Rojak or the melting pot

Japanese Government to Keep ‘Hooligans’ Away from Summit

2008-01-07T13:03:00.000+08:00

Japanese Government to Keep ‘Hooligans’ Away from Summit

TOKYO - The Justice Ministry has begun preparations to put into force a hooligan provision of the immigration law to prevent anti-globalization activists from entering the country to protest the Group of Eight summit meeting to be held in Hokkaido in July.

More here

Whatever happened to mandarin?

2008-01-06T17:13:00.000+08:00

Language in Singapore is something that's fascinated me. Not the language itself (as can be proven by my hard-earned Cs in second language), but how it's treated. There are four official languages in Singapore - Malay, English, Mandarin, Tamil. Once upon a time, it seemed like everything was translated into all four languages - signages, official documents, brochures, etc.etc. It started to change - nowadays, it's actually quite fun to spot when and where and what language is used. Usually you'll find that it's English + Another. The Another can be Japanese (usually tourist areas), Bengali (ReallY! More on that another time), Mandarin, Malay.

It's worth a thesis in its own right. In the meantime, I'm wondering why "What's Up Doc", a newsletter for patients published by the National Healthcare group of Polyclinics, only has English, Tamil, and Malay. No Mandarin. It's quite unusual.

Does this mean that all Chinese can speak English, and they're worried about the Malay and Indians?

On further examination, I realised that the articles were about healthy eating during Hari Raya Puasa and Deepavali, which sort of explains everything, really. Still, I can't help being a little tickled by it all.

In the meantime, I'm tempted to try the recipe for Nasi Tomato yang Menyihatkan (Healthy Tomato rice).

Santerias against global warming

2008-01-05T20:45:00.000+08:00

Lately, religious leaders of all faiths from all over the world have been pointing out to their congregation that global warming, is, well, global, and it behooves all good Muslims/Christians/Buddhists to take care of the earth.

Apparently that includes Santeria priests.

HAVANA - Priests offering New Year's prophecies from Cuba's Afro-Cuban religion on Wednesday gave few hints on the future of convalescing leader Fidel Castro and instead warned about dangerous climate change and epidemics.

More here

(Yes, they do the animal sacrifice thing. Humanely. They consider themselves sorta Catholic.)

How to do what you love

2008-01-03T08:17:00.000+08:00

Rather interesting post
here.

Prestige is like a powerful magnet that warps even your beliefs about what you enjoy. It causes you to work not on what you like, but what you'd like to like.

That's what leads people to try to write novels, for example. They like reading novels. They notice that people who write them win Nobel prizes. What could be more wonderful, they think, than to be a novelist? But liking the idea of being a novelist is not enough; you have to like the actual work of novel-writing if you're going to be good at it; you have to like making up elaborate lies.

True dat. I often think it'll be fun to be a world-class fencer, but the idea of practicing squats ... not so much.

The test of whether people love what they do is whether they'd do it even if they weren't paid for it—even if they had to work at another job to make a living. How many corporate lawyers would do their current work if they had to do it for free, in their spare time, and take day jobs as waiters to support themselves?

Actually, I find the idea that some corporate lawyers would do their current work for free because they like it.. faintly disturbing. I have respect for lawyers, as with any other profession, but for some reason i find myself adding, "Yeah, I bet mass murderers would be happy to do it for free too."

"Come for an interview, plztnx"

2007-12-13T16:05:00.000+08:00

This may be an employee's market, but that doesn't make the job hunt any fun. That said - I'm not particularly impressed by a comapany who called me down for an interview recently. Upon arriving, I was told that they had decided they wanted me for a different position than the one I had applied for.

Ok, it was similar enough that it wasn't such a stretch, but it was not necessarily something I would have applied for, would have required working in a different part of town, with decidedly different job prospects and environment.

Then again, perhaps I should have been tipped off by the HR person who called me the day before to confirm that I was coming down. Her opening line on the phone was, "Eh, this is X from the XYZ. You tomorrow coming down hor?"

The interview didn't inspire confidence either. I was asked two questions in total - and one of those questions was, "So, do you have any questions for us?"

The coupe de grace came as the interview wrapped up. "Oh, the person whom you'll be working under and hiring you isn't here, she's on holiday. If we shortlist you, you'll be asked to come for a second interview."

So why ask me to come down in the first place? I had to take leave for this. Gah.

I don't think they'll be calling me. I may cost too much. Am I an elitist?

A teddy bear called Muhammad

2007-12-10T18:32:00.000+08:00

A pretty cool article about the Muhammad teddybear incident in Sudan, by Arsalan Iftikhar, the contributing editor for Islamica magazine in Washington, D.C.

From the article:

While I was making the global network-television rounds during the Danish cartoon controversy a few years ago, it dawned on me that our human collective was going to continue having international crises every time some backward Muslim knucklehead irrationally reacted to global events somewhere.

Having been asked to explain virtually every kooky action performed by some criminal Muslims worldwide, I saw a new chapter added to the legacy of this sad phenomenon in recent weeks. This time, it was a story about a little teddy bear named Muhammad that lived in the deserts of the African nation of Sudan.

When the incident broke out, I was heartened by the number of commentators on the BBC Have Your Say article, who announced that they were Muslim, and now fully intended to name their next cat Muhammad just for kicks. Of course, there were those who felt very very strongly about it, and thought that the teacher should be lucky that she wasn't getting executed.

Of course, at the heart of it, the story was about culture, not Islam. As you know, Muslims are differents! Some wear scarfs, some belly button rings. Some booze it up, others go vegetarian. Sometimes they're all in the same family (ref: Egypt).

This was my impression of the reactions:

1. Muslims in countries with clear judicial systems and clear recourse to expressing displeasure, seem to feel that if the parents had felt so offended, they should have just asked the teacher to change the name.

2. Muslims in relatively first-world countries, where they were not the underclass, offered to name their next cat Muhammad.

3. Countries with a Muslim majority that had been former British colonies, dryly asked if there would have been a similar outcry if it was a local teacher.

4. Countries with a Muslim majority that had been former British colonies, and still suffering from the aftereffects, thought the world should stay out of this, and the teacher in question should thank her lucky stars that she wasn't executed.

The categories overlap, of course. They're not exact, and definitely not scientific. But to me, it seems to say once again, that the whole conflict had never been about religion. And if that's the case, why are Muslims worldwide on trial? And what's the point of thinking that moderate Muslim leaders will necessarily solve the problem? To Sudan, it's just another case of colonial imperialism.

I'm not saying that moderate Muslim leaders shouldn't bother to speak up. They still have a pull with Sudanese Muslim groups that most world leaders don't have. But at the end of it, the rest of us should stop passing the buck to religious organisations to "take responsibility" for their own, and acknowledge there's more to it. It's too simplistic - and oh yes - fundamentalist.

In the meantime, I agree with Arsalan Iftikhar:

Meanwhile, the world has had yet another chuckle at the expense of every Ali, Akbar and Ahmad out there.

Let me explain: I call this the "Ali, Akbar and Ahmad" phenomenon, which is comparable to the old adage about "Tom, Dick and Harry." To put it in proper context, I would say something like, "I am sick and tired of having to answer for every Ali, Akbar and Ahmad who does some idiotic thing around the world."

But alas, Ali, Akbar and Ahmad always come calling.

If I were given the opportunity, I would fly to the United Kingdom to offer Gillian Gibbons a peace offering. I would express my sadness for her ridiculous ordeal and humbly offer her a teddy bear to put a happy ending on this story.

And that teddy bear's name would be Muhammad.

Indians will rule the world - first stop, Lousiana

2007-10-22T01:59:00.000+08:00

Indian-American wins in Lousiana

The US state of Louisiana has elected its first non-white governor, Bobby Jindal, since the 1870s.
Mr Jindal, 36, also becomes the youngest US governor and the first Indian-American to head a state.

----

Ah. That's why we need the GRC system, because clearly the minorities can't get ahead, and because the majority always votes along racial lines. This is despite David Marshall and JB Jeyaratnam getting in without racial hassle, or needing the minority quota on a group ticket.

Bobby Jindal managed it in Lousiana, and there's a Sikh mayor somewhere else. They're doing it in a country where there's an even lower population percentage of Indians than in Singapore. They manage to get representation.

So why do we need GRCs again?

CMIO promotes ignorance

2007-10-21T23:28:00.000+08:00

Today is Dasera.

Wha?

Dasera is a major Hindu festival, as it makes up one of the three-and-a-half auspicious days (sade teen muhurta) of the year. It is the name imparted to the tenth day (dashami) of the bright fortnight of the Hindu lunar month, Ashvin. Also known as Dasara, Dusshera. and Dusshera.

Bet you didn't know that. Serangoon Road was in full swing Sunday night. I first realised something was up when nearly every Indian-driven lorry/goods vehicle had a garland across the grill.

The thing I really hate about the CMIO is that it gives you the false idea that there's all there is to the various races in Singapore. Just four categories - memorise their official holidays and customs, and you're done. Who needs to know more?

It's especially ridiculous when you consider that the entire spectrum of Indian religious gets subsumed under one category. India, nicknamed the Empire of the Soul, gets one lousy slot. Cos, you know, Parsi=Gujerati=Sikh=Hindu=yeah right.

And it does have an effect on people - I can't count the number of times I've heard people say,"Eh? Got Indian Muslims?" or express bewilderment that Indians come in various shapes, sizes, costumes, and religious accessories. Sadly, it's usually the Chinese who have that reaction. However, the Chinese get shortchanged in their own way - there are Cantonese, Hakka, Hokkien, and don't you dare confuse one for the other to some members of the older generation. My grandpappy hates Hakka, for reasons that I prefer not to think about.

Of course, dealing with all the variations is a bit.. messy. Much easier to have four boxes, to make the statistics easier. And the national holidays. And the costumes on national day, and racial harmony day. Much easier to act as though the variations don't exist.

Sometimes I think that the whole CMIO structure isn't about celebrating diversity, it's about making diversity uniform so that you don't have to think so hard.

The Power of Faith, Muzzled.

2007-09-26T23:31:00.000+08:00

Now that Singapore's finally woken up, and realised that there's something happening in Myanmar, I wonder if the powers that be are going to add al-Qaeda to their prayers tonight. In thanks.

After all, it's thanks to them that religious organisations in Singapore are very determined to toe the line and maintain the harmony.

Ok, no, it's not as simple as that. But historically speaking, religious organisations have power, even if they don't have an army, or even a treasury. In Myanmar and in Thailand, the Buddhists monks have a power of sorts, and they can and will use it politically.

In Singapore, there's no reason to believe it can't happen here. After all, more than one person believes that the Christian pastors hold some political influence, and there's a reason why certain visiting imams are going to get their speaker's pass revoked. Religious organisations do have power, even in secular Singapore. Some might even say, especially in secular Singapore, where people are turning to a religious revivalism to fill that unspoken hole left by a rapidly modernising country.

However, there's a current political clime of suspicion left by the events of September 11th. Every religious group is suspected of potentially fomenting inter-religious violence. At this point in time, it only makes sense for the religious leaders to support the status quo. A push for political change runs the risk of being seen as divisive, or opens themselves up for charges of being "disruptive". There are far more groups right now interested in doing interfaith work,than leading demonstrations or pushing the anti-Iraqi-war stance.

It's not as simple as that, of course. The Singapore government has shown that it's quite capable of maintaining religious peace and solo control of the country's joystick in the past. But I can't help thinking that the current "terrorists!!!OMG" atmosphere has given the religious groups an added impetus to stay the hell away from Parliament Lane.

MCPs thrive on the P65

2007-08-22T09:30:00.000+08:00

From a commenter on the p65 blog:

I am not homophobic, long back in my polytechnic days I dated a girl who is bisexual (she told me) and I have studied abroad in a country where “gay is ok” and have studied with persons with such orientation, even befriended them and if they visit this country and if I have the resources, I’d accomodate them in my home. However, to change the law concerned with them right now, is perhaps not the best of ideas because although a lot of noise has been heard as of late calling for the change, it is all coming from a small liberatarian portion of an Asian city state. It is because somebody was a part of a Rafflesian alumnus, a possible future leader of this country we cannot afford to lose, that that person chose to abstain from going anywhere near that segment of society. It is that sort of a person, that thinks like the majority of his people. Do not challenge such sentiments or Lynette, you yourself for one may not have a boyfriend for long, or a decent husband born in this country ever, unless he is bisexual.
- Harish Shah, July 22nd, 2007 at 9:00 pm

How on earth does stuff like this get through the moderator?

No, really. This is classic male chauvinist behaviour - "behave little woman, or you're going to be single all your life, and as a woman, that would be TERRIBLE for you." It's demeaning, because it in effect puts down the other party, by reminding them that they are female, and lesser.

Don't believe me? Reverse the situation.

Do not challenge such sentiments or Harish, you yourself for one may not have a girlfriend for long, or a decent wife born in this country ever, unless she is bisexual

Doesn't quite have the same punch, does it?

Of course, I could be taking it out of context.... *sidles away sheepishly*

Things I have said to evangelists

2007-08-02T16:01:00.000+08:00

It happened again. Two girls, bright, perky (in more ways than one), polite - approached me in a shopping mall, and asked me if I would be interested in attending a "special event" at their church.

I've always had a special interest in Christian evangelists in Singapore. Singaporeans as a whole seem to be shy about approaching strangers. Evangelists on the other hand, don't seem to mind, in fact, they're quite happy to do so. It's something they share with those credit card roadshow folks, time-share marketeers and "Hi we are looking for model" people.

(strangely enough, students on flag day seem prepared to die of embarrassment. And block the escalator while doing so.)

Anyway, I've thought that it was quite cool that they did so - after all, it takes guts to go up and tell complete strangers that they're currently on the pathway to hell. In some sense, I envy them - I've always wanted to tell people that they're going to hell.

So let's get this straight - I admire what they do, and the kind of conviction that can get you to overcome so many years of cultural conditioning.

But to be honest, it's a hassle to tell them that you're not interested in the kind of ecstasy they're pushing. After the most recent attempt at conversion, I started to think about all the experiences I've had with evangelists.

Mezzo, age 12

Bespectacled, vaguely aware that there's going to be an exam. Not entirely sure what religion is, except that for some it means no charsiew bao, and for others, no free time on Sunday morning.

Evangelist cousin, 19, and therefore has the answers to the cosmos. She corners me in her bedroom, along with an even younger cousin. Younger cousin is Catholic, or so her mother has told her.

Evangelist Cousin: Jesus saves. Accept him. Become christian.

Mezzo, age 12: Really?

EC: Yeah. Take a look at this handy little Christianity 4 Noobz booklet I happen to have here. All here.

Mz12: But I think I'm [insert faith].

Younger cousin: And I'm already Christian, cos I'm Catholic.

EC: Nya-uh. Did you know that [prominent leader of faith] went to hell? There was this guy, see, who had an mystical vision, and saw [leader] in hell. It's true. You can trust people with mystical visions.

Mz12 + younger cousin: *looks*

EC: Look, you wanna go to hell?

Mz12: .. no?

EC: Excellent. Take this book, and the booklet, and start reading it. Younger cousin, take one too, I know you're Catholic, so you'll need one. I'm so glad!! Oh, and do you want the rest of your family to go to hell?

Mz12: .. no?

EC: Well, you know what to do! I have more Christianity 4 Noobz booklets, just ask me for them. *leaves the room*

YC: Did we just get converted? Mum is going to kill me.

Mz12: I think you go to hell if you convert.

YC: Mum's worse.

Two weeks later -

Mz12: *dials* Um. Evangelist cousin? I don't think I can be Christian anymore.

EC: Oh no, why?

Mz12: I think my family would get upset.

EC: You're a very brave kid. You can do this.

Mz12: No, I don't and I think I'm too young and you're not allowed to chose religions if you're too young. I can't even watch porn yet, how can I choose Gods?

EC: You watch porn?

Mz12: Erhm. Bye.

Mezzo, age 15

A typical teenager, trying to fit in while trying to stand out. Hesitating a touch too long at a bus interchange, as if unsure of where to go.

An evangelical surveyer approaches, to show Mezzo@15 the way, the only way.

ES: Hey, do this survey. The one that cunningly yet casually asks you your religon with other data that only exists to make it look legit.

Mezzo@15 is a teenager, looking for a way, trying to take root while trying to uproot.

ES: Oh ho, I see you are a 'freethinker'. Let me get you to sit down and ask further questions.

Mz15: Sure? Why not?

ES: Have you seen my l33t Christianity for Noobz booklet? Got one right here. Now, if you're feeling lost, that's because Christ needs to be on the throne of your life. Like in the picture here. See? There's this cross, and it's sitting on a throne. That's good, cos now there's a big circle around the cross and the throne and you, and GOD, who unlike Christ and you, actually gets his name spelled out.

Mz15: I think I've seen this comic before.

ES: The circle is like your life. It's a circle of life, but without Elton John, because Elton is gay and God hates fags. Hahah. Now, the other picture, you're on the throne, Christ is not, and God is OUTSIDE the big circle which is your life. Which makes God sad. Do you want to make God sad?

Mz15: No?

ES: Then accept Christ on the throne of your life!

Mz15: Um. Yeah. Let me think about that. Thrones.

ES: Here, take my Christianity for Noobz booklet. In fact, take three.

Mezzo, age 17

It's junior college, and partying is what you do, apart from angst. You're a jc kid, ergo, you party. Any party.

Friend: Come along to my Easter day party!

Mz17: Awesome! Ooh, movie! Ooh, guy in robes! Talking to himself! Ok, it's like he's going to die, no wait, he doesn't have to die, he's asking his father why he has to die.. eh. Think I know how this goes.

Evangelist Party-goer: Hi, person. Come sit with me! Don't worry about your other friend, she'll be sitting with my friend. It makes things easier when I break you down, um, bond with you.

Mz17: *notes that EP is unfanciable, loses interest*

EP: Hey, lookie at my Christianity for Noobz booklet!

Mz17: *spaces out*

EP: *ten minutes later* .. and here, God is in your life, cos Christ is on the throne. Also, he's the pathway to heaven!

Mz17: Never mind. Er, you know, I'm kinda already [member of faith]. And aren't all Gods one god anyway, and teach basically the same thing? We're all brothers. And world peace.

EP: No. Christ is the only pathway to heaven!

Mz17: Like Led Zeppelin?

EP: *is polite*

Mz17: *wonders if wise-assery keeps you out of heaven*

Mezzo, age 21

Still finding the way, but university's given the tools to navigate. If you're going to find your way, it helps to find your starting point.

At a train station this time, because Singapore's finding new ways too. Two girls approach, with a survey in the hand, and faith in the heart.

Evangelist Girls: Hey, survey! You're freethinker?

Mz21: Sorta, but I'm also kinda [insert faith here]

EG: Oh. Um. Could we go through this booklet with you?

Mz21: No. Absolutely not. Look, I've got friends who show me the way already, ok?

EG: Oh, which church? Come on, strike up a conversation with us, that way, it's harder for you to be so mean as to just leave.

Mz21: One of them. Thanks, but not interested.

EG: But! Save! Throne!

Mz21: No, don't worry about me, ok? Anyway, I've a friend who's going to turn up in a bit, so I don't want to keep him waiting.

EG: We could meet your fr..

Mz21: We're in a hurry. Movie. But thanks for caring.

Friend turns up, Mezzo@21 fills him in.

Mz21: They're the ones over there.

Friend: The pair talking to a makcik?

Mz21: Yeah.

Friend: They're dedicated.

Mz21: Optimists.

Friend: Christ is Hope, remember? Hey, that one's hot.

Mezzo, age 24

At 24, family starts being bearable again. You stop imagining that you're actually adopted, and acknowledge you could be related. Again, at a junction, a surveyer approaches.

Evangelical Surveyor, ver. 2: Ah. You're [member of faith].

Mz24: Uh huh. *wonders if actual prayers are required*

ESv2: Well, nice to meet you.

Mz24: *wonders if the booklet is the same colour* Huh? Where'd she go? That was fast!

Mezzo, present day

I'm standing in Novena Square, and the girls have pamphlets. I'm a working adult, almost visibly English-educated, and I look younger than I am. I'm not surprised I was picked.

The girls ask me if I'm interested in a special performance at their church. They've got leaflets, with colourful Photoshop images. For a moment, I miss that little orange booklet.

They ask me to come and listen. I know a bit more of what I am, than I did at 12. I know how to stand out and fit in, because I'm not 16. I'm not 17 either, and I know that nice-sounding concepts need to be supported by understanding and facts. Moved beyond 20, so I've done the readings. No longer a tentative 24, I can stand firm and say it, because I am an individual, and belonging to a family or a group greater than myself doesn't change it.

And I've been working for awhile, and I know what to say.

MzPresent: Thank you. But I already believe in Jesus.

Evangelist girls: That's fantastic!

Their pleasure is palpable. For a moment I feel like telling them that I don't think they understand it the same way I do. But what's the point? They'd get upset, and right now, they're happy and if I am a true believer in my faith, I wouldn't do that to them.

Maybe I should have just been straight with them. I didn't lie. Some beliefs are common to all humanity, too.

But I do believe. In my own way, and so do they. And it doesn't threaten me at all.

-------

Events described here are real, though I will admit to paraphrasing it for the purposes of coherency and to allow for my impressions to come through. I've actually been approached many more times than this, but some were less pleasant, as well as somewhat irrelevant.

To the two evangelists I met at Novena - Um. Sorry. Yes, I do go to a church in Bishan, like I told you, but when I said "church", I was broadly interpretting it as "place of worship". By the way, you're cute. Really. Are you single?

Wordblock!

2007-03-22T12:00:00.000+08:00

Where's a good synonym for "falloopalazza" when you need it?

Bah.

Voices of Youth in Denmark

2007-03-07T16:17:00.000+08:00

As Danes view the drab rubble of what was once a vibrant youth centre few applaud the decision to demolish a hotbed of creative youth culture.

But even fewer condone the organised outrage of youths that left parts of Copenhagen resembling a war zone.

From the BBC

There's a dark side to everything, even youth culture. They're a far cry from the fresh faced enthused young "delegates" that pop up at every generic Youth Conference, determined to Change the World and Make Youth Voices Heard.

They're prepared to fight for what they believe in, and for them, it doesn't mean talking about it.

Judging from the well-organised battle plans and the cases of prepared projectiles and petrol bombs found in Ungdomshuset, Europe would do well not to underestimate the anti-establishment resolve of some of its more politicised youths.

In a way I admire them. Not for their ability to accomplish goals - because I think that compromise is a virtue, but because they're willing to go beyond talk.

That said, don't do drugs and petrol bombs. They're bad for you and the environment.

Sorry about that, Mr Chia

2007-03-06T17:21:00.000+08:00

Prisoners subjected only to psychological torture report as much mental anguish as those who are beaten, according to new research.

The study of nearly 300 survivors of torture from the former Yugoslavia found that those who experienced no physical torment later developed equally high levels of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as those who did. The survivors also rated the distress caused at the time by the two types of torture equally highly. Researchers say the findings provide a strong argument against the use of psychological maltreatment of prisoners - referred to by some as "torture lite".

The UN convention against torture came into force in 1987, prohibiting acts that cause severe pain or suffering in order to gain information from prisoners. Nevertheless, torture still appears widespread around the world: a 2005 report by Amnesty International found that systematic torture occurred in 104 out of 150 countries surveyed.

Since the attacks on the US on 11 September 2001, the nation received severe criticism for torturing suspected terrorists abroad, such as in the Abu Ghraib prison and at the Guantanamo Bay naval station. Officials claimed that the psychological torture used against detainees there - such as sleep deprivation - were legal as these did not cause direct physical harm.

"These techniques were designed to break down prisoners to get information without leaving a physical mark on them," explains Leonard Rubenstein, executive director of Physicians for Human Rights.

Sham executions
To investigate the impact of purely psychological torture, Metin Basoglu of King’s College London, UK, and colleagues surveyed 279 survivors of torture from the former Yugoslavia, including both soldiers and civilians from the previously war-torn region.

Between 2000 and 2002 the survivors answered questions about the nature of the torture they endured. The majority of them had endured beating and other forms of physical torture, including electric shocks, tooth extractions and suffocation. But about 20 of the survivors experienced purely psychological manipulations, such as sham executions or the torturing of family members and threats of rape.

The researchers collected medical assessments of whether the torture survivors showed signs of PTSD - a form of lasting anxiety. They found no difference in the prevalence of this disorder between the two groups.

Mind and body
They also asked the participants to rate their distress during torture on a scale of zero (no distress) to four (maximum distress). Both those who suffered physical torture and those who experienced physiological torment alone rated their overall level of stress as 3.5.

Basoglu says the findings challenge the common perception that psychological torture is less distressing than physical torture. "Implicit in this distinction is a difference in the distressing nature of the events. The evidence takes issue with that," he says. "And since psychological torture is as bad as physical torture, we shouldn’t use it."

The findings chime with previous work, say others. "The conclusions are completely consistent with what those subjected to these draconian practices have reported," Rubenstein says. He points out that US Senator John McCain, who experienced torture as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, has said that if he were forced to make a decision between enduring psychological or physical torture, he would not hesitate to pick the latter.

Bad intelligence
McCain and fellow lawmakers pushed for an explicit ban on the US using any form of torture. In 2005, US president George W Bush signed the bill outlawing the torture of detainees. And officials later revised the Army Field Manual to explicitly ban certain treatments of detainees, such as forced nudity and sex acts, hoods or duct tape on the eyes, and electric shock. "We don’t know what the CIA is doing, though," Rubenstein notes.

Beyond question of human rights violations, recent reports have also raised doubt over whether any form of torture produces reliable information, he adds.

"Torture generates extremely bad intelligence data" and is "enormously counterproductive", according to bioethicist Steven Miles at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, US. He gives the example that some of the information linking Iraq to Al-Qaeda, which later proved wrong, came from a man named Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi during CIA interrogations in Egypt that involved torture.

From New Scientist.

Good thing we outsourced it to Kuala Lumpar in the '60s.

Farsitube! - Skiing in Iran

2007-03-05T14:41:00.000+08:00

There's Farsitube?

Far out.

Check out Skiing in Iran. It's an amatuer documentary on, um, skiing in Iran and the axis of evil.

Singapore Mosques reaching out to non-Muslims

2007-03-05T12:54:00.000+08:00

Muis aims for all mosques to reach out to non-Muslims

The goal is to have all 69 mosques in Singapore reach out to those beyond the Muslim community, by the year 2009.
Challenging new-generation mosque leaders at their investiture yesterday to adopt an inclusive attitude towards non-Muslims, Mr Alami Musa, president of the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (Muis), said: "Doing so can ensure that our mosques become a catalyst for national integration."

So far, said Mr Alami, 56 mosques are running joint programmes for the elderly with grassroots organisa-tions such as the community development councils (CDC).

But he hopes all 69 would reach out beyond the community in the next three years, as spelt out in Muis' second three-year work plan unveiled over the weekend. One major change announced was that Muis would manage mosques in clusters, CDC-style.

Shouldering the responsibility of shaping the "community-friendly mosques" will be 197 individuals invested as volunteer members of 18 mosque management boards. Of the 57 who are newcomers, 14 are tertiary educated.

Those Today spoke to felt there was scope for mosques to conduct more programmes with non-Muslim organisations. Such tie-ups should go beyond meals together during festive seasons, said Mr Anis Maricar, 36.

He suggested forming working committees to share experiences on common social problems, such as broken homes and low-income families.

Mr Kamsari Sanuh, 38, added: "And when we have agreed on which areas to focus on, we can move on to conducting workshops that can benefit not just Muslims but also non-Muslims." /rose

Posting this for my own interest. Good idea if it actually works out.

Christ: "King of the World!"

2007-02-28T09:14:00.000+08:00

According to James Cameron, director of such classic theological treatises as Terminator, Aliens and especially Terminator 2, Jesus Christ died on the cross at Golgotha. On this, both he and the Pope agree. But instead of rising from the grave three days later, pouring himself a cup of coffee and then wandering the countryside inviting disbelievers to jam their index fingers into his crucifixion wounds, Jesus stayed dead and spent the next two millennia rotting in the grave. And bad news, Christians! James Cameron claims to have DNA evidence to prove it.

From Table of Malcontents

I'm not a big believer in Christ being reborn myself, but.. Titanic director James Cameron? Like, "King of the World", makes him qualified to certify the King of Peace?

The tombs have been around for awhile, but James Cameron has a documentary coming out on the subject, directed by Jewish director Simcha Jacobovici, which may explain the press conference.

Reactions - the theologians think he's misinformed, the archeaolgists think he's press hungry, and the local Jews who live around the area the tomb was found?

They're quite happy.

Local residents told the BBC News website they were pleased with the attention the tomb has drawn.

"It will mean our house prices will go up because Christians will want to live here," one woman said.

When I link to you, I link myself

2007-02-28T00:10:00.000+08:00

I updated some of my links, and added new ones. I've got to think of a better way to organise them, or at least come up with some terrible catchy trendy title for each link section.

I rather liked this one: Muslime-a-day. Lots of lovely photos, and it's a lovely, sensitive website run by Hijabman. Very peaceful.

The Perfect P

2007-02-27T13:24:00.000+08:00

Don't look here.

Seriously, what was he thinking? Was he thinking? And that smile on his face when he talks about having anal.. with what, an elephant? I've never been one for prayer, but if it'll help me forget faster..

The 40 year old Egyptian Virgin

2007-02-24T13:05:00.000+08:00

Shiekh Khaled El Gindy, an Al-Azhar scholar and member of the Higher Council of Islamic Studies told The Daily Star Egypt that he agrees with the new fatwa.

"Islam never differentiates between men and women, so it is not rational for us to think that God has placed a sign to indicate the virginity of women without having a similar sign to indicate the virginity of men," El Gindy said.

"Any man who is concerned about his prospective wife’s hymen should first provide a proof that he himself is virgin," he added.

From Daily Star, Egypt

I rather like Egypt.

Other bits -

Even more shocking to many observers, Gomaa said that if a married woman had sexual intercourse with another man but truly regretted her actions and asked God for forgiveness, she should not tell her husband.

"According to Sharia, if a husband knew that his wife had sexual intercourse with anyone else, he should divorce her, so by not telling him she would be protecting her home and her life," he explained

I rather like the idea of someone interpreting the old books according to the principles they were founded on, rather than on some pet issue latter-day clerics found pressing. It's also good to see someone who realises that there's a huge difference between a cultural practice that sprung up because of the need to be able to apply a principle in that period of time, and a religious obligation.

According to the good mufti here, the overriding principle is protection of life and self, which takes precedence over telling your husband of your vagina's extra-curricular activities. The latter is based on the idea that the vagina somehow belongs to the husband, and as such, he gets to control it, as his personal spawning pond.

In the way he's interpreting it, the mufti is essentially saying that a women's well-being takes precedence over some man's sexual right.

It's International Women's Day next month. I'm in that kind of mood. On a side note, the mufti sounds a bit looney. I should probably check if it's been reported anywhere else.

The women of Iraq

2007-02-18T15:37:00.000+08:00

The war turns gender roles on its head.

In Iraq:

We were asked to send the next of kin to whom the remains of my nephew, killed on Monday in a horrific explosion downtown, can be handed over. The young men of the family, as was customary, rose to go.

“NO!” cried his mother. “Isn’t my son enough?? Must we lose more of our youth?? You know there are unknowns who wait at the Morgue to either kill or kidnap the men who dare reach its doors. I will go.”

So we went, his mum, his other aunt and I.

I was praying all the way there.

I never thought a day would come when it was the women of the family, who would be safer on the roads.

Read the rest of it at Inside Iraq

There really isn't anything that I can say that hasn't been said before, and said better. But with the mess in Iraq now, it's hard to remember that the other conservative Arab nations were worried about Iraq, not for Saddam, but because Iraq looked and behaved a lot like America - wealthy, modern, and moderately secular.

Ghost Brides of Shaanxi

2007-02-06T16:05:00.000+08:00

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese police have arrested three men for killing two young women to sell their corpses as "ghost brides" for dead single men, a Chinese newspaper reported, warning the dark custom might have claimed many other victims.

Yang Donghai, a 35-year-old farmer in western China's Shaanxi province, confessed to killing a woman bought from a poor family for 12,000 yuan ($1,545) last year.

She thought she was being sold into an arranged marriage, but Yang killed her in a gully and sold her corpse for 16,000 yuan, the Legal Daily reported on Thursday. He and two accomplices then killed a prostitute and sold her for 8,000 yuan before police caught them.

"I did it for the money; it was a quick buck," Yang said, according to the paper. "If I hadn't slipped up early, I planned to do a few more."

The women were victims of an old belief, still alive in the yellow-earth highlands of western China, that young men who die unmarried should go to their graves accompanied by deceased women who will be their wives in the afterlife. Often these women die natural deaths.

Police in Yanan, the poor and dusty corner of Shaanxi where Chairman Mao Zedong nurtured his Communist revolution, said the dark trade went beyond these cases.

"The actual number is far from just these," the paper said.

Yang and two helpers sold the bodies to Li Longsheng, an undertaker who police said specialized in buying and selling the dead women for "ghost weddings". It was unclear what happened to Li.

From Reuters

China is a crazy place, and it's on the brink of implosion.

Then again, we've been saying that for awhile.

Things I heard in the Kallang Roar

2007-02-01T21:55:00.000+08:00

A conversation that did not quite happen last night after the Singapore-Thailand game.

"Anyway, we wanted to shout 'Ho Ching', but decided against it."

"'Ho Ching'? Why?"

"Cos she brought down Thailand? And wasn't even trying?"

"No shit. I guess we know who wears the Lee pants now."

"Guess so - didn't they used to say that she's a man?"

"She'd totally take out the Thai team."

"Yeah. They're all girls, anyway."

"Girls? Really?"

"They're Thai, they're all transgender - didn't you watch Iron Ladies, the one about the volleyball team?"

"Those were men pretending to be women, not the other way around."

"Yeah. Wonder if Ho Ching plays volleyball."

"Thanks, now you made me think about Ho Ching's kar-ching."

Anyway, that conversation didn't happen. But the game was fun, for reasons that had nothing to do with the game. The National Stadium's got a lot of memories for me - I remember being a performer for the SEA games, and the days spent with classmates practicing our moves and our bridge game. The way Khong Guan biscuits and 100 plus tasted (the official sponsers). The stairs that always smelled of urine, even after they cleaned it up. Blissfully caught in the rain with the one that I thought was my first true love.

The grand old pee-stained lady's going to go soon. I don't want to launch into a discussion as to whether she should be kept; architect historian that I am, I want to build and preserve at the same time.

But I was glad to be there once last time - with thousands of others, to cheer on the national team, so that we could say all the things we never say, in that one last Kallang Roar.

(And for those of you who weren't there, yes, someone led the crowd in a cheer that went *clapclapclap* SHINCORP!* A lot of things get said at the National Stadium, that we never ever say outloud. )

Description of the day

2007-01-23T19:17:00.000+08:00

"At rest, it was a sad little mushroom cap sleeping in a bed of pubic hair." - anonymous Internetizen

I wish I could write like that. Really.

En memoriam

2007-01-14T23:55:00.000+08:00

I've always had a reluctant crush on MP Ms Indranee Rajah, ever since her great boobs and fantastic poise caught my attention. I don't know her personally, and I think she's mildly condescending, but I've never had the urge to diss her competence. She's ok, and I think she mostly knows what she's doing.

So the news of her brother's death was - well, I wouldn't say upsetting, since it's not as if I was friendly with either of them - so let's just say that it caught my attention in a "oh shit, that sucks" kind of way.

Of course, the fact that it took place two floors below me was a factor as well.

I heard that Dr Rajah had a heart attack while a student was consulting him in his room. Much as I live for the drama, I'll skip this starring role in ER: Singapore edition.

Poor guy. Heart attacks are just awful - it's out of the blue, and that little chunk of muscle that we never pay attention to as it blip-blops along suddenly goes blip-blop-bzzzzt.

You never get to say goodbye - so other people have to do it for you. I don't know the man, so the notice that was sent out on the mailing list will have to do:

Death Notice - Dr Ananda Rajah

It is with great sadness that I write to say that my friend and
colleague Ananda Rajah died on the afternoon of Tuesday, 9 January
2007, of an apparent heart attack at the age of 54. Ananda is probably
best known for his research on the Karen and on ethnic relations,
particularly relating to Myanmar, but anyone who had the pleasure of
knowing him will also remember his fine sense of humor and the great
pleasure he took from relating to friends, colleagues and students.

Paul Kratoska
Editor, H-SEASIA

He was one of the first generation of NUS academics, back when it was the University of Malaya. He would have remembered a time when the university believed itself an insitution of learning, not the Human Resource centre of Singapore, when they accepted government grants as homage, not as payment.

And now he steps into the past, carrying his memory with him. I think the older professors look at him, and see their own future - the last of a greater generation, marginalised by a government that sees them as inconvenient reminders of another time.

Let it end

2007-01-13T13:05:00.000+08:00

A:There is no "I" in "team".

B:But there's certainly a "me".

Best comeback ever.

Revising a thesis is like opening up the wound, putting your appendix back in, stitching it up, and then cutting it open again.

And I use to have My Little Ponies

2007-01-07T23:42:00.000+08:00

I've been busy recently - rushing a publication and the obligatory thesis revisions. I have a newfound respect for people who manage part-time degrees now.

Came across any number of interesting links recently, but this one, featuring an LJ community that specialises in erotic horse art, is very special indeed. And by "special", I mean "god damn internet crazies." I try to be open minded as I can, but there is something deeply disturbing about a mare with breasts masturbating herself with a carrot. It's just wrong, ok?

(right?)

A rant in the museum

2006-12-21T20:35:00.000+08:00

Rant mode: Am I the only person on the planet who actually likes the National Museum? Or am I simply one of the few people who've actually spent more than 20 minutes in it? Seriously, half the criticsms I've read are by people who don't seem to know what was going in there.

I don't think the exhibits were perfect. I think there's area for improvement. I can name one, actually. But some of the criticisms that the NMS has received simply aren't justified. And for that matter, I've seen perfectly blah exhibits in some of the "world class museums".

I'm quite tense this today, so I'm definitely overreacting. But I can't help feeling that the NMS is going to have to face the problem of having to be all things to everyone.

Screw them. Heh. I need to put my head down and get some perspective. I suppose if people perceive it to be a problem, then there is a problem, whether I think it's there or not.

testing in progress | i am alarmed

2006-12-18T23:15:00.000+08:00

This is a test. How about that??

The rude(?) Singaporean

2006-12-18T10:52:00.000+08:00

Last Saturday, the MRT was crowded - not quite peak hour crowded, but the next best thing. The average person there was carrying shopping bags galore - it was the coming-home-from-Xmas-shopping crowd - the kind that clears out of Orchard so that the heading-out-for-dinner crowd can move in.

Two senior citizens got on. Senior with an S - white hair, pajama top and polyester print - not one of those can-withdraw-CPF sort of senior citizen, the kind that doesn't quite identify themselves as senior citizen until financially or morally convenient.

The seats filled as usual.

Pause.

Two people - under 30 - got up and gave their seats to them. Both of them were carrying bags as well, and looked slightly knackered from a day of shopping. One man, one woman, not together.

I remember the man's face - vaguely uncomfortable at reaching out to another person in the potential breach of a social contract that sacralised personal space in the crowded MRT in lieu of not actually having any, slightly awkward because god forbid he should actually draw attention to himself, wanting to go unnoticed while at the same time needing to get the senior's attention.

The elderly man sat down, and smiled in thanks.

The younger man gave a slight grunt and nod of acknowledgement, and quickly turned away. I fancied there was a tinge of pink to him now.

It's not the first time I've seen it happen - enough for me to question the maxim that Singaporeans are innately rude and uncaring, or that young people have no breeding. Granted, I've never taken the MRT at the real peak hours, where I'm sure all the real shit takes place. Still, it makes me wonder if the whole "rude Singaporean" meme is an overreaction to the official line that Singapore is a gracious society.

I don't think we're particularly gracious, nor are we particularly rude. I think we're not very good at standing out from the crowd, whether it's to do the right thing or the wrong, thing, and we're more likely to bitch that something went wrong than when something went right. I think we're human, with all that entails, and all the variations between.

Law! Huh! What is it good for! | absolutely everything

2006-12-12T01:29:00.000+08:00

A little kerfuffle - or lack thereof over the MHA Women's Focus Group Discussion session. The topic was about article 375 (marital immunity) and article 377 (homosexuality).

Sayoni have done a great job of covering the event, so there's not much to say (especially since I wasn't there.)

There's just thing I want to bring up. During the session, Ms Indranee Rajah had this to say:

Indranee: Logic has little to do with whether the law stands or not… It is more about maintaining the status quo. [follows up with point about religious groups being upset]

Indranee: You are right, it does not have a physical impact on them. But it is more of an emotional impact, and what kind of message we are sending by removing the law. We have to look at parents. They might be afraid that their children will turn gay, if they see other people being gay, and they think it is okay to be gay

I actually have a soft spot in my heart for Indranee Rajah - and maybe even a hard spot somewhere else. She has an awesome car, fills out a T-shirt really well, and generally comes across as quite sensible. I don't agree with what she says, but I can appreciate that she's damn good at spinning the party line.

And smart chicks = hot. Chicks that spend their careers with their heads up the patriarchy's backside = so not hot, and yes, I'm looking at you, beyotch.

So anyway - I am willing to believe that Indranee doesn't believe everything she says. That being said, I don't have her personal LJ account (screw the p65 rubbish, indraneerajah.blogspot is where it's at!) , so all I can crit is what she says publically.

No, the law isn't about maintaining the status quo. It's about protecting rights, rights that were laid out in the constitution. In fact, the law should never be used to maintain the status quo, because more often than not, the status quo is stupid.

From Pandogan.net

The more things change, the more they stay the same, huh? Reading those above pullquotes back to back confirms why civil rights for gays and lesbians should never be decided at the ballot box. Bigots of all stripes, indeed the public at large, are never comfortable — and more often than not are hostile — when it comes to granting rights to an oppressed group.

Time eventually reduces the hostility over time, but in the end, it is the courts that end up protecting and establishing rights when people cannot do the right thing because of fear and prejudice.

The sad difference today in the struggle for gay civil equality is that both political parties at the national level have accepted and promoted the proposition that it’s fine and dandy that our rights should be determined by the American public.

That’s shameful

I am not a political activist, or if you chose to call me one, I'd be a pretty poor one. I don't "get" politics in the sense that I don't know how to get things done. So that's my caveat and disclaimer - I may be wrong about what's happening in Singapore.

However the problem I have with some of the arguments put forth by both sides of the gay rights discussion in Singapore is that it sometimes seems to be centred around the idea that people must be made comfortable, that people might complain. Govt says "People will hate it/religiousblahblah", Gay rights activists reply, "No they won't/who cares?"

You can't win with that sort of framework based around the idea that hypothetically someone might be offended. You can't win, because you can't prove that "No one will complain" or "no one will get hurt" or "society will stay intact".

Surely the argument should be based on demanding that the law protect your civil rights, rather than the non-existent rights of potentially non-existent groups to infringe on your rights? Why should the law care if the status quo isn't maintained? That's not what it's there for. For heaven's sake, the status quo also believes (or used to believe) that people shouldn't date interracially/inter-religiously. (remember the scholar who did not get his scholarship revoked despite writing disgusting racist comments in his blog? I swear, Singaporeans should grasp that there are scholars, and there are no-one-applied-to-that-organisation scholars.)

The law is there to protect the rights of the individual, not the prejudices of the majority.

I'm sure Indranee is aware of that. I just wish she could say so.

-----

In a more light-hearted mood, there's the kerfuffle US-side over Mary Cheney (right wing VP Dick Cheney's daughter)and her long-time partner Heather Poe's decision to have a baby. Some of the more hilarious nuggets that it inspired from the apoplectic religious right:

You got blood vessels and membranes in your behind. And if you put something unnatural in there, it breaks them all up. No wonder your behind is bleeding. It’s destroying us. Can’t make no connection with a screw and another screw. The Bible says God made them male and female. The Hebrew word Negade, which means complimentary nature - there is something unique to man and unique to woman and it takes those two things to compliment each other. You can’t make a connection with two screws. It takes a screw and a nut! (shouting)…”
–D.C. pastor Rev. Willie Wilson during a sermon.

And the responses on the internet:

look, God was a carpenter, so he’d understand this a hell of alot more than some pastor. a screw doesn’t go on a nut. it goes into wood. and you need at least two of them to make a connection, otherwise it’s just a pivot point which pries out. so two screws are good to go. two nuts also work fine, provided you have a medium for them to act through (generally a threaded shaft of some sort, but for people, hands, tongue, or gizmos would be fine.) so gays are good, and lesbians are fine, so long as they don’t exist in a vacuum. but I think other problems would introduce themselves there. like explosive decompressi.

and you can’t switch over to bolts and nuts (which do require one another) because they you gotta ask what the hell is the washer is. a condom? foreplay? your patriarchial metaphor would fall apart with either of those.

From Pandagon.

Singapore Armed Forces According to Singaporeans | exam observations

2006-12-05T22:34:00.000+08:00

This post could be massively unprofessional. Of course, it's definitely not on par with whiney brats who publicly undermine their companies and backstab their (named) colleagues, so by internet standards, this is probably alright.

I've been busy the last week or so with work. Namely, marking. There isn't a member of the faculty yet who faces a pile of undergrad exam scripts with joyous heart and jovial red pen. It's massively depressing - exams bring out the worst in students, and it makes you question the effectiveness of your teaching. Of course, the value of exams is questionable in its own right - I actually endorse the regurgitation factor when setting the questions - but that's a post for another time.

There are, however, highlights to these days of red ink and curve-creation. Exams bring out the worst in the students, but at the same time, it has a way of stripping arguments and thoughts to the bone. Few people have the luxury of inserting qualifiers, and often they fall back on trite phrases meant as shorthand for a larger, far less crude idea.

Because of that, it's possible to discern - or at least, it's very easy to think that you can discern - what students actually think about a subject, or their constructed impressions of certain institutions.

(And as you can tell, blogs bring out the diametric opposite of the exam shorthand..)

And finally, the subject of today's post:

Observations on the Singapore Armed Forces

A foreigner reading the exam essays would reach these three conclusions.

1. The SAF was created to be a bonding common experience for Singaporeans. Thus is the Singapore identity created. Singaporean males spend two years bonding with each other, learning about other Singaporeans. In short, National Service is a holiday camp, the kind your parents sent you to in December. Come to think of it, most of those were at army barracks. Presumable, at some point in time, someone whips out a guitar so that participants can sing old favourites while roasting pythons on the fire.

2. The SAF helps Singaporean females to bond and form the Singaporean identity as well, because they have fathers, brothers and boyfriends who serve NS. Presumably, lesbian orphan Singaporeans are discriminated against and cannot be part of the Singaporean Identity.

3. The SAF's function as an army is a pleasant bonus and afterthought. Side effects including boosting the economy. Its main purpose is to train Ministers.

If exams are a way to see into men's souls, then Singaporeans' concept of the SAF is worrying. What happened to the SAF as, well, an army? In a country that was never born in the revolutionary fires, how on earth did we end up with a military so all-pervasive as to become a major institution in constructing civilian rule and civilian culture?

I end with a last point that seemed very important from the undergrad's point of view:

The SAF is a poisoned shrimp.

Really.

Taking a break

2006-11-30T23:21:00.000+08:00

I wouldn't normally do it, but the graphics used in the quiz were strangely seductive. The buttons practically purred when I clicked them.

Nollywood noogie

2006-11-29T17:21:00.000+08:00

I have learnt two things today.

1. "Nollywood". Refers to the growing film industry in Nigeria.

2. Someone finally microwaved a baby.

In reference to an earlier post about China and Africa, I found a link to a discussion on whether China is colonising Africa. I hearts the BBC.

China and Africa | someone's getting screwed

2006-11-26T21:39:00.000+08:00

Everytime someone talks about how China is our motherland and we should do business in China because a)it's a booming market b)we share the same culture, I just want to sigh. Or cry.

We don't share the same culture as China. And even if we did, so what? China's a nation now, and it thinks along national lines. Don't get sentimental about China. China'll bend you over the Great wall and fuck you blind.

The reason I mention this - another news report about how China's screwing over poor African nations through dumping practices.

China's ambitions in Africa

China has stepped up its business presence in Africa, but is being criticised for not pushing for improvements in human rights and governance in some countries.

...
All but a few varieties of Africa's flip flops now come from China and local companies cannot compete.

Mr Ghaddar claims end of line stock from Chinese factories is "dumped" here, sold for less than the cost of materials, dodging customs and import duties.

...

Some Tanzanians object that Chinese imports are shipped to the Chinese embassy in diplomatic containers from Beijing - but no-one can prove it.

Former Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere visited Beijing 13 times

Outside, Chinese digger trucks are at work in the street - a Chinese company has won a government tender to renovate the sewage system.

And foundations have been laid for the new Julius Nyerere National Stadium, named after Tanzania's founding president.

The raw materials, machines, the pipe work and the scaffolding, come from Beijing.

Then there's the other way to colonise a country - through immigration. The part about language is the one that troubles.

Mr Yang is the 31st member of his family to settle in East Africa.

His uncle opened the first of their seven shops in Nairobi, a decade ago.

But after three years here, Mr Yang - who wears a sweatshirt with a picture of an American footballer and the logo "Top Class" - has learned neither English nor Swahili.

His showroom is draped with silks, curtains and upholstery fabrics and is crammed with furniture such as dining suites, reclining chairs and an emperor-sized bed with adjustable headrest.

Mr Yang, his wife and his teenage son sit at the back of the shop munching snacks - Chinese snacks - from a jumbo-sized packet on his desk.

Yes, Mr Yang admits, through his translator, he has heard about local businesses swamped by Chinese imports.

Then he shrugs and says: "Africans love my shop."

It's not that unusual for a first - or even second generation immigrant to fail to pick up the lingua franca of a country. But it doesn't bode well either.

And of course, China's disregard for international copyright law is strangling another African nation that is barely managing to climb out of the morass of international aid debt.

China's going to be the next superpower, just like the United States. And rather like the US, China knows damn well that it can do what it damn well wants.

Malaysian "Communists" | honesty

2006-11-25T16:38:00.000+08:00

ABRAHAM'S "THE FINEST HOUR" GIVES MORE INSIGHT ABOUT MALAYSIAN HISTORY
322 words
4 November 2006Bernama Daily Malaysian News
English
(c)
2006 Bernama - Malaysian National News Agency
The newly published book "The Finest Hour": The Malaysian-MCP Peace Accord In Perspective" will enable Malaysians to gain a greater insight into Malaysia's history, including the communist party's influence during the post-war period.

In the 245-page book, the author, renowned Malaysian sociologist Dr Collin Abraham, takes a balanced approach in explaining Malaysia's pre- and post independence history, covering its road to nationhood to the Haadyai Agreement of 1989 with the Malayan Communist Party (MCP), which finally ended the protracted armed struggle between it and the Malaysian government.
"My research orginated from scratch and it took me 15 months to this book, my third (book)," he told Bernama after the soft launch of the book at the Royal Selangor Club here today.

The book touches on a gamut of exciting as well as polemic subjects ranging from the Malay Left, the Kelantan Resistance of 1915, the Baling Talks and the Haadyai peace agreement between the government and MCP leader Chin Peng.

"The foundation for a Malaysian Malaysia was laid during the country's struggle for independence and peace. Now we need to move on towards (Vision) 2020," said Abraham, 75, who had spent more than 30 years in academia.

Former Malaysian prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who wrote one of the four forwards in the book, described it as "a bold and extraordinary" piece. He is expected to offically launch the book on Dec 2 at the Royal Selangor Club.

Dr Mahathir in his forward said: "More Malaysians should do research on the MCP and the Emergency because so far most of the books written about it are by the British. Quite naturally their writings have been biased."

The book costing RM40 and published by the Strategic Information and Research Development Centre will be available in local book stores next week

Malaysia is notorious for producing extremely slanted histories. It's not uncommon for a historian to include an endorsement by a leading political figure in his book, which should tell you something about the book. And Malaysia censors are alive and well - Gabra, Prince of Egypt, Zoolander The Last Communist being examples of religious and state censorship. Plus of course, they have a very different version of Seperation - Mohammad Sopiee's account, while biased and inaccurate in parts, makes the point that Singaporean accounts don't make - that the UMNO politicans frankly found LKY downright kurang ajar.

However, I'm interested to see what they do with this book. If it's all that it promises, it means that Malaysia is prepared to take a long hard honest look at the Emergency. And the "mistakes" that were made in the heat of battle, where opponents were labelled communist, for convenient internal security disposal.

And if Malaysia is willing to take the step - what's Singapore waiting for?

Did you know Singapore has no press freedom? | ad infinitum

2006-10-26T02:03:00.000+08:00

Singapore's dropped 6 places in the Press freedom index. According to Reporters San Frontieres, we're at 146 now because

Singapore (146th) slipped six places because of new legal action by the government against foreign media.

Can't say that comes as a surprise. I suppose they're referring to the requirement that foreign media take out a bond/hostage for the Singapore government, so that they could be sued under Singapore law. The Far Eastern Economic Review refused (no surprise there, since they've been stung before), and promptly engaged on a round of Singapore-bashing. While the bashing was deserved, it doesn't say all that much about FEER's objectivity either.

Rest of the report

Citizen newsgathering | stomp

2006-10-25T00:34:00.000+08:00

Jon Stewart has something to say about Stomp - I mean, CNN's new I-report, whereby everyone is recruited to become a CNN reporter.

The BBC editors' blog - have I mentioned that I really do love their blogs? - also wrote about the idea of citizen journalism.

Essentially, they make an important distinction between citizen newsgathering, and citizen journalism. Stomp - newsgathering. Yawningbread, Backfence, Singaporeheritage, Yesterday.sg - citizen journalism. Newsgathering is just that - getting news and reports in - or out. Journalism - refers to sorting out the story, and analysing it, ultimately producing something that needs to be recorded and presented.

History's sort of like that. You get a stack of materials, from shopping receipts to court records, and while the part about the chancellor caught in flagrant delicto with the tortoise is undoubtedly hilarious, it doesn't do anything for the overall story, nor is it particularly earthshaking. (Unless it involves the phrase Chelonius Mobilus, and that's a whole new planet. Literally) So you leave it out.

In fact, the recent efforts by the National Heritage board have reminded me of this important distinction. With webbies and programs like Singaporealbum.org and the Family tree project, and the NLB's decision to archive websites - well, what the NHB is doing to essentially citizen heritage resource gathering. (That's a damn clumsy phrase, I admit.) They're gathering records for the future and the present, sending citizen heritage/memory gatherers into past. And eventually, a historian will put it together, and write up these little histories.

There's also a point that the BBC makes, that I think historians can empathise with. Much has been written recently about the threat that blogs and citizen journalism pose towards the traditional media - both from insecure bloggers and equally insecure MSM. (I'm not going to discuss the Singapore context here) However, it's worth noting that BBC, arguably the veteran of MSM, doesn't quite share the concerns of lesser newsbeings, and in fact has taken the simple stand that there isn't a threat - and in fact, that they complement each other.

Historians don't regard citizens as a threat - why should the BBC?

Gay animals in Norway | Singapore art

2006-10-20T00:22:00.000+08:00

There's a gay animal exhibition in a museum in Norway. I understand that's the first time such an event has been held in a museum.

Curators say a Norwegian exhibition on homosexuality among animals has been well received, despite initial indications of strong opposition.

from the BBC

Sometimes, I think that it's Singapore's attitude towards sex/political commentary/mystical Asian values that is holding the arts scene back. After all, art thrives - heck, throws parties - on top of societal OOB markers. Those are the grey areas, relatively uncomprehended, which requires explanation and illustration through art.

The odd thing is this - the MDA always cites some group being potentially offended as a reason for clamping down. But often the cited group doesn't care, or thinks that kicking up a fuss will just make them seem silly. Take Talaq, for example, banned on grounds of being insensitive to Muslims - every Muslim I talked to couldn't figure out why it should be banned. Ironically, Malays as usual got the brunt of the blame - which is odd, since it was an Indian group that first complained.

So just who is holding MDA's leash? Or is the MDA like a tradition that's gone on for so long that everyone continues to do it, despite the fact that no one can quite remember why?

Bah. I want to see gay penguins in Singapore. Then again, there's always been something gay about penguins.

Copyright and Singapore | owning air

2006-10-17T16:02:00.000+08:00

Just came across this.

The argument was sparked off by the writer spotting a sign that declared an area was copyright protected. Long and short of it: there was a photography service there, that charged you $15USD have your picture taken with birds. The owner understandably didn't want people standing outside and photographing the birds for free.

However, the writer makes a greater comment about the whole situation - namely, that copyright isn't working. It's litigious, harms society, and harms the person who took out the copyright to begin with.

In Singapore, maintenence of copyright and its friend intellectual property is a problem. It's on the back-burner again, but just like that last crumb from the toast you ate in bed, it's going to bite again when least expected.

Enforcement of copyright - especially with regards to foreign copyright - is a headache for Singapore. On one hand, we're building the whole knowledge-based economy thing, and need to convince investors that we'll protect their shit from reappearing at Sim Lim. On the other hand, the contributions of Queensway Shopping Centre towards education can never be underestimated - UltraSupplies would receive a Pingkat Bakti Masyarakat if they weren't making so much money too.

Of course, there's a difference of effect/influence depending on the object discussed. Software isn't music, books aren't images, bio-sci processes aren't the ST interactive subscribers-only service.

Still. I do wonder what's going to happen in the long term for a society that jealously resents the idea of anyone getting anything for free. To art, and the flow of ideas and information, that make life that much richer. As it is, the National archives has its restrictions, and heritage mover-shakers found it necessary to include a talk on copyright along with its recent workshops.

Sun sets in two and a half hours. I'm hungry.

Mobile clubbing | p65

2006-10-14T15:58:00.000+08:00

There's a new sort of flashmob in London - and it's called mobile clubbing. Essentially, a message was sent out asking people to turn up with ipod and dancing shoes at Liverpool Street Station. When the clock struck, the participants amped up their music, and gyrated to a beat only the could hear.

I'd describe it, but Geoff Dyer does it better.

P65 MPs - as one p65er to another - now that is cool.

North Korea is one with a bomb and no plastic surgeons

2006-10-11T20:20:00.000+08:00

As usual, Jon Stewart sums up the North Korean situation.

Funny. When Bush first listed the three countries that formed the Axis of Evil, North Korea was thought to have been thrown in so as to avoid charges of an anti-Muslim bias on the part of the Bush administration. Now, three years on, of the three countries cited - Iran, Iraq, North Korea - it's North Korea that has nuclear missiles and is prepared to test it.

I wonder if the Daily Show decided to have Aasif Mandvi as their "North Korean Correspondant" on purpose. He's Indian American, but usually plays some sort of Middle Eastern. Ragingly funny, and one of the latest Daily Show additions.

Reflectoporn | Singapore and Qatar

2006-10-11T14:20:00.000+08:00

I have learnt a new word today: Reflectoporn.

This is reflectoporn:

This is also reflectoporn. (Hint: look at the mirror)

Both were taken off Ebay auctions. For further explanation, see Snopes, created by the wonderful Barbara Mikkelson whom I workship for her l33t research skills.

Random comment: Singapore's forged a MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) with Qatar. (CNA report)

I can't say that I'm surprised, but then again, I don't think anyone was surprised by this. Southeast Asia has traditionally been seen as the pivot and punching bag between the twin forces of China and India. We're the original middleman of Asia, due to geographical location and demographics.

Singapore's been playing nice with China for some time - well, about 30 years? I'm glad that we can actually step away from this racist mindset that Singapore = Chinese, and realise that we have historical and demographic links with darker skinned people to the west as well, and that it's in our best interests to forge links there as well.

Of course, the fact that Malaysia's been forging links with the Middle East just a bit longer than we have is not a factor at all ... as the saying goes, kalau Malaysia boleh, Singapura juga boleh.

I really don't know anything about the Middle East though - for some reason, they just don't teach it at NUS, a situation that I suspect is going to be remedied pretty soon if recent hires are any indication. However, if Qatar looks set to be another Dubai - and it does - I wonder what that means for Singapore's relationship with Dubai. Dubai's been projecting itself as a port city, (which it is), and is pushing its way into the port administration business thingy. IIRC, our PSA has had dealings with them, maybe even taught them. Then PSA found out that we'd maybe taught them a bit too well, since they beat us out for a lucrative contract involving the management of American shipyards.

Hmm. So now we're in Qatar, a little country set to modernise that's been pissing off the rather more conservative countries around it with its Al-Jazeera network. Annoying Muslim neighbours - yes, Qatar's come to the right little city-state for lessons.

In the meantime, I think I'm signing up for Arabic classes.

(Reads entry again: You know, I don't even know why I bothered to write all that down. The net is full of noise - it feels almost irresponsible to add to it)

Batman wants you to slap his ass | big boy

2006-10-05T16:07:00.000+08:00

Much has been written about the difference in artistic approach towards comic book heroes versus heroines. The heroines, although proported to be representative of Gurrrrl power and therefore "strong female role models", are nevertheless portrayed in a sexualised way. The sexualisation is normally done in such a way as to presumably satisfy heterosexual male fantasies; e.g. exarggerated arched backs, thrusting breasts. Academics have argued that such a sexualisation reduces the potentially positive message of an alpha female to that of a mere sex object, seen through the male gaze and whose purpose is ultimately directed by (heterosexual) men.

The paragraph I've just written has its conceptual problems that stem from my own poor understanding. However, the main reason why I wrote it anyway is because it's a leadup to a link I came across. Essentially, comic book artists decided that it would be interesting to draw male heroes in female postures.

and this is what they came up with:

There's more here and it's all hilarious, and rather homoerotic. However, I'm especially fond of the fiery ball-pouch-thong thing.

Public demonstrations in Singapore | vivocity

2006-10-05T01:20:00.000+08:00

I did think of going down to check out Chee Soon Juan during the IMF, but never bothered. Partly because I was busy, partly because I detest him on a visceral, logically untenable level, but mostly because I'm Singaporean and if I was there, I'd die of embarressment. The embarressment would have come on two levels: for Chee, and for Singapore.

And I suspect that I wasn't the only one. Your average policemen finds it all quite embarressing too. We'd have all melted into a little red-hot puddle of embarressment.

I still mean to write something about it, concerning the historical geography of the place, but it'll have to be another time.

However, I was subjected to another public march 'n demonstration last Sunday.

I was driving and had paused at the Ngee Ann City junction along Orchard. There was a sudden influx of people in white t-shirts crossing, and I didn't think much of it till they stopped to form a circle in the middle of the junction.

Then they did a sort of clap 'n cheer that basically advertised for Vivocity.

Then they left.

It should be noted that they only formed the main circle after the bulk of the pedestrians had crossed, but as anyone who's been to Orchard on a Sunday can tell you, the bulk of pedestrians cross, and new bulks come along. There were a few irritated people trying to make their way through the circle.

Later, I saw the group head down towards Plaza Singapura. Clearly, they were prepared to repeat that stunt all over the city.

On one hand, that was a pretty cool advertising stunt.

On the other hand:

1. There were more than four people.
2. They were a public nuisance.
3. They were shouting.
4. They were guilty of being university-age students.
5. It was partisan.
6. Road usage comes under LTA.

What I want to know is this - how did they get a permit anyway?

[NB: This is not entirely nonsensical post. Originally, I posted it because I found it an entertaining form of advertising and because if I squinted a bit, it was almost like a public demonstration in Singapore, of all places. But after awhile, I got to thinking - how do you apply for permission to advertise/perform on the road?

Who owns the road? Who controls the street? In an academic exercise that I conducted some years ago, I predicted that ownership of the street would become an issue in time to come in Singapore. The laws just aren't up to it yet. ]

Miss Singapore got 'jacked | money well spent?

2006-10-04T14:29:00.000+08:00

Last night, a Turkish plane flying from Tirana to Istanbul was hijacked. No one was hurt, the hijacker voluntarily surrendered. He seems to be a Turkish army deserter, and claims that as a Christian convert (he's Turkish), he should not be forced to serve in a Muslim (Turkish) army. So he's a conscientious objector.

However, the only reason why I'm mentioning this is because several beauty contestants were on board - including Miss Singapore. They were en route to Butrint, Albania, to participate in the Miss Globe International contest.

The People's Daily Online is inadverdently funny about this event:

Much of the pageant's history and related information remain sketchy. No one can say for sure how many times the event has been held. And this has led to minimal publicity of the pageant, as well as the lack of interests by international pageant enthusiasts.

Wikipedia is also vague. I like this bit:

Much of the pageant's history and related information remain sketchy. For example, the website claims that the 2004 pageant edition was its 31st, while several editions were also held on American soil. However, such information remain unavailable for scrutiny and verification. The number of delegates per edition, and even the name of the winners for some years, remain a mystery. These inconsistencies have led to minimal publicity of the pageant, as well as the lack of interest by international pageant enthusiasts

A look at past winners seem somewhat, well, dodgy. The requisite Brazil is there, and Venezuela, but you'd expect India to have run off with crowns as they routinely do. Strangely, Estonia, Turkmenistan and the Czech Republic have won before.

While I agree that there is no universalist standard of beauty, and that more recognised beauty contests such as Miss Universe do seem to favour a type, it does seem strange that crop of listed winners for Miss Globe are fairly spread over the world - but doesn't include India. And the official website is just downright dodgy.

Did the STB just spend money to ship our Miss Singapore over to a one-horse town, to win a two-bit tinfoil tinsel crown, at a competition that isn't going to do jack squat in terms of publicity for Singaporean lovelies? Or did they spend the money in hopes that we could nab a cheap title if no one else was really competing?

Either way, money well spent? Seriously, why bother? The only publicity that Ms Singapore got for this competition happened because her plane got hijacked.

BBC report is here.

(And if it comes back that Miss Singapore wasn't on the plane - well, blame it on the BBC, and I apologise to STB. By the way, Miss Globe International has no relation to Globe International, a Mongolia-based NGO involved in press and information freedom.)

The time of your life | killing time

2006-10-03T23:27:00.000+08:00

Playing around with Google has got to rank as the no.1 time-waster ever. I sort of envy youth nowadays - in my time, I only had telnet and solitaire.

Anyway, google search led me to that time hallowed statistic about suicide being the leading non-medical cause of death in Singapore. Apparently - and when I say apparently, that's short-hand for "It was on wiki so don't quote me" - 1,700 people committed suicide between 2000-2004.

Other details that you should pull up and mention at a wedding dinner you didn't actually want to attend:

1 in 8 suicide attempts by Singaporeans are successful. I think our start-up companies experience the same success rate.

By comparison, 408 people were executed between 1991 to 2003.

Because we're Singaporeans, we have to compare to Malaysia - 2,000 committed suicide in 2005. That's 1 in 12,000. In Singapore, that's roughly 1 in 40,000. (I think)

In both countries, Indians have the highest suicide rate. Does that mean that they're simply better at it?

The FAQs of dealing with death in Singapore are handled by the NEA (?!)

Foreigners who want to be buried here are not eligible for public post-mortem housing, but must instead opt for more expensive private niches.

The plural of columbarium is columbaria.

Killing your child of less than 12 months of age is not considered murder if you're the mother. Still not kosher though.

If you commit suicide unsuccessfully, you shall be punished with a term that may extend to one year, or a fine, or both. Whatever happened to "it's ok to fail"? Is it ok as long as you learn from your mistakes and do better next time?

If you commit suicide in Singapore, you're more likely to be male. Oh, and you jumped.

Now I know what to avoid. God forbid that if I commit suicide, I die as I have lived - perfectly average.

Like whoa

2006-09-29T21:23:00.000+08:00

Random thought of the day:

Are cities predisposed towards pro-colonialism sentiment? This urban experience is framed in binary with the anti-colonialist rural experience. Ref: Singapore, circa 1945.

(Probably not)

Confucius and the state | tempus fugit

2006-09-28T19:25:00.000+08:00

Confucius he say, woman ok!

You learn something everyday. Confucius's family tree has been maintained all this while in his hometown of Qufu, eastern Shandong province. However, the construction of the family tree, and therefore, family history, has been influenced by Confucius's uncomplimentary views on women. As a result, the women were excluded from the family tree, and of the dubious prestige of being a descendant of Kong Tze.

Seems that they're rethinking things, and moving with the times.

However Mr Kong, speaking at a festival marking Confucius' 2,557th birthday in the philosopher's home town of Qufu in eastern Shandong province, said equality now had to be observed.

Mr Kong is planning to reveal the fifth family tree update in 2009 and believes there could now be more than three million descendants - about 2.5m of whom live in China.

He said: "Even if a woman has to leave the family when she gets married to live with her husband, that doesn't change the fact that she is descended from Confucius."

From the BBC

Confucius believed in a great many things, including a strict social hierarchy, with a specific emphasis on the maintenence of proper relations and respect, with service to the state being the utmost virtue. (I'm sure there's more to it than that, but I had to learn Chinese as a child so as to imbue a sense of rootedness to Chinese culture, so now I hate the damn thing.)

The emphasis on the stratification of society and the fossilisation of social development made Confucianism unacceptable during the Cultural Revolution. Of late, it's come into favour because China, like well, Singapore, is worried about the effects of globalisation and the erosion of the Chinese identity. Well, theoratically concerned - they're more concerned about what the erosion of the Chinese identity would do rather than the id itself. If they could find an implant that instilled "Asian deference" and "loyalty to the motherland", their concern about erosion wouldn't just erode, it would vanish faster than half price abalone on CNY eve.

Of course, this is when I take a moment to brag and point out that the touting of Asian/Confuscian values as a form of identity to foster nation-state cohesion - we beat them to it. LKY was doing it around 1997. Didn't work, but hey, maybe it will for the Chinese. Probably not.

These Chinese, always copying someone else.

[but yay, daughters of confucius! The times, they change.]

National education, the ST and moderates | all about meeeeee

2006-09-27T00:40:00.001+08:00

There are times when I hate the Straits Times. Then there are times that I hate the people who hate the Straits Times.

And then I realise that what I actually hate is this whole pressure-cooker society of Singapore, where people seem to believe that we're the worst/best city in the world. All these polar opposites - I swear, declaring that Singapore is Worst Country Ever is just our old friend exceptionalism, coming from the other side. We're Winthrop's City on the Hill, except when I say "hill", I mean "cesspit". It's the same idea, from the other side - we're either the best, or the worst.

I suspect that my stand on this is what also makes me a very boring person. Take the whole National Education/varying perspectives on history-teaching debate. I know that the syllabus is undergoing revision - well, part of it is. Aside from the issues of National Education is not history - and that is a very huge issue - I went through some of the NE analysis on the teachability of varying perspectives, especially the period that everyone loves to talk about. And the conclusion was this: if you could somehow arrange 30 hours to the day, with corresponding increases to history/SS periods... then yeah, you might be able to do it. Because of that, I'm a little worried about what's going to happen on the ground or rather in the schools - the teachers are going to be forced to teach more content while at the same time, throw in more analysis, with the result that the subject's going to get a very superficial treatment overall.

Anyway - the point of that anecdote was that I take a very heuristic approach to things, stand subject to mutatis mutandis, and as a result, stand somewhere between the iconoclasts and the conservatives. And a result, nowhere in the debate. Is that what's called being a moderate?

However, back to the ST. People say that the ST is biased? Sure. Only one? Only if by "only", you mean "every other paper in the world."

(except the BBC. BBC is God. Yes, I've just said this during Ramadan, God help me. )

The link that inspired it all: Why the American Media Sucks

Anti-semiticism

2006-08-24T11:40:00.000+08:00

Quick! Let's test your general knowledge.

Question: Three countries in the last month have been featured in the news for issues dealing with anti-semitism. Which one country mentioned displayed the most sensitivity towards Jewish concerns?

Choices: India, Austria, Malaysia.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.... It's Malaysia.

The Jewish community in the Indian city of Mumbai (Bombay) is outraged by a new restaurant named after Adolf Hitler. The restaurant, Hitler's Cross, opened last week in the city's outskirts, initially displaying a giant poster of Hitler at the entrance.
From the BBC

Human rights campaigners in India's Gujarat state have condemned school textbooks which they say praise Hitler.
The books are issued by the Hindu nationalist state government. One includes a chapter on the "internal achievements of Nazism
From the BBC

The Austrian birthplace of Adolf Hitler is fighting to contain an outcry over pictures that apparently show local football fans making a Nazi salute.
From the BBC

Malaysian authorities have published a list of undesirable titles to prevent parents giving their children names such as Hitler, smelly dog or 007.
From the BBC

I am not for a moment suggesting that Malaysia's about to land Israel a big fat one on the lips any time soon, if ever. In fact, "not ever" is closer than "soon".

However, my greater point - and I have one - is this: Don't make assumptions. Examine the facts, and don't bring your pre-conceptions to the table. It's sloppy thinking, it's deterministic - just because it's logical for a country to have behaved in such-and-such a way, doesn't mean that the country did behave in such-and-such a way. If you bring that to the table, you're far more likely to dismiss instances where the country behaved unexpectedly as an aberration. You won't, for instance, acknowledge that it's possible for two things to happen at the same time.

And you'll never see when things begin to change. And what a poor world that would be!

Connecting with youth | rubber does it

2006-08-24T02:56:00.000+08:00

Condoms. The thing I like about the word condoms is that you tend to have everyone's undivided attention once you've said it.

France's ruling conservative party has come up with a novel way of trying to woo voters - by handing out condoms and flip-flops with a party logo.
from the BBC

And that's the conservative party.

Meanwhile, over in Singapore:

One 'great success' when the party connected with younger members was at the Young PAP's 20th anniversary rally in April, complete with balloon clappers and cheerleaders

-Li Xueying, ST July 27, 2006, linked from Mr Wang with permission

Maybe they could compromise with condom balloon clappers? (I'm trying to be a constructive commentator.)

HDB housing and Milton Keynes | strange parallels

2006-08-22T20:36:00.000+08:00

Milton Keynes looks set to become the first British town to get a high-speed wireless network based on so-called Wimax technology. Net connection firm Pipex is to trial a network in the town, which should be up and running by the end of 2006. Unlike wi-fi technology, Wimax offers high-speed net access over long distances, instead of just a few metres.
From the BBC

Not a lot of people know this, but Milton Keynes is the best example of the product of the British New Town policy - essentially, a planned town, based off Ebenezer's 1900 Garden City movement. (Crib your info here)

If the terms sound familiar to Singaporeans, they should. The HDB new towns are based on this idea of planned, self-contained sub-urban developments, all ringed around the city centre. And Garden City movement - you're living in an adapted version of it.

So historically, this is interesting, as Milton Keynes, which was a sort of experimental piece for the UK at large, is being used here again as a testing pad for Wimax.

And for the HDB cynics amongst you, if you're interested as to how it is perceived by the British public...

Milton Keynes also appears in Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett's book Good Omens, as an example of a town neither heaven nor hell take credit for, but both regard as a success: "it was built to be modern, efficient, healthy, and, all in all, a pleasant place to live. Many Britons find this amusing."

... yes, they do feel the same way we do about HDB new towns. Well, I do.

niblets from the National day rally | cranky

2006-08-20T19:32:00.000+08:00

"we hope to change the mindset.. and convince Singaporeans to have more babies, for themselves, for the country.." [paraphrase]

It struck me, in a passing way, that convincing people to have babies for the sake of country isn't very successful. You have a hard enough time convincing them to stop littering for the sake of country. Putting more bins might be more effective, then telling them they owe it to country. If people did things for country, you wouldn't have to pay MPs that much to prevent corruption. In any case, there was an interesting ARI study where number crunching suggested that people were more inclined to have babies in dragon years, and were unresponsive to any number of government incentives, including direct pay-offs on production of Singaporean niblet, and subsidies for choosing a HDB residence near prospective niblet's baby sitters - aka grandparents.

However, this part amused me:

c. How we get to know one anotheri.
Previously face-to-face
(1) Lim Kim San hated email – preferred to meet people
ii. Now young people are now making friends through the internet, e.g.
after exchanging photos on MySpace
iii. Some even get married through the internet! (I don’t recommend
it)

..because of this report on the BBC that came out the same day..

A zoo in the Netherlands plans to set up a webcam to help its orangutans form long-distance relationships with potential mates in Indonesia.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4794279.stm

Just saying.

Teleology

2006-08-15T21:31:00.000+08:00

If all goes well, in a couple of weeks I will be part of the state-sponsered propaganda apparatus.

Not that one, the other one. No, the other other one.. yes, I realise that there are quite a few. Nevertheless, that one.

Singapore Idol flashes the Japanese flag on National Day | forgotten idols

2006-08-11T13:02:00.000+08:00

Leviathan-like thesis has assumed more cetaecean proportions, so I'm taking a break.

--------------------------------------------------

Amidst the screeches of kelong!!! that erupted after Thursday's results show, I wondered if anybody noticed that little bizarre blip that occured during the group performance. No one's talking about it, which isn't a great surpris since RAHIMAH RAHIM IS OUT AND THAT FREAKING TUNELESS JOACHIM IS STILL IN. Seriously, look at the guy! He can't sing! And what kind of Singapore Idol has a name that no one in Singapore can pronounce?? And he's soooooo boring - he's a "good boy", with family values - ok, I supppose he could be a Singapore Idol after all. We'd never dare show him to the rest of the world, which means that as a Singapore icon he'd be in good company with the Merlion, Budget Terminal, Sentosa, and Annabel Chong. Scratch the last - we would show Annabel to the rest of the world, since most of the world's seen most of her already.

Anyway - the results show on Thursday, 10 August, had a National Day theme. National Day, Singapore Idol, I can see how it works. It goes together like garlands and MPs - everyone agrees it works, but we were quite happy when they were separate too. Thursday was the results show, where the idols have a group performance. Since it was National Day, they broke out in red and white costumes, which must have cost Mediacorp wardrobe quite a bit, since the contestants probably didn't own red and white outfits.

It's a Singaporean thing. No one truly Singaporean wears red and white anymore. Except the Nanyang High girls on occasion, and they'd rather not talk about the time they accidentally flew the flag of Japan.

And speaking of the flag of Japan, guess what I spied during the group performance?

Just behind the contestants - the backdrop, actually. And in case you don't get it, here's another pretty pix:

Well, konichiwa Japanese Flag-san. We haven't seen you around in Singapore for a bit - it's been such a while. When was the last time you were around - oh yes, you were with this guy:

Seriously. On the National Day special, Mediacorp decides to flash not just the Japanese flag, but the Japanese Rising Sun, the symbol of Japanese wartime aggression. Aggression that resulted in Singapore's own private little Holocaust, known as the Sook Ching Massacre. When 20,000 Chinese men were rounded up at the point of a Japanese bayonet, or sold out by self-interested neighbours seeking to settle old scores, and sent to that one way journey through the present day Hong Lim Complex, the journey that ended face down with a bullet to the head as the tropic waters of Changi Beached lapped idly over them. If you were lucky. Otherwise you'd have to dig the trench for your mass grave yourself, but those were war times, so must gotong royong a bit.

It's quite funny, actually. I mean, we talk about Singaporeans not knowing their history, but there's no doubt that it's produced several giggle-worthy moments and WTFness that probably were nation-bonding experiences.

Other countries are equally screwed when it comes to their own history, so I don't feel inclined to rant about Singaporeans not knowing their own history, a sort of exceptionalism which I consider anti-nationalism, which is just as goddamn poisonous as nationalism. We're special and unique and ok and screwed, just like everyone else!

But back to the Mediacorp faux-pas: I can't help wondering what the heck was in the technician's mind when he/she decided to programme the flashing backdrop to display that bitter reminder of Singapore's living nightmare under Japanese Occupation. Then again, I figured everyone who would have had a post-traumatic stress disorder attack brought on by that flashback to the past probably wasn't watching the show, on account of being 80 years old.

This isn't the first time that Singaporeans have displayed a lack of historical knowledge - remember the Mr Brown flashmob? The one that asked people to wear brown shirts and hang around City Hall? The one where the organiser made a Freudian slip because he/she didn't seem to realise that brownshirts were the symbol of Fascist oppression? Actually, come to think of it, that was probably very thick or very brilliant. Referencing the Nazi stormtroopers in a protest against government oppression of the media - like I said, very thick, or very brilliant - oh who am I kidding, I'm going for thick because it's funnier that way.

Oooh! I remember another good one - remember the Mein Fuhrer incident? The secondary school team who decided that Hitler would be a great team name? They argued that he was a great leader - that's the Singaporean pragmatism for you - seriously. The man's a right bastard, a racist, has megalomania issues, but he ruled Germany with an iron fist, cleverly dispensing with all opposition parties. And he wept when his delusions of ruling Europe were crushed. I can see why Singaporean youth might think he's a great leader.

So Singaporeans and their knowledge of history - still funny. Inadverdent Japanese war flag on National Day show - doubly funny.

Except.

I had a flashback of my own, to the last time I saw something Japanese.

I was down at Pagoda Street, Chinatown the other day. There was a signboard there, an STB affair, meant to give the tourists a brief taste of Olde Chinatown. It talked about incense and slave markets, ginseng root and coolies, an Orientalised image of Chinatown. About racial harmony in the early days, and the tip-tic-tap of the street hawkers and the rich, rare scent of spice that always seems to accompany the old sepia photos of Singapore.

And as I read this Disney version of events, I felt the breath of 20,000 condemned men on the back of my neck. I smelled the sick stench of fear rising off the men crammed into that narrow street under a pitiless noon-day sun, their barely-restrained terror rising in tumorous mists and corroding the pretty pastels off the shophouses. And I heard their silent dread of the second death, that of being forgotten, in a country far away from home, that had become their home.

I wondered why it wasn't included in the tourist signboard, before realising that the signboard had the history portion in three langauages, one of which was - yes, Japanese. It wasn't convenient or profitable to remind wealthy Japanese tourists that their ancestors had conducted a massacre right where they stood.

And then I wondered which other portions of history would be carefully edited out because it wasn't convenient. Or pragmatic. Or desirable. The people and deeds that SIngaporeans would never learn about, who would soon die, and die again when no one remembered them.

And suddenly Singaporeans not knowing their history wasn't quite so funny anymore.

---------------------------------------------------

Here's the Singapore Idol Results Show special.

I am a Singaporean | unresistance of the meme

2006-08-09T11:24:00.000+08:00

Wrote this some time ago, actually. Never completed it, thanks to the thesis.

---------------------------------
I am a Singaporean.

I am Chinese, and I am Malay. I am also Indian, and indeterminate Caucasian. Because of that, I generally identify myself as Race: Singaporean

I went to the best secondary school in Singapore, and the best junior college, and I still feel a tingle of undeserved, shameful pride about that, despite telling people that Raffles is no big deal and it's really time I stop talking about my high school.

I love the MRT because it divides up the country into easily understood packages. I also hate the MRT for doing just that.

I smile when I want to, and frown when I want to, and hide my face completely when I see the 4 million smile campaign. I can smile, but some stupid government campaign can't bloody make me.

I believe that the government should run a campaign to get people to smile.

I wanted Potong Pasir to stay Opposition, because I'm glad that someone stood up to the government. I'm never going to move there because I want someone else to stand up against the government.

I think it's perfectly fine to drive for an hour just to reach that perfect laksa stall, and I wouldn't do it.

I don't wear red and white anymore.

Malaysians are just like us, except completely crazy, immoral, law-breaking, and possibly having more fun. And the combination of the last two drive me crazy.

I believe in freedom of speech and I also wish that the government could crack down on people whose views I don't like.

I get annoyed when foreigners criticise my country. When foreigners praise it, I assure them there's a lot wrong with it.

I am a Singaporean. Please don't tell anyone.

Worker volunteer | drabble

2006-07-24T14:08:00.000+08:00

drabble is: an extremely short work of fiction with exactly one hundred words. The purpose of the drabble is brevity and to test author's ability to express interesting and meaningful ideas in an extremely confined space.

Haven't written one ever, but what the heck.
---------------------------------------------------------

He seemed faintly familiar as he filled out the form in front of her.

“Previous work?”

“In telecoms.”

“Any media experience?”

“Extensive. I appeared as an extra on TV, once.”

“What sparked the interest?”

“Oh, my family’s always been into politics.”

“Oh, really? They also want to volunteer?”

“I doubt it, they’re more for the other party.”

‘Oh I see… haha well, guess your father’s going to kill you for this, lah.”

“Quite possibly.”

She laughed. “Fathers always say that.”

He shrugged and smiled. He was not always a truthful man, but he had not lied once this evening.

Slaves in Singapore | maids

2006-07-21T01:53:00.000+08:00

Standard contracts on hiring maids launched
By S Ramesh, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 20 July 2006 1532 hrs

SINGAPORE: The Association of Employment Agencies and Casetrust have come up with two standard contracts for maid employers.

The contracts will have a service agreement between the agency and the employer and a second employment contract between the employer and the maid.

Under the agreement, there would be a well defined replacement policy and a fairer refund policy reducing the possibility of disputes.

While the employment contract stipulates the minimum one day off entitlement for the maid in a month, if the day off is not taken, the employer would have to compensate the maid in cash.

All employment agencies accredited by the two bodies (Casetrust and Association of Employment Agencies) would have to implement the standard contracts by the 15th of September 2006. -

I'm wondering how easy is it for a maid to report that she's not getting the extra cash if she can't get out of the house.

Hope she knows how to work the phone. Still can't see why MOM is being obstinate about the mandatory day off thing. It's not about people who claim they need the maid 24/7, that's for sure.

Start a culture of praise | Cat Welfare volunteers build Singapore

2006-07-12T19:37:00.000+08:00

ST Forum, 11 July 2006, Tuesday (Online edition)
Unsung heroine who helped nab cat abuser

Madam Sharifah Khamis played a key role in the nabbing of cat-abuser David Hooi who was sentenced to three-month jail in November last year.

He was arrested again on June 27 at 2am for abusing a kitten whose injuries were so severe that it had to be euthanised at the SPCA. It is fortunate that Hooi was arrested before his destructive behaviour was extended to the human residents.

In the process that led to Hooi's two arrests, Madam Sharifah put her personal safety aside with frequent patrolling in the dead of the night in the vicinity of Hooi's block of flats so as to catch him in the act. This public spiritedness dispels a common notion that Singaporeans are apathetic.

She also intermingled with many residents in the estate to strategise surveillance plans. These residents cut across different races and consisted of men and women, young and old. Surely this kampung-spirit type of cooperation is what the Government is hoping to achieve with ad hoc inter-racial harmony fairs graced by the presence of MPs.

Perhaps identifying common platforms in the community such as concern for the welfare of community cats, is more effective in enhancing long lasting interracial harmony?

I think ordinary people can identify easily with Madam Sharifah, an ordinary person living in the heartland than with a PBM recipient on a full page announcement in the newspaper.

She may not have received a PBM award but surely she deserves public recognition for her extraordinary display of courage and public spiritedness. Let not her heroism be unsung.

Dr Tan Chek Wee

Dr Tan refers to the Pingat Barisan Masyarakat, or the Public Service Medal. The Medal may be awarded to any person who has rendered commendable public service in Singapore or for his achievement in the field of arts and letters, sports, the sciences, business, the professions and the labour movement. If you look at the list of previous recipients here, you'll notice that there's a trend to it. Mostly, they have titles that end in CC, RC, Council, or have the word "Church/Mosque/Sacred Tree" inserted somewhere. For that alone, Mdm Sharifah and the other volunteers aren't going to be standing on the podium anytime soon. And she should, really. Or at least receive something. Not just a commendary letter that didn't make it to the print edition of the ST.

An expat made the observation the other day that Singaporeans don't seem to like to praise people. Efforts on her part to do so resulted in the company reluctantly going "Yeah, I guess it's ok." And heavens knows that we're allegedly famous for complaining. A cursory survey of the better read blog entries suggest that bitching does go around the world faster than praise. It's completely understandable - after all, rage makes for a better muse, as Alanis Morrisette displayed, and critical commentary is vital in a society where the MSM is muzzled.

But ultimately, it doesn't help Singapore towards becoming a gracious society. It's Singapore's birthday soon, and if I had a wish for her, it would be that we would become better at praising people. Praise and positive rewards are the best incentive of all (I've read books. i've also tried it on the Partner. It works) and I think we could do better as a society if we just got better at telling people they did the right thing.

And Dr Tan is right. What Madam Sharifah, and the other volunteers of the Cat Welfare Society did was fantastic. They cut across all racial and economic barriers, and organised a neighbourhood watch patrol that went on through the night. Through their efforts, they saved a kitten, and they got a potentially dangerous man the therapy he needed.

And most amazing of all, in pragmatic Singapore, these volunteers did it knowing they would get nothing for it. Of course, volunteer work is generally unrewarding, but if you save the elderly, the AIDs patients, or abused children, people generally praise you and eventually recommend you for the PBM or the Home gives you their own award plaque. You see, helping juvies through state-sponsered organisations is hardcore "real" volunteerism.

They help animals. There is really no tangible reward to helping animals; it doesn't go down on your CV, nor is it ever going to be a factor in your candidacy for MPship, cos people think it's fluffy and bit odd. They help animals because in many ways, animals are the ultimate marginalised group anywhere. In the process of doing so, they engaged a community, crossed barriers of faith and race without a CC-sponsered event, raised social awareness, bounded people on either side of a widening economic divide - in short they set about creating the society that so many of the bloggers and other Singaporeans dream of living in.

Is it so hard to take time out of your busy day, and email them to tell them they're doing a great job?

If we want a better society, one that our children would be happy to live in, the best that we can do is cultivate a habit of praise, and encourage those unsung heroes and heroines amongst us who are quietly, without fanfare or reward, building that society one day at a time.

---------------------------------------------------------------
To contact the volunteers, you can email Cat Welfare at info@catwelfare.org. Alternatively, Dawn Kua blogs for the Cat Welfare society, so you can head over there and drop her a note. (Cat Welfare)

To read about the cat abuse case, go here.

To read about politics and animal welfare, go here.

Excerpts from ST March 11, 2006
-----------------------------------------------------

Neighbourhood patrol helped send cat killer to jail;
Bedok residents started night patrol to nab man killing strays

FOR five months, a group of Bedok residents took turns to patrol their neighbourhood over seven hours every evening. Their mission - to catch the man they suspected of torturing and killing the area's stray cats.

One of them, Miss Ngiam Mui Wah, 46, finally caught him in the middle of another attack and had enough evidence to make criminal charges stick. That ended David Hooi Yin Weng's reign of terror. The 42-year-old packer was this week jailed three months for animal abuse.
...

They set up a neighbourhood patrol. Ten residents - backed up by young boys who often cycled in the area - came forward. Each team did a two-week shift from 6pm to about 1am.

Team member Sharifah Khamis, 40, also started taking a census of the neighbourhood's strays. If one cat or kitten went missing, patrol members were asked if they saw it.

My paperclip for a house | personal stuff

2006-07-11T12:15:00.000+08:00

Kyle MacDonald traded a paper clip for a house. He swapped the clip for a pen, and so on, various swapped items included a snowmobile, an afternoon with Alice Cooper, and finally, a house in Kipling, a small town in Canada. You can read the rest here.

If he was in Singapore, he'd have to start out with two paper clips.

___________________________

Still writing thesis, so I've banned myself from writing much in this blog, as well as reading other blogs. Reading other blogs - such as the fascinating www.singaporeangle.com (it's spearheaded by a NUS tutor in the Philosophy dept, freshly back from his phD.) - just makes me want to write more articles of my own. Writing isn't the time consuming part, it's the research behind it. Hee. Had a little chat with someone the other day, and we ruefully concluded that historians make poor political bloggers. Political, commentary blogging, to some extent, must be done fast, with soundbites and catch-phrases and labels of convenience, and in a medium like that, it's hard to find the grey areas because you just don't have the time. Whereas historians fidget if they don't see a footnote, referencing, and at least a paragraph devoted to context. It's a whole new cultural matrix.

(This is in no way related to a thesis that can only be described as "bloated" at this point in time.)

I don't usually like to write about the personal, but I feel impelled to do so on this occasion: take care, A and Z. Be safe.

And bring back presents.

Vivian and Mr Brown | two stories

2006-07-09T16:28:00.000+08:00

Just posting two articles in relation(the second tangentially so) on the Mr Brown affair, aka Lee Mun Kin.

CNA, July 8, 2006 Saturday 3:01 PM GMT
Mainstream media has role in ensuring quality of debate: Dr Balakrishnan

Singapore's mainstream media has a crucial role in ensuring the quality and standard of discourse and national debate, says Second Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan.

And he says as long as everybody understood their respective roles and respected each other, Singaporeans can have a useful dialogue going forward.

Dr Balakrishnan made these remarks when asked to comment on reactions by the foreign media to a recent decision by MediaCorp's TODAY newspaper to stop publishing a column by "Mr Brown" who was one of its regular columnists.

A recent article by the columnist about the cost of living in Singapore had drawn a sharp rebuttal from a government spokesperson.

Dr Balakrishnan said: "I am not at all concerned at all about what the foreign media thinks. We are not here to fulfil their agenda. Let me put it to you this way. We are all entitled to express our opinions.

"But we also have to be accountable for our opinions and to be prepared from time to time to stand by them or be called to answer them and from time to time to be rebutted. So I see this as part and parcel of the consistent position which the government and people of Singapore have taken."

He added that what is important for Singaporeans, particularly on serious issues, is to have an honest constructive debate with no extraneous agendas involved.

Dr Balakrishnan said: "If you feel there is a problem with cost of living, say so, let's collectively explore solutions. But don't in the name of humour distort or aggravate on an emotional level. That sort of discourse does not generate solutions. It generates more heat than light.

"So we should put this in its proper context. If someone says something which we disagree with, we will say so. If someone says something which is unhelpful we have a right to say it is unhelpful. We have a right to remind everyone that at the end of the day, this is not a fight.

"We are in search of solutions and by working together and by engaging in an honest constructive dialogue we can do so and we want our newspapers to be a part of that process and also to be aware that, the mainstream media in particular. You are not an internet chat room."

I just wanted to compare the two articles.

CNA, July 8, 2006
Flying the Flag an ongoing commitment by all Singaporeans: Dr Balakrishnan

Getting Singaporeans to fly the National Flag collectively during important celebrations like National Day is not a tired formula, says Community Development, Youth and Sports Minister Dr Vivian Balakrishnan.

Instead, it is an ongoing commitment by all Singaporeans to celebrate the nation's birthday jointly.

Dr Balakrishnan launched the "Join the Celebrations, Fly our Flag" programme at the Bukit Panjang division on Saturday.

For the first time the Singapore Scout Association will also join hands with grassroots bodies to rally more Singaporeans to display the National Flag.

From now leading up to National Day the scouts will also play their part and go on house to house visits in both HDB and private estates to enhance this effort.

Dr Balakrishnan said: "For young people it is especially significant. For them to get a sense that they are participating in something at a national level. The young boys will also understand the significance behind the flag and why there's a need for us in some occasion in the year to fly it collectively. It's an opportunity for us to remind every one young and old, whatever religious or political background, that you have that this is an occasion for joint celebration and commitment and a commitment to the future.

"We want to make sure that whatever we do, we do it respectfully and in a way which accords the respect the Flag deserves. At the end of the day the Flag reflects us as a people. It's not a piece of cloth. I am hoping to see more people on their own and more groups come up on their own with new ideas on how to celebrate National Day in their own way, how to use the flag and make it a common exercise on the part of all Singaporeans."

Emphasis in the second article is my own. Incidentally, Vivian Balakrishnan was once lauded for his critical views of the government, and was a President scholar. He was heavily involved in the cat-culling issue, and was responsible for educating Parliament on cat copulation metholodogy, using that as a reason for banning cats from HDB. Frequently praised for his youth engagement in his ministerial capacity and I've heard, well-liked for his dynamism by the youth.

Want to comment, but it'll have to wait. Offline life calls, and it's simply yummy.

Blog like an Egyptian | A lesson in media protest

2006-07-09T15:43:00.000+08:00

Someone should do a study about how people stop blogging during the world cup. Anyway, while on the topic of media freedom, let's see how Egyptian newspapers protest against government interference in press freedom:

Egyptian papers protest over law
By Heba Saleh
BBC News, Cairo

President Hosni Mubarak had made pledges on media law
Some two dozen Egyptian newspapers are suspending publication for a day to protest against a new law they say will prevent them investigating corruption.

The papers will not appear on Sunday and journalists plan to stage a demonstration outside parliament.

President Hosni Mubarak promised two years ago that he would abolish prison sentences for media offences.

But a new draft law makes it a crime punishable by prison to question the financial integrity of individuals.

Editors of the newspapers taking part in the protest are hoping that public opinion will pressure the government into changing its position.

Outrage

Mr Mubarak's pledge two years ago was portrayed by the government as a sign that Egypt was moving into a new democratic era.

But when last week the government unveiled its planned amendments to the law, journalists were outraged.

They were especially shocked at the new offence concerning the financial integrity of individuals.

Reporters say it is designed to protect corruption.

Parliament has already started debating the bill and there is little hope it will be defeated.

The ruling party has a crushing majority in the assembly and many members would prefer it if the press were less free to delve into their affairs.

The Egyptian press had become remarkably bold in the past two years, carrying direct criticism of the president and of senior officials.

But many now feel that with elections out of the way and the US no longer pressing for reform, the relative freedom of the recent past could be about to end.

Can't quite see that happening in Singapore, really. But it's an interesting way of protest - rather like the "blank column" approach taken by some newspapers to indicate that the column was censored. Totally legal protest. Then again, in Singapore, the government doesn't need to rely on the law to make their opinion felt.

Neither do a lot of governments, actually.

Who is Mano Sabnani? | Today in trouble

2006-07-07T11:54:00.000+08:00

I didn't say much about the recent developments in Mr Brown's case, mainly because I hate repeating the works of others, and because my online life factfile is starting to spill over to my offline life factfile, and I just wrote that "the king felt threatened by student blogger Hang Nadim's evident popularity after actually being able to provide a solution for the recent swordfish incident, and the king regretted challenging Hang Nadim to stop being an irresponsible partisan critic without answers."

The Straits Times reported on the incident here, together with reactions from the local media and media observers such as Tan Tarn How (from Institute of Policy Studies) and Cherian George (IPS). Reactions seem to be high on the WTF factor, and there a terse one-liner from Today editor Mano Sabnani, whom I knew nothing about.

Anyway I went digging to find out about him, and the search results tossed up an article that reminded me of the last time that Today got into trouble - last year, for reporting that the MM's wife had received preferential treatment in London. Today, according to the source inside, got fixed.

LKY's press secretary summoned Shaun Seow, Mano Sabnani, Rahul Singh, Bachchan Singh and Val Chua for a tekan session at the Istana. He chided the newspaper for running provocative stories that are out of bounds.

Today was asked to explain what service it does to the nation and why it shouldn't be closed down. Mediacorp was ordered to supervise Today more closely or it will be punished too. Also, all reports on local news must be written by locals, no foreigners allowed.

The chief editor, Mano Sabnani, has been demoted. He still holds the title, but he must now report to Shaun Seow, CEO Mediacorp Channel News Asia. ...[personal remarks snipped]...

The deputy editor Rahul has also been demoted to night desk to be together with the other night editor Bachchan Singh.

The reporter Val Chua now writes advertising features for DBS and other banks. Her press pass is withdrawn and she cannot report news. She keeps her job and now reports directly to an old ex-Reuters editor hired in September by Today to consolidate operations.

Today has been told it has crossed the line and the media license will be withdrawn if it writes in such a way as to provoke bad feelings which may lead to public unhappiness.

So in a way, I can see why Today might have decided on this occasion to cut their losses and drop Mr Brown, a freelancer. I don't think they should have, but having been burnt once, I can see why Mano Sabnani is prepared to listen to hints. I wouldn't even be surprised if he figured that Mr Brown's popularity would ensure an outcry of public support, which poor Val Chua never got. (correct me if she did.)

Sigh. Both incidents reminds me of the point that keeps on getting made; the press isn't going to be free until the government lets it. Commentary is all well and good, but there's a dearth of people who are willing to actually enter politics and play the game of power and change things. Yes, I am aware that social commentary raises social conciousness, but there is only so far you can reach, and so many people you can convince. Making the youth aware of the problems, and hoping to raise a generation of socially, politically active Singaporeans? Our best and brightest are still not going to turn down a government scholarship if they can get it. Theoratically, that would be a good thing, because then they'd get into the system and change things - but we've been saying that for a very very very long time. The ones that spoke up and were just a bit too good - they got sidelined.

...sigh. Sorry, mind's still firmly somewhere in 15th century Malay politics. I'm kind of all over the place today...

Alex Au makes the point somewhat better here.

(oh, and Mano Sabnani's bio is here
An old journalist, with heavy links with DBS, and ex-editor of Business Times and managing editor of Straits Times. I wonder what's the skinny on him.)

Jon Stewart and Blogging | he's married bleh

2006-07-05T23:49:00.000+08:00

From the Daily Show that I mentioned. I just knew that Jon Stewart would have talked about bloggers. Touches on the main issues that have been raised over here.

Jon Stewart is Jewish, married, smart and hot, which means that we have nothing in common whatsoever, so we'd just have a meaningless relationship based on sex. But we'd use a condom, so it's ok.

Bhavani vs Brown | no such non-partisan

2006-07-03T22:04:00.000+08:00

There's something that bugs me about Bhavani vs Brown. Mainly, it's a rather stupid letter, as many bloggers in the sturm en drang of the blogosphere have pointed out, and Mr Wang has done a great breakdown of the points as usual, with thankfully a little less sturm en drang than the rest of the world.

But it just doesn't make sense. There are parts of it that are just incorrect, which makes you wonder exactly how efficient/intelligent MICA has become under the helm of Lee Boon Yang. Of course, as they say, the leaders set the tone for the rest of the organisation, and if Lee Boon Yang thinks blogs are annoying, then ergo, the rest of the organisation has to, regardless of the actual facts involved.

But overall, it's just a very clumsy letter. Why was it sent out at all? It seems part of a general trend to discredit the non-mainstream media, or indeed, opposition at all. Seems like someone's been to the Karl Rove school of Public Relations and Media.

Couple of things that I found interesting, but I haven't completely worked them out yet. Stream of conciousness about to flow now:

The letter stated that journalists should not take part in partisan politics, which many bloggers rightly interpreted as saying that partisan politics meant disagreeing with the government. They also felt that Mr Brown was a neutral commentator. However, I'm not entirely sure that in the Singaporean context, there is such an animal. Partisan politics, as I understand it, is applicable in a situation in which there are at least two parties in power. So if you're taking up the cause/helping the cause/giving comfort to the enemy (oops!) of one party over the other, you're taking part in partisan politics.

However, in Singapore, there is only one effective party in power - and it's in control, complete control of the government. (or at least it thinks it is, what the heck is SM Goh up to?) Therefore, from their point of view, everyone else is the Other Party. In this totalitarian state of affairs, there is no room for the middle ground anymore.

Think of it this way: let's say there's Party A and there's Party B. There's also 3rd Party. 3rd Party was recently seen in Joo Chiat breaking up Singaporean marriages.. sorry, I'll be serious now. Anyway. 3rd Party. Party A doesn't agree with Party B. 3rd Party doesn't disagree with either, as 3rd Party wants to save the trees and get girls. But Party A has to deal with Party B, because both of them are in Parliament. Party A and B therefore use 3rd Party as occasional ally against the other party. 3rd Party therefore still gets invited to the cool parties, and gets to sleep with all the bored neglected spouses of Party A and B.

If Party A is completely, dominantly in power, this whole dynamic gets tossed out the window. Party A doesn't need 3rd Party, and therefore lumps in 3rd Party with Party B, and accusing innocent 3rd Party of partisan politics. 3rd Party actually just wants to save the trees, but that occasionally runs contrary to Party A's interests, so they get tossed out, can't go to the cool parties, and no one wants to sleep with them because the bored neglected spouses of Party A are now running GLCs.

Actually, the whole thing is starting to remind me of something Jon Stewart said. Jon Stewart is the host of the Daily Show, on Comedy Central in America. It is a parody of a newshow, and it often satirises politics in America. Jon Stewart's show has been extremely well-received, and many people reported that during the 2004 elections, they found that they received a better analysis of the news and election events from his comedy show than from standard news channels.

Jon Stewart is non-partisan, and I believe him. Although comedians tend towards the Democrats anyway, Stewart has an established track report in skewering both sides. In recent years, he has been accused of being partisan, because he now frequently criticises the Republicans. His answer? He couldn't help but criticise the Republicans more, because they were so completely in power. They controlled both houses, they controlled the executive - in short, they controlled completely two out of three branches of the US government (legislative, and executive, and judicial looks rather iffy too). He was quite prepared to criticise the Democrats - but guess who was in power? In the current political situation of the US, that has come dangerously close to a one-party system, there simply has been no middle ground anymore.

Same here.

Feh. Writing all this is very disturbing, and I feel just plain uneasy about this. It's too political science for me.

Hillary Clinton Has a Blogger | speculative

2006-07-03T21:19:00.000+08:00

This is interesting:

Using Peter to play ball
By Mark Tran / USA 12:54pm

In hiring Peter Daou, a prominent political blogger, for her campaign, Hillary Clinton is sending a clear signal that she intends to run for the White House in 2008.
There is not great love lost between Ms Clinton and the liberal wing of the party. She stands condemned, in their eyes, for having gone along with most senators in authorising George Bush to use force in Iraq.

In enlisting Mr Daou's services, Ms Clinton is banking on his credentials as a blogger and a liberal to take the edge off attacks from the blogosphere.
For Cenk Uygur, the move poses an intriguing question. He wonders whether Ms Clinton will pay any heed to what Mr Daou has to say and move more towards the Democratic party's so-called netroots, a phenomenon that first appeared during Howard Dean's 2004 run for the Democratic nomination. Mr Dean enjoyed a great run for a while, using the internet to mobilise disaffected Democrats and to raise money before his campaign imploded.
- The Guardian, 3 July, 2006

The rest of the article is here

I wonder who will be the first major political blogger co-opted here? We've already seen the beginnings of bloggers being taken seriously by MSM, and hired by them. I don't know my SG blogging history, or indeed, blogging history period, so I don't know if it's already happened.

Will we see the same thing here, and watch a prominent political blogger offered a prestigious job by a young ambitious MP needing the clout and cache of being "with it"? Or since quite a few bloggers are still young, a scholarship by a ministry that figures that the best way to silence someone is to hire them?

I'm not saying it's a bad thing to be offered something like that, and it will probably be offered with the best of intentions. But I can't help remembering how many of the new MPS this year were thought to be "dissenting" voices, until they actually ran for Parliament.

Will these hypothetical bloggers be called sell-outs too?

Straits Times gripe #789 | feelin' fluffy

2006-07-02T19:17:00.000+08:00

Just noticed that the ST Forum page requires women who write in to select the title of "Ms" "Miss" "Mrs" "Madam".

Why?

I mean, I'm sure that it's just convention at work, and very little thought was given to it. (Of course, that's what the whole power discourse is about: the extant hierarchy inherently privileges the dominant group, and determines the terms of engagement.)

But really, why? What does the inclusion of that title do for me? What does it tell me about the person? And more importantly, what does it tell me about the person, that will somehow be of interest when I read the letter?

The quick answer is that it tells me if the person's married/single (Mrs/Miss or Ms), prefers it not to be known (Ms), kept her maiden name though probably married (Mdm). It still doesn't suffice as a reason though - why do I care if a person's married? Not to mention that with the use of "Mdm" and "Ms", the marital status is uncertain.

If marital status is that important, why don't the men who write in include it too? After all, considering the scintillating and mind-blowing intellect of peoples such as Lionel de Souza, I'm sure the female populace would love to know if they were on the market, or MBA.

But yeah, I'm sure that the reason why the ST asks women to include the title is because it's just convention, and because you want to know what they'd prefer to be called. In which case, my next letter to the ST is going to be signed off with Lord of the Universe.

Cat Abuser nabbed again | think of the kittens

2006-06-29T23:50:00.000+08:00

This seems to have escaped the notice of most bloggers and forums, but the cat torturer has struck again.

Cat abuser nabbed again for hitting kitten
by Tanya Fong

THE Bedok North cat abuser has struck again. Police arrested David Hooi Yin Weng, 43, at 2am yesterday after his neighbour found a limp, bleeding kitten outside his flat. He had already been jailed earlier this year for cat abuse.

The stray cat was unable to walk and had broken teeth.

...

Ms Deirdre Moss, executive officer for the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), attended to the case at 4am yesterday with a vet. Said Ms Moss: 'The kitten's eyes were both swollen. It had a blood clot in its mouth and was semi-comatose. The vet said it suffered suspected brain damage likely caused by trauma to its head.'

....

The kitten had to be put down. Its body has been sent for post-mortem at the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority.

In March, Hooi was jailed for three months after he pleaded guilty to torturing a female kitten at his rented flat in Block 544,Bedok North Street 3, in November last year. On that occasion, police, alerted by Hooi's neighbours, found thekitten with its left eye protruding and blood stains on the nostrils. The kitten had to be put to sleep because of the severity of its injuries.

The penalty for animal abuse is a fine of up to $10,000 or a jail term of up to 12 months, or both, under the Animals and Birds Act. Pleading for leniency in court, Hooi said he had made a 'mistake'and would not do it again.

The Community Court, set up earlier this month to deal with 'special' offenders like animal abusers, can order mandatory counselling.

Said consultant psychiatrist Ko Soo Meng: 'A custodial sentence alone may not help, even if it deters potential abusers. Those who abuse animals lack empathy and may have anger management problems. Some may have psychopathic traits.'These are issues which need to be worked through to deter the animal abuser from future deviant behaviour.

- Straits Times, 29 June, 2006

My first reaction is fume angrily about the state of society that would allow this torturer to go practically scot-free. I'd also be tempted to take a pot shot at a newspaper who hires Xiaxue for their Star Blogger, the same Wendy Cheng who thinks that it's ridiculous that we jail people who crack kitten skulls.

But as always, there's the bigger picture that's interesting. Lately, there's been some talk about the need for an alternative to jail for certain offences, where the offender would be better off with counselling rather than incarceration. There's the case of Iskandar Muhammad Nordin, the mentally disabled repeat molester who molested a woman within a day of release, the implications of which former DPP and karma-biscuit baker Mr Wang has discussed here.

When I was young, I used to believe that punishment was the right way to do things. That there should be an eye for an eye, and preferably a limb as well. Teenagers are frighteningly self-righteous that way, which is why I'm glad that blogging didn't exist when I was a teen, otherwise there would be little internet trails of some truly ridiculous things I believed in, that some enterprising young thing would bring up and throw in my face if I ran for election.

I'm (significantly) older now, and I still want bad things to happen to bad people. I am an ENTJ, and one of the traits of ENTJs is that at a certain visceral level, they can't quite understand why people just don't obey the law. But these tests aren't meant to say that your character is set in stone, they're (in part) meant to help you work on your shortcomings. And another trait of ENTJs is that they'll always deal with the world as it is.

The thing about throwing David Hooi in jail is that we're killing more kittens that way.

If I understand correctly, the principle behind jailtime is that it deters the offender from committing the crime, and it deters other would-be offenders from committing the crime. It also announces that the crime goes against societal principles. But the problem with Hooi and Iskandar's case is that it signally failed in the first goal, and probably had very little effect with regards to the second.

It failed to deter the offender from committing the crime again because it failed to address the reason why the crime had been committed - mainly, Hooi and Iskandar had psychological problems.

It fails in the second because it's not going to deter people with similar psychological problems from committing the same crime. People with low IQ problems (Hooi's is at 57) don't think about these things before they commit the crime.

It succeeded in the third goal, namely, to announce that Singapore Society Just Won't Condone this. Then again, it's hard to imagine that any first world country has a pressing need to prove that it hates people who touch unwilling boobies or pop kitten eyes, so I'm not all that sure completing this goal is anything to whoop about. We should make a statement against such practices of course, but I'm not sure that incarceration was the way to do it.

That's why I want to see what happens next with this case, especially with all the talk recently about community courts blahblah. The thing about Hooi's case is that they can afford to be more experimental about it than they can be with Iskandar's - Hooi's victim was a kitten, and as many animal lovers in Singapore have wont to find out, Singaporeans don't generally care about what happens to animals. (At least half of Singapore does care about their boobies going unmolested, though.)

I am an animal lover, mind you. I am particularly fond of cats, and I used to bottlefeed 4 day old kittens, toilet train them, wake up in the middle of the night twice to feed them. I used to choke on the tears that I couldn't cry when they died, because I'm an ENTJ and we don't do soft. Part of me wants Hooi castrated. But punishing him with more jail time is the easy way, and it only satisfies my - our - need for vengeance.

And while we continue to not deal with the actual problem, another kitten's going to die.

------------------------------------------------------------
(Incidentally, Ovidia Yu's got a play coming up called the Silence of the Kittens. There's an interesting dialogue session that will occur:

Sun, 6 August 5.30pm
LIFE: Strays and Critters: The Culling Fields
ART: The Silence of the Kittens

Furry friends or pernicious pests? We had our own era of The Culling Fields in 2003, where senseless phobia overtook logical procedure and a mass cull was ordered. Is there space for vermin in Singapore? Howare undesirables dealt with? How "open and inclusive" are we as a society?
Moderator: Paul Rae (Artistic Director, Spell #7, Academic)Points of View: Ovidia Yu (Playwright), Dawn Kua (Cat Welfare Society); Lucy Davis (Artist, Activist, Critic), Alex Au (Social Commentator, Activist)

Damn you anonymous bloggers! | ST forum weirdoes

2006-06-28T13:11:00.000+08:00

I swear, some people just seem to camp out at the ST forum. I want to be ST forum editor one day, I'm quite sure the letters that never make it are the good shit. You know, the real crazies as opposed to the functional crazies.

The good doctor whose letter got published today is an ST forum regular.

Stand up for S'pore by speaking out from heart
I REFER to the recent debate on anonymous bloggers and would like to express my opinion not just about blogging but also about providing feedback.
Netizens who post anonymously (even with pseudonyms) do so for various reasons:

1. Some have to:

Their employers (eg civil service or illiberal bosses) do not allow employees to post matters which may be interpreted as being anti-establishment.

In any case, it would be unprofessional for any of us to ventilate publicly confidential matters relating to our firms or professions.

2. Some want to:

Some feel (erroneously) that anonymity allows them the liberty to publish just about anything without having to back up their assertions with facts or proof.

Most of us who read these would be foolhardy to take them more seriously than coffee-shop gossip.

3. Perceived fear (whether real or not):

Unfortunately there are some who fear that any opinion - even if credible and valid, so long as it goes against political correctness, is not welcome by the authorities and will be responded to with a sledgehammer.

Their perception that we are a sort of 'quasi-police state' somehow seems more than paranoia to them. Hence, everything is a conspiracy to 'fix' them. Sometimes these perceived fears are understandable.

Although I sympathise with the first group (those who have to be anonymous), I feel that with globalisation, the authorities will have no choice but to loosen the grip on an overly paternalistic 'nanny-state'.

The question is not if but when.

I have also observed that when the newspapers' forum pages discontinued the practice of allowing pseudonyms many years ago, the quality of letters increased noticeably.

No writer wants to look like a fool by making unsubstantiated allegations.

My hope is that more people will stand up to be counted with sincere but candid opinions, irrespective of where one stands on our nation's issues.

If we do not speak out from the heart, the establishment may end up hearing only what it wants to hear because of 'selective retention' and this will not be good for all of us.

Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan
- ST Forum, June 28, 2006

I don't have a problem with the bulk of the letter, actually, because it's all been said before. I'm mainly highlighting this letter because of this part:

Some feel (erroneously) that anonymity allows them the liberty to publish just about anything without having to back up their assertions with facts or proof.

Why is there the implicit assumption there that bloggers are anonymous? Many bloggers don't post their names, it's true. But many don't exactly hide who they are either - do a little homework, and it's there for you to find. The only blogger that I know who's managed to actually maintain anonymity is Rockson. Who started this whole bloggers are anonymous myth anyway?

However, I'm curious about the overall stand that anonymous bloggers with to remain anonymous for reasons that are generally nefarious, unprofessional, or merely unwholesome. Or for reasons that make them untrustworthy news sources. In short, the good doctor believes that anonymity is bad - because if you want to hide, you must be doing something wrong. The good and righteous have nothing to fear.

Dear Dr Huang: I am a (mostly) anonymous blogger. But I'm choosing to remain anonymous because I like my privacy. I'm choosing to remain anonymous for now because I don't want my offline professional life to be confused with this blog. I'm choosing to remain a relative unknown because my offline persona has nothing to do with the topics I'm writing about. If it did, I'd mention it.

But mostly, I'm anonymous because I think Mezzo is so much cooler than my real name.

Lastly, many blogs are essentially people talking to each other, holding online discussions. Yes, I suppose that makes it rather like the kopitiam talk that you disparage. However, the good doctor may or may not be surprised to learn that academics refer to conferences held by venerable (?) institutes such as IPS or IDSS as coffee sessions too. They know that discussions are discussions, and you shouldn't judge the value of the opinions exchanged based on the location.

It's about people talking. It doesn't matter if it's over kopi, or held in a posh hotel conference room. It's about people trading and sharing ideas and sorting things out, and that's always worth listening too.

GRCs make it easier to find top talent | governmental brats

2006-06-27T18:33:00.000+08:00

There are times when I fancy I can read the thoughts of an article's author, some sliver of personality that slips through the self-censorship and the editorial censorship and the professional censorship. The little part of the self, that stands behind the facade of objectivity and journalist responsibility, the bit that understands the difference between reporting what happened, and telling the story, the part called individuality that manages to nudge the article ever so subtly to hint at what the author really thinks.

In Li Xueying's case, I strongly suspect that it of having pulled a Charlie Brown, announced "Good grief", and handed SM Goh onto a professional, objective platform to hang himself.

I'm referring to the article in the Straits Times today: "GRCs make it easier to find top talent: SM". Mr Wang already commented on it here, and once again, thank you Mr Wang for posting up articles by the ST in their entirety. He made a series of good points, although the one that I found most interesting was the meta issue of why SM Goh said it at all.

(An aside: my memory isn't that good, but it does seem to me that SM Goh has been behind a series of governmental gaffes, or rather, the political faux-pas of plain speaking. Off the top of my head - pseudo opposition, upgrading, etc.etc. What's with that, Mr Goh? Were you always like that, or has the ST been given the signal to take off the velvet gloves?)

What Mr Goh Said:

'Without some assurance of a good chance of winning at least their first election, many able and successful young Singaporeans may not risk their careers to join politics,' Mr Goh said at an event marking the appointment of members to the South East Community Development Council (CDC).

I was going to say something about this, in a sensible reasoned manner. About the lack of risk in joining the PAP even as a toilet scrubber, about the contradictions between the government call for Singaporeans to take risks, before pampering and protecting their own, and how the government effectively undermines its supposedly policy of fostering a risk-culture. (although the last sounds like a contradiction). And then I said screw it. I need to rant.

I have had it with these little entitled pampered brats of privilege that the government is carefully bringing up. I've seen any number of scholars go through the system - sorry, make that scholarship recipients. There's a difference - Kwa Chong Guan and Brenda Yeoh are scholars. Mah Bow Tan is a scholarship recipient. Many of them come back fine young men and women, but I don't know any Singaporean who hasn't had a horror story to tell about the scholarship returnee who whinged about having to - eek - serve their bond without being treated as special. Despite the fact that their career path could only go up, protected by the institution that granted the scholarship, because they scored at the A-levels when they were 18.

(Disclaimer: Many are deserving young men and women, who'd have done well no matter what. I'm ranting, I don't do reason and logic when I rant, 'k? )

And this massive sense of self-entitlement - along with horrific indignation when things don't go their way - seems to be the message that is being sent from the top. Our PM is a brilliant man, I'm sure. But he seems to be the only leader of a First World country anywhere that complains, at a political rally, on how annoying it is to win elections, because he has to go and fix the opposition.

He'll say it overseas too:

'Prime Minister Howard spends all his time dealing with this party politics. The result is you don't have a lot of time to worry about the long-term future,' Mr Lee said.
-- Straits Times, 20 June 2006, Aussieparty politics behind
stalemate: PM (Credit: Yawning Bread )

Is this the same country, that just one generation ago, fiercely believed that Singapore could only depend on Singapore, that no one, not the British or the Malaysians or the Americans, owed Singapore a living?

What happened?

So stop calling my generation the generation of whiners, the Why-me? group, the famous "post-'65ers" that expect the government to do everything.

We bloody well learnt it from the generation just before us. We learnt it from you.

Gather ye laurels where ye may | i say nice things

2006-06-18T15:18:00.000+08:00

After I posted the previous entry that mentioned STOMP tangentially, I went to Yawning Bread and came across his take on STOMP.

An excerpt: "But the nature of Stomp is such that, it is the worst habits of netspeak that is likely to be encouraged. Far from cultivating an audience for the journalism products that a quality newspaper can generate, self-service portals cultivate a disdain for that kind of content"

(The tin-foil pyramid hat that I occasionally don when in conspiracy theory mode tells me that Stomp looks set to provide fuel for the "internet people are crazy although some bloggers can be entertaining" argument used by Balaji.)

Anyway, it's a great article, go and read it.

As the entry title suggests, I wanted to say something nice. As everyone knows, bad news spreads faster than good news, and we're more prepared to slap someone than clap them on the back. So I thought it would be nice, for a change, to point out something that was well done.

Chua Mui Hoong recently wrote an article in the ST criticising the government's linking upgrading with voting, and pushing opposition wards to the end of the queue. It was an unsually critical piece coming from the ST, although the signs that it was about to erupt was there for anyone interested ( see here ).

It was a good article, I thought. Although conspiracy theorists with bigger tin foil hats than myself want to talk about her sister and co-worker Chua Lee Hoong being an ex-ISD officer (and some have hinted darkly that "ex" wouldn't be entirely right), I have this to say: whatever. It's Singapore. Everyone's connected one way another. If you say that people shouldn't receive preferential treatment because of their parents, it goes the other way as well. You should consider it, of course, but it's not a determining factor.

Anyway. It was a good article, and it needed to be written. Incidentally, does anyone know what Ms Chua looks like sans spectacles? Just wondering. And they're, like, sisters, right? huh. Just asking. No reason.

Seditious whistleblowers | talking dog

2006-06-17T01:08:00.000+08:00

(disclaimer: not a lawyer. no law degree. am very good at TV law, so if I was on CSI or Law 'n Order, I'd wipe the floor.)

There's one thing I don't like about the whole seditious blogger incident, and it's not unique to the incident, and definitely not to Singapore - it's the annonymous informant-ism of it all. The person being charged or investigated doesn't get to find out who the informant is. The same goes for other similar incidents involving "citizen reporting", and I'm not talking about reporting in the journalistic sense.

And if you don't get to face your accuser, it's a bit hard to mount a defense, I would imagine. After all, how do you determine that the material is offensive to the complainant if you don't know anything about the complainant? I mean, if the complainant complains about anti-Buddhist cartoons, but owns a massage parlour in San Fran with the tag line "Recline your buddha with our lovely lotuses".. well, I'd doubt the depth of his offence.

(of course, it seems that determining whether something is seditious has nothing to whether the complainant found it offensive, but rather that someone would find it offensive. Of course, there are people who would be offended by a banana held in an upright manner.)

And of course, there's the whole personal agenda aspect. The phenomenon of people reporting you in for misdemeanours that have nothing to do their actual grievance with you is a time dis-honoured one. And it's not difficult - after all, as Mr Wang has pointed out, are you sure you've never done anything wrong? Did you criminally intimidate someone recently?

Most of the time, you go unpunished (whoohoo!) for your crimes, mainly because the police can't be bloody arsed (and I don't blame them). However, there are some things that they are obliged to take more seriously, such as sedition. And HDB complaints.

(It sounds strange, but it shouldn't be. The link between politics, social harmony policies and housing is a well documented one in Singapore - I recommend Chua Beng Huat's book on the Politics of Housing for further reading. It's a good read, and Prof Chua is a very smooth writer with a palpable distaste for jargon)

Returning to the topic of anonymous complainants - i do understand the need to guaruntee anonymity to complainants. It's just that I've seen it abused too many times to feel comfortable. Dog owners will tell you that it's amazing how many complaints rack up against you because you own a dog. Sometimes the complaints are dog-related, like the person I know who kept on getting complaints about the barking. The problem was that his dog was a Cavaliar King Charles spaniel, a breed known to be on the quiet side. Unless, of course, to take a random example, the neighbour's kids stood outside the door and barked at the dog. The same (Chinese) neighbour incidentally, used to tell her kids "Dog! Dirty! Don't touch!" and was the only one who ever had problems with his dog.

It's not an isolated incident; in another case the outcome was potentially worse because the dog in question was an "illegal immigrant", a mongrel that the homeowner had adopted from a factory, but considered too large by HDB regulations. After the complaint was made, HDB officers told the homeowner to give up the dog (risking near certain death), or face losing the flat. The homeowner had to resort to bringing his dog out at midnight, so that no one would know he had a mutt. He didn't know who the "public spirited" complainant was, but he was fairly sure it was the neighbour who had insisted that his dog was noisy, spread SARs, and whose hair kept floating into the neighbour's flat. Now there's a guy who'd count the number of wanton he got at the hawker centre, and compare it to the picture.

The anonymous complainant aspect is prone to abuse. Of course, it's not a new phenomenon - to cast an even darker shade on it, similarly public-spirited individuals would report their neighbours to the Japanese/British/Facists/British/Russians/ISD/school teacher. (am guilty on the last score, myself. I'm ashamed, ok?)

It's a necessary evil of course, but at the same time, I wish the police, or rather, the attourney general's office would learn to exercise a little, well, judgement. You could say that political necessity dictates that they go after everyone; well, I would like suggest that it isn't as indiscriminate as that, and that they can choose not to go after a person, as was shown in Chua Chang Zhen's case. In fact, the depth of offense was much higher in this PSC scholar's case than in Char's Zombie Christ case, since Char merely reproduced material easily available on the net, whereas the PSC scholar Chua Chang Zhen wrote that Indians were disgusting and not Singaporean.

Actually, at times, I'm tempted to simply flood CID with a list of complaints about blogs that are offensive - hmm, we could start with Xiaxue the blogger that has been hired by the Straits Times to blog for them despite her bluntly racist entries. Sorry, I should correct that, it's STOMP that hired her, the new ST enterprise that's been launched and I haven't looked at yet because of computer woes. Man, if the hiring of Xiaxue is anything to go by, I feel bad for the ST. The Straits Times is a whore, as I've said before, but damnit, the old girl was just a dame trying to get by. It's too soon to tell, of course, but by comparison, STOMP isn't a whore, it's Paris Hilton drunk on a table at a party, legs splayed open, vagina ready to take on all comers.

Rounding up - Of course, there's a reason why the anonymous complaint/reporter mechanism, and the abuse that ensures works so well in Singapore. We're Singaporeans, remember? As Janandas Devan wrote: "Singaporeans are famous for complaining."

And of course, we have a strong belief that the government should "fix" everything.

Yet another seditious blogger | zombie christ is bad

2006-06-15T02:18:00.000+08:00

I just want to say this:

I'm not entirely sure how seditious the cartoons were, to begin with. After all, the disruption to social harmony was quite minimal - there was no internet war, and there certainly wasn't an uproar on the scale of the anti-Muslim bloggers. And the cartoons were always out there - rather like the Jesus with a crucifix machine gun action figure.

I do know this though - everyone's going to start looking for those pictures now. Way to go to keep social harmony, boys in blue.

(Mr Wang pays for articles from the online ST, God bless him. I just link to him)

IPS post election forum 2 | mandalas and me

2006-06-09T15:49:00.000+08:00

One thing that I had wished was discussed at the IPS was the concept of daulat/derhaka, and the personal mandalas. Having said that to show off, in plain English it would roughly be the idea of giving face, and the likeability factor.

Daulat/Derhaka is a Malay concept that nevertheless has parallels in other cultures. My understanding of it is very rough, but daulat could be explained as the divine right to rule given to the king. Derhaka referred to treason against the ruler, treason including lack of complete loyalty and obedience . The prof who taught it to me is currently very embarressed by my explanation - sorry, but I was only sitting in at the lecture out of interest rather than for the credits, so my note taking was ... sketchy, although my pinball game was awesome.

The reason why I mentioned is because of something that I heard quite often, especially from the older generation, or more traditional Singaporeans: "Vote for the PM lah, give him a bit of face. He's our leader, we owe it to him." There seemed to be the opinion that giving the PM a weak mandate would have translated into making him the laughing stock on the international scene.

This seemed interesting for what it could be thought to say about the Chinese/Asian interpretation of the electoral process. It didn't seem to be a case of choosing a leader, or as is often the case of in walkover Singapore, choosing to express their opinion of leadership to date. For some, it seemed, the electoral process was a case of voting for the established leader as an act of patriotism. The same thing happened in the 2004 US elections, of course, but I wonder if the Bush voters thought of it as "giving face" to the leader, as an extension/representation of the state.

Personal mandalas - a mandala can be roughly described as a concentric sphere of influence, with an object at the centre as the source of celestial power. A personal mandala would have a person at the centre, a person imbued with certain characteristics that would cause power and people to be attracted to him. Southeast Asia has always featured such strong men leaders, strongmen who attract based on two things; what they could give their followers, and this indefinable sense of being blessed.

"Beloved Leader", anyone?

I was wondering how that came into play in the election as well. Chiam See Tong was occasionally described as having gone on a charm offensive, with the ST even featuring articles on Potong Pasir's love affair with Mr Chiam, as well as some appearing in the Chinese papers. Of course, it goes both ways as well - there are people who told me that they were voting LKY - or would have voted LKY because "It's Lee Kuan Yew! I remember when (insert war story) , and he was (insert moment of humanity)".

(At this point, I feel obliged to mention that some people insist that LKY and "moment of humanity" don't ever belong in the same sentence unless the "lack of" modifier is included. I disagree with such people; after all, the PM didn't arrive via stork.)

And of course, when it comes to the ability of the mandala holder to give out the good shit to his faithful followers - well nothing says I love you like a lift shaft. Unless, of course, it seems, if you're in Potong Pasir.

The benefits that the mandala-centre-holding person could give to his followers weren't always material goods or general lobangs. Sometimes it was just about recognition of the follower, the confirmation that the follower belonged to him, to the village, to an imagined community greater than the sum of the individuals. In the wild, frantically developing and shifting world of featureless sea and dark jungle that was Southeast Asia, where boundaries blurred and the dense foliage blocked your view of the greater sky, it was comforting to know one simple fact: I belong here.

I am his man. I belong to this group of people. I follow this leader. And he looks back at me, and he knows who I am, and I am known. It was about identity.

I don't know when I last saw my MP. I don't know when he came around last, if he ever did. Actually, I'm not sure which ward I'm in, to which ward I belong. I don't know when he last spoke in Parliament, if he spoke. I don't know if he thought of me when he was speaking. I'm not sure if he would know where I stayed, even if I gave him my address.

I don't even think he lives here.

I bet Mr Chiam lives in Potong Pasir.

How do I know that I belong to this greater thing called the nation if I don't know who my MP is? How can the government represent me if my MP doesn't know who I am? The government is this big confusing place filled with rules and regulations and faceless parliamentary secretaries and party whips and I don't know what that has to do with me and what it means and will someone help me out and tell me how i belong?

Mandala. It's not some ancient weirdo concept that belongs to 14th century Southeast Asian kings that pierced their penises, it applies to the hear and now. The thing about these people who get votes based on personality is this: they get it because of recognition factor, that's true. But they also get it because they put a human face on the government, and because of that, manage to do what they're suppose to do - functions a link between the governers and the governed, between the grassroots and the greater sky.

And in doing so, they tell people who they are, and where they belong, one more anchor to the soil.

Daulat/Derhaka, mandala, personality cults and loyalties and nationalism - they never got discussed at the IPS forum. It's understandable, there were other things, and it's too soon to tell what role they played. And perhaps we'll never know - this isn't the US, where entire industries sprung up around polling data.

But as long as we're making tenuous links between ancient concepts of kerajaan and politics today, we might as well dig this one up as well: the story of Demang Lebar Daun. He was the one whom, in the Sejarah Melayu, coined the concepts of daulat and derhaka, and in doing so gave his unconditional loyalty and that of his descendants to Sri Tri Buana, better known to us as Sang Nila Utama, fabled founder of Singapore.

What often goes unmentioned was that it was not a gift of loyalty and unquestioned obedience, it was a covenant. An agreement, with two parties, with God as witness and judge. Demang Lebar Daun gave his loyalty.

And in return, his king was never to fail to serve their interests. He was to care for their needs. And most of all, he was never to shame them in the eyes of God and Heaven.

Daulat and voting - it goes both ways.

-------------------------

And the king replied:"I agree to give the undertaking for which you ask: but I in my turn require an undertaking from you, sir... that your descendants shall never for rest of time be disloyal to my descendants, even if my descendants oppress them and behave evilly. " And Demang Lebar Daun said, "Very well, your highness. But if your descendants depart from the terms of the pact, then so will mine." And Sri Tri Buana replied, "Very well, I agree to that covenant"...

... and that is why it has been granted by Almight God to Malay rulers that they shall never put their subjects to shame, and that those subjects however gravely they offend shall never be bound or hanged or disgraced with evil words. If any ruler puts a single one of his subjects to shame, that shall be a sign that his kingdom will be destroyed by Almighty God."

- from Chpt 2 of Sejarah Melayu, or the Malay Annals, CC Brown translation of the Raffles MS 18.
.

IPS post-election forum | discounted thoughts

2006-06-03T15:05:00.000+08:00

The Institue of Policy Studies post-election forum was interesting for a variety of reasons. Firstly, it was the first academic analysis of the elections and election results. Secondly, the topics discussed included elections and the new media factor, trends in political freedom, and voter trends. Thirdly, it had Alex Au (Yawning Bread) and Kenneth Kwek (Straits Times) in the same room, the prospect of which sent me into a very very happy place indeed despite the possibility of future blindness.

The aforesaid happy place was not worth $150 that IPS was charging, so I didn't go for the forum. bastards.

As a result, I was thoroughly happy when Yawning Bread, in the best possibly example of citizen journalism, wrote up a synopsis of the discussions that took place. I hate having to do anything based on second hand reports, since I'm sure he wasn't completely objective, something that I'm sure that those people who strongly suggested that the Straits Times should be turned into kitty litter will keep in mind. Nevertheless, I think he was as objective as humanly possible, and judging from what I heard from other people, he was probably spot on. You can read his account of it here and here, as well as a thoughtful breakdown of Gillian Koh's post-election survey results here.

A few things that caught my interest: Gillian Koh's phone survey which suggested that there was a preference for alternative parties, opposition voices, and "fairness" (whatever that is) amongst voters, and that nearly 80% of them listed it as a key concern. Alex Au made the valid observation that this only represented the views of those actually answered the survey, which was something around 30%, suggesting that those survey results only represented the views of the politically mature/aware. I feel obliged to add the caveat that politically mature/aware does not necessarily translate into "member of the high socio-economic-education class".

(As an aside, conversation I had with a Genuine Heartlander: "Ok lah, the government is efficient, but really sometimes they are too much! We need opposition MP because when they talk cock you need someone with big balls to talk back to them - that's why we need opposition party because no one listen to small fart like you and me.")

However, there was one point I would have liked to have seen raised: how far does this preference for an alternative party translate into votes? Or rather, did this preference actually affect voter decision?

Story behind this - a friend came back on the edge of tears: "I'm so so sorry, I just couldn't bring myself to vote for the WP - I really think there needs to be checks and balances especially after NKF, but I just couldn't do it!"

It's like the Potong Pasir syndrome. Everyone wants Potong Pasir to stay opposition (Chiam! Woo! Hot! Elderly! Statesman!) but it's a NIMBY thing - someone elses' ward should be opposition. In your own ward, you might be a bit more concerned about rising prositutes and lowered property values than opposition voices, which are often misunderstood as something less close to home.

I suppose what I'm also trying to say is this: If you had two equally qualified candidates, would the opposition factor be a factor in your decision making process?

(More thoughts tomorrow. This is a re-typed entry, a mere ghost of the one that Blogger swallowed up and digested in its vasty fetid codes)

Two laws, one country | James gomez revisited

2006-06-03T14:14:00.000+08:00

JBJ was sued for waving a piece of paper (a police report about the PAP) to the election crowd.Technically, the legal decision IS actually correct. Gomez was warned by the police for committing the offence of criminal intimidation.Technically, he DID commit the offence.Mr Wang now says: "[forum poster], I want to slap your face for being stupid."There. Mr Wang is also technically guilty of an offence of criminal intimidation.

The point is - you will not be able to get Mr Wang in trouble for that. The human elements throughout the legal system will obstruct you. For example, if you print out this page and you go to the police station to make a police report against Mr Wang, the police officer will laugh at you and say, "Go away, lah, I'm very busy, don't waste my time with these stupid things."But the police officer won't be able to say: ""Go away, lah, I'm very busy, don't waste my time with these stupid things", if the person making the police report is a PAP minister.

There is a lot of human common sense in social systems to sort things out. But when too much power is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals, those individuals will be able to override the common sense in the social system.--- Incidentally, yes, many negative statements that teachers make about their students would probably be defamatory in nature. For that matter, many negative statements that bosses make about their employeers would also be defamatory in nature.The reason why defamation suits don't occur out of those kinds of incidents is that neither the student nor the employee has sufficient incentive to do so. But if an Opposition candidate or a persistent blogger keeps on making negative statements about a public figure such as a PAP minister, you can see why there would be incentive to do so. Don't you?

...Of course you wouldn't. And I hope by now, you understand that it's not quite so easy to comment seriously about politics in Singapore and yet be sure that you haven't broken some law somewhere.In fact, you remind me of a previous discussion somewhere on this blog where I pointed out that technically, most of us have committed many crimes even if we have never been prosecuted. After all, all of these are crimes:drove above the speed limit / drank a little alcohol, then drove / smacked your dog for being naughty / smacked your child for being
naughty / littered / took a little "free" office stationery home / didn't declare bank interest in your income tax form / jaywalked / downloaded porn / owned a pirated VCD / downloaded illegal music / used illegal software / cut & pasted Mr Wang's posts into your blog without asking for permission etc etc.

Taken with permission from Mr Wang

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posting this because I'm a teacher at heart (ie. bombastic blowhard), and like to remember a good usable punchy turn of phrase when I see one.

Actually it reminds me of a Terry Pratchett quote: Everyone's guilty of something. The only difference is if someone tried to do something about it.

It also reminds me of the etymology of privilege: from the Latin privilegium, an amalgamation of privus, single/alone, and leg, law. Privilege = private law.

Well, that's Singapore - sorry, that's life. It's not a Uniquely Singapore kind of thing - Bill Clinton's feelings about that would also be relevant - but it's life. Not condoning, just .. being aware of the Singapore permutation, I suppose.

Lee Boon Yang rambles, I ramble, it's a ramblefest | speculation

2006-05-31T23:28:00.000+08:00

Reference complete article here

Govt promises review of new media, 'lighter touch' in next GE

Speaking at the 5th Annual PR Academy Conference on new media, Dr Lee said the Government accepts that Internet and new media are evolving and even more people will be net-savvy in five years' time.

Fair enough.

'Moving forward, we will consider how to better embrace these changes so that by the next GE, we may be able to adopt a lighter touch approach during the election period.'

Nah, you've got a pretty light touch. Seeing as the forum that is run on your own website is full of anti-PAP trolls, I think it's fair to say that the touch was very light. In fact, one was tempted to say non-existent, and when I say non-existent touch, I mean non-existent control, unless you count singling out selected individuals to give the impression that you were paying attention.

I must say, this sounds better than the "manage" bit by Disarray Chua.

'The emergence of new media platforms and the fact that many of our young people are tech-savvy supported such intense interest. Many also see the new media as increasing the political space to speak up on the issues brought up during the election campaign,' he said.

'I accept that some will argue that we should let the people be the judge and form their own opinion by accessing all sorts of information and arguments. I agree that this is not without merit. But it is only valid when information available on the Internet is equally reliable and accurate.

He did not. *close eyes, open eyes* He did.

Do any of these people know anything about the internet other than the email? Somehow I think not. I can't imagine the cabinet ministers flipping through Rockson after a hard day's work, or some MP reading the Daily Kos after a hard day's not turning up at Parliament.

For my own reference, the rebuttal points are:

Equally reliable ..as... what? What is this golden standard that he brings up? Could it be MSM? Like, oh, Channel News Asia? This would be the same Channel News Asia that doctored website photos before flashing them on the news?
Generally, in academia, supervisors encourage the students to read widely, and read intensively. Good and bad. This means reading Myth of the Lazy Native, and holding your nose before touching the absolute dreck that is The Clash of Civilisations. The reason behind this is simple - you need to be aware of what is available, and existing arguments - and learning to use your brains to decide which is right, and form your views.
The situation in point 2 isn't exclusive to academia, it's what people do in life as well. Why is it that only in political issues that bad information is so insidious and infectious as to instantly burrow into the reader's mind and reprogram them entirely?

I'm just wondering - how far does new media actually affect the way people vote? After all, the point has been brought up time and again that sometimes preaching through new media is preaching to the converted. And the thing about the internet is that you can pretty much pick what you want to hear as well.

And what about young people? Wasn't it announced that young people lovvvvvvvvved the government and voted for them? Aww... is someone worried that they won't be loved no more next time?

The rest of the article was fairly run-of-the-mill, and reiteration of what was said before: that young people being young should be allowed to run loose on the Internet (i like the way they've managed to take a right, and turn it into a privilege), except during election season, in case of "undesirable situations". Newsflash: undesirable situations happened. My MP got reinstated in a walkover.

The point about the PAP getting more involved in new media intrigued though. How about Mr White: The Persistantly Political Podcast?

Two World Wars and One World Cup | football mania

2006-05-31T13:29:00.000+08:00

...fuck Singapore politics. The World Cup is coming. And as Clifford Geertz would have agreed, international sport is a mirror of international relations, a lens with which we peer through and discern truths about the society we live in.

GO ENGLAND!!!

(they're so going to lose)

I will also say that the second best part of football season is the ads. *humms da-da-da* bring on the lederhosen, I say.

"Da-Da-Da" - Bavaria FIFA World Cup 2006

Coke ad, rivalling FIFA sponser Pepsi

It's the World Cup after a 4 year hiatus - and once again, time is on our side.

WP Serangoon pledge recitation

2006-05-30T22:34:00.000+08:00

I still haven't figured out the legalities of it, but what the heck, there are about a thousand Singaporeans who are going down with me.

This is my recording of the pledge recitation that took place during the Worker's Party rally at Serangoon Stadium on May 5, 2006. Sylvia Lim led, then Low led the Chinese portion which I didn't record. I took awhile to put this up because I didn't know how to edit a video.

Incidentally the reason why the video was so shakey at the beginning was because I was using my right hand to hold it up. Since we've been taught since primary school that we need to say the pledge with hand over heart, my hand took on a life of its own and kept wanting to come down.

(I wonder if there's any truth to the rumour that they started the hand over heart thing so as to catch Jehovah's Witnesses?)

Two stories | speculation

2006-05-29T01:13:00.000+08:00

Disclaimer: I am a political observer novice. I have never denied it, except when I was explaining to my friends rather vehemently about why having an Alternative Party is good, and I may have made up shit to persuade them. For which I apologise, but would like to add in mitigation that I didn't do any harm since none of them were in a position to vote anyway.

(They are still talking to me. Thank goodness elections is every 5 years or so.)

Something I observed over the last couple of weeks that I'm blogging about because I want to remember it, is about what makes an event blogworthy. Two things sparked it off - the Bilahari Kausikan versus Gayle Goh, and Denise Phua versus everyone that the money-grubbing-nouveau-riche-eugenics-program aka NUSS could get to come down.

Recounting:
Bilahari, Second Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Gave a talk to JC students, caused Gayle Goh to be "flabbergasted" at his apparent harshness of words, especially with regards to the acknowlegment that elderly employment is a perennial problem, since his generation wasn't about to "conveniently die". Other things that caused disgruntlement included the basic self-interest and "siege mentality" that governed Singapore foreign policy. Ms Goh later blogged about it and her feelings articulately, and her blog was picked up by Tomorrow.sg. Things snowballed, and Bilahari later wrote a letter of apology to her.

(On a personal note, said letter of apology was an excellent example of why Bilahari earned his stripes as a diplomat, since he managed to, well, not apologise while giving the impression that he had.

Denise Phua speaks at a forum thatIwasnotatbecauseNUSSisfucked - anyway, in the process she explained that she was shocked when she went online that 80% of the content was anti-PAP. She also suggested that the PAP should look into correcting this imbalance, and "managing" the Internet. Singapore bloggers howled hysterically with laughter, and proceed to complain about idiocies of walkover newbie MPs, censorship, and also change her name to Desiree in one case

(Desiree is an excellent name, but if you say it fast, it becomes Disarray. Freudian?)

One thing that struck me is this - well, two. Firstly, the ST picked up the story about Gayle Goh, and Ignatius Low turned it into a David-versus Goliath piece. Denise Phua's incident was reported but not commented on, with the reporter choosing to leave the quote intact and letting Singapore decide on what to think.

Secondly, Yawning Bread and Mr Wang picked up the Denise Phua piece, but not the Gayle Goh one. A quick survey of the more prominent political blogs suggested that none of them had picked it up. (Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm underpaid and I owe the university 46k. Toss me the requisite 12.90 per hour, and I'll research it better)

Stream of concious reasoning here: The Bilahari one was never about Bilahari. It's about Gayle Goh, the narrative is the one of "spunky fearless youth" tells it to "the Man". And you know that David wins, because of the apology. Never mind that the letter never apologised, but did the equivalent of patting David on the head. The David-Goliath story fit what people like to hear, it made the ruling party look good, it was heart-warming, and it was PR served to them on a plate.

Bilahari didn't get picked up by the more prominent political blogs, except in the Gayle Goh context. The reason - he never dropped the ball. He'd done his job, and done it well, and by all accounts, was well-versed in his area of expertise. (This is from what I read, for all I know my MFA friends are going to start screaming about how he steals the office donuts.)

Denise Phua didn't get picked up by MSM because she had dropped the ball. I won't go into detail about how abyssmally the ball had dropped, because Yawning Bread and Mr Wang have done so excellently. It got carefully ignored by MSM, and that's where bloggers come in - to fill in the gaps and use their position to say what MSM can't or won't.

The doyennes of the political blogs picked it up because it was blogworthy. Ms Phua's mistake was worthy of comment, because it was representative of many issues that people have with the PAP, and because it was potentially indicative of party views, the quality of new MPs, and much more. It was political.

Bilahari's didn't get picked up by the political bloggers because it was fluff, and got picked up by MSM because it was human interest. Ms Phua's got picked up by the bloggers and was ignored by MSM because there was blood on the floor.

------------

Disclaimer Part 2: I'm fully prepared to also believe that the reason why it didn't get picked up is because Alex Au had a flu. This is ultimately speculation.

Then again, there's a reason why the university paid out 46k to hear people speculate away.

Singapore Idol begins | writing despite myself

2006-05-29T00:21:00.000+08:00

I am watching Singapore Idol, mainly because the Partner wants to watch it. I am posting that piece of information so that Partner will Feel Bad. Also, in unrelated news, I have never been to Bali but would like to go.

Anyway, actually I used to follow American Idol off and on, so no big. Didn't catch the first Singapore idol - can't remember why, but was pleased as punch that Taufik won.

The Girls
I happened to be involved in the FHM Girl Next Door competition this year, so the girls threw up a few familiar faces, including Chanelle. And I will say this: everything that happened in the space of the competition...well, let's just say that I don't think the bizarre little petty "who gets the room" spat initiated by Chanelle versus Geraldine was due to editing. Some of those girls can be just that bizarrely stupid.

So.. I was kinda glad when Charmaine, Chanelle's sister got through but not Chanelle. At the audition, I thought Charmaine had the better voice, but Chanelle had the looks. And as the half-assed cringeworthy poledance showed, Chanelle's just a bit too used to using her body to talk.

People to look out for: Jasmine, Rahimah, Meryl. Meryl's undoubtedly good, and her quality of voice isn't entirely due to vocal training. But I'm willing to bet money that this isn't the first or last time she's sung public - glancing at her bio, church choir's a good bet - and she's had training. Concerns - is there much more to improve, and has Meryl hit a wall? On the other hand, she's got the pretty face and sings well, so she's the equivalent of the PAP when it comes to voters. Also, what's with the bizarre faintly-creepy mommy ties? I mean, ok, she's young and all that, and her mum looks tai-tai so she's probably close to mummy - but all that crying on Gurmit's shoulder about disappointing her mum after she gave an excellent performance that was praised by the judges?

Ploy to gain sympathy votes, or just really emotional? I'm going for b) since she was probably stressed.

Jasmine and Rahimah - good, strong voices that would probably improve after training. Rahimah seems like a girl's girl, and a boy's boy- she cracked me up with her cheerful "Um.. the song was running through my head all night.. i'm going to count that as rehersal time, ok?" Probably won't win because Jasmine and Meryl beat her in the looks department, but I'd like her to go far.

Jasmine and Meryl cite Aguilera as a favourite artist, while Rahimah's got Shakira. So they're ok in that department. Rahimah's coming across as the boho type, which could work in her favour since she's not going to win votes in the pop tart department.

My favourite for now: Rahimah. Rahimah (and Jasmine to a lesser extent) has good interpretive skills, and know how to make emotion come through the song. Meryl's bordering on soul-less - which is in line with her mummy-crafted image.

The Boys
The only one I remember is Jonathan Leong. Whom I taught last year. Heh. He's got a good voice, and he is quite the charmer in real life as well, and it's coming through in the interviews. I found him a nice enough boy when I was teaching him, and the things that I did rip him over are between him and me.

Favourites to win: Jonathan versus Meryl.

Definitions | on waking up

2006-05-28T09:48:00.000+08:00

WTF is idealism anyway? Note to self: cucup merancap tulisan. Or maybe I mean tulisan dilocok. No, maybe tulisan rancapkan.

Introspective indulgences | All about me

2006-05-27T22:18:00.000+08:00

There are times when I regret that I am essentially holding down two jobs right now. Two and a half when you consider the extras, and paid for about 1.5 of them. There's so much more I could do if I was holding a real job - Bhutan, for example, - and other little projects that are inevitably kept on hold because you realise that if you don't finish the thesis you're going to owe NUS some 46K.

Bugger the passion about my subject, I tell you. Money is a damn good motivator.

I realise that the sentiment is less than idealistic - after all, aren't post grads supposed to be seeking higher truths, whether in fuel cells or Derrida, a situation that would suggest a certain idealism (not in the philophical sense) about the people who decide to pursue a degree course with high opportunity cost, in the hopes that they can make a difference to the sum of world knowledge. And maybe tenure.

But they aren't idealists. This isn't news, but I feel obliged to write it down anyway, to remind myself of this. Words have power of their own, they frame little realities in text and syntax, till you're faced with a crude mirror of your own amorphous thoughts. Faced with the mirror, you are forced to face the mirror.

And then you wonder what happened. When did you start accepting pragmatism and abandoning idealism? When did you stop wanting to know why the world didn't perform as promised, and start learning about the world to see how it needed changing?

And when did you realise that you had changed?

As an analogy; paraphrased from the wonderful BitchPhD: "There comes a time in every man's life when he stops finding out what women want, and starts finding out what his woman wants."

This realisation comes in bits and pieces, as do many things in life, fragments of a pattern of a larger meaning that your intuitive mind works to put together.

(or just mine. I'm slow, ok? I'm ENTJ. We're like that. Alright, it's just me. )

A fragment of this came at the Mary Turnbull talk organised by the Asia Research seminar. Mary Turnbull is a darling of a British academic - white hair and white lace, hint of antique rose and tweed - and she's written a definitive book on Singapore history. Political history - not unusual, since most histories first written are from the political aspect.

Attending: Drs. Lysa Hong, Albert Lau, Edwin Thumboo, Tony Reid, Chua Beng Huat, Geoff Wade, the entire Singapore History museum board, Iskandar Mudin, Chua Ai Lin, Sim Chi Yin, the general local postgrad community, assorted honour years.

So you get an idea of what the talk/seminar was pitched at.

There were also a few history teachers, and a few ACJC students. Happens occasionally: the history teachers from JC are always trying to shove students into NUS lectures, and the NUS lecturers are always trying to politely tell them that they didn't mind, exactly, but there are people sitting on the floor and subcription to the module is overwhelming, so if you didn't mind..?

After Mary and Lysa and Albert had spoken, there was a Q&A. Questions raised; the impact of great man history, the ideal amount of time to have passed before historians are generally allowed to get away with merde involving the government's role in events, the possibility of a more social-oriented history, and the likelihood of the approved national/founding myths being invariably political and history from the top.

So you get the idea of the questions and key issues that had formed the theme and impetus behind the talk.

And then one of the ACJC students spoke up. Bright-sounding, articulate, tiringly preppy, desperate to get the words out and beat the time limit. The question (paraphrased): "Do you find it disturbing that our Singaporean history is not objective and written with an agenda?"

The room went still. Not with awe, but with a collective "well, duh."

I lie. It wasn't all "well, duh." There was also "Where'd the students come from?" "zzzz - Huh?" "Do you think there are chocolate eclairs on the food table outside?"

Lysa Hong, who is first and foremost, a lady, handled the question with the grace and flair that has marked her tutorial classroom. And because she is also a teacher, she treated the questioner with tolerance and the question with her trademark velvet handling designed to encourage rather than deflate young egos.

No, she said, it didn't disturb her at all.

And the rest of the room echoed the answer silently before we heard it.

Because history isn't objective. It never is. Never was. Objective is a little lie that we tell, the pot of gold that we describe when we want you to chase your rainbow'd dreams.

And I doubted the student had known it. I also knew that the answer had been fair and patient, in recognition of the questioner's youth and idealism, and evident interest that Prof Hong did not want to quash.

And I know that another person that evening who had asked a similarly out-of-place question had been treated less gently, because he was older and thus judged to have known more and better - known more about the subject and the discussion at hand, known better than to ask the question here and now .

And then I realised that in the knowing of these things, I'd lost a little more of a person I had once been.

I think I've gained more much than I had ever lost. Idealism is a wonderful thing, but there are times when I think that idealism is ultimately about forcing your own utopia on a world that has other plans. And the thing about losing your idealism is that in doing so, you actually begin to start achieving your dreams.

And more than that, there comes a time in life, where idealism is no longer forgiven nor cherished, nor looked on fondly by others, nor protected. We look indulgently on idealism in our young, because they are seen as children. We are less indulgent of blind idealism in our peers.

Losing your idealism isn't about losing your hopes and dreams and beliefs and desires. It isn't about giving up making the world a better place, or about "caving in". It isn't about keeping silent in the face of Evil or Evil's more ubiquitous cousin, Screw-up.

It's about realising that there isn't one answer to everything, that disagreements can flare between people who agree on the goals but not the paths. It's about seeing the world in more than a binary, about giving up the Other for others, and about multi-isms. It's about that perfectly delightful moment when the factors and relationships and considerations and issues that drive and complicate and decide and inspire our world lie revealed to you in their rainbow glories.

And it's about that moment when what I have written are no longer just revelations to you, but echoed in your blood when you read it. When you realised that you knew the answer before you read it.

Fun, isn't it? Fuck being 17, there are things that are even better than being young.

----------------------------------------------

[ As an addition to the question of history's objectivity, and by natural extension, the objectivity of MSM that has come under fire in recent months, I give you a quote from Good Night and Good Luck, the Oscar nominated film about Ed Morrow, the journalist who went against Senator Joe McCarthy in an attempt to battle censorship and freedom:

"I would argue that everyone censors. Including you."

Think on it ]

Blogging Ethics

2006-05-27T02:54:00.000+08:00

Since I am technically NUS staff, does this mean that I shouldn't post critically about my employer?

Laundry list of things I want to bitch about: not paying the cool admin staff enough (not me, in case you were wondering), dumbass overpaid NUS business school adds, ugly-ass University block, fucktard arrivista-mentality graduate society, and no proper on campus postgraduate housing.

Sometimes you just need a list

2006-05-25T22:57:00.000+08:00

Sometimes you think, "Dang, I wish I thought of doing that first."

In the course of writing papers and articles, and trying to identify a question in the material that you've collected, sometimes you forget how lovely, elegant, and utterly useful a simple list can be.

Here's one on quotes about the opposition from the PAP this past election.

The Straits Times is a whore - so what?

2006-05-10T21:41:00.000+08:00

What about the Straits Times?

Over the last few days, there's been a lot of bitching about unfair coverage of the elections. The venerable old dame of the Singapore news scene has been demonised as a painted hussy, a shameless whore sent to walk the streets for the government. Other people complain about the reporters: they're gutless government shills, who have no integrity or worse, whine and say it's just a job.

My reaction is... well, I don't have one, really. Because... nothing new there.

A newspaper has the duty to be objective? Can you hear the historians sniggering off their collective wrinkled ancient asses at you? A newspaper may have the duty to be objective. Whether it actually is objective is something else. As any academic worth their tenureship will tell you - objectivity is something we sell to the JC students and freshmen. It's a little lie we tell. The truth is - no one's objective. If you truly wanted to be objective, you'd have describe the scene right down to shoelaces, underwear brand, and every last pearl of wisdom dripping from every last candidate's mouth.

(As an aside, if anyone knows how to erase the mental image of pearls dripping from George Yeo's mouth, please tell me how. )

What happens in the newspaper is that it's story telling on the run - they need to tell you the story. So stuff gets edited. And the end result - isn't objective, and how balanced it is depends on who's watching. And the first objective of newspapers isn't to rock the world, it's to tell the story, as accurately as possible.

But we could go back and forth all day on how objective the Straits Times is (my answer, nope, not at all), and we'd never reach a conclusion. (Rather like every last bloody GP paper I ever had to write)

I think the greater question is this: Why is the Straits Times so determinedly middle-of-road, and conservative? If the answer is because it's the mouthpiece of the government - why then, we elected the Straits Times the same time we elected the government. Change the government, change the Straits Times.

But I think that part of the problem is that there is no body else. Take a look at the US - you have Fox News (Republican) versus New York Times (Democratic, baby-killer, gay down to the janitor). While admittedly a flawed comparison, since it's TV versus print, it still goes to show the diversity of viewpoints possible within MSM. And because there's more than one paper, it's possible for a newspaper to push one side of the issue more than the other side - or to put it in more diplomatic terms - take a stand.

And as for the readers - well, if you don't like the NYTimes, just walk two steps over and pick up the NYPost. Or skip the whole thing and pick up the latest on alien abductions in Wyoming. See? You have a choice. Just pick the newspaper that tells the version of the news you like better.

But in Singapore - we're unique, just like everyone else! - if you're an English-language reader (and far too many of us with Chinese/Malay AO-levels are English readers only), there's no getting around the Straits Times. Don't tell me about "alternative" viewpoints of the "braver" newspapers like Today - Today's news is written with fact-checking as an option. It's the Straits Times or nada. At least until someone manages to break into the monopoly, and for a history of such attempts and related journalism in Singapore, check out Dr. Cherian George's blog.

So the Straits Times has to be all things to all people. And if you've ever had a conversation with your friends in the Econs/Engineering department - well - you might find that they like the ST. The ST is "just right". And that should tell you something about people - they don't like their world shaken up - they don't like to be disturbed. They like something that fits in with their worldview - the world as they know it.

(And before you get feeling all happy and snobby - so do you. It's just that your world view is different from theirs.)

In short, people don't want to hear man bites dog. They want to hear dog bites man. They don't want news, they want olds.

And because of that, the Straits Times is doing its job just fine.

So lay off the old lady. She's in bed with the government and gets fucked by them every single day. And if you've looked at the headshots of the PAP recently, you'll realise that it's punishment enough.

My Election Results Post

2006-05-07T00:13:00.000+08:00

Potong Pasir and Hougang just told PAP to take their lifts and shaft 'em.

It can only go downhill from now. I'm taking my fun when I can.

WP Serangoon Rally: Sylvia has no last name now

2006-05-06T01:20:00.000+08:00

Serangoon Rally was interesting. I got there in time for Sylvia Lim and Low Thia Khiang, which is far more impressive than it sounds since the jam around the Stadium area started in...

.. Clementi. Seriously. The PIE was jammed from there - a moving jam, but jam nonetheless.

When we finally got there, the place was filled with people - less than the Hougang rally, but it could be because the place was larger, so the impact was somewhat less. But there were still people pressing in to listen, climbing on top of cars, of fences.

Sylvia was considereably more impressive than she was on Sunday - kept the message short, and sweet. She hammered home a few points that mainly appealed to the crowd's sense of being ignored by the PAP. A few that stood out, and were emphasised by Low:

1. The WP has run a clean campaign, with no insults. Unlike *cough*youknowwho*cough*

2. The WP does not, and never has, intended to take over the government. They want to be the Opposition, not just an opposition party. Which brings us to point three...

3. The point of having an opposition is to make the government work for the country. She brought up the 2001 elections versus the 1991 elections. During the first in 1991, the govt received a narrow margin of victory, and the subsequent years saw pork barrels and goodies galore. After the 2001 elections where the govt won by a large margin, the electorate got.. nada.

The last point was the one that I considered interesting. Many people that were fence sitters sometimes confessed that they were fence sitters because they didn't see the need for an opposition for the sake of opposition. They felt that the opposition should talk about more bread and butter issues, and couldn't make the mental connection between having an opposition party and the impact on their lives.

And that's why I found Sylvia's point a good one. The idea of having an opposition is an intellectual one, and some people can't wrap their minds around that idea. Others are pragmatic - they think that having an opposition is some liberal arts western intellectual academic masturbation, that has little actual practical purpose. Sylvia's example (and naturally, a teacher would think of this!) managed to link the theory and the practice of having an opposition. She un-intellectualised it, and showed how an abstract idea had actual bread-and-butter issues.

The WP rally ended with Sylvia and Low leading the crowd in a recitation of the pledge, which was rather interesting since it drove home that being an opposition member didn't make you un-patriotic, or un-Singaporean.

Well, that's the last rally for another 5 years. But going to them has been interesting in many ways, partly because you get to learn a lot more about Singapore than you normally would. And you get to see Singaporeans that you never really see. As a member of the intellectual elite, going to the rallies is one of the times that I get to interact, however superficially, with the species known as the Heartlander.

And there's the thing that has always struck me about these rallies. They defy everything that I've ever been told about these heartlander Singaporeans, or indeed, Singaporeans in general. Politically apathetic? The numbers say something else. Anti-social to strangers? As Yawningbread pointed out, this is one of the few times where Singaporeans will talk and discuss with complete strangers. (The other time it happened, as I recall, was the NKF period) Un-co-operative? The people quietly translating for strangers say otherwise. Pushy and rude? The entire crowd was Singapore on its best behaviour, acting together gotong royong style, determind not to give the police any reason to intervene.

And they were here to listen. All over, you could hear the sound, or lack of sound, that people make when they're actually.. listening.

The PAP tried to claim that people were attracted to the opposition rallies because they wanted to see the show. It may have had to do something to do with this compared to this. But it is true that high turnout doesn't translate into voter inclinations.

But did Singaporeans come down see show only? Well, of course we're there to see show. If we didn't come down to just see the show, it would suggest that this was somehow important to us.

And that just isn't Singaporean, now is it?

Doggie voter

2006-05-04T01:21:00.000+08:00

Dear Herbie,

I don't know if anyone' s told you, but there's an election on. Now, I'm sure that it's just something that humans do, like go to school, drive tin cans and pee in private. However, this one involves you.

I'm sure you don't want to get involved. After all, why should you care? It's about stuff that other people do, like economic stability and Gomezgate and cost of living and upgrading. You're not a politician, a professional or an expert on finance, or economics. Surely they know better? They're paid more than your owner, they must know. Why should you know? It's complicated.

Because it's about you, Herbie. It really is.

One of the big issues right now is that the party in charge is the PAP, and they're the only party in charge. Some of the humans say that it's not right, and that there should be an opposition party that can act as a check on the government's power. The opposition is needed so that they can ask questions if they think that the ruling party is doing something silly or wrong.

There's something else that opposition parties do - they take up issues that the ruling party doesn't think are very important. Part of the reason they do that is because they believe that this means there are people who aren't being paid attention to by the ruling party, and so might be willing to vote for the opposition party if the opposition takes up their worries. That's why opposition is good for minority groups and causes.

That would be you, Herbie.

You're a minority, Herbie, you and your owner. There aren't that many dog owners in Singapore. So for some people, you are inconvenient. They don't want you to be around, or take up space. This means that they don't want you to have that dog run that you love so much, or be able to walk past a playground, or even live next to them. You're... messy. And difficult to deal with, because it's not what people are used to. It's much easier to just not deal with you.

They'd rather you didn't exist.

You know that. You've seen what happens to your animal friends, because the law and the majority of people - Chinese, Malays, Indians - don't care about them.

There was that mongrel puppy that you loved to play with, what happened to him? He was saved and brought home by the little girl next door. But because he was a mutt, he was about 2kilos too heavy by HDB regulations, and when the spiteful neighbours next door reported him, the family was told to either give up the dog, or give up the flat. He went to the SPCA, and never came out alive.

The terrier who used to play with all the kids in the neighbourhood ran out of the house one day. He was knocked down in front of his owner's little boy's eyes. The lorry stopped, but the driver only wanted to check his vehicle for blood. "Call the police? Hah, go ahead - SURE they come - it's just a stupid dog you weirdo." The police, of course, did not come.

The fluffball Maltese who died at a grooming accident, and the tearful owner was offered $80 compensation. The kittens that were found strangled all over a HDB estate, and the killer jailed for a mere 6 months.

Remember 2003, and the SARS scare? The government decided that in the name of assuring investors that Singapore was safe, they had to assure them that it was hygienic and clean. So Vivian Balakrishnan, then Minister of State for National Development, took charge and culled the stray cats. In the hundreds.

Because they might have spread the SARS virus, they claimed. Then they found it didn't.

Didn't matter. Stray cats were a hygienic nuisance, they said. And they continued.

It didn't matter that the Cat Welfare charity had invested tens of thousands into sterilising the stray cats, because the AVA had agreed to leave those alone.

It didn't matter that there was a retired old grandmother crying her eyes out when she realised that the cats she loved never came home.

It didn't matter that an old man who paid half his pension to feed the strays (and neutered them, and cleaned up after them so they wouldn't be a nuisance), was left on a park bench, one more anchor in his world gone.

It didn't matter that angry hawkers disagreed with cats being a nuisance at food places. They kept the rats away, they insisted, and the regulars liked having them around.

It didn't matter.

The cats were... troublesome. An uncontrollable factor. And besides, the majority of Singaporeans didn't like them, it was claimed. Perhaps it was true, Singaporeans wrote in to endorse the killing of the cats, since it was self-evident that having cats within 100m of a playground gave your kid asthma.

Dr Balakrishnan later declared that the cats didn't seem to have SARS, and that it probably wouldn't pass to humans. But the killings would continue:

"'Culling is a last resort,' he added. 'If we didn't have people abandoningpets,
if pets were properly sterilised, properly cared for, we'd have no problems with
strays." (Straits Times, May 31, 2003)

Then why were sterilised cats killed?

If so many stray cats are the problem, why not make it easier for people to adopt cats?
Dr Teo Ho Pin, then MP, apparently agreed with this solution:

Dr Teo suggested this solution: 'Animal lovers should go out and adoptstrays,
take them home, care for them and organise a programme to take them inas pets,'
he said. (ST, May 25, 2003 Sunday)

Well, that's a funny thing, Dr Teo, they already do. Of course, HDB people aren't allowed to legally adopt cats, and they form 80% of the population, so it's a touch difficult. And of course, your party members made it that even more difficult, when they turned down two separate appeals by the Cat Welfare Society to allow cats in HDB. This was around 10 months earlier. And your colleague, Dr Balakrishnan, who was complaining about the strays, help to turn them down. This is part of what he said:

Cats, he said, are not allowed as pets in HDB homes because of their penchantfor
screeching while in heat.He went on to provide this veterinary tidbit: 'Cats
caterwaul in post-coital agony, not post-coital ecstasy.' (Straits Times, July 9,
2002 Tuesday)

So Cat Welfare's attempt to solve the stray situation was foiled, by a reason that was somewhat bizarre, since sterilised cats don't screech. And 10 months later, you have a cat problem. So you kill the cats.

I don't know if Dr Balakrishnan ever apologised for his role in the killings. Maybe he did. Maybe not. Cats aren't important.

But you see, Herbie, that's what you get when you have a strong dominant party. They all think the same way. There is no one that can say, Stop, this is wrong. Because you don't question a fellow party member. That's not what a united party should do.

That's what an opposition party should do. To question the actions of the ruling party, and make sure that everyone is taken care of and listened to. To give minorities, such as yourself, a voice.

So that's why having an opposition is important for you. But either way, the election concerns you, Herbie. Because it's about you and your kind and your owners: it's about every dog and cat that died because someone just didn't like them, it's about every animal abuser that went unpunished because kittens just weren't important enough, it's about every single time someone called out "stay away from the big dog before he give you a disease or bite you." It's about your life.

And if the cat culling incident is anything to think about, it's not just your life, it's your right to live.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer: I am in no way suggesting that an opposition party will be any better to animals than a one-party system. However, considering the current situation, I can't imagine it will get much worse. And if animal welfare is what you're interested in, then the elections are important for you. Because it's about choosing people that will come to affect your life, or even your right to live.

Think I'm crazy to link animals and humans? Go on. I don't care.

If [man] is not to stifle human feelings, he must practice kindness
toward animals, for he who is cruel to animals becomes hard also in his dealings
with men. We can judge the heart of man by his treatment of animals. - Immanuel
Kant

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the
way its animals are treated”. - Mahatma Gandhi

My First PAP Rally at Boat Quay

2006-05-04T00:41:00.000+08:00

Attended PAP rally at Raffles Place today. It was just at Boat Quay, on the promenade, backdrop of the Fullerton.

Cheryl Fox attended. I wonder if she ever attended the WP ones? Does CNA go to WP rallies at all? (Lazy to check.)

Am vaguely wondering, did they have to put the ministerial podium with the seated PAP pple in the sun, on the promenade, because there's some kind of electoral rule about holding rallies on private property? (e.g. under the UOB canopy, on its plaza.)

Because that's the only reason I can think of that would explain why the poor PAP ministers had to sit under the sun for 2 hours at noon. Seriously, I felt sorry for them. Sitting out there in the sun - to what purpose? To get some sort of crowd at a PAP rally for once, by attracting the RP office people? Or to not too subtly hold a rally celebrating the PAP's past achievements, in the business district, surrounded by the most tangible results of past acumen - gigantic metaphorical phalluses?

I'd blog more, but seriously, I cannot be bothered. What I would like to say is probably defamatory, or will be ruled defamatory. Or maybe that's defamatory. Ok, I'll say it - white makes you look like RI boys.

Out of curiousity, has there ever been a politician of First World Country that whined about the opposition party making his extremely well-paid job difficult, by forcing him/her/it to win elections? Which did not occur today. I'm just wondering.

Tag: Singaporeelections
(Technorati hates me. I refuse to take it personally.)

Letters from a Hougang Rally

2006-05-01T00:24:00.000+08:00

Just got back from the Hougang rally by Worker's Party.

A few quick letters:

Dear Sylvia Lim:

I want to love you. Really. But you need to get a good speechwriter, stat. Ask me. I work for internship pay (ie. half nothing, and coffee).

XOXO
Mezzo

-------------------------------------
Dear Low Thia Khiang:

I'd say that I love you, but I think your heart's in Hougang. That chemistry you have with it - well, far be it from me to spoil such a beautiful relationship. For the sake of the nation, I'll step out.

Heartbroken Martyrly yours,
Mezzo

-------------------------------------
Dear 30,000 plus rally attendees:

Dun bruff. I know you're all illegal immigrants from uncontested GRCs, who've snuck into Hougang for because you were in search of a better life, one with democracy, freedom of speech, and rights of the individual. Did you hide in a cargoload of organic vegetables from Tuas?

Mezzo

-------------------------------------
Dear Heartlander Man:

Thanks for happily translating the Teochew speech for me. I realise that you weren't the only one who did so, since I spotted more than one person helpfully translating the various speeches into Chinese/English for strangers in the crowd. It helped greatly, although I suspect that if I had guessed "Down with PAP", I would have been right.

Monolingually yours,
Mezzo

------------------------------------
Dear AhBeng:

I'm sorry I rolled my eyes at your Von Dutch shirt that your girlfriend bought you. You were beng, but you were nice and sweet and offered to help me across the ditch after I'd crawled under the barricade to get closer to the action. You deserve better, and I hope you enjoyed yourself that night.

Apologetic,
Mezzo

-----------------------------------

Nice turn out tonight. Crowd wasn't enthusiastic, but what Singaporeans ever are? They turned up quietly nonetheless. The spirit was co-operative, with people offering to help complete strangers, and heartlanders who by turning up, displayed that they were most definitely not politically apathetic - in short, everything Singaporeans are accused of being.

Sometimes I forget that as a blogger, I'm the noisy one. Sometimes change starts from the bottem, from the voiceless.

But not always the powerless.

(oh, and some political stuff went down. Healthcare, upgrading, blahblah. Hey, I said the other people were politically un-apathetic. )

Remember, Prison Got No Broadband

2006-04-28T00:25:00.000+08:00

Listen, you NUS brats that I'm invigilating in the semester exams. I was a student once. Your lecturer was a student once. His lecturer was a student once. Hell, even the Vice Chancellor was a student once.

So you know what? WE KNOW ABOUT THE TOILET STUNT. We have entire briefings about the "stash your notes in the toilet" gag. We check the toilets. By the way, the girl who stashed your notes behind the sanitary napkin bin? You're gross.

We also know about the back of calculater stunt, the pencil box reversi, and the point form pen tattoo. GIVE IT UP. Make my life easier. I don't want to have to fill out a form tomorrow. If you want to make my invigilation more interesting, do something standard like having a nosebleed or a dying relative.

But whatever you do, don't cheat. Because if you cheat, we expel you from the university. Then you can't get a degree job. And then you'll have to take a job even more lowly than the polygrads, because A-levels aren't a real life qualification. And then you'll fall in with the wrong company, because your little charmed priviledged membership in tertiary education (only 20% of the cohort make it!) hasn't prepared you for real life. And you're book smart, not street smart. And then you'll get caught using your passport to smuggle babies from China.

Then you get jailed.

And you know the Yellow Ribbon project? Is all fake.

So don't cheat, ok? Remember, Prison got no broadband.*

Tag: Singaporeelections, NUS

*Refer to here for further explanation

Playing God

2006-04-26T12:59:00.000+08:00

Yawning Bread has an excellent post on fundamentalism and its (detrimental) effect on Singapore. Appealing to the only true sensitive spot on the government body, he illustrates how fundamentalism's influence is counteractive and undermines policies intended to spur the Singaporean economy. Specifically, Christian fundamentalism and its overrepresentation in positions of power.

This isn't going to be a post about fundamentalism, Christianity, or demographically representative elected parliaments. It's just a little story that occured in NUS. However, I'm going to issue a disclaimer anyway, because I'm just so Singaporean that way, so "I dunno anything but jus my opinion ok", "just saying only, not serious" and oh yes, I have Christian friends.

(I do. And Christian relatives. Some of these Christians believe that even suggesting that Jesus Christ looked like a dark-haired man of Semitic descent is blasphemy - how can Jesus look like a terrorist?? - while others go to church every Sunday, read the Bible before bed, and simultaneously believe that it's none of their bloo- blessed business if gay people want to get married. But yeah, saying that I have Christian friends shouldn't be taken as proof that I'm not-anti-Christian, or that I don't have my own prejudices, it just means that I have Christian friends who managed to overlook my flaws. God bless 'em.)

So I have a friend, who knows a boy. And by knows a boy, I mean it in the Biblical sense. As in she knows him. Frequently. She kinda liked him, you know how these things are.

As it turns out, there was this one time Mr Durex sprung a leak. So like any sensible girl, she headed to get Plan B, also known as the morning after pill. In Singapore, you need a prescription for it, so she headed for the NUS clinic. Yes, the NUS clinic does provide them. The doctors will discuss a birth control pill scheme with you if you want, and various other options available to you. It's part of the same reason why condoms are cheaper at the NUS Co-op - because while the NUS halls of residence are great ways to get graduates to hook up and hopefully one day marry and produce graduate children, well - NUS doesn't want them to actually produce children just yet.

She goes in, and she gets a doctor - young, personable, male, around maybe three years older than she was. She explains her dilemma, condom broke, yeah, so could she get the pill that prevents an fertilised egg from taking root in her womb and causing her trouble some 18 years down the road when it starts wanting to borrow the car?

"No."

wuh?

"No. I won't prescribe this. It goes against my beliefs."

??

"Look, I've been in this world awhile." He leans forward, fatherly fashion. "I've done a lot of wrong in my life, and I don't want to add to it."

He leans back, and as he does so, a tiny crucifix pendant slides past his open, neatly pressed shirt collar. "You'll thank me one day, and I hope you use this to rethink your attitude to.. certain things in life."

My friend gave up on him, and went off. Since she was sensible, she also knew that the pregnancy chances were pretty low for that particular day, so she got on with life. Never reported him.

I wish she had.

Because what just happened here was that a doctor, sworn to the health of the patient, told her that he didn't want to prescribe her the morning after pill, because his religion said no. His interpretation of his religion said that contraception was bad. He believed that his beliefs superceded any of her own wishes. He believed that because he believed that it was wrong, he was right to punish her. He all but called her a slut, because pre-marital sex was wrong. In his belief.

And because of his belief, she might get pregnant. She might have to face the prospect of an abortion, of an invasive procedure that is traumatising to the woman on the receiving end. She will have to make the choice that no woman wants to have to make.

Of course, if she gets a doctor who believes that women shouldn't have abortions because it goes against their beliefs, then problem solved.

But the bottomline is this - because he believed it was wrong, she lost control of what happens to her own body. She lost the choice. He believed that it was wrong of her to have sex, so guess what? He gets to punish her.

To what extent does a doctor get to deny treatment to a patient because they personally don't agree with it? Can a Hindu doctor refuse to hand out medication derived from cows?

If the medication was potentially harmful, that would be a marginally acceptable reason. But it isn't. The morning after pill has been proven, time and again to have no harmful side effects. Studies that "proved" otherwise, were found to have been sponsered by the Christian Right in America, and were denounced by leading medical journalists.

Maybe you'd like to think that I was exaggerrating things. After all, one doctor, right? Yes, it would be easy to point to him and say, oh, fundie, you always get a few of those hahahahah.

Except that in the US, there have been hundreds of cases of pharmacists refusing to sell birth control pills to women.

I've only dealt with one way he punished her, and judged her. Luckily for her, she wanted the morning after pill because of mostly wholesome activities. What if it hadn't?

There's another name for the morning pill - the anti-pregnancy pill, used in the cases of rape.

What if my friend had been raped the night before, and for reasons of her own, didn't want to go to the police? Raped - by a stranger, by someone she knew, by her own father.

And she tries to deal with life the best way she can, and tries to avoid at least one consequence - that of being pregnant with her rapist's baby. So she goes to the NUS clinic, and that same doctor tells her, "Oh you slut. I'm Christian, we don't believe in contraception. Nope, not giving you the pill. If you get pregnant, well praise the Lord!"

Because that's what he just did.

And that's my story. It happens to be true, and I didn't make it up. I know who the doctor is, but I have no intention of naming him. It happened awhile ago, and there's nothing to be done. I don't even consider him representative of fundamentalist doctors as a whole.

So I suppose that it's not that important. After all, there are other doctors around, so as long as you can do it within the timeframe of 2 days or less, you or your girlfriend or your sister or your godsis or your cousin can get the pill. Sure, she'll be a tad traumatised, what with being called a slut for getting raped and all, but hey, at least she got a pill.

I wonder what will happen if that doctor ever reaches political office?

Miracles

2006-04-17T17:24:00.000+08:00

The Italian Stallion has just returned from Jakarta. Or rather, not returned from Jakarta. Because he was never there. He was especially not there should anyone from the university inquire, since in addition to not possessing a cheap $81 return air ticket to Jakarta, he also did not possess approved leave.

"The fish market was just so terrible - I thought I was going to catch malaria from the fish and the people - my gosh, why do people keep having so many many many children when they can't afford them and they cram them all into one little cardboard box?"

The Stallion is a bright young man, and although more whippet than stallion, can still charm like an Italian. He is also given to the stereotypical Italian hyperbole and the tendency to never use one word when 20 run-on sentences will do. I wish he wouldn't, it's a complete waste of a good mouth. A very good one.

"Honestly, if I could vote, I would vote PAP - after all, the PAP brought this country from third world to first. It could be like Jakarta!"

Why not? He's absolutely right - the PAP did wring a miracle of sorts. Some miracles are born in shining lights and thunder clashes - Singapore's miracle was in a lightning bolt. Our nation was Struck By Lightning. But not all miracles are godly and divine; some are bred from uninspiring sweat and smelly toil, over years and generations. They are called miracles nonetheless. They've been dusted off, polished and presented in nationalist histories, clad all bright and shiney to become a reliquary on the PAP altar of Cathedral Singapore.

But like a reliquary, something frail and foible and human lies at the heart. And if you know where to look, you can find the dirt. Hidden in words not said, behind lips now rotted, held in minds that take one step closer to the grave every day.

It is nonetheless, a miracle. No one said it had to be nice. And it did happen - one of the little bitter jokes about Singaporean nationalist history is that it is true. Mostly. It is true, unlike the more common type of Southeast Asian nationalist history, which generally suggest that after the [insert colonial oppresser] were chased off by the [insert relevant local term meaning blood sons of the soil], peace reigned and beer was available to all. Such national histories are easily labelled myths or more cruelly, as jokes and dismissed. The only joke about the Singapore Story is a bitter one - that because it is true, it cannot be dismissed and has achieved credibility, making it that much harder to for the casual citizen to recognise it for what it is: nationalistic. It crawled out of the same genre of optative histories that were written to serve a purpose.

But it is hard to remember that when you sip your latte and surf for net porn amidst soaring skyscrapers, and marvel that a mere generation ago, your father walked 20 miles to school every morning. Uphill. Both ways. And, against all probability, in the snow.

So we shall assume that the story is true, that it is the leadership of the PAP that brought a little red dot to become the honking great pus-filled pimple on the back of Malaysia. That good governance, by gifted men (were there ever woman? not in that time, and not in that version), brought Singapore to first world status. In the name of the Lee, we honour our miracle workers: LKY, hallowed be thy name, Devan Nair, Rajaratnam, Goh Keng Swee, David Marshall, Lim Kim San, and others.

And I say this with respect. Yes, the PAP, led by some of these men, brought Singapore to First World status. If they were running, I might vote for them still.

But they're not. The PAP that runs Singapore today is not the PAP of those heady tremulent years of nation-building. The MPs that stand for office are the new elite - to me, they too are the post '65ers. They did not build Singapore any more than I did.

So don't tell me to vote PAP MPs because of what they did for Singapore. The PAP members that run for election today had nothing to do with the triumphs of the 70's-'80s, only the triumphs and failures of the 90's.

All this I tell the Italian. He looks at me meekly, cocking his pretty head to one side. "You know, I'm joking, you know that right? Of course, the PAP of today is nothing like the old PAP, you can't vote for it on that basis, parties change over time."

He turns back to his work, but glances over to add, "You know, you talk too much sometimes."

Oooh. Snap.

How to get girls

2006-04-12T14:10:00.000+08:00

Taken from the comments of a rather funny post on flirting:

I have also come to the conclusion that being self confident and bold or however you want to term it is about communication pure and simple.
"I am attracted to you and will not weep uncontrollably if you reject me."
Now if more people of both sexes would be able to do this there would be a lot more happy people with silly grins on their faces on Monday morning

The comments in there crack me up.

Youth Ink, or You think?

2006-04-11T22:09:00.000+08:00

I finally got to Monday's papers on Tuesday, due to work schedules. I would subscribe to the Straits Times online edition, but the thought of having to pay for something that I already subscribe to annoys me. Somedays I wonder whose idea was it, because all the reporters that I know seem to turn red in the face, as if I'd just uncovered that their sister works as a part-time stripper. A cheap one. That does lapdances for an extra $15.50 per month.

Now, I just want to say this once - oh who am I kidding - I hate YouthInk. YouthInk is a section of the Monday's papers devoted to letters/articles written and submitted by young Singaporeans, young Singaporeans being, upon forensic examination and statistical sampling, undergraduates. (Ok, I lied about statistical sampling, but doesn't everyone? That's why you should always use a condom.)

I hate YouthInk for a variety of reasons, with commensurately varying levels of reason. The first is - let's start with the bile - yes, I'm just jellus. I am exactly that jus jellus. I hate not being young anymore. I hate that I don't have half the opportunities that they will have. I hate that I'm considered too old for many student programs - for scholarship boards, for internships, for exchanges to places where the weather is cold and the women are men. Let me get this straight - I don't want to be young again, as I was when I was twenty. (Ok, I lie, I had abs when I was 20, so I'd like to be young in that respect. Alright, I still lie, I never had abs when I was 20 - still, I possessed a body that had a greater potentiality of abs than my current one.) I just want to have the mind, the understanding that I have now, with all the opportunity that is offered, and often seemingly limited, to the young.

The second reason I hate YouthInk: It's contrived. It's not representative of young Singaporeans - it's representative of the General Paper essays of an elite group of young Singaporeans. And not even first tier-elite current or future, as the contributers are mostly from local universities, and even as I complain about the opportunities offered to the young, it is nothing compared to the gulf between that of the NUS cohort and their scholar counterparts. But it's not representative. I've seen frequent contributers there - more power to them, but I wish they had something to say.

The third reason is a continuation of the second - it's contrived because they read like General Paper essays. I knew the conclusion - heck, I knew the points, the justifications, the language, the sheer blah before I got to the end of the first sentence. They read as though Mummy had cooed and suggested that wouldn't it look, oh so impressive, on your resume if you had something published in the papers? Now, go and do what Mummy says and you can prove to later job interviewers that you are Proactive and have an Independent Interest in Public Affairs.

(Unfortunately, it works. I've written too many student references to not know this.)

As a direct consequence of that - they stink. I seldom get a sense that the authors feel their convictions to any great depth. Or if they do, aforesaid convictions will come back to haunt them, the same way adults since time immemorial have winced over their youthful opinions, starting with "I did not have relations with that mammoth." Convictions that have been expressed in YouthInk include:

1. Singapore has no culture because we don't know enough about ancient traditions in China. Japan also has no culture because they changed after WW2. (I can only assume that the editor for YouthInk hates you and let it through on purpose.)

2. Media breeds immorality and it is hard for me, as a youth, to keep my viriginity in an environment chockful of media temptation. (Sweetie, it's amazingly easy to keep your virginity even if you want to throw it at the first dick wielder to come along. Then again, that's not the point - the point is that you are 19 years old, and university is about to hit your hormones big time. There's a reason why condoms are about 30% cheaper at the NUS co-op)

These are just a couple of articles, and there are better ones of course. In fairness, I would say that most of the contributers are just 20, and their convictions and opinions, however uninformed and shallow, are nonetheless their own and should be respected. And I think that it's great that the youth (however you define them), are given a platform, however limited, where they can practice getting their voices heard, and engage in at least some form of public discourse. Seeing as how many times I've gone down on my knees and offered blowjobs to anyone, anyone who would raise an opinion in a tutorial group discussion, these lot should be commended for wanting to take part at all.

Except. Except that I want it to be a lot more. I, too, am still young, and I want everything. I want real discourse, real thought, real understanding by Singapore youth. I want to hear the real voices - not some watered down PC crap generated by a recycled General Paper essay. I want to know that the youth of today, with all the advantages that I never had, are prepared to take those opportunities granted to them and grab the ones that weren't.

And I'm dissatisfied because I know these kind of youths exist. I know that what I'm seeing isn't what there is - because I've seen those real voices, and I am just young enough to remember thinking those thoughts myself. I've read excellent blog entries, articulate little essays submitted to me that while historical, were nonetheless commentaries on the present (much as all history is.) I've seen opinion pieces submitted to campus rags, though not earthshattering, had the fire of conviction behind them, as they rampaged through topics ranging from terrorism to abortion, from AIDS to child prostitution. They weren't all great. But they rang with the author's voice, and in a place like Singapore, they were the equivalent of grabbing a banner and joining a demonstration.

Maybe that's what gets me so riled up about YouthInk. Because I don't think it shows how Youth Think at all. I think it's more about presenting the articles such that the impression the casual reader receives is that Youth doesn't think at all.

Does Balaji Blog?

2006-04-04T18:06:00.000+08:00

I hate this blogging thing. It's like that hallmate you once had - you know, the one that was really cool to do - I mean, do things with and hang with on Friday nights, but just would not get off your bloody back when you had a presentation the next day, the presentation that was way behind schedule because you'd spent too much time f- hanging with aforesaid hallmate. They would be all: "Yo, wanna Fong Seng/prata/table soccer?" when all you wanted was to finish the stupid freaking essay on International Political Economic Relations with China in a Globalised World System and make a nice cover page with the NUS logo because everyone knows that TA's give you extra points for NUS logo cover pages. But you couldn't tell them to fuck off, because God knows that friendships need maintenence, blahblah, and if you didn't do it, eventually the only friend that you'd have would be your own hand.

So when Senior Minister of State for Information, Communication and the Arts Balaji Sadasivan announced that political podcasts would not be allowed during elections, and that blogs that persistantly espouse political views need to be registered and have to stay out of the blogosphere during the election period... well, I just wanted to run up and snog him. Hard. Roughly. Passionately. Upside down. Finally, someone shared my ambivalence about blogs. Knew my problems. My dreams. Even the littlest ones. Cared. *clutch hand to heart*

(Actually, I don't mind snogging him anyway - he's in a pretty good shape for a Senior Minister. There's a slight paunch, but you know what they say - when you see a thin businessman, how can you do business with him? Fat businessmen are worth investing in. The fat is evidence of being very good at getting rich.

See? Snoggable. Politicians, businessmen - go for the slightly paunchy ones.)

Then I actually read the article on the front page of the ST through, and I swore. Then I yelped, because I'd dropped the papers after I swore, and it hit the head of the Partner, and the Partner accidently bit down and I had to go find some cold water, and didn't get back to the paper till about half an hour later.

Just as well I didn't snog Balaji, I guess. He might think that I'll give him AIDs.

Anyway, by now everyone's heard about the podcast and blogging restrictions, and there's a truly excellent analysis of the legal implications by Yawning Bread, as well as what you should observe as a blogger. Alfian Sa'at has more to say about the actual workings of getting your blog registered, including the implication that the Media Development Authority really needs to get their internet division wing (or whoever it is that managed to claw his way to a deskjob with unlimited net porn) replaced with my 12 year old tuition kid. Mr Miyagi talks more about the podcast aspect, which I know nothing whatsoever about, and because of that, I shall shut up and not volunteer an opinion about it in the fine tradition of politicians everywhere, especially in Singapore. After all, I don't know anything about it - it doesn't really make sense for me to say anything, right?

(On the other hand, feel free to ask me about goats.)

So a couple of things passed through my mind, in between the oil and the candlewax. One question was: Who's actually affected by all these rulings? Whoever blogs and podcasts, which means the technologically abled, and those who for a variety of reasons, have restricted access to more mainstream methods of information dessemination. The first category generally, though not exclusively, refers to the post-65ers. This would be the same group that has no memory of fighting for independence against a patriarchal government dominated by an overpaid elite, that at the same time sought to shut down dissenting publications and arrested people who threatened the status quo, all the while citing the precariousness of a tiny city state against the wilder forces of the world outside. The same group that wants the vote, the same demographic group in every single ethnic group in the world, that wants things to change.

(I was talking about the British earlier, by the way. I get confused easily.)

The second would be fringe groups - for example the newer activist groups that have limited funding. A prime example would be Cat Welfare and Action for Singapore Dogs, groups that have had to deal with the existence of a decrepit, morally bankrupt white elephant charity that nonetheless had official recognitioin and was rewarded duly for its careful refusal to rock the boat. The second category would also include groups that had restricted access to other forms of information dessemination, whether through state control by dominant groups, or pre-emptive censorship by the media.

The next question was: What could actually be done to enforce the ruling? Well, judging by the stellar performance by MDA, and the fact that surfing for Crazy Killer Bikini Teen Nymphoes is more fun than surfing Crazy Professor Politician Chee, er. Not much. Don't get me wrong - as the recent racist bloggers episode proved, if shit looks as if it's about to hit the fan, the authorities are more than prepared to get to the room, wait for impact, then arrest anyone still standing. And they'll prepared to prove that they take the law very very seriously, and apply it. Unless, of course, you're a PSC Scholar, in which case you were merely youthfully stupid to suggest that Indians were repulsive, but you'll only get a slap on your wrist because everyone knows that blog entries aren't to be taken seriously and don't reflect what you really think.

And in both cases, someone proved their Singaporeanhood by writing in, and demanding that the government needed to do something about it.

At this point, I'm issuing a disclaimer: I know nothing. Whatsoever. I have been told that repeatedly by various authority and romantic figures in my life, starting with my mother. Who is an authority figure. Only.

Anyway, so given that barring the obvious candidates or extant opposition party bloggers/podcasters, the average blogger, it seems, can rely on the good old noise-to-sound ratio, and general reluctance to oppress people too vigorously, in case they start doing things like throwing Thousand Treasure tea in the harbour and demanding human rights extremely vigorously.

They know that. Maybe even Balaji knows that. We know that. So... why?

Because something needs to be said. The thing about being a law-abiding government is that you have to abide by the law. Being a law abiding government doesn't mean that you're incorruptable, or kind, or nice, or help little old ladies wearing WP badges cross Potong Pasir Ave 5. You just have to follow the law - which you made. It's as if the government was a Lawful Evil/Good/Neutral character in an Advanced Dungeons and Dragons game. You know the character - it would be the Evil Overlord who proposes to kill your half-elven ranger and his gang, but allows them to claim trial by combat and the use of +5 Str +2 Ag breastplate. Because it's the law, and he's got to uphold some kind of law, or where would he be? He'd look all kinds of crazy, there would be no structure to things, and then all hell would really break lose.

So it's been said. They've made a ruling, and drawn a line in the sand. They've explained that crossing the line means that you will be charged, made an example of, kicked to the back of the HDB queue and your favourite 4D number forever withdrawn from the Toto machine. But not every time. Not all of you. Just sometimes. Occasionally. More than occasionally, if you're non-pseudo opposition.

But not every time. Go on, cross the line. It won't be you.

This time.

Potty Wisdom or, Disposable dogma.

2006-04-04T11:49:00.000+08:00

In the loo cubicle of the Kuang Chee Buddhist Association:

I don't know about defecating and urinating, but I was achieving a state of bliss.

Close enough.

Forum on the 2006 Singapore General Election at NUS

2006-03-29T22:23:00.000+08:00

When I turned 21, I became qualified for a number of things, most of which I did not want. Firstly, I could be tried as an adult. Secondly, I was no longer entitled to child support. Thirdly, the government took possession of my kidneys, unless I opted out. The only thing I wanted to do was vote - and yes, you guessed it - nobody wants my constituency. Ever. So they generously let the PAP keep it.

This year, as a result of circumstances, I was actually paying a sort of half-ear to elections. It was in that spirit that I went down to the forum on the 2006 Singapore General Election, held at the National University of Singapore. Jointly organised by the NUS Political Science Dept (aka the Snake Pit - that would be my lecturer's name for it, intra-faculty rivalry can be rather drama) and the members of the Political Science Association of Singapore, it featured various political figures. For the first time in my academic career, I was free at the same time as a forum I wished to attend, so I headed down. Also, Pol Sci does great spreads, and I would personally recommend the roast beef next time you're down.

Speakers
Ms Indranee "That's Ms, not Mrs, don't marry me off" Rajah, MP for Tanjong Pagar and director for Drew and Napier.

Mr Chia "The Drone-inator" Ti Lik, Assistant Organising Secretary in the Worker's Party, vp of the WP Youth Wing. Apparently a litigation lawyer.

Mr Chiam "Studmuffin" See Tong, opposition MP for Potong Pasir, head of the Singapore People's Party and a leader in the Singapore Democratic Alliance.

Ms Cherie "Marblemouth" Lim, director of EKA training group, who believes she can "save the world, one person at a time."

It was the first time I've actually stayed awake at these things, so I'm fairly sure that a revolution may have taken place while I was admiring Ms Rajah's boo - fitted red shirt. I seem to recall someone shouting Majulah Singapore - which as it turns out, actually did happen, so you know, the government really should keep an eye on those engineers rather than the arts grads. It's always the quiet ones that snap. Us arts grads with our pinko-Communist-neo-Marxist-green-party talk? Please - it's for the girls, although it didn't work for me.

At any rate, this is my (amatuer) account of what happened.

Firstly, it was crowded with undergrads, postgrads, and a sprinkling of Faculty - I spied a certain Prof Chua, Bukit Ho Swee native. There was a healthy dose of exchange students as well, including James Martin of the Southeast Asian dept, who stepped up - in fact, managed to show his complete cultural assimilation by being No. 1 to rush up to ask a question later. There was also a history major who's been rather prominent in the faculty recently - this was the first time I'd seen him - quite pretty, in a poet sort of way, but I'm too old for these boys now - but in need of a haircut and an order to stay away from Youthinc.

Steve Chia was supposed to be the WP talker, but he was replaced by Chia Ti Lik. The joke circulating the theatre was that he'd just gotten a new maid to photograph.

I don't know when Indranee and Ti Lik showed up - who cares when Cherie popped in - but everyone knew when Chiam showed up. He entered in a pretty low key kind of way - this is Singapore, opposition MPs get minimal security. But someone spotted him - and that was it - the entire theatre broke out in cheering and applause. No cue, no nothing. It was absolutely delightful. As in turns out, that was the trend for the evening - Indranee did a nice slick job, and if she would say yes, I'd marry her - but Chiam was clearly Da Man, who stuck it to The Man. Plus, he's cute in an elderly statesman sort of way. Yes. Don't throw up on the keyboard all at once.

Faizal, the MC began the evening by first stating that if you weren't NUS, invited Press, or the speakers, you were to leave, plus the requisite disclaimer that the questions students asked were not representative of the student body as a whole, blahblah. No shit. I sure as hell didn't want to be associated with some of the questions raised.

Gist of the talk - nothing new, really. Ms Rajah (who was turned into Mrs Rajah by various clueless male students in Q&A -chauvinists!) spoke of the post '65ers, the needs of the new generation, and the importance of voting. She made a comment about how she and Ms Lim had turned out in the exact same shade of red (unplanned), in contrast to the "gentlemen sitting between us."

For me, the interesting part about Ms Rajah was the body language and the subtext. Didn't bother to listen to what she said, much - we pretty much know the drill. I'd heard that in more robust dynamic political systems, candidates tended not to refer to each other by name - something about not wanting to give their opponents screen time. Throughout the forum, I don't think I heard Ms Rajah refer to either Chiam or Chia by name more than absolutely necessary.

And then there was her performance during the Q&A. Don't get me wrong, I personally thought that she was smooth, professional - but I've come to expect no less from a party that can have entire departments scripting their answers for them. However, she may have missed her calling. When someone asked why they should vote for the PAP, she decided to rebut the whole opposition point about how the Opposition Party hears the voices of the people that get drowned out. She explained about how much the PAP cared about the People of Singapore, all of them, and truly wanted to listen to their voices, and their hopes, and their dreams, even the littlest ones - all the while clutching her hands to her heart.

Really. Neber bruff. Wah, PAP can really wayang-wayang, yah? Can see her motherly instincts coming through - when she talked about the woes of the unheard unwashed masses, her voice dropped, and softened, and she clutched her hands to her maternal bosum as if to indicate her desire to bring the weary, the unwanted into the sheltering cleavage of the PAP bosum.

I can't make this shit up, people - she clutched her heart.

Chia Ti Lik spoke next, and I just have to say this - why does every Chinese opposition member under 40 sound as if they're 2 lawsuits away from pulling a complete Chee Soon Juan crazy? He drones. And he contrasted with the polished perfection of Indranee - loose black sports jacket, and crumpled up sheets that he read from. I got some reading done while he talked about the need for diversity in parliament. He talked about how a lack of diverse voices and actual voter participation resulted in a reduced nationalism, since citizens did not get a sense of contribution and representation in the national decision-making process. He handled his questions ok, but he sounded as scripted as candidates from a certain other political party, and he ducked questions .. not very well.

Chiam, however - well, this was the first time I've ever seen him talk. And when you listen to him - you start to understand why he's just so bloody popular in Potong Pasir. He was polite, he was polished, and he spoke with the clear voice of a man who had spent a considerable portion of his adult life in speechmaking.

And it made me sad in a way. Chiam (someone correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a history major nor a pol sci-er) seemed a remnant of another era - where politicians were statesmen, and made speeches that rang in the rafters of Parliament House. He had a lovely neat English-ed accent that I've only heard from people of a certain generation, a voice that was equally at home in the courtroom and in the kopitiams. He had poise, he had grace born of years of experience of being an opposition MP, an air made more evident by the contrast with the unkempt Chia Li Teck.

And he felt so real.

Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you..

He spoke about the need for an opposition, any opposition in a government. I'd read these points before, so there was nothing new there. He spoke about how a vote for the Opposition was a vote that announced the people's desire for freedom - freedom of assembly, of mass media, of processions. He spoke about the very real problems that have plagued Pontong Pasir residents, residents that have stuck by him despite being penalised over and over again for daring to be an opposition ward. He talked about the utter ridiculousness of a situation where his opponent controlled all the grassroots organisations, the CCs, heck, even the police, dryly commenting that he didn't have quite so many people at his back. He talked about funds for municiple improvements that were never released, and a certain bus stop that was proving dangerous for school children, because his opponent refused to use the bus stop that Chiam had managed to build.

And of course, he talked about the pseudo opposition, and the utter ridiculousness of creating, in effect, a two class party, a sentiment that got cheers and applause from the admittedly liberal university audience. He suggested that even the current government saw the need for an opposition MP, as SM Goh had not made much of a media ripple in his low key visit to Potong Pasir. He talked about media bias, just when the LT alarm (used to indicate the end of a lecture period) sounded. Ever the consumate stageman, he cracked the audience up by commenting that opposition party events always got disturbed.

Cherie Lim seemed to be there mainly to play a role: "Hi! I'm young! I'm a voter! I'm not apathetic! You can be unapathetic too! Rouse ye, apathetic masses, from ye slumbrous slumber, and ROCK THAT VOTE!" I couldn't get away from the sensation that she was talking down to us, despite the fact that she was about - oh, a year or two my senior. Well, time will tell - she had prospective MP written all over her, which just might happen. If, you know, she lost that babyvoice, the talking-as-if-on-speed, and that marble in her mouth. That being said, she made some comments about the forced apathy of the youth day, since their wards were never challenged, and about the spoiled votes party being a vote that stated that the voter resented a choice that was no choice at all.

The questions put to the speakers by the floor varied in quality. One of the few that I remember involved a student who was disgruntled by the current restrictions on media loans in the NUS library. The restriction is basically this - if you're not taking the course, you can't borrow the video, as I found out when I wanted to borrow MTV's Girls Gone Wild: Miami Springbreak Special. Ms Rajah very kindly offered to personally write in and ask about it, Mr Chia being surprisingly impish when he pointed out that that's what opposition parties can do - force the ruling party to take care of something before the opposition gets on their case.

Someone asked Ms Rajah directly if she had ever had to vote against her conscience because of the party whip blahblah. I've never been able to decide how I feel about those questions; no, you textbook rebel, she voted against her conscience once and she's abso-bloody-lutely in tears about it and she'll cry on your shoulder any moment now. Ms Rajah replied with a textbook comment about how the benefits of PAP rule is that it's all decided blahblah. Mr Chiam spoke up at this point, mentioning an abortion bill that came up some time ago, where a PAP MP who had been a pastor found himself unable to agree with it, and instead mysteriously absented himself the day the vote was taken. Chiam pointed out that even dissent within the party was suppressed.

Another student brought up the suggestion of an opinion vote for unchallenged wards, so that the people could make their stand clear, giving the party a chance to see whether they actually had the people's mandate to rule. Ms Rajah felt that it was unworkable, mainly because it was inaccurate.

Some freshman law student posted a question to Ms Rajah: didn't the current approach to upgrading which favoured PAP wards actually contravene Section 12 of the constitution, which stated that no citizen shall be discriminated against?

*facepalm moment* Let me get this straight - you, freshman law student, are challenging a director from DREW AND NAPIER about the finer points of constitutional law? Why? Really? As it turns out, it was to score a cheap point. Ms Rajah pointed out that Section 12 actually said no citizen shall be discriminated against based on race or religion; the student immedietly rebutted by saying, "So it's ok to discriminate them based on political preferences?" to loud cheers.

Yes, hotshot proto-lawyer. That's exactly it. When you vote, you make choices. You decide that one political party, and what it can bring you, is what you want, and is worth your vote. The residents of Potong Pasir know that. They've decided that keeping Chiam is worth all the ugly red tile rain shelters in the world. Is it fair? No. But neither is it fair that Angelina Jolie only adopts Cambodian babies rather than male adult FAS NUS students. The PAP can deliver goodies, and all according to the law.

Nothing much else occured. I remember Ms Rajah explaining that the Proggressive Package was not scheduled for the elections, after all, the government gave out freebies every year. Chiam made the point about checks and balances, the NKF and a peanut reference, which never ever ever ever will get old and unfunny. Ms Rajah replied that it was in fact a PAP MP who brought the issue up in Parliament.

Poor Susan Long. History's being re-written as we speak.

That was about it, wrapping up a 2 hour session. The last question was by a guy who wanted to recount his experiences with Opposition parties in the UK, to show how wonderful it is when you get an opposition. He ended off by announcing, "Majulah Singapura", which was awesome in an indefinite way, since it was quite obvious how he thought Singapura should progress.

Well, that was the first time I've ever been to such a forum. It was interesting, although not much was said was new. But it was worth it to see Chiam in action - watching him personify that older generation of Singaporeans, the legendary generation that scrimped and worked to build a nation. When it came to the token of appreciation time, the entire theatre broke out in cheers once more when Chiam came forward.

And he turned around to the audience, and smiled. A smile of thanks, that radiated appreciation for the clear support he had received, a little hint of a man who never failed to acknowledge that he had the support of the people, for what he was rather than what he could give.

We don't see smiles like that much anymore.