Half way through a prepared speech on the reliability of the train, Boon
Wan could not tahan anymore and went off the cuff to berate the
negative reporting of the breakdown of public transport by the main
media. ‘I don’t like the media reporting…Even our main media have turned
tabloid. Yes, exciting and so on…frightening figures, headlines.’
According to Today’s readers comments, the media were reporting the
truth, what were happening exactly on the ground and these were very
helpful to commuters who needed to know the real situation and to plan
their travel. It would be terrible if the media were to report average
of breakdowns over24 hours like the reporting of haze situation and the
commuters would be like lost sheep, not knowing what to do.
Some comments from interviews conducted by Today, ‘The media is
basically reflecting the sentiments of regular train commuters….the
updates provided by the media have helped commuters such as herself to
plan their commute…I don’t think the media has (exaggerated) recent
train delays and breakdowns….)
Professor Lee Der Horng of NUS has this to say, ‘…that mainstream media
coverage of the recent train delays was an accurate reflection of the
situation, and it played a role in getting train operators to come
forward and explain to the public the cause of those delays….The media
cannot be so blind that when the re-signalling work casuse delays,
they’re not reported. I think (in that case) the public would be
furious.’
Now the media is caught in a vice, between a hard rock and the deep blue
sea. How and what should the media be reporting? Or should the media be
telling the people just to hear the good stuff…and ignore the bad news?
What Boon Wan could do is to follow Donald Trump and go twitting and
instruct the train operators to twit as well. Just keep twitting and
ignore the main media. It would be better if he could tell the main
media to stop reporting on the train delays and all news on public
transportation and delays would be available on twitters. That would
make the job of the main media easier and commuters would only hear the
good news, the good stuff, the right stuff, from twitters.
What is fake news and real news is a fine thin line. I am being generous.
The latest missile test by the North Koreans has drawn immediate
response from the world's number one outlaw and its fellow gangsters.
The Americans not only responded by more military exercises to threaten
the North Koreans, Trump also added this rhetoric,
'By threatening the world, these weapons and tests further isolate North
Korea, weaken its economy, and deprive its people,...The United States
will take all necessary steps to ensure the security of the American
homeland and protect our allies in the region.'
This is the normal reaction of the outlaw, to show the other party that
it has bigger guns to hit them and also to fool the world that the North
Koreans are threatening them and the outlaw is there to protect the
rest of the world from the North Koreans. Now, who would be fooled by
the American rhetoric, who would believe the North Koreans would be
firing nuclear weapons at them for no good reason? Or is there any
country been poking at the North Koreans and now felt guilty about it
and thus has good reason to know that the North Koreans would not be
happy with their big mouths?
The North Koreans are doing the right thing, to make sure it could give a
few deadly blows at the outlaw should it tries to nuke them. The best
part is that attention is directed at North Koreans' ability to hit the
US homeland. Should the Americans nuke NK, Japan would be the first
target for the short range missiles from NK. Japan would go up in smokes
as the North Koreans have plenty of short range missiles to cover all
the big cities and American bases in Japan.
The first victim of a nuclear war between the US and NK would be Japan.
They better don't play with fire and tell the Americans to back down
from their madness.
And why is North Korea becoming China’s problem and China has to solve
it? What has China got to do with the affairs and defence capability of
another sovereign state? Who is poking the North Koreans and threatening
the North Koreans and demonizing the North Koreans?
China should show its middle finger to the Americans and tell them to
deal with the problems they created, or was there really a problem in
the first place? Just stop provoking and harassing the North Koreans and
they would not threaten to blow up American cities. Stop your war games
and flying nuclear armed bombers over the Korean Peninsula.
The Americans are the real problem, the threat to North Korea and world peace.
The controversy over the new batch of representatives for the Miss
Singapore Universe contest is turning very sour and distasteful. Some of
the comments were outright discourteous and nasty and uncalled for.
What is this beauty contest all about? It is all about beautiful and
intelligent lasses representing their respective countries to show off
to the world. It started off as an innocuous event but now becoming more
political and commercialized and as fake as one can get.
While being fake is acceptable, let’s go one step further by doing what
Singapore is good at, buy, buy, buy. Just like our dream of buying a
football team for the World Cup and our embarrassing displayed of
foreign players winning medals for our country to prove that we have
talents, why not go the extra mile and buy the most beautiful girls from
around the world to represent Singapore in the Miss Universe or Miss
World contests? When money is everything, when money can buy everything,
let’s use our money to its fullest advantage and tell the local lasses
to step aside, we are going to import beautiful girls from around the
world to represent Singapore.
This would add another plastic layer to our everything beautiful
country, a country full of foreign talents and no local talents. But
never mind, as long as it is good for the country. Never mind if it is
good or no good for the people. Anyway we are already deep in the
process of replacing all the unwanted, untalented and now unsightly
Singaporeans with better foreigners. It is just part of the process of
renewal for the better. Let’s fake this one as well.
What do you think?
Next on the list to be replaced by foreigners would be the top military
and police officers, the top civil servants, the judges and of course,
last on the list, the ministers and Prime Ministers and the President.
Singapore must pay for the best foreigners to take over jobs that
Singaporeans cannot do better. And there are billions of foreigners out
there that can replace every Singaporean, from the toilet cleaners to
the President and PM of the country.
Let's not kid ourselves that what we have the best in the world. The best in the world are out there, the foreign talents.
My alma
mater has made Singaporeans proud by believing in the abilities of
Singaporeans as among the best academics in the world. After the
disaster in NTU where the heart of Chinese education continues to be
headed by foreigners and the incident of Chinese language not allowed, it is a pleasant surprise to see NUS raising the
flag of Singapore in appointing another Singaporean to be the President
of our premier university. I would not know where to hide my face if all
the heads of Singapore's universities are headed by foreigners.
This was reported in Channel News Asia on 29 Jul 17.
SINGAPORE: The National University
of Singapore (NUS) has named Professor Tan Eng Chye as its new
president, an appointment that will take effect in January 2018.
Prof
Tan, a mathematician and an NUS alumnus, has been the university’s
provost for the past 10 years. He will succeed current president Tan
Chorh Chuan who will be seconded to the Ministry of Health, said NUS in a
news release on Friday (Jul 28).
The incoming
president, 56, said he will be focusing on three areas - lifelong
learning, personalised learning and inclusive learning....
If
Singapore and Singaporeans do not believe in Singaporeans, then this
country would go to the dogs. Singapore belongs to Singaporeans, true
blue Singaporeans, not those instant tree Singaporeans. Singaporeans
need to take back control of this country before it is taken over by
foreigners and instant trees.
I am proud of my alma mater.
The CNA also reported this,'
'NUS also announced the appointment
of Professor Ho Teck Hua as its new senior deputy president and provost
from January 2018. He is currently the deputy president (Research &
Technology), and heads two national research and development programmes
in artificial intelligence and data science.
“With these two appointments, NUS
will have a truly outstanding leadership team,” said NUS chairman Hsieh
Fu Hua who led the search for the new president.
Recently Singaporeans have been bombarded with the myth that Bhutan is
the heaven on earth where the Bhutanese are the happiest people in the
world. There are some truths on this statement without the ’buts’ being
exposed. The happy Bhutanese are as happy as the caged canaries. A caged
bird’s happiness is about living in a cage with food provided, secure
and safe from the paws of a hungry cat and ignorant of what lies outside
the cage.
Bhutan is in all definition a protectorate of India. It has an agreement
with India, supposedly signed voluntarily and happily, that India
guides its foreign policies ie India decides its relations with other
states. In the current border dispute with China, or India’s border
dispute with China by actually hijacking Bhutan’s border to start a
dispute with China, it was repeatedly highlighted that Bhutan has no
diplomatic relations with China. It did not say that Bhutan also did not
have diplomatic relations with all five powers of the UN Security
Council. Why would not Bhutan want to have relations with the five
powers or with more countries of the world? Because India decides it to
be so. Having relations with other powers and countries would be bad as
it would reduce the influence and control of India over Bhutan.
Why didn’t Bhutan wants to participate in the BRI project? A landlocked
country would definitely benefitted from more access to the rest of the
world. No, India would not allow that. India would not allow Bhutan to
have FDIs other than those from India. Japan and European countries and
now China would like to invest in Bhutan. But permission was not
allowed. Whose permission? Bhutan or India?
Bhutan has very little trading activities and trade relations with other
countries, not allowed to participate in such activities. On the
surface, Bhutanese love to remain in their present state of heaven and
are very happy with their way of life and want to be protected to be in
this state of living forever.
Is this what the Bhutanese want or what India imposed on the Bhutanese?
The current border trouble with China, or is it Bhutan’s trouble with
China or India’s trouble with China? India is claiming that China wants
to invest in Bhutan, wants more relations with Bhutan and wants Bhutan
to participate in the BRI project. But Bhutan refused and wanted to
remain a protectorate of India, did not want to open up, want to remain a
happy cage bird, look after and fed by India, and to remain a nation of
very happy canaries. Oops.
What do you think is the truth? Do the Bhutanese have any aspirations
and ambitions to be a free people, to decide what is good for them, to
be a normal country like everyone else? Are they really happy to be
canaries in a cage?
The current border dispute is India's excuse to move in troops into
Bhutan to strengthen its control over Bhutan in the name of protecting
Bhutan. And Bhutan could hardly say anything within the approval of
India. The canary can only sing but not speak up for its own interests
The UN has started a move, led by the small nations of the world to ban
nuclear weapons. But knowing how powerful is the evil Empire, this move
is at best dreaming and chest thumping. The evil Empire will not give
up its arsenal of nuclear weapons. Without the nuclear weapons it would
not be able to bully every country that it chose to demonise by
threatening to conduct preemptive nuclear strike on them.
The evil Empire is sending its nuclear forces of aircraft carriers and
bombers to the east of the Mediterranean Sea poised to attack Syria. It
is also sending its nuclear fleet and nuclear bombers to threaten the
North Koreans as well as Russia and China.
The North Koreans have warned that the evil Empire is flirting too close
to ignite a nuclear war. Many people still did not know how destructive
is this coming war? It would escalate beyond control and half the world
would be wiped out and become inhospitable for centuries to come,
becoming nuclear wasteland. And to the Americans, please, the American
continent would not be spared either as the top target in a nuclear war.
You will be wiped out while your soldiers are out there wiping out
other countries.
Is this what you want? No, you do not think you too would be victims of a
nuclear holocaust? You think your so called nuclear shield, the stupid
Thaad system, could protect you from a nuclear war? The trial shooting
of pre planned inert targets is proof that it would be able to shoot
down real targets that are designed to evade the Thaad missiles?
For the rest of the world, pray hard that your leaders did not get
involved and be spared from becoming collaterals in this war. The bad
news is that even if they did the right thing, not to get involved, the
nuclear clouds would be all over the world and there is no escape.
When would the American masses put a stop to the evil men and women in
charge and stop this menace from destroying human civilization? There
will be no Sunday morning cuppa of hot coffee or football games to
watch, no more Saturday night fever or basketball or baseball games, no
more hamburgers or hotdogs to tuck in. The devastation would be
horrendous. You want your good life to be destroyed by your
irresponsible and reckless monsters in the White House, in the Pentagon,
in Washington?
You still have a chance to stop them before it is too late. The mad men
and women and their madness will drag you into the sea of fire. You
have to take charge now and throw out all the mad men and mad women
wanting to go to war, to provoke a nuclear war with North Korea or in
Syria and surrender the peace and good life you are having today.
God save the poor Americans, they are inviting disasters onto themselves
thinking that they would be spared. They could destroy others and
others could not destroy them. The monsters in Washington do not care a
shit how many million people would be annihilated when this war starts.
Not to worry, the North Koreans may not hit you, but don’t count on
China and Russia not hitting you. It is World War 3, damn it! Keep on
threatening others, keep on provoking others. Just keep trying.
The time to remove all the nuclear weapons on mother earth is here. Get
rid of them or they will rid you from mother earth. Small nations must
stand up, especially the principled ones, to blow their trumpets loud
and clear, that nuclear weapons are harmful not only to small nations
but to the whole world.
This controversy over what is a Malay and what is a Muslim has
precipitated finally, thanks to the Constitution on the definition of
what is a Malay or who can represent the Malay community as a minority
President. According to Article 19B of the Singapore Constitution, "any
person, whether of the Malay race or otherwise, who considers himself to
be a member of the Malay community and who is generally accepted as a
member of the Malay community by that community" is qualified to run as a
candidate for the reserved EP for Malays.
The dichotomy between a Malay and a Muslim has never been in question or
was a non issue before. It was not important enough or there was reason
to want a clearer definition of a Malay and a Muslim. It is common
knowledge that all or nearly all Malays are Muslim, with a few
exceptions. For those Malays that are non Muslim, I am not sure if the
Malay community still regards them as Malays or ex communicado.
On the other hand, all Muslims are not necessarily Malay. One can be a
Muslim from any race or nationality. A Muslim can be European,
Caucasian, Arabs, Pakstani, Indian, African or Chinese and living
totally different ways of life. Ok the Singapore Constitution understood
this and further clarified that a Malay is not only a Muslim but
practises Malay way of life. The ‘otherwise’ in the Constitution is very
extensive and inclusive to the extent that anyone not of the Malay race
can be considered as a Malay if the Malay community, reads as the
Committee set up by the govt, accepts the person as a Malay.
The big issue, what is this reserved EP all about? Isn’t it about the
election of a Malay rather than anyone not of Malay ethnicity? A Malay
is a Malay by ethnicity. Period. Though this is further complicated by
mixed marriages, a person that has no Malay ethnicity in him despite him
practising the Malay way of life and being a Muslim, is not a Malay by
any means except by a round about way of interpreting what is written in
the Constitution.
Coming to this big question of a Malay that is not a Muslim. Does the
Malay community regard a Malay that is a non Muslim a Malay or no longer
a Malay? What about the legal interpretation of a Malay? Is it by
ethnicity or by religion? Legally, I would presume that Malay parents or
mixed Malay parents that are not Muslims but chose to register their
children as Malay at birth have the right to do so and no one can deny
that they are Malays when registered. Things get more complicated should
non Malay Muslim parents decide to register their children as Malay at
birth. What would be the status of such persons legally? Malay or non
Malay? Going forward, with the EP pie beckoning, would Pakistanis,
Indians and Pinoys choose to register their children as Malay to take
advantage of this loophole? Would the babas also do likewise?
How would this debate continue and would it lead to a better definition
of what constitute a person being accepted as a Malay or would the
definition in the Constitution be final and the end of the story? Is
this mess necessary or can be avoided? There is no such problem before
this minority EP thing.
This is what a Malaysian said of corruption in high places in Malaysia.
Where got problem? It is ok if the corruption did not lead to high cost
of living. Who is going to complain when seeing a govt doctor cost RM1.
Who is going to complain when the delivery of a child in govt hospital
cost RM1?
Then there is public housing where a 2 bedroom apartment cost RM50,000.
Complain for what? This is good govt, a govt that looks after the
welfare of the people. What corruption? Who cares?
Najib just announced a RM1.42b package for Felda. How is this to be
spread among the people? This is what AGENCIES reported, ‘Cash
incentives of RM475 million, or RM5,000 to each settler. Forgiving
RM128 million in debt for settlers who took out Felda Global Ventures
equity loans. Debt forgiveness of RM519 million, or up to RM5,000 for
each settler that had taken part in Felda’s scheme to replant
unproductive oil palms, and A special fund of RM300 million to be set up
for 2017 to 2021, to help with replanting operational debts of RM40,000
or more.
And everyone knows that this is pre election budget. The Malaysian govt
is buying votes and the people are not worry as the govt would not be
coming up with high taxes to take back everything they gave during the
election. Why not? If the govt is giving money to the people, this is
the kind of govt that the people will vote for. Why vote for a govt that
promises everything under the sky but what comes after the election are
tax hikes in everything. Malaysians are smart, unlike the daft
Singaporeans, got conned and conned after every GE and still never
learn.
The Malaysians love their govt, a govt that takes care of them and their
welfare. It is ok if they take care of themselves, pocket a bit more,
but give the people more also.
Which govt do you think is good for the people? Which govt is not
corrupt? What is important is whether they are making life better for
the people or not.
Diplomacy is an old art of interstate engagement to build relationship
and to improve and protect the interests of states. When diplomacy
fails, the likely outcome is war between states or strained relations.
This is something that the art of diplomacy would want to avoid so that
states can work and live with each other peacefully. The last thing in
diplomacy is Bridge Burning.
Is there a Diplomacy of Bridge Burning being practiced by the diplomats
and state officials? In the recent tense relations between Singapore and
China, ok I may be wrong as Singapore did not see it this way and
claimed that Singapore’s relation with China is as good as ever, I would
say a few cardinal sins of diplomacy were committed on the Singapore
side. Ok, please feel free to disagree with me as this is just my
perception of the events.
What were these cardinal sins? 1. Singapore demanded that China obeyed
the rulings of the Hague Tribunal on the South China Sea. 2. Singapore
demanded that China followed the rule of law. 3. Some Singapore
officials commented that China was adopting a policy to divide Asean. 4.
Some Singapore officials said China had been pressuring Singapore to be
on the side of China on some issues.
To me, these are the cardinal sins Singapore committed in this fracas
that led to a very strain relation with China. Of course I stand to be
corrected as some Singapore officials said Singapore did not do anything
or say anything to provoke China or things that would affect the
relations negatively. If this is so, then all my comments are hogwash,
even fake news.
Did Singapore say or do anything to offend China? Did Singapore know
that the above four points that I mentioned are as good as Diplomacy of
Bridge Burning? The positions taken, cannot be uttered unthinkingly as
the statements were very serious in nature, were as good as telling
China that Singapore was prepared to cut off relations with China if
needed to. And to take such a position, it would be expected that
Singapore would have thought through this very carefully and weighed the
consequences of offending China and possibly breaking all ties with
China, diplomatically, commercially, economically and culturally.
It is foolish to think that when Singapore took that position that was
openly unfriendly to China, ok, I agree to disagree with those that
thought Singapore was friendly with China and did not do anything
against China, it did not do any homework to consider the consequences.
To take such an unfriendly position, to shout so loudly, daily, to China
and for the rest of the world to hear, it must be a properly thought
out position, that Singapore was prepared to burn bridges with China. Or
maybe Singapore thought China was hapless and would not do anything to
harm its relation with Singapore as Singapore was more important to
China to lose. China would swallow the bitter pill and would keep
relations as per normal despite the utterance of Singapore.
Oops, was there an after thought, that burning bridges with China was
not a good idea after all? Or this was not even discussed or considered,
that taking that position would not lead to such an eventuality? The
subsequent flurry of activities to make amends to China, to tell China
that Singapore was a friend and is still a friend said it all, that
Singapore cannot afford to burn bridges with China. There are too much
at stake economically for Singapore to do so.
Funny, why didn’t they thought of it in the first place and avoid the
Diplomacy of Bridge Burning? When a bridge is burnt, it takes time to
rebuild a new bridge and the new bridge would not be the same again.
The big question going forward is whether Singapore would adopt another
Bridge Burning Diplomacy again in the name of national interests and
sovereignty, in the name of rule of law? From the noises heard recently,
Singapore does not regret its Bridge Burning Diplomacy and would do it
again for the same reasons, ie when Singapore’s interests are at stake,
when the rule of law affecting small states are challenged. Singapore
has strong principles and would stand on its principles come what may.
Do not triple of the Little Red Dot.
Did I get Singapore’s principled position right? Lee Kuan Yew’s time was
all about pragmatism and survival. Things must have changed.
The issue of your race has never been so controversial, so ambiguous, so
subjective and so disputable until this minority election for an EP
comes into being. Everyone is now questioning what his race means to his
opportunity to qualify for the appointment of the EP. While the heat is
now on in how to define what is a Malay and Malayness, many have
forgotten the meaning of race as stated in the BC/IC. Is this still valid
and still legal? Is a person a Malay or Indian or Chinese or Others as
stated in his BC/IC or is that person something else?
Going backwards, when a child is born, the most important decision and a
natural thing to do for the parents are to identify which race the
child belongs. This is instinctive and the real identity of the child
that the parents want the child to be. They have consciously chosen,
declared and made a decision for life for the child.
What is happening today is that this important decision of choice is
questionable and may not be legal. A person with a particular race
stated in his/her BC/IC could not be what was stated in the BC/IC. A Malay may
not be a Malay or an Indian may not be an Indian, and so is a Chinese
or Others.
Would this new development have any implications other than just the
qualification to stand as an EP candidate? Many govt polices are race
related like HDB, education, social organisations etc etc. When one's
identity in the BC/IC is subject to question and challenge, what would it
make of the BC/IC, an official document that tells the identity of a
person?
Can the Committee deciding what or who is a Malay reject a person that
is officially stated as a Malay in his/her BC/IC? Can the same Committee
decide that a person that is officially stated as a non Malay be
officially ‘accepted’ as a Malay despite what is stated in the BC/IC? How
would such an issue be ruled in the courts of law should race be in
question, is the person what he is as stated in his BC/IC?
The problem of this confusion of racial identity is not just about the
EP but about a whole series of complex govt policies and regulations and
the social fabric of the country. This is a problem that is self
created and is not going to go away just by a few simplistic rulings by a
Committee that now appears to have the right and authority to change
the race of a person.
What is happening?
Would there be more stringent checks and conditions before one can
register a child belonging to an ethnic group at birth given this new
development, that parents cannot anyhow hantam the race of the child in
the BC/IC when being an ethnic minority comes with exceptional privileges?
The cover up of activities by Japanese soldiers in Sudan in the logs of
Japanese soldiers has raised doubts of the participation of Japanese
soldiers fighting in Sudan. The soldiers were sent there as peacekeepers
under the UN mission. Japan has prohibited sending soldiers into theatres
of war and would only allow Japanese soldiers in places where a ceasefire
is in place.
Apparently in the case of Sudan when fighting was escalated, the removal
or non admission of logs by Japanese soldiers in Sudan has led to
suspicion that the Japanese govt is hiding something and what they are
hiding is Japanese soldiers involved in fighting on the ground in Sudan.
Japanese defence expert Tosh Minohara has been quoted to have said this
about the cover up. ‘We all know that things were getting nasty in South
Sudan. If the logs recorded fighting by Japanese troops, what will be
the political fallout?’
ST’s Japan correspondent in Tokyo was reported in the ST to have said
this, ‘At a meeting in February, Defence Minister Tomomi Inada was said
to have given the nod to her top officials to hide the existence of
activity logs maintained by ground forces in South Sudan….The
controversy started brewing last December after the Defence Ministry
declined an information disclosure request for the logs from the media,
which had noted the worsening situation in South Sudan since July last
year….’
What is the Japanese govt trying to hide or to lie to the Japanese
people and the people of the world, that Japanese troops have engaged in
actual warfare again? After having lied about their war atrocities
across Asia, about comfort women, it is not unusual for the Japanese to
lie again about the truth in Sudan.
Japanese soldiers have conducting warfare again, forbidden by their
Constitution and their pledge not to conduct war after their defeat in
the Second World War. And they are going to hide this truth.
The lesson in 1962 was not taken seriously, or not hard enough for India
to learn not to trifle with the PLA. In 1962, the PLA was literally a
peasant army, poorly equipped, against the India Army, equipped with the
best leftovers from the British Empire. Still, given the advantage of
modern weapons and several years of preparation in the building of the
4th Army Corp and the element of surprise and initiative, India was
knocked unconscious within a matters of 2 weeks by the PLA.
Today the world is looking at almost an identical situation in the China
Bhutan border. Though again India is claiming that China was the
provocateur like in 1962, the facts today are current and fresh for all
to see. China was building a road along the China Bhutan border, nothing
to do with India except that Bhutan was a de facto protectorate of
India. India claimed that it was Bhutan that was asking India to
intervene though it was obvious that it was India that wanted to
intervene in the dispute. And India took the first step to move troops
into the disputed area but accusing China of doing so. In the first
place the dispute has nothing to do with India.
Now both sides are moving thousands of troops to the region. And India,
like in 1962, is saying that it would not back down, spoiling for a
fight with China. India must not forget that the PLA today is fully
operational and supported by all the four arms of China’s military
might, modern and well equipped that India can never think of matching.
There is nothing that Indians have that is superior or equivalent to
what the Chinese have.
This time the mismatch in the two forces is even more stark though India
as usual thinks it has an upper hand and would want to try its luck a
second time. This time the PLA would not be so gracious and merciful and
the body blow would be hard and heavy. The China of today is no longer
in a state to be nice to India. And if the Indians think they want to
play with fire, with implicit support from the Americans, then they
would be in for a rude shock.
India may think it has arrived, that it is a world power and could do as
it pleased, even to take on China. Go ahead, but don’t regret when
history repeats itself. The first time was ignorance, the second time is
stupidity, to repeat the same mistake. This time the Chinese are well
prepared and no more surprises and sneak attacks. The Chinese will deal
with the Indian forces head on from day one. They are ready, knowing
what the Indians would do from the 1962 experience to take advantage of a
surprise attack against an unprepared enemy. This time China is
waiting.
The govt has been harping on the criticism by Kishore Mahbubani over its
hiccup in its relation with China. The angst over the episode is very
hard to get over with in several quarters meaning that what Kishore had
said must have been painful to the ears of some. Over the last few days
the govt has came out very strongly with its principled position
diplomacy as if it is some unknown gem that must be displayed for all to
see.
The key points were guarding and protecting our national interests and
territorial integrity and also punching above our weight. The message,
Singapore would walk around with a loudspeaker to make sure everyone
heard us, that Singapore is not some little country to be trifled with.
Vivian Balakrishnan even called a townhall meeting and had it
broadcasted over the national media about how big Singapore was and is,
that we are the champion of small states and the interests of small
states and the rule of law. Who is/are the intended audience of this
‘koyok’ selling session? Is Kishore the main target, that he had rubbed
people the wrong way and must be put in his place? Or are the audience
the neighbouring countries or China, the country that was poked, oops,
some denied that we did that, and was not amused?
What did Kishore say that must be straightened out? I heard that Kishore
was accused of saying something like being small we must compromise our
principles and interests, that we should bend out heads and be kicked
around or something like that. I am very sure Kishore did not say such
things or implied either. It is an over exaggeration to put words into
Kishore’s mouth that as a small state we should not speak up and allow
others to trample all over us. Kishore was very outspoken on such issues
when he was our rep in the UN and the US.
In Vivian’s townhall speech I got it that it was all about ‘we’ or ‘us’
and our interest, that these should not be compromised, our principles,
our integrity. No one can dispute such arguments. Even all the smallest
states that have been very quiet in their diplomacy would guard their
interests and principles vehemently. And I think all the big powers
would also appreciate and would accept such a position of small states.
But bully they would if conditions allowed.
In diplomacy it is all about influencing other countries to support
one’s position and interest. Every country, big and small, is doing
this. Singapore too is doing the same thing. There is nothing wrong with
this. What is wrong and unacceptable is to reveal what were said behind
closed doors. This is a breach of confidentiality and faith. There is
no need to wash such laundry in the open. Behind closed doors, many
things would be said, there would be horse trading of all shades and
colours. Take your positions or turn down the offers, but there is no
need to kpkb in the open about what was spoken. This country or that
country wanted us to do this or that. This is bad manners and poor taste
in diplomacy!
And in the cause of protecting our principles and interests, it does not
mean that we can go around compromising other people’s principles and
interests. While we are talking about ‘we and us’ there is a need to
know if we have violated or compromise the principles and interests of
other parties. A good example is the hosting of American air and naval
forces here. There is nothing wrong with that and it is in our national
interest to want the Americans to be here. But we need to be careful of
what the Americans are doing to others. And we need to be careful in
what we said and why the Americans are here for. Telling China that the
Americans are invited here to balance their influence is very
unfriendly. Some things are left better unsaid. If the Americans are
using our facilities to violate, intimidate or threaten the interests of
our neighbours or other countries, can we walk around with a halo over
our heads and proclaim we are innocent, none of our business, we are not
involved?
Every nation state would pursue their national interest at all cost. But
while doing so, and it compromises the interest of other states, then
it is not so innocent and acceptable by others and one can expect
consequences. The Americans’ provocative and belligerent behavior in the
South China Sea, and operating from our shores, would not be accepted
kindly and would affect our relations with China for sure. Do not do
unto others if we don’t want others to do unto us. This must also be a
key principle in diplomacy. It cannot be always about ‘we and us’ with
no regards to others. This is elementary. This is decency.
What are the main differences between a peaceful country and a
warmonger? It is not what they said or claimed to be. It is what they
are doing around the world. In the recent decades with the opening up of
China and China’s participation in world trade after its admission into
the IMF and WTO, China has been actively engaged in all kinds of major
infrastructure projects around the world. And China backed these up by
setting up the AIIB and the BRI to connect the Asian countries together
to advance trade and economic activities.
China is not just talking and investing in the BRI projects that joined
the Asian countries by land and sea. China is also attempting to open
another route through the Arctic region. A massive US$20.1b has been
budgeted by China towards these projects. Apart from the high speed
railroads crisscrossing Asia to Europe and Africa, the Chinese are also
building high speed rails in the Americas and Africa. The Chinese are
also intensely involved in the development of ports from Greece through
the India Ocean littoral states, Malaysia and Indonesia and in Papua New
Guinea.
In Malaysia alone, the four key projects of Melaka Gateway, Kuala
Linggi Port, Penang Port and Kuantan Port would cost China US$10.5b. In
Indonesia, the development of Tanjung Priok Port would be to the tune
of US$590m.
Arctic route ports that are in the pipeline are Norwegian port in
Kirkenes, Russian port Arkangelsk in Siberia, and Klaipeda port in
Lithuanian to complete the opening up of an Arctic sea route.
And as usual, asshole thinkers like Jonathan Hilman, director at the
Centre for Strategic an International Studies started to put up a spin
on the possible use of such ports for ‘non commercial activities like
hosting military forces and collecting intelligence.’ Aren’t these
activities the key roles of American military and non military
installations and bases around the world? Further, he did not admit that
these ports are in the sovereign territories of the respective
countries and military activities would not be allowed without the
approval of these independent states.
While China is deeply involved and spending hundreds of billions in such
economic projects, what is the world’s number one warmongering nation
doing? No need to guess. It is building more and more military bases,
forming military alliances, developing and selling more deadly weapons
of mass destruction and threatening other countries with sanctions and
wars. The USA has run out of ideas. It is only interested in wars and
creating tensions around the world. It is spending all its limited
resources in weapons and everything related to wars, about wars and
nothing about economic development and trade. It backed away from the
TTP and even the Paris Climate Change accord.
These are the stark contrasts between a peaceful super power and a
warmongering super power. One is about trade and economic development
and the other is about wars and more wars. What else do the Americans
think they can contribute to the world other than wars and selling
weapons for wars?
How many more pieces of evidence are required to wake up the unthinking
Asians to call a spade a spade instead of being misled by the western
media to believe the Americans are for peace and China is for war? Who
is fighting wars in the Middle East and going to start a war in the
Korean Peninsula and possibly the South China Sea?
MOM, NTUC and SNEF put up a press release on a new manpower strategy for
Singapore. The three main points, one, enhanced internship and training
for new entrants into the industry, two, self help HR portal for
employers and three, provide free HR solutions and expertise to SMEs.
Good, but what about the influx of foreigners to replace Singaporeans?
Would the above three points address the concerns of Singaporeans
looking for jobs? No, non issue? What are the real problems facing
Singaporeans today when many graduates are finding difficulties in
getting jobs here and ended underemployed or unemployed while foreigners
just waltz into the island and found jobs aplenty, almost instantly
employed?
For the last couple of decades, there appears to be a de facto manpower
authority that is setting the agenda and strategies for Singapore’s
employment scene and the authority of this de facto agency is
foreigners. They set the rules and dictate who should be employed, who
is skilled, qualified, what kind of degrees or fake degrees are
acceptable, and in most cases to the detriment of Singaporeans. Maybe
this is a fake issue, that the employment scene for Singaporeans is
healthy and bustling and nothing needs to be done, everything is fine?
Is there a problem? Are Singaporeans being replaced by foreigners and
becoming redundant, unskilled and obsolete? The impression I have is
that the problem is very serious. But maybe I am getting fed the wrong
information by people who are paranoid. Everything is fine. If that is
the case, then the new strategies would be fine. Singaporeans would be
happy with the employment scene and things would even be better, rosier
by the days. Nothing to worry about.
South Korean President Moon Jae In has made good his election pledge to
reduce tension with North Korea by proposing direct talks between the
top military officers of the two states. Some reports have come out
saying that this is a dangerous policy to deal with the North. How
dangerous could it be? To the western narrative and thinking, the North
Koreans are mad people and cannot be trusted. So talking to them about
peace is a dangerous thing to do.
I have a different take on this. The first South Korean President Park
Chung Hee that initiated talking with the North to reunite the two
states was assassinated. By who? Definitely not by the North Koreans or
by pro unification South Koreans. This is how dangerous it is to talk
with the North and to think of reunification. Moon Jae In got to walk
gingerly along this path and be wary of reunification talks if he wants
to avoid being assassinated. It is a treacherous path.
The other dangerous things that could happen while Moon Jae In is
proceeding with talks with the North is that there could be more false
flag incidents to depict the North Koreans as untrustworthy, dangerous
and mad. Such false flag incidents could the sinking of South Korean
ships or attacks on South Korean installations, acts that are obviously
‘committed’ by the North without much thinking.
The South Koreans must be very careful and alert to the risks and
dangers along the way for peaceful talks and in the longer term a
reunification of the two states. When reunification takes place like in
Germany and in Vietnam, there is no reason for the deployment of Thaad
missiles in Korean soil, there will be no reason for American bases in
Korea and the South Korean armed forces would not be controlled by the
Americans as their supreme commander. The stakes are too high.
A peaceful Korean peninsula, a reunification of the two Koreans, must
not take place and any South Korean president taking this road is
flirting with his own safety and possible assassination. It is a
dangerous policy to pursue.
For the link to Lim Tean's speech at Hong Lim Park on the Protest
against abuse of power on 15 Jul 17 please go to TRE and read this article, 'Lawyer Lim Tean’s speech at Hong
Lim Park on 15th July'. (Somehow unable to put the link here)
The 30 minute speech gave a good insight on what had happened in
Parliament and what is next to this episode raised by Hsien Yang and Wei
Ling. Though Hsien Loong and his camp in Parliament gave the impression
that everything had been properly addressed and all the allegations
were unfounded and the case is closed, Lim Tean's speech called for a
commission of inquiry to be initiated by the President whose two major
duties are the safeguarding of the nation's reserve and the integrity of
the govt.
The case is anything but closed in the eyes of many Singaporeans. And it
looks like Act 2 Scene 1 has just started with the revelation that the
AG’s office is looking into a private facebook post by Li Shengwu. Wei
Ling has joined the play and questioning AG’s role and interest in a
private correspondence. Someone squealed and this private mail is no
longer private anymore. It is now all over the media.
Looks like the ball is now in the court of the AG office, to decide if there is a case to proceed on.
The 30 minute speech gave a good insight on what had happened in
Parliament and what is next to this episode raised by Hsien Yang and Wei
Ling. Though Hsien Loong and his camp in Parliament gave the impression
that everything had been properly addressed and all the allegations
were unfounded and the case is closed, Lim Tean's speech called for a
commission of inquiry to be initiated by the President whose two major
duties are the safeguarding of the nation's reserve and the integrity of
the govt.
The case is anything but closed in the eyes of many Singaporeans. And it
looks like Act 2 Scene 1 has just started with the revelation that the
AG’s office is looking into a private facebook post by Li Shengwu. Wei
Ling has joined the play and questioning AG’s role and interest in a
private correspondence. Someone squealed and this private mail is no
longer private anymore. It is now all over the media.
Looks like the ball is now in the court of the AG office, to decide if there is a case to proceed on.Lawyer Lim Tean’s speech at Hong
Lim Park on 15th July « Editorial « TR EMERITUS with courtesy from TRE
and TOC.
The 30 minute speech gave a good insight on what had happened in
Parliament and what is next to this episode raised by Hsien Yang and Wei
Ling. Though Hsien Loong and his camp in Parliament gave the impression
that everything had been properly addressed and all the allegations
were unfounded and the case is closed, Lim Tean's speech called for a
commission of inquiry to be initiated by the President whose two major
duties are the safeguarding of the nation's reserve and the integrity of
the govt.
The case is anything but closed in the eyes of many Singaporeans. And it
looks like Act 2 Scene 1 has just started with the revelation that the
AG’s office is looking into a private facebook post by Li Shengwu. Wei
Ling has joined the play and questioning AG’s role and interest in a
private correspondence. Someone squealed and this private mail is no
longer private anymore. It is now all over the media.
Looks like the ball is now in the court of the AG office, to decide if there is a case to proceed on.
The Constitution was amended for a simple reason of having a minority president,
should there be no Malay, or member of another minority group be
elected as the President over a 25 year period. The idea and intent were
simple and clear to the Malay and other minority groups. You will have a
chance when all else failed.
This simple but untenable proposition is increasingly looking like a bad
dream coming true. And as the goal posts keep shifting, the issue of a
Malay president is looking more like a farce when reality hits the
roof. What is a Malay becomes a major issue to address.
With the ridiculous and extreme elitist conditions in place, hardly any
Malay would qualify, and those that qualified are either partial Malay
or ethnically non Malay in all counts taking the application of Mohamed Salleh
Marican and Farid Khan as examples. Even Halimah Yacob is only half
Malay at most.
The big question now facing the committee that is given the power to
determine what is a Malay is to come up with a formula or definition on
Malayness. As this is going to be a very serious matter that affects the
Presidency and racial harmony, the last thing that this committee would
want to do is to come up with something that is unacceptable to the
majority of the Malay community. Suka suka business tak boleh pakai.
Other than being accepted by the Malay community as Malay, practising
Malay culture and living like a Malay, the next big factor is the
Malayness. How many percent Malayness would be considered as adequate or
minimal to be called a Malay? 10%, 30%, 50% or more? Can one that is
ethnically not a Malay, ie 0% but fulfilled the rest of the conditions
be called a Malay? What about someone with race in the IC or birth
certificate clearly stated as non Malay qualifying as a Malay? In the
case of Farid Khan, his IC said he is a Pakistani.
There is this other controversy of foreigners taking up citizenship and
in their IC it is stated that they are Malay when they are not. Can a
person officially stated as Malay in the IC, but did not qualify in the
other conditions be refused to be a Malay and thus disqualified?
This can of worms is getting serious with so many worms crawling all
over the place. The whole intent and purpose of the constitutional
amendment is for racial harmony. In reality it is becoming a very
divisive issue facing the Malay community. How many Malays agree to the
definition of Malay in the Constitution? The govt must not take the
Malay community for granted. By their reticence it does not mean that
everything is fine. Would they be seething with anger beneath should a
non ethnic Malay be elected as the EP to represent them?
The Pandora box is opened and what would happen to this simple idea and
intent turning into a Gordian knot and turning everything topsy turvy? A
badly conceived idea, and rushed ahead for implementation, would have
highly undesirable and dire consequences to the maker and the country as
a whole.
What kind of joke is it if an EP election to elect a Malay President
ended up with no Malay President or at most a half Malay President?
Oops, this is not a joke but a very serious matter concerning the
interest of the Malay community.
Some of you here cannot tahan my hard truth about the westerners and
their century old smear campaign against Asians in general and China, N
Korea, Iran and a few others in particular. Just read the daily verbiage
in print in western media and unthinking stupid Asian media allowing
themselves to be used by the westerners to rubbish Asians and you will
understand why. They will keep repeating their lies and over time many
unthinking readers would believe that they are truths. Some are so used
to such rubbish as part of their lives and thinking that they are gems
and truths and will parrot them around.
There was an article in the Today paper by NYT on 13 July attacking the
North Koreans for sending their people to work overseas as slave labours
with the govt confiscating their income for the state. I will just
quote the silly things they said and readers here should be able to
relate them to the conditions of foreigners working here, including
Singaporeans that are no difference or could even be worst off, but
never reported so negatively as slave workers.
1. North Korean labourers helped build a new soccer stadium in St
Petersburg…a project which at least one of them died. They are working
in central Moscow, where two North Koreans were found dead last month in
squalid hostel near the construction site. (Try to compare this with
the death of foreign workers in Singapore, including the maids).
2. Most of their earnings are confiscated by the state. (Got such thing in Singapore or not?).
3. …his highest paid workers now lose half or more of their monthly
salary through confiscation, while the leader of each construction squad
of about 20 to 30 labourers takes an additional cut of about 20 per
cent in return for finding painting jobs for his men. (Familiar? This
NYT author must be living in a well).
4. Quoting a North Korean painter, ‘I hope I can come back’ to work
again after his work permit expires. (Think what our maids and foreign
workers are saying here when their WP expired).
5. The Russian boss said North Koreans work “crazily long hours” without
complaint and call him at 6am, even on weekends,…They are basically in
the situation of slaves.”(Think of the working hours of the maids here).
6. All the same, he added, North Koreans will want to work in Russia,
where, despite the hardships and confiscation of a big chunk of their
‘CPF, oops’ wages, they can live better and freer than they do at home.
(Sound familiar?)
How much difference are the North Korean foreign workers’ fate in Russia
compare to the foreign workers and the maids here? Why the constant
attack against North Korea with such rubbish distorted news?
Shall I stop writing about the western media farce but let them continue
to write what they want since the last couple of centuries? What they
wrote daily are acceptable, reputable and respectable media, what I
wrote now and then are not acceptable, fake news?
PS. Singaporeans cannot distinguish between fake news and facts. It would be worst when fake news are officially sanctioned as real news by govts to spread their lies.
The issues, allegations of abuses of power by Hsien Yang and Wei Ling.
The speakers are:-
1. Danny Ng – researcher – “What is fear?”
2. Sivakumaran Chellappa – private educator – “The future of our country should not be determined by Oxley”
3. Jan Chan – recent graduate – “Need for government to respect and abide by the separation of powers in Singapore”
4. Osman Sulaiman –business owner/active in politics – “A nation of sheep begets a government of wolves”
5. Tan Kin Lian – former Presidential candidate – “Abuse of power by our government”
6. Dr Ang Yong Guan – psychiatrist – “What else could PM have say in Parliament?”
7. Leong Sze Hian – Blogger/President of Maruah – “Secret committee and what it shows – so many secrets in Singapore”
8. Lim Tean – former Sec Gen of National Solidarity Party – “Wherever law ends – tyranny begins”
(Mr Kwan Yue Keng will be the MC for the event)
There will also be a press conference on site immediately after the event at about 7pm.
Responding to Hsien Loong’s call for tough questions in Parliament on
the Lee Family feud, MP De Souza submitted 10 tough questions in
Parliament. The questions below were from a post in TRE titled PAP MP
put forth ‘tough questions’ on familee feud’.
Mr De Souza said that it was important to investigate whether the
mission of the organs of state were subservient to the agenda of any
personality, as alleged by PM Lee’s siblings.
He then put forth the following ten questions to the Prime Minister and to Parliament:
1. Is it true or false that organs of state are being used to target Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling?
2. Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang questioned whether “able
leaders with independent political legitimacy will be sidelined to
ensure Hsien Loong’s grip on power remains unchallenged.” Is it true
that ensuring the Prime Minister’s power remains unchallenged trumps
independent political legitimacy?
3. Mr Lee Hsien Yang said, “a few of the attacks we had to face in
private are now public. False accusations, character assassination, the
entire machinery of the Singapore press thrown against us.” Is it true
or false that the Government uses Singapore press to target Dr Lee Wei
Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang?
4. The siblings have said that they see “many upright leaders of quality
and integrity throughout public service who are constrained by Hsien
Loong’s misuse of power at the very top.” Is it true that public service
is constrained by the Prime Minister’s misuse of power at the top?
5. Is it true or false that the leadership and direction of the
government is directed for personal purposes or any other improper
purpose?
6. Is it true or false that organs of the state may be used for personal agendas?
7. Is it true or false that the ministerial committee is merely a facade
that the Prime Minister is able to influence in one way or the other?
8. Is it true or false that the ministerial committee never told Mr Lee
Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling about options they were exploring?
9. On 15 Jun 2017 at 9.25pm, Mr Lee Hsien Yang wrote, “Hsien Loong’s
public statement contradicts the statutory declaration he made to his
secret committee. It is wrong to lie to Parliament and it is wrong to
lie under oath. Is it true or false that the Prime Minister lied to
Parliament?
10. On 14 June 2017, Lee Hsien Yang said, “Hsien Loong has asserted to
the committee that Lee Kuan Yew would accept any decision by the
Government to preserve 38 Oxley Road. In doing this, Hsien Loong has
deliberately misrepresented Lee Kuan Yew’s clear intentions for his own
political benefit. He has also gone back on his own declarations that he
would recuse himself from all government decisions involving 38 Oxley.”
Is it true or false that the Prime Minister has misguided a ministerial
committee to fulfill his own personal purposes?
The questions were tough alright. But De Souza put in all his experience
as a lawyer to frame the questions in such a way like questioning or
cross examining a witness and only allowed the witness to answer yes or
no, in this case true or false. Hsien Loong would not be allowed to say
but or if or maybe, just answer true or false. He also made it easy for
the people reading the tough questions to come to a quick conclusion.
50% false answers, pass, 70% false answers, good, 90% and above false
answers, distinction.
In a way the questions also made life easier for Hsien Loong, just tick true or false. So simple!
What would happen if Hsien Loong tick all as false or as yes? Who will
be the judge, the Parliament, De Souza or the public? To me it is the
public acting as the jury. It is anytime better than being the accused,
the witness, and also the judge.
Wan Saiful Wan Jan wrote a piece titled ‘Malaysia’s priority is to
manage not stop, China’s investments’ in the Today paper on 11 Jul 17.
While many doubters are raising red flags when the Chinese govt is
pouring money into Malaysia, Wan Saiful took a slightly different stand,
understand the pros and cons and manage it to the best advantage of
Malaysia. The money coming in is good if not why ask for the money, but
more important is how to capitalize it to the best for Malaysia and its
people. Who else is going to give you money?
In his article he addressed some issues with the Chinese investments and
quoted the experience in Latin America and Africa to offer some
hindsight on the pitfalls to avoid. One of the key issues is the
repayment of the soft loans for the infrastructure that China is
building for Malaysia. Wan Saiful lamented that after the projects are
completed, Malaysia would have to pay and pay, ie to repay the loans
over 20 years or more, and plus interest some more. This is bad. Ok,
pointed noted. China must reconsider this, maybe let Malaysia determine
how long to repay the loan. But this is also bad. The best thing that
China could do is to offer the loan to build the infrastructure without
having to pay back, build them for free, give the loan for free. Now
that would be nice. China must seriously consider this strategy then Wan
Saiful and his friends would not have to raise this concern again.
The second serious concern and I quote, ‘Not only does China get back a
substantial portion of its money immediately in the form of payment for
work done by their state owned enterprise CCCC, they will also get more
money when repayments start, with interest. Ultimately, over the long
term, there is still an outflow of funds from Malaysia to China.’ How
can China do this? This is no good. China must rethink how not to get
back a substantial portion of its money immediately for payment for work
done and to ensure that there is no outflow of funds from Malaysia to
China. Again, the solution is simple. Build for free, give the loan for
free. No need to pay back and Malaysia will be very happy.
Another concern, the infrastructure built may not be profitable and ‘the
risks and liabilities are borne by Malaysian taxpayers through a
government guarantee of the loan.’ Now how to overcome this? Maybe China
should guarantee that the project should be profitable and take the
risk and bear the liabilities if the project is not profitable. How
about that? This is something that China must seriously think over
before embarking on the project. It is not the responsibility of the
Malaysian govt to ensure that the project is profitable or useful to
Malaysia.
Another important point raised by Wan Saiful is how Venezuela ended up
with huge debts despite China’s soft loans. Venezuela’s mistake was to
agree to repay the loans with oil. But then oil price collapsed. With
this lesson, China must let Malaysia choose whatever way it wants to
repay the soft loan, maybe by paying in ringgit, RMB or US dollars or
coconuts. Oops, not a good idea either. The value of the currencies can
fluctuate and Malaysia could end up paying more. Maybe China can work
out a flexible option to let Malaysia pay in whatever currency or
commodities it so chooses without having to make exceptional and
unexpected losses. The best way is to leave the option for repayment
blank, to be determined by Malaysia as and when it likes. That should do
the trick, I think.
And another point, not the last, is the transfer of technology. From
Malaysia’s past experience with investments from western countries,
including Japan, there was always a transfer of technology to Malaysia.
Look at how much technology the Proton car has transferred to Malaysia
today. Or remember Dunlop, Shell and all the famous western companies
that have invested in Malaysia and all the technologies they have
transferred to Malaysia and made Malaysia a modern and industrial power
house? China must transfer its technologies to Malaysia just like what
these western and Japanese companies did before, the Sony, Panasonic,
Sharp etc. This should be easy for China, by following what the western
and Japanese companies have done before.
Oh, one more concern, Chinese companies should not use Chinese workers
in their projects. They must employ the Malaysians to do the job.
Actually it would be easier and less troublesome if China just offer the
money to Malaysia and let Malaysia hire all the locals to work on the
projects and all the local SMEs would also have subcontracts to work on.
Just give the money to Malaysia and everything will be fine. It would
also be easy for China too, no need to do anything. A little catch,
would China still be responsible for the completion of the projects and
profitability of the projects when Malaysians are doing all the work?
Oh, one more very big concern. China is an authoritarian state promoting
authoritarian capitalism. If more Chinese investments poured into
Malaysia, Malaysia is likely to be influenced and become an
authoritarian regime as well. This is so dangerous. How to overcome
this? Ok, Wan Saiful concluded with this remark, ‘The responsibility to
ensure good governance in Malaysia lies with the Malaysian government
and the Malaysian people, not China.’ So China no need to do anything,
just invest and don’t try to influence the Malaysians to become an
authoritarian state. Don’t try regime change also. Don’t ask questions
about 1MDB. I am not sure how easy it is to influence the Malaysian
leaders and people to become an authoritarian state just by investing
and building infrastructure in Malaysia. I am still scratching my head.
China should read my above points carefully and seriously rethink how
they could invest in Malaysia without getting back their investment
capital. If they continue to do it this way, always thinking of
repayment, Malaysia is likely to invite western countries to invest in
Malaysia with free loans, no need for repayment. Then China would lose
out in investing in Malaysia.
The entry of Farid Khan, a Muslim of Pakistani descent, as a possible
Malay candidate for the next EP opens up a window for Cheng Bock to get
in using the same route. As reported, ‘Although his identity card shows
his race as “Pakistani”, presidential hopeful Farid Khan Kaim Khan
considers himself “Malay enough” to run in the coming presidential
election(EP) reserved for Malay candidates.’ Khan added, ‘I was born in
the Malay village in Geylang Serai, the heart of the Malay community.
And I adopted the Malay language, and when I studied in school, my
second language was Malay.’
Farid Khan must have read the provisions of the EP in the Constitution
and its definition of what constitute one to be a Malay and eligible to
stand. If I can remember, it was something like one needs not be an
ethnic Malay but must be accepted by the Malay community as a Malay, or
by the govt committee.
So, how can Cheng Bock make himself qualified? He must act very fast.
Get himself converted to Islam and become a Muslim. Show proof that he
is very conversant in the Malay language, which I think he is. Change
his lifestyle a bit more to be like the Malays. Get all his Malay
friends to accept him as a Malay. If he can convince his Malay friends
that he is a Malay, then all the obstacles in his way would be cleared,
technically and according to the definition in the Constitution. Then he
can tell Singaporeans that he considers himself a Malay.
It is not easy. The Malay community may not accept him. But he can try,
just like Farid Khan and other non Malay or half Malay candidates. The
Constitution is very clear that one needs not be a Malay but must be
accepted by the Malay community as a Malay. Correct me if I am wrong on
this interpretation of the Constitution. I would not seek a court
interpretation on this. I am just a layperson trying to read and
understand the Constitution, like Farid Khan and the other non Malay or
partial Malay candidates are doing.
Thank you very much. How about this, President Abdullah Tan Cheng Bock?
(Oops, no offend intended. Just looking at the possibilities. If Constitution can change, every can change to suit the Constitution).
PS. Cheng Bock has appealed against the judgement of the court counting
Wee Kim Wee, an appointed President by Parliament, now also read as
elected President or no difference according to the court. Appointed or
elected, same same, no difference in law. We need to change our
dictionary on the meaning of these two words. Would the students pass
their English Language examination if they write appointed and elected
mean the same thing, sama sama?
This debate between Kausikan and Kishore continues with Han Fook Kwang
chipping in with his two cents worth in an article in the Sunday Times
on 9 Jul. Han Fook Kwang was trying to point to the changing
circumstances and the need to apply intelligently on lessons and
policies of the past. Not every event is the same and it is important to
understand the new forces in play before blindly applying past
methodology that may no longer be relevant today.
One take away from Han Fook Kwang’s comment is his quoting Kausikan,
‘Small states like Singapore cannot allow their sovereignty and national
interests to be dictated by others.’ This is sound and good, just like
the same saying, ‘Singapore leaders stood up to major powers in the past
when they attempted to intimidate them.’ On first glance, both
statements are statements of principles and laudable and should be the
guiding principles of small states. As such, small states must act big
and talk big.
However, take a serious look at the statements and understand them a bit
deeper. Both are important statements but must be applied cautiously
and discriminately and not recklessly or foolhardy. Do not read the
statements superficially.
Take the first statement about not allowing our sovereignty and national
interests to be dictated by others. By sticking our guns onto this
policy, we must also put ourselves on the other side and not to dictate
on other people’s sovereignty and national interests. Get the point? We
do not want others to dictate to us, and we must not dictate to others
as well. Yes, do not trample onto others…
Similarly we must stand up when others try to intimidate us. There is a
big difference between standing up to intimidation and trying to
intimidate others, especially when it has nothing to do with us. When
the big powers did not intimidate us, it is foolhardy to intimidate the
big powers. When the big powers are not infringing on our sovereignty or
national interests, it is silly to infringe on their sovereignty or
national interests. In the South China Sea issue we are just an outlier,
a peripheral party.
I think this is as simple and easy to understand as you can get, no need
to explain further. The poking of our nose into the South China Sea
dispute is not just being a busy body, not only minding other people’s
business, but infringing on the sovereignty and national interests of
China and intimidating China. We deserved to be fucked. Period. This
is applying past lessons and Lee Kuan Yew’s thinking blindly, foolishly
and unintelligently. Don’t fuck around with big powers when they did not
fuck around with you.
There is a time to stand firm, act big when you are intimidated but act
small and don’t try to intimidate the big powers when there is no need
to. Small states have the right to chart its own course, but don’t be
foolish to want to chart the course of big states.
The recent revelation of ‘reputable’ American media printing fake news
or alternative truths in their papers came as a rude shock to the
ordinary unsuspecting readers who have all the years been made to
believe that these media only print the truth, nothing but the truth,
with some claiming to double or triple check their facts before
printing, to ensure that they print only the truth. And of course some
of these media have been ranked at the bottom of the list for their fake
news printing prowess.
What has happened in the USA may have rubbed off some people in
Singapore to realize that there were lots of fake news printed in the
media and that these are dangerous. Oops, I must make a clarification
on this. Fake news only occurred in social media, not in the century
tested, proven, trustworthy and reliable main media. They print only
real news, factually correct and nothing else. The govt is starting to
get uneasy and planning to introduce more laws to protect the citizens,
normally very daft, not sure it is part of the DNA or nurtured, so that
they would not read fake news. To do so, people who published fake news
would face the wrath of the new laws and may end up behind bars. This is
how serious the govt is today, to protect its people from being harm by
fake news.
The most reputable paper in the island that only published truthful news
(please ignore the fake reports that ranked the reputable paper at the
bottom of the ladder) has come out to tell its reader not to worry as
they would help the people to decide what is fake news from real news.
And if the readers are not sure, they can ask the paper for their
opinion. I am not sure how the local media are going to do this,
probably a hot line to let readers call in to check on the news, is it
fake or not fake. This is how caring the govt and local media have
become, to make sure the daft citizens of this island would not be
bluffed by fake news and taken advantage of.
In the past I used to tell myself that when I write a satirical post or a
joke, I must add a PS at the bottom of the article to tell my readers
that it is a satire or a joke as they are not supposed to know the
difference and would take everything as real stuff. And for believing
my satire or joke as real, I can be accused of propagating fake news
because the readers cannot tell the difference and I did not tell them
it is not real. I think from now onwards when I write something I must
add a remark to tell my readers that it is real or fake news, not that
my readers could not tell but one or two here may have such problems,
but to protect myself in case the law comes after me for publishing fake
news. I think it should be alright if I print something that is fake, a
satire or a joke and state it as so, then I would not be accused of
publishing fake news to mislead the innocent and unthinking readers that
are supposed to have difficulties telling the difference. When you have
a nation of daft, people with low thinking ability despite having
tertiary education, it is necessary to take precaution not to mislead
them and to protect them. Did someone say they never grow up?
So what if more than 50 percent of the population received tertiary
education and cannot tell between fake and real news? If they could then
the govt and the media would not have such a big headache trying to
come up with laws and assistance to help them understand. Dunno to
laugh or to cry.
Stupidity has no cure. Maybe next time they will teach the people how to
have sex and pass law to protect them in case they can’t tell the
difference between having real sex and fake sex. Oops, I am walking a
fine thin line on posting another piece of fake news. Ok, ok, no such
things ok, I am just using an example, not because of inhaling some
drugs or hallucinating without the aid of drugs. Ok, ok, I am just
another daft Singaporean that needs the protection of the laws on fake
news. Thank you very much. Now I feel safer already.
After two days of vigorous debates with the opposition MPs and PAP MPs
asking tough questions and throwing everything they had to Hsien Loong,
Singapore’s first world parliament has found Hsien Loong innocent of all
the charges by his brother and sister on corruption or abuse of power.
ESM Chok Tong said he has full confidence in Hsien Loong’s integrity.
Minister Heng Swee Kiat said there is no abuse of power.
Hsien Loong
also said there is no abuse of power and demand the MPs in parliament to
show proof. None of the MPs could come out with any proof that Hsien
Loong has abused his position as the PM. The allegations by Hsien Yang
and Wei Ling were thus unfounded, unjustified and unproven. It is not
easy to tarnish the reputation of our incorruptible politicians, and the
squeaky clean political system has stood the test of the day, its
integrity intact, faith in the govt restored. They are not paid millions
for nothing.
Now that these serious allegations are out of the way and confidence has
been restored on Hsien Loong as the PAP leader, the govt and the Civil
Service, everything is back to normal. Chok Tong told the Parliament to
move on.
What is left outstanding is the dispute on Lee Kuan Yew’s will on his
house. This is a private matter and both Hsien Yang and Wei Ling have
written a facebook post that they would settle these matters privately
or pursue them in court. Latest is that their conditional truce is not
agreeable to Hsien Loong and everyone is waiting for Act 2 to start.
The whole episode has ended just like a storm in a tea cup. Hsien Yang
and Wei Ling should count themselves lucky for being the brother and
sister of Hsien Loong. Otherwise, with such serious allegations and
unable to prove them, they would be sued till their pants dropped.
Whatever, the storm has subsided and calm has returned to the island.
The MPs and ministers can now go home and have a well deserved rest
after posting so many challenging and difficult questions to Hsien Loong
in Parliament. Not to forget the ministers and MPs that vigorously
came out to defend their leader and forgot that they were supposed to
ask questions about the allegations. They also did exceptionally well in
their arguments and defence of Hsien Loong. They should deserve more
than just a good rest. How about a bigger bonus or promotion?
Singaporeans have again been given a chance to watch how first world
Parliament worked in full transparency without everything laid on the
table, all above board, nothing to hide, and how false allegations
without proof are easily dispatched to the waste bin. Our Parliament is a
good example for others to learn from as a role model parliament of the
first world.
US war in Syria and threat to attack North Korea shows it is on the maniac psychopathic war path again.
Historically US has been on a psychopathic war path. This is criminal and is no different from a psychopathic serial killer except much worse and may be incomparable. US criminal wars kill hundreds of thousands or even millions of lives and cause untold painful sufferings to millions more as well as damages and destruction to countless numbers of properties and resources.
Why is America on a psychopathic war path since the day of its independence from England? US politicians and statesmen always have that inherent animal instinct of fierce and wild aggression which is similar to that of a tiger, lion, hyenas , leopards or crocodiles. This wild aggressive animal instinct is further aggravated by their strong belief in their religious doctrine of militancy and aggression which they claim is sanctioned and supported by their Christian God and therefore they claim they have not committed any wrong or sin in their unprovoked wars of aggression and conquests and killings of other peoples who do not subscribe to their religion. They are insane and their insanity can be found in their counterparts of the just as evil extreme Islamic militants of the Arabs. In fact both the Arab militant Islamic doctrine and the white men or American Christian religious doctrine spring from the same roots in the Holy Bible especially of the Old Testaments.
To learn more about American militant religious doctrine it is necessary to delve into its source "The Doctrine of Christian Discovery" and its offshoots :American Manifest Destiny" and "American Exceptionalism". These topics can be searched in Google or Wikileaks.
Who is behind this American Psychopathic war path? US seems to be ruled by an establishment consisting of two political parties The Democrats and The Republicans. a president, the Senate and Congress and House of Representatives. The two political parties are actually two sides of the same coin. They both subscribe to the same militant religious doctrines such as "The Doctrine of Christian Discovery" as well as the doctrines of American Manifest Destiny and American Exceptionalism , all of which are geared for aggression and conquest of other countries. Then what is the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans? The difference is that the leaders of both political parties are competing to be at the centre stage of political power directing government policies and strategies. They are no different from the Catholics and the Protestants or the Islamic Sunnies and Shias for they will always unite against others who are not one of them.
But who actually runs the American government and controls its governance and policies. Is it the president, the senate and congress or CIA and The Pentagon -the military. Whoever they are , they are all rogues, crooks and scoundrels with no iota of conscience. They are in turn control by a sinister body the Illuminati and the Free Masons which form a Deep State or shadow government controlling everything from behind the veil.No American politicians like the president, senators, congressmen and others can get elected without the approval of the Illuminati or the Deep State. And who are the ultimate powers behind the Illuminati? They are the rich and mighty powerful Anglo-Saxon Jewish Zionist Rothschilds cabal and the one percent elite Americans who hold the ultimate authority and decision making in Washington over watching and controlling the judiciary, Wall Street, banking and commerce,war and peace, CIA and The Pentagon in the military.
Don't ever hope for the world to have peace for as long as US is controlled by the Deep State or the sinister Shadow Government of the Illuminati, the Zionist Rothschild cabal who thrives on wars to make money. They believe in conducting permanent wars to sustain its humongous military war industries so as to perpetually make mountainous profits out of it. US will as a policy instigate and provoke other countries to fight so as to be able to sell military hardware to the unsuspecting warring factions. During the Second World War US was making hundreds of billions of dollars by selling oil and other natural resources to Hitler and Japan until it itself was caught in the web of the war when Germany U-Boats-submarines began to destroy and sink American merchant ships carrying war cargoes to England and Japan began to attack Pearl Harbour.
In order for the world to have peace it is necessary and essential for the world to unite and destroy America and the Zionist Rothschild Illuminati cabal.
This call for Hsien Loong to sue is getting louder and louder. The WP
has called for it in Parliament with Low Thia Khiang firing the first
shot. Lim Tean has come out with a 8 minute video to tell Hsien Loong
why he has to sue. Similarly the whole social media is flooded with the
same call, sue, sue, sue.
Tan Jee Say up the ante by writing to the President to demand an inquiry
and also calling for Hsien Loong to step down. SDP's Chee Soon Juan too
made a similar call not much different from what Low Thia Khiang said
in Parliament.
This is the first time in Singapore’s history that the call for the
Prime Minister to step down is heard so loudly. And if Hsien Loong still
refuses to sue, this call is likely to gain credence and volume. More
and more people will be embolden to demand Hsien Loong to sue as this is
the PAP standard for integrity and conduct of its MPs and ministers,
and the PM is no exception. Sue or step down.
Singapore is a rule of law country. The law is blind and there can be no
exception. Would the people allow the siblings to get away with the
serious allegations of corruption and abuse of power by the PM without
being sued and without the PM clearing his name in the court of law? Is
Hsien Loong’s explanation in Parliament adequate to absolve him from the
allegations and so he is clean and innocent and there is no need for
any follow up? Case closed, move on?
Without a proper closure in the courts of law how would it affect the
integrity and credibility of Hsien Loong and his standing among his
ministers and his reputation among world leaders?
What if the call for his resignation continues to a state of civil
disobedience, like another mass gathering at Hong Lim Park? It would not
look very good for Hsien Loong nor for Singapore. There must be a
proper closure for Hsien Loong to stand tall again, clean and pure and
his integrity restored and unquestionable. That is the Singapore
standard, the PAP standard.
The main issue cannot be about brotherly relationship or family ties.
The main issue is whether the allegations have any basis, true or false.
That is the crux of the matter. Not whether to sue or not to sue.
Protest at Hong Lim Park
Activist Gilbert Goh is organising a public protest on the allegations
of abuse of power by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in his dealings with
his siblings.
The proposed event will be held at Hong Lim Park on Saturday (15 July) from 4pm to 7pm.
When I first saw this photo (credit to CNN) I was wondering where was Donald Trump. Then I saw him at the edge of the photo, far far away from Merkel unlike the usual spot occupied by past American presidents, beside the host, I was puzzled. Given Trump's big bully antics, he would have elbowed everyone in the way to be right beside the host.
Then I saw a video clip showing how the guests were escorted to their spots with their names marked on the floor giving them no choice to muscle around, then I got the picture. Merkel specifically put Trump in a spot she chose for him. The USA is not a key player in Germany, in G20, cold shouldered.
This is another picture that is worth a thousand words and telling the same story. American President not welcomed in the front row. Look at both photos and see who were there to get the picture of who was in favour and who was not. (Credit to Getty's)
The days of the Americans as the front seat or front row VIP are over. Move over Trump.
This article is written as a sequel to Redbean's article, "The world's number one Outlaw threatening war in Korea." dated 07-07-2017.
Do not believe when US labels other countries as hostile, irresponsible, badly behave and a threat to world peace. The truth is always the other way round , the Americans.
The US has from the day of its independence from England adopted war as an acceptable means to national policy designs whether it is attacking and grabbing other countries lands, opening markets for trade, installing friendly puppet regimes and regime change. At the time of its independence US consisted of thirteen ( 13 ) states amounting to about Six Hundred Thousand Square miles. The rest of North America was still ruled by self-governing native American Indian states albeit under British sovereignty. For the start US planned the destruction of all the self-governing native Indian states and thus eventually acquired all the rest of North America with the resultant genocide of eighty-Five million North American natives or almost ninety-eight percent of them.
Beginning with the brutal genocidal wars on defenseless native American states US has been declaring and fighting more than 230 aggressive wars continuously out of its 242 years of its history. All these wars were criminal in nature as they were carried out wantonly and brutally against all the victimised countries with mass killings irrespective of men, women or children, genocide and destruction of scarce resources and native cultural sites, icons and artefacts.
The American people by and large are ignorant of their government using War as a national policy to achieve its ends of conquests and domination. US government and its state's mass media deliberately manipulate fake news and shore up official twisted and slanted official reports from the White House, CIA and Pentagon through misdirection.
For many years North Korea had accepted the good offices of China in the Six Party talks involving DPRK, China, Russia, South Korea, Japan and US to achieve a fair and just peaceful settlement to the Korean issue. Each time just as DPRK had accepted and signed the agreements the Evil Empire reneged, tore up the agreements and illaterally imposed further unwarranted conditions and sanctions. It then carried out frequent mass military drills involving the army, navy and airforce with Japan and South Korea to intimidate DPRK simulating an attack on North Korea. Thus DPRK has always been forced to react to US endless insidious provocations to protect itself from US attack and regime change by going nuclear.
US has never have any intention to a peaceful Korean settllement. Portraying North Korea as hostile and as an enemy will give US legitimacy in continuing to operate its over 400 military bases in South Korea, Japan, Guam, Philippines and the Marshall Islands
The crux of the Korean problem is not North Korea but the ultimate aim of the Evil Empire in containing China and Russia. US is using DPRK as an excuse and a proxy against China and Russia,the only two countries able to stand up to to US wild ambitions and capable of stopping the Evil Empire from world domination and hegemony.
The hot heads in Washington, CIA and Pentagon are contemplating and delving into the pros and cons of the possibilities of taking a pre-emptive nuclear strike against Russia and China foolishly thinking US will be able to survive and win a nuclear war.
The Evil Empire has more than 1,000 military bases around the world threatening every country big and small. The United Nations must demand that US close down all these military bases and let the world live in peace less humanity may have to face Armageddon due to US irrational wild ambitions.
