Huffington Post is unfair

How can Huffington Post be so unfair and published only articles written by Dr Chee Soon Juan, an opposition party leader? Even if the articles were well written, Huffington Post should be wiser and fairer, and be more balanced to post a few articles by leaders of the ruling party. In that way, the paper will be seen as more even handed, like our local media that published the govt’s articles and also those of Dr Chee. I did not check on this and so please forgive me if my information is not accurate. But quoting from a minister, Chan Chun Sing, who said that the Straits Times has been fair and has published Dr Chee’s articles, it must be true. Our ministers would not dare to lie in an official letter to a western media like the Huffington Post.

The ball is now in Huffington Post’s court. It would be seen as a biased news media if it does not publish some articles from the govt to give its side of the story, or the right to reply. I am also not sure if the Govt has asked for the right to reply or want to make any reply. Just curious, has the govt tried to rebut Chee’s points in his articles and rejected by Huffington Post? Huffington can take the example of our local media to publish two sides of a story, both sides count. I don’t think Huffington Post is that unfair and would only post articles from one political party and ignore the rest or selectively post articles that are irrelevant or inconsequential when it does so.

Or is Huffington Post exercising some kind of censorship, to print only what it deems fit and decide what its readers can read and what its readers should not read? There is a need for more transparency, accountability and honesty from a reputable media like the Huffington Post. If our local media can be transparent and fair, why can’t the Huffington Post?

Where is the fairness? Or is it that fairness is selective? Huffington Post has a good reputation and so has our local media, except of course the social media, the latter only spread misinformation and lies, and drumming, completely unreliable.

You people agree with my chastising of the Huffington Post? Ouch, don’t anyhow throw stones can?

Are you a ‘no body’?

Please don’t say yes. Being a no body is a very shameful and depressing thing, that you would be despised and looked down upon, maybe not in your face but surely behind your back. Some were too unfortunate that they were told right in their face that they are no body and better shut up and go hide in a corner. As a no body, as a failure, you should not even be talking to the public, to the world. Only successful people, people that are not ‘no body’ has the right and honour to blow their trumpets, to stand on high pedestal to lecture to the no bodies.

Some say failure is the mother of success. Many entrepreneurs, professionals, even world leaders, were no bodies until they achieved fame and glory over their failures. And many successful some bodies ended in oblivion, in shame, in disgrace. But that is not the moral of the story. The wise always say things to encourage the losers, the failures. Do not be dismay or despair if one is not making much headway in life. Life is full of up ups and downs, unpredictable. At your worst moment one could turn around and be helped by some fortuitous events to make it good. And they have been many instances of people born with golden spoons but ended in the gutters of life.

The moral of the story is that when you are down, you are not out if one is willing to fight on. On the contrary, when you are up and successful, be wary that you could trip and fall very badly. Nature likes to poke fun at people, especially very successful and arrogant people. The pride goes before the fall.

How many of you are no bodies? How many of you used to be some body? No need to kee chiu. We see you, especially the PMEs and the pioneer generations. Many used to bathe in glory, money cannot finish, chauffer driven, calling the hot and cold when they were around and sending shivers down the spines of those in their company.

Life is full of surprises and upsets. A little humility will go a long way. Don’t ever be cocky. Don’t write people off so easily. Do not be dismissive of people who are still struggling to make their mark. Until your last breath, there is time to right the wrong, to be successful after a life of failures.

Ha, my Sunday sermon.

Counting the 24 to go

Hsien Loong in his press interview confirmed that 24 new candidates would be introduced in the next GE, which also means that 24 of the current batch in Parliament would have to quit. Actually not, only 17 would be quitting if we count the 7 seats taken up by the WP.  Again it may not be 17 if the Gov thinks this country is too big and needs another few more MPs in Parliament. This is still an unknown variable.

Assuming that the Parliament remains at 87 seats then we can count on 17 PAP incumbents to vacate their seats and stand down in the next GE. Now who would be the lucky ones that could step down on a winning card, and not stepping down because they lost in a GE? Let me make a wild guess starting from the slate of ministers. If membership to the CEC is an indication, those ministers that were not in could be likely candidates to miss the boat when it leaves the port.

Of the 18 ministers, only 4 were not in the CEC, Lim Hng Khiang, Vivian, Lui Tuck Yew, Grace Fu, and Iswaran.  Lim Hng Khiang looks like a very tired minister after having been in office for more than 20 years. Vivian and Lui have been in the hot seats and affected by many bad publicities. These 3 could very well be stepping down. Iswaran is new and being out of the CEC is quite normal. On the other hand some ministers in the CEC may also offer to step down for health or personal reasons. Boon Wan and Swee Say have openly talked about it. So, all in we can count on a max of 3+2 ministers to leave politics.

This leaves 12 MPs to be let go. And again, those in the CEC are likely to be favoured MPs and can safely be counted to be in.  Assuming that the oldies would be the first on the list to retire, this would count MPs like Charles Chong, Arthur Fong, Cedric Foo, Chok Tong, Inderjit, LKY, Teo Ho Pin, Lily Neo and the ex ministers Wong Kan Seng, Mah Bow Tan and Raymond Lim, making a group of 11.

And we have a balance of 1 left to be dropped. Who is the possible candidate? Who is the likely one to make up the last of the 17? Anyone offering to step down for personal reasons? Anyone involved in controversies and bad publicity? Baey Yam Keng and Seng Han Thong have been heard to be considering retirement. That would leave the rest safe to stay on for another term.

I think the above list is likely to be the candidates that would be laid off in the next GE. Some may think of a few newer candidates that social media were unhappy with would likely to go, but I think they will be safe as there are already too many candidates that are due to quit politics for the above considerations. Intan would be safe, Tin Pei Ling, Lee Bee Wah, Irene Ng, Alvin Yeo, Lim Wee Kiat, and whoever that drew fierce criticisms by the social media would also be safe.

This is just my guess and I swear that I am likely to be wrong in 50% of these guesses. The above considerations do not take into account the Aljunied factor that may need a few of the existing MPs or Ministers to be specially retained just to take back the GRC or to spare the agony for being chosen to fight there.

GE2015/16 – Rules of Engagement defined?

Everyone is in anticipation of the next General Election that could be called anytime now, if not in 2015 then must be in 2016. All the political parties have been busy making plans and arrangements and strategising on how to engage in this once every 5 year battle for the right to form the govern and run the country. PAP, being the ruling party and the one in the know on when the election would be called, is in the best position to execute its election plans as it is calling the shot. Everyone is watching and second guessing what is in the mind of the PAP and the election date that is closely guarded. Their best hope is to watch the moves of the PAP, what they are saying and doing, to have a feel of when the GE will be called. And there are many signs surfacing over the last few months.

The latest political move is the letter by Chan Chun Sing to the Huffington Post attacking the Post for allowing Chee Soon Juan’s letters to be published. What is more important is the text of the letter, what it said and what are the implications. Chee Soon Juan is going to play a central figure in the next GE if he is qualified to contest and all the big guns of the PAP will be trained at him. This letter is perhaps the first cannon shot fired ahead of the GE and would set the tone of the debate, the mood, tactics and rules of engagement.

Taking the hints from this letter, the PAP has in a way set the standard of what can be said, what would be said, and what is fair game. Let’s take a look at the content of the letter, I have deleted the less relevant to allow the key items to stand out.

“Your website has given Dr Chee Soon Juan considerable but undeserved attention and space. You perhaps believe that he is a weighty political figure in Singapore. He is nothing of the kind.
Dr Chee has stood for elections thrice – and lost badly all three times, once receiving just 20 per cent of the vote.
The party he now leads, the Singapore Democratic Party, was once the leading opposition party in the country. …
Indeed, it was Mr Chiam who brought Dr Chee into the SDP in 1992. He mentored the younger man and promoted him. Dr Chee then proceeded to betray Mr Chiam, isolate him and force him out of the SDP, ….
In 1993, Dr Chee was dismissed from the National University of Singapore for misappropriating research funds and for other serious misconduct, including surreptitiously recording conversations with university staff.
He has been sued for defamation not only by ruling party politicians,…
And in 1996, Dr Chee and three of his associates were convicted of perjury by Parliament tor submitting false statements to a Special Parliamentary Committee. … It is because of these and other failings that Dr Chee is a political failure – not because he was persecuted,… voters do not regard its leader as an honourable man.
Dr Chee was disqualified from contesting the last two General Elections because he was declared a bankrupt in 2006 for failing to pay damages for libel to former Prime Ministers Lee Kuan Yew and Goh Chok Tong. ….
Sincerely,
Chan Chun Sing
Minister for Social and Family Development, Singapore”

Some commentators have called this name calling or character assassination. (Full test of the article is available in all the main media and also at TRE). The letter was about Chee Soon Juan as a person and his character in question. It was about him as not honourable, a bankrupt, ungrateful, and misconduct. It related his affairs and encounters with politicians, govt officials and his employers that are negative.

As they said, food for the gander is food for the goose. Are these the lines drawn by the PAP as acceptable fodder for the GE campaign whereby political parties can dig out everything they could find about their political opponents and to use them freely in name calling and character assassination to win the votes? These were thought to be the OB lines in the past where anyone crossing them would be condemned as mean, unethical, hitting below the belt, dishonourable or unacceptable.

Now that Chan Chun Sing, signing off as the Minister for Social and Family Development and using them to attack a potential political opponent, does it signal to the opposition parties that they can do likewise? Of course they need to say things that are factual or risked being sue for defamation. Maybe immortals are flawless and blameless and there is nothing that the opposition parties could find to use in the GE. That may give Chan Chun Sing and the PAP the confidence that they could widen the OB markers to accommodate more juicy stuff and the washing of dirty laundry during the heat of the election rallies.  

The election rallies are going to be very interesting and going to be very well attended when all kinds of personal information would be aired to down an opponent. Insults, insinuations, name callings, sneerings, badmouthing, exposing personal gaffs etc etc are permissible? It would be good if the rallies could be put on live telecast. One thing for sure, youtube and webcast, mobile videos etc etc would be made available in all the blogs and websites to share the good stuff and great stuff of the election one upmanship, with many red faces to show.

This GE election rally must be something to look forward to, could be more exciting and part of the SG50 celebration.

Sin City the destination for the decadent rich

Everyday we are hit by reports and commentaries of turning this island paradise into a destination for the opulent rich to indulge in the worldly pleasures money can buy. Give them everything they want in exchange for their money. We are almost there. We have F1, casinos, Sentosa, the Durian, Garden by the Bay, 6 stars of everything, and we are going to get the must visit Jewel, and the next attraction, world class jungle paradise minus Tarzan and Jane, but all the animals that they can put into a confined space without the feeling of being caged, freedom for the birds and animals in an imaginary jungle paradise. It will cost a few billions though, just like the Garden by the Bay and the Jewel.

I still think something is missing. The rich and famous may not need all the artificiality of a desert or Antarctica here, or the African savannah or the Amazon jungle. They could simply whisk there for the real stuff at a moment of fancy. Those who would want to visit the imitations would be the peasants that cannot afford the real stuff, and grumble that the imitations are too expensive. The developers may not even recover their cost as the high price may deter the crowd.

A cheaper attraction to create would be a real Sin City in Geylang with all the amorous wants and desire of the flesh and the senses available to those who could afford to splurge without blinking an eyelid. That is where the money is. Turn Geylang into a lavish, grandiose and luxuriant paradise on earth where the super rich could have everything they desire or crave for, to satisfy their every indulgence and extravagance. It would be a real destination to cater for the hedonists with worldly pleasure. How about that as a start? Forget about the cheap foreign workers. They not only could not afford much, their presence is also unsightly for a world class city. They not only don’t fit in, they destroy the image of what this city is all about.

The developers could allow their imaginations to go wild and turn Geylang into a true destination that no one with the money would want to miss, must visit but would not want to leave once they are inside Geylang, the City of Sinful flirtation, exploitations, opulence and of human lust.

And I think it would be cheaper to develop but with unimaginable returns on investment, where the customers would never ask for the price but willingly pay for everything thing they fancy and to be pampered. Why waste money on the Jewel and an imitation jungle when the customers can have their satisfaction on anything of pleasure that they want in Geylang, and when they will be happy and grateful to part with their money, plenty of it?

Now if they really develop Geylang into a City of Sin, would I get any credit for it?

What, outrageous? Nothing can be more real and lucrative, and money well spent and well returned than a City of Sin other than a mini Jurassic Park in one of our islands. Want to spend a few billions watching a few wild boars and deer and antelopes running around?