Am I grumbling? I've been taking a break and wondering if I should continue grumbling and getting it off my chest on this blog. I would have taken a longer break if not for the caring comments I received.Life is worth living when you know that people care! I'm touched and grateful for the concern that some of my readers have shown me. My sincere thanks to Hazel Poa Koon Koon, the Monk and Shrimp for your kind concern and I want you to know that I'm well. There are good days and there are bad days. Having knocked on Heaven's door with a damaged heart, I've learned to make the best of each day.As 'Singaporeans are champion grumblers" [Link] and [Link] , I'm glad to be back being a champion :) MM Lee said that he allows foreigners to be PRs and citizens of SinCity so that Singaporeans can be "kept on their toes" maybe "with spurs on their hinds"!It's a pity that we do not have foreigners to compete with politicians and ministers in SinCity. If we have, they may have "kept" the hotshots in GIC and Temasek "on their toes" too. If we had "the spurs on the hinds" of the chairmen, directors and executives of GIC and Temasek, the performance of these elites may have been much better! Do their 'high faluting' positions and connections absolve them from the responsibility and accountability expected of them? Or are they above fair play and moral human standard? Are we finally having a "bad dose of government" even though we are paying king's ransom for their services? The sound of silence for those responsible for the losses is most deafening. Like the increase of GST to help the poor (or ministers), have we been had again?Here's the latest on the haemorrhage of GIC at Stuyvesant Town [Link] With so much talk of "paying for the best" maybe those big guns at GIC and Temasek deserve something more drastic than "spurs on their hinds".Yes, Singaporeans are champion grumblers and the #1 Elite grumbles that we do not work hard enough. “We tell them look they have got to work harder or they’ll become stupid. It’s just that they don’t see the point of it." The man keeps grumbling that his daughter is a spinster. He grumbles that his granddaughter should be husband-hunting instead of titles-hunting and he grumbles again on the same issue of a 32-year-old physiotherapist who's lucky (or unlucky) enough to treat him :)So apart from "Stopping at Two" then and "Wanting us to get screwed and give more births" now, what does the MM expect of us? What do we expect from him? Depending on his audience and mood and the occasion, it can be anything!On the subject of screw and sex, it may be good to visit Sin City's history. . .“Repression, Sir is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love-it is always easier the second time! The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course with constant repetition you get more and more brazen in the attack. All you have to do is to dissolve organizations and societies and banish and detain the key political workers in these societies. Then miraculously everything is tranquil on the surface. Then an intimidated press and the government-controlled radio together can regularly sing your praises, and slowly and steadily the people are made to forget the evil things that have already been done, or if these things are referred to again they’re conveniently distorted and distorted with impunity, because there will be no opposition to contradict.”-Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition PAP member speaking to David Marshall, Singapore Legislative Assembly, Debates, 4 October, 1956 “…you attack only those whom your Special Branch can definitely say are communists. Then you attack those whom your Special Branch says are aiding communists. Then finally, when you have gone that far, you attack all who oppose you.”-Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition PAP member speaking to David Marshall, Singapore Legislative Assembly, Debates, 4 October, 1956Maybe we should be grateful for grumblers. They are safer than those mayhem seekers who hit the streets each time their leaders spew rubbish and make derogatory remarks of their own citizens.Stay safe, stay healthy.Thanks again to my readers who help me make it a good day!feedmetothefish Stupid & Stupider Timing of HDB tax hike 'avoid bigger increases later'Front Page headline of Straits Times on Monday, 23 Nov 2009 by Sue-Ann Chia, Senior Political CorrespondentQuote from ST:Rear-Admiral (NS) Lui said: "The problem is, the longer you defer it, the larger the increase will be. . . if HDB prices continue to go up." Hence, the Government has decided to raise the property tax "to reflect the prevailing movement of HDB prices and also to give rebates", said Rear-Admiral Lui. (emphasis mine)In Hollywood, we have actor Jim Carrey doing "Dumb & Dumber." In Singapore, we have actor (wayanger) doing "Stupid & Stupider".Is the the current batch of mintsters treating Singaporeans as morons or are Singaporeans stupider than stupid to accept such logic?Last I remember the GST increase from 5% to 7% to was to help the poor. Not too long after that, PAP Ministers had their million dollar pay hike with much arrogance and shameless justification of their self worth [Link]. I think the 2% GST increase lightens the burden of the poor less but enriches the millionaire ministers in PAP Government more.To be beaten again by another HDB tax hike is one thing but to have our faces rubbed in again with such stupid (I cannot find a more diplomatic word) reason is beyond me.Increase the property tax . . . so that you can give rebates? This must be the mother of all reasons! Just how screwed up can one get? If this isn't another male cow manure from a PAP mintster, I don't know what is.In the second half of 2009, Singaporeans have learned that:Singapore Pledge is merely an AspirationSingapore is not a cuntry, but a cityHDB Tax is increased so that the Government can give give rebatesAnd I thought "Mee Siam Mai Hum" was funny... or was it the $400,000 to rename Marina Bay... Marina Bay [Link]?feedmetothefish. A Few Good Men Does it take cruelty to human beings (including founding brothers in arms of PAP) and the selling of one's soul to be a despot?The last time that I was painfully emotional was when I woke up after a heart attack (and ventricular defibrillation) to be told by the doctor in ICU that one in one thousand may die from being fed Streptokines intravenously! Yes, that's the stuff the doctors used to clear clots in your blood vessels when angiogram wasn't so instantly available 10 years ago. I asked for my wife and kids and hugged and kissed them for dear life before I went for the procedure which lasted for 6 hours (if my memory serves me right). I survived. I'm grateful.Dr Lim Hock Siew, in his revelation, [you must watch this video!] has created in me the raw emotion that the near death (or death) experience brought me. When I saw him speak in the video by Martyn See [Link], I asked myself of the time God has given Dr Lim Hock Siew, Chia Thye Poh, Lim Chin Siong, Said Zahari, the detainees of Marxist's Conspiracy and many others. Was God responsible for their loss of time and freedom? Or was it a power hungry despot (who aspires to be god) who was responsible?I've read what's written by JB Jeyaratnam, Francis Seow, Vincent Cheng, Teo Soh Lung [Book Link] and others. I have seen "One Nation Under Lee" [Link]. I have seen Said Zahari's 17 Years video [Link]. They were raw. They were revealing. But to have Dr Lim Hock Siew said what he said in the video is to know and be convinced that "white" ain't that "white" after all.This is what I saw and heard Dr Lim said of INTEGRITY:I stood firm and had to suffer 2 decades. That's the price I had to pay for Integrity. Where PAP is concerned, "Integrity have to be sustained by the Highest Pay in the World."This is the Immorality of the situation in Singapore today. That touched my heart, my damaged heart. My broken Singaporean heart!I believe Dr Lim did not die from the cruel incarceration because his job wasn't done. He had to survive to tell us this.For what you've been taught in schools; what you have read, seen or heard in msm; what you have read from the Lee Kuan Yew's Memoirs; what you have read from "Men In White" book . . . Fair is fair. It Is Not What It Is until you have seen and heard THIS!It is men like Lim Hock Siew, Said Zahari, JB Jeyaratnam, Francis Seow and many more including women like Teo Soh Lung who shows us, and put on record, the hidden Singapore story. With a Few Good Men and Women, we now have another version of truth, of Singapore's history before us.Truth prevails and Truth hurts.To every life a little rain must fall.I appreciate and respect Dr Lim and Martyn See for telling it like it is.Thank you for teaching us some!feedmetothefish That's Such An Insolent Remark We live, we learn.I did not know of Wole Soyinka, Nobel Laureate from Nigeria, until I read an article where ST senior writer Cheong Suk-Wai interviewed him on "colonialism and human rights activists". Here are some interesting Q&A.Q: "On Singapore?"A: "I find it well laid out, very orderly with a kind of antiseptic atmosphere."Q: "With globalization leveling playing fields, it would appear that everyone might soon have an equal voice".A: "At the moment, Western powers have built up a tradition of commercial dictatorship with all nations, with the encouragement, very often, of leadership of our very own societies, who find it very easy to collaborate. They become the darlings of their trading partners but, in fact, they are degrading the collective worth of their own societies."Q: "But isn't being open to trade beneficial to their peoples?"A: "I've heard statements from so-called democratic leaders such as: 'I know what is best for my people.' That's such an insolent remark."Q: "Why so?"A: It's no different from the language of the former colonial masters. So you are quite right that we are still aspiring towards the level playing field.Q: So the colonialism still prevails long after the colonialists have left?A: It is so. The British, when they were leaving, decided which part of Nigeria was to rule over the rest.Q: What would you advise other countries with similar competing ethnicities and histories?A: The only advice that I can offer is exactly the formula which we are proposing for our nation, which is this: We know this nation was founded on a lie. But let us sit down now and decide the protocols of co-existence, because as long as we have not done that, we are fulfilling the mandate of our colonial masters. We are not yet free. Singaporeans are always reminded by leaders of how lucky we are in not living in a peaceful fishing village but a vibrant city where providing gambling dens has become a pride and joy of a government devoid of other means and ideas of sustaining a country's (or is it city's?) economy. Some would prefer a laid-back fishing village than a over-crowded money-crazed $ingapore where friendliness, kindness and compassion give way to greed, power and insolence. Where everyone is just a cog in the wheel, a mere digit, to serve the gods of CBF. No, not the Face of the female sexual organ (in Hokkien) but be part of a Cheaper, Better and Faster cog in the wheel of Lim Swee Say!Interestingly, I also read about MM Lee rubbishing opposition parties in Singapore. "Come election time, they talk a lot of things, which is rubbish," said Mr Lee. [Link] and singing praises of PAP's politicians."MINISTER Mentor Lee Kuan Yew yesterday hit out at critics of People's Action Party politicians, reiterating that the Singapore system works precisely because the ruling party takes great care when choosing its candidates, including some who forgo high-paying careers to become ministers.To drive home his point, he pointed to the examples of Law Minister K. Shanmugam, an MP of Sembawang GRC, and Tanjong Pagar GRC MP Indranee Rajah.Ms Indranee is a lawyer with one of Singapore's top legal firms, just as Mr Shanmugam was before he became an office-bearer last year.Mr Shanmugam, Mr Lee said, could make $6 million a year while in private practice, but now makes $1.5 million a year as a minister.'(Opposition MP) Low Thia Khiang says, 'Oh, so much money.' I tell you honestly, if I am not a minister, I myself could make two or three times what I am making now. Every time I talk to foreign companies, they offer me $100,000. What do I do with the money? I give it (away) for scholarships, donate to it schools,' he added.Likewise, it was hard to find an MP like Ms Indranee - well-educated, earning a good living, but who yet took the time to nurture her constituency and push residents' interests and help improve their living conditions." [Link]Shanmugam may lose some but does Indranee make more by being an MP?Such self adulation makes the little guys in Singapore want to puke. Some swear. With money that may last till the world ends (but some Chinese say only 3 generations), what is one to do if not spread some around in some charity for good karma? With due respect to the MM, if he wants more money, he should just go do his thing, not stifle his son and give Lee Jnr the chance to prove his mettle as a Prime Minister.Just because Indranee and Shangmugum earn less now (but still in the millions) does it mean that they are sacrificing their bloody selves? Hello, do we want to put them in the same league as Mother Theresa or Mahatma Ghandi next? Let's have a sense of proportion.For goodness' sake, politicians chose to be in PAP for their own benefit. Whether it is altruistic (for the good of others) or for their own fame and glory, who knows? Only they themselves know. Maybe, just maybe, they want to be in the limelight so that they can get paid $100,000 as a guest speaker in a foreign company like their mentor. God knows!"Come election time, they talk a lot of things, which is rubbish".In the words of Mr Wole Soyinka, "That's such an insolent remark." In the eyes of some, I'm may be equally insolent, as in disrespectful, to an old man. However, as "speak from the guts" Greatgrandma of my granddaughter teaches me, "Respect needs to be earned, not demanded."feedmetothefishInsolent: [Link]adj.1. Presumptuous and insulting in manner or speech; arrogant2. Audaciously rude or disrespectful; impertinent. "Exceptionalism" is to Ignore, Rebut or Engage? Chua Mui Hoong, Senior Writer of Straits Times wrote this in "In defence of Singapore exceptionalism" on Friday, 6 Nov 2009. "THERE are three ways to respond to critics: ignore them, rebut them or engage them. For a long time, the Singapore Government's preferred response to criticisms levelled at the Republic's civil-political milieu has been to ignore them. Some ministers with a more combative nature - notably Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew - have chosen to rebut them robustly. Few have done the critics the honour of actually looking at their views and engaging them publicly. Law Minister and Second Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam did so, as did Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, during the recent meeting of the New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) International Section in Singapore."Law is law and we should respect the law of the land.I have always respected Singapore Law until I read of how the Attorney General of Singapore in 1997, Chan Sek Keong wrote a letter to the then Law Minister of how law can be so cleverly interpreted. The issue was The Workers Party had complained to the police that Goh Chok Tong, Lee Hsien Loong and Tony Tan had been inside a Cheng San GRC polling station on Polling Day. [Link] After reading this story way back then, I have come to conclude that we have laws in Singapore that can be quite weird. It depends on who is interpreting it.I wonder why Shanmugum, the current Law Mintster did not do the honour of engaging the IBA on this [Link] - International Bar Association Human Rights Report July 2008 on Singapore. To engage Reporters Sans Frontiers (which ranked Singapore's press freedom at 133) but to ignore IBA is "exceptional" indeed.Ignore, rebut or engage? What the difference?In trying to make Singapore 'unique' we now have the new term, 'exceptional'!What is "Exceptionalism"?When Chan Sek Keong wrote in 1997, "There is a consistency in the rationales of the regulatory schemes governing activities inside and those outside polling stations on election day. Waiting outside a polling station is made an offence because it gives rise to opportunities to influence or intimidate voters: see paragraph 99 of the Elias Report. Hence, the Act has provided a safety zone which stretches outwards for 200 metres from the polling station. In contrast, the possibility of a person inside a polling station influencing or intimidating voters in the presence of the presiding officer and his officials, the polling agents etc was considered so remote that it was discounted by the Act." That's "Exceptionalism". I think a person may not be intimidating but to have the current SM, PM and former DPM in the same room where you put your cross on a voting slip can be quite "exceptional"! When MM said that the 'National Pledge' is just a high falutin' 'Aspiration', that's "Exceptionalism"!When Shanmugum said Singapore is not a Country but a mere City in defending government's restriction on press and other freedom, that's "Exceptionalism"!Rule of law?Rule by law?Ruler's law? orLawyers rule?In SinCity, who knows?feedmetothefish HDB: So where the hell did the money go to? According to CNA, HDB suffers S$2b Deficit [Link]Holy shit, lesser mortals are now treated like idiots!Nobody competes with HDB. It builds and sells thousands of units every year at hundreds of thousands dollars per unit. HDB takes a cut from resellers when resale flats are transacted. How can a monopoly with so much freedom and free-play (charging hapless HDB mortgagees any price it fancies) end up with such a shameless account of itself?With all the "pow ka leow" - "control everything" and "pow chiak" - "sure win" position, who on earth would believe that they can end up with a S$2billion defishit. I've no idea how they cook and audit the figures, if they are audited at all. If HDB can lose money, then pigs should fly. Singapore should score #1 in press freedom. There should be no kangaroos in Singapore Courts and no judges in Singapore Zoological Gardens. LKY was never a PM, SM or MM in control of Singapore. My mother should take over Her Royal Highness Elizabeth’s post as the Queen of England and I'll be reincarnated after I’m fed to the fish and return as the POTUS! Unless, of course, HDB went on a gambling spree like Town Councils which dabbled in toxic Lehman Bros funds or "Ah Long" (lend) $$$,$$$,$$$ to GIC or Temasek and can’t get them to O$P$. (Owe Money, Pay Money!) Bloggers are wondering if someone should bite the bullet and answer to this sickening joke and knives are pointing at Mah Bow Tan, Mintster of National Development. THen again, if Wong Kan Seng can still keep his job after Mas can Selamat Jalan to JB, I doubt Mah Bow Tan will lose his million-dollar-job.Will the Singapore accountant-general or auditor-general comment or will this be another PM's "what to do, it happened" swept-under-the-carpet issue.Or will we get another FM's "the public is interested but there in no reason to explain" to "we-can-walk-all-over-these-lesser-mortals-who-are-too-stupid-to-know-the-difference" kind of answer. Who knows?feedmetothefish Lee Wei Ling's Half Glass in Washington DC The article below is extracted from The Malaysian Insider [Link]The glass is really half full — Lee Wei Ling OCT 30 — This is the last week of October, well into autumn. As I do my step-aerobic exercises, looking out of my hotel window in Washington DC, I see a lone maple tree. Half of its leaves have fallen. Of the remaining leaves, only a few are red; the rest are partially brown and partially green. They are wilting before they get a chance to display the splendid red that makes autumn my favourite season in the United States. The sad-looking tree reminds me that the year is drawing to a close. It has been a dreary year, both for myself and the world-at-large. Yet, in spite of my misfortunes, there are many things that I am grateful for. The five months I spent in hospital earlier in the year gave me a chance to reconnect with old friends, some of whom I had lost touch with for three decades. I made new friends among the nurses and doctors who looked after me. I enjoyed writing my columns for The Straits Times and The Sunday Times, and still do. After being discharged from the hospital, I was happy to see my patients again, and they were happy to see me. I have resumed travelling with my father Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, something that I used to do in my late teens and in my 20s, until work and my conference schedule put a stop to it. This time, when my father asked me to accompany him on his trips, I dropped everything and joined him. I am travelling not for fun but to keep him company. As a result, I have had quality time with him. While I have always known that my father was wise, I was surprised to see the movers and shakers of this world seek his opinion and advice on a multitude of international problems. Over the past weekend, my father stayed in the home of Henry and Nancy Kissinger in Connecticut. For dinner on Saturday and again for lunch on Sunday, the Kissingers invited people from politics, academia, the media and business to meet my father. On Monday evening, Fed Malek of Thayer Capital organised a gathering at his home in Washington DC for my father to meet more movers and shakers. My father learnt about US perceptions of the world and the views of the Obama administration and Congress. On Tuesday evening, at a black-tie dinner, my father was presented the Lifetime Achievement Award by the US-Asean Business Council. Former US Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton sent taped tributes. President Barack Obama sent a statement that was read out on his behalf by Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell. Kissinger and George Shultz — both former US secretaries of state and old friends of my father — attended the event. Both paid glowing tributes to my father. I am proud of my father, not for the award per se, but for making Singapore and Asean better places. And for this event, even I, usually heedless of convention, was appropriately attired. I wore a Chinese jacket that my sister-in-law Ho Ching had bought for me, carried a bag that my friend and colleague, Professor Helen Tjia, had given me, and wore shoes bought by another friend. Together, they had conspired to ensure that I was dressed appropriately for the occasion. I did not know how similar my thinking process was to my father's until after a private lunch with the Kissingers last weekend. Kissinger and my father were lamenting the state of the world, when my father said: “Henry, we must do what's right.” My father has always tried to do what is right for Singapore, and for humanity. He will stand by friends who fall out of public favour to show the world: “To hell with you, he is still my friend.” These are the same rules by which I have tried to lead my much humbler life. According to the psychologist Hans Jurgen Eysenck, sons think more like their mothers and daughters more like their fathers. My father believes in Eysenck's theories and blames himself for his non-conformist daughter. He is a world-famous statesman, one whom world leaders consult. As Kissinger noted on Tuesday evening: “Over 40 years, when Mr Lee comes to Washington, he gets to see an array of people that almost no foreign leader gets to see... because he does not come as a supplicant.” Today, my father is to meet Obama. But, after all is said and done, my father will leave it to history to have the final say on his life. In the meantime, he will simply continue to do what is right for Singapore and for the world. I believe that if there were more politicians like him, the world would be a better place. This article began on a sombre note. I admire the Stoic philosophy, and had decided to take a stoic view of this year. But I have since come to the conclusion that the glass is half full, and that really, I and most Singaporeans are not in such a bad situation. It is more likely to stay that way if we continued to do what's right — in season as well as out. — The Straits Times The writer is director of the National Neuroscience Institute.My thoughts:After reading the article by Lee Wei Ling, some may be moved to think of their father and the quality time they wish to spend with their Dad. But how many can have the good fortune of "dropped everything and join him".Being "lesser mortal", most would have difficulty getting approval for leave from work and would be scared stiff of being "dropped" from their job as money is needed to pay HDB mortgage, children's education and putting food on the table for the family.No, I'm not talking about spending time with Dad in USA receiving accolades, I'm talking about some poor souls wishing to spend time with Dad who's sick and bedridden at his HDB flat with no maids or Amahs to help.To be able to stay 5 months in a hospital without losing one's job is to have a very caring and generous employer. To be able to drop everything and have quality time with Daddy is to be luckier than Lucky Tan [Link]With life come challenges and traumas. It goes with the territory of living. Rich or poor, elite or not, to every life a little rain must fall. Having gone through some serious health challenges and misfortunes of my own, I can appreciate, though not totally agree, with LWL's writings during and after her 5 months stay in hospital.Lest I be a accused of being a poor sour grape and being mean to a sick person, I wish to state that I had my share of "half glass full" experience (dropping dead on the road with a heart attack and ventricular fibrillation) too. Though I did not need to stay 5 months in a hospital with special exercise equipment (I can't afford it anyway), it took me more than 5 years (without a job or income) to recuperate physically and financially!Life is funny.In trying to humanise or philosophise, one may upset readers by being insensitive to their sensitivities. It depends on where one is coming from and where one is heading to. The line between the intention to share one's sense of good/bad blessings and an exercise in shameless adulation can get blur at times.I guess each of us, regardless of coming from family or famiLee, will do our best to do good, to leave a decent impression, before we are fed to the fish.Some get the support of msm, some not.feedmetothefish Condensed version of "Men In White" I read it at The Temasek Review [Link] and think it's good to reproduce it here.If guys can get rich writing "Men In White", 新加坡文献馆 should be recognised and celebrated for taking the effort to tell it like it is; putting into perspective the hype and mirage that's been stuck on the groove of the 45rpm record of Singapore for far too long.As the MSM never cease to resist the madness of idolising the PAP and carrying its testicles till it hurts, it's a breath of fresh air to read an alternative view. To know more about 'Is the new Singapore model proceeding towards a “eating, drinking, whoring and gambling” and “don’t care black money or yellow money as long as can make money” model? Will Singapore degrade into a “laugh at the poor but not at the whore” kind of pragmatic society?", please read on.feedmetothefishOriginal author: 新加坡文献馆 Translated by Lim Leng Hiong Is the Singapore Model a “Mud Buddha Crossing the River”? (Chinese idiom: 泥菩萨过江-自身难保 Mud buddha crossing the river, can hardly save oneself). Does the Singapore model have any residual study value? Singapore’s media has routinely lauded the PAP government’s brilliant capability. Among them is a report on 30th Nov 2008 with very typical wording: “Ever since China’s reform and opening up, many leaders have visited Singapore and also learnt from Singapore’s numerous effective methods. Moreover, in recent years many officials, academics and journalists have expressed deep interest in the PAP and Singapore’s political model.” Clearly, the PAP and their supporters both think that the Singapore model is feasible, and can become a reference study for other developing nations. Lee Kuan Yew’s 2000 book “From Third World to First: The Singapore Story” recounts Lee Kuan Yew’s successful experience. However, Western academics have been doubtful of the feasibility of the Singapore model for many years. The 2008 Nobel economics prize recipient Paul Krugman wrote an economic commentary in 1994 disputing the so-called Asian economic miracle, and thought that Singapore’s economic growth benefited from the increase in foreign investments and not via gains in economic productivity. Similarly, American political academic Samuel P. Huntington had always doubted that Singapore’s political system can persist in the post-Lee Kuan Yew era. In reality, the economic policies enacted by the Singapore government are just basic necessities and not conditions leading to success, and thus Singapore’s economic performance is not decided by the PAP government’s policies. What experience does Singapore have that is worth studying? The article “Singapore Is a Good Example” on the 21世纪网(21cbh.com) website on 30th Dec 2008 reported an interview with a NUS academic. Part of the contents include: “Singapore’s influence on China… the China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park… Singapore’s sovereign funds and Temasek Holdings model… for 30 years Lee Kuan Yew has always… provided sincere suggestions to China’s governmental leaders… Lee Kuan Yew also thinks that Singapore’s greatest value to China is not in the aspect of hardware, but in the aspect of software, in this area he influenced Deng Xiaoping… Deng Xiaoping said to learn from Singapore, not only Singapore’s more advanced economy, but also her good social order.” Is this the actual case in reality? To Singapore, the China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park was an experience of utter failure. In 1994, China and Singapore both signed a contract to develop the industrial park, in 1997 both sides faced serious differences of opinion, in 1999 both sides agreed to let China take over the industrial park planning and then on 1st Jan 2001 Suzhou local officials formally took control of the industrial park. Singapore, in not quite 3 years after signing, already had serious disputes with the Chinese side, and by the next year 1998 had given up their sprouting offshoot. What kind of Singaporean success model is this? What are the contributions of this model in the software of attracting investment and developing industries for China? Singapore often repeatedly mentions – in a self-congratulatory way – Deng Xiaoping’s quote of learning from Singapore. Hong Kong’s Anthony Yuen expressed his views on this topic on 8th Jul 2004: “China’s side… always holding the sentiment of compatriotism (or common heritage), treats Lee Kuan Yew leniently, not only generous with courtesy, but also generous with reverence, often talking about learning from ‘Singapore’s experience’ and Lee Kuan Yew often believed it to be true, often promoting ‘Singapore’s experience’ to Chinese officials. Actually, the experience of managing a 3-million-population ‘company-like’ country is very difficult to transplant into a 9.6-million-sq-km, 1.3-billion-population country, the politeness of Chinese officials spoiled the Singaporeans.” In reality, Deng Xiaoping was only interested in “Singapore’s social order is strictly managed”. To say it plainly Deng Xiaoping was only attracted by Singapore’s political experience as a one-party-rule, atypical democracy. Systems are very difficult to transplant, moreover Singapore’s national financial system is built on the foundation of stronghand politics, and thus it cannot be or should not be emulated by other governments. The abundant capital controlled by GIC and Temasek is commonly misunderstood by outsiders as the PAP government’s indicator of success. This is only an illusion, the real situation is not necessarily like this. In economics, wealth can be created or transferred; the former through the reallocation of resources using prices set through market competition, and the latter by using political power to regulate the reallocation of resources. The first case is wealth by entrepreneurship, second case is wealth by exploitation. In other words, wealth creation is an economic behaviour and a display of capability, whereas wealth transfer is a political behaviour and a display of power. To use the sale of state land as an example: in Hong Kong all proceeds from the sale of state land is used for government spending, whereas in Singapore all proceeds from the sale of state land goes into the reserves. Two different policies with different results – in Hong Kong the gains from society are used for society, whereas in Singapore is it the case that gains from society are used for GIC? If so, does the Hong Kong model or Singapore model more closely conform to the definition of a democratic society? Besides, in Singapore many plots of state land were mandatory acquisitions by the government from the people at low prices. On 26th June 2003, the Straits Times published a piece of land acquisition news: the government acquired two plots totalling nearly 200 sq metres for a mere 1 dollar, and one of the plots was actually freehold land. This land acquisition case is a classic example of wealth transfer; the government’s payment of 1 dollar was just to fulfill legal transfer procedures, and is not the market value of the land. Is the PAP government getting wealth by entrepreneurship, or getting wealth by exploitation? In 1965, right after Singapore’s independence, Lee Kuan Yew immediately made amendments to the original constitution articles pertaining to fair compensation for the acquisition of private land. In the 43-year span between 1965 and 2008, how much money has the PAP government accumulated from the sale of land? Clearly, this money is in essence the flesh and blood of the people. The Singapore model also seemingly represents what the outside world admires as a highly-efficient administration. So what about the reality? Singapore’s ERP system is often – both inside and outside the country – praised as number one in the world. Firstly, the source of this concept was from the UK and not originated in Singapore. Next, the fact that Singapore is able to implement this system, only reflects the strong-weak relationship between the government and the people; from the policy perspective, the people are powerless to resist and the PAP government can do as they wish. The PAP government has been adopting this system since the 70’s of the last century. In these 30-plus years, how much road fees have been collected by the government? And how much has Singapore’s traffic jam situation improved? Until today, congestion on the roads remains an evergreen phenomenon. Is the ERP a traffic management system or a reserve-generating mechanism? Are Singapore’s land and traffic policies worth emulating by other developing nations? In the Singapore model, the core axle that moulds the relationship between the people and the government is public housing and the CPF. This does not mean that Singapore’s social welfare is also not worth emulating. Firstly, Lee Kuan Yew strongly dislikes welfare systems, thinking that the poor have an attitude of insatiable greed. Secondly, a relief fund is a waste of precious resources. Thirdly, Lee Kuan Yew also thinks that wealth inequality can stimulate the poor into working more diligently thus contributing to economic development. As you can see, the Singapore model is not accommodating of social welfare. The two most valuable properties that ordinary citizens of Singapore have are their flats and CPF. However, from the strict definition of property rights theory, these so-called private properties are in reality public properties; governmental properties. This is because flats do not comply with 3 necessary conditions of private property: the right to freedom of use, the right to freedom of transfer and the right to freedom of income-generation. In the case of housing property, the most significant right of use is residency that comes with conditions, the other rights of use, transfer and income-generation are all subject to HDB restrictions; compare the rights of flat and private condominium ownership to clearly understand what is meant by private property rights. Is there any assurance in the contract of a flat? Under redevelopment law, the original 99-year lease can be terminated at any time; if the government tells you to move, you have to move. Very clearly, of the two parties in a contract, if one party can terminate the contract at any time or amend its contents at will, then he is necessarily the true, and sole holder of the property; and essentially the owner. To put it simply, the people are the tenants, the government is the owner, although the people paid money to buy the flat. Bank accounts and CPF accounts are also different, the former can be freely used, freely transferred and freely invested etc., while the latter clearly does not confer these private property advantages. Lee Kuan Yew, through the policy of acquiring land at cheap prices, produced a result that effectively liquidated homegrown capitalists, and this is the main reason that caused the utter failure of the homegrown economy. Besides, look at the result of how many multi-millionaires that China has produced in a brief 30 years, isn’t it possible to realise that under the governance of the PAP government, Singaporeans’ opportunity for prosperity has long disappeared without a trace? In Singaporean society, building an enterprise from scratch has become an ancient, remote myth. The political consequences of the Singapore model is crystal clear. When the government completely controlled the people’s most valuable properties, the government also controlled the people’s lives and thoughts. Under this strong-weak relationship structure, economically the people has degenerated into productivity statistics. Politically, the people have to ensure the stability of the ruling party, because their land ownership rights and fate of their CPF funds are controlled squarely in the hands of the government and the bureaucracy. This is also the main reason why the PAP was able to have such a long period of one party rule. Thus it can be seen that the Singapore model is not democratic, but a reverse socialist model. According to socialist theory: the people are the masters and make decisions, while the government serve the people. But the Singapore model is: PAP is the master and make decisions, while the people serve the government. Clearly, those countries that intend to pursue democracy and free-market economy definitely would not be happy and should not want to emulate this type of Singapore model. So, what is the essence of the Singapore model? During an interview on Dec 2006 with 财经 (Channel 8 TV show) Lee Kuan Yew frankly said: “The Singapore model has no essence to speak of but has the ability to continue to change in accordance to changes in the world.” This can be reasonably interpreted as meaning that the Singapore model has no essence but has the characteristics of a chicken weathervane: to change direction based on changes in the situation. Thus, currently it’s the East wind that blows with vigor, the chicken’s head of course looks towards the East. In early years, Singapore was in a precarious position (一夫当关，万夫莫开 If one man guards the pass, ten thousand are unable to get through) acting as the Western capitalist world’s anti-communist frontier in Southeast Asia. In 1963, Lee Kuan Yew’s “Operation Coldstore” was to prevent Singapore from degenerating into a “Third China”. Not long after, in Nov 2004 Taiwan’s Mark Chen used Taiwanese language to criticise: “Nose-booger-sized Singapore is carrying Communist Party balls. One way then and the other way later, concretely demonstrating Singapore model’s true colours as a chicken weatherwane. In retrospect, the chicken weathervane is an indispensable characteristic of the Singapore model, and is also the face of this spirit. Pragmatism at another level is opportunism: to steer by the wind (nearest English equivalent = trimming one’s sails).” However, this form of unprincipled, utility-seeking model of governance definitely will not be acceptable to those national cultures with political ideology and patriotic spirit. In international politics no country would sell out their political beliefs or sacrifice patriotic spirit for short-term benefits. To reiterate, as a post-colonial body, the Singapore model has no national culture, political beliefs and also lacks patriotic spirit. To tell a society with a national culture to accept a Singapore model with no national culture is an unthinkable thing to do. So, will there be an international market for such an immature political model as Singapore? The idolisation of the Singapore model is only a plaything of Singapore’s media, not to be taken seriously. Undeniably, Lee Kuan Yew is extremely intelligent, and proficient at adapting to circumstances; in his younger years Lee Kuan Yew’s idea of survival was to emphasise the inevitability of change. Indeed, he who knows the Singapore model like the back of his hand, Lee Kuan Yew knows that the Singapore model that he personally moulded has long started to head towards decline. The old version of the Singapore model looks to be a depreciating model. This is because the financial crisis at the end of the last century and the economic rise of China has fundamentally altered the landscape in world politics and economics. However, lacking in political and economic resources, Singaporean society is unable to change existing social restraints to adapt to the times. That is why in 2002 Lee Hsien Loong’s Remaking Singapore campaign attempted to create a second version of the Singapore model in order to adjust to the new world reality. In 2005, Lee Kuan Yew declared Confucian ethics to be outdated. In 2006, Lee Kuan Yew talked about the Singapore model having no essence. This kind of political trick is just to drum up support for changing direction, to facilitate the future adoption of new ideas in society, and furthermore to give the old version a respectable stage exit. The PAP has always strategised before they act. Is the new version of the Singapore model an improvement over the old? (青出于蓝胜于蓝 Green comes from blue and surpasses blue) Or is it worse than before? (一蟹不如一蟹 Each crab is smaller than the one before) Until now this trial version of the Singapore model seems unable to emerge from a stepwise fumble, unable to grasp a direction. Singapore’s manufacturing section today is neither high nor low, without top talents producing research results and also without bottom line competitive advantage. Singapore’s high-salary elite team was no match for mere Suzhou local officials, and so the idea of Singapore’s manufacturing industry turning China into an economic hinterland vanished into thin air. Didn’t the government’s investment of large expenses to import and forge ahead with life science technologies result in a clash of opinions? Different officials individually insist on their own research directions. Using massive funds to attract world-class scientists who engage in rotating horse lantern games (nearest English equivalent = playing musical chairs), people come and people go, but who knows if they have produced any breakthrough world-class results? The second wing (referring to sovereign fund investments), which earlier on had flown so high with such unabashed glee, looks today to have fallen hard, part of the investments have now degenerated into long term investments? Isn’t that equivalent to saying that the future government will have to clean up the mess? In 20-30 years, who will be the ruler? Who will be the beneficiary? However, from today’s perspective, people who look forward to getting back their retirement funds on schedule will perhaps face an unforeseeable risk of CPF policy change. Now, the fate of the IT2000 Intelligent Island plan is unknown. In 2005, Lee Hsien Loong announced the construction of the casinos. In 2006, Singapore became a tax-evader haven and money laundering centre. Xie Guozhong pointed out that Singapore is a failed economy that relied on money laundering to thrive. In the eyes of the Taiwanese, Singapore along with some other third world countries are money laundering centres. In 2008, the F1 racing that was rejected by the government for many years finally kicked off amidst much elation but ended up all sound and no fury. Now the Italian racing world are even more doubtful about the wisdom of holding street races? In 2010, when Singapore legally begins betting, will sex-based economy follow suit in the legalised market? Singapore degenerating into a money laundering centre already makes people sorrowful, looking for a way out by rummaging rubbish heaps is even more heart wrenching, has the creativity of Singapore’s ultra-high-salaried elite completely dried up? Is the new Singapore model proceeding towards a “eating, drinking, whoring and gambling” and “don’t care black money or yellow money as long as can make money” model? Will Singapore degrade into a “laugh at the poor but not at the whore” kind of pragmatic society? Perhaps this explains why Lee Kuan Yew had to say the Confucian ethics was out of date. Today, ravaged by the financial thunderstorm, under the climate of a decelerating world economy, the Singapore model is a Mud Buddha in the water. The residual value of the Singapore model is to act as a negative educational example: one-party-rule, one-person-party is not beneficial to the long term development of a society. The post-Lee Kuan Yew era has already begun, Singapore must proceed towards political openness; moulding a society where a hundred flowers can bloom is the only feasible direction for Singapore’s transformation. Hopefully after the Mud Buddha disintegrates, out of the muddy puddle will emerge an untainted and fresh new lotus blossom. Rich Enough to be Frugal, Blessed Enough to Suffer. In her Sunday Times article of 18 Oct 2009, "No bed of roses for me, thank you", Lee Wei Ling wrote: "I was brought up to be frugal. As children, my brothers and I were chastised if we did not turn off the taps completely, or left lights or air-conditoners on when there was no need for them to be. My parents decided not to live at Sri Temasek, the prime minister's official residence, because they didn't want their children to be waited by butlers and servants.""There is certain benefit to be derived from a certain degree of deprivation and even suffering. Many of the things we like in excess are bad for us - for example, fatty meat, chocolates and alcohol. Over and above denying ourselves such pleasure, outright suffering is not always bad, and in moderation, is good in character training. I have been through a fair amount of suffering in my life, mainly because of my health. If I had been given a choice to be spared the experience, I would have actually chosen to go through it because suffering taught me lessons no teacher or book can ever teach me. As ancients of various traditions know, tribulations worketh character."Prior to this, I read "A Letter to Lee Wei Ling" by Patriot [Link] who brought up some interesting points regarding an earlier article written by Lee Wei Ling.From the two articles, I perceive that Lee Wei Ling is a filial daughter who can make do without the luxuries that is her birthright. It amazes me that given a choice, being a fitness and health enthusiast, she would choose to suffer sickness than to be healthy. I simply cannot see the benefit of such suffering and deprivation of good health. All I know is: that which did not kill me continue to strengthen me to tell it like it is.Having personally gone through the trauma of a heart attack and ventricular fibrillation (which I do not wish upon anyone), I must admit that it is a blessing that I survived. However, if given a choice, I'd rather not have it. Unless I'm a sadist and a masochist, the shock and pain I brought upon myself and those who love me is reason enough not to suffer a heart attack or any other serious illness.Not having the pedigree of famiLee, if the heart attack did not kill me, the medical and hospital cost might! Having the riches and wherewithal to overcome serious and costly challenges, one can have the luxury to write about sickness and suffering and be grateful for it. However, to the little guy or the average Joe, the cost of such suffering can literally kill!There is a great difference in frugality practiced by the rich and frugality practiced by the poor. The poor can't choose. The rich can. The rich can talk and write about it while the poor may be too embarrass by it. I know an acquaintance who owns and drives a very expensive car. He took a MRT ride one day and said that the train ride was fantastic. He could not see why people are complaining about public transportation. This bloke is lucky to have the choice. He took the MRT joy ride during off-peak hour and did not experience the sardine-packed ride of of the little guys. While average Joe's are being squeezed and breathing from others' armpits, this acquaintance of mine is in his luxurious Lexus with music, GPS and what-have-you on his way to and from the bank where he worked. The only choice the little guy has is BMW -Bus, MRT or Walk.If only everybody can choose to be frugal by choice rather than circumstances, would this world be a better place? Heal The World?Yes, Let's cut down on "sports cars, extravagant banquets, expensive wines, designer clothes, shoes and handbags - all these things are wasteful." Let's use such excesses to "upgrade kindergartens" to"help young children". We can also help reduce the Gini Index in Singapore and not bitchiBala about the poor having meals at hawker centre, foodcourt or restaurant. While we are at it, we can do much more if budget for defense and mintsters' salaries can be readjusted and channeled to the deserving.Meanwhile, my thoughts are with Dollah Kassim. "Please get up soon and play again, my Gelek King!"feedmetothefish Do Not Mess Around With God's Words I read the Singapore Recalcitrant [Link] and I salute the writer for his fortitude in calling a spade, a spade. I guess when shit hits the fan and one's integrity is humiliated, one has to put money and life where the mouth is! Under such condition, Kiasi (fear of death), Kiasu (fear of loss) and Kia-cheng-hu (fear of government) can take a hike.Reproduced in full: An Unconscionable Injustice Occasionally, there can happen to an unsuspecting person an underbelly attack on his reputation from not entirely unexpected quarter.Quite frankly, I am baffled by the motive of the ebullient authors of the overhyped political book "Men in White" in giving me unflattering mention in it. Whilst it is purported to give an objective history of the PAP struggle I wonder what have I got to do with the intra-party struggle. Anyway, in page 441 of the book the ambitious authors made the following unverified disparaging statement about me under the sub heading "Another Foreign Hand" : "But in 1971, after a police raid on his (Francis Seow's) woman friend's apartment, he used his influence and friendship with the then director of the Corrupt Practices Investigations Bureau, Yoong Siew Wah, to have the four officers who had conducted the raid sacked. The attorney-general Tan Boon Teik intervened to reinstate the four officers. Seow was allowed to resign rather than have his actions investigated because of his track record in the Legal Service. Yoong was also asked to quit."On 28-9-09 I wrote to the Chief Executive Officer of the Singapore Press Holdings drawing his attention to this disparaging statement about me and requesting that a correction be made in his newspaper. I explained that the CPIB was duty-bound to investigate all formal complaints. Mr. Francis Seow made a formal complaint and CPIB carried out investigations of the four detectives. The investigation papers were sent to the Deputy Commissioner of Police who made the decision to dismiss the detectives. There was a prima facie case against the detectives. There was no question that I was asked to quit. I was appointed Director of Internal Security Department following my CPIB stint.My letter was passed to Mr. Richard Lim, one of the three authors of the book. Mr. Lim replied on 1 October that the material for the disparaging statement was taken from a speech made by the then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew at the Select Committee Hearing of the Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill which was published in the Straits Times on 10 October 1986 of which a copy was attached.It did not come as a surprise to me as the then PM Lee Kuan Yew was like a god to some people and the accuracy of his denigration of a person's reputation was invariably taken at its face value. That he made the disparaging statement about me in the heat of the moment without regard to its accuracy in his heated exchange with a cool-headed eloquent Francis Seow at the Select Committee Hearing could not be ruled out. He is not unknown to have behaved erratically with venom in his speech when highly agitated. He was obviously so infuriated by Mr. Francis Seow's biting taunts that it escaped his normally lucid mind that I was not boarded out but appointed Director ISD after my CPIB stint. It was subsequently pointed out to him but humility is not his forte and he has not been known as one to apologise for his mistakes. Mr. Richard Lim, one of the authors, has assured me that he would add a line after the sentence that I was also asked to quit to indicate that I was actually appointed Director ISD after my CPIB stint in his next and future editions of the book in order to be fair to me.It was reported that the then attorney-general Mr. Tan Boon Teik intervened to have the four detectives reinstated. Very gallant of him. He must have read the CPIB file on the investigations and could not have missed that the dismissal of the four detectives was made by the Deputy Commissioner of Police. How the then PM Lee Kuan Yew was given the impression that I had the four detectives unlawfully dismissed is something I would like to get to the bottom of.Mr. Francis Seow was the solicitor-general at the time when I was director CPIB. He had overall supervision of CPIB investigation files sent to his department for final direction. That I should have had a cordial relation with Mr. Francis Seow was natural in human relationship development. For the then PM Lee Kuan Yew or for that matter the attorney-general Mr. Tan Booin Teik to give a sinister connotation to such a relationship seemed to raise doubt as to the soundness of the detractors' mind. Why should the affinity between Mr. Francis Seow and me be seen as something unwholesome?The most decent thing for the Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew to do now is to undo the harm he has caused me and to restore my reputation. But will he?The most striking sentence from Yoong Siew Wah is:"The most decent thing for the Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew to do now is to undo the harm he has caused me and to restore my reputation. But will he?"Times, they are a-changing!Who would imagine the ex-CPIB Chief & ISD Director, 'Singapore Recalcitrant' would blog in such a manner?Could he be affected by:"If I lose my wealth, I lose nothing;if I lose my health, I lose something;if I lose my integrity, I lose everything!"It warms my damaged heart (and many Singaporeans with good hearts) to note that more and more people are sick and tired of being sick and tired of the worship of an arrogant human god. More and more are waking up to the fact that one needs not forgo truth and integrity just to be in the good book of the mighty. As much as we do not wish to rock the boat, the future of our children and our children's children will be negatively impacted if we continue to keep quiet about the irregularities and injustices that are hurting us now.It does not benefit me one bit to see skeletons oozing out of the cabinet but it may enlighten the elites, the rich and powerful, that humility (not walking all over other lesser mortals) is a better option than practicing hubris.Is this the beginning of the end?With what has happened lately, I'm won't be surprised. Examples:Upturn the Downturn [Link]All Things Being Equal [Link] and [Link]PAP Getting Credit For HDB Upgrade In Opposition Wards [Link]I Don't Want To Be Your Platoon Commander [Link]Is the publication of the book "Men In White" meant to upturn the downturn of the fortunes of the men in white? Is it meant to help the MIW gain more votes in the coming election? With this expose, I don't think so.Singaporeans Boleh!feedmetothefish Truth or Contortion I often tell my friends and relatives, "What is important to you may not be important to me and what is important to me may not be imported to you." As much as we love each other, the perception of one may not be what is perceived by the other.I appreciate the numerous comments in my previous post [Link] and in TOC [Link].Some commented that I wrote out of context while others asked me to go get laid. In whatever context, regardless of active NS vs Reservist or Citizens vs PRs, are males age 30 and above good enough for national service? If yes, why is the Prime Minister reluctant to be their Platoon Commander? If no, why are so many over 30 Singaporean males still serving?In response to those who asked me to go get laid (screwed?), I must admit that I am getting laid. Here are some examples:To have my contribution as a NSman and reservist taken for granted.To have my hard earned money taken from me by CPF since I started working more than 40 years ago and not having the freedom to use it after my retirement. Why I was good enough to manage my money (without debt) to support and bring up my children but not good enough to manage it during my retirement is beyond me. Is my CPF mine? [Link]To realise that "We the citizens of Singapore pledge ourselves as one united people regardless of race, language or religion to build a democratic society based on justice and equality" is nothing but an aspiration.As a Singaporean seeing the video of 28 year old Ms Zhang Yuanyuan of China picking a Blue Singapore NRIC followed by “repaying the motherland is her greatest wish!” [Link] makes me feel like Singapore got laid.As much as Singaporeans may be upset by this video of Zhang Yuanyuan showing loyalty to her motherland, I'm sure many Singaporeans are loyal to their own motherland, Singapore because they sacrifice years of their precious time doing active and reservist training (though not voluntary) for motherland.Or has our loyalty been eroded by leaders who continues to make sure that we keep getting laid as above?Those who love me have advised me to take down my previous post [Link]. They are worried that the comments posted by some sound ballistic, defamatory and threatening and I may end up in trouble. They are afraid that I may be accused by the mighty MHA or ISA of inciting violence or whatever. If I end up in the slammer (or worse) for writing what I write, then I have to accept that to every life a little rain must fall.With hand touching my damaged heart, I write to get the frustration off my chest. To let the insensitive, high and mighty know that there are little guys out there. The little guys, the non-elite Ali, Ah Seng, Rajoo and Joe who are loyal and have done much for their motherland, Singapore. The little guys who are getting disillusioned and disenchanted with the daily grind that gets them working harder and getting poorer! It's tough seeing the quality of life deteriorating everyday.To let the insensitive, high and mighty know that it's not nice to rub us the wrong way with callous comments.If the Chinese leaders are proud of Ms Zhang Yuanyuan., why can't the Singapore leaders be proud of the thousands of NSmen who sacrifice much more for Singapore than what Ms Zhang Yuanyuan did for China?My truth is not your truth until you find it to be true.Once the truth is with you, no one, nothing can take it away from you.feedmetothefish Ungrateful Platoon Commander, Insensitive Leeder I saw this pic at BigTalk [Link]I'm shocked that these words can come from a former Brigadier-General of the Singapore Armed Forces, the current Prime Minister of Singapore!“If we make it (NS and Reservist for PR) a requirement, we would not get the people we wanted. Secondly, if they did serve NS at 30, 40 and 50 years old. I would not like to be their platoon commander.”If I have not learned to be cool, calm and collected from my guru, Wisdom, the first words that should come from my mouth would be: "KNNMCCB" or, "Fcuk you, man!"So why am I so bloody mad?I was released from the bondage of NS and reservists' in-camp training almost 20 years ago at age 40! It hurts me to know that having been considered over the hill as a NSman at 30, I was still asked to waste my time to serve certain platoon commanders who did not appreciate my service.I do not know the context at which such stupid statement came from a statesman but to belittle the contributions and sacrifices of thousands of NSmen who serves till 40 is appallingly sick! It is so sad to know that Singapore citizens who recite the Singapore Aspiration (Pledge?) are lesser mortals in Singapore than PRs who spice up the lives of elite Singaporeans!Why such callous deed tears my guts out?At this moment, my 18 month-old grand-daughter is yearning for her father. She is fatherless for 3 weeks because her 35 year-old dad (who is my son) is out of Singapore in some godforsaken jungle somewhere doing reservist training which his Platoon Commander (if he were PM Lee) does not appreciate because he's too old to be in NS.It's all well and good when careless politician speaks of buying votes and fixing oppositions [Link] but to callously deride the sacrifices of so many true blue Singaporean NSmen is really asking for trouble.NSmen and reservists are already disillusioned by ministers who make a mockery of nation serving by paying themselves millions; the 'white horse' classification of NSmen and the disadvantage they face in equal employment opportunity [Link].Mr Prime Minister, why rock the boat further with such insensitivity?Under the current economic and social condition in Singapore,A grateful heartA touch of kindnessA sense of solidarityA caring demeanouris what we expect from a leader.A high falutin ingrate is furthest from our minds!God bless Singapore.feedmetothefish F1 and Men in the Street of Singapore If it did not come from the horse's mouth, you'd thought that a out-of-touch-high-faluting soul said it.Extracted from Straits Times [Link]: Pointing out that F1 was far from being an elite race, Mr Goh said that those who cannot afford the $8,500 Paddock Club seats have access as well via the general walkabout tickets, which went for as low as $28. 'So that way, the organisers have made a special provision for the man in the street,' he noted. The walkabout tickets let a person stand at designated areas to watch the race and this year, for the first time, about 7,500 were sold at the discounted early-bird price of $28.It's a bloody shame that the discounted early-bird price of $28 entitles one to watch nothing but merely hear engines roar. Pity the poor guy who wrote to ST Forum to complain that he's been conned.No, F1 is not an elite race. Neither is football a gentlemen's game played by ruffians and rugby a ruffians' game played by gentlemen. Or is it? I'm of the opinion that there are gentlemen and ruffians in almost every sports and hypocrites in many politicians.Living within my means and not having the luxury of SM Goh's connection and salary, I'm lucky to catch some of the F1 action at a coffeeshop TV by just buying a 90 cents kopi-c-siew-tai (black coffee with evaporated milk and not much sugar).Yes, the man in the street did get a chance to watch the elites' sports but to use the $28 example was kinda dumb. To me, the live telecast would have been a better example.I enjoyed the race. However, I find it odd that the PM of Singapore had the pathetic role of presenting the trophy to the winner. He looked as uncomfortable as he he did delivering the National Day Speech (with weird gesticulation). Wouldn't it be more appropriate if Vivian Balakrishnan or Teo Ser Luk did the job instead. At least they are sports related and look the part. Or like many others, has the PM's Office (highest office in the land?) sold out to commercialism too? F1 now. What next? Gambling dens? IRs?Singapore's men in the street are getting confused with lots of things lately. They are trying hard to understand:Why income has stood still? Reduced with pay cut?Why cost of living is shooting through the roof? From food to HDB flat to transportation . . .Why lately, the embarrassing self-congratulatory news in msm of Temasek & GIC caliming to recover Singapore's lost treasures ( as in Citigroup, Barclays, ShinCorp, ABC, etc.)?Why foreign talents are no longer talents but victims of greedy employers and despots who refuse to let go?Why we can hardly breathe with a 4.9 million population that we did not have the pleasure to screw for?Why we continue to get skewed responses from MP where salary increase is highlighted without comparison to cost of living [UBS Survey Link] Not quite, says MP Seah Kian Peng, who also chairs the Government Parliamentary Committee for Community Development, Youth and Sports.'The figures may be right, but the conclusion could be wrong,' he notes.Rather than look at prices and wages in isolation, he says the key considerations should be: Do Singaporeans lead a better life than they did in the past, and are the poor taken care of?'If the answer to both is yes, then moving up or down two notches becomes mere semantics,' he says.He cites a recent government report which found that the salaries of the bottom 20 per cent of wage earners have risen. Their monthly wages increased from $1,200 in 2006 to $1,310 last year.So why are men in the street so disillusioned?Or is it just me?feedmetothefish Whiter Than White I'm amazed that Sonny Yap of Straits Times took a half page on Saturday's Page 2 to do his thing in promoting sales. "Criticise, but please get your facts right." [Link]Has sales been so bad that ST has to dedicate half a page of whining to boost the sales of Men in White? [Link]. I love the part where Sonny asks us to read the book first before any comment. More sales? So clever!Please visit Mr See Tong Min, Martyn at Singapore Rebel [link] and judge for yourself if the whining and 'crying father, crying mother' of the injustice done to the writers of the book (commissioned by SM, endorsed and forwarded by MM?) is valid. Or as I feel, an awesome way to sucker more innocents to buy into "Men in White".I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired of the arrogance and the "father knows best" attitude of the MIW. The decision of MIW to pay themselves millions while men-in-the-street, especially the middle class, are at wits end to make ends meet takes the cake! To add insult to injury, the shameless boot licking of some msm is so damned pukingly ad nauseam.Talking about taking the cake, this is the first book launch I know that the authors do not put their beautiful signatures on the book to add value. Instead it is the subject's signature that makes it orgasmic enough to bring in the money to the tune of $10,000 a copy! For charity if I may add to add rubber to the wheel. Uniquely Singaporean!Facts of the book? Truths? We will never know until we know.For untold story to be fair, may I recommend:The video on Mr Said Zahari by Mr Martyn See (banned) [Link]The exchange between Sonny Yap and Martyn See [Link]The Dr Lim Hock Siew Press Statement [Link]The British Archive of the Men in White and Lim Chin Siong [Link]Facts and truths? For many years my impression, through the main stream media, of Mr Chee Soon Juan was that he's a nut case. It was at a NUS political discussion (where I met him, Denise Phua, Perry Tong and Catherine Lim amongst others) years ago that I saw CSJ in person and come to realised the poison that's been fed to my brain by the msm. It was then that I realised the reasons of why a man with a beautiful wife and 3 young kids would spend time in and out of jail taking on the mightiest of the mighty in Singapore to do what most Singaporeans consider stupid and hopeless.And as the 1st anniversary of Mr JB Jeyaratnam's passing is nigh, I'd like to share what I've just seen on youtube with you. [link].Is this a nut case? A madman, a near psychopath so called by MM and Chua Mui Hoong of Straits Times [Link]Is he?Times, they are changing . . .For the better.feedmetothefish Do Singaporeans deserve to be treated like Freaks? Singapore's famous Catherine Lim posed MM Lee this question: ‘Sir, in the event of a serious threat of a freak election, would you do the unthinkable, that is, send in the army?’ [Link]Just what on earth is a 'freak election'?I know the men in white will freak out when they lose the election but are we so bloody brainwashed that an election not won by PAP becomes a freak election?Would anyone consider Barack Obama a freak for having won the USA Presidential Election?It's frigging freaky for Singaporeans to think that an election not won by PAP is a freak.For what they have done, I think PAP deserves to lose an election every now and then. It is neither an aberration nor an anomaly. It'll wake them up from their hubris to become more earth-bound and human. Yes, it's about time to bring people down to earth from their high faluting arrogance . . . . .On a more serious note, I'm still confused from the answer Catherine received on whether the army will ensure the longevity and perpetual power of PAP? It's either I'm too thick or the answer is meant to confound.Maybe the Army will. That's why our Pledge of 'building a democratic society based on justice and equality' has become an Aspiration.To think that an election not won by PAP is a freak election is so UNTHINKABLE!feedmetothefish "Gian Png" Temasek Needs Retail Investors? For the benefit of those who do not understand the Hokien dialect, "Gian Png" literally means "hungry for rice" or if I may, "needs more money to survive".Temasek needs retail investors? [Link]It needs to update its Charter? [Link]Does it actually matter to common citizens like me?To whom does the murky money (whatever that's left) in Temasek (or even GIC) belongs to?We, the citizens of Singapore?The PAP Government?Or "Monopoly Money" of the rich and famous to play with?And who is accountable for the losses so far?We, the citizens of Singapoor?The PAP Government?The Ministry of Finance (during LHL or Tharman's tenure)?Temasek's Board of Directors (whoever they are)?Chairman Dhanabalan?CEO Ho Ching?Or shall we put the blame on Chip Goodyear? Ooops . . 'Actually I think both Dhana and Ho Ching are loss for words to describe the loss so far.Maybe the GreatGrandma of my granddaughter is right after all. She always advises me to let things be. Don't rant. Don't bitch. She tells me that the Power that is (be it PAP govt, CPF Board, HDB, IRA, the Police, the Judiciary, Temasek, etc) has the Power. Simple as that!They do their "thing" and there's nothing non-elite citizens can do about it . . . except to rant, bitch or vote. And serious feedback (PR gimmick) so often requested even by the PM is nothing but another "chui kong lumpar song" ( mouth talks, testicles titillate).NMP Viswa Sadasivan is one good example. It is so sad that feedback to build a more inclusive society is but a joke after NMP Viswa Sadasivan with his brilliant truth got shot down by LKY and NEH. The heart of the matter is: Truth bloody hurts! Both the giver and recipients!Great Grandma (whose husband would be as young as LKY today but decided to let go at age 73) is wise enough to advise that voting them out would be tough because of the gerrymandeering and the silly GRC. One man one vote but one constituency needs 6 bloody MPs? It becomes a greater joke when the GRC is meant to protect the minority and the Pledge is nothing but an Aspiration. A bloody insult to the good names of David Marshall, JB Jeyaratnam, Rajaratnam, Othman Wok, E W Barker and other politicians who truly deserved their parliamentary seats, regardless of race language or religion. Of course, the Election Department under the purview of the PM's office [Link] is another reason why the Pledge is just an Aspiration.TemasekOld Charter?New Charter?Who caresExceptThePowerThatIsFlip flop? Damage control? Call it what you may. A rose by any name would smell as sweet. Alas, Temasek doesn't.Even if truth hurts,The Art of Living is To Die Young . . . . . . . . As Late As Possible!Yes, to every life, a little rain must fall.We need the water.feedmetothefish Is Our Pledge an Aspiration Leading to Expiration? I read MM's Pledge/Aspiration Tsunami but after watching the video [link], my heart skipped a beat or two and I almost had another heart attack!As a Singaporean Cheena who's old enough to sing "God Save The Queen"; "Negara Ku" and "Majulah Singapura" as a National Anthem, I'm shocked by MM's retort to Viswa Sadasivan. It was uncalled for.In his typical pompous way (though not as loud now) of demolishing what he finds irksome, MM gave examples of Indians (Brahmins not in Sinda and Non-Brahmin in Sinda) and Malays (getting pregnant at a young age) which I and many of my Mat, Neh and Grago friends find racially sick and nauseating. Hello, does he not know that young unmarried Singaporean Cheena girls get pregnant too? Wouldn't it be more politically correct to use young Chinese prego instead of Malay as an example?Isn't the rich/poor divide, the elites/heartlanders divide a greater cause for concern than the divide within each race. For heavens sake, there are arseholes and good guys in each and every race! Let the Brahmins and the Indians be. And please, the history lesson of America (with crazy dates all jumbled up) is better left unheard. Instead of tackling Viswa's pleas for government's accountability in gerrymandeering; media control; locals losing out because of foreign workers/talents influx; helping the poor and, the elites/peasants divide, MM went on with his "knuckle-duster-meet-you-at-the cul-de-sac" rhetoric to bring Viswa and everybody else "down to earth" by saying that the Pledge is an Aspiration. If that's not enough, the guy who mocks all 55-year-old male Singaporeans for their active libido [sad link here] has to put in his $3millon worth. Extracted below is Channelnewsasia's report on Ng Eng Hen's response to NMP Viswa Sadasivan maiden speech in parliament."Singapore and Singaporeans cannot afford to ape any model, but must choose or create a solution which is best suited to our nation."Dr Ng added that the government had consistently presented a "frank accounting" of the realities facing the republic, and if the PAP government was corrupt or incompetent, it would be voted out.Mr Viswa, in reply, said he had been misunderstood on some points. "I'm not saying that the government is stuffing ballot boxes or doing things that are unconstitutional," he said."I was highlighting a lingering perception that I sensed on the ground that politically it's not a level playing field, and if you don't address this, there'll be growing cynicism, especially among our youth, who choose to express their displeasure through angry postings on the Net, which is not useful," he added.Mr Viswa also clarified that when calling for a repoliticisation of Singaporeans, what he envisaged was not riots on every street corner, but simply getting more people interested in politics. He said he believed this would help Singapore going forward.And this came from the mighty MM: "We’re here today, we have this building, we have all these facilities, and all around us is evidence of our accountability. Without being accountable, we would not have been re-elected and there would have been no Singapore of today.” [link]Just when will they stop their chest-thumping? It eats me up because we are here today not because of Lee Kuan Yew or Ng Eng Hen alone.We are where we are today because:We, the citizens of Singaporepledge ourselves as one united people,regardless of race, language or religion,to build a democratic society,based on justice and equality,so as to achieve happiness, prosperity andprogress for our nation.And we bloody well did our part by working hard (in whatever job/vocation we did/still do) to improve this land that we call home. And yes, I treat my Mat, Neh, Grago and cheena friends as my brothers with racial and religious sensitivity as we are sensitive souls who accept the funny labels that we give each other! Instead of aspiring, my Mat, Neh, Grago and Cheena friends whom I've grown up with have been doing and living the Pledge since we were playing marbles and huntam bola! In our tiny ways, though we joke about ourselves like Kumar does [link], we've done our part in making the Singapore what it is today. Please lah, it's the people, the citizens regardless of race, language or religion that make it! Without the co-operation and hardwork of its citizens, the government can't do squat!So please be sensitive to the sensitivities of others. It's just not nice as a Cheena (in whatever high falutin postion one may be) to draw ill examples of other races to justify one's paid contribution to society.In 1965, Lee Kuan Yew cried when a Malaysian Malaysia could not be a reality.In 2009, a 58-year-old Singaporean choked when he heard that a Singaporean Singapore is just an Aspiration.To every life, a little rain must fall.My concern is whether Aspiration will end up as Expiration?feedmetothefish Truth Hurts! And it touched the raw nerves of the Old Man and got him going. . . . . . . . to the extent of belittling a new NMP.So the National Pledge is nothing more than a high faluting - pompous; bombastic; haughty; pretentious "aspiration".Poor Mr Rajaratnam must be turning in his grave.We, the citizens of Singaporepledge ourselves as one united people,regardless of race, language or religion,to build a democratic society,based on justice and equality,so as to achieve happiness, prosperity andprogress for our nation.The citizens pledge but the government aspires . . .Isn't that interesting?To MM and PAP, the National Pledge is just an aspiration? And they had the temerity to do it on National Day in front of the TV and whole wide world?Aspiration . . . WTF is that? Breathing? Hope? Goal? Ambition?Isn't a Pledge a solemn promise or agreement to do or refrain from doing something?So now we know the Pledge means nothing because it conflicts with our Constitution?A case of meaningless "chui kong lumpar song*" for the past 4 decades?*Translated from Hokkien: Mouth speaks, testicles titillates.I do not see why MM had to interrupt his newspaper reading and physiotherapy [read below] and choked on Viswa's maiden speech. Read the speech [here], put your hand on heart, and pray tell is there malice in Viswa's speech? What's so 'false', 'flawed' or 'untrue' as claimed by MM?Or is the MM annoyed and hurt by the naked truth of Viswa's maiden speech?In the typical LKY style, Viswa got an earful (including a lesson in Sinda and his Indian ancestry). In his own way, "to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation", Viswa has spoken the truth which I and many appreciate.It's interesting to note that they have had enough of Siew Kum Hong's truths and they threw him out. Now they have to deal with a new thorn - Viswa Sadasivan.I am grateful to Viswa for living and doing the Pledge instead of 'aspiring'. You have done what my MP (whom I did not vote for) would never dream of doing. Please accept my sincere appreciation for taking the road less traveled and tell it like it is. Please keep up the good work! Your parents and those who love you will worry for you (as the great-grandma of my grandchild does) but truth will always prevail!Truth hurts only those who are not truthful and insincere.So is Viswa or MM high falutin?Your answer is as good as mine :)feedmetothefish____________________________________________________________________Dangerous to let highfalutin ideas go undemolished: MM Edited transcript of Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's rebuttal of NMP Viswa Sadasivan. -ST Thu, Aug 20, 2009 The Straits Times SIR, I had not intended to intervene in any debate. I was doing physiotherapy just now and reading the newspapers and I thought I should bring the House back to earth. Mr Rajaratnam had great virtues in the midst of despondency after a series of race riots when we were thrown out of Malaysia. Our Malays in Singapore were apprehensive that now that we (Chinese) were the majority, we (Chinese) would in turn treat them the way a Malay majority (in Malaysia) treated us. He drafted these words and rose above the present. He was a great idealist. His draft came to me; I trimmed out the unachievable, and the Pledge as it stands is his work after I've trimmed it. What is it? An ideology? No, it's an aspiration. Will we achieve it? I do not know. We'll have to keep on trying. Are we a nation? In transition. Sir, reference was made to the Constitution. The Constitution of Singapore enjoins us to specially look after the position of the Malays and other minorities. Article 152 says: 'Minorities and Special Position of Malays. It shall be the responsibility of the Government constantly to care for the interests of the racial and religious minorities in Singapore. The Government shall exercise its functions in such manner as to recognise the special position of the Malays who are the indigenous people of Singapore and, accordingly, it should be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster, promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests and the Malay language.' And on Muslim religion, Article 153: 'The Legislature shall by law make provision for regulating Muslim religious affairs and for constituting a council to advise the President in matters of the Muslim religion.' Our Constitution states expressly that it is a duty of the Government not to treat everybody as equal. It's not reality, it's not practical, it will lead to grave and irreparable damage if we work on that principle. So the Pledge was an aspiration. As Malays have progressed and more have joined the middle class with university degrees and professional qualifications, we have asked Mendaki to ask them to agree not to have their special rights of free education at university, but to take the fees they were entitled to and use the money to help more disadvantaged Malays. So we're trying to reach a position where there is a level playing field for everybody but it's going to take decades, if not centuries, and we may never get there. Now let me read the American Constitution. The second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, reads: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.' That's 1776. The US Constitution passed a few years later says: 'We, the people of the United States' (this is the preamble) 'in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings and liberties to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States.' Nowhere does it say that the blacks would be differently treated. But the blacks did not get the vote until many decades later. Racial segregation was not ended until the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s with Martin Luther King and his famous We Dare To Dream speech. Enormous riots took place and eventually, then President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964. From 1776, it was more than 200 years before an exceptional half-black American became President. My colleague (Nominated MP Viswa Sadasivan) says we are trying to put square pegs into round holes. Will we ever make the pegs the same? No. You suggest to the Malays that we abolish the (Article 152) provisions in the Constitution, you will have grave disquiet. We start on the basis that this is reality: We will not be able to get a Chinese minister or an Indian minister to persuade Malay parents to look after their daughters more carefully and not have teenage pregnancies which lead to failed marriages. Can a Chinese MP or an Indian MP do that? The Malays will say to him: 'You're interfering in my private life.' But we (the Government) have funded Mendaki and Muis (Islamic Religious Council of Singapore), and they have a committee to try and reduce the numbers of such delinquents. The way that Singapore has made progress is by a realistic step-by-step approach. It may take us centuries before we get to a similar position as the Americans. They go to wars, the blacks and the whites together. In the World War I, the blacks did not carry arms, they carried the ammo, they were not given the honour to fight. In World War II, they went back, these ex-GIs - those who could make it to university were given the GI grants - they went back to their black ghettos and stayed there. Today there are still black ghettos. These are the realities. The American Constitution does not say that you will treat blacks differently but our Constitution spells out the duty of the Government to treat Malays and other minorities with extra care. So the basis on which the NMP has placed his argument is false and flawed. It's completely untrue, it's got no basis whatsoever. I thought to myself, perhaps I should bring this House back to earth and remind everybody what our starting point is. If we don't recognise where we started from, we will fail. Nobody can speak with the knowledge that I have; I knew the circumstances in which the Pledge was made. I admire the sentiments of Mr Raja. In August 1965, my worry was, what would the Malays in Singapore do, now that they knew they were a minority? When I returned on Aug9, on the advice of our Special Branch, I did not go back to my house. I stayed at Sri Temasek (in the Istana), which was my official residence. I stayed there for one week, then I went to Changi Cottage and stayed there for two months to make sure that everything subsided. These are realities. Today, 44 years later, we have a Malay community, I believe, at peace, convinced that we are not discriminating against them, convinced that we are including them in our society. NMP Viswa used to work in Sinda. I'm told for 10 years. He will know Indians are not equal. Brahmins will not be in Sinda. It is the non-Brahmins who are in Sinda. So I think it is dangerous to allow such highfalutin ideas to go undemolished and mislead Singapore. The $3.71 Million Performance If not for cable TV, the only show in Singapore for TV tomorrow (Sunday, 16 Aug 2009) between 6pm (or is it 7pm) to 10pm will be the "At Last, The $3,710,000 Show!"Though the Star of the show is paid much more than the stars of years gone by, every year, year in year out, we get the same "PM knows best" assessment of the current situation and how great the Nightmarish 'A Team' is doing to make Singapore better!The assessment is always good! If it's not good, as it is now, the fault is always with someone else - globalisation, USA, China, Europe or even our neighbours! Or plain Singaporeans who simply do not measure up!Check out what's on the ground and in the msm lately:We must be mindful of racial and religious harmony (as if we aren't)We must not let 'democracy' screw up Singapore's stability (as if we can wear kangaroo T'shirt and not go to jail)Hidden cameras in Hong Lim Park (for safety indeed)We must be more 'welcoming' to foreign workers (and not let them serve NS)We must 'get real' and tighten our belts (while ministers are still enjoying their $millions)We must encourage our fathers and mothers to work as cleaners in hotels (I'd love my 80+ year-old mum to be the Queen of England!) We must be 'more forgiving' to those responsible for the mess we are in. Be it Mas Selamat, Temasek, GIC or even the Town Councils who gamble and give away our money to Lehman Brothers. (Or are those at the top so super that they don't shit?)The performance tomorrow, as usual, will be all talk, though lately, some videos and graphics have been added to keep the audience awake.Alas, however hard they try, the poor cameramen still find it very difficult not to capture the very important specially selected audience from dozing off when The Man just go on and on about the current situation in Singapore and what great plans he and his NightmareTeam has to make Singapore better, again and again! History of this particular show tells us of:"Stop at 2""Build A Rugged Society""More Good Years" "Have More Children If You Can Afford""Screw Graduates and Make Clever Babies""Build A More Inclusive Society"There are more and you know the rest.I know I won't be fooled again in watching the same. It's just too painful watching a guy talking for more than 3 hours. Experts tell me that a human's attention span lasting for 45 minutes is already an awesome feat! It tortures me to see audience trying their utmost to look attentive, forced to laugh at jokes that aren't funny and fearing for their well-being should they be caught in camera with their eyes shut close because the speaker can't cut it! Hope springs eternal and I love pleasant surprises.It would be nice if the Star announces that Ministers and their Nightmare Team will take a pay cut or contribute the obscene 40% increase (which they had since their last increase) to help the deserving poor before more Singaporeans destitute themselves through no fault of theirs! It'll do that nation good. It'll put a stop to the mockery of National Service and Nation Building!It would be nice if, for once, the Star of the Show can admit that it's okay to screw up. Why keep putting up a front and not admit that some things are not right due to one's bad decisions. Nobody's perfect!If Barrack Obama who earns only one-sixth the Star's salary can be man enough to admit his mistake, I do not see why the Star can't.Surprise me!It'll be nice!It may even win more votes without giving away goodies bags!Me? I'll catch a more star-studded show in watching a soccer game in the English Premier League!feedmetothefish Can one be more honest than this? Truth Hurts!If you have not visited http://www.insanepoly.com/ it's time you do.What written below by insanepoly is so nakedly honest that no true blue Singaporean should miss. It's so good that I have copied wholesale from his blog [link] and paste it below. I Don’t Care For National Day. National Day came and went with barely a blip on my radar. I don’t celebrate National Day. I don’t put up flags, I don’t watch the parade and I don’t listen to any of that manufactured bullshit songs like Count On Me Singapore, Stand Up for Singapore nonsense. The only thing I celebrate is that I don’t have to turn up for work that day. In fact, that morning when I went to the gym for my workout, I seemed to be the only one attired in full black workout gear while everybody else seemingly wore red or white. Not that I had intentionally wore black, just that when I looked around, I realized I was the only one in black in a sea of red and white. Freudian slip perhaps. Honestly I see no reason to celebrate. Celebrate what? Celebrate that one political party has hijacked my country, its institutions and everything it stands for? Celebrate that Singapore the nation has become PAP the political party which in turn has become the government which in turn has become the civil service. The lines are so blurred that I don’t even know where one starts and the other ends. Singapore, PAP, NTUC, People’s Association, HDB, SAF, SIA, ST GIC, CPF and everything in between seems to be nothing more than extensions of one monolithic entity that seeks to control every aspect of our lives and wants nothing more than to make living batteries out of us and turn this country into a mega corporation. Celebrate that? Seriously? Everywhere I turn my head there are posters and banners with all sort of feel good sound good exhortations to celebrate National Day. Ministers and MPs smiling down benevolently at us while pictures of citizens are conveniently Photoshopped beside them as if to say we are all one people, one nation. National Day, PAP Day- what difference does it make? Those posters and banners put up by the town councils and grassroots organizations seems identical to those election banners and posters put up by the PAP during election. Who the fuck really knows the difference? The only thing I know is that between the political leaders and us- its one Corporation, two people. They make millions while we try to eke out a living. We stay together while they move ahead indeed. One people one nation is for suckers who still buy that bullshit. Its very telling that among that challenges spelled out by Goh Chok Tong, narrowing the worst income gap among all developed nations is not one of them. Count on me Singapore? If Singapore counts on me than can I count of Singapore in return? Can I count on Singapore to bail me out when I am poor and jobless? Can I count on Singapore to treat me when I am sick and penniless? Can I count on Singapore to provide me with a social safety net? Can I count on Singapore when I am old and alone? Can I count on Singapore if I suffer permanent injury in the course of NS? It used to be said at least you can count of your CPF when you’ve reach retirement. Now who the fuck knows. They went ahead and changed the law so that if the CPF fund becomes insolvent, they can actually not pay you your money which they took away without asking for your permission. So as a Singaporean, who can I really count on except myself. Stand up for Singapore? Did Singapore stand up for those who lost their life savings because banks sold unsafe financial products? Did Singapore stand up for those who got conned by paper mills selling degrees of dubious origins? Did Singapore stand up for those lost their lives performing their duty as male citizens. Amid the sound and fury of the National Day parade, was there a moment of silence for those fallen NSMen? Did Singapore stand up for those people who can’t stand up for themselves. Did Singapore stand up to the transport companies that increases their fares year after year in good or bad times? I think at some point during the celebrations, everyone was supposed to stand up and recite the Singapore Pledge together. Do these people even know what they are reciting or are they just going through the motions? Do you even know the true meaning of the pledge? I for one did not recite the pledge for in reciting it would be the tacit support of a gross hypocrisy. To build a democratic country? When one thinks of democracy, singapore is just about as far away from that as you can get. The truth is there is nothing in the world I want more than to celebrate National Day, to proudly stand and declare myself Singaporean. But I can’t. I can’t celebrate National Day while Singapore remains a nation in captivity and its people stripped of their rights and civil liberties. I can’t celebrate National Day until Singapore is returned to its rightful owners- the people of Singapore. If some fucker came into your house and stole all your stuff, you sure as hell don’t celebrate that.My sincere appreciation to insanepoly for telling it like it is.I'm learning some.feedmetothefish Putting The Money Where The Mouth Is. Singapore time 8.22pm of 9 Aug 2009 was a "Universal Pledge Moment" (reported ST) where many were hyped, cajoled and encouraged to recite:"We, the citizens of Singapore pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion, to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality, so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation. "I missed the 8.22pm show last night because it was just that. A show. A well promoted show planned very much in advance, similar to the factitious 4 Million Smiles Advertisement for visitors of IMF & World Bank Meeting in Singapore 2006!I remember the last time I recited our National Pledge with gusto and heartfelt warmth and national fervour was in a Sports Stadium in Serangoon. That magic moment of doing what came naturally on 5 May 2006 is worth remembering. There was no hype, no rehearsal, no shebang, no countdown, no goodie bags! Just the good feeling of suppressed nationalistic pride brought forth by the political opponents of PAP, namely Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim of Workers' Party and, the synergy of thousands of Singaporeans who were sick and tired of being sick and tired of the politics that was, and still is.Unlike the 8.22pm Pledge Special, there was no prior main stream media advertisement on when to say the Pledge. There was no cajoling. There was no pre-planned "Universal Pledge Moment" with 'qitters' or Singaporeans 'stayers', staying elsewhere!With hands on hearts, I sincerely hope that political leaders who did their 8.22 Special last night stay true to what they did. Unless my understanding of the words 'equality', 'justice' and 'democracy' means something else, I think the leaders of this land need to put right the Pledge or change what Mr Rajaratnam wrote more than 40 years ago.I cringe, my heart aches and I 'kor cheoh' (laugh in bitterness) when leaders of this land speak of "building a democratic society based on justice and equality so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation" when they do otherwise. Eg:When the Senior Minister told my friends (living at the wrong place at the wrong time) that they'll get served last in HDB and Lift Upgrading just because they live in opposition wards like Hougang and Potong Pasir. This makes a joke of ' building a democratic society' in our Pledge.The money I pay for the conservancy of the estate I live in got lost in Lehman Bros and nobody (especially the caretaker MPs) cares to explain to me what went wrong.This makes a joke of 'equality' in our Pledge.We wonder if the money in Temasek in GIC belongs to the citizens of Singapore? If the person responsible for the loss of billions in Temasek also made a mess of the succession plan, the buck had to stop somewhere. We've been told so often that there's no free lunch in meritocratic Singapore and each must pull his/her socks to earn his/her keep. If one doesn't measure up, off one goes! So why some get the sack while others continue to keep the bag?This makes a joke of 'justice' in our Pledge.If Ministers in Singapore pays themselves up to $3.7 millions (with the PM getting six times the salary of Barack Obama) but bitch about welfare for the poor, waste precious time arguing about the $30 allowance increase for destitutes to eat at hawker centre, food court or restaurant, then something is very wrong.This makes a joke of "happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation" in our Pledge.Or is "happiness, prosperity and progress" meant for a chosen few?With hands on hearts, its time for the chosen few to put the money where the mouth is, instead of where the pockets are!Just where did the idea of 8.22 Pledge Special come from? Was it from an awesome evening of "unity and togetherness" in a stadium in Serangoon 3 years ago? I wonder. See the "the moment" here[Link]Don't get me wrong. Like Singaporeans who took the pledge last night, I'm proud to take the Pledge as I did in 2006. However, I just hate it when it's so bloody contrived and doesn't cut with the real Singapore that we live in!The greatest irony is:Saying the Pledge is easy but living the Pledge is tough and dangerous.Consider this:To really "build a democratic society based on justice and equality" in Singapore, does one need to do a Chia Thye Poh; a Tan Wah Peow; a JB Jeyaratnam; a Tang Liang Hong or even a Chee Soon Juan?Universal Pledge Moment? feedmetothefish It never rains in Temasek! To every life, a little rain must fall.However, the sun always shine in Temasek where nothing can and will go wrong.Even tens of billions of dollars were lost in investments (ShinCorp, Merrill Lynch, Barclays, ABC and lately Australand [Link] just to name a few) and vanished into thin air, there is not a tinge of contrition, remorse or regret for the losses from those responsible. Or has the buck stopped at the lower ranks (who are already punished?) as in the Mas Selamat Jalan / MHA fiasco?In contrast, the upwomanship and hubris displayed so far by Ho Ching and even the comments from Ministry of Finance leaves a bitter taste in the mouth of many. MOF is trying to keep clean by saying that meritocracy is the main criterion for selection of leadership position in Temasek. I do not know how they work the Report Cards in Temasek but if it's meritocratic to keep those who lost people's money by billions and act as if it's no big fcuk, then I think pigs can fly and the greatgrandma of my grandchild should be the Queen of England!What Ho Ching has said so far on the losses in her empire and the succession plan deserves no repetition as it may trigger some to puke. I can't help laughing when I read that staff in Temasek including Ho Ching and her office attendants will receive "negative bonuses". So just WTF is "negative bonuses"? Are they getting bonus or are they getting their bonuses paid earlier clawed back? Which is which? Or are we expecting another "no answer" answer which they are so good at!Ex-president Roh of South Korea committed suicide because of mistakes (real or perceived) he felt he was responsible for. Whether he did right in killing himself is not for me to comment. Is it an act of heroism or cowardice? I don't know.However, considering the price one pays for core values like integrity and accounatbility, it is very unlikely that Ho Ching will fall on her own sword as in 'seppuku'. However, a little human-ness in accepting part of the blame for the losses in Temasek instead of perpectually riding the high horse may gain her more respect than the brickbats she's receiving now. To arrogantly say that there should not be any regret and to joke about the perceptions others have of the "no Goodyear' debacle is a little too much for the taste of many.To every life a little rain must fall.To the lucky few, it never rains in Southern California nor in Temasek.One may be God's gift to the most powerful family in Singapore and one's hanger-ons. However, to brush aside the thoughts and reasoning (and the savings) of the common folks is to invite fury to the hearts of those who love and stay Singapore.Temasek Brief 2008 states their values of:ExcellenceTeamworkMeritocracy (or should it be spelt: Marrytocracy?)Merit (or is it Married?)InnovationIntegrity andRespect for PeopleDo they measure up or is this another case of "Chui Kong Lumpar Song"?Your guess is as good as mine.Ultimately to each, no matter how powerful (and they never do no wrong), a little rain must and will fall!Peace be with you.feedmetothefish[link one] 5C's - Monks And Ministers Got Them All! Sunday Times [link] wrote: "Monk with the 5Cs - Cash, credit card, car, country club membership and condo - the self-confessed 'modern-day' monk has got them all"Aren't monks and ministers (especially the political kind) and other 'do-gooders' suppose to do good? To serve the people, to serve their believers, to serve the nation?In so doing, are they entitled to the 5C's - the supposedly "good things in life'? Is that a 'given' or are they expected to ”experience the richness of life without the riches of life. You can experience abundant life without the abundance of life. You can experience health and well being without wealth.”The quotation above is from Mr Anthony Yeo (God bless his soul) [Link] who's gone (fedtothefish) too soon.The msm has the resources and the power to target anyone in a bad light, good light or whatever light msm chooses. Whatever one makes of the Sunday Time's article on Ming Yi, I can't help thinking of the core values of those in power. The values of those who has the religious power to suck money out of ordinary people through tithes. Characters of those who run charities that sucks people through donations and Nobility of political authorities who sucks citizens through taxes and duties (not forgetting CPF and HDB mortgages).So are the do-gooders really good?Or are the ordinary people being cajoled and conned off their hard earned money to satisfy the greed and deceptive delight of such powerful so-called do-gooders?I don't know.All I know is I can choose not to donate but I cannot choose not to pay Singapore taxes or CPF as I'll be penalised by law.Powerful hypocrites can make life a bitch but I can choose to be better by following the hard-to-live-by advice of Mr Anthony Yeo - ”You can experience the richness of life without the riches of life. You can experience abundant life without the abundance of life. You can experience health and well being without wealth.”We live, we learn. I thank Mr Yeo Toon Joo for writing and Mr Anthony Yeo for teaching me some, reminding me that until I'm fed to the fish, “with open hands, knowing that I am not grabbing on to anything”, I can have a life as good if not better than some money-grabbing, power-crazed elites!feedmetothefish God knows! Temasek, Temasek, TemasekWill the joke ever end?Once there was a country whose Lady Icon had too many shoes.Now there's a country who's Lady Icon's shoes are too big to fill.Having a strategy of 3 years for a succession plan and to have "strategic differences" as a reason for the failure in the succession plan is a strategy in stupidity.When I heard the answers from the chairman of Temasek and even Ministry of Finance for this "Singaporeans must be dumb moment", I realised that the answers provided can make the "Singaporeans must be dumb moment" into an eternity!Has Singaporeans become so dumb or have we given up on the circus or wayang or whateveryoumaycallit?Why do we continue to get insulted by these "no answer" answers from these hotshots all the time?All I know is:It's Goodbye Mr Chip!No More Goodyear unless its "More Good Years" of GCT era which (except for the chosen ones) everybody else has been waiting endlessly for!How on earth can we replace the wife of the son of the father?If only more Singaporeans can learn to "live without regrets", they'd be able to chuck away their jobs and get it back as and when they fancy.Some people have all the luck; others live with the pain.God bless Singapore!feedmetothefish And Another One Bites The Dust! It's not about the sad departure of Farah Fawcett, Michael Jackson or Anthony Yeo. It's the death of a Voice. A voice much liked by some Singaporeans whose voices cannot be heard in parliament. A voice that scares the shit of a powerful house because truth hurts! Truths that wake people up, stir the hornets' nest and create enlightenment that will cost votes!They Don't Want My Favourite Botak Anymore because Mr Siew Kum Hong has been a pain in the posterior of those who make a living by "fixing opposition and buying votes".It's tough for them to accept that Siew Kum Hong makes sense in Parliament and put some (not all) of the ruling MPs to shame, especially those not working hard for their money in representing their constituents. Those that do nothing but merely earn their keep by being rubber stamps in parliament, protecting their own turf, PAP's turf but not that of Singaporeans!I guess in his pursuit "to build a democratic society based on justice and equality so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation", Mr Siew Kum Hong has become a liability to the power that is if he continues to be a NMP.I'm not surprised at all that Mr Siew is not re-appointed. In fact, I'm sure it is a serious act to set an example to all new Nominated Members of Parliament on how to (and not to) behave and what to (and not to) say in Parliament.Alas, another awesome opportunity to "staying together moving ahead - bersatu padu begerak maju" has gone NATO. No Action, Talk Only! The hype of being "inclusive" is a hype indeed. It's become a sad joke!Mr Siew, I appreciate you for speaking for me in parliament. Should you find a stranger asking you for permission to kiss your Botak Head, it'll be me asking for Laurent Blanc-Fabian Barthez Good Luck Special!Thank you so much and please keep keeping it up at your blog. [Link]feedmetothefish Will H1N1 feed me to the fish? First, I'd like to thank my readers who enquire about my wellbeing after I've stopped blogging for about 2 months. For the benefit of those who read and commented on my last post [link], please be informed that the article was actually written on 29 May but only posted on 29 June 2009 with some update.Lately, apart from the H1N1, the other news that attracted my attention includes:The one who defended Chee Soon Juan has left us too soon.The one with the Moon Walk writes, sings and dances no more.One of my favourite angels has gone to join the real angels.Rest In Peace - Anthony Yeo, Michael Jackson and Farah Fawcett.Through what I've read from his articles and books and those who know him, Mr Anthony Yeo's not a very 'Singaporean' Singaporean. He took the road less traveled by being himself without fear or favour to the power that is. I strongly recommend everyone to read what he wrote here [must read link]. His guts in defending Chee Soon Juan whom LKY and CLH consider "seow" (and wishes everybody will treat) as a "psycopath'' is something worthy of my respect.While reading again another article he wrote on the subject of the 'graciousness' of local politicians [another must read link], I'm saddened that his life has been cut short before he sees his dream come true.These letters from Sam's thought blog [link] shows Anthony's thoughts on various social issues. I look up to him for what he stood for and his courage to tell it like it is. The only thing I have in common with Mr Anthony Yeo is we choose to be fedtothefish.Meanwhile, I've been dazed and confused by the directives given by various ministries and ministers and their spokesperson onH1N1. The different games played out by the various 'top guns' are simply amazing!I've been told yesterday that a fitness class that I'm supposed to attend is canceled due to H1N1. On the other hand, I've been told by Mintster Vivian Balakrishnan to help him cheer on his AYG Singapore team at the various sports venues.Just which direction are we heading?Exercise class not allowed but gather in big crowd to cheer and scream for Singapore's AYG team strongly encouraged?So, which is which?On a personal note, based on the advice of MOH, due to my heart condition, my chance of getting whacked by H1N1 is much higher than the average Joe.With the current confusion of some H1N1 cases being treated at clinic, some at hospital and some at home and whatever; some entitled to expired Tamiflu drugs and others not, let's hope that H1N1 is kind to us and not feedustothefish before our time is duefeedmetothefish Alamak, they move the goalposts again! The intent to tweak the GRCs and NCMPs by the powerful may be old news but it's worth reflecting upon.They belittle the opposition.They bankrupt the opposition.They treat the opposition with ridicule and contempt.They insulted and laughed at the academic achievement of Opposition Member, Mr Chiam See Tong. [link] The man who did Singapore proud by challenging the PAP to release the alleged conspirators of the 'Marxist Conspiracy'. [link]I believe the 'Marxist Conspiracy' was indeed a conspiracy but, not by or of the Marxist kind! It was of and for the ruling kind!Now the joke is they want more! Another joke on Singapore & Singaporeans?Minimum of 9 Opposition members in Parliament?While they change as they like, are they doing it for their own benefit or the benefit of Singapore and its people?Is this another "fix opposition, buy votes" strategy of the Kiasu, Kiasi, Kialaukwee Party?As much I am delighted by the suggestion from Mr Chiam See Tong of having a maximum of only 2 members in any GRC, I still feel that the political GRC rape in 1988 makes a mockery of democracy - not unlike paying ministers millions makes a mockery of national service and nation building.The previous upsizing a 3-member GRC to 6-member makes the logic of minority representation in parliament a very sordid joke indeed.Have we forgotten politicians like Mr David Marshall, Mr J B Jeyaratnam, Mr Othman Wok, Mr E W Barker, Mr Rajaratnam and others who stood on their own without feeling disadvantaged because of the colour of their skin or the root of their ancestry?I'm surprised that Dr Vivian Balakrishnan said this to Mr Low: 'You have been in politics longer than me and I think, heart to heart, you will know there will always be an inherent disadvantage for minority candidates. I'm just asking you to say why take risk of creating a system where you can end up with an unrepresentative House as far as race is concerned?'."Heart to heart", I think the "unrepresentative House" refers more to the "unrepresented poor" than the "unrepresented race".Is Vivian Balakrishnan a lesser politician than J B Jeyaratnam, David Marshall, S Rajaratnam, E W Barker or Othman Wok?It is unbecoming to judge people by the race and not character. To think that people put more value on the colour of a man than his quality as a political candidate is to be blind to what happened to USA and Mr Barack Obama.Or are Singaporean more racist than American?I don't think so.feedmetothefish Hypocrisy Sucks! I learned from Wikipedia that "Hypocrisy is the act of being less critical of oneself than of others."I'm amazed that on Saturday 23 May 2009, Singapore's main press, Straits Times dedicated 6 pages in a Special Report on the anniversary of the 'TianAnMen Incident' of 4 June 1989.I wonder why they did not put as much effort on the 22nd Anniversary of the 'Marxist Conspiracy' where Singaporeans were incarcerated and tortured.Are local incidents less newsworthy than incidents that happened elsewhere?Or is it the ST culture to do objective reporting elsewhere but not in Singapore?While mainstream media finds it difficult to confront and report the truth within, I'm glad that the cyberspace is able to enlighten us with alternative news and views that some try so hard to suppress.Below is an alternative that's worth reading. Tuesday, 17 March 2009 Chee Siok Chin [link]That We May Dream Again. That's the title of a collection of brief accounts written by ex-detainees of the Marxist arrests in 1987 by the Internal Security Department.It is a thin book that one should be able to finish reading in a couple of hours. However, it took me three days to complete it. It wasn't that I had to plod through it and it certainly was not that the accounts were dull. It was more because after almost each chapter, I found it difficult to move on for the experiences suffered by the detainees were heart-wrenching. It was not easy to read about how some of my fellow Singaporeans were used, bullied and persecuted by our own Government.I have met two of the detainees who contributed to this book. Vincent Cheng and Kevin de Souza. Both men exude sincerity and humbleness. Although there is no hint of bitterness when he spoke to me about his experiences under detention, Vincent Cheng writes in his chapter, I still feel angry at the injustice of the whole incident, and that the perpetrators have not been brought to account. 'Operation Spectrum' was political rape. I cannot forget nor forgive, the harsh treatment meted out to me in prison to extract information – the freezing room, the slapping and the beatings, including the blow to my abdomen. He goes on to say “Victims of injustice must not give up the fight to regain their dignity. I believe that forgiveness and letting go is genuine and meaningful only when justice has been, or is seen to have been, done.”Mr Cheng speaks on a topic close to my heart – justice. The main motivation for his involvement with helping the oppressed and the poor in Singapore then.He articulates my very thoughts and feelings when he says, “Working for justice necessarily calls for involvement in public life, in 'politics'...Advocacy is an integral ingredient of justice, and this makes the questioning and restructuring of public policies a necessity, even if the authorities do not appreciate it.”These words concisely sum up why some of us, the SDP and our Friends, have chosen to stand up to the PAP Government despite the charges, trials, jail terms and bankruptcies meted out against us.When Mr Lee Hsien Loong, who was the deputy prime minister, he said this about the re-arrest of the alleged Marxist conspirators. “The Government does not ill-treat detainees. It does however apply psychological pressure to detainees to get the truth of the matter.”This directly contradicts Mr Cheng's account of the beating he received at the hands of his captors. Who is telling the truth?Another detainee, Ms Tang Lay Lee, provides another account of her torture: “Are you a Marxist?”“No. I'm a Catholic.”PIAK!“Are you a Marxist??”“No. I'm a Catholic.”PIAK!“Are you a Marxist???”“No. I'm a Catholic.”PIAK! PIAK!“Are you instigating workers??”“No. I'm helping workers.”PIAK! In his chapter, Kevin de Souza writes, The period of detention turned out to be the most traumatic years of my life – the strip search, the blindfolds, the interrogations in cold rooms, the sleep deprivation, the television interviews, the slaps on the face, the tree-legged chair I was forced to balance...the solitary confinement and, most of all the fear of the long-term incarceration without trial. Either Mr Lee Hsien Loong had no idea what the ISD was doing to its detainees or he was lying through his teeth.These extracts may be frightening to those who are already afraid. But for those who are tired of the bullying and the lies perpetuated by this Government, this compressed book offers us hope and encouragement to stand up to injustice and oppression in our own country.Christina Tseng, an associate and friend of several of the detainees, writes at the end of her chapter, The Kingdom of Heaven is not just about what will happen after we are gone from this earth. It begins with what we do on earth. I believe if more people work towards a better society, if we are motivated by love, justice, peace and compassion, and cared more about the environment, more people will certainly start to experience heaven on earth. I hope this event can help younger Singaporeans appreciate how we can all play a pert in building a better society, whether we are Christian, Muslim or of other faiths. I have drawn encouragement from the authors of this book. What each of them had gone through gives me strength to continue with my work and struggle for freedom, transparency, dignity and rights for my fellow Singaporeans.Thank you Vincent Cheng, Tang Lay Lee, Kevin de Souza, Lucy Tan, Christina Tseng, Joseph Ng and Theresa Yeo for sharing so that we may all dream again.The book can be purchased here."I believe if more people work towards a better society, if we are motivated by love, justice, peace and compassion, and cared more about the environment, more people will certainly start to experience heaven on earth. I hope this event can help younger Singaporeans appreciate how we can all play a part in building a better society, whether we are Christian, Muslim or of other faiths."What's written by Christina Tseng above has taught me some.We live, we learn.feedmetothefish Prisoner of the State The following on Zhao Ziyang's Prisoner of State is extracted from UK Telegraph. [link]"By insisting on my view of the student demonstrations and refusing to accept the decision to crack down with force, I knew what the consequences would be and what treatment I would receive. Mentally, I was fully prepared, I knew that if I persistently upheld my view, I would ultimately be compelled to step down. If I wanted to keep my position, or give up my post in some face-saving way, I would have to give up my viewpoint and conform. If I persisted, then I had to be prepared to step down." Zhao Ziyang on explaining his opposition to Deng Xiaoping: "I had no other choice but to express my views to Deng personally, in a face-to-face meeting. Since I had asked for a personal meeting with Deng, only to have Deng call for a full Standing Committee meeting at his home, I realised that things had already taken a bad turn. "I expressed my views roughly as follows: 'The situation with the student demonstrations has worsened, and has grown extremely grave. Students, teachers, journalists, scholars and even some government staff have taken to the streets in protest. Today there were approximately 300,000 to 400,000 people. Quite a large number of workers and peasants are also sympathetic. Besides the hot issues of corruption and government transparency, the main impetus for all these different social groups is that they want an explanation for how the Party and the government can be so coldhearted in the face of hunger-striking students, doing nothing to try to save them... If the hunger strike continues and some people die, it will be like gasoline poured over a flame. If we take a confrontational stance with the masses, a dangerous situation could ensue in which we lose complete control.' "While I was expressing my view, Deng appeared very impatient and displeased. "In the end, Deng Xiaoping made the final decision. He said: 'Since there is no way to back down without the situation spiralling completely out of control, the decision is to move troops into Beijing and impose martial law'." Zhao Ziyang on the Tiananmen massacre: "On the night of June 3, while sitting in the courtyard with my family, I heard intense gunfire. A tragedy to shock the world had not been averted, and was happening after all." Zhao Ziyang on being purged: "Cultural Revolution-style tactics that had been condemned and abandoned long ago were taken up to be used against me. These tactics included inundating the newspapers with critical articles making me out to be an enemy, and casual disregard of my personal freedoms. "After June 4, they entirely disregarded these rules [drawn up at the 12th Party Congress to prevent the Cultural Revolution from ever occurring again] in their treatment of me, instead openly violating them and reassuming the ultra-left tactics of the Cultural Revolution. This was something I had not anticipated." Zhao Ziyang on the West: "It is the Western parliamentary democratic system that has demonstrated the most vitality. This system is currently the best one available. It is able to manifest the spirit of democracy and meet the demands of a modern society. "If a country wishes to modernise, not only should it implement a market economy, it must also adopt a parliamentary democracy as its political system. Otherwise, this nation will not be able to have a market economy that is healthy and modern, nor can it become a modern society with a rule of law." Zhao Ziyang on political reform: "If we don't move toward this goal, it will be impossible to resolve the abnormal conditions in China's market economy: issues such as an unhealthy market, profiting from power, rampant social corruption and a widening gap between rich and poor. Nor will the rule of law ever materialise. "If the final destination is a parliamentary democracy, the ruling Party must achieve two breakthroughs. One is to allow other political parties and a free press to exist. This can happen gradually, but it must be pursued. The second breakthrough is having democracy within the Party: that is, the Party needs to adopt democratic procedures and use democratic means to reform itself ... Different opinions must be allowed to exist, and different factions should be made legitimate."Will some wisdoms from the book (if applied in Singapore, like honest to goodness press freedom, stop political bullying and gerrymandeering), do our nation good too?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~The book 'Prisoner of State" was also reported by Peh Shing Huei and appeared on top half of the front page of Part B 'World' section of the Straits Times today. With the help of ST's positioning, I'm sure 'Prisoner of State' will sell millions.If only books like "Dark Clouds at Dawn" by Said Zahari, "Our Thoughts Are Free" and "That We May Dream" by Teo Soh Lung, Vincent Cheng & Victims of 'Marxist Conspiracy' were featured with the same prominence in Straits Times, I bet Singaporeans will be more politically aware and better informed.I wonder if Lim Cheng Siong, Chia Thye Poh, Said Zahari, Teo Soh Lung, Vincent Cheng and other victims of the 'Marxist Conspiracy' were also 'Prisoners of the State' because they refused to betray their principles and core values.feedmetothefish Awesome Performance! What does it take to win a Singapore May Day Award?To play "10-20-30-40" [link] after losing between US$2.3 billion (S$3.4 billion) and US$4.6 billion (S$6.8 billion) .[link]The escape of our money in Temasek and GIC has become as puzzling as the escape of Mas Selamat Kastari.Lesser mortal works hard to escape from detention centre.The Great Mortals simply escape from accountability without much effort and still get rewarded!Looks like Mas Selamat Kastari is not the 'greatest escape artist' in Singapore after all.Majulah Singapura!feedmetothefish