lonely voice of marina mahathir

She is a champion of a sort. A lonely voice in a world where women are supposed to be wrapped up, unheard and unseen. But she is fighting to be heard, to champion the cause of women in society. She wrote an article on the sentiments and attitude of believers and how they would react when their faiths are questioned. She pointed to the contrasting responses of Christians towards Dan Brown and the Da Vinci Code and the Muslims deadly threats towards Salman Rushdie and his Satanic Verses. Both authors and their books touched on issues that challenged the major doctrines of the respective religions. And the way the believers reacted simply lead the world to stereotype them as either rational or prone to violence. But her main objective is to call for her sisters in Islam to stand up and present another face of rationality and moderation. Would she find enough believers to take up the challenge and shed the shackles placed on them?

the story of ike see

When I read the story of Ike See, my immediate response is that another prodigy going to waste. Another case of rigid application of rules that puts up more obstacles to the few rare talents we have. It is tough being a Singaporean. But to be fair to Mindef, it is a tough decision to make. It is an exception that if seen positively, people will say Mindef is flexible. On the other hand, for those who cannot appreciate such musical talent, they will criticise the decision and say so what? In situation like this, someone has to make the decision. And either way, there will be those who agree and those who disagree. The bottom line, it points out one very important thing about being Singaporean. You have a big obligation and responsibility to the nation. And this is also a personal burden that all male Singaporeans have to bear. So please treat the male Singaporeans, or all Singaporeans who have to perform national service better. Please do not take this personal sacrifice for granted and opt for more foreign talents.

citizen reporting

There was a proliferation of blogs and forums reporting on the recent election. There was a sudden surge of interest on social and political issues among the people. The people are no longer apathetic and apolitical. The people are concerned and interested in social and national issues concerning them. Now isn't this a good thing? Isn't this what the govt wants, a maturing people who care for the nation. Or will we see more curbs to cut off such exuberance of the people? That the people should not get too nosy and should quietly go back to their lives, to the rat race, earning a living, now that they have chosen a reliable and competent govt comprising honest people with unquestionable integrity. I have been interviewed by one of the press and among the issues raised is the role of citizen reporting. Should the traditional media engage the citizens in cyberspace or should they ignore them? Like it or not, the citizens are not going to shut up. They will continue to express their views, colourful and even extreme views. And they will challenge the traditional media in reporting events and issues in the way they see it. And these are the views and feelings of the people. Not doctored views of the traditional media seen through specially coated lenses. The reporting scene will no longer be the preserves of the traditional media journalists. And the citizen reporting will grow in leaps and bounds as more people flock to the net to hear alternative and refreshing views and voices. News and news reporting will never be the same again.

where have all the forumers gone?

I have posted this article in response to Green Peas in redbeanforum. Hi Green Peas, A very big welcome to the forum. You are quite right to say that most of the forumers have disappeared after the general election. I was scratching my head to find out why. I scoured the forums and the activities have really died down except for those threads where forumers were biting at each other. Not many issues are now floating around. Even the news media are still clinging onto the post election bit to push out some articles to keep themselves busy. But the key thing is that Singaporeans are by nature quite conservative, reserve and inhibited in expressing their views. And one cannot run away from the element of fear. Everything we said here may one day be used or misquoted as evidence against us. The best example is Gayle Goh who was warned by all the well wishers to be careful in what she said. And prior to the election, when Balaji came out with the statement that blogs and forums need to be registered, the same quiet enveloped the whole cyberspace. Singaporeans need to speak out and express themselves. We should remove the fear and inhibition within us. We all make mistakes in our lives, in the things we said and do. By not saying or doing anything does not improve things except to minimise our mistakes. But it is through our mistakes that we learn. In general, the people are now more mature and more forgiving, more liberal in their judgement of other people's behaviours and little mistakes. Steve Chia is an example that despite the little skirmishes he had with the law, people still accept him as what he is. Of course there are parties or people who will rush to condemn someone for a little misdemeanour as if they themselves were angels and gods. But they could do so only because they kept their cupboards tightly closed and guarded. Practically everyone, every human being, has a cupboard full of skeletons. Lets be human and live with our mistakes and other people's mistakes. If we can do that, maybe we can speak a bit more freely, and laugh at ourselves. Relax a little, and kick a few arses if needed to and be kicked as well. one thing for sure, the number of new forumers coming to read blogs and forums are growing. i can see it from my statistics.

consistency in HR policies and job creation

Over the last few days we have seen two conflicting models of human resource management put on the showcase. The first case was the halfing of the pay of a professor at NTU, working for the same number of hours, but the HR dept claimed that his workload is half and thus deserved half pay, at the age of 55. Then we have another model from the PAP. This model emphasises the creation of many high paying jobs. So, other than being an MP, a candidate can be a Prime Minister, Senior Minister, Minister of State or Parliamentary Secretary. In addition to these positions, more are created like Senior Minister of State, Senior Parliamentary of State and Minister without Portfolio. And if that is not enough, they can have more than one minister in one ministry and more that one minister of state or parliamentary secretary. Not to mention that MPs can also be appointed as Mayors. Between the two models, understandably the second model is better as it is a very creative way of creating more high paying jobs. The NTU model is not only dissecting high paying jobs into halves, but also goes against the govt policies of keeping people gainfully employed after 55. It is also against the trend of people being able to live longer and be economically active till past 80 years. But the important thing is consistency. The govt must be consistent in its policy of encouraging employment past 55 years and to support its call to create more high paying quality jobs. And by setting a good example with its models of having multiple ministers in a ministry and creating more jobs at minister or junior minister levels, other govt or govt link organisations should follow the lead. On the other hand, if each organisation is deemed different and has their own peculiarities like after 55 years, professors and academics will suffer from dementia and their mental faculties will degenerate, then all the professors and academics reaching 55 should also have their workload halves and their pay also halves. Then people cannot cry discrimination or inconsistency. Fairness must be seen, and application of HR policies must be transparent.