Why we should vote

This was first published on The Malaysian Insider on 28 November 2010.

Democracy is a powerful notion.

It allows; an octogenarian black woman, a single-mother working on double shifts, a 40 year-old unemployed college drop-out, a life-saving surgeon, a homeless war veteran with one arm, a 19 year-old exchange student in Europe, a young beautiful stripper, Joe the gay plumber and Mary the unhappy housewife; to choose who they want to run their country.

It is perhaps the only rare time when every single person, who has not relinquished his or her civil and political rights, will ever be treated equally. Think about it: is there any other time when everyone’s voices are valued and measured in the same manner regardless of their socio-economic background? And because of this power and the sanctity of it, the State will try its best to provide each and everyone the means to exercise this inalienable right to vote.

Photo above: Robin Carnahan, a Democrat candidate for the Missouri State House of Representatives lost in the recent Mid-Term election.

Democracy can be a dangerous notion.

In order to wipe out competition; political opponents, women candidates and pro-democratic mullahs are intimidated or killed. Women who decide to shed their proverbial and literal burqas in order to have their photographs laminated on their voter registration cards are being threatened to death or killed.

For the lucky ones who manage to emerge unscathed, they will walk miles and miles to the polling stations in the harsh winter climate wearing only inferior Croc-style shoes on their freezing feet and determination on their faces already showing signs of pre-mature aging.

I was fortunate enough to witness how democracy was carried out in the United States of America (USA) and Afghanistan. Although their spirits are as different as night and day, the essence of the notion remains the same. Hence, for the precise reason that democracy is such a powerful notion that many Afghans are being persecuted for embracing it. To me, this is the first reason why we should vote.

I love elections. There is nothing more exciting and inspiring than watching regular citizens from any given layer of society share one common belief that each of them has the opportunity to be a part of that intricate fabric that will one day adorn their government.

When I am at a polling station, I am amazed and comforted by the thought that no matter how insignificant one is in the scheme of things, his or her vote will be counted. No matter what the election outcome is, that person’s existence that day has mattered greatly. Sadly, it is too rare to witness such a sense of importance and purpose in regular people throughout our daily lives, but when such opportunity presents itself, it is truly an honour.

When my alarm clock went off at 4:30am on 2 November 2010, I jumped off my bed and was ready in advance of my 5:30am pick-up. John Chasnoff, the Programme Manager for the American Civil Liberties Union for Eastern-Missouri (ACLU, E-M) (insert hyperlink: http://www.aclu-em.org/), pulled up at the entrance of my hotel on South-Jefferson Avenue, St. Louis City, a few minutes after 5:30am.

Photo above: Volunteers at the legal command centre of St. Louis. It was still dark outside. Polling stations open at 6am in the United States on Election Day.

Photo above: Finally things got a bit more exciting as the day progressed. Volunteers gathered together to discuss a complaint.

It was still dark and the roads were completely deserted when we arrived at a Reformed Judaism temple serving as the legal command centre for St. Louis’s Voter Protection Programme (insert hyperlink: http://www.advancementproject.org/our-work/voter-protection) that day. The programme was run by Advancement Project with the help of a coalition of non-governmental organisations such as ACLU, National Disability Rights Network, etc.

We were greeted by Denise Lieberman, a civil rights lawyer, who had just arrived at the center with her arms full. I quickly established that she was the team leader as she wasted no time in turning on the lights and coffee machine, setting up the centre, getting someone to pick up assortments of bagels and cream cheeses and organising the volunteers who were beginning to trickle in to the centre.

Most volunteers were lawyers on standby to address complaints of electoral irregularities. The day started off slowly and I was beginning to feel convinced that voters in America do not need protection after all and the existence of such programme was merely a frivolity and not necessity.

Throughout my trip in the USA, I asked some Americans whether electoral fraud is a concern in the country. Most of them smiled politely as if it was the most ridiculous question they had ever heard. According to many, it would be extremely difficult but not impossible, to find someone trying to vote twice since the real challenge is actually to get more Americans to vote. Apparently, the USA is notoriously known for low voter turnout, except for the last Presidential election when throngs of young voters turned up to vote.

What intrigued me the most was the absence of photo ID as a requirement to vote. When I pressed on about how such a system could potentially become a target for abuse and fraud, most of them just shrugged and said, “You just need to trust.” It was my turn to smile politely.

While refilling my third cup of coffee that morning, I stroke up a conversation with another volunteer. According to him, many Americans do not have any form of photo identification since not all Americans possess a passport or driver’s license; the two most common documents with photos attached. As such, it makes it virtually impossible for the electoral law to include photo ID as a requirement to vote. He believes that one of the main reasons why some Americans make this into such a big issue is to prevent certain voters from voting for the opposition.

Sure enough, one of the complaints which subsequently came in that morning was of a polling officer who insisted that a voter must present a photo ID in order to vote. Later on, John and I were sent to a polling station to investigate a complaint against a Republican challenger who was allegedly telling polling officers that the voting machines were faulty and in order for a republican vote to be registered in the system, voters must press the button for the Republican candidate repetitively. Another complaint received was from a blind voter who was concerned that the polling officer might not have read out the whole list of candidates and propositions on the ballot paper.

Once we determined that the day was not going to get more exciting, John was ready to cast his vote at the polling station where he registered. As long as I am not John’s employer or labour union representative, I was allowed to accompany and assist him at the voting booth, in which I did. Since USA is pretty much a country that seems to rely heavily on trust, nobody bothered to question whether John genuinely needed my assistance in the first place. I also noticed that there was no police presence in most of the polling stations we went. The only time when we actually saw them was when they came to collect the ballot boxes.

 

Photo above: John Chasnoff distributing electoral materials at one of the polling stations. We had to make sure that we were at least 25 feet away from the entrance of the polling station. A voter arrived at the polling station with his granddaughter.

When I talked to John about my experience in Afghanistan as a Civic Education Officer and Political Rights Verification Officer, I was reminded of how different the atmosphere was on election day in Afghanistan. At the end of the day, we would have witnessed or received countless of reports on the number of fraud, intimidation and violence committed all over the country.

I think there are many reasons why some people do not vote. It could be because they have lost faith in the whole democratic process. It could also be because they do not know who to vote for or care enough for what the candidates stand for. It could be because they are not physically or mentally fit to vote. But there are also many who do not vote simply because they think their votes do not matter and election period is just another day for politicians to hurl malicious accusations at each other in public. For these people, here’s news for you.

Democracy is not free but often comes with a huge price. It is not handed down to us on a silver platter but one that is often filled with blood and difficult compromises. For many of us who live in relatively peaceful and politically stable countries, we have become myopic of how our fore parents had fought hard for it many years ago. It would appear that the more democratic a country is, the less interested her people are in her political affairs. For isn’t this the ugly side of human nature that it is when something is taken away from you that you will only come to value it the most?

So vote while you still have the right to do so.

Is freedom of expression a problem?

French comedian Dieudonné M’bala M’bala became an instant household name in France when he was banned from performing his anti-Semitic stand-up comedy routine. He is notoriously known for implying that a renowned Jewish journalist belonged in a gas chamber. 

Dieudonné may have become one of the most hateful personalities in France but many of his haters still believe that he should not be banned from performing.

It is not very often that the French court decides to restrict freedom of expression, a sacred institution in France. The other time it was done was when it prohibited the wearing of all religious headgear in public school, and more recently the wearing of a full-face veil in public spaces.

I found it interesting that France, a country that gave birth to Voltaire – known for his “I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to my death your right to say it” quote – appear  more willing to use court power to silent offensive speech and curtail the expression of religious identity.

I was told that the majority of the French disagree with the court’s ban on Dieudonné’s comedy show despite many who think he’s a hateful bigot and found his jokes extremely offensive and borderline violent.

I also learned that many French people believe that while the ban against hate speech is wrong, religious headgear isn’t (and other symbols for that matter) because they are two separate matters.

“Dieudonné’s jokes are more than just racist comedy. If you watch his videos online, you’ll see that he’s inciting violence and hatred against the Jew. What he does is criminal. But you [the court] cannot ban his show because that’s against freedom of expression. We cannot allow that to happen in France. It’s much too sacred,” Philippe, a French expatriate said when asked what he thought of the ban on Dieudonné.

“What the court should have done was to give him a prison sentence or a huge fine. There is sufficient evidence to charge him for inciting violence. But to ban his show, that’s just ridiculous.”

Philippe’s concern obviously lies in the protection of freedom of expression, something he considers sacred and cannot be violated.

I was told that the majority of the French are outraged by Dieudonné’s anti-Semitic jokes but like Philippe, they are more concerned that the judiciary may fall into a slippery slope.

“We couldn’t care less about Dieudonné M’bala M’bala. Who the hell is this guy anyway? If civil liberty groups are upset about the ban, it’s definitely not to defend what he did. It’s to defend our right to freedom of expression. We cannot allow the ban to happen because who knows what else will be banned in the future?” Philippe insisted.

“People need to understand this. Objecting the ban does not equate to defending racist behaviour. They are two separate issues,” he added.

Guillaume, another French expat, agreed with Philippe. Although he disagrees with Dieudonné’s racist behaviour, he wished people would stop giving him so much attention.

“I don’t really care about him. He did not exist in my life before but now because of this fracas, everybody knows him and they are giving him way too much importance.  He’s become so popular. Why? There are other more important things that deserve my attention,” said Guillaume.

What is true for Philip seems to hold true for Guillaume as well. According to both, freedom of expression must not be restricted. But what I find even more intriguing is that the duo feel that the French court’s consistent upholding of the ban on religious headgear (more prominently the face-veil worn by Muslim women) in the public sphere is completely justified.

What’s the difference?

“Well, for centuries we’ve suffered the imposition of the Catholic Church. France is a secular country now. There’s no room for people who want to impose their religion on others. You go to school to learn, not to practise your faith. We did not say you can’t have a religion. All we’re saying is religion has no place in the public sphere. You can do what you want in private. That’s your business,” Philippe asserted.

I argued that wearing a headscarf does not mean a person is imposing her religion on others. It is well within one’s right to express one’s religious identity and to practise one’s religious teaching.

“I really doubt that these people are merely expressing their religious identity. I think they are trying to Islamise the country. They are deliberately provoking the public with their religious attire,” Philippe said.

I looked at Guillaume to hear what he had to say about this. He remained silent and appeared to be in deep thought. Perhaps he may disagree with Philippe this time.

Philippe meanwhile continued to express strong feelings against the wearing of religious headscarf in public. He said that those who insist on practising their religion openly should live elsewhere. France is not a country for them.

As I am familiar with such sentiment, often expressed by those who think we (the Malaysian minority) are complaining too much and should leave the country, it dawned on me that freedom of expression wasn’t really the issue here. It was the fear of France losing its secular identity and Islamaphobia that had prompted such different opinion.

I had an epiphany - there are people who are equally as afraid of the threat of converting into Islam as much as the threat of converting out of Islam. I begin to see some sort of a resemblance between religious and anti-religious fanatics.

When I pointed this out to Philippe, he argued vehemently that it wasn’t just the Islamic headscarf that he has an issue with, but all religious headgear and symbol.

“Do you know that Muslims are now demanding public schools in France to serve halal food? I mean, what next?” Guillaume finally broke his silence and that was sufficient for me to deduce that he shared the same sentiment as Philippe.

The French courts may try their best to apply restrictions on constitutional rights as consistently as possible, the French public are quite split on the two issues. This is precisely what makes freedom of expression an extremely grey area. No matter how it is being applied, there will always be someone who is unhappy somehow, somewhere.

To me, freedom of expression is not the problem. What becomes problematic is the hypocrisy of human being – “I will defend my right but not yours”.  

Freedom of expression must be for everyone which is why, it should only be restricted when it is absolutely necessary and within the law. There is no fast rule on what entails necessity. It must always be judged contextually and from both sides of the perspectives.

What could potentially be a solution to address polarity is the emphasis on critical thinking by our society, a faculty so lacking these days.

For many centuries, the Socratic Method or what is commonly known as critical thinking has been the pillar of the finest teaching institutions in the world. Famous for his quote “an unexamined life is not worth living”, Socrates distinguished intellectual and free minds from ignorant fools although he was sentenced to death for making a mockery out of the ancient Greek Gods and the Athenian ruling elite.

His student, Plato, created the first institution of higher learning in the Western world and wrote Dialogues, a book where characters argue a topic by asking each other questions.

The Socratic Method further inspired Plato to expound on his theory of dualism, separating perception from idealism. He illustrated this theory using the cave metaphor – people living in a cave can only see the light within the parameter it is projected upon, hence depriving them from seeing the big picture or external realism as he would call it. Here lies another reason why freedom of expression must not be restricted to allow peripheral points of view.

Plato’s Academia and Dialogues are both famous for promoting critical thinking. The presiding philosophy was that all school of thought must be given equal opportunity for discourse so that students and readers can make their own judgment after careful analysis.

The American Association of University Professor agrees with Plato’s philosophy and thus adopted a Freedom of Expression and Campus Speech Code which says:

“Freedom of thought and expression is essential to any institution of higher learning. Universities and colleges exist not only to transmit knowledge. Equally, they interpret, explore, and expand that knowledge by testing the old and proposing the new. This mission guides learning outside the classroom quite as much as in class, and often inspires vigorous debate on those social, economic, and political issues that arouse the strongest passions. In the process, views will be expressed that may seem to many wrong, distasteful, or offensive. Such is the nature of freedom to sift and winnow ideas.

On a campus that is free and open, no idea can be banned or forbidden. No viewpoint or message may be deemed so hateful or disturbing that it may not be expressed.”

The code went on to prescribe measures that can be taken to address incivility, intolerance, offensive and harassing behaviour, all short of banning free speech. Click here for the full code.

Freedom of expression can be both empowering and disempowering at the same time. To me, it should not be restricted whenever possible because it can be used to empower more than it can disempower.

As a woman, I may be offended by a disempowering video objectifying women as sex symbols but as a human rights activist, freedom of expression is an inviolable right that must be defended at a reasonable cost. It is because of freedom of expression that human rights values are imparted and upheld all over the world on a daily basis. Finding a balance between these competing interests is not easy and requires time and wisdom to understand. 

To me, it is easier to correct a harm caused by an expression than to correct one that is caused by a ban on expression. For example, the public can challenge an offensive expression through criticism and counter argument when there is space which allows freedom of expression but it becomes extremely difficult to expose and correct wrongdoing in an environment where freedom of expression is being curtailed.

Plato’s theory of dualism explains the inevitability of two opposing views which makes it difficult to judge an issue as simply black or white. As such, the solution should never be to restrict the expression of these two opposing views, but to encourage the audience to think about the views as critically as possible and come to their own conclusion.

Shielding an adult from distasteful or offensive form of expression is not a heroic act. In fact, it can be disempowering and it can perpetuate ignorance. Not only are you treating the adult like a child, you’re saying that you know better. This is an offence many Malaysian politicians are committing on a daily basis. 

Fighting injustices and human stereotypes is not about restricting offensive or distasteful content. It’s about educating and empowering men, women and children on a daily basis to think critically about such content so that they can learn to make informed judgment on their own.
Freedom of expression is not the problem. The lack of it is.

This article was first published here on 13 February 2014.

Technorati Tags: Dieudonné M’bala M’bala,Voltaire,Socrates,Plato,Socratic Method,Academia,Dialogues,dualism,American Association of University Professor,Freedom of Expression and Campus Speech Code

“To sign or not to sign?”

That was a decision I was forced to make one early morning at a private hospital in Kuala Lumpur.

“I’m not signing. The hospital can go fuck itself!” My husband’s mind was made up even before I could blink my sleepy eyes twice.

For a brief second, I almost dismissed my husband’s reaction as a tad too melodramatic and was very close to signing what had already begun to threaten the tranquility of our rare morning together. But I didn’t.

I let out a big sigh and told the young woman at the front desk, “Sorry, I can’t sign this. We won’t consent to this.”

Once I had said it out loud, the look on her face told me that things were not going to be smooth for my husband and I that day. The wide eyes behind her glasses looked shocked, confused and uncomfortable. I might be biased but I thought she also reeked of judgment.

“I’m sorry but this is a hospital policy. You have to sign this if you want to get tested,” she said a bit too timidly. I don’t know how, but she seemed to sense that this would not go down well on us.

I looked at my husband, not as an attempt to persuade but for an affirmation of our decisions.

“Nope. I’m not going to sign.” He walked away to signal his unwillingness to waste any more time on this matter.

I let out another big sigh as I found myself losing patience too.

“Look, we have no problem signing a consent form for HIV testing but we do have a problem with this clause here. See? It says, if tested positive, you guys will be notifying the Government Authorities,” I explained.

“But this is the law,” she tried to convince me.

So if the law requires you to jump off the Penang Bridge, you would?

I rolled my eyes and sighed again.

“I know but we don’t agree with this law. So we’re not going to consent as a sign of our protest,” I said instead.

We were then told to wait at the lounge while she consulted her manager.

After ten minutes, an older woman came and asked to speak to me privately. She ushered me to the corner of the room and said to me in a low voice, “M’am, your medical package includes HIV screening. We’re not sure whether it is possible for us to exclude this testing.”

I stared her. It was my turn to look shocked, confused, uncomfortable and judgmental. By then my patience had hit a record low and I couldn’t help myself but to retaliate in full force.

I can’t remember what I had told her precisely but I surprised myself that day for being eloquent as I made my case. The conviction and anger inside me helped me to articulate my argument to her and in summary, I told her that nobody could force my husband and I to test for HIV/AIDS.

“Of course, of course. You’re right. Let me go and check with the company who offered you the package to confirm that it’s OK for you to go through the check-up today without the test.”

My husband looked defeated. He was convinced that we were not going to have our routine medical check-up that day. In a determined voice, I said to him, “If she comes back and tells us no, I swear I’m going to give them hell.”

After waiting for another 15 minutes, hell remained mine.

For close to ten years, my husband and I had gone through routine HIV tests annually. In fact, before we had our first sexual intercourse, we had ourselves tested. This is how strongly we feel about protecting each other from HIV/AIDS. The episode above was the first time that we had actually skipped a HIV test.

Many of you may wonder why we had made such a ruckus over this.

I had recently learned from a friend that testicular cancer is apparently rather common amongst Canadian adolescents. According to her, because most adolescents are embarrassed to talk about their private parts, many choose to remain silent when they feel an abnormal growth on their testicles. By the time they decide to seek treatment, the cancer has already advanced considerably.

I suppose the same principle applies here, except multiplied by ten because of the stigma HIV/AIDS carries. Because of our strong fear of stigmatisation, we would rather not get ourselves tested. Because of the lack of information, we are not sure what the Government Authorities would do with our medical record. In the meantime, the hospital did nothing to help us understand the procedure of HIV disclosure. If anything, the hospital did everything wrong that day to gain our trust. This problem could have been potentially solved by sound public relations and communications practices but instead, the hospital staff made us felt like we were the enemy.

When I first saw that young woman’s reaction when we declined to sign the consent form, and her subsequent looks after that, I knew that I had made the right choice not to sign the paper. She carried a look that spelled, “They have AIDS. That’s why they’re not signing the paper.” She was very awkward with us. She would tense up whenever we appeared before her. When we went to collect our test results a week later, we felt unwelcomed. The doctor who went through our report dismissed me when I told him that I thought I felt a lump on my neck. He did not even feel my neck. He behaved as if he couldn’t wait to get rid of us.

Act 342, Section 10 (2) is the clause that compels every medical practitioner to notify the government authorities if he/she is aware of the existence of any infectious disease. Under the same section, it also compels anyone, other than a medical practitioner, to do the same. This means, if I know my work colleague has HIV/AIDS, I must report this to the authorities.

In the United Kingdom, the General Medical Council states that a disclosure of HIV positive patient to anyone other than a healthcare professional is unlawful. Their Data Protection Act provides legal redress to people living with HIV/AIDS if their confidentiality rights have been breached. In Malaysia, there is no such law yet unless the personal data is used for commercial purposes.

In the United States of America, hospitals do report to the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, but only after they have removed all personal information from the patient’s record. This is mainly because the federal and state funding for HIV/AIDS is often targeted at areas where the epidemic is strongest.

An American survey revealed that one-third of 20,000 respondents knew at least one person who is afraid to take HIV test for fear of prosecution if they are tested positive. More than 60% of Americans do not know whether their state has a HIV specific disclosure law. Accordingly, many people at risk may prefer not to get tested for HIV rather than risk being accused of or criminally charged for non-disclosure if they are tested positive. In a similar survey, when asked what motivated people to disclose their condition, majority of them cited moral or ethical reasons; honesty, love, desire to protect their loved ones. Less than 1% said that the law is the primary motivation.

All these studies point to the understanding that having a disclosure law such as the Act 342, Section 10, does not help to reduce the risk of HIV/AIDS. On the contrary, it has significant repercussions because it stops people like my husband and I from getting tested and seeking appropriate treatment once diagnosed.

Driven by curiosity, I called two organisations* relevant to this subject matter for more information. I could not get through one but the other told me that I could get an anonymous HIV test for free.

“Total anonymity? How come the law doesn’t apply to you guys?”

“That’s because we’re an NGO. There are a couple of NGOs around that do anonymous testing. Do drop by and get yourself tested. It’s important.”

Free anonymous testing with an NGO versus a private hospital that doesn’t seem to give a toss, it’s a no brainer really who will have a more successful campaign against the spread of HIV/AIDS.

* The identities of the organisations have been deliberately kept confidential to avoid getting them into trouble with the authorities.

This article was first published on The Malaysian Insider on 5 March 2013.

It generated quite a bit of discussion on a friend’s Facebook. According to this friend, the local NGOs are not exempted from reporting to the Government Authorities if you’re tested positive for HIV. He also left a comment on my Facebook and here’s what he said:

“Also, at the NGO, you are testing live with a person, who then gives you the result. You are no longer anonymous to him. Some people don't go to such NGOs because they may know people from the community who are volunteers at the NGO. So actually, this creates a different problem. People who would go for such testing in spite of the social barriers (being recognised, reporting, etc) are already monitoring their sexual health -- even if some do test positive eventually. The problem is getting people for whom the lack of anonymity prove a deterrent. Some people also have to overcome the guilt of being judged for being irresponsible at such an NGO as these NGOs have been aggressive in promoting Safe Sex messages with moralistic overtones (you are irresponsible if you don't use condom, you are a slut if you have multiple sexual partners, etc). It is a lot to overcome for most people. In Taiwan, their anonymous testing works like this: you get your blood taken for testing and you are given a code and a phone number to call; you call the number and tell them your code and you get your result without needing to reveal your name at all.”

Another person left a comment on this article:

“As a matter of fact[ly], both Malaysian and Singaporean law requires medical practitioners to report patients tested positive for HIV. Both deport and ban entry to foreigners if tested positive while in the country.”

Technorati Tags: HIV/AIDS disclosure law,anonymous HIV testing,stigmatisation facing people living with HIV/AIDS,Act 342 Section 10,Act 342 Section 10(2),US Centres for Disease Control,General Medical Council,United Kingdom

Global Bersih: Connecting Malaysians Around the World

This article was first published in The Malaysian Insider on 8 June 2012.

When a work engagement required me to be in Washington DC on April 28, I decided to meet some fellow Malaysians who were involved in Global Bersih 3.0: Washington DC for the purpose of writing this article. I wanted to bring their stories home with me.

Exhausted from a full day of an “unconference” and heavily deprived of sleep from an all-nighter of monitoring “live” tweets on the rally, I waited patiently for my company to arrive. They were going to end their march at the Malaysian Kopitiam, a tradition that started on July 9 last year.

I ordered a glass of “teh tarik” but when it arrived at my table, it was just regular hot tea with milk and sugar served on a small cup and saucer. Not the real thing naturally, but authentic Malaysian cuisine was not why I was there.

While waiting for nearly an hour, I kept myself alert by listening to other people’s conversations with my eyes closed, giving the illusion that I wasn’t eavesdropping. It wasn’t difficult at all since I was close to being brain dead.

Two waitresses, presumably Malaysians, were quizzing each other at the bar on what the rally was all about in Cantonese. Although they were speaking under their breath, I could identify the gossipy tones of a hush-hush conversation between two nosey neighbours across the fence.

They ended their conversation abruptly when a party of eight Americans walked in. One of them shrugged her shoulders and before she left hastily to welcome the party, she ended by sighing, “Haiyah. Who really knows? It has nothing to do with us, right?”

Once the loud conversations ensued at the table, I established that the Americans were probably members of a foodie club of some sort. Their leader began to introduce the dishes, which had been pre-ordered because they were all served shortly after they were seated.

The leader insisted that everyone must absolutely try the curry puff and “popiah.” To reinforce her authority, she continued to share her knowledge of Malaysian food culture and how she thought the food in Penang was one of the best she had ever tried in Asia. The rest nodded in sheer admiration of her worldly wisdom.

As soon as the tiny door to the basement of the building, where the modest restaurant is located, opened, a hyped-up small group of young Asians and two Caucasians in bright yellow T-shirts entered. Unmistakably, they were the company I had been expecting. I recognised Kean and Andrea whom I had met a few days ago and I was quickly introduced to the others.

I was happy to see Andrea again. Behind that quiet and shy demeanour, she’s fondly known as “the slayer” at The Hatchet, a student paper at the George Washington University, where she served as senior editor. We had met at a campus bar at the university where she’ll be finishing her journalism degree soon.

Having interned with an online news portal in Malaysia a few months back, she was fully apprised of the political situation in Malaysia. Coming from a country where a permit for peaceful assembly is often required only to provide the police sufficient time to implement regulatory measures aimed at minimising obstructions to public life, rather than to restrict the right to peaceful assembly per se, she said she was shocked that this should happen in Malaysia.

Like Andrea, Mike, also an American, shared the same sentiment that peaceful assembly is a universal right that should be supported. Before being married to the lovely Grace, he said that he was not aware of the political situation in Malaysia at all.

Now, he’s happy to share this cause with his Malaysian wife who looked radiant in an identical Bersih T-shirt, concealing her protruding belly. They’re expecting their first born soon. The couple had travelled more than one hour to be at the march that day.

Grace holds a green card but is unwilling to revoke her citizenship. She’s been catching up on Malaysian news through an online news portal and is obviously concerned about reports on electoral fraud.

She grew up in a politically savvy family in Malaysia and such events are not foreign to her. She certainly didn’t look as if the rally was such a big deal to her as she happily tucked into her fried noodles.

I turned to Lee who was sitting quietly across the table. From her silence, I could sense that she was not too eager to share her “Bersih stories.” This piqued my curiosity even more. After some gentle probing, she confessed that she didn’t want to be visibly seen to support Bersih.

“I just don’t want to get into trouble with the Malaysian embassy, you know. I still rely on them for diplomatic assistance,” she justified herself.

“But why are you here today?” I asked.

She said she attended the march because she was curious but that didn’t eliminate the fear factor for her.

Playing the devil’s advocate, I couldn’t resist asking, “How do you feel though when you see what’s happening today in Malaysia? Hundreds of thousands of people are abandoning their fear to fight for electoral reform. Isn’t that inspirational to you? If they can abandon that fear, why not you?”

She didn’t answer my question immediately. I could see she was weighing my question carefully, possibly not because she didn’t know the answer but how she could respond to me as calmly as possible. Perhaps my question sounded judgmental because when she did finally answer, I could sense tears brimming in her eyes.

I thought I detected a quivering voice when she said, “Malaysians living in Malaysia don’t have to be at the mercy of the government to go on with their livelihood. Not me. I need them to sort out my paperwork here.” A split second later, she quickly added, “I’m living here on my own. What happens if I need the embassy’s help one day? I attend embassy functions occasionally. I know some of the people working there. I, I just don’t want to get into trouble.”

Lee was right. I was being judgmental and as soon as I heard her, I realised that she was conflicted. I thought to myself what kind of a country am I living in when people are afraid of its government even when they are thousands of miles away from it?

“Would you be less fearful if there’s a change in government?” I ventured to ask.

“Yes, yes. I think it would be better,” Lee answered but for now she’s trying her luck to obtain a green card in America.

The conversation soon turned into the green card lottery system, a system that allows 50,000 eligible immigrants to obtain permanent residency annually. Lee then made an announcement that another Malaysian she knows had just recently won the lottery, much to the others’ envy.

Kean changed the conversation by sharing his horror story of the Malaysian consulate in Australia. Married to an Australian, he had gone through hell with the consulate while attempting to sort out the citizenship of his Australian-born child. The consulate had allegedly lost the paperwork and after four years, the process is still pending.

After more than an hour of animated conversation on Lina Joy and what not, I managed to talk to Feng, a post-graduate student, before we left.

“You know, I missed Bersih 1.0. Since then, I told myself I would never miss Bersih 2.0, if it happened again. So, I organised Bersih 2.0 in New York City last year. It was successful and those guys in NYC are really active. They know what to do. Of course, it’s still nothing compared to the students in Australia. They really have guts, courage and passion. More socially active, you know.”

Feng explained that no one from the Bersih Steering Committee had instructed them to start a chapter in New York and Washington DC. It was done independently. The only correspondence ever done with the Bersih Steering Committee was to get the latter to help them with the publicity.

“When [the idea of having a] Global Bersih came up, nobody in the States stepped up. Malaysians who are members of MCA [here] were against it. They said it would tarnish the country’s image. I gave up arguing with them because they wouldn’t listen.”

I asked Feng why those who were present at the march today were mostly of Chinese descent.

“Many Malays are on scholarships. They want to be a part of it but they’re fearful of the repercussions.” He then added quickly: “The same can be asked of Bersih 1.0. Why so few Chinese and Indians? It was mainly the Malays who started Bersih 1.0 but then Bersih 2.0 changed everything. I don’t think it’s valid or fair anymore to ask why only a certain race is fighting for this cause.”

I asked Feng my last question: “Have you ever been asked why you left the country if you love it?”

He laughed at my question and his answer caught me by surprise.

“Who said I love my country? I’m not a patriot. Look at people like Chin Huat and Ambiga. To me, they are the real patriots. They have a choice to leave Malaysia but they didn’t. I’m not a patriot but this seems to be the right thing to do. This is my right and I’m exercising it.”

“And what right is that?” I asked.

“I don’t want other people to fight for me anymore. I want to fight with them. That’s my right.”

Earlier that week, Kean explained that many of the Malaysian diaspora do feel guilty for living abroad. That sense of abandonment does exist. Global Bersih allows them to redeem their guilt by doing something; either by organising a rally, participating in one or simply just to donate money to the cause.

My conversations with my fellow Malaysians in Washington DC taught me something. Being a Malaysian is not necessarily defined by distance, but by spirit and essence. No amount of national ties can be severed if one continues to care about the people whom they’ve left behind and, in their absence, continue to do what they can for the people. For those who’ve asked what have these Malaysians abroad done for the country, perhaps a more valid question to ask is what are the Malaysians in Malaysia doing instead?

Missing out on Bersih 3.0 was totally unplanned. Although I had been critical of the rally’s impact on real electoral reform, I never doubted its tremendous ability to become a national event in the history of the country.

Attending Bersih 2.0 was to me a life-changing experience as a Malaysian. If anything, I felt more Malaysian than any other day that I’ve lived in the country and it gave me a thought — perhaps the younger generation has more difficulty grasping the concept of unity or “Malaysian-ness” as opposed to Malay, Chinese, Indian and “Yang Lain-Lain” is because we never really had to fight for a common purpose together.

Not until then, the fight has always been about who’s getting a bigger piece of the pie and who’s a “pendatang”? Whether or not Bersih has succeeded to achieve its main objectives, I believe that for many, it has taught us a valuable lesson — it’s not always about “them” and “us” but who we are and what we want together as Malaysians. This, unfortunately, is a lesson our education system has sorely failed to impart and uphold.

For those who have constantly upheld the excuse that Bersih has tarnished the country’s image, I urge them to back their statement up with evidence. During the “unconference” I attended, several participants from different countries actually referred to Malaysia as an authoritarian regime. Clearly, it wasn’t the demonstrators who had embarrassed the nation, but what the government is doing to the demonstrators that gave them that impression. Needless to say, I was embarrassed.

When I came home, I gave the only Bersih 3.0 Washington DC T-shirt I could snag up to a friend’s husband who was in Kuantan for work during the rally. I smiled and thought to myself, that’s how connected we all are.

 

Technorati Tags: Malaysian Kopitiam,Washington DC,Global Bersih,Bersih 3.0,Bersih 2.0,Bersih Story,peaceful assembly,Ambiga Sreenevasan,Wong Chin Huat,national unity,Bersih Steering Committee,Lina Joy

The chronicle of 2011’s Resolution [Part 3]– The attack of the Jelly Belly beans

This is a new series chronicling my journey towards looking fab by the end of 2011 (well, preferably before the year ends but who am I kidding, right?). Read Part 1 here and Part 2 here.

Jelly Bellies are not just candies. They’re a lifestyle. An expensive lifestyle if you’re in Malaysia.

According to its website here, there are 50 different types of flavours, each bearing a fun name that any nail polish maker would love to covet. According to a colleague, the Sizzling Cinnamon tastes like tiger balm, so maybe that’s an inspiration for tiger balm companies if they’re thinking of revamping their image and expanding their demographic target groups.

I can’t remember when I tasted my first Jelly Belly. It must had been a long time ago (possibly when I was in university and a Canadian friend might had introduced them to me) but the memory of how they taste like, the rubbery and gummy texture and fruity smell have stuck in my mind since then. So, when I went back to the US last October, I got into a gas station and remembered to buy some during a road trip to Chicago.

When the American Council for Young Political Leaders (ACYPL) delegation from the US came to visit not too long ago, they brought along one of their most famed and beloved candies. Yes, it’s none other than the Jelly Belly.

They were giving out these 7 oz clear can 30- flavour edition (see picture on the left) at meetings. Of course, some didn’t appreciate them and gave it away, much to the other’s delight. I guess, Jelly Belly is a willy-nilly after all (I’m not even sure whether I’m using the sentence correctly).

One of the pleasures of having a mix-pack such as these, is the burst of unidentifiable flavours all mixed together in your mouth. It’s not uncommon to expect a series of mixed reaction as the candies slowly melt and release their flavours onto your palate. Some of my favourites  are the buttered pop corn, toasted marshmallow and A&W root beer. What I hate are the licorice, Dr. Pepper or anything cherry. So, you’ll be hearing a series of, “yummmm….” and quickly followed by a “ewwww….what the hell?!”

And ladies and gentlemen, that’s why I love Jelly Belly beans.

Anyway, what does this have to do with my 2011 resolution, right?

So, E and I were running a really quick errand at a grocery market last night. At the check-out counter, I stumbled across rows of Jelly Belly on a shelf nearby. Although they were all accompanied by cut-throat price tags, I couldn’t help the temptation of picking up a mix-pack. E, stopped me and literally pushed me away from the shelf and reminded me that those yummy beans were going to cost me RM50.

I, of course, lost my self-control and the ability to think rationally. All I could think about was the beautiful places these beans had brought me to once, not too long ago. E wouldn’t hear of it and she went all Jelly Belly nazi on me and needless to say, she won.

I wasn’t happy but on hindsight, I’m glad she stopped me because I would be upset to pay so much for something which would inevitably cost me much more. So, thank you E for being such a good friend (unlike V who bought us cream puffs. That’s evil!)

I end this with a poem as an ode to the Jelly Belly.

It started off with "KE and jelly babies"
all because of the 3 ladies and their bellies
who don't want to be mistaken for the tele-tubbies
So they all agree to help each other get rid of the flabbies
and now it ended with “E and the Nazis”

p/s: This resolution sounds very promising so far and off to a good start. I haven’t lost any weight despite having less than 2 weeks to go and we’ve all declared a moratorium for Chinese New Year! God, I need someone to sponsor a personal trainer for me!!!

Technorati Tags: Jelly Belly,Sizzling Cinnamon,Buttered Popcorn,Toasted Marshmallow,A&W root beer,ACYPL,Dr. Pepper,licorice

Goodbye, 2010

This year has simply came and went in a wink of an eye. This must be how my cat, Obama aka Prootsie (see photo above) feels like. From the moment I signed on the job at the Bar Council in October 2009, days have been passing by at the speed of 1 cat year, especially during the night on every weekday. Waking up in the morning, cursing and wondering where the night had gone, seem to be a favourite 2010 past time (I bet that it’s so popular that it’ll be brought forward to 2011).

I’ve managed to keep myself extremely busy this year and I think I may have compensated for the period of time when I stayed idle from 2005-2008. This year has been indeed fruitful and well-lived. Any regrets? None whatsoever, except for not seizing enough moments, if there were any that went completely unnoticed.

Apart from managing the MyConstitution Campaign (if you haven’t heard of  this yet, this is your last chance to get involved in the biggest phenomenon to hit Malaysia since the government announced the 1Malaysia campaign. The MyConstitution Campaign is expected to wind down  after March 2011), I’ve been writing a lot for The Malaysian Insider and Loyar Burok.

Travelling used to be my most favourite thing to do but since work has been occupying most of my time and money has been rather tight this year, I have turned to writing as a source of inspiration and a form of meditation. This year, it has become my most favourite thing to do when I’m not coordinating events, attending an event, picking up boxes of Rakyat Guides booklets from Taman Ukay, Ulu Klang, or trying to comprehend what are the new amendments made to the Criminal Procedure Code (they’re not necessarily in that order).

Above: A sample of a MyConstitution Campaign Rakyat Guides booklet. The 6-panel cardboard paper is folded to form a small pocket-sized “Luxe Travel Guide”-like booklet slipped into a plastic cover that can be used as a self-defence weapon due to its sharp skin-grazing capabilities. I’ve got tonnes of scars on my hands as proof of this.

My second most favourite thing to do is photography. It was only this year when I first started using the manual mode of my Canon DSLR camera to take pictures. I must say that the results have been most gratifying. Not all the pictures I’ve taken are any good but I think there may be some that show potential (well, to me anyway and any bona fide photographer may disagree).

Here are some of my favourite photos:

Photos above:

1. At the Rally for Sanity, Gateway Arch, St. Louis, USA   2. At Arlington Cemetery, USA  3, 4 & 5. At the St. Louis Rams Vs. San Diego Charges game, Edward Jones Dome, St. Louis, USA   6. At Yogyakarta city, Indonesia    7. At Yogyakarta Market, Indonesia  8. At St. Louis Zoo, USA  9. At St. Louis Zoo, USA

This year has been special too because I was given the opportunity to travel to the United States of America for 6 weeks. Being selected for the Legislative Fellows Programme (LFP) under the American Council for Young Political had been surreal and I am grateful for such a priceless experience.

After working for more than a year in Malaysia, I’ve had a difficult time coming to terms with how messed up the country is.  I was utterly disappointed, demotivated and frustrated with the government, the public and private service sector and just basically the mentality of Malaysians in general. There were times when all I did was fight with almost anyone who could or would not do their jobs properly.

Being in America provided me with a breath of fresh air. I met many people who displayed good leadership and professionalism and I was inspired. I think I came home a different person. I became more eager to take on more leadership role and begin to think more deeply about starting a project on my own.

As a summary, here are some of my most and least favourite things in 2010.

Favourites:

1. MyConstitution Campaign

2. Writing

3. Photography

4. Loyar Burok

5. Friendships I’ve made through MyConstitution Campaign and LFP

Least favourites:

1. Weight gain

2. IKEA (am boycotting the world’s worst international franchise for their horrendous and appalling service)

3. Michael M (probably one of the most loathsome people I’ve met this decade)

4. Did not finish even a book

5. Not seeing more people

Biggest achievment:

1. Quit smoking since April 2010

Hopes for 2011:

1. Lose 17kg

2. Start my own project

3. Travel more (maybe to the North Pole, if I’m lucky)

4. Take better photos

5. Read more

6. Write better

7. See more people

8. Do something new and go crazy

HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL and HELLO 2011.

It must get better

This article was first published in The Malaysian Insider on 25 December 2010 and then Loyar Burok on 27 December 2010.

I am heterosexual and if I have had more than one sexual relationship, I’d be called a shameless slut. 

If I were a Muslim, heterosexual and have pre-marital sex with my long-term boyfriend, I’d be arrested, persecuted and labelled a sinful and bad Muslim. 

If I am homosexual, I’d be blamed for spreading HIV/AIDS. 

If I were Muslim and homosexual, I might as well be dead because this would be what many of my Muslim brothers and sisters would want me to be — non-existent. 

The point I’m trying to make is homosexuals are not alone when it comes to receiving unwanted, cruel and malicious remarks and punishments, but they do bear the worst of it, especially if they’re Muslims. 

If you’re part of the activist circle in Kuala Lumpur or know someone who is part of the circle, you’ll know the “Seksualiti Merdeka movement” led by several brave and no doubt amazing individuals. These individuals are brave because they confront and embrace their sexuality instead of hiding behind a facade. 

They’re amazing because they do something about defending and promoting their rights to alternative sexual lifestyles, rather than bitch within their own circle of like-minded friends and wait for society to accept them for who they are. 

One recent project that has attracted a lot of attention is the “It gets better in Malaysia” videos. These series of short videos feature several individuals who talk about their experiences as homosexuals in Malaysia. 

This is not an original initiative as it is very much inspired by a similar campaign in the United States aimed at combating gay teenage suicide as a result of bullying in schools. The message is simple. It tries to tell gay teenagers that their lives will get better eventually and hence they should not give up on life. 

I find this campaign very human. It’s not just about promoting or glorifying the rights of lesbian, bisexual, gay and transgendered persons. It’s about treating and respecting them as human beings who don’t deserve to be bullied and certainly don’t deserve to suffer in silence. 

When children take their own lives simply because they can no longer tolerate the torture they have to endure in school and are unable to find the worth in themselves to continue living, something is fundamentally wrong. It is no longer about LBGT rights. It’s about human rights. 

When Azwan Ismail appeared in one of the videos recently, he was condemned by many people. Some even called for his death. It makes me feel sick and it makes me angry to hear this. It also makes me ask why. Why do we behave as if we have the moral right to pass judgment on someone else who is different from ourselves? 

The truth of the matter is, we constantly hide behind our religions so that we can continue to be lazy thinkers and we try to delude ourselves as a society, that sex is taboo so that we don’t have to deal with any problems related to it. We’re told that sex should be something best kept private, which I can agree with. However, I don’t think we should stop discussing sex or try to censure ourselves by pretending to be an asexual society when we’re not. A Catholic priest will be able to tell you this. 

At the end of the day, those who condemn homosexuality do not realise what huge fools and bigots they make of themselves. They’re foolish because they continue to think that if they don’t talk, see or hear about it, then surely it doesn’t exist. (Thank God for great scientists and philosophers who don’t subscribe to such ludicrous theories.) They’re bigots because they believe in casting the first stone even though they are far from unblemished themselves. It’s as if the more stones they throw, the fewer stones will be left for their own sins. 

Being Malaysian is tough. Well, surely not as tough as an Afghan, Iraqi, Sudanese or Somalian, I hear you say. In a way you’re right but at least these countries don’t try to fool you into believing that they’re so close to being a developed nation, founded on the principles of democracy and respect for human rights. It is tough being a part of a hypocritical nation and anyone who asks me to balik China, you’ve proven my point. 

Afghanistan was once ruled by the Talibans, Muslim hardliners who implemented syariah and hudud laws in the country. These Talibans are also known for their sexual activities with young Afghan boys. They won’t talk about this but they will tell you that they’re defenders of Islam. 

Azwan Ismail did nothing of that sort and if anything, he did the opposite. He is honest, as opposed to those who hide behind their masks. I am sure all homosexuals want to be honest about themselves. Something which all parents should be teaching their children, instead of forcing them to be liars. 

I sincerely believe our country will be better if we start being more honest and less hypocritical. I also believe that this country will be better if we’re governed by leaders who are more honest and less hypocritical. 

We have come to a juncture where things must get better for all of us. I’ll vote for the next politician who starts a campaign about this.

Joe is smokin’!

Above: Smoking Joe’s signature barbecued pork ribs with beans and potato salad on the sides.

How do you like your barbecued ribs?

I like mine meaty yet tender, slightly burnt and caramelised on the outside but moist on the inside. Above all, it should have that smoky taste and smell.

When I first saw my plate of barbecued ribs at Smoking Joe’s, I was not convinced that they would be anything but dry and hard to chew on. I also didn’t like how they were covered with what looked like dried oregano.

Well, I was pleasantly surprised when I finally bit into the rib. The meat was not only tasty, it was so tender that it could easily fall off the bone with one gentle gnaw. The herbs on it were in fact, Smoking Joe’s very own signature St. Louis rub mix which contains a secret ingredient. The mix was salty, aromatic, slightly hot and tangy. It was so good that Joe the owner, uses it  liberally on almost all his dishes. Customers can even buy them at the restaurants. I brought mine home with Joe’s signature on it and have been using them to spice up my grilled meat.

Left: A customer holding Smoking Joe’s special seasoning mix

 

Above: (l) The feast we had at Smoking Joe’s, (m) Pulled pork, (r) The gooey and yummy macaroni and cheese

Above: (l) Joe giving us his personal attention (m) Roast turkey & beef briskets (r) Side dishes and salads

Smoking Joe’s is the kind of restaurant that serves simple but hearty American food. My kind of comfort food with lots of meat, mash potatoes, coleslaws, beans, creamy soup and macaroni and cheese. If you’re concerned about your waistline, fear not because it also serves hearty portions of lean turkey meat and beef brisket on a generous bed of salad leaves.

The other thing which I liked about the menu was the fresh potato crisps sprinkled with Smoking Joe’s signature mix. Unlike the usual Lays’ potato crisps, these were only slightly thicker, not as crispy that it felt artificial and you can really  tell that they were made of real potatoes. I wouldn’t trust those bags of potato crisps that claim they’re baked without preservatives anymore.

The ambience was nice and at first I thought the place was a bit too classy for what it serves. One would not have guessed that such a tastefully decorated restaurant would be serving normal regular American food. But again, what would I know since I had only gone to Pappy’s Smokehouse for barbecued ribs before?

It was a refreshing change from the usual loud and rowdy restaurants such as Pappy’s where customers are forced to line up to get their orders before being seated on uncomfortable wooden benches and then pressured into chowing down their food as quickly as possible in order to give the table up for the next customer. Smoking Joe’s is all about comfort, style and good value for money because believe it or not, the food cost almost the same as Pappy’s, if not less.

Above: Joe showing us the new logo for his chain in Jakarta.

Left: What did I tell ya? Ain’t Joe smokin’?

For real and simple American food, this is as good as it gets. It’s so good that Smoking Joe’s is going international by opening a new chain in Jakarta, Indonesia next year!

I wish Joe all the best and hope I’ll get to dine in his restaurant in Kuala Lumpur one day.

 

 

 

Smoking Joe’s is situated at:

1901 Washington Avenue, St. Louis, Missouri, US.

For more information, you can check out its website here.

Redefining leadership

This is my contribution for the American Council for Young Political Leaders (ACYPL)’s blog.

Above: The delegates from the South-East Asia programme at the Legislative Fellows Congress at the US State Department, Washington DC on 8 & 9 November 2010.

When I was thirteen, I stood up in my classroom and told my teacher that I disagreed with his method of punishment, which consisted of drawing on the faces of misbehaving fellow students with a white chalk.

That day, I took several strokes of the cane on my open palm for being disobedient but I left the classroom with my face untouched and a new resolve to end my teacher’s abusive and degrading treatment.  Since then, nobody had their faces drawn on again and my teacher was suspended indefinitely.

That was the only time when I felt like a true leader.

Many years have passed and I often look back and wonder where that thirteen year-old girl has gone.

It is probably no surprise that as an adult, I have continuously chose to work for human rights and humanitarian organisations because of my lack of tolerance of those who disrespect the dignity and integrity of other human beings. However, none of my accomplishments as an adult has come close to what I did when I was thirteen.

Sure, I would often try my best to execute my duties and responsibilities to the best of my abilities and judgments, but I have always allowed others to lead while I stay happily behind the scenes. I would often shy away from social engagements, hide from the spotlight and prefer to live a life that is free from what I assume as cumbersome commitments.

My philosophy has always been this: do the right thing but leave the big things to those with big ambitions.

When I got into this programme, I figure that I’ll be able to learn more about leadership.  Thankfully, I’ve met many people with impressive portfolio; young politicians and corporate executives who have founded or co-founded organisations or other miscellaneous community projects. I learn that these individuals do not sit and wait for others to solve issues faced by their communities. They get out from their comfort zone and do something about it. Not only do these individuals want to see a change in their communities, they want to be a part of that change.

At the same time, I also discover that in order to be defined as a leader here, one often needs to be seen as a leader; the one who asserts him/herself forward, the one who gets him/herself noticed and the one who is competitive enough to want to be recognised as a leader. These are aspects of leadership which I have never felt comfortable with.

Throughout my stay in St. Louis, I’m forced to ask myself these questions:

“If I don’t want to appear on the television, does that mean I’m not a leader?”

“If I don’t care enough about meeting very important or influential people, does that mean I’m not a leader?”

“If I don’t care about being photographed with important people, does that mean I’m not a leader?”

“If I don’t want to give a speech in public, does that mean I’m not a leader?”

After much pondering, my answers to all the above questions are an affirmative no. I realise that in order to be a good leader, I need to stay true to myself. There comes a time when I need to be honest and courageous enough to make a stand on what are the things I will support or need to do and what not. Leadership is not just about “being out there” but also about making the right decisions, no matter how tough they are, and taking necessary actions to implement those decisions.

When my best friend asked me over Skype what I’ve learned from the programme, I told her that most of the people I’ve met here inspire me to get out from my own comfort zone and start thinking about what I want and can do for my community. I told her that I’ve always wanted to run a non-profit organisation which provides youths with a platform to have their voices heard and to become more socially responsible within their own communities and I would like to see this vision coming to fruition.

So, by being in this programme, I think I’m able to see the reincarnation of that thirteen year old girl again. Hopefully, I’ll be able to have the courage she had by standing up in the midst of a crowd to advocate for what is right without fea

Many days and weeks later: Silence of the Lim

I blame it on the hotel suite at the Residence Inn, Marriott and the Office of License Collector in St. Louis. The day I moved into the suite, unpacked my 2 suitcases and began to make myself feel at home, that was the day when I stopped blogging.

It’s like when I saw all my clothes hanging on the wardrobe rack, arranged in the order of warm, formal, work and casual; and the rest folded neatly away in the countless of drawers in the bedroom, I kind of sub-consciously told myself that there is no urgency to pen down my daily journal as religiously as when I was in Washington DC.

Yeah, a bedroom suite with ample of storage space and living out of a suitcase is bad.

Picture above: The St. Louis City Hall

On top of that, living the unaccustomed life-style of a “foreign dignitary” (believe me, I wouldn’t like to be referred to as that but for Michael and Charlotte who insist on calling us that), courtesy of our hosts at the Office of License Collector, has made it impossible for me to keep track of what had happened in the last few weeks. By the time I wanted to blog about something new that had happened on the day before, it had become old news.

At the risk of sounding as if I am having too much of a good time (although I insist on calling them socio-cultural activities), I’m just going to provide a very summarised version of some memorable events that had taken place, or will be taking place:

• Attend the St. Louis Development Corporation (SLDC) luncheon at the Renaissance Hotel;
• Field passes to watch the St. Louis RAMS versus San Diego CHARGES game at the Edward Jones Dome;
• Attend the 100 Black Men masquerade ball at the Hyatt River Front Hotel;
• Attend Sunday service at the Prince of Peace Church;
• Shopping at Macy’s, Saks @ 5th Avenue, the Mills, etc.
• Dining at various local eateries and soul food;
• Attend the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) gala at the Millennium Hotel;
• VIP seats for America’s Got Talent live show at the Fox Theater;
• Going up the Gateway Arch;
• St. Louis Zoo at Forest Park;
• St. Louis Science Centre;
• Live jazz and blues at BB’s, South Broadway;
• Trip to Jefferson City, capital of Missouri State;
• Trip to Chicago;
• Attend Friday Shabbat at the Temple of Emmanuel;
• Attend the Rally for Sanity, Gateway Arch.
• Halloween with the St. Louis BLUES hockey team against Atlanta THRASHERS at the Scottrade Centre;
• Visiting legendary baseball player Lou Brock at his home; and

the list can go on…..

Wonder whether I do any work or serious stuff at all? Of course, I do. Who am I kidding?

In addition to the countless of meetings with government and elected officials, non-profit and business communities, I have been working with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for Eastern-Missouri on their campaign to push for the passing of a State Bill to bring the police from state to local control of what is known as Proposition L (Prop L). A referendum on Prop L will be carried out simultaneously at the mid-term election next Tuesday.

Above: A rally that was held outside the St. Louis City Hall in conjunction with National Day Against Police Brutality on 22 October 2010

Above: Doing some community work with Mission Continues, a non-profit organisation which aims to help former war veterans to find purpose and meaning in their lives again.

And if you think some of these activities are not serious enough, here’s a photo which will prove it.

Standing on the glass floor at the top of the Willis Tower (formerly known as Sears Tower), Chicago, has got to be some serious stuff, man!

Anyway, I’ve already got some articles planned for my TMI column. Do watch out for that.

 

 

 

 

 

Photo on the left, courtesy of CW Lim.