'Goh Chok Tong was reportedly quoted in an audio recording as saying that
PAP Ministers are not paid enough, and people who earn S$500,000
annually are “mediocre”.'
Simon Lim made this quote in his article on how disappointed he was with Goh Chok Tong. He may be disappointed but Goh Chok Tong did not become LKY's first choice candidate as the PM of Singapore for nothing. It must be exactly for making such wise cracks, oops, I mean comments to be noticed by LKY as his number one choice. Pardon me, I am ageing and maybe getting dementia.
But Chok Tong need not be unduly worried about the ministers being underpaid since the recommendation by the nasty COI to reduce a bit of their grotesque out of this world salary. There are many ways to increase a minister's salary without asking for a pay revision. Let me be a smart alec for once and offer a few good suggestions that the govt can do to increase the salary of ministers without asking for a pay rise and without raising alarm and unhappiness among the daft citizens.
1. Just promote them, to senior this and that or deputy PMs. Can have 4 or 5 dep PMs. The increase in salary would be seen as due to promotion ie clever and deserving, not simply pay hike. Who can quarrel with that? Clever ministers must reward mah. If not every minister acts stupid stupid how?
2. Create more minister positions, like having more ministries, ministers without portfolios or having more ministers in a ministry. So instead of one minister, two ministers can be promoted to be paid ministerial salary.
3. If that is still not enough, appoint them to be chairman of GLCs, part time jobs with good monetary rewards.
4. Can also appoint them to be directors of companies, easiest is GLCs. If one directorship is not enough, offer 2 or 3 directorships, or 8 or 10 until happy happy.
5. And chairmanship and director fees need not be reflected in the govt's budget some more. The pay of the ministers would look unchanged and can look unchanged for ages. And ministers can pretend to look very unhappy and grumpy because got no pay rise or salary revision. This is like playing the sympathy card, so poor thing, so long no pay rise. Caveat, this is a tough act if ministers all eat until fat fat and chubby chubby, looking so oily, rosy and radiant, very difficult to have the hungry look of cleaners in kopitiams or cardboard collectors. They must not look like Napoleon.
6. Of course there is the annual bonus to add to the salary. Be creative, call it productivity bonus and tie it to some fanciful formula that always go up, or can be jigged to go up.
7. When productivity bonus still not enough, can create creativity bonus, leadership bonus, innovative bonus or PLP bonus. PLP stands for people in short, ie people bonus for being people caring like scheming compulsory insurance schemes using CPF money that the people cannot say no. Don't have funny ideas.
8. There are also other indirect bonuses or rewards in kind, like going for overseas trips, fully paid, for training trips, learning trips, fact finding trips etc etc. Go and learn how to manage MRT, how to manage the oldies, how to make our education system better than third world education system...QED.
Just ask any HR professional and they would be able to produce a long list of monetary rewards without increasing the basic salary or calling for a pay revision.
I think I have given a lot of good suggestions that the govt can consider without ruffling the feathers of the unhappy and very sensitive daft citizens. They would not know what is happening, not a clue that the ministers salary can be fatten in these ways and keep telling everyone the ministers are only earning $1m or the PM earning $2m dollars as officially said so. So 'cham', so poor thing. Like that how to become the highest paid politicians in the world with the highest dignity?
What do you think? My suggestions good or not? Oh, one trade secret, don't tell, don't talk about it. When smart alec asked, just be very transparent about the basic salary and buat bodoh about the additional perks, bonuses, fees etc etc.
8/06/2018
Talking Points and View Points in Perspectives
These talking points is a follow up and continuation on the subject on Sunday, 5th of August, 2018
Christianity and Islam
With the advent of Jesus Christ a new religion , Christianity was founded It is based on the teachings of Jesus who is claimed by his followers to be the Son of God and part of the Holy Trinity. In other words Christians claim that God appear in three forms and Jesus embodies being the Father, the Son as well as the Holy Spirit. Christian God is supposed to be a universal God. But it has historically been hijacked by the Jews as its own God and who claim that they are the chosen ones of God and are bestowed with all the blessings above others. Christianity the teachings of Jesus Christ was first proliferated by his disciples Peter and Paul and the religion spread to Rome, the Roman Empire and Greece. Christianity in the Roman Empire was known as the Roman Catholics and all Christians including kings and emperors in different parts of Europe were under the orders of the Holy See the government of the Roman Catholics in Rome under the charge of the Pope the head priest of the Catholics. All temporal powers and the people's social life events and affairs come under the overseer or supervision of the Pope whose spiritual powers transcends those of the temporal powers of the ruling kings and queens and emperors, prince and princess. Soon the Catholic church indulged actively in carrying out missionary work when their priests travel far and wide to distant lands to convert non Christians known as heathens to Christianity. The dark side of the missionary work was that usually the missionaries were accompanied by the merchants and the military who indulged in force conversion and with negative consequence of occupying and colonizing non-believers lands.
Islam
Islam which was founded by prophet Mohammad almost six hundred fifty years after Jesus Christ and Christianity is based on the teachings of Mohammad in his book the Koran and his followers are known as muslims. As mentioned previously the tenets of Islam bear resemblance to the teachings of the Christian Holy Bible of the Old Testament and its monotheistic god is known as Allah which is also mentioned in the Old Testament. Like the earlier Catholic Christians Mohammad and his followers went on a wild rampage to spread Islam through both persuasion and by the might of the military to force conversion to Islam. As years gone by Islam spread very fast to almost all of Middle East, North Africa, Central Asia and Southern Europe in Kosovo, Spain and Portugal. The two militant religions Christianity and Islam soon crossed each others path in a catastrophic trajectory of life and death struggle for supremacy.
This contest for centuries between the European Christians and the Arabic muslims for supremacy has its everlasting negative ill effects on every country in this world. The European Christians have hijacked the militant Christian religion for their own political agenda of aggression and conquest. Similarly the Arab muslims hijacked Islam to serve the same chronic political agenda of force conversion, aggression and conquest.
Both the European Christians and the Arabic Muslims claim to be fighting for the love of their Gods. The European Christians have ever since been fighting in the name and honour of Jesus Christ while the Arab muslims have been fighting in the name of Mohammad and in honour of their God Allah.
The question now is are these two religions both surreal for good of mankind or have the European ( white Americans as well) followers of Christianity and the Arab followers of Islam perverted the two religions to serve their own selfish political interest and ego to the detriment of others. Are all the present ills and troubles in this world, the chaos, instabilities, aggressions and wars the result of these wild unholy contests between these two highly charged incompatible religions. Have the two religions brought more peace than wars, killings, genocide and destruction to this world after their advent or arrival or rather the reverse more of the latter. The white American christians have since the last hundred years taking over the vanguard to further rape, kill , murder, assassinate,genocide and destroy many other non christian countries. It seems such wanton callous American wars of aggression are not going to stop anytime soon. The free world must prepare for a long struggle against the savage ungodly white Americans. Netizens are encouraged to contribute their views on these talking points.
Southernglory1
Monday, 6th August,2018
Christianity and Islam
With the advent of Jesus Christ a new religion , Christianity was founded It is based on the teachings of Jesus who is claimed by his followers to be the Son of God and part of the Holy Trinity. In other words Christians claim that God appear in three forms and Jesus embodies being the Father, the Son as well as the Holy Spirit. Christian God is supposed to be a universal God. But it has historically been hijacked by the Jews as its own God and who claim that they are the chosen ones of God and are bestowed with all the blessings above others. Christianity the teachings of Jesus Christ was first proliferated by his disciples Peter and Paul and the religion spread to Rome, the Roman Empire and Greece. Christianity in the Roman Empire was known as the Roman Catholics and all Christians including kings and emperors in different parts of Europe were under the orders of the Holy See the government of the Roman Catholics in Rome under the charge of the Pope the head priest of the Catholics. All temporal powers and the people's social life events and affairs come under the overseer or supervision of the Pope whose spiritual powers transcends those of the temporal powers of the ruling kings and queens and emperors, prince and princess. Soon the Catholic church indulged actively in carrying out missionary work when their priests travel far and wide to distant lands to convert non Christians known as heathens to Christianity. The dark side of the missionary work was that usually the missionaries were accompanied by the merchants and the military who indulged in force conversion and with negative consequence of occupying and colonizing non-believers lands.
Islam
Islam which was founded by prophet Mohammad almost six hundred fifty years after Jesus Christ and Christianity is based on the teachings of Mohammad in his book the Koran and his followers are known as muslims. As mentioned previously the tenets of Islam bear resemblance to the teachings of the Christian Holy Bible of the Old Testament and its monotheistic god is known as Allah which is also mentioned in the Old Testament. Like the earlier Catholic Christians Mohammad and his followers went on a wild rampage to spread Islam through both persuasion and by the might of the military to force conversion to Islam. As years gone by Islam spread very fast to almost all of Middle East, North Africa, Central Asia and Southern Europe in Kosovo, Spain and Portugal. The two militant religions Christianity and Islam soon crossed each others path in a catastrophic trajectory of life and death struggle for supremacy.
This contest for centuries between the European Christians and the Arabic muslims for supremacy has its everlasting negative ill effects on every country in this world. The European Christians have hijacked the militant Christian religion for their own political agenda of aggression and conquest. Similarly the Arab muslims hijacked Islam to serve the same chronic political agenda of force conversion, aggression and conquest.
Both the European Christians and the Arabic Muslims claim to be fighting for the love of their Gods. The European Christians have ever since been fighting in the name and honour of Jesus Christ while the Arab muslims have been fighting in the name of Mohammad and in honour of their God Allah.
The question now is are these two religions both surreal for good of mankind or have the European ( white Americans as well) followers of Christianity and the Arab followers of Islam perverted the two religions to serve their own selfish political interest and ego to the detriment of others. Are all the present ills and troubles in this world, the chaos, instabilities, aggressions and wars the result of these wild unholy contests between these two highly charged incompatible religions. Have the two religions brought more peace than wars, killings, genocide and destruction to this world after their advent or arrival or rather the reverse more of the latter. The white American christians have since the last hundred years taking over the vanguard to further rape, kill , murder, assassinate,genocide and destroy many other non christian countries. It seems such wanton callous American wars of aggression are not going to stop anytime soon. The free world must prepare for a long struggle against the savage ungodly white Americans. Netizens are encouraged to contribute their views on these talking points.
Southernglory1
Monday, 6th August,2018
A mischievous article by Andy Morimoto
Below is another mischievous article, this time by a Japanese, Andy Morimoto. If you read the whole article you will see how silly he has become to misquote historical facts to justify his biased and mischievous claims like China entered the Korea War to divert attention from domestic problems. How silly. Everyone knows why China was forced to fight the Americans, the most powerful nation on earth, with rifles and hand grenades against tanks, bombers, big artillery pieces and rockets from the ships.
His definition of a failed China is when its economic growth fell to 3 or 4%! Is this not an economic truism? The growth of all mature economies would slow to this level or lower, like the American and European economies. Is this Morimoto saying that the American, European and Japanese economies have failed, failed states and out to do mischiefs? What are the growth numbers of these failed economies? 1 or 2%? Should China's economy grow at 1 or 2%, it will be in the good company of the Americans, Europeans and of course Japan.
His supposedly academic hypothesis, that China would resort to aggression if it fails as a country is pure bullshit. There were historical evidence and facts that the rise of big powers, Japan included prior to WW2, was built on conquest. The Europeans left Europe to invade and conquer other people and seized their land. They then went to the Americas and killed the natives to take over their land. Japan also tried that, killing Chinese and other Asians and SE Asians to want to rule the world.
The only exception in the rise of big powers is China. China has risen and other than military might, China is equal to the Americans or better in many areas. China now has more money to spend for sure and is using its money to help to rebuild the infrastructure of the whole world. America is as good a bankrupt.
China's peaceful rise is not through military means or wars of conquest. It is through sheer grit and industry of its people, in being the factory of the world. The few skirmishes with its two neighbours had nothing to do with its rise as a big power. Have no doubt that China has risen, peacefully.
The evidence against failed states is the reverse. No failed state has the chance to do mischief or conduct wars of destruction. The British, French, Spanish and Portuguese went out on a limp. The last two big powers that failed badly were Germany and Japan. They too could not do any mischief as the Americans made them virtual colonies till today. The Americans are their masters after defeating them.
Things have changed now with the American changing their agenda. In their attempt to isolate and contain China, they have unleashed the Japanese and allowed them to rearm, to remilitarise and consequently to do mischief and to conduct wars.
Would China be destructive should it fail, a story that all westerners and Japanese are hoping and praying everyday that it would happen. They even cursed their gods for allowing China to rise as a big power. Hopefully this day would not come in the foreseeable future. Should China fail, it would have to suffer the same fate as the Japanese, to become a colony of the victor. There will be no chance to do mischief. The Japanese knew that very well, as a semi colony of the American Empire. The American Emperor is always there, in charge and calling the shot.
History, historical facts are there to say that no failed state would be given a chance to be mischievous or to be destructive. Look at the failed states in the Middle East, Iraq and Libya.
Here is the silly and pretentious article by this Andy Morimoto, loaded with mischiefs, from Yahoo News.
"Question: Can China 'Fall' Peacefully? What will be the geopolitical implications for China, its neighbors and the United States if the Chinese economy tanks? Would China be taken off of its supposed collision course, or would conflict remain unavoidable?
The idea that China cannot rise peacefully has become something of an international-relations truism. The story here is simple: as China’s economy grows, its military will follow, and just as other great powers have used force to achieve their foreign-policy goals, so, too, will China. Yet while much ink has been spilled to explore the security implications of China’s rise, relatively few attempts have been made to examine the potential effects of a sudden and prolonged economic downturn. This might be about to change.
As the Wall Street Journal recently reported, China’s growth will decline sharply in the coming decade, from 7.7 percent in 2013 to 3.9 percent between 2020 and 2025. Some analysts are more pessimistic, projecting future growth rates as low as 1.6 or 1.7 percent. (To put these numbers in perspective, China grew at an average annual rate of 10.2 percent from 1980 to 2011.) These trends have led some at the National Interest to claim that China is headed for collapse and that we may be approaching the end—not a delay—of China’s economic rise...."
His definition of a failed China is when its economic growth fell to 3 or 4%! Is this not an economic truism? The growth of all mature economies would slow to this level or lower, like the American and European economies. Is this Morimoto saying that the American, European and Japanese economies have failed, failed states and out to do mischiefs? What are the growth numbers of these failed economies? 1 or 2%? Should China's economy grow at 1 or 2%, it will be in the good company of the Americans, Europeans and of course Japan.
His supposedly academic hypothesis, that China would resort to aggression if it fails as a country is pure bullshit. There were historical evidence and facts that the rise of big powers, Japan included prior to WW2, was built on conquest. The Europeans left Europe to invade and conquer other people and seized their land. They then went to the Americas and killed the natives to take over their land. Japan also tried that, killing Chinese and other Asians and SE Asians to want to rule the world.
The only exception in the rise of big powers is China. China has risen and other than military might, China is equal to the Americans or better in many areas. China now has more money to spend for sure and is using its money to help to rebuild the infrastructure of the whole world. America is as good a bankrupt.
China's peaceful rise is not through military means or wars of conquest. It is through sheer grit and industry of its people, in being the factory of the world. The few skirmishes with its two neighbours had nothing to do with its rise as a big power. Have no doubt that China has risen, peacefully.
The evidence against failed states is the reverse. No failed state has the chance to do mischief or conduct wars of destruction. The British, French, Spanish and Portuguese went out on a limp. The last two big powers that failed badly were Germany and Japan. They too could not do any mischief as the Americans made them virtual colonies till today. The Americans are their masters after defeating them.
Things have changed now with the American changing their agenda. In their attempt to isolate and contain China, they have unleashed the Japanese and allowed them to rearm, to remilitarise and consequently to do mischief and to conduct wars.
Would China be destructive should it fail, a story that all westerners and Japanese are hoping and praying everyday that it would happen. They even cursed their gods for allowing China to rise as a big power. Hopefully this day would not come in the foreseeable future. Should China fail, it would have to suffer the same fate as the Japanese, to become a colony of the victor. There will be no chance to do mischief. The Japanese knew that very well, as a semi colony of the American Empire. The American Emperor is always there, in charge and calling the shot.
History, historical facts are there to say that no failed state would be given a chance to be mischievous or to be destructive. Look at the failed states in the Middle East, Iraq and Libya.
Here is the silly and pretentious article by this Andy Morimoto, loaded with mischiefs, from Yahoo News.
"Question: Can China 'Fall' Peacefully? What will be the geopolitical implications for China, its neighbors and the United States if the Chinese economy tanks? Would China be taken off of its supposed collision course, or would conflict remain unavoidable?
The idea that China cannot rise peacefully has become something of an international-relations truism. The story here is simple: as China’s economy grows, its military will follow, and just as other great powers have used force to achieve their foreign-policy goals, so, too, will China. Yet while much ink has been spilled to explore the security implications of China’s rise, relatively few attempts have been made to examine the potential effects of a sudden and prolonged economic downturn. This might be about to change.
As the Wall Street Journal recently reported, China’s growth will decline sharply in the coming decade, from 7.7 percent in 2013 to 3.9 percent between 2020 and 2025. Some analysts are more pessimistic, projecting future growth rates as low as 1.6 or 1.7 percent. (To put these numbers in perspective, China grew at an average annual rate of 10.2 percent from 1980 to 2011.) These trends have led some at the National Interest to claim that China is headed for collapse and that we may be approaching the end—not a delay—of China’s economic rise...."
8/05/2018
Talking Points and View Points in Perspectives
Who and what is the cause of all troubles, instabilities, chaos, aggression and wars in this earthly world. The answer to who lies originally with the Jews and the Arabs of the Middle East and it has its roots thousands of years ago since Abraham which both the Jews and the Arabs claim to be their common ancestor. Abraham had two wives. The children and descendants of his first wife subsequently became known as Arabs. The children and descendants of his younger wife who was also of fair complexion and original a slave or maid in the household became known as Jews. It seemed she and her children were favored by Abraham over those of his first wife. So the Arabs and the Jews are actually half brothers and half sisters. As time went by the descendants of the two wives went their separate ways and were always jealous of each other and in everlasting feuds and quarrels. The Arabs became polytheist and worship many gods and idols. The Jews based their religious belief on Judaism which is based on the bible of the Old Testament and the Talmud, a collection of ancient Jewish laws and tradition for religious and social matters. The central belief of Judaism is that God is the creator of all things and the source of all righteousness.
The Jews were wanderers and travelled afar to found many semitic tribes also known as Hebrews. But wherever they may be the Jews were always more united by their religious belief in Judaism.The Arabs were great multipliers and also founded separate Arabic tribes. However the Arabic tribes tend to be more disunited perhaps it could be due to the contention of their believe in separate different Gods and idols.
As time went by the Arabs observed that the Jews stayed very cohesive and united despite of being persecuted by the Egyptians and later by the Romans. One of the leaders of the Arabic tribes by the name of Mohammad observed that Jewish unity was due to their central and common believe in one God. It seemed Mohammad was determined to unite all the Arabic tribes. To do this he had to destroy the Arab practice of politheism and convert them to believe in only one God. monotheism. He took ideas from the Old Testament of the Holy Bible and wrote a religious doctrinaire book called the Koran, the ideas of which are more or less similar to the teachings propounded in the Old Testament. Armed with the Koran he went on a warpath to convert all Arabs to worship only one God, Allah. With that the rest is all history.
The above brief discourse whether it is true or not I do not know for I too heard it and read it from different sources. So please contribute your view points to the discussion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christianity and Islam
With the advent of Jesus Christ a new religion , Christianity was founded It is based on the teachings of Jesus who is claimed by his followers to be the Son of God and part of the Holy Trinity. In other words Christians claim that God appear in three forms and Jesus embodies being the Father, the Son as well as the Holy Spirit. Christian God is supposed to be a universal God. But it was hijacked by the Jews who claim that they are the chosen ones of God and bestowed with all the blessings above others. Christianity the teachings of Jesus Christ was first proliferated by his disciples....to be cont...
.
The Jews were wanderers and travelled afar to found many semitic tribes also known as Hebrews. But wherever they may be the Jews were always more united by their religious belief in Judaism.The Arabs were great multipliers and also founded separate Arabic tribes. However the Arabic tribes tend to be more disunited perhaps it could be due to the contention of their believe in separate different Gods and idols.
As time went by the Arabs observed that the Jews stayed very cohesive and united despite of being persecuted by the Egyptians and later by the Romans. One of the leaders of the Arabic tribes by the name of Mohammad observed that Jewish unity was due to their central and common believe in one God. It seemed Mohammad was determined to unite all the Arabic tribes. To do this he had to destroy the Arab practice of politheism and convert them to believe in only one God. monotheism. He took ideas from the Old Testament of the Holy Bible and wrote a religious doctrinaire book called the Koran, the ideas of which are more or less similar to the teachings propounded in the Old Testament. Armed with the Koran he went on a warpath to convert all Arabs to worship only one God, Allah. With that the rest is all history.
The above brief discourse whether it is true or not I do not know for I too heard it and read it from different sources. So please contribute your view points to the discussion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christianity and Islam
With the advent of Jesus Christ a new religion , Christianity was founded It is based on the teachings of Jesus who is claimed by his followers to be the Son of God and part of the Holy Trinity. In other words Christians claim that God appear in three forms and Jesus embodies being the Father, the Son as well as the Holy Spirit. Christian God is supposed to be a universal God. But it was hijacked by the Jews who claim that they are the chosen ones of God and bestowed with all the blessings above others. Christianity the teachings of Jesus Christ was first proliferated by his disciples....to be cont...
.
The best Asean Meeting held in Singapore
The three day Asean Foreign Ministers Meeting and Summit with the big powers just ended. The happiest man was Vivian Balakrishnan. He was so pleased with how the meetings went that he announced in the press briefing that this was the best and least quarrelsome meeting Asean ever conducted in recent years. The big powers bickering and fighting were left to themselves to fight with Asean remaining on the sideline as non participants, absolutely neutral, and Singapore being a small country, played the role of an honest broker, not taking sides, not acting as proxy for any big powers.
Why was it that the last few Asean meetings were so hot, so aggressive and unfriendly and so heated? Anyone wants to give the answer?
Asean was set up by the founding fathers to be a neutral organisation of South East Asian countries. That was the key principle of Asean. But in recent years, not this recent meeting, Asean meetings were like a boxing match for he big powers with Asean countries taking sides and some Asean countries arrogantly stood up as proxies for the big powers. Asean neutrality was like a ghost of the past, forgotten. The proxies were so proud to play their role to provoke and agitate for the big power masters, taking sides and firing at other big powers, acting like braggarts and hooligans.
This recent meeting is a big change. The little proxies somehow did not do what they did best, behaving like barking dogs of big powers. This time they meekly stood on the side lines. Without these monkeys jumping up and down at the biddings of the big powers, the big powers could not do much. They could not go yelling around like the little monkeys used to do. See, big men knew that behaving badly is bad. So they let the little monkeys to do such silly things, and some silly monkeys really loved their roles, punching above their weights, to punch at big powers.
They punched and punched until they kena blue black instead of the big powers. So they wise up this time, and play low key. So the meeting became more proper for serious discussions with a little bit of chest thumping but not going too wild. Instead of mischievous rhetoric, many things were done and achieved in this meeting.
Let's hope future Asean Meetings would be just as polite and respectful without the little monkeys jumping all over the place. As long as Asean remains neutral it is easy to take a common position and he big powers would have no leverage to stir shit and turn Asean Meetings into a circus for their private agenda.
Why was it that the last few Asean meetings were so hot, so aggressive and unfriendly and so heated? Anyone wants to give the answer?
Asean was set up by the founding fathers to be a neutral organisation of South East Asian countries. That was the key principle of Asean. But in recent years, not this recent meeting, Asean meetings were like a boxing match for he big powers with Asean countries taking sides and some Asean countries arrogantly stood up as proxies for the big powers. Asean neutrality was like a ghost of the past, forgotten. The proxies were so proud to play their role to provoke and agitate for the big power masters, taking sides and firing at other big powers, acting like braggarts and hooligans.
This recent meeting is a big change. The little proxies somehow did not do what they did best, behaving like barking dogs of big powers. This time they meekly stood on the side lines. Without these monkeys jumping up and down at the biddings of the big powers, the big powers could not do much. They could not go yelling around like the little monkeys used to do. See, big men knew that behaving badly is bad. So they let the little monkeys to do such silly things, and some silly monkeys really loved their roles, punching above their weights, to punch at big powers.
They punched and punched until they kena blue black instead of the big powers. So they wise up this time, and play low key. So the meeting became more proper for serious discussions with a little bit of chest thumping but not going too wild. Instead of mischievous rhetoric, many things were done and achieved in this meeting.
Let's hope future Asean Meetings would be just as polite and respectful without the little monkeys jumping all over the place. As long as Asean remains neutral it is easy to take a common position and he big powers would have no leverage to stir shit and turn Asean Meetings into a circus for their private agenda.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)