CPF Protest Rally at Hong Lim Park

There were no 10,000 crowd, but not 200 supporters either. About 5,000 t0 6,000 people were at Hong Lim to support Roy and Hui Hui in this protest asking the Govt to Return Our CPF money. Many well wishers were there with cash to donate to Roy but could not find a donation box. The organisers were told that no donation box was allowed. But somehow the money still found their way to Roy and Hui Hui who had came out with her own money to erect the tents and sound system.

The speakers, Tan Kin Lian, KJ Jeyaretnam, Ariffin Sha, Vincent Wijeysingha, Leong Sze Hian, Hui Hui and Roy took the stage. Chee Soon Juan's message was read out by Ariffin as he was away. The crowd was appreciative and cheered their hero in Roy Ngerng.

Below are some of the photos I took which would give a better feel of what happened yesterday.

The top 4 pics were the speakers followed by some pics on the messages that were carried around by the supporters of the event. The bottom few pics were the crowd and the last pic, strolling back home after the rally.

Kopi Level - Red

Singapore is a democracy

Yes, Singapore is a democratic state. It has all the forms and institutions of democracy. The funny thing is that many Sinkies still think that they are living in a dictatorship or a kingdom of sort and living in fear of the authority. At least this is the impression that I get after reading the comments in the social media and main media.

Every four or five years the people will march to the polling stations to vote for their representatives in Parliament. And they did this after attending the election rallies and hearing the candidates making promises on how they will serve them as their representatives. And when they vote, there seemed to be this fear hanging over their heads that eventually determined who they should vote.

After 50 years of independence and living in a democratic system, the people somehow did not believe so. Did they know that in every general election they could vote in a new political party to run the country? Do they know that if a political party failed to serve their interest, they could simply vote in another one? There is nothing wrong with changing the political party in govt. That is what democracy is all about.

By their hesitant in changing the govt gives those in govt to think that they will be the govt forever and even plan to be in govt like a career, with promotions, performance bonuses, career training and development, and even talking down to the people. And the people tremble in fear, wetting their pants just by thinking of it. As least this is what some of the pathetic Sinkies are behaving.

The people must believe that this is a democracy and if they are not happy with any govt, they should just vote them out. And the people in govt must also know that if they don’t serve the interest of the people they would be booted out in a GE. This sequence of changing govt is a check on the politicians to behave like politicians in a democracy and not in a dictatorship or an unending dynasty.

We have a democratic system. Unfortunately the electorate doesn’t think so and doesn’t act as one, and the elected representatives also don’t think so and don’t act as one. After 50 years, it seems that everyone, electorate and elected still think otherwise and behave accordingly.

This is uniquely Singapore. And the people are highly educated, widely travelled, but become ‘gong gong’ when come to exercise their right to elect the people that would serve them best. They fear the people they elected to serve them. They elected people to be in govt so that they can live in fear of them.

Is this a joke? Or the Sinkies are a joke?

Kopi Level - Green

CPF Protest Rally - Today is the Day

The CPF Rally is today, 4 pm at Hong Lim Park. Singaporeans who want to know more about what is happening to their CPF savings would be briefed by at least 7 speakers, including Tan Kin Lian, Leong Sze Hian, Vincent Wijesingha, KJ Jeyaretnam, Han Hui Hui, M Ravi and Roy Ngerng. Yahoo reported that Reform Party speaker would be Prabu Ramachandran. He may have replaced KJJ.

These speakers will be talking about the CPF from the people's point of view, like looking at a coin from the other side. The young Singaporeans and those reaching 55 must want to know what is going to happen to their money when they reach 55.

A big crowd is expected today, rain or shine.

Kopi Level - Green

Tiananmen Square ‘massacre’ was a myth

By Deirdre Griswold
WikiLeaks confirms it
Published Jun 29, 2011 2:53 PM
How many times have we been told that the U.S. is an “open” society and the media are “free”?
 
Usually such claims are made when criticizing other countries for not being “open,” especially countries that don’t follow Washington’s agenda.
 
If you live in the United States and depend on the supposedly “free” and “open” commercial media for information, you would without a doubt believe that the Chinese government massacred “hundreds, perhaps thousands” of students in Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989. That phrase has been repeated tens of thousands of times by the media of this country.
 
But it’s a myth. Furthermore, the U.S. government knows it’s a myth. And all the major media know it too. But they refuse to correct the record because of the basic hostility of the U.S. imperialist ruling class to China.
 
On what do we base this assertion? Several sources.
 
The most recent is a WikiLeaks release of cables sent from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing to the State Department in June 1989, a few days after the events in China.
 
Second is an assertion in November 1989 by the Beijing bureau chief of the New York Times, an assertion that has never again been referred to by that newspaper.
 
And third is the account of what happened by the Chinese government itself, which is corroborated by the first two.
 
Only one major Western newspaper has published the WikiLeaks cables. That was the Telegraph of London on June 4 of this year, exactly 22 years after the Chinese government called out the troops in Beijing….
 
They knew the truth in 1989
 
The New York Times knows it’s credible. Their own Beijing bureau chief at the time, Nicholas Kristof, confirmed it in an extensive article entitled “China Update: How the Hardliners Won,” published in the Sunday Times magazine on Nov. 12, 1989, five months after the supposed massacre in the square.
 
At the very end of this long article, which purported to give an inside view of a debate within the Chinese Communist Party leadership, Kristof stated categorically: “Based on my observations in the streets, neither the official account nor many of the foreign versions are quite correct. There is no massacre in Tiananmen Square, for example, although there is plenty of killing elsewhere.”…
 
The full article can be found at : http://www.workers.org/2011/world/tiananmen_0707/

Kopi Level - Green

High-Frequency Trading Models Under FCA Scrutiny,

By Lindsay Fortado and Dave Michaels
June 4 (Bloomberg) -- Britain’s market regulator is
scrutinizing high-frequency trading algorithms to ensure firms
can suspend operations at short notice and aren’t abusing the
market, its chief executive officer said.
 
The Financial Conduct Authority is monitoring firms across
the industry to understand “the risks associated with the
development of algorithms for use in high-frequency trading,”
Martin Wheatley said at a conference in New York today….
Mary Jo White, chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, told lawmakers on April 1 that the agency is
conducting “a number” of enforcement investigations that focus
on high-frequency trading and automated trading strategies. The
regulator has also said it’s conducting a broad review of equity
market structure and may make changes to the way investors trade
stocks.

European Union lawmakers approved legislation in April that
will create some of the toughest rules in the world for high-
frequency traders. The limits include standards meant to keep
the price increment for securities from being too small,
mandatory tests of trading algorithms, and requirements that
market makers provide liquidity for a set number of hours daily….

“Essentially what we have now in the U.K. is a mix of
exchange-led monitoring, with the regulator analyzing risks such
as cross-market techniques on the one hand,” Wheatley said.
“On the other, industry itself reporting suspicious activity,
so the challenge here becomes a shared one.”
 
My Comments: The American and European regulators are putting on a show but not doing much. The important thing to know is that the regulators knew that HFT is unfair trading and violating the rules and regulations of the exchanges, but they still allowed HFT to operate.
This is as good as knowing a crime but closing an eye to let the crime to be committed. They are both condoning a criminal act and should be prosecuted for allowing it to go on.

Kopi Level - Green