Favouritism of GOD's chosen or preferred one?

Why 'God' loved Isaac more than Ishmael

Abraham with (at that time) a futuristic mode of transportation, 

According to Genesis, Abraham had a wife named Sarah who was barren and could not give him any children. Sarah had an Egyptian slave named Hagar, so Sarah told Abraham to use Hagar as a surrogate mother since she (Sarah) could not give Abraham any children.

Hagar soon became pregnant and not long after that Sarah, too, became pregnant. So now both of them were pregnant. Hagar’s son was named Ishmael while Sarah’s son was named Isaac. But Ishmael was elder to Isaac since he was born first.

Sarah soon became jealous and told Abraham to get rid of Hagar and Hagar’s son, Ishmael. So Abraham dumped both of them in the desert and left them there. God, who called Himself, El Shaddai, then appeared and told Sarah that she will become the mother of all nations.

Now, there are two things to note here. First of all, God acknowledged Isaac (the younger brother) and not Ishmael (the elder brother) as the true successor and heir to Abraham.

and

Oh, by the way, Jews practice circumcision, an Egyptian practice at that time -- and Hagar was Egyptian while Sarah was not. Does this mean the Jews follow Hagar and not Sarah? 

Let's mull on the last part first, that of circumcision.

Gulp,yikes, look of what appears to be a pair of pliers (on right)
what's that tool on the left? hacksaw..mercy me?

 circumcision was then an Egyptian practice. The Egyptians were probably the first people to conduct circumcision, but then only among the royals and nobility.

Please note that when we refer to the biblical Egyptians we’re NOT talking about today’s Egyptian who are and have been mainly Arabs, and of course mainly Muslims since Prophet Mohammad  introduced Islam to the Middle-Eastern world.

The biblical Egyptians were a different race, no, not even the people of Ptolemy’s and Cleopatra’s who came later and were mainly Macedonians and Greeks, remnants of Alexander’s army. The original Egyptians were a race of a much earlier era, and have since long gone; no one other than perhaps historians of ancient Egypt or Egyptologists know where they are now -

Strangely, for the Hebrews, a people who despised the Egyptians for their pagan beliefs, yet they adopted many Egyptian practices, including that of circumcision – . Of course the Hebrews would claim that Abraham circumcised himself to show his covenant with YVWH.

OK then, we might as well begin our discussion with Abraham who the Bible told us came from Ur of the Chaldees, as in Genesis 11:27-31, which say:

27 Now these are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran begat Lot.

28 And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees.

29 And Abram and Nahor took them wives: the name of Abram's wife was Sarai; and the name of Nahor's wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah.

30 But Sarai was barren; she had no child.

31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.

Abraham was born around 2000 BC according to those who also believed that Adam and Eve and their Fall happened around 4000 BC). But archaeologists said that Chaldeans (of the Chaldees) didn’t even exist until around the sixth to fifth century BC, nearly 1500 years after Abraham’s time.

Thus the claim that Abram (before he became Abraham) came from Ur of the Chaldees was likely a latter day invention (or writeup) at a time (around 530 BC) coincidentally when the Judeans were incarcerated as slaves in Babylon and first wrote down the oral tradition of Abraham’s story while compiling the written Hebrew Bible Tanakh).

Now, just note Genesis 17:17 which says Abraham became hilarious when God told him he would have a son:

Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? And shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?

This tells us that the age gap between Abraham and Sarah was 10 years.

OK, flashing back to earlier, specifically 25 years earlier, to Genesis 12:4, we have (before he changed his name to Abraham):

So Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him: and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

Abraham was already 75 years old when he was instructed by God to leave Haran after his father died. Therefore Sarah was sixty-five years old. It also tells us that there was a gap of at least 25 years between entering Egypt and having their son Isaac.

In Genesis 12:14-15 we have:

And it came to pass, that, when Abrams was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very fair.

The princes also of Pharaoh also saw her, and commended her before Pharaoh: and the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house.

When entering Egypt, Abraham wanted Sarah to pretend she was his sister. The biblical reason was that he was afraid of being killed if it was known she was his wife, for he anticipated Sarah would attract lustful attention. And he was right. Pharaoh was told of her beauty, took her into his Palace and rewarded her ‘brother’ generously.

Here, some questions begged to be asked.

(1) What did Egyptians see in a 65 year old Hebrew woman that made them acclaim she was fair, and recommend the beauty to the Pharaoh, and why would a Pharaoh, who could have any woman in the land, want an old crone as his lover?

(2) Did the Pharaoh have his naughty ways with Sarah after taking her into the Palace?

(3) What was a pastoralist (shepherd) like Abraham doing in a cosmopolitan city like Ur (remembering Ur existed only 1500 years later)? One would expect him to live in a tent in a rural area, but we are told he came from Ur of the Chaldees.

(4) Then, what would be the likelihood of a foreign commoner, a mere pastoralist, even allowing for his beautiful 65-year old wife, coming into contact with the royal house of Egypt, namely the princes and the Pharaoh? (Genesis 12:15) Can a great empire like Egypt be so small that a mere foreigner, on entering its border, would come into contact with or to the knowledge of its princes?

(5) Why is there a leitmotiv surrounding Abraham and Sarah of the man and wife pretending to be brother and sister, a King taking (or attempting to take her) the wife, God intervening to return the wife to the husband, and the husband profiting greatly from the separation? The leitmotiv may be discerned in:

• Abraham and the Pharaoh (Genesis 12:11-20)
• Abraham and Abimelech of Gerar (Genesis 20:2-18) – Sarah was even older by then, around 90.
• Isaac and Abimelech of Gerar (Genesis 26: 7-16) – we aren’t too sure whether this was the same Abimelech for it was then more than 50 years later, but the King had a chief captain of the army named Phichol (Genesis 26:26) as was in the case of the earlier or Abraham’s Abimelech (Genesis 21:22).

(6) Why was Sarah told to change her name from the original Sarai to Sarah, the latter in Hebrew meaning Princess? (Genesis 17:15)

What were the authors (or author) of Genesis trying to say, or do?

I leave the above for you to find out,  including Genesis 12:16 which states: And he entreated Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and he asses, and menservants, and maidservants, and she asses, and camels.

Camels weren't to be domesticated for another 800 years (in 1200 BC) if Abraham was reputed to live around 2000 BC.

Carrying on with other biblical mysteries:

The Israelis journeyed from Rameses to Succoth. There were about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children ….. (Exodus 12:37)

The Book of Exodus relates the preparation of the Hebraic exodus from Egypt after the Pharaoh, cowered by the 10 plagues including the death of his firstborn, gave Moses leave to lead 600,000 male Jewish slaves plus their families, totalling some two million people.

2,000,000 Hebrew slaves migrating out of Egypt!

Even allowing for some ancient exaggerations, yet there is not one mention of this monumental migration in ancient Egypt’s famed recording of anything and all things! No, not one!

Continuing:

Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt was 430 years. At the end of the 430 years, to the very day, all the Lords’ division left Egypt ….. (Exodus 12:40-41)

Nearly half a millennium of residence in Egypt by 2,000,000 Hebrews –  again there wasn’t any ancient Egyptian record of them! Not one hieroglyphic, hieratic or demotic line anywhere!

As mentioned, this was a nation which recorded everything, about Pharaohs, their gods, floods, harvest, births, deaths, ownership of this and that, weather, social events, wars, etc, but not a skerrick of written line about 2,000,000 Hebrews living in their land for 430 years, let alone making a mass exodus.

This was an unexplained omission of amazing proportion by the Egyptian scribes. Or, was it?

Surely there must be something to explain the mysterious and very monumental omissions in ancient Egyptian records about the significant Hebraic presence there, unless of course there was no Hebrew ever in Egypt, and thus no Hebraic exodus took place.

The most puzzling mystery has been that in a land of such fastidious recording of events, not one single line of hieroglyphor hieratic or demotic in Egypt’s vast repository of recording made any mention of these personalities.

OK, as mentioned, the word Pharaoh is mentioned 274 times in the Bible in various descriptions and forms. In the first two books of the Old Testament (OT), namely Genesis and Exodus, it is referred to 155 times.

Yet, in that 155 times, the OT fails to identify which Pharaoh was involved in the respective events involving Hebrews. The time span as chronicled by the Books of Genesis and Exodus would logically suggest that the Pharaoh of Abraham and Sarah should be a different person to the Pharaoh of Joseph son of Jacob, and indeed to the Pharaoh of Moses and the Exodus.

In the story of Joseph, he was sold to an Egyptian Potiphar, one of Pharaoh’s officials (Genesis 39:1). After interpreting his famous ‘seven fat and seven lean years’ for the Pharaoh (Genesis 41: 25-32), the latter made him the Grand Vizier, the No 2 man in the land, and conferred on him an Egyptian name, Zapethnath-Paneah and married him off to an Egyptian wife, Asenath (meaning Gift of the Sun-God). She was the daughter of Potiphera, priest of On (Genesis 41:45).

Notice how detailed were the personalities identified, yet the name of the Pharaoh was not revealed. Instead the Pharaoh was merely referred to as ‘a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph’ (Exodus 1:8).

As for Moses, we read of Pharaoh learning of the killing of an Egyptian by this Prince of Egypt (Exodus 2:12), and naturally wanting to have Moses executed (Exodus 2:15). Of course by then Moses had fled. Much later, after marrying Zipporah and witnessing the burning bush, he heard that the Pharaoh died. By then God ordered him back to Egypt to demand from the new Pharaoh the release of the Israelite slaves (Exodus 3:10).

Again, we observe the lack of details about one of the most significant Pharaoh in the biblical saga. Who was this Pharaoh? Or better, who were the Pharaohs, the one who died as well as his newly crowned successor?

Compare the seemingly evasive or, if one wants to be less conspiratorial, broad brushing of certain Pharaohs’ identities, particularly those associated with the stories or events from Abraham to Moses, with the detailed genealogies of others in the Old Testament, as presented in Genesis Chapter 4:17-22 (Cain’s), Genesis Chapter 5 (Noah’s, he of the Flood and Ark fame), Genesis Chapter 10 (The sons of Noah and their families’), Genesis Chapter 11:10-32 (from Shem to Abraham), and the list of details goes on.

WHY?

So, were there Hebrews in Egypt after all? Was there ever an Exodus?

Incidentally, the word ‘Egypt’ appears in the Bible more than 750 times while ‘pharaoh’ is mentioned over 274 times. More than any of the Israelite nation’s neighbouring countries, Egypt was the most described country in the Scriptures.

·   Egypt – the nation that, according to the Bible, held 2,000,000 Hebrews in slavery until God instructed Moses to lead his people out of Egyptian bondage. The Egyptian pharaoh only released them after a bitter and acrimonious struggle resulting in the deaths of all Egyptian first-borns including the pharaoh’s own.

·   Egypt – where the Israelite people including its kings would always run to for refuge and sanctuary when threatened by other warring nations such as the Babylonians. The Israelite so-called prophet Jeremiah threatened the Israelites about running to Egypt for refuge when the Babylonians were advancing, by relaying God’s message:“As my anger and wrath have been poured out on those who lived in Jerusalem, so will my wrath be poured out on you when you go to Egypt” (Jer 42:18). But the Hebrews nevertheless went to seek sanctuary in Egypt, and Jeremiah, notwithstanding his own warnings, followed, purportedly to rail against the Israelites for picking up Egyptian worship (Jer 44), but more likely to save his own bloody skin, wakakaka.

On Egypt as a perennial sanctuary for the Israelites-Judeans, it may worthwhile venturing across into the New Testament to recall Matthew 2:13 which advised Yusuf (Yehoshua’s dad, you know, Joshua or with the Greek name of Jesus)  in a dream, of Herod’s murderous hunt for the newborn Messiah:

Arise, He said, take the child and his mother and flee to Egypt and stay there until I bring the word ………

And then, most surprising, in Deuteronomy, under 23: Exclusion From the Assembly, God warned the Hebrews not to allow the neighbouring nationalities to enter the assembly of the Lord, even unto the tenth generation, except for the Edomites and the Egyptians.

The Edomites were of course also Hebrews, ‘cousins’ to the ketuanan Israelite people, as they were descendants of Esau, the firstborn of Isaac, who lost his birthrights to Jacob through trickery and deceit.

In fact, Deuteronomy 23:7-8 read:

You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother. You shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were an alien in his land; the children of the third generation born to them may enter the congregation of the Lord.

The Edomites I can understand, but why this special treatment for their mortal enemies, the Egyptians, their oppressors who supposedly kept them in bondage for 430 years, and required a series of terrifying divine-sent plagues to intimidate the Pharaoh before he released them from slavery.

Indeed why?

.

According to Genesis, Abraham had a wife named Sarah who was barren and could not give him any children. Sarah had an Egyptian slave named Hagar, so Sarah told Abraham to use Hagar as a surrogate mother since she (Sarah) could not give Abraham any children.

Hagar soon became pregnant and not long after that Sarah, too, became pregnant. So now both of them were pregnant. Hagar’s son was named Ishmael while Sarah’s son was named Isaac. But Ishmael was elder to Isaac since he was born first.

Sarah soon became jealous and told Abraham to get rid of Hagar and Hagar’s son, Ishmael. So Abraham dumped both of them in the desert and left them there. God, who called Himself, El Shaddai, then appeared and told Sarah that she will become the mother of all nations.

Abraham casting Hagar and Ishmael out

Now, there are two things to note here. First of all, God acknowledged Isaac (the younger brother) and not Ishmael (the elder brother) as the true successor and heir to Abraham.

On  whether it was the Hebraic God who acknowledged ‘Isaac (the younger brother) and not Ishmael (the elder brother) as the true successor and heir to Abraham’would depend on who was the Hebraic God, wakakaka.

The Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) was written by various people but mainly by (though not all) Davidic supporters (obviously of the House of Judah). ‘Davidic’ supporters mean supporters of King David of the House of Judah, the most evil and treacherous man in the entire bible.

David was even more treacherous than his eponymous ancestor, cheating Jacob. He plotted the murder of King Saul who doted on him, and f**ked Saul’s wife and Saul's son Jonathan (yes, he and Jonathan were lovers) to get to the throne.

And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul. ... Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul. And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle - Samuel 18:1-4 (KJV).

David and Jonathan

Though both his lover Jonathan and his wife Michal (Saul’s daughter and Jonathan’s sister) helped the bloke all the time, eventually he had both of them murdered as he did to their father King Saul.

Naturally the Bible was written by his supporters to show that Saul became mad with jealousy etc etc and was forsaken by God, to justify David's trail of f**king and murder right up to the throne.

He also shagged the wives of many others to get what he wanted (no doubt he was a handsome Adonis) including the most infamous of all, Bathsheba, the wife of his most loyal general Uriah whom he deliberately sent into the thickest of battle to be killed.

Uriah, cuckolded and murdered by King David, so-called God's beloved

David was also guilty of many other crimes including consorting with Israel’s enemies, the Philistines, against Israel.

In the way that the New Testament would not have been written if there was no Yesohua ben Yusuf, thus the Tanakh would not have been written if there was no David.

David's supporters wrote the Tanakh basically to exonerate his many crimes, but fortunately for posterity they weren't the only writers of the Tanakh, hence through the writings of those who weren't his supporters we catch glimpses of his evil as well as the treachery of his eponymous cheating ancestor, Israel, as Jacob was known by, in the Old Testament.

But an important point his supporters wanted to make was to show that contrary to Deuteronomy 21:15-17, God wanted him to be King.

So what does Deuteronomy 21:15-17 say? Essentially and significantly the following:

If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife he does not love, when he wills his property to his sons, he must not give the rights of the firstborn to the son of the wife he loves in preference to his actual firstborn, the son of the wife he does not love.

He must acknowledge the son of his unloved wife as the firstborn by giving him a double share of all he has. That son is the first sign of his father’s strength. The right of the firstborn belongs to him.

So, where did that leave Ishmael as compared with Isaac in the eyes of God?

That’s the reason I asked earlier: Whether it was the Hebraic God who acknowledged ‘Isaac (the younger brother) and not Ishmael (the elder brother) as the true successor and heir to Abraham’ would depend on who was the Hebraic God 

But why did David’s supporter want to diminish the age-old concept of primogeniture, which is (even until today in many races and cultures) the right, by law, or usually by custom and even religion as per Deuteronomy 21:15-17, of the firstborn son to inherit the family title, properties, even greater blessings compared with other sons, and which was what buggered Ishmael out  from being Isaac's rightful heir.

That’s because David was not the first born of Jesse of Bethlehem. He was the youngest of Jesse’s eight children (sometimes mentioned as seven).

How could an eighth child become King of Israel?

Of course he could ........ BUT only if the Bible showed that God didn't favour primogeniture despite Deuteronomy 21:15-17.

And we'll see how a bible commentator would cunningly get around these two conflicting points, wakakaka.

Thus, in the story of Cain and Abel we have God favouring Abel over Cain, the first born. Conveniently the Tanakh had Cain murdering Abel.

Yes, no reason of whatever sort was provided by the Bible for God’s favouritism. It would only be in other subsequent explanatory documents or books that embarrassed clerics creatively explained away God’s inexplicable bias.

was the Hebrew God a meat lover who thus preferred
Abel's barbeque offerings over Cain's veggies?

Then we have our Ishmael and Isaac, with Ishmael conveniently being an Egyptian. Guess which nationality was Isaac, wakakaka. Don't know? Well, go back above and re-read my post, wakakaka.

Following that, we have Esau and Jacob. Again, conveniently we are told Esau sold his birthrights away to his younger brother for a bowl of lentils. Even allowing for that pro Davidic creation, we have their mother conspiring with Jacob to cheat, yes, CHEAT, his father into blessing him when the old blind man wanted to do that for his first born Esau.

How could God love such a cheat? How could God love his descendant David, the most treacherous murderous adulterer?

Can lah, because the Davidic supporters, not unlike our Utusan Malaysia and Biro Tatanegara, wakakaka, could write any bullshit!

As if that was not enough, when Joseph (of the Technicolor coat in the Old Testament) went to see his father Jacob the Cheat for blessings for his sons, Manasseh (first born) and Ephraim (the younger), make a guess who Jacob blessed more,

The Bible tells us that despite Joseph positioning his sons before Jacob so that the elder son Manasseh would be blessed by Jacob’s right hand (this being the hand which gave the greater proportion of blessings) and Ephraim by his father’s left hand, Jacob crossed his hands so that his right hand was on Ephraim’s head instead while his left hand blessed Manasseh but less according to Hebraic custom.

When Joseph tried to catch hold of his father’s right hand to have it on top of Manasseh head, Jacob resisted and said “I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.” (Genesis 48:19) -

And we have the biblical commentator who wanted it both ways, saying as we have suspected all along, that

This shows how the idea of firstborn in the Bible (as per Deuteronomy 21:15-17) is often a position of pre-eminence, not necessarily meaning 'first out of the womb'.

Thus by creative biblical composition, David enjoyed the position of firstborn, even though he was the youngest son. 

So naturally we have those Judean BTN writers  with Psalm 89:20-29 (KJV) informing us how God viewed David:

20 I have found David my servant; with my holy oil have I anointed him:

21 With whom my hand shall be established: mine arm also shall strengthen him.

22 The enemy shall not exact upon him; nor the son of wickedness afflict him.

23 And I will beat down his foes before his face, and plague them that hate him.

24 But my faithfulness and my mercy shall be with him: and in my name shall his horn be exalted.

25 I will set his hand also in the sea, and his right hand in the rivers.

26 He shall cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation.

27 Also I will make him my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth.

28 My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him.

29 His seed also will I make to endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven.

That’s how (not why) the Hebrew God loved Abel over Cain, Isaac over Ishmael, cheating-Jacob over Esau, Ephraim over Manasseh, and of course the most evil man ever in the Bible, David the adulterous traitorous murderer and 8th son of Jesse of Bethlehem - all courtesy of the pro David bible writers.

sourced..why-god-loved-isaac-more-than-ishmael

they are amidst !

I was at the checkout of a K-Mart.  The cashier rang up $46.64 charges. I gave her a fifty dollar bill.  She gave me back $46.64. I gave the money back to her and told her that she had made a
mistake in MY favour. She became indignant and informed me she was educated and knew what she was doing, and returned the money again.  I gave her the money back, same scenario!

I departed the store with the $46.64.

They Walk A mong Us and Many Work Retail

I walked into a Starbucks with a buy-one-get- one-free coupon for a Grande Latte.  I handed it to the girl and she looked over at a little chalkboard that said 'buy one-get one free'.  'They're already buy-one- get-one-free,' she said, 'so I guess they're both free'. She handed me my free Lattes and I walked out the door.

They Walk Among Us!

One day I was walking down the beach with some friends when one of them shouted, 'Look at that dead bird!' Someone looked up at the sky and said, 'Where?'

They Walk Among Us!

While looking at a house, my brother asked the real estate agent which direction was north because, he explained, he didn't want the sun waking him up every morning.  She asked, 'Does the sun rise in the North?.  
When my brother explained that the sun rises in the East, and has for sometime, she shook her head and said, 'Oh I don't keep up with all that stuff.'

They Walk A mong Us!!

I used to work in technical support for a 24/7 call center. One day I got a call from an individual who asked what hours the call center was open. I told him, 'The number you dialed is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.' He responded, 'Is that Eastern or Pacific time?' Wanting to end the call quickly, I said, 'Uh, Pacific.'

They Walk Among Us!

My sister has a lifesaving tool in her car designed to cut through a seat belt if she gets trapped. She keeps it in the trunk.

They Walk Among Us!

My friends and I went out to buy beer and noticed that the cases were discounted 10%.  Since it was a big party, we bought 2 cases. The cashier multiplied 2 times 10% and gave us a 20% discount.

They Walk A mong Us!

I couldn't find my luggage at the airport baggage area, so I went to the lost luggage office and told the woman there that my bags never showed up.  She smiled and told me not to worry because she was a trained professional and I was in good hands.  'Now,' she asked me, has your plane arrived yet?'

They Walk Among Us!

While working at a pizza place I observed a man ordering a small pizza to go. He appeared to be alone and the cook asked him if he would like it cut into 4 pieces or 6. He thought about it for some time before responding. 'Just cut it into 4 pieces; I don't think I'm hungry enough to eat 6 pieces.'

Yep, They Walk Among Us!

They Walk Among Us, they Reproduce and THEY Vote!

slipstream

Pete Teo:
 I saw a 30 minute newsreel more than a year ago. Shot at Malaya’s Independence ceremony, the archive film was in poor repair yet the spirit captured was unmistakable. I was struck by how people’s faces were more open then, how proud their eyes were and upright their stance – especially when held spellbound by Tunku Abdul Rahman, whose Proclamation Of Independence declared us to be: “…forever a sovereign democratic and independent state founded upon the principles of liberty and justice and ever seeking the welfare and happiness of its people…” That was in 1957. Although we would only become Malaysia in 1963, Tunku’s Merdeka speech clearly outlined the foundations of our country. Yet subsequent years have often seen us falter in the high principles that he envisioned. To the extent that modern Malaysia is a mixed bag of beauty and filth, I began to wonder if Tunku was alive today what he would make of us. I concluded that perhaps it would do us good to listen to him again. Thus an idea began to take shape… It occurred to me that I should make a time machine: a temporal device to transport Malaysia back to the days of its founding. In times of heightened political, religious and racial tension, perhaps time-traveling to where we began would be good. It might remind us of our greater commonality instead of our petty differences


 

 SLIPSTREAM” 
WRITTEN BY PETE TEO  PERFORMED BY MELINA WILLIAM 
See how you go slipstreaming on.
 Past crimson rose and fields of gold.
 Along these fallowed steps to your heart 
Where you did find me there 
And I did come so far 
 People are you coming with me? 
People are you coming with me? 
 So now we go through wind rain sleet and snow. 
The love we speak is more than they’ll ever know. 

 My thoughts:
 Moments in the video that is thought provoking and poignant, to decipher what we individually see in the imagery.
 Brilliant imagery and visual story telling on how the story of our nation enfolds post merdeka ..with a multi diverse cast all of which who in one way or another have a contributing stake in the shaping of our country’s identity..whether through politics , arts and entertaiment , sports and collectively moulded Malaysia into what we are today.
 As we watch the video , note the expressions of solemnness and eager anticipation on the faces of David Arumugam /NameWee , whereas Nazir Razak (would like to think that he also represents Najib in this image) / Liow Tiong Lai , Sofea Jane and Saifudin Abdullah had a look of relief / joy and of course suppressed excitement eagerly awaiting the moment of declaring independence for the country.
 Ambiga ..still has that endearing no-nonsense look on her as she observes the historic moment in the making..
 NameWee serious and solemn expression captured on his face almost boyish like innocence in the serious expression.
 Michelle Yeoh… waiting elegantly .
 Tengku Razali and Lim Kit Siang (political opponents from both sides united in one common voice of being Malaysian) seems to be savouring the moment as it builds up , as their smiles seem to be suggesting.
 Noticed that Namewee is seated in a multi racial mix of a songkok wearing Malay pak cik and a Indian gentleman plus of course the Malaysian Chinese Namewee . Truly a accurate depiction and representation of the 3 main ethnic groups waiting to celebrate the moment together and of course with the other minorities in one voice and mind. ..
 All who are present at the stadium real and “added on” , eagerly anticipating the declaring of Merdeka..of their nation that they are yearning to chant together in sincerity and passion.

 Then comes a panoramic shot of KL skyline of the 60s ..(1.17) back then as the cries of Merdeka rang out from the stadium. ( this is a good footage comparison to the enhanced images later in the video)

 Another favourite thought provoking and endearing scene is of Marina Mahathir and Nurul Izzah ( children of the political nemesis of each other.. today both of these ladies much loved and popular with the people in their own right ) crossing a busy street together. holding arms looking out for each other, and with the Arch in the background with the message ” Bersekutu bertambah mutu” . Quality in Alliance”. A message of reconciliation in the image , that doesn’t get better than that. (2.10)
 Then followed by a scene of the couple from the movie ” Sepet”. (2.15) An interracial love story that ended in tragedy. Directed by the much loved and acclaimed Yasmin Ahmad. But in this image, the couple had a baby in their arms.. An alternate happy ending. A poignant message that there is hope for us yet in our Malaysian multi ethnic and cultural backgrounds as we interact amongst each other.

 Then of course comes the footage of Tunku Abdul Rahman preparing the declaration of “MERDEKA” , and against a surrealistic misty backdrop of the post modern KL skyline with the outline of the twin towers faintly visible.
Like a prophetic optimistic futuristic visual projection of the direction of where our nation’s capital and country will be headed post independence.

 Who can forget the glory days of our country’s football in the era when Santokh Singh (2.36) combined with Soh Chin Aun was defending our Malaysian team , it was almost an impenetrable wall . And looking at that big strong ,friendly aged and mellowed Santokh Singh gazing back at us with his ” dignified resilience , strength , maturity and commanding respect with his presence . Such are the qualities Malaysia can do with as a nation.


 The late Yasmin Ahmad (3.34) with a ”child in her arms”.
Another very poignant image that can be significant as she is so fondly known for her distinctly down to earth film productions that had a very Malaysian flavour of a multi racial Malaysia.
 Her movies had been able to touch many hearts and minds of our nation’s people. Her productions are well known in Malaysia for their humour, heart and love that crosses cross-cultural barriers although in Malaysia some of her productions were deemed controversial for skirting taboo subjects.
 Many of her “babies” went on to become multiple award winning short or feature films and documentaries locally and internationally.
 Here we see Yasmin cradling a child asleep in her arms -  feeling protected / safe / secure as to his/her position in the world.
How we wish that the child in her arms is the metaphor of Yasmin’s imaginings of a multi cultural diverse society she yearns to see accepted .
 That child can also represent the future generations of Malaysians , “mothered and nurtured ” by Yasmin ‘s ideals of a Malaysian psyche.

 Finally as the video ends , take in the few seconds of silence and ponder on the background scenery of a modern but fuzzy KL city skyline and even as KL tower comes into view… The Silence lets you witness the images and contemplate how far we have come since the ringing of the Merdeka chant from Tunku reverberating from Stadium Merdeka.


 –Slip Stream is very much A feel good video to watch , reminding us of what being Malaysian is. If only we have full length movies produced with this theme of reminding us of the wealth of our cultural diversity and help unify us as a nation with a common identity.

 Why can’t we have more movies that go this direction in creating inspiration and love for our country and also acknowledgment of our diversity as the source of our strength.? This is indeed a very Malaysian production reflecting the creativity of our home grown talent. 

Well done to Pete Teo and his Malaysian team 

 CAST LIST featured in the video: spotted in order of appearance -

 David Arumugam (of the Alleycats) at 0:50 – looking very sombre.
 Nazir Razak and Liow Tiong Lai and Sofea Jane at 0:54 
 Ambiga Sreenevasan at 0:57. with the endearing no-nonsense expression on her face. 
Namewee at 1:04–also serious and somber looking to almost a point of reverence 
 Saifuddin Abdullah 1 .06- relaxed and calm look as usual 
 Jo Kukathas at 1:11.. quaint hat amongst european crowd 
 Lim Kit Siang and Tengku Razaleigh at 1:12 . both have a smile that seems to suggest that they are enjoying every minute of the historic moment.. Sitting next to each other . Suggesting perhaps that despite idealogical or political differences and inclinations is no reason for not getting along if they united in the common cause of being Malaysian first.
 Michelle Yeoh at 1:14. looking elegant in relaxed anticipation. 

 Marina Mahathir and Nurul Izzah Anwar at 2:10. liked this scene a lot as they cross the busy street looking out for each other
 Jinniboy (of Youtube fame) at 2:15 merdeka ! 

 The couple from Sepet The movie 2.16 couple re emerge with a baby in their arms suggestive of a happy ending after all. alternate conclusion to the tragic ending . If only real life imitates art. 
 Santokh Singh 2.36 may be aged and mellowed but still projects formidable strength and resolve simply by a glare at the camera. 
 Pete Teo 3.20 has to sneak himself in to this much loved video he directed and produced and play a part and deservingly so.
 Ramli Ibrahim 3.27 icon of the art of dance in Malaysia


 Yasmin Ahmad 3.34 multiple award winning local and international film maker of movies that has a social message which has resonated with viewers especially her Malaysian productions.

tanda putra podcast review

http://umaandjoe.com/#


Tanda Putra written review : /fit-for-golden-raspberry-award-biggest-box-office-flop/



Negara Ku ..Happy Birthday Malaysia

Well, he sounds really pissed off.!

Guess he is upset!!

This is an actual letter sent to the Australian DFAT (Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade) Immigration Minister.  The Government tried desperately to censure the author, but got nowhere because every legal person who read it could not stop laughing !

Dear Mr Minister,

I'm in the process of renewing my passport, and still cannot believe this.

How is it that K-Mart has my address and telephone number, and knows that I bought a television set and golf clubs and condoms from them back in 1997, and yet the Federal Government is still asking me where I was born
and on what date ?

For Christ sakes, do you guys do this by hand ?

My birth date you have in my Medicare information, and it is on all the income tax forms I've filed for the past 40 years.

It is also on my driver's licence, on the last eight passports I've ever had, on all those stupid customs declaration forms I've had to fill out before being allowed off planes
over the past 30 years.

It's also on all those insufferable census forms that I've filled out every 5 years since 1966.

Also... would somebody please take note, once and for all, that my mother's name is Audrey, my father's name is Jack, and I'd be absolutely bloody astounded if that ever
changed between now and when I drop dead !!!

SHIT! What do you people do with all this information we keep having to provide?

I apologize, Mr. Minister. But I'm really pissed off this morning.

Between you and me, I've had enough of all this bullshit!
You send the application to my house, then you ask me for my bloody address!

What the hell is going on with your mob? Have you got a gang of mindless Neanderthal arseholes working there!

And another thing, look at my damn picture. Do I look like Bin Laden? I can't even grow a beard for God's sakes. I just want to go to New Zealand and see my new granddaughter.  (Yes, my son interbred with a Kiwi girl).  And would someone please tell me, why would you give a shit whether or not I plan on visiting a farm in the next 15 days? In the unlikely event I ever got the urge to do something weird to a sheep or a horse, believe you me, I'd sure as hell not want to tell anyone!

Well, I have to go now, 'cause I have to go to the other side of Sydney , and get another bloody copy of my birth certificate - and to part with another $80 for the privilege of accessing MY OWN INFORMATION!

Would it be so complicated to have all the services in the same spot, to assist in the issuance of a new passport on the same day?