The DRUMS of War

Many bloggers are still very uncomfortable with Eng Hen’s comment on the internet and the acronym DRUMS, meaning Distortions, Rumours, Untruths, Misinformation and Smears, that can spread far and wide in the internet. As this came closely after the new licensing laws on websites, it is natural for bloggers to feel that both are inter related and a concerted effort by the Govt to curb internet freedom. Some fear that this is like the Govt declaring war on bloggers and netizens.
 
One underlying assumption is that DRUMS could be spread in the internet to undermine the Govt, or aiming at discrediting the Govt, or be simply anti Govt. Another assumption is that this would be the works of Sinkies to a great extent. The other more dangerous and expected part is that DRUMS could come from external sources which would be more direct in many cases, or in disguise and subtle as the works of the Sinkies.
 
Paranoia is raising its head in some quarters. No doubt the internet has been pretty critical of the Govt in many issues recently. Without the internet, such issues would not have been blown up and many would either die a natural death through a wall of silence, or be simply dissipated over time. The internet is making a presence that makes governing that much more difficult than before. Every little hiccup or flaw in govt decisions or policies will be pasted on the internet wall, truth or untruth, half truth or exaggeration, for all to see.
 
This development has made the Govt feeling very uneasy and very uncomfortable. They are unable to adapt or get use to being in the spotlight for all the wrong things. Things will be so much nicer and running the city so much easier without the irritating noises coming from the internet.
 
With this kind of mindset, that the internet is NG or up to no good, and DRUMS could be the latest label of threats to the people and country and any perpetrator of DRUMS is likely to face the music. The internet has in a way been seen as a trouble maker, an enemy of the state, on the other side of the fence unlike the main media. They are more likely to create mischief and chaos that will undermine the Govt.
 
Is that true? Admittedly there have been many unhappy and disgruntled views, very critical and some even hostile to the Govt, posted in the internet. If one is to step back and ask a simple question, why are such views posted and what are the intent of the authors, one cannot miss the fact that they are genuine feedbacks to the Govt and demanding attention. They are not advocating rioting or an uprising to overthrow the Govt. Look at them positively, they are saying that the Govt can and still have time to tackle the issues and problems raised. They are not enemies of the Govt but concerned citizens, or citizens who are badly affected by bad policies.
 
Would the Govt embrace them, take the angry comments seriously and work on it? Or would the Govt simply ignore and dismiss them as nothing worth listening to, that they are voices of the enemies? Taking the first stand could lead to a narrowing of the differences and making policies more acceptable to the people. Taking the latter stand would only divide the people further from the Govt.
 
In a crisis situation, or when the country faces a common threat, it is likely that many critics would rally around the Govt as one people one nation, to deal with the crisis. But if the Govt is to take the critics as enemies from first base, then they will be enemies, real or imagined, or even fabricated or concocted.
 
Many netizens are concerned and responsible citizens. Period. Do not regard them as enemies of the Govt. The people who spoke out, who spent efforts to tell the Govt that things are wrong, or things are going wrong, are people who care for this country and its citizens. They are the real patriots, the unappreciated friends of the Govt but wrongly perceived as threats by the narrow minded and the unenlightened.
 
The sound of the DRUMS can be music but can also be noise depending on who is the drummer and who is the listener. No more branding or tagging please.

Cyber Space : The Wolf And The Lamb

The wolf and the lamb
Updated: 2013-07-29 10:41
By Xu Peixi ( China.org.cn)


The wolf and the lamb
  Face off [By Jiao Haiyang/China.org.cn]

In Aesop's fable about the wolf and the lamb, the wolf wants to eat the lamb yet does not want to convey an unreasonable or greedy self-image. Keeping this in the back of its head, the wolf invents a series of excuses ranging from "you muddle the water from which I am drinking," to "you insulted me last year" and "you feed on my pasture." Nonetheless, the lamb is able to refute every single one of these accusations. These refutations range from "I cannot be the cause for the water being muddy because it runs down from you to me" to "I have not yet tasted grass." The wolf gobbles up the lamb anyway. The moral of this story? A tyrant will use any excuse to do evil.

To the larger Chinese public, the US-China row over cyber security and whistleblower Edward Snowden seemingly reproduces the narratives contained in the fable.

On the American side, Google accused the Chinese government of accessing "the accounts of dozens of US-, China- and Europe-based Gmail users" and with that left the Chinese market. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned against the risks of investing in "countries with aggressive censorship and surveillance policies." American information security firm Mandiant reported that "140 companies have been hacked … and hacking groups from China were responsible for most of the attacks." American Attorney General Eric Holder announced a plan to "fight the quickly growing threat from cyber spies." National Security Advisor Thomas Donilon was concerned about "cyber intrusions emanating from China on an unprecedented scale" and warned that "the international community cannot afford to tolerate such activity from any country." Finally then, President Obama pushed the hard ball game to new heights by charging the Chinese government with endorsing espionage activities, and consequently called for US Congress to take action in "protecting people's privacy and civil liberties."

From the Chinese side then, some claimed that the US wolf controlled most of the world's Internet resources and was unreasonable in voicing such allegations against the Chinese lamb. Moreover, China said that China itself was in fact the most vulnerable target and biggest victim of hacking activities emanating from the US Former Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi responded that "the Chinese government opposes hacking activities," "anyone who tries to fabricate or piece together a sensational story to serve their political motives will not be able to blacken the name of others or whitewash oneself," and "what cyber space needs is not war, but rules and cooperation." Newly installed Prime Minster Li Keqiang simply dismissed American accusations as being a "presumption of guilt." Chinese President Xi Jinping called for "conducting good-faith cooperation" as to "remove misgivings and make information security and cyber security a positive area of cooperation between China and the US".


Yet for now, let us be reasonable – even in a post-Snowden era. The abovementioned American accusations are "fair" in the sense that they leave China room to refute. Surely, the Chinese refutations have not been heard by a wider global public since the American commercial media often dominates the global public opinion and redemption has to come within the West. Let us just say it is "fair" for the simple reason that China is able to give an explanation.

As the fable goes, for every excuse the wolf comes up with, the lamb is able to refute the claims and back up its arguments with evidence. However, the American trick – dubbed "21st century statecraft" – has gone far beyond what the wolf in Aesop's fable could ever imagine. Let us here reiterate the rationale used by Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. In his efforts to defame Chinese telecommunication companies Huawei/ZTE, he said: "China has the means, opportunities and motives to use telecommunication companies for malicious purposes." This charge implies a future tense that China is unable to rebut. In comparison with Mr. Rogers, the wolf in Aesop's fable is still being quite reasonable.

The dispute over cyber security in the post-Snowden era between the US and China has evolved onto psychological and cosmological levels. The issue of cyber security was discussed by a working group installed under the fifth China-US Strategic and Economic Dialogue. To many members of the global public, it appeared China wasted its chance at a full-fledged counterattack. Germany and Brazil, for example, would like to discuss the cyber security matter with the US, but their efforts did not materialize. The reason that China actually was able to do so, stemmed from the fact that the cyber security working group had been approved well before Snowden blew the lid off America's mass Internet surveillance, at the initiative of John Kerry and with the original purpose to shame China. Instead of fighting back, China asked for nothing but an explanation over the Snowden case and even this request was brushed aside. The Chinese philosophy behind this grand retreat is one of "live and let live," with the kind expectation that the US would take the message and back down. Nevertheless, this gesture was completely misinterpreted.

The US mistook China's kindness for cowardice. The reason behind this misinterpretation occurred on a cosmological level. The US adores the zero-sum game mentality, making China's reservations a stimulus for more American attacks. According to Norwegian peace researcher Johan Galtung, this American cosmological view of objects and people exists in terms of competition and tries to decide "who is best, who is worst, who wins and who loses." After a bizarre period of truce between both countries, running from early June when the first document was revealed through early July when the fifth China-US Economic and Strategic Dialogue started, the US went back to its old disapproving ways. During their so-called truce, China had wanted to give President Obama the benefit of the doubt and did not undertake any counterattack – despite its people learnt Chinese institutions had indeed been systematically hacked into. The US entered stand-off mode, mainly to observe China's reaction to the Snowden scandal. By the fifth China-US E&SD, the US thought it had figured China out and decided to resume its earlier accusations. Following American logic, when China is involved with espionage activity, it is called IPR theft. Whenever America does it, it is for the sake of national security.

If American accusations continue on the same level as before, China may still find it worthwhile to prove its innocence by providing counter evidence. However, politically-motivated American style accusations are bound to grow and self-escalate.

I would say that the abovementioned points to the typical American mentality that once it has gained any advantage over others (with the term "others" often referring to the former Soviet Union, large parts of Asia, the Middle East, Africa and the global South), it would use it against them; it mistakenly assumes China shares this same zero-sum mentality.

The American history is too short for it to realize that if you overstretch yourself, it will come back to you. In other words, the US need to follow the Dao in international relations. China has learned to respect this adage thousands years ago. "Whoever relies on the Dao in governance does not try to force issues or defeat enemies by force of arms because for every force there is a counterforce; violence, even well intentioned, always rebounds upon oneself" (taken from the "Dao De Jing," 551-479 BC, Para.30).

The American cyber, hot and cold warring mentality has to be dropped. Its propaganda of righteousness to showcase its moral superiority must be halted – unless it fixes its democracy deficit. My earlier analysis of the sudden rise of American accusations of China over cyber security issues were three-fold: to divert world attention over the American domination of Internet resources through the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, to create a new enemy to stimulate the imagination of the American public and bridge polarized party politics and to keep Chinese businesses out of the US in the name of national security while using its leverage to expand American business in China.

A solution for the aforementioned issues may already be overdue as severe harm has been done. The privacy and commercial secrets of global citizens and companies have been intercepted and/or stolen. There is also the particular element of the ultimate breaking point igniting a global sentiment of anger. American senior officials try to justify their actions to American citizens by saying that these activities are directed against foreign citizens. This kind of phrasing had Germans, Brazilians, Indians and Chinese speechless. The damage is done. However, fixing these problems would indeed make a fundamental difference: preventing the country from falling into fascism. At this time, governments ranging from China to Russia, France to Germany are surprisingly silent – with a few Latin American exceptions. By remaining silent, comes the possibility that many of these governments have become willing partners of hegemony and business interests. If that is the case, we will have to re-define the wolves and the lambs.

The author is a columnist with China.org.cn. For more information please visit:

http://china.org.cn/opinion/xupeixi.htm

Loan sharks strike in Hougang

The loan shark scourge does not seem to go away. They are looking like a permanent feature in this city. Three cars were hit by red paints in the carpark in Hougang Avenue 8. And what more, the attacks on the residents have been going for three months. Can you believe that?
 
Several units of flats have had their doors chained locked and the loan sharks even warned the residents that they would set fire to the flats. The beautiful thing about this kind of incidents is that the residents are innocent and did not borrow money from the loan sharks. They are threatened and harassed as collateral damages to force the intended victim to pay up. How could this be? Or are the loan sharks thinking that the harassment would be frightening and disruptive enough that the innocent residents would cough up money to pay for the one who took loans from the loan sharks?
 
The MP Yeo Guat Kuang has advised the residents to install CCTV on their own or the Town Council will help them to do so. What can the CCTV do to deter the brazen and law defying attacks? Are the residents supposed to protect themselves? Can the residents form a vigilante and attack the loan sharks without being hauled to the police station for assaulting them in an act of self defence? Would the loan sharks counter sue the residents for damages and grievous hurt if they are wounded by the resident vigilante?
 
What is happening?

Al Qaeda threat, 21 US embassies and consulates closed

The Americans have received the most explicit threat of attacks by the Al Qaeda and have closed 21 embassies and consulates in the Middle East region. With the vivid memory of the bombing of the American embassy in Benghazi, Libya, the Americans are not taking any chances. The threat is not only limited to Sunday and will extend through the month of August.

The American law makers are busily trying to second guess what this threat is all about with mounting fears over the safety of Americans and their families in the Middle East and the rest of the world. The danger of this threat is best described by a retired general, “We have to remember that we’re up against an enemy who kills indiscriminately — whether it be women, children, diplomats — and our embassies … have been one of the targets,” Mattis told CNN on Friday. Funny that I thought this is what the Arab and Middle Eastern countries are saying about the Americans bombing them and killing and maiming hundreds of thousands of their olds, women and children. But the Arabs did not know that those innocent civilians killed by the Americans were not seen as victims of American warfare but collateral damages, not lives or living things.

With a whole month of Ramadan, paranoia is hitting the American law makers. It could be anything, it could be anywhere. And the Americans are also self praising their govt and claiming credits for taking such a drastic and comprehensive measure in advance. Whether anything incident occurred as a result of this intelligence, the Al Aqaeda won. They are now in a position to cripple the Americans in a big scale across the world by simply creating a threat which could be a hoax. And they need to make it looked real serious to make the Americans jumpy.

The next threat could be American businesses or anything and the Americans would be made to jump and scurry for cover. And this can go on and on till the American’s guards are down and a real incident could strike that will drive the American bonkers and blaming one another and everyone. The intelligence agencies would be the first scapegoat. They will not blame those in Congress and the White House for starting wars against other people.

The initiative is now in the hands of the Al Qaeda to set the time and place in a war of terror, a war without borders, that the Americans or any country will be ill prepared. They cannot keep closing down their embassies or businesses all over the world whenever the Al Qaeda leaked out an intelligence threat. When would the war mongers learn the lesson that the enemies are now in as good a position to deal a crippling blow to them in places beyond their wildest imagination and at their own time and own target?

It is amazing how warfare has changed and the hunter is now the hunted. The terrorists have found a way to squeeze the American balls and make them jump whenever they like it.

Education - What kind of education are our young getting in schools?

Other than teaching the 3Rs, going to schools to get educated involves a lot of other things. The students are taught to be a wholesome person, to learn some good values, to be honest, caring and responsible persons, and more.

And there are more challenging agendas like telling the children to seize the moment, dare to be different, just do it, to stand up for what one thinks is right, to think critically, to challenge conventional thoughts, to be creative, to be caring, kind, compassionate and to help those who need a helping hand. Actually no, none of these if you know what I mean.

One thing I believe our education system should not teach is to make the students conformist, unthinking, follow the rule blindly, to be just another exact copy of many from a standard mould. The educators must not try to force all the different pegs into a square hole.

Educators are there to inspire the students to find themselves, to be themselves, to find their own ways in life, to light up a spark inside them. Educators must not be there to restrain and enforce stupidity for the sake of stupidity.

Foolish, idiotic and bureaucratic educators have no place in an education system that is preparing the young to meet the challenges of a brave new world that is ever changing in increasing speed. This is the 21^st Century. Why are the youth of Korea so innovative and creative and taking the world by storm? Why are our students still sucking pacifiers, restrained, inhibited, and believing in follow the teachers or follow the leaders, without a mind of their own, dull, lacking in fresh ideas, and fearful of authority, and bullied by narrow minded old matrons or school masters that walked around with a cane on their backs?

No wonder our students are straight As but blank in everything. Did I hear that some girl students were punished for shaving their heads bald to support a cause for cancer patients because getting bald is unacceptable in the school? And did the MOE support the stand of the school or otherwise?

What kind of values are our young taught in schools, or what kind of products is our educational system supposed to produce? Little droids? R2D2 or C3PO?

The USA is what it is today because of a dare devil spirit of crossing the line, to do something when they believe in it and will break away with whatever rules and convention. That is the American free spirit. That is the greatest value of American education. Our education system, though we professed to be the best, to want our children to be innovative, creative and entrepreneurial, but in practice we are turning them into fearful conformists, fearful of authority, fearful of initiative and adventurism. And the authority will kill the fire in them before a little spark can light up.

They should duly all be replaced by the never say die attitude of the foreigners grown up in the wild and a free wheeling spirit to try and take the unbeaten road.