Are we moving towards a kinder society?

Below is an article by Andrew Loh posted in the TRE about Amos.  I share Andrew's angst about the case and hope the kindest person in Singapore, Willaim Wan, would say a few kind words for Amos Yee. This boy could have said the wrong things and ruffled some feathers.  I believe he is just an impressionable kind going through the paces of adolescence and unlikely to pose a security threat to anyone. He is precocious and very articulate and well read.

The objective of the Singapore Kindness Movement is to build a nation of kindness. So far I am waiting to see some kindness shown to this boy, not necessary by the Kindness Movement but by the average Singaporeans. Amos is all alone. His parent is not posting bail and Amos would have to spend time behind bars until kindness appears.

Here is the article 'Why are we over killing Amos?'

22 police reports filed against him, 8 policemen at his home to arrest him (while he was in pajamas), handcuffed at home, handcuffed in court, bail set at $20,000, new conditions of removing his fundraising blog post (he was trying to raise funds to pay his legal fees) and to report to police station every morning at 9am.

All this along with charges of sedition, harassment, obscenity, and a biased mainstream media publishing misleading reports about his mother, so-called celebrities in a public forum pontificating about how his parents are to blame, together with pro-PAP psychos calling him names, questioning his parents, threatening to cut off his penis and stuff it into his mouth, etc.

Welcome to the PAP’s first world nation in the 21st century.

And oh, the boy is 16-years old, in case you forgot.

Whatever your political leanings, and whatever you think of Amos Yee, we really need to think of what kind of society we are becoming.
—————-
Footnote:
“Lee Kuan Yew says Singapore needs more mavericks, geniuses and independent thinkers” – AFP, 2003.
Andrew Loh

LKY’s last wish – Think fengshui

With the public appeal by his children to demolish his house, it is as good as being done. The house in 38 Oxley Road would be gone. And given the urgency and efficiency of the govt and contractors you can bet that it would disappear as quickly as the Harry Potter waves his magic wand.

But wait, wait. Please do not rush into such a major decision without consulting the fengshui master. Maybe Hsien Loong has already done that then go ahead if the fengshui master said it is a good thing to do. I am no expert in fengshui, but to demolish a house or even buying a house or renovating a house, if one can afford it, it is good to get a second opinion from the fengshui master or masters.

This house in Oxley Road is no ordinary house. Anyone would tell you that it is sitting on a very auspicious fengshui location. No need to ask the fengshui masters. Just look at the wealth and good fortune it has brought to the Lee family! 3 generations of prosperity and good descendants. And don't forget the good fortune of Singapore. With such a good fengshui, no one in his right mind would want to touch the house. Many would not even do any renovation on it so as not to disturb the good fengshui. And maybe that was what the Lee family did in the last 40 years. The house is as original as it could be. There must be a very good reason. They can afford to turn it into a multi storey modern home with the flip of a finger. Money is not a problem. So you can guess the reason.

Now out of the blue the children are so eager and ready to get it demolish. Is the fengshui of the house changing and turning bad that it has to be demolished? If so, well, better do it fast. If no or not sure, don’t they think it is worth to spend a few dollars to hire the best fengshui masters, get a second or third opinion, on the expediency of demolishing it, to tear it down? You do not tear down a house of good fengshui just like that. That is what the Chinese believe even if they are not steep in the art of fengshui. Better be safe than be sorry.

What do you think? Is it a good idea to tear the house down from the perspective of fengshui?

A new trend and a new normal

This guy came to me and offered me his name card. My God, was I impressed. Below his name is a long list of credentials. Let me just list them down to show you how well qualified he is.

B. Eng, Masters Computer Science, Ph D Eng, Ph D Science, Ph D Social Engineering, Ph D Technology.

I asked him if he was in senior management. He said no, just an engineer. But his boss was very impressed and even asked him how to get these Ph Ds to add on to his name card. He said his boss only got a B Eng from NUS. Now his boss felt malu looking at his name card.

I said soon he should be taking over his boss position. He said no lah. He was employed only because of his first degree which was genuine and from a reputable university in Geylang, the rest he bought it from the degree mills. Oh, you mean degree mills degrees can also be printed in the name card. He assured me can. He said he listed them in his CVs also. But not to worry, the rest just for show show only. The boss knew he did not get them by the normal and proper academic route. But it is okay. No worry, no crime. Not a crime.

This is the new fashion in Singapore. Even one government agency did not find any problem with it, till now. He said if don’t believe go and ask IDA. This type of thing is very normal one. If I don’t have a long list, employers would say I got no relevant skills set compare to FTs. FTs all got very long list of degrees and many many skills set.

I was so happy that I too went to get a few Ph Ds to add onto my name card. My name card now is printed on two sides. Too many degrees from University of Cempedak, University of Tekka, University of Telok Blangah, University of ….Oops, I can’t remember, so many of them that I don’t even know what they are. But shiok, damn shiok. Damn impressive. Whenever I meet anyone I will hand them my name card.  Lan par oso song.

Having fake degree from a degree mill is acceptable in Singapore?

Below is part of an article posted in the TRE about a staff from IDA with a Masters degree from a degree mill. The netizens are questioning IDA whether this is a crime. So far no official comment from any ministry on this.
 
‘IDA says staff’s MBA not a relevant certificate for her working in IDA
On 2 Apr, TRE wrote to IDA for comments on the matter and asked if it is aware that one of their staff has obtained her MBA from a degree mill. TRE did not get any reply from IDA.
 
However, netizens continue to pursue IDA relentlessly on its Facebook page and on Tues (14 Apr), IDA finally replied.
 
IDA said that her Bachelor’s degree is from a reputable university and she was recruited based on the Bachelor degree. Her MBA was “not a relevant certificate for her position in IDA”, it added.
 
IDA further said, “We would like to share that Nisha has been a committed team member and contributed in her role as an Applications Consultant for the past year.”
IDA’s full reply on its Facebook page [Link]:

Diego Garcia, Guam and Spratleys, what’s the big deal?

The Americans have been bombarding the Chinese daily about their constructions of buildings and airstrips in the islands in South China Sea. To the Americans, these actions are unacceptable, even acts of aggression that could lead to war. The Americans are all behind the Philippines to cry foul against the Chinese and even agitating the Asean countries to form a naval force to challenge the Chinese for building structures in their islands. And everyday there will be reports in the New York Times or other American media highlighting the Chinese activities with aerial photographs and condemning them. The drumming of war has started.
 
What is so wrong with the Chinese construction of buildings and airstrips in their own islands? These are islands the Chinese claimed as their own under the historical law of finders keepers. These are uninhabited islands, with no natives, no human life forms in them.
 
What about Diego Garcia and Guam? These were islands with islanders, natives living in them. And one is in the Indian Ocean and the other in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. The Americans went in and seized the islands from the natives and built buildings and air bases for military purposes. These are two military fortresses owned by the Americans, taken from the natives. These islands are owned by the natives.
 
Why is it acceptable, no crimes, no aggressive intent? Why are the Americans allowed to treat the islands belonging to the natives as their own, without the permission of the owners and happily strutting around as a right? American Exceptionalism? The islands are not no man’s land. There are natives living in them.
 
China should show aerial photographs of the military bases in Diego Garcia and Guam to the world, get the New York Times to publish them and make comparisons on why one is acceptable, nothing wrong, and why the other is unacceptable and wrong. No man’s land is finders keeper. Land with natives are own by natives, like the continent of North America, Australia and New Zealand, and of course Diego Garcia and Guam. Who conquered them, robbed them from the natives?
 
Did China rob any natives of their islands in the South China Sea? Oh, other Southeast Asian countries are claiming them too. When China founded these islands, these Southeast Asian countries did not even know of their existence. They were not even nation states in the western concept of statehood. They have more rights to the islands than China?
 
The Americans should stop their bull and stop using its bigger military size and power to bully China. China would not take it lying down. When would the Americans stop their hypocrisies? The Americans must remember that the Chinese would not forget the attack on their Embassy in Belgrade. One day, one of the American Embassies will suffer the same fate when China is ready to stop the bullying. Sleep well America! What you sowed you shall reap.

When the Japanese did the sneak attack on Pearl Harbour, all the Americans were crying for blood and blood they did extracted from the Japanese with the two Atomic bombs. What makes the Americans think that they can get away with the sneak attack against the Chinese Embassy?