Chinese missiles in the Paracels

This is the latest good news reported by Fox News. Whether it is western media fabrication like the WMD in Iraq or real, the deployment of military assets in view of the provocative actions by the American gunboats aircraft sailing into the area is necessary and urgent. China must put in real missiles, fly in their fighter aircraft and sail in more naval ships and submarines into the region to protect its national sovereignty or be violated by the Americans at wil, and be seen as weak and unable to defend its territorial integrity.

‘South China Sea dispute: Chinese missiles in Paracels, says Fox
News

Feb. 17 (Sydney Morning Herald) -- 

Fairfax exclusive, May 2015: China puts weapons on its new artificial islands

The Chinese military has deployed an advanced surface-to-air missile system to one of its contested islands in the South China Sea, Fox News reported, citing new civilian satellite imagery.’

And little Australia’s Foreign Minister Julie Bishop is telling the Chinese to stop reclamation and construction work in the Chinese islands. Who does she think she is, the Foreign Minister of the Empire?’

 

China should use the provocations by the Americans as a legitimate reason to militarise the South China Sea in the same way the Americans are using freedom of navigation to justify their military presence in the region.  China cannot let the Americans threaten its sovereignty and appear weak and do nothing when confronted by the American missile destroyers. No country would back out and do nothing in the face of foreign military intimidation. The Americans are using freedom of navigation to for military intervention. The Chinese should thank the Americans for the provocations as the reason to militarise and defend the islands.  They should move in more military hardware to match the American ships and aircraft in the region.

What China is doing is purely defensive in nature. The missiles are to protect the islands from being attacked, unlike the B52s, F22s and missile destroyers deployed by the Americans.  Compare these to the militarization of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, Guam and many other Pacific Islands by the Americans, the Chinese action is legitimate and non aggressive in nature. The Americans are deploying offensive weapons in Diego Garcia to control the Indian Ocean and India is hapless and could not do anything, and in other Pacific Islands as well as military bases in South Korea, Japan, Australia, the Philippines and other South East Asian countries. They are moving all their big guns into the region for war. And China must to everything it can to defend against the Americans should the Americans start to attack China or Chinese islands in the South China Sea.

The American military allocations into the region is many times more hostile and offensive than the North Koreans sending satellites into space. The latter is a peaceful and commercial mission. What the Americans are doing is preparation for war, to attack China and North Korea but harping about peace and not to raise tension.

China must intensify its military build up in the South China Sea and prepare to defend them or face an American attack like the Japanese attacking the British colonies in WW2. The Americans are the provocateurs, the aggressors, the invaders. The Chinese are the defenders, defending their own territories.

What is a rogue President?

Lye Khuen Way:

February 16, 2016 at 7:13 am  Lye Khuen Way(Quote)

It’s probably time to do away with this wayang Elected President thing. Why? From President Ong onwards, we never had any Presidents, Elected or Appointed who dare to ask probing questions of the Government of the day.

With impending changes that will make further mockery of this institution of an Elected President, let’s not fool ourselves that it’s for Singapore good.

Then what? No symbolic Head of State? What State is my retort! Aren’t we a place that belongs to Everyone? I didn’t say it. One PM did and he is still the new PM!

 

The above is a comment by a blogger in TRE. Lye is very cynical and suspicious about the purpose of this ‘wayang Elected President thing’. What was Lye Khuen Way saying in this sentence, ‘From President Ong onwards, we never had any Presidents, Elected or Appointed who dare to ask probing questions of the Government of the day.’? These Presidents cannot be rogues right? Everyone is an honourable man, high net worth, with plenty of money, ‘chiat buay leow’, how can they be rogues?  Not asking probing questions is not a condition to be  a rogue. And when everything is fine, country so well run, all the reserves so well taken care of, what is there to ask? And when the govt is making all the right policies and supported by the people, elected by the people, lagi no reason and no question to ask. Like that how to blame them?

There is no point asking simple questions or silly questions just to be put on record that one actually spoke up right?  The president is not like MPs, need to speak up in parliament or to ask questions to be seen to be working.  There is no need to waste people’s time asking questions that meant nothing or take too long to answer.  As the most dignified person in office, the President cannot anyhow open mouth to ask question when there is no question to be asked. To be presidents, all must be very smart and know when to ask questions when they know something is wrong.

The impending changes must be good, how can it be a mockery? Have faith in the popularly elected govt to do the right thing for the good of the country. Cannot anyhow cast doubts and demand an explanation like asking opposition politicians to explain everything. An elected govt is not the same as opposition parties.  Everything tip top, everyone honourable and integrity cannot be doubted. That is why the people trusted them and elected them to be the rulers of the country.

Anyone knows what is a rogue president?

Operating nuclear power stations or super computers

Operating nuclear power stations or super computers plugged into the exchange trading systems incurs the same risk of self inflicted disaster when there is no where to run or hide

 

One Of The Biggest High Frequenecy Traders Warns Of Potential Market "Catastrophe"

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 02/04/2016 09:20 -0500

 

Here is part of an article in www.zerohedge.com that told of stupid men and women in charge and courting a catastrophe that they have no control over and did not know enough of. The high risks are obvious and well documented, but they stubbornly stick to a dangerous practice like they were bought and controlled by the high frequency traders to do what they want, freely, and risking a total system collapse.

This is like men and women flirting with the sexiness of operating nuclear power stations, knowing the risks and the inability to provide a failsafe system but ‘die die’ still want to have nuclear power stations. Should a country like Singapore go the nuclear road, would it be due to stupid men, clever men or too clever men’s recklessness or desperation?

Read this article to understand and know who are responsible to expose the ignorants to such high risk with little regards to protecting them from it. Look at how irresponsible men and women can be, how reckless they can be by turning the other way, not wanting to see the elephant in the room just to achieve their private interests.

 

….Below is part of an article in Back in April 2009, we wrote what may be the first seminal article predicting the failure of capital markets as a result of widespread predatory high frequency trading and fragmented market structure when we laid out "The Incredibly Shrinking Market Liquidity, Or The Upcoming Black Swan Of Black Swans." Several years later, and countless flash crashes, we have been proven right, however one thing is missing: "the catastrophe" that finally wakes up people to the dangers of all the individual things we have warned about over the years.

Today, we are one step closer to that day, when none other than the head of one of the biggest high-frequency trading companies, Mark Gorton of Tower Research,warned that there are several faultlines in the structure of increasingly electronic, automated financial markets that could lead to a “catastrophe” in the long run,according to the FT. 

To be sure, Mark Gorton, has a clear conflict of interest: being one of the largest HFT members himself, with his company dominating program trading on the NYSE with his Latour Trading subsiiary, the founder and head of Tower Research Capital argued that exchanges have become far more efficient with the advent of more computerised markets, but "cautioned that increasing complexity brought new dangers that needed to be mitigated."

In other words, don't blame the HFTs, blame the markets, which is to be expected from a person who will be out of a job if HFT is banned.

He further adds that "The recent evolution of markets from manual to electronic trading has had huge benefits and investors save money every day due to the lower cost of trading. But electronic trading brings with it a number of new risks, and we need to continue to strengthen the resiliency of electronic markets,"Mr Gorton told the Financial Times.

What keeps Gorton up at night? The short answer: the lack of safeguards at exchanges to prevent HFT firms like his from dragging the whole thing down:

The high-frequency trader is particularly concerned over the lack of risk controls at exchanges, which he said constituted a “large hole in the middle of the system that needs to be filled”....

 

Nonetheless, exchange-level risk controls remain “limited at best” and should assume there will inevitably be glitches, bugs and errant trading algorithms that could cause problems in the wider market, according to Mr Gorton.

Glitches from algorithms, he forgot to add, such as the one Tower uses each and every day to scalp and frontrun billions of trades in order flow.

However, his warning, conflicted as it is, is spot on: the market will crash again, it is only a matter of time, simply because the HFTs have captured market regulators so well, nobody has any idea what is going on any more: “We need a regulatory framework that assumes that any single system(can alsoread nuclear energy) in the market will fail and insures that we have multiple redundant levels of checks that can catch failures in other parts of the system,”he said.

What is Gorton's suggestion?

Mr Gorton highlighted in particular the lack of a centralised position-tracking mechanism for the US stock market, the need to refine and synchronise market circuit-breakers between highly correlated markets, such as cash equities and futures, and the absence of clarity over what it takes for trades to be declared invalid.

In other words, focus on the symptoms, shutting down markets when things go haywire, not the underlying cause, which as we have said since 2009 is simple: broken markets, designed to benefit just one group of traders….

Who would it benefit if Singapore goes nuclear?

Asean – Between the devil and the deep blue sea

Asean countries have been invited by Obama to Sunnylands estate in California for a retreat. The agenda has been crafted by the Americans for Asean to join the Empire to go knocking their heads against China, the top trading partners of many Asean countries.  According to Dr Tang Siew Mun from the Yusof Ishak Institute, ‘The US will pitch for explicit support for US actions in the South China Sea but Obama may leave Sunnylands disappointed.’ This is not the picture the western media like NYT, AFP etc are saying. Instead they reporting that the Asean countries are all living in fear of China and would join arms to fight China.

Asean are not the pieces on a chess board and the Americans are moving them together to form a united front against China like the socalled League of Nations 8 western powers invading China. Would the Asean countries be made to fight a war against China for the interests of the Empire? The heightened tension would be great opportunities for the Americans and their war industries to start selling weapons that the Asean countries would now need to defend against an enemy the China chose for them.

China is now the biggest trading partners to many Asean countries and investing heavily in them. Would Asean trade the economic benefits for war that would only lead to the destruction of their economies and the killing of their people?

In Sunnylands the Asean leaders would have to choose between a military super power and an economic super power, to chose between war and peace, to choose between economic growth or instability and destruction.

To the Americans, the best thing for Asean is tension and war with China. After 60 years of peace and stability, would Asean be foolish enough to want to court war and destruction for the benefits of the Americans and the Empire? Every summit, meeting, conference with the military power is about war. Every meeting with the economic power is about trade and investment.

It is not so right to say between the devil and the deep blue sea. It is more between war and peace, between destruction and construction, between wasting money in buying weapons or infrastructure development and trade.

Would Asean leaders be tempted by the devil to bring destruction to their countries and people?

Is there a need to treat children like adult criminals?

Below is a letter from a parent of a 13 year old boy who had to go through a similar ordeal like Benjamin a couple of years ago.  The article is posted in TRE. This is how the children are being treated by adults who are educators and law enforcing officers. As long as ‘god’ keeps quiet, it is a sign of approval that this is the right way to treat naughty children, like criminals. Children are very safe in this caring and compassionate in this nanny state run by goody priests and matrons. But it is also a sign of a kind of sickness in the head, people that think children should be treated this way. Don’t be deceived by people appearing normal when they are actually crazy inside the head.

Psychiatrist would have a lot of things to say about such people, sadist, masochist, deprived or abused childhood, maybe privileged childhood and lost the sense of compassion for children, megalomaniac or whatever, some may have personal grudges or agenda.

 

13-year-old boy locked up in detention cell with other offenders for alleged molest

After reading the letter from Benjamin Lim’s family on citizen online. I totally understand how they felt and would like to share my story to let Benjamin Lim’s parents know that I admire their strength and courage to speak up.
I’m really sorry that they had to lose a son, in order to have authorities listen to what they had to say.
On 26 February 2014, I had a similar incident happen to me.
At 2.23pm, I received a call on my mobile from my son’s school discipline master informing me that they will be calling the police. They informed me that it was due to an alleged outrage of modesty of a female teacher. I asked the discipline master if it could wait till I got to the school before they did that, and his reply was that they had no control of what the teacher wanted to do which was to call the police.
Later on, when I had a chance to speak to the principal and the discipline master, I asked for an explanation of this, I was told that as the principal of the school it was his job to protect his staff – the teacher. If the job of the school principal, is to protect his adult staff, who protects the 13-year-old child?
At 2.50pm I arrived at the school’s general office and requested to see my son, the Discipline Master came to bring me to a room where my son was. He was being questioned by a police officer and with another police officer taking the statement and three other police officers outside. Unlike Benjamin’s incident, these police officers were all in uniforms and the police cars were marked.
Upon entering the room, I saw my son with his head resting on his arm on the table crying. The amount of tissues next to him showed that he must have been crying quite a bit.
I was told that they were done taking my son’s statement and got him to sign for it in my absence.
If you were a 13-year-old and there were 5-6 police officers present, would you not be afraid and would have admitted to whatever the officers had suggested to you? (especially, when you had no one there to support you?) As an adult, I would be frightened and extremely intimidated let alone a 13-year-old. Why would one require this amount of police officers to pick up a 13-year-old boy from his school in two police cars?
To shorten the story, my son was brought to the police station in the police car handcuffed. ( I had to beg the Investigating officer not to handcuffed him in the school,  only when they got into the police car.) After many requests, I was finally allowed to post bail for my son at about 10 pm!! All this while, he was sitting with other offenders in the same cell even though he was only 13 years of age.
These are the facts* that led to the above incident which I managed to find out from my son when we finally made it home.
1.        My son was in the school canteen just after school hours at 1.50pm, rushing to buy lunch; he has a history of gastric and thus try to eat as soon as he has the opportunity before he starts to get gastric pains. As there was no queue, in front of the drinks stall, many students were jostling to get to the front to buy their drinks. There was some manoeuvering, slight pushing and shoving, as in any typical canteen scene after school at lunch time, particularly in an all-boys school.
2.        As he was jostling his way forward, the said teacher, was walking past (on his right side and just within an arm’s length). At the point, his hand having swung outwards due to the jostling brushed her buttocks accidentally with the back of his hand, because he was holding his wallet in the hand.  She turned around and asked him “Do you  know what you have done?”
3.        My son immediately apologised to the teacher explaining that it was accidental. However, the teacher said, “Even if you are sorry, it is an arrest-able offence, and sorry cannot make up for it.” She then informed him that she was going to report this to his Form Teacher, who subsequently arrived and escorted him to the Discipline Master’s office. Before long, the police arrived, questioned him and arrested my son.
4.        When asked why he had confessed to the statement he made, he said it was the manner it was suggested to him, and he didn’t have a choice.
5.        Subsequently, My son was given a warning letter for the offence he confessed to. This is after a few months of having to go to the police station to post bail.
Children have to be protected because they have no formal rights
1.        Schools need to captain young lives and not put them in jeopardy
2.        Schools should not protect staff above pupils, but to treat both fairly.
3.        The child will clearly be traumatized socially, and there is bound to be a lot of rebound in terms of re-socializing him. (We had to have a 14-year-old boy’s death to prove this point)
4.        There was no proper disciplinary evaluation of both teacher and student before the case was taken to the police?
5.        The school did nothing to champion the situation and I think this is something that our education system is unaware of and has no idea how to handle given the climate today where we live in a world of cyber bullying etc.
6.        I had written into Ministry of Education (MOE) to seek answers, only to have MOE ask me to give the principal of my son’s school a call. (My son had by that time moved to another school.) It is extremely frustrating to try to explain to a 13-year-old boy, that even though he had done something accidentally, by mistake he was not given a chance to be proven innocent, no benefit of a doubt. He lost all his childhood friends in the process of his moving school.
I’m very thankful that with support and conversations with my son he has not taken it as hard as Benjamin Lim. Whether this incident has any long-term repercussions on his relationships in the future is yet to be seen.
Yours truthfully,
A concerned parent

Whether or not he deliberately touched her does not warrant the teacher calling the police. If a teacher is not capable of managing a situation in school with a student by herself then she has failed as a teacher. To decide to get police involved instead of leaving matters to the disciplinary teacher is to disregard the welfare of her student, disregard the fact that students are minors in her care in need of guidance. Such a person is not suitable to be a teacher. Boys at the school will not trust nor look up to her and this accused boy will probably be so traumatized that when he grows up he may have difficulty making friends with women.
The Singapore Police is expert at extracting confessions. They should be more professional and do more leg work to gather evidence. Did the police question the teacher how did she know it was a deliberate touching amounting to molest. Did the police gather evidence from the other students at the canteen whether the touching was deliberate or accidental or they merely rely on the confession extracted from the boy?
The Law on molesting in Singapore is too strict. Almost everyday you read in the newspaper someone is found guilty of molesting. It appears that Singapore is a nation of molesters. If someone happens to brush against a woman he can be charged for molesting if the woman complains. The man is defenseless.