Amos Yee – A new divide

The flutter of a butterfly has morphed into many butterflies fluttering in this island. When the fluttering of a butterfly is allowed to go flapping unrestrained you will get a storm brewing. The Amos Yee Incident has led to the gravitating of two groups, one hating him and wanting him to be lynched and another calling for understanding as he is just a wayward boy and needing guidance. When no one thinks it is right and prudent to tell the lynching mobs to back off, the mob went wild.

In the beginning there were the verbal threats of bodily harm to the boy, and this was followed by a man hitting the boy outside the court house. And there were applause from silly adults, supposedly responsible people, that the boy deserved it. And the icing to top up this comic tragedy of vicious attacks against a boy, a book store put up an insensitive tweet that went viral. I quote from an article in TRE on this,

‘Meanwhile, Popular bookstore posted an insensitive tweet on Twitter capitalizing on the “slapping incident” of Amos Yee.
It poked fun of Amos by putting up a picture of Famous Amos cookies and tweeting “Sorry you got slapped. Here, have some cookies on us!”.
Netizens were outraged and heavily criticised Popular bookstore. Many are calling for a boycott of the bookstore:… Facing a barrage of criticisms and calls of boycott, Popular bookstore later quickly put up an apology:
“It was a mistake that we accept and sincerely apologize for. We promise that we won’t do it again. #saynotoviolence”.
It has since deleted the insensitive tweet….’
The level of viciousness from the group against the boy, Amos Yee, is getting more serious and escalating. The voice of reason and compassion is also up a few scales to condemn those attackers. And the rest of those following this Incident are divided into two camps, one shaking their heads at how this is allowed to go on and on unrestrained, like it is the right thing to do, with approval from God, while the attackers behaving as if they are the righteous and godly people with God on their side. Come to think of it, when God is in the picture, who dares to go against God?
Everyone must be cowering in fear except some god fearing people that think they have the consent of god to do what they are doing to Amos Yee, the boy on the wrong side of god. What a heavenly divide this has become. And the storm is brewing, an act of God that nothing can be done to stop it except to hurry and evacuate to safety, away from the storm.
See nothing, hear nothing, say nothing and do nothing are the best things to do.
Which is the side of Darkness, which is the side of Light? Amen.
Below is a comment by a netizen, a father of 4 to Popular Book Store posted in TRE.

Trust et al:

May 2, 2015 at 1:52 pm  (Quote)

Dear Popular Book Store
I am a father of 4, a Singapore citizen.
I saw your utterly reprehensible disgusting and outrageous Tweet making fun of Amos Yee, a defenceless teen who was viciously assaulted at the doorstep of our Courts. There was the image of a human hand in the gesture of slapping accompanied by the words ‘Hi 5′ and ‘Ouch!’. This clearly meant you were celebrating and even congratulating the assailant and feeling gleeful about the attack. To a 16 year old imprisoned as an adult and in handcuffs and ankle fetters after an assault, you offered Famous Amos cookies, clearly to taunt him.
This was a carefully designed stunt calculated to capitalize in a sadistic manner on the trauma and agony of a teenager. You clearly sought to gain cheap publicity since the tweet featured stationery which you sell!
Minister of Law Shanmugan has categorically stated that this horrendous violent act cannot be condoned.
The Singapore Kindness Movement (whose Patron is our Prime Minister) has denounced the vicious online attacks on Amos Yee which led up to this atrocity.
You are a company which makes its fortune selling textbooks, guidebooks and stationery to kids.
I cannot comprehend how you could stoop to such uncivic and barbaric behaviour when a young person is being victimized.
It is highly probable that conduct such as yours will lead to further violence against Amos Yee and will promote a culture of political violence and thuggery in Singapore.
‎I am ashamed as a Singaporean that an apparently reputable company like yours could stoop to such reprehensible cyber-lynching.
You have not apologized to Amos and his family. Instead you are resorting to PR gimmicks.
Many netizen have called for a boycott of your store and products. I think this is the least that you deserve!

Amos Yee’s assailant arrested

I wrote about this trivial incident yesterday, just to quote the intro paragraph of the article, ‘The boy, Amos Yee, was hit by a man outside the court when he turned up to hear the charges against him for insulting religion and God. After hitting the boy the man ran off but not before shouting ‘Sue me, sue me’ in front of journalists waiting outside the court for the boy’s appearance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJ17hfhI0C0....’

Our super efficient men in blue did not fail and the man was arrested at 2 am on the same night. The news broke the next day saying that a 49 year old man was arrested. Oh, 49 year old! Heck, my old man’s vision must be playing tricks on me, or was it the above video? That man seemed too young, at most in his mid 30s. His movement, mannerism, his running and gesturing, all seemed too young to be 49.

It is unbecoming for a 49 year old man to behave that way, more like a juvenile. If he is not caught and identified, I would go on thinking that it was a young man hitting Amos Yee.

The big question, what’s next? How would this man be dealt with? In this case, though trivial, it has an international standing and an international audience. It is a very high profile case, and God is watching over us. At the mortal level, this is a case of reckless defiance of the law, the police, and the govt. It was conducted just outside the courts of justice, presumably there would be police around, and in front of many journalists and reporters with cameras ready, and he did it, without a care that he would be caught in camera. He was so confident that he could get away with it, thinking, acting and behaving like a kid. After hitting the boy he turned around to taunt the boy, facing the cameras, without trying to hide his face, no sign of fear of the law, that he could be easily identified. It was very unusual for a 49 year old to behave so naïvely confident of himself. You would expect a 49 year old to know what he was in for and be more careful to commit a premeditated act of violence. He was not provoked and act in the heat of a moment. He was there waiting for Amos Yee..

Would the courts, the police and the govt take this case in a different manner? Would this be treated as more than a simple scuffle between two private individuals and Amos Yee be asked to file a personal suit against his assailant and claim for damages? The fact that he has been arrested means that the govt or the police are taking this very seriously. Would this case be used to make a statement, a deterrent, against all future and potential violators of peace and order, not to think that this is a lawless country, ‘bo cheng hu’, and they can go around hitting and assaulting anyone they liked, right in front of the courts?

With the noise about this case spreading unrestrained, many cheering, some jeering, that the hitting of the boy is a right and good thing, and with many leaders keeping their lips sealed, other than Shanmugam, the impression is not very well received.  Shanmugam, as the Minister of Home Affairs, had to say something or people will get the wrong message, like the fake degree case.

Now, would more righteous people, and ministers, speak out against this assault in broad daylight, against a child by a 49 year old man? A trivial case, nothing much about it, not vile, not outrageously?  Not alarming? Anyone wants to be kind to this kid, or to be kinder to the kid/man for hitting the kid?

What would be the message to be sent out by the govt and the police?

Eddie Teo – The ethos of an era

There is an article in the ST on 28 Apr by the Eddie Teo, the Chairman of PSC on the ethos of a bygone era, the things that the Civil Service breathed and lived by. The story of the Civil Service is best summarized by what Eddie Teo said in these paragraphs.

‘There was already a strong ethos of incorruptibility. I recently met Mr David Rivkin, President of the International Bar Association, who asked how our ethos of zero tolerance for corruption was imparted to, and sustained in, the public service. I told him there had been no training classes or brainwashing sessions.

But public servants watched and followed the examples shown by our political masters.  We were incorruptible because they were incorruptible. We saw that they lived simple, frugal and unostentatious lives and dedicated themselves totally to nation building and improving the lives of Singaporeans. All the older public servants who worked closely with our pioneer generation political leaders will have stories to tell about their frugal habits. To people like Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Dr Goh Keng Swee, there was no such thing as work life balance. Work was life, and life was work.’

These few paragraphs sum up the ethos and philosophies of a time not too long ago that seemed strangely different from what it is now. And it is only a couple of decades apart. The difference in ethos and values and the motivations of the Civil Servants are simply glaring. And they lived and work and developed a new ethos by the living examples of the political masters today.

Though apparently the message of an incorruptible, merit based and impartial Civil Service is still there, the essence and practices are starkly different from the days gone by.  Indirectly Eddie Teo touched on the new values and aspirations of a new generation of people that looked at life differently and wanted to live life differently and these would and must affect their work style and ethos as civil servants.  Affluence and opulence are the new aspirations and wide income gap is good as it allowed the top to indulge in the decadence of wealth and an extremely good life of plenty.

What makes the new civil servants today are greatly influenced by the affluence of a better time and also by the examples they see in their political masters. They follow the leaders and whatever the leaders do would and must rub down on them. The civil servants of today are not the same as the civil servants of yesteryears, crafted by a confluence of changes from many dimensions.  The aspirations are not similar and the ethos, have they changed?

Policies and political decisions were and are made by politicians. Civil servants are now expected to defend political decisions, in a way compromised to take sides with the politicians. This is a big diversion from the past when the political masters were confident to take a stance and make their own defence.

The emerging problems facing civil servants today is the possibility of a change of political fortune and new political masters on the horizon. How would such a change affect the impartiality of civil servants, their loyalty to party versus dedication to the service of the people, and their tenure of service? Would it affect the ethos of the Civil Service? A relatively less politicized civil service like the British system would provide better continuity than a politicized civil service that would have to go with the flow of political realities, serving the wrong masters of the land. They would have difficulties to stay relevant and remain in the Civil Service when the political masters changed. They are now in the same sampan as the political masters, to float or sink together.

Amos Yee - A piece of trivial news

The boy, Amos Yee, was hit by a man outside the court when he turned up to hear the charges against him for insulting religion and God. After hitting the boy the man ran off but not before shouting ‘Sue me, sue me’ in front of journalists waiting outside the court for the boy’s appearance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJ17hfhI0C0

The news, though trivial, is now the hottest topic in the social media. People were shocked at the audacity and defiance against the law and order of the city state. All kinds of rumours are speculating in the social media as to the ‘who and why’ of this attack and how the man was able to get away without anyone thinking it necessary to apprehend him. Conspiracy theory seems to be having a very high rating here. Many were pointing the finger at you know who and have made all kinds of conjectures and the disappointment of how such a brazen act of defiance of the law could happen in broad daylight, in front of the court house, and in front of so many people, many armed with cameras.

I am sure the super efficient men in blue would have no problem taking this man into custody as the incident was captured by so many cameras and seen by so many eyewitnesses. Justice will be served for sure. No need to make wild speculation and gesticulations. Save the middle finger.

The issue is that this likely to be an isolated incident and of an aggrieved public taking the law into his own hand. Pure and simple as that. Would this be seen as a criminal act or as another private matter and the boy be told to take a civil suit against the assailant? Just wondering how the charges could be made, the hitting was like a hard slap. Can it be justified as causing serious bodily harm? Would it be assault or just a case of being a public nuisance?

The Law Minister Shanmugam has commented in his Facebook that this kind of acts is unacceptable. I am sure he would have given his order to get the culprit arrested ASAP. No sweat except for Amos Yee and his parents. If it is a civil suit, would they have the money to pursue the case?

Credit goes to LKY – 3rd World to 1st World

Ok, ok, don’t be angry. I know many of you don’t like this statement, but other than all the iffy arguments, it was during LKY’s watch that Singapore moved from 3^rd World to 1^st World. This one, no matter what, like him or hate him, you got to give credit to him or someone else would be getting the credit.

The question that I would want to ask is, who would want to claim credit for taking Singapore from 1^st World to 3^rd World? There are many ways to equate Singapore as a 3^rd World country today. Just by demography alone, one can classify Singapore as a 3^rd World country. Why, because half the population comes from the 3^rd World. So at least it is a country that is half in and half out of the 3^rd World.

Then look at what is happening all over and you have no choice but to admit that Singapore is looking more like a 3^rd World country. First point, it has no talent, or no native talent. Second point, it needs 3^rd World talents to help to grow the economy, to provide jobs for its citizens. These are official hard truths uttered everyday by the leaders, so must be the truths. Thirdly, the foreign talents are mostly from the 3^rd World, ie 3^rd World talents. This is one of the reasons why the streets are getting dirtier with litters everywhere. The trains and public transports are smelling like the 3^rd World, including the chattering. Don’t ask me what is the official reason for the litters and dirty streets and who are responsible for littering. 

Fourth, look at the frequency of train break downs? And very likely they are seeking help from some #rd World country to solve the train breakdown problems. Fifth, look at the number of fakes being employed here? Sixth, we got no talents and our universities are being filled by foreigners as lecturers and professors to teach 3^rd World students?

What more, what more to put this country in the 3^rd World league of nations? The political system, a citizenry of daft Sinkies that  are incapable of thinking? A country that is dependent on 3^rd World citizens and talents for everything. 3rd World culture, 3rd World thinking, 3rd World politics, and 3rd World talents laughing silly at our stupidity for employing them to replace our real talents with fakes.   

Is Singapore not already a 3^rd World country?

And who is going to claim credit for this?