背影

我犯了太岁，要打小人！

不知道我是不是最近犯了太岁，无端端惹了一身蚂蚁。。。
有人说，多做事少说话，是不变的真理。。。但是真理不往往在任何时候都适用。。。
有些事情没有说，或忘了说，或不想说，也会惹上小人！
是的，有些人喜欢走捷径，喜欢take people advantage。。。这样的小人，必须特别留意。。。我靠自己把东西做出来，往往成为小人下手的目标。。。
做实验不简单。。。有些人做到半死，没有任何结果。。。当然也有幸运的人，踩在别人肩上往上爬。。。
那你能怎样？只能告诉自己，不是做研究的料。。。或让自己成为鸵鸟，骗自己运气还没有到来。。。
不是我不愿意和人分享，只是有些人就会抓着你不断地在社会上生存。。。他们不要成为最杰出的，但是都能在任何的关卡中顺利通过。。。
这样的人很容易成功，而且更能在人群中光鲜亮丽，没有人会知道，那背后丑陋的一面。。。

Some more photos of mine..

Thanks Calvin G. using his D300 to take these photos for me!

我不会跟你客气！

好，有人在lab要跟我做对了。。。老板不在，每个人都要爬出来称王了。。。
平时不在lab的人，尽然公告天下lab应该怎么做。。。嫌lab的仪器吵，说一整天在lab觉得很不舒服，头痛。。。嫌lab不干净，要大家顺手弄干净。。。还说我今天弄来的gas cylinder不安全。。。天晓得lab本来就不安全。。。

他妈的！我今天特别做了特长的超声震动，你就嫌仪器吵。。平时不见你在lab出现，以后也就不要呆在lab。。好像你很勤劳，一整天呆在lab。。。
lab不干净你自己也有份的，时常不在Lab,还公告大家，说三道四。。。顺手弄干净的人已经不说话了，有种你就顺手。。。
gas cylinder更是我查证过后才决定按装上去的。。。摆什么regulation和规格出来唬人。。。安全考量我比你还重视，还用得到你来教训我。。。

今天我在lab可是从早忙到晚，晚上还收到这样的email。。。你他妈的去死好了！

好啊，不合规格就把lab关掉，大家都不用玩。。。我也不在乎这个博士头衔...回老家我也不怕找不到饭碗，倒是有些人拚死想呆在美国。。。

我知道以我的个性在lab是不会被人掏好的。。。我知道我不说话还好，说话一定会有人不爽。。。so what?!? 有人摆臭脸，我的脸会更臭。。。做人如果一直要为别人而活，也太累了吧。。。

我不会跟你玩，看你耍什么猴子把戏。。。但不要以为你的人多就胡作非为。。。我的脾气不是很好。。。你如果针对我，我不会跟你客气！

郁闷。。。

最近的试验又不是很成功。。。或许，自从我从Oak Ridge National Lab回来之后，试验结果就已落千丈。。。
之前忙着搞prelim的考试，现在又回到了伤脑筋的阶段。。。
老板不在（去了sabbatical leave），琐碎的事都得靠自己。。。其实，本来我都有在学习独立的，所以影响并不会太大。。。只是在沟通和行动上就变得比较不方便。。。

只希望，试验结果可以赶快恢复正常。。。这样才可以在之前建立的基础上，去开拓新的成绩。。。

除了加油，还要运气啊。。。做试验要靠运气，总是觉得~~~

Endless Love - Specially Delicated to you, Jun...

My love,
There's only you in my life
The only thing that's right

My first love,
You're every breath that I take
You're every step I make

And I (I-I-I-I-I)
I want to share
All my love with you
No one else will do...

And your eyes
Your eyes, your eyes
They tell me how much you care
Ooh yes, you will always be
My endless love

Two hearts, Two hearts that beat as one
Our lives have just begun

Forever (Ohhhhhh)
I'll hold you close in my arms
I can't resist your charms

And love and, love
I'll be a fool
For you, I'm sure
You know I don't mind
Oh, you know I don't mind

'Cause baby you, (baby baby baby)
You mean the world to me
Oh I know I know
I've found in you
My endless love

Oooh-woow do do do do do
do do do do do
do do doo doo

Oooh, and love Oh, love
I'll be that fool
For you,I'm sure
That You know I don't mind
Oh you know - I don't mind

And, YES
You'll be the only one
'Cause no one no one can deny
This love I have inside
And I'll give it all to you
My love My love, my love
My endless love

My Book Chapter

之前老板给了一个机会写review chapter。。。终于出版了。。。放上照片。。。哈哈。。。背后有我的大名哦。。。爽下！
不过，竟然发现内容有一点editing error。。。闷。。。

搞科学的人。。。

发觉，有些人，是不能给予任何意见或忠告的。。。我不在乎别人是不是否决或采纳我的意见，但我喜欢跟有诚意和肯干的人一起工作。。。
或许，有时候当别人给我一些建议的时候，心底会对自己说，凭什么你叫老子应该怎么做。。。但是，每当别人给我提醒和建议，我更会是去聆听和仔细思考可行性。。。当你承认人不会是完美的时候，你就会去学聆听，甚至是虚心接受批评和指教。。。甚至有时候别人说的我已经知道，或觉得行不通，我也不会断然就拒绝或争辩。。。最多就是讨论一番，提出质疑或替代方案。。。我一直觉得，只有在不断的讨论和各种的沟通后，可以理清自己的一些思绪，而往往别人的经验和讯息，就是自己宝贵和所需要的知识。。。
我想，这也是为什么那些高高在上的人，根本不会去理会那些所谓的民意。。。这是因为打从心底，他们就认定自己的对的。。。

搞科学研究其实更是这么一回事，许多时候，同一个结论，可以用各种方法去论证。。。往往，一个科学的结论或证据，需要以各种的方法去证明方才有效。。。这样的方法论很重要，好处很多，重点是它也是一种排除法，更可以减低了错误结论的可能性。。。坏处就是，这需要更多的严谨思考，重复试验论证，甚至是没完没了或不可能的实验。。。
但是，到底有多少这样的人在做研究呢？为了快速发表论文，为了省事省力，为了贪图名利，为了快速毕业，甚至是不知道自己应该这样做研究。。。
有些人甚至会告诉你，这些不是我的研究范围，我为什么需要知道和学习？有多少人越过了这些严谨的思考，观念和态度？更可悲的是，那些不知道自己不知道的人。。。你应该原谅他，因为不知者无罪，但是，你更要鄙视他，因为他根本不知道什么叫专业和尊重自己的专业。。。

有些人就只能遵循就有的制度，有些人却会去反思各种未来的可行方案。。。套爱因斯坦的一句话，“所谓物理，就是不断去改进每天的思考和想法甚至是行为。”真正准重科学的人，不会拒绝任何的讨论，意见甚至是批评。。。
毕竟人人的观念思想不同，你不能要求每个人都像自己一样，去收旧瓶罐，甚至不舍得丢掉用过的朔胶瓶。。。有些人，就是顺手关一下灯，关好一下抽屉，离开前检查有没有东西遗漏，也不愿意去做。。。
我一直认为，从小事当中，就能察觉一个人的个性。。。你呢？

Color Tour

刚和Malaysia的朋友去了Color Tour。。。秋天的风景真的很漂亮。。。放几张自己觉得还不错的照片和大家分享。。。照片颜色有enhance过。。。
真的要买好相机了。。。

什么话会让男人直接变成窝囊废

什么话会让男人直接变成窝囊废
-摘录自《康熙来了》，与天下男人共勉之。。。

“饮料杯湿湿的我不敢拿。。。”

“我头好痛。。。”

“鬼片都是假的，有什么好看的。。。”

“我妈妈说台风天，不要去海边玩。。。”

“我妈妈说我们的八字不合，不适合在一起。。。”

“我妈咪说。。。”

“空气好脏哦，骑摩多车脸上会长豆豆。。。”

“啊！蟑螂！”

“大哥，有事好商量，不要动手动脚的嘛。。。”

“那边好黑，我们不要过去”

“可以不要看鬼片吗？”

“外面太阳很大，我怕晒黑。。。”

我的prelim过了。。。

哈哈，我的prelim过关了。。。
没有需要做任何补救或特别的write up工作。。。一切都在掌控之中。。。有答错问题，但这不影响大局。。。
不过，committee也给了一些建议。。。我的研究方向应该要集中一点。。。从研究背景，材料，motivation，都要环环相扣，也要尝试对比其他人的研究报告。。。这样才有连贯性，丰富更多的内容，也比较科学性。。。

我想，我还是可以做科学的。。。至少在研究课题上可以自己找到要下手的地方。。。在加上老师和各方面的意见和想法，尝试解决研究上的课题。。。

考试一过，接下来还有更多工作要完成了。。。prelim其实还有一个好处，承这个机会把自己做过的事整理一遍，还可以理清自己接下来的工作项目。。。
在经过长时间的瓶颈后，最近的实验有一点点进展，现在要展开较积极的研究，务必把实验掌握在自己手上。。。这才是研究。。。

无线上网案引起公众健康疑虑 - 一项有趣的科学问题。。。

无线上网案引起公众健康疑虑
槟政府：若证实有害愿意终止

新闻见：http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/90725

这是一项有趣的问题。。。WIFI无线网络本来就是一个伟大的发明。。。只要有一台电脑在手，就可以无时无刻，随时随地上网。。。和世界任何一个角落取得联系。。。不仅如此，现在许多手机，PDA，iPhone，先进科技产品，也可以让我通过WIFI,取得网络联系。。。覆盖面之广而深，是15年前所不为人所想象的。。。

说到WIFI，现在许多摩登家庭也在家里设置了无线网络。。。咖啡厅也提供顾客这方面的服务。。。但是民间团体不见得在这些事上提供人们注意事项或引起民间反弹。。。反倒是特别批评槟城政府。。。有时候，我会认为，好人难做。。。

我不信上帝，但我从来不反对宗教的意义，也抱着开放的态度来讨论或批评宗教。。。而自己也是依循宗教的真善美去做人。。。同样的，我虽然学科学，但我也从来不崇拜科学。。。一件事总有它的利弊存在，只是我们要如何去看待而已。。。

你说无线网络辐射有害，反对全城提供免费的无线上网服务。。。那位什么你不说，每天都有车祸发生，我们应该停止车辆在路上穿行？刀子是会死人的，你是不是从来不用刀子在厨房里做菜，或要求政府必须严厉监控刀子的售卖？我不知道那些所谓的民间组织是什么来历，但是这样的逻辑，我没有办法理解。。。

虽然说手机辐射影响健康，但在现今的时代，你真的就不用手机吗？能够做的，就是减少使用量，不要长期曝露在强烈辐射低下。。。当然，问题可以更为复杂。。。如果全天24/7提供无线网络，人们长期暴露在无线网的辐射地下，科学家是不是真的可以确保它决对使用安全？

细胞对辐射的影响其实也是一项复杂的科学问题。我们已经知道，短波长的辐射如紫外线，X-ray，或gamma-ray，对人体的伤害。。。但是，对于那些长波长的辐射线，也就得看个别的具体研究了。。。科学，不能告诉你，这是100%安全的。。。而只能说，在这样的情况下，会有多少辐射。而这样的辐射量，相等于微波炉所发射多长时间的量。。。
这是很真实的人生，我们没有办法去切割二分法，而常常，我们有着一个非常宽的灰色地带。。。。

所以，我也没有办法告诉你，我们应该不应该反对这项计划。。。但是，全世界许多重要城市，都已经提供市民全城的无线网络。。。政府可以去参考他们的经验和取得相关的研究报告，然后进行市民教育工作。。。在安装设备的同时，必须符合国际安全标准。。。

而我主观认为，这是一项利多于弊的计划。。。没有理由反对，只要一切符合已经制定了的标准。。。。

爱的最高境界是经得起平淡的流年?

一天，男孩和女孩吵架了。他不再对她说"我爱你"，当然她也不再对他说"我也是"。一天晚上，他们谈到了分手的事，背对背睡下了。半夜，天上打雷了。第一声雷响时，他醒了，下意识地猛地用双手去捂她的耳朵，才发现不知何时他又拥着她。雷声紧接着炸，假装什么也没发生，可谁都没有睡着，她想也许他还爱我，生怕我受一点点吓。他想，也许她还爱我，不然她不会流泪。爱的最高境界是经得起平淡的流年。......... by unknown

转载自网络上的流传。。。。

我有手机了

我今天收到了电话了。。。跟朋友take over过来的。。。来美国这些年，我才真正买了手机，很不可思议吧。。。
干麻不舍得花20多30块去弄一个手机呢？其实，我真的认为我不是很需要的。。。大多是件我的msn都是开着的。。。我想，朋友也不会一直有好事情要马上联络我。。。这里的生活圈子不会很大，不是学校就是家。。。手机反而成了累赘。。。

那怎么现在又想弄一个呢？最近发现，在实验室的角色越来越重要了，所以需要一部别人可以联系我的电话（哈，这只是在自吹而已）。。。其实，还是有些时候别人没有马上有电脑和网络可以联络我，而我也遇到这样的状况。。。所以，还是有部手机会比较方便的。。。er,电话号码呢，就不方便在网络上公布了。。。想要我电话的朋友，请email我吧。。。谢了。。。

好啦。。。有了新电脑，有了手机。。。还缺什么呢？
咳，为什么人生总是有不断的追求呢？

Suit for the prelim exam

Dedicated to you...

Just Once
James Ingram

I did my best
But I guess my best wasn't good enough
'Cause here we are back where we were before
Seems nothing ever changes
We're back to being strangers
Wondering if we oughta stay
Or head on out the door

Just once can't we figure out what we keep doing wrong
Why we never last for very long
What are we doing wrong
Just once can't we find a way to finally make it right
Make the magic last for more than just one night
If we could just get to it
I know we could break through it

I gave my all
But I think my all may have been too much
'Cause Lord knows we're not getting anywhere
Seems we're always blowing whatever we got going
And seems at times with all we've got
We haven't got a prayer
Just once can't we figure out what we keep doing wrong
Why the goodtimes never last for very long
Seems we're always blowing
Whatever we got going

Just once can't we find a way to finally make it right
Make the magic last for more than just one night
If we could just get to it
I know we could break through it

Just once I want to understand
Why it always come back to good-bye
Why can't we get ourselves in hand
And admit to one another
That we're no good with out the other
Take the best and make it better
Find a way to stay together

Just once can't we find a way to finally make it right
Make the magic last for more than just one night
I know we can break through it
If we could just get to it

Just once
If we could get to it

Just Once...

4周年快乐

10月2日，是我跟君正式决定交往的日子。。。
一转眼，4年就这样过去了。。。而我，却有3年不在她身边。。。虽然开始的时候我也没有时常抽空和她粘在一起。。。
我必须承认，我很少给过她一个女生想到的安全感。。。她不能寄托我在她身边保护她，给她安慰。。。
回忆着过去4年的点滴，我在想，如果我是她，是不是早就离开？
很多时候，我被动得让自己都觉得可怕。。。不知道为什么，我就是没有什么创意去哄她开心。。。
她的要求其实不高，只是，我连那基本程度也不及格。。。
我对日期的记忆，是有毛病的。。。但是，10月2日，是我们诞生的日子，我不会忘记。。。
君，我希望可以给你永远的幸福。。。请你多忍受一下我不在你身边的日子。。。我知道我有点呆，也不是很有创意。。。但是我要公告天下，我要娶你的。。。
祝我们4周年交往快乐！

An open letter to the PM - from ZAID IBRAHIM

这是一篇不能不转载的文章。。。前司法部长给予首相Abdullah的公开信。。。有点长，但请耐心看完。。。中文翻译见 http://www.merdekareview.com/news.php?n=7782

An open letter to the PM
30 Sep 08 : 2.31PM

By Datuk Zaid Ibrahim
29 September 2008

YAB Dato' Seri Abdullah Badawi
Prime Minister of Malaysia
5th Floor, East Wing
Perdana Putra Building
Putrajaya, Malaysia


Dear Mr Prime Minister,

In our proclamation of independence, our first prime minister gave voice to the lofty aspirations and dreams of the people of Malaya: that Malaya was founded on the principles of liberty and justice, and the promise that collectively we would always strive to improve the welfare and happiness of its people.

Many years have passed since that momentous occasion, and those aspirations and dreams remain true and are as relevant to us today as they were then. This was made possible by a strong grasp of fundamentals in the early period of this nation. The Federal Constitution and the laws made pursuant to it were well founded; they embodied the key elements of a democracy built on the Rule of Law. The Malaysian judiciary once commanded great respect from Malaysians and was hailed as a beacon for other nations. Our earlier prime ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn were truly leaders of integrity, patriots in their own right, and most importantly, men of humility. They believed in and built this nation on the principles and values enunciated in our Constitution.

Even when they had to enact the Internal Security Act (ISA) in 1960, they were very cautious and apologetic about it. Tunku stated clearly that the Act was passed to deal with the communist threat. "My cabinet colleagues and I gave a solemn promise to Parliament and the nation that the immense powers given to the government under the ISA would never be used to stifle legitimate opposition and silence lawful dissent", was what the Tunku said. Our third prime minister Tun Hussein Onn reinforced this position by saying that the ISA was not intended to repress lawful political opposition and democratic activity on the part of the citizenry.

The events of the last three weeks have compelled me to review the way in which the ISA has been used. This exercise has sadly led me to the conclusion that the government has time and time again failed the people of this country in repeatedly reneging on that solemn promise made by Tunku Abdul Rahman. This has been made possible because the government and the law have mistakenly allowed the Minister of Home Affairs to detain anyone for whatever reason he thinks fit. This subjective discretion has been abused to further certain political interests.

History is the great teacher and speaks volumes in this regard. Even a cursory examination of the manner in which the ISA has been used almost from its inception would reveal the extent to which its intended purpose has been subjugated to the politics of the day.

Regrettably, Tunku Abdul Rahman himself reneged on his promise. In 1965, his administration detained Burhanuddin Helmi, the truly towering Malay intellectual, a nationalist who happened to be a PAS leader. He was kept in detention until his death in 1969. Helmi was a political opponent and could by no stretch of the imagination be considered to have been involved in the armed rebellion or communism that the ISA was designed to deal with. This detention was an aberration, a regrettable moment where politics was permitted to trump the rule of law. It unfortunately appears to have set a precedent, and many detentions of persons viewed as having been threatening to the incumbent administration followed through the years. Even our literary giant, the late Sasterawan Negara Tan Sri A Samad Ismail was subjected to the ISA in 1976. How could he have been a threat to national security?

I need not remind you of the terrible impact of the 1987 Operasi Lalang. Its spectre haunts the government as much as it does the peace-loving people of this nation, casting a gloom over all of us. There were and still are many unanswered questions about those dark hours when more than a hundred persons were detained for purportedly being threats to national security. Why they were detained has never been made clear to Malaysians. Similarly, no explanation has been forthcoming as to why they were never charged in court. Those detainees included amongst their numbers senior opposition members of parliament who are still active in Parliament today. The only thing that is certain about that period was that Umno was facing a leadership crisis. Isn't it coincidental that the recent spate of ISA arrests has occurred when Umno is again having a leadership crisis?

In 2001, Keadilan reformasi activists were detained in an exercise that the Federal Court declared was in bad faith and unlawful. The continued detention of those that were not released earlier from the Kamunting detention facility was made possible only by the fact that the ISA had been questionably amended in 1988 to preclude judicial review of the minister's order to detain. Malaysians were told that these detainees had been attempting to overthrow the government via militant means and violent demonstrations. Seven years have gone and yet no evidence in support of this assertion has been presented. Compounding the confusion even further, one of these so-called militants, Ezam Mohamad Noor, recently rejoined Umno to great fanfare, as a prized catch, it would seem.

At around the same time, members of PAS were also detained for purportedly being militant and allegedly having links to international terrorist networks. Those detained included Nik Adli, the son of Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, the Menteri Besar of Kelantan. Malaysians were made a promise by the government that evidence of the alleged terrorist activities and links of these detainees would be disclosed. To date no such evidence has been produced.

The same formula was used in late 2007 when the Hindraf five were detained. Malaysians were told once again that these individuals were involved in efforts to overthrow the government and had links with the militant Liberation Tiger of Tamil Eelam of Sri Lanka. To date no concrete evidence has been presented to support this assertion. It would seem therefore that the five were detained for their involvement in efforts that led to a mobilisation of Indian Malaysians to express, through peaceful means, their frustration against the way in which their community had been allowed to be marginalised. This cause has since been recognised as a legitimate one. The Hindraf demonstration is nothing extraordinary as such assemblies are universally recognised as being a legitimate means of expression.

In the same vein, the grounds advanced in support of the most recent detentions of Tan Hoon Cheng, Teresa Kok and Raja Petra Kamarudin leave much to be desired. The explanation that Tan Hoon Cheng was detained for her own safety was farcical. The suggestion that Teresa Kok had been inciting religious sentiments was unfounded as was evinced by her subsequent release.

As for Raja Petra Kamarudin, a prominent critic of the government, a perusal of his writings would show that he might have been insulting of the government and certain individuals within it. However, being critical and insulting could not in any way amount to a threat to national security. If his writings are viewed as being insulting of Islam, Muslims or the Holy Prophet (pbuh), he should instead be charged under the Penal Code and not under the ISA. In any event, he had already been charged for sedition and criminal defamation in respect of some of his statements. He had claimed trial, indicating as such his readiness and ability to defend himself. Justice would best be served by allowing him his day in court more so where, in the minds of the public, the government is in a position of conflict for having been the target of his strident criticism.

The instances cited above strongly suggest that the government is undemocratic. It is this perspective that has over the last 25-plus years led to the government seemingly detaining arbitrarily political opponents, civil society and consumer advocates, writers, businessmen, students and journalists whose crime, if it could be called that, was to have been critical of the government. How it is these individuals can be perceived as being threats to national security is beyond my comprehension. The self-evident reality is that legitimate dissent was and is quashed through the heavy-handed use of the ISA.

There are those who support and advocate this carte-blanche reading of the ISA. They will seek to persuade you that the interests of the country demand that such power be retained, that Malaysians owe their peace and stability to laws such as the ISA. This overlooks the simple truth that Malaysians of all races cherish peace. We lived together harmoniously for the last 400 years, not because of these laws but in spite of them.

I believe the people of this country are mature and intelligent enough to distinguish actions that constitute a "real" threat to the country from those that threaten political interests. Malaysians have come to know that the ISA is used against political opponents and, it would seem, when the leadership is under challenge either from within the ruling party or from external elements.

Malaysians today want to see a government that is committed to the court process to determine guilt or innocence even for alleged acts of incitement of racial or religious sentiment. They are less willing to believe, as they once did, that a single individual, namely the Minister of Home Affairs, knows best about matters of national security. They value freedom and the protection of civil liberties and this is true of people of other nations too.

Mr Prime Minister, the results of the last general election are clear indication that the people of Malaysia are demanding a reinstatement of the rule of law. I was appointed as your, albeit short-lived, minister in charge of legal affairs and judicial reform. In that capacity, I came to understand more keenly how many of us want reform, not for the sake of it, but for the extent to which our institutions have been undermined by events and the impact this has had on society.

With your blessing, I attempted to push for reform. High on my list of priorities was a reinstatement of the inherent right of judicial review that could be enabled through a reversion of the key constitutional provision to its form prior to the controversial amendment in 1988. I need not remind you that that constitutional amendment was prompted by the same series of events that led not only to Operasi Lalang but the sacking of the then Lord President and two supreme court justices. Chief amongst my concerns was the way in which the jurisdiction and the power of the courts to grant remedy against unconstitutional and arbitrary action of the executive had been removed by Parliament and the extent to which this had permitted an erosion of the civil liberties of Malaysians. It was this constitutional amendment that paved the way for the ouster provision in the ISA that virtually immunises the minister from judicial review, a provision which exemplifies the injustice the constitutional amendment of 1988 has lent itself.

I also sought to introduce means by which steps could be taken to assist the judiciary to regain the reputation for independence and competence it once had. Unfortunately, this was viewed as undesirable by some since an independent judiciary would mean that the executive would be less "influential".

I attempted to do these things and more because of the realisation that Malaysia's democratic traditions and the rule of law are under siege. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with giving everyone an independent judiciary and the opportunity to a fair trial. This is consistent with the universal norms of human rights as it is with the tenets of Islam, the religion of the Federation. Unchecked power to detain at the whim of one man is oppressiveness at its highest. Even in Israel, a nation that is perpetually at war, the power to detain is not vested in one man and detention orders require endorsement from a judge.

If there are national security considerations, then these can be approached without jettisoning the safeguards intended to protect individual citizens from being penalised wrongfully. In other jurisdictions involved in armed conflicts, trials are held in camera to allow for judicial scrutiny of evidence considered too sensitive for public disclosure so as to satisfy the ends of justice. If this can be done in these jurisdictions, why not here where the last armed struggle we saw, the very one that precipitated the need for the ISA, came to an end in the 1980s? Any doubts as to the continued relevance of the ISA in its present form should have been put to rest by the recommendation by the National Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) that the ISA be repealed and an anti-terror legislation suited to the times enacted in its place. Containing as it did a sunset clause in its original times, the ISA was never intended to be a permanent feature of the Malaysian legal landscape.

Through its continued use in the manner described above and in the face of public sentiment, it is only natural that the ISA has become in the mind of the people an instrument of oppression and the government is one that lends itself to oppressiveness. Its continued use does not bode well for a society that is struggling to find its place in the global arena. It does not bode well for the democracy that is so vital for us to develop sustainably.

Mr Prime Minister, I remember very clearly what you once said: that if one has the opportunity to do what is good and right for the country, then he must take on the task. I respect you deeply for that, and if I were confident that I would have been able to do some good for Malaysia, I would have remained on your team. Sir, you are still the prime minister and you still have the opportunity to leave your footprint in Malaysian history. I urge you to do so by repealing the ISA once and for all.

Let us attempt to fulfil that solemn promise made by our beloved first prime minister to the people of this country.


Yours sincerely,

ZAID IBRAHIM
Kuala Lumpur

(Datuk Zaid Ibrahim was the former Minister in the Prime Minister's Department in charge of law. He resigned on 16 Sept 2008 in protest against the use of the ISA.)

Source: http://www.thenutgraph.com/open-letter-to-the-PM