let's create more tragedies

She is only 26, has three children, 7, 6 and 1 and divorced. At one stage she left for work daily and left the baby to the care of a 6 year old child, locked up in her flat with plain rice or noodles. How could people be so thoughtless and irresponsible, to bring lives to this world without caring how these lives are going to survive? How could these children ever think of growing up as normal children, go to school, get an education and live life without all the deprivation? How could people be so unfair and wicked to these children? Bullshit if they called it love. There was another man and a woman, both second marriage, both part time employees. And they had between them 4 children each. Do they care or know what life will be to these kids when they, the parents, could not even afford to look after themselves? And such tragedies are being perpetuated, if not, even encouraged by society. Are we being kind or evil to let these things to happen over and over again? When people are irresponsible to their children or to the lives they brought into this world, recklessly, what shall the society do to them? Or shall we pat them on their back and said well done, keep producing a few more tragedies?

myth 19

'Singaporean teachers are well trained to teach' I can't believe that I have to call this a myth. But when the Minister said so, then a myth it is. Tharman was shocked to discover that Singaporean teachers were not taught to teach English and were assigned to teach English. Now how could such a blunder happened in our world class education system? Now we even have an institution called National Institute of Education where all teachers are properlee trained and awarded a degree or diploma in education. Then why are our children shortchanged by having unqualified teachers to teach them English? I believe this must be so traumatic for the Minister that it prompted him to call for the recruitment of native speaking teachers to teach our students whose standard of English has deteriorated because our poor English Language teachers were not trained to teach the subject. Isn't that a mouthful?

myth 18

'All Singapore households own a TV' For a super rich Singapore where all household gadgets are part and parcel of life, owning a tv, radio, fridge, washing machine, hifi etc is now taken for granted. Every household should have these equipment. And so the story goes. This guy was fined by MDA for not reporting that he did not own a tv set. And the onus is on Singapore resident to inform MDA or else they will be fined. Why is there such a regulation? Isn't it enough when asked to pay for the licence, for the house owner to confirm that he does not own a tv set? This must be the problem of a super rich country. Maybe next time they will fine people for not owning a tv set. Maybe...below is copied from Singaporesurf. RECENTLY I received a summons sent by the Media Development Authority (MDA) for having a 'broadcast television receiver without a valid licence'. I called up Licensing Services (Broadcasting) to inform the staff that I have not had any television set in my house from at least last year, so how could I be guilty of the offence? An officer from the licensing unit told me: 'You did not inform us that you did not have a television set, so you have to pay the fine.'.... N. Stanley Jeremiah

do we need native angmo teachers?

We need angmo teachers to teach us English. Our standard of English has declined. A few immediate thoughts came to my mind. 1. Fire all the staff in MOE. All these high payment morons have failed the education system miserably and do not deserve to be there. 2. This is a case of pocket too much money. So fingers itchy and must find ways to spend them. Or something like if we want good sportsmen, just buy them. 3. Local talents are never good enough, so must pay for imported quality. Locals going to lose some jobs to foreigners again. 4. We are paying for quality foreign talents, so school fees must go up. Quality does not come cheap. After 40 years of excellence in our first class education, after 40 years of almost 100% literacy rate, after ramming our population with English in all major media and means of communication, from pop culture, fashion, literature, movies etc,... and our standard of English got from bad to worst? Why don't we look at it in a different way? Before, Ah Lian and Ah Beng only swore in Hokien or whatever dialects. Today they can swear in English. And they could do a little bit more. They can use words like auntie and uncle! Our society is anything but homogenous. The languages or dialects spoken are poles apart in terms of grammar, sentence construction etc etc. Do we really believe that with native angmo teachers our standard of English will be as good as England or America? And we believe that the mases will speak Queen's English like native English gentlemen? Even in England, many native English speakers speak in a variety of dialects and accents that are incomprehensible. The good English speakers are there, and those who need to speak and commnunicate in good English will possess the skills and abilities to do so. It is unnatural to expect the pork sellers and fishmongers in the market to speak good English. On the reverse, we could expect them to speak good dialects or their mother tongues. If we are thinking of having a nation of native English speakers, the only solution is to ban all other languages. Then we can proceed from there to make everyone a native English speaker. In reality, many Singaporeans are already native speakers and English is their mother tongue. English is not only their first language, the language they were born with and spoken at home, but also the only language they converse in daily. Want good native English teachers or not? Want, got or not? With our openly admitted position that our English Language is of sub standard, how are we going to attract foreign students to come here for a good English biased education? And how are we going to become a centre of excellence in Education? When foreign parents know that our English standard is half past six, no come anymore.

stomp, stomp, stomp

The Straits Times is stomping all over the cyberspace for the last few days. With the muscle of the the main paper, its advertising resources and the money it has, it is using all its marketing power to stage a claim to be the number one player. And it has been very successful in promoting itself, with free gifts being thrown at their visitors. I think the budget must be pretty substantial. The conquest and claim for a presence in cyberspace is on. The Straits Times means business, to gain its market share and readership in no man's land, in a new frontier. In the fun, pop culture and entertainment fields, there is no doubt that the Straits Times will have an upperhand over the other blogs and forums. These are fadish and politically neutral areas and are easily embraced by anyone who are in it. The true test of influence is in the social and political fields, providing views in these areas are politically sensitive. And as long as the Straits Times is seen as an official mouthpiece, its penetration in these areas are bound to be inhibited by its own history and background. The cynical, questioning, non conformist and rebellious readers will still seek the unregulated and freer blogs and forums for more refreshing views. What ever the Straits Times objectives, it is a welcome player in cyberspace and will make the scene more colourful, vibrant and interesting. Huh, more choices. Interest in cyberspace has blossomed and is now an area to be reckoned with. It now has a noticeable presence.