Wednesday, June 27, 2012

So Sorry

The Star online published on Friday June 22, 2012 MYT 8:45:00 PM:
S'pore envoy summoned to Wisma Putra over diplomats' participation in illegal rally" [Link]

PUTRAJAYA: Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman summoned Singapore High Commissioner Ong Keng Yong to Wisma Putra Friday afternoon to convey the Malaysian Government's displeasure over the participation of three Singapore diplomats in the illegal Bersih 3.0 rally on April 28.
"During my meeting with Ong Keng Yong this afternoon, I again explained the position of the Malaysian Government that the direct participation of diplomats in the illegal rally is an inappropriate move." Malaysian Foreign Minister said.

I wonder how Singapore envoy Mr Ong Keng Yong replied to Malaysia's Foreign Minister Mr Anifah Aman. If he did, I wonder if he said:

  1. "I don't know what to say" or
  2. "What do you think?"
If it were me (what me envoy?), I would humbly explain to the Foreign Minister as follow:

Dear Datuk Seri Anifah Aman,

On behalf of the people and government of Singapore, I sincerely apologise, without reservation, for the participation of the three diplomats in that illegal rally. 

I hope you can understand that the three diplomats involved, like most Singaporeans, are a deprived lot. They are not as blessed as Malaysians. Singaporeans do not have the right to peaceful assembly. The do not have the right to demonstrate against injustice, inequality and unjust laws. They are denied their freedom to do many things due to the Uniquely Singapore Laws and their fear of ISD and ISA.

Being dispossessed of their fundamental rights at home, I hope you can understand their enthusiasm and excitement in being present at the Bersih 3.0 Rally on April 28. Not unlike children who are deprived of their liberty and natural instinct to play or their access to candy, these deprived Singapore diplomats could not help doing what they did! Like the forbidden fruit, they had to take a bite for there are no such fruit in Singapore!

In the same way that you allow the three Singapore diplomats to enjoy chewing gums in your kind country, I'm sure you are aware that they are banned from chewing such gums in Singapore. I hope you will forgive and pardon the youthful exuberance of my three diplomats who just could not resist the actions they so miss in Singapore!

Being sensitive to the sensitivities involved, I humbly apologise again unreservedly to Malaysians, your government and your goodself. 

By the way, can you get your Finance Minister to teach my Finance Minister how to bring up our 2.5% CPF interest to 6% like your EPF? Oh, and teach him about Minimum Wage for the Singapoor too. 

No Sir, most ordinary Singaporeans are not "sikit atas" unlike those who act "selalu atas"

Thank you.

Yours very respectfully,


Monday, June 25, 2012

Say What, Swee Say?

ST Photo: Desmond Lui for Straits Times

According to Labour Chief Lim Swee Say, by 2015, 10,000 cleaners will earn at least $1,000 a month.   

So why has the pay of cleaners been so miserable for so long. In fact, some are earning less that they did in previous years. My gut feel is there are just too much outsourcing, too much sub-contracting and too many middlemen getting a cut of the pay that is actually due to the cleaners. We celebrate Labour Day but physical labour and dignity of cleaners and security guards is not worth respecting, unlike the labour of plastic surgeons and ministers. Of course, surgeons and ministers deserve higher pay but cleaners need a decent minmum wage to survive too.

Allowing cheaper foreign workers who are willing to accept lower pay also cause cleaners' pay to stagnate and even decrease.

Gone are the days when organisations and ministries employed their own housekeeping (cleaning) staff.   Due to cost cutting and operating with cost efficiency, I doubt any ministry now employs cleaners directly. They are outsourced or contracted to cleaning contractors who may even subcontract the contract to a subcontractor. 

"Mr Lim also noted that the minimum wages in Europe today are so high that many young graduates are unable to enter the job market. European countries are already talking about lowering the minimum wages, he said, without referring to any specific country."

I find it tiring for politicians to use selective comparison to make a point to serve one's argument. To serve one's purpose. The above scare mongering so as not to pay minimum wage is pretty sickening.

I do not know what minimum wage Lim Swee Say is referring to but to state "that the minimum wages in Europe today are so high that many young graduates are unable to enter the job market" is ridiculously funny!

I may be wrong but my perception of minimum wage is minimum wage for the lowest paid in the industries. That is, minimum wage of maybe cleaners, security guards, hawker's assistants or coffeeshop assistants and others whose pay is hardly enough to sustain a decent livelihood of providing 3 cheap meals a day and a roof over one's head. 

How on earth a Labour Chief and a Minister in the PM's Office would think that young graduates would want to enter the job market as a cleaner or security guard or a hawker's assistant is beyond me. Is Lim Swee Say blind to the fact that local cleaners comprises mainly of old uncles and aunties who cannot find a better way to make a living?

Thus, the above statement is another Swee Say Special, not unlike what he said below:

PAP rulers were so concern about ministers pay that they had to have a commission of inquiry to decide how many millions to pay the various PAP ministers. To add insult to injury, The Ministers Salary Review Commission headed by Gerard Ee had to pay Mercer $860,000.00 to add substance to the inquiry [Link]

Isn't it funny that PAP ministers paid millions by taxpayers can be justified by COI whereas the poorest paid cleaners do not deserve a decent minimum wage for survival? Or is it because many young graduates will be unable to enter the job market if we increase the pay of the lowest paid?

How in hell can PAP ministers justify and defend their million dollars salaries with COI and demean the labour of the poor with crap like this is sinful!  

If this is not puke inducing, I do not know what is.

What do you think?


Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Woffling Through Cheng San . . .

Will the Woffles Wu case turn into waffle? [Link]

The bloggers are Woffling . . .
The coffeeshops are Woffling . . .
The lawyers, including Hri Kumar, are Woffling . . .

There are so many inconsistencies in this abetment case that I don't know if I want to laugh or cry. Or stamp my feet and shout, "I don't know what to say!

What do you think?

Woffles Wu admitted to the press that, "I was fined for providing the name of someone who was not driving the car" [Link] and the AG Chambers respond with: 

2. Woffles Wu was charged for abetting his employee Kuan to give false information to the police about the commission of speeding offenses in 2005 and 2006. Kuan gave the false information. Woffles Wu, who did not give any information to the police, was charged with abetting Kuan to do so, which is an offence under Section 81(3) of the Road Traffic Act.  There was no evidence of payment or gratification given to Kuan. Kuan, who is 82 years old, was given a stern warning.

3. In general, fines or short custodial sentences are imposed for wilfully providing false information, under Section 81(3) Road Traffic Act. Custodial sentences are typically imposed under this section when there are aggravating features, such as many instances of the offence committed by the same person. [Link]

My simple-coffee-shop-uncle logic is:

If "Woffles Wu, who did not give any information to the police" then who responded to the police  "request for driver's information" for the speeding offence? And why did Woffles Wu admitted to the press that, "I was fined for providing the name of someone who was not driving the car

Who do you believe?
What do you think?

I think of the letter written by the then Attorney General to the Law Minister on 27 July 1997 regarding "PRESENCE OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS INSIDE POLLING STATIONS" in Cheng San. [Link] "Plainly, a person inside a polling station cannot be said to be within a radius of 200 metres of a polling station" will enlighten us on the kind of justice and equality we have in Singapore

Murphy's Golden Rule: "Whoever has the gold makes the rules"


Monday, June 18, 2012

When Words Fail Me

WARNING: Prudes and hypocrites who are allergic to swear words are advised not to read further.

The editorial in ST of June 18, 2012 titled "Swearing off the profanities" makes me want to swear. It is editorial like this that "can spark a chain of reactions that can spin out of control". Indeed!

Trying to be preachy, ST wrote, "More troubling than just the language was the student's attitude - he wanted answers to national issues from the minister rather than to be asked for his views on them. It spoke of a lack of understanding that citizens own and shape societies they live in, not government leaders or officials. Carried to extremes, this what's-in-it-for me attitude is antithetical to fostering social cohesion and consensus on the way forward on the many challenges this country faces."

The way I read it, apart from belittling Reuben Wang's lack of vocabulary prowess, ST now blames poor Reuben for being a selfish brat with a what's-in-it-for me attitude!

If "citizens own and shape societies they live in, not government leaders or officials." why the fuck is ST still harping and flogging this dead horse?

If the attitude of the 17-year-old is fooked up, the attitude of the DPM is worse!  An ex-PAP minister who lost and got lost in Aljunied GRC (George Yeo?) once said something like we cannot be "bo tua bo sway" literally meaning "no big no small". In other word, "respectful".  It does not mean that the small must respect the big!  It means respect needs to be earned, regardless of race, language, religion, age, gender and/or status. If the big and powerful behave no better than bullying scumbags, they deserve no fucking respect!

I love the attitude of Reuben. He has the guts to tell it like it is. He is so different from the majority (60%?) who are either cowered and coerced for fear of the rich and powerful. For fear of losing what's-in-it-for-them!

If ST is still having an orgasm beating up young Reuben, using him as a example to scare others from fecking off deadwood ministers, ST deserves to be fooked big time! (Oops, my words fail me!) Instead of flogging a dead horse on the 'fuck' word, I think decent Singaporeans (even those who dislike to use the fuck word) would see that the sickening behaviour of a DPM who almost always answer a question with a question in that forum was fuckin' irritating. Isn't it a no brainer to ask a question when you know the answer?

DPM: "What do you think?"
Student: "Dear Millionaire Minister, you take me for an idiot or are you one? If I know the fuckin' answer, would I be asking you?

I believe the way the DPM behaved in the Pre-U Forum is "antithetical to fostering social cohesion and consensus on the way forward on the many challenges this country faces." If Millionare Ministers of PAP continue to behave this way, it'll be the death of Singapore!

ST ends the editorial with: "Worse, profanity for its own sake can can vulgarise a community and degenerate the tone of public discussions. It could foster a cynical culture, more ready to knock down than to nurture and build. With maturity, the young may come to see that it is all a question of time, tone and place."

No Sir, vulgarity or the 'fuck' word' is not going to bring Singapore down. The following will definitely bring Singapore down:

  • Rulers who do not know how to lead, 
  • Leaders who take care of themselves instead of the people
  • Msm that sucks up without any sense of fair play or decency
  • Discontent of the people generated by ivory-towered leaders who still think that Singaporeans are daft.
  • Prudes and hypocrites who make a fuckfarce out of a 'fuck' word used by a 17-year-old 

Usually, I do not use so many 'fuck' words in what I write. I guess "it is all a question of time, tone and place."

Indeed, what triggered it is my sympathy for the plight of a young man who has the gumption to tell it like it is!

Peace and strength be with him.


The menacing editorial of ST 18 June 2012 in full:

Swearing off the profanities

PROFANITY on the Web is so common these days that it has lost much of its impact. It is poor substitute for wit or a clever argument, of course, but it's a no-brainer for some bloggers when words fail them.

Consequently, swearing for effect tends to be seen in a negative light, as noted by Glen Matlock, formerly of the Sex Pistols, in a television interview: 'It's pathetic when people just swear for the sake of it.' He should know as the punk band didn't do itself any favours by spewing vulgarities for no apparent reason on the most inappropriate occasions.

What is appropriate, of course, depends on the context of a group and a verbal exchange. In working class interactions and the online chatter of the young, foul words are so routinely traded that some would consider it a way of merely building rapport.

Hence, the measured response to the expletive-filled blog post of a junior college student commenting on this year's annual Pre-U Seminar where Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean was the key speaker. The student deleted the post afterwards and apologised for his words, which an Education Ministry spokesman noted were 'rude and unbecoming'. The spokesman added: 'We hope to turn this into a teachable moment both for the student blogger and students in general.'

More troubling than just the language was the student's attitude - he wanted answers to national issues from the minister rather than to be asked for his views on them. It spoke of a lack of understanding that citizens own and shape the societies they live in, not government leaders or officials. Carried to extremes, this much lamented what's-in-it-for-me attitude is antithetical to fostering social cohesion and consensus on the way forward on the many challenges this country faces. Beyond this, the swearing incident raises questions of public manners and how public discourse should be conducted.

Even so, it would be unrealistic for language gestapos to even try to stamp out such conduct entirely. Swearing is so much a part of popular culture that it has surfaced everywhere, from acclaimed books like J. D. Salinger's The Catcher In The Rye to the HBO drama Deadwood. In real life, however, if the intent is to show disrespect or desecration, it can spark a chain of reactions that can spin out of control.
Worse, profanity for its own sake can vulgarise a community and degenerate the tone of public discussions. It could foster a cynical culture, more ready to knock down than to nurture and build. With maturity, the young may come to see that it is all a question of the time, tone and place.

Sunday, June 17, 2012


WARNING: Prudes and hypocrites who are allergic to swear words are advised not to read further. The Dalai Lama may shock you.

After Teo Chee Hean was blogly told to "FUCK OFF" by Reuben Wang for his performance as a 'What do you think" Minister in a Pre-U Forum, I am delighted to see the video above. The Dalai Lama has lighten up the situation by saying we should fuck it (forget?) about our religious differences in the video. His mention of our rights, being human regardless of our individual wealth, serves well to remind our PAP rulers and judges not to treat our less endowed with bully and contempt.

But should Singaporean fuck it (forget?) about the justice system that we have? Why Dr Woffles Wu (fined only $1000) was treated so differently from Charlie Lim (jailed 6 months) [Link] is beyond many who care about justice and equality in Singapore? 

The Law Minister spoke [Link]. I wonder what is he up to? I'm more dazed and confused.

Law and justice in Singapore is uniquely Singaporean. Laws are passed at the whim and fancy of PAP because there are not enough opposition in parliament to veto what PAP wishes. What PAP wishes, PAP gets! I still remember the sad joke of GST being raised to 7% after the 2006 election by PAP. The reason given by PAP was to help the poor but it ended up with ministers' salary raised to millions while help for the poor was answered with, "You want them to have their 3 meals in restaurant, foodcourt or hawker centre?". To reduce the GINI co-efficient so that the gap between the poor and rich can be improved, the PAP MPs voted for the Estate Duties Act to be repealed! Now the rich dies richer! So is PAP helping the poor or the rich? Sad!

Justice in Singapore? Woffles and Charlie is a good example of what it is. Another blatant case of injustice in our justice system is why an ex-school principal was only jailed for 6 weeks [Link] for fecking a 17-year-old prostitute while an odd job worker got jailed for 4 months for doing the same [Link]? Could it be one is fooking a a 17-year-old Singaporean girl while the other is fecking a 17-year-old Vietnamese girl? A case of nationality discrimination on under-aged prostitutes?

Some get fooked, some get fecked while most Singaporean just fuck it (forget?)

While we are at it, wasn't there an investigation on City Harvest Church founder Kong Hee & 16 others  in 2010? [Link]? Is the police and the AG still at it???


I recommend that it's time to revisit Alan Shadrake's "Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock" [Link]


Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Short of MPs? We have enough Singaporeans!

I may be considered an old geezer who is behind time. I keep finding interesting videos and speeches that excite and make sense to me. Even they were meant for GE 2011! I find the value of the 2 videos below to be worthy of not only for Election 2011 but as lessons for Singaporeans who take life in Singapore for granted. And also for those who are still chasing the 5C's without realising that our country is going to the dogs!

PAPolitical leaders make a mockery of National Service by paying themselves millions. Hypocrisy is not being condemned because they are practiced by the politically rich and famous - If Dr Lim Hock Siew (incarcerated for 20 years for refusing to give face to a despot) [Link] was considered honourable by a minister, why has not the same minister do the decent thing of clearing Dr Lim's good name by requesting for a Commission Of Inquiry on his detention (Operation Cold Store) and that of Operation Spectrum (Marxist Conspiracy). [Link]

Fact of the matter is: Fooking talk is cheap and riding on the deaths of bravehearts to gain brownie points and political mileage is so . . . "I don't know what to say?" (courtesy of Kate Spade TPL) and "What do you think?" (courtesy of TCH)

Year 2011 is history but project 2011 has created the above awesome and brutal videos that remind us of the truths that has been suppressed by the powerful, namely: msm and political party. It is through such videos that we are reminded of the filth that is! 

Many fair-minded and decent Singaporeans lament that we do not have enough opposition MPs to tackle the PAP. With the results of GE 2011 and the BE 2012 of Hougang, I'm delighted to note that at least more than 40% of us citizens are putting our money where our mouth is - showing our contempt to those who claim to help us by importing more migrants to compete for our jobs, our homes, our hospital beds, our rights to fresh air and our rights to a decent and healthy livelihood!

With the crap that's hitting the fan lately for the MIW especially for the PM [Link] and DPM [Link], all Singaporeans should take a step back and truly reflect on . . . WTF is there left for a Singaporean?

I believe that the poor, average and middle class Singaporeans who do not have the means to emigrate can connect with the disconnect that is. The cronies and elites who have benefited from their connection would consider what I write nothing more than TCSS (Talk Cock Sing Song). Through my more than 60 years of existence in Singapore, the joy that I have is to know that more and more Simgaporeans are waking up and listening to:

Do you hear the people sing
Singing the song of angry men
It is the music of a people
Who would not be slaves again 
When the beating of the heart 
Echoes the music of the drum
There is a life about to start when tomorrow comes

Do you hear the people sing
Singing the song of angry men
It is the music of a people
Who would not be bullied again 
When the beating of the heart 
Echoes the music of the drum
There is a life about to start when tomorrow comes

Do you hear the people sing
Singing the song of angry men
It is the music of a people
Who would not be cheated again 
When the beating of the heart 
Echoes the music of the drum
There is a life about to start when tomorrow comes

Do you hear the people sing
Singing the song of angry men
It is the music of a people
Who would not be fooled again 
When the beating of the heart 
Echoes the music of the drum
There is a life about to start when tomorrow comes [Link]

To the elites that have and Singaporeans who worry not of the the struggles of the less fortunate, please be a little like Dr Lim Hock Siew who not only put a despot to shame but did his part in being kind to his poor and sick patients by not charging them after the treatment he provided. Definitely not one who waits for you at the cul-de-sac with his knuckle dusters when you owe him some!

For the sake of my children and grandchildren, I want to believe that Singaporeans are not 'daft'. They do not need 'spurs' to drive them to be decent, hardworking and loyal with a righteous spirit to do right for themselves, their country and their children and their grandchildren. They would recite the National Pledge as a Pledge and not as fookin' aspiration because of the personal racial or whatever bias of one!


Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Is CPF Broke?

We pay to the CPF Board hoping to retire with peace of mind when we finally take a break before we die. The people in PAP keeps moving the goalposts. Way back in the 60's and 70's we were promised that we would receive our CPF (with interest) at age 55. Look what's happening now? It went from age 55 to 60 to 62 to 65 to . . . . . . .kingdom comes!

They screwed us with:
  • Medisave
  • Minimum Sum Scheme
  • Compulsory Annuity (CPF Life?)
Economists and financial experts like Christopher Balding [Link] and Kenneth Jeyaratnam  [Link] and [Link] have come up with their report and theories of the funny but scary financial situation that Singapore is in. Kenneth has written to Tony Tan (President of Singapore) and Tharman Shamugaratnam (DPM and Finance Minister of Singapore) to ask what, where and why Singaporeans' reserves are. However, poor Kenneth has yet to receive a reply. I do not think a reply is forthcoming from the ruling PAP because I can still remember what they did to our ex-President Ong Teng Cheong when he asked to know of our reserves. [Link on why he wasn't given a state funeral] [Link on his interview with Asiaweek]

As an ordinary Singaporean with no knowledge of economics or financial expertise, my gut feel is our reserve is fooked! Like our former President Mr Ong Teng Cheong could not know, we will not know! My simple minded reasoning is:

If the money is there, why does PAP need to delay the withdrawal of CPF savings with deceptions like:
  • Medisave
  • Minimum Sum Scheme
  • Compulsory Annuity (CPF Life?)
I am sad to note that CPF is so fookin' broke that they have to charge CPF members an administrative fee of more than $3.00 (plus co-payment and deductibles) for sick senior citizens to use their own Medisave savings to pay for the medical bill in Polyclinic!

Is CPF broke?

Rationale for CPF Board's Corporate Logo

The circle draws emphasis on the completeness of the CPF system as a guaranteed social security savings scheme.
The shield represents security and protection for our members in their retirement.
The three keys represent the unity in the tripartite relationship among employees, employers and the Government.
Lastly, the use of the colour green in our logo highlights CPF's constant growth and dynamism.

Rationale for CPF Board's 50th Anniversary Logo

The CPF Anniversary logo comprises the Board's logo and the symbolic 50 which denotes 50 years of CPF history.
The numeric symbol "50" underscores the Board's long-standing commitment in helping our members save for their retirement. Its bold stroke suggests qualities of spontaneity and creativity. It also demonstrates our confidence in the many collaborative relationships we have forged with our stakeholders through the years. Placed securely next to our corporate logo, the 50th Anniversary logo reaffirms our vision in a planned future.
The colour scheme, crimson yellow and green, creates a contemporary, refreshing appeal with a touch of warmth. Crimson yellow represents 50 golden years of strength and illumination. Our corporate colour green signifies constant growth and dynamism.
Signed across the “50th ” anniversary symbol is the tagline - “Saving for our retirement”, an axiom that captures the essence of the Board's mission.

An enlightening question that we must ask ourselves with regards to CPF: "ARE WE FOOKED YET?"

My dear readers, in the words of DPM Teo Chee Hean,



Monday, June 11, 2012

Understanding the Anger of Good Citizens like Reuben Wang and Jolovan Wham

WARNING: What I write here is not meant for prudes and hypocrites who find the the word "Fuck" offensive.
As much as I would punish (cane and wash his mouth with red hot burning chilli padi) should my grandson use "Fuck you" on anyone, I would not do the same to Reuben Wang. After watching the above from Razor TV, I cannot blame Reuben Wang and the other thinking participants for their disrespect for the speaker. I find the speaker as well as the MC/moderator 'fooking ruditating'. For the uninitiated, it means "fucking rude and irritating".

The fact that they had the sickening smiles on their faces and enjoying it when they put the students in a spot is despicable. If leaders of a country and educational institution can behave in such deplorable manner, where in Singapore can we find examples of grace and civility?

This sick culture and bad example of the rich, powerful and elite belittling, bullying and taking advantage the smaller, weaker and poorer Singaporeans must stop! The greater worry:  Is the PAP government's generous welcoming of more millionaires [Link] to Singapore with open legs to ultimately raise GDP,  hence increase ministers' salaries, a tsunami spring waiting to implode!

For those who insist that Reuben Wang did wrong in writing"Fuck You, Sir" in his blog, I invite you to read the frustration and anger of Mr Jolovan Wham for what ST did to him. [LINK]. After reading what Jolovan wrote, may I invite you to listen to what Teo Chee Hean said about the media at the same forum which got Reuben so angry that he had to speak his mind.

Now do you blame Reuben for his exclamation!???

Do you not feel for the frustration of Jolovan for the lies and deception?

I won't blame you if you repeat the same word that Reuben used in his blog in your comment on my 'caricature' blog.


Do you hear the people sing? [Link]

Saturday, June 9, 2012

So Who The Fook Got Fecked?

WARNING: What I write here is not meant for prudes and hypocrites who find the the word "Fuck" offensive.

The word ‘Fuck’ is in fact not a bad word. ‘Fuck’ originates from back in the day when Kings were in charge and had the power to do whatever they want. In order for couples to have a baby, they had to ask for permission from their King, if the King thought that it would be acceptable he would allow them to have sex only if they put a sign on their door that says FUCK. The letters stand for "Fornication Under Consent of the King".

So the next time you’re having sex, put a sign outside your door saying FUCK, this way if a king suddenly appears, you will be safer by being more legal than the people who are making love or just having sex, meaning you’ve saved yourself from decapitation.

How has ‘fuck’ became such a bad word over the years?
Why is the word used in other things that don’t even involve sex?
Next time you want to insult someone or something like that... say: "Excuse me; Get fornicated under consent of the king!"

Here's a short video explaining how the word Fuck can be used these days:


Now on a more serious note:
As a parent and a grandparent, I worry for 17-year-old Reuben Wang of SAJC (St Andrew's Junior College. The more than half a page of "Top of The News" of Page A2 of Straits Times 8 June 2012 is not doing any good to the emotional and mental health of Rueben Wang. Having written this
and wrote again, unrepentantly of asking Teo Chee Hian to "get Fornicated Under Consent of the King!', I am amazed that he now allows Teo Chee Hean to brag, "I'm glad he (Reuben) has taken the time to reflect, and recognises that what he said and, as well as the way he said it, were wrong." 

If Reuben apologised on his own volition, it is all well and good. However, if it was stage-managed with fear or favour or threat to put a DPM in a good light, I fear for this young man's mental wellbeing.

We have seen the virtue of steadfastness of Chia Thye Poh, Dr Lim Hock Siew, Said Zahari and many others in our recent history. I hope this young man was not broken by fear of losing his place in the JC or other subtle threats. It is sinful to manipulate this young man in such a way that he ends up dazed and confused, losing respect for himself and hating himself for not standing up to what he truly feels.

I'm no psychologist or behaviour expert, but I know what it feels like to be thumbed down by bullies. You can hardly breathe and you just feel like you're zero and you tell yourself, "Fuck! If I can't fight back, death may be a better option!"

If Rueben is reading this, this geezer's advice is: "You did what you did. You are where you are now. You can choose to be bitter or choose to be better. Better is the Only Option!"


ps: For readers who wish to see the final journey of Dr Lim Hock Siew (Rest In Peace), I have recorded a brief video here [Link]

Friday, June 8, 2012

Do Citizens of Hong Kong Have More Democracy Than Singaporeans?

I just viewed this video [Link] and I feel that as a Singaporean, I'm deprived of my freedom. I have less freedom than a Hong Konger, a SAR of Communist China.

When I go to pay my last respect to Dr Lim Hock Siew this afternoon, I hope to see many Singaporeans line up along Joo Chiat Terrace to pay their respect to Braveheart Dr Lim Hock Siew who showed us the true essence of bravery, resilience, integrity and honour.

Almost everyone is aware of September 11. Not many are aware June 4?

Please visit the following links to know what June 4 1989 is all about.


Do you hear the people sing?


Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Respecting and Remembering Dr Lim Hock Siew

Out of the 81 years, almost 20 were taken from him at the prime of his life by a repulsive despot.

Dr Lim Hock Siew's passing is reported in yahoo news [Link]  

Apart from the video above recorded last year, I also have the opportunity to listen to Dr Lim speak in 2009 on the injustice and cruelty done to him by Lee Kuan Yew. He said, "After 9 years of incarceration, they wanted me to issue a statement to firstly support the so-called democratic system in Singapore and secondly to renounce politics. I told them that these two demands are self-contradictory because if there is parliamentary democracy then I don't have to give up politics. So they said, 'You must say something to show repentance. Otherwise, Lee Kuan Yew would lose face'. For me it was not a question of pride, it's a question of principle. In the first place if a person has to save his face by depriving somebody else of his fundamental rights, then that's not a face that is worth saving . . . In Singapore we have a situation where government leaders said that they have integrity that has to be sustained by the highest pay in the world but yet they demand from political opponents and detainees an integrity that has to be sustained by the longest imprisonment in the world. Why should anybody has to sacrifice so much just to sustain his integrity and his beliefs." [Link]

Though I do not know Dr Lim personally, I went to his funeral wake this morning. After introducing myself to his son Yue Wen, I very respectfully bowed to Dr Lim 3 times for teaching and touching me with his integrity, honour and fortitude in taking on the tyrant and the cruel system!

Come Friday, I shall go again to Joo Chiat Terrace to pay my last respect to a patriot who was cheated of his freedom and joy of fatherhood for almost 20 years by a despot too cruel and a system too vile.

To me, being present at Dr Lim's funeral on Friday is an emblem of we the citizens of Singapore showing and doing our part to build a democratice society based on justice and equality.


Sunday, June 3, 2012

ST Hypocrites!

I had to be sure so I checked the dictionary [Link] before I blog on Hypocrites:
hyp·o·crite   [hip-uh-krit]  Show IPA
1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

It was 'a view I could die from' when the editorial of Sunday Times 3 June 2012 read: "More civility, please"
If Straits Times can preach on civility, I believe I can be the father of the Queen of England, pigs can fly and Lee Kuan Yew can win an Oscar Award from Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for being the world's 'noblest' and 'kindest' and 'best' politician. On a more sober note, Lim Swee Say can nominate LKY for the 'cheaper, better, faster' not forgetting 'longest' minister of all time Life Time Award on May Day 2013! 

If there is a lack of graciousness, kindness, humanity and civility in Singapore, it is due to the overwhelming bullying and scary tactics that is practiced by the msm and the PAP. For the past 50 years or so, they created this uniquely Singaporean 'fear culture'! Vincent Wijeysingha put it so succinctly by saying, "Wealth and status is preferred to kindness and humanity" [Link]. Sadly, in their quest to hold on to power and wealth Straits Times behaves like PAP. How can they preach when what they do is so inconsistent with what is right and proper? When they so flagrantly commit acts that appear to flout and abuse morality and fair play?

  • Of all days, why publish such subtle trash on Hougang By-Election Day? To remind voters to vote for "red lightning and blue circle"? Subtle trash indeed!
  • If not for self-interest and to score political points for PAP, why do such trash against WP below
  • If ST were to play fair, would we not see something like below in the front page of ST to match what they did to Workers Party? "People's Action Party Gov't faces allegations of wrongful detention, torture, for 1987 episode". Unfortunately not! I have blogger Andrew Loh to thank for the 'like real' mock-up below! [Link]

If all the above are not signs of the flagrant abuse of power and monopoly, I do not know what is.
I am amazed that Rachel Chang wrote about "Ballsiness" (testicular strength?) in "Don't Let The Bullies Get You" on ST 3 June 2012:

I only wish Rachel could take on the big bullies, the real bullies. If only Rachel can take on the bullies like Maruah and Function 8 take on the bullies. 

If only Rachel can take on the bullies like Martyn See takes on the real big bullies [Video Link]

If only Rachel can take on the bullies like Vincent Wijeysingha takes on real big bullies [Video Link Part One] and [Video Link Part Two]

Sadly, Rachel's bread may be buttered by bullies.

Meanwhile, apart from 'Beyond the Blue Gate" by Teo So Lung, go get and read these books!


Singapore: A Place Where Wealth and Status is Preferred to Kindness and Humanity.

"You degraded the humanity of the people. You hobbled the trade unions. You threw the politicians into jail. You silenced the newspapers. You co-opted the professional bodies and you impoverished the universities, and you bankrupted and exiled so many of our honest and decent Singaporeans, some of our best people in our community. In a sense, you exiled and bankrupted us all".

The above is extracted from the speech by Vincent Wijeysingha at Hong Lim Park on 2 June 2012.
See the unabridged video version here [Link]

A description so apt of a despot who so mercilessly destroyed so many for the greed of status, power, and wealth!
I thought the above 'Breaking News" was for real. I thought ST is playing fair at last. Unfortunately, the above is a look-like-real mock-up done by Andrew Loh! [Link]

"If you are a member of PAP, if you have voted for PAP, if you are an admirer of Lee Kuan Yew or PAP, you are endorsing and indirectly responsible for the following. . . . . . . . The ISD with its network of informers and goons have quietly terrorized and intimidated two generations of Singaporeans to political submission. It has created a nation where its citizens are afraid to participate in politics. It has created a democracy where until the last general election, about half of the electorate have never voted, because the opposition could not find candidates to contest in general election. This has allowed the PAP to rule uninterrupted for 50 years, implementing policies that has increased the income gap  and forced many of our senior citizens to work till their death." extract of Martyn See's speech at Hong Lim Park, 2 June 2012. Full Speech here. [Link]

Only last Saturday, I had the blessings of being among thousands of Hougangites celebrating the victory of Png Eng Huat of Workers' Party [Link]. One week after, I witnessed courageous Singaporeans like Martyn and Vincent doing their part to "build a democratic society based on justice and equality . . ."

For those who missed the opportunity to be at Hong Lim Park on 2 June 2012, I strongly encourage you to watch the speech by Martyn See here [Link] and Vincent Wijeysingha here [Link Pt 1] and [Link Pt 2].

Listening to Vincent Wijeysingha, I found more of Jolovan Wham. It is sad to read the following:

"Two days ago I was informed that a large and influential Multinational Corporation with strong links to the government was unhappy that I might be speaking at Saturday’s commemoration of Operation Spectrum, That We May Dream Again, co-organised by Function 8 and Maruah. I was urged not to participate because I should not be associated with 'Marxists' and our work with migrant workers might suffer.

The knock on the door in the middle of the night that took the 22 into detention is no longer heard. But it has been replaced by veiled threats, warnings and funding cuts. The government appears to have found proxies to do its censorship and its oppression. This is Singapore’s twenty-first century version of the ISA. It is scary. And it makes people who work for social change nervous.

The legacy of 1987 will continue to oppress us if we do not speak out and take action for the change we want to see. I am optimistic that it will come but we can only do it when we are united and work in solidarity with one another." [Link]

Do you hear the people sing?


Friday, June 1, 2012

The Subtle Filth

On 23 May 2012, 3 days before the by election in Hougang, we were shown this.
On Saturday, 26 May 2012, the day of the By Election, we got to see this!
We have the Cooling Off Day (a law fixed by the PAP) and we get to see the PAP Symbol! Subtle and tricky advertisement at work! Blimey, it is so 'On Your Face!' Isn't it?

Yet, editors in local newspapers are 'crying father, crying mother' over the comments made by WP's Low Thia Khiang of the newpapers bias reporting. [Link] and [Link] and [Link Chinese] are responses from Low Thia Khiang to the editors

I do believe that most reporters and journalists are honest and have integrity. I believe that most of them are fair and objective in their reporting. However, what they write have got to go through their sub editor, editor and higher ups and Boss. And the Boss, I believe is PAP! [Link] I thank Subra for his legalistic explanation of the structural problem of our msm. With such structure, it is tough for the editors to report otherwise, unless they plan to look for jobs elsewhere.

As much as they try to explain their way out of Low Thia Khiang's comment that msm is bias, their numbers will not add up because Singaporeans are not daft duds that some Lee wish we were! Most Singaporeans are polite and peaceful but we are not blind! Neither are we stupid!

Because they (PAP & cronies) think Singaporeans are 'daft' stupid simpletons, they came up with insidious ways to damage the integrity of their political opponent hoping that voters in Hougang will fall for such treachery. Ironically, they shot their own feet again and they may need time to 'repent' for the despicable contempt they have for Singaporeans!

Amid the celebration of so many fair-minded citizens on Png Eng Huat's win in Hougang, it is wise to note that Singaporeans are angry with the arrogance and callous attitude of the PAP with has led to unaffordable housing, shambolic public transport, over-crowdedness, unbearable inflation, rising vices, broken families and more unhappiness.

Do you hear the people sing?