I will Ladies and gentlemen: http://www.iwill.sg/I would have.I would have posted "I will vote for the opposition" had the IC number thing been removed.What? Cannot meh? One reason to love The Straits Times Quote: "Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong gave credit on Sunday to resilient Singaporeans for helping to keep last year's unemployment rate low." [Source: Resilient S'poreans praised]Molly really, really loves this sentence. Occasionally, The Straits Times does some bad reporting that turns out to be unwittingly solid. The paper telling us that PM Lee is actually concerned about the statistics (Singapore's unemployment rate) than about the people themselves. That is why he thanked the people for nice unemployment figures.Thanks to your sacrifices, the statistics are kept pretty. It's not so much your survival that concerns me, but how you contribute to the country's image as measured by numbers. Election not about Mah Lee Kuan Yew: If Mr Mah is unable to defend himself, he deserves to lose.Mah Bow Tan: A general election (GE) is not about me, an individual minister or an individual MP. It's really about the residents themselves. I offer myself up for election because I believe that I can do the best and the most for them. But ultimately it's for the residents, the people to decide.True, the people decide. But the people decide whether he can best represent their interests. If it is not about him, the people should have no qualms voting for the opposition for he must be quite irrelevant.Mah: There's no question that our policies are designed for the good of the people. And perhaps there is no question whether your policies have turned out to be good for the people, Mr. Mah.Everyone should remember MM Lee's words. If Mah is unable to defend himself, he deserves to lose. Wisest thing Lee has said for a long time. Premier Trash According to PM Lee:For the opposition . . .  one scholar or two [and] you think "wow" this is a luminous transformation. Well, it is a significant development ... but finally let's look at the person, not what degrees he has, but what he is able to do for Singapore. I can tell you, we interview many scholars and each time we field a few of them. And we interview other people too and we often field people who are not scholars. It is good to see it in perspective. We hope that anybody who enters politics is somebody of not just ability but integrity and commitment. These are young people who have got good records academically and been in the civil service. We wish them well, but we hope Singaporeans will judge individuals like that as rigorously as they would judge individuals who join the PAP side. In other words, it's not just what degree you have, but what sort of person are you and what can you do. (CNA article) Nonsense, Hsien Loong. If it is about the sorts of people and what they can do, why privilege good academic records and evil civil service experience? That's not any better than deciding on candidates based on whether they have scholarships, you know? And it is obviously political suicide to have a party consisting solely of scholars, so these are just empty words that amount to no more than a cheap attempt to take a stab at the opposition.It is not about what you can do, Hsien Loong. I happen to think that you are capable of doing lots of things including what I would want you to do, really. But whether you will do those things is another matter. Ultimately, it is what you stand for that matters to me. If you are the embodiment of my misery, I do not care who you are or what you can do. In fact, the more capable you are, the more worried I would be.It doesn't matter what you can do if you merely stand for your father instead of standing up against him. Who's the real ugly Singaporean A letter featured in the world's most screwed up paper: New ugly Singaporean.HERE is a new breed of Ugly Singaporean more sinister than the ones who cut queues, pile up the buffet plate or rush onto the bus before other passengers can alight.Those belonging to this new breed fancy themselves as keyboard warriors and deface Internet sites with postings that are plainly worrying.Hiding behind the anonymity of the Net, they post comments that reek of prejudice, racism and envy.For instance, it is virtually unavoidable these days to read anti-migrant comments online. These netizens flood message boards with anti-foreign worker vitriol that degenerates into childish name calling and personal attacks on those who are courageous enough to defend foreign workers.  This is a ridiculously simplistic way of putting the issue across. Either the writer is stupid or he is worryingly sinister. He would like to have us think that there are two camps: the evil anti-migrant people (apparently the majority online) and the heroes to are pro-migrants. While it might be commendable for people to defend others (migrants or not) from prejudice, who is to label one group of people "anti-migrant" to begin with? Suddenly the large number of people feeling unhappy with the foreign policy as it is manifested in Singapore are dismissed as the bad guys who "flood" message boards. On the other hand, political sycophants are elevated to the status of heroes even if their objective may simply be to defend the policies of the ruling party rather than to put an end to discrimination.Childish name calling? Personal attacks? Keith Garard Tan, the writer of the offensive letter, seems to be doing exactly that. And he is truly sinister to this bimbotic blogger. If you voice out when you think you have suffered an injustice that is perpetrated by the very government that you have "voted" in, you are guilty of the sin of envy. Is Tan as stupid as to really think so or does he have a political agenda in saying so? One can never quite tell. But, either way, the letter stinks.According to Tan,These ugly warriors use labels like 'traitor' frequently. The irony is that these same anonymous posters say they want to leave Singapore because they feel they are being forced out by foreigners taking their jobs. What is so ironic about wanting to leave Singapore after labeling others as traitors unless Singaporeans who desire to leave Singapore are traitors in the eyes of Keith Gerard Tan? If there is irony, perhaps it is that Tan himself is anti-migrant and is labeling aspiring emigrants as traitors. The second irony is of course that it is ironic how Tan is speaking of irony.But perhaps Tan's real concern is as follows.Another example: The Eric How controversy, in which an inflammatory Facebook diatribe by an unidentified individual who called himself Eric How and claimed to be a member of Young PAP triggered a witch hunt.Did he just say "another" example? Pardon me, but what was or were the previous examples given? In any case, I have to confess that I do not know what Tan is driving at. Is he saying that the supposed impostor is an ugly Singaporean? But that one impostor should not be considered a "breed" of Singaporeans. Is he saying that those involved in the so-called witch hunt are ugly Singaporeans? Hey, but why should pro-migrant people be considered "courageous" while those who want to defend Singaporeans against the accusations of "Eric How" not courageous people who take the effort to expose those who post the inflammatory remarks to which Keith Gerard Tan seems so opposed? Apparently, it's good to defend migrants, but it's bad to defend Singaporeans or attempt to expose someone who makes remarks saying that Singaporeans have their karma to blame for their plight. Those in this new breed of Ugly Singaporean worry me because they suggest a sense that beneath a placid exterior lurks a collective subconscious that is intolerant, mean and narrow-minded.People like Keith Gerard Tan worry me. They either show how stupid Singaporeans can be or how far some would go to assassinate those who are critical of Singapore as his political gods have made it. Discriminatory Ads vs Discriminatory Practices From The Straits TimesA REPUTABLE preschool is seeking a teacher for English and in its newspaper advertisement, it specified 'Caucasian' as a criteria.Such discriminatory job advertisements are, however, few and far between nowadays, according to the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices (Tafep). [Maybe people are just becoming less open about showing their discrimination.]Its monitoring of print advertisements found that last year, only 1 per cent specified race, age, gender or other preferred characteristics, without explaining why these were necessary for the job. [Does it mean that stating preferred characteristics with ridiculous "explanations" will qualify them as non-discriminatory ads?]In 2006, it was 19.7 per cent. The plunge is a feather in the cap for Tafep, which released its first progress report on Wednesday.Its general manager, Mr Andrew Fung, attributed it to heightened awareness among employers of the need to recruit on a fair, meritorious basis. [Bullshit]For the unaware few, like the preschool, Tafep contacts them to explain the importance of using only relevant and objective job criteria in hiring. [That's about as good as telling a barbarian to behave like a gentleman in public even if he remains a brute through and through.] Fewer discriminatory ads? But who cares about ads? The most politically correct ad does not guarantee the fairest employment practices. And, really, you don't even need to specify anything that sounds discriminatory. Just offer a salary that only certain groups of people will take, for instance. (And then blame the others for being picky.) What Singaporeans think about Molestation - Woman molested (or so it is said) at Sentosa Siloso Beach Countdown Party- Someone recorded the incident on video- RazorTV reporters go around asking people for their opinionsI'm not sure if RazorTV is deliberately generating a stereotypical spin or if most of the men interviewed seem to be blaming molested woman. Nevertheless, amongst the views expressed are:1. You deserve to be molested if you go to parties.“She deserved it lah because she going to the party.”2. If you choose to go somewhere, and there happens to be molesters there, you are choosing to be molested. (AKA: Be a good girl or be a walking sex toy.)“She chose to be there. It’s a choice that she made.” 3. Women going to countdown parties should expect to be molested.“She should know. . . .I mean, before she go there she should know the consequences.”4. It’s normal to be molested. Especially if you are “wild”.“It’s interesting. If she was drunk or anything, I think it’s normal . . . It’s a countdown party, . . . there’s alcohol and stuff and maybe she’s a wild girl.”5. Many cases of molestation makes molestation OK.“It’s a club lah. I think this kind of behavior is expected.” “It’s actually quite common.”[Try starting a mass homicide then. If it's common enough, it's fine.]6. Erm . . . maybe molest women in private instead?“Disgusting. The guys are just plain disgusting. To be doing this in public area, it’s really disgusting. Illicit.”7. It's your fault that you did not sufficiently protect yourself.“I guess if you want to go to that kind of party, she should bring along some others friends [in order] not to be an easy target. . . .It’s just wrong.”Disclaimer: Although everyone knows that Molly is a wild bimbo who parties in bikini all the time, she is not the victim of the Siloso Beach molestation. She is also relieved that no one took a video of her molesting the drunk hunks in Speedos at the party. They totally deserved it for their partying ways. I say I'm putting you first (so stop your f****** whining) From PM Lee's New Year Message:1) "Workers will need to up-skill, re-skill and multi-skill. They must be flexible, willing to adapt to changed conditions, and take on new jobs as conditions change."= Improve your skills (up-skill) and do more kinds of work (multi-skill). Work longer hours with lower expectations (be flexible) and adapt to harsher and harsher conditions without any real workers' rights.2) "Earlier this year, when job prospects were uncertain, workers took skills upgrading seriously. Now that job prospects have improved, workers must not think that this is no longer urgent." => There is always this danger that Singaporeans become complacent and adopt the wrong attitudes. Terrible people.3) "Older workers should also carry on working for as long as they can; one encouraging sign through this crisis is that employment rates for older workers stayed high."= Erase the word "retirement" from your dictionary. Erase the word "retirement" from your dictionary. Erase the word "retirement" from your dictionary. Erase the word "retirement" from your dictionary. Erase the word "retirement" from your dictionary. . . .+ I'm happy that old folks are competing with young PRC foreigners for cleaning jobs (one encouraging sign) while my father accuses them of not being hardworking enough.4) "[T]he best way to protect workers is to give them the right skills to remain productive and employable, and ensure that their companies stay competitive internationally."= Workers should not be protected by stupid things like rights. We protect them by helping their companies stay competitive internationally. Let's start with depressing wages so that the companies will always remain competitive. Competitive companies are always beneficial for workers, aren't they?5) "The Government’s first responsibility is to Singaporeans. = I say lah. No harm saying.6) We will manage and moderate the inflow of foreign workers, so that Singa-poreans are not overwhelmed by the sheer numbers. But we must continue to welcome hardworking, enterprising people to our shores. We need them both to expand our talent pool and help Singa-pore to prosper, as well as to top up our own population and make up for our low birth rates.= When I say you are not overwhelmed by the number of foreigners thanks to my management, you are NOT overwhelmed. My word is truth, as always.7) "Our history has been one of overcoming difficult odds to survive and prosper."= Of course, there will be those who can overcome difficulty and there will be those who can't. Let's only remember the former. Let the latter die off naturally and be forgotten.8) "Singapore’s prospects are good. . . . Our policies are sound and we have the courage to do the right things."= Yes, you may hate what I'm doing, but trust me, it is the right thing. Because I say so. *****In a nutshell:Singaporeans, continue to faithfully vote for the PAP, believing that it will do you good no matter what the reality of your plight tells you! =) Fresh Year, STale Propaganda Oh hi hi hi! Happy New Year everyone! It's the New Year and everyone's favorite newspaper must start the new year on the right note—by publishing the model ST (ET?) Forum letter. This time, exemplary citizen Loke Kong shares with us how wonderful the government is. :)[If you are unable to see the image, click on the title of this post to view just this entry. Alternatively, click on the image and be redirected to Photobucket where you can zoom in.] Molly helps Janet Wee Fix TOC  Dear Molly,I have found out that a certain righteous Ms Janet Wee is trying to protect the reputation our leaders and has written to the Singapore Police to complain about The Online Citizen for being seditious. I am worried that her email does not get the point across clearly enough. Will you please help her out so that she can lodge a better complaint?Mr. Lee See NaoDear See Nao,Ah yes, finally someone is complaining about those terrible people who criticize a government that can do no wrong. I will try to help.Yours,MollyDownload pdf here. ST Snapshot HK Bad, Therefore SG Not Bad The Straits Times either enjoys publishing ridiculously silly letters or obsessively edits them into stupidity. In a letter, "Don't beat Singapore with Hong Kong stick", Ms Priscilla Pey tells us that she has had encountered bad service in Hong Kong and goes on telling us about how ungracious the people there are (which has nothing to do with customer service), and reasons: "In conclusion, Singapore is not far off target on customer service. Keep it up, Singapore." Singaporeans should hold the press responsible if the average national IQ falls below 80. Finally, a piece of good news (I hope) MediaCorp to discontinue TV Mobile from next year"A statement released Tuesday said MediaCorp has decided to terminate the service upon expiry of its current agreement with SBS Transit on January 1." Although the termination is due to the unprofitability of the venture for MediaCorp rather than from all the complaints and petitions the public have sent (i.e. MediaCorp would likely have no qualms continuing with the intrusive trash if it were profitable), there will at least be one source of trauma less.Hopefully, there will be no other attempts to invade my world with speakers louder than the already noisy engines.(Though do I see SBS coming up with a sob story about how it has lost a source of revenue and hence needs to raise fares?) Gender, Sexuality & What Attitudes to Peepholes Reveal Peepholes in men's toilets too(Razor TV)"Peepholes in men's toilets" would be a reasonable headline. But "Peepholes in men's toilets too"? Do I sense the somewhat (or perhaps more than somewhat) sexist assumption that women attract sexual attention (objectification through a gaze) whereas there is nothing about men that attracts scopophilic exploits and hence it should come as a bit of a surprise ("too") that men's toilets have peepholes?On top of that, do I detect some silent refusal to simply see the issue as it is? "While perverts and peeping toms have long been common in female toilets, RazorTV discovered that men are not immune." There is something strange here. Firstly, I have no idea how "common" perverts and peeping toms in the Ladies are. Do women bump into one every other day?Secondly, there is the question of what the comparison is. Perverts and peeping toms are common in female toilets but they are less common in men's? Or peepholes are common in female toilets but less common in men's? Obviously perverts and peeping toms do not need peepholes, and, holes need not be used by peeping toms (though I suspect some would argue that they are used by perverts nonetheless). Just because there are holes, it does not mean that they are used for peeping. Perhaps the voice-over in the Razor TV video is too abashed to say certain holes are what might be called glory holes, as one sealed hole seems featured in RazorTV seems to be. In this case, it may not be an issue of peeping toms taking delight in peeping at others perform tasks that most people do not want to watch. Instead, it is more likely going to involve a subculture of sorts with knowing, consensual participants. Of course, there will be unknowing men who step into a toilet cubicle with peepholes or other sorts of holes in the partitions and it might indeed be disturbing for them to be exposed to unwanted attention.Their privacy should be safeguarded. But what's the point of interviewing one seemingly clueless man after another, only to have them to make remarks ranging from:1) I don't care because I'm a man and there's nothing (for other men?) to see. [Only women are eligible scopophilic objects.]to2) It would be a more serious issue for women. [Why? If men can be watched by other men, can't women be watched by other women? Or is there an assumption that the "watchers" in both men's and women's toilets are invariably male? [Sexual predators are always male. And women make bigger victims because, for some strange reason, it's not as bad for a man to be peeped at as it is for a women to be peeped at.]and3) It's no big deal, actually. We are all men. (Peeping toms in the Ladies can be male, but there are no female peeping toms.) Only worry is that some men are, you know, "abnormal." (?)I prefer cubicles with their partitions intact. But what a whole lot of assumptions we can infer from what people say about holes! Exchanges With See Nao I Dear Molly,It’s nice to see that you are blogging again even though you are as trashy as always. And you really shouldn’t move from Livejournal. How could you be so disloyal. I fear for the fate of Singapore if young Singaporeans are as whimsical as you. But please do a good deed and help me publicize the following letter I wrote for the Straits Times Forum. Thanks.Yours coldly,See Nao*****Make Cooling Day a Public HolidayIt is very encouraging that the PAP Government is thinking of having a cooling day prior to polling day for Singaporeans to consider if they want to vote the PAP out. This shows the PAP's magnanimity and is proof that elections in Singapore are fully democratic. While is is clear that all cool, level-headed Singaporeans will vote for the right party, that is the PAP, allow me to suggest that Cooling Day should be made a public holiday.There are absolutely rational reasons to make Cooling Day a public holiday. Given that Cooling Day is meant to let people cool down so that the innocent party will not be scorched, the Government should help to facilitate the cooling down so that people can sit down and rationalize voting for the PAP. The rationale behind Cooling Day is that people should be given time to calm down and think rationally. However, if people have to go to work (and be reminded of how they could have been their foreign talent superiors, for instance), if they have to travel in overcrowded buses in overcrowded roads with overburdened loads on their shoulders, if they are—that is to say—allowed to be as they are on a normal day, their fiery irrationality will not have a chance to cool down. This will defeat the purpose of Cooling Day itself. Hence, I strongly urge the Government to consider making Cooling Day a public holiday. The LTA and the PTC should also ensure that minimum public transport service standards are more stringent on Cooling Day to ensure that people can cool down properly.Lee See Nao (Mr.)*****Dear See Nao,Long time no see. The idea of a Cooling Day already chills people's bones. The concept ensures its own effective implementation and Singaporeans require no additional retard(ant)s. But for the sake of one extra public holiday, I support your cool suggestion. I hope the President makes it a public holiday even though no voters had to think about whether to vote for him or not.Yours bimbotically,Molly Another Space Molly is now blogging elsewhere. Canadians  Canadians have probably never heard about Singapore.According to a survey at http://ca.yahoo.com/, many people think that Canadian politicians are being paid too much. And their Prime Minister earns only a 6-digit figure a year!Do you feel that Canadian politicians are paid too much?(76%)Yes(15%)No(9%)UnsureHey, you people don't want monkeys running around, do you? Come on, you have more than 30 million people in Canada. Averaged out, your Cabinet probably costs less than a spoonful of Char Kway Teow or Mee Siam (without golden cockles). In fact, you aren't paying your politicians enough. They might become corrupt, you know. And your economy is going to suffer because no talented person will even think of taking up the job for a pathetic salary. And no one will be bothered to sue you for defamation when you speak irresponsibly. Canadians, please wake up your idea OK. Apologies to Zaqy and Today I would like to apologize the Zaqy Mohamad and the mainstream media for satirizing their nonsensical and mutually contradicting rhetoric about press freedom—half a decade before they spewed them out recently. In December 2004, Molly wrote in the spirit of parody, "A wide-scale survey conducted on countries around the world reveals that Singapore's Press Freedom has increased on a year-to-year basis. The nation state has been placed positions ahead of its neighbors like Malaysia . . . ." About a year later, in October 2005, Today reported that "Singapore has inched up seven spots in the 2005 World Press Freedom Index". And it was parodied by Molly once again. Molly feels obliged to offer her deepest apologies. If Molly had known that some people are utterly incapable of coming with new scents to mask the stench of old shit, she wouldn't have made fun of them. Now Today wants us to think that Singapore's press freedom ranking has "rebounded" (as if it had dropped for a while after being quite high for a long period). But before you can start celebrating, Today quotes Zaqy Mohamad who wants us to believe that the low ranking (of course neither he nor Today calls it low) means that the local media is "credible" despite all those heretical bloggers who do not side with the PAP. (Huh?!) From the phrasing of the Today article, one might think that he means that the 144th to 133rd "improvement" is something positive and means that Singapore's media have become more credible. On the contrary, he seems to think that the media has become a little less credible (because those crazy free press fanatics aren’t ranking it so low now). I believe the ever-reliable media might have misunderstood him somewhat. I think he really means that (insert sigh) the higher ranking isn’t something to celebrate, but is simply saying that at least the local media has (thankfully, phew) not gone too much in the way of those disgusting media in the West that do not know how to lick their governments' asses. Look at the Today article: Mr Zaqy Mohamad, chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Information, Communications and the Arts, said the improved ranking "underlines that our press remains credible especially in the face of challenges like the new media". He says that the press remains credible (i.e. it’s still credible), not that it has become more credible. He seems to be suggesting that the better Singapore's media is ranked (better according to Reporters Without Borders, I mean), the less credible it is. Admittedly, I can't really accuse anyone of misquoting him. This is all too ridiculously twisted to be properly articulated. One moment, you have to pretend to buy into Reporters Without Borders' ranking (or so it seems) and spin something positive out of the dismal ranking by calling Singapore's position this year an "improvement". The next moment, you are expected to do the usual nonsense of saying that the better Reporters Without Frontiers ranks the local media, the less credible the local media is, because (insert collective PAP gasp) surely the new ranking shows that the media is not as sycophantic as was a year ago . . . I should refrain from accusing Zaqy Mohamad of bad rhetoric. Perhaps he wasn’t being rhetorical. I think he has simply internalized the idea that good ranking = bad press. (Any double entendre should be noted.)  I wonder if he would see Today's failure to coherently adopt his ideological standpoint (but unwittingly contradict him instead) as a sign of the potential for a more disturbing (better? Worse?) ranking next year. Harmony and Difference Once upon a time, there was a storyteller. The moral of his stories were invariably about harmony. One day, someone regurgitated his plots and spun them, perhaps unintentionally, into tales of equality. This enraged the veteran storyteller who threw a hissy fit and yelled, “You are telling my stories wrongly!” “But these stories are not yours.” one wishes the second storyteller had retorted. “You are just another storyteller.” As though the staleness of PM Lee’s National Day Rally about harmony (the racial and religious species, what else?) is not enough, many contribute their reverberations, adding stench to staleness. But suddenly, MM Lee seems strangely agitated about an NMP’s advocacy of equal treatment of all races.Now, it might have seemed to many people to be quite politically correct to want all races to be treated equally. Surely, one might ask, the PAP which is so obsessed with racial harmony would have no problems with racial equality? As such, MM Lee’s strong reaction to Viswa Sadasivan’s view might seem rather odd at first. Is MM Lee against racial equality? Yes, if we assume that racial equality involves the equal treatment of all races. In a nutshell, MM Lee’s view is that the different races cannot be treated equally because the government has be sensitive towards minority races and take action or have policies that will reassure minorities that they will not be discriminated against.And if we go on, we will be going in circles for the strength of Viswa Sadasivan’s point is precisely that if the government persists in the stance MM Lee has elucidated, racial categories will become further entrenched. And Sadasivan probably has a problem with this because the emphasis on racial categories will ensure that the consciousness of race and of the perceived differences will always be present. Understandably, for a government that has played the race card for its strategic political benefit, any call to eliminate the need for racial categories is a travesty.What we have are simply two positions but an uncannily common standpoint at their core. While Sadasivan talks about equality, MM Lee talks about non-discrimination, which in fact draws from discourses of equality. One says that there is no true equality if race continues to be visible, if the walls of race continue to be painted and repainted. The other says that, in practice, we cannot simply pretend that we have attained the ideal situation in which no one is bothered by what they consider to be race.Perhaps it is not the difference in the two men’s positions that is significant. Perhaps the issue of equality as articulated by Sadasivan threatens to hit a sensitive spot in the discourse of harmony as propagated by the government. Suddenly, Singaporeans might be reminded that harmony is different from equality. It is possible for me live harmoniously with you even if I am (or you are) suffering social injustices. At the same time, you and I might be equals but we squabble from time to time. Which do you find preferable? (I do not mean that any racial group in Singapore is suffering injustices. This is just an illustration to distinguish the ideas of harmony and equality.)Difference is an essential precondition of harmony. We can harmonize because there is you and I, because there is an other. With harmony is always the possibility of discordance; there is always a threat of sorts. If no one perceives difference, then the notion of harmony has to go. How painful that would be for someone who has built an entire city on that notion, who has made skyscrapers from the bricks of difference! More tragically, what would happen if people living in these glittery skyscrapers suddenly reject the buildings, the apartment-compartments, that have been built for them and in which they have been placed with a heavy hand. Worse, what if the inhabitants of the harmonious city decide to hire architects of their own?Never throw away a child’s Lego set. It is devastating.But is harmony not just harmony? Of course, but perhaps not. Perhaps harmony is not even harmony. The moment harmony is divided into types, with most types being invisible, there is silent disharmony. Or silenced disharmony. Racial harmony. Religious harmony. Why not gender harmony, for instance? Because, as a storyteller explains, many years ago, there were racial riots. And people died! So racial issues must be handled sensitively. Someone ought to send that storyteller to jail for sedition. For surely he is inciting riots on the basis of gender. What else? If we accord “racial harmony” importance because of racial riots, what is there to stop people from starting gender (or any other kinds of riots resulting in violence and deaths, something we fear so much?  The MM-NMP argument is ultimately not a racial issue. It is a political issue (as always). I feel as if I’m contributing staleness too. (But what else one have to offer?) When PM Lee warns of the danger of playing the racial/religious card (such as in the case of a group of Christians taking over AWARE), is he not playing the racial/religious card in a different way, not in the sense of being affiliated to any race or religion but in the sense of deploying race and religion to exact political benefits such as the restrictions on free expression on the part of the people. (Oh, but of course there is freedom of expression in Singapore, if you dare say this. Oh, but you are just been taken in by those Western ideals that simply don’t apply, if you persist in saying this. Of course we are democratic! .  . . We are not democratic because we are different from the West!)I wonder if MM Lee remembered that he was telling someone from a minority race that he knew better what minority races need. Reflections Watching that thing shown on every channel is like being forced to watch a recording of yourself being raped -- while being raped another time round. Surreal Realism 1. "The simulation of a terrorist strike was surreal and profiled such an attack realistically." (Mr. Benny Cheok, ST Forum)Hmm... Surreal and realistic. The Straits Times Forum is a surreal anthology of nonsense from real nitwits.2. From TodaySome Singaporeans are sore that they do not know enough about how "their money" is being invested by Temasek Holdings, acknowledged Singapore's first female Cabinet minister, Mrs Lim Hwee Hua."We have to ask ourselves if transparency is an end in itself, or if it is the means to an end," said the Minister in the Prime Minister's Office to Petir. "If all our cards are revealed in pursuit of complete transparency, does that serve the purpose of having Temasek and the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation manage the reserves well?In other words: Don't demand for transparency when the system is designed to be opaque."It is reasonable for people to ask questions, but ultimately the government holds the responsibility for deciding how much to reveal in our best interests."In other words: We will tell you what we want to tell you. Your job is to believe.Question: Does "our" refer to the government or to all Singaporeans (or whatever else it might be)?To the editors of Today: What a wonderful feat of double entendre! Are you saying that Singaporeans are sore (a word that passes negative judgement) and Mrs. Lim is acknowledging that Singaporeans are sore (in which case the word should be "claimed" and not "acknowledged")? Or are you saying that Mrs Lim is acknowledging that people are questioning Temasek's transparency (in which case there's really nothing to acknowledge)? What day? A time to celebrate, a time to deplore. There are those who are determined to infantilize the collective, choreographing empty pledge recitations, tribal face-painting, mumbling songs designed to for the practice of false love for a mythical nation. And there are those who feel a sense of belonging by participating in the unspoken dread of the idiocy ritualized annually.How could August 9 be known as National Day if there’s nothing tangibly national to speak of, when the dominant tales of the nation alienate all but those who have been successfully infantilized? In other words, what is national day if the widely circulated notions of nationhood are held with contempt by those who persist in their (in)sanity while being repeated ad infinitum by those who seem to find delight in lip-synching to delirious gibberish about harmony, overcoming crises together, Lee Kuan Yew the Greatest, Goh Chok Tong the Great, hegemony our pride? The nation, as the political power-authors of Singapore articulate it, is anti-nation. This is not to say that there is anything necessarily desirable about being a nation. But if we understand a nation as a group of people, the anti-nation of Singaporean nationalism may be said to be anti-people. The nation as it is orchestrated by the state goes against the very people it claims to be working for. It is invariably a collection of tales about achievements together with cautionary tales of crisis. Your unhappiness is forbidden. Be happy like the blessed infantilized whose sole mission in life seems to be to recite the pledge, riding it of signification whilst clenching fists at their chests, wringing your heart.Don’t be unhappy. Don’t protest. The PAP is not the nation, the argument goes. Love the nation even if you hate the PAP. But August 9 is a time of mourning precisely the PAP has made itself national. There is only loss, no love. Premature loss before love could even exist. You can’t trick me into loving the PAP, fools.If there is anything national to speak of, it has to be the deformity born out of the collective trauma of 44 years (and counting) of disfigurement. Singapore is a mass of scar tissue, aching with dying life. Eternally dying to die. It is the trauma of the oppression that has taken place under the pretext of nation-building, the constant assault on our minds and common sense by omnipresent propaganda.What oppression? The question is bound to crop up. One shall not answer a question which, by answering it, would subject one to further assault. Yet, by not answering, one subjects oneself to further accusations. Irrational. Biased. Imbalanced. Insane. And this is perhaps the essence of the national trauma brought about by a group of people’s (or perhaps one man’s?) nation-building. To articulate the trauma is perhaps one way of imagining the nation, not against the people, for once. Perhaps this is why one sees the urgency with which the social engineering project of infantilization is carried out. Make them idiots from a young age. Rather they paint their faces red than they see red. Obscure the trauma forever with a mask of glittery enjoyment. Let everyone recite the pledge at 2022, let their hysterical voices conjure the horrors of the Japanese occupation and institute it as The Trauma, sitting on the actual trauma of the people.Let those who cannot be made happy leave or be consigned to eternal suffering-silence. Unfortunately, every day is national day.What day? I’ve forgotten. What day I can’t forget. I don’t hate Singapore. The trite disclaimer. Perhaps it’s the only way to love. But I’ve nothing to hate. Nor anything to love. The Fundie Agenda The Homosexual Agenda according to a certain feminist mentor whose own agenda and sanity I highly question: 1. decriminalisation of sodomy [big deal?] 2. equalization of age of consent for heterosexual sex and homosex [so what?] 3. anti-discrimination laws e.g. equality in sex education which should cover heterosexual sex and anal sex [sounds reasonable] 4. same-sex marriage or civil union [what's wrong?] 5. homosexual parenthood and adoption rights [cannot meh?]   The Fundie Agenda according to Molly: 1. Capitalize on existent homophobia to criminalize homosexuality by aligning it with pedophilia and other forms of sexual behavior deemed unacceptable 2. Removal of age of consent laws to allow sex only after marriage 3. Oppressive laws that ban contraception and abortion 4. Invasion of fundie morality on all behavior on all heterosexual relationships 5. Sectarian StateThe Bimbotic Kitten Agenda:1. To pee on someone's grave [Er, stray cat pee on grave not against the law hor?] A Political Affair To be absolutely truthful, it is clearly possible for homosexuality to be promoted, whether through sexuality education programs or in other ways. The great minds of people like Dr. Thio Su Mien are certainly right to believe that homosexuality can be promoted, although this does not mean that it has been promoted through AWARE's sexuality education program. I doubt, though, if there are many people whose passion in promoting homosexuality are as intense as the passion of those who promote heterosexuality. After all, the same crusaders against the promotion of homosexuality are promoting heterosexuality and have managed to convince a number of homosexuals to become straight―or at least behave as though they are. And since heterosexuality can and has been be promoted, why should we pretend that homosexuality can't?It is not whether homosexuality has been promoted through sexuality education in schools. I doubt even Dr. Thio (either of them―the mother or the daughter) would believe me if I were to tell her that teenagers became lesbian because AWARE told them that being lesbian was fun. What the likes of Dr. Thio are concerned about is really a group of people who are encountering uncertainty about their sexuality. They might observe their same-sex peers being interested in the opposite sex and feel that they have different inclinations for some reason. Given the way the world is today, most teenage students would know what “gay” and “lesbian” refer to. But when they find themselves possibly being described as “gay” or “lesbian” (words often used derogatorily, with the assumption that being gay and lesbian is abnormal), they are likely to begin facing self-doubt and guilt. Their psychological health is inevitably affected in some way.Dr. Thio clearly does not simply want people to stop themselves from telling others to become lesbian.  (Pardon me if I give the impression that I'm trying to use her as the avatar of bigotry. I could very well use a certain Pastor or many of his followers, but none of them has ever claimed to be a feminist mentor.) What she―and her allies―want is something more. She does not even condone neutrality. Pastor Derek Hong of Church of Our Saviour apparently believes that they cannot be neutral and that is fine. No one is obliged to be neutral. But one cannot stop others from being neutral about issues to do with homosexuality. And this is the impulse of the opponents of AWARE's sexuality education. For the sake of what they believe God wants, they righteously go out and stop people from being neutral. No, you cannot be neutral. You cannot say that I have no issues if you are lesbian. God forbid. So homosexuality has got to remain taboo, and when it ever has the audacity to sneak into conversations, judgment has to be pronounced. Negative judgment, of course. If you do not turn homosexuality into a taboo, or if you do not condemn homosexuality (it's probably optional to claim to love homosexuals after the condemnation), you must be a promoter of homosexuality. I suppose only God can decide if these people are promoting perverse wisdom Which isn't really wisdom, of course, but we don't really have a good word for it. It's perverse but the moment it establishes itself in enough minds, it becomes conventional wisdom; it becomes irrefutable.What about the young people going through sexuality education then? If they happen to have any inclinations towards homosexuality, they must be told by the seeming authorities that it is wrong. And the people who are judgmental might ironically think that they are not being judgmental. A fictitious conversation:Girl: Dr. Thio, I think I'm lesbian.Dr. Thio: Oh . . . Are you sure? What makes you think so? Maybe it's a passing phase―maybe you just admire some of your peers and and you mistake it for love? There's a chance you are not . . . you know . . .Act non-judgmental―after judging with your heart, mind, and soul. From the fictitious conversation above, it is clear that no one has even said that homosexuality is sinful. But it is the assumption. Even if you tell someone, “I think I support the opposition over the PAP,” I doubt people will say, “Are you sure? Maybe it's a passing phase. Maybe you are really a PAP supporter like the rest of us.” To say so would be to assume that it is rather strange (if one tries not to use the word “abnormal”) to support anyone else but the PAP. And one doubts that the screwed-up but screw-loose person who might think it sinful to support the opposition would have a similar reaction if you say, “I don't do politics.”So what? Don't people have a right to be homophobic? Sure, they do. As much as I have the right to use Dr. Thio as the avatar of bigotry, she has the right to do the same to, say, Alex Au. But the concern is really what sorts of effects there are on those affected by sexuality programs. Dr. Thio may or may not know this, but what she wants is for those having issues with their sexualities to feel obliged to change, to feel abnormal until they do something to convert, to feel rejected despite having the supposedly unconditional love of Dr. Thio, her pastor and her mentees. Never mind if these students don't believe in God and are going to hell anyway, according a much less debated Christian concept.And beyond the relatively small number of people affected by the issue of homosexuality, there might be those who engage in premarital sex. It is very strange, but I have no idea why no one is saying that the premarital-sexualites promote a premarital-sexual lifestyle or have some kind of premarital-sexual agenda to prevent righteous laws banning premarital sex from being implemented. (Hey, if the Public Order Act can be implemented in Singapore, is there anything that can't?)In the world of the passionate conservatives (otherwise known as fundies, but I prefer to be neutral and I hope no one has issues with my neutrality), it is probably wrong to teach people about the various methods of contraception―even if they are not against contraception, they would probably see no reason to teach teenagers about contraception when they are not supposed to be having sex until after they get married many years later. Surely to talk about contraception is to promote premarital sex. And to talk about abortion is surely to promote murder―the murdersexuals must be promoting a murderous lifestyle and have some sinister murdersexual agenda and must be stopped.What do the passionate conservatives eventually want then? Lots of miserable people. People who feel miserable for having homosexual inclinations, people who feel dirty for having had sex before marriage (don't ask me how much sense it makes to insist that atheists have sex only after they get themselves legally married despite not believing in any god that would make the marriage sacred). People who are constantly haunted by selective specters of Sin. And what might they get? People who simply stop having faith, disenchanted people for whom there is no negotiation or discourse. If they get what they want, our society might get what it doesn't want.According to more optimistic bloggers than Molly, the recent AWARE saga is an indication of how mature Singaporeans have become and how civil society has developed. But it is actually a purely political process that is located outside of the realm of politics proper. Against the conservative takeover of AWARE, the only discourse we seem to have recourse to is that of neutrality. To make matters worse, the mainstream media was clearly not in support of what they called a coup―not because they are not conservative, but because their politics is the politics of the PAP. In other words, the politics of claiming tolerance, harmony and neutrality. The results of the AWARE EOGM that had Josie Lau and her conservative team losing to those they ousted became a triumph of neutrality and tolerance in Singapore. It could very well have been seen in terms of confrontation rather than tolerance. What we need is not imposed neutrality and enforced tolerance. What we need is for everyone to have the equal freedom to be non-neutral and confrontational, though this might make Molly sound somewhat too subversive for her own good. But confrontation is not anarchy and it certainly does not preclude peace. What has happened after the EOGM? AWARE politely stated that it would review its sexuality education program. And people have managed to manipulate the Ministry of Education into suspending the program―simply by complaining and complaining passionately.What we are now left with is the unequal freedom to be non-neutral. When you are seen as “mainstream”, you have more power to make noise about the sexuality program. I cannot say for sure, but I really doubt that the MOE would suspend a sexuality education program if lots of gays and lesbians start complaining that despite claiming to be neutral, it is actually discriminatory towards homosexuality and there is a need for tolerance.Singapore has not changed. It is exactly the same before and after the AWARE saga, though it provided for the usual dose of entertainment during the prolonged ennui of staying in Singapore. (Now move on to Mas Selamat.) Dark clouds gathered, but they were blown away before a storm could be brewed.  Black or white, everyone is in the same set of chess with less than two players. Perhaps your game is a programed computer demo. Sure, the AWARE coup was a travesty. But it wasn't disallowed in the script. It was not as if an ingenious hacker had changed the program to allow for possibilities it offers. Your apparent agency is never your own. Well, admittedly it is more exciting if you don't think too much. Forget yourself and not be aware and you might find fulfillment even without dignity. I love presumptuous people Imagine how people would react if Molly were to say, "I am alarmed by developments in AWARE. I don't want my children to say that oh, it's sinful to be homosexual, to experiment with conservatism and fundamentalism. I'm concerned. I'm a parent. It's shocking. How can this be done in Singapore?"Of course, I would rather say, "I am alarmed by the developments in AWARE. The people in the new exco are assuming that the right thing to do is to declare that homosexuality is evil whereas it would be more appropriate to be neutral. Even if you do not agree with advocating the acceptance of homosexuality, you have to be neutral and tell people that it is currently a controversial issue and you can't decide for them."But Maureen Ong would rather say:"i don't want my children to say that oh, it's all right to go and experiment with homosexuality, to experiment with anal sex [why are these people to fixated with anal sex??], to experiment with virginity or the pill or even pre-marital sex. I'm  concerned. I'm a parent. It's shocking. How can this be done in our Singapore society?"Now, how the hell do you experiment with virginity?! I must say Maureen Ong has very creative sexual ideas. Experiment with virginity. I've always thought you either have it or don't have it. What's there to experiment? And the pill. Swallow it or not. What experiment. Does she happen to think of crushing it into powder and applying them to her face as make-up?But what is really disturbing here is that she might also be suggesting that other than homosexuality, using contraceptive pills is wrong too. Did she forget to say "experiment with condoms" too? Goodness. Homosexuality cannot, pill cannot, pre-marital sex cannot. And the word "even" tells us  that she seems to regard pre--marital sex even more seriously than homosexuality or the use of the pill. Which is fine if it's a personal choice. But why go around with the idea that everyone else must have the same values? This is exactly the sort of people I won't want in AWARE. To me, it's fine if people cannot accept homosexuality personally. But it's a different issue when people allow their personal moral values to affect their professional work. And I seriously don't know what a group of people so obsessed with homosexuality would really do for gender equality in Singapore. Tell women, "Either you don't have sex, or you have sex and get pregnant and give birth to babies. Don't use contraceptives. Don't abort. These are sinful. Don't . . ."? I won't be surprised if they do, seriously. Obliged to Hate, We all must die “I don't understand what has sparked this irrational fear of us . . . and what hatred.” One might imagine someone facing severe discrimination, such as a victim of homophobia, to say this. But in a moment of supremely palatable irony complete with a lingering bitter aftertaste in the mouth, the current President of AWARE, Josie Lau, is the one saying this. (The Straits Times, New exco gets death threats) It seems to this irrational blogger that some people have such an irrational love for hijacking that they would hijack even victimhood.It also seems to me that some people have rather liberal interpretations of religious texts. On the one hand, they would be fixated with a selected verse or two about the permitted sexual behavior of homo sapiens; on the other hand, they would totally disregard a commandment about being truthful.From what I remember, Josie Lau claimed that the AWARE coup was not premeditated. Really, it must be the will of a wise divine being—residing somewhere in the dark recess of someone's sunless heart—that a few women attending the same church happened to want to take up key positions in the executive committee in AWARE, and these few people happened to be voted in. One has got to believe in miracles. Then righteous mentor Dr. Thio Su Mien decides to confess that she has been urging women to challenge what she perceived to be AWARE's promotion of a homosexual agenda. Perhaps the same divine being appeared before some people and said, “Thou shalt not lie.”Or perhaps the act of coming out of the homophobic closet is a calculated act, now that there is an Extraordinary General Meeting coming? If those who are suspicious of the agenda of the new executive committee of AWARE could get people together, so could they. In fact, they could mobilize even more people. Recall the time when people signed a petition to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code? Didn't some people manage to do the same thing and get even more people (rational or irrational) to petition against the repeal in the name of protecting their definition of marriage and family. Perhaps these people now believe that they need to defend their definition of equality for the benefit of Singapore. And what would work better than reminding like-minded (if “mind” is not an unfortunate misnomer here) people that they are under siege? Who really are the new members of AWARE, now that membership has shot up?No one would disagree that the primary concern of AWARE has always been to promote gender equality, probably not even Dr. Thio Su Mien. But Dr. Thio would tell you that the old AWARE was promoting lesbianism. Which is to say that she thinks: if you happen to behave as if you are fine with lesbians when you are promoting gender equality, then you must be promoting a lesbian cause. Or perhaps one could say that one is suddenly obliged, in the world of Dr. Thio, to be against homosexuality, to be so wary of it that one cannot even screen a movie with a plot involving lesbians. Mandatory paranoia.Any person of reasonable intelligence would likely find that any attempt to understand Dr. Thio's mentality to be as challenging as an attempt to chew a ball of tangle hair.As far as I can see (but bear in mind that I'm irrational), the new exco of AWARE (or a few of its members anyway) are more interested in putting a stop to what they deem to be a homosexual agenda than in women's equality. Perhaps they would even go a step further and promote what one might (to learn from them) call a homophobic agenda. But, of course, it is not homophobia. These people love everyone, including lesbians. It is just that there is a need to protect the sacred institution of marriage as something heterosexuals (or perhaps bisexuals?) have an exclusive right to, is it not? And for this, one might also say that abortion is terrible. So is divorce. Or that gender roles contrary to what is prescribed by a particular religious text (or one interpretation of it) is abominable.There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female. But perhaps there is lesbian or straight. There self-righteousness and decadence. There is heaven and hell, condemnation prior to judgement, redemption in idiocy, hypocritical love and sincere hatred. There is forgiveness and magnanimity, but rationality shuns them. Sin began with one woman and thanks to her we all must die.  Tele-Metaphysics | Or: Journalist Concludes for Independent Committee From Today:Residents did not make complaints Zul Othman zul@mediacorp.com.sg WHEN news of a seven-year-old girl’s four-storey fall through a broken railing first made headlines, many wondered why complaints from residents months earlier had gone unaddressed by the town council. However, it has now transpired that neighbours other media had quoted as calling up the town council didn’t in fact make the calls. [Nonsense. They have stopped claiming that they made the calls. This doesn't mean that they really didn't. There's simply no proof that they did.] This is according to the independent committee appointed by the Tanjong Pagar Town Council to look into the incident. The panel has completed interviewing all the parties involved, chairman Johnny Tan told Today, and the only party that maintains it had called up the authorities about the broken railing is the family of victim Siti Nur Aini. [One more time: just because people who do not maintain (initially claim, but later stop claiming) that they called up the authorities, it does not mean that they didn't do so. Perhaps they are not maintaining their claim because they do not want any real or perceived trouble.] But the family is not certain when they placed the call, so tracing the records has not been possible. [And so this means that no one made the call?!?!? If no one remembers my existence, I don't exist. Why is tracing the records not possible anyway? Maybe someone can check the telecom company records to see if the family made a call to the Town Council on any occasion, and then check the records based on the dates found. Or if the telecom company has no such records, but the Town Councul has records of calls, it is still not really impossible to trace the records. Just plough through everything, no? Or check at least the December records since Siti Nur Aini's uncle, Mr. Muhammad Syukur Johari, claimed in March 2009 that he had informed the Town Council of the damaged railing three months before.*] Added Mr Tan, principal partner of LT&T Architects and an accredited adjudicator: “At the moment, without any final conclusion, we have not done any assessment as to the accuracy of what the witnesses have said.” [Ah, I see. So who's making conclusions? Journalists?] The committee — appointed by Town Council chairman Koo Tsai Kee last month — includes Mr K Anparasan, a lawyer and deputy managing partner at law firm KhattarWong, and Mr Teh Hee Seang, an engineer and senior adviser at T Y LIN International. “We have interviewed all the people involved, investigated the inspection regime of the town council and are now in the process of analysing the information,” said Mr Tan. The report will be released to the town council by the end of next month. [Still in the process of analyzing the information? Bah! Local journalists are more efficient, I think!] The Blangah Rise Primary School student’s grandfather, retiree Johari Mohd Siamu, told Today Siti was discharged from hospital on April 6 and is now “quite active”. She had suffered multiple fractures and bleeding in her abdomen from the fall on March 8. The medical bills were paid by the town council. “She will be going for check-ups, but it looks like she will be going back to school on April 20,” said the 69-year-old.------*According to a March 18 report in The Straits Times, "Mr Muhammad Syukur Johari, had told the media that he informed the Town Council three months ago about the damaged railing, there were no records of such a call being made to its service provider, the Emergency Maintenance Service Unit (EMSU). The question: is it that they records could not be found (the Town Council's problem) or that the family could not remember when they made the call (read: "Not the Town Council's problem. Blame the family!")? ST-upidity Forum For the record, Ace Kindred Cheong who thinks that “running naked from one hostel to the next is something all schools and universities must prevent” because it “can lead to other crimes” also believes that hawkers “should have an 'A' grade (for hygiene) before they are allowed to operate.” (No wonder he's called Ace.) It's not the grade that counts, silly. It's the minimum standard met before hawkers are allowed to operate that counts. If standards are so low that even a dirty stall can ace a hygiene examination, there is no point having that 'A'. On the other hand, if standards are so high that even a sterilized stall might score a 'B' because of other shortcomings, then there is nothing wrong with having a 'B' grade. (After all, it does seem to me that, for some strange reason, a C-grade hawker  can get an 'A' grade after his hawker center has been upgraded even though I have no reason to believe that his practices have changed.)Nevertheless, the questions should really be what the B- and C-grade hawkers are lacking compared to their A-grade counterparts—and whether food safety is compromised at all in any way. The NEA grades hawkers based on hygiene, cleanliness and housekeeping. I don't know how a hawker is assessed for hygiene and housekeeping. Does the NEA seek the help of the ISD and send someone to hide somewhere and observe hawkers in action? Or can hawkers wayang whenever they are being assessed? What is “housekeeping”; why and how is it being assessed? Elsewhere in the ST forum, Dr. Hoe Wan Sin (who perhaps doesn't want any sin), says, “I am puzzled as to why official approval was given for the pro-euthanasia group, Exit International, to run a workshop here, considering that it promotes a subject that is against public policy.” Excuse me, but why can't a workshop that advocates something than runs contrary to public policy be held? Isn't this a . . . free country? And it's not as if a seditious workshop on civil disobedience is being held. Dr. Hoe's ultimate purpose of writing the letter is ultimately to say that euthanasia should not be legalized. So why pretend to be puzzled over the approval of the workshop?In another letter regarding euthanasia, Kelvin Wong thinks that “[l]egalising euthanasia will lower our quality of life.” Whose quality of life would be affected? Really? When I'm euthanized, I think there wouldn't be any quality of life to speak of . . .The title of Kelvin Wong's letter (which could have been invented by a journalist) is even better. “Euthanasia robs terminally ill and their loved ones of precious moments.” I would have thought that when something is given up voluntarily, the word “rob” should not be used.Then there are what I think could be acts of journalistic rape. In a letter to the Forum, Ms. Yeo Gek Noi writes about the pay cuts that her company has implemented. She believes that “If employees are not represented by a union, there is one less hassle to deal with. If any employee is unhappy and resigns, the company saves more money because his workload can be spread out to the remaining staff. If a replacement is required, it will not be difficult to find one at a lower pay, now that so many people are looking for jobs.” However, the heading goes “Why SMEs resort to pay cuts”, which sounds as if Ms. Yeo was trying to explain or even justify why there are pay cuts in SMEs.A Teo Kueh Liang who “read with concern” Ms. Yeo's letter has this to say: “The Government has implemented the Jobs Credit scheme and tax rebate incentives to help businesses and employers tide over this difficult period . . . However, some petty-minded, over-calculating and over-pessimistic employers still exploit such measures to cut staff pay or freeze increments and force employees to take unpaid leave.” I don't really see why the letter is given the heading, “Pay cuts are a fact of life, especially in a recession.” Couldn't the title have been “Employers should not reduce workers' benefits unnecessarily” or something? Terrorizing Protestors Minister Terrorized By Protestors The Streaks Times, April 16 2009SINGAPORE: Singapore will treat protestors as terrorists, according to the police state's Dopey Minister (DPM), Mr. Wong Cant Sync. He confided to journalists of his party's widely circulated newsletter, The PAPer, that his party has been terrorized by protestors who keep breaking the law that curtails their right to protest. This latest move has disappointed avid protestors (or “troublemakers” according to The PAPer”)."Singapore has a responsibility to ensure the safety of world leaders, such as those from America and China, from protestors when we meet later this year from the APEC Summit,” said Mr. Wong in an exclusive interview with The Streaks Times. When it was pointed out that even his fellow politicians from communist countries might not even be averse to protests, DPM Wong retorted, “There are a lot of them coming, so Singapore will become a target for terrorists. Therefore, we have to take tough action against protestors and violent anarchists.”“While there is clearly a need to prevent violence, could you please explain the logical link between potential terrorism and protests? And could you clarify if you think that protestors are the same as those whom you call violent anarchists and terrorists?” probed our puzzled Streaks Times journalists. In response, Mr. Wong sternly said, “Now, you are protesting the fact that Singapore is taking necessary steps to protect world leaders. Do you know that this attitude could result in the deaths of heads of state such as President Obama of America?” (The Streaks Times journalists has fled the country in fear.)In a report by The PAPer, Mr. Wong is quoted reprimanding activists who engage in protests. “In Singapore, there is a small but irritating group of irresponsible people who want to engage in street protests. If they want change, they should not protest, but should do it the responsible and altruistic way like the new executive committee of AWARE.” Mr. Wong argued, “It is not as if there are no legal means of self-expression in Singapore. We have, for instance, taken the bold steps of liberalizing the Films Act to allow people to objectively make films to express their adoration for the government.”Mr. Wong, who is also in charge of the Intelligence and Surveillance Department (ISD), world-renowned for being tougher on those guilty of political dissidents than on an alleged terrorist by the name of Mas Selamat, also highlighted new roles for his favorite department to The PAPer. “The ISD has a very important role to play and that is to maintain social cohesion now that Singapore is undergoing its deepest economic crisis ever. We have to make sure that our racial and religious harmony is not threatened,” said Mr. Wong without specifying how the ISD is going to maintain social cohesion or explaining what the economy has to do with racial and religious harmony.” So-called troublemakers contacted by The Streaks Times have expressed their disgust with not just DPM Wong's covert threats. One troublemaker who prefers to remain anonymous said, “It is already bad enough to take a ridiculously harsh stance against protests. It is worse that the minister tries to manipulate public sentiments by talking about terrorists and protestors in the same breath without any due consideration about peaceful protestors. It is despicable hypocrisy from the same people who have been claiming to free political space for years."“It' reminds me of the time when I was a kid and the school bully stopped me from complaining about him, warning me, “Shut up or I will slap you!” and then telling my classmates that I had tried to extort money from him,” claimed another troublemaker........The Streaks Times . . . Baring All Do train doors close without warning?  Ms Charmain Ng wrote the the ST Forum relating an incident in which her hand and bag were caught between MRT train and platform doors: The place was crowded and as we were boarding the train, the train and platform screen doors suddenly closed without warning. My left hand and bag were caught between the train doors while I was still standing on the platform.I assumed the doors would reopen but that did not happen. I had to tug hard to extricate my hand and bag before the train and platform screen doors closed completely.SMRT replies saying:All SMRT train and platform screen doors are fitted with safety sensors that ensure all doors are closed and locked before a train is permitted to move off from the station. [Yes, but was there a glitch in the system during the particular incident provided by Ms Ng?]The train officer will reopen the train doors [so the doors won’t open automatically?] if the sensor indicator shows that the doors are not fully closed. In Ms Ng's case, she had managed to pull in her hand and bag before the train doors were fully closed hence the indicator did not prompt our train officer to reopen the train doors.Excuse me, but didn’t you say that if the train doors were not fully closed, it will be shown through the sensor indicator? Then you say that she pulled her hand out before the doors were fully closed, so the indicator did not tell the train officer to open the doors. Doesn’t this second statement seem to suggest that the doors had to be fully closed before the indicator would show the officer that something got stuck? (What? You want the doors to amputate her hand ah?)Of course, perhaps there are two meanings of “fully closed”—the first being that the doors are fully closed with nothing between them, and the second being that the doors are fully closed with something stuck between them. This should have been made very clear and when Ms Ng said that her pulled her hand out before the doors were “closed completely”, she was clearly using the first meaning. It seems obvious that Ms Ng’s hand was caught between the doors. So the explanation by SMRT seems lacking. I would assume that the moment anything is caught between the doors, the indicator should indicate to the train officer to open the door—if the doors do not open automatically (why don’t they?). What Ms Ng and the public is interested in knowing is probably whether there was a glitch in the system and whether it is well-maintained. One point that SMRT seems to have failed to address is Ms Ng’s claim that the doors closed “without warning”. We know that an alarm would go off before the doors close. If Ms Ng’s account was accurate, then it would seem that there was a glitch in the system, at least where “train doors are closing” alarm is concerned. And from her account, it would seem that there was a very short but significant amount of time after her hand was caught between the doors: “I assumed the doors would reopen but that did not happen. I had to tug hard to extricate my hand and bag before the train and platform screen doors closed completely.” Assuming that Ms Ng’s account is reliable, it seems quite possible that she actually “waited” before pulling her hand out instead of pulling it out immediately after it was caught between the doors. So was the indicator able to indicate that something was caught between the doors? The public does need replies that state what should have happened as though it represents what actually happened. But it seems that it’s the trend in Singapore these days.  **************************************************************************************************** Hand Caught in Train Door (March 5 2009) DO MRT train doors and platform screen doors have automatic sensors? If a person or object is caught between the doors, do they continue to close or do they reopen? My experience suggests that safety measures at train stations are inadequate. Last Saturday afternoon, I was waiting to board an eastbound train at City Hall MRT Station. The place was crowded and as we were boarding the train, the train and platform screen doors suddenly closed without warning. My left hand and bag were caught between the train doors while I was still standing on the platform. I assumed the doors would reopen but that did not happen. I had to tug hard to extricate my hand and bag before the train and platform screen doors closed completely. Does the train driver not monitor the boarding situation before and while closing the doors? What if a small child had been caught between the doors? Does this also escape the attention of staff in the station control room, where the CCTV monitoring system could have shown what happened on the platform? I reported the incident to a station manager, who told me the doors have automatic sensors and they would reopen if an object is stuck between them. He was unable to explain how the incident occurred. Charmaine Ng (Miss)   Hand caught in door: Don’t rush, advises SMRT I REFER to the online letter "Hand caught in train door" by Ms Charmaine Ng (March 6). We are sorry to learn of Ms Ng's experience on Feb 28. All SMRT train and platform screen doors are fitted with safety sensors that ensure all doors are closed and locked before a train is permitted to move off from the station. The train officer will reopen the train doors if the sensor indicator shows that the doors are not fully closed. In Ms Ng's case, she had managed to pull in her hand and bag before the train doors were fully closed, hence the indicator did not prompt our train officer to reopen the train doors. Our investigation also showed that our staff at Raffles Place MRT station had promptly attended to Ms Ng's complaint and reassured her that the incident would be investigated. [Your investigation shows that you promised to investigate? Haha, this sounds quite funny.] We wish to take this opportunity to remind passengers not to rush into the train when doors are closing. Before the doors are closed, a chime, door closing announcement and a buzzer are played to alert passengers of the impending closure of the doors. As a visual reminder, there are also red flashing lights above platform screen doors at underground stations. [But Ms Ng said that the doors closed without warning.] Bernadette Low (Ms) Manager, Corporate Marketing and Communications SMRT Corporation Ltd