atans1

Search for “CoC”

Academic talking cock/ Got such thing as “Malay” race meh?

In Uncategorized on 17/07/2017 at 11:41 am

A really moronic statement from someone who makes moronic statements when he’s trying to justify that the “PAP is always right”

… felt that voters should not be overly-fixated with a candidate’s ethnicity – albeit being an election reserved for a particular race – as it would “detract from the raison d’être of the elected presidency and of the elected president as a symbol of our multiracialism”, as Singapore Management University law don Eugene Tan put it …

Assoc Prof Tan said the reserved election “inevitably puts race up front and centre”. However, it is “imperative that we do not get too hung up over the race” of a presidential hopeful, he said.

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/reserved-presidential-election-casts-spotlight-malayness

WTF. How not to think a lot about racial identity when the election is reserved for a “Malay” president especially given that it seems that being a “Malay” is a cultural issue, not an ethnic (ie racial) issue.

The constructive, nation-building press quotes two experts on “Malayness” who seem to imply that there really isn’t such a thing as a Malay race:

Malay-Muslim self-help group Yayasan Mendaki has a set of criteria for its financial assistance schemes for students administered on behalf of the Government. Among other things, the recipients “must be of Malay descent” as stated in their identity cards. It spells out a list of what it considers to be “Malay descent”, and this includes 22 ethnicities including Acehnese, Javanese, Boyanese, Sumatran, Sundanese and Bugis. Students with “double-barrelled” race are eligible if the first race is listed on the identity cards as Malay, said a Mendaki spokesman. For example, a student who is Malay-Arab would qualify for the schemes but an Arab-Malay student would not, he added.

However, for the Presidential Election, Association of Muslim Professionals chairman Abdul Hamid Abdullah stressed the need for a “wider definition of a Malay” in Singapore’s context. A narrow definition would be restrictive and could disqualify potential candidates who have been “accepted” as a member of the Malay community, he added. “It is better to be inclusive. Otherwise, (it) may lead to divisiveness in the Malay community,” he said.

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/reserved-presidential-election-casts-spotlight-malayness

So my take that Chinese can be Malay is a real possibility isit based on the second expert? Heck, let’s juz say that Indian blood is necessary to be president. Or better still, that from now on, the president must be the result of a mixed marriage. Halimah can set the precedent of the president as a symbol of our multiracialism.

 

Advertisements

Olam: On a cocoa high

In Commodities, Temasek on 16/07/2017 at 5:47 pm

Olam is the third largest cocoa provcessor and based on the results of the largest, Barry Callebaut, Olam and other cocoa processors should be minting money from cocoa production.

The “combined cocoa ratio” — which measures the combined sales price for cocoa butter and cocoa powder — is now 3.5 reports the FT.  The “combined cocoa ratio” needs to be between 3.0 to 3.2 times higher relative to the bthe price of the bean to be profitable, it also reports.

The problem is that we don’t know the revenue contribution of cocoa production to Olam’s revenue. It’s part of “Confectionery & beverage ingredients” which contributes 36% to revenues.

http://olamgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Olam-InvestorPresentation-Nov2016.pdf

Sad.

Whatever, Tenasek is laughing all the way to the bank, while Philip Ang, TJS and other cybernuts are banging their balls in frustration.

8 ministers from Oxbridge but still can cock-up?/ One-term Malay MP?

In Investment banking, Political governance, Public Administration on 04/07/2017 at 5:06 am

I tot the above when I read

At the peak of Japan’s 1980s bubble [Nomura] … recruited more Oxford and Cambridge graduates than any institution outside the British government.

FT

Nomura has since been struggling to be great again. It’s now ranked 17th among investment banks. In the 80s, it was ranked alongside Goldie, Morgan Stanley, First Boston (disappeared into Credit Suisse) and Merrills (part of BoA today)

Given that there are seven Cambridge graduates and one Oxford graduate (Desmond Lee) in our cabinet of 22 ministers, no wonder we are no longer great. Sad.

(The seven from Cambridge are PM, DPM Teo, Hng Kiang, Zorro, Gan, Heng and Kee Chui.)

Yesterday’s wayang and the preceding Lee family row could have been avoided if PM (from Cambridge) had not have gone to the cabinet about his doubts about the circumstances around the execution of the will and the cabinet committee headed by another Cambridge man had not decided to act on PM’s doubts.

As a PAP Malay MP (Likely the central committee is already looking for her replacement for the next GE) pointed out

PM Lee’s comments in statutory declaration may appear to be a “backdoor approach” in challenging validity of his father’s will.

MP Rahayu Mahzam

Err maybe she reads me or the FB postings of a really, really smart lawyer? No not M Ravi or Jeannette Chong. The guy votes PAP but his legal brain is as sharp as a razor.

Whatever, she has balls of steel or is a real sotong to believe “vigorous debate” means “vigorous debate”. Her Chinese and Indian colleagues know better.

Hsien Yang talking cock about “will being final and binding”

In Uncategorized on 16/06/2017 at 11:34 am

If the Lee row goes on, I wouldn’t be surprised if the state decides to ask the courts to rule on the validity of the will. Despite probate having been granted, it’s still possible for the will to be ruled invalid. See below.

I find two things, that don’t look good for the PM’s siblings and their cybernut fans, intriguing.

PM’s siblings have not yet given their statutory declaration, something the cabinet committee has asked for. If by the end of June (Extension of time granted, at their requeset, to give the declarations), they don’t, one is entitled to ask, as Pa would certainly have asked, “Scared is it? Got something to hide is it?”. There are criminal sanctions for giving false declarations. So scared to give declarations isit?

Interesting that a “new” law firm with a connection to one of beneficiaries drew up the “final” will*. Nothing illegal or wrong, but the optics don’t look good. Neither does it smell right. Especially as all previous versions had been drafted by another firm.


*Update at 1.02: Lee Hsien Yang denies that his wife’s firm drew up the “final” will. I suppose he’ll say that they used the language of a previous version.

——————————————————-

In movies and novels, this is a signal to the audience or readers that something’s not right: a famous detective will called in in to establish if there was anything wrong.

Plenty more entertainment to come. And better still, it’s free.

Challenging a will

Under certain circumstances, a will may be treated as invalid by a court. In such cases, a claimant can challenge the validity of the will. If a will is invalidated, the deceased’s assets will not be distributed according to the will, and such assets may instead be distributed according to the Intestate Succession Act.

 

Furthermore, if the deceased was under undue influence, the will is also invalid. Undue influence can refer to the unconscientious use of one’s power over another for selfish purposes. For example, coercion, threats, harassments or persistent persuasion may amount to undue influence by one party in causing the testator to err in the making of his will.

On a related note, the lawyer who draws up a defective will which does not reflect the true wishes of the testator, may be liable for negligence to the potential beneficiary. For instance, if the testator instructed his lawyer to make a provision in his will to bequeath $10,000 to his son, and the lawyer negligently failed to do so, the son may be able to sue the lawyer for negligence.

https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/how-do-i-contest-a-will/

Talking cock about Return Our CPF

In CPF, GIC, Temasek on 04/06/2017 at 10:27 am

Cybernuts, from Mad Dog Chee to Philip Ang, regularly point out GIC’s and Temasek’s “losses” as evidence for the real reason why the PAP administration intriduced the “Minimum sum” scheme and CPF Life: Temasek, GIC lost money, resulting in a shortfall of funds if CPF can be withdrawn at 55.

I’ll quote two of the heloos of the cybernuts to show that the state can refund everyone’s outstanding CPF balance.

Uncle Leong, of fake analysis fame, points out

Amount due to CPF members is $324.2 billion

According to the Department of Statistics’ Monthly Digest of Statistics – the Amount Due to (CPF) Members is $324.2 billion as of October, 2016.

(Yes I double checked to confirm that he wasn’t faking this.)

So does state have the $ to refund $325bn ++?

Chris K (no cybernut and an unwilling hero of the cybernuts) recently pointed out on FB that looking at reserves as unencumbered assets – i.e. assets minus liabilities or net assets, a term used by Tharman and in the constitution when calculating the net investment return contribution, the ball park numbers are

MAS: $40bn,

Temasek: $220bn,

GIC: $290bn

And this excludes the past reserves still sitting in the various Fifth Schedule entities like EDB and etc LTA.

Still think got no money to repay yr CPF?

So in an alternative universe when Dr Chee becomes PM later today, with a two-thirds majority in parly, he can tell president Yaacob to allow him to draw on the reserves and return our CPF. He will tell President Halimah

I have the mandate of the people. What do u have? How many S’poreans voted for u? None because u won by default.”

Sign or I’ll pee on u and let the mob into the Istana.

 

She signs and when everyone gets their money back, the lies the cybernuts tell will be exposed.

 

Cock of an ad

In Uncategorized on 31/05/2017 at 1:26 pm

For the last week, I keep getting on my FB wall an ad that begins

Motley Fool Singapore CEO David Kuo has just opened up an extremely limited number of seats to his private, invitation-only investment club, Stock Advisor Gold.

If so limited, why do I see this ad every day?🤣 

Talking cock this fool David Kuo.

Ex SDP Chairman talking cock on LKY

In Uncategorized on 27/05/2017 at 4:30 am
Mohamed Jufrie Bin Mahmood

MANY THINGS SEEM TO HAVE GONE WRONG SINCE HIS PASSING.

IS IT NOT TIME YET FOR HIM TO RISE FROM THE ASHES?

Ex SDP Chairman talking cock, juz like Dr Chee. LKY was very specific.

Even from my sickbed, even if you are going to lower me to the grave and I feel that something is going wrong, I will get up.

He had to be buried in a grave to return. He was cremated and put in urn. Actually taz why the Russian and other Eastern churches oppose cremation. Cannot rise on the day of judgment.

Maybe his children and the PAP didn’t want him rising from his grave and starting a revolution against the PAP (Shades of Mao) and so cremated him and sealed his remains in an urn making sure super strong industrial glue was used to seal the lid.

Btw, a better way than cremation: dissolving the body in an alkaline solution. More eco friendly. I hope S’pore introduces this. The water used can be recycled via the reservoir.

 

LKY talked cock on UBS/ Ang mohs that really invest for long term

In GIC, Hong Kong, Property on 25/05/2017 at 4:26 am

GIC’s sale of at a loss of part of its stake in UBS reminded me that one Harry Lee boasted that S’pore was even more long term than Buffett: it had a 30 yr horizon. Well he said that in 2007 or 2008 after GIC bot UBS and Citi and Temask bot Barclays (sold) amd Merrill Lynch (disappeared), so it turns out he was talking cock: like on being a good friend of China? He was a running dog of the US going by the quality of the US crowd versus that of the PRC crowd at his funeral.

Now this is serious long term

— Jardines (controlling shareholder of Hongkong Land where the land in Central now resides) first bought freehold land in Central in 1901, and

— HSBC has owned its nearby site since 1866.

And that’s nothing. The Duke of Westminster has properties in central London dating from the 17th century.

Amos’ case again shows how cock S’poreans are

In Uncategorized on 29/03/2017 at 5:07 am

(Breaking news at 111.00am: Amos is really a born loser. US immigration is detaining Boy Fantastic necause it’s appealing. S/o JBJ is KPKBing. See below.

The anti-PAP cybernuts are using the immigration judge’s decision to gloat and sneer at the system that 70% of S’poreans voted for in free but unfair elections.

They should sit down and shut up.

Let’s wait and see if the US immigration appeals, and if so the final judgement.

Something for them to think about at least for those with brains: What if the final judgment is that he isn’t being persecuted? Will all the anti-PAPpies gloating change their minds about what they think about life in S’pore?

I doubt it. They’ll find another excuse to diss what 70% (and more) of S’poreans are comfortable with.

Likewise the whities should sit down and shut up about dissing the US. If the US decides not to give him asylum, will they return to fawning on the US?

S/o of JBJ’s KPKBing on FB:

Breaking news: Amos Yee is still being held in detention. This is highly unusual and dubious in the extreme. For those of you not familiar with how asylum works let me explain.

Before the hearing Amos was an asylum seeker. Asylum seekers can lawfully be kept in detention. Amos Yee’s asylum bid was successful was successful and the minute Judge Coles ruled that Asylum was granted, Amos Yee’s legal status changed from asylum seeker to “Refugee”.

Amos-the-stateless-asylum-seeker become Amos-the-American-refugee awarded protections under domestic US as well as International law. As a refugee he is immediately granted those rights under US Law as well as being granted rights under the UN Convention on Refugees. Those rights accorded him mean he shouldn’t be detained.

You may have heard that ICE plan to appeal the asylum decision and that this is being used as a pretext to keep Amos in detention. I use the word pretext because there is no provision in the Nationality and Immigration Act for ICE to detain anyone already granted asylum, even pending an appeal.

Amos now has rights and these rights are clearly being breached. As such the detention is arbitrary without basis and unlawful.

I will update you further when I hear from his lawyers. Mary Toh must be extremely concerned.

Upon release there is a good network in place in Chicago of friends and activists to support Amos with a place to live and so on. He would also be able to apply for some limited refugee financial relief. Let’s hope they release him soon and that there is not any underhand political plot behind the continued detention.

Lawrence Wong talked cock

In Uncategorized on 24/02/2017 at 2:56 pm

Speaking during Channel NewsAsia’s Singapore Budget Forum 2017, which was broadcast yesterday (23 Feb) Mr Wong said he drew inspiration from Sweden where the small country with a population of 9.6 million has produced technology start-ups like Spotify and Skype and further with iconic brands such as IKEA and H&M.

Erm Skype was an Estonian start-up.

PAP’s Talk Cock King

In Uncategorized on 24/01/2017 at 6:00 am

Seems the PAP has a Talk Cock King where once it only had Queen Jos: the Talk Cock Queen

The world as we know it is at an inflection point, said Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen on Friday (Jan 13) – and as such, the ability to change and adapt is especially relevant today as fundamental rules will change; and with it, the fate of nations.

Err why say this when Ownself not willing to be flexible Ownself?

Think of the many Hard Truths that have become obsolete if not outright dangerous. Examples: Forced savings of 36%, minimal welfare sprnding to prevent “welfarism”, reserves must keep growing, Mindef’s 25% share of the Budget is sacrosanct and not subject to outside scrutiny.

Then there was this whopper late last year just after US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter made it clear that the US was out to “contain” China.

“It is neither possible nor strategically necessary to contain China’s rise … China is now an integral leader of global systems of trade, finance and security. It is clear that China needs the world as much as the world needs China, and I think this interdependence will grow, not diminish,” he said at the forum in Simi Valley, California, attended by US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, foreign defence ministers and members of the US Congress.

CNA — early December

Just before the speech to the Americans, it seems he was removed from the party’s CEC, its highest decision-making body. Reports say he was not even on the ballot. Parliamentary speaker Halimah Yacob was elected in his place.

Maybe he’s on the way out? Tot he was one of PM’s inner team alongside Teo, Tharman and Shan.

S’poreans really that cock despite topping PISA exams?

In Uncategorized on 20/12/2016 at 10:52 am

I’ll let Chris K tell the story. But, if interested here’s the background and additional info from the real Independent (not the fake news site from S’pore also known as TISG: The Idiots — S’pore:  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/world-most-ignorant-countries-index-ipsos-mori-poll-survey-a7481196.html?cmpid=facebook-post

 

Peenoy leader talks cock again

In Emerging markets on 03/12/2016 at 2:14 pm

Mr Trump is also reported to have invited President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines to the White House next year during a “very engaging, animated” phone conversation, according to one of Mr Duterte’s aides.

But a statement issued by Trump’s transition team made no mention of an invitation.

BBC report

 

Duterte a real talk cock, sing song Peenoy?

In China on 20/10/2016 at 1:12 pm

Funny this despite Duterte telling the US to f-off

Joint naval patrols continue, as does co-operation in Mindanao; and America still has five bases on Philippine soil. The close working relationship with Filipino counterparts, the Americans insist, is as strong as ever. The Filipinos, for their part, report no change of orders from the new chief.

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21708984-philippines-until-now-staunch-american-ally-falling-chinese-camp-rodrigo


This is what Duterte, president since June, has said recent weeks

He has branded Barack Obama a “son of a whore” for criticising his “kill them all” war on drug dealers and addicts, which has claimed thousands of lives, many of them innocent. He has demanded an end to joint naval patrols and to America’s assistance in the southern jungles of Mindanao, where American special forces advise Filipino troops fighting against Abu Sayyaf, a violent group linked to al-Qaeda. And he has questioned whether America would honour its treaty obligation to come to the Philippines’ aid if the archipelago were attacked.

——————————————————————————-

Why he has been brown-nosing China’s ass?

He wants to see mangoes to China.

The Philippines had been plucky in standing up to China. But it has paid a price. Now, the goodies that China is dangling look irresistible. Mr Duterte wants lots of infrastructure, particularly railways. China is offering cheap loans. He wants the country to export more. China is offering to reopen its markets to Philippine fruit. He wants help with the war on drugs. A Chinese businessman is building a big rehab centre. And he wants Filipino fishermen to be able to return to their traditional fishing grounds around the Scarborough Shoal. China has told Philippine officials that it is open to an accommodation.

And he wants China to let in Pinoy maids. There are about 154,000 Pinoy maids working in HK legally. It’s illegal for them to work in China but the FT reports that there are about 200,000 working illegally there. And that the Pinoy govt wants to get China to allow them in legally

Americans subtle, PRC leaders cock (cont’d)

In China on 19/07/2016 at 6:46 am

Here I pointed out that China is really dumb … Why did it sign UNCLOS in the first place if it thinks it’s a tua kee like the US?

The US refuses to sign UNCLOS because it refuses to play by the rules of sua kes like the UN and PinoyLand. It reserves the right to do what it thinks is right (Usually this means “Might is right”).

But China did sign up and now refuses to abide by a decision of its highest tribunal. Why so stupid?

Actually the US is even smarter than I tot. Successive US administrations have said that they will abide by UNCLOS despite the US not being a party to it. At the same time, because the US is not bound by it, it can legally, in International law, ignore any ruling it doesn’t like. And unlike China, it is not an outlaw.

How did the US this “Heads I win, tails you lose,” situation?

UNCLOS needs to be ratified by the US Senate for it to be binding on the US.  Treaty ratification requires 2/3 of the senate to vote for approval, and there are more than sufficient senators happy to block ratification because they say UNCLOS violates US hegemony (OK “sovereignty”).

Those who read James Clavell’s Asian Saga novels will know that the Chinese characters were always sneering that the ang mohs were stupid fools to be manipulated despite them lording over the Chinese because they, unlike, the Chinese had the technology to defeat the Chinese in battle, and were not afraid of using violence. Well I’m sure these Chinese characters will be ashamed that the PRC leaders got tricked by the ang mohs.

Btw, the Japanese characters were also sneering at the ang mohs. But the ang mohs have not outsmart them except in making the Japanese buy  in the 1980s US assets at inflated prices; assets bot back a few years later at fire-sale prices.

And looking at the Chinese buying of US assets, one wonders if the Chinese are the victims of another US scam.

.

 

Why Bryan Lim and his apologists are bigger cocks than u think

In Uncategorized on 15/06/2016 at 7:07 am

If u want to skip being reminded what Bryan the “killer” clown wanted to do, and his “defence” or juz want to know why he and his friends are really that cock, feel free to skip to the last two paragraphs. They had a pedantic, legalistic and Jesuitical but logical defence for him. But being juz nutters, I mean they belong to  We Are Against Pink Dot timeline, they juz screwed up. They can’t think logically.

Bryan Lim posted on the FB group We Are Against Pink Dot timeline, “I am a Singaporean citizen. I am a NSman. I am a father. And I swore to protect my nation. Give me the permission to open fire. I would like to see these £@€$^*s die for their causes.”

When there were, rightly, howls of outrage, he wrote:”I did not mean physical bullet or physical death. I mean open fire in debate and remove them from Singapore domestic matters.”

His original post was unambiguously about asking to be given an order to open fire and kill people who offended his values: no ifs no buts. Or allegorical or metaphorical. It was murdering people who offended his sensibilities.

A friend of Bryan’s came out with this defence:

 

Then after pretending to apologise, he (and his defenders) juz did what S’poreans always do when kanna hantam, sit down and shut up.

Bryan and his defenders could have argued that his wanting to kill people who offended his values was conditional on being allowed to: “Give me the permission to open fire …”. And that if he wasn’t given “permission” he’d not kill even if he would really have wanted to. Yes he’d love to murder innocent people who offend his sensibilities, but only if he was given “permission”. Now that’s self-discipline, they should have argued.

Now this is a pedantic, legalistic and Jesuitical defence but it’s logical, especially in S’pore where everything must get permission because everything illegal until permission given.

Our cock town planners

In India, Infrastructure, S'pore Inc on 03/02/2016 at 2:13 pm

They cut and paste ang moh ideas. Works in Animal Farm but not in India

“The draft masterplan for Amaravati was prepared by planners from the Singapore government as part of an agreement between the state of Andhra Pradesh and Singapore,” explained Srikant Nagulapalli, commissioner of theAndhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority (APCRDA). “But when the first draft arrived, we realised that it would not work.”

According to Nagulapalli: “Global town planning principles do not take Vaasthuinto consideration. But the people of Andhra Pradesh have a deep-rooted belief and will not buy any property that is not north- or east-facing. We had to send [the draft plan] back to the master planners and ask them to rework it taking these principles into account. The whole capital city project would have had no buyers if the initial draft had been implemented,” he said.

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/jan/26/amaravati-andhra-pradesh-india-singapore-new-state-capital-city

More

“The master planners with the Singapore government were puzzled,” Nagulapalli said. “They wanted to know what Vaasthu was and who wrote it. We were stumped. After some rather frantic research, we found that the Indian scholar Varahamihira had written it in the 6th century. We have learnt a lot during the process of building this capital.”

And

Amaravati was envisioned as a world-class smart city, the first to be part-funded by the Indian government. The new city will be built at an expected cost of 1 trillion rupees (£10.7bn) on 217.23 square kilometres of land on the banks of the Krishna river, and is expected to generate jobs to sustain a population of 9-12 million people in the surrounding capital region.

The Andhra Pradesh government signed a pro-bono agreement with Singapore in December 2014 to plan the new capital. In all, the government of Singapore, along with private agency Surbana Jurong, committed to preparing three masterplans – the last of which, the “seed capital masterplan” for the core of the city (which will house the Central Business District and the state’s new government offices) was only submitted last week.

KL airport that cock meh?

In Airlines, Malaysia, Uncategorized on 12/12/2015 at 1:19 pm

Two cock-ups by KL airport

The South China Morning Post reports that Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) in Malaysia has just come across three ancient 747s that have been sitting on its tarmac for over a year. It says it has no idea who left them there.

What is most surprising about this story, other than the chutzpah of the 747s’ owner, is that KLIA can’t trace the operators. All aircraft are supposed to be logged with a national authority, so one wouldn’t think it could be that hard. The Post says that the airport has contacted a “so-called owner” without response. Malaysians now know where to head next time they have an old banger to dispose of.

Economist blog

The latest is that

An air cargo company in Malaysia says it owns three Boeing 747 jets which officials said were left unclaimed at Kuala Lumpur airport.

Swift Air Cargo says it has been trying to retrieve them, but Malaysia Airports disputes its paperwork.

Only in M’sia. After all this is country where the PM refuses to disclose who deposited US$700m, and where he can still remain PM.

Haze: Indon officials that cock meh? Double confirm

In Environment, Indonesia on 09/10/2015 at 5:32 am

Further to this https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/10/03/haze-indon-officials-that-cock-meh/, I’ll let my fellow Facebookers speak for me on the u-turn in Indon policy

“Jakarta accepts foreign help to fight raging forest fires” ST today. Finally. Why didn’t they accept such offers weeks back when it was offered and when the situation was already hazardous? Was it pride or what? And here, neighbours numbering millions have been suffering due to the Indonesian government’s previous stance! Hopefully there will be some relief in the near future.”

“At last! They also accepted Russian help. If Russia did not offer assistance I doubt that their foolish pride would have allowed them to accept Singapore’s offer. But now that a huge country and P5 member is helping them it has become acceptable to accept an insignificant offer from a tiny neighbour. Another factor may be the impending ASEAN Summit which also entails meetings with Dialogue Partners. Their lack of capacity has been all too evident and they would have wanted to avoid criticism from world leaders.
‘In today’s ST page A6 there is a story about how the Indonesian government pressured major palm oil firms to roll back no deforestation pledges they made at the UN. I think this is actually a more important story than Jakarta’s belated acceptance of foreign assistance because it reveals something of the thinking and priorities of this Indonesian government.”

To the second comment, I’d add that there is a newspaper that a senior Indon official claimed that it turned down S’pore’s help initially because it didn’t want S’pore to claim credit for solving the problems.

Using that line of reasoning, one can assume that Indon officials will refuse to divulge the name of S’pore-based cos that it thinks is causing the haze. Doesn’t want S’pore to claim the credit for prosecuting them.

Which brings me to Terry Xu’s constructive suggestion to the S’pore govt.

“Zenata Putera, co-founder of local NGO, P.M Haze, said that while Indonesian authorities have said that there is a lack of information regarding the plots of land which companies own, NGOs have noted that such information is in fact available. He also said that it would be easier to work with the NGOs to resolve the haze-related issues than to go through the bureaucratic process.
What the Singapore government could probably do is to engage with the NGOs in Indonesia and to work out a plan to monitor errant companies. It could also help provide jobs for villagers who would be willing to work as firefighters and watchmen of the plantations to prevent fires or to testify against companies who run foul of the law.
The Singapore government has a duty to address the annual issue and to stop pushing the blame to “uneducated” villagers and companies that are almost never prosecuted in any way. The residents of Singapore deserves a better answer than being urged to bear with it and told that things are beyond our control.”

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/09/is-spore-helpless-about-the-haze-not-really/

What Terry Xu is saying is this, “By-pass the Indonesian govt, work with the Indon NGOs to identify the criminals”

Good suggestion but following it will get the Indon govt further upset with us. Indonesia is so protective of its sovereignty that it refuses to provide the map co-ordinates of the areas where it alleges S’pore cos are breaking its law, when our govt wants the info to prosecute the alleged burners.

In dealing with the haze problem, there no win-win possiblities, only a choice of lesser evils.

Haze: Indon officials that cock meh?

In Indonesia on 03/10/2015 at 4:32 am

Indonesia has enough resources to fight the forest fires that are causing the haze in the region, and does not need the assistance offered by Singapore at this time, Indonesian officials told a Singapore delegation on Thursday (Oct 1). CNA

Strange as

— Tot Indon VP told S’pore to help, not juz bitch: OK he said Indon was open to help, but that implies that it needs help. So officials now saying he talk cock king?

— These fire fighters say they don’t have the resources to put out the fires in their area http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34341012

PM talks cock about “private” sector

In China, Temasek on 14/09/2014 at 6:57 am

The private sector-led, Government backed Guangzhou Knowledge City (GKC)* is a good model for future Singapore-China projects, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Friday (Sep 12).

… Mr Lee said he was happy with the progress, six years after he first discussed the project with provincial leaders … the private sector-led GKC is a different model that Singapore is “trying out” after the Suzhou Industrial Park and Tianjin Eco-city, both government-to-government projects. (CNA on Friday)

Funnily the private sector leadership is provided by Temasek-owned company Singbridge who is in a j/v and the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou.  Singbridge is 100% owned by Temasek, 100% owned by the Minister for Finance. Not even the fig-leaf of a SGX-listed TLC like Keppel or SIA.

And PM went to Catholic High and NJC? But then Yaacon was from RI (see tom)

—-

*”The hurdle for government-to-government projects like Suzhou and Tianjin will be higher in future, so I think this (GKC) is a good model that we should explore going forward,”

“But there has to be a balance between private sector leadership and government support, and there has to be market demand for what’s being offered by the project” …

Located 35 kilometres from Guangzhou city centre, work is underway to turn the Guangzhou Knowledge City, currently a 123 square-kilometre site into a future magnet for industries like pharmaceuticals and info-comm technology, part of local authorities push for so-called high end industry.

 

PM talking cock? Impossible to know if trade-offs are reasonable, fair or appropriate

In Political governance, Temasek on 29/06/2014 at 4:49 am

(Or “Shades of Orwell’s Big Brother?”)

Came across this thoughtful piece by Andy Mukherjee over the weekend. It explains clearly the issues and trade-offs Singapore faces in building our ideal society, while ensuring that Singaporeans have jobs and economic opportunities to build better lives and a brighter future.
As the article points out, we do enjoy important advantages compared to other countries, but it will still not be easy. There are serious trade-offs, which we must be willing to acknowledge and address. If we just pretend that everything can be better, and no hard choices are necessary, we will get into trouble. Mukherjee calls this “please-all economics”, and expresses confidence that Singaporeans are too pragmatic to fall for it. We must make sure that he is right. – LHL on FB two weeks ago

Piece PM raving about: http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/06/12/breakingviews-singapore-unrest-idINL4N0OQ07F20140612

But if we don’t know how much money we have, and how much are the returns the reserves are making for us, how can we judge if the trade-offs PM and his govt make are the right ones? After all he has as gd as admitted his govt got immigration, welfare, public tpt and public housing policies wrong by changing (sorry tweaking or is it evolving?) these policies.

And these were policies significant numbers (self included, and I note not M’sian new citizen Pussy Cat Lim who confines herself to general banalities) had been warning against for yrs. We were called “noise”, until the govt decided to change these policies.

This is what one LHL said many yrs ago when he was DPM and economic and financial czar:

The Singapore government, May 16, defended the secrecy surrounding its financial reserves of more than US$100 billion, saying it was not in the national interest to disclose details.
The veil of secrecy was necessary to protect the Singapore dollar from speculative attacks, Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in parliament.

“It is not in the people’s interest and the nation’s interest to detail our assets and their yearly returns,” he said.http://www.singapore-window.org/sw01/010516a3.htm

This remains the govt’s stand.

And if I remember correctly, his dad once said that info reserves had to be kept a secret so that S’poreans couldn’t ask for more welfare, which they would if they knew how much money S’pore had. Readers correcting me or referencing the quote appreciated.I can’t find it via my googling.

In this mobile internet age, it is sad and self-defeating that the the PM and the PAP govt (ministers and civil servants) cling to the Leninist system that all information is political and can be designated a “state secret” at any time if the govt decides it does not help to bolster the govt’s or party’s own legitimacy and power.

BTW flaw in AndyM’s analysis which disqualifies from being an unbiased analyst

There is a fifth way which Mr Mukherjee has not considered. It is to reduce and reallocate government expenditures. In particular, the government can consider reduce defence spending so as to increase spending on welfare. This is a classic “Gun vs Butter” resource allocation problem studied in elementary economics. At present, Singapore is spending nearly a quarter of the $57 billion estimated government expenditures for FY2014 on defence alone (23% at $13 billion) … [TRE]

Maybe he aiming to be a PAP minister? He is a FT based here.

He did serious weight-lifting in 2011 at a Temasek briefing:First of all, congratulations on beating the sage of Omaha because [ … ] you seem to have out performed Warren Buffett on every horizon. He was BSing as Temasek and Berskshire cannot be compared ’cause Berkshire is listed, Temasek is not.

And if you think PM’s remarks on trade-offs when juxtaposed with his remarks  on the need for secrecy on reserves are Orwellian, his press secretary’s remarks in relation to Roy Ngerng are even more chilling:

… What is at stake is not any short-term positive or negative impact on the government, but the sort of public debate Singapore should have. When someone makes false and malicious personal allegations that impugn a person’s character or integrity, the victim has the right to vindicate his reputation, whether he is an ordinary citizen or the prime minister. The internet should not be exempt from the laws of defamation. It is perfectly possible to have a free and vigorous debate without defaming anyone, as occurs often in Singapore. Emphasis mine

Foster public debate by suing for defamation? Come on, pull the other leg, it’s got bells on it. I’m reminded of the slogans in 1984:

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

 

 

 

SIR – I refer to the article “A butterfly on a wheel” (June 13th). You referred to an “alleged ‘serious libel’” by Roy Ngerng. This is not an allegation. Mr Ngerng has publicly admitted accusing Lee Hsien Loong, the prime minister, of criminal misappropriation of pension funds, falsely and completely without foundation. After promising to apologise and to remove the post, Mr Ngerng did the opposite; he actively disseminated the libel further. This was a grave and deliberate defamation, whether it occurred online or in the traditional media being immaterial.

What is at stake is not any short-term positive or negative impact on the government, but the sort of public debate Singapore should have. When someone makes false and malicious personal allegations that impugn a person’s character or integrity, the victim has the right to vindicate his reputation, whether he is an ordinary citizen or the prime minister. The internet should not be exempt from the laws of defamation. It is perfectly possible to have a free and vigorous debate without defaming anyone, as occurs often in Singapore.

Chang Li Lin
Press secretary to the prime minister
Singapore

– See more at: http://www.economist.com/news/letters/21604530-ukraine-singapore-employment-housing-food-trucks-john-birch-society-football-0#sthash.lPfPUP1T.dpuf

 

CPF: The cock that Swee Say talks

In CPF, Financial competency, Financial planning on 25/06/2014 at 4:43 am

The best way for Singaporeans to prepare for retirement is to use less of their Central Provident Fund (CPF) money when they are young. Mr Lim Swee Say, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, said this will ensure the current level of CPF payout can be maintained over time and not be eroded by inflation.

Mr Lim, who is also the labour chief, made that point when speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the closing of the Singapore Model Parliament yesterday. (23 Jan 2014). He later issued a clarification saying “that housing, healthcare and education for the children” were excluded from his spending comments, saying the constructive, nation-building media had misreported him.

Even with the clarification, he was talking rubbish, showing how clueless the nTUC minister was with the life of his ordinary members.

For starters, as TRE pointed out

Using less CPF money means leaving the money with CPF board, which in the case of OA, will earn only 2.5%. Inflation rate for the last few years already exceeded 2.5% (except last year, which barely covered the 2.4% inflation rate) [Link]:

  • 2010 – 2.8%
  • 2011 – 5.2%
  • 2012 – 4.6%
  • 2013 – 2.4%

Next after his clarification that he was talking of CPF spending other than for “housing, healthcare and education for the children”, one is left wondering if he doesn’t realise that other than for these things, CPF cannot be used for other than retirement. Is he so out of touch? Or another example of his special status, like once a month CPF statement?

The more impt issue, if no use CPF, how to afford “affordable” public housing? Public housing is only “affordable” because of 20-yr mortgages that use CPF monies to finance the loans.

At the moment 36% of a S’porean’s wages are locked up in the CPF because of this Hard Truth

[Without the CPF], Singaporeans would buy enormous quantities of clothes, shoes, furniture, television sets, radio, tape recorders, hi-fis, washing machines, motor cars. They would have no substantial or permanent asset to show for it.

  • Asian Wall Street Journal, Oct 21 1985 quoting one LKY.

Our money, but can only be spent on the “right” things: uniquely S’porean.

But it was an ang moh’s idea in the first place: In February 1940, one Keynes published How to Pay for the War. He advocated that interest rates should be kept low and that compulsory saving (thereby deferring pay) should be used as a mechanism to prevent the inflation that occurred during World War One. A portion of everyone’s income would be automatically invested in government bonds. Then, when the war was over, and the economy was in dire need of savings, the money would be released. The plan was too revolutionary for the British government.

In the S’pore version, the payout got deferred and deferred.

“The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday – but never jam to-day.”
“It must come sometimes to ‘jam to-day’,” Alice objected.
“No, it can’t,” said the Queen. “It’s jam every other day: to-day isn’t any other day, you know.”
“I don’t understand you,” said Alice. “It’s dreadfully confusing!”

(Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There)

What Home Team’s recent cock-ups tell us

In Political governance, Public Administration on 30/01/2014 at 4:51 am

S’pore Notes was analysing the response DPM Teo gave to the apparent* tardiness in responding to the Little India ripple, and the little old lady in a red car entering S’pore illegally,  evading capture, and then entering undetected a secured area**

One of his readers gave the most insightful analysis I have seen of what these incidents portend: This incident has sparked off comments like yours and your commentators. The seriousness of the situation in its proper context is more than such observations, in my opinion. It exposes the mindset of those in charge of the security of the nation. They talk themselves into believing that everything is under control and that they are prepared for any eventual situation. The recent billion dollar decision to upgrade of the warplanes and expected purchase of the latest military toys give them this illusion. The quality of our uniformed personnel is not what they tell you. The result will be disastrous given the leaders’ penchant for annoying our neighbours.

Should we be afraid, very afraid that S’pore’s home security services appear to be paper tigers. leading to our neighbours thinking that our SAF is also a paper tiger? The performance of two ex-SAF chiefs in SMRT and NOL. PM, DPM Teo, BG Yeo and the three newbie ministers (two SAF generals ansd one admiral), would do nothing to dispel the perception.

My Facebook Avatar isn’t so sure that there is a serious, systematic problem: In the case of her entering S’pore illegally, failure to being detained in the police compound and her entry into a secured area, who else is at fault other than line officers involved? If there were systematical flaws, well we’d have heard of a lot more incidents, including possibly a few bombings. Sometimes, the front lines officersto blame.

Maybe the sytemic flaw is the training the officers receive?

I’ve got mixed views.

To quote DPM Teo, “What do you think?”

Related posts:

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/08/14/scholar-ex-saf-chief-temasek-md-fails-to-turnaround-nol/

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/sporeans-are-over-reacting-to-the-riot/

*All the problems at Home Team over recent yrs (corruption, Ang Moh tua kee attitude, PR status for possible criminals etc etc) show that it was badly run when Wong Kan Seng was the Home minister. There should be a claw-back of the millions he earned as a minister.

—-

*I’m undecided on whether the riot squad was activated tardily. I agree with DPM Teo that the riot squad should not suka suka be activated. The time taken to decide (about 15 minutes) sounds reasonable to me. On getting there, well it takes time. You can’t have a convoy of heavy vehicles full of people speeding at 90km to the scene. Use helicopters?

My beef is the behaviour of the police officers on the spot. I hope the inquiry tells us why they didn’t fire warning shots when their vehicles were in danger of being damaged. And if they were wrong not to fire warning shots in such a situation. An old timer NS riot squad guy tells me that in his time the police would defend their cars on the ground that it is a symbol of their authority like their badges and guns.

**Secured area? What security?

Jos keeps on talking cock

In Infrastructure, Political governance, Public Administration on 14/01/2014 at 4:52 am

“We cannot have the attitude that everything will be perfect from Day One. If we go in with that attitude, it can only mean that we have to build in a lot of redundancy.” – Josephine Teo, Senior Minister of State for Transport.

As someone who once upon a time reported directly to people who reported directly to LKY and Dr Goh, I can safely say that they all expected things to be perfect from Day 1. So now Ms Teo implying  that because of their exacting standards, they were encouraging inefficiencies and wastefulness?

Even before he is dead, LKY gets slimed? Son should give Jos a tight slap to show his filial piety this CNY. Co-driver too busy looking at bank statements and feeling happy.

Seriously, the govt should stop giving excuses for a simple cock-up: it should simply admit that it was an honest mistake by civil servants who didn’t drive because they couldn’t afford the COEs. Insufficient signs were put up as I explained here and this was a major source of the problem.

(Pic from TRE)

Waz interesting is that even now she refuses to concede that there were insufficient signs:

Q: After the jam, more signs and advertisements on the routes came up. Why not earlier?

I once got a speeding ticket (in Singapore) and was adamant there was no signage (for speed limit). I had driven on this road umpteen times. I thought: “Never mind. Tomorrow I’ll pay attention.” True enough, I saw the sign. Sometimes we don’t notice (the signs) because we don’t need them.

You can always have more (signs and advertisements). But you have to be interested.(http://www.singapolitics.sg/supperclub/josephine-teo-%E2%80%98free-mrt-rides-has-allowed-lifestyle-change%E2%80%99)

Here’s a great comment from TOC’s facebook in response to her remarks about redundancy:

Tremendous time/effort would be incurred when trying to rectify a flawed design/system. Doing it right the first time is critical. A good design is the result of thorough research/ consultation/ brainstorming and that will ensure the success of the project. eg. years ago, woody goh said handicap people should stay away from travelling for safety reason, now we have to retrofit busses/MRT stations for wheel chair access. same for HDB flat, now installing lifts on every floor and the whole project takes decades to complete, what if the HDB architechs had done that in the first place? zero effort for wheel chair access! Our MRT trains adopted designed with 6 carriages while HK MTR already up and running and uses 8 carriages. We could have learnt from HK, instead, we choose ONLY 6 carriages. Now we are flooded with immigrants over crowding the transport system but we are handicapped in increasing the MRT stations capacity by using 8 carriages and must go for the stupid solution of changing the signaling system to cut down only 20 sec peak frequency. using tens of millions and takes 5 years or more to do it. Now who is the stupid one? which way is more cost effective?

BTW, notice that NTUC MPs were, are a bunch of cocks (the exception is Halimah). Think Jos, Lims ( Cheap Zorro, Cry Baby), Hard of hearing Han, Irene the Whiner, Choo the criminal and racist, BG Yeo’s MP from Hell (Cynthia) and NMP Terry Lee.

Related posts:

Jos: Talk Cock Queen

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/10/26/jos-too-is-talking-cock/

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/reputations-be-mean-laugh/

Jos: Empress Dowager of Bishan East

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/thanks-jos-for-giving-nishan-east-residents-another-reason-not-to-support-the-pap/

Ageing population Hard Truth is cock and bull?

In Economy, Political economy, Political governance, Public Administration on 20/11/2013 at 4:25 am

The govt and the constructive, nation-building media keep shouting at us that a rapidly aging population (and the stas do show this aging as a fact, no bull here) will lead to disaster if FTs like two-timing new citizen Raj or Tammy’s killer or the FTs that beat up S’poreans and then fled S’pore*, or a looney, violent bank director are not allowed in by the container load. They point to Japan as what can happen if FTs are not allowed in: economic stagnation. The truth is more complex. As I reported here HSBC, a bank, in 2012 published research that Japan is doing pretty well when compared to other developed countries, including immigrant friendly countries like the US and the UK (though the UK is now repenting its liberal immigration policy)

Whatever the impact of an ageing population on S’pore’s prosperity, here’s a piece of evidence casting doubt on the assumptions (stated or unstated) behind the need to have a population of 6.9m by 2030. It comes from academics from the University of Edinburgh.

The idea that dependent older people represent a great demographic challenge of our age has been turned on its head …The research questions an assumption behind arguments for health, social care and immigration policies … The paper demands society rethink some of its assumptions about elderly dependency – drawing a distinction between the ‘young old’ and the ‘old old’

Here’s more from the BBC’s Home (i.e. domestic affairs) editor (Note that the paper in question is based on British statistics but the argument seems applicable elsewhere as he points out)

“The extent, speed and effect of population ageing have all been exaggerated and we should not assume that it will strain health and social care systems,” Professor John MacInnes and senior research fellow Jeroen Spijker write in the article ‘Population Ageing: The timebomb that isn’t?’

Healthier and fitter

The mistake people have been making, the paper suggests, is to assume that all pensioners are dependent and all working-age adults are workers.

They point out that, while it is true there are now more people over 65 in the UK than children under 15, rising life expectancy means older people are effectively “younger”, healthier and fitter than previous generations.

Instead of simply looking at how old someone is, the research focuses on how long they might be expected to live.

“Many behaviours and attitudes (including those related to health) are more strongly linked to remaining life expectancy than to age,” it says.

In 1841, life expectancy at birth was 40 years for males and 42 years for females.

By 1900 it was 52 and 57 and today it is 79 and 83. So the point at which we enter ‘old age’ has also been changing.

Equally, using age to define the adult working populations makes little sense, the authors suggest, because “there are more dependents of working age (9.5 million) than there are older people who do not work”.

So they calculated an alternative measure, what they call “the real elderly dependency ratio”, based on the sum of men and women with a remaining life expectancy of up to 15 years divided by the number of people in employment, irrespective of age.

Important implications

Using this measure, the paper calculates that old-age dependency in the UK fell by one third over the past four decades – and is likely to stabilise close to its current level.

The measure suggests similar falls in many other countries.

“Our calculations show that – over the past four decades – the population far from ageing, has in fact been getting younger, with increasing numbers of people in work for every older person or child,” the authors say.

“The different story of population ageing told by our real elderly dependency ratio has several important implications for health policy and clinical practice.”

In policy terms, this analysis to one of the central challenges of an ageing population might be something of a game changer. Rather than seeing longevity itself as an expensive problem, focus could shift towards managing morbidity and remaining life expectancy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24921171

The continued refusal of the govt to accept that the issue of ageing population is a complex one and the unwillingness to question its Hard Truth on the issue continued in the face of evidence that the Hard Truth is doing real harm looks all too similar to the intellectual fetters that led central bankers to persist in tighten monetary policy in the early 1930s when faced with a global Depression.

It also shows that they are unlike LKY and Dr Goh Keng Swee who were willing to challenge the conventional wisdom that allowing MNCs in amounted to neo-colonialism. And demographics is not the only issue where the PAP govt is wedded to Hard Truths. Take welfare, where there is evidence that gd welfare systems do not reduce the will to work: they do not make people lazy e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24974745: another University of Edinburgh study.

Maybe, time to send scholars there to learn to walk on the wild side, and think unHard Truths? After all  University of Edinburgh is a great university. It juz doesn’t produce the ruling elite of the UK or the US. Our scholars to to unis where the UK and US ruling elite are educated.

BTW, here’s an article on using robots to as carers for the elderly: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24949081

*PR was given to one after he beat up the S’poreans.

Answering the PAP’s cock & bull about the “long term”

In Political governance on 05/06/2013 at 5:08 am

The head of the civil service’s defence of the infamous population white paper and the long game the PAP govt is playing over how to control the new media (http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/06/04/the-real-reason-behind-the-internet-crackdown/) reminded me that the PM, other PAPpies and their allies love to talk of the PAP (and allies)  being the only ones that think long term, and that only they can protect future generations, because only they dare take the unpopular decisions (Like allowing FTs to flood into S’pore while limiting the places in local unis for locals?).

No, the retort is not to say, like Lord Keynes,”In the long run we are all dead”.

No the retort is that long-term planning and decision-making must proceed with a clear understanding of the trade-offs between current and future generations. Thinking of the children does not spare one from considering the present needs of the hungry, sick and elderly.*

Let me explain what is meant.

Doesn’t: The Republican [looney right wing tea drinkers] line on fiscal policy is that it is unconscionable to saddle Americans’ children and grandchildren with a mountain of debt.

Only a gutsy, enlightened steward has the wisdom to thwart a future threat to the nation’s well-being by biting the bullet and calling for short-term pain to promote long-term gain. Only a statesman is equipped to make the tough decisions to set the country on a better course.

sound something that our PM or any PAPpy minister from our rational “left of centre” cabinet would say?

Here’s the crushing rejoinder:

But there are philosophical and empirical complexities at play in the “protect future generations!” line of reasoning. If we could avoid bigger trouble in the long run by assuming short-term hardships now, should we? Well, the answer depends on how dire things look in the long run, how much hardship is necessary to avert disaster, and how certain we are that the strategy will in fact work out in the nation’s favour. It would be irrational to opt for certain, indefinite-term pain now to purchase an unspecified amount of theoretical gain later. In any case, the moral calculation is quite a bit more involved than [what the PAP would say**] Government owes a duty to future generations, but it has a duty toward individuals living today as well: it would be perverse to aim to quell the indebtedness of Americans coming of age in 2050 by cutting food stamps for hungry children today.

The pursuit of solvency must proceed with a clear understanding of the trade-offs between current and future generations. Thinking of the children does not spare one from considering the present needs of the hungry, sick and elderly.[From Economist blog]

This idea of trade-offs is nothing new. When I studied the law on trusts, there were tomes of cases on the duties of trustees when deciding whether to cut trees belonging to a trust. The income beneficiaries wanted the trees cut so that they could get the income; against them were those who were not yet income beneficiaries. They didn’t want the trees cut, and the capital “squandered”: cutting the trees now would affect their income from the estate in the future. The trustees often found themselves in the Court of Chancery when one side or other was unhappy.

—-

*As Uncle Leong could have pointed out here,  thinking. planning and implementing policies didn’t do much for the average S’porean: low growth, wages and productivity, with high household debt and inflation.

**My addition to make it easier to follow the reasoning.

Town Council Debate: Cocks posturing & preening

In Political governance on 22/05/2013 at 5:30 am

Yes,yes Aunties’s not a cock but she sure behaved like Khaw and  Dr Teo. All these three, and the other supporting speakers didn’t try to bother to explain what the facts were. They juz tried to slime the other side, hoping that some mud would stick. No one drew blood.

I won’t bother to go into detail critcising what the PAPpies said as Sg Daily has done a gd job over the last few days providing links to a critique of the PAP’s position and its attacks on the WP. All I will say is that it confirms my view, many yrs ago, that the idea of town councils would come to haunt the PAP. It wasn’t even a gd idea at the time. Ah well, another black mark to Goh Chok Tong and one Lee Hsien Loong and their team.

I’ll juz make some points about what I found astounding about the WP’s position and netizens’ views.

I find it really strange that the WP thinks its OK for it to give a contract to its supporters but that it is wrong for the PAP to give a contract to a PAP linked company. The distinction escapes me. To me, “It doesn’t matter if a cat is black or white, so long as it catches mice”. (Deng Xiaopin).

The other point is Auntie telling Dr Teo to report the WP to the CPIB if he had evidence of wrong-doing. Err Auntie, why so more PAP than the PAP? Imagine if when Auntie first made her allegations, those many noons ago, the PAP had said the same to her. I mean she, WP and netizens would be bitching at the PAP for trying to hide something. And rightly so. So why like that Auntie?

Which brings me to the point that netizens are so anti-PAP that they unthinkingly cheer the WP’s position on

— it’s OK to give contracts to supporters, but not party-affiliated organisations; and

— trying to win the argument by telling other side to report the matter to the CPIB.

While the PAP has the 120% support of the constructive, nation-building media, netizens are 99.9% anti-PAP. Here’s a tot for the PAP: if the local media were less servile to the PAP, would the internet be a less hostile place to the PAP. Could the hostile environment on the internet be a reaction to the power of the PAP over the local media.

To end, it would be nice if both sides respected the other side so that we the public can learn the truth of the allegations. Here’s an interesting excerpt on the benefits of respecting one’s opponent, though the author readily admits it’s damned difficult,:

Just how charitable are you supposed to be when criticising the views of an opponent? If there are obvious contradictions in the opponent’s case, then you should point them out, forcefully. If there are somewhat hidden contradictions, you should carefully expose them to view – and then dump on them. But the search for hidden contradictions often crosses the line into nitpicking, sea-lawyering and outright parody. The thrill of the chase and the conviction that your opponent has to be harbouring a confusion somewhere encourages uncharitable interpretation, which gives you an easy target to attack.

But such easy targets are typically irrelevant to the real issues at stake and simply waste everybody’s time and patience, even if they give amusement to your supporters. The best antidote I know for this tendency to caricature one’s opponent is a list of rules promulgated many years ago by social psychologist and game theorist Anatol Rapoport.

How to compose a successful critical commentary:

1. Attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly and fairly that your target says: “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way.”

2. List any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).

3. Mention anything you have learned from your target.

4. Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.

One immediate effect of following these rules is that your targets will be a receptive audience for your criticism: you have already shown that you understand their positions as well as they do, and have demonstrated good judgment (you agree with them on some important matters and have even been persuaded by something they said). Following Rapoport’s rules is always, for me, something of a struggle…

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/19/daniel-dennett-intuition-pumps-thinking-extract

Wimmin, keep away from our cocks: PAP, Govt

In Humour, Political governance on 24/12/2012 at 10:43 am

Here’s what of JG (smart gal except she believes in WP) view of why Laura Ong was exposed: to tell gals to lay off PAP MPs. The punishment is being exposed publicly. Or put put it another way, cut off the supply of gals so as not to put temptation in the way of the PAP MPs.

Hey, you got it wrong!! How dare Laura sleep with Palmer??? She’s the one who is in the wrong!! Let the media dogs go after her!!

How dare Laura’s BF expose the affair to TRE and TNP? He’s also in the wrong!! Let the media dogs go after him too!!

Hence most of the expose is about Laura and his BF. Including camping outside their house, or their parents’ house, or asking neighbors about their actions. None of these stuffs when it comes to Palmer.

Seen in this perspective, everything makes sense. The PAP is whiter than white. If they are blemished, its the blemish-er that’s in the wrong. Let everyone learn his lesson – don’t ever touch a PAP MP, OK??

And maybe this is why Sue’s pix appears so often in SPH’s publication. The govt wants to send the message to customer service ladies that customer service does not include providing sexual gratification to civil servants.

Postings may be light until after 2 or 3 January. Happy partying or whatever you may be planning to do or are already doing.

Jos too is talking cock

In Economy, Political governance on 26/10/2012 at 5:42 am

Shouldn’t Jos Teo bitch about the Integrated Programmes that make PSLE such an impt exam today, rather than against employers that offer PSLE leave for their employees, and parents that take time off to coach their kids. In my time, PSLE was important to get into RI, Victoria and Serangoon English: once in if no major balls-up could do PreU in these schools (Integrated Programme is juz modern variant), but if one went to mission primary schools, going to mision secondary schools (and PreU) wasn’t that dependent on PSLE results, unless one was stupid. Things got even better when the govt started NJC.  More places for PreU studies.

But then the cycle turned and now PLSE is the exam to pass.

“We are quite mistaken to behave as if PSLE is THE defining moment in a child’s development.”: Err not all parents can afford to send their kids overseas to make sure they get a good education, if the kids get culled here.

And following the logic of her outburst, wouldn’t the logic of her argument mean that the government is wrong to continue curbing the number of COEs? As even ministers and MAS concede that the rising costs of COEs adds to inflationary pressures, even if ministers are wrong to say that rising COEs don’t affect the cost of living of us plebs (those unable to afford owning cars, and have to use public tpt).

Which brings me to the inflation situation.

Remember me bitching in early August that MTI jnr minister Lee Yi Shyan, and the local media covering him, were misrepresenting the pix on food inflation? I had pointed out that there were reports of rising food prices.

Well now MAS validates what I was saying. MAS warned on Tuesday about upward pressures in imported food prices over the next few months and into early 2013 due to weather-related supply disruptions.

Jos has gd company. And this ST guy should be in line to be a jnr minister.

Note: Last sentence and link to Jos piece added at 9.09am on day of publication.

 

Talking cock Kadir, Hariss?

In Uncategorized on 25/09/2012 at 6:23 am

Waz this rubbish abt wanting to attack when playing away?

“Strikers win games, defenders win trophies,” said a great Arsenal manager who won the double when it meant something.

Hope that these LionsXII guys are playing mind games, not being talk cock artists.

Vietnam: “A toxic cocktail”

In Vietnam on 22/09/2012 at 3:17 pm

From the September issue of the ISEAS ASEAN monitor

“A toxic cocktail” – the words of economist Le Dang Doanh – aptly describe Vietnam’s situation for the fourth quarter of 2012. The ingredients are economic stagnation, banking scandals, political insecurity caused by Party rectification and anti-corruption drives, and challenges to Vietnamese sovereignty in the South China Sea. Party rectification aims to curb abuses of power and corruptive behaviour by government officials in cahoots with businesses to enrich both sides. Politician banker, Nguyen Duc Kien, and the head of the Asia Commercial Bank, Ly Xuan Hai, have been arrested. Notably, while the rumour mill has for years linked Kien to Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung, the Chief of Police has declared that it was the Prime Minister himself who directed the arrests. Earlier reports gave credit to the Minister for Public Security but the order probably came from the Political Bureau.

The arrested pair of Kien and Ly could reveal the extent of illegal activities in the banking sector. Rumours are pointing to imprudent bank loans arranged by Kien, as well as his role in the merger/acquisition of another bank, an act perceived as political bullying. In the next two months there will be an intense struggle over how the official reports regarding Party rectification should be written. Individual leaders would want to avoid blame, and most important, retain their positions. Party rectification would also go down to provincial level and lower. Greater conservatism and caution in officials’ behaviour, if only to avoid making mistakes, leading to riskaversion,is to be expected.

The economy has not lived up to earlier optimism. Imports have decreased and analysts note that this would impact negatively on exports in the next quarter. Credit growth is at an unhealthy low while the burst of the real estate bubble has turned speculation into locked investments. Speculators are not realising losses and banks are unable to recover loans. Close to 100,000 companies, mostly from the private sector, have ceased operations.

On this downward spin, there are yet no signs of external help, be it from a buoyant world economy or the IMF. The stagnation is expected to be relieved slightly as the end of the year usually sees a rise in consumption, but the overall trend is a downward one.

Key points: While Vietnam and China appear to have reached a quiet and uncomfortable détente over the South China Sea, expect more bilateral problems as the fishing season resumes this September.

Economist on Vietnam

Vietnam’s banks are in dire shape; and that corruption and waste pervade the economy.

This was never a secret, but during the boom years in the middle of the past decade, when the economy was growing by 8% a year and foreign investment was pouring in, nobody much cared. Now, with slower growth, huge business debts and more competition from places such as Cambodia, Indonesia and Myanmar, the problems loom large. It did not help when, two months ago, the central bank admitted that bad debts amounted to up to 10% of all bank loans, double the level previously admitted to. The real figure could be two or three times that.

The hitch in Hanoi

And so confidence in the Vietnamese economy, especially among Western investors, is tumbling. Foreign direct investment (FDI) into Vietnam, at $8 billion for the first seven months of the year, is a third lower than a year earlier. Japan accounts for fully half of all the inflows.

STOMPED! Yacoob’s CoC

In Media, Political governance on 11/07/2012 at 8:09 am

(Or “The difference between blogging and the traditional newspaper story”) 

Remember when Yaacob was  promoting his CoC (Code of Conduct) for the internet, he praised our mainstream constructive media and said they should be exemplars netizens should follow https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/two-examples-of-how-st-covers-fts/ .

We now know what he wants us netizens to do: fake news reports using paid content producers like STOMP. His sis is a very, very senior editor at ST, a sister publication of STOMP.

Well I doubt that in 2012, we will hear anymore about his CoC. But next year is another year, and the CoC is not a once in 50-years event.

I was reminded of the above CoC and STOMP’s paid content producers posing as “citizen journalists” when I read this: [T]he traditional newspaper story derives its force and directionality from the man-bites-dog newsiness of the flat content. It’s very difficult to include expert commentary that depletes or diffuses the newsiness, because it sucks the signifying force out of the piece. In contrast, blogging and tweeting are far more flexible and use many other discursive techniques to supply directionality and signifying force, most importantly personalistic tone. You can write a blog post about something utterly un-newsworthy, say the fact that Barack Obama is president of the United States, and make it signify through sheer emotive presence or stylistic technique. But you can’t write a newspaper story about that.

One great reason why netizens shouldn’t be forced to be like a newspaper, even one like the FT or NYT or the Economist, let alone a publication like ST when even the footie news is distorted for the government’s constructive, nation-building agenda of “FTs are betterest” policy. 

Read the whole blog posting because it gives great insights on how a newspaper, any newspaper from the NYT to ST and its peers in China and North Korea, operate http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/06/media-rules

Related http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18458567

Indonesia: Talking cock is not helpful, helpful

In Indonesia, Infrastructure on 13/06/2012 at 7:32 am

Work on a new deepwater port for container ships on an island between Batam and Bintan is set to begin next year, creating a potential rival to Singapore’s port. The port, on Tanjung Sauh, aims to be a major transshipment center for Indonesia, and is part of the country’s overhaul of its transport infrastructure to cope with growing domestic demand.

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/05/21/deepwater-port-near-batam-set-rival-singapore.html

Well in 2005, Indonesia annced a major expansion of the port on Batam. It even awarded a contract to a French company. Err nothing ever happened. Wonder if this time, it will be anything different. And remember that Batam has one unused int’l airport. It was built to rival S’pore’s airport in the late 1970s.

Readers will know I’m bullish on Indonesia. But that is despite, not because, of its officials or the government planning agencies.

But here’s one talking cock project that works: using social media to help farmers get info they need http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18193993

China’s Community Convention = Yaacob’s CoC

In Political governance on 04/06/2012 at 6:34 am

The “community convention” of China’s biggest microblogging service, Weibo, made public last week, says its members may not use the service to:

  • Spread rumours
  • Publish untrue information (Interjection: Might be a problem if this is adopted here as SPH publications have an online presence. Exemption for newspapers that need an annual government permit on the ground that they are already regulated? Juz being constructive, not mean.)
  • Attack others with personal insults (PAP and this site might have a problem here if this is adopted here) or libellous comments
  • Oppose the basic principles of China’s constitution
  • Reveal national secrets
  • Threaten China’s honour
  • Promote cults or superstitions
  • Call for illegal protests or mass gatherings

It adds that members must not use “oblique expressions or other methods” to circumvent the rules.

Substitute the word “S’pore’s” for “China’s”, and Yaacob, Kee Chui Chan, and the staff of MDA and Institute of Policy Studies don’t need to consult no more the “inhabitants of cowboy towns”.  Can go back to earning millions of dollars without working with the troublesome, noisy “little people”.

Community Convention  covers everything that DPM Teo, Yaacob, Kee Chui, and IPS (and now even Dr M) find objectionable abt the behaviour they find ojectionable.

More on Weibo’s CoC http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-18208446

—–

Telling coc jokes: Ministerial CoC needed

In Humour, Internet, Political governance on 03/05/2012 at 7:10 pm

Based on the remarks of the PM and the two DPMs the last few days, I think Yaacob would find S’poreans receptive to a Ministerial CoC (Code of Conduct) on the telling of jokes in bad taste.

I ranted earlier on DPM Teo’s joke on more openness and passing the burden of integrating FTs to us S’poreans who never asked for them in the first place.

Well that was the start of the bad-joke telling session.

We then had Tharman telling us that although inflation rose by about 5.2% (“a high figure” said he) in March 2012, this did not mean that the average Singaporean will feel this “high inflation” because more than half of the headline inflation rate of 5.2% came from higher COEs for cars and the effect of higher market rent on houses. The vast majority of Singaporeans who already own their homes and are not buying new cars would not feel the effects of these sharp increases. And the increase in prices of daily necessities and essential services such as food and clothing have actually been much more moderate at 3% or lower.

Well he got well and truly beaten up for this tasteless joke because among other things, high COE prices affect those who need to buy vans and lorries to transport goods. Their costs go up and guess who pays?

And this isn’t the first time he tried to tell bad jokes. Remember the one about someone earning less than a $1000 a month being able to afford to a 30-yr HDB mortgage, or the one that low-income Singaporeans may be able to receive between $3.97 to $5.10 in government benefits for every dollar paid in taxes over a life time. We found out that it all depends on the assumptions made, and anyway in the case of benefits, much of it was paid into the CPF account, while a recipient had to pay his taxes upfront in cash. What abt the time value of the money, minister?

Then the PM joined in. He told the joke about the need for wages to be driven by higher productivity. I mean how could productivity go up with 80,000 immigrants a year being imported to keep wages down? Or even the planned only 25,000?

And what abt this spotted by Donaldson Tan and reported on his FB page, “MBS raised demand for unskilled labour in the hospitality sector, resulting in wage growth for everyone in the hospitality sector while Labour Chief asserted that wage growth must be backed by productivity gain. There is no productivity gain in the PM’s example.”?

The PM also said, “Singaporeans will always be our priority”: “Whether it was adjusting the supply of foreign workers or the pursuit of economic growth, he said the Government seeks to maximise the advantages for its citizens, and to provide them with jobs and a share of the nation’s success.” (ST report)

Huh? Hey who waz it who allowed in 80,000 FTs a year to keep wages down, without expanding the public housing and transport infrastructure?

And before I forget his office said that only “good quality” people are allowed to immigrate? What abt the hooker-looking, violent, cheating, unrepentent shop assistant, and the hawkers that became PRs? Not exactly “good quality” migrants are they? Honest mistakes?

Now this was one bad joke too far.

Yaacob’s Code of Conduct for the internet is not needed because S’pore has the penal code and laws on sedition, contempt of court, criminal and civil defamation and incitement to religious hatred that can be used to repress curb the excesses of netizens like the unemployed chap behind “Fabrications abt the PAP”.

But let’s trade. What about a CoC for ministers to get ministers to stop telling cock jokes, in exchange for a CoC in which bloggers become less anti the governing PAP?

Kee Chui.

 .

DBS FTs: balls-up on top of cock-up?

In Banks, Corporate governance, Temasek on 15/06/2010 at 5:53 am

Islamic finance is set to play a bigger and more central role in global finance. This is because of greater awareness and adoption in more financial centres.

Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang said this at the launch of the inaugural World Islamic Banking Conference Asia Summit in Singapore on Monday.

So why is DBS cutting back on the activities of its Islamic banking activities?

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/dbs-fts-goofed-again/

Temasek should sort out the “FT is best policy” that dominates the thinking at DBS. It is on its 6th FT CEO in a row. It’s costing Temasek (and ultimately us) shareholder value.

Remember it was an FT that overpaid for Dao Heng Bank, and messed up the takeover of OUB.  And the loss in market share in retail banking, so much so that the ex-CEO of PosBank has been brought back as adviser.

Other cock ups

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2010/05/14/dbs-fts-balls-up-contd/

PAP beware: PAP and LKY loyalists not the same

In Political governance on 20/09/2017 at 7:16 am

When GCT was talking cock about the moral authority of the PAP administration (OK, OK he used the word “govt”) I couldn’t help but remember a remark that would pls the Oxley Rd hermitess and her younger brudder, and worry PM and the other PAppies, if they had been told about it.

In a closed FB group that my avatar belongs to, someone who could be reliably relied on to parrot the PAP line, was KPKBing about the reserve presidency (even though Hali’s i/c like his said “Indian”). When other members of the group gently pointed out his deviation from the PAP line, he said something to the effect that “I’m the third generation of LKY loyalists, I’m not a PAPpy”.

He got a good number of “Likes”.

Based on PE 2011 and GE 2011 and GE2015, the core PAP vote is around 35%, with the soft PAP vote about 35%.

No wonder PM was so keen to get Hali as president because even a ceremonial president can cause problems. But in so doing, he may have reduced further the die-die must vote PAP voters. Now that is a real problem. When LKY loyalists disagree with the PAPpists, the PAP’s core vote may now be smaller than 35%.

Never mind, expect more goodies using our own money. My hope is the extension of Pioneer Gen healthcare benefits to those in their early sixties.

 

 

“I’m invested in S’pore”

In Economy, Political governance on 19/09/2017 at 5:21 pm

Hence I talk so much about the way the PAP is mismanaging the place. I wrote this in 2013:

Shumeone (Bad grammar indicates that it is a member of YPAP Internet Brigade? Juz joking LOL) wrote,”why (sic) is this blog becoming like the local sites to air political grievances ?”

Because like PAPy Puthu, “I’m invested in S’pore”. So long as I remain a quitter in residence, and have investments here (property, shares, S$ cash), I must protect these investments. Increasingly the issues affecting my investment centre around the goofs of the PAP govt. These goofs have resulted in over 5% inflation, overcrowding, failing (by S’pore’s very high standards) infrastructure (telco and train cock-ups, congested roads, and the very high cost of public housing), productivity, stratification of society, among others.

“I’m invested in S’pore” & S’pore in 50s/ 60s

I’m not like chief TRE cybernut Oxygen who moved on out of S’pore years ago, but cannot get S’pore out of his mind. He still KPKBing about his CPF when all he needs to take it out is to become an Oz citizen. But maybe Oz will not him become a citizen because he’s a nut?

Symbolism of Hali’s pix with PM, CJ

In Political governance on 18/09/2017 at 12:56 pm

Shamugam was talking cock on FB.

Image may contain: 6 people, people smiling

Look at the two uniformed Chinese men behind the Chinese PM, Malay (even if her i/c says “Indian”) president and Indian CJ.

Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun

Mao

Without the elected president and if there is a freak result, within two or three years, the army would have to come in and stop it.

Lee Kuan Yew (2006)

Coming back to the minister, I couldn’t help but be reminded of what LKY once said

I have said this on many a previous occasion: that had the mix in Singapore been different, had it been 75% Indians, 15% Malays and the rest Chinese, it would not have worked. Because they believe in the politics of contention, of opposition. But because the culture was such that the populace sought a practical way out of their difficulties, therefore it has worked.

Lee Kuan Yew (1985)

Two cheers for Hali

In Political governance on 16/09/2017 at 10:53 am

(For TRE cybernuts like Ng Cock Lim aka Rabble-rouser, pls look up the meaning of “two cheers”)

Because of Hali, “chop” cannot be banned

I am both gladdened and saddened by the National Environment Agency’s reply (Two hawker centres set ‘house rules’ against choping; Sept 2).

It is good that the NEA has acknowledged that “choping” is indeed a problem. But its approach to solving this is not in touch with reality.

The softly-softly approach has not worked ….

ST forum complainer

He’s a real cock (Ng Cock Lim’s twin isit?). Chopping cannot be banned because we juz saw PAP chopping the presidency. If PAP can chop presidency, S’poreans cannot chop seats isit?

Hali wants to unite S’poreans?

In Political governance on 15/09/2017 at 1:24 pm

Against her isit by branding voters as “racists”. Why liddat?

“I look forward to the day when we will no longer need to rely on the provision to have reserved elections, and Singaporeans naturally and regularly elect citizens of all races as Presidents”

The above implies that we voters are racists despite events like the Bukit Batok by-election where an Indian (with the help of true blue Chinese like Grace Fu) whipped the ass of talk cock sing song Hokkien-speaker and GE2015 where yje same Indian beat Chen Show Mao in the latter’s ward. Only the GRC system saved Mao. Ironic because the PAP said GRC was to protect minorities against orang Cina, not orang Cina from Chinese.

Many S’poreans believe the only reason why we had a reserved election was to ensure the PAP’s wish of having someone whose i/c said “Indian” as the second “Malay” president and first woman. If this is true, then the PAP are the racists, not us. And sexists too.

How to respect someone who uses the presidential pulpit to brand me and other S’poreans as racists?  And in her first speech too as president?

Was I wrong about her. I wrote in early 2016: Malay PAPpy that can thrash Chin Bock. I even said I’d vote for her in a one to one fight with Dr Tan despite voting fot Dr Tan the last time round.

Whatever, with comments like this from her, its going to be easy to keep S’poreans angry with the PAP about the way she became president. I had tot that come the next GE S’poreans, bribed with their own money, would forget their anger.


The only way to make PAP listen to you is through your vote. The way to stop PAP from manipulating the elected presidency is to stop them from having a 2/3 majority. They can still be the government with over 50% of the total seats in parliament but once they obtain above 66%, it means they can change the constitution at their whims and fancy and there absolutely NOTHING you can do about it. GE 2011 has shown that if you want PAP to listen to you, the only way is to stop voting for them, nothing is more straightforward and clear cut than that! Losing 1 GRC already made them panic, imagine what losing another 5 GRCs and a couple more single seats will do to them?! You have the power to bring them to their knees, just be smart with your vote.

FB post by upset S’porean

———————————————–

If Hali keeps on sounding like the PAP (Remember PM and ministers on need for reserved presidency? They all said we are racists.) maybe we’ll thank her one day. Meanwhile she can look at her bank statement and laugh at Judas. He only got thirty pieces of silver. And Jews are supposed to be really smart.

 

 

Why S’pore will never be Smart city

In Corporate governance, Political economy, Political governance on 08/09/2017 at 7:35 am

PAP will never let this happen because, if we become a Smart city, no more cushie jobs for PAPpies.

As a TRE reader put it when TRE republished my piece that the post of Speaker is a BS post*:

Trim the fat:
September 7, 2017 at 5:10 pm (Quote)

We should just install a couple of Smart robots , programmed to do the jobs of Sg President and Speaker of parliament.

Both are robotic roles in our sunny sg.

Trim the fat wherever possible n see how much money can be saved!

Well we could extend the programme to the entire cabinet including the post of PM. And to all senior civil service posts, govt agencies, and TLC and other GLC posts.

Juz programme them to apply Hard Truths and the Economist.


*Incidentally because it’s a BS posts, PAPpies are right that Tan CJ has what it takes to be Speaker. I perceive him as a Talk Cock Sing Song artiste. Btw, going by Hali’s “presidential” statements, she’s now one of these artistes.

Sad.

What the lure of being able to cry all the way to the bank can do.

Amos:11 months in US jail, and still counting

In Uncategorized on 06/09/2017 at 4:54 am

SgDaily’s Buzzfeed story (from March) reminded me that Amos has spent 11 months in a US jail. And there’s still no end in sight.

Taking into consideration his jail time here, if he had done the right thing and gone into NS, he’d have 12 months more to go (and taz excluding leave).

What a born loser.

And taz not all. In jail he kanna robbed.

What an ass to believe that America is the land of the free for scroungers. He should have tried Europe but taz the trouble with a stupid boy. He didn’t research or analyse enough the topic. No wonder he’s a hero of the TRE cybernuts. Stupid people like stupid people.

Amos: 7 months in US jail, 4 more to go at least 

Amos’ case again shows how cock S’poreans are

Amos keeps slipping on banana skins he threw on floor(See that other chimp Meng Seng eat a babana)

 

 

Why there’ll be no presidential election

In Political governance, Public Administration on 04/09/2017 at 9:02 am

The short answer is that ST Editor said so leh.

Warren Fernandez said (among many other things about why the presidency sucks: really he did) yesterday that Eddie Teo and his committee should accept that there is only one candidate who qualifies under the present rules spelt out by Parliament. I’m sure he is channeling the views of the ruling party on this matter.

Image result

What a polite way of saying the next elected president will be chosen by a “walk-over”.

Seriously, why would the PAP go thru the wayang of wanting an unelected elected president?

A fanboy of Hali

Many good friends and those who have worked with her testify for her character. Thus, it is not difficult to place increased weightage for her to lead as President”

unwittingly gave the answer away when he asked people to vote for her.

He posted on FB

The true test, against all comments posted on and offline regarding how the system discriminates positively in a meritocratic society with a pledge that has the phrase ” regardless of race, language or religion”, will be when she becomes President and has to exercise her independent judgment and call for action against the ruling G of the day for matters concerning Singaporeans and their reserves and related matters.
The support for her will not just be for the “now” but when she calls differently from the ruling party. How many will stand stand up independently and vote with her in agreement.

This reasoning is precisely why there’ll be a walkover. An unelected elected president has no mandate from the voters.

The PM of the day can sneer at her and ask, “Mandate? What mandate?” if she disagrees with something that the govt of the day wants done and in an area where she has “custodial” powers. In an alternative universe, PM Mad Dog will threaten to pee on her if she refuses to sign a law returning our CPF.


Ownself check ownself check ownself: Paradox of the PAP presidency.

———————————————

Think Ong Teng Cheong. In any row with LKY’s govt, he could (and may have) said, “I won a presidential election. I got mandate”. It seems this attitude really got LKY really upset resulting in “you know what happened” after Ong died. Since then, the PAP administration has only once allowed a presidential election.

It would be even more wary after its preferred candidate won by only 3,000 votes thanks to two opportunistic clowns from RI. They didn’t even get 30 pieces of silver each, though TKL’s campaign manager, Goh Meng Seng, is alleged, to have asked TKL for 15 pieces of silver. TKL is alleged to have responded, “WTF. I lost my deposit because of u.”

Another reason that there’ll be a walkover is so that those who voted for Tan Cheng Bock and the clowns can’t give the finger to the PAP. Remember they constituted 65% of the vote in the last PE and many of those who voted for the opportunistic RI clowns have repented. Many even deny they voted for Jee Say or TKL. They get upset when I produce evidence of what they told me before the vote.

Here’s the reason why the PAP wants the president to be compliant kaki lang: When a ceremonial president goes “rogue”

After OTC’s term of office, the PAP realised that they had a problem. In the old days LKY would have found an excuse to revert to old system, while he retot the issue of how to protect the reserves. Instead he and PAP resorted to short-term fixes and things nearly went wrong for the PAP in 2011 (See above). Reserved presidency is another first-aid job. 

One day, hopefully soon, the edifice of the “elected” presidency will be like the MRT system: systematic long overdue long-term repairs must be made because things are going badly wrong

Btw, I wrote this in March 2016 about Hali: Malay PAPpy that can thrash Chin Bock and later (May 2016) Halimah deserves better. But she’d rather look at her monthly bank statement and be happy. Maybe she’s thinking of buying an entire HDB floor on her retirement, given that she has a supersized unit now?

Do Singkies want Fair Jobs for S’poreans?

In Uncategorized on 28/08/2017 at 4:48 am

I’ve posted about Lim Tean before: freelance political activist that talks sense. But then he was a senior partner in a law firm that gave us the present CJ, some High Court judges and some ex-AGs.

He’s now testing the ground in a good way and in a great cause.

He is asking 16 800 Singaporeans to contribute $1 each to fund a rally at Hong Lim Green calling for

Fair Jobs for Singaporeans!

and in the process show the displeasure of the neglect of the government in the area of Fair Jobs for Singaporeans.

Anti-PAP S’poreans are asked put their money where their mouths are. Not juz talk cock sing song.

**************Fair Jobs for Singaporeans!*****************

I shall be organising an event at Speakers’ Corner in the 2nd week of September under the aegis of my Movement – Project Freedom , with the theme of ” Fair Jobs for Singaporeans ! ” .

We will not be discussing diabetes , pre-school or smart nation at the event but on the critical topic of what our Government should be doing to protect the rights of Singaporeans to find good jobs in their homeland !

Singaporeans are finding it increasingly difficult to get jobs whether you are a fresh graduate or a PMET who has been displaced by a foreign worker . The landscape for jobs in Singapore gets bleaker by the day . Our government has done little to prepare our workers for the revolution that is about to engulf the world as a result of automation .

I am crowdfunding for $ 20 000 to organise the event . A breakdown of the estimated itemised cost is as follows :-

1.Stage and tentage
2.Sound system
3.Barricades
4. Security personnel

Please support generously by donating to the following account ;

POSB Savings Account No : 404-14132-5

I call on 16 800 Singaporeans ( so far $ 3200 has been raised ) to please help give $ 1 each ( and in the process show the displeasure of the neglect of the government in this area ) and to share this meaningful event with your friends .

I look forward to seeing you at Hong Lim Park !

Good way to test whether there are S’poreans out there willing to walk the talk by donating and in the process show the displeasure of the neglect of the government in Fair Jobs for Singaporeans. 

Money talks, BS walks.

If the crowdfunding response is lousy, time for him to move on: out of politics. S’poreans are not interested in Fair Jobs for Singaporeans nor in showing their displeasure of the neglect of the government in not providing Fair Jobs for Singaporeans. 

Glad he knows that it’s a waste of time if the only supporters he can attract are the cheapskate cybernut fans of TRE and TOC who suck TeamTRE and Terry dry with their demands of free anti-PAP opiates.

Btw, I’ll write a cheque for a token donation and deposit it into the account tomorrow.

Continue to Pak PAP, but not Pak Halimah

In Political governance on 02/08/2017 at 6:56 am

Yesterday, I promised to explain why this is unfair to Hali and her mum and the Malay community.

(Terry Lim’s photos)

The cybernut who did the above, conveniently left out the inconvenient fact that none of the three “Indian” PAPpies had the misfortune of their “Indian” father dying when they were young children.

Halimah had the misfortune (OK, OK, it later turned out to be a winning lottery ticket) of her Indian-Muslim dad dying when she was eight. It was her widowed Malay mum that then brought Halimah (and her siblings) up with the support of her Malay relatives and the wider Malay community.

Halimah was not brought up in the Indian-Muslim community as an Indian-Muslim; but among the Malays as a Malay. No racists, the Malays: if a widowed Malay mother in a mixed race marriage wants to bring up her children as Malays, they support her. Truly tolerant, truly S’poreans. Really Mendaki should reflect this tolerant attitude: not that only i/c matters (See above link) as to who is a Malay.

And as I’ve written before, when she was NUS Law school, she was tot of as a Malay. Even then she wore a tudung, which then wasn’t hip. Btw, an Indian who knows the other female PAPpy Indian says she only started wearing saris when she became a junior minister.

A senior lawyer posted on FB that “the test in the Presidential Elections Act is not a race test, it’s a community acceptance test”. He’s right but the PM framed the need and importance of a Malay president in racial terms: “multi-racialism” to be precise.

So

S’poreans are right to ask to be talking about the issue because the next presidency is reserved for a Malay.  And one of the candidates is “Pakistani” (i/c says so leh) and the other while his i/c says “Malay” has Malays complaining that he’s really Indian because he can’t speak proper Malay.

The view among S’poreans of all races that what is on one’s i/c is a lot of bull* when it comes to whether someone is a Malay is becoming a major problem for the PAP.

By playing the “race” card albeit in the name of “multi-racialism”, the PM created a rod for his back and that of the PAP.

Image may contain: 2 people, people smiling, text

So let us continue to “Pak PM, Pak PAP” on the unreality of Muslim-Indians becoming Malays when the presidency is reserved for a Malay. Good clean fun. And best of all, the PAPpies started the conversation, not us.

But let’s remember Hali’s a decent person that could (and should) have become president on her own merits. She doesn’t really deserve this rubbish both from the PAP and the cybernuts, even though as a PAP Speaker she’s crying all the way to the bank. Wonder if she too has a monthly CPF statement, like Zorro Lim?

———————————-

*Even PAP MP Zainal Sapari says i/c is irrelevant in deciding whether one is a Malay. He’s not expected to stand at next GE.

 

SIA enpowers oldies

In Airlines on 02/08/2017 at 4:14 am
The u/m NYT Dealbook story reminded me that SIA is also like that. One neighbourhood SIA pilot is 62 (my age). And I know a pri school class mate is still flying for SIA.
Nice to know that it’s not only S’pore Aunties that are employed by SIA.

 

The Pilot in the Cockpit? In Japan, He Might Be a Retiree

By JONATHAN SOBLE

Many retired people in the country have returned to the work force as the population dwindles and jobs go unfilled, including Shigekazu Miyazaki, who is still flying at 65.

Man PAP trying to persuade to be president?

In Political governance on 01/08/2017 at 4:47 am

But first, I saw this on FB

(Terry Lim’s photos)

(Btw, I’ll explain why it’s unfair to Hali and more importantly her Malay mum.)

Back to the 73-year-old man who the PAP wants to do NS.

Usually reliable sources say that the PAP is trying very hard to persuade Abdullah bin Tarmugi to stand as president. He’s reluctant because despite being only in his early 70s, he has heart problems. This is PAP’s Plan B.

Halimah (Plan A but in abeyance) will now only stand if Tamugi can’t be persuaded to do NS. So she’s not really BSing that she hasn’t made up her mind. The PAP hasn’t decided to go ahead with her coronation because the issue of who is a Malay is a major topic of discussion among the 60- 70% that regularly vote for the PAP. That the 30% are talking about it too is irrelevant.

S’poreans are right to ask to be talking about the issue because the next presidency is reserved for a Malay.  And one of the candidates is “Pakistani” (i/c says so) and the other while his i/c says “Malay” has Malays complaining that he’s really Indian because he can’t speak proper Malay.

The view among S’poreans of all races that what is on one’s i/c is a lot of bull* when it comes to whether someone is a Malay is becoming a major problem for the PAP.

This is especially because Mendaki’s position is that if i/c doesn’t say “Malay” there’ll be no help for the Muslim supplicant, even if the entire kampung swears that said supplicant is really a Malay.

Malay-Muslim self-help group Yayasan Mendaki has a set of criteria for its financial assistance schemes for students administered on behalf of the Government. Among other things, the recipients “must be of Malay descent” as stated in their identity cards. It spells out a list of what it considers to be “Malay descent”, and this includes 22 ethnicities including Acehnese, Javanese, Boyanese, Sumatran, Sundanese and Bugis. Students with “double-barrelled” race are eligible if the first race is listed on the identity cards as Malay, said a Mendaki spokesman. For example, a student who is Malay-Arab would qualify for the schemes but an Arab-Malay student would not, he added.

(CNA)

Tamugi’s i/c says “Malay” and so that fact alone will kick into the long grass for the next 30 years the lethal bomb that what the i/c says is irrelevant in deciding who is a Malay.

Better still he’s from RI and played rugby for RI at scrum half.

Even better still, his mum was Chinese and his wife is Chinese. So while he may be the token Malay president that the PAP wants to hoist on us, he can be the second multi-racial president, after Sheares.


*Even PAP MP Zainal Sapari says i/c is irrelevant in deciding whether one is a Malay. He’s not expected to stand at next GE.

M Ravi: Money talks BS walks

In Uncategorized on 23/07/2017 at 10:28 am

Update: $6,011 has been received (as of 2.23 p.m. 22 July) to help M Ravi to set aside the foreclosure of his HDB flat

Here I reported that Uncle Leong had asked for donations to help Ravi pay off the arrears on his HDB mortgage

Please help M Ravi as he may become homeless, when he comes out of the hospital.

I would like to appeal to 7,452 Singaporeans to give $1 to POSB Savings Account 032-00582-9 (account of 73 year old L. F. Violet Netto who is the joint owner of the HDB flat).

Glad to know that his supporters are not the same people who refuse to help TRE and a publisher who wants to “Make S’pore Literature Great”. But I wonder about those who were egging him on on FB? Were they among the donors?

Here’s what Amos Yee (Remember him?) thinks of those who talk cock, sing song but who are unwilling to help with cold hard cash:

Interesting that Amos has denounced his activist “supporters”; denouncing them for talking the talk but not walking the talk: the activist friends would have happily let him rot in remand, while pontificating to society on the harm that being in remand would do him.

It’s nice to know that not all S’poreans are as cheapskates as the TRE cybernuts and the ang moh tua kees.

Let’s salute the real S’poreans. They realise that in S’pore, superheroes need to pay their bills.

But will Ravi thank the donors? He was planning to challenge the legality of the mortgage, arguing that the constitution allowed him to default on his mortgage. His grandfather wrote the constitution  isit? Juz like parly belongs to his grandfather?

 

Lim Tean: Activist who talks sense

In Uncategorized on 22/07/2017 at 2:52 pm

Don’t hold it against him that he was for a while Sec-Gen of the No Substance Party, and stood for GE for the NSP.

He’s now a free lancer activist who wants S’pore to be a more open society where the state is more accountable to the people.

He’s no talk cock, sing song artiste like Goh Meng Seng or Mad Dog Chee. He’s more like the SDP’s Dr Paul: an achiever. He was one of the senior partners in Rajah & Tann, a law firm where the the CJ and several judges and AGs came from.

He until recently was based overseas.

AGO and the importance of paperwork

In Accounting, Public Administration on 20/07/2017 at 5:13 am
It’s that time of the year when the cybernuts especially those from TRELand get their yearly free (They are cheapskates, juz like the ang moh tua kees) high from the Auditor-General’s report detailing cock-ups in the process and procedures of ministries and state agencies.

For the rest of us, it shows “Efficiency? What efficiency?”: the PAP administration, like all management systems or bureaucracies, has flaws that need to be fixed. Monitoring and fixing things are eternal, non-ending unglamarous work.

Those criticised often grumble (sometimes rightly) that they live in the real world, not in a world where box-ticking is more important that delivering the “goods”. Not in the case of the WP though.

Whatever, this NYT Dealbook story tells us why getting the paperwork right is important.

Private Student Loan Debts May Be Wiped Away

Tens of thousands of people who took out private loans to pay for college but have not been able to keep up payments may have their debts wiped away. The reason? Missing paperwork.
At least $5 billion in troubled loans are at the center of a legal dispute that has echoes of problems that arose from the subprime mortgage crisis a decade ago.
Private student loans, which come with higher interest rates and fewer consumer protections than federal loans, are often targeted at the most vulnerable borrowers, but judges have already dismissed dozens of lawsuits against former students because of insufficient documentation.
Court records reviewed by The New York Times show that many other collection cases have been brought without complete ownership records.
Like those who took on subprime mortgages, many people who took private student loans may never earn enough to repay the debt.

Yikes! Cynical Investor part of PAP IB?

In Uncategorized on 16/07/2017 at 11:20 am

Going by the u/m Chris K will have to unfriend me if he wants to remain friends with Tay Kheng Soon (Future of S’pore), the other unhappy anti-PAP activists (real life or cyber), and the cybernuts. I’m sure Jedi like Terry Xu, Tan Tee Seng and Eric Tan will not respond to my emails.

After all I use repeatedly: “talking cock” and “one party state“. And I regularly rubbish the opposition (here and here ) sowing “dissention, cynicism and suspicion”.

I don’t get credit for dissing PAP meh?

And by implication, TRE is also part of the PAP IB as it regularly uses my pieces and other pieces using “talking cock”, “sham democracy” and “one party state”.

Seriously Tay Kheng Soon is talking cock. He’s almost like Talk Cock, Sing Song King Lee Hsien Yang (Examples below)

Tay Kheng Soon

For the sake of healthy civilised discussion on FB it is necessary to reveal the tactics of the IB. They have names but they may not be real people. How we can tell is the same language they use repeatedly. “talking cock,” “sham democracy,” “one party state.” What is their aim? It is to disrupt civilised discussion to prevent public education. Their aim in this is ultimately to justify dictatorship by muting public voice. They are false democrats themselves. Thus they rubbish the opposition. They sow dissention, cynicism and suspicion. They hunt as a pack of predators. This way they instill fear, fear to respond to their attacks. If we fear them, they think they win. Dont let them!


Lee Hsien Yang talking cock 

Oxleygate: “the curious incident”/ What S’poreans are not focusing on

In Political governance, Public Administration on 14/07/2017 at 10:36 am

“The dog did nothing in the night-time.”

“That was the curious incident.”

The real “scandal” is that DPM Teo and Lawrence Wong did not protect their reputations the PAP way, when the younger Lees defamed them by accusing them of doing their brother’s bidding, not PM not threatening to take legal action against his siblings, but doing a wayang in parly.

ESM Goh said in parly:

[I]t is clear that their goal is to bring Lee Hsien Loong down as PM, regardless of the huge collateral damage suffered by the Government and Singaporeans. It is now no more a cynical parlour game. If the Lee siblings choose to squander the good name and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew, and tear their relationship apart, it is tragic but a family affair. But if in the process of their self destruction, they destroy Singapore too, that is a public affair.

Now isn’t the attempt to destroy S’pore by making allegations against other ministers, not just their brother the PM, a good enough reason for said ministers to have demanded an apology and sued the younger Lees for defamation, if no grovelling apology was made? And what about their personal reputations? Why liddat?

After ESM’s Goh’s speech, Lee Hsien Yang posted

“We are not making a criticism of the Government of Singapore, as we made clear from the beginning. What we have said is that we are disturbed by the character, conduct, motives and leadership of our brother, Lee Hsien Loong.”
Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/we-are-not-making-a-criticism-of-the-government-lee-hsien-yang-9006620

————————————————

Talk Cock Sing Song King Lee Hsien Yang talking cock again above. Other examples

Reading Lee Hsien Yang’s repeated “clarifications” on FB to his earlier FB “clarifications” (example on whether his wife’s law firm was used in the final will: he said “No” emphatically, but then went to explain what they did*), I can understand why the committee wants a statutory declaration and I can understand why he hasn’t given one.

Talking cock about the will

Didn’t do his job as executor

—————————————

Huh? I tot the younger Lees were making allegations that the ministerial committee set up to consider the fate of LKY’s house was doing their brother’s bidding, not making independent judgements and findings? That not attacking govt meh?

DPM Teo rightly responded:

“With regard to Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s allegations against the Ministerial Committee, public agencies and public officers, the Government has already responded comprehensively to all of them in Parliament,”
Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/38-oxley-road-govt-still-has-to-carry-out-responsibilities-for-9009684

This shows that, while the PM may have felt that he could not sue his siblings, DPM Teo or Lawrence Wong should have had no such qualms about suing PM’s siblings for the good of S’pore and their good name. They should have asked the younger Lees to withdraw their allegations against them, and apologise. Failing which, they’d sue the Lees.

While I’ve argued that that the cabinet full of Oxbridge men royally screwed up

Yesterday’s wayang and the preceding Lee family row could have been avoided if PM (from Cambridge) had not have gone to the cabinet about his doubts about the circumstances around the execution of the will and the cabinet committee headed by another Cambridge man had not decided to act on PM’s doubts.

DPM Teo, Lawrence Wong, and, possibly, other ministers should have been prepared to take legal action to protect the reputation of the cabinet and themselves. They didn’t and that me is the real scandal. It now seems that this White Horse and White Mare have privileges not extended to people like Roy Ngerng. Who else does do these privileges extend to?

Even now, the Princess of Oxley Road is attacking Shanmugam, raking over the ashes of her allegation of his conflicts of interest. Shouldn’t he be telling her to “apologise or else”, instead of sitting down and keeping quiet? She that special isit?

Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”

Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”

Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”

Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”

Silver Blaze by  Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

 

 

“Strong push back”? What “strong push back”?

In Political governance, Public Administration on 05/07/2017 at 1:46 pm

PM said on Monday there was “strong push back from the public” on the demolition of the house.

Huh? A poll then showed over 70% of Singaporeans supported demolition of the house. Even a very recent poll showed a lot of support for demolition https://sg.news.yahoo.com/live-blog-pm-lee-deliver-ministerial-statement-38-oxley-road-011158139.html

And there’s this I highlighted on Monday.

So where did LHL get his statistics from? Can we assume a secret poll that ignores us plebs i?

But then that would be par for the course for him and his cabinet, 36% of which are from Oxbridge, and 32% from Cambridge. 

Seriously it is the atas anti-PAP people like Tay Kheng Soon and friends (unlike their cybernut pleb allies like Teo Soh Lung) who want the house preserved presumably to give the finger to our dearly beloved Harry: “Ha, ha ha, yr house is being preserved against the wishes of u and Mrs Lee,” they can say quietly. But to be fair to them, they talk about preserving history and heritage, not about giving the finger to LKY. But that’s their intention.

Looks like PM and his cabinet prefer to listen to their subversive views on the house rather than the opinion of the masses who vote for the PAP. They, like me, want the cabinet of the day to accede to his (and his wife’s) wishes on the house when their daughter no longer defiles the sacred ground.

It’s not that surprising that the views of subversives and “enemies of the people” are seemingly preferred to those of the PAP masses because as Chris K points out Cambridge in the 1930s was notorious for upper class traitors who wanted to subvert the British way of life. I mean even one Harry Lee wanted an end to rule to British rule of S’pore: a radical tot then. But it’s very strange that our LGBTs have been bullied and harassed recently, unsuccessfully as it turns out, because as Chris also points out Cambridge was notorious for its gays.

And he headed SAF and SingTel?/ Where PM’s siblings have the high moral ground

In S'pore Inc on 28/06/2017 at 4:59 am

Mdm Ho Ching was “never authorised” to remove the personal belongings of Mr Lee Kuan Yew from his home, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said on Saturday (Jun 24).

(More details from CNA below)

So why wait till now to tell S’poreans that he and his sister didn’t do their job as executors? If they really didn’t give their consent, shouldn’t they have taken steps to retrieve the property then? And as citizens, and good children of Harry, expose their sister-in-law’s thefts and their brother’s lies?

And he should remember that by keeping quiet at the time, the executors are likely to be deemed to have consented.

Where else have they failed in their duties? Given they held high executive posts in S’pore Inc., we have a right to know.

Seriously, I think he should stop being petty, because he and his sister are trying to frame the row as about the abuse of power, the absence of “checks and balances to prevent the abuse of government”, and how the constructive, nation-building media ignores or disses those that don’t fit into the “right” narratives. And how these are new developments and that they are the first to notice**.

They should have focused on where they have the moral high ground, not give spurious, cock reasons.

To my mind, they  are right to be morally upset with their brother for not challenging the will but telling his subordinates that he had problems with the circumstances surrounding the will.

Why PM could not go to court.

— But he should have just sat down and shut up not tell his subordinates his concerns.

Especially since LKY recognised that the govt could override his wishes.

And PM’s statutory declaration was nothing less than an attack on the integrity of Lee Hsien Yang and his wife. As a son of LKY, Lee Hsien Yang would have learnt the importance of defending his integrity. He could do no less as a son of Harry than to attack his brother’s integrity in return.

——————————

*The youngest son of founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew was responding to a note on Facebook by Mdm Ho, the wife of his brother and Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, on the circumstances under which the elder Mr Lee’s belongings were loaned to the National Heritage Board (NHB) for a memorial exhibition.

Mdm Ho had explained that she was tidying up the house after Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s death when she came across “small interesting items which (she) thought were significant in papa’s life”. She also said that she kept both Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his sister Dr Lee Wei Ling informed on what she had done, including the loan of the items to NHB.

PM Lee also said on Friday that the loan to NHB was “openly done, and for a good cause – an exhibition remembering my father soon after he died”.

But in a Facebook post on Saturday, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said that he and Dr Lee – the executors of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s estate – had not authorised Mdm Ho to lend the items to NHB.

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/ho-ching-was-never-authorised-to-remove-lee-kuan-yew-s-8975018

**They seem to have forgotten JBJ, Chiam, the Coldstore and Spectrum detainess, etc.

 

Oxleygate: We got monkeys as ministers isit?

In Political governance, Public Administration on 23/06/2017 at 10:54 am

But to be fair to our monkeys ministers, I still can’t stop laughing about a White Horse and a White Mare (lineage of Lee and Kwa) KPKBing screaming about the abuse of power, the absence of “checks and balances to prevent the abuse of government”, and how the constructive, nation-building media ignores or disses those that don’t fit into the “right” narratives.

They seriously expect us to think that these are new developments and that they are the first to notice? (More on these matters one of these days.)

Back as to why reasonable people can reasonably conclude that Lee Hsien Loong and the Oxley house cabinet committee members are a bunch of overpaid monkeys, and cocks to boot.

LHL really fixed himself. Here I explained why it was impossible for him to challenge the will in court: it would let world know the family was rowing; and because if he had challenged it and succeeded, the estate would be divided by the law governing situations where’s there no will*, not by an earlier version of dad’s will. Not something a filial, honourable son would do.

So as he couldn’t challenge the will, he should have just sat down and shut up and not KPKB tell his subordinates his suspicions that the will may have been improperly executed. He could comfort himself with the thought that dad’s wish in the will to demolish the house, was just a wish because LKY accepted that the govt could decide not to demolish the house. He personally could sidestep the issue by really recusing himself on the issue of what to do with the house.

As to the cabinet committee members, when they heard his KPKBing suspicions about the execution of the will, they should have told him, “Sorry boss, no can do anything. Not appropriate to do anything since you, rightly as honourable and filial son, didn’t challenge the will in court.

‘So we can’t go into the issue of whether the 9th Immortal was railroaded into signing the will.

‘We have to accept, because it says so in the will, that HE wanted the house demolished .

‘Even if you can get Ho Ching to summon him from Hell Hades his place of honour beside the Jade Emperor, to say that he didn’t want the house demolished, and that he was “fixed”, we have to accept what the will said he wanted.

‘Anyway, what’s the big deal? He accepted that the govt has the final say.”

Seriously I don’t think it was wise of the Lee Hsien Loong or the cabinet committee (and by extension the cabinet) to try to go into the execution of LKY’s will, and that it was a serious and bad mistake to try to do so.

Btw, still think that serious money gets us ministers who are not monkeys?

————————————

*https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/in-the-absence-of-a-will-how-is-the-deceased-estate-distributed/

PM did the honourable thing by not challenging will

In Uncategorized on 18/06/2017 at 5:38 am

His brudder has said that if he had doubts, PM should have challenged probate. He added that the hearing could be conducted in private so it would still be a private matter.

Yah right: the public would still know that the Lees were rowing.

And as I pointed out here:  If a will is invalidated, the deceased’s assets will not be distributed according to the will, and such assets may instead be distributed according to the Intestate Succession Act.

This means that the challenge had been successful, there would have been no reversion to the previous will (Version 6). Instead of Harry’s (and indirectly his wife’s) wishes on how the assets of the estate should be distributed, the assets of the estate would be mechanically according to the Intestate Succession Act. Like that why bother with a will in the first place?

This would really be the act of a dishonourable son.

 

LKY, PM not above the law: Dr Lee, LHY and cybernut friends

In Uncategorized on 17/06/2017 at 8:25 am

That’s what these cocks don’t understand.

Here’s an extract from the “Observer” (new to me and sounds like TMG, pro-PAP but pretending to be neutral) that summarises the law well:

The family home on 38 Oxley Road is subjected to the Planning Act and the Preservation of Monuments Act, with the latter due to the fact that the building undeniably holds significant historical importance. The decision-making agencies are ultimately the National Heritage Board (NHB) and the Urban Redevelopment Board (URA). In this regard, even if LHL had wanted for the building to be demolished as he has asserted previously, the final decision lies in NHB and the URA. Under the Planning Act, building owners are required to seek the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s (URA) approval prior to carrying out works to demolish, redevelop or undertake additions and alterations to their properties. Under the Preservation of Monuments Act, the National Heritage Board (NHB), under the purveyance of the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY), can make a preservation order to place any monument under the protection of the Board. https://observer.news/…/lee-family-not-get-decide-lkys…/

To this, I’d add that LKY was aware that he was not above the law: hence his wish that the house be demolished once Dr Lee get her ass out of the house. He knew that the govt could preserve his house despite his wishes.

I’m not saying that the PM behaved in a proper, respectful manner towards his siblings. The evidence on that is still coming out. And so far neither side has come out looking well. Score draw so far.

But it’s clear to me that PM’s siblings and their cybernut allies think that Harry, at the very least, is the 9th Immortal. And that his will must be done.

That is wrong. And disrespectful of Harry. 

 

 

 

Paradox of the PAP presidency

In Political governance on 13/06/2017 at 7:20 am

I pointed out  here that our CPF could be returned tomorrow (if the govt of the day was willing to do so).

I also said that in an alternative universe when Dr Chee became PM, with a two-thirds majority in parly, he could tell president Yaacob to allow him to draw on the reserves and return our CPF. He would tell President Halimah

I have the mandate of the people. What do u have? How many S’poreans voted for u? None because u won by default.”

Sign or I’ll pee on u and let the mob into the Istana.

Seriously, this is the paradox. How can a president that entered office via a walk-over have the moral authority to resist a newly elected govt that is different from the one that “chose” the “right’ president?

Where does the will of people reside?

Ownself fix ownself

I commend this post where a law professor points out that Nathan was never elected”: he was an unelected president, same like Devan Nair etc. Only Ong Teng Cheong (another cybernut hero) was the real deal.  Within is a video where he points out that the presidency is problematic for the PAP when the PAP is the govt in power. Watch the video to understand how “Ownself sabo ownself”.

This post on the presidential council describes how the PAP tries to solve the problem posed by the professor.

“Oh! What A Tangled Web We Weave” which continues “When First We Practice To Deceive”.

Not talking about race or religion

In Uncategorized on 08/06/2017 at 1:20 pm

When TRE republished this, there was the usual ranting from the cybernuts.

But there was this

opposition dude:
June 6, 2017 at 2:16 pm (Quote)
I never like talking about race or religion, it’s too sensitive a topic.

What I would rather do is continue being on good terms with people of other races and see them as friends. So far this has worked well since I was in primary school up to working life.

For me, it’s always nice to just makan together with other races and just enjoy their company and talking cock with them.

I like him avoid talking about race or religion with people of other races or religions. The problem is that we can stand accused (rightly) of being tolerant rather than accepting of other races or religions.

The accusation does has merit especially if we are from the majority group. But what is the alternative? Let it all hang out like Shrey and gang?

Empire strikes back delivering mortal blow to Pink Dot?

In Political governance on 16/05/2017 at 4:37 am

Putting Organising Committe’s asses on the line. As my FB avatar put it “Forcing organisers to check ics isit? Then if one FT there, arrest organisers isit?”. (Explanation below for the blur.)

Siew Kum Hong (Remember him?) replied “those are the implied threats”.

But let’s begin at the beginning,

Here I wrote after congragulating the Pink Dot othanisers of getting rid of their ang moh tua kee mentality and trying to raise money from locals only

But the LGBT community should not be taking their pants off and treating themselves to a sexual orgy as a pat on the back. There’s trouble ahead. I’ll talk cock about this some other day.

I never got round to talking cock on the issue, but we now know how the Empire Struck Back

Pink Dot 2017: Foreigners not allowed to attend annual LGBT pride event due to new changes to regulation

My foreboding was because in words of FB comment by someone

“Pink Dot’s success* is an indication that we need to reconsider the traditional approach towards the relationship between the government and civil society, and recognize the importance of civil society in bringing forward meaningful change in a pluralistic world.”

Or as my FB avatar responding to the news that Pink Dot met its funding target*

Well done Pink Dot organisers for getting rid of idea that only ang mohs tua kee. And well done local donors for showing that not all S’poreans are cheap skates. And the LGBT community should get on their knees and thank the PAP. Without the actions of the PAP administration, there would be many S’poreans (self included) who doubted that Pink Dot had local roots. But beware everyone, in a de facto one party state, the ruling party hates other groups that can organise without its co-operation.

As I wrote in Keeping power in a one-party state

Again, while not exactly true here “Fear of competing narratives makes it drive some of China’s brightest and best into exile or jail” the PAP’s fear of competing narratives has stifled society here largely thru self censorship and self blinkered minds.

A successful NGO is a threat to the PAP or the CCP.

( Related post: Would this happen in a one-party state?)

BBC report on the exclusion of FTs: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-39916201 and this from 2013 on growing official and community acceptance of LGBTs http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-22088852

————————————–

*In just six weeks, Pink Dot has surpassed its own targets, raising over $201,000 and attracting 103 local sponsors. It was forced to turn to local funding after the government introduced a controversial ban on foreign sponsorship, which threatened the event’s success.

Smart Nation: It’s all about Big Brudder watching us

In Economy, Infrastructure, Internet, Political governance, Public Administration on 24/04/2017 at 2:45 pm

True the BBC in  http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39641262 can come across as constructive and nation-building as ST but three cheers to the BBC for pointing that the way the PAP administration does things is a major problem for the Smart Nation initiative:

Harminder Singh, a senior lecturer in business information systems at the Auckland University of Technology in New Zealand, says the main issue with Smart Nation is that there may be too much government control over it right now for real innovation to take place.

“Singapore’s way of doing things is that the government leads, then others follow,” he told me. “This might be a problem – it is too centralised and so it may take too long for plans to trickle down.

“And ideas from the ground may be neither visible to those on top nor acceptable to them, especially if they are related to the delivery of services that are traditionally handled by the government.”

But he’s very cock in saying

it is not clear why Singapore’s leaders are so keen to move full steam ahead with this plan.

Ah ya no need to explain. It’s all about making sure Big Brother can keep on watching S’poreans. But he’s right to say that we don’t know “how the Smart Nation project will improve salaries and jobs”

“Smart Nation is about building national technology infrastructure so that the government can offer new services, or do what they do now differently. The government may need to explain more clearly how the Smart Nation project will improve salaries and jobs in Singapore to get the project moving faster.”

 

FAS elections: Do the other Game Changers know the name of Bill Ng’s wife?

In Footie on 21/04/2017 at 4:52 am

Update on 22 April at 4.35am: Double confirmed, Bonny Wong is still married to Bill Ng. They’ve been called up for questioning by the police http://www.todayonline.com/sports/bill-ng-questioned-police-after-raid-three-football-clubhouses-and-fas

(In case anyone doesn’t know, Game Changers is the name of the Bill Ng led team that is contesting the FAS elections. And he has been alleging irregularities in a donation made to FAS*.)

When I knew Bill Ng in the 1990s (it wasn’t a pleasant experience), I met his wife Bonnie Wong, a Hongkie lady. Good looking, sassy lady.

So I was laughing when I read that Tiong Bahru FC was paying rent to a company owned by Bonnie Wong

TODAY found that Tiong Bahru also paid around S$960,000 in total rent in 2016 to the unit’s landlord, Polygon Ventures, which is listed on the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (Acra) as a company dealing in general wholesale trade. That works out to be about $80,000 per month.

The listed owner of Polygon Ventures is Bonnie Wong Yuk Ying, who TODAY understands shares the same residential address as Ng.

With the clubhouse measuring 2,583sqf, it means that the rental amounts to S$31 per square foot.

In contrast, a check showed that other basement units in People’s Park Centre are charging between S$2.92 and S$11.23 per square feet in rent. The only unit charging S$31.50 per square feet in rent is located at street level, and measures only 200sqf.

While Ng is understood to be running the club, the chairman of TBFC’s general committee is listed as former FAS president Zainudin Nordin.

Btw, I owe him an apology because I got one thing wrong about him: I tot he wouldn’t organise a slate to contest the FAS election. Here I wrote:

Those of us who had dealings with Bill Ng in his stockbroking days can testify that he is a talk cock sing song artiste, No Action, Talk Only. He’s carried this over to footie mgt: witness his so-called bid for the storied Rangers FC, and the absence of his slate to run FAS at the AGM. He’s a used car salesman.

I predict that his slate will not materialise.

I’m still wondering why Bill Ng threw stones when he was was living in a bungalow made of glass even though I’m sure that if he’s still married to Bonnie Wong, all the legal niceties were followed in the agreement to pay rent to a biz owned by her.

My other posts on him

Billy the Kid in the 90s

Billy and his fighting footie team 


*FAS produces letters, cheques to show that Bill Ng knew he was donating S$500k to AFF

http://m.todayonline.com/sports/football/fas-produces-letters-cheques-show-bill-ng-knew-he-was-donating-s500k-aff

Bill the ex one-armed bandit that had kept paying and paying at the behest of some tua kee FAS officials replied that he was misled and “directed” to sign the letter that showed he was lying.

Naming and shaming a very stupid PAP MP

In Uncategorized on 02/04/2017 at 5:30 am

After a PAP MP said that the higher motor-bike taxes introduced in the Budget would help bring down bike COEs

Certificate of Entitlement (COE) premiums ended mostly higher in the latest bidding exercise on Wednesday (Mar 29).

Motorcycle premiums closed at S$8,081, a record high compared to the S$7,483 in the last exercise.

The Govt Parliamentary Chairman for Transport, Mr Sitoh Yih Pin had said, “The revised ARF, therefore, serves this further purpose ‒ to reduce the demand for expensive motorcycles and, consequently, to lower motorcycle COE prices and lower cost for purchasers of smaller motorcycles.” (My thanks to TNG’s Daniel Yap for drawing my attention to these remarks.)

What cock. What weed was this MP smoking when he said that? Same brand as that of the FT MP who said that the 30% hike in water prices is to make us more aware of the need to appreciate water more.

 

 

 

What Trump and our Harry have in common

In Uncategorized on 01/04/2017 at 5:54 am

To celebrate the fact that the second anniversary of Harry’death passed without his daughter publicly showing her grief (something I was afraid of because it would dishonour him, not honour him), I reptoduce this piecewhich I did when no-one thought Trump would become POTUS.

They have so much in common that I’m surprised so many known PAPpies are dissing Trump while adoring LKY on social media.

What Trump and our Harry have in common

Trump tower.jpg

LKY didn’t want anything to be named after him, while Trump wants his name on anything  “big” like Trump Tower (see pix). The Republican foreign policy establishment said nice things about Harry, while they cry at Trump’s comments.

LKY had life-long marriage, Trump is into his third marriage.

You’d think that there would nothing that LKY and the Donald have in common or would agree on. But you’d be wrong.

Children

They have two sons and one daughter, though Trump’s daughter is married and by all accounts is a normal person even though she admires (not worships) her father. His children work for the family business.

Attended elite universities

LKY was a graduate of Cambridge. The Donald graduated from the Wharton Business School.

Super Salesmen

Trump talks about “truthful hyperbole”. Before Harry became lord and master of all he surveyed from his Oxley Road house (built on a hill), he had to persuade the British and the voters to trust him and the PAP.

Recovered from knockdowns

Some of Trump’s businesses went bankrupt and he lost serious money. But he reinvented himself as a reality tv star. Our Harry failed to persuade the Malayan Malay and Chinese elites of a “Malaysian Malaysia” with him in charge.

The result was independence for S’pore, something he had argued was bad for S’pore’s prosperity.

Well he had a good cry on tv, then did his best to ensure that he and S’pore could prosper.

Use or the threat of  litigation 

No need to say much about our Harry’s love of litigation. But did you know Trump also is litigious?

Five years ago, I was part of a discussion panel on the popular Morning Joe talk show in the US when the issue of Donald Trump came up. A rowdy debate erupted and I cheerfully joked that Trump was a great businessman “barring a few bankruptcies” — and blessed with charisma even “with that hairpiece”. A few minutes later, Trump telephoned the show and demanded an on-air apology. Apparently, he was not just upset about the bankruptcy quip (he wanted to clarify that he has never personally gone bankrupt but “only” seen some of his companies go bust); he was also angry about the hair joke.

So, as we sat around the table on the TV set, one of the show’s hosts read a straight-faced legal apology to camera. “He might sue,” a reporter later explained to me, as I squirmed with embarrassment and wondered whether to laugh or cry.

(Gillian Tett in an FT magazine article)

Finally,

Views about Muslims

The most neutral thing that can be said about their views on Muslims is that they seem suspicious of people who happen to be Muslims ie people who profess Islam.

Trump had said Muslims should be barred from the US. He later dropped the idea when it was pointed out that this was unconstitutional. He changed it to ban anyone from a country where terrorism was rampant. He calls for the profiling of Muslims in the US.

LKY’s views on Muslims are on record. But if anyone forgot what they were please read on.

LKY’s views on Muslims as documented

Wikileaks released a cable by the US Embassy in Singapore reporting on the visit of Senator Hillary Clinton to Singapore in Jul 2005. The cable claimed that in my meeting with Senator Clinton, I had “characterized Islam as a ‘venomous religion’”.

This is false. I looked up MFA’s filenote of the meeting. Nowhere does it record me describing Islam as “venomous”, nor did I say anything which could have given that impression.

I did talk about extremist terrorists like the Jemaah Islamiyah group, and the jihadist preachers who brainwashed them. They are implacable in wanting to put down all who do not agree with them. So their Islam is a perverted version, which the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Singapore do not subscribe to.

I also pointed out that our Muslim leaders are rational, and that the ultimate solution to extremist terrorism was to give moderate Muslims the courage to stand up and speak out against radicals who have hijacked Islam to recruit volunteers for their violent ends.

(TOC)

And

Singapore’s presiding genius, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, on the failure of Muslim integration:

In the book, Mr Lee, when asked to assess the progress of multiracialism in Singapore, said: “I have to speak candidly to be of value, but I do not wish to offend the Muslim community.“I think we were progressing very nicely until the surge of Islam came, and if you asked me for my observations, the other communities have easier integration – friends, intermarriages and so on, Indians with Chinese, Chinese with Indians – than Muslims. That’s the result of the surge from the Arab states.”He added: ”I would say today, we can integrate all religions and races except Islam.”He also said: “I think the Muslims socially do not cause any trouble, but they are distinct and separate.”(Can’t remember the source of this quote)

But to be fair he then

issued a statement last night and said he stands corrected on how well-integrated Malay-Muslims are in Singapore, according to a Straits Times report.

He referred to the comments he made in the new book, Lee Kuan Yew: Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going.

He said: “Hard Truths was a book based on 32 hours of interviews over a period of two years.

“I made this one comment on the Muslims integrating with other communities probably two or three years ago. Ministers and MPs, both Malay and non-Malay, have since told me that Singapore Malays have indeed made special efforts to integrate with the other communities, especially since 9/11, and that my call is out of date.

“I stand corrected. I hope that this trend will continue in the future.”

Since the book was published, reactions from some Muslim groups were negative. Some said his remarks were unfounded while others called for him to apologise.

But Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that his perspective differed from MM Lee’s, which were the latter’s personal opinions.

During a breakfast session at the Yio Chu Kang Community Club on Jan 30, PM Lee said: “Muslims are a valued and respected community, who have done a good deal to strengthen our harmony and social cohesion.”

PM Lee added that his own views were that of the Government’s.

http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne+News/Singapore/Story/A1Story20110308-267055.html

Btw saw this http://singapore.coconuts.co/2015/03/27/outrage-ensues-muslim-community-over-praise-lee-kuan-yew-during-friday-sermons.

(https://atans1.wordpress.com/2016/09/29/what-trump-and-our-harry-have-in-common/)

Amos the born loser cont’d

In Uncategorized on 31/03/2017 at 2:03 pm

His cont’d detention and US immigration appeal against the granting of asylum by a judge shows how cock Amos is. He should have tried Europe. But then he not RI boy. He from neighbourhood school.

Opps I forgot TJS, THL and Kee Chiu also RI boys.

Ang moh tua kee mentality of Pink Dot Organisers

In Uncategorized on 28/03/2017 at 11:15 am

What a bunch of wanking buggers who only saw ang mohs as their only sponsors. Ang moh tua kee isit? Sad.

Although I’m very happy  that the movement has local supporters that are happy to sponsor the event (so unlike the cheapskates that populate TRELand always claiming poverty when TRE asks for donations).

With four months to go before its annual rally to support the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community, Pink Dot has raised 70 per cent of the total sponsorship dollars it got last year.

This is even though foreign companies – the majority of its sponsors in the past – can no longer fund events at the Speakers’ Corner unless they have a permit.

I feel sad after reading the SunT article entitled “Local firms throw weight, dollars behind Pink Dot”. This makes it clear that the organisers didn’t think they could get local money to replace ang moh *.

Pink Dot spokesman Paerin Choa told SunT

“We were a bit worried whether there would be enough support from local companies to fill the vacuum left by the MNCs.”**

Pink Dot, now in its ninth year, had intended to run this year’s event “bare bones”, like its first one in 2009.

This showed that the organisers didn’t think the movement had local roots? Or more likely that the LGBT community was full of freeloaders (like the TRE community) who valued it only as a free and easy way of picking up sexual partners (in the case of TRE cybernuts, TRE gives them a platform to KPKB about the PAP administration free of charge).

Whatever, it took an outsider to show that locals could raise money for the LGBT movement.

Mr Darius Cheung, 36, founder of property start-up 99.co, who sent Pink Dot a message saying: “We are a small start-up but we want to help.”

Mr Cheung, a Singaporean, then rounded up tech entrepreneurs he knew to reach out to local firms. He also volunteered to front the Red Dot for Pink Dot campaign and build its website through which companies can sponsor.

The campaign hopes to rope in 100 corporate sponsors, and to raise $150,000 in all.

Good for him and the other sponsors. But the LGBT community should not be taking their pants off and treating themselves to a sexual orgy as a pat on the back. There’s trouble ahead. I’ll talk cock about this some other day.

————————–

*Last October, the Ministry of Home Affairs made clear that only local entities can sponsor, promote or get its employees to participate in events at the Speakers’ Corner. To be considered local, companies need to be incorporated or registered here, and be majority-controlled by Singaporeans.
**My take on this last year.

Revisited: Why we don’t buy the “explanations” of S’pore Inc

In Political governance, Public Administration, S'pore Inc on 27/03/2017 at 7:40 am

In 2010 (before the double blow to the PAP of GE and PE of 2011), I posted a piece that I reproduce below.

I repost Why we don’t buy the “explanations” of S’pore Inc below because recently

— The police and prison service confirmed (double confirmed?) that a 74-yr old woman was handcuffed and restrained when she was moved from the police post to the police division and to the courts. They said it was “part of standard procedure lar”.

— AVA’s culling of fowl asserting are not junglefowl, refusing to do genetic testing. We have to accept its word despite discrepancies in its explanations that the public pointed out.

And last year we had the Benjamin’s death and in Dec 2o13 the Little India riot. Again everything was done by the book: hence no need to explain further. No need even to rethink or learn lessons. (I don’t think the changes introduced after Benjamin’s death and the riots amount to anything other than cosmetic changes to appease its supporters who were troubled by what happened.

In short, the PAP administration has not changed its spots when it comes to accepting responsibility or explaining when mistakes or cock-ups happen.


Why we don’t buy the “explanations” of S’pore Inc (first posted in 2010)

The ex-head of the civil service and now chairman of the Public Service Commission showed he “got it” when he said at a recent speech in the US to S’pore  scholars: If we strive to be world-class, we will be judged by world-class standards. If we say that we have one of the best governments in the world, the public will expect it to solve virtually any problem Singapore faces.

Taz correct.

But he showed he didn’t “get it” when he went on: Some of our citizens are now beginning to expect the government to do the impossible. Many citizens are now less prepared to give the government room to make mistakes and are less forgiving and more demanding. They tend to regard explanations as excuses. Take the recent floods. To some Singaporeans, saying that floods are natural disasters and Singapore cannot be flood-free, sounds like a cop out. Every time something goes wrong in Singapore, citizens ask: “If our public servants and Ministers are so smart and paid so well, why can’t they prevent the problem from occurring, or solve it for good after it occurs?”

He is assuming that the “explanations” given explained what had happened. He should relook this assumption.

Juz look at some of the recent “explanations” that have been given for goof-ups or incidents that caused public inconvenience. Are we wrong in thinking sume people were trying to avoid responsibility?

When MPs asked why the flat of Mas Selamat’s brother was not watched, they were told by the Home Affairs minister that that Mas Selamat could go undetected in the flat “was not a security lapse’ and that hundreds were probed . Err how abt answering the question, “Why wasn’t the flat watched?”

As to the floods, I could not understand the minister’s and senior officials’ explanations. I only “got it” when, on an inside page of ST, it was reported that more rain had fallen in a few hours than it had for days on end i.e. it was very, very heavy rainfall in a very short space of time. Point taken. But this explanation by a junior official was buried deep inside ST, and I’m sure many would have missed reading it. The front page “explanations” failed to give this fact, or where they did, this fact was lost in the smoke of hot air.

The problem is that the “explanations” given often ignore the question, assume that S’poreans are morons or that we are educated, and refuse to admit that mistakes were made. Perhaps PSC should run courses to train scholars to be less arrogant; to admit to making mistakes; and to write in simple, believable prose? One gets the impression that ministers and civil servants attend courses where they are taught not to ever admit making a mistake; and to avoid answering questions.

It wasn’t always like this. When one LKY was PM, mistakes were admitted; and explanations were given in simple and understandable English. I wonder how GCT or LHL would have explained why and how we were kicked out of M’sia, and what was the future of S’pore post-demerger?

And on economical and financial matters, no minister post-1991 has matched the simplicity of Dr Goh’s radio talks and articles.

And asses were kicked and faces shamed. (Admittedly, sometimes the wrong people were punished.)

But let’s be fair: MoE did admit that a scholarship was given to a peeping-tom because the boy’s teachers got some things wrong. He was recently convicted in England for possession of child pornography. But what if the balls-up had been made by officers higher up the food chain? I mean teachers are the lowest of the low in the education food chain, or so I’ve been assured by teachers.

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2010/11/27/why-we-dont-buy-the-explanations-of-spore-inc/

Otters, Watergate: What’s worth of ministers’ parly statements?

In Environment, Political governance, Public Administration on 03/03/2017 at 5:12 am

I recently wrote that I was afraid for our Bishan otters because

a population of five in mid 2015, has expanded to 14 in about two years. By the end of 2018, there’ll be 10 sexually mature otters. They won’t be stopping at two for sure.

And

what happened at Sing Ming can happen to the Bishan otters because based on what happened to wild pigs and the fowl, the default mode at AVA to any animal problem is “Cull first, ask questions and BS later”.

So it was really nice that on Tuesday, a junior minister made it clear that

The culling of animals is only a “very small part” of the overall work of the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA), and it does not track the expenditure it incurs on doing so, said Senior Minister of State for National Development Desmond Lee.

Answering a question in Parliament on Tuesday (Feb 28), Mr Lee said AVA takes a multi-pronged approach to manage the animal population and mitigate health and safety concerns. It first undertakes a professional assessment of potential threats that animals might pose to public health and safety, he explained, and AVA will have to act if there “significant health and safety concerns”.

“Where feasible, it will work with stakeholders, including the animal welfare groups and organisations like Wildlife Reserves Singapore, to relocate and rehome these animals,” said Mr Lee. “Culling is used only as a last resort.”

In response to a clarification from Member of Parliament Louis Ng, Mr Lee added that AVA’s total budget for animal management operations for 2016 was S$800,000.

CNA

But then I learnt that VivianB had said in parly in 2015 (juz before GE) that there was no need to change the price of water because of PUB’s improvements in membrane tech and productivity and that the water tariff and WCT reflected the scarcity of water.

But we now know 18 months later than that isn’t true any more (Wah facts change so fast? Can tell us what changed? Or cock-up somewhere? Or 2015 statement was “political”?) and that the price of water will be 30% more because of the cost of producing water and to reflect the scarcity of water.

———————————

“The consumer must feel the price of water, realise how valuable water is in Singapore, every time he or she turns on the tap, right from the first drop,” says Water minister Masagos Zulkifli.

————————————————-

So we can’t trust the word of a PAP minister even when he makes a statement in parly.

Sad.

AHTC accounts: WP outsources decision to recover monies

In Corporate governance on 23/02/2017 at 7:45 am

AHTC chairman Pritam Singh said in a statement on Friday (Feb 17) that the Workers’ Party-run town council has been studying KPMG’s Past Payments Report since it was issued on Oct 31, 2016 and “while AHTC’s key officials have a different perspective from the audit team on key aspects of the report, AHTC believes that it is in the interests of AHTC and its residents to appoint an independent panel to review the findings and take such action as deemed appropriate to safeguard AHTC’s interests”.

CNA

So what will happen if the independent panel appointed to review the findings of a KPMG report agrees with the findings and recommendations of KPMG? KPMG said the town council had “serious flaws” in governnace and had made improper payments amounting to millions of dollars to third parties. It recommended that the amounts be recovered.


What else the report said

The KPMG report said the town council’s “failed control environment exposed public funds to the potential for misappropriation and civil or criminal breach of trust, and that the Town Council may potentially look to the Town Councillors for the recovery of losses arising from any breaches of their fiduciary duties”.

——————————————————-

The WP TC members would at the very least be shown to be a bunch of cocks who don’t do accounting.

So one assumes that the WP has a plan.

So are the WP TC members that confident they can get the independent committee to see things from the WP’s perspective?

Three professionals were appointed to the panel following consultation with HDB.They are panel chairman Philip Jeyaretnam SC, and members Mr N Sreenivasan SC and Mr Ong Pang Thye (managing partner of KPMG LLP).  The Court of Appeal also approved of the panel.

Interesting a man from KPMG is part of the team reviewing KPMG’s report.

Bit of ownself check ownself ain’t it?

So what weed are the WP TC members smoking? Do they really think the panel will say the findings and recommendations of the report are rubbish?

Maybe they have new information that they think will make the panel say that the report is no longer relevant in the light of the new info? Possible but not probable.

As I see it, the decision to get a “independent” panel to decide on the actions the AHTC has to take as regards the report  shows that the WP TC members have hoisted the white flag. They have no more room for manoeuvre, having run out of road. The TC members have to make the decision to start the recovery process, or explain why they are refusing to attempt recovery.

If the former, there will be unhappy suppliers and service providers who may have tales to tell. If the latter, the stench will get worse at the very least. It is likely that a “concerned” resident (Chen Show Moa?) living in the area would ask the courts to compel the WP TC to recover the monies.

At worse, a grass-root activist will sue the TC members in their personal capacity. The 15k a month each wanking MP gets will be insufficient recompense in such a event.

So better to get others to make the decision to recover monies. Can tell all those suppliers, “Not our decision leh.”

 

 

 

 

Fowl play: Cull in haste, repent at leisure

In Environment on 20/02/2017 at 5:43 am

TOC and TMG*, both occupying locales at the more responsible end of the cowboy town that is our cyberspace, created a fuss about the culling of the fowl around Sin Ming Avenue.

I really don’t know if they were Red Junglefowl, as both TOC and TMG, claimed; or as the AVA seemed to imply domesticated chickens gone feral or mixed breed. It would be a shame if Red Junglefowl were culled.

Two interesting observations: the willingness of the anti-PAP 30% to believe an ang moh even if he’s no expert, and how cock the AVA can be.

Ang moh always tua kee

Waz interesting is that these publications and the S’poreans they quoted, and those other S’poreans jumping on the band wagon and criticising the AVA and the PAP administration, seems to have accepted the word of an ang moh that the fowl were Junglefowl, even though he admitted that no tests were conducted. He directed a series** that among other animals featured these chickens:

Andrew Scott, director of Wild City in response to the news of the culling commented, “I directed the episode of the TV programme “Wild City”, and we featured those very birds. I have very fond memories of the week we spent filming on Sin Ming Ave. We filmed all over the island for that show, but that street always stuck in my mind as the most charming and characterful place we visited. I would dispute the assertion that they are “chickens, not jungle fowl” – They are exactly the same species (only genetic testing would be able to differentiate wild type fowl from domesticated birds, and even then the difference is debatable).

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2017/02/03/wild-city-features-sin-ming-ave-chickens-as-endangered-red-junglefowl/

He expert meh? Ang moh tua kee isit?

AVA: a bunch of headless chickens

But let’s face it, AVA’s response to the “noise” has been pathetic. Its latest attempt at damage control got this response in the Forum section of our constructive, nation-building ST:

No consistency in AVA statements

The letter by Dr Yap Him Hoo, director-general of the Agri-food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) (“AVA concerned about bird flu risk, not noise of chickens“; Feb 15), contradicts an earlier statement by Ms Jessica Kwok, AVA group director of the animal management group (“Free-ranging chickens may be culled“; Feb 2), that the authority had received requests to manage the free-ranging chicken population due to noise pollution.

The impression that the AVA took action because of noise was, therefore, not due to various media reports. Rather, it was created by the AVA itself.

With such contradictory statements from two high-profile figures in the AVA, what is the public to believe?

It gives the impression that the AVA top management is not working as one.

Dr Yap’s statement that the chickens were at risk of being exposed to bird flu from migratory birds, as the chickens could catch the disease through direct contact with them or through their droppings, is flawed.

Free-ranging chickens are few in number, compared to the many pigeons, mynahs and crows congregating at public eating places, snatching food and leaving their droppings all over the place.

Doesn’t this group of birds pose a greater risk of being carriers of bird flu, should there be an outbreak in Singapore?

It would be more credible for the AVA to come up with long-term measures to solve the pigeon, mynah and crow problem here, instead of culling chickens as a stop-gap measure.

These other birds are not only a health risk, but a noise nuisance as well.

Ronnie Lim Ah Bee

Background for those not in S’pore during CNY

The AVA culled some noisy chickens claiming that they were a bird-flu risk. It said that they were not Red Junglefowl as alleged by the usual suspects.

However someone unearthed a series shown here in 2015 which was made with the support of the MDA**.

In a segment of one a two-part series on wild life in the city-state, Sir David Attenborough said that the chickens  around Sin Ming Avenue were Red Junglefowl, the ancestors of domesticated chickens. Footage showed the chickens had grey legs and that they can fly; domesticated chickens have yellow legs and can’t fly. But please note that chup cheng chicken, the result of crossing breeding, could have these characteristics.

The video got the feathers flying and the anti-PAP cybernuts upset.

At the very least, the AVA should cull fire those responsible for its response for the culling especially as it seems that they were not aware of the series.


*Waz interesting is that a TMG tua kee (no not the wannabe be Sith Lord turned Jedi) is trying hard to show that AVA misled the public about the reason for the cull, although the facts show otherwise.

**

The two-part series produced by local company Beach House Pictures and supported by MDA through the Public Service Broadcast funding, is part of a series of seven SG50 documentaries. The first episode titledUrban Wild, which focuses on the wildlife who have made their homes among Singapore’s urban landscape, features civets in roof cavities and wild otters at the Marina Reservoir. The second episode,Hidden Wild, takes audiences to Singapore’s hidden wildlife spots like the coastal wetlands and offshore islands, which have become thriving habitats to a variety of creatures.

https://www.imda.gov.sg/infocomm-and-media-news/sg-spotlight/2015/3/singapores-wild-city

 

 

 

Why SPF and their minister should not be so defensive about criticism

In Uncategorized on 19/02/2017 at 11:17 am

I was reading this about  “Funny”cock ups by the British police http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-38861475.

The article ended by reporting  Professor David Wall, of Leeds University’s Centre for Criminal Justice Studies as saying”I think we look to police as a source of authority and to help us when we are in trouble and I guess that we expect them to be a little more perfect than the rest of us are,” adding this is only because their actions have “more serious consequences for society and public safety.

This is precisely why the Minister for Pets and the police should not be defensive when ordinary S’poreans (not people like Ms Teo Soh Lung and her groupies who never have a good word about the police) query the actions of the police: we trust the police and have high expectations.

Happily for people like Ms Teo, the minister and police undermine the trust we have by being defensive. Sad (((

 

Will CEO of TLC behave in the recommended PAP way?

In S'pore Inc on 09/02/2017 at 6:06 am

The PAP administration likes to say that S’poreans should follow the Japanese way accepting responsibility for cock-ups: apologise and, where necessary, resign.

So will the CEO of Surbana Jurong follow the Japanese practice, after the  Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say on Tuesday (Feb 7) scolded Surbana Jurong in Parliament describing the company’s behaviour as unacceptable? The GLC had publicly labeled the 54 employees it sacked as poor performers,

—————————–

Surbana Jurong is a Singaporean government-owned consultancy company focusing on infrastructure and urban development. It was formed in June 2015 with the merger of Surbana International Consultants and Jurong International Holdings. It is wholly owned by Temasek Holdings and has about 4,000 employees

Surbana’s labelling of sacked staff as poor performers ‘unacceptable’

Surbana Jurong group chief executive Wong Heang Fine said: “We cannot allow our 1 per cent of poor performers to continue to affect the rest of the 99 per cent of staff who are performing.” The company later said the process could have been better managed after even the running dog that is NTUC KPKBed.

———————————————————————

“To the best of my recollection, this is the first time that an employer conducted such a major termination exercise and … labelled the workers as ‘poor performers’. I think as Manpower Minister, it’s something I do not find acceptable.”

Adding that one’s work environment and a company’s human resource practices may be contributing factors to performance: “I hope we will not come across another case where a company does a major termination and labels employees as having poor performance publicly.”

He said Surbana Jurong’s management and the unions reached an agreement on ex gratia payment, “which in our view is a fair outcome for the affected employees”.


The law on unfair dismissal

If an employee files an appeal of unfair dismissal to the Ministry of Manpower (MOM), the ministry will first mediate. Should that fail, MOM will conduct an inquiry and require the employer to produce evidence to justify the termination.

If the employer is unable to substantiate claims that the affected employee’s performance is poor, the employer may be ordered to reinstate the employee or provide compensation. If it does not comply, it can be prosecuted.

By settling Surbana Jurong has effectively admitted that it cocked-up.

——————————————————–

Will the CEO accept Japanese style responsibility for cock-up? Or will it be usual “move on” that so discredits our so-called meritocracy system? Sadly the latter is more probable.

The PAP believes that “All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others”:

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/07/21/why-khaw-vikram-must-commit-hari-kiri/

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/learn-from-japanese-set-example-leh-elites/

After all, a Surbana Jurong spokesperson said the matter had been resolved “amicably” with the unions, adding “It is currently reviewing our performance management processes to improve the system.”

This means that some S’porean human resources manager is going to get the sack (Replaced by a Peenoy or Arneigh FT? Cheaper leh.), while the CEO will continue smiling when he gets his monthly CPF statement like Lim Swee Say.

Sad!

 

Really? “Singapore Says Asian Growth Helps Offset U.S. Trade Threat”

In Economy on 07/02/2017 at 4:31 am

(Or “EDB does alternative facts”)

“A lot of our manufacturing here is to address the needs and opportunities in Asia.”

“Singapore Says Asian Growth Helps Offset U.S. Trade Threat” 

Erm. A lot of the opportunities and needs in Asia come about as a result from the ultimately exporting to the US of A.

Here’s a chart from the Bloomberg article

Juz google “Export data” and

— China’s main export partners are the United States (18% of total exports), Hong Kong (15%), the European Union (16%, of which Germany, the UK and the Netherlands account for 3% each), ASEAN countries (12%, of which Vietnam accounts for 3%), Japan (6%) and South Korea (4%)

— Malaysia’s main export partners are: Singapore (14%), China (13%), European Union (10%), Japan (9.5%), the United States (9.4%) and Thailand (6%).

Need I say more?

But there’s more: the chart below (courtesy of Chris K) shows that we are among those countries that will suffer the most from the imposition of a US border tax. But we’ll be happy that M’sia will be more badly affected. As will Thailand and Vietnam.

Image may contain: text

Again the effects on big exporters to the US like China and M’sia will also affect their trade with us.

So what cock is the chairman of the EDB talking? And what weed is he smoking?

Finally remember when reading the u/m from EDB remember what I said recently about FDI numbers: FDI does not always result in new physical investments, with new jobs to match it. Often FDI is the transfer intangible assets for the purpose of lowering corporate tax.

Investment commitment levels in Singapore are expected to be similar to those seen in 2016 amid uncertainties in the global economic environment, the Economic Development Board (EDB) said on Thursday (Feb 2).

At its 2016 Year-in-Review press conference, EDB said it will seek to consolidate Singapore’s position as a high value manufacturing base by capturing opportunities in advanced manufacturing. It will do this by anchoring lead adopters of advanced manufacturing in Singapore, while building up an ecosystem of suppliers and enablers to develop technologies and solutions, the agency added.

And

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/singapore/2017-investments-likely-to-remain-similar-to-last-year-s-edb/3486220.html

Btw, maybe FDI levels are projected to remain static because MNCs are expected to cut back their use of tax havens following public outrage in the West after revelations of the tricks (not all legal) they use to mininise tax?

Luxembourg is already expecting this and if it happens there, it’ll happen here. Remember Oz miners are on the rack after it was revealed that they use S’pore to minise taxes on their exports of minerals from Oz?

The difference between “alternative news” and “fake news”

In Media on 24/01/2017 at 5:30 pm

The “We love Hilary. Trump sucks” equates the term “alternative news” (used by Trump’s right hand woman when talking about the size of the inauguration crowd) with “fake news”. They have a point on the issue of the size of the crowds going by the photos.

But isn’t this a good example of the proper use of the term “alternative news”?

Mr Spicer said it was “unquestionable” that Mr Trump’s inauguration “was the most watched” ever.

Although Ronald Reagan’s was top in terms of television figures, attracting 41.8 million viewers, Mr Spicer pointed out that the 30.6 million who tuned in to see Mr Trump take the oath of office did not include the millions who watched the ceremony online.

(Extract from a BBC report)

The usual suspects are dissing this argument but really I can’t follow what they are trying to say. All I know is that they are not calling this “fake news” and this I suspect makes them madder.

The Trumpeters are telling a lot of lies but the “We love Hilary” MSM (because they are so emotional that Trump Triumphant cocked a snook at them and won) are letting the Trumpeters get away with murder.

From NYT Dealbook on another reason ehy MSM is so upset:

DRIVEN TO DISTRACTION
Breaking down the stage after President-elect Donald J. Trump’s news conference on Wednesday. As new would-be scandals rapidly follow older ones, many fail to gain traction.

Trump Shows How to Smother a Scandal: With a Bigger Story

As one would-be controversy rapidly succeeds another, it’s clear that there’s only so much the news media and the public can focus on at once.

Congrats TOC, but pls be careful

In Uncategorized on 18/01/2017 at 5:44 am

TOC cocked a snook at the PAP administration and won a famous victory, courtesy of the Court of Appeal. Well done.

But this will only make the Dark Side strike back and they have a dagger furnished by FTs (?) in TOC.

Yang also revealed that he and his wife Ai Takagi (and co-director of TRS) were slapped with over 200 copyright infringement claims by Singapore Press Holdings. He said unlike other large companies such as Yahoo! Inc which also faced similar copyright infringement claims in the past by SPH, this impacted their lives directly in a major way.

This was published by TISG (The Idiots — S’pore, or is it The Indians — S’pore?) in late December. Ironically one of those who seemingly do cut and paste from SPH is none other than The Idiots — S’pore.

Well I don’t really care about The Idiots — S’pore getting sued and being taken to the cleaners by SPH, even if it’s now sounding like the WP’s Hammer Online even though (or perhaps?) a tua kee there boasts of the following:

Among his current editorial clients are NTUC Media, Petir (PAP magazine), North-East CDC and South-West CDC.

(More.)

But I do care about Terry’s Online Channel (or TOC) being getting sued and being taken to the cleaners by SPH. Its fought the good fight and keeps on fighting.

TOC writers really should take care in their articles. Often the pieces look like they’ve been lifted off ST with very minor alternations. Even the story angles are the same as ST’s.

___

Comment from TOC reader (one Adtian Tan) on a piece on water supply from Johor:

TOC, somethink to think about. What value does this article add to the news MSM published a day or two ago? Could apply to a lot of recent stuff from TOC on news that MSM covered a day or two earlier. It’s the different angle we want. If can’t find it, then don’t waste yr resources and our time.

____

There is room to use ST reported facts in a creative way. Richard Wan (ex-TRE editor who retired after GE 2015) was good at it. He used ST reported facts but gave different perspectives.

Terry himself is pretty good at this when he does it. But sadly his in-house writers (cheap FTs isit?) are unable to do this to save their lives.

Maybe Richard Wan should come of retirement and write for TOC?

Whatever, come on TOC etc, the constructive, nation-building media is full of useful, precious nuggets that can be mined and used to undermine the PAP’s hegemony. All that’s needed is intelligent cutting and pasting. But that requires thinking.

Another day, I’ll make constructive, nation-building suggestions that I hope TOC considers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ong Ye Kung: A study in failure

In Political governance on 17/01/2017 at 4:48 am

If his appointment as minister, and rise and rise since 2012,  is the PAP’s idea of meritocracy, give me nepotism any day (See last para of article in link).

He was Executive Secretary of NTWU (Nation Transport Workers’ Union) and a non-executive director of SMRT when SMRT’s S’porean and FT drivers had problems with salaries or working conditions. Even Zorro Lim (his ex boss) seemed to criticise him.

Here’s something I wrote after he resigned from NTUC in 2012. Slightly edited.

Meritocracy’s feet of clay: Ong Ye Kung

Our nation-building constructive media are ignoring the white elephant in the space where of the circles of TLCs/GLCs, PAP, NTUC and the civil service meet: sometimes also known as S’pore Inc.

Once upon a time, Ong Ye Kung, was S’pore Inc’s poster boy of meritocracy.

Just in April 2011, before the May GE, our nation-building constructive media praised him as an example of meritocracy at work. Son of a Barisan Socialist MP (and no friend of one LKY), he was a scholar* who rose to a senior civil service post**, then became a senior NTUC leader, and then a PAP MP candidate. It was whispered that he was Zorro Lim’s anointed successor as NTUC chief; and was tipped by ST as a future candidate for ministerial office. He did became the NTUC’s Deputy Secretary-General in June 2011.

But by then his slave worker drawn chariot had gotten stuck in the mud . He was a member of George Yeo’s losing Aljunied GRC team. Worse was to follow in 2012: the wheels came off his chariot of gold and ivory and he was thrown-off, and cast into the darkness and mud and became a person that the constructive, nation-building media knew not.

Earlier this year, SMRT’s S’porean drivers made known publicly their unhappiness over pay proposals that had his endorsement as Executive Secretary of NTWU (Nation Transport Workers’ Union). As he was also a non-executive director of SMRT, if he were an investment banker, a US judge would have rebuked and censured him for his multiple, conflicting roles.

Then he resigned, effective last month, from NTUC to “join the private sector”.

In perhaps a farewell, good-riddance gesture, FT PRC workers went on strike (illegally) and we learnt:

— they lived in sub-standard accommodation (SMRT admitted this);

— unlike most SBS FT PRC drivers, most of SMRT’s PRC drivers were not union members; and

— Ministry of Manpower reprimanded SMRT for its HR practices.

All this reflects badly on Ong: NTUC’s Deputy Secretary-General, Executive-Secretary of NTWU and SMRT non-executive director. And on the system that allowed him to rise to the top. After all his ex-boss said the following reported on Friday, which given Ong’s multiple roles in SMRT, can reasonably be interpreted as criticism of Ong:

In his first comments on the illegal strike, which saw 171 workers protesting over salary increases and living conditions, the Secretary-General of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) said the labour dispute “shouldn’t have happened” and “could have been avoided”. [So where was Ong: looking at his monthly CPF statements and being happy?]

NTUC is thus reaching out to SMRT’s management to persuade them “to adopt a more enlightened approach to embrace the union as a partner”, he added. [Hello, NTUC’s Deputy Secretary-General was on SMRT’s board, so what waz he doing?]

Mr Lim, who was speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the Labour Movement Workplan Seminar, cited the example of SMRT’s rival SBS Transit where nine in 10 of its China bus drivers are union members. Only one in 10 of SMRT’s China bus drivers are union members, according to union sources. [So, why didn’t Ong advise SMRT to help unionise these FTs, and if he did, why didn’t NTUC push harder ehen SMRT refused?]

SBS Transit’s management “recognised the constructive role of the union”, while union leaders “played the role of looking after the interests of the drivers”, said Mr Lim.

“And as a result … they work very closely as one team, it’s a win-win outcome. In terms of how workers are being treated and respected, how management are responsive, how they work together, I think it’s a kind of model that we ought to see more and more in Singapore.” (Today)

Apparently, Ong is supposed to join his father-in-law’s property development business: but with this revelations, it should come as no surprise if his in-law’s family has reservations about him: he might mismanage and upset the workers. Property development companies are fragile because of their leverage: they can’t afford executives who can’t execute***.


————————————————————————————–

And here’s another post (Links to TRE outdated):

TRE says it all about Ong Ye Kung, NTUC & SMRT

In Humour on 10/04/2013 at 6:54 am

TRE posted these articles in the following order on its front page.
NTUC claims credit for unionising SMRT PRC bus drivers

NTUC claims credit for unionising SMRT PRC bus drivers

In a recent hour-long phone interview with 2 journalists from Yahoo! Singapore, former SMRT bus driver…
185 SMRT PRC bus drivers had petitioned MOM in 2010

185 SMRT PRC bus drivers had petitioned MOM in 2010

 

Ong Ye Kung as a director of SMRT should have known about the plight of the bus drivers. But as union leader of the bus driver, he did nothing. And NTUC is now claiming credit for unionisg PRC drivers? Why now only after a strike? But let’s be fair, maybe NTUC leaders are like the many readers of TRE who “hate” all things PRC. See all the negative stories TRE carries from the Western media about China which pander to these readers.


—————————————————————————————————

And if anyone is wondering about the origins and meaning of the term “feet of clay”:

Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.

This image’s head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,

His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. (Daniel 2:31-33)

And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.

And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.

And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. (Daniel 2:41-43)

————————————————————————————-

*From 1993 to 1999, he was in the then Ministry of Communications, where he helped develop the Land Transport White Paper and was part of the team which established Singapore’s Land Transport Authority. Taz right, he was there at the beginning of the great SMRT cock-up.

**He was the Principal Private Secretary to one Lee Hsien Loong, then became the CEO of the Singapore Workforce Development Agency.

***He joined Keppel. And as a shareholder, I’m very glad he took a big salary but did nothing. He’s the fourth kind of guy described below.

General Freiherr von Hammerstein-Equord, a chief of the German Army between the two world wars, is reoted to have said “I divide my officers into four classes as follows: The clever, the industrious, the lazy, and the stupid. Each officer always possesses two of these qualities.

Those who are clever and industrious I appoint to the General Staff. Use can under certain circumstances be made of those who are stupid and lazy. The man who is clever and lazy qualifies for the highest leadership posts. He has the requisite nerves and the mental clarity for difficult decisions. But whoever is stupid and industrious must be got rid of, for he is too dangerous.”

 

TJS should listen to the Toilet Man

In Uncategorized on 19/12/2016 at 4:36 am

TJS spams at regular intervals using his Facebook stuff a closed group on Facebook of mainly moderate S’poreans who in the main voted for Dr Tan Chin Bok and would vote for him if allowed to  to. They understand economic trade-offs and are more than happy to accept lower growth, in return for FT controls. They kicked out Jason Chua of FATPAP with him accusing them of criminalising support for the PAP.

His stuff annoys many of them. They don’t like his TRE, juvenile cybernut style of personal attacks on the PM without supporting evidence, only his rants, as they see it. Recently one Adrian Tan responded by posting my piece about him being a cybernut, adding that TJS’s like Roy Ngerng. Must invite that guy to guest write here. My kind of guy as the posting seems to have annoyed TJS (see below).

A longish thread ensured with TJS responding. He accused commenters of making personal attacks (Cannot imitate him isit? Waz sauce for an elite like him, not sauce for plebs who don’t live in bungalow houses like him isit?)

In the thread (and another related)  there were comments from the Toilet Man (Jack Sim) rebuking TJS.

——————————————–

Jack Sim, Founder of World Toilet Organization (WTO), has been a successful businessman since age 24. Having achieved financial success in his 40s, Jack felt the need to change his direction in life and give back to humanity – he wanted to live his life according to the motto “Live a useful life”. Jack soon left his business and embarked on a journey that saw him being the voice for those who cannot speak out and fighting for the dignity, rights and health for the vulnerable and poor worldwide.

http://worldtoilet.org/who-we-are/founder/

——————————————————

Three stand out, and I hope TJS* takes to heart Jack’s comments (though from his response to JS, I doubt it):

Why don’t you speak about the National Regeneration Plan more with the public instead of writing articles that are discouraging without any positive outcome?

And

Jee Say Tan I’ll avoid personal attack. The reason was your recent posts were personal attack on the PM without real substance. As many writers here have expressed they’ve seen nothing constructive in them as compared to your National Regeneration Plan. We’re all Singaporeans and want to see Singapore become strong and healthy. When we destroy our leaders we destroy ourselves. When we criticise or advise, we do it with good intention to make Singapore better. Our opposition parties must not merely oppose. It must offer better solutions.
Things like investing in the young start-ups is already done but without gumption as a national culture, these start-ups loses massive money for both government and investors. We need to go back to root causes. We need to embrace the people who wants to make Singapore strong. Not just people who merely want to benefit themselves

And on another thread:

I’ve now read Tan Jee Say”s National Regeneration Plan and felt he did have something useful to offer. I encourage him to stay on the constructive dialogue instead of merely saying sad things
 Adrian Tan added to the last:
Saw that. Well done. He does himself no credit with spam like this. One could argue that this spam reflects his true self.

TJS asked Adrian Tan to post a response of his as a response to the pirce on him. Tan wasn’t sure which one he meant even though TJS was pretty specific, but TJS never responded to his query. He most probably tot that Tan was trolling Tan.

It’s below. I decided to use it as part of a piece rather than let it languish as a comment

But note that he never answered my beef with him** (which was why Tan queried Tan, as he explained to me): that he, TJS, so cock as to think that we’ll get the chance to vote in the next PE.

TJS says

Participating in GE n PE is the only way of communicating alternative views n policies in public platforms n through main stream media. Many PAP old timers including ex-ministers have cheered me on n encouraged me to continue with my criticisms of PAP policies n practices as few who are familiar with government policies, dare to speak up esp those who do want to risk their million dollar salaries n high positions. If I n others had not spoken up , would PAP change their policies on immigration, housing, health, pioneer benefits etc. So be thankful to us who took part in GE n PE n spoke up for you n your benefits, your children n their benefits.

As I keep saying, the PAP is lucky in its enemies. With Mad Dog, TJS, Roy Ngerng, M Ravi, s/o JBJ, New Citizen Han Hui Hui and Goh Meng Seng as enemies, who needs friends?

So Chris K, Terry and other brave warriors, you sure you want to keep on fighting alongside these nuts?


*Because for all his oversized ego and failures to make it big time (What happened when he headed John Govett: it tanked), and doing the PAP’s work for free*** (think PE 2011) he has some interesting ideas for the betterment of S’pore.

**

It is vitally important that we elect a strong President, not a token one, next year to ensure that our reserves are used to benefit ordinary people, rather than provide life support to “natural aristocrats” and their cronies.

TJS must be deluded to think we’ll get the chance to vote for the next president. LOL. But then TJS tot he had the votes to become MP and then president and then MP. The whipping his ass got (three times in row) must have affected his brains which doesn’t seem to reside in his skull.

I mean, the conventional wisdom among the thinking anti-PAP activists and cyberwarriors is that we’ll not get the chance to vote at the next PE.

Not I never argued that his standing for election was a waste of time.

***It’s alleged he never got his 30 pieces of silver for standing in PE 2011. Could that add to his bitterness?

Lips to teeth: US’s and S’pore’s position on Taiwan

In China on 12/12/2016 at 5:09 am

====================================

If the lips are gone, the teeth will grow cold
唇亡齿寒

is a chinese saying.

=========================

The US attitude to Taiwan since it was set by Jimmy Carter’s administration in 1979 could be described as constructive hypocrisy. America professes to support Taiwanese democracy and sells it arms to defend itself from its powerful neighbour, while at the same time adhering to a “one-China” policy and refusing to recognise Taiwan as an independent country.

FT

We don’t support Taiwanese democracy (In fact, the PAP and the constructive, nation-building media sneers at it afraid that the sheep S’porean Chinese voters will realise that Chinese can do democracy. Indians always have done democracy (The elites love to talk cock, sing song, steal from the poor  and forget about economic development: think India.) And the Malays don’t matter going by the PAP’s decision to reserve presidency for them every now and then).

And to my knowledge we doesn’t sells arms to Taiwan.

But S’pore adheres to a “one-China” policy and refuses to recognise Taiwan as an independent country. And oh yrs , we train out troops there and send our most advanced weaponry there,

We really old friend of China?

As Global Times right says:

Singapore should learn the lesson that, if it tries to challenge China on important issues, it has to be prepared to bear consequences.

Singapore has long attempted to serve as a bridge or middleman between China and the US, and the mainland and Taiwan. But this will by no means work in the future.

The bilateral relationship used to be based on private ties between former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping* and late Singaporean prime minister Lee Kuan Yew. But nowadays, a simply state-to-state relationship is more feasible.

There are reports that S’pore executives and business people living in China are worried that they will become the next victims of China’s anger. They only need to see what Lotte and K-pop singers are experiencing in China to see what can happen when China is angry with another govt. SGDaily’s FB wall has a FT article on waz happening to Lotte and K-pop singers in China: their balls are being squeezed hard, really hard.

Related article: http://www.scmp.com/business/article/2053679/weaponising-hong-kongs-free-port-status

====================

*And Jiang his successor too. Harry’s daughter once wrote in ST why Dr Goh Keng Swee’s state funeral had to wait because her dad tot he had to meet Jiang.

Remember at Harry’s funeral, no senior Chinese leader came.

Two global secular trends that will adversely affect us and PAP’s legitimacy

In Economy, Political governance, Property on 06/12/2016 at 4:36 am

The problem has been for the last eight years, there’s been no economic growth. What we saw travelling with the president-elect, at all these rallies, is that for the average American worker they’ve gone nowhere.

The Donald’s nominee tor Treasury Sec Steven Mnuchin

Well that nightmare for American workers, the Obama and Hilary mafia, their liberal supporters and the US MSM will be coming here soon for S’poreans and the PAP.

S’poreans know that the economy is slowing but most expect a rebound to normal times: hence property prices are holding up pretty well.

But there are two interconnected secular trends that will affect S’pore’s growth prospects: slower global trade caused in part by onshoring (companies making more products locally).

Until the 2008 global financial crisis, trade growth outpaced economic expansion in most years. But since 2012, the two growth rates have been roughly similar. The World Trade Organization forecast in September that global trade volumes in 2016 will increase by 1.7% on the year, compared with projected global economic growth of 2.2%.

Improved manufacturing technologies and rising income levels in emerging economies have reinforced this trend. Companies have become better able and more inclined to make products locally. Narrowing wage gaps between developing and industrialized countries have made the conventional system of producing goods in countries with cheap labor and exporting them to richer nations less attractive. Economies have also become more dependent on online services, for which shipping capacity is irrelevant.

 http://asia.nikkei.com/magazine/20161124-S.O.S/On-the-Cover/Shipping-lines-plunge-into-a-war-of-attrition

And The Donald’s warning to US companies to manufacture in the US will only help these trends.

The PAP has what is called “output legitimacy”. S’pore is a de-facto state in large part because of the PAP’s reputation (albeit waning what with cock-ups in public transport, public housing and PR) for competence, particularly in its handling of the economy and its ability to raise living standards.

Coming back to Steven Mnuchin

Wage increases and good jobs. Taz what the PAP needs to do to keep its share of the popular vote closer to 70% than to 60%. The two interconnected secular trends that will affect S’pore’s growth prospects (slower global trade caused in part by onshoring) will not help.

Temasek and GIC had better step up their game so that the PAP administration can make up (via welfare) for the fall in living standards if these trends persist (or worse strengthen): loss of jobs, low or non-existent wage increases (if not pay cuts) and the fall in property values.

Hopefully, the Oppo and others opposed to the PAP’s hegemony speak up to point that it’s S’poreans money that is being spent on welfare, so no need to be grateful to the PAP.

We paid for these PAP goodies in advance via forced savings: CPF contributions and Budget surpluses.

Halimah deserves better

In Political governance on 05/12/2016 at 4:32 am

Halimah Yacob was featured in a full-page spread in the inaugural edition of the revamped (now free) TNP last week. And that feature featured in last Friday’s ST. And known and rapid PAPpies are publicising the TNP feature on Facebook.

Starting the spin ahead of PE next year?

Actually I’d really be disappointed if she’s the chosen one.

She deserves better. IMHO she could have whipped Tan Cheng Bok’s ass in a straight fight. I’d have voted for her despite voting for TCB, and never ever voting PAP.

I wrote this in March this year

I pointed out that there was one Malay PAPpy who could thrash Dr Tan and that he and I would vote for that person: he had commended her in the past.

Yes the person in Halimah Yacob. Going by her credentials, she’d sew up the union, core PAP vote (“Any donkey so long as he or she is a PAP preferred donkey”) and wimmin vote. And because she’s such an intelligent nice, no-airs, capable and compassionate person, she’d get a big share of the swing vote. Ftr, we attended the same law postgraduate class in 1978.

My friend could only sputter, “Malay men won’t vote for her.” I said, “So what? The Malay wimmin, all wimmin, NTUC members, hard-core PAPPy voters and many swing voters will.” I added that I tot she could get more than 59% of the popular vote (i.e. more than Ong Teng Cheong in 1993)

Malay PAPpy that can thrash Chin Bock

She’s also consistent in her values. Examples: I think she was wearing the tudung in the late 70s (not hip then) when we were in the same post grad law course. And she toiled away in NTUC for many, many yrs before being talent spotted.

I mean PAP and NTUC so cock that they didn’t identify her earlier. I mean I was near early retirement when she was “spotted”.

I know, I know she sucks as a Speaker, openly campaigning for PAP candidates and is reported to discriminate against WP MPs. But let’s face it, she may be a good person but she’s a PAPpy running dog all the same.

But some running dogs have better attributes than others. Think Tharman the pedigree running dog as against the pariahs.

So I’ll still vote for her against TCB. After all he too was a running dog in his prime.

All PAP running dogs are to be despised, but some are to be despised less than others. I’d put Tharman, Haliman and Dr Tan among the less desposed.

Double standards: S’pore can change position, China cannot isit?

In China on 30/11/2016 at 4:33 am

(Or “Typical S’porean attitude: Actions have no consequences”)

China has made an official protest to Singapore over its military ties with Taiwan after nine Singaporean military vehicles were seized in Hong Kong. It’s very own ST, Global Times says “It is no longer reasonable for Singapore to continue … any kind of military exchange with Taiwan.”

Ordinary patriotic S’poreans (not juz PAP bootlickers) other than the China tua kees  are shouting that S’pore has always trained in Taiwan and China knows about it, so why the KPKBing by China.

Err why nationalistic S’poreans so cock? Don’t know this isit?

Singapore has strengthened its military ties with the US over the past year, agreeing to boost co-operation on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief missions as well as cyber-security. Singapore allowed US Poseidon surveillance aircraft to operate from the city-state last December.

And the US had based a naval vessel here that was specifically designed for operations in waters like the South China Sea. The vessel was withdrawn and not replaced.

And Ah Loong* has been pretty noisy about the need for the TPP and rule of law in the South China Sea. Both issues are important to S’pore but were used by the US to maintain US regional hegemony. The US defence secretary said that the TPP was worth to the US the addition of another US aircraft carrier to the US navy

——————

Rule of law what rule of law?

The US refuses to sign UNCLOS because it refuses to play by the rules of sua kes like the UN and PinoyLand. It reserves the right to do what it thinks is right (Usually this means “Might is right”).

But China did sign up and now refuses to abide by a decision of its highest tribunal. Why so stupid?

So if Ah Loong is genuine and consistent about wanting the rule of law in the South China Sea, he should say that the US is wrong to refuse to rarify UNCLOS.


S’pore has tilted towards the US, China has noticed it (see below) but China cannot change it’s mind isit?

So far I’ve not seem our MSM or social media tell us that the state-owned hawkish Global Times said in an editorial that S’pore was supposed to have suspended its military co-operation with Taiwan in 2012. “However, the recently detained vessel with its cargo of armoured vehicles reveals Singapore’s hypocrisy.”


My toes are laughing

“One thing in Chinese culture is you never forget your old friends … and surely in Chinese culture you appreciate this concept of loyalty to old friends”: Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan.

Old friends surely don’t allow US Poseidon surveillance aircraft to operate from their homes?

——————————————

And really as someone who thinks US global hegemony, is the least bad option (OK, Ok, it’s actually a lot better than the alternatives), I can’t argue with Global Times when it says “For quite some time, Singapore has been pretending to seek a balance between China and the US, yet has been taking Washington’s side in reality.”

Err didn’t realise that China so cock not to realise this until now? That stupid meh?


*For every prime minister like Lee Hsien Loong of Singapore, who can provide off-the-cuff a detailed and sophisticated tour d’horizon of the Asia-Pacific region, there is a boorish novice like Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte.

Insulting Trump’s “stupid” supporters is a lose-lose proposition

In Uncategorized on 26/11/2016 at 10:47 am

The extreme ultraliberal left can’t stop insulting the poor whites who voted for Trump. The latest tactic is to sneer at them for making card-carrying liberals richer. Here’s an example Cox: Liberal elite owe gratitude to Trump voters

And our very own liberal tua kee Donald Low keeps doubling down on using the word “stupid” to insult voters who vote against their economic interest.

Well they should stop for the sake of their own reputations.

Now, I’m sure people like Donald Low and Cox are proud to be called “arrogant”.

But would they like to be called “stupid” with evidence supporting the claim?

Stretching the arguments laid out by Cox to their logical conclusion, the extreme ultraliberal liberals are really stupid. They not only didn’t see Trump winning but they should have voted for Trump, not oppose him, given that he’s making them a lot richer relative to the white trash.

They’d argue that there are more important things than material well-being, and that they not are stupid for preferring racial and gender equality, poverty reduction or the right not to get killed by gun-toting white trash.

Well why then are they not willing to concede that the white trash too have good, valid reasons (trying to preserve their towns and societies, fear of terrorism or anger at being sneered and lied to) to vote against their own economic interest?

Seems that for many liberals what is sauce for goose is not sauce for the gander: Do what we tell you to do, not what we do.

One Harry Lee dismissed liberals out of hand as a bunch of wankers, talking cock and singing song. Seems he has a point.

Sad as in the S’pore context, the level of authoritarism  is so extreme that a good strong dose of liberal values would do the body politick, and economy no harm.

Triumphant: What the media “liberal” “experts” are keeping quiet about

In Media on 11/11/2016 at 5:43 am

(And media includes new media)

Trump did a bit better with blacks and Hispanics than Mitt Romney in 2012.

Women didn’t desert though there was a swing to Hilary. Predatory Trump better than a Liar and a Crook.

And while

Mr Trump ran as a champion of the country’s working class, but his support lay predominantly with those earning more than the country’s $56,000 median income. Mrs Clinton won 52:41 among voters earning less than $50,000 a year, according to exit polls. Mr Trump won narrowly among all income groups above that.

FT

The first two points show that the Democrats had a really lousy candidate.

The last point shows that Ariffin Sha is talking cock when he wrote

It’s funny how the people who would be most affected by Trump’s plans are the very people who voted for him. People, especially those who need the most help, do tend to vote against their own interests pretty often.

With deluded, uninformed young ang moh tua kees like him, the PAP is lucky in its enemies. With enemies like Ariffin, who needs friends?

China the paper tiger

In Banks, China on 06/11/2016 at 2:41 pm

New York’s banking regulator fined the Agricultural Bank of China US$215 million for a series of money-laundering violations and attempts to “mask” suspicious transactions. The bank is not contesting the fine.

As the Agricultural Bank of China of is owned by the Chinese state, this is as insulting to tChina as sailing a foreign warship sailing within 12 miles of a Chinese rock in the South China Sea.

And it isn’t even a US Federal agency that the bank is kow towing to. It’s a state agency that is giving China the bird and making it grovel.

What has RedBean and other China supremacists have to say?

Duterte the talk cock sing song Peenoy president should note that even China kow tows to a state agency.

KPMG report on AHTC: Notice the deafening silence?

In Corporate governance on 05/11/2016 at 9:24 am

But first some other observations:

Obvious that Low is in now the front man in fighting the PAP administration. Auntie and her babi are silent having made a hash of things last time round, he can’t hide behind them.

Not that he is any better. In fact he sounds like he’s auditioning to join the PAP’s Comedy Club for failed comedians where Tharman,PM, Hng Kiang are the founding members.

Low said the latest  KPMG report on Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) did not reveal more than what had already been set out in the Auditor-General’s report on 2015.

Err so can he point out where AGO report got ever say that

“While our work was not focussed on identifying potential criminal acts arising from theissues we observed, we are advised that, had the shortcomings … been committed deliberately, they could amount to criminal conduct, the
implications of which the Town Council should consider.”

And if similar how come instances are different from that of AGO report? He got read KPMG report mah?

Now as to the silence.

First there’s Auntie. How come she no say again, “Charge or sue us”? She said that last time.

And where’s Andrew Loh and the usual suspects who die die said WP is whiter than white?

Oh I forget Andrew Loh is PAPpy after realising that he has to pay “peanuts” for his by-pass because PAP so compassionate to poor gut like him even if he was anti-PAP.

But where are the others?

Got nothing to say isit? Because convinced that there are really irregularities?

Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”

Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”

Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”

Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”

Silver Blaze by  Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

 

Why Duterte keeps cursing, dissing US

In Currencies, Emerging markets on 05/11/2016 at 6:54 am

He’s frus because Pinoys more American than Americans while he personally hates America. Beecause he got buggered by an American Catholic priest?

Let me explain.

Filipinos hold a more favourable opinion of the US (92%) than even Americans themselves says the respected Pew Research Centre. And only 22 per cent of them trust China “very much” while  76% of Filipinos trusted the US “very much”, another poll says.

Bring on the hamburgers and Coke and forget the paos, siew mais and Chinese tea.

Taz why the US can continue to ignore Duterte and treat him as another talk cock sing song Peenoy macho man who should be made aware that even a US state can beat up a bank owned by PRC: NY state fines China’s AgBank US$215m over money laundering violations. Bank is paying fine.

And why China would be wise not to throw money his way, the way they did to Hugo Chavez. (Btw, they are regretting their decision to be generous to Venezuela).

Whatever when the hegemon is annoyed, Peeso collapses and US MNCs don’t invest.

 

Peenoy English

In Uncategorized on 23/10/2016 at 4:54 pm

Separation from the US means breaking away from a “mindset of dependency and subservience”: Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Perfecto Yasay.

Duterte now says he only said “separate” not “sever” ties. “It is not severance of ties. When you say severance of ties, you cut diplomatic relations. I cannot do that,” Duterte.


No Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin consciously uncoupling, then. Juz the usual Peenoy BS.

———————

I tot Peenoys pride themselves on their ability to speak English fluently? They mangle the English language.

A S’porean who has Pinoy ties says on FB that Duterte has “delivered”. When I asked what he has delivered as he can only killed less than 3,000 Pinoys when he wanted to kill 3m, he told me to find out for myself. I said his failure to send me a link on what Duterte has “delivered” allows me to draw my own conclusions. It’s all a lot of BS.

Well his armed forces have the right attitude: they ignore him .

Amos again in the news/ Amos the wise?

In Uncategorized on 18/10/2016 at 4:57 am

Update on 20 October: CAN (a bunch of ang moh tua kees that Amos had dissed for not helping him: see link below) has alleged that he got beaten up in Changi Prison by fellow inmates.) Well, well.

We have also been informed that he has been threatened, slapped on the back and kicked while he was climbing up the stairs. A complaint has been lodged with the Prison Authorities, who had efficiently replied to say they will look into the matter. Amos’ mother has put in an urgent request for Amos to be moved to Home Detention.

Mother Mary’s full of BS. Home Detention so she can clean his ass for him?

Yup, he and she and made their beds, and must lie in the said beds.

————————————–

But first let’s talk about how the alternative media has been covering Amos recently. Huh you may ask? Coverage what coverage? And you are absolutely right.

Amos Yee went to prison on 13 October. Alternative media was silent except for a report by TRE.

Self-proclaimed genius teenage blogger Amos Yee is back in prison and will remain in there for at least the next 4 weeks (after remission).

Amos Yee (Photo: Terry Xu)

The 17-year-old was slapped with 8 charges, which were: 6 charges under section 298, and 2 charges under section 174 of the Penal Code.

It went on to list the charges.

Otherwise this once (and future hero?) of the alternative media, the ang moh tua kees and the cybernuts received no publicity showing that this ang moh kay poh was talking cock

The teenager’s latest trial was closely watched by rights groups, who argue that the case threatens freedom of expression.

Phil Robertson of Human Rights Watch said Singapore now needs to review its approach in dealing with cases like Yee’s, who is likely to benefit from the publicity.

“Every time the authorities go after him, it just adds to his online audience,” said Mr Robertson in an email.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37505951

The ang moh was talking after he was sentenced to 38 days jail beginning on  Oct 13

Well going by on online buzz about Amos, he’s wrong about. There isn’t any buzz

As I’ve said before “The anti-PAP  caravan moves on”. Amos has had his fifteen minutes of fame. Next celebrity please.

As for the wisdom of Mother Mary’s boy fantastic, a few weeks ago he posted

.
Know what, I am getting sick of my long hair after 2 years, I think I’ll cut it short. Fortunately for me they offer free haircuts in prison

Well maybe he’s learning wisdom (something dad said he lacked): liking what’s going to happen anyway.

Next he’ll embrace going into NS? LOL.

But maybe he was faking his wish to cut his hair. Putting on a brave face. Only time will tell if he’s acquired wisdom or not.

 

Meritocracy? No leh Cosiness

In Political governance on 10/10/2016 at 5:43 am

General Paper question in the year 2065:

In S’pore in 2016, there was “cosiness”, not the meritocracy claimed by the bourgeois fascist dictatorship led by bureaucrat monopolist capitalists. The system rewarded mediocrity or even failure if one happened to be in the “right” circle.

Discuss.

==================

The FT reported in October 2016 that a group of neo-Maaoists held a secret meeting recently and denounced the present system in China. Their manifesto was a call for revolution to overthrow the current system, which they claimed had evolved into a “bourgeois fascist dictatorship led by bureaucrat monopolist capitalists”.

=====================

A student wrote the following essay that won the Mad Dog Chee prize that the first non-PAP PM, Dr Paul Anantharajah Tambyah, set up to commemorate Dr Chee.

Text of essay:

A columnist from the capitalist supporting Financial Times, Janan Ganesh, in 2016. wrote:

“Britain is not corrupt, as such. Laws on bribery and embezzlement are not routinely broken. The country does well in transparency rankings.

But what it lacks in venality, it makes up for in cosiness. Insiders look after each other and mediocrities fail upward, or at least sideways. The elite is only half-porous: it is possible to get in but not to fall out. There are plenty of second acts in these British lives. There is always a commission to chair, a university to head, a seat to take in a second chamber that now has almost 800 members keeping London’s livery tailors in profit. This is public service as a parallel welfare state for good eggs.”

Sounded like S’pore in 2016, it seemed to S’poreans who read the FT article. This cosiness wasn’t just a figment of the imagination of the anti-PAP cybernuts who helped the ruling Peoples’ Action Party’s maintain its grip on power (With enemies like them to alienate the swing voters, the PAP didn’t need friends).

The then PAP PM said that ministers who failed cannot be chucked out just like that. Their exits had to be “managed”.  He said this after two ministers (the transport and public housing ministers) resigned after the PAP’s GE 2011 “defeat”. The “defeat” (only 60% of the popular vote voted PAP) was attributed to  voters’ unhappiness with public housing prices and public treansport deficiencies.

In 2016, an ex-CEO of NOL, a shipping company (scholar, paper general and a Temasek MD) after losing his job when NOL was taken over got a cushy sinecure as a director of SPH, the owner of the media outlets that parroted thr PAP administration’s line.

And then there was Desmond Kwek the CEO of SMRT, a public transport company, another paper general, who kept his job despite failing to make the trains run on time.

I’ll let an alternative media outlet of the time, TRE, describe what happened to someone in the “right” circle who really failed in 2016

Cock-ups after Cock-ups

Mr Chew, who was previously with the Public Utilities Board (PUB) and Navy, joined LTA barely 2 years ago in October 2014.

During his two year term at LTA, Mr Chew presided over multiple cock-ups including the collapse of a temporary structure at the Bugis DTL work site which killed two workers, the discovery of extensive defective trains from China and attempt to secretly ship them back to their manufacturer, and the failure to resolve the perennial problem of taxi shortages on the roads.

http://www.tremeritus.com/2016/08/06/ltas-ceo-chew-men-leong-commits-harakiri/

TRE speculated:

In what appears to be a move to appease increasing public anger over the record-breaking failures of the public transport system, especially the SMRT, the Chief Executive Officer of the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has tendered his resignation yesterday (5th Aug).

Coffee shop gossips have it that the CEO has been ‘fingered’ as the ‘fall guy’ to take the blame for the countless failures in the public transport system and did not resigned voluntarily as Mr Chew claims.

“Who in his right state of mind would want to resign from a lucrative paying job that comes with so much authority?”, some uncles and aunties commented.

Some however, speculated that he has voluntarily committed ‘harakiri’ out of his own conscious [“conscience” is what he must have meant], following the foot steps of former Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew.

TRE went on to describe “cosiness” S’pore style:

Members of ‘men-in-white’ club never go jobless

The 48-year-old did not mention where he was heading for, but it is a known fact that members of the ‘men-in-white’ club will never go jobless and arrangement will be made for an alternate posting to some GLCs. It is believed that Mr Chew might join Singapore Technologies. [Chew had said he was going into the private sector.]

Only in a bourgeois fascist dictatorship led by bureaucrat monopolist capitalists would ST qualify as a private sector co. It was owned by the state.

Thankfully in 2026, Mad Dog Chee and Harry’s daughter (she was the chief priestess of the cult of worshippers of Harry Lee Kuan Yew, the founder of the PAP) brought the edifice of a bourgeois fascist dictatorship led by bureaucrat monopolist capitalists down, albeit at the cost of their own lives.

The subsequent general election brought Dr Paul Anantharajah Tambyah’s PAP Bahru (Slogan: “Whiter than White and a Lot More Compassionate”) remade S’pore into the compassionate place it is, with admittedly a standard of living today that is below of of London and NY (OK closer to that of Calcutta and Bombay) than today’s global cities of Rangoon, Shanghai and Hong Kong.

 

 

 

Three cheers for FAS’s cynicism

In Footie on 09/10/2016 at 9:41 am

I’m very happy that Fandi will be responsible for local youth football. See below* a comment by Edwin Tong MP who I did not realise until I read the FB u/m post was involved with the FAS.

But I cannot help but think that the bad publicity the FAS has been receiving over

— the proposed changes to its constitution;

— an AGM that was over almost as soon as it started;

— that there will teams contesting to run the FAS**and

— the “peanuts” ($70,000 a year) being spent on local footie compared to the high salaries of the top five officials (around $1.5m a year) and the millions amount spent on the Lions XII (money well spent in my view),

was responsible for this piece of good news for local football.

FAS needed some good publicity and what better way than to wheel out kampong boy made good who then fell on hard times and then recovered (whether with or without FAS’s help has been a point of contention and bad blood between the two***), and now has a FAS pension.

What do u think?

Here’s another question: Is Mah Bow Tan (Remember his 1998 call for S’pore to play in the 2010 World Cup?) advising China on its bid to win World Cup by 2031? This tot struck me when I read a BBC report that Chinese fans are outraged that China lost to Syria lessening its chances of playing in the next World Cup Thttp://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-37582501

 

——

*Edwin Tong
5 hrs ·
TNP website
·
I am very glad that we have managed to agree a long term deal with Fandi, to have him oversee youth football in Singapore over the next few years. In all our discussions, it was always made clear that the FAS wanted him to stay. And on his part, as he says, his heart was always set on staying, even as many good offers came pouring in for him. He grew up in the kampongs here. Didn’t start with much, but made such a difference to Singapore football when he was playing in the fabled No.17 shirt. Now, we look forward to Fandi inspiring a whole new generation of young, talented and precocious footballers in Singapore. All the best!

**Those of us who had dealings with Bill Ng in his stockbroking days can testify that he is a talk cock sing song artiste, No Action, Talk Only. He’s carried this over to footie mgt: witness his so-called bid for the storied Rangers FC, and the absence of his slate to run FAS at the AGM. He’s a used car salesman.

I predict that his slate will not materialise.

***For what’s it worth, I think FAS did help him financially. But he tot he deserved more.On that point I don’t know.

What Trump and our Harry have in common

In Uncategorized on 29/09/2016 at 4:57 am

 

Trump tower.jpg

LKY didn’t want anything to be named after him, while Trump wants his name on anything  “big” like Trump Tower (see pix). The Republican foreign policy establishment said nice things about Harry, while they cry at Trump’s comments.

LKY had life-long marriage, Trump is into his third marriage.

You’d think that there would nothing that LKY and the Donald have in common or would agree on. But you’d be wrong.

Children

They have two sons and one daughter, though Trump’s daughter is married and by all accounts is a normal person even though she admires (not worships) her father. His children work for the family business.

Attended elite universities

LKY was a graduate of Cambridge. The Donald graduated from the Wharton Business School.

Super Salesmen

Trump talks about “truthful hyperbole”. Before Harry became lord and master of all he surveyed from his Oxley Road house (built on a hill), he had to persuade the British and the voters to trust him and the PAP.

Recovered from knockdowns

Some of Trump’s businesses went bankrupt and he lost serious money. But he reinvented himself as a reality tv star. Our Harry failed to persuade the Malayan Malay and Chinese elites of a “Malaysian Malaysia” with him in charge.

The result was independence for S’pore, something he had argued was bad for S’pore’s prosperity.

Well he had a good cry on tv, then did his best to ensure that he and S’pore could prosper.

Use or the threat of  litigation 

No need to say much about our Harry’s love of litigation. But did you know Trump also is litigious?

Five years ago, I was part of a discussion panel on the popular Morning Joe talk show in the US when the issue of Donald Trump came up. A rowdy debate erupted and I cheerfully joked that Trump was a great businessman “barring a few bankruptcies” — and blessed with charisma even “with that hairpiece”. A few minutes later, Trump telephoned the show and demanded an on-air apology. Apparently, he was not just upset about the bankruptcy quip (he wanted to clarify that he has never personally gone bankrupt but “only” seen some of his companies go bust); he was also angry about the hair joke.

So, as we sat around the table on the TV set, one of the show’s hosts read a straight-faced legal apology to camera. “He might sue,” a reporter later explained to me, as I squirmed with embarrassment and wondered whether to laugh or cry.

(Gillian Tett in an FT magazine article)

Finally,

Views about Muslims

The most neutral thing that can be said about their views on Muslims is that they seem suspicious of people who happen to be Muslims ie people who profess Islam.

Trump had said Muslims should be barred from the US. He later dropped the idea when it was pointed out that this was unconstitutional. He changed it to ban anyone from a country where terrorism was rampant. He calls for the profiling of Muslims in the US.

LKY’s views on Muslims are on record. But if anyone forgot what they were please read on.

LKY’s views on Muslims as documented

Wikileaks released a cable by the US Embassy in Singapore reporting on the visit of Senator Hillary Clinton to Singapore in Jul 2005. The cable claimed that in my meeting with Senator Clinton, I had “characterized Islam as a ‘venomous religion’”.

This is false. I looked up MFA’s filenote of the meeting. Nowhere does it record me describing Islam as “venomous”, nor did I say anything which could have given that impression.

I did talk about extremist terrorists like the Jemaah Islamiyah group, and the jihadist preachers who brainwashed them. They are implacable in wanting to put down all who do not agree with them. So their Islam is a perverted version, which the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Singapore do not subscribe to.

I also pointed out that our Muslim leaders are rational, and that the ultimate solution to extremist terrorism was to give moderate Muslims the courage to stand up and speak out against radicals who have hijacked Islam to recruit volunteers for their violent ends.

(TOC)

And

Singapore’s presiding genius, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, on the failure of Muslim integration:

In the book, Mr Lee, when asked to assess the progress of multiracialism in Singapore, said: “I have to speak candidly to be of value, but I do not wish to offend the Muslim community.“I think we were progressing very nicely until the surge of Islam came, and if you asked me for my observations, the other communities have easier integration – friends, intermarriages and so on, Indians with Chinese, Chinese with Indians – than Muslims. That’s the result of the surge from the Arab states.”He added: ”I would say today, we can integrate all religions and races except Islam.”He also said: “I think the Muslims socially do not cause any trouble, but they are distinct and separate.”(Can’t remember the source of this quote)

But to be fair he then

issued a statement last night and said he stands corrected on how well-integrated Malay-Muslims are in Singapore, according to a Straits Times report.

He referred to the comments he made in the new book, Lee Kuan Yew: Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going.

He said: “Hard Truths was a book based on 32 hours of interviews over a period of two years.

“I made this one comment on the Muslims integrating with other communities probably two or three years ago. Ministers and MPs, both Malay and non-Malay, have since told me that Singapore Malays have indeed made special efforts to integrate with the other communities, especially since 9/11, and that my call is out of date.

“I stand corrected. I hope that this trend will continue in the future.”

Since the book was published, reactions from some Muslim groups were negative. Some said his remarks were unfounded while others called for him to apologise.

But Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that his perspective differed from MM Lee’s, which were the latter’s personal opinions.

During a breakfast session at the Yio Chu Kang Community Club on Jan 30, PM Lee said: “Muslims are a valued and respected community, who have done a good deal to strengthen our harmony and social cohesion.”

PM Lee added that his own views were that of the Government’s.

http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne+News/Singapore/Story/A1Story20110308-267055.html

Btw saw this http://singapore.coconuts.co/2015/03/27/outrage-ensues-muslim-community-over-praise-lee-kuan-yew-during-friday-sermons.

 

 

Trump, media manipulator extraordinaire

In Uncategorized on 26/09/2016 at 11:35 am

Large images of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump are seen on a CNN vehicle, behind asecurity fence, on September 24, 2014, at Hofstra University, in Hempsted, New York. The university is the site of the first Presidential debate on September 26, between Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump. / AFP PHOTO / PAUL J. RICHARDSPAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images

(Images of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on a television vehicle at Hofstra University, in Hempsted, New York, venue for the first Presidential debate. Sums up where I think they both should be.)

Later today, Trump the Donald and the “truthful hyperbole” King, and Lying, Crooked Hilary will debate or rather talk cock sing song.

Expect Trump to win big by entertaining the audience like one Reagan did many yrs ago: Mr Trump grasps a truth about today’s low-trust democracy that still eludes others. People want to be entertained. His mangling of the facts and distorting of the truth sadly won’t matter. It didn’t matter then, But Reagan ended up as a great president, though I doubt the Donald will.Reagan was a good governor of California, something the liberal media ignored.

A few weeks ago the FT carried a piece on Trump the media manipulator

“It was clear to me that Trump had his own vision of how to be nominated. It was not a vision I shared. He never took a single poll, he was shooting from his gut the entire time — no analytics, no targeting, no paid media of any kind. He decided to bet the ranch on a communications strategy that consisted of doing as many interviews as you could jam in one day, then framing his rallies as media events that enticed the cable channels to cover them in a kind of commercial worth millions of dollars that we don’t have to pay,” he says. “I didn’t think that could work.”

Roger Stone, Trump’s longest-surviving confidant tot it wouldn’t work and he’s an expert. Stone was a self-described “dirty trickster” for Richard Nixon’s infamous Creep (Committee to Re-elect the President), a campaign that culminated in the Watergate scandal.

But Hilary has done on a comedy show to get a little practice on entertaining the audience. http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37443618

Btw, the FT article had this bit about Nixon whom LKY admired (actually so do I too)

that in life when things don’t go your way, when you get knocked down, again and again, instead of quitting, you dust yourself off and start again.

“That’s the way Nixon was. He does not come from privilege. His gangster, bootlegger father is not buying him the presidency [as Stone alleges that Joe Kennedy did for JFK when he defeated Nixon in 1960]. Elites are soft — they don’t have the belly for the long fight. They didn’t want to see Vietnam to the end. There is also the subtext of inherited wealth.”

“People are unsatisfied, but we’re afraid of change”

In Political governance on 25/09/2016 at 5:33 am

True here too? Especially the bits about “Power and the state … are one and the same,” and “And any citizens’ participation in politics is not expected.”

Think of waz happening to the post of elected president here? The voters use a presidential election when there is one to cock a snook at the PAP administration. In return, the PAP has drawn up more convoluted fixes (think Nathan) rules, and tied itself in knots or avoiding the issues raised when arguing the case for changes in the qualifications to be a candidate.*

MARINA, a middle-aged Muscovite with dark hair and piercing eyes, is unhappy—about rising prices, rampant corruption and even Russia’s confrontation with the West. But she is not ready for a change of course. “People are unsatisfied, but we’re afraid of change,” she declares. “Gorbachev had some nice ideas, but see how that turned out? I don’t want Russia to be destroyed.” So it comes as no surprise that Marina, and most of her compatriots, voted for more of the same when they took to the polls on September 18th for elections to the Duma, the national parliament.

http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21707388-reshuffle-russias-security-services-may-follow-parliamentary-elections-vladimir-putins

And

Many complain of rising prices and falling wages. “You go into the store and your money gets you nothing,” says Marina (who declined to state her last name, quipping, “Tomorrow they’ll burn my car”). 

Doesn’t this reflect what many S’poreans in the 70% that voted for the PAP feel?

And

The new ministry and United Russia’s dominance of the Duma ought to end any illusion that the Russian system could allow resistance from within, argues Oleg Kashin, a prominent columnist. “Power and the state in Russia are one and the same,” he writes. “And any citizens’ participation in politics is not expected.”

Think of waz happening to the post of elected president here?

——————————————————————————–

*U/m quotes from the constructive, nation-building MediaCorp whose website suspiciously looks similar to N Korea’s internet: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37426725

The Minister for Pets said:

The commission highlighted the “tension” between the President’s two roles and suggested that an appointed body of experts could take over the custodial functions, while Parliament could appoint a President to serve as a unifying symbolic figure. But Mr Shanmugam pointed out: “If you look at the commission’s report, the commission recognise that if a person or body is not elected then they cannot really say no and block the Government.”

Among other recommendations, the commission recommended that the President be obliged to consult the Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA) before exercising his discretion on all fiscal matters. Nevertheless, the Parliament can override the President’s decision, with the level of CPA support making a difference to the Parliament majority needed. Referring to the CPA, Mr Shanmugam reiterated that the commission recognised that “this body of experts, because they are unelected, the best (they) can (do is) only delay (the decision) and Parliament can still override”. He added: “If you want to give real power then they have to be elected as the commission itself recognise”.

In his letter to the commission, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had said he appreciated the commission’s reasons for making the suggestion to consider reverting to a President elected by Parliament. But he stressed that “it would be difficult for a President to exercise custodial powers over the reserves and public service appointments, and veto proposals by the Government, without an electoral mandate”.

… also responded to critics who claimed that the EP changes were politically motivated. “All sorts of statements can be made but (I think they should) get back to basics and look at logic,” he said …

He said that people can disagree with the report, including whether elections are needed to choose a President. If there is a need for elections, it would be sensible to put in requirements for the candidates because the President will have to make important decisions that involve huge sums of money, for instance, he noted. “If you agree that there should be qualifications, I think most people will agree (the Government) should also review the criteria, so the debate and discussion will become better if we deal with the specific issues and questions that I have asked,”..,

Ong Yee Kung said:

“In the end, I think whether the president is (considered to be chosen based on merit) and seen to (have done a) good job has to be judged after he has done the job – and not before he is elected.”

Huh? What cock is this?

Queen Jos said

that the President plays a “hugely important role” in being a custodian of the reserves. “He needs to have the financial oversight and decision-making ability, That is the basic criteria he must fulfill,” she said. His ability to command respect still depends on the people’s mandate, she said. She noted the role of former President S R Nathan – who died last month – during the 2008 global financial crisis. Mr Nathan agreed to the Government’s request to draw funds from the reserves to help companies. The decision ultimately helped “save many rice bowls”, she noted. “When it comes to crucial times like this, he has to make a critical decision, and to answer to the people.

What has this to do the changes, Jos never said.

 

 

Hard Truths on connecting with the 70%

In Internet, Media on 16/09/2016 at 6:10 am

Activists (anti-PAP, Oppo, alternative views or social) must realise or be aware that

— The 70% (especially the swing voter, 35% of the voters ) know what they are doing when they vote for the PAP; and

— that some anti-PAP, alternative etc views are more equal than others i.e. the cybernuts must not be given the space to talk cock, sing song. They must not be given publicity, and rebutted.

WP knows these Hard Truths and have used this knowledge to win and hold Aljunied GRC. Trouble is that others don’t. Yes, I thinking particularly of Mad Dog. (And sadly, retaining Aljunied was all the WP was interested in until recently.)

Voters know what they are doing

Those who think the decisions voters make are ignorant or even irrational do them a disservice. The judgments rendered by the electorate are sometimes misinformed, and often harsh, but rarely irrational …

Many experts on the issue despair at the ignorance voters display: they seem hopelessly wrong about the numbers coming, the reasons they come and the impact they have on the economy. Yet although they are muddled on the details, voters are remarkably responsive on the big picture. Concern about the issue tracks numbers closely: when migrant numbers go up, more voters cite it as a concern. Voters noticed the pledges by successive governments to bring numbers down, they noticed when these pledges failed, and they noticed that one important reason for that failure was rising immigration from the EU. The growing number of voters who wanted immigration reduced drew the logical conclusions from all of this: the old parties had failed on the issue, so they turned to a new one (Ukip); controlling migration looked close to impossible within the EU, so they voted to leave.

This pattern of behaviour – ignorant about the details, but responsive on the big picture – is one we see quite often. It has a lot to recommend it. When a room gets too cold, we respond by turning up the heating. When the room gets too hot, we turn it off. We usually manage to do this without knowing the precise temperature. Voters often display a similar thermostatic logic. Of course, voters aren’t consistently rational even on the big picture stuff. But usually when they apparently go off the rails, there is an interesting logic underlying what they do, throwing light on the strengths and weaknesses of how we reason more generally.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/27/secret-life-of-british-voters-revealed

In the S’pore context this translates into as Chris K commented in response to this post

Slightly less the oppo but the social activists and their non nutty cyberspace allies are framing the free and liberal society in terms of ideals of human rights, civil society and democratic process. IMHO this don’t work in the peculiarly utilitarian mindset of the voters, shaped by one party rule. The free and liberal society needs to be framed in terms of access to public goods and redistribution, the nuts n bolts or bread n butter of that kind of society. Singapore is no totalitarian state, the social activists n their non nutty cyberspace allies take the easier route of wearing their hearts on their sleeves but this is putting the cart in front of the horse.

The SDP has a set of policy proposals that tries to frame its arguments for a “free and liberal society” in  “terms of access to public goods and redistribution, the nuts n bolts or bread n butter of that kind of society.”. The problem is that 60- 70% of S’poreans have problems with Dr Chee’s history and character. Sad really that Dr Chee refuses to retire.

Why not publicising the cybernuts is a must

Not all anti-PAP, alternate views are equal. Some are more equal than others. The editors of alternative media and activists who are influencers must curate wisely. Allow the likes of Chris K, Donald Low and Yeoh Lum Keong free rein, but don’t spread the views of nutters like Roy Ngerng, Philip Ang and M Ravi.

The nutters taint those rational S’poreans who want change, making it easier for the PAP to persuade the swing voters that anyone who wants change must be as nuts as M Ravi.

And rebut them or get others to rebut them, even though the time spent on this activity can be seen like doing NS, the time can ne better used to inform and persuade the swing voters, a difficult task which I will post on next week. One way to look at rebutting is that it helps built up cred with the swing voter.

—————————–

once a solid consensus has been reached through thorough testing, this must take precedence in responsible media discussion: as he says, “it would not be impartial, but irresponsible to give a smoking enthusiast equal time with the Chief Medical Officer or Surgeon General”.

The media’s dysfunctionality is structural. They must get audiences — public service broadcasters are increasingly exposed to that imperative — and they seek them, like politicians, in the privileging of emotion and personal experience. During the MMR vaccine debate, in which one rogue and inaccurate article on the dangers of the vaccine led to an insistent press campaign, interventions of “I’m just a mom and I want to keep my baby safe” could have more force than the arguments of the scientific establishment, especially if the latter were obscurely framed or contemptuously delivered.

In one of his many dissections of an anti-scientific consensus position, Thompson takes a statement from the social anthropologist Benny Peiser, director of Global Warming Policy Foundation, a sceptical climate change think-tank. In 2011 Peiser had argued: “Fundamentally these are social, ethical and economic questions that cannot be answered by science alone but require careful consideration by economists and social commentators.” It sounds broad-minded until you realise what the word “fundamentally” implies: as Thompson puts it, “that the layer of policy consideration which addresses social, ethical and economical questions is somehow weightier or more critical than the scientific layer”.

Yet the veracity of the scientific consensus is the determinant of the whole issue: everything else, including the ethical dimension, hinges entirely on it. You either believe that the scientific community, for all its neglect of comprehensible speech, has evolved a trustworthy discipline of verification through robust challenge — or you do not, in which case you must take some time to advance a reasonable case as to why. “I’m just a mom” doesn’t make the cut.

The former director-general criticises those of his former BBC colleagues who insist on absolute balance, even if it goes to the point where a sage must be countered by an idiot. The issue has moved some of those who voted Remain in the June referendum on the UK’s European Union membership, who argue that distinguished economists were given equal time with undistinguished shopkeepers: a complaint that might not have surfaced had the close result been reversed. Thompson wrote too early for that debate, but does argue that once a solid consensus has been reached through thorough testing, this must take precedence in responsible media discussion: as he says, “it would not be impartial, but irresponsible to give a smoking enthusiast equal time with the Chief Medical Officer or Surgeon General”.

(Emphasis mine)

Extract from FT review of Enough Said: What’s Gone Wrong With the Language of Politics?, by Mark Thompson, Bodley Head, RRP£25 / St Martin’s Press, RRP$27.95, 384 pages

The author  of the extract is John Lloyd. He is an FT contributing editor and a co-founder of Oxford university’s Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism

—————————————————

 

Zika shows alternative media at its best and worst

In Political governance, Public Administration on 02/09/2016 at 6:09 am

Reading alternative media and the constructive nation-building media, would one know the following (on Tuesday morning) about the Zika outbreak?

The Singapore outbreak appears to be localised. Of the 26 new cases identified in Singapore on Tuesday, 22 live or work near the Aljunied neighbourhood in the south-east of the city where 56 cases were confirmed earlier this week. [OK FT had not heard about Bedok case]

At least 36 of the Singapore Zika patients are foreign construction workers …[They] live in dormitories separate from the local population, reducing the risks of transmitting illnesses.

You might just. Many in the alternative media, and the PAP administration’s media allies (or worse) have good reasons to complicate the facts and issues.

So three cheers for the WP, and people in the alternative media like Chris K ,  Daniel Yap and others in Team TMG, Terry and others in Team TOC (“All the measures now by MOH are only implemented after the first find” is more than fair comment) and Alex Au (a super piece on Zika), are doing the right thing by asking relevant questions or pointing out the PAP administration’s BS.

We need more citizen analysts and journalists like Chris K, Alex Au  Daniel Yap and his team at TMG (Yes even though there is there someone who wanted to be a Sith Lord until told the vacancy had been filled), Terry and his team at Terry’s Online Channel, SgDaily* and Forever Vagabond (If he keeps away from Nathan, OTC, investments, SMRT and DBS and focuses on social injustice here).

They believe like CP Scott “Comment is free, but facts are sacred”


Charles Prestwich Scott (26 October 1846 – 1 January 1932) was a British journalist, publisher and politician. Born in Bath, Somerset,[1] he was the editor of the Manchester Guardian(now the Guardian) from 1872 until 1929 and its owner from 1907 until his death. He was also a Liberal Member of Parliament and pursued a progressive liberal agenda in the pages of the newspaper.

(Wikipedia)

———————–

And we need a lot less of those in Team TISG** and the TRE cybernuts now joining TISG. They make the likes of Mad Dog and Goh Meng Seng sound pretty rational. At least Mad Dog and GMS don’t pretend to anything other than partisan.


Cover-up? What cover-up?

My response to the almost similarly worded rants by the SDP and TISG (Sharing resources isit? That poor?) is

If there was a cover-up i.e, we’d not be told there was one case. And then told that there were 41 cases with more to come. We’d not be told nothing. And that the clean-op activity etc were “Juz precautions leh. Cannot isit?”

MoH was complacent and was “caught with their pants down” even if on the issue of “alarm” in the Zika case, I’m on govt’s side, like I was over haze and masks when a prominent blogger went bananas a few yrs ago.

I’m not the only one who has issues with the usual suspects. Here’s a non-partisan view from a person working in communications

Singapore had its first confirmed case of Zika on 28 August 2016, and the Singapore Ministry of Health (MOH) issued a press statement on the same day and called for a press conference the next day. Unfortunately, when it comes to managing issues concerning viruses (especially when the symptoms are mild and can be easily misdiagnosed) retrospective diagnosis is not uncommon. Thus when further testing on previously undiagnosed cases were done, the number of confirmed Zika cases rose literally overnight. When these additional numbers were subsequently made public, alternates were quick to accuse the MOH for deliberately hiding information from the public.
 
What is disconcerting is that these unfounded allegations against the Government hinders the proper and effective flow of important health information to the public. Instead of focusing the public on what they should and can do to protect themselves from the Zika virus, the public is distracted to focus on a non-existent witch-hunt. Valuable government resources are then diverted from dealing with the crisis to dispelling unfounded rumors.
 
As communications consultants, we constantly advocate for information to be released as soon as possible to stay ahead of the social media cycle. However, we also advise clients tobalance the need for speed with the need for accuracy. This is because false positives can cause unnecessary panic (especially in instances concerning public health) and this will affect the credibility of the organization and any subsequent message that is released.
 
Not being privy to what the MOH knew, or the thinking behind their decision, we can only speculate. What we do know is that when dealing with a crisis, there are usually trade-offs when deciding what to communicate with the public. In the case of Singapore’s first confirmed case of locally transmitted Zika, we assess that the MOH needed to decide whether to unnecessarily alarm Singaporeans (and visitors to Singapore which will impact the economy), or to allow the Government to be accused of a cover-up. Rightly or wrongly, we noted that the MOH chose to be responsible and opted not to cause alarm.
But let’s be fair. The PAP administration has in recent months shown yet again that its preferred option is to avoid telling S’poreans anything that is inconvenient to the administration. Think “Traingate” and “SGHgate”.
So reasonable people have grounds not to trust the PAP administration’s version of anything, giving TISG’s and the cybernuts’ rantings some credibility.
————————

What annoys me is the Goh Meng Seng’s, TISG’s, SDP’s etc rants are full of misleading information, allegations and wrong assumptions: “Facts are irrelevant when it comes to criticising the PAP administration”.

This doesn’t help the responsible people in alternative media and those of us opposed to the PAP’s hegemony connect with the swing voters. Worse, misleading or false  information, allegations and wrong assumptions, mean that the reality of the PAP administration’s cock-ups and misdeeds are often ignored by swing voters because the news and analysis comes from alternative media, and the swing voter associates alternative media with the likes of TISG and TRELand.

Finally, juz wondering, if the TRE turned TISG cybernuts will attract to TISG rabid TRE posters like Oxygen***, Dosh, GreatEagle etc? TISG must hope that Oxygen will migrate to a new and better rats’ nest. He was rumoured to have donated $10,000 to TRE in 2015. TISG sure can use that kind of money.


*My Facebook avatar can post links on the SgDaily’s wall.

** The boast “Government and related agencies see us as a useful loudhailer.” is really surprising.

***Example: The 69% are TOO STUPID TO EVEN KNOW THEY ARE STUPID – some even clapping fictitious CPF returns of 2.5% to 3% per annum (really is MONOPOLY money credited to their imprisoned CPF accounts cannot be withdrawn) when global interest rate is 1.5% or negative for even 10-yr govt bond yields.

Other stupid Sinkies voted PAPpy looking skyward IMAGINING their property values will soar higher with municipal carrots dangling in front of their greedy eyes. ALL STUPID – even prime waterfront property hold for 10 years lost millions of dollars.

Here is my evidence.

https://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/1-4-mil-loss-reflections-000000355.html

And there are also IDIOTS AMONG THE 70% Sinkies thinks PAPpy immigration policy of massive influx will bring in rich Ah Tiongs to chase their property value up.

WRONG!!! stupid again.

 

 

 

Amos cracks great jokes

In Humour on 31/08/2016 at 4:38 am

Unlike Tharman,  PM and other PAP ministers.

I visited Amos’ FB page on Sunday and saw three great posts juz in the last two weeks. They made me laugh. They’ll make u laugh too. Don’t worry, no foul language.

1

Amos Yee’s planned list of illegal acts in Singapore:

2015 – Criticising the Government (Done)
2016 – Criticising religion (Done)
2017 – Skipping national service
2018 – Stepping on the national flag
2019 – Grafitti
2021 – Porn
2022 – Tax Evasion
2023 – Not Paying CPF
2024- Non-violent public protest
2026 – Taking marijuana
2030 – Hacking in and revealing private government files
2036 – trafficking marijuana/ attempting to sneak firearms into Singapore

(Death Penalty)

2

Joseph Schooling info:

Left Singapore and his secondary school Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) at 14 to go to America
Lives in: America
Speaking accent: American
Secondary School: Bolles School in Florida (America)
University: University of Texas (America)
Trains swimming: In America
Swimming Coach: Eddie Reese (American)
Swimming Inspiration: Micheal Phelps (American)

Singapore shouldn’t be proud of Joseph Schooling for winning the Olympic Gold, America should

[Hey Amos, in the US one gold medal is “peanuts”: nothing to get excited about.]

3

This should be printed and distributed by SDP

I hope he realises that he can be a good stand-up comic, and use his videoing skills to highlight in the West his talent. He can make money, serious money if he’s talent-spotted.


A good satire http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35641528

15 funniest jokes from the Edinburgh Fringe

——————————

At the very least, he can be a good script writer for an ang moh comedy show.

Whatever, he may have got over his love of using foul language. Maybe he realises they’ve lost the power to shock people. They juz don’t ;listen.

A final tot. Maybe the ang moh tua kees who deserted him can commend him to their controllers in MI6 and the CIA, asking that MI6 and the CIA help get him a job in the comedy business?

 

TISG: Wee first ‘Elected President’/ “S’poreans only” policy backfires?

In Humour on 26/08/2016 at 5:28 am

Wee Kim Wee, not Ong Teng Cheong, was the first ‘Elected President’ of Singapore

Dr Wee Kim Wee and not Mr Ong Teng Cheong is the first Elected President of Singapore, a law don has clarified. Dr Jack Tsen-Ta Lee, Assistant Professor of Law at the Singapore Management University’s School of Law made this point in the website ‘Singapore Public Law’.

TISG

This is what Dr Jack Tsen-Ta Lee posted on Facebook

“The provision was carefully worded to avoid deeming Wee Kim Wee as having been elected, so although he exercised all the discretionary powers of an elected President, the first truly elected President was Ong Teng Cheong.” So how come the conclusion is that Wee was Singapore’s first elected President? I’m mystified!

Obviously, TISG Team, can’t understand his article written in simple English. That cock meh? Need FTs to understand?

Either that or adult supervision is desperately needed.

That’s not the only recent goof.

On Augist 22 at 5.50pm  To cater to a consistently high number of readers, we are migrating to a larger server. Our website may be inaccessible for a few hours due to this. We apologise to our readers. – TISG Team

The “few hours” turned out to be at least 24 — 40hrs No articles appeared on 23 August and only late on 24 August were articles posted.

As TISG prides itself on employing only true blue S’poreans (Has no choice given its tendency towards xenophobic* articles?), maybe it got some lazy TISG-reading S’porean cybernut  to do the IT migration?

As commercially minded employers know, FTs from India are the best for low-level IT jobs like migration. Cheap and good.

Two other goofs by TISG Team.

Yup, it’s two goofs a week, for two weeks in a row.

TISG positions itself as a commercial site, not a socio-political site (Er so how come so many articles from a TRE hero, and TRELand cybernuts and sane residents?). That’s good news for TISG Team. A socio-political site would have found replacements for such goofing, careless, wanking S’poreans, assuming they were either subversives working for the PAP, not for the Cause, or that they were incompetent, lazy S’poreans.


*Aiming  “to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore”?

 

Can’t TISG get anything right?

In Uncategorized on 20/08/2016 at 4:49 am

Wrong building, TISG.

Reporting a press release from the S’pore Heritage Society about the importance of preserving the Ellison Building*, TISG, a commercial site not a socio-political site, used a photo of the David Elias Building

This is Ellison Building TISG

Why so cock meh? The photo of the Ellison Building was included in SHS’s release.

This piece followed this

“STTA taxing junior team’s prize money to sustain its foreign players”. The truth (something TISG is increasingly having problems with) is that the money collected also funds our local athletes. And our PRC mercenary FT gladiators are also “taxed” on their prize money. These “taxes” go into a pool, which is used to fund STTA activities.

That’s locals funding FTs isit, TISG? It’s winners funding others. And like it or not, the gladiators have until recently been doing pretty well in winning awards .

But maybe TISG is alleging that the FT gladiators are not “taxed’?

The piece sounds like another one of its xenophobic (“to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore” isit? Why liddat TISG?) pieces aimed at attracting eyeballs.

More 

Economy rice not enough to sustain brain power at TISG isit? In the above link I calculated that the ad revenue from eyeball ads ($1,700- 9,000) are Enough for “economy rice” meals for those working there.


*The Singapore Heritage Society (SHS) is deeply disappointed with the decision to demolish a substantial part of Ellison Building. A substantial part of the building will be demolished to make way for the North South Highway and will be reconstructed when the Highway is completed. It is located at the junction of Selegie Road and Rochor Canal Road and was built in 1924.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/singapore-heritage-society/18-august-2016-statement-on-ellison-building/1055948937786075