Pause For A Prayer

From A Concord Pastor Comments

Sometimes when I pray, Lord,
I imagine sitting next to you
on a park bench, on a warm day,
a grassy carpet at my feet...

Sometimes we just sit there,
you and I, just the two of us,
in a moment made holy
by the silence we share...

Or I pour out my heart to you
and share my cares and worries
while you listen
and gently wipe away my tears...

(It goes on, but that's the relevant part.)

My regular readers are probably scratching their heads by now.

Someone in Mountain View, California got to this old post ( What Do I Know?: Little India, The Arab Quarter, and Peranakan) of mine from a blog called A Concord Pastor Comments.  Nowadays, most of the browsers don't leave behind the search terms people use to get to your website.  When they did, I sometimes did a post looking at what people searched for and what they got.  (For example:  "Where Can I Ride A Trained Polar Bear?")  That's interesting for a blogger because you can see what people were looking for to get to your blog.  Sometimes it's a great match, other times it leaves you wondering.

But I rarely get to see the search terms these days.  Most often from Bing.  But this one had a link so I went to the Pastor's blog to see why my post got linked.

I wandered around the site not finding any links to my blog and then I saw the picture of the two people on the bench in the park.  I took that while I was visiting my son in Singapore where he was studying for his Masters degree and I was on my way home after volunteering three months in Chiengmai, Thailand.

It really is a perfect picture for the poem.  Few people seeing the picture and poem would imagine the two on the bench are Chinese and the park is in Singapore.   And I appreciate the Pastor linking to the source of the picture.  Not everyone who uses someone else's photo acknowledges where they got it.


It turns out there were about 12 other hits on the Singapore post all clustered together around the same time from around the country, but none of the others showed how they got to my blog.

BlacKKKlansman and Crazy Rich Chinese - Rediscovering Going Out To See Movies

Last Tuesday, it was rainy and I suggested we go see BlacKKKlansman.  The theater isn't far, but it was raining, but worse we fooled around and didn't have time to walk.  And when we got there, the lines were long.  But when we got to the front we were surprised that the tickets on Tuesday were only $5.75.  And then, inside, the seats were leather-like recliners.  Hmmmm, the theater wants to woo us away from Netflix.  Or at least to share some of our Netflix time.

BlacKKKlansman's - that's getting to be a hassle to type out - biggest draw was that it was a Spike Lee movie.  But I have to say it was basically a slick detective flick, but with a black point of view.  And the ending - with the scenes that yelled out:  Hey, this is relevant today - look, here's David Duke being pals with Trump - were not great film making, but I understand Lee's feeling that his point might be over people's heads.  At least the people who needed his message.

Tonight we walked over and saw "Crazy Rich Chinese".  I've following EJR David's discussions of Filipino and other brown Asians being the hidden Asians, lost in the word Asian.  And here you can read  a Singaporean writer of Gujarati descent view of how darker skinned Singaporeans are depicted in the movie.  The debate over what any specific movie needs to cover - especially when it represents people not normally represented in Hollywood - is to be expected.  No one can make a film that represents everyone the way the want to be represented.  The idealist answer is to let each filmmaker make tell their own story.  But that assumes others have access to make a film and gain major distribution of it.  After all, "Crazy Rich Chinese" is one of the few Hollywood movies to have such a predominantly Chinese cast.  How do the various Indian groups, the Arabs, and Peranakan gain access to Hollywood resources to tell their stories?

I hope Trump skips this movie.  It makes him look like a low-rent developer, and that might piss him off and lead to a war with Singapore.  And as Trump starts to realize that his Singaporean meeting with Kim Jun-un was big win for Kim and a big loss for Trump . .   I'll leave that to your imaginations.

[UPDATE Sept 5:  A reader emailed to point out that the name of the movie is "Crazy Rich Asians".  Yes, of course.  But I was trying to call people's attention to EJR David's criticism that it's not about "Asians" but about Chinese, and that the term Asians often means East Asians, not darker skinned Asians like Filipinos and Indians and Pakistanis and Bangladeshis.  ]

Comparing the Joint Statements of Trump and Kim Jong Un and of Nixon and Chou Enlai

I keep hearing about the statement from Singapore saying little or nothing, so I thought I'd read it and put it up here for people to see.  Then I thought it would be useful to get some sort of benchmark to compare it to.  So I found the Shanghai Communique released after Nixon's visit to China in 1972.

Some things to think about when reading through these two documents:
1.  The basic purpose of Nixon's visit was to simply start a dialogue with the most populous nation in the world after decades of the US denying the existence of China and supporting Taiwan instead.   Trump's visit had some similarities because the US and North Korea had no diplomatic relations for decades either.  However, in the present case, Trump was visiting a pariah nation and there was growing concern about North Korea's nuclear weapons. Trump's goal to 'denuclearize' the Korean Peninsula.
2.  In the current statement, the names of the two leaders are in the title.  In the 1972 statement, they are not.  Probably not a big deal, but still telling.
3.  In both statements there are a lot of vague commitments with no actual specific steps or deadlines.  In the Singapore statement, the most specific commitment is that North Korea "commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula."  A further specific commitment is to return identified remains of POW's and MIA's.
The Shanghai agreement goes through many more issues including Vietnam (the US was still fighting there at the time), peace between India and China in Jammu and Kashmir, peace in Korea,  and China and the US commit to a one China policy and the US will withdraw military bases from Taiwan. This was a huge concession on the part of Nixon radically changing US policy on China. There is also mention of cultural exchanges.
4.  The Singapore statement includes a bit of self-aggrandizement when it mentions "a first, historic summit"   and later, "Having acknowledged that the U.S.-DPRK summit — the first in history — was an epochal event of great significance in overcoming decades of tensions and hostilities between the two countries and for the opening up of a new future . . "  (emphasis added)  The Shanghai statement has no such language.

Nixon went to the most populous country in the world - opening relations that both saw as beneficial for trade and for peace in Asia and the world.  Trump went to one of the poorest nations with a population of 25 million (the 52nd largest in the world).  Trump went to denuclearize North Korea.  And the statement shows commitment to that goal.  As much as the Shanghai Communique shows commitment to any of their goals.  Though in the Shanghai case, the two countries met, if not quite as equals, then as two of the most powerful nations on earth.  And without any clear agenda items (such as the denuclearization goal) other than to establish contact and begin to regularize relations.

Singapore Statement

Joint Statement of President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea at the Singapore Summit
President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) held a first, historic summit in Singapore on June 12, 2018.
President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un conducted a comprehensive, in-depth, and sincere exchange of opinions on the issues related to the establishment of new U.S.-DPRK relations and the building of a lasting and robust peace regime on the Korean Peninsula. President Trump committed to provide security guarantees to the DPRK, and Chairman Kim Jong Un reaffirmed his firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
Convinced that the establishment of new U.S.-DPRK relations will contribute to the peace and prosperity of the Korean Peninsula and of the world, and recognizing that mutual confidence building can promote the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un state the following:
1. The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new U.S.-DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.
2. The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.
3. Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
4. The United States and the DPRK commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.
Having acknowledged that the U.S.-DPRK summit — the first in history — was an epochal event of great significance in overcoming decades of tensions and hostilities between the two countries and for the opening up of a new future, President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un commit to implement the stipulations in this joint statement fully and expeditiously. The United States and the DPRK commit to hold follow-up negotiations, led by the U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, and a relevant high-level DPRK official, at the earliest possible date, to implement the outcomes of the U.S.-DPRK summit.
President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea have committed to cooperate for the development of new U.S.-DPRK relations and for the promotion of peace, prosperity, and security of the Korean Peninsula and of the world.
(Signed)
DONALD J. TRUMP
President of the United States of America
KIM JONG UN
Chairman of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
June 12, 2018
Sentosa Island
Singapore

And here's the Shanghai Communique (as best as I can tell) issued jointly by China and the US after Nixon's visit in 1972.  

203. Joint Statement Following Discussions With Leaders of the People’s Republic of China1Shanghai, February 27, 1972.President Richard Nixon of the United States of America visited the People’s Republic of China at the invitation of Premier Chou Enlai of the People’s Republic of China from February 21 to February 28, 1972. Accompanying the President were Mrs. Nixon, U.S. Secretary of State William Rogers, Assistant to the President Dr. Henry Kissinger, and other American officials.
President Nixon met with Chairman Mao Tse-tung of the Communist Party of China on February 21. The two leaders had a serious and frank exchange of views on Sino-U.S. relations and world affairs.
During the visit, extensive, earnest, and frank discussions were held between President Nixon and Premier Chou En-lai on the normalization of relations between the United States of America and the People’s Republic of China, as well as on other matters of interest to both sides. In addition, Secretary of State William Rogers and Foreign Minister Chi P’eng-fei held talks in the same spirit.
President Nixon and his party visited Peking and viewed cultural, industrial and agricultural sites, and they also toured Hangchow and Shanghai where, continuing discussions with Chinese leaders, they viewed similar places of interest.
The leaders of the People’s Republic of China and the United States of America found it beneficial to have this opportunity, after so many years without contact, to present candidly to one another their views on a variety of issues. They reviewed the international situation in which important changes and great upheavals are taking place and expounded their respective positions and attitudes.
The U.S. side stated: Peace in Asia and peace in the world requires efforts both to reduce immediate tensions and to eliminate the basic causes of conflict. The United States will work for a just and secure peace: just, because it fulfills the aspirations of peoples and nations for freedom and progress; secure, because it removes the danger of foreign aggression. The United States supports individual freedom and social progress for all the peoples of the world, free of outside pressure or intervention. The United States believes that the effort to [Page 813]reduce tensions is served by improving communication between countries that have different ideologies so as to lessen the risks of confrontation through accident, miscalculation or misunderstanding. Countries should treat each other with mutual respect and be willing to compete peacefully, letting performance be the ultimate judge. No country should claim infallibility and each country should be prepared to re-examine its own attitudes for the common good. The United States stressed that the peoples of Indochina should be allowed to determine their destiny without outside intervention; its constant primary objective has been a negotiated solution; the eight-point proposal put forward by the Republic of Vietnam and the United States on January 27, 1972 represents a basis for the attainment of that objective; in the absence of a negotiated settlement the United States envisages the ultimate withdrawal of all U.S. forces from the region consistent with the aim of self-determination for each country of Indochina. The United States will maintain its close ties with and support for the Republic of Korea; the United States will support efforts of the Republic of Korea to seek a relaxation of tension and increased communication in the Korean peninsula. The United States places the highest value on its friendly relations with Japan; it will continue to develop the existing close bonds. Consistent with the United Nations Security Council Resolution of December 21, 1971, the United States favors the continuation of the ceasefire between India and Pakistan and the withdrawal of all military forces to within their own territories and to their own sides of the ceasefire line in Jammu and Kashmir; the United States supports the right of the peoples of South Asia to shape their own future in peace, free of military threat, and without having the area become the subject of great power rivalry.
The Chinese side stated: Wherever there is oppression, there is resistance. Countries want independence, nations want liberation and the people want revolution—this has become the irresistible trend of history. All nations, big or small, should be equal; big nations should not bully the small and strong nations should not bully the weak. China will never be a superpower and it opposes hegemony and power politics of any kind. The Chinese side stated that it firmly supports the struggles of all the oppressed people and nations for freedom and liberation and that the people of all countries have the right to choose their social systems according to their own wishes and the right to safeguard the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of their own countries and oppose foreign aggression, interference, control and subversion. All foreign troops should be withdrawn to their own countries.
The Chinese side expressed its firm support to the peoples of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia in their efforts for the attainment of their [Page 814]goal and its firm support to the seven-point proposal of the Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South Vietnam and the elaboration of February this year on the two key problems in the proposal, and to the Joint Declaration of the Summit Conference of the Indochinese Peoples. It firmly supports the eight-point program for the peaceful unification of Korea put forward by the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea on April 12, 1971, and the stand for the abolition of the “U.N. Commission for the Unification and Rehabilitation of Korea.” It firmly opposes the revival and outward expansion of Japanese militarism and firmly supports the Japanese people’s desire to build an independent, democratic, peaceful and neutral Japan. It firmly maintains that India and Pakistan should, in accordance with the United Nations resolutions on the India-Pakistan question, immediately withdraw all their forces to their respective territories and to their own sides of the ceasefire line in Jammu and Kashmir and firmly supports the Pakistan Government and people in their struggle to preserve their independence and sovereignty and the people of Jammu and Kashmir in their struggle for the right of self-determination.
There are essential differences between China and the United States in their social systems and foreign policies. However, the two sides agreed that countries, regardless of their social systems, should conduct their relations on the principles of respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states, nonaggression against other states, noninterference in the internal affairs of other states, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. International disputes should be settled on this basis, without resorting to the use or threat of force. The United States and the People’s Republic of China are prepared to apply these principles to their mutual relations.
With these principles of international relations in mind the two sides stated that:
—progress toward the normalization of relations between China and the United States is in the interests of all countries;
—both wish to reduce the danger of international military conflict;
—neither should seek hegemony in the Asia–Pacific region and each is opposed to efforts by any other country or group of countries to establish such hegemony; and
—neither is prepared to negotiate on behalf of any third party or to enter into agreements or understandings with the other directed at other states.
Both sides are of the view that it would be against the interests of the peoples of the world for any major country to collude with another against other countries, or for major countries to divide up the world into spheres of interest.
[Page 815]
The two sides reviewed the long-standing serious disputes between China and the United States. The Chinese side reaffirmed its position: The Taiwan question is the crucial question obstructing the normalization of relations between China and the United States; the Government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government of China; Taiwan is a province of China which has long been returned to the motherland; the liberation of Taiwan is China’s internal affair in which no other country has the right to interfere; and all U.S. forces and military installations must be withdrawn from Taiwan. The Chinese Government firmly opposes any activities which aim at the creation of “one China, one Taiwan,” “one China, two governments,” “two Chinas,” and “independent Taiwan” or advocate that “the status of Taiwan remains to be determined.”
The U.S. side declared: The United States acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States Government does not challenge that position. It reaffirms its interest in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves. With this prospect in mind, it affirms the ultimate objective of the withdrawal of all U.S. forces and military installations from Taiwan. In the meantime, it will progressively reduce its forces and military installations on Taiwan as the tension in the area diminishes.
The two sides agreed that it is desirable to broaden the understanding between the two peoples. To this end, they discussed specific areas in such fields as science, technology, culture, sports and journalism, in which people-to-people contacts and exchanges would be mutually beneficial. Each side undertakes to facilitate the further development of such contacts and exchanges.
Both sides view bilateral trade as another area from which mutual benefit can be derived, and agreed that economic relations based on equality and mutual benefit are in the interest of the people of the two countries. They agree to facilitate the progressive development of trade between their two countries.
The two sides agreed that they will stay in contact through various channels, including the sending of a senior U.S. representative to Peking from time to time for concrete consultations to further the normalization of relations between the two countries and continue to exchange views on issues of common interest.
The two sides expressed the hope that the gains achieved during this visit would open up new prospects for the relations between the two countries. They believe that the normalization of relations between the two countries is not only in the interest of the Chinese and American peoples but also contributes to the relaxation of tension in Asia and the world.
[Page 816]
President Nixon, Mrs. Nixon and the American party expressed their appreciation for the gracious hospitality shown them by the Government and people of the People’s Republic of China.2
Source: Public Papers: Nixon, 1972, pp. 376–379. Commonly known as the Shanghai Communiqué.↩
A Note following the text of the communiqué reads: “The joint statement was released at Shanghai, People’s Republic of China. On the same day, the White House released a statement by Press Secretary Ronald L. Ziegler and the transcript of a news briefing on the joint statement. Participants in the news briefing were Henry A. Kissinger, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, and Marshall Green, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs. The statement and the transcript are printed in the Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents (vol. 8, pp. 480 and 476).” On February 14, the White House released a statement by Ziegler on further relaxation of trade with the People’s Republic of China. The statement is printed in the Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents (vol. 8, p. 438). On February 21 the White House released a statement and transcript of a news briefing by Ziegler on the President’s meeting with Chairman Mao Tse-tung. The statement is ibid., p. 466.↩
CHINA, 1969–1972

Optimistically, one could argue that Trump understood Kim as he understood the white working class in the US.  He saw them as having a strong need for respect from others.  A need that Trump himself seems to have.  If he's right on this, perhaps being on equal footing the president of the United States will give him what he needs to stop his nuclear weapon program.  It's possible.  But as all but the most ardent Trump fans have been saying, there are no timetables, not concrete steps, no discussions of how to verify. It would be great if things progressed as Trump sees things.  I'd be willing to acknowledge Trump did a great thing, if it works out.  But there's a lot that can go wrong, not the least is Trump's twitter addiction.  Some one night stands become more than that.  But in most cases the glow fades quickly.

But looking at the two documents, I'd say that the China one has more detail on a wider range of topics and is more diplomatic in its language, but there aren't any more specifics about the next steps and no deadlines.  That peace on the Korean peninsula they both supported, well, it's 35 years later and we've been in one of the tensest periods in decades.

Who's the President of Rwanda?

We get a lot of depressing international news (in addition to US news). My son emailed me a copy of his invitation to a presentation tomorrow (Singapore time, so in a few hours) night to hear the President of Rwanda talk. This is part of his Masters Degree program there. Here's what the invite says about the topic and the speaker. (OK, this is obviously pushing the good stuff, but the good stuff looks pretty good.)

THE AFRICA AND RWANDA:
FROM CRISIS TO SOCIOECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

You are cordially invited to attend the following lecture
hosted by the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy:

His Excellency Paul Kagame President of the Republic of Rwanda

Topic: Africa and Rwanda: From Crisis to Socioeconomic Development

Speaker: His Excellency Paul Kagame

President of the Republic of Rwanda


Moderator: Prof Kishore Mahbubani, Dean, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy

Date: Thursday, 22 May 2008

Time: 5.30 pm - 7.00 pm


Synopsis

Perceptions and stereotype of Africa and Rwanda as perpetual 'basket cases' and 'donor havens' only sustained by aid, charity and pity no longer correspond to contemporary development of the past decade. Rwanda, under the leadership of one of Africa’s most able leaders, President Paul Kagame has undertaken considerable reforms leading to serious domestic and foreign investment.



President Kagame has single-handedly redefined the way African leaders should engage the best of the Western and Eastern world. He has appointed some the world's greatest minds in business and strategic investment to his council of economic advisers. President Kagame also put Rwanda on the global map by hosting UN secretary-general Ban-Ki Moon and US President George W. Bush.



Some of the recent indicators that prove President Kagame's esteem with world leaders include his appointment by Bill Clinton to the board of the Clinton Global Initiative. Tony Blair also recently became the Rwandan Government?s advisor for no fees; Bill Gates has personally been working closely with President Kagame in supporting the health sector in Rwanda. Paul Farmer, a Harvard professor and world's leading authority on public health-care in poor countries is advising President Kagame to develop one of the most innovative national health insurance systems in the world.



The strategic alliances between Rwanda/Kagame and some of the leading minds in business and politics around the globe are yielding good results. Improvements in health care, increased education opportunities, an investor-friendly environment and the transformation of the city of Kigali are some of the accomplishments that have started to take root in the country.



Rwanda is also aggressively seeking business opportunities with Asia. Dubai World has just signed a US$ 230m investment deal in Rwanda. The government of Singapore has been hired to advise Rwanda on how to build a modern city that serve as the region's service centre.


About the speaker

His Excellency Paul Kagame was sworn in as President of the Republic of Rwanda for a seven year term on September 12, 2003. Paul Kagame was born October 23, 1957 in Ruhango, Southern Province. In 1960 he fled with his family at the age of three and moved to Uganda were he grew up as a refugee. He returned to Rwanda as a leader of the Rwandese Patriotic Front (RPF) in 1990. The RPF was the force that ended the Rwandan genocide in 1994. Under President Kagame?s leadership, Rwanda has been in the forefront of the prevention of genocide in Africa and elsewhere. Rwanda Defence Forces have become one of the major contributors to African peace keeping operations in Dafur as well as the newly created hybrid AU-UN force.



His administration has also proven its enduring commitment to peace and development at home as well as on the continent, greatly helping to sustain the emerging image of Africa as a continent leaving behind ugly images of violence and underdevelopment for the redemption of its peoples and institutions. As he has stated, "In Africa today, we recognise that trade and investment, and not aid, are pillars of development."




We look forward to seeing you at the lecture.

I'm sure J will post his observations on his blog afterward. We can see if he lives up to his billing. At least as a speaker.

Singapore Hawker Markets

I made it to Taipei fine. The weather's wonderful - that means not sauna like. Here's a bit of video from the hawker stands at Newton Circle Wednesday night, before we found out Kona wasn't well.



So I ordered the barbecued stingray since it's a local speciality and some morning glory (a favorite stir fry dish in Thailand). We got home to find that Kona wasn't well, so we left the food and went to the vet. When we got back the swordfish was still tasty.

Money Laundering

It's 11:12 am Thursday in Singapore. My plane to Taipei leaves at 2:40pm. Since the Anchorage flight leaves Taipei at 4:15pm, I have to overnight in Taipei - courtesy of China Air. So even though I could make it through the next 48 hours with the clean stuff still in my suitcase, I decided to do some laundry. There is a washer and dryer in the apartment here.

It would have been better had I taken my wallet out of my pants first.

The New Peranakan Museum

One of the profs at J's program told me about this museum which just opened. Peranakan is the name for people of mixed ethnicities in the southeast Asia area if I understand it right. The descendants of foreign fathers marrying local women. Often this means Chinese fathers.

Given that the US is finally recognizing, officially in its census categories, the concept of mixed ethnicities, I thought it would be interesting to go to this museum.

The pictures of various Peranakan people were spectacular and each had a quote below it. There were also some excellent videos, beautifully placed on the walls, in frames as though they were pictures on the wall discussing the common connections that Peranakan felt with other Peranakan. But there weren't enough of these encounters with real people. Most of the displays are thiings - dishes, clothing, furniture. But there are also diaries, books, letters.


But I'd say the museum has a way to go in terms of the depth it goes into. And the museum recognizes this in the narratives written on the walls. But this point it makes things seem all so rosy and wonderful. I didn't see anything that even hinted at the problems people probably faced in the past because they were of 'mixed blood.'

I also thought having an Anglo sounding narrator in the intro video talking about the Peranakan as "They" having a lot to teach "Us" to be a terrible choice. Even in their own museum they are not "us," but "them." The narrator should have been a Peranakan welcoming guests into their house.

Little India, The Arab Quarter, and Peranakan

J went to take his exams. I eventually got myself ready, took Kona for a walk, then came back and walked to Little India. I'll give you a glimpse of my day. I can offer things only for your senses of sight and sound. You can't, unfortunately, smell the garlic or incence, or taste the cardamon tea, or the dosa. Or feel the near 100% humidity that turns the Singapore into a giant sauna.







A park bench. Two men talking. A great trea. Lillies in the pond.












Walking to Little India.












Through the wet market. They called them wet markets in Hong Kong too. It just means the local market, usually in a covered market area. More like things have always been done than a supermarket.

































Western Union, even in the age of internet, is still alive. Indian workers in Singapore use it to send money home to their families.










There were lots of jewelery stores in Little India.





A Hindu temple.





There were also lots of restaurants. This one was Veg Only, and looked air conditioned, so I went in. They had idli on the menu. This is a southern Indian dish we discovered in Kerala. I couldn't resist. It wasn't as good as I remembered.














And dosas too. The idly by themselves would have been enough, but flooded with happy memories, I ordered a dosa too. And some cardamamon tea. (Checking the spelling, I learned that the preferred spelling is with an 'm' at the end, but with an 'n' is an alternative. How come I never noticed before?) I couldn't finish the whole dosa, but it was good.
















I was going to go into the mall, just to see what was in there, and hoping it might be air conditioned, but you had to check your bags and I didn't feel like doing that.







I've been struggling to find some remnants of the Singapore I saw 40 years ago. The laundry is one. They don't do this in the fancy areas of private housing where J lives.













The Alsacoff Arab School. The building in the background shows up later.

























Sultan Mosque












This is the building that is in the background in the picture above of the Alsacoff Arab School.




























This just seemed an interesting culinary juxtaposition.













Peranakan is just going to have to wait for the next post. It's turned from April 29 to May 1 while I was doing this.

Sold Out, Anthony's Arm, Moving Conversation

J and Kona walked me down to the Alliance Francias where the movie was going to be. J stayed outside with the dog and pointed out Anthony, a classmate, to me. I introduced myself. And he pointed to the sign on the counter.

that said that Persepolis was sold out. When Judith came we decided to go to Orchard Road to get something to eat and to chat.

J and I were good with gelato. But Judith hadn't eaten so she and Anthony went upstairs to find some food while we waited downstairs. Kona does tend to attract attention. I wish I could just video the looks on people's faces as they see her.

This lady has a Maltese and couldn't resist stopping, stroking Kona, and talking about her dog.

Then we ate and talked. People were waiting for seats.
So we moved and continued to talk. But people were smoking near us so we moved our convesation once again.

And then we decided it was time to head home.


I want to say that while Anthony's tattoo is striking, I'm afraid the picture above makes too much of it. It's part of him, but as we talked, it's not who he is, and I'm afraid my picture makes the tattoo dominate who he is. So I'm adding this little extra note.

Cranes For Zaki

Dennis Zaki has some sandhill cranes he photographed on the Alaska Report. I'm jealous, but hoping they'll stick around a week or two so I can go out to the Matsu Valley and see them for myself. In the meantime, I indulged at the Singapore Bird Park today.

I'm ambivalent about putting birds in cages. Not really. I don't think we should put birds in cages, though I accept that if it's done very well, the educational value and the survival value of some endangered species may balance the evil done by capturing and locking up birds. The Singapore Bird Park, in it's large aviaries, does it reasonably well, though the smaller cages, while nicely landscaped, are still small cages. And pictures you take of caged birds certainly don't count as wild bird pictures. The first one is a black necked crane. I couldn't find the name of the second one. Here are the cranes and I'll do another post later, but now I have to go off with J to meet some of his friends and see Persepolis.

Singapore Graffiti

For Independent Alaskan who thought the pictures of Singapore looked 'so neat': Here's some graffiti I saw this morning on the way to the bird park
.

Visit to NUS

Monday, April 28, 2008 almost midnight: J gave me great instructions how to get to the National University of Singapore. J's exam wasn't 2pm and he needed to stay home so he could walk the dog before going to the exam. So I walked down the street to the bus stop.



So far, all the neighborhoods I've seen - and mostly I've been in the private housing areas apparently - have been lush and garden like.



This sign at the bus stop was a little disturbing. No, the need to be on top and the promotion of that way of thinking is a big problem for people. On the other hand, hierarchy is found all over the animal kingdom, so I suspect it is a genetic inheritance and fighting the notion can sound quixotic. I wonder how many of the those who believe in life being about getting to the top don't believe in evolution...


On the other side of the sign were these girls in their student uniforms, or so I assumed.
You get on the bus and touch your card to the pad and move on to your seat. The bus stops are all numbered and I knew the University stop was 21. All very easy. The man sitting next to me was reading a newspaper in a script that looked a lot like what was on the sign yesterday for Sir Thomas Raffles, so I asked him what language it was. Tamil, one of the southern Indian languages.

I got out at 21 and there was the entrance to the University. Actually, this is not the main campus.



WX and I had lunch with another faculty member I knew - JJ. I asked JJ, who had been with the Asian Development Bank when I first met him, about good sources on land reform in Thailand. Which got WX to think about another faculty member he introduced me to after lunch. Dr. O, a Thai with a PhD from Syracuse. We ended up talking a long time and I never got to walk through the botanical gardens and the orchid garden as planned. J showed up after his exam and took me around to meet other professors and classmates. The students above were in a little lounge called the Thinking Corner.

And chocolate is the international thinking fuel of choice.

I met a whole group of students from all over - Burma, India, Thailand, Italy, Pakistan, Singapore, Philippines, Japan, China - and we went for dinner together at the same Indian resstaurant just off campus. So the pictures I forgot to take at lunch, I could take now.

The Singaporean in the orange shirt below went home with us. We picked up Kona and then walked down to this building to pick up his girlfriend. He works for HDB, Singapore's public housing department, so I learned a little more about the issues raised in the article I linked to earlier today.




The Public Utilities Board is in an environmentally prize winning building.