Covid19 - New York Times vaccine safety rankings

 

 
New York Times vaccine safety rankings

1. Sinopharm 

2. Sinovac

3. Kexing 

4. CanSino

5. Astrazeneca 

6. Pfizer

7. Moderna

8. John and Johnson 

9. Novavax 

10. Satellite 5(Russian) 

This is a very interesting and revealing data from New York Times. What is more revealing are things that were not said or written and readers would have to figure out what New York Times did not say or did not want to tell.

In the first place we need to take it that New York Times did not come up with the rankings by guessing but with statistics to support it or they would be sued or accused to spreading misinformation. Pfizer, Moderna, John and Johnson, Novavax would be very unhappy with their low rankings and be ranked lower than Astrazeneca.

Let me elaborate on this point first. Astrazeneca has very bad safety records and most European countries have banned its use. The Americans have a hoard of Astrazeneca vaccines and are giving it away for fear of adverse side effects. Japan too refused to use it and dumped what they had to Taiwan.

So, how dangerous is Astrazeneca? When the Americans, Europeans and Japanese think it is not fit and unsafe to be used, trust them and stop using them as the risk is too high, unacceptable risk. Some Asean countries are still using it out of no choice as they did not have enough supplies of other vaccines. It is a case of between the devil and the deep blue sea. 

Given the fact that Astrazeneca is unsafe, bad enough to use, why should any country be using vaccines that are more unsafe than Astrazeneca?  Pfizer and Moderna are both ranked lower than Astrazeneca. Logically they should be more unsafe and should not be used. Oh, the new slogan, the benefits outweigh the risk! 

How serious is the risk compares to Astrazeneca? Now one is talking about it or reporting it. They only reported the adverse effects of Astrazeneca. Imagine how much adverse data have been covered up, not to be reported. Imagine why so many silly leaders are still singing about how good Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are and encouraging their people to use them...when it is more unsafe than the already banned in many countries Astrazeneca?  Would or should Pfizer and Moderna be banned too? Why not?

The other important point to note is NY Times is anti China and always out to smear China and of course Chinese vaccines. For them to rank four Chinese vaccines at the top, safer than their darlings Pfizer and Moderna, must be something that they had no choice but to do so. There must be overwhelming evidence that proved that the Chinese vaccines are far safer than the American vaccines. Some stupid politicians are still trying to investigate if Chinese vaccines are safe and claiming ignorance and not enough data. Surely the NY Times rankings did not mean much to them, probably unreliable.

NY Times must have all the data of the vaccines on the table for comparison. And they had the gumption to rank Pfizer and Moderna lower than even a dangerous and banned Astrazeneca said it all. They could not do otherwise. The data must have all the adverse effects of Pfizer and Moderna that the public would not be privy to, not allowed to know. But NY Times know and has to admit the facts and thus cannot say they are safer than Astrazenca or safer than the Chinese vaccines, something that they were dying to do so. And Pfizer and Moderna would not dare to sue NYT to clear their names.

Now, what do you think? Why would countries be pushing for a much unsafe vaccine to their people instead of safer vaccines? Are they mad or irresponsible or there is something else that we don't know?

I am written sometimes back that this is a rare and unusual occasion when the white people deliberately chose to inject their people with poison, an act of God, to terminate themselves. Now the proof is here. They have safer vaccines but did not want to use but insisting on using less safe vaccines. How not the white men destroy themselves willingly when they chose to act based on political exigency?

The full impact of injecting poison into their bodies would only blossom in the near future, maybe 5 years or more. By then it would be too late for those injected with these unsafe vaccines. By then there is no way to rewind the clock. The rice would be cooked.

Good riddance for the evil crimes against humanity committed over a few centuries. The debt must be repaid.

With the finding that the mRNA vaccines did not or cannot prevent the infection, many are still stubbornly sticking to the belief that mRNA vaccines are still the panacea, the must have vaccines, the must jab to be safe. But this narrative is changing and the new narrative is that it would prevent an infection from getting worse with statistics selected to substantiate the belief. How real is this? Is it too much to admit that the narrative of the best thing to have is falling apart, not as what was bragged and believed? Only time will tell.

PS. You have been warned by NYT that Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are less safe than Astrazeneca. In another word, poison, as some scientists have called them.

Was the US Invasion of Afghanistan Legal Under International Law? - Part 3 + 4

It is quite clear that insufficient efforts were made by the US to pursue peaceful solutions or further dialogues and negotiations, as President Bush had give an ultimatum of two weeks for the Taliban to hand over suspected terrorists. When this time frame is compared to that of other international conflicts, for example the Israel-Palestine conflict, in which it had taken a tremendous amount of time to broker deals. Conversely, the Afghanistan government was given hardly any reasonable time to comply or discuss its problems, issues or reservations.

The law that was used by the US to justify the need for the invasion was Article 51 of the UN Charter, which deals with the issue of self-defence.

President George W Bush announced, in a speech delivered after the first strike on Afghanistan, "We have called up reserves to reinforce our military capability and strengthen the protection of our homeland." It can be seen through this quote, and many others by President George W. Bush, that the US believed its actions were justified on the grounds of self-defence. This justification was used because it was alleged that if Afghanistan was not contained, more terrorist attacks would occur in the US and elsewhere around the world.

However, the issue of self-defence could be raised by the Afghan people themselves too, as resistance against NATO and US forces and their perceived aggression could in itself equate to individual self-defence, countering the collective, national self-defence that the US claimed.

Furthermore, it should be noted that the terrorist attacks on 9/11 were not carried out by one state acting aggressively against the US. They were the actions of a terrorist organisation that had no direct links to the government of any state. This logic could also be used by Afghanistan to argue that the response of Afghans who subsequently joined resistance movements did so in retaliation to a pre-emptive strike by the US, as the 9/11 attacks cannot directly be traced back to Afghanistan.

In relation to a state fighting a non-state actor, if it was necessary for the US to invade a country in order to eliminate Al Qaeda, then it can be argued that Saudi Arabia would have been a more logical choice than Afghanistan. This is because many reports over the years have suggested that Al Qaeda was formed, funded and trained by Saudi Arabia. This is affirmed by Wikileaks cables which mention this fact.

Legal scholar Olivier Corten states that there was ‘nearly unanimous political opposition to the Taliban regime’. Nonetheless even though there was strong opposition to the Taliban by various international organisations and states, regime change is not itself a substantial enough reason to allow for an invasion of one country by another. Thus, this justification for intervention by the occupying forces would not be seen as credible or permissible under international law. Furthermore, the Taliban were initially welcomed by the majority of the Afghan population when they came to power as they worked to eradicate ‘warlords and banditry’.

That is why an alternative narrative came into existence after the invasion had been going on for a while, namely that the invasion of Afghanistan by US and NATO forces was a humanitarian mission. And that the mission’s aim was to liberate the Afghan people and bring them democracy by eradicating the Taliban hold on the country.

Another important part of the Charter which needs to be mentioned is Article 2(3), which states that all disputes should be solved in a peaceful manner in order to ensure global peace and security. With this Article in mind, it seems that not enough effort was made to determine whether the objectives that the US wanted fulfilled by Afghanistan could be reached in such a manner. The threatening tone used by the former US President George W. Bush when addressing the issue, including the fact that he only gave the Taliban two weeks to hand over the suspected terrorists, suggests that this Article 2(3) was ignored entirely.

The issue of a state using force against a non-state actor is a contentious and compelling area that also needs to be analysed. Even though the Taliban was the only form of government in Afghanistan at the time of the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan, Al Qaeda was not. Thus, the war in Afghanistan with the aim to eradicate a non-state actor could be seen as beyond the scope of necessity and proportionality. This is because Al Qaeda did not have the kind of influence and control that the Taliban did in Afghanistan, so invading the country in order to eradicate them could be seen in a legal context as disproportionate and therefore illegitimate.

One more key issue to consider here is the principle of State Sovereignty. Afghanistan was primarily invaded due to the fact that people who the US considered to be terrorists linked to the 9/11 attacks and living in Afghanistan at the time were not handed over to the US. But it seems dialogue and diplomacy could have been pursued in order to reach an agreement, rather than rushing to the conclusion that an invasion was the only means for the US to achieve its objectives. This is because International Law states that other means to resolve disputes should be looked into before considering the act of war. This is affirmed by Article 2(4) of the UN charter which states that:

"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."

But due to the fact that the US government believed that it was acting to prevent further loss of civilian life by the perceived future threat of Al Qaeda, such objectives could be viewed as being humanitarian and not territorial or political, as was done in Kosovo, thus leading people to believe that such an operation was more legitimate than any other form of conflict.

However, George W Bush only gave the Taliban two weeks to hand over terrorist operatives and it seems that no other forms of negotiations were engaged in, so not all that could be done to prevent war was undertaken by the US and the NATO states that subsequently invaded Afghanistan.

Washington had failed to recognise the opposition to Al Qaeda, which was vast in the Muslim world. If the US had looked to work with such groups, the spread of Al Qaeda might have been better contained than it is at present.

Furthermore, it could be argued that the Taliban was reluctant to give up these alleged terrorists for numerous reasons, one of the main ones being that it could have caused unrest in Afghanistan if it was not a move that the majority of the Afghan population supported. And given that Afghanistan had already suffered a bloody and devastating civil war, this was a serious issue that needed to be considered.

Another issue to consider was the fact that declaring war on the basis of one terrorist attack could be seen as going against the principles of necessity and proportionality when looking to engage in war, even if a state is relying on self-defence as a justification for war.

SSO - 31 July 2021.

Credit is hereby declared:

This article is an adaptation and modification of an essay written by Rabia Khan for a Master's program at the University of London. It was written in January 2013 and published on 6 November 2013.

Was the US Invasion of Afghanistan Legal Under International Law? - Part 1+2

Introduction

This article sets out to analyse whether the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 was legal under international law.

Reference is primarily made to the United Nations Charter and customary international law.

Moralistic and pacifist arguments are not relied upon in this article, as the aim here is to assess the conflict within a legal context.

The work of legal scholars, academics, journalists and politicians are also used for analysis in order to determine the legitimacy of the war.


Brief History of Modern Afghanistan (1979 Onwards)

Afghanistan is a country with a population of approximately 30 million people. It is predominantly a Muslim country and is very ethnically diverse. The major ethnic groups in Afghanistan include the Pashtuns (who make up around half the population of Afghanistan), Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks and Turkmen.

The country was invaded in 1979 by the Soviet Union, after they believed that the Afghan elite was becoming increasingly close to the Americans and drifting away from the Soviets.

The war began at a time when revolutions were taking place across Afghanistan. That war went on for just under 10 years, and resulted in the defeat of the Soviet Union and victory for the Taliban, and the Afghan resistance movement as a whole.

The Taliban was an Afghan resistance movement that came into being during the Soviet invasion as a direct response to the invasion. It was funded by the US and Pakistan and was made up mainly of ethnic Pashtuns.

The need for a resistance group was necessary in Afghanistan, as the Afghan army had been funded and trained by the Soviets and was in place to serve their interests.

After the Soviet invasion came to an end, Afghanistan continued to face an uncertain future and was still riddled with instability. This was due to the civil war that broke out in the country in the late 1980s which intensified in 1992, after the government of Afghan President Mohammad Najibullah was toppled.

The civil war itself went on for over a decade and resulted in the deaths of approximately 400,000 Afghans.

After the Taliban seized control of Kabul, a group known as the Northern Alliance was formed. This group consisted mainly of Afghan minorities of Central Asian descent and was funded primarily by Iran, as well as the CIA. But the Northern Alliance fell apart by late 2001, and was not in any way as powerful as the Taliban when it was in existence.


The Beginning of ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’

The invasion of Afghanistan took place on the 7th of October 2001, and was called ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ by the United States Government. The US Government claimed that the invasion was in retaliation to the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York and Pennsylvania. The main reason the invasion took place was because the US felt that it could eradicate Al-Qaeda and its support network within the Taliban through military action. The US claimed that it needed to get troops on the ground in Afghanistan, as Afghanistan refused to comply when asked to hand over terrorists that had sought refuge there. These were terrorists that the US believed played a major role in the 9/11 attacks.

On hindsight, after numerous Independent investigations and studies, the 9/11 attacks are said to have been carried out by people organised, trained and funded by Saudi Arabia, and probably Israel was also involved in one way or another.

It must be noted that no terrorist organisation in the world had claimed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks, even if some may have sympathised with the act itself. 

Yoram Dinstein in his book 'War, Aggression and Self-Defence' incorrectly made the assertion that the Taliban had alluded to having conspired in implementing the attacks. In reality, the chief spokesperson of the Taliban at the time of the attacks, Wakeel Ahmed Mutawakel, and the Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan, Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, both condemned the attacks and did not claim responsibly for them on the part of the Taliban or Al Qaeda. This is also affirmed by Aijaz Ahmad in his book 'Iraq, Afghanistan and the Imperialism of Our Time', where he writes, ‘it was in fact even more difficult to link the Taliban themselves with the events of 11 September; they denounced the attack immediately and promised in no uncertain terms to help find the culprits’.

What is a ‘Terrorist’?

The US and UK governments claimed that they were engaging in a war with Afghanistan because the country was harbouring terrorists that were complicit in the attacks that befell the US on the 11th of September 2001. In order to determine whether terrorists had taken refuge in Afghanistan and if they were actively operating from there, a descriptive definition of what a terrorist or terrorism comprises is due.

The CIA has its own definition of terrorism, namely that terrorism is a ‘premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.’ Thus, with reference to the CIA’s definition of terrorism, it can be deduced that anyone engaging in such activity is a terrorist.

Furthermore, in relation to the CIA’s definition of terrorism, Al-Qaeda fit the common narrative of being a terrorist organisation, as it uses an ideology to justify the use of violence against innocent people. However, a small issue of technicality does arise here, as the CIA’s definition does not account for motives for terrorism other than political. This issue should not be ignored as Al Qaeda uses a skewed religious ideology as the basis for its activities rather than a ‘politically motivated’ one. None the less, the suicide bombings carried out by Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the region would suggest that such activity can only be the work of a terrorist organisation, thus labelling Al Qaeda as such is justified.

On the other hand, labelling the Taliban as a terrorist organisation is problematic. This is because the Taliban was formed as a resistance group to fight against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, with funding from the US and Pakistan.

Also, conflating Al Qaeda and the Taliban has caused more confusion to the matter, as low level infiltration of the Taliban by Al Qaeda does not mean that both organisations are one and the same. Furthermore, the ideology of the Taliban is based around the application of Sharia law within Afghanistan, and it does not seek to follow Al Qaeda’s practices.

The Taliban continue to fight occupiers of their land and in the present context this applies to the US-led forces based there. Also unlike Al Qaeda, the Taliban are not active in terrorist attacks abroad, except in Pakistan due to the porous border between the two countries.

International Law on Self-Defence, the Use of Force and War

Initially, the United States had claimed that the invasion of Afghanistan was necessary on the grounds of self-defence, as a terrorist attack had taken place in the US and action was needed in order to prevent other such attacks. Afghanistan was specifically chosen since the US believed that terrorists were being harboured and trained there by Al Qaeda.

The former US President George W. Bush affirmed this when he said, ‘One by one we’re going to find [Al Qaeda and the Taliban] and piece by piece we’ll tear their terrorist network apart’.

SSO 

Credit is hereby declared:

This article is an adaptation and modification of an essay written by Rabia Khan for a Master's program at the University of London. It was written in January 2013 and published on 6 November 2013.

Covid19 - 75% of vaccinated people infected with Covid19 in Massachusetts

WASHINGTON: Three quarters of people infected with COVID-19 at public events in a Massachusetts town were fully vaccinated, a study by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed.

The study, published on Friday without naming the town, suggested the Delta variant of the virus was highly contagious.

Advertisement

The study found vaccinated individuals had a similar amount of virus presence as the unvaccinated, suggesting that, unlike with other variants, vaccinated people infected with the Delta variant could transmit the virus, the CDC said.

CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said this was a "pivotal discovery" leading to CDC's recommendation this week that masks be worn in areas where cases were surging as a precaution against possible transmission by fully vaccinated people.

The above Reuters report confirmed that vaccinated people are not safer than non vaccinated people against the virus especially Delta variant. It also said that the virus presence in vaccinated and unvaccinated people are similar, ie no difference, just as infectious.

The narrative in Singapore is that vaccinated people are safer though this is changing to one that said vaccinated people would have less severe infection than unvaccinated. Maybe the virus here and those in Massachusetts are different and the virus here are less likely to infect vaccinated people. Any data to prove this is so? Any view, vaccinated people are more dangerous carriers as many are asymtomatic and could be spreading the virus under a false confidence that they are not infected.

Whatever the narratives, the number of new cases is the new and real story. If the vaccines are effective, new cases must go down, not go up. The situations in US and UK are getting worse, more infections and more stringent measures introduced with mask becoming mandatory. And they all use mRNA vaccines, touted as the best by the sales talk with sales figures claiming more than 90% efficacy but losing ground and confidence with new data coming up.

Where is the solution, what is the solution when vaccines are no longer effective? The self denial that vaccines is the solution, the cure and prevention of this virus is growing very thin. Why keep poking and paying when it is not going to be effective?

PS. Vaccinated people infected with the Delta variant might be as contagious as those who are unvaccinated , the CDC says, and urged Americans to start wearing masks again.

Moon landing cat. How long more can the American cover up their moon landing hoax?

 

 

Look carefully at this American moon landing clip. Partially hidden by the translation band a cat was seen walking slowly across the screen, a few meters in front of the astronaut,...on the moon! How on earth could the cat be there?

Second point, looking at the shadow, the sun is pretty low on the horizon and very bright. Look at the reflection on the back of the astronaut. But it was pitch dark in the back where the sun was supposed to be.

Third point, the front of the astronaut and the cat were very bright, as if a reflector was used to reflect light onto them to show the details in their front. Normally their front would be pretty dark relative to the strong light behind them.

Fourth point. Remember the infamous Armstrong footprint on the moon? And also the numerous footprints around their lunar module in an area that looked damp? The astronaut above was walking some distance from the rover behind. But there was no trace of any footprint behind him or around him. It looked as if he was planted on the spot for a photo shoot and a cat just walked past nonchalantly.

China's moon mission is not simply to explore the moon and setting up a moon base station. It is also there to expose the American lies that they landed on the moon.  With the recent visit to the moon by its probes and collecting samples of moon soil, China is on the very of confirming that the American moon landing was simply a lie, a typical American big white lie.

Covid19 - Petition to allow vaccinatee Indians to enter Singapore

 As travel restrictions prevail, a petition has popped up on Change.org urging the Singapore government to allow vaccinated individuals from India to enter the country.

The petition, titled “Ease Travel Restrictions for Vaccinated ‘Indian’ with Singapore“, has garnered over 4,300 signatures at the time of writing.

Specifically, the petition seeks to have Indian travellers with valid work, student, or dependent visas or holders of other passes to be allowed to enter Singapore if they can provide a government-issued vaccination certificate on the Indian government’s end....

The situation in India, the petition claimed, has “improved a lot” as new daily COVID-19 cases have been “significantly reduced” recently, coupled with the “accelerating” drive to vaccinate the population....

In April, the COVID-19 pandemic started to spiral out of control as the country faced a new wave of infections, with new cases being reported at over 300,000 each day

 

Above is quoted from TOC.  Apparently more than 4,000 have signed the petition. Not sure how many Singaporeans were among the 4,000+ that signed. Any thinking Singaporean would be asking, are the numbers reported in India true, the situation has improved? What is the situation now, acceptable?

Another question, how many would believe the certificates for vaccination are real, not fakes?

How many of you would think it is a good thing, a wise thing, to sign this petition?

The Illegal US Invasion Of Afghanistan in 2001

The United States' invasion of Afghanistan occurred after the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York, USA, in late 2001. This Invasion was part of the Bush Administration's War on Terror, the countering of terror with even greater terror, by inflicting untold and uncountable sufferings upon millions of innocent women and children of the Afghan people and people in the neighbouring countries.

The aggression is also known as the US War against the Afghan people, or the 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan.

On the surface, publicly, the US claimed that the aim of the invasion was to dismantle the al-Qaeda and deny it a safe base of operations in Afghanistan by forcefully overthrowing the existing Afghan Government, led by the Taliban, from power.

In reality, the Invasion of Afghanistan by the US, and its few coerced or cowed allies, was an extension and expansion of the Afghan Civil War's from 1996 to 2001, between the Northern Alliance groups and the Taliban forces which controlled 90% of the country by 2001.

The Northern Alliance Group was a number of Afghan warlords, supported by Western powers, mainly the UK, US and France. Yet they have lost the fight miserably to the Taliban forces because of popular and widespread supports of the local population given to the Taliban. The Taliban was/is actually a nationalistic movement painted black and evil by the evil White Imperialists, who were more interested in the natural resources of Afghanistan than caring for the Afghan people.

The US invasion of Afghanistan became the first phase of the War in Afghanistan, which has three main phases.

This Invasion was not debated or approved by the United Nations Security Council. It was an arbitrary, unilateral decision made by the US with a few of its allies being used to make it looked like a combined international force. Therefore, for all intents and purposes, the US Invasion of Afghanistan was totally illegal and belligerent.

Whatever resolutions then passed by the United Nations Security Council on Afghanistan after the US Invasion cannot be used to justify for the US invasion of Afghanistan. The US had totally disregarded International Laws in the first place.

The US Invasion of Afghanistan is illegal and, therefore, criminal. Period.


SSO - 30 July 2021.

Muslim countries found China as a reliable partner and trusting friend

 After centuries of colonisation, oppression, exploitation and invasion by the West, the Muslim countries have found a new consensus in China as a trusted friend and reliable partner to build strong economic and strategic relationship. No longer would they be bullied by the West, be controlled and manipulated by the West, be invaded and their people killed and countries destroyed by the West. They no longer trust the West and their white lies.

Iraq is inviting China to rebuild its infrastructure destroyed by the invading Americans.  Syria is doing likewise, inviting China and accepting Chinese military aid and infrastructure building brigades to rebuild their war torn countries, bombed and destroyed by the Americans. 

Iran could have been invaded and suffered a fate worse than Iraq and Syria if China did not stand solidly behind them and telling the Americans that China would not stand idly by if they invade Iran. China also defied the American sanctions and became the major buyer of Iranian oil when the rest of the world were threatened by the Americans from doing so.  This gave the Iranians a lifeline and support for its isolated economy. Chinese economic and military aid, including the sales of sophisticated and modern military weapons to counter the American military might flowed freely into Iran. The Chinese support kept the Americans at bay and the Iranian economy churning.

The latest, the failed occupation of Afghanistan and the defeat by the Taliban forced the Americans to withdraw from a devastating war they could not win. Again, China is the country that the Taliban sought help from to rebuild their country and as the trusted mediator with the Afghan govt in Kabul.

What did all these developments said about China and the USA in the eyes of the Muslim countries, despite the daily attacks and demonisation of China with fabricated lies by the Americans and the Brits? Yes, the Muslim countries no longer trust the white men and are gravitating to a China that they can rely on to rebuild their flatten countries destroyed by the white men.

The white men, especially the Americans and the Brits, have completely lost the trust of the Muslim countries. No more white lies would turn them against China. Not that the Muslim countries believed or trusted the white men in the past, but there was no one to turn to then.  China was also economically and military weaker than the West and could not be of much help. The revival and rise of China as a super power and its ability and willingness to stand up to the oppression of the white men, in particular the Americans, give the Muslim countries a new hope that there is now a China to stand by them and to stand up for them against the bullying and oppression of the white men.

The table has turned in the Middle East and Central Asia against the white men, especially the Americans. China is now the country to turn to for help, for economic cooperation and infrastructure development and a military force to be reckon with to protect the weaker countries from American and white men's threat of war and destruction.

A new balance of power is taking shape with hopes for peace, development, cooperation and prosperity for the people of Central Asia and the Middle East. With the Americans and white men kept out of the region, peace will return, forged by the BRI financed by Chinese money and backed by China's military power.

Central Asia and the Middle East, mostly Muslim countries could see a better future of peace and stability and economic growth. No more wars, no more coercion and bullying and looting by the West.

The Americans and white men have proven beyond any doubt that they are liars, cheats and untrustworthy partners to the Muslim countries and would no longer be trusted again, would not be invited or allowed into their countries to wage wars against their people, ruined their economies and countries, wounding and killing their people, making many homeless widows and orphans and many refugees. The crimes against humanity, against the Muslim people shall never be allowed to be repeated again.

Muslim countries have abandoned the Americans and white men, turning to China for support. They have enough of American and white men hypocrisies and treachery. They know who is against them, killing them, destroying their countries and people.

PS.  The Afghan Taliban support the BRI and pledged not to support anti China terrorist groups in Afghans. The terrorist groups were mostly supported, trained and finance by the Americans.

First Group of Afghan-US Spies Evacuated To USA

This reminds me of the fall of the US US-Vietnam War in 1974/5. History repeats itself again. Only this time it's not so chaotic as before.

As the US military forces withdraw from Afghanistan, the Taliban resistance militia has manage to recapture and control more than 60% of the country. Only about 20% of the land are controlled by Afghan government forces. The other 20% are contested ground, which the Taliban seems to have the upper hand.

(The Talibans were removed from power by force through the illegal US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, initiated by President George W Bush.)

As the Taliban militia forces win more and more territories, threats against Afghan traitors who spied or worked for the US military and CIA have become more intensified and imminent. As such, the US is frantically trying to get their Afghan spies and operatives out of Afghanistan as fast as possible.

The first group of 2,500 interpreters (spies) and their families has been evacuated from Afghanistan on Thursday to Washington DC.

They are temporarily housed at the military quarters near Fort Lee Army Base, waiting for the completion of their Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) processing.

The SIV programme is offered to those who worked with the US government or American-led military forces during the Afghanistan war, which began in 2001.

Since 2008, approximately 70,000 Afghans who have received SIVs have been resettled in the US.

Last week, a senior state department official said that the total number of SIV applicants stands just over 20,000. About half have yet to complete the first steps of the process.

Mike Jason, a former US Army battalion commander who has been deployed to Afghanistan, said that travelling across Taliban-controlled areas with the documentation needed for SIVs puts the translators in crucial dangers.

"That's basically an entire confession that you're an interpreter working for the Americans. We're asking them to travel with the evidence," he said.

The "No One Left Behind" agency estimates that at least 300 Afghan traitors or family members have been killed. The figure seems too low. More traitors could/should have been killed.

The mass evacuation is codenamed "Operation Allies Refuge". This marks the end of the US military invasion of Afghanistan.


SSO - 30 July 2021.

Covid19 - Sign petition to investigate Fort Detrick lab for origins of Covid91

 Click here to sign at the bottom of the webpage.  

'US-launched cyberattacks have ramped up attacks against an online petition for a probe into Fort Detrick lab on COVID-19 origins as it has gathered nearly 20 million signatures. The petition has been a channel for overseas netizens to contribute their signature as many have expressed their support.

As of  Wednesday evening, the online petition demanding the World Health Organization (WHO) investigate the US' Fort Detrick lab on the origins of COVID-19 has gathered more than 17.75 million signatures, and the number is still growing.

Meanwhile, the server that hosts the petition has been under continued cyberattacks launched from US IP addresses, including DDoS (distributed denial of service) attacks on a large scale. Earlier, the US-launched attack had come on Saturday evening when the number of signatures reached 10 million.' Global Times

You can click on the above link to support this petition.

Random brief facts and truth . ( A )

      The U.S. - Yankee - North Carolina Fort Detrick Virus

The diabolical U.S. Yankee Corona virus which is causing turmoil and death through out the world was conceived and planned decades ago by American billionaire elitists whose control of their multinational pharmaceutical and chemical companies such as Pfizer, Monsanto, Bayer, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Glaxo Smith Kline and Lily just to name a few gave them the free way to carry out all their evil plans. These evil billionaire Wall Street bankers and business tycoons are all members of the diabolical Anglo-Saxon-Rothschild-Illuminati cabal. The Cabal are liberal democratic capitalists whose political and economic philosophy is Darwinism. They are devout Darwinists whose practise of Darwinism philosophy which is based on the 'Law of the Jungle' is the belief in the survival of the fittest. In other words the liberal democratic capitalists can use their absurb monopoly of power to trample you or trample any other country and that 'ýou die is your own business'. This is contrary to communist - socialist philosophy which believes in helping and prosper your neighbour and to achieve the common good of rising and developing together. 

The 'Cabal'constitutes the Deep State, the 'Shadow government' which controls both the American Republican Party and the Democrats. Both parties are beholden to the all powerful multi-billionaires or trillionaires of the Cabal which actually calls the tune and controls the politics, economic policy and Foreign Policy of the U.S. Thus American indulgence in 'liberal democratic capitalism and Darwinism has disadvantaged the large majority of the American people  or more than 95 percent of the population. Likewise they indulged in very aggressive foreign policies in attacking small or weak foreign countries and exploit them for their own enrichment and prosperity while grievously impoverish the victimised countries. This diabolical practice of the Cabal for world hegemony has been going on for centuries. Now they are demonizing Russia and China  with every intention of crushing the two countries because they are in the way of their world hegemony. But in going against Russia and China the United States will meet its nemesis and be itself crushed and destroyed forever. This will be the eventual good outcome for the world which hopefully will become more peaceful and harmonious. 

There are two perspectives to this American virus. The wicked billionaires have been working in close collaboration with the white supremacists in Washington,  the Pentagon and CIA. The first perspective was to use a genetically engineered virus in their biological labs as a weapon to destroy and reduce the population of non-white people in non-white countries substantially by at least two thirds. The next perspective was to turn the virus plan into a billion or trillion dollar money making racket of manufacturing a vaccine to sell to the virus affected countries. In the sales and purchase agreement and the use of their vaccines they have inserted clauses to prevent themselves from prosecutions should any side effects fatal or otherwise arise or should their vaccines turn out to be ineffective. As their motive is to destroy the populations of non-white races they intentionally held back the vaccines so that they would die quickly by the millions and at the same time to jack up the price of their vaccines under their control fake scarcity. They are so wicked that killing innocent non-white people is not enough for in addition they must make toxic money out of these victims.

In short the biological virus  they make  kill and decimate the non-white races but they also create vaccines  to make sinful money out of them.   This shows how wicked and evil the white race and the Anglo-Saxons headed by the white Americans are.

Their first target and victim was China when they secretly planted the virus in Wuhan, China during the International Military Games in October, 2019. However, the virus backfired and went home to roost to attack America and the white countries with greater severity and terrific vengeance. The rest is history and the world continues to suffer because of white men's evil design to rule the whole world with absolute hegemony. They are now facing retribution or Karma or Pow-ing in Chinese dictum.

Southernglory1

Thursday, 29th July, 2021

Covid Vaccination: Creates Over-Confidence That Takes The Guards Off

The UK has decided to allow people who have been fully vaccinated in the EU or US to enter England, Scotland and Wales freely without quarantine.

The change will come into force at 04:00 hours on Monday.

Currently, only people who received their jabs in the UK can avoid quarantine when arriving from amber list countries, except France.

The UK government said the rule change would help to reunite family and friends whose loved ones live abroad.

The rule change would make the coronaviruses very happy and also help the coronaviruses to reunite with their families and friends.

What a brilliant idea!

How to know who is fully jabbed and who is not? Use certificates that can be easily forged?

And even those who have been vaccinated can still be infected and can spread the disease even faster and wider because they show only mild symptoms or no symptoms.

Desperate times drive desperate people to adopt desperate measures that will ultimately make them even more desperate.


SSO - 29 July 2021

 PS. Comment by Redbean. 

UK is a country that has lost control of the virus. So there is nothing else to do but to open up to everyone. It makes no difference anymore. So all the countries in the same bad state would adopt the same option, welcome everyone and all virus. You know the risk, you are responsible to yourself. 

Let's see how many failed state will follow this route to open up irresponsibly and see the damage going forward.

CPF's unreasonable, unfair, unjustifiable logic of a bully

 CPF as a life long saving scheme started well and meant well. Setting aside as high as 40% of a person's monthly income for retirement is a bit too much, but no one is complaining of having too much of a good thing. The intent is good but the execution is turning unreasonable, abusive and abrasive and unreasonble and unacceptable to the people in many ways.

The first annoyance and offensive change was the shifting of the goal post, from being able to withdraw at 55 to 60,  and now 65 and hinting of moving it to 70. The people did not accept this lightly and were furious, but unable to do much against the govt that think it can do anything without the consent of the people, by changing the rules as and when it suka. It is leegal! What can the people do?

The following are the things that are unreasonable, unacceptable to the point of unthinkable.

1. How can a saving scheme for retirement has no consideration on when the people should stop saving after a certain age? The ridiculous nature of this saving scheme is that one is expected to continue to save and contribute new money into the system past the age of 60 to infinity. There is not cut off age and no regards to how much one has in the savings and how much one needs.

2. With no consideration to set a cut off date when a person no longer needs to save, some have more than enough to live a comfortable life after retirement, the scheme gradually turns to look like a trap, to tangkap the people's money at all cost. A good example is the interest on CPF money withdrawn for housing loans. The interest keeps running, interest on the borrower's own money, and this running even after the age when one is entitled to withdraw all his savings! This is made worse when one now cannot withdraw all the savings on withdrawal age. So the running interest could be even more than the loan. 

Why should a 60, 70 or 80 year old person be owing interest to a housing loan he took, the money for the loan is his/hers, when he/she is many years past the age that he/she can withdraw all the savings when he/she could die any moment? What kind of logic or premises is behind the thinking of the people in govt?

What this means is that a person that sold his property at 70 or 80 or 90, must put back the interest accrued from his housing loan, into the CPF and still cannot withdraw all from the CPF. Is this reasonable, meaningful or simply unreasonable and unthinkable?

Any reasonable saving policy must have a cut off point when there is no longer a need or requirement to want to save anymore, and many would even have more than they need to live on.

Should the millionaires in the govt be reminded of the purpose of a saving scheme for retirement and why, after a certain age, it is meaningless to save and save anymore, that it would be better to enjoy the life long savings that to be stressed up to be forced to save when one can die the next very next day?

Please be reasonable, please stop bullying the people by having an iron grip on their life savings, their money, to spend while they are still able to enjoy and conscious of being alive. Please stop being so mean when it is the people's life savings, not public money.

3. Compulsory medical insurance.  Regardless of whether you need it or not, whether you have private insurance, or if overseas, already contributing to insurance of country of residents, still must pay up. still got to pay for children's insurance, by law man, leegal man. Not paying up is a crime man.

4. No money to eat but got money in CPF. Many people are jobless, retired, no income, no savings, no money to eat, but have a lot of money in the CPF. But CPF money cannot touch. The logic, can die first from hunger and sickness, CPF money is for the future to live on, and in case, in case only, when one got sick in the future, got money to pay medical bills.  Brilliant thinking and very compassionate and caring. This is how good the thinking behind the CPF scheme.

With such a scheme, everyone that died, through sickness or hunger, will still have a lot of money in the CPF. Only millionaire policy makers can come up with such a fantastic and caring scheme for the people, to die rich.

PS. Comments from a 76 year old

However, the cunning Minister of Health has compel me to pay for compulsory medical insurance which I do not need.

Not only that. He also compel me to pay for my son's and daughter's medical insurance, which do not need because they are also covered in my pension agreement with the government. Everything is done by force, against my free will.

Even though I have been paying the medical insurance, I still have to keep a minimum sum in my compulsory Medisave account to "cover my medical expenses".

This double whammy upon my financial situation, when I have no more income and unable to find a decent job at my age, is a crooked, cruel and sadistic action deliberately inflicted upin a hapless old man. It is unthinkable, horrendous and inhuman.

With such an experience with the CPF, I will never put in even one single cent into the CPF.

CPF to me stands for Compel People by Force.

CPF - I want to have $2m in my CPF when I am 80

 

'The ST article also advised Singaporeans to refund the money that one might have withdrawn from CPF for home loan. ST wrote, “You should now set targets to give your OA a regular boost by refunding the money that you withdrew for your home loan.”

It advised people to go to myCPF website and “Make a housing refund with cash”. This is so that one “can have a high level of savings in your CPF again, as if you have never used a dollar to pay for your home loan”.

ST said this is the “secret” to how people can achieve about $700,000 in their OA when they are in their early 50s, by “dutifully contributed to their CPF since they were young”.

“If you can achieve this, you will stand a chance to have $1 million or more in your OA when you are in your 60s,” concluded ST.

There are 394,710 CPF members with over $500,000 such as the featured CPF member with 1.6 million in her CPF account. The CPF member’s age group (65-70) has 25,599 other similar members.'

I am so encouraged by the above posted in TOC, that I want to set a target of having $2m in my CPF savings when I am 80. I am going to withdraw whatever cash I have in my bank and repay the interest accrued from my CPF loans for housing.

I think I will become one of the richest 80 year olds in Singapore. I hope that I could live to 100 to enjoy my savings. I also hope that I would not suffer from dementia and forgot what I have in the CPF. 

My greatest consolation is that I would have enough savings to have a maid to push me around the parks every evening to watch the sunset, if my eyes are still able to see.

What a nice advice, and what a nice feeling to have so much money at 80. Maybe I should continue to save until I am 100 years old. Never too late to save.

Please don't call me stupidity has no cure. I like good advice that is well meaning and for my own good.

To be able to achieve this goal, I will now commence on a diet of eating bread and margarine and not to go for holidays. Only then can I smile every time I received my monthly statement from CPF....so much money, so rich. Siok, siok, siao, oops, sorry, siok.

PS.  This is the greatest advice I have ever had in my life. And I could, in an indirect way, contribute to our nation's investment in India that could blossom into billions and billions of profits and help to make many people very rich with big, big pay and big, big bonuses. But please don't ask me what the fxxx I want to do with $2m at 80.

What do you think?

China's claim of no man's island in the South China Sea has no basis?

Martin Abbugao
Tue, 27 July 2021, 7:40 pm


Pentagon chief Lloyd Austin said Tuesday that Beijing's expansive claims in the South China Sea have "no basis in international law", taking aim at China's growing assertiveness in the hotly contested waters.

Austin's broadside came at the start of his first trip to Southeast Asia as US defence secretary, as he seeks to rally allies in the region as a bulwark to China.  Yahoo News

 This black African American dared to denounce China's claim of no man's islands in the South China Sea as having no basis in international law.

Alright, what is the basis for the Europeans to claim the whole swath of North America, ie USA and Canada? These are not no man's lands. They belong to the natives of North America.  There were millions of them there. Can this black African American tell the world on what basis are the Europeans claiming these lands as theirs? 

On the basis that they could genocide the native Americans until near extinction and no longer able to occupy the land? Or was it on the basis of the Christian doctrine of Discovery, whereby the natives are not regarded as human beans but sub human beans and did not have any rights of ownership of the land?

Is there any international law that recognised the white Europeans' claim of USA and Canada? Did the UN recognise these claims?

Please tell the world on what basis did the white men claim ownership of USA and Canada,  and also Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii, Guam, Diego Garcia and many Atlantic and Pacific Islands?

The world, the UN, must question the white European's claims of native lands all over the world,  The UN must conduct an inquiry into the seizure of native lands by the white men and make a ruling on it. 

Yes, since the Americans are questioning the ownership of land claims, it is opportune for the UN to take a position on this subject and settle the score once and for all in the name of justice and fairness and in respecting the rights of natives and international law.

 

 

 

Covid19 - Why is vaccination imperative if it does not prevent infection?

 

As I see it, taking the vaccine is now a national imperative. Once the nation is well-vaccinated, we can get on the road to restoring what the pandemic has taken away from us.

Helping others will always involve personal risks and detriments. But we need to unite our efforts to save our country, our economy, and our future from the destructive effects of the pandemic.

To those who have volunteered to be vaccinated, I say thank you for your sacrifice and the risk you took, for sake of others and for loved ones.

In this pandemic which affects us all, there is a big picture to consider. In the big picture, so long as the nation is insufficiently vaccinated, our borders will never be fully opened, our economy will be hampered, and people’s lives and livelihoods will remain in limbo.

To those eligible for vaccination but are hesitant to take the vaccine, do consider joining the vaccination drive. In my humble opinion, time is not on our side. 

Jeannette Chong Aruldoss

The above is the concluding paragraph of an appeal by Jeannette Chong in a post in TRE.  Does anyone know what she is talking about? What is the real problem? I know, lawyers are very good in words, in arguments, but in science, technology and numbers?

The issue in her argument is that our lives are affected because the economy is affected and we need to get our lives back by reopening the economy. And why is vaccination imperative? It is to open the economy.

Then what does vaccination do? For one, vaccination does not stop one from getting infected. Two, vaccination does not prevent the spread of the virus. The best vaccination does is to lower the risk of the infection getting too serious or leading to death. What do these mean? Getting vaccination is a personal affair, about protecting oneself from being more sick or dying. Getting vaccinated or not does not increase or decrease the spread of  Covid19. 

The spread of the disease can be moderated by isolation, social distancing, wearing masks and not socialising when one is infected. It has little to do with vaccination!

So what is this hype about calling for compulsory vaccination or imperative vaccination if it is not going to have any direct effect on the spread of the disease or opening of the economy?

Go ahead and open the door, open the economy for all you want.  The people that did not get vaccinated would only be responsible to themselves and their actions would not lead to infecting others if they wear masks, maintain social distancing and isolate themselves when infected. Vaccination is only to protect themselves and lower the risk of hospitalisation and death if it did reach that stage. There is no need to cry and panic whether they are vaccinated or not.

In fact getting vaccination is taking a risk, a sacrifice, to allow the opening of the economy.  Can you believe this? Why would anyone want to take a risk for the sake of opening the economy? Is this too much to ask for? Asking people to take risk, make it compulsory some more, so that the economy can be open? OK, the compulsory call was not by Jeannette.  But I must give her credit for admitting that getting vaccinated is taking a risk. 

If getting vaccinated would prevent one from being infected, thus lowering the risk of spreading the disease, it would be more meaningful to make it compulsory, imperative. But it is not. It is now proven beyond any doubt that vaccination does not prevent one from being infected. This is unlike other vaccinations that we have known, eg, measles, polio, etc etc.

PS. From a commenter called Oxygen in TRE.

'The vaccines now in use seems ineffective of their claimed efficacy protection. Just look at the Jurong Port/KTV clusters where 3/4 of the infected are fully vaccinated, right?

This cluster proportion is higher than the population-wide averages (which include children) reveals the futility of vaccination outcome sought.

SO IT IS UNDERSTANDABLE THAT SOME DON’T WANT TO TAKE RISKS of the unknown when the known outcome is so dismally defeating of outcome.'

People's Association Caught Sleeping Again and Again?

 The People's Association must be a very exciting organisation to work in. It seems like there are new discoveries every year by the Auditor General's Office (AGO). Last year, there were several serious discrepancies discovered. This year, the AGO has again discovered several lapses and possible irregularities related to the People's Association's management.

The PA had engaged contractors to carry out minor building works at OTH and a managing agent to manage the facilities and supervise the contractors.

The AGO checked only a sample of payments totalling $1.27 million made between April 2018 and March 2020 and found possible irregularities in the supporting documents for 34 of the 36 payments. What if the AGO had checked ALL the thousands of payments? I think someone will faint on the spot.

The irregularities included possible falsification of quotations, alteration of hard-copy payment supporting documents and the creation and backdating of documents to give the false impression that proper processes had been followed.

"As the lapses relate to serious allegations involving falsification of documents, including in relation to claims by external parties, PA has lodged a police report and investigations are ongoing," the PA said, adding that it had suspended the staff involved pending the outcome of the investigation.

The PA also said it would set up a task force led by senior officers to strengthen processes in procurement, contract and facility management, raise staff capabilities, and improve oversight of contractors and managing agents.

It will also appoint an external consultant to conduct a thorough review of its governance system and oversight functions related to contract management of all development projects, the PA added.

The external consultant will be given a "broad mandate" to review such matters and provide recommendations to strengthen PA's oversight of contract management.

Other issues flagged by the AGO include lapses in the computation of adjustments for price fluctuations for the main construction contract at OTH and weaknesses in the management and oversight of contract variations for the main construction contracts for both OTH and HBB.

This means PA could have overpaid its contractors by an estimated $2 million for building materials for OTH, such as concrete and steel reinforcements.

The AGO also checked 465 contract variations amounting to $26.48 million and found lapses in 252 or 54.2 per cent of them. Contract variations are mutually agreed changes to the terms of contracts that are already in effect.

No evidence of approval was found for 109 contract variations, while approvals for 142 of them were obtained only one month to 5½ years after works had commenced or were already completed. There were also other issues such as the use of incorrect rates, resulting in over- and underpayments.

AGO also found wastage of $5.39m of public funds at HPB over excess fitness trackers.

AGO finds heritage items improperly deleted from NHB records, tender bids not evaluated.

But the PA failed to ensure this requirement was made explicit in the tenancy agreement. This resulted in the tenant charging fees that were 23 per cent higher than the cap specified for the first two years of its operation.

With a budget of $1 billion, or slightly less, per year, the money seems to be easy come easy go?

Every year, the AGO is bound to discover several lapses, irregularities, discrepancies or possible frauds in almost all the Ministries, Statutory Boards or other government agencies. This cannot go on and on for years. The government is urged to fix the root causes of such embarrassing and preventable lapses.

SSO

July 25, 2021

Quad - Gang of 4 fictional characters

 The Quad was the antagonistic scheme of the evil Americans to confront and challenge China's rise as the top superpower. The Americans have all the reasons to want to stop China from becoming richer and more powerful than them and to topple the Americans as the number one economy. Instead of facing the Chinese challenge head on by putting all their resources to boost up their economy, the Americans seek the way of the gangsters to want to block China by all kinds of aggression and wars.  This is in the blood of the Americans, wars and killings, to be rich and powerful by going to wars to kill their enemies, to steal their land and their resources and enslave the people. The continent of North America and its natives, South America and the Arab countries in the Middle East are all victims of American aggression.

Very few countries would want to go to war with China except for a few like Japan, India and Australia, that have an axe to grind for one reason or another.  In the military sense, only the Americans could present a real challenge to China. The rest are at best playing the role of jokers, jesters or spoilers.

In the case of Australia, a country with only 22m population, and a little military force that at best be enough to defend a city like Canberra and nothing else, definitely not enough to defend the piece of continent they stole from the aborigines, its role in the Quad is like a court jester. Everyday this jester would be pounding its chest and telling the top dog that it is going to send its soldiers to fight China, to go to war with China. What a joke. If Indonesia decides to take over this little clownish country, it would be over in a week before they could cry to the Americans for help.

India is big in population but otherwise just a spoiler. A poor third world country with pretension of being a super power but not even able to provide a decent life for its people, and a dilapidated armed forces that depend on buying weapons from other countries to give it some image of a modern army, can never be a threat to China. Without a strong military manufacturing base, its war machine could not last a week in a major war with China when it would be crying out loud for supplies of bullets and spare parts.

India would and could win all wars if wars is fought with the mouth and words. When real bullets and fighting soldiers are the key factors, India is best be forgotten. Its role in the Quad is best as a spoiler, a trumpet to make a lot of noises.

Japan has a significant military, the biggest and most powerful in Asia after China. But one for one, it is dwarfed by the might and heft of the PLA. Today Japan is no contest against China.  There would be no Japan to talk about should war breaks out with China. Japan would be history, a barren grave yard for centuries to come. Japan has three arch enemies in China, Russia and the Koreas, all waiting for a chance to turn it into smokes.

Japan knows its precarious situation after being the invader and butcher of China, Russia and the Koreas in WW2. It has a blood debt to pay and can only hope that this day would not come or can be kicked further down the road. Its only hope is for the Americans to be on its back and keep its enemies at bay. It needs the Quad to keep the balance and China in check. Unfortunately the value of Quad and the American protection is weakening with each passing day.

The day of reckoning must come and will come for Japan to face its crimes against China, Russia and the Koreas. This is the pathetic future waiting for Japan. And the Quad is as good as it could be as a fictional gang that would prove useless when that day comes. The Americans would not and would never fight a war with China. In conventional war, the Americans would be blown to pieces by the PLA. The PLA had done it in Korea, and to some extent in Vietnam. A nuclear war has no winners. The Americans are hoping to use the Quad as a straw man to frighten China with a joker, jester and a spoiler in tow. The latter three would be turned into mince meat by China if a war really comes. Straw man can only be straw man and nothing else.

COVID-19 Olympics: Stupidity has No Cure

 

Tokyo reported at least 1,979 new Covid-19 cases on Thursday, 22 July 2021, as the Olympic Games are just ONE day out from its official start.

The jump in new cases is the Japanese capital Tokyo's highest increase in new cases since January 15.

The number of Covid-19 cases in Japan linked to the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games has risen to 91, according to Tokyo 2020 organizers Thursday.

Nine of the 91 cases reported were residents of the Olympic Village, five of whom are athletes and four are "Games-related personnel."

The capital is currently under a coronavirus state of emergency — set to expire on August 22 — while the Tokyo 2020 Games are set to officially begin on Friday.

It is a clear sign of being stupid and stubborn to go ahead with the Olympics, when the COVID-19 Pandemic is still rampaging across the Whole World.

If one is stupid and stubborn at the same time, one is an IDIOT! When one is an idiot, then his stupidity has no cure.

It looks like the present set of Japanese leaders has stupidity that cannot be cured.

SSO

July 23, 2021

Reality vs Stats (CECA) As experienced by a real citizen

 

Dear Minister Tan See Leng,

This is an open letter as a handful of citizens may be interested in the matter of "employment disconnect" as seen from the eyes of a real citizen.

From your ministerial statement made on 6th July 2021, you declared:

"Today we still have about 22,000 PME jobs that are not filled. Companies are desperate to fill these jobs, and would love to take in Singaporeans if they could, because they would be more productive. So why are these jobs not filled till now?"
and

"The citizen unemployment rate over the past decade has been consistently low at around 3%".

Minister sir, then it is time for all of us to celebrate and smell the roses.......... if the above statements are true. That SG is actually experiencing full employment status as defined by textbook economists.

However, if the Minister would take the effort to leave his Ivory tower and spend some money to support our Grab and private hirer drivers and chat with them about why they are driving instead of being driven, then the Minister would tear up his stacks of data and bin them.

You will find your trip well spent and highly educational. Most of us speak good English. Able to talk about social, political, and diversified matters that come with our world-class education system. If you close your eyes, you could have sworn that you are actually speaking with a PMET. Imagine that. Like the CECA Indians, we the PMET drivers are everywhere!

The next question as a competent Minister of Manpower would ask " why are you driving risking your life for 8 to 12 hours a day without rest when there are 22,000 PMET jobs sitting in my office?"

Why indeed. As a humble PMET driver, I can only postulate that it is because there is
a Blockage that is stopping these jobs from being filled by SG. This also applies to the thousands of delivery drivers, food Pandas, security officers, supervisors and those who simply give up and slip through the cracks and out of the system. Your 3% unemployment rate would look rather untenable if you factor in the thousands that are not working in the appropriate jobs as commensurate with their experiences and educational level. A term that MOM should start adopting in your statistics - Underemployment.

By now, your senses must be chiming with a small alarm bell that not all is rosy at the grassroots level. Either the vacancies data you are provided with are false, thus permitting the hordes of PRs and new citizens continued and unrestricted entry into SG or a blockage that is undermining our ability to access these 22,000 PMET jobs. Or both.

I, like many others, have applied repeatedly for jobs that are in line with our expertise and experiences. Yet, over the 8 years of applications, I received less than 10 calls and 2 interviews. I assure you that I am not alone in this matter. I assure you that it has nothing to do with lack of skills upgrading too. This is some diversionary tactic to detract us from the grim fact that our jobs are simply taken over regardless of skills, salaries, and experiences. For many of us, this exercise is actually skills "downgrading".

As a responsible Minister, I urge you to be more proactive in this matter by:
1. Check and confirm that there are actually 22,000 PMET jobs available. Not just a number that has not been refreshed and gathering dust.

2. Deploy some manpower and speak with Real people on the ground driving, delivering, guarding, cleaning, and other jobs.......why they are doing what they are doing. Is
this to keep fit, hobby, list of things to do before dying or lack of proper jobs?

3. Include in your database, the status of "Underemployed" citizens for this group is not insignificant. This will provide a more realistic reflection on our state of employment.

4. Set up a "Sting" operation to flush out why these vacancies are blocked or even "gamed" and still not filled despite your so-called best efforts.

How?

Use actual CVs of unemployed PMETs to test the usual routes to potential employers and monitor what happens with the applications. Keep in close communication with the applicants.

If nothing happens after 1 month (no calls at all), then pay a friendly visit to the employer and enquire about the status of these unfilled jobs without giving their HR knowledge that the MOM has been monitoring the application.

I am sure that along with the thousands of unemployed PMETs, we will be very interested in learning why these jobs remain unfilled and what gems the MOM may uncover on the proviso that you are willing to reveal them.

We, the people of our beloved red dot, are mostly not smelling roses but the pong of Titan Arum aka "smelliest flower in the world". I urge you along with our esteemed Ministers to cast off your suits and really start looking with fresh eyes instead of burying yourselves in statistics for you are losing touch with your own people - I mean Singaporeans who have served the Army, reservists and wives and mothers that borne them.

Your humble GRAB driver,
Philip Wen

July 25, 2021