SingapuraKini: May 11, 2009

Monday, May 11, 2009

Upfront: with Dr. Gwee Li Sui

Upfront: with Dr. Gwee Li Sui

Foreword
Dr Gwee Li Sui is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of English Language and Literature, National University of Singapore (NUS). He has been teaching a wide array of courses including introductory world literature, 18th-century fiction, poetry and criticism in NUS for the last 6 years. His current research interest includes 17th and 18th century literature, British and German Romanticism, Modern German literature, Singaporean literature, and last but not least, Reformation and Modern Theology.

Dr Gwee came into prominence at the height of the AWARE saga when his written notes on the topic were widely publicized. In his writings, he provided from the Christian perspective an opposition voice to the religious-motivated infiltration of AWARE by a group of like-minded individuals from the Church of Our Saviour. The Kent Ridge Common is indeed honored to feature an email interview with Dr Gwee.

We sought his thoughts on the pertinent issues surrounding the AWARE saga, asking the questions that you the readers have wanted to ask all along

KRC: Do you agree that Christians today have to support liberal viewpoints actively or be castigated? If it does happen, do you think that it is natural for democratic societies to cause different groups to attempt to moderate to centrist views? How can secularists and the religious harmonise with each other?

Dr. Gwee: This question involves a central misconception I want to correct here. Respecting the space for civility among people with different worldviews and lifestyles does not need to result in the erosion of conservative religious values. Its establishment may require everyone to observe clear rules of engagement, but it does not oblige a person to compromise his or her own set of essential beliefs. This should be made clear from the start. There has always been good historical and theological basis to state that pluralism and the cultures of, say, Christianity and Islam are not at odds.

aware2 What I want therefore to get us to see is that the fear of conformity itself is a dangerous subtler way of “moderating to a centre”. It compels people to band together in self-elected groups and forgo what is unique in their own value systems for a more primitive vision of exclusiveness. In this vision, the world becomes too neatly organised in binary terms (good/evil, us/them), and then a whole range of features familiar in the history of politics reappear. There is nothing new about crusades, divine mandates, hidden demons, enemies, betrayers, and so on. Their simplicity conversely explains why so many forms of fundamentalist expressions feel and sound alike.

Allowing the space for others to believe differently is thus not just something one should welcome: it also brings with it benefits to one’s own belief system. For example, if I lived in a religiously homogeneous community, what would I have learnt about my fear of difference and my need to defeat fear with love? Also consider how a pluralistic space can enable me to have faith more radically or, rather, more purely. If religion is the business of one’s soul, what secularism allows is the work of clarity to be pursued individually from within and not by a convenient definition against something or someone else. One becomes a more inwardly involved and more focused believer.

KRC: There has been talk of encouraging Miss Josie Lau’s group to start their organisation to advance their own interests. Assuming that they start a women’s organisation with a similar philosophy as that of their church, the Church of Our Saviour, how do you think such an organisation will fare?

Dr. Gwee: I have no insider’s knowledge into the affairs of AWARE or the Church of Our Saviour and can only make general guesses here. I am not sure if Miss Lau and friends will go on to form their own advocacy group, but it will be very telling if they don’t. A failure will play into the persistent suspicion that their goal has been the neutralisation of an organisation they deem to have liberal leanings all along. In other words, there might be no real affirmative content to the takeover: the team could have less desire to understand the range of issues confronting diverse women than to push a myopic, value-laden, and vengeful focus. If this is true, the irony shouldn’t be lost that a covert sabotage of society is what its supporters continue to charge AWARE of.

Miss Lau’s team is no doubt thrown into a terrible dilemma now. It has a moral obligation to follow through what it has claimed to be a noble collective wish to serve women and their families. But to set up a faith-based organisation for women, new questions will emerge. Given its highly publicised origin, the group may end up attracting people who already favour the same set of values that the team holds. So how wide-reaching such a body can be is as much a concern as what it will do on a day-to-day basis. Will it take up the work of counselling any woman in need, seeking redress for others, and affirming broad-based women’s rights, what has made AWARE respectable? Or will it focus more on mounting regular assaults on what it identifies as liberal incursions into mainstream society, playing a kind of unimaginative nemesis of AWARE? In other words, will it assume a real constructive role or a mere reactionary one?

KRC: Do you think this AWARE episode would set a precedent for churches or Christian groups to adopt an anti-homosexuality stand? Should a Singapore church even adopt an anti-homosexuality agenda like their counterparts in the US? Why?

Dr. Gwee: I hope that this AWARE episode will get each church or Christian group to consider how it feels about homosexuals and whether it wants to be openly exclusive, actively inclusive, or quietly inclusive. Being quietly exclusive is the only option I do not see as helpful enough to be encouraged. To be sure, positions can vary further: the conflation of Christianity with anti-homosexuality is not as universal as particular voices in this saga have made it out to appear. It is nonetheless true that many believers in Singapore consider homosexuality more a matter of choice even when there are gay Christians and at least one gay church here. How each Christian decides to engage this small community is another open issue.

Indeed, homosexuality – and a range of issues such as abortion, surrogacy, and euthanasia – make the present time an exciting one for Christians in Singapore. We may be redrawing the lines of Christian disagreement, and these are real despite the needless discomfort some have with the fact. Internal differences have been as old as the Christian Church, and they manifest themselves in historical moments from the early Councils to events tied to the Reformation and the current diversity of Christian struggles across the world. We have to aim to reclaim such a space for divergence as Christianity’s heritage and strength, what can contain different takes on the way to practise God’s unconditional love. The abstract idea of Church itself was this early neutral all-inclusive space in which Christians could affirm both their unity and their diversity.

US influence on our churches is definitely stronger now than it has ever been at any point in Singapore’s history. It is therefore important that believers be conscious of this import in the way they worship, think, and behave and be encouraged to revisit Church history with an open mind. What cannot be helpful is a triumphalist attitude that treats the most recent Christian trends as also the most positive and privileged. It is rather painful to hear some believers talk about the events involving AWARE and their aftermath as being a battle between “traditional” Christianity and “postmodern” society. This idea that what we see as dominant in Church life today has been around for a long time needs to be examined critically. Even the current obsession with the social implications of homosexuality has a short history here.

KRC: The AWARE issue has seen a spike in membership. Do you think that these new members were there for the hype or will they be committed to the long-term future of AWARE?

Dr. Gwee: This question reminds me of another one which Miss Lau’s team used as a means to legitimise its spectacular power grab. It asserted that AWARE under the Old Guard deserved what it got since it was slack enough to have allowed its own members to become apathetic and not show up at the AGM. This was an brazenly poor excuse: just because my family members fail to appear for reunion dinner doesn’t make it right for a neighbour to kick me out of my own home. So, when, by the same measure, others help me to reclaim my space from these “trespassers”, the gesture must be read in a very particular light.

The main issue should be cast not in the form of a question but as evidence of hope; it shouldn’t keep us dithering on whether people came just out of the hype but should get us to celebrate how they did come. These individuals have chosen to participate in what many have felt to hold their personal sense of society at ransom. If the new members then go on to be involved in a number of AWARE’s activities, it can only spell good for the organisation on the whole. But, even if they don’t, my respect still goes out to them for having taken the time, money, and effort to do what mattered when it mattered. They rightly refused to let their own passivity weigh on their conscience should things in Singapore make a turn for the worse as a result.

KRC: Much criticisms have been directed at the way audiences heckled Miss Josie Lau’s team, i.e. the booing and catcalls. What would this episode spell for the chances of conflict resolution between Miss Lau’s team and the rest of the AWARE membership?

Dr. Gwee: Here is one irony that never fails to bother me when mostly Christian critics still complain about Miss Lau’s team being treated badly at the EGM. They are expecting an unorganised crowd of individuals from all walks of life to behave with the kind of decency denied to others by a small Christian team while in office. The better call would have been to ask each person to examine his or her own conduct from the perspective of another from a different camp. In any case, I am quite sure that there has been a lot of ground-level technicalities that didn’t become common knowledge, and these could explain the day’s rowdiness more precisely.

But I want to read all this in yet another light: what we have seen may effectively be two modes of civil behaviour whose conflict affects the way we can make objective sense of the EGM. From this perspective, both parties have been equally polite and rude but not on the same terms. The regimental quietness of one side reflected its own values of solidarity, discipline, respect for real and perceived leaders, peaceful conduct, verbal politeness, and all that. The nature of civil engagement, however, is messy by nature: it is full of open disagreements, rhetoric, wit, claims to good sense, and little triumphs. Its spirit of civility lies not in outward form but in a respect for another to be vocal and open and to challenge.

These essentially cultural differences point to the difficult task of reconciliation ahead. The central qualities all parties should have are a willingness to sit at the same table and talk and a transparency of procedures. In this respect, Miss Lau’s team is still found wanting: it should show all its cards and engage in open discussion without fear of ideological “contamination” or “unholy” compromise. But as long as AWARE keeps these individuals informed and involved, there is a lot of hope in the matter yet. Remember: only extend the fact that roughly a third has voted in favour of the now-deposed team, and you will see that diversity is exactly what the newest ex-co has inherited. Whether it can now take the hard walk of inclusiveness it preaches remains to be seen and certainly to be wished for by all of us.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.303

A True Cognitive Cultural History of Singapore, and the present need for foreign talent – in brief

I really don’t understand Singaporeans’ surprise or incredulity in the face of increased foreign workers coming in to take their jobs. Sherlock Holmes once said that a true logician will be able to look at a drop of water and from there, extrapolate the existence of the ocean even if s/he had never know of its existence. An exaggeration it may be to our currently and relatively underdeveloped minds, but the principle is sound.

As I’ve said to sim and v, amongst others, before, any government has 2 choices, one, keep the people perspectivally and intellectually docile so that they can reign in perpetuity whilst maintaining an academic elite to produce the ideas (i.e. China is a quintessential case in point), or don’t impose intellectual constraints on the people and risk political longevity. Apathy has to become a part of the culture for this to succeed. And with apathy, perspectival docility, near-sighted pragmatism, penchant for the familiar, intellectual sloth, decline in generic curiosity, etc, are both effects and causes. Now how would such a people fare in globalised economics. I wonder how many people realise that there is a cultural cause, that is politically-induced, that led to India producing IT professionals amongst others whilst China was producing factory workers. In the case of Singapore, an intellectually docile people would be fine for the manufacturing phase of its development, but not when it comes to the demands of global intellectual economy. That is when the people will be told to seek their fortunes abroad, price themselves competitively, and also see an influx of the ‘foreign talent’ to circumvent the docility of the locals – which was constructed to minimize the kind of empathy that might threaten political longevity.

The Progressives vs The Traditionals - the 2 races of Singapore Past

Most of the ‘young-uns’ these days don’t know that Singapore was extremely different in the 70s and 80s. The intellectual economy was yet to be ‘centralised’ back then (i.e. China centralised it 2000 years ago and kept the masses of its inhabitants numb and relatively perspectivally and intellectually docile thereafter – which also explains why it is the longest running state in recorded human history.). In fact, the intellectual economy was being increasingly run by the Christian/Catholic/English-speaking sector. It is not because of ‘Jesus Saves!’ that this was the case. It was simply because there was more cultural collusion amongst different ‘races’ in church as opposed to other faiths which saw people of a singular ethnic group practicing a singular and historical religion. So in church, we had the cultural and perspectival inter-breeding of Eurasians, Chinese and Indians. 3 cultural perspectives were coming together – with the most vibrant being the Indians and Eurasians…with the Eurasians bringing in the ‘vibrant’ and ‘western’ component, and the Indians bringing in the intellectual and perspectival side of things. The Chinese in the aforementioned milieu benefitted greatly from this. Thus, it was not surprising that significant opposition in Singapore began to come from the Catholic quarter.

Back then, these people disavowed much association with their ‘race’ and generally lacked fluency in their ‘mother-tongues’. Thus, they were more open to other ideas as they were not insecurely biased toward their ‘own race and culture’ simply because they looked like Chinese, Malays or Indians. For myself, and as a consequence, I grew up without a conception of race. I only knew that there were intelligent and vibrant people, and that there were people who weren’t. I also realised in primary school that the top classes were mainly populated by English-speakers, who, whilst being adept in their 2nd languages, spoke English most of the time. At that time, more and more people began to conform to the perspectival and linguistic standards of this sector of society. Inter-ethnic mixing was also on the rise. People began to shy away from speaking their ‘mother-tongues’ as it denoted a penchant for the familiar and hence, ‘backward’. People were becoming culturally and perspectivally vibrant and had an intelligent opinion on many things.

‘Singlish’ (local style English) then, was also a mix between English, Malay and Mandarin/Hokkien as opposed to the present where it is generally a mixture of only Chinese and English. (I believe that the colloquial style of English indicated the degree of cultural integration) In fact, we now have 3 variants of Singlish as opposed to the past. The Chinese have a ‘Chinglish’ that comprises mainly Chinese and English; the Malays have a ‘Malglish’ that comprises Malay and English; and the Indians, an ‘Indglish’ that comprises Tamil and English. This is ‘integration’ taken a paradoxical wrong turn mate.

I wonder how many of the 4 or 5 million in this country, including its ‘great’ intellectuals, and so-called oppositional voices, realise this. If you didn't then you're as much a part of the problem that you're attempting to address. It indicates the existence of a perspectival deficiency that is a product of socialisation within this milieu. It will certainly have a host of other negative effects on your analyses, understanding and perceptions in a host of other situations. Ever tried to put a fire out with a flame? Exorcise thyself. As I've always said, it's easier to suggest a solution than to not be a part of the problem. That's the guideline I've always applied on myself. The best I can hope for is to decrease my culpability so that my problem-identification and solutions will be more accurate. The question, 'What's wrong with the world' must always be accompanied with, 'what's wrong with me'. Both have to be asked and incrementally addressed and resolved simultaneously. It is a never-ending quest, but has to be undertaken by those whom are truly interested in changing the world for the better. If not, it is simply self-indulgent vanity.

Cultural Clampdown Singapore

Anyway,

It was then (80s onwards) that a cultural clampdown began to occur in singapore. Street signs were named in ‘hanyu pinyin’ terms (romanised Chinese words); a potential Indian Prime Minister was passed over for a Chinese one; the ‘speak mandarin it’s cool’ or ‘speak mandarin it’s an advantage’ campaigns picked up pace; the SAP (Special Assistance Plan) schools which provided advanced education for mainly Chinese students finally began to come to fruition and began to produce acculturalised Chinese to take over the economy; there was increasing critique in the newspapers of ‘western values’ vs ‘asian values’ with increasing emphasis on Confucian/Chinese values thereafter; being different was increasingly frowned upon with police checks on people dressed differently; impromptu behavior was checked on by banning breakdancing in public even if it was in the void deck of flats in the 80s (I remember my being surrounded by 3 policemen whilst I was in the midst of a ‘backspin’ on a cardboard under my block one afternoon; separate cultural channels were created as opposed to the singular channel broadcasting the productions of different cultural productions – with the Indians not getting a channel until recently…Indians previously shared a channel with arts and cartoons; the initiation of a ‘mother-tongue’ policy that forbade the various ethnic groups from studying each other’s languages as a 2nd language in schools (my brother and sister, before this, studied Malay, whilst I studied Mandarin); the Chinese were spoken of by the government as ‘pragmatic and hardworking’; Chinese culture began to be celebrated in central locations whilst the celebration of other cultures were left to old ethnic enclaves such as Geylang (for the Malays) and ‘Serangoon Road (for the Indians); grander celebrations were promoted for other Chinese festivities (where I live, there are celebrations planned by the Resident Committee for Chinese New Year and the Mid-autumn Lantern festival but none for the Indian and Malay festivals); there was a major clampdown on the oppositional elements in the Catholic quarter; the ‘Zoo’ radio of Indonesia that played different types of music was blocked in favour of the local radio station that generally played only one type of music; English speaking dramas began to mainly comprise the Chinese as opposed to ‘others’, or with ‘others’ being accorded stereotypical roles that did not represent their true social characters, i.e. ‘serves you right’; public advertisements, and advertisements by corporations, and government-linked corporations only showed one ethnic group; cultural difference in school was eradicated for the stated purpose of ‘integration’ whilst only one culture and language of one ethnic group was promoted in the media and in the public…..

The above are some of the ways that singapore took the monocultural route. We could say that Singapore experienced what China did in 221 b.c. when ‘chinese’ was associated with the ‘one way’ system of Qin Shih Huang Ti as opposed to the ‘many ways’ system of the Chou era. In other words, from the late 80s onwards, Singapore, perspectivally-speaking, moved from the Chou era to the Qin era; or the Indian era to the post-Chou era; or the democratic era to the ‘Asian democratic’ era. Quite an amusing way to look at it isn’t it.

The consequence

In a cockleshell, Singapore moved to a monocultural era which can be likened to a child reared to only appreciate one type of food, friends, environment, culture, perspective, dress-style, thought, language, etc.

What do you think that is going to do to the child’s perspectival development. How do you think such a child is going to contend with novelty. Such a child is always going to go back to the familiar if given the chance. Such a child is going to reflexively discount anything new or different. Such a child is going to be more slow in processing new information. Such a child is not going to be able to sense things from different angles. But such a child will certainly not be a threat to the political longevity of any party. Thus, for instance, the longevity of the nation-state of China. Way before the west came up with the idea of the nation-state in perspectival form, China already was. The government does not have to maintain it. The people have been diminished to not want anything out of the familiar. Thus, China might always be as it always was.

Well, as I’ve always said, when we take the nation as one family, we can easily tell what’s going to happen in all situations given the dominance of this child and the methods used to rear it – what I call cognitive cultural analysis. That is why dear Singaporeans, singapore now needs ‘foreign talent’. That is why your jobs can’t be protected. The only way to protect yourself from ‘foreign talent’ is to make the methods by which talent is produced not foreign to your culture simply because it is someone else’s culture. But for that, the people must truly me the mistress and master of the political realm. When you abdicate this to the few, your complaints thereafter come across as the annoying whining of an evicted poodle. You have confused your progress in the past for the validity of a ‘one way system’. But you forget, the methods for success varies with the degree of success in varying arenas. What is a boon in one, is a disadvantage in another. It takes far-sighted pragmatism to realise this I’m afraid. It doesn’t take much intellect to advance your economic situation at the manufacturing phase, but the unfettered development of your intellect during this phase will enable you to occupy the forefront of development in the relatively intellectual and creative phase thereafter. If not, being ‘copycats’ is the best you can be.

‘Foreign talent’ is such an innocuous sounding word isn’t it. But, essentially, it refers to people who, being brought up under different cultural conditions, will be able to do things which people of other cultural conditions will necessarily require time to do given the deficiencies they will embody given their different cultural milieux. And people from the most variable cultures are generally the most equipped to be ready come what may, and do well when it does. Most people are not going to accept this as it threatens the identity upon which they base their sense of self-efficacy on – which is why I threw aside my ‘Indian’ identity when I was 18 in favour of basing my personal culture on the best elements of all cultures. But, when we base our sense of self-efficacy on nothing else but the ability to take on cultural elements of the verifiably self-efficacious of other cultures, that is when we are going to be more than we can otherwise imagine to be.

Singapore took a wrong-turn from the 80s onwards. Without critical and unbiased cultural introspection, we are going to be complaining more about its effects instead of doing something about the foundations upon which it is based, and upon which we base our present sense of self-efficacy. If it is not for present apathy and self-absorption, we will find that we will have little to complain incessantly about in the future. Ask yourselves what forms of apathy in the past has led to your present predicament. And then ask yourselves what forms of apathy you are exhibiting in the present. Both inquisitorial ventures will go far in addressing the conditions upon which your present and future complaints would be based. If not, it will cease to be an intelligent discussion, and just simply annoying.

Think about it.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28813.1

NMP Dr Thio Li-ann on her mother Dr Thio Su Mien

Mother's Day Tributes

I'm proud of her courage

NMP Dr Thio Li-ann on her mother Dr Thio Su Mien

May 11, 2009

AT THE height of the AWARE furore, my mother asked whether she had disgraced me by her infamy.

THEN: Dr Thio Su Mien, 32, and daughter Li-ann, 4. ST FILE PICTURE

I hugged her and said I was proud of her courage in standing up for her principles and grace in facing uncouth opposition.

I expect nothing less from her. She is a woman of integrity who taught me to always champion what is right, good and just, even if this attracts flak.

My mother gave her children the space to be individuals and to follow their own paths.

She did have a mean streak and petrified me as a child by singing the songs of Cruella de Ville.

She worried for me when I burnt midnight oil studying. The day before my PSLE, she asked me to play squash with her!

I used to come home from primary school crying because of the cruel remarks by my mathematics teachers. My mother wanted to confront them, but I begged her to desist. I think she regrets this as I became quite withdrawn because of my academic failings.

NOW: Dr Thio Su Mien and daughter Dr Thio Li-ann. ST FILE PICTURE

We are quite different, my mother and I. She is outgoing, practical and sociable. I am more introspective, melancholic. However, perhaps I ended up a constitutional law professor due to osmosis, as she was pregnant with me when she lectured public law.

My father excelled at creative storytelling, but my mother held me rapt with her childhood tales of the Japanese occupation in Malaya and how a British soldier gifted her with her first taste of chocolate.

She told me stories about Robin Hood, King Arthur, which fed my love for English literature. I used to sneak off with her dog-eared copy of the Oxford Treasury of English Verse and imbibe the poetry.

As a busy lawyer, my mother was often pressed for time. Still, she noticed details and was mesmerised by how BJ, my puppy, would stare at butterflies for hours.

We were mutually intoxicated by the BBC production of Pride and Prejudice. I made my mother laugh uproariously with my renditions of Mr Collin's vanity and Catherine de Burgh's pomposity, complete with angmoh accent.

My mother took me along during her many overseas business trips. When I was 10, she brought me to Denmark's Elsinore Castle and told me about Hamlet and King Claudius' ghost. I suspect my subsequent love for Shakespeare can be traced to this.

She regaled me with the criminal trials of David Marshall and introduced me to the leonine man himself in Paris when I was 13.

As adults, my mother and I have become close friends. Our common interest in history, theology and archaeology has inspired recent travels to Jerusalem, Patmos and Istanbul.

My mother tolerated my rebellious adolescence when I would lock myself in my room and practise my electric guitar riffs - loudly.

She rejoiced when I obtained a place at Oxford University.

She entered heated debates with me when I disavowed atheism and became a Christian as a law undergraduate. I think she may have regretted teaching me to think independently!

Today, she has a deep faith and lives it. My mother has a tender heart and I have seen her sacrifice hours counselling many hurting people. From her, I have learnt and received the joy of unconditional love.

Happy Mother's Day, Mum. I love you and am awfully proud to be your daughter.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.299

Mas Selamat: Dead-end trails in hilly Johor

Mas Selamat Caught

'Jalan Selamat'
Dead-end trails in hilly Johor

Photojournalist ZAIHAN MOHD YUSOF gets on sports bike and surveys possible escape routes taken by terrorist Mas Selamat while on the run

May 11, 2009

TRAIL OF DESPERATION: (Top left) Palm worker Mastur says first-timers can be easily lost in the sprawling oil palm estate. (Center) The wooden Jetty near Mr Umar Flee's kampung faces a sloped jetty at Jalan Bahtera in Singapore. LIKELY LANDING POINT: (Right) This stretch from Stulang to Pantai Lido may have also been ideal to make a beach landing. The beach in some areas is just metres away from the road and bus stop. Malaysians authorities believe that after swimming from Woodlands, Mas Selamat may have landed here. In the background are Woodlands flats. TNP PICTURES: ZAIHAN MOHD YUSOF

RECCE REPORT 1

OIL PALM ESTATE

Johor location: Oil Palm Plantation on the outskirts of Bandar Nusajaya.

Water crossing: Less than 700m from Singapore.

Jump-off point: Directly opposite Sungei Gedong (live firing area).

This would've been the shortest escape route for Mas Selamat.

Landing at the oil palm plantation would allow him the 'perfect cover' due to its vastness. Nobody ventures there except oil palm workers, said Mr Mastur, a 25-year-old Indonesian who works on the estate.

The place is deserted as it is hilly, damp and mosquito-infested.

But this route is not without its difficulties.

On the Singapore side (Sungei Gedong), Mas Selamat would have been faced with the long fence along the live firing area.

This would have prevented him a direct line of sight to the plantation.

Also, once across, he could get lost.

Said Mr Mastur: 'He would have to depend on good navigational skills to get out of here safely. During my first year working here, I got lost many times. Every bend in the estate looks the same. You can walk the whole day and not bump into anybody. It was scary for me at first.'

Mas Selamat would also need to be an expert at finding food as there is hardly anything edible in the palm estate.

'There's no village here. The only source of food would be wild boars and snakes. And you're unlikely to find a clean source of water here,' he said.

Perhaps Mas Selamat sought help from workers in the estate.

Mr Mastur added: 'The illegal workers may not know who Mas Selamat is.

'(Even if they did) they wouldn't dare to make a police report for fear of being arrested themselves.'

If Mas Selamat was able to reach the estate's main road, lorry drivers or bikers would not mind giving a stranded person a lift.

Who knows, an unsuspecting motorist could have given him a lift all the way to Skudai, less than an hour's drive away.

RECCE REPORT 2

KAMPUNG SUNGAI MELAYU

Johor location: Malay village in town of Nusa Jaya, about 30 minutes' drive from Second Link.

Water crossing: Between 1km and 1.3km from Singapore.

Jump-off point: Directly opposite end of Lim Chu Kang Road.

This old Malay village looks like an ideal place for an escapee to lie low.

Families and homes mean there's food, clothing and shoes that can be begged for or stolen.

It is very close to Singapore. So close that from Johor fisherman Umar Fiee's home, you can clearly see the sloped jetty where seafood is loaded onto awaiting lorries at Lim Chu Kang in Singapore.

On some days, Mr Umar, 64, said he can hear the live firing exercises near Poyan reservoir.

He has even made the watery journey himself.

In the '60s, he and his friends used to challenge each other and swim across to Singapore.

Said Mr Umar, a father of six: 'Back then the rules were more relaxed. We had no passports.

'But the trick is not to start too strong, you need to pace yourself when swimming. It usually took me about an hour.'

Nowadays, when Malaysian fishermen like Mr Umar stray too close to Singapore waters, the Singapore Police Coast Guard or soldiers tell them to turn back.

Mr Umar believes Mas Selamat could have taken advantage of outcrops like Pulau Sarimbun to take a breather.

Or he could have rested at one of the many mussel harvesting kelongs before deciding where to land.

'Unlike the Singapore kelongs, we do not keep dogs. So Mas Selamat's presence would not be detected.'

Yet, the stretch of 8km along Kampung Sungei Melayu, which is a hotspot for illegal immigrants trying to swim into Singapore, is not without danger.

Mr Umar said bodies have been found entangled in fishermen's nets, the result of 'failed attempts' to cross the straits.

Just two years ago, a female China national was a victim, he recalled.

As for food, Mas Selamat could've eaten fruits growing wild, or stolen from homes.

He said: 'Kampung people trust each other. So we leave our clothes drying out in the open. We seldom lock our doors. And there is almost no activity when it gets dark here.

'If Mas Selamat had been spotted, we would definitely know that he is not from around here.'

But most kampung folk may not be aware who Mas Selamat is or what he has done. He would've been just another passer-by.

Mr Umar said because of the lax security, bicycles and motorcycles have gone missing in the village. With a stolen getaway vehicle, Mas Selamat would have been able to find his way out of the kampung to the highway some 10km away.

From there, Skudai is less than 20km away.

RECCE REPORT 3

Pantai Lido and Stulang

Johor location: These sit on the left and right of Causeway respectively.

Water crossing: Between 1.2km and 2km.

Jump-off point: Woodlands.

In order to land on this stretch, Mas Selamat would have to start swimming from Woodlands, which Malaysian authorities believe he did.

Unlike the other two spots, this is built-up urban landscape, with a coastline dotted with food stalls, picnicking crowds and parked cars.

There is a bus service that plies up and down Jalan Skudai, the main artery heading northwards into Malaysia.

Despite the distance, with the help of currents, Mas Selamat's swim across the Johor Strait would be less taxing, said Mr Mohd Shafie, 26, a cleaner at the beach.

He said: 'Every morning, I find oil drums, plastic containers, styrofoam boxes and bottles along the shore. If he had been among these items floating in the water, no one would've seen him.'

The advantage of this destination is that Mas Selamat would've been able to quickly blend in the crowd once he reached the shore.

'There is a city mentality here. Nobody cares who you are. If Mas Selamat put a baseball hat on, he would look like an average person in the city,' said Mr Mohd.

That makes this landing point an obvious stop, which is probably why Singapore Coast Guard patrols seem to be more frequent.

Added Mr Mohd: 'I have seen secondary school students swimming from Stulang Laut to the half-way point between Malaysia and Singapore on the Johor Strait.

'They can get there in about 25 minutes before the Singapore Police patrol boats warn them to move back into Malaysian waters. Mas Selamat would've needed a lot of luck.'

Trail of a fugitive...

After crossing the water, he makes his way to Ulu Tiram, about 45 minutes away, to look for a Jemaah Islamiah (JI) member, Abdul Matin.

He then links up with another JI sympathiser, Johar Hassan in Skudai, about 30km away to the west.

Both Abdul matin and Johar are arrested by the Malaysian authorities on 1 Apr.

On the same day, Mas Selamat is arrested in a Skudai village sitting away from the highway. He was reportedly sleeping when the house was raided.

Mas Selamat could barely put up a fight in his shorts and T-shirt when caught during a dawn raid on 1 Apr.

He has been living a simple life without arousing the suspicions of villages in Skudai.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28568.138