Little India riot COI – A voice of wisdom and reason

Finally we are hearing a voice of reason from not only a very experienced ex commissioner, but one who uses his wisdom to think before making a subjective assessment. If you are following the comments of experienced, so called experts in the MH370 case, you will know that many of them were just spouting nonsense. They may have the experience and in senior positions, but they were the proverbial one eyed jack during a time when everyone was blind. Intelligence and wisdom will show when one does not have them in the first place.

Back to the COI. We have several sessions when the COI was more about a contest of opinions between the police on the ground and the COI committee. It was about who is right and smarter in handling the riot. The police’s view was not using excessive force, waiting for the SOC to reinforce their position was the right thing to do as any wrong move could inflame the already bad situation that could be life threatening. The COI’s view, the police should have acted swiftly with a bit more assertiveness or use of force to disperse the crowd. It wasn’t life threatening and going after the rioters would prevent more violence or the burning of more vehicles. These two views were what I read from the media and the police or COI may want to dispute and say I am misreading the whole hearing. Just my view, feel free to disagree.

In this morning’s paper, ex Police Commissioner Khoo Boon Hui offered some very sensible and reasonable views of what he thought, and how the police handled the situation. He did not outrightly claim which side was right as the situation was fluid and volatile and could turn any way. Whatever actions the police could do otherwise, could lead to lowering the tension and lesser rioting, or it could be worse. Who could be wiser to claim for sure that doing A would end up with B or doing C would end up with D unless he is omniprescient. A mob is unpredictable.

Khoo Boon Hui also spoke about different times, different values and different methodologies. The old tactics of meeting force with force is less desirable in today’s context unless the situation warrants it. How the police handled the situation in Little India was in line with their new doctrine and a new reality. He wisely stayed away from committing himself into a ‘I am right and you are wrong’ situation. No one in his right mind should be making such a judgemental pronouncement without looking pompous and silly.

The COI would definitely benefit from Khoo Boon Hui’s statement of reasons.

MH370 – A confluence of Incompetence

I may be jumping the gun to say this as no one is really in the picture and those in the know would be smiling quietly. For all the while goose chase, there is a pattern, like they say, even madness has a pattern. Who knows, from the very next day the Malaysian Govt was already in contact and negotiating with the hijackers and the rest of the chase was just a big wayang kulit.

Putting this aside, the incompetence of those managing this affair is showing. When MH370 first went missing, the first thought that it could be a crash or an explosion was reasonable and the search for a crash site and debris a very logical thing to do. The stupid part about this was that though there were other possibilities mentioned, there was no serious effort to follow up in those directions. The most important of which was a hijack scenario. Instead, all efforts and resources were ploughed into searching for debris in one location. And when this was fruitless, everything was turned towards the Indian Ocean to follow a new lead.

The authorities should have dovetailed the search, from just looking for debris and a crashed aircraft to looking at where the hijackers could possibly take the aircraft to at the same time. Before ruling out a crash, a hijack cannot be ignored and ruled out.  It could not simply ignore other possibilities while sitting on one. Ok, I am saying this assuming that they did not know and were not negotiating with the hijackers. Without chasing this possibility and other possibilities, without looking at possible landing sites, many precious days were lost and now it is as good as impossible to locate them except for the hijackers to call.

In the case of a hijacking, and not a suicide bomber mission, the plane would have to be flown to an airstrip or some islands where it could land with minimal damage to the aircraft and loss of lives. It could be a friendly airport controlled by sympathetic forces, or an island prepared for this mission, fully secured by members of the hijacking team.

In the first couple of days, the aircraft and passengers could be at the landing site. By now they would have been dispersed to far away locations from the landing site. The aircraft could have been camouflaged or hidden or dumped somewhere else. If it landed in an airfield, it could be inside a hanger or even be repainted. All clues would be gone.

I am afraid by now any searches to locate where they could have landed would be in vain. There would be no traces of their presence or where about.  One possibility, as in the case of the debris in the Antarctic, is that after off loading the passengers and doing all the necessary, they would be dumping the aircraft as far away as they could to hide their tracks.  

The initiative is now with the hijackers and everyone could just wait patiently for the phone to ring. The last lead is for the intelligence services to make contacts with their sources for information. If it is state terrorism, it would be a very different proposition. Do not expect them to tell you even if they are openly offering assistance.

All the search parties can now make a last ditch effort with the Australian lead in the southern Indian Ocean before going home for a good rest and hope for more leads.  For sure, whatever that could be found from the latest lead would not lead to the passengers or the hijackers unless the passengers are sacrificed and buried with the aircraft.

For so many days, everyone was just reacting to news and would rush to wherever something was seen moving. It was funny but pathetic. Everyone was waiting for something to fall onto their laps but nothing came. They were not using their heads to look at other possibilities. To anticipate what could be and looking in different directions.

What theory are they going to explain for a pilot or hijacker to dump the plane in the Antarctic if this is the case?  The aircraft was airlifted by alien spacecraft and dropped off in the Antarctic Ocean? Or could it land in a remote airfield in Australia or Diego Garcia, off load the cargoes and passengers, refueled to fly to the Antarctica and dumped into the deepest corner of the ocean, not to be found again?

Kopi Level - green

MH370 - The 10 ‘NOs’ that tell a story

This is a summary of the 10 NOs we know of the missing MH370.
 
1. The pilot did not make an emergency call.
2. The pilot did not switch on the emergency squawk.
3. There is no radar contact or no confirmation of radar contacts but only believed to be seen on radars.
4. There is no visual sighting of the aircraft.
5. There is no mobile phone call/message from the passengers.
6. There is no sign of wreckage or debris, no explosion.
7. There is no signal from the black boxes.
8. There is no claim of responsibility by any terrorist groups.
9. There is no demand for ransoms or negotiation.
10. There is no news of the aircraft’s where about.
 
The above may be NOs but they also tell us a lot of things about what happened. Every NO is saying something. Piece them together it gives a picture of what had possibly happened and even said that the passengers are likely to be still alive. But if the silence goes on for another couple of weeks, then things will look really ugly. At this point, no news is still good news and keep the fingers crossed that whoever had taken the aircraft and its passengers would be contacting the authorities soon. Maybe they had already done so.
 
Now the answers to all the 10 NOs, ‘WE ARE IN CONTROL.’

High-Speed Traders Face Scrutiny In the U.S

Regulators are taking aim at the relationship between high-frequency trading firms and major exchanges, examining whether the preferential treatment market operators offer the firms puts other investors at a disadvantage....
 
The probe is focused on complicated, often opaque incentive programs that give high-volume trading firms financial benefits such as discounts on fees the exchanges charge to execute trades, the people said.
 
Separately, Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement officials are investigating whether stock exchanges provide advantages to certain clients, including high-frequency traders, by designing software programs that can give preferential treatment to their orders, and whether such details have been fully disclosed, people familiar with that inquiry said.
 
The probes come amid heightened concerns among institutional investors, lawmakers and regulators that superfast traders have access to advantages on stock and futures exchanges not typically available to regular investors.
 
Regulators are concerned that less-savvy or less-influential investors aren’t aware of the benefits and advantages that exchanges are providing to certain clients, making it difficult for them to compete fairly, according to people familiar with the investigations.
High-speed firms use sophisticated computer systems to move rapidly in and out of markets in fractions of seconds.
 
So far, market watchdogs have done little to curb such trading, which has boomed and now makes up about half of all stock-market volume....

Quality of Singapore University going up

I posted this chart in Mar last year.




 

Universities fees were raised in concert last year. And they are doing it again this year, in concert again. Is there anything wrong when merchants acted together to raise prices, like the price of a cup of kopi in the kopitiams? My apologies, universities are not merchants.
 
This time they cited higher costs of talents, supplies and services and the expectations of students and the fee hikes are to defray these costs. So our students must be the best in the world by now with the frequent hikes to improve the quality of university education. Why are the employers still running to 3rd World countries to employ their talents and our graduates are found to lack the skills and talents needed? Or is it that the quality of our universities has always been sub par and we are still playing catching up with the 3rd World universities?
 
The fee hikes are in the region of 2.6% to 7.9% for NUS, 2.5% to 5% for NTU, 2% for SMU and 4% for SUTD. In monetary terms the increases range from $200, $850 and $1150 in NUS. The increase for PRs and international students will be higher. As an example, in SUTD, Singaporeans will pay 4% more while PRs 12% and international students by 16%. Polytechnic fees also go up with this hike.
 
Singaporeans are so lucky that the universities are upgrading their teaching quality every year with higher fees to buy better talents to teach them. At the rate it is going, all the top academic talents in the world will be bought by our universities and our graduates will be the best in the whole world that money can buy.
 
I only hope that this is true. I only hope that the employers stop rushing to 3rd World countries to employ their graduates and complain that our graduates are not good enough. I hope to see one or two of our local graduates be found fit to be the CEO of a local or foreign bank.
 
What to believe? You tell me lah.