US Destructive Colonialism And Imperialism

US has inherited the mantle of British colonialism and imperialism for almost four hundred years. This destructive British and American colonialism and imperialism plius that of Spain, Portugal, Holland and Russia has either destroyed or cause great damage to many ancient civilization. History will reveal that the natives of North America and South America were not as savage and uncivliae as the invading white men from Europe. Just because the white men were better armed with modern weapons like guns and cannons does not make them more civilise than others. 

Below I quote a passage from an unknown author . Please read it and reflect deeply on the truth of its contents. Those so called selfstyled intellectuals who are history illiterate and like to fawn on white supremacists should go back to school before they write any comments. I am referring to many of those silly intellectuals who are being unreservely highly paid in many of Singapore's institutes of higher learnings and international studies. 

THE JADE PAVILLION 
-------------------------- 

" He felt a familiar rise insight him. Eucliff 
was a good example of how the Chinese were 
being corrupted, their culture eroded, their 
countryside altered by speculative land deals. 
It was the same wherever the British went. 
India, Africa, Malaya, China: whatever they 
saw, they changed - as if that was the natural 
way of things. They did not learn the local 
languages except in order to teach the natives 
English. They built their churches and 
imported their own god annd tried to convert 
the local deities. They eradicated customs 
without having anything better with which to 
replace them. They brought their own 
business practices which they expected to be 
adopted, their own laws to be obeyed, their 
own merchandise to be purchased. They even 
brought their own diseases of influenza and 
gonorrhoea to add to the local scourges. When 
they could not get their own way with the 
natives they ruled by division , pitting tribe 
against tribe, clan against clan, religion 
against religion: when that failed, they 
brought in their troops and their gunboats." 

Southernglory1 

Wednesday, 1st March, 2017

How long does it take to admit a silly mistake?

A few people came to me shaking their heads just to ask why it took 6 long years and wasting so many precious hours of unproductive time to realise that the no lunch break is a total failure from the start? The promise and optimism of some half baked logic that longer hours with no lunch break meant more business,  would increase trading business by 10%, were at best be good for a laugh. Only someone not in the industry could think that such an idea would work when anyone with a couple of years in this business and with a little grey matter would know how silly it was. And it took a whole solid 6 years to admit that it was all an expensive mistake, an unproductive farce.

Then I also heard some clowns still saying that it was a great idea and it did not fail, it was a great success. The no lunch break farce gave SGX a big advantage over other bourses that have to close for lunch. The clown even bragged that if one bought one share in Timbuktu and the market crashed, the buyer of that one share could sell it in SGX without missing a bid while other bourses were closed for lunch.

I must say that I agree with the clown's clever reasoning. We could boast to the world that we have a market that opens a whole full day, so efficient and so convenient for all the traders of the whole wide world to trade here. I would also agree that if the market is open 24 hours, better still, then our aunties and uncles and ah mahs could trade in all the markets all over the world any time they like. They can even wake up in the middle of the night after having a good tip from their dreams to buy shares, and the Singapore market will be there waiting for them.

Come to think of it, the failure of the no lunch break would not have happened if they open the market 24 hours a day non stop. (Oops, I know some disagreed that it was a failure and would still swear that it was a great success.) And business would boom and everyone in the business will be laughing to the bank and no one would be complaining of no business or a waste of time. It must be, 8 hours of business, now 3X8 hours would mean business would triple. As they said, want to do something well, go all the way, no half hearted measures like no lunch break.

Many are cheering that they are having their lunch break back. Please forgive these people for they did not know what they missed and how good it would be, how good it could be, if the market remains open 24 hours a day. The only reason for these folks to be happy for a miserable lunch break, I think, is that they are not talented so unable to appreciate how good no lunch break is for the business. A child in the kindergarten would also be able to work out the arithmetic. The idea is so simplistic! But that is the brilliant part and even simpletons would know that it would work. How can anyone say it would not work or it did not work?

Maybe we need to engage a foreign talent to teach these simple folks how good it is if a market has no lunch break, or better still operates on a non stop 24 hours basis. Give it more time to succeed, keep the no lunch break. 6 years is too short a time for this great idea to bear fruits. Please don’t throw out such a clever idea.

Stupidity has no cure.

A consolation is that the market still has many great innovations that would keep it flourishing and in the pink of health. I particularly like algo trading, computer trading, smaller bid size, can trade one share at a time to improve liquidity and cheaper for children to play with their piggy bank savings. $1 can buy 100 shares. Now isn’t that nice? And main board shares some more. More than 2 billion shares are traded daily, and will be bigger tomorrow. Don't pray pray. See how healthy is the stock market or not? It is growing from strength to strength.

It is such a pity that they are bringing back the lunch break. Now business will surely be adversely affected.

Critics and cynics to be invited to share their disruptive views

The word disruptive is now being floated like a new panacea to cure the ills of everything. I thought I was dreaming when the island’s top 5 govt spokesmen and women proposed that critics/cynics aka disruptors, should be invited to sit in govt boards to share their opposing and disruptive views and ideas. Kishore Mahbubani, Tommy Koh, Chan Heng Chee, Han Fook Kwan and Danny Chan gathered at a seminar organized by the SMU to share their new and disruptive thoughts derived from the success of disruptive technologies. It is time to slay sacred cows and bravely confront the new forces of disruptive change.

Kishore has this to say, ‘We need more naysayers. Singapore cannot take its formulas for success developed over the last 50 years and apply them to the next 50 years, as the world has changed drastically. We need to create new formulas, which you can’t until you attack and challenge every sacred cow. Then you can succeed.’

Heng Chee too agreed with Kishore’s view by adding this, ‘But it is in policies and leadership teams that Singapore needs people willing to challenge authority. more robust internal discussions on policies with a wider range of people from different backgrounds. We need naysayers in leadership teams who can think the unthinkable.’

Tommy Koh, another doyen of Singaporean thought makers did not want to be outdone and added, ‘When we appoint people to boards, we can also appoint challengers who are subversive and who have alternative points of view. That’s the kind of cultural change we want to see. It makes Singapore stronger, not weaker.

I could not believe my eyes reading such disruptive comments from the thinkers of the establishment. I am not alone. Danny Chan, one of the panelists, could not help himself and took a dig at his fellow panelists. ‘You talk so much to me but when the minister is present, in front of him, you’re absolutely silent. This habit stems partly from a fear of looking bad in front of others and of failing.’ Oops, maybe he was referring to the audience.

Danny Chan could not stand the hypocrisy of the session. Maybe the talk shop was just a talk shop without any minister around and the message would be different when a minister is around. Maybe there is really such disruptive talks going around in the circles of natural aristocrats, that it is time to test the unknown and the unthinkable. Disruptive thoughts and disruptors are the new darlings of change, the change agents.

Critics and cynics like Philip Ang, Leong Sze Hean, Cynical Investor, Richard Wan and company may be receiving invitation letters to sit in some govt boards as disruptors to throw spanners into the works and hopefully things would get better. I would not include names of opposition party leaders as it would be too much to take to think that they could be invited. The non political individuals may have a rare and a one in a million chance to see this happening, definitely not those politically connected. I may even add the out of question candidates like Amos Yee and Roy Ngerng.

After saying this, maybe it is just another wet dream, too good to be true. Danny Chan should know better for highlighting the hypocrisy of the talk shop. If only the thought leaders are the decision makers, then there may be a little chance of it happening. For the moment, enjoy the musing.

World Affairs in Perspective: Diego Garcia US military base in the Indian Ocean. PART 2

US made irrelevant noise when China built self defense facilities in her own island territories in the South China Sea. US said China should not militarise the South China Sea. But US can sail its flotilla of aircraft carriers, destroyers, submarines and frigates in the South China Sea and within 12 KM of Chinese coast. US can conduct overflight of its bombers and jet fighters over the region. All this is done purportedly to demonstrate its freedom of passage and navigation through the region. But freedom of passage and navigation has never been a problem in the South China Sea. China has never stopped any vessel in the region. Nor does it intend to do so in the future. Then what is the problem? The fact is US has surrounded China with over 400 military bases since the end of Second World War. Are these American military bases in China's periphery for peace? No, they are a show of force to awe China and to contain China's peaceful development. The sellf righteous US says China is not allowed to progress too fast to be on parity or even overtake US in wealth and stature. Therefore the noise about China's self defense facilities in her own territories in the South China Sea is a bogey. It is an excuse to carry out insidious plan and strategy to stir trouble and conflict among the littoral states in the region so as to hold back China's peaceful development.

Instead US should take note of the world's deep concern about its illegal and illegitimate military bases in Diego Garcia of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean. American military bases in Diego Garcia is a launching pad for constant US aggression against countries in the Middle East Arab Islamic countries, Central Asia and Africa. US had and is still using Diego Garcia military base to launch attack, bomb and invade Iraq,Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia. Yemen and Syria. US has been coveting the region which is rich in oil and other mineral resources.

In building a gigantic military base in Diego Garcia, US has committed a horrendous crime against the few thousand original inhabitants, the Chagossians of Diego Garcia and against humanity.

Immediately after the Second World War US started to look for a military outpost in the Indian Ocean. England which then controlled the Mauritius Island archipelago inclusive of the Chagos Islands and Seychelles was obliged to lease to US, Diego Garcia the largest island in the Chagos Archipelago because it still owed US a huge debt. The Chagos Islands which form part of Mauritius was supposed to be granted independence by England. But before granting independence to Mauritius, England at the behest of US annexed the Chagos Islands and then leased out Diego Garcia, the largest island in the group to US in 1966 for fifty years for just a paltry sum of money. US had used arm twisting on England to get the Diego Garcia lease at the expense of the Chagossians who eventually suffered tremendously .

From 1966 to 1973 USA carried out force dispossession and deportation of the native Chagossians to Mauritius and Seychelles in an extreme decrepit condition and without any compensation. The Chagossians were left on the disused docks in Mauritius and Seychelles without any support. They were left homeless, jobless and with little money. The Chagossians were put in overcrowded cargo ships which were used to carry guano. Throughout the five days trip to Mauritius and Seychelles they slept on top of guano, causing them to vomit, urinate and purge in the cargo hold. Their extreme predicament and living in abject poverty was later exposed by journalists.

The US lease in Diego Garcia expired in 2016 and according to the terms of the lease the Chagossians were to be allowed to return to their homes after the expiry of the lease. But both the British and the Americans were dishonourable and did not allow the natives to return. Instead US insisted on renewing the lease for another fifty years.

The Chagossians have been fighting for compensation and the right to return home to Diego Garcia but so far to no avail.

I t must be pointed out that the unconscionable forced dispossession and deportation of the Chagossians were illegal and illegitimate and that they should be sufficiently compensated and be allowed to return home.

In 2015 a United Nations Tribunal delivered a ruling which found UK continued to sideline Mauritius sovereignty over the Chagossian islands. But UK at the behest of US is adamant in keeping the Chagos Islands as its last colony and vestige of power in the Indian Ocean though actually it is done in submission to US coerce, might and power.

In the meantime the Evil Empire made it clear it was determined to renew its lease claiming that Diego Garcia is of vital strategic importance to US security. How can that be when US is more than ten thousand miles away? US always harps on its security. US security is always at the expense of other countries' insecurity. Now the whole world knows Diego Garcia military base is a staging outpost for US aggression and world hegemony. Diego Garcia is planned by US for staging future air strikes against Russia, China, India and Indonesia should US plans its future aggression and wars against these countries.

As a ploy to keep the Chagossians permanently out of Chagos Islands and Diego Garcia US connived with UK to declare the Chagos Islands to be a " Marine Protected Area " alledgely to protect it delicate ecosystem. It was just a contrived ploy to make it impossible for the original Chagos inhabitants to pursue their claim for resettlement on the islands if the entire Chagos archipelago were a marine reserve.

US occupation of Diego Garcia is evil and illegal. It had secretly built a huge military base in Diego Garcia for aggression, conquest and world hegemony. US forced dispossession and inhuman way of forced deportation of the Chagossians were illegal and a crime against humanity.

United Nations must bear on UK to hand back Chagos Islands and Diego Garcia to the people and government of Mauritius. US  must dismantle its insidious military base in Diego Garcia for good.

USA should stop complaining about China's self defense facilities in her own territories in the South China Sea. Unlike US military bases in Diego Garcia and all parts of the world, China is building self defense facilities in her own sovereign islands  and so it is of no concern to US, Japan or any nosey others. US is intentionally harping on China's defense facilities in her own islands just to sidetrack and distract the world of its own massive buildup in Diego Garcia,Japan, Guam, South Korea, Marshall Islands and the Philippines. America military bases in Diego Garcia and elsewhere are poised for aggression and world hegemony whereas China,s defense facilities in her own territories are for selfdefense against American and Japanese aggression.

The world will be safer If US gives up its Psyche of aggression, warmongering and world hegemony

Southernglory1

Tuesday, 28th February, 2017

World Affairs in perspective: S.China Sea & Diego Garcia

South China Sea     ( PART  1  )

The native Americans say " Whitemen speak with fork tongues and cannot be trusted. " This truth can be reflected in USA's position in the South China Sea and in US huge military base in Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. In the South China Sea, China owns the Paracels and Spratly Islands in which it has sovereignty and historical rights for thousands of years. In the Indian Ocean, USA stole Diego Garcia from the Chagossians of Mauritius and secretly and illegally built a military base for aggression and world hegemony.

US is ten thousand miles away and is not a claiment to the disputed islands in the South China Sea. For over two thousand years China hold sovereignty over the Paracels and the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. During the Second World War Japan invaded and occupied these islands. At the end of the Second World War Japan handed back these islands to China officially and legally through the League of Nations and later the United Nations and through legal documents signed at the Cairo Conference 1943, the Potsdam Treaty 26-07-1945, the Yalta Treaty 11-02-1945 and the San Francisco Treaty 08-09-1951.

At that period of time the Kuomintang under Chiang Kai Shek was the party in power in China. The Kuomintang was defeated in the Chinese civil war and fled to Taiwan with the help of US which then blockaded the Taiwan Strait with its Seventh Fleet to prevent Chairman Mao's People's Liberation Army from taking Taiwan to consummate the unification of China. US had wrongly and callously interfered in Chinese internal affairs. If US had not interfered there would not be a Taiwan problem or divided China today.

However, after the defeat of Kuomintang, the reign and sovereignty over the Paracels and Spratly Islands remain to be under China though under a new government of Mao's People's Republic of China.

In the mid 1970s many South East Asian littoral states under the behest of US, stole some Chinese islands largely in the Spratly island archipelago. China then was not able to do much except to lodge some protest because of the presence of the US Seventh Fleet in the region. Vietnam stole 25 of the Chinese islands, Philippines 9, Malaysia 7 and Brunei 5.

Vietnam, Philippines and Malaysia began to build forts and military naval strongholds with airstrips for harassing Chinese fishing boats. While these illegal activities were going on there was total silence in US, Japan and the whole of the western world and no one condemn the illegal provocative activities of these American minions except the only the official protests of China. China could have easily evicted Vietnam, Philippines and Malaysia from the islands they stole from China but choose not to do so for the sake of peace.

In June 1986 US and the West tried to supplant China's sovereignty and historical rights over the islands in the South China Sea by floating a new concept of economic rights of a country within 200 KM of its continental sea shelf. Since China has a long coastline it agreed to the new treaty but only on the proviso that the treaty would not infringe the existing Chinese Sovereignty and historical rights of these islands. Incredulously US and a few western countries did not even want to sign and submit themselves to this treaty. On hindsight it can be seen US and the West were using this treaty as a ploy and strategy to rob off the Paracels and Spratly islands from China. Fortunately China had foreseen this chicanery and signed with the proviso that stated clearly that the new treaty would not be allowed to infringe on the Chinese South China Sea islands. In short the new treaty should not supercede Chinese sovereignty and historical rights over the Chinese territorial islands, shoals, atols and reefs in the South China Sea.

Thus US is speaking with fork tongues when it says China should not claim those islands especially those islands stolen from China by Vietnam, Philippinnes and Malaysia. US is being dirty when it tries to invoke the 1986 treaty to supercede China's sovereignty and historical rights.

With encouragement and some finance from US , Vietnam, Philippines and Malaysia have seen fit to militarise the islands they occupy by building airstrips and naval stations to harass Chinese fishing boats. Of course China will not allow these wrongs done to her in her own territorial islands and seas. Instead of using force to take back her stolen islands China choose to dredge some of her islands and build light houses and selfdefense facilities in them to forestall American and perhaps Japanese aggression. Now America and the West and Japan were quick to raise a furore and accused China of militarising the South China Sea while at the same time US was sailing aircraft carriers and other naval vessels in the region and conducting overflights with jet fighters and bombers as a show of force to awe the Chinese. Who then is militarising the South China Sea?

US has no business to interfere in the issues of the South China Sea since they do not concern them. US is speaking with fork tongues when its says the South China Sea is of strategic importance to US security though it is ten thousand miles away. On the other hand US conveniently forgets that the South China Sea is vital to China's security and survival. China and South East Asian states are able to talk, negotiate and hold peace in the region. US should cease its military activities and illegal naval patrols in the region for the sake of peace and tranquility in South East Asia. South East Asian countries should bear on warmongering US not to turn the region into a second Middle East turmoil and destructive wars.

It must be pointed out before 2010, US like the rest of the world was supportive of those agreements and treaties that Japan officially and legally returned the Paracel and the Spratly islands to China. However in 2010, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in their streaks of insanity somehow reneged on those treaties in their pivot to Asia to contain China.

Southernglory1

Monday, 27th February,2017

NB:   PART   2  will be published on Tuesday, 28th February, 2017