Singaporeans, PRs, locals, residents?

Read a front page article in thenewpaper talking about Jobless graduates

and the numbers of locals unemployed, residents unemployed but not a word

mentions about Singaporeans or PRs. What is a local, what is a resident? A

Singaporean, a non Singaporean, a PR or a foreigner that happened to work

here? Who cares?

Who cares about locals or residents? What a true blue Singaporean would be

concerned about would be the well being of Singaporeans, whether they are

happily employed or unhappily unemployed, under employed or retrenched.

This is what being Singaporean is all about. And isn’t this is what the

govt or people in govt should be concerned about?

Why are they mumbling about locals and residents? Are these some secret

codes that are used to confuse matters, to hide facts that are important to

Singaporeans? With all the numbers mentioned in the report, does any

Singaporean know how many Singaporeans are unemployed versus non

Singaporeans? Is this not the issue?

What is happening? What is the agenda? Does anyone want to know how many

Singaporeans are unemployed or retrenched? Locals, residents, what the

hell? These are meaningless terms unless we know what they are and what

portion or percentage is Singaporeans. Not talking about Singaporeans, not

wanting to say anything about Singaporeans is as good as not wanting to let

Singaporeans know, something to hide, something unpleasant to hide.

The fate of daft Sinkies is sealed but no one wants to talk about it. Not

saying it, not revealing it does not mean it will go away. Singaporeans

have a right to know what is the situation and whether they are being sold

to the karung guni man.

Singapore Prison preparing for influx of senior citizens

The Singapore Prison Service retrofitted 25 cells with mobility-aid features like handrails, grab bars, anti-slip flooring and nurse call help button. State media Straits Times however attributed the double in elderly inmates due to an ageing population. – the Statestimes Review

The Statestimes Review also said, ‘Due to insufficient CPF retirement fund, Singaporean elderly are turning to crimes to get free lodging and food from the prison. According to state media Straits Times, the number of elderly prisoners above the age of 60 have doubled in the past 5 years from 359 at 2.8% of the prison population in 2012, to 651, or 5.3%,in 2016.’

With no jobs, no money, little CPF savings, Medisave as good as untouchable for minor illnesses that did not incur more than a few thousand dollars, the senior citizens are just following the trend of developed western countries like the USA, commit minor crimes to get free lodging, free food and free medical from the prison institutions.

The Singapore Prison is quite forward thinking, thinking ahead, planning ahead to cater for this new trend. Unfortunately 25 cells may not be enough given the size of the senior citizen population now about 1m and growing. The Prison authority should be more generous in the expansion of facilities for the seniors that are planning to make the prison their permanent home. A couple of blocks of HDB flats may be the solution and may shall be inadequate in view of the rising demand.

Senior citizens are getting innovative and creative in planning for their retirement, in the comfort of Changi Prison, everything taken care of. And the facilities have been upgraded to make sure they did not slip and fall. Comforting thought.

I thought it was a joke or a hoax

Below is posted in the statestimesreview.

‘I am deeply saddened and shocked by the events that took place on March 4. My mother is 73 years old, frail and suffers from a host of medical conditions.

That morning, she went to the Ang Mo Kio South Neighbourhood Police Centre to report a lost pawn shop ticket. However, the officer-in-charge informed her that there was a warrant of arrest issued against her in 2015 for failing to appear for a court hearing on a town council-related matter. They did not provide her with any further details of the offence.

She was detained and taken to the Ang Mo Kio Police Station and, from there, to the State Courts, before being remanded at Changi Women’s Prison (CWP). While in custody, my mother was stressed and overwhelmed, and was unable to recall the contact details of any of her relatives....

Furthermore, when my mother was moved between the police station, CWP and the court, she was handcuffed and had leg restraints on. It is appalling that a weak old woman was subjected to such harsh treatment.

Law enforcement officers must be empowered to exercise flexibility to handle such cases with empathy and more humane considerations. I hope our pioneer generation members will not be subjected to such an ordeal in future.’

When I read this narrative, immediately I don’t believe that this could happen in Singapore. Our police officers are very well trained, very caring, very proper, very professional, as exemplified in the Benjamin case. How could they treat a 73 year old woman like that? This cannot be true, this must be a joke.

The statestimereview must verify the details before posting this kind of articles or may incur the wrath of the police. I hope the statestimesreview double confirm this case or remove it from its site.
Oops, after writing the above I came across a half page article in the ST on 16 Mar stating that indeed this case was genuine. The victim that was restrained/not restrain, is a Gertrude Simon. The police respond on this, ‘A joint statement by the Singapore Prison Service (SPS) and Singapore Police Force (SPF) last night said she was not restrained by the police, and this was done only when she was transferred to prison as part of standard procedure.’

The Police added, ‘The Police and SPS have a duty to enforce the law and to ensure that the rule of law is respected. At the same time, we are committed to ensuring the well being and safety of persons in our custody.’ The Police were just doing their duty and also for the well being and safety of the person to restrain/not restrain a person.  And she was offered food and water, to call home and like Benjamin, ‘She did not show any sign of being traumatised, and was alert in police custody.’

The daughter said, ”When I saw her after her release she was very quiet and when I brought her home, she slept with her hands closed to her face, like in handcuffs,” she added.

Basically she was very well and professionally taken care of, under standard operating procedures, when under police custody. Everything was done properly according to the law and lawful procedure. Case close, no big issue.

Would the kind and compassionate Shanmugam want to review this procedure just like the Police reviewing the procedure after Benjamin’s case, to rethink if it is appropriate to restrain/not restrain a 73 year old woman with respect to the nature of her crime that warranted a restrain/not restrain procedure?

A few questions to ask.
1. Did she commit a serious crime that requires handcuff and leg restraint?
2. Can the handcuff and leg restraint protect her from harming herself?
3. Would she be able to run away from the police?
4. Is it necessary to restrain a mild, weak 73 year old woman?

China needs a doctrine of universal appeal to survive

The West have the Doctrine of Christian Discovery and the Arabs the Doctrine of Jihad. The Chinese need to have a national doctrine of universal value to stay ahead for survival.

The Chinese have always been a disunited people. They are prone to fight among themselves rather than against invading foreigners. This can be seen in their disunity in the face of foreign invasions by the Mongols and the Manchus and later by the Japs and Western countries inclusive of Russia.

The Chinese people and nation must be united if they do not want to be humiliated again. To foster that unity the Chinese need a doctrine that will galvanize Chinese civilization and solidify the national spirit of the Chinese people and the patriotism of the Chinese soul.

The West inclusive of Russia have that militant Doctrine of Christian Discovery. That doctrine works wonders for the West. Armed with that doctrine Western countries have adopted a very assertive and aggressive spirit of aggression and conquest for centuries. That explains how England, France, Spain, Portugal and Holland and later US expand their empire worldwide. That also explains how Russia expands and controls a huge empire stretching from Europe across Asia to the Pacific coast largely at the expense of the Chinese.

To enhance its aggression and hegemony of the world USA adds in the Doctrine of Manifest Destiny and the Doctrine of Exceptionalism.

It is not just the European countries adopting a doctrine to serve their justification of aggression and conquest . The Arabs like the Europeans also have for centuries a powerful doctrine to drive their ambition of conquest and dominance of other countries. The Arab muslims militant doctrine is no different from white men's Doctrine of Christian Discovery. Theirs is the Doctrine of Jihad in submission to Allah's demand of world conquest and mass conversion of conquered people to embrace Islam. That explains how the Arabs conquered and ruled large swathes of land from Middle East to Central Asia and North Africa and how Islam spread far and wide to Pakistan, Bangladash, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines and even to China.

China is the only country and ancient civilization without a national doctrine that had been frequently attacked, conquered and torn apart by foreign invaders. The map of China since 1689 and the map of China today will show clearly how Chinese territories shrink in size every other decade from 1689 due to foreign aggression and occupation of Chinese territories.

The Chinese need a strong and powerful doctrine with universal appeal to counter the West and the Arab militants. Chinese all over the world must think of a good doctrine to serve and protect Chinese integrity and security.

The West and the Arabs have done much harm to the world for centuries. It is time to stop them from doing further harm by exposing the true nature of their doctrines.

Southernglory1

Friday, 17th March, 2017

How to lose your country?

In the past losing your country was usually through conquest. The foreigners just marched in, killed the kings and proclaimed themselves as the new kings. Then the colonialists came, doing almost the same, some just planted their flags and claimed they found the land and the land belonged to them. Many silly Asians still read this in their history books and accepted this silliness.
In order to defend themselves and their countries, armies were raised with paid or unpaid soldiers, trained to fight and die to defend the country, the people and their way of life. The soldiers are there to protect the country and people from foreigners coming to rob and loot them and to occupy their country, to the country as theirs.
With globalization, things are changing. It is a good thing to invite foreigners to your country, to take over your country, to change your way of life. The big question, why is there still a need for soldiers, to defend what when foreigners are happily invited home to take over what you have built, to be owners of your country?
Still don’t understand? Ok, let me give you a simple and real example that is easy to understand. This is reported in YahooNews.
‘A 51-year-old owner of a three-room flat in Hougang Avenue 8 was forced to move out of his own home, after his tenants (a couple) refused to leave the flat, reported Shin Min Daily News.
The homeowner, who works at a supermarket, began renting his flat out 10 years ago to supplement his income.
The couple moved into his home in July 2013. After paying their rent for the next nine months, the couple suddenly stopped making their payments and even refused to move out.
With this, the homeowner decided to move out and began renting a house from a colleague.
“It’s been three years and I had given them many chances, yet they deliberately delay payment and refuse to move out…My family members worry for my safety and advised me to move out,” he said.
“I have a home, yet somehow I’m homeless and have to rent a room from someone else…This is laughable indeed.”’

No this is not laughable. This is stupidity, the hallmark of a stupid people, a daft people that did not know that they are daft. This happened to a home. Translate this to a country, the homeowner(citizens) renting his flat/country out, ie allow foreigners to come in as visitors or PRs, to work and stay in the flat(country)
The tenants(visitors/PRs) then refused to go away. The owner left his flat/country to rent another place to live, ie migrated to another country to live, leaving his country to the foreigners. And the daft owners think it is alright when his home/country is being occupied by his tenant/foreigners. And he stupidly asked, “I have a home, yet somehow I’m homeless and have to rent a room from someone else…”
He did not know that he has lost his home/country and did not know his right to take it back or how to take it back. Singaporeans are boat people in the making.

Daft Singaporeans would soon lose their country without a fight, without knowing why, without knowing that it is their right to their own country, without knowing that they have lost their home and country. And the soldiers, do they know why they are soldiers, why there is a need to be soldiers, why NS, to defend what? What are there to defend against when the foreigners are here, taken over their country and everything?

No, the daft Singaporeans did not mind losing their country. They love the foreigners and happy to share their country with the foreigners, to give their country to the foreigners?

When 50% of the population is new citizens, it is as good as giving away 50% of the country to them. If it is more, eg 70%, it would mean the foreigners are owning 70% of this country. Is this acceptable, the way to go? Is this what the original Singaporeans want, to give their country away without a fight?

Is this too difficult to understand?