Three cheers for our millionaire ministers?

Yesterday, I grumbled that our millionaire ministers don’t provide value in Millionaire dollar ministers, yet only second in Asean?, They are like paying for a Rolls Royce but getting a cheap and cheerful made-in-China made car, not even a Hyundai. So today I should praise them?

Actually No.

Because the minister responsible for throwing enough people into prison to ensure that gals can go running after midnight safely, and I can safely leave my doors open even when there’s no-one in,

was already a millionaire before becoming a minister (he was a top litigation lawyer), unlike the civil servants (e.g. Lawrence Wong), paper SAF generals (think Kee Chiu Chan) and GLC executives (err Grace Fu) who only became millionaires after becoming ministers.

I give credit where credit is due.

Indonesian riots prove minister’s point on zero tolerance of racist remarks?

If a racist rap video was allowed to remain online, it could normalise offensive speech and such attacks against other races could become mainstream, said Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam.

Speaking at the CNM Leaders Summit organised by the National University of Singapore’s Department of Communications and New Media on Thursday (Aug 22), Mr Shanmugam expanded on why the Government acted to remove the rap video by YouTuber Preetipls and her brother Subhas Nair, which came in response to a controversial “brownface” advertisement.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/preetipls-subhas-nair-rap-video-normalised-offensive-speech-11834928

Constructive, nation-building CNA

Well the following article from the BBC about violent protests in West Papua province is evidence that he isn’t talking cock about the probability of violence when there’s official tolerance of racist language. Racist taunts aimed at a group of students from West Papua in Java have sparked violent protests in Indonesia’s West Papua.

What happened in Java last weekend

The groundswell of anger that has fuelled the latest demonstrators was sparked by an incident in the Javanese city of Surabaya at the weekend.

After accusing Papuan university students of damaging an Indonesian flag during Independence Day celebrations, nationalist groups surrounded their boarding house and goaded them with racist taunts, calling them “monkeys”, “pigs” and “dogs”.

Police in riot gear then stormed the dormitory to force the students out. Authorities said the students were briefly questioned before being set free.

This resulted in violent protests in West Papua

The area’s largest protests in years saw numerous buildings torched – including a jail and a market – and resulted in the Indonesian government deploying thousands of additional security officers to an area which is already the country’s most heavily militarised.

The internet has also been shut down to “restore security”, according to the Indonesian government.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-49434277

But it’s more than racist taunts. Papuan students in Java, told BBC Indonesian they are often made to feel like second-class citizens.

“I have been turned away from student boarding houses and told that they will not receive boarders who are Papuan students,” said Benfa, a Papua student in Yogyakarta.

“We face discrimination and racism daily,” Aris Yeimo, from the Papuan student union, added.

Coming back to the spark that started the riots (the racial taunts),  a few Indonesian politicians are showing some sensitivity. The governor of East Java province apologised for the racism in Surabaya, and President Joko Widodo announced plans to visit Papua. But better not to have allowed the taunts in the first place?

Related post:

Brownfacegate: Did you know Shanmugam also said this?

Typical Chinese reaction to “brownface” ad/ Cina also can get upset

Brownfacegate: The inside story?

Brownfacegate: Did you know Shanmugam also said this?

In cyberspace, and in particular anti-PAP sites where cybernuts infest, urinate and defecate, Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam’s comments on the video up-loaded by local YouTuber and comedian Preeti Nair (known as Preetipls) and her brother, rapper Subhas Nair, have been given a lot of publicity and scorn. The Nairs were superheroes, the cheering cybernuts said.

The video was said by the Nairs to be their response to an ad for a NETS E-Pay campaign tot by many to have committed the offence of “brownface”: a Chinese guy dressed up to be caricatures of the four major racial groupings. (Read this about how S’poreans got divided into four racial groupings: “Malay race” created by ang mohs, not the Malays)

He was quoted as saying, “When you use four-letter words, vulgar language, attack another race, put it out in public, we have to draw the line and say not acceptable.”

And “This rap video insults Chinese Singaporeans, uses four-letter words on Chinese Singaporeans, vulgar gestures, pointing of middle finger, to make minorities angry with Chinese Singaporeans.” (Btw, wow treating us Chinese the way he treated Christians, protecting our sensitivities: in Religious equality, the PAP way, I said Minister Shan treated equally offended Christians as the equals of easily offended Muslims by banning Watain from performing, here he treated us Chinese as being as sensitive as ethnic Indians. Fair chap, this minister.)

Seriously, he also said

Let’s say a Chinese now does a video attacking Indians, Malays using four-letter words, vulgar gestures, same kind of videos,” he told Channel News Asia. “And let’s say there are hundreds of thousands of such videos. How do you think the Indians and the Malays will feel? Would people feel safe? Would the minorities feel safe?

No alt media publication seems to report this. But to fair to alt media, the constructive, nation-building media (that alt media copies and paste from) don’t give much prominence to these remarks.

He has a very valid point about the possibility of Chinese attacking Malays and Indians verbally, hurting their feelings: or worse if they physically attacked them. Doubtless there will calls to protect them, and I’m sure anti-PAP sites like TOC (with writers based in India, not S’pore because of the cost here: TOC: A lot of bull) will say that the PAP govt is not protecting minorities.

Fyi, I have no problems with the ad or the video. Live and let live, I always say. And I’ve lived as part an insignificant minority in London, Sydney and Melbourne: those were the days when Red China didn’t allow its people out. Life was really good as a Chinese in ang moh places. Us Chinese were considered to be model members of polite society, those Hongkies and spit on pavements who cut queues excepted.

How the establishment view the ad, video and Shan’s comments: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/preetipls-ministers-religious-leaders-rap-video-brownface-ad-11766998?cid=h3_referral_inarticlelinks_24082018_cna

How s/o JBJ views the ad, video and Shan’s comments : https://kenjeyaretnam.com/2019/08/01/we-need-to-talk-about-race/

How the BBC views the ad, video and Shan’s comments   https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-49205225. And in case you don’t read thru to end, I’ll post the concluding paragraphs:

The country is no stranger to satire, but the liberal use of swear words in K. Muthusamy, and its sharp, direct and caustic tone in discussing racial discrimination, is unusual and would be considered shocking to mainstream Singapore.

But a small and growing number of Singaporeans – many of them young, voracious consumers of online content that has a similar tone to the video – see nothing wrong with it.

This is a group that yearns for a franker and bolder conversation about race, and is frustrated with the careful tones of the discourse in the tightly-controlled local media. They are not content with how mainstream society and the government get to impose a certain definition of racism, and rules on how Singapore should discuss race.

The decision to censor the video and investigate Preetipls and Subhas, coupled with a perception that those who came up with the “brownface” advertisement got off lightly, may only stoke that frustration.

Related post: Indian lady takes issue with charge that Nets ad was “brownface”

Religious equality, the PAP way

Yesterday was Vesak Day and this reminded me of the way the PAP govt treats the sensibilities of the various religions: equal treatment of intolerant religious views.

Recently minister Shan gave the lie (in the religious context) to the view that “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” 

The Christian preachers, when they talk to me, say ‘you are very, very strict when it comes to anti-Muslim, anti-Islamic messages…They said: ‘You treat the Muslim community differently than the Christian community.’

Minister Shanmugam

True, very true in my opinion. I had always tot that easily offended Muslims found it very easy to obtain satisfaction from the PAP govt compared to easily offended Christians. (Declaration of interest: I was once upon a time a very liberal Methodist. Didn’t believe that God created the world in seven days; didn’t believe that bible is the only record of what God says; tot that it didn’t matter if Christ never rose from the dead; and relaxed about LGBTs and divorce etc.)

So what did this PAP minister do after hearing out the Christian preachers?

I looked at it and I thought that there is some truth to what they say, I won’t say that it is completely true but it is an approach.

Result Watain’s performance was banned, upsetting its Malay fans.

“You have a group of Malay young men, showing the one-finger sign, supporting the group,” CNA quoted the minister.

“If a group of Chinese went and showed the finger sign and said that we should allow it – how would you all have felt? It is the same.”

Watain ban: playing the easily offended game can backfire

He’s being very fair in trying to ensure that all easily offended zealots of all religions are not offended, and if as a result of his actions, others are offended, juz too bad. No longer true (if it ever was) that “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” Remember what George Yeo once infamously said, “Christians are less likely to riot”?

But what this even handed illiberal attitude does to S’pore’s aspiration to be a global city on par with London and NY?

As intolerant as M’sian Talibanites? Uniquely S’porean solution

S377A: Ex-ST tua kee thinks Christians won’t harm him?

 

Watain ban: playing the easily offended game can backfire

Easily offended Muslims are paying the price for being easily offended and making police reports etc, and getting other S’poreans into trouble. Their actions have had consequences. When social media took after here, all those years ago, some easily offended Muslims were forever making police reports or complaining loudly publicly about posts they found offensive. Well easily offended Taliban Christians (minority here thankfully) were watching and listening, and learning.

The govt said Watain targeted the Christian religion specifically and hence the ban. Fair point given that if the band insulted Muslims, it’d have been banned because the authorities didn’t want easily offended Muslims to be upset, and making known their unhappiness.

But because “Christians don’t riot” (BG Yeo said this when he was a minister: remember him?) some civil servant tot it fine to let them in to perform? I’m glad the govt is being even-handed in its illiberal attitude*, which I personally disagree with.

I note the band also targets Jews.

But they don’t insult or diss Islam or Muslims. Why, despite Islam being an Abrahamic faith too? I can only suppose because jihadists even in Sweden kill or threaten to kill those who mock Islam or Muslims. Christians and Jews in Sweden ain’t so violent against those who insult their religion, I suppose.

This is another reason to ban them: for having only the balls to insult those who they know won’t kill or threaten to kill them for the insults. Christians don’t riot remember? Ditto Jews? The Jews only file law suits.

And I agree with the Minister with responsibility for the welfare of pets, among other duties, who warned the Muslim community that it has responsibility to show that it lives in a multi-cultural society and must be aware of others’ sensitivities, just as it expects others to be sensitive to its sensitivities.

“You have a group of Malay young men, showing the one-finger sign, supporting the group,” CNA quoted the minister.

“If a group of Chinese went and showed the finger sign and said that we should allow it – how would you all have felt? It is the same.” Very true. Something for the Malay community to think about.

As the photo has gone viral “across the Christian community”, Shanmugam said that it was crucial to show that the picture does not represent what the Muslim community thinks. “They won’t realize that this a small group of Malays, but they may think, is this what Muslims think of us? So now we have to send the message that this is not what the Muslim community thinks. These are black metal group supporters, they are not the mainstream community.”

---

*Minister Shanmugan said, “The Christian preachers, when they talk to me, say ‘you are very, very strict when it comes to anti-Muslim, anti-Islamic messages…They said: ‘You treat the Muslim community differently than the Christian community.’ I looked at it and I thought that there is some truth to what they say, I won’t say that it is completely true but it is an approach.”

Added 21 hrs after first publication.

 

 

 

Coldstore: Why Harry’s narrative or the highway

(Or “Why Harry’s Coldstore narrative must be the truth”)

The roughing up of someone who dares to publicly talk about a Coldstore narrative that is different from that of one Harry Lee has cyberspace talking cock and upset*.

Amidst the noise and fury, one important issue in both what constitutes “fake news”, generally,and, in particular, in the ongoing dialogue of the deaf about different Coldstore narratives has been forgotten.

The son of one of the Coldstore detainees recently said:

For some of the matters around national security, race, religion, economic and financial issues, public health issues, by definition that source of truth must be government-backed or state-backed. The most egregious issues, the issues with significant impact, significant impact on our social fabric, on our national security, on our public health, the issues of peace, stability, the facts behind those, if you’re going to have a source of truth, it needs to be state-backed.

Dr. Janil Puthucheary, a Jnr Minister, at the Select Committee hearings on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, 23 March 2018

As S’pore is a de facto one-party state (because the voters regularly agree to it), Harry’s version of ColdStore (Bunch of commie subversives who had to be locked up because they wanted to make S’pore Great for Communism) is the official version. 

And because it is “government-backed or state-backed” it must be the truth going by what the jnr minister said. (And don’t forget that the greatest of the Hard Truths is that “Harry is always right. Harry is never wrong”.)

Related post: Were the Coldstore detainees communists, progressives or leftists?

Coming back to the jnr minister’s comments, looks like he agrees with what a M’sian minister said is “fake news”:

“Any information related to 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) that has not been verified by the Government is considered fake news.

Datuk Jailani Johari (pic), the Deputy Communications and Multimedia Minister, explained that fake news is information that is confirmed to be untrue, especially by the authorities or parties related to the news.”

What “fake” news will be allowed

What else does the jnr minister says about “fake news”? Fake news traffickers will be hanged.

But does the jnr minister disagree with the allegations made against his Pa and uncle who were Coldstore detainees, thereby contradicting the official narrative of “Bunch of commie subversives who had to be locked up because they wanted to make S’pore Great for Communism”?

---

*The grand inquisitor explains why he did what he did

I have been asked why I spent some time asking PJ Thum questions.

PJ’s main point, in his written submission to the Select Committee, was that Mr Lee Kuan Yew was the biggest creator of fake news in Singapore, a liar, and Operation Coldstore was based on falsehoods.

These are serious allegations made in Parliament about our founding PM.

Either they have to be accepted, or shown to be untrue. Keeping quiet about them was not an option.

Thus I told PJ I will ask him questions, on what he had said.

PJ refused to answer many of the questions directly – if a person believes in what he says, and has gone through the documents carefully, then what is the difficulty in answering questions?

It took 5 hours plus to go through the documents and records carefully.

In the end, PJ said that he had not read some of the material published by ex-Communists on what happened in Singapore; that he disregarded the statements made by Chin Peng, the CPM leader; that the way he set out the most important documents (of December 1962) was not accurate; the key meetings of Barisan Socialis showed that they were prepared to use armed struggle to overthrow a Government of Singapore, if necessary; and the British had a honest view, in December 1962, that security action (which was Operation Coldstore), was necessary.

People know me – I am direct, I deal with the facts, and say it as I think it is.

I can see that Sonny Liew is not happy with what happened with PJ. It is quite understandable. Based on what he says, he and PJ are quite close; they work together in a venture. His award winning cartoon, The Art of Charlie Chan Hock Chye, is also based on PJ’s version of history.

I have not met Sonny, but I have to say he is a good cartoonist. He is a talent.

K Shanmugam Sc‘s post

Btw, I agree with the points he makes about Sonny Liew being a good cartoonist and about why he asked the questions he asked. He had every right to beat up PJ Thum. I make no comment on

PJ refused to answer many of the questions directly – if a person believes in what he says, and has gone through the documents carefully, then what is the difficulty in answering questions?

Btw, seems PJ gave as good as he got, so his whining seems strange. But that’s grist for yet another post soon.

More on Thaipusam issues

Further to Anti-PAP Hindus never satisfied

The ban on playing of musical instruments during Thaipusam dated back to 1973, due to fights between competing groups, but was relaxed in late-2015.

Since 2016, live music was allowed at the festival, via three live music points along the procession route.

Good to know that Indians didn’t use their special position to pak other races but to fight among themselves. If Chinese or Malays sure to pak and burn property of other races

Constructive suggestion

Stressing the importance of live music, one dialogue participant suggested getting musicians and music groups to be registered and accredited, who could then work on a single booklet of songs to be played for the procession.

Calling it a good suggestion, Mr Shanmugam said he was prepared to consider it, if the community is able to carry it out.

Piped music

He added that as long as “there is no serious disamenities”, he is prepared “to allow more live music points”. In fact, he said: “I am prepared to allow piped-in music all the way.”

Wonder if anyone had suggested piped music before this remark by the Minister for Pets.

Anti-PAP Hindus never satisfied

The ang moh tua kees KPKBing about Shan’s savaging of PJ Thum (I hope to read the transcript: more on why he deserved to have his views on Coldstore challenged next week*) reminded me of another recent Shan comment

Explaining on Sunday that all religious foot processions have been banned since 1964, after riots occurred, the minister reiterated that Hindus were given an exemption on three occasions — Thaipusam, Panguni Uthiram and Thimithi — passing through major roads.

Minister Shan

Wah got such a privilege position yet anti-PAP Hindus KPKB that PAP govt trying to destroy Thaipusam.

---

*For the moment, this is what my FB avatar posted when Kirsten KPKBed

Go read about the paper he submitted. They had every right to ask him the questions they asked him about Coldstore. Anyway based on newspaper report, I now know why he never referenced the views of certain known Communists when he analysed Coldstore. (I read his stuff). He thinks they are unreliable. So an issue when analysing his views is whether he’s right or reasonable to dismiss the views of said Communists.

 

Symbolism of Hali’s pix with PM, CJ

Shamugam was talking cock on FB.

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)

Couldn’t help but think of Donald Low and Shanmugam

When I saw this in http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-39873020

 

Did he really think he could have got away with an attack on Shanmugan that was based on a headline that misrepresented Shan’s nuanced views on the delicate relationship between public opinion and judicial punishments.

When I saw the headlined, I tot someone from Mothership or The Idiots — S’pore (Or does the “I” stand for “Indians”?) had joined Today. I didn’t read the article because no way a minister of law would say such a thing as “Penalties for crime must reflect public opinion: Shanmugam” without qualification. It was a click bait headline. Btw, I hear that some asses in Today have been badly bruised. So Donald Low shouldn’t feel that bad.

Seriously, only Judge Dredd would say, “Penalties for crime must reflect public opinion”.

Btw, it seems the opinion of senior faculty members of the LKY School is that, “Donald must go for anyhow slimimg a minister, a minister that helped him get in after he lost his private sector job*.”. So why u think he offering to suck XXXX after offering to lick ass?

Money talks, BS walks: rice bowl is that important leh even for a scholar with a double first from Oxford.

---

*My dogs agree that he got to be punished severely for biting the hand that fed him.

Anton Casey chooses wrong PAP minister to emulate?

What is the link between Anton (masculine, not sheltered, babyed and childish like local men according to wifey Bernice “Beauty Queen” Wong), the Pope and two PAP ministers?

Pope Francis is a Jesuit, a Catholic order which has traditionally, among other things, served the rich and powerful as teachers and confessors. At its best, a Jesuit education inspires the mighty to serve the lowly. The Pope’s address to the business and political leaders assembled at the World Economic Forum at Davos fits right into that tradition.

He flatters the “innovative” for “improving the lives of many people by their ingenuity and professional expertise.” Then he hits. Davosians, he says, “can further contribute by putting their skills at the service of those who are still living in dire poverty.”

In other words, if you are clever enough, and determined enough, to rise to Davos-level, you should do more to help those who cannot help themselves. It’s hard to disagree. (Emphasis mine)

Almost all the delegates have a surplus of something valuable – money, knowledge or influence. Almost all of them waste that surplus, by the Pope’s standards. Francis thinks they should invest the surpluses in what the bishop of Rome calls “the life of humanity.” If they wanted to they could do much more to promote: “an inclusive approach which takes into consideration the dignity of every person and the common good.” (Economist)

The Pope’s views reflect the values of one K Shanmugam Sc:

I have been asked what I thought of Mr Anton Casey and his statements. Like many Singaporeans, I am terribly upset and offended by what he has posted. Deeply offensive, wrong, and unacceptable. Those who have done well in life should always be looking out for others – especially the less well-off or needy. It is basic human decency. Instead Mr Casey showed contempt. Having money and a Porsche, does not automatically mean that one is superior. Character is important. I am glad the community has come together to condemn what he has said. He has attempted to apologise to Singaporeans. But some feel that the manner of his apology showed a lack of sincerity. And I think there is some basis for thinking that …

They are role gd models for anyone, especially for Casey: They could have tot grammar schoolboy (English schools — mostly fee paying) where entry is by way of competitive exams like our PLSE) Anton Casey the meaning of not sneering at those less off or less fortunate or smart or pushy or any combination thereof.

But maybe his role model was another PAP minister born into privilege and wealth? What do you think of someone who makes the u/m remarks about the “Pioneer Generation” praised by PM who fell on bad times, then went on to overspend on the Kiddie Games, food poisoning included? Remember them?

Dr Lily Neo:

Sir, I want to check with the Minister again when he said on the strict criteria on the entitlement for PA recipients. May I ask him what is his definition of “subsistence living”? Am I correct to say that, out of $260 per month for PA recipients, $100 goes to rental, power supply and S&C and leaving them with only $5 a day to live on? Am I correct to say that any basic meal in any hawker centre is already $2.50 to $3.00 per meal? Therefore, is it too much to ask for just three meals a day as an entitlement for the PA recipients?

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:

How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?