Homeschooling rights in Malaysia.

In Malaysia, homeschooling is, essentially, illegal for Malaysians, unless the child has special needs. By this, they generally mean, impaired in some way. Though, of course, one could try to interpret giftedness as a special need...(though I don't know if they would allow that).

Anyway, recently there has been some articles in the Malaysian newspapers regarding homeschooling, in Malaysia. These articles mentioned the fact that it was illegal and did not, in my opinion, give full consideration to the impact of homeschooling regulation on the life choices of Malaysian citizens. So, I wrote a letter to the New Straits Times to point out an effect of banning homeschooling on emigration patterns. I waited and waited and waited...but they didn't publish it.

Today, however, the New Straits Times has published another letter, on homeschooling, which explicitly calls for greater regulation and control of homeschooling. So, what do we have here: my letter which calls for the legalization of homeschooling and the right of all to be homeschooled, is NOT published, but a letter which emphasises the burden of homeschooling and urges further controls IS published. Here we have a clear case of only publishing views in agreement with, perhaps, the outlook of the paper itself or the government of Malaysia, as it presently is. There is not the entertainment of a plurality of viewpoints - which is most healthy, whenever important decisions concerning the fate of a nation are to be made. Failure to look widely, at the fullest range of options, is often reason for failure of the endeavour itself. I believe that Malaysia is making just that kind of mistake, in its approach to considering the homeschooling issue.

After the New Straits Times declined to publish my letter, I sent it to the Star. They, too, have not published it. I find this interesting, since the Star have published two of my previous letters. Thus, it is appears, in this instance, that it is the VIEWS I express that are not considered desirable, thus, must be muffled.

Malaysia's newspapers may not wish to publish my letter...but the wonderful world of blogs and search engines, allows me to do so myself. Thus, I have pasted the letter below, so that, at least, some people in Malaysia, might have the chance to read it, and consider its viewpoint.

Thank you for reading.

Don’t lose Malaysia’s gifted: legalize homeschooling.

Some of your readers may have heard of my son, Ainan Celeste Cawley, the scientific child prodigy, aged 10, studying at HELP University College. What they may not have heard, however, is why we left Singapore, where he was born, to come to Malaysia. In a word it largely came down to homeschooling. Quite simply, Singapore wouldn’t allow us to homeschool him, so we left.

We strove for three years, to get suitable educational provision for Ainan once he revealed a precocious talent for and interest in science, in particular Chemistry. It was very hard to get the educational system to respond adequately in Singapore. It took us, for instance, almost two years to secure regular laboratory classes for him, in Chemistry, at a Polytechnic. It should not have taken more than two weeks, in a responsive educational environment. In other respects, the school system was not meeting his needs – they were teaching way below where he was in the sciences and could be in the other subjects, given the opportunity. So, we asked to be allowed to homeschool him. The only reply we ever received from the tellingly named “Compulsory Education Unit” was a note saying: “We will revert to you shortly”. They never did. It was the only kind of letter they ever responded with, despite repeated attempts to secure a decision. Finally, I spoke to the woman in charge and she would only say: “I cannot give you an answer”.

Once Ainan’s laboratory classes came to an end, there was no further educational provision for him, in Sinagpore – and the system had refused to allow him to be homeschooled, so we were not allowed to provide for him, ourselves. Given the dead end we faced, in Singapore, we looked overseas and found what he needed in Malaysia, very quickly. So we emigrated.

Now the lesson here, for Malaysia, is clear. If Malaysia does NOT allow homeschooling, it will lose its most gifted students, if they cannot find what they need here and are not allowed to be provided for at home. They will go overseas. Ironically, as foreigners, they would be allowed to be homeschooled in Singapore. Thus, Malaysia, may lose its gifted students to Singapore, if it doesn’t allow them to be homeschooled here.

The answer is obvious: every parent should have the right to homeschool their child, if they feel the child’s needs cannot be met in a standardized schooling situation. The educational system should also help in whatever way it can, by, for instance, allowing homeschooled children to join in with extra-curricular activities at a school. If Malaysia does this, it will ensure that its brightest children do not have to leave for more flexible shores, to secure an education. Surely that is in the best interests of Malaysia as a nation?

__________________________________________________________________________________________
I do not know why Malaysia's newspapers wouldn't publish my letter - or at least the main ones which I tried (perhaps I should try others?) However, I know this: I do hope that some, at least, of my future letters are published, since the last three attempts have not met with any success. As an outside observer, I am equipped to see things which may not be clear to locals, who have no comparisons to make. Thus, I have insights to contribute, which could help Malaysia, in its continued development. I only hope to be allowed to share those insights and not have them silenced, relatively speaking, by being restricted to a blog that most people will never know about.

Of course, if all my future letters are declined, the day will come when I stop writing them, to the local media. Then, of course, they will have lost a voice...and where is the gain in that? Every different perspective is valuable, if an intellectually rich society is desired. Of course, if sterile conformity is the goal, then I understand why such views might be rejected. I would urge Malaysia, however, to move towards accepting a plurality of views...and not learn from its southern neighbour's efforcement of but one way to think about the world.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 6 and Tiarnan, 4, this month, please go to:
http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at: http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/
Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/
Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is at http://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

Helen Thomas, Israel, and freedom of speech.

Helen Thomas has recently shown us the limits of free speech in the United States. Indeed, it seems that there is no real freedom of speech in the modern United States.

Helen Thomas is a well-known journalist in the US. She has had, I understand, a stellar career over the last five decades, starting out at UPI, leading to the position of President of the White House Correspondents' Association and ultimately working with Hearst newspapers. Oddly, however, the political class of America think her entire career, her skill and her experience are worth less than a few remarks about Israel.

Helen Thomas recently called for Israel to "get the hell out of Palestine"...and to go back to their former homes in Germany and Poland. Apparently, this was regarded as "offensive" enough by America's, oops I mean Israel's American politicians (by which I mean that Israel seems to own the heart of many American politicians), for calls decrying Thomas to be heard on the left and right, in US politics.

The result? Helen Thomas resigned, after five faithful decades of coverage.

Think about what this situation means for the United States. A journalist has exercised her supposedly constitutional right to freedom of speech and spoken out against Israel. The consequence has been that politicians from both left and right, have denounced her and she has been forced to resign from her job, after fifty years, of dedicated service.

What does this mean? It means that, in truth, there is no freedom of speech in the United States. In the USA you are only notionally free to speak, because if you do, there will be consequences. Thus, the idea of freedom of speech in the US, is a lie. It is a fraud on the public. To test the truth of this, just pick a favoured group – for instance, the Jews, who have long been favoured in the USA – and speak out against them, even in a mildly critical manner. You will soon be out of a job, out of a life and out of a nation. You will become a pariah…for what? For exercising your “right” to “freedom of speech”.

Israel is, at times, bad. I mean this is in the pure sense of good and evil. It was evil of them to board the aid ship to Gaza and kill 9 human rights activists, five of whom were shot in the head, and some had multiple other gunshot wounds. There is just no construing this as a “good” act. Morality was definitely not on the side of Israel in that particular encounter. The question is: was this an uncharacteristic error, a slip that doesn’t truly describe the nation’s core? Unfortunately, no. A quick look at the history of Israel shows that bombing, shooting and crushing by tanks, is the habitual mode of Israel with respect to its neighbours. Israel, that nation founded by a terrorized people, has a long history of terrorizing people. Israel doesn’t make a good, friendly neighbour. It makes an angry, aggressive, absurdly and unpredictably violent neighbour. Israel is a nation that prefers the well-aimed bomb, to a well phrased word. It is a nation, that has chosen to subdue its neighbours in a kind of slow-motion, preemptive war, so that those neighbours will never think of going to war with it.

Yet, there are other ways. A nation, just like an individual, can choose to make friends or make enemies. Israel believes that it is safer to make enemies – and kill enough of them, to get the message across. This is, however, no way to build, maintain or secure a nation. Israel has chosen a shortcut to extinction, as history will, one day, tell.

For now, however, Israel exists, but chooses not to co-exist, with its neighbours. It is constantly attacking them and murdering thousands of people. Yet, the world, in particular, the US, stands by and says nothing. It says nothing because, after all, the people murdered are Muslims and, in the eyes of those who watch in unprotesting silence, Muslims are not truly people, are they? So, it doesn’t matter if Israel kills them by the thousand, does it?

The only way to peace in this world, is if the death of any person, of any religion, of any race, of any nation, is held to be of equal value. The only way to peace in this world is if this universal life, is held to be infinitely precious. All men are infinitely important and no man should be killed by another, for any reason – and especially not for a political end. For, if this is done, it is the end of politics and the beginning of darkness.

I puzzle, greatly, that Israel, founded by a people who experienced mass murder, should become a people who murder the masses, of their neighbours, by the thousand, when they need to send a message that cannot fail to be understood. How is it that a people with such a history of persecution, should become the persecutors? It seems clear that the much vaunted Jewish intellect is a mirage, for it has not been turned to reflect, upon itself, by the Jewish people, as a whole. They have not come to see, that they are becoming, what they once feared. Is there not a single mirror in Tel Aviv, to show its leaders, just what they have become?

The truth of a man, and of a nation, is shown, not by its words, not by its friends, but by its deeds. The truth of Israel, has recently been declared to the world. In murdering the human rights activists on the Mavi Marmara, they have shown themselves to be indistinguishable from pirates. So, why aren’t they treated like pirates, by the US? Why do American politicians speak out in their defense, despite their murderous crimes?

Let us look at what Helen Thomas was saying. “Get the hell out of Palestine”, she said. Well, who in the world, who is not a Jew, or influenced by them, could possibly argue with that? The Palestinian people are besieged, impoverished, bombed, shot, crushed, starved. They are a people under prolonged torture. Who could do otherwise than feel sympathetic towards their plight? Yes, Israel and Palestine may have their differences, but there are other answers than the one they have chosen. Peace can always be sought, even in the midst of total war – so why not seek it, then, in the midst of their much lesser enmity?

She also urged the Jews to return to Germany and Poland. Well, think about what she is saying, here. She is making it clear that she does not think the Jews should have a state in the Middle East. The question is: is she right to think so? Ask yourself this: has the presence of the Jews in the Middle East brought peace or war? Has anyone suffered because of it? Have people died? Have they been bombed, shot, crushed?

What Helen Thomas seems to have been saying is that were the Jews to leave the Middle East, there would be peace there – and she is, of course, right. Were there no Israeli state, there would be peace in the Middle East. The existence of Israel is the direct cause of all the troubles in the Middle East. Were the Jews to leave, therefore, there would be peace, at last.

She isn’t wrong. She might have expressed herself in a way which upset people – because it seems intolerant – but she is right in her underlying reasoning.

Helen Thomas has lost her job because she spoke the truth, as she saw it, of the Jewish situation. She spoke the truth in a land that, in reality, does not want people to speak the truth. “Freedom of speech” is a trap for the unwary. You see, if you use your “freedom” you will be ensnared by your own words and find them used against you. In America, nobody is truly free, anymore, for once free speech, now has a price: the freedom to live as you once did, before you spoke. So, it is with Helen Thomas. She is no longer free to pursue her career, in the way she had hoped, simply because she expressed her views.

It is ironic, actually. You see, Israel and America are not so different from each other. In Israel, or at least, near it, you might be murdered for a difference of belief; in America, you might be persecuted for a difference of opinion. In both, a difference in inner life, once expressed, is enough to bring punishment upon you.

Perhaps that is why the American politicians spoke out so fervently against Helen Thomas: because they feel akin to Israel. They both love to persecute those who dare assert a different view. They both, in fact, enforce a mental conformism, in different ways, but much to the same end: to ensure that their view, their beliefs and their way of life, should prevail, no matter what the cost to any alternatives.

Personally, I wish that all parties would seek peaceful means to resolve their differences. Let the deaths on the Mavi Marmara be the last that Israel inflicts on its neighbours. So, too, let those neighbours leave Israel in peace. Were both sides to choose this way forward, the world, as a whole, would be much safer for it.

However, the sad truth is that Israel's recent murder of human rights activists, will inspire much hate and probable retaliation against Israel, for many years to come. So, the cycle will go on - fueled by Israel's casual disregard for non-Jewish life. If only both sides could come to value each human life as infinitely precious, then this war, in all but name, would come to an end, in lasting peace.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 6 and Tiarnan, 4, this month, please go to:
http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at: http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/
Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/
Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is at http://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

Public transport in Malaysia and subsidy reductions.

Below is a letter I sent to the editor of a newspaper in Malaysia. Now, I have had two other letters to the editor published in the past few months, so I thought that it would be no problem to publish this one. However, they have decided not to publish it. I am left to wonder what elements of my proposal or suggestion they thought worthy of censoring. There are other writers to the letters pages here, who are published regularly. They are, however, local (both the ones I know are, in fact, Indian). It is possible that they don't wish to publish my work, too often, because I am a foreigner. Or perhaps, my ideas this time, impinge too much on what should be policy in Malaysia. Whatever the case, I think the letter I have written is of importance, for Malaysians, for the fact is that real incomes here, are quite low and the coming subsidy changes will affect many here, badly.

I agree, however, that the subsidies need to be phased out, for the sake of the nation's finances. However, I suggest, below, a painless way to do so with reference to the fuel subsidies. Without my proposal being taken up, it would be very hard on many people, to suddenly forego the fuel subsidy.

Please read the letter below, then link to it, from your own sites and tell your friends about it. That is the only way I can get these views out since the news organizations here, don't want these views known - otherwise they would publish it.

Thank you, in advance, for your help in spreading the word.


Don't forget public transport

Malaysia is a nation in love with the car. The question is: is this love affair one of passionate choice, or one enforced by circumstances? Would Malaysians still love the car, if they had an alternative?

It is timely to ask these questions, for soon the fuel subsidies that have made car ownership and usage so affordable in Malaysia, may be at an end. The Federation of Malaysian Consumers Associations (Fomca) has proposed that this and other subsidies, would be better spent on education. Were this change enacted, many Malaysians would soon face a stark reality: they would be unable to afford the petrol for their cars.

It is a probable truth that car ownership in Malaysia is so prevalent for two reasons: the first is that public transport is so relatively underdeveloped – and the second is that subsidies have made the per kilometre cost of driving modest, by global standards.

However, should the price of petrol rise to normal global prices, many fewer Malaysians would be able to afford such casual use of cars, as is now customary. They would be stuck in their own driveways, reluctant to drive on all but the most important journeys. Thus, we can see that the admirable intention to support education, through shifting the subsidies to it, would create an undesirable problem: many people wouldn’t be able to afford to travel.

There is a clear solution to this dilemma. As the subsidy on fuel is diminished, investment in public transport should rise. Thus, as cars became more expensive to run, public transport would become more widespread, more available, and more effective. People would still be able to travel but in a bus or on a train, and not in their own car.

The benefits for Malaysia would be considerable. The present car-clogged streets would run smoothly, as the number of cars on the roads, fell. Malaysia’s environmental impact would be reduced, too, since public transport is immensely greener than any car could be. Malaysia would become a more pleasant place to live – and all because people would have a choice that they don’t presently have: to travel other than by car.

I am a foreigner. Thus, I, along with, I suppose, more widely travelled Malaysians, see Malaysia with eyes informed by how other places, all over the world, are. I see a country of great potential that is, however, hampering itself and stymieing its own development. An effective transport system is key to a country that actually works, as an integrated nation. Malaysia is not really at that stage, yet. The reason is simple and clear: there is too much reliance on cars and so there are too many cars. Thus, the car becomes less useful than it should be, since traffic jams are so common. Ironically, fewer cars, would make each car much more effective. What Malaysia needs, as much as any improvements it might need in the education system, is a better public transport system. One of my first thoughts, on seeing Kuala Lumpur, was “Where are all the buses?” Every other major city I have lived in, has plentiful buses. It seemed strange to see a major city essentially without them. That has to change, if Malaysia is to reach its full potential.

The first use of any subsidy money saved, should be to establish a comprehensive bus network in all major cities of Malaysia – and between those cities. The buses should be affordable to all, regular, reliable, clean and safe. They should also be family and child friendly and be accessible by the elderly and infirm. It is important that everyone should be able to use them.

In the longer term, the train network should be expanded, first with more trains, to relieve overcrowding and increase capacity – and secondly with more lines, to connect more places to the network.

Were Malaysia to do this, no-one would suffer from a lack of means to travel, once cars become too expensive, for many.

If Malaysia is ever to be a fully developed nation it needs an effective public transport system, since all developed nations I am aware of, have very good ones. Malaysia should set about developing one, too. That would be a life-changing – and nation changing – use of subsidies saved. Who knows, perhaps one day, Malaysians will come to love their buses and trains, as much as they do their cars, today.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 6 and Tiarnan, 4, this month, please go to:
http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at: http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/
Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/
Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is at http://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

An alternative to AWARE's war.

Presently, the women's advocacy group, AWARE, in Singapore is engaged in what amounts to a civil war - or perhaps a hostile takeover.

As any Singaporean reader will know, but no overseas reader would...AWARE has recently been hijacked by what appears to be an organized group of outsiders, who have moved in, and elected themselves into the positions of authority in AWARE. Basically, they have taken over the show...although none of them has a history of volunteering or working with AWARE before. Another issue to note is that they seem mainly to be associated with a Christian fundamentalist Church and to be strongly anti-gay. AWARE had previously spoken up on behalf of all women, gay or not. That non-discriminatory stance now appears to be in danger.

From what I understand, there is now a war on, at AWARE...and a dirty war it is too. The "old guard" and the new are fighting...and the incomers are doing everything they can - including such moves as changing the locks on the offices, to make life difficult for the old guard.

There is shortly to be an EGM at which a vote of no confidence has been called, in an attempt to thwart the incomers.

At this stage, it cannot be determined whether the incomers, led by Josie Lau the new President and Thio Su Mien (the ostensible puppeteer in the background, pulling the strings), will win out and push out the old guard for good. Perhaps, at the EGM, the new guard will be ousted. We will see.

I have, however, a suggestion to the losers: start a new organization. There is no need to fight over AWARE. The old guard, who say they believe in standing up for women, of all situations, and the new guard, who mainly seem to stand for stamping out lesbianism, clearly have incompatible views of how AWARE should be run. Clearly, they cannot work together. Were both groups to remain as part of AWARE, no work would be done, for all would be fighting each other. The answer is to split off and form a new organization. If the old guard lose, they can simply take their ideals and their experience elsewhere and set up a new organization, for themselves, with a constitution that doesn't allow outsiders a vote, or the ability to take it over.

The same applies to the new guard. If they strongly believe in something (other than a fundamentalist Christian God and gay bashing), then they can set up their own organization if they lose. However, I foresee one problem with this: the approach of the new guard seems to suggest that their primary interest is in suffocating the voice that AWARE represents, rather than expressing their own voice. So, perhaps, the new guard at least, wants control of AWARE precisely so as to snuff out that voice. The new guard would not be happy then, just starting a new organization, because that would not snuff out the voice they want silenced.

My suggestion, though, at least works for the old guard, who do have a voice they want represented. They can simply take that voice elsewhere and re-establish themselves. If they lose the vote, they should most certainly do this.

I don't know how AWARE is funded...but it would be interesting to see which way their natural funding will flow: will it follow the old guard, or flow to the new?

In my eyes, starting a new organization to embody the other voice, is an ideal solution. It is one that prevents a war and provides a peaceful solution.

The irony of this is that AWARE's strength was its weakness. In being open to all, they allowed outsiders to come in and hijack their organization. If they had been a more closed, less accessible organization, this could never have happened. Perhaps, unfortunately, they should give up some of their openness, should they reform and create a body that cannot be taken over, to maintain the voice that they wish to express.

I wish those who are sincere in what they wish to say, in all of this, the opportunity to be heard.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

Freedom of Speech and the United States

Is there true freedom of speech in the United States? Is there freedom of speech on the internet? Does it endanger international relations and stray into politics, to speak freely on the internet?

I ask these questions for a reason. You see, I keep an eye on the locations of those who visit my website and on who comments on my pages. It is helpful to keep track of such things, since then I know something of the perspective of those who comment. I have, therefore, noticed something with regards to one of my posts. I wrote of George Bush's difficulty with the English language, picking up on a Reuters report that had made his mangling of English centre stage. It seems that simply speaking of such things is not permissible, at least in the eyes of at least one American. You see, there used to be regular visitor to my blog from Bothell, Washington - or Washington, Bothell. Every day, they would visit my blog. Until, one day, I wrote about George Bush's linguistic limitations, not in censure, but with a sense of worry about the wherewithal of a nation's Commander-in-Chief. Apparently, one is not really free to speak of anything one wishes in America - at least, Americans on the ground don't really respect freedom of speech, with their hearts and minds. You see, if you speak freely, without wish to offend, they can get offended and take umbrage: so where does that leave freedom of speech? It is, in effect, only a theoretical entity, in America. That visitor from Bothell, Washington had been a steadfast regular on my blog - but after I alluded to the Reuters report on George Bush, she or he, wrote a somewhat miffed remark on the post, and then never visited my blog again.

To me, his or her action is very significant. It means that, in practice, there may not actually be true freedom of speech in the United States (or perhaps anywhere else - but most other places don't actually boast of having it in the first place). True freedom of speech, in my eyes, implies that no-one will take any kind of action against you, for voicing an opinion. Not visiting a blog, again, comes under the category of a retributive action. It indicates, therefore, that the high principle of freedom of speech is not actually respected by that individual. That action led me to wonder how many, or how few, other Americans really understand what a world where speech was truly free should be like. In such a world, no opinion would ever attract censure and all would be listened to with equal open-ness. That is the ideal that America speaks of, when it boasts of its freedom of speech. Yet, in truth, the reality falls short of that, at least if this example is anything to go by.

It is perilous, it seems, to speak of anyone in politics. People are polarized and any opinion, about anyone political, whether it be local or international, is likely to differ from the opinions of many of one's readers. In a free world, where speech was truly free, it would not matter. One's opinion would not lead to problems. I have learnt, however, from observing that event, that although one may write as one wishes, on the internet, that certain opinions - perhaps any opinion, in fact - will lead to some people taking exception to it.

We have, therefore, the freedom to write as we wish - but not the freedom to be welcomed universally.

Freedom of speech is an admirable ideal - and it is heartening that the United States says it upholds such a thing. Indeed, as I understand it, it is a First Amendment right, in the Constitution. Yet, its citizens - at least some of them - have not yet fully internalized what freedom of speech really means. I look forward to a day when all the world is free, in every way - being free in speech, is probably the easiest freedom of all - if only people would be tolerant of each other, in all our infinite variety.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and ten months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and three months, and Tiarnan, twenty months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)