Senior Pastor Lawrence Khong has emerged as the point man to take the
fight against homosexuality with the LBGT group. From reports in the
media, the Pastor Khong’s group has been quietly organizing themselves
and has came out with a seven page guide on how to express support for
Section 377A of the Penal Code. The LGBT has been mustering support to
have this Section of the Penal Code rescind, so far without success.
Their fight is in the open with the big show of support at Hong Lim Park
on a couple of occasions. On the other hand, supporters of Section 377A
have been rather quiet or afraid to voice out their stand. This is the
first time, after many closed door sessions, that this group is coming
in the open to challenge the views of the LBGT.
It was a solitary battle between the LGBT group and the govt with
everyone staying clear from this thorny moral issue. The growing
acceptance of the lifestyle of the LGBT both locally and internationally
has encouraged the LGBT to come out openly about their lifestyle
choice, some biological, some hereditary, as normal or natural and not
an abnormality.
Now we have a religious group coming out openly to challenge this
lifestyle choice as not normal and to protect the provisions in Section
377A that makes homosexuality a crime. There are now two big interest
groups with equally big supporter bases and international organizations
as their backers to pitch their voices for and against the other.
The Govt could breathe easier and could take the role of a neutral party
other than upholding the law. The less vocal majority could now pitch
in their supports for either groups and more fireworks can be expected
with both sides quite evenly matched at the moment. Where would this
lead to eventually would be interesting to watch as it would affect the
moral fibres and values of our society. It is not just a battle of the
conservatives against the liberals. It goes deep into the accepted
morality of the day and could change quite dramatically on what is
normal and acceptable and what is not.
Kopi level - Green
2/20/2014
2/19/2014
The most hilarious article posted in TRE to date
The editorial post in TRE titled ‘Dr Ng condemns TI’s defence spending
rating for SG’ is drawing a lot of laughters and funny comments from
readers. The latest count on the number of comments is 65 and growing.
This is a great thread for laughter but some might have their eyes
popped out or their throats choked for lost of words.
Great thread. Highly recommended for jest and entertainment reading.
Great thread. Highly recommended for jest and entertainment reading.
Singapore needs to monitor the 500 mile long Straits of Malacca
‘U.S. defense contractor Northrop Grumman Corp. hopes to pitch its
high-altitude military drones to Singapore to help the city-state better
monitor air and sea traffic at the Strait of Malacca, one of the
world’s busiest trade corridors….
“The need to be able to have very long-range intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capability to monitor all that traffic… suggests that [Singapore] needs a…system that could stay up in the air for a very long period of time and cover a very large ocean area,” said David Perry, Northrop’s chief global business-development officer, at the Singapore Airshow.’
The above paragraphs were posted in TRE. Northrop Grumman is going to sell us a very good drone eye in the sky. My immediate response was why not, the more we can see, the further we can see, the safer it is for our security. If we can monitor traffic in the Indian Ocean and the East and South China Seas would it not be better?
After much serious contemplation, all two seconds of it, I think this drone from Northrop is not good enough. What we really need is an eye in the sky, like a series of satellites floating in space to monitor the traffic across the globe. Then we can even double as the Deputy Sheriff for the Empire. We can wear a badge and carry a big clout too.
And to add to our defence and offence capability we need at least two aircraft carrier groups, one for the Indian Ocean and one for the South China Sea. We have the money and can afford it. All these military weapons manufacturers only need to convince us on how good their weapons are and how great would it be to have these toys. Surely we need them just like we need the F35s.
What do you think, boys?
PS. A blogger by the nick of Expensive Toys made this comment in the same thread in TRE. ‘Northrop is selling its drone here because it believes in the saying: “A fool and his money are soon parted.” It knows PAP will by anything as long as it is considered high-tech.’
I strongly disagree. We must have the best and the most expensive hardware to keep our potential enemies away. We must make sure they know we mean business and we can back up by our hardware and anything money can buy to deal with them. This kind of feeling and confidence really damn shiok.
“The need to be able to have very long-range intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capability to monitor all that traffic… suggests that [Singapore] needs a…system that could stay up in the air for a very long period of time and cover a very large ocean area,” said David Perry, Northrop’s chief global business-development officer, at the Singapore Airshow.’
The above paragraphs were posted in TRE. Northrop Grumman is going to sell us a very good drone eye in the sky. My immediate response was why not, the more we can see, the further we can see, the safer it is for our security. If we can monitor traffic in the Indian Ocean and the East and South China Seas would it not be better?
After much serious contemplation, all two seconds of it, I think this drone from Northrop is not good enough. What we really need is an eye in the sky, like a series of satellites floating in space to monitor the traffic across the globe. Then we can even double as the Deputy Sheriff for the Empire. We can wear a badge and carry a big clout too.
And to add to our defence and offence capability we need at least two aircraft carrier groups, one for the Indian Ocean and one for the South China Sea. We have the money and can afford it. All these military weapons manufacturers only need to convince us on how good their weapons are and how great would it be to have these toys. Surely we need them just like we need the F35s.
What do you think, boys?
PS. A blogger by the nick of Expensive Toys made this comment in the same thread in TRE. ‘Northrop is selling its drone here because it believes in the saying: “A fool and his money are soon parted.” It knows PAP will by anything as long as it is considered high-tech.’
I strongly disagree. We must have the best and the most expensive hardware to keep our potential enemies away. We must make sure they know we mean business and we can back up by our hardware and anything money can buy to deal with them. This kind of feeling and confidence really damn shiok.
The Sheriff invites himself here
John Kerry, the US Secretary of State is marching into town in the
capitals of East Asia and South East Asia to tell the regional leaders
what is expected of them and their behavior. The USA has an interest
here and the Sheriff will call the shot. Ignore at your own risk. At the
moment the Sheriff is waltzing around with a wide grin on his face.
When this fails to work, when the regional leaders do not toe the line,
the next move will be to expose the gun tuck in his belt.
The regional leaders do not know how to behave, do not know what is good for them. They need the Emperor to think for them, and to back them up with the firepower if needed, to do what is right, according to the plans of the Emperor.
Indonesia better remember how they twisted the arms of Suharto during the Asian financial crisis. If they don’t behave, even haze can become an arm twisting excuse. Be afraid. And for the smaller states, be more afraid. There is free choice, freedom of choice, to join the Empire.
The Sheriff is really a very nice man. See, no guns. He comes in peace, to bring peace to the region that needs peace badly. Without the Sheriff around they will go to war over very silly things.
The Sheriff has invited himself here. Let’s welcome him for more peace in the region, and no arms twisting. Did he also take the opportunity to warn the Indonesians not to bully American allies in the region while he was in Jakarta?
What is clear is that the Sheriff did make the Indonesia to come up with a statement that they would not accept China’s ADIZ in the South China Sea. Actually this matter did not really concern the Indonesians but with the Sheriff breathing down their neck, they just have no choice but to do the Sheriff’s bidding. What the Indonesian failed to understand is that they would not have the backing of China or anyone should it decide to have its own ADIZ over the airspace facing Australia.
Anyway, whether the Indonesians accept it or otherwise, it was an unnecessary statement that the Chinese would simply ignore but would cost Indonesia dearly one day. It also forces the Chinese to want to declare an ADIZ to show the Indonesians and the USA to mind their own business in their own backyard.
Indonesia has cowered under the pressure of the Sheriff and this would undermine its image as a regional power to be. If it has to take the cue from the Sheriff, it shows how weak it is, and how it could be made to toe the line by a superpower. It is weak and does not have a mind of its own.
The regional leaders do not know how to behave, do not know what is good for them. They need the Emperor to think for them, and to back them up with the firepower if needed, to do what is right, according to the plans of the Emperor.
Indonesia better remember how they twisted the arms of Suharto during the Asian financial crisis. If they don’t behave, even haze can become an arm twisting excuse. Be afraid. And for the smaller states, be more afraid. There is free choice, freedom of choice, to join the Empire.
The Sheriff is really a very nice man. See, no guns. He comes in peace, to bring peace to the region that needs peace badly. Without the Sheriff around they will go to war over very silly things.
The Sheriff has invited himself here. Let’s welcome him for more peace in the region, and no arms twisting. Did he also take the opportunity to warn the Indonesians not to bully American allies in the region while he was in Jakarta?
What is clear is that the Sheriff did make the Indonesia to come up with a statement that they would not accept China’s ADIZ in the South China Sea. Actually this matter did not really concern the Indonesians but with the Sheriff breathing down their neck, they just have no choice but to do the Sheriff’s bidding. What the Indonesian failed to understand is that they would not have the backing of China or anyone should it decide to have its own ADIZ over the airspace facing Australia.
Anyway, whether the Indonesians accept it or otherwise, it was an unnecessary statement that the Chinese would simply ignore but would cost Indonesia dearly one day. It also forces the Chinese to want to declare an ADIZ to show the Indonesians and the USA to mind their own business in their own backyard.
Indonesia has cowered under the pressure of the Sheriff and this would undermine its image as a regional power to be. If it has to take the cue from the Sheriff, it shows how weak it is, and how it could be made to toe the line by a superpower. It is weak and does not have a mind of its own.
SMRT – a pledge by then Transport Minister Yeo Ning Hong
Someone took the trouble to sieve through the old newspaper and came up
with a copy of the ST dated 9 Jul 86 with Yeo Ning Hong announcing the
opening of the MRT. He said that ‘One thing was certain…Because the Govt
will be paying for the construction of the stations and lines, fares on
our MRT will be lower than fares in other MRT countries where commuters
will have to repay the capital cost and financing of the construction
of their systems…He pledged that the private company which will be set
up to operate the MRT will not be allowed to profit at the expense of
the public. The principle for fare setting was clear. Fares will be
kept as low as possible, consistent with collecting enough revenue to
meet the running cost of the MRT, replace parts and equipment regularly
and provide company shareholders with a reasonable return.’
How far have the govt and the SMRT deviated from this original pledge with their new formula for fare increases? The cost of building the MRT was borne by public fund, not from the shareholders. The principles of lower fares, enough to repay capital cost and financing of construction should be fairly clear. The part about replacement of cost for parts and equipment is also not difficult to understand. Only the last part, provide company shareholders with a reasonable return can be subject to different interpretations. What is reasonable? From whose perspective?
What is interesting to note is that the current formula to adjust fare hikes which is directly linked to returns to shareholders does not include parts and equipment replacement cost and financing cost. The formula has been changing over the years with no reference to the original position and pledge.
Is the pledge another nice to have aspiration not meant to mean anything? What were the factors in the latest formula? The 2012 formula which was also used for the 2014 fare hike includes the consumer price index, wage index and productivity gains. There was no direct reference to replacement cost of parts and equipment or profits for shareholders.
Obviously the 1986 pledge was not in the radar of the Fare Review Mechanism Committee. The 1986 pledge and the principle of lower fares were no longer factors for consideration. Forgotten, not important any more, dumped into the waste bin?
Does it matter if the pledge by the former Transport Minister and the original principle are disregarded and ignored or discarded? Or they are actually following closely to those principles pledged by a past minister?
Kopi level - Yellow
How far have the govt and the SMRT deviated from this original pledge with their new formula for fare increases? The cost of building the MRT was borne by public fund, not from the shareholders. The principles of lower fares, enough to repay capital cost and financing of construction should be fairly clear. The part about replacement of cost for parts and equipment is also not difficult to understand. Only the last part, provide company shareholders with a reasonable return can be subject to different interpretations. What is reasonable? From whose perspective?
What is interesting to note is that the current formula to adjust fare hikes which is directly linked to returns to shareholders does not include parts and equipment replacement cost and financing cost. The formula has been changing over the years with no reference to the original position and pledge.
Is the pledge another nice to have aspiration not meant to mean anything? What were the factors in the latest formula? The 2012 formula which was also used for the 2014 fare hike includes the consumer price index, wage index and productivity gains. There was no direct reference to replacement cost of parts and equipment or profits for shareholders.
Obviously the 1986 pledge was not in the radar of the Fare Review Mechanism Committee. The 1986 pledge and the principle of lower fares were no longer factors for consideration. Forgotten, not important any more, dumped into the waste bin?
Does it matter if the pledge by the former Transport Minister and the original principle are disregarded and ignored or discarded? Or they are actually following closely to those principles pledged by a past minister?
Kopi level - Yellow
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)