagangan yang dilakukan yang menguntungkan semua pihak. Malangnya, kerakusan Inggeris dan Belanda itu telah memporak-perandakan Dunia Melayu.

Kemuncak usaha kuasa penjajah Barat itu ialah Konfrantasi yang dialami oleh Malaysia dan Indonesia dalam tahun 1960an. Mujur kita mempunyai tokoh seperti Tunku Abdul Rahman sebagai perdana menteri Malaysia dan Mohammed Sukarno sebagai presiden Republik Indonesia yang telah dapat mententeramkan keadaan sehingga dapat membawa keamanan di antara kedua buah negara. Maka oleh itu kuasa penjajah Barat itu gagal.

Tetapi kesan mereka masih dapat dirasakan sehinggakan sekarang apabila kaum pendatang yang mereka telah bawa dari negara-negara luar dari Nusantara seperti tidak serik dan masih mahu mencari pasal. Ini berikutan dengan kenaikan tahab ekonomi mereka dan kuasa politik yang diberi kepada mereka oleh kita yang telah membuat mereka terlupa asal-usul mereka.

Usaha Inggeris dan Belanda pasti akan gagal juga walaupun mereka tidak memainkan peranan langsung, tetapi oleh sisa-sisa peninggalan mereka itu.

Itulah maka perlunya untuk Bangsa Melayu di seluruh Nusanatara Melayu bersatu dan menwujudkan persefahaman dalam semua bidang dan tidak sahaja untuk meraikan ketua pemimpin mereka sahaja. Ia harus dilakukan dalam semua peringkat dan melibatkan kegiatan sosial, kebudayaan dan ekonomi serta ugama.

Sultan Hussain Shah, atau dikenali sebelum ini sebagai Raja Hussain Muazzam Shah ibn Sultan Mahmud Riayat Shah III (1761-1812) dari Riau atau Tengku Long (Tengku Sulong) Raja Hussain Shah, atau Raja Long yang ditabalkan sebagai Sultan di Padang di Singapura pada 31 January, 1819.

Munshi Abdullah yang pernah bekerja sebagai pencatit untuk Stamford Raffles di Melaka dulu, datang ke Singapura dalam bulan Jun, 1819 untuk menyambung bekerja dengannya, juga sebagai pencatit. Oleh sebab itu Munshi Abdullah tidak dapat menyaksikan upacara yang berlangsung di Padang pada 31 Januari lalu.

Bagaimanapun, dia telah diberitahu tentang apa yang telah berlaku oleh rakan dan kenalannya yang telah menyaksinya. Munshi Abdullah juga tidak senang dengan apa yang dilakukan oleh Inggeris. Dia tahu satu hari nanti, Sultan Singapura akan disingkirkan dan Singapura akan dikuasai oleh bukan Melayu.

Enche Yahya, pencatit untuk Kolonel William Farquhar membaca pengistiran yang telah dibaca dalam bahasa Inggeris oleh seorang pegawai Inggeris, ‘Adalah dimaklumkan bahawa Governor-General Lord Hastings di India telah melantik Yang Teramat Mulia Raja Hussain Muazzam Shah sebagai Sultan Singapura yang pertama dan semua tanah jajahanya, dengan gelaran Sultan Hussain Muazzam Shah ibni Al-Marhum Sultan Mahmud pada hari ini, 31 haribulan Januari, 1819.’

Jenazah beliau sekarang disemadi di sebuah makam sederhana di penjuru tanah perkuburan dalam kawasan Masjid Trengkerah di Melaka, terbiar dan langsung tidak dikenali oleh sesiapa. Cuma sebuah papan tanda sahaja yang menulis tentang riwayat hidupnya. Sedangkan dia adalah watak penting dalam sejarah awal Singapura.

Malah Istana Kampung Gelam di Singapura yang sekian lama didiami oleh kerabatnya, kini sudah diambil alih oleh pihak berkuasa di Singapura dan dalam tahun 2002 ia telah diubahsuai untuk dijadikan Pusat Warisan Melayu atau Malay Heritage Center.
Kisah riwayat hidup Sultan Hussain Shah amat menyayatkan hati. Ia adalah kisah bagaimana Inggeris dan Cina mengusir seorang Sultan Melayu dengan begitu mudah.

Caranya ialah dengan memperbanyakkan jumlah orang Cina yang didatangkan dari Selatan Negeri Cina sehingga jumlah penduduk asal Melayu di situ menjadi kecil dan dengan ini kuasa politik mereka hapus begitu sahaja.

Monday, July 26, 2010

NELSON MANDELA THE CONFUSING INTERNATIONAL HERO – OF WHAT?

…DOES HE KNOW THAT TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN WAS THE LEADER WHO HAD CALLED FOR THE EXPULSION OF THE APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICA FROM THE COMMONWEALTH WHICH CREATED A CHAIN REACTION CAUSING THE COUNTRY TO BE SEEN AS AN INTERNATIONAL PARIAH STATE?
By Mansor Puteh



IF NELSON MANDELA IS KNOWN FOR ANYTHING, IT IS FOR BEING THE PERSON WHO WAS SUPPRESSED AND OPPRESSED BY THE WHITE APARTHEID REGIME OF HIS COUNTRY.

IT IS DEFINITELY NOT AS A PERSON WHO SUPPORTS THE PLIGHT OF THE SUPPRESSED AND OPPRESSED AFTER EVERYBODY HAD SUCCEEDED IN RELEASING HIM FROM PRISON AND FREEING HIS COUNTRY.

HAS HE AND SOUTH AFRICA THANKED THOSE WHO HAD CONTRIBUTED TO ITS SUCCESS?

He was the benefactor of other people’s support and charity, but who does not know how to reciprocate by showing his personal concern for the plight of the others, especially those in the Middle East and other courtiers.

Mandela is not doing what he should have done, to support the expulsion of foreign forces in the Middle East and other countries.

This is depressing. And those who had supported him and his country have the right to feel disappointed with him for looking elsewhere and not take any interest in their well-being.

Mandela got a lot of support from Muslim countries and leaders that finally allowed him to leave prison after twenty-seven years.

It also caused the collapse of the apartheid system that was imposed by the white minority in his country.

But he doesn’t seem to care for the plight and miseries of the others, especially those in the Middle East and those Muslims who had supported him all this while.

Is he not grateful to them without the Muslim asking him so?

Why is Mandela not doing anything about this? So that he can be in the good books of Uncle Sam?

Mandela is therefore no real hero. He benefited from the charity and support of Muslims. But he did not reciprocate by showing his support for their cause. He has not said anything on the plight and persecution of the Palestinians.

He only cares for himself and his own country, and also for the Fifa World Cup which must be his personal triumph.

South Africa is now an independent country with African black majority and a shrunk white minority.

They seem to be living in peace and basking at the success of the Fifa World Cup which was also unfortunately the reason why his thirteen-year-old granddaughter died, in a car crash after the opening ceremony last June.

Despite that Mandela seems to be happy with the attention he has got from his birthday celebration.

But what has Mandela done to those who had supported him and his country?

Does he know or care that our first prime minister and Father of Independence, Tunku Abdul Rahman was the first leader of a Commonwealth country which had called for the boycott of South Africa and its expulsion from the group?

Did he give thanks to him and the other leaders and countries for fighting his cause, to force the apartheid regime to free him from prison and give his country back to the African Black majority?

No, he didn’t.

Mandela has never given any tribute to Tunku or even make any official visit to Malaysia.

And I am sure his country does not have a special recognition for Tunku in the form of it being done to rename a street in Tunku’s name.

They also do not teach their schoolchildren about Tunku and how he had managed to force Apartheid South Africa to be incarcerated for so long, and as long as Mandela was also incarcerated.

No, Mandela had not done any of these. He had become the first president of Free South Africa. He had extolled the virtues of America, a country which did not fully support the Apartheid regime.

And he had conveniently forgotten Tunku, Malaysia and the others who had supported their cause.

He only remembered Muamar Ghadaffy and made an official visit to Libya.

This is despite the strong reservations the George W Bush administration had on his planned trip to that country. He said and told the Americans off by saying, ‘We don’t forget who our friends were in our times of need’.

That put the Americans and the White House off their back. They fell for his tirade and Mandela was able to go to Libya to meet with Ghadaffy.

But why didn’t he also meet the other leaders and visit those countries, especially Malaysia which had steadfastedly stood behind him and his country?

Mandela should have at least paid a tribute to all of them and especially Tunku. But this he never did.

Mandela and all South Africans must be taught that it was Tunku who had caused the apartheid government to feel cornered by his calling for the expulsion of the Apartheid regime from the Commonwealth.

This caused the country to become a pariah state.

But they persisted and were able to do more harm still for a while more before they succumbed to international pressure.

Mandela was freed. But Malaysia and Tunku were forgotten.

This is a very important part in the history of their country and their students must be taught about this.

And not doing it means that the new free South Africa is in self-denial.

Mandela was not yet an old man when he was released from his prison; he was able to walk out of it like a hero and dancing with everybody with joy.

He left prison intact. But there are still many in the world, especially in the Middle East who are still trapped in prisons and yet Mandela doesn’t seem to care about it.

The experience he had while in prison had not taught him to care for the well-being of the others now that he is a free man. He left that to look ahead and assume the presidency of his country.

He did not care for the plight of those whose countries had been destroyed by the western imperialists. He only cared for himself and his own country.

Mandela can therefore be seen as the hero of the oppressed in his own country, but he cannot be seen as the champion of the oppressed in the others, especially those in the Middle East.

In fact, he was just the icon of the South Africans who did not do much since he was incarcerated in prison, with the job having been initiated by Tunku.

The truth is Mandela was confused by the adulation America and the Americans gave him. He wanted these more, despite the fact that America did not really caused his country to be free but the others which Mandela and South Africa have not bothered to thank.

Maybe it’s still not too late for them to consider having something to admit they were wrong. A small gesture of gratitude would be sufficient. There are some ways that can be used to achieve this.

One of which is to organize an international cultural event in South Africa by bringing in cultural groups from those countries which were friendly to the country when they were under Apartheid rule so the South Africans can find out who they are and be able to learn more about each other’s culture.

This should be sufficient.

The other way is for South African television to have special programs to highlight the programs such as television dramas and documentaries on these countries, to achieve the same result on a regular basis so the annual cultural event can be better promoted and that it can be come a major feature in the cultural and social lives of the ordinary South Africans.

We have similar stories to share for our people to relate to.

Friday, July 23, 2010

DEVELOPMENT OF KAMPUNG BARU MAY CAUSE THE RISE OF THE ECONOMIC MIGHT OF THE MELAYU AND FORCE THE ECONOMY OF THE CHINESE TO TUMBLE.

…IT CAN DO WONDERS TO THE MELAYU SO THEY CAN BE SELF-SUFFICIENT AND BE AMONGST THEMSELVES.
By Mansor Puteh



FOR THE MELAYU TO SUCCEED AND RECLAIM OUR RIGHTFUL PLACE IN THE COUNTRY IN ALL FIELDS, THEY MUST RELATE TO EACH OTHER EVEN MORE. THEY HAVE CARED FOR THE WELL-BEING FOR THE OTHER COMMUNITIES TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE RELATIONSHIP AMONGST THEIR OWN.

THEY MUST PATRONIZE EACH OTHER’S ESTABLISHMENT EVEN MORE SO THAT THERE IS NO NEED TO SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES OF THE OTHER COMMUNITIES, WHO HAVE BEEN DOING THIS SORT OF THING FOR AGES.

THE MELAYU CONSUMERS ARE THE REASONS WHY THE CHINESE BUSINESSES IN MALAYSIA SUCCEED, WITHOUT WHICH THEY WILL FAIL.

THE DEVELOPMENT AND SUCCESS OF KAMPUNG BARU CAN BE REPEATED IN OTHER CITIES AND TOWNS WHERE THERE IS A NEW MELAYU TOWNSHIP, THAT CAN DISTRACT THE ATTENTION ON THE OLD CITIES AND TOWNS WHICH ARE CHINESE DOMINATED.

For too long the Melayu have been contributing to the wealth of the Chinese by offering their consumer support to ensure their businesses are successful.

It’s therefore time for the Melayu to embark on a new economic road to chart their own future in business of all sorts.

There is no need for the development of Kampung Baru to involve the non-Melayu. They never asked to be brought in. It was just the stupid idea mooted by some Melayu leaders who do not know economics, sociology and psychology. They have no real vision.

They do not know how to manipulate the Melayu intelligentsia and ordinary folks and form an immense economic force, using the development of Kampung Baru as the first springboard to achieve this.

The other cities and towns in the country can follow suit.

There is a good chance for Kampung Baru to become a new township in Kuala Lumpur where the Melayu dominate all the economic activities which can force all the Melayu to converge in it.

If this happens, all the other major shopping centers including KLCC can go bust, if the Melayu simply refuse to go there to shop.

Then these establishments can go bankrupt and be sold for a song.

It’s time for the economic might of the Melayu to show its full force. And it’s time for the non-Melayu businessmen to realize that their continued existence has all along been at the tender mercies of the Melayu, whose support was what had made them successful.

Yet, their community leaders continue to harbor the thought that the Melayu have been unfair and unjust to them!

If the Melayu had been unfair and unjust to them, their businesses would not have flourished to be what they are today.

There won’t be any Chinese sundry store in the remote Melayu village where they patronized it.

If the Melayu are unfair and unjust, the Chinese would have continued to be laborers for the wealthy Melayu with their women working as ‘amah’ and drivers for them.

But this did not happen, because the Melayu were charitable and supportive of them. They knew the Chinese of old were immigrants who did not have anything other than what they were wearing.

So the Melayu helped them by offering whatever they wanted until they were successful.

But what have the Chinese done to show their gratitude? They want to wrest control of parliament and dominate the politics in the country.

Do they have a secret desire to turn Malaysia into another Singapura?

Therefore, the development of Kampung Baru is crucial to the economic development of the Melayu not only in the city but throughout the country.

It must transgress petty sentiments that some of the owners of the land in this area may have. Their views are too petty and trivial to be considered.

They only have grouses. They have also been shamed by their backwardness.

So the only means for them to hide their shame is to retaliate and use whatever means to reject the development plans just so that they can be counted.

There are too many of them to count since the plots of lands in Kampung Baru have been divided into many owners, with each owner not capable of doing anything to the land. They can’t even build a shack on it.

So if there are reservations voiced by some Melayu in Kampung Baru who own lands there, it is due to their miscalculations and grand assumptions.

These can be discounted very easily.

They own barely a few feet of the land, which have been fractured due to the many people who claim it.

Their views should not be considered because they have no means of taking advantage of their own land.

They are only important and interesting collectively, when the land is grouped together so they can be developed into a township.

Therefore, I strongly urge those in Kampung Baru to be fair to the other Melayu elsewhere; they too ‘own’ the land, which was earmarked and given by the then Sultan of Selangor, Sultan Sallahuddin for the Melayu to develop as farms so there is Melayu presence in the city.

If this was not done, Kuala Lumpur or Bandar Baharu Kuala Lumpur as it was known then would not have Melayu presence and it would become a Chinese town.

It was also to ensure the Melayu in the city to develop themselves to they could compete with the Chinese then, many of whom had just come to Malaya as immigrants.

Unfortunately, over the last century or so, not many in Kampung Baru were able to progress in education. Many of the descendants of those early farmers have failed to gain meaningful employment in the city or to have a proper education.

They end up being uneducated and living in shacks. So few are successful. And so many are less so.

They are a disgrace to the Melayu elsewhere especially those in the remote villages who are still able to pursue their education at universities abroad.

And when Kampung Baru wanted to be developed there are some who complain for being sidelined.

They wanted a say in its development.

Who are they to say they are capable of developing Kampung Baru? They do not have enough land to do anything since the owners of the land that was given by the Sultan then to their ancestors had been fractured.

They also do not have the financial means to develop the village.

In fact, most of the people living in Kampung Baru today also do not have the means to renovate their own houses which are still made of wood and can tumble at any time.

If Kampung Baru is far away from Kuala Lumpur, chances are these houses would have been left alone until they fall to the ground one by one, as what one can see if one drives from the city to Melaka.

There are many such old wooden ‘kampung’ houses which had life and glory at an earlier time, but which had been left vacant when those who live in them fled to the city, leaving their old parents alone to live there until they die.

And the area would later be sold to the Chinese developers.

Fortunately, Kampung Baru is situated at the fringe of Kuala Lumpur and in the shadows of the Petronas Twin Towers and other buildings along Jalan Ampang.

So the value of the land in Kampung Baru had appreciated.

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

WHY THE SPECIAL DOCUMENTARY ON TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN WAS IGNORED BY THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE NEWSPAPERS. – PART II.

…WILL TUNKU AGAIN IS IGNORED IF SOMEONE COMES WITH A SIMILAR DOCUMENTARY ON ANOTHER COLLETION OF PERSONAL PHOTOS OF HIM AND HIS FAMILY?
By Mansor Puteh



(NOTE: FILMS AND VIDEOS ON THE COMMUNISTS AND MELAYU LEFT GET WIDER COVERAGE IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE NEWSPAPERS.

THE ONLY DOCUMENTARY ON TUNKU WAS SABOTAGED. EVEN A FILM ON A FORMER STRIPTEASE DANCER BEING MADE IN SINGAPURA IS GIVEN A LOT OF ATTENTION BY AN ENGLISH LANGUAGE PAPER IN MALAYSIA.)

IN FACT, ANYTHING THAT HAS A LEFTIST SWING WILL GET THE WIDE COVERAGE, ESPECIALLY IF IT IS ON HOW TO CHALLENGE THE MELAYU EXISTENCE AND THEIR HISTORY IN THE COUNTRY.

There are small screenings of these videos which could get wide publicity. There are strong reasons to prove that the media has been taken on a long road to prop up the left and anti-Melayu and anti-Malaysia sentiments in Malaysia.

The production of the documentary on Tunku has managed to reveal all this and more…

Our writers are in a daze; they are confused when they saw the documentary, because it did not fit into their thinking of things. Tunku meant something else to them. I did not show that to them in my documentary.

They only wanted a one-dimensional image of Tunku, while my aim and that of Finas’ was to produce a documentary to show the other side of him.

I could have also given personal anecdotes on Tunku and appeared in many of the scenes, but I didn’t. I also did not profile my family in it.

I gave Tunku all the attention. I also gave those who knew him a platform for them to tell the other side of tTunku, which no one would bother to do.

What’s wrong with that? After all, they had earlier written glowingly on the book on food which Tunku had liked.

They also often wrote interviews with Tunku’s former staff such as his driver and gardener. They had stories which they could write themselves, so that is why they were found to be interesting because the writers could claim literary credit for writing the report for them>

Don’t they know anything on Tunku was and is still interesting? Or, have they started to find him not so anymore? It is barely twenty years since Tunku died on 6 December, 1990.

It was supposed to be the most interesting documentary on Tunku Abdul Rahman, our first prime minister and Bapa Kemerdekaan which contains materials not many had seen before.

As the producer and director I took great pains to discover the three places in England where Tunku had lodged at.

Unfortunately, not many writers could see these.

Only Utusan Malaysia and the Malay Mail gave prominence to the production of this documentary. They were doing a great service to Tunku Abdul Rahman. They were not doing me a favor as the director.

They would do the same promotions of the documentary if it was done by someone else.

In fact, if there is another person who has personal materials on Tunku and is doing another special documentary on him, I’m sure these papers will also give him due recognition.


And it was only the Malay Mail which bothered to release the story which they put on the front-page on Tunku’s safe which had been left for more than thirty years in the Residency. Rais Yatim got someone to prise open it where they found some forty-four items in it. They have been described as ‘national treasures’.

I gave the lead to the New Straits Times and the Star but they declined to carry it. But they and the other papers including RTM, gave prominence on the opening of the safe.

Finas liked the documentary so much that they insisted that the names of two of their executives be given special credits for the production. This happened while we were dealing with some issues they raised for which all were explained.

So no wonder the final version of the documentary is almost the same as the first version.

Two Berita Harian writers criticized the production of my documentary. And they were later given recognition with the Anugerah Wartawan Hiburan by Finas recently.

The forty-eight-minute documentary was shown on TV1 on 7 March without any promotions by the station. The television listing was for another program called ‘Sehati Sejiwa’. But the documentary was shown instead.

I was in Nottingham, England that day. I had a day earlier shown the same documentary to the Malaysian students of the University of Nottingham and discuss it with them.

I later visited Cambridge University and gave the library of St. Catharine’s College a DVD of the documentary that they are keeping. In fact, it is exactly one year ago today that I was there.

I also visited the owners of the two houses in Cambridge where Tunku had lodged at in 1919 and 1920s when he studied at the university.

There is another building in Barkston Garden in London where Tunku had lodged at in the 1940s.

These are facts that were disclosed in the documentary. They are on the places where Tunku had lodged at. And they are Malaysia’s heritage buildings in England.

The three buildings therefore, must be given due recognition being the heritage buildings of Malaysia in England. And special commemorative plaques are placed on the walls of those buildings.

And the English Heritage organization must be informed of this so they can also place the ‘Blue Plaques’ on them too.

There can never be other buildings in England which can also be described as Malaysia’s heritage buildings in the country other than these three.

Unfortunately, the writers do not see it that way. They missed this fact and the many others that are abundant in the documentary.

And they could not see the photos of Tunku that I had shown in the documentary to know how he behaved with his family and how those who were close to him reminiscence about him.

Yet, the newspapers found the documentary uninteresting.

The truth is that not many writers can see these. One has to be formally trained in film and knows the documentary tradition and style, and also a strong interest in the history of the country and on Tunku himself.

Most likely they ignored the documentary because they did not want their readers and the whole country to know of the special family connection I had with Tunku’s family through the marriage of Syed Abdullah and my sister, Rokiah binti Puteh.

These were probably the reasons why the newspapers did not bother to write on the production and broadcasting of the documentary.

This is fine, if they say they are doing Tunku a service so that the public does not know him better.

But wasn’t this exactly what the documentary was all about? That it was not meant to be an official one which RTM and Filem Negara Malaysia (FNM) can do anytime?

Finas and the ministry of information, communication and culture (KPKK) were excited with the prospect of seeing such a documentary that has unseen and personal photos and other materials on Tunku which could enlighten the Malaysian public on who he was like in private and amongst close family members and friends?

It is therefore wrong on the part of the writers to try and look for another documentary on Tunku to write on? Chances are they won’t be able to find one anytime soon. And they have missed the boat.

Even the other English language newspapers had also ignored this documentary. It is probably for the same reason, that they were confused as to what it was all about.

The fact is the New Straits Times had on 29 and 30 August, 2005 published some of the personal family photos of Tunku for their special Merdeka Day special and tribute to Tunku for that year.

And in doing to, they must have upstaged the other papers who did not know how on earth the NST could get into their possession such intimate photos of Tunku and his family.

And it could only happen because I thought of them first so I told them about the existence of the photos taken by Syed Abdullah who is Tunku’s nephew whom he and Mak Engku or Tun Sharifah Rodziah had adopted. Syed Abdullah happens to be my brother-in-law.

I was dealing with the senior editors of the NST and had given them the photos three days before they were published. Yet, they did not even found it interesting to do a write-up or brief interview with the photographer to allow their readers to know who had taken the photos.

In fact I was also not given due recognition for exposing the photos to the NST then who their readers did not know who had provided them with the photos and the story behind them.

Yet, five years later, the same paper had found these photos which are in the documentary to be uninteresting.

Lastly, what can the NST and the other publications do to promote Tunku?

Saturday, July 17, 2010

WHY THE SPECIAL DOCUMENTARY ON TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN WAS IGNORED BY THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE NEWSPAPERS. – PART I.

…THEY HATED THE DOCUMENTARY BECAUSE THEY DISCOVERED MY FAMILY HAS A SPECIAL CONNECTION WITH TUNKU’S FAMILY…AND I HAVE RARE PHOTOGRAPHIC MATERIALS ON HIM AND AN EXCLUSIVE TAPE RECORDED INTERVIEW I DID WITH HIM. SO THAT’S NOT GOOD?!
By Mansor Puteh



(WHEN TUNKU WAS NEGOTIATING FOR THE FORMATION OF MALAYSIA IN THE EARLY 1960S, HIS WIFE, MAK ENGKU OR TUN SHARIFAH RODZIAH BARAKHBAH WAS NEGOTIATING WITH MY MOTHER ON THE MARRIAGE OF THEIR CHILDREN.

THE ‘BERSANDING’ CEREMONIES TOOK PLACE AT MY PARENTS’ HOUSE IN BANDAR MELAKA AND ALSO AT THE RESIDENCY. IT HAPPENED IN NOVEMBER, 1963 OR TWO MONTHS AFTER MALAYSIA WAS FORMED.

TUNKU AND MANY MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY CAME TO MY PARENTS’ HOUSE. AND MANY MEMBERS OF MY FAMILY ALSO ATTENDED THE ‘BERSANDING’ AT THE RESIDENCY. THEY WERE ALL GIVEN ACCOMMODATION AT THE THEN ISTANA TETAMU WHICH WAS THE ‘GUEST PALACE’ FOR IMPORTANT LOCAL AND FOREIGN DIGNITARIES.

Such was the respect Tunku had for my family.

And the ‘bersanding’ ceremonies probably gave a huge enjoyment for him after what he had gone through to form the federation of Malaysia.)

Maybe the writers and the papers ignored the documentary on Tunku because they had found a reason not to like him! Why did I want to give them any excuse to do that?

I don’t care much for the Mandarin and Tamil newspapers because they live in a world of their own.

Why did the ministry of home affairs give their publishers the KDN permits in the first place since all they do is to over-promote Hong Kong, India and America?

If someone else had produced such a documentary using rare photos and a taped interview with him, his work would have been given better media coverage.

After all they had also ignored the photo exhibition on Tunku which I put out at the R A Gallery in November, 2008 where a coffee table book with more photos of Tunku and his family were published.

The Sultan of Perak was gracious enough to come to the small private gallery to open the exhibition after I had failed to impress the National Art Gallery or Balai Senilukis Negara (BSLN) to have it.

These and the other matters were not raised in the documentary. But there are there if one cares and is qualified to find them. Unfortunately, many want to see another documentary on Tunku, one which shows him in one dimension only.

Unfortunately, the same writers and their papers are so happy to write and give coverage on unknown characters who are shady that appear in photo exhibitions and documentaries or videos.

I would not have wanted to do it by exposing such details on the weeks preceding the formation of Malaysia and immediately after that for secondary historical activities of the first prime minister, which do not sound to be trite if done stylishly.

If I had deliberately done that, there would be more criticism of my work than there has been. I can then get the credit for having confused them even more.

The only reason why I am writing this review of my own work to produce the documentary is because it has come to my attention on why the newspapers did not find the documentary on Tunku Abdul rah man called ‘Bertahun di Residensi’ or ‘the residency years’ to be interesting.

I found the reason given to be utterly childish and not professional. Any negative sentiment one has on anything that is meant to help promote the image of Tunku must be given credit where it is due, regardless of what materials are used to do so. The ends justify the means, as they say…

What more since the documentary was produced to highlight hidden aspects of the Tunku and his family which no one could find anywhere else?

Is jealousy was the main reason why the English publications ignored the documentary?

That could be the main reason why their writers and editors who did not bother to even mention the production and broadcasting of this special documentary.

It’s as though the documentary did not happen; it was not produced and broadcast.

Unfortunately, the documentary has been produced and broadcast, and despite the reservations some of the writers in these publications have, the documentary exists and it lives. It can be shown on television in the country and elsewhere, again and again.

It was shown in a film festival in Dhaka last March.

And the more those outside of Malaysia knows about Tunku, the more they will want to see this special documentary.

The fact that Tunku was the first secretary-general of the Organization of Islamic Council (OIC) has not been said too often. If this gets to the attention of the right persons, chances are his deeds will start to be remembered by many Muslims.

Being the first prime minister of Bapa Kemerdekaan of Malaysia may not ring a bell in the international community and amongst the Muslim Ummah. But being the first secretary-general of the OIC and its founder can.

Therefore, I can understand the utter contempt the writers have of this documentary. Because they are naïve not to know what it was meant to do and achieve.

It’s not difficult for me not to forgive them because they are not well educated in film. They can never go far in their writing on film.

They thought they had a good and valid reason for not liking the documentary which they thought had personal materials on Tunku and they related to my personal family relationship and connection to his like it is such a bad thing. Why should it be?

Did this bother them? What could anyone in my position do with it?

(Note: All the photos of Tunku and his family taken by Syed Abdullah Barakhbah have been bought by Arkib Negara following the production of the documentary, so they are now in their care and can be accessible to the members of the public.)

I have formal training in journalism and also film. I also studied the documentary and from the materials I had I thought I could come up with an interesting one on Tunku, which no one in the country could do.

I had written better pieces on film and television which were published in all the major Melayu and English newspapers including the NST, and even had a column in the Sunday Star for a while.

So I know what a good and interesting documentary is more than anyone who writes about films in the newspapers in the country. It’s just that I did not have editorial control to chide some articles that were published or sack anyone for having written lousy pieces.

I also have an exclusive tape recording of an interview I did with Tunku in 1986. It was done at his residence in Bukit Tunku which I had not revealed before. I transcribed it and sent a story on it to the Star but they declined to publish it.

I asked Tunku a lot of things which no one had asked him before on his student life at Cambridge and his interests in life and the cinema for which he wrote some screenplays for Shaw Brothers.

Finas and the ministry of information, communication and culture or KPKK like it and immediately approved my proposal to produce the documentary so that the exclusive materials I have on Tunku could be shown in a production and in the style no one had seen before.

If it was on a former American president or an international pop star, surely, such a documentary on him would have been hailed, and the director given due recognition for ‘exposing’ the other side of this character.

Unfortunately, it did not happen with Tunku.

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

BOYCOTTING THE 2012 LONDON OLYMPICS CAN DO THE TRICK FOR THE MUSLIM COUNTRIES AND TO FREE PALESTINE!

…AMERICA BOYCOTTED THE 1980 MOSCOW OLYMPICS AND THEY DEMOLISHED THE SOVIET UNION AND BROKE DOWN THE BERLIN WALL AND UNITED THE TWO GERMANYS.
By Mansor Puteh



SO WHY CAN’T MUSLIM COUNTRIES BOYCOTT THE OLYMPIC GAMES?

IN FACT, MUSLIM COUNTRIES SHOULD ALSO BOYCOTT THE COMMONWEALTH GAMES UNTIL THEY ARE TREATED FAIRLY BY THE ‘INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY’ AND ALSO BY THE UNITED NATIONS (UN).

IN FACT, THE UN HAS SO LONG BEEN UN-FAIR AND UN-JUST TO THE MUSLIMS, BECAUSE THEY ARE BEING DOMINATED BY THE FIVE SUPERPOWERS WHO CALL THE SHOTS.

How could the World Muslim Community not have a representation as a permanent member of the Security Council considering their huge number when smaller countries are in it?

Do the six permanent members fear the Muslims from having the veto power like they do? It is this veto power that is the cause of all the problems that we see today.

The irony is that the members are those that have nuclear arms. Yet, when a Muslim country aspires to join the nuclear club, they stop them from doing so.

They say they want to introduce democracy in the Muslim countries like what they have in their own countries; but they are not willing to introduce nuclear programs too.

Muslim countries have not used all the means available to them to achieve success. They still place their trust in the UN, which they all know has not been fair to them. They keep on going back to the UN and their Security Council to try and get them to do the bidding for them.

So they keep on writing the same memoranda and submit them to the UN and hope for a miracle to happen.

But alas after so long, nothing is achieved. Yet, they persisted and hope that one day soon, the UN can do something. They are stupid indeed.

Therefore Muslim countries should try other means. Some of the more radical ones thought they could at least try to do something on their own. So they created militant groups and created a bit of mischief here and there all to no effect.

In fact they gave more problems to the Muslims than they could ever imagine; that they fall right into the trap set by their adversaries, many of whom are happy to ‘help’ them create more cells in other countries which had hitherto not been known to have them before. Now they do.

Trying to solve the problems faced by Muslims in the world which were all created by them should also be done on the non-political and military levels. They have proven to be useless efforts.

What did America have to lose for boycotting the 1980 Moscow Olympics? A bit – for not allowing their top athletes to win medals in it.

On the other hand they managed to do wonders on the other fronts – when they managed to demolish the Soviet Union and broke down the Berlin wall and united the two Germanys.

These were more important to them than to have their top athletes win medals in the Olympics, although this may not be entirely true, as problems that were created post-soviet union and with the fall of their forces in Afghanistan, other more interesting ones were created and continue to happen till today.

It was the then President Ronald Reagan who proudly called for the tearing down of the Berlin Wall when he made a visit to the then West Berlin in the then West Germany.

And what do the Muslim countries have to lose for boycotting the 2012 London Olympics – not much really since their athletes are not likely going to win many medals in it.

Athletes from the OIC countries are not going to win many medals in the Olympics anyway; so why worry?

There should not be pride in participation this premier sports meet when it can be put better use.

Was it a good option and action taken by the Americans then? It was.

And why can’t it also be a good option for all the OIC countries to do what America had done by boycotting the London Olympics?

That one simple act can do wonders; it can teach the west a good lesson and can even cause the freedom of Palestinian land so all Muslims can then start to walk with their heads up high.

Better still if all the Muslim athletes in the other non-Muslim countries, including those in America, do the same and this can cause greater wonders.

Muslims have not actually considered this action to push for their cause. America had done it once. And they will do it again if they are given the chance if the Olympic Games are held in a country they find to be repulsive. They don’t care for international sentiments.

So why do we have to care for the sentiments of the countries which are clearly working against the interests of the Muslim ones?

The London Olympics is barely two years from now. And if this stand can be made known to the international community, chances are the organizers and their supporters will feel the heat long before it opens in the summer of 2012.

This unusual opportunity must be put to good use by Muslim countries and the OIC. This is the best chance to be heard and be counted.

The boycott of the Moscow Olympics had caused the Soviet Union and communism dearly. They became almost bankrupt.

The same thing can happen to America and the west if there is a similar boycott of the London Olympics, so perennial issues concerning the Middle East can be solved once and for all.

Will the United Kingdom go bankrupt if their Olympics in 2012 is boycotted by all the Muslim countries? Maybe they could especially if more than half of the athletes from almost a third of the countries they represent do not turn up for the games.

This could definitely cause a lot of confusion and sadness.

But America did not care for the emotions of the Soviets when they decided to boycott the Moscow Olympics. They thought it was their duty to teach them and this they did, at huge costs to the Soviets then.

The Soviet Union collapsed as a result, because the amount of money they had invested in the games were immense.

Maybe it was just a ploy by the International Olympic Organization (ICO) to give the rights to the Soviets to be host of the Olympics in 1980, so that they could collapse.

It may not be what the ICO’s intention to award London host of the 2012 Olympics, instead of to another city, but the fact that it happened can still be taken advantage of if the Muslim leaders know what they can do with it collectively, since it does not mean much if only one of the OIC countries decides to do it on their own.

It is not America whose athletes normally create sensation at the Olympics and if they are missing from the games, the Olympics lose its glamour.

Something magical can only happen if all the OIC countries boycott the London Olympics en masse.

They have got nothing to lose anyway since most of the countries do not have excellent athletes who can even go into the quarter finals in any major event.

Monday, July 12, 2010

THE SINS OF SUMMER:

THE NON-MUSLIMS AND WESTERNERS TAKE ISSUE WITH MUSLIM WOMEN’S DRESS CODES NOT DURING THE COLD DAYS BUT WHEN THEY ARE ALLOWED TO UNDRESS IN THE WARM OR HOT ONES…AND ALSO TO MISBEHAVE TO CREATE THEIR SINS OF SUMMER.
By Mansor Puteh



DON’T ALL THOSE WOMEN, MEN AND OTHER SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS ACTIVISTS COVER THEMSELVES UP FROM HEAD TO TOE IN THE THICK OF WINTER? THEY ALL KNOW HOW TO COVER THEMSELVES WITH LAYERS AND LAYERS OF CLOTHES.

WHY DO THEY HAVE TO DO THAT?

WHEN IT’S CONVENIENT FOR THEM TO DO SO THEY DID NOT FREEZE TO A CERTAIN DEATH DUE TO HYPOTHERMIA?

But in the warmer months and especially in the middle of a nasty summer, they start to peal off their layers of clothes to reveal their bare skin.

And this is also when they start to bare their fangs and blame those who still want to cover themselves up.

It’s as though they are not aware that they also have to cover themselves up when they attend formal functions and especially when they are participating in the masquerade parties when their women cover their faces with masks.

There are many westerners and those who are not Muslims who do not have issues concerning the covering up of Muslim women. Many of them are the more religious. It’s only the small group of the zealots and bigots who seem to be interested to bring this matter up when it is convenient for them to do so.

The Eskimos do not have any reason to dispute or criticize the way Muslim women wear, and cover up their body, even they are not Muslims.

The reason being, they know such clothes do protect themselves from the elements, like how they also cover their bodies all through the year.

Not only the Eskimo women who cover up their bodies but the men, too.

The better educated Westerners such as their surgeons, spacemen from all those countries that had sent them to outer space to also land some of the astronauts and cosmonauts on the moon do not complain.

In fact, there are more westerners or non-Muslims who do not take any issue regarding this, other than that small bunch of confused westerners who have already rejected their own religions mostly Catholicism and Christianity who seem to have some unsettled issue to deal with.

After more than 1431 years since the Prophet Muhammad, pbuh, made his flight or hijrah from Madinnah to Mekkah, this issue concerning Muslim women’s clothes seems to be a very convenient target for some in the west.

And worse, it has also taken another dimension – a national one which concerns a country in Europe which is France.

France has taken the lead to ban the ‘burqa’ by their women.

Will the other countries in the European Union take the lead and do likewise to jump on the anti-burqa to rip off the cloths from the hapless Muslim women all of whom were in these countries not through their own fault by through the indiscretion of the leaders of those countries in an earlier time?

If not for them and their military adventures, there would not have been that many Muslims in their countries today.

So they just have to take the blame of having them now. They have no choice because what is happening now is not due to their own fault by the fault of their earlier leaders.

France, the center of fashion in the world, where all sorts of strange and funny ideas concerning human existence whose leaders in many fields had taken the lead to their own deprivation and social and cultural degradation and religious strife, is not trying to penalize some innocent Muslim women for their fashion choice.

This is strange, especially when the concept or pseudo-philosophical or pseudo-religious behavior of self-isolation was indeed created and introduced by the Europeans.

Yet, when this matter is taken up a step further, they balk.

Is it because they are not the ones who had done it but some innocent Muslim women?

So no wonder issues concerning the covering up of the women’s body are not raised by the Eskimos and those who live in the North or South Poles and other areas where the weather is very, very cold most of the year where their summer is too limited to a few days, and even then they still have to wear thick clothes.

No wonder the issue of Muslim women’s attire has never become any issue in the media in Alaska and the other countries in the Artic, who do not cover such stories.

They are only covered and debated by the media in the west, where the temperatures are less inhospitable, and their summers are very hot.

Here, their media have some valid reasons to want to discuss such issues.

They are only raised by those who enjoy different seasons in the year and especially those living in the west or Europe to be exact. But they only get tensed up in summer and not in winter.

But don’t they realize that they also cover up in the cold months?

If the issue of covering up of the body is bad, then why practice it when it suits them? Why not go about half-naked even in the cold months and see if nature does not act harshly on them and on their protestations?

The issues of how the pious Muslim women dress are only raised by those non-Muslims in the west only in the summer.

This is when they peel off their clothes to reveal their skin and sun-tan to everybody.

But in winter, their mode of dressing is no different than that of the Muslim women. They cover up their body and mostly, they also cover-up the issue and put it off through the winter and other cold months, only to raise it again in the summer.

This has happened almost ever summer.

But don’t they also know that western and non-Muslim men and women also cover themselves up if they are astronauts and surgeons, etc. Are they also subject to the protests and criticisms of those who want to create their sins of summer, too?

They should, since they are also covering up much like the Muslim women do.

And if France is intent on banning the burqa, then why do they have to pride themselves as the center of fashion in Europe if not the world?

Even the atheists are not bothered by what the Muslim women wear because they practice democracy more than those who are supposed to religious and secular.

One Muslim woman in Australia was killed when part of her headscarf of ‘hijjab’ got caught in a machine.

But there are hundreds of women in the west who had got skin cancer which was mostly due to exposure to the sun.

Monday, July 5, 2010

THE MUSLIM CENTURY – OF WHAT?

…ALMOST ONE DECADE HAS PASSED IN THIS CENTURY; YET, THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT THE NEXT NINE OTHER DECADES IN THIS SO-CALLED ‘MUSLIM CENTURY’ WILL BE NO DIFFERENT THAN THE FIRST ONE WAS IF MUSLIM POLITICAL AND INTELLECTUAL LEADERS CONTINUE TO TALK ROTS.
By Mansor Puteh



‘MUSLIM CENTURY: REALITY OR MYTH?’ WHAT SORT OF A DISCOURSE IS THIS WHICH WAS ORGANIZED AT HUGE EXPENSE?

I FIND THE TALK GIVEN BY DR ALI AL-AMIN MARZUI OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK (SUNY) IN BINGHAMTON, NEW YORK STATE TO BE UTTERLY DEPLORABLE AND USELESS TO THE CAUSE OF ISLAM OR THE MUSLIMS, OR ANY ACADEMIC DISCOURSE WHATSOEVER.

WHAT HE HAD SAID ABOUT THE NEED TO ABIDE BY THE SEVEN RULES TO BE UTTERANCES THAT CANNOT BE IMPLIMENTED. IT HAS GOT TO BE ONE OF THE MOST EXPENSIVE SPEECHES TO BE GIVEN BY ANYONE IN MALAYSIA.

How on earth could anyone be entranced by what he had said since there is no direct effect on it?

Therefore, the so-called ‘Muslim Century’ has got to be a myth that can never become a reality, unless it is the ‘Muslim Century of Despair, Destruction and Humiliation…’ and not one of Revivalism, Reawakening, Rejuvenation, Unity and Wholesomeness…’

This has also got to be the ‘Muslim Century of Muslim academics and leaders talking rots’.

This is what happens when a so-called ‘Muslim intellectual or academic’ talks about such a topic; he often ends up being vague. He is lost in his own thoughts and who does not seem to know in which century he is in.

I don’t blame him; I blame the organizers for bringing him to the country to talk on this topic which is beyond his comprehension which requires more than an intellectual stand-up comic who knows how to ‘entertain’ the crowd and get some applause. In the end nothing happens.

It can’t be the Muslim decade of destruction, humiliation, confusion and depravity, which is more like it, can it?

One thing’s for certain is that it is also – the Muslim century – one of despair, of poor quality Muslim intellectuals, academic and other leaders.

They must accept the fact that they have all failed the Muslim Ummah; the Muslim world is in such a sad state because of all of them.

Someone from America was invited to speak in an open forum on ‘the Muslim century’.

He must be important because he is from America and he is also Arab and an American. So he can be convincing especially if he is attached to a university in that country.

But what did he say? What has what he said done to the Muslim Ummah?

There was not much reported in the media on what he had said in the forum.

One thing that one can digress from his speech is that he has not said much. He managed to thrill the audience by talking on issues which are petty and trivial without covering new grounds.

He, despite his lofty academic position at a university in America, can be said to be out of date. His views and some proposals, if he has any can never be used for the betterment of the Ummah.

So we can say the forum was just for pure entertainment.

What can the Ummah expect from old Muslim academics, leaders and the other experts including those who are called the ulamas? Not much. Maybe nothing.

The reason why the Ummah is in such a state of deprivation is because the old generation of Muslim leaders in all fields had not done much in the past.

This explains the state the Muslim World and Ummah are in now.

Who was the American-Arab academic from a university anyway?

One decade in this century has passed. If it is to be described as a Muslim Century, then what sort of a century is it?

The least that we can do is to describe it as the ‘First decade in the Muslim Century of despair, despondency, deprivation, confusion and destruction.’

And if we can add to this, we can also say it is the ‘First decade of the Muslim Century of the incomplete and poorly trained Muslim ulamas.’

The ulamas have also not provided intelligent and effective guidance to the Ummah; they have all not been properly or adequately trained in Islam to know what they can benefit from their studies.

They only know how to past ‘fatwas’ or edicts on issues which are not important that crop up because of poor Islamic governance.

These ulamas are poor examples of the pious Muslims because their world is too restricted and they only communicate with those who are like them. They do not know the Ummah and how they are going astray. Yes, the ulamas only know how to pass more ‘fatwas’ to exert themselves and the special position they have in the Muslim society.

They cannot do much else to ensure there is strict adherence to the religion by the Believers and Faithful.

Has the so-called Muslim Century really showed up? And in what form?

As far as we know the first decade in this century has not turned out to be any different than the many decades or the last few centuries.

And one can say with a lot of confidence that the next decade on until the end of this century, the Muslim World and Ummah will still be as what they have been all this while.

Or, maybe it is indeed the Muslim Century. But alas, it is not a century of victory, but of destruction, despair and depravation.

Many Muslims are in a state of shock. Some Muslim countries which had been destroyed by the American and other European forces since the last decade of an earlier century are still not in a bad shape with no future for them and their people.

Yet, the American-Arab academic and mostly the sponsors of the forum dared to call it the Muslim Century. Alas, they did not say what sort of a century they had wanted to describe it.

Maybe they are not aware that the title of the forum they had organized could have a lot of negative implications and connotations.

The title was indeed vague.

And with such a vague title for a forum, what can one expect from the speaker?

There are many areas that the speaker or any one can talk about if one wants to talk about the Muslim Century.

It must take into account all fields of endeavor that Muslims can take part in and seize control of, especially the strategic industries and commercial activities.

Did the Arab-American academic say something like this?

Did he also talk about the need to create the New Islamic Cinema, new syllabi for the re-education of the present generation of Muslim youth?

If there is no effort being made to re-educate the Muslim youth, then they will grow up behaving and thinking very much like those before them.

These are some of the more important and intelligent things that can be brought up for discussion if the topic is on the Muslim Century and one when the Muslim World and Ummah triumph.

There is also an urgent need for Muslims to revisit the past to discover where and how we were left behind in the economic development of the world, starting with the industrial revolutions and the reawakening of new and vibrant economies of Japan and South Korea who did not have vast natural resources, yet, who can still become significant economic powerhouse today.

So with a lot of natural and human resources, one can also say with a lot of confidence that the Entire Muslim World and Ummah can do a lot better than Japan and South Korea.

We can also talk about introducing new economic principles around the prescribed Islamic principles on halal food, Islamic banking and financial practices to the Islamic way of life, behavior and aspirations.

The Muslim World can be self-contained and self-sufficient. And Muslims can be taught and programmed to look inwardly.

Looking outwardly has created a lot of unnecessary discontent amongst the Muslims, especially the younger generation of Muslims who have started to even question their religious beliefs, when this should not be the case.

There are many Muslim countries which are now less Islamic. Their leaders do not seem to know who they are subservient to, their religion or the west and unashamedly embrace decadence and opulence when most of their own subjects are economically backward.