Category: Singapuraku

  • I Was Muslim In Trump’s White House And I Lasted 8 Days

    I Was Muslim In Trump’s White House And I Lasted 8 Days

    In 2011, I was hired, straight out of college, to work at the White House and eventually the National Security Council. My job there was to promote and protect the best of what my country stands for. I am a hijab-wearing Muslim woman––I was the only hijabi in the West Wing––and the Obama administration always made me feel welcome and included.

    Like most of my fellow American Muslims, I spent much of 2016 watching with consternation as Donald Trump vilified our community. Despite this––or because of it––I thought I should try to stay on the NSC staff during the Trump Administration, in order to give the new president and his aides a more nuanced view of Islam, and of America’s Muslim citizens.

    I lasted eight days.

    When Trump issued a ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries and all Syrian refugees, I knew I could no longer stay and work for an administration that saw me and people like me not as fellow citizens, but as a threat.

    The evening before I left, bidding farewell to some of my colleagues, many of whom have also since left, I notified Trump’s senior NSC communications adviser, Michael Anton, of my departure, since we shared an office. His initial surprise, asking whether I was leaving government entirely, was followed by silence––almost in caution, not asking why. I told him anyway.I told him I had to leave because it was an insult walking into this country’s most historic building every day under an administration that is working against and vilifying everything I stand for as an American and as a Muslim. I told him that the administration was attacking the basic tenets of democracy. I told him that I hoped that they and those in Congress were prepared to take responsibility for all the consequences that would attend their decisions.He looked at me and said nothing.It was only later that I learned he authored an essay under a pseudonym, extolling the virtues of authoritarianism and attacking diversity as a “weakness,” and Islam as “incompatible with the modern West.”

    My whole life and everything I have learned proves that facile statement wrong.My parents immigrated to the United States from Bangladesh in 1978 and strove to create opportunities for their children born in the states. My mother worked as a cashier, later starting her own daycare business. My father spent late nights working at Bank of America, and was eventually promoted to assistant vice president at one of its headquarters. Living the American dream, we’d have family barbecues, trips to Disney World, impromptu soccer or football games, and community service projects. My father began pursuing his Ph.D., but in 1995 he was killed in a car accident.

    I was 12 when I started wearing a hijab. It was encouraged in my family, but it was always my choice. It was a matter of faith, identity, and resilience for me. After 9/11, everything would change. On top of my shock, horror, and heartbreak, I had to deal with the fear some kids suddenly felt towards me. I was glared at, cursed at, and spat at in public and in school. People called me a “terrorist” and told me, “go back to your country.”
    My father taught me a Bengali proverb inspired by Islamic scripture: “When a man kicks you down, get back up, extend your hand, and call him brother.” Peace, patience, persistence, respect, forgiveness, and dignity. These were the values I’ve carried through my life and my career.

    I never intended to work in government. I was among those who assumed the government was inherently corrupt and ineffective. Working in the Obama White House proved me wrong. You can’t know or understand what you haven’t been a part of.

    Still, inspired by President Obama, I joined the White House in 2011, after graduating from the George Washington University. I had interned there during my junior year, reading letters and taking calls from constituents at the Office of Presidential Correspondence. It felt surreal––here I was, a 22-year-old American Muslim woman from Maryland who had been mocked and called names for covering my hair, working for the president of the United States.

    In 2012, I moved to the West Wing to join the Office of Public Engagement, where I worked with various communities, including American Muslims, on domestic issues such as health care. In early 2014, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes offered me a position on the National Security Council (NSC). For two and a half years I worked down the hall from the Situation Room, advising President Obama’s engagements with American Muslims, and working on issues ranging from advancing relations with Cuba and Laos to promoting global entrepreneurship among women and youth.

    A harsher world began to reemerge in 2015. In February, three young American Muslim students were killed in their Chapel Hill home by an Islamophobe. Both the media and administration were slow to address the attack, as if the dead had to be vetted before they could be mourned. It was emotionally devastating. But when a statement was finally released condemning the attack and mourning their loss, Rhodes took me aside to to tell me how grateful he was to have me there and wished there were more American Muslims working throughout government.  America’s government and decision-making should reflect its people.

    Later that month, the evangelist Franklin Graham declared that the government had “been infiltrated by Muslims.” One of my colleagues sought me out with a smile on his face and said, “If only he knew they were in the halls of the West Wing and briefed the president of the United States multiple times!” I thought: Damn right I’m here, exactly where I belong, a proud American dedicated to protecting and serving my country.

    Graham’s hateful provocations weren’t new. Over the Obama years, right-wing websites spread  an abundance of absurd conspiracy theories and lies, targeting some American Muslim organizations and individuals––even those of us serving in government. They called us “terrorists,” Sharia-law whisperers, or Muslim Brotherhood operatives. Little did I realize that some of these conspiracy theorists would someday end up in the White House.

    Over the course of the campaign, even when I was able to storm through the bad days, I realized the rhetoric was taking a toll on American communities. When Trump first called for a Muslim ban, reports of hate crimes against Muslims spiked. The trend of anti-Muslim hate crimes is ongoing, as mosques are set on fire and individuals attacked––six were killed at a mosque in Canada by a self-identified Trump supporter.

    Throughout 2015 and 2016, I watched with disbelief, apprehension, and anxiety, as Trump’s style of campaigning instigated fear and emboldened xenophobes, anti-Semites, and Islamophobes. While cognizant of the possibility of Trump winning, I hoped a majority of the electorate would never condone such a hateful and divisive worldview.

    During the campaign last February, Obama visited a Baltimore mosque and reminded the public that “we’re one American family, and when any part of our family starts to feel separate … It’s a challenge to our values.” His words would go unheeded by his successor.

    The climate in 2016 felt like it did just after 9/11. What made it worse was that this fear and hatred were being fueled by Americans in positions of power. Fifth-grade students at a local Sunday school where I volunteered shared stories of being bullied by classmates and teachers, feeling like they didn’t belong here anymore, and asked if they might get kicked out of this country if Trump won. I was almost hit by a car by a white man laughing as he drove by in a Costco parking lot, and on another occasion was followed out of the metro by a man screaming profanities: “Fuck you! Fuck Islam! Trump will send you back!”

    Then, on election night, I was left in shock.

    The morning after the election, we lined up in the West Colonnade as Obama stood in the Rose Garden and called for national unity and a smooth transition. Trump seemed the antithesis of everything we stood for. I felt lost. I could not fully grasp the idea that he would soon be sitting where Obama sat.

    I debated whether I should leave my job. Since I was not a political appointee, but a direct hire of the NSC, I had the option to stay. The incoming and now departed national security adviser, Michael Flynn, had said things like “fear of Muslims is rational.” Some colleagues and community leaders encouraged me to stay, while others expressed concern for my safety. Cautiously optimistic, and feeling a responsibility to try to help them continue our work and be heard, I decided that Trump’s NSC could benefit from a colored, female, hijab-wearing, American Muslim patriot.

    The weeks leading up to the inauguration prepared me and my colleagues for what we thought would come, but not for what actually came. On Monday, January 23, I walked into the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, with the new staffers there. Rather than the excitement I encountered when I first came to the White House under Obama, the new staff looked at me with a cold surprise. The diverse White House I had worked in became a monochromatic and male bastion.

    The days I spent in the Trump White House were strange, appalling and disturbing. As one staffer serving since the Reagan administration said, “This place has been turned upside down. It’s chaos. I’ve never witnessed anything like it.” This was not typical Republican leadership, or even that of a businessman. It was a chaotic attempt at authoritarianism––legally questionable executive orders, accusations of the press being “fake,” peddling countless lies as “alternative facts,” and assertions by White House surrogates that the president’s national security authority would “not be questioned.”

    The entire presidential support structure of nonpartisan national security and legal experts within the White House complex and across federal agencies was being undermined. Decision-making authority was now centralized to a few in the West Wing. Frustration and mistrust developed as some staff felt out of the loop on issues within their purview. There was no structure or clear guidance. Hallways were eerily quiet as key positions and offices responsible for national security or engagement with Americans were left unfilled.

    I might have lasted a little longer. Then came January 30. The executive order banning travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries caused chaos, without making America any safer. Discrimination that has existed for years at airports was now legitimized, sparking mass protests, while the president railed against the courts for halting his ban. Not only was this discrimination and un-American, the administration’s actions defending the ban threatened the nation’s security and its system of checks and balances.

    Alt-right writers, now on the White House staff, have claimed that Islam and the West are at war with each other. Disturbingly, ISIS also makes such claims to justify their attacks, which for the most part target Muslims. The Administration’s plans to revamp the Countering Violent Extremism program to focus solely on Muslims and use terms like “radical Islamic terror,” legitimize ISIS propaganda and allow the dangerous rise of white-supremacist extremism to go unchecked.

    Placing U.S. national security in the hands of people who think America’s diversity is a “weakness” is dangerous. It is false.

    People of every religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, and age pouring into the streets and airports to defend the rights of their fellow Americans over the past few weeks proved the opposite is true––American diversity is a strength, and so is the American commitment to ideals of  justice and equality.

    American history is not without stumbles, which have proven that the nation is only made more prosperous and resilient through struggle, compassion and inclusiveness. It’s why my parents came here. It’s why I told my former 5th grade students, who wondered if they still belonged here, that this country would not be great without them.

    Source: www.theatlantic.com

  • Gay Community Expressed Mixed Feelings About Prominent Activist Charged For Drug Crime

    Gay Community Expressed Mixed Feelings About Prominent Activist Charged For Drug Crime

    A prominent gay activist, Dr Stuart Koe, was hauled to court yesterday for six drug-related charges (including one of trafficking) and the gay community have expressed disappointment that the incident will cause the public to have poor view of it.

    Dr Koe was one of the 3 petitioners who appealed to parliament to repeal Section 377A in 2007. He is also the managing director of a local pharmaceutical company, ICM Pharma and the founder of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) news and social networking site Fridae.com.

    The 44-year-old allegedly sold a packet of crystalline substance which contained 0.17g of methamphetamine, to another man for $240, at a Spottiswoode Park Road apartment on 25 Aug last year.

    Reverend Miak Siew, the pastor of the gay-friendly Free Community Church, said that the community should not kid itself about the harms of drugs. “I know far too many lives destroyed by meth (ice),” he said.

    And added: “Addiction is a disease that takes over a person and it is dangerous and irresponsible to say “a little bit” is ok.”

    Nic Lim the founder of the Facebook page ‘GLBT Voices Singapore’ said that he had been repeatedly attacked in the past by people in the gay community for posting honest entries about drug use in his page dedicated to gay confessions. They accused him of painting a bad image of the community and of disgracing them.

    “So long a huge swath of our community prefers to pretend that we don’t have a drug problem (and we definitely do), then we will lose more and more of our gay brothers and sisters to it, and see more of them in the news,” he said.

    Otto Fong, a former Raffles Institution teacher whose coming out in 2007 caused a stir, said:

    “But let’s be rational here and look at the real problem. It isn’t Koe who blocked all positive portrayals of gay people in the media. This is a concerted effort by others to erase all the good stuff gay people have been doing – like charity for orphans, creating families in spite of the odds, researches, shaping policies, being great healers and teachers. Just erase our contributions, and make sure the public only reads only the bad things. How can individuals like Koe fight against a tide of people coached weekly to complain, to repeat lies and to hate us with irrational fervor?
    I can only hope the younger generation of gay people and straight allies find a better solution. Instead of aiming our hopes and frustrations at Koe, we can do far better to reflect on ourselves and what we can and need to do.”

    Another prominent gay activist, Kelvin Wong, said that the conversation on drug use needs more clarity.

    “I think we need more clarity when talking about drug use. There is drug use for medical purposes, drug use for recreational purpose, drug abuse and drug addiction. There are growing cases that not all drugs have the same level of harm and addiction level. It is those whose addiction level is high and/or harmful that we need rigourous awareness. There are drugs that have shown to help medical conditions. So we cannot lump drug use or people’s attitudes to drugs the same boat. Furthermore, the law on drugs is historically politically driven and has little relevance to science and facts as the law treats all drugs the same. We could well say the same about alcohol, but because is not against the law and socially accepted people are getting drunk nightly in pubs and dead pissed or dying of liver related failures but nobody cares as much.”


    Comments are found in this Facebook post: http://bit.ly/2lyqU2t.

     

    Source: www.theindependent.sg

  • Amos Yee Allegedly In Solitary Confinement In The US For Insulting Muslims In Jail

    Amos Yee Allegedly In Solitary Confinement In The US For Insulting Muslims In Jail

    According to a Facebook post which has since been deleted, teen blogger Amos Yee is currently in solitary confinement for criticising Muslims and Islam during their Muslim Studies in jail; and that he is feeling terrible about it.

    According to Nina Palay who set up the relocation fund appeal for Yee, this is what happened.

    “He attended a Muslim Studies class, in order to “disagree”. There was a “Muslim pastor” from outside (not a prisoner) and about 18 Muslim prisoners in attendance. Amos called Allah a “sky wizard”. He said that if the religion is 5,000 years old then it’s “complete fucking garbage”. (He said “fuck” a lot). He said that the Quran has passages instructing the devout to kill non-Muslims; the pastor handed him the Quran and challenged him to show such passages, and when Amos said “Ok, I will”, the pastor took the Quran back.

    The pastor claimed “The Quran was the most respected and popular book in the U.S.”

    The pastor said Amos was disturbing the peace or something and got Sergeant R.Henson to sign a form putting him in solitary. Amos is certain that he is in solitary for punitive reasons, not for his own protection.

    He has been in solitary for 3 days. He doesn’t know how long he will be there. They don’t let him write, don’t give him paper. They let him out for one hour per day.

    Amos was “kicking, screaming, and banging the door yelling “LET ME OUT”, other prisoners heard him, the “police” came, opened his door, took a look, and left.

    Amos wants us to “tell his story” on Facebook, share with the global secular human rights movement, get on CNN and the Rubin Report. He wants the Rubin Report to interview me and Melissa to tell Amos’s story. “These people don’t know what they’re messing with. We gotta destroy them.” “MAKE IT BIG”. “This is a free speech issue and everyone will be on my side”.

    ++++

    My main concern right now is for Amos’s mental health. Solitary must be making it much worse.”

     

    Source: www.theindependent.sg

  • Singaporeans Support Petition To Retain Sungei Road Flea Market

    Singaporeans Support Petition To Retain Sungei Road Flea Market

    The Sungei Road flea market’s last day of operation is on July 10 but the hawkers are hoping to be given an alternative or temporary site that will allow them to continue their business.

    On Thursday (Feb 23), Mr Koh Ah Koon, 76, the president of the Association for the Recycling of Second Hand Goods, unfurled a banner at Sungei Road calling for the site to be conserved.

    Speaking to The Straits Times later, Mr Koh said he was saddened but hopes an alternative site can be allocated for the hawkers.

    “We don’t need a permanent location and can move. We hope the government can give us a temporary site so that our lifestyle and this aspect of local heritage can be retained.”

    He said he has printed 10 banners and plans to collect signatures till July to support calls for the site to be “conserved” or retained. By 7pm on Feb 23, he had collected about 200 signatures.

    The Government said the free hawking zone has to make way for future residential developments in a multi-agency statement last Tuesday.

    Mr Koh’s association, which represents about 70 of 200 vendors at the flea market, had previously proposed four alternative sites – next to Rochor River, at Kampong Bugis along Kallang River, behind Sim Lim Tower and a roadside near Jalan Kubor Malay cemetery.

    But the authorities said the four sites had been zoned for parks and residential use under Master Plan 2014.

    After the Government announcement, the association submitted a fresh appeal to extend the deadline until the end of the year. If that fails, it hopes to secure a temporary site in Jalan Besar behind a hawker centre.

    Mr Kalay V., 45, a businessman who signed the petition said: “This provides the elderly hawkers a legitimate source of income and can be seen as an engagement programme for seniors – not that different from those run by community centres.”

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • 15,000 Jurutera Diperlukan Untuk Industri Kereta Api Jelang 2030

    15,000 Jurutera Diperlukan Untuk Industri Kereta Api Jelang 2030

    Terdapat hampir 10,000 jurutera dalam industri kereta api sekarang ini, namun jumlah itu dijangka meningkat kepada 15,000 menjelang 2030, kata Menteri Pengangkutan Khaw Boon Wan hari ini (23 Feb).

    Encik Khaw, yang juga Menteri Penyelaras bagi Prasarana, berkata sepanjang lima tahun lepas, LTA dan kedua-dua pengendali kereta api, SMRT dan SBS Transit, sudah meningkatkan jumlah pekerja yang diambil mereka untuk kejuruteraan, operasi dan penyenggaraan sebanyak 50 peratus kepada jumlahnya sekarang ini, namun, lebih ramai pekerja diperlukan.

    “Menjelang 2030, kami menjangkakan bilangan ini akan meningkat lagi – sekurang-kurangnya sebanyak lagi 50 peratus kepada 15,000. Tapi saya rasa kami akan memerlukan lebih ramai daripada itu. Ini menjadikan industri kereta api sebuah industri pertumbuhan, yang prospek pengambilan pekerjanya hampir dijamin untuk dekad seterusnya,” katanya.

    Menteri itu berkata demikian di pelancaran Akademi Kereta Api Singapura hari ini, yang bertujuan membangunkan generasi jurutera akan datang untuk rangkaian infrastruktur kereta api yang kian meluas di Singapura.

    Akademi itu ditubuhkan di dalam Penguasa Pengangkutan Darat (LTA) yang berpangkalan di Kampus Bedok, dan di situ, para bakal jurutera dan teknisyen boleh meraih kemahiran dan pentauliahan yang diperlukan untuk menyertai industri kereta api. Akademi tersebut juga akan berperanan sebagai pusat kajian dan pengembangan (R&D) untuk kejuruteraan kereta api, dengan menjalankan kajian gunaan bersama institut kajian yang lain serta Institut-Institut Pengajian Tinggi.

    Akademi itu kini sedang bekerjasama dengan Institut Pekerjaan dan Daya Kerja (e2i) untuk membangunkan program latihan yang disasarkan kepada para jurutera dan teknisyen yang memulakan kerjaya mereka dalam sektor kereta api, serta para pekerja yang melangkah ke industri itu semasa pertengahan kerjaya.

    Program itu sudahpun mengalu-alukan kumpulan pertama hampir 30 jurutera dari SBS Transit, SMRT dan LTA, yang selesai menjalani modul asas selama tiga hari yang pertama kali disediakan, dari 9 hingga 11 Januari. Modul itu meliputi topik-topik seperti aspek kawal selia dan kewangan sistem kereta api Singapura, pemikiran tentang reka bentuk dalam kitaran kejuruteraan kereta api, dan dasar tambang pengangkutan awam.

    Dikenali sebagai program Career On-boarding for Railway Engineering (CORE), e2i akan menyediakan geran-geran latihan bagi semua peserta program yang layak. Modul-modul pertengahan dan lanjutan akan juga dibangunkan selaras dengan rangka kerja kecekapan industri kereta api.

    MEMBANGUNKAN BAKAT TEMPATAN

    Di acara itu juga, satu memorandum persefahaman (MOU) dimeterai antara LTA, Institut Teknologi Singapura (SIT) dan Majlis Antarabangsa tentang Kejuruteraan Sistem (INCOSE) untuk membangunkan tenaga manusia berkemahiran dalam kejuruteraan sistem untuk menyokong keperluan tenaga manusia dalam pengangkutan awam di sini.

    Ketiga-tiga pihak akan bekerjasama untuk membangunkan kurikulum-kurikulum pembelajaran berdasarkan pembangunan industri bagi latihan sebelum pekerjaan dan program-program pendidikan dan latihan yang berterusan.

    Sejajar dengan kerjasama itu, LTA juga mengumumkan pembukaan dua makmal di SIT untuk menjalankan latihan dan kursus-kursus untuk para pelajar di program sarjana muda Kejuruteraan Infrastruktur Mampan (Darat) SIT, program sarjana muda Kejuruteraan Sistem (Sistem Elektromekanikal) SIT-DigiPen serta para jurutera.

    Sebuah makmal juga dilengkapi dengan sofwe simulator kejuruteraan kereta api untuk membolehkan para pelajar dan pelatih cuba mereka rangkaian kereta api, dan didedahkan kepada pelbagai operasi isyarat kereta api dan simulasi. Sofwe itu diperolehi dari London Underground, dan disesuaikan untuk rangkaian kereta api Singapura.

    Source: BeritaMediacorp

deneme bonusu