8/30/2012
Sayang sayang
Alex Tan, a Reform Party candidate who stood in the GE against Hsien Loong is now being investigated for harassment against SBS Transit.
Here is a short clip from a post in TRE, ‘One of the founding editors of The Real Singapore (TRS) is being investigated by the police for “intentional haressment”, following a complaint by SBS Transit (SBS).
Alex Tan ZhiXiang was summoned by Tanglin Police Division after a Magistrate Complaint was lodged against him, for using multiple instances of F* word in an open letter addressed to SBS, commenting on the overcrowding and infrequent bus services.’
I read Alex’s letter which was posted in TRE by another blogger and indeed he spiced up his letter to SBS with a lot of ‘fuck’ words. I am now going to be more careful with using this word in case I offended any bloggers here. It is natural for some to have thinner skin or more sensitive skin. For those who are offended whenever the ‘fuck’ word is used here, let me sayang sayang you a bit to make you feel better.
And for those who are writing complaint letters to corporations, please be mindful that you can be investigated for intentional harassment. So, please hor, no say I never warn you or you did not know, it is quite dangerous and no one would sayang sayang you hor. Using ‘fuck’ word is a serious thing and can be hauled to court hor. This is Sinkapore where we are squeaky clean and a word like this is not for normal use by the inhabitants. They will be very offended by it and can report you to the police and sue you also.
A kindly word of advice to foreigners to read this carefully and don’t come here and fuck around ok and think it is ok. This is my contribution to integrating foreigners to our squeaky clean culture.
Heart very big 心很大
The big conversation in everyone’s lip now is about the heart, about how big is the heart, not about not having a heart. It is true that everyone has a heart. Believe me, it is true. And this heart grows bigger and bigger as one grows from a baby to an adult, and then it gradually stops growing. Our body can only accommodate a heart of a certain size. Normally the bigger the body the bigger the heart.
In a figurative sense, the heart is used to describe the desire, ambition and magnanimity of a person. When one is described to have a big heart, it is often a good thing. In another sense it can also connotes a negative feeling. A generous man has a big heart to forgive and forget, not a narrow heart. But a man with a big heart can be used to describe a very ambitious or greedy man, who covets for more and more.
The heart grows bigger and bigger, for instance, describe someone who was initially content to earn a 4 figure income, than 5 figure and then 6 figure income. The heart is growing bigger. It can also describe a person who thinks he can do three jobs, 5 jobs, or ten jobs at the same time, something like wearing more and more hats. Or the head is very big. There is a subtle difference between head very big and a big heart when doing more jobs is concerned. Big head is more like thinking too highly of oneself, that one can do a lot of things, very able. Big heart is like being too greedy, just want to have more jobs in the pocket with no regards to one’s ability, a bit like wild heart, 野心. And this kind of hearts can grow to enormous size, and can keeping growing non stop.
So, when we talk about big hearts, we need to know what we are talking about. When we praise people with big heart, it could mean a generous person or a greedy and ambitious person. And this kind of heart is not the same as the physical heart as every big or broad guy will have a big heart. And don’t get distracted by talking about the colour of the heart. Presumably all the hearts are red in colour and in the right place.
Six proposals to turn Sinkies into baby making machines
4 women from the PAP Women’s Wing, including MPs Jessica Tan and Intan Azura Mokhtar, have came out with 6 recommendations to make Singaporeans to produce more babies. And the recommendations are sensible.
Are they smarter than those that are paid millions to come up with such good proposals? Or when can’t those who are paid in the millions come out with such good proposals? The talents in the Women’s Wing cannot be more talented than the million dollar talents right? If they are, then the Women’s Wing talents should be paid the million dollars instead.
And why does it take so long for a group of women to come out with such good ideas? I think the answer to this is that someone came out to ask for ideas, so ideas are coming out now. Does it also mean that if no someone asked for ideas, then no ideas will be forthcoming?
Maybe the million dollar talents are working on some more brilliant ideas that they have not discovered in the past. Just hope they do not throw away the good ideas from the Women’s Wing but offer nothing better in return.
8/29/2012
Japan, US conduct island defense drill near Diaoyu Islands
| Globaltimes.cn | 2012-8-21 15:43:00 |
| US Moves in E. Aisa |
1.Japan, US conduct joint drills near Diaoyu Islands
Japan and the US have decided to intensify military and defense cooperation at a very sensitive time for the region. The decision was first reported on in the Japanese newspaper Sankei Shimbun. The news comes as relations between China and Japan have been severely strained due to the territory dispute over Diaoyu Islands.
2.S. Korea, US launch joint military drill
South Korean and US militaries have begun an annual joint exercise to test defenses against potential security threats.
3. Private deals between US, Japan concerning Diaoyu Islands "invalid": Chinese FM
According to Japan's Kyodo News Agency, a senior US State Department official said on July 9 that the Diaoyu Islands (referred to as the Senkaku Islands in Japan) fall within the scope of Article 5 of the US-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, as the Senkaku Islands have been under the administrative control of the government of Japan since they were returned as part of the reversion of Okinawa in 1972.
4. US-Japanese strategies put region at risk
At the end of April, the US and Japan reached a new agreement on the joint use of the US military bases in the Pacific region. According to media reports, the Japanese Self-Defense Forces are expected to station forces alongside US troops in the Philippines. Once Manila approves, Japan, the US and the Philippines will conduct specific military training together in Philippine bases.
5. Japan’s tough Diaoyu position aimed at US
In December 2011, Japan and the US jointly held a military drill. Such military drills have been practiced for more than two decades, but this time the scale was unprecedented.
The reason was exactly the incident that happened in September. Japan and the US assumed that the waters near the Diaoyu Islands might be threatened by Chinese military forces, although in ordinary people's eyes a fishing boat barely represents a nation.
Inventing the Chinese Threat
Inventing the Chinese Threat
John Glaser, August 17, 2012
“Since the disappearance of the
Soviet Union,” writes James Dobbins at RAND Corp., “China has become
America’s default adversary, the power against which the United States
measures itself militarily, at least when there is no more proximate
enemy in sight.”
I know what you’re thinking: What has China ever done to us? What
villainous offense have they committed to our well-being or our
interests? It can’t possibly be the case that China is our “default
adversary” just because the Soviet Union is gone, can it?
Well, yes it can. As Colin Powell, former Secretary of State and
retired four-star general, said about the fall of the Soviet Union,
Washington was remorseful that we “lost our best enemy.” The system –
the “whole structure,” Powell explained, “depended on there being a
Soviet Union that might attack us.” He said Mikhail Gorbachev sat
across the table from him at the time and said apologetically “Ah,
General, I’m sorry, you’ll have to find a new enemy.”
When people in Washington and their surrogates in the mass media
punditry crow about our other trumped up threat, they at least have a
laundry list of alleged transgressions. You know the list: they
support terrorism, they want to wipe Israel off the map, they’re
secretly building nuclear weapons, they killed US soldiers invading
and occupying neighboring Iraq, etc. With China, there is no such
list. China’s mere existence as anything other than a vassal state is
the major transgression. As James Holmes has written in the National
Interest, China “presents the sternest ‘anti-access’ challenge of any
prospective antagonist.” In other words, they resist US
interventionism and military presence. China is gaining power and
influence, which ought to be solely American prerogatives, as far as
Washington is concerned.
This is the reasoning behind President Obama’s strategic shift into
Asia-Pacific, announced by the administration last year. This
so-called ‘Asia pivot’ is an aggressive policy that involves surging
American military presence throughout the region – in the Philippines,
Japan, Australia, Guam, South Korea, Singapore, etc. – and backing
basically all of China’s rivals.
More than that, the Pentagon is drawing up new plans to prepare for an
air and sea war in Asia. “As part of the Air-Sea Battle concept,”
reports Military.com, the US is refurbishing old WWII bases, looking
“to disperse its air forces stationed at its handful of major bases in
the western Pacific in the event of a major conflict with China.”
Source: BBC
The idea is to have enough US bases peppered throughout the region so
that China would be too surrounded to safely attack. “Doing so would
make it more difficult for China to wipe out entire squadrons sitting
on the ground with surprise attacks from its long range ballistic
missiles.”
Chinese officials have not appreciated this unprovoked bellicosity. In
May the Chinese Defense Ministry accused the Pentagon of hyping a
Chinese military threat out of thin air. Others have said these
Pentagon moves could start an arms race. “If the U.S. military
develops Air-Sea Battle to deal with the [People’s Liberation Army],
the PLA will be forced to develop anti-Air-Sea Battle,” one officer,
Col. Gaoyue Fan, said last year in a debate sponsored by the Center
for Strategic and International Studies.
“Some Asia analysts worry that conventional strikes aimed at China
could spark a nuclear war,” according to the Washington Post. Other
“critics see a dangerous tendency toward alarmism that is exaggerating
the China threat to drive up defense spending.”
“While China’s overall military capabilities will not equal those of
the United States anytime soon,” Dobbins puzzlingly warns, “it will
more quickly achieve local superiority in its immediate neighborhood,
first in and around Taiwan and then at somewhat greater distances.”
To continue: Take your chance and click link if you have the you know
what's to do so .
http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/
John Glaser, August 17, 2012
“Since the disappearance of the
Soviet Union,” writes James Dobbins at RAND Corp., “China has become
America’s default adversary, the power against which the United States
measures itself militarily, at least when there is no more proximate
enemy in sight.”
I know what you’re thinking: What has China ever done to us? What
villainous offense have they committed to our well-being or our
interests? It can’t possibly be the case that China is our “default
adversary” just because the Soviet Union is gone, can it?
Well, yes it can. As Colin Powell, former Secretary of State and
retired four-star general, said about the fall of the Soviet Union,
Washington was remorseful that we “lost our best enemy.” The system –
the “whole structure,” Powell explained, “depended on there being a
Soviet Union that might attack us.” He said Mikhail Gorbachev sat
across the table from him at the time and said apologetically “Ah,
General, I’m sorry, you’ll have to find a new enemy.”
When people in Washington and their surrogates in the mass media
punditry crow about our other trumped up threat, they at least have a
laundry list of alleged transgressions. You know the list: they
support terrorism, they want to wipe Israel off the map, they’re
secretly building nuclear weapons, they killed US soldiers invading
and occupying neighboring Iraq, etc. With China, there is no such
list. China’s mere existence as anything other than a vassal state is
the major transgression. As James Holmes has written in the National
Interest, China “presents the sternest ‘anti-access’ challenge of any
prospective antagonist.” In other words, they resist US
interventionism and military presence. China is gaining power and
influence, which ought to be solely American prerogatives, as far as
Washington is concerned.
This is the reasoning behind President Obama’s strategic shift into
Asia-Pacific, announced by the administration last year. This
so-called ‘Asia pivot’ is an aggressive policy that involves surging
American military presence throughout the region – in the Philippines,
Japan, Australia, Guam, South Korea, Singapore, etc. – and backing
basically all of China’s rivals.
More than that, the Pentagon is drawing up new plans to prepare for an
air and sea war in Asia. “As part of the Air-Sea Battle concept,”
reports Military.com, the US is refurbishing old WWII bases, looking
“to disperse its air forces stationed at its handful of major bases in
the western Pacific in the event of a major conflict with China.”
Source: BBC
The idea is to have enough US bases peppered throughout the region so
that China would be too surrounded to safely attack. “Doing so would
make it more difficult for China to wipe out entire squadrons sitting
on the ground with surprise attacks from its long range ballistic
missiles.”
Chinese officials have not appreciated this unprovoked bellicosity. In
May the Chinese Defense Ministry accused the Pentagon of hyping a
Chinese military threat out of thin air. Others have said these
Pentagon moves could start an arms race. “If the U.S. military
develops Air-Sea Battle to deal with the [People’s Liberation Army],
the PLA will be forced to develop anti-Air-Sea Battle,” one officer,
Col. Gaoyue Fan, said last year in a debate sponsored by the Center
for Strategic and International Studies.
“Some Asia analysts worry that conventional strikes aimed at China
could spark a nuclear war,” according to the Washington Post. Other
“critics see a dangerous tendency toward alarmism that is exaggerating
the China threat to drive up defense spending.”
“While China’s overall military capabilities will not equal those of
the United States anytime soon,” Dobbins puzzlingly warns, “it will
more quickly achieve local superiority in its immediate neighborhood,
first in and around Taiwan and then at somewhat greater distances.”
To continue: Take your chance and click link if you have the you know
what's to do so .
http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)