Another piece which I like

Oh, my god! Are the 'fourth floor boys' back?

Shah A Dadameah Tuesday, 30 June 2009 04:00

KUALA LUMPUR - When Najib Abdul Razak moved into the fifth floor of the Prime Minister’s office on April 3 this year, he came with his big picture of “One Malaysia” to drive home the point that this land belongs to every son of the soil, native and citizen of the country. If the idea had come during the tenure of his predecessor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, you would hear that it was the result of some clever brainstorming by a band of young intellectuals on the floor below. Blue Ocean strategy Najib is known to be an ardent follower of the Blue Ocean strategy, which dictates there is ample opportunity for growth that is both profitable and rapid in a market where competition is irrelevant. With more than 30 years in politics and administrative affairs, he has lately taken the Blue Ocean stance of creating rather than fighting over opportunities. Thus, it is said, he has given more room for people, albeit selective, to advise and counsel him over key functions and issues in his administration. Has the spectre of the “fourth floor” resurfaced? In Abdullah’s brief era, the so-called “fourth floor boys” were relatively young officers of sound knowledge on current affairs, with good business acumen and networking skills as well as very media savvy. Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who gave them the label, had accused them of using their talents and close links with Abdullah to influence decisions and policies in Umno and the administration. They were said to be very authoritative in their ways, to the extent that anyone who wants to meet the prime minister has to first be screened by them. In other words, if the ‘fourth floor boys’ were not convinced about the nature of the planned meeting, the visitor would not get to go to the upper floor. In contrast, when Dr Mahathir was at the helm everything centered on the fifth floor of the Prime Minister’s office in Putrajaya and every decision had his personal intervention. His critics may say he was a dictator but they acknowledged that for every failed ‘Plan A’ he has ‘Plan B’ to bank on. Critics of Abdullah were less kind to him. They say he has no plan. Mahathir's impatience, Abdullah's sad exit Mahathir’s impatience with Abdullah reached a crescendo when his grand design of a scenic bridge across part of the Tebrau straits to replace the causeway was shredded by the Cabinet of his successor. Several unhappy events followed, leading to Mahathir quitting from Umno. He returned to the party only when Najib took over the office as the country’s sixth prime minister. Abdullah’s exit, in a sense, was sad. He was harassed to resign following the Barisan’s dismal performance at the 12th general election. He was criticised by both foes and those he thought were friends. He had introduced a string of economic corridors across the country but his critics only want to blame him for the country being at very low economic ebb. Enter Najib, with his One Malaysia theme. He made a flamboyant start with a magnanimous decision to release 13 Internal Security Act detainees and withdrawing the suspensions of political papers Harakah and Suara Keadilan. In an attempt seen as redeeming lost pride over the Johor bridge issue, he proposed a third link between the state and Singapore. But he probably pushed his luck too far for the Sultan was not impressed. State assemblymen on both sides of the political divide were also not keen on the bridge, reasoning that the people of Johor were not consulted on the matter and, furthermore, the project would only bring more benefits to the republic. What Mahathir feared was happening during Abdullah’s term appears to have returned and decisions made by Najib are suspiciously being maneuvered by remote control from elsewhere. This time around the power broking may not necessarily come from the space below the fifth floor office. While working in similar fashion as the ousted “fourth floor boys” of Abdullah’s time, the currently-invisible new kids could be operating from any other block. It is, according to some careless whispers, the new batch of “fourth floor boys” who had come out with the One Malaysia concept; an idea conceived from outside the boardrooms of Umno. Najib's own 'fourth floor boys' And, because the party was allegedly not consulted on the matter, those who were caught by surprise when Najib announced the concept immediately said there would be dire implications and repercussions that would further distance them from the leadership. Word has it that his own “fourth floor boys” report back to Najib on those who disagree with the concept. Among other key decisions that have allegedly not gone down well among his own party members are the abolishment of the Ministry of Entrepreneurial and Co-operatives Development and the scrapping of the 30% bumiputra quota in the civil service. Najib, of course, has his reasons to revise policies deemed inconsistent with his One Malaysia nation and, perhaps, as Finance Minister, he has to think as well in terms of being prudent and optimising talents. To be fair to Najib, he has only been at the helm for three months and he does need all the help he can to carry out his premier duties and make an impact as the “people’s prime minister”. Some people choose to think that Najib came to Putrajaya carrying some “excess baggage’ that was not declared when he took the prime minister’s job. While he has repeatedly denied he ever knew murdered Mongolian beauty Altantuya Shaaribu - with wife Rosmah Mansor solidly standing by her man - he continues to be taunted by his opponents over his link with the woman’s alleged lover, political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda. Having cronies around is not a new phenomena in Malaysian politics. But what has become phobic for many people is the haunting return of “the fourth floor” syndrome in Umno and the country’s administrative capital. Worse, it could demoralise Putajaya officials whose role in the administration could be gradually usurped by this ghostly band of advisers and opportunists – if they actually exist.

Good reading!

Watching Malaysia change

18 Jun 09 : 10.00AM

By Zedeck Siew
zedecksiew@thenutgraph.com

Updated 22 June 2009, 5.16pm

US first lady Michelle Obama (right) and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hand Ambiga the
Secretary of State's Award for International Women of Courage, on 11 March 2009
(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images North America, Source: Zimbio)

DATUK Ambiga Sreenevasan's reference point for how aware Malaysians are about issues is the taxi driver. The respected lawyer and former Malaysian Bar president is no stranger to being scolded by taxi drivers while she is dressed up in her courtroom garb.

"'Aiya, this judiciary, can buy,' one told me," Ambiga says. "They are very critical, and are very clear on what is right and wrong."

The Malaysian taxi driver is one of her gauges of public awareness, and the senior lawyer is convinced that nobody should underestimate the Malaysian public's understanding of issues.

Indeed, Ambiga's seen quite a lot in her own life. The Nut Graph talked to her on 26 May 2009 at her office in Kuala Lumpur about growing up through 13 May 1969, watching the 1988 judicial crisis unfold, and the changing attitudes of Malaysians.

We are all pendatangs. Where are you from?

My father was born and bred in Malaysia. My mother was from South India, and my father married her and brought her to Malaysia.

My paternal grandfather was also from South India. I think it was a question of looking for opportunities, for him. He was an assistant commissioner for labour.

My parents have three children. I was born in Seremban, on 13 November 1956; my father, who was a doctor, was posted there.

My father, Datuk Dr G Sreenevasan, was one of our pioneer urologists. He was the main person behind the Institute of Urology and Nephrology in Hospital Kuala Lumpur. I remember him spending longs days and nights planning this.

Ambiga's father and the staff of the Institute of Urology Nephrology on his retirement
from government service at the age of 52 (Courtesy of Ambiga Sreenevasan)

Growing up, I remember that my father was very inspired by Tunku Abdul Rahman, and his call for all races to unite. My father had many opportunities abroad, but he decided to stay here; he wanted to build something up in Malaysia. And he did.

All my father's friends and colleagues were like that. Those people who lived through independence really had the spirit of nationalism in them. The drive that they had — unfortunately we've lost that now. Comparing them with Malaysians today, I understand when people of that generation tell me: you don't know what it is to want to build up our country.

What was school like?

I went to Convent Bukit Nenas from Form One to Upper Six. I remember that my friends and I had a strong sense of "Malaysianism".

This was after 1969. It's true that 13 May destroyed a lot of trust. But then there was the Rukunegara, which we all had to learn — seemingly real attempts to bring people together. We were happy to strengthen our command of Bahasa (Malaysia), for example.

It felt as if — in my school, at least, where the student body was mixed — there was a coming together of the races. It was a healing period.

Let's backtrack. What was 13 May like?

I was 13 at the time. On the day it happened, we got a message from the school authorities: Go home early. My mother came to pick me up.

Father G Sreenevasan and mother Visalakshi (Courtesy of Ambiga Sreenevasan)

Well, we lived in Kampung Baru, at the time. On Jalan Putra — now Jalan Raja Muda 1. This was not far from the then-Selangor menteri besar's home. We were there because it was close to the General Hospital, so it was easy for my father to get to work. Ours was the last house on the row. My father was overseas at the time, so it was just mother and us children, my uncle and aunt, and the household cook.

At 6pm we saw people running past, wearing headbands. Soon after, we heard screams. Later, there were cars being burnt in the field. The house behind us was burnt. We were always safe, though. I don't know why. Maybe it was because we had lived there so long, so everyone knew us. Or maybe it was because we were Indian [Malaysian].

When my father got back, about a week after 13 May, he helped out at the hospital, treating people with injuries. He said: "I read about the riots, but I never imagined it would be this bad."

It was bad. We had never before seen anything like that. For a long time after, whenever I heard fireworks going off, I would feel nervous.

What was university like?

When I went to university in the UK, my horizons expanded and I learnt about freedom of thought and speech — and what these concepts meant in real terms. When I visited the Bar there, I saw how a functioning democracy operated. This time was a very important part in moulding my views on human rights and fundamental freedoms.

I came back and joined the Malaysian Bar in 1982. It was a wonderful organisation, even then. Being a young lawyer, I remember being petrified to appear before people like Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader — he would chew you up if you didn't know your brief. He was so respected because he knew your brief, and the law, and was of the highest integrity and intellect.

Ambiga and Tun Salleh Abbas

In fact, I'd appeared before all the judges who were later suspended in the judicial crisis.

What was it like, being a young lawyer during the 1988 judicial crisis?

It was a real shock to the system. Our first three prime ministers never touched the judiciary; probably this was because they were lawyers themselves. Our judiciary was a very respected institution.

I remember, as the tribunals were in progress, a group of us lawyers sitting at the back of the courtroom and watching. To see these men, who had so much self-respect, to be treated in that shabby way — we couldn't believe it.

I remember going home and bursting into tears. It was like someone demolishing your house while you're standing in it.

Things are getting better since those dark times. But, ultimately, when it comes to the judiciary, it is up to the judges themselves to act courageously, now.

When did you become aware about race?

Race was always there. We were always aware of it, but it wasn't as divisive as it is today. The New Economic Policy worked quite well, initially.

Then the abuses started: the enrichment of a few at the expense of the many who actually needed it. And these few became arrogant. Playing the race card suited them, because it solidified their positions.

I think, very frankly, that politicians are responsible for bringing so much racism into our society. I think it suited the politicians to play on our differences instead of what unites us.

But the arrogance that grew with this has been rejected by the people. I'm talking about the March 2008 elections. What we saw was a rejection of racist rhetoric. People were fed up. Previously, the 13 May bogey used to work — but that's not working any more.

Where do you think we are going, now?

I like to think of Malaysian history as being divided into three phases.

R Gopal Ayer, Ambiga's grandfather (Courtesy of Ambiga
Sreenevasan)The initial years, during my father's time, when there was this nationalistic feeling, this drive to show the world that we could be an independent and united nation.

Then a long period, during which things became more divisive. A time when we appeared to have economic prosperity, but also had so much corruption and racism.

And now, a third phase: the push for change.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a lot of young Malaysians now feel no connection with 13 May. They don't come from that past. There is a disconnect between the youth, and old politics.

My father's generation adored Tunku. I don't know whether we will get that feeling again. But you need this generation saying: the world has moved on, so let me move on, too

Oh Micheal it never end with you! First they told me you have converted and your name change to Mikail, the archangel played beautifully by John Travolta in Micheal. Mikail to those who are not aware are the Angel of Providence (Rezeki!) so now his dead thus no more providence for many, now they claim he is gay!, what next? To me just

Just Beat It, Beat It, Beat It, Beat It
No One Wants To Be Defeated
Show them How Funky Strong Is Your Fight
It Doesn't Matter Who's Wrong Or Right
Just Beat It, Beat It
Just Beat It, Beat It
Just Beat It, Beat It
Just Beat It, Beat It

Yaaa! baby beat the meat! and have fun doing it!

‘I’m better off dead’ — MJ

During his prime. Michael Jackson performs during the halftime show at the NFL's Super Bowl XXVII in Pasadena, California, January 31, 1993. — Reuters file pic

By Ian Halperin

LOS ANGELES, June 29 — Whatever the final autopsy results reveal, it was greed that killed Michael Jackson. Had he not been driven — by a cabal of bankers, agents, doctors and advisors — to commit to the gruelling 50 concerts in London’s O2 Arena, I believe he would still be alive today.

During the last weeks and months of his life, Jackson made desperate attempts to prepare for the concert series scheduled for next month — a series that would have earned millions for the singer and his entourage, but which he could never have completed, not mentally, and not physically.

Michael knew it and his advisers knew it. Anyone who caught even a fleeting glimpse of the frail old man hiding beneath the costumes and cosmetics would have understood that the London tour was madness. For Michael Jackson, it was fatal.

I had more than a glimpse of the real Michael; as an award-winning freelance journalist and film-maker, I spent more than five years inside his “camp”.

Many in his entourage spoke frankly to me — and that made it possible for me to write authoritatively last December that Michael had six months to live, a claim that, at the time, his official spokesman, Dr Tohme Tohme, called a “complete fabrication”. The singer, he told the world, was in “fine health”.

Six months and one day later, Jackson was dead.

Some liked to snigger at his public image, and it is true that flamboyant clothes and bizarre make-up made for a comic grotesque; yet without them, his appearance was distressing; with skin blemishes, thinning hair and discoloured fingernails.

I had established beyond doubt, for example, that Jackson relied on an extensive collection of wigs to hide his greying hair. Shorn of their luxuriance, the Peter Pan of Neverland cut a skeletal figure.

Janet Jackson, sister of Michael Jackson , speaks at the BET Awards '09 in Los Angeles yesterday. — Reuters pic

It was clear that he was in no condition to do a single concert, let alone 50. He could no longer sing, for a start. On some days he could barely talk. He could no longer dance. Disaster was looming in London and, in the opinion of his closest confidantes, he was feeling suicidal.

To understand why a singer of Jackson’s fragility would even think about travelling to London, we need to go back to June 13, 2005, when my involvement in his story began.

As a breaking news alert flashed on CNN announcing that the jury had reached a verdict in Jackson’s trial for allegedly molesting 13-year-old Gavin Arvizo at his Neverland Ranch in California, I knew that history had been made but that Michael Jackson had been broken — irrevocably so, as it proved.

Nor was it the first time that Michael had been accused of impropriety with young boys. Little more than a decade earlier, another 13-year-old, Jordan Chandler, made similar accusations in a case that was eventually settled before trial — but not before the damage had been done to Jackson’s reputation.

Michael had not helped his case. Appearing in a documentary with British broadcaster Martin Bashir, he not only admitted that he liked to share a bed with teenagers, mainly boys, in pyjamas, but showed no sign of understanding why anyone might be legitimately concerned.

I had started my investigation convinced that Jackson was guilty. By the end, I no longer believed that.

I could not find a single shred of evidence suggesting that Jackson had molested a child. But I found significant evidence demonstrating that most, if not all, of his accusers lacked credibility and were motivated primarily by money.

Jackson also deserved much of the blame, of course. Continuing to share a bed with children even after the suspicions surfaced bordered on criminal stupidity.

He was also playing a truly dangerous game. It is clear to me that Michael was homosexual and that his taste was for young men, albeit not as young as Jordan Chandler or Gavin Arvizo.

In the course of my investigations, I spoke to two of his gay lovers, one a Hollywood waiter, the other an aspiring actor. The waiter had remained friends, perhaps more, with the singer until his death last week. He had served Jackson at a restaurant, Jackson made his interest plain and the two slept together the following night. According to the waiter, Jackson fell in love.

The actor, who has been given solid but uninspiring film parts, saw Jackson in the middle of 2007. He told me they had spent nearly every night together during their affair — an easy claim to make, you might think. But this lover produced corroboration in the form of photographs of the two of them together, and a witness.

Other witnesses speak of strings of young men visiting his house at all hours, even in the period of his decline. Some stayed overnight.

Host Jamie Foxx performs the Michael Jackson crotch grab at the BET Awards '09 in Los Angeles yesterday. — Reuters pic

When Jackson lived in Las Vegas, one of his closest aides told how he would sneak off to a “grungy, rat-infested” motel — often dressed as a woman to disguise his identity — to meet a male construction worker he had fallen in love with.

Jackson was acquitted in the Arvizo case, dramatically so, but the effect on his mental state was ruinous. Sources close to him suggest he was close to complete nervous breakdown.

The ordeal had left him physically shattered, too. One of my sources suggested that he might already have had a genetic condition I had never previously come across, called Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency — the lack of a protein that can help protect the lungs.

Although up to 100,000 Americans are severely affected by it, it is an under-recognised condition. Michael was receiving regular injections of Alpha-1 antitrypsin derived from human plasma. The treatment is said to be remarkably effective and can enable the sufferer to lead a normal life.

But the disease can cause respiratory problems and, in severe cases, emphysema. Could this be why Jackson had for years been wearing a surgical mask in public, to protect his lungs from the ravages of the disease? Or why, from time to time, he resorted to a wheelchair? When I returned to my source inside the Jackson camp for confirmation, he said: “Yeah, that’s what he’s got. He’s in bad shape. They’re worried that he might need a lung transplant but he may be too weak.

“Some days he can hardly see and he’s having a lot of trouble walking.”

Even Michael Jackson’s legendary wealth was in sharp decline. Just a few days before he announced his 50-concert comeback at the O2 Arena, one of my sources told me Jackson had been offered £1.8 million (RM10.3 million) to perform at a party for a Russian billionaire on the Black Sea.

“Is he up to it?” I had asked.

“He has no choice. He needs the money. His people are pushing him hard,” said the source.

Could he even stand on a stage for an hour concert?

“He can stand. The treatments have been successful. He can even dance once he gets in better shape. He just can’t sing,” said the aide, adding that Jackson would have to lip-synch to get through the performance. “Nobody will care, as long as he shows up and moonwalks.”

He also revealed Jackson had been offered well over £60 million to play Las Vegas for six months. “He said no, but his people are trying to force it on him. He’s that close to losing everything,” said the source.

Indeed, by all accounts Jackson’s finances were in a shambles. The Arvizo trial itself was a relative bargain, costing a little more than £18 million in legal bills.

But the damage to his career, already in trouble before the charges, was incalculable. After the Arvizo trial, a Bahraini sheikh allowed Jackson to stay in his palace, underwriting his lavish lifestyle. But a few years later, the prince sued his former guest, demanding repayment for his hospitality. Jackson claimed he thought it had been a gift.

Roger Friedman, a TV journalist, said: “For one year, the prince underwrote Jackson’s life in Bahrain — everything including accommodation, guests, security and transportation. And what did Jackson do? He left for Japan and then Ireland. He took the money and moonwalked right out the door. This is the real Michael Jackson. He has never returned a phone call from the prince since he left Bahrain.”

Although Jackson settled with the sheikh on the eve of the trial that would have aired his financial dirty laundry, the settlement only put him that much deeper into the hole. A hole that kept getting bigger, but that was guaranteed by Jackson”s half ownership of the copyrights to The Beatles catalogue. He owned them in a joint venture with record company Sony, which have kept him from bankruptcy.

“Jackson is in hock to Sony for hundreds of millions,” a source told me a couple of months ago. “No bank will give him any money so Sony have been paying his bills.

“The trouble is that he hasn’t been meeting his obligations. Sony have been in a position for more than a year where it can repossess Michael’s share of the [Beatles] catalogue. That’s always been Sony’s dream scenario, full ownership.

“But they don’t want to do it as they’re afraid of a backlash from his fans. Their nightmare is an organised “boycott Sony” movement worldwide, which could prove hugely costly. It is the only thing standing between Michael and bankruptcy.”

Joe Jackson, the father of deceased pop star Michael Jackson, arrives at the BET Awards. — Reuters pic

The source aid at the time that the scheduled London concerts wouldn’t clear Jackson’s debts — estimated at almost £242 million — but they would allow him to get them under control and get him out of default with Sony.

According to two sources in Jackson’s camp, the singer put in place a contingency plan to ensure his children would be well taken care of in the event of bankruptcy.

“He has as many as 200 unpublished songs that he is planning to leave behind for his children when he dies. They can’t be touched by the creditors, but they could be worth as much as £60 million that will ensure his kids a comfortable existence no matter what happens,” one of his collaborators revealed.

But for the circle of handlers who surrounded Jackson during his final years, their golden goose could not be allowed to run dry. Bankruptcy was not an option.

These, after all, were not the handlers who had seen him through the aftermath of the Arvizo trial and who had been protecting his fragile emotional health to the best of their ability. They were gone, and a new set of advisers was in place.

The clearout had apparently been engineered by his children’s nanny, Grace Rwaramba, who was gaining considerable influence over Jackson and his affairs and has been described as the “queen bee” by those around Jackson.

Rwaramba had ties to the black militant organisation, the Nation of Islam, and its controversial leader, Louis Farrakhan, whom she enlisted for help in running Jackson’s affairs.

Before long, the Nation was supplying Jackson’s security detail and Farrakhan”s son-in-law, Leonard Muhammad, was appointed as Jackson’s business manager, though his role has lessened significantly in recent years.

In late 2008, a shadowy figure who called himself Dr Tohme Tohme suddenly emerged as Jackson’s “official spokesman”.

Tohme has been alternately described as a Saudi Arabian billionaire and an orthopaedic surgeon, but he is actually a Lebanese businessman who does not have a medical licence. At one point, Tohme claimed he was an ambassador at large for Senegal, but the Senegalese embassy said they had never heard of him.

Tohme’s own ties to the Nation of Islam came to light in March 2009, when New York auctioneer Darren Julien was conducting an auction of Michael Jackson memorabilia.

Julien filed an affidavit in Los Angeles Superior Court that month in which he described a meeting he had with Tohme’s business partner, James R. Weller. According to Julien’s account, “Weller said if we refused to postpone [the auction], we would be in danger from “Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam; those people are very protective of Michael”.

He told us that Tohme and Michael Jackson wanted to give the message to us that “our lives are at stake and there will be bloodshed”.”

A fan of Michael Jackson shouts before a candlelight vigil held in tribute to the pop music icon in the city of Lima yesterday. — Reuters pic

A month after these alleged threats, Tohme accompanied Jackson to a meeting at a Las Vegas hotel with Randy Phillips, chief executive of the AEG Group, to finalise plans for Jackson’s return to the concert stage.

Jackson’s handlers had twice before said no to Phillips. This time, with Tohme acting as his confidant, Jackson left the room agreeing to perform ten concerts at the O2.

Before long, however, ten concerts had turned into 50 and the potential revenues had skyrocketed. “The vultures who were pulling his strings somehow managed to put this concert extravaganza together behind his back, then presented it to him as a fait accompli,” said one aide.

“The money was just unbelievable and all his financial people were telling him he was facing bankruptcy. But Michael still resisted. He didn’t think he could pull it off.”

Eventually, they wore him down, the aide explained, but not with the money argument.

“They told him that this would be the greatest comeback the world had ever known. That’s what convinced him. He thought if he could emerge triumphantly from the success of these concerts, he could be the King again.”

The financial details of the O2 concerts are still murky, though various sources have revealed that Jackson was paid as much as £10 million in advance, most of which went to the middlemen. But Jackson could have received as much as £100 million had the concerts gone ahead.

It is worth noting that the O2 Arena has the most sophisticated lip synching technology in the world — a particular attraction for a singer who can no longer sing. Had, by some miracle, the concerts gone ahead, Jackson’s personal contribution could have been limited to just 13 minutes for each performance. The rest was to have been choreography and lights.

“We knew it was a disaster waiting to happen,” said one aide. “I don’t think anybody predicted it would actually kill him but nobody believed he would end up performing.”

Their doubts were underscored when Jackson collapsed during only his second rehearsal.

“Collapse might be overstating it,” said the aide. “He needed medical attention and couldn’t go on. I’m not sure what caused it.”

Meanwhile, everybody around him noticed that Jackson had lost an astonishing amount of weight in recent months. His medical team even believed he was anorexic.

A guest wipes her eyes during a tribute to the life of Michael Jackson at the BET Awards '09. — Reuters pic

“He goes days at a time hardly eating a thing and at one point his doctor was asking people if he had been throwing up after meals,” one staff member told me in May.

“He suspected bulimia but when we said he hardly eats any meals, the doc thought it was probably anorexia. He seemed alarmed and at one point said, “People die from that all the time. You’ve got to get him to eat.”

Indeed, one known consequence of anorexia is cardiac arrest.

After spotting him leave one rehearsal, Fox News reported that “Michael Jackson’s skeletal physique is so bad that he might not be able to moonwalk any more”.

On May 20 this year, AEG suddenly announced that the first London shows had been delayed for five days while the remainder had been pushed back until March 2010. At the time, they denied that the postponements were health-related, explaining that they needed more time to mount the technically complex production, though scepticism immediately erupted. It was well placed.

Behind the scenes, Jackson was in rapid decline. According to a member of his staff, he was “terrified” at the prospect of the London concerts.

“He wasn’t eating, he wasn’t sleeping and, when he did sleep, he had nightmares that he was going to be murdered. He was deeply worried that he was going to disappoint his fans. He even said something that made me briefly think he was suicidal. He said he thought he’d die before doing the London concerts.

“He said he was worried that he was going to end up like Elvis. He was always comparing himself to Elvis, but there was something in his tone that made me think that he wanted to die, he was tired of life. He gave up. His voice and dance moves weren’t there anymore. I think maybe he wanted to die rather than embarrass himself on stage.”

The most obvious comparison between the King of Pop and the King of Rock “n” Roll was their prescription drug habits, which in Jackson’s case had significantly intensified in his final months.

“He is surrounded by enablers,” said one aide. “We should be stopping him before he kills himself, but we just sit by and watch him medicate himself into oblivion.”

Jackson could count on an array of doctors to write him prescriptions without asking too many questions if he complained of “pain”. He was particularly fond of OxyContin, nicknamed “Hillbilly heroin”, which gave an instant high, although he did not take it on a daily basis.

According to the aide, painkillers are not the only drugs Jackson took.

“He pops Demerol and morphine, sure, apparently going back to the time in 1984 when he burned himself during the Pepsi commercial, but there’s also some kind of psychiatric medication. One of his brothers once told me he was diagnosed with schizophrenia when he was younger, so it may be to treat that.”

His aides weren’t the only ones who recognised that a 50-concert run was foolhardy. In May, Jackson himself reportedly addressed fans as he left his Burbank rehearsal studio.

Jamie Foxx sings 'I'll Be There' as a picture of a young Michael Jackson is shown at the closing of the BET Awards '09 — Reuters pic

“Thank you for your love and support,” he told them. “I want you guys to know I love you very much.

“I don’t know how I’m going to do 50 shows. I’m not a big eater. I need to put some weight on. I’m really angry with them booking me up to do 50 shows. I only wanted to do ten.”

One of his former employees was particularly struck by Jackson”s wording that day. “The way he was talking, it’s like he’s not in control over his own life anymore,” she told me earlier this month. “It sounds like somebody else is pulling his strings and telling him what to do. Someone wants him dead.

“They keep feeding him pills like candy. They are trying to push him over the edge. He needs serious help. The people around him will kill him.”

As the London concerts approached, something was clearly wrong. Jackson had vowed to travel to England at least eight weeks before his first shows, but he kept putting it off.

“To be honest, I never thought Michael would set foot on a concert stage ever again,” said one aide, choking back tears on the evening of his death.

“This was not only predictable, this was inevitable.”

On June 21, Jackson told my contact that he wanted to die. He said that he didn’t have what it would take to perform any more because he had lost his voice and dance moves.

“It’s not working out,” Jackson said. “I’m better off dead. I don”t have anywhere left to turn. I’m done.”

Michael’s closest confidante told me just two hours after he died that “Michael was tired of living. He was a complete wreck for years and now he can finally be in a better place. People around him fed him drugs to keep him on their side. They should be held accountable.”

Michael Jackson was undoubtedly a deeply troubled and lonely man. Throughout my investigation, I was torn between compassion and anger, sorrow and empathy.

Even his legacy is problematic. As I have already revealed, he has bequeathed up to 200 original songs to his three children, Prince Michael, aged 12, Paris Katherine, 11, and Prince Michael II (also known as Blanket), seven. It is a wonderful gift.

Yet I can reveal that his will, not as yet made public, demands that the three of them remain with Jackson’s 79-year-old mother Katherine in California. It promises an ugly row.

Ex-wife Deborah Rowe, the mother of the eldest two, has already made it clear to her legal team that she wants her children in her custody, immediately.

The mother of the third child has never been identified. I fully expect that it will emerge that the children had a “test tube” conception, a claim already made by Deborah Rowe.

Michael Jackson may very well have been the most talented performer of his generation, but for 15 years that fact has been lost to a generation who may remember him only as a grotesque caricature who liked to share his bed with little boys. Now that he’s gone, maybe it’s time to shelve the suspicions and appreciate the music. — The Daily Mail

written by Dr Yap, June 29, 2009
A comment made by a reader!

I was his doctor when he was in Kuala Lumpur doing his concerts. I can assure you that MJ is not a child molester, but the trial by the media has given him a guilty verdict. He is a frail man, a man totally lacking in self-confidence, despite his public image. And a good man at heart. He gave away a substantial sum of his fees to orphanages around KL during his stay....and he kept quiet about it...to show you the humility of that man.

Oh how idiotic can a Minister be and look at their supporters! Nothing wrong to say you're sorry and moved on. You do not have to spin it because the more you spin the more stupid it looks! Look at his statement below

Swine flu? H1N1? Rais now says ‘use both’

KUALA LUMPUR, June 27 — Information Communication and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Rais Yatim has suggested that both the “swine flu” and Influenza A(H1N1) terminologies be used by the media in reporting the disease.

This was a better and more accurate way of reporting the pandemic to the public, he said. He added that many international media organisations such as the British Broadcasting Corporation, Voice of America and Australian Broadcasting Corporation as well as search engines like Google and Yahoo were using the term swine flu.

“As a responsible ministry, we should use both terminologies when explaining the issue.

“We in the ministry will continue to use the easy-to-understand term. We will use the A(H1N1) terminology but for subsequent mentions, we will proceed with the term ‘swine flu’,” he told reporters after the launching of the “1Malaysia” logo by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak here.

Rais said it would be up to the Health Ministry if it wanted to continue using the term Influenza A(H1N1) as stipulated by the World Health Organisation.

He also called on the media not to play up the swine flu issue as it could negatively impact the country, particularly its tourism sector.

Too much publicity would give the wrong impression among the public that the disease was more serious than dengue, which is still on the rise, he said. — Bernama

Comments which border on senility

written by No value, June 27, 2009

I believe the WHO has officially named this flu H1N1. If anything you might want to call this virus the Mexico-2009 influenza. This would follow the traditional way of naming a virus. Place and date.

The H1N1 influenza virus is not swine flu. H1N1 is not carried by pigs, it does not infect pigs. This influenza virus infects humans, and is carried by humans.

The H1N1 virus is hybrid between several strains of influenza viruses that infect birds, pigs and humans. So you might as equally call it bird flu.

In summary calling the H1N1 virus swine flu is misleading and inaccurate.

P.S: Rais you are making Malaysia appear stupid in the international press. 2009 has been a bad year for Malaysia image. So "Jangan memperbodohkan nama Malaysia!"

written by apam2009, June 27, 2009

is there any PROBLEM calling it SWINE FLU??? We muslim don't feel offended!!!Or perhaps those non-muslims feel 'shy' to use SWINE FLU!!! PLS PUBLISH and ANSWER!!!!!

written by apam2009, June 27, 2009
TO JIJOT

Dear friend....it has been tested and proven by modern science..there is a germ in the meat (or pork) that even you cook up to 500C it will remain there..pls do your reserach and do not deny it...at the first place, we the muslim did not feel offended if the WHO call it SWINE FLU...if the matter of fact, the virus did origin from PIG..just admit it..your statement is STUPID..it seems that non-muslim did not eat chicken and beef..common lar....do not be STUPID JIJOT

I feel vindicated!

Influenza A(H1N1) terminology stays – Health Ministry

PUTRAJAYA, June 26 — Health Ministry Director-General Tan Sri Dr Mohd Ismail Merican today gave three reasons why his ministry is sticking to the term Influenza A(H1N1) instead of swine flu.

Dr Mohd Ismail Merican said firstly that the virus that causes the spread of the disease is a mixture of three aspects – human beings, avian and swine – as identified by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

He also said Malaysia must comply with the directive of WHO because if it were to use another term, it would mean that other countries too could use different terms and that could lead to chaos in controlling the spread of this pandemic.

Furthermore, he said that using the term ‘swine flu’ could lead to a misunderstanding as the people would have the wrong perception that only those who consumed pork would be infected by the virus.

“Because of these three reasons, the Health Ministry would maintain its stand of using the term Influenza A(H1N1).

“I have conveyed this information to the minister and I hope he (Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai) will bring up the matter for discussion by the Cabinet ministers today,” he told reporters, here today.

He said this when asked to comment on the statement yesterday by Information Communication and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim, who suggested that the media used the term ‘swine flu’ instead of Influenza A(H1N1) used currently.

Dr Rais had said the suggestion was made to ensure that the public was aware of the danger of the flu and that the message could be conveyed more accurately to them.

Commenting further, Dr Mohd Ismail said “on April 29, WHO had issued a statement to change the name ‘swine flu’ to Influenza A(H1N1) because of the combination of the three factors, that is, human beings, avian and swine. This is not the swine flu that you see every day. This is a new virus,” he said.

He said the use of a different terminology would also make it impossible to carry out a comparative study.

Dr Mohd Ismail also said that he did not intend to dispute the suggestion made by the minister concerned but a directive from WHO must be complied with because Malaysia was part of WHO.

“If you don’t follow WHO, whom would you follow. And you have to make sure that every country will use the same terminology,” he added. – Bernama

Here is a piece of news I found funny and annoyed at the same time. Read on and my comment

Liow says it’s A(H1N1), Rais tells media to say ‘swine flu’

KUALA LUMPUR, June 25 – Shortly after Health Minister Liow Tiong Lai urged the media to use the term Influenza A(H1N1) as recommended by the the World Health Organisation, Information Communication and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim said all media should return to using “swine flu” instead.

Rais said this was to ensure that the people realised the danger of the disease and to get the message across to them more accurately.

It is also easier for (radio and television) announcers to state “selsema babi” (swine flu) than H1N1 in Bahasa Melayu, he told reporters after an official visit to Pos Malaysia, here.

Rais also said that the ministry would monitor programmes broadcasting health-related advertisements to ensure that there was no confusion as to the accuracy of the message as well as the people’s understanding of swine flu/A(H1N1).

“We should not combine health-related matters with confusing advertisements," he said. – Bernama

written by warrior 231, June 26, 2009

Time to call a spade, a spade. Despite, WHO' play on semantics, the world press organisations with odd exceptions have largely maintained the original name

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090625/ap_on_he_me/us_med_swine_flu

Pressure against "swine flu" only percolated amongst the pork industry who lobbied to have the original name culled on commercial concerns:http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N28343516.htm

The facts are as they are and even WHo was resistant to the change :

"However, the World Health Organization has not budged from "swine flu."
source: http://www.google.com/hostedne...1ilBdLV6yQ

and pigs are the incubators of the stuff with even the experts agreeing to the swine origins of the disease, so why quibble over something just because it touches a raw nerve.

"Six of the eight genetic segments of this virus strain are purely swine flu and the other two segments are bird and human, but have lived in swine for the past decade, says Dr. Raul Rabadan, a professor of computational biology at Columbia University."
source:http://www.physorg.com/news160371024.html

and why the furore, no one seemed to be equally lathered up when bird/avian flu was bandied about:

My question is, why didn't the CDC or WHO change the name of bird flu to avoid offending the chicken industry? The whole thing's ridiculous. I hope everyone calling it "H1N1" grows a snout and a tail.
source : comment box from above

Rais, got it right, end of story

My Comment

Bagus(Good thumbs up) warrior you hit it on the nail. Yes Swine flu it is but is it politically correct? Rais says to make a great impact or is it? What about Avian flu, Why call it avian flu or bird flu why not Chicken flu to make it a great impact! Why stop there , why call foot and mouth disease which has also mutated and call it cow disease or sakit lembu! Hoooray we start culling the pigs and swine and chicken and go Vegetarian!! Go Veggie go! The truth is WHO has decide to call it H1N1 because it is a mutated swine flu. It is a combination of Swine and Avian( or chicken viruslah!) Whether it is because of the lobbyist it doesn't matter, we are part of the international community if not be an island lah! to me Rais is just flexing his puny muscle even UMNO pun tak mahu dia!!!(Dont want him)

The seventh child of the Jackson family, Michael Jackson debuted on the professional music scene at the age of 11 as a member of The Jackson 5, and became their biggest star.

At the age of 50, the King of Pop still cuts a cool figure, seen here during a visit to Tokyo last year.

Michael Jackson performing during the Singapore-stop of his HIStory tour in 1996, complete with his signature crotch-grabbing antics.

Ah today I heard that i lost two idols of mine, one from Anal Cancer and one from a heart attack. Both were big during their heydays. I learn one lesson do not f*** your partner in the arse you will give her not just anal but cancer so beware those victim of Anwar you can get Cancer and also to watch my diet

The sex symbol who wanted to be more

Maybe not how she’d want to be remembered but this is the image many fans will remember – fondly – of Farrah Fawcett.

JUNE 26 – She really tried. And, for a sex symbol, that alone can be like an accomplishment.

A scrim of sadness covers Farrah Fawcett’s career. Her stardom traced that cautionary Hollywood arc: meteoric fame followed by years spent trying first to overcome it, then, too late, seeking to recapture it.

Cancer interrupted Fawcett’s attempted comeback in 2006 and put her on a different, more didactic track – pursued by a careful-what-you-wish-for flurry of publicity.

She put the incessant tabloid intrusion to the service of her illness, making a video diary of her struggle with anal cancer that, among other things, allowed her to feel that she had some control over the coverage.

NBC, never shy about exploiting a celebrity tragedy, overproduced and overpromoted her film in “Farrah’s Story,” but never made the public service point that, besides abstinence, the HPV vaccine is the most promising form of prevention against this type of cancer, which in most cases is sexually acquired.

Fawcett died Thursday at 62. And her last poignant appearances sometimes obscure a smaller, more gratifying story line of a celebrated beauty who worked against type to construct a more dignified second act.

Long before Charlize Theron gained weight to make “Monster” and Nicole Kidman put on a fake nose to play Virginia Woolf, Fawcett scrubbed off her tawny good looks to play battered – and battering – women in “The Burning Bed” and “Extremities.”

There were many less successful performances as well and cameo roles in B movies, but Fawcett kept trying, and that’s more than can be said of many of today’s fading stars who coast on surgically preserved looks, cable reality shows and the culture’s insatiable hunger for celebrity abasement.

Bea Arthur, who died at 86 after a long, varied and joyous career, accomplished many things, perhaps most notably making the case on “Maude” and “The Golden Girls” that an older woman with a large frame, beak nose and stentorian voice could be an object of male desire. Fawcett was not as talented or as versatile. Still, while at the peak of her career she tried to show skeptics that an object of male desire can hold her own in roles usually reserved for less glamorous, better trained actresses.

Though, of course, it was her early work that kept her famous. Nobody in recent memory comes close to the giddy heights Farrah Fawcett reached in the mid-’70s with one season on “Charlie’s Angels” and That Poster.

The pinup of Fawcett in a red one-piece bathing suit, tanned, head tossed, body lithe yet curvy, was a revelation. She looked delicious but also a little carnivorous, her gleaming white teeth frozen in a friendly but slightly feral smile.

That poster ended up on every teenage boy’s bedroom wall and in the annals of pop culture – Farrah was the face, body and hair of the 1970s

More recently Fawcett became almost as well known as fame’s camp follower after a dizzy, incoherent interview on David Lettermanin 1997..

That bad moment was reinforced by an ill-advised 2005 TV Land reality show, “Chasing Farrah,” the kind of doomed career defibrillator that was parodied so brilliantly by Lisa Kudrow in “The Comeback.” A camera crew followed Fawcett as she giggled and tossed her golden mane at movie openings and on shopping sprees – more Blanche DuBois than “Charlie’s Angels.”

In one scene, as Fawcett strode ahead in a cloud of fans and paparazzi, a stocky, balding man in a T-shirt told the camera with a leer, “I’d do her,” as if that would be doing her a favour.

Fawcett left “Charlie’s Angels” after only one season, the queen of “jiggle TV.” She had a dazzling smile underscored by a whispery baby voice, a sweetness that allowed young male fantasists to believe that she would be a forgiving sex goddess.

Bo Derek and Pamela Anderson, physical prodigies who took her place on dorm-room walls, seemed less approachable – they were positioned more as parodies of sex symbols than the real thing and seemed perfectly content in that niche.

Fawcett was built on a more human scale, a cheerleader from Corpus Christi, Texas, who radiated a healthy athleticism just ahead of the aerobics revolution led by Jane Fonda and Jamie Lee Curtis.

She made movies like “The Cannonball Run” but also set her sights on Broadway long before it became fashionable and profitable for theatres to boost ticket sales by recruiting television and movie stars to perform onstage.

And in 1983 she dared to take over a role originated by Susan Sarandon in “Extremities,” in the grueling role of a rape victim who seeks revenge on her attacker. That performance led to “The Burning Bed,” a 1984 TV movie in which she played a battered wife and which was a television milestone; it helped her secure the lead in the 1985 film version of “Extremities.”

She took on other ambitious roles, not as persuasively perhaps, but they were brave choices nonetheless: the Nazi hunter Beate Klarsfeld in a 1986 television movie; the heiress Barbara Hutton a year later; and in 1989, the wartime photojournalist Margaret Bourke-White.

Her career took a detour in 1997 – that was the year of a Playboy spread and her infamous David Letterman interview, but it was also the year she played Robert Duvall’s wife in “The Apostle,” an affecting performance that was well received by critics, if not widely seen.

She kept at it, though the offers kept shrinking; her last movie was a small part in “The Cookout,” the 2004 Queen Latifah comedy.

Toward the end, her private life – her son’s drug problems, her on-and-off relationship with the troubled Ryan O’Neal – eclipsed decades of work. Cancer brought it to an end.

Not all of her performances will stand the test of time, but what is worth remembering is how hard Farrah Fawcett tried. – NYT

Michael Jackson tributes streaming in

UPDATED

JUNE 26 – Michael Jackson's sudden death at the age of 50 brought reactions from across the entertainment world and elsewhere.

Music producer Quincy Jones, who collaborated with Jackson on three of his best-selling albums, “Off the Wall,” “Thriller” and “Bad,” said in a statement: “I am absolutely devastated at this tragic an unexpected news. For Michael to be taken away from us so suddenly at this young age, I just don't have the words.

He added: “He was the consummate entertainer and his contributions and legacy will be felt upon the world forever. I've lost my little brother today and part of my soul has gone with him.”

Lisa Marie Presley, daughter of rock great Elvis Presley and who was married to Jackson in the mid-1990s, said in a statement: “I am so very sad and confused with every emotion possible. I am heartbroken for his children who I know were everything to him and for his family. This is such a massive loss on so many levels, words fail me.

Actress Brooke Shields, a long-time friend, said in a statement released through her publicist: “My heart is overcome with sadness for the devastating loss of my true friend Michael. He was an extraordinary friend, artist and contributor to the world. I join his family and his fans in celebrating his incredible life and mourning his untimely passing.”

Pop star Madonna told People magazine: “I can’t stop crying over the sad news ... I have always admired Michael Jackson. The world has lost one of the greats but his music will live on forever. My heart goes out to his three children and other members of his family. God bless.”

Representatives for actress Elizabeth Taylor, another of the singer’s longtime friends, said she was “too devastated by the passing of her dear friend Michael Jackson to issue a statement at this time” but promised one later.

Former Guns N’ Roses guitarist Slash, who performed Jackson’s 1991 hit “Black or White,” said: “Really sad news about Michael. He was talent from on high.”

Entertainer Liza Minnelli told Entertainment Tonight: “He was a kind, genuine and wonderful man. He was also one of the greatest entertainers that ever lived. I loved him very much and I will miss him every remaining day of my life.”

Rudy Clay, mayor of Jackson’s hometown, Gary, Indiana, told the Chicago Tribune: “Wherever a person from Gary, Indiana, went in the world, people would say, ‘That’s Michael Jackson’s home town.’ So Michael helped Gary just by being from Gary.”

Neil Portnow, president and CEO of the Recording Academy, the group that organises the Grammy Awards, said in a statement:

“Rarely has the world received a gift with the magnitude of artistry, talent and vision as Michael Jackson. He was a true musical icon whose identifiable voice, innovative dance moves, stunning musical versatility and sheer star power carried him from childhood to world wide acclaim.

“A 13-time Grammy recipient, Michael's career transcends musical and cultural genres and his contributions will always keep him in our hearts and memories.”

US civil rights activist Al Sharpton, who knew Jackson for decades, said in a statement:

“A friend of Michael's for the last 35 years, I call on people around the world to pray for him and his family in the hour.

“I have known Michael since we were both teens, worked with him, marched for him, hosted him at our House of Justice headquarters in New York, and we joined together to eulogise our mutual idol, James Brown.

“I have known him at his high moments and his low moments and I know he would want us to pray for his family.”

New Yorkers and tourists in the city’s Times Square were shocked at the news of Jackson’s death.

“I don’t know what to say. It’s sad, it’s really, really sad,” said Nicole Smith, an 18-year-old student from Brooklyn, New York, in Times Square. “My mother was a fan. I listened to his music.”

“I’m shocked. I thought someone was lying to me when I first heard it. I was a fan from when he was a little boy and then he got weird,” said Sue Sheider, 51, a teacher from Long Island. – Reuters

Michael Jackson is dead

Michael Jackson’s grieving fans gather at UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles June 25, 2009. – Reuters pic

UPDATED

LOS ANGELES, June 26 – Pop giant Michael Jackson, who took to the stage as a child star and set the world dancing to exuberant rhythms for decades, died on Thursday after being taken ill at his home. He was 50.

Jackson was pronounced dead at about 2.26pm PDT (5.26am Malaysian time) after arriving at a Los Angeles hospital in full cardiac arrest, said Fred Corral of the Los Angeles County Coroner’s office.

The cause of death was not known and an autopsy would likely take place on Friday, he said.

Media set up across the street are seen outside the emergency room dock at UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles. – Reuters pic

Jackson’s sudden death had been reported earlier by US media, which said he was taken ill at his Holmby Hills home and rushed to the hospital by paramedics who found him not breathing when they arrived.

There was no immediate comment from spokespersons for Jackson, who was known as the “King of Pop,” for hit albums that included “Thriller” and “Billie Jean.”

Outside the hospital in Los Angeles about 200 fans and reporters gathered on Thursday, waiting for confirmation of Jackson’s death or condition.

Some fans were crying and hugging each other, and others were climbing atop fences to get a better look at a microphone stand where a news conference was supposed to take place.

He had been scheduled to launch a comeback tour from London next month.

The entertainment website TMZ said that “We’re told when paramedics arrived, Jackson had no pulse and they never got a pulse back.”

Earlier, the Los Angeles Times said the singer had been rushed to a Los Angeles-area hospital by fire department paramedics.

The newspaper said paramedics performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation at the scene before taking him to the UCLA Medical Center hospital.

Known as the “King of Pop,” for hits that included “Thriller” and “Billie Jean,” Jackson’s dramatic, one-gloved stage presence and innovative dance moves were imitated by legions of fans around the world.

He transformed music videos and his lifetime record sales tally is believed to be around 750 million, which, added to the 13 Grammy Awards he received, made him one of the most successful entertainers of all time.

But Jackson’s belief that “I am Peter Pan in my heart”, his preference for the company of children, his friendship with a chimp, his high-pitched voice and numerous plastic surgeries also earned him critics and the nickname “Wacko Jacko.”

Comeback concerts

Jackson, who had lived as a virtual recluse since his acquittal in 2005 on charges of child molestation, had been scheduled to launch a comeback tour from London, starting July 13 and running until March 2010. The singer had been rehearsing in the Los Angeles area for the past two months.

The shows for the 50 London concerts sold out within minutes of going on sale in March.

His lifetime record sales tally is believed to be around 750 million, which, added to the 13 Grammy Awards he received, makes him one of the most successful entertainers of all time.

He lived as a virtual recluse since his acquittal in 2005 on charges of child molestation.

There were concerns about Jackson’s health in recent years but the promoters of the London shows, AEG Live, said in March that Jackson had passed a 4-1/2 hour physical examination with independent doctors.

Michael Jackson gestures during a news conference at the O2 Arena in London March 5, 2009 file photograph. – Reuters pic

Child star to megastar

Jackson was born on Aug. 29, 1958, in Gary, Indiana, the seventh of nine children. Five Jackson boys – Jackie, Tito, Jermaine, Marlon and Michael – first performed together at a talent show when Michael was 6. They walked off with first prize and went on to become a best-selling band, The Jackson Five, and then The Jackson 5.

Jackson made his first solo album in 1972, and released “Thriller” in 1982, which became a smash hit that yielded seven top-10 singles. The album sold 21 million copies in the United States and at least 27 million worldwide.

The next year, he unveiled his signature “moonwalk” dance move while performing “Billie Jean” during an NBC special.

In 1994, Jackson married Elvis Presley’s only child, Lisa Marie, but the marriage ended in divorce in 1996. Jackson married Debbie Rowe the same year and had two children, before splitting in 1999. The couple never lived together.

Jackson has three children named Prince Michael I, Paris Michael and Prince Michael II, known for his brief public appearance when his father held him over the railing of a hotel balcony, causing widespread criticism. – Reuters

‘Angel’ Farrah Fawcett dies

Before: Farrah Fawcett (centre), with co-stars Kate Jackson (right) and Jaclyn Smith in a 'Charlie's Angels' promo shot...and 30 years after, at the 58th Emmy Awards in 2006.

LOS ANGELES, June 26 — Actress Farrah Fawcett, the “Charlie’s Angels” television star whose big smile and feathered blond mane made her one of the reigning sex symbols of the 1970s, died yesterday after a long battle with cancer. She was 62.

Fawcett, first vaulted to stardom by an alluring poster of her in a red swimsuit, was diagnosed with anal cancer in late 2006. It spread to her liver in 2007, proving resistant to numerous medical treatments in Germany and California.

“After a long and brave battle with cancer, our beloved Farrah has passed away,” Fawcett’s long time companion, actor Ryan O’Neal, said in a statement.

“Although this is an extremely difficult time for her family and friends, we take comfort in the beautiful times that we shared with Farrah over the years and the knowledge that her life brought joy to so many people around the world.”

Fawcett’s death in a Los Angeles hospital came just six weeks after the TV broadcast in May of a video diary she made chronicling her battle with cancer and her final months.

Called “Farrah’s Story,” the documentary was effectively a self-penned obituary by the actress, who was bedridden and had lost her famous hair by the time it was shown.

O’Neal said she had wanted to tell her story on her own terms.

Fawcett’s close friend Alana Stewart, ex-wife of rocker Rod Stewart, told Entertainment Tonight after leaving the hospital yesterday; “I just lost my best friend. Her death was very peaceful.”

A file photo dated August 27, 2006, showing Farrah Fawcett at a tribute to Aaron Spelling at the 58th annual Primetime Emmy Awards at the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles. – Reuters pic

Fawcett, born February 2, 1947, in Corpus Christi, Texas, was an art student in college before she began modelling, appearing in shampoo ads.

She started guest-starring on TV in the late 1960s and appeared on the television hit “The Six Million Dollar Man” after marrying the show’s star, Lee Majors, in 1974. The couple divorced in the early 1980s.

Angel culture

Fawcett’s career took off thanks to a poster of her posing flirtatiously with a brilliant smile in a red one-piece bathing suit. It sold millions of copies and led to her being cast in 1976 in “Charlie’s Angels,” an action show about three beautiful, strong women private detectives.

As the tanned and glamorous Jill Munroe – part of a trio that included Jaclyn Smith and Kate Jackson – Fawcett was the hit show’s most talked-about star. She left “Charlie’s Angels” after only one season but lawsuit settlements brought her back to guest-star in subsequent years.

Fawcett’s face appeared on T-shirts, posters and dolls. She came to epitomize the glamorous California lifestyle and inspired a worldwide craze for blown-out, feathered-back hair.

The New York Times once described that hair as “a work of art ... emblematic of women in the first stage of liberation – strong, confident and joyous.”

“Her hair needed its own phone line,” “Charlie’s Angels” co-star Smith recalled later.

In late 2008, Fawcett shaved her own hair when it began falling out because of her cancer treatments.

Ryan O'Neal (right) and Farrah Fawcett pose as they arrive at the premeire of his film,'Malibu's Most Wanted', in Hollywood in this April 10, 2003 file photo. - Reuters pic

Serious roles

While Fawcett’s early career was marked by lightweight roles, the actress sought to play down her sex symbol image in more challenging dramas in the ‘80s.

She earned critical acclaim for her performance as a battered wife in 1984’s “The Burning Bed”, for which she received the first of three Emmy nominations.

The off-Broadway play and subsequent film “Extremities,” in which Fawcett played a woman who takes revenge on a would-be attacker, earned one of her six Golden Globe nominations.

Fawcett posed for Playboy magazine in 1995, the same year she received a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.

She had one son, Redmond, with O’Neal. Redmond O’Neal, now 24, was arrested on several occasions in 2008 and 2009 for heroin and methamphetamine offenses leading to time in jail.

In the last few years, Fawcett appeared frequently on entertainment TV, where she shared details of her battle with cancer.

But she was outraged when news of her deteriorating condition was leaked to tabloid newspapers. A Los Angeles hospital employee was charged in 2008 with stealing and selling Fawcett’s medical records, leading to a new California law imposing tighter controls on medical files and stiffer penalties for privacy breaches. – Reuters

Today is father's day and I am not a father yet but to father's everywhere happy father's day. A song I like and which a friend say describe me, maybe and maybe not!




The lyrics to Ocean Deep
Ocean deep

Love cant you see Im alone
Cant you give this fool a chance
A little love is all I ask - a little kindness
In the night
Please dont leave me behind
No - dont tell me love is blind
A little love is all I ask and that is all

Oh love Ive been searching so long
Ive been searching highnlow
A little love is all I ask - a little sadness
When youre gone
Maybe you need a friend
Only please dont lets pretend
A little love is all I ask and that is all

I wanna spread my wings - but I just cant fly
As a string of pearls and pretty girls go sailing by

Ocean deep - Im so afraid to show my feelings
I have sailed a million ceilings - in my -
Solitary room
Ocean deep - will I ever find a lover
Maybe she has found another
And as I cry myself to sleep
I know this love of mine Ill keep - ocean deep

Love cant you hear when I call
Cant you hear a word I say
A little love is all I ask
A little feeling when we touch
Why am I still alone?
Ive got a heart without a home
A little love is all I ask - and that is all

I wanna spread my wings - but I just cant fly
As a string of pearls and pretty girls go sailing by

Ocean deep - Im so afraid to show my feelings
I have sailed a million ceilings - in my -
Solitary room
Ocean deep - will I ever find a lover
Maybe she has found another
And as I cry myself to sleep
I know this love of mine Ill keep - ocean deep

Im so lonely lonely lonely...
Maybe..

Last week in one of the religious talk show on islam shown on the telly, they were talking about circumcision. It was interesting to note. It comes to mind the idea I have about belief and faith. To the uninitiated circumcision according to Malay muslim is obligatory for Men for woman it is encourage. That is a fallacy for only certain school of thoughts especially Shafie believe so but Hanafi says otherwise. So what is important is cleanliness not cutting of the foreskin or mutilated the clitoris!!! Ahh but that is life, a Malay muslim still can't figure his right in questioning his basic belief tells a lot about the development of their mind. But again the hold of the conservative in shaping the minds of Muslim everywhere is amazing and all intrusive.

Let's go to the debate of covering of hair for the Muslimah. Most in fact 99% of Muslim believe the covering of hair is mandatory in fact they cite surah 33:59 of the Quran to support their commandment. Although the surah is meant for Muhammad's wives and daughters were never fully explain. Yet if you go at another surah at 24:60 a verse meant for the elderly women it gave them permission to put aside their outer garment as long as it is modest. And if you go to another surah 7:14 the general rule is basically to be modest and cover your adornment.

But when Proffesor Hathout say on TV that they were some theologians who believe that covering of the hair is not mandatory and that majority agrees to it(the covering of hair) and which he also agrees leave me to wonder. One, how come elderly woman is given permission not cover their hair base on the above surah and since now days with the advent of Science people are doing it until the 70's I wonder whether what is important is to be modest. Look I am thinking aloud here and I wonder why there is some theologians say you don't need to cover your hair. They base it on the hadiths narrated by Aisha that the prophet while still ada air sembahyang(after ablution) kiss her hair and proceed to pray. To the theologians the hair is not part of the skin thus it did not cancel the air sembahyang thus it is not an aurat and therefore if that is the case the muslimah or muslim woman need not cover their hair. I also found out that if you have slaves( yes muslim people in the olden days have slaves in fact they were the one trading in human in Africa that sold the africans to the whites.) the women need not cover the hair although modesty is required! Does this mean the Muslims regard the humans as subspecies for this were the edict then. Funny it is not found now, you have to dig deeper for it.

As for me I prefer a Muslimah to be modest and if you want to cover your hair I would not stop you but please do so properly and not wear a short sleeve T shirt or one I can see all the way to the bra straps. I love to see beautiful hair and i don't see a problem displaying it but praying or when you are communicating with God follow the rules! I can't find the old rules in the net yet but when I do I will republish it here. I found all this in the net but I am continuously searching so here is the traditional view

The word translated here as veils is khumur, plural of khimaar. According to scholars, the word khimaar has no other meaning than a type of cloth which covers the head. Muslim scholars point out that men's turbans are sometimes called khimaar as well.

Women during the time of Muhammad did wear the khimaar, but would wear it tied behind so their neck and upper chest were visible. This verse is therefore an order that the khimaar now be drawn over the chest, so that the neck and chest were not bare.

According to most scholars, the khimaar is obligatory for Muslim women.

Cast their outer garments over their persons

O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft- Forgiving, Most Merciful.33:59

Elderly women

The rules are relaxed for elderly women:

Such elderly women as are past the prospect of marriage - there is no blame on them if they lay aside their (outer) garments, provided they make not a wanton display of their beauty: but it is best for them to be modest: and Allah is One Who sees and knows all things.24:60

General rules

The Qur'an gives these general rules, which may help in understanding how to interpret dress and other rules in modern times.

O ye Children of Adam! We have bestowed raiment upon you to cover your shame, as well as to be an adornment to you. But the raiment of righteousness,- that is the best. Such are among the Signs of Allah, that they may receive admonition!7:26

The Prophet's family

Muslims in their first century at first were relaxed about female dress. When the son of a prominent companion of the Prophet asked his wife Aisha bint Talha to veil her face, she answered, "Since the Almighty hath put on me the stamp of beauty, it is my wish that the public should view the beauty and thereby recognized His grace unto them. On no account, therefore, will I veil myself."Women in the Muslim World, ed. Lynn Reese, 1998

As Islam reached other lands, regional practices, including the covering of the faces of women, were adopted by the early Muslims. Yet it was only in the second Islamic century that the face veil became common, first used among the powerful and rich as a status symbol.

Awrah

The Arabic word awrah refers to the parts of the body which must be covered with clothing. Awrah is any part of the body, for both men and women, which may not be visible to the public. Awrah is interpreted differently depending upon the sex of the company one is in.

Women

Rules for women are more complicated. There are a number of scenarios for women:

• In front of unrelated men (Muslim or non-Muslim), women must cover everything except the hands and face

• In front of close male relatives, awrah is the navel to the knee and the stomach and the back

• In front of other Muslim females, awrah is from the navel down to, and including, the knees

• Awrah in front of non-Muslim women is a point of debate:

  • Some scholars say that women should cover all but the hands and face. This is to prevent non-Muslim women (who may not understand the rules regarding hijab) from describing the appearance of the hijab wearer to other men

  • Other scholars say that if a non-Muslim woman can be trusted not to describe a woman's appearance to other men, then she may reveal as much as she would in front of another Muslim woman in her presence.

The Hanafi school of thought, which is followed by most Muslims in the world, agree that the feet are not part of the awrah and therefore may be revealed.

Amongst other schools of thought a common opinion is that everything apart from a woman's face and hands is awrah. Scholars holding this opinion use this hadith to justify it:

Narrated Aisha (the Prophet's wife): Asma, daughter of Abu Bakr, entered upon the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) wearing thin clothes. The Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) turned his attention from her. He said: 'O Asma, when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this, and he pointed to her face and hands.Abu Dawud, Book 32, Number 4092

N.B. 1: Some Muslims, notably Shias, do not recognise Hadith as an authoritative source.

N.B. 2: This particular hadith is regarded as 'weak' (i.e. not reliably attributed) by some scholars, including the hadith's collector, Abu Dawud

Hijab

A response to “The dehijabization phenomenon”

By Rifk Ebeid, May 12, 2009

---

As someone who chose to “dehijab,” I respect all Muslim women regardless of whether they choose to wear hijab, not to wear it, or to stop wearing it. What is unacceptable, however, is Muslims being judgmental toward those who simply disagree with them.

---

Darah Rateb’s, “The dehijabization phenomenon,” addresses a contentious issue facing the Muslim community today. The hijab debate tends to generate heated discussion among Muslims, but unfortunately hits a dead-end when Muslim women express their belief that hijab is not obligatory. Rateb calls these women “just as problematic” as preachers who emphasize hijab over more important duties and responsibilities.

Rateb opens her piece by thoughtfully describing the various reasons women “dehijab” and points a critical eye towards the hijab obsession that has overshadowed discussion of more important duties and responsibilities of Muslims. Her final analysis, however, addressing “women who remove the headscarf because they choose to interpret the Islamic tradition in their own way without training,” diminishes the strength of her article significantly. The initial reasons addressed were implicitly portrayed as acceptable, or more tolerable, reasons for Muslim women taking off hijab. The piece then took a sharp turn as Rateb accused women who do not believe hijab is obligatory of being arrogant: “For someone who has not dedicated their life to the study of Islam to declare that they have the same ability to interpret the Qur’an as the erstwhile amateur, comes across to me as incredibly arrogant, even while they may not realize their obvious arrogance.”

As a Muslim woman who chose to stop wearing hijab out of a belief that it is not obligatory, I felt it was important to express my view on this issue rather than to allow someone else to speak [incorrectly] on my behalf.

I grew up in a very strict Muslim community in Florida where I was one of a few other Muslim girls who did not wear hijab. I always grew up thinking that wearing hijab was obligatory and hoped to wear it when I felt psychologically ready, even though my mother did not wear hijab – and also does not believe it is obligatory. During Ramadan of my last year of undergrad, I felt ready to don the hijab. I remember making a lot of dua (supplication) for Allah to make it easy on me and to help me feel comfortable in it, and subhan’Allah, my prayers were answered.

Although I never grew up questioning hijab, the arguments against it began to loom in my head very soon after I began wearing it. I initially brushed it off and told myself it was just a test from Allah. I realized how serious of a dilemma it was for me, however, when I stopped knowing how to answer non-Muslims when they asked me why Muslim women wear hijab. I did not have an answer anymore because I, myself, was no longer convinced. I honestly cannot pinpoint exactly what made me lose my conviction, but I believe it was primarily based in my being forced to explain why hijab was obligatory – and realizing my arguments were not even convincing to myself.

Wearing hijab was truly a life-changing experience and brought me into a realm I was completely unaware of before. While this sounds dramatic, it really is something one cannot and will not understand until one does it. Thus, as with any life-changing experience, you begin to question and think about issues you could not have considered or even thought of unless you made that change. The most significant issue for me was the fact that I realized the only reason I was keeping it on was out of fear of what my community would say, and not out of fear of Allah. I began to resent everything that came with hijab. A good friend of mine summarized the dilemma beautifully when she said, “I can see how my faith has suffered as a result of my obsession with my hijab to the detriment of my spiritual health.” When I began to feel like hijab was pushing me further from Allah, rather than bringing me closer, that was when I began to explore beyond my blind belief in others' statements that “it is a command from Allah.”

This juncture in my story is usually where a discussion on hijab turns to the tumultuous path less taken. It appears as though many Muslims get very defensive when they face other Muslims who question their socially acquired beliefs. This is not to say that Muslim women only wear hijab due to socially acquired beliefs. It is to say that from my own personal experience, although I initially wore hijab out of what I thought was conviction, I later realized that the conviction I developed was, in fact, superficial and based subconsciously on what was ingrained in me from a young age. Many Muslim women who begin to question hijab face this dilemma, even if they still believe it is obligatory. It is a natural progression in one’s spiritual growth to look deeper into why we believe what we believe.

Rateb incorrectly assumes that Muslim women who do not believe hijab is obligatory think they “have the same ability to interpret the Qur’an” as those scholars who have dedicated their life to the study of Islam. Contrary to Rateb’s accusation, Muslim women who take off hijab out of a belief that it is not obligatory each have their own personal story that involves an arduous and emotional thought process that made them reach the difficult decision to take off hijab. Additionally, what these Muslim women do believe is that they have the right to question the logic and argument of scholars and to dig deeper and ask questions in response to their answers. If we do not find these answers satisfactory – if they do not put us at ease and make sense to us – then we have the right to disagree.

One of the biggest problems in the Muslim community is that the community often gives holy deference to scholarly interpretations. While I highly respect scholars’ knowledge of Islam, I do not have to agree with their interpretations. This is not arrogant – it is natural. That is why we have four schools of jurisprudence; why the companions of the Prophet often disagreed with one another; and why Islamic history is rife with thinkers who all had differing opinions on even more important issues such as aqeedah (foundation of belief).

Additionally, there is significant importance and wisdom in the fact that the Qur’an was sent down to the masses – to the literate and illiterate alike. At that time the masses had the Prophet to ask questions and receive guidance. This does not translate, however, into today’s scholarly interpretations being anywhere near equivalent to the finality of the Prophet’s guidance. If one believes that a scholar’s explanation and interpretation does not make sense to them, then they should be free to disagree. They should not be accused of being arrogant.

After researching the issue, reading the arguments for hijab, and talking to friends who strongly support hijab, I made the personal decision that it was not something I believed was obligatory. Thus, after four years, I chose to “dehijab.” Wearing hijab for those four years served both positive and negative functions in my life, and it helped me grow immensely as an individual and as a Muslim. While I do not believe hijab, primarily covering of the hair, is obligatory, I do still believe in dressing and acting modestly (“modesty” is a subjective concept, but to each their own).

It is not important or beneficial to go into the reasons why I believe hijab is not obligatory because I am not writing this to convince anyone to adopt my viewpoint. I respect all Muslim women regardless of whether they choose to wear hijab, not to wear it, or to stop wearing it. What is unacceptable, however, is Muslims being judgmental toward those who simply disagree with them. It is unacceptable to accuse those with minority beliefs of being afflicted with very serious diseases of the heart. While it is critical to discuss issues of importance and to argue and learn from one another, launching ad hominem attacks does not enhance the discussion or bolster one’s arguments in any way. The Prophet is narrated to have said that anyone in whose heart there is a mustard seed of arrogance will not enter Heaven. Keeping this in mind, it would be wise for all of us in the Muslim community to be conscious of the gravity of our words, judgments, and accusations.

Rifk Ebeid is a 25 year old Palestinian-American. She has a Master of Arts in Human Rights Studies from Columbia University and is expected to receive her Juris Doctorate degree from George Mason University School of Law in May 2009.

Rulings regarding wearing Hijab and Niqab

http://www.islamonline.net

We would like to highlight that hijab is the Muslim woman's proper dress, which Allah Almighty has ordered her to wear when he said what means: *{And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed.}* (An-Nur 24:31)

This verse shows clearly that Allah has obliged women to wear hijab. But what is exactly meant by hijab?

Hijab is the proper Islamic dress code, which is primarily intended to safeguard the modesty, dignity and honor of men and women. By wearing Hijab, women protect themselves from any lustful gaze or act that may expose them to temptation or harassment of any kind. On the other hand, it protects men from indulgence in vices and unlawful acts.

Hijab does not only refer to head cover, but to the whole dressing of a woman. This means that there are certain requirements for a woman's dress to be Islamic: It must cover the whole body.

It must not be tight or transparent.

It must not delineate the parts of the body, especially those parts that are sexually attractive.

It must not be a dress that is usually worn by men. Hence, a Muslim woman is permitted to wear whatever she likes as long as her dress has all the legal requirements of a woman's Islamic dress code, and it covers the `awrah (sensitive parts of the body that a woman must cover in front of non-mahrams). This is agreed upon by all scholars and jurists.

However, scholars differ concerning the limits of a woman's `awrah, depending on different interpretations of the verse that is mentioned above, and this entails a disagreement among scholars concerning the ruling of niqab (covering the face and hands); whether it is obligatory or not. The majority of Muslim scholars, including the four schools of fiqh, maintain that niqab is not obligatory. They base their view on many evidence that are discussed below in details. Only some of the Hanbali scholars see that niqab is obligatory.

Here, I'd like to cite for you the different opinions as explained by Sheikh Ahmad Kutty, a senior lecturer and an Islamic scholar at the Islamic Institute of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, who states:

“Allah Almighty says what means:

*{And say to the believing women to lower their gazes and guard their chastity, and let them not display of their charm - except what is apparent.}* (An-Nur 24:31)

Commenting on the phrase: *{what is apparent}* Ibn `Abbas, the famous Companion and the Qur’an exegete, said: “It means face and hands.” In other words, according to Ibn `Abbas, a woman must cover all her body except her face and hands while in the presence of men who are not related to her directly. The list of those in whose presence she needs not cover is clearly outlined in Surat An-Nur 24: 31.

The majority of imams - including those of the four schools, as well as others - share the above interpretation of Ibn `Abbas, and thus hold the opinion that a woman is not obliged to cover her face and hands.

However, a group of scholars, the majority of whom belong to the Hanbalite Juristic School, teach that a woman must cover her face and hands as well. In support of their position they invoke a tradition attributed to the Prophet, peace and blessings be on him, stating: “Woman is all `awrah”, and hence as such, needs to completely be covered up. They also reason by saying that the most attractive parts of a woman’s body capable of enticing men are her face and hands.

The aforementioned position of the majority on this issue seems to be more consistent with the general understanding and evidences of the Qur’an and Sunnah than of those who advocate covering the face and hands as well. There are several proofs which point to this conclusion:

Firstly, the verse quoted above from the Qur’an seems to presume that the women it addresses are not wholly covered, i.e. face and hands. Otherwise, there is no sense in ordering both genders to lower their gazes.

Secondly, it is a general consensus among scholars that a woman is not required to cover her face and hands while performing salah (ritual prayers). If these were deemed to be `awrah, it would certainly have been necessary to cover them.

Thirdly, a woman is required to bare her face while she is in a state of ihram (consecration during Hajj and `Umrah). This again confirms what we said earlier.

Moreover, the evidences in the sources – the Qur’an and the Sunnah - are overwhelming in showing that the hijab, as prescribed by Islam, was not meant to segregate women or shut them out of the social involvement and participation in the affairs of the Muslim community. This is since the participation of Muslim women - at all levels of Islamic life - is fully documented beyond a shadow of doubt in the sources of Shari`ah. Such active participation as described in the sources is conceivable only if we assume that women were not wholly covered from head to toe.

In light of the above, we conclude: a Muslim woman is required to cover all her body except her face and hands, according to the majority of scholars belonging to all schools. Covering the head, however, is not at all a disputed issue among them - they all agree that this is a necessary part of hijab.”

From Sheikh Kutty'swords, we derive that there is no controversy regarding covering the whole body except for the face and hands. The controversy occurs in respect of covering the face and hands. The majority of scholars say it is not obligatory, while few others maintain it is obligatory. This, in turn, requires that a woman must abide by the agreed ruling which stipulates that a woman must cover her whole body except the face and hands.

As for the controversial part of the issue, we should think of it as a sign of Allah's mercy that He left some things open, so that there will be no hardship for people, and that they can make use of such things according to their own benefit. For example, if a woman is so beautiful to the extent that she attracts men's attention and her beauty tempts them, she would cover her face, as an aspect of preventing harm, even if it is agreed that niqab is not obligatory. On the other hand, some women may have some breathing or skin problems that they do not tolerate wearing face cover. Here, we realize that the difference of opinion in relation to niqab is really an aspect of Allah's mercy.

Finally, I'd like to stress that differences among scholars are only in minor and secondary things, and never in the fundamentals of faith. This is in fact an aspect of God’s mercy, as the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him said:

“Allah has prescribed certain obligations for you, so do not neglect them; He has defined certain limits, so do not transgress them; He has prohibited certain things, so do not do them; and He has kept silent concerning other things, out of mercy for you and not because of forgetfulness, so do not ask questions concerning them.” (Reported by ad-Darqutni.)