Penman for Monday, April 4, 2011
I'VE BEEN to Hong Kong quite often since my first visit in 1987, and thanks to the generosity of sponsors and friends, I’ve been fortunate enough to taste some of the good life out there during my most recent trips: swanky hotels, limousine service, and what a TV host used to call “champagne wishes and caviar dreams.” And thanks to our daughter Demi’s job with a major hotel chain, Beng and I have been able to get sizeable discounts at fine hotels all over the world—you know, the kind of place where they greet you with fruit baskets and a personal welcome letter from the manager, signed with a Montblanc (and, conversely, charge you something like $20 a day for the wifi).
Of course, it wasn’t always like that. Like most Pinoy tourists, we used to check into the usual cheap hotels in Kowloon or the New Territories as part of a budget tour package that included a mandatory visit to the same jade factory and the same outlet shop for the nth time. “Breakfast included” meant a coupon to the next-door McDonalds.
Last week, Beng and I took a trip back to the old days. We went to Hong Kong, to burn up some expiring Mabuhay Miles. That meant the ticket was free (at least before the hefty surcharges and taxes kicked in) but we had to find our own lodgings, so I sent the usual parental SOS to Demi, who told us that, this time, we were out of luck; because we were flying into Hong Kong on the week of an international film festival and a big flower show, no discounted rooms were available anywhere on her hotel chain.
So off I went to Google, keying in “Hong Kong hotels.” Within seconds, I had a list of nearly 200 hotels, sorted out by price from highest to lowest. Regretfully I had to pass on the Peninsula, which was going for more than US$600 a night. Then I was seized by a perverse inspiration, partly out of nostalgia, largely out of necessity. I reversed the sorting order, and liked what I saw. “Hey, Beng,” I said, “what if we go to the cheapest place on the list and see if we can survive four nights in it?” Being the adventurous sort, and having no real say in the matter anyway, Beng said “Sure, why not?”
The place in question was the optimistically named USA Hostel in Kowloon. Take note, that’s “hostel” with an “s,” not the usual “hotel.” Well, I thought, there goes the lobby with the Grecian pillars and the curved staircase, but what the heck, “hostel” had a warm, homey ring to it. My spirits rose even higher when I read the blurb on the hostel’s website (note how smoothly it morphs into a “hotel” in the first sentence):
“Situated in the center of Hong Kong, this hotel is an excellent hub to the main business, shopping and entertainment area of Kowloon. USA Hostel has the perfect combination of attentive care and modern convenience. Located in the heart of Tsim Sha Tsui… USA Hostel provides a central location on a budget with great accommodations you can't resist.”
And no, I didn’t resist. How could I? At US$55 a night, I figured I could save enough to bring home some souvenirs that were dancing in my head—one or two PokerStars jackets from the Grand Lisboa in Macau, to make me look more fearsome at the tournament table, and maybe a new pen (or two); the rest would go to Beng and her charities. So I booked us into the USA Hostel for four nights, and we flew out to Hong Kong right after the semester ended.
Yes, I did read some reviews of the place on TripAdvisor—something I always do when I’m going somewhere I don’t know. I should’ve been deterred by the comments I read, along the lines of “the smell is just awful! Imagine, while sleeping, being hugged by a sweaty athlete who just brushed his teeth using curry powder and garlic paste! I bought a pillow at Disneyland the next day so that i wouldn’t have to use theirs” and “this is the worst place I’ve ever stayed in 20 years of traveling around the world—the room is tiny, the staff are rude, etc. etc.” On the other hand, a few guests did write “it wasn’t as bad as the others say” and “great location at a good price!”
My mind must’ve been stuck on Parkers and Pelikans, because I could focus only on “great location, good price” and forgot everything else. I should perhaps add at this point that I spent more than seven months in martial-law prison, so tight spaces and even funny smells don’t bother me as much as they might other people; Beng, for her part, dreams of reincarnation as a Buddhist monk, so every trial for her is one step closer to nirvana. But were we flying to Hong Kong to willingly go to prison? What was the truth behind all the hype?
The hostel’s location was, indeed, terrific; the airport bus stopped practically in front of the building on Nathan Road. A few steps away was Exit D of the MTR’s TST Station. The hostel itself was on the 13th floor (yes, I didn’t think buildings had 13th floors, but I suppose they have different ideas about numbers in China) of the “Mirador Mansions,” which looked like what Hong Kong tenement housing might have been in the ‘70s, refitted for 21st century entrepreneurship. The ground floor was crammed with tailors, cellphone stalls, and souvenir shops; budget tourists like ourselves—Filipinos, Pakistanis, Nigerians, Germans—queued up at the elevator for the upper floors, which had been subdivided into “hostels” going by such names as “London,” “Venetian,” and “Cosmic.” When the elevator door opened, you were greeted by laundry hanging out to dry in the corridors.
We were led to our room by a receptionist named Tess, formerly from Cavite; our “double de luxe” suite stood at the end of a pink-themed corridor no wider than the door we stepped through. We opened the inner door and found ourselves stepping into a room half of which was occupied by the bed, a quarter by the toilet and bath, and the rest by the sitting/standing area, whose wall also doubled as the closet. The window on the far side served as the fourth wall. At least we had a view, even if it was only that of the building across the street. I had never been in a smaller room in a foreign city, unless I count the triangular attic I booked in London three years ago, which had only a sink in lieu of a toilet.
On the plus side, the room was clean, the water strong and sizzling hot, and—best of all for incorrigible surfers like me—the wifi was free and fast. The TV had two English channels, featuring news, rugby, and kiddie cartoons. Beng and I learned a lot about seahorses that weekend.
As usual, we brought in bread, jam, and bananas from the nearby 7-11 for breakfast, treating ourselves to full lunches and dinners with rice at the malls and streetside in Mong Kok. We had a blast walking through a fresh-produce market we discovered in Sham Shui Po, gawking at the monster-sized cucumbers, carrots, and starfruit. We even hopped on the ferry to Macau, had an egg tart and corn on the cob, and shuttled from one casino to another just for the free ride. The PokerStars souvenir shop was closed, so I saved several hundred HK dollars, which I blew on three tiny but tough Kaweco Sport fountain pens back at the City Super in Kowloon; Beng got herself a pretty caftan at a closing-out sale in Central, where we sat on a bench watching birds and people go by.
By the time we staggered back to the USA Hostel at the end of each day, we were too tired and happy to worry much about curry and garlic smells, and flopped down onto the bed and fell asleep. Maybe former prisoners make terrible hotel reviewers, but if you’re on a tight budget and not too finicky about the neighborhood, the USA Hostel might just be in your traveling future.
Month: April 2011
Accountability in the Aug 23 hostage tragedy
If only the deputy ombudsman did his job honestly
Of course, no one condones how Mendoza demanded justice which was to hijack a tourist bus full of Hong Kong nationals on a holiday visit. At the end of a 10-hour crisis that showed bungling by authorities, eight of the Hong Kong nationals were killed.
The actions of President Aquino during and after the grim incident had set a chain of diplomatic bunglings that have lasting effect on relations with China.
He refused to punish persons the principal officials who bungled the handling of the first major emergency situation of his administration namely Interior Undersecretary Rico Puno, then PNP chief Jesus Versoza, and Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim which displeased China, cancelling the Manila visit of it vice premier and refusing to meet the Filipino delegation that Aquino was sending to explain the action he had taken.
To make up to the powerful Asian neighbor, Aquino agreed to China’s request to snub the Nobel Peace Prize ceremonies that honored a Chinese dissident, a decision that elicited a lot of criticism from his human rights advocates constituency.
To appease the criticisms which brought out the irony that his mother, the late President Cory Aquino, had once been nominated for that prize that he was boycotting, his advisers looked for an issue to justify his anti Nobel Prize decision. They saw in the list of issues with China, the case of the Filipino drug mules who were in China death row. They thought using the drug mules’ case as a justification was a bright idea because it also involved human rights.
The Philippine Ambassador to China Francisco Benedicto followed up Malacañang’s story hinting with Chinese officials that the Philippines would be willing to give in in the Spratly issue if they spare the lives of the drug mules.
Even Malacañang was aghast with what Benedicto did, his appointment which was with the Commission on Appointments was withdrawn. (Benedicto, by the way, has been ordered by Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario to come home immediately. Without an appointment, he has no legal personality in Beijing.)
Despite Aquino’s appeal, China executed the drug mules last week.
It would not have been necessary to go through all the convoluted steps to make amends with China if Aquino heeded the recommendation of the Incident Investigation and Review Committee which he formed to investigate the incident.
Aquino, however, didn’t like some of the recommendations of the IIRC headed by Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, especially those that called for making Puno, Versoza and Lim accountable for their neglect of their duties. So he formed a panel to review the IIRC report headed by Executive Secretay Paquito Ochoa which of course was kind to the those three officials.
Aquino said he “admonished” Puno. That was all.
Versoza was allowed to retire. The tragedy made his becoming secretary of the Depertment of Interior and Local Government untenable.
Instead of criminal charges recommended by the IIRC, the Ochoa panel recommended administrative proceedings against Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim for “misconduct in office and simple neglect of duty and/or inefficiency in the performance of official duty.”
The press release of the Office the Press Secretary about the dismissal of Gonzalez underscored that “this is the first time that the Aquino Administration has taken a direct action against an official in connection with the August 23 hostage-taking…”
“This decision reflects this Administration’s commitment to hold those responsible for the hostage-taking incident accountable,” Ochoa said. “Those of us who serve government must be cognizant of the fact that people are affected by our failure to fulfill our responsibilities. In this case, lives were not only affected, they were lost,” Ochoa added.
We will hold on to that statement for re-assurance that this administration is sincere in making accountable officials who betray the trust of the people.
We are with Malacañang in its conflict with the Ombudsman in this issue. We are appalled by the defiance of the Ombudsman insisting that they are above the law. The gall of Assistant Ombudsman to declare that they consider the case against Gonzalez “serrado” (closed)” because they have cleared him after their internal investigation.
Sec 8 (2) of the Ombudsman law (R.A. 6770) is clear: ” A Deputy, or the Special Prosecutor, may be removed from office by the President for any of the grounds provided for the removal of the Ombudsman, and after due process.”
De Jesus’ invocation of the disciplinary authority of the Ombudsman over all appointive and elective officials merely clouds the Deputy Ombudsman’s accountability in the Aug. 23 tragedy.
We still clearly remember Mendoza’s angry tirade against Gonzalez over the phone:”P– mo, humihingi ka pa ng P150,000 para sa kaso ko. Kung may mamatay rito, kasalanan mo lahat ito.”
Yes, Gonzalez’s conscience should bear the heavy burden of that tragedy. The lives of those who perished in that fiasco can never be regained. But we can at least give justice to their death by holding the guilty accountable. Gonzalez is the first. We expect he will not be the last.
Activists’ murders spur online protest vs mining
Part I:Activists’ murders spur online protest versus mining
Part II: Foreign, local firms raid Cagayan for magnetite
By Farah Sevilla and Denise Fontanilla
Alyansa Tigil Mina and VERA Files
Anti-mining advocate Gensun Agustin
A Facebook page named “Stop Black Sand Mining in Cagayan” has garnered some 3,700 supporters who have been using the online space to speak up not only against the environmental destruction magnetite mining brings, but also about the deaths it has caused.
In fact, the page was put up shortly after 30-year-old anti-mining advocate Gensun Agustin was gunned down by unidentified men in Buguey, Cagayan on March 1 last year while riding his motorcycle on his way home.
Agustin was one of five anti-mining activists killed within months of each other in that mining town on the country’s northernmost shore. All deaths remain unresolved.
The five had been actively campaigning against the extraction of magnetite, a black sand ore abundant in the province and commonly used as an additive for high-strength concrete and steel products.
Click here (VERA Files) for the rest of the story
You got Veet! Congrats to our promo winners
Congratulations to the following winners of this blog’s recently-concluded “Share Your Best Budget Beauty Tip” promo from Veet as drawn by random.org. Most especially, thanks to everyone for joining! I really appreciated your inputs and am sure everyone will agree that your tips are all worth trying. In these hard times, it pays to be practical about beauty. And we really don’t have to fill our make up drawer with all sorts of products when what matters most is your smile and the right attitude:)
Have fun with your Veet gift packs dear readers!
1. Bagel
2. Kaho Din
3. Det
4. Maria Avelo Navarro
5. Mary Jane Pineda
6. Ria Villareal
7. torque 15
8. Criselda
9. melandriaromero
10. Vera Paola
Please email me soon your addresses. Unfortunately, I will only be able to ship to Metro Manila.
In this season of shorts, sun dresses and bikinis, it pays to have smooth, hair-free skin with Veet. Have a fun summer everyone!:)
Inalis na muna ng Jollibee ang ‘Mang Inasal’ sa Wiling-Willie
Related article: Child Abuse and the macho-dancing boy
Ang desisyun ng Jollibee Corporation na alisin muna ang advertisement ng Mang Inasal sa Willing-Willie habang ini-imbestigahan ng TV5 at ng MTRCB ang insidente noong March 12 ay nagpapakita na ang kanilang imahen na pangpamilya ay hindi lamang sa promosyon.
Talagang isanasambuhay nila ang tamang kaugalian na respeto at pangangalaga sa bawa’t miyembro ng pamilya, bata man o matanda.
Sumulat si Pauline Lao, ang namamahala ng corporate Media ng Jollibee Foods Corporation na may-ari ng 80 per cent ng Mang Inasal na mga restaurant kay Froilan Grate na siyang namamahala ng “Para kay Jan-Jan Facebook” at sinabing sa loob ng isang linggo, hindi na muna sila maglalagay ng advertisement sa Willing –Willie.
Sinabi ni Lao na hindi naman talaga naga-advertise ang Jollibee, Chowking, Greenwich at Red Ribbon sa Willing-Willie.
Sabi pa ni Lao alam nila ang kontrobersiya tungkol sa Marso 12 na show ng Willing–Willie tungkol kay Jan-Jan kung saan sumayaw ang anim na taon gulang ng bastos na macho dancing at lalong inudyukan ni Willie Revillame na para bang sa bar. Umiiyak ang bata habang sumasayaw at pinauli-ulit pa ni Revillame bago niya binigyan ng P10,000.
Sabi ni Lao hihintayin niya ang resulta ng imbestigasyon na ginagaw ng TV-5 sa insidente bago mag-desisyun ng kanilang pangmatagalan na aksyun.
Sana hindi na bumalik ang Mang Inasal sa Willing-Willie. Kahit naman hindi sila mag-advertise doon, marami pa rin ang kakain doon dahil patok talaga ang kanilang unlimited rice na policy.
Sabi pa ni Lao, “Rest assured that the JFC group remains committed to upholding the welfare of children. We trust that the appropriate and expert institutions will also respond and look into this matter with urgency. Like you, we are also hoping for a quick and rightful resolution of this matter.”
Ini-imbestigahan na rin ng Movie Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) ang insidente. Sinabi na ni Etta Rosales ng Commission on Human Rights at ni Social Services Secretary Dinky Soliman na ang ginawa ni Revillame sa bata, kahit pa sinabi ng magulang na hindi pinipili si Jan-Jan, ay pang-aabuso ng bata at ‘iyan ay paglabag sa batas na nagbibigay ng proteksyun sa mga bata.
Sinabi ni Soliman na binibigyan daw ng counseling ang bata at ang kanyang mga magulang dahil mukhang despalinghado ang values.
Humingi ang TV-5 ng paumanhin at pinagbabawalan na raw muna ang mga batang magsasayaw sa Willing-Willie. Naglagay na rin daw ng tao ang TV5 para tumutok sa audition ng Willing-Willie.
Ang paumanhin na sinasabi ni Willie ay hindi naman paumanhin dahil mayabang pa nga siya.
Yung iba namang advertisers ng Willing-Willie, mukhang wala silang paki-alam. Pareho ang pag-iisip nila ni Revillame at ng magulang ng batang Jan-Jan.
Tayo na lang ang mag-boycott sa kanila.
Reta