MediaCorp DJ Jamie Yeo: United Airlines passenger should have just ‘accepted apology and moved on’

Screen Shot 2017-04-15 at 8.15.29 AM.png

So this viral video showing a United Airlines passenger – a doctor who was in the rush to get back to somewhere to do medical treatments – being forcefully taken down the plane – by being knocked unconscious and dragged down the aisle, to the awe of the other passengers – provoked some unexpected responses from DJs employed by none other than state media MediaCorp Radio, of one of the mainstream radio propaganda stations.

Ms Jamie Yeo, DJ for Gold 90.5FM, apparently remarked on national radio airwaves, that the said doctor should have just ‘accepted the apology and moved on’. She even made a comparison to ‘government ministers’, saying the doctor should not act like them, suing people.

A reader wrote in to All Singapore Stuff to report about the incident, adding that she was disgusted by her reaction and appalled by how she brought the ‘government’ into comparison. Indeed, the link was weak and confusing.

First, our PAP ministers have been suing Opposition figures based on a lack of evidence of the figures’ accusation, notwithstanding public perception agreeing with what the Opposition figures are saying. For the United Airlines case, it was clear and evident that United did injustice, and there is a full case for him especially in a really rule-of-law society like America where lawsuits could be made successfully against  – yes, big corporations and government – entities who bully.

Jamie Yeo should now apologise. But MediaCorp need not fire her lah, as she fits perfectly the PAP psyche and is a boon for the regime’s undying propaganda efforts.

Maybe this ‘Singaporean perspective’ story by Albert Tay could help to understand some Singaporeans’ (maybe most of the population!) mentality as well.

Bad criticism vs Good criticism

Screen Shot 2017-04-06 at 7.15.07 PM

Bad criticism: “The PAP is bad, the system is unfair and flawed. The people are suffering. There must be a party takeover.”

Good criticism: “The civil service is sometimes rigid, and ‘tweaks’ can be made to ‘smoothen’ processes so as to expediate the ‘right’ actions to be done; there are things the esteemed ministers and leaders cannot take care of because they are too small and minute. The system has its flaws but overall, it is working and takes consideration of the overall picture very well, and is the ‘best middle ground’ for all, never mind if it takes care of the high and the privileged first because that should be the way to go anyway. Some people are suffering either because they are lazy, fuzzy, or simply silly. Worse, they do not know how fortunate they are to be living in Singapore, where the poor are ‘better off’ than those elsewhere. I think education ought to be intensified to ‘correct’ people’s mindsets, especially that of parents and small business owners. ITE students’ mindsets are already taken care of. There must not be a party takeover, in fact, the Opposition parties must win less, and the people ought to stay ‘united’ to a single course/cause for progress and happiness. The PAP is also the only capable party that can rule Singapore forever and ever.”

In other news, Lee Hsien Loong says he does not like “yes men”, and implores that leaders of nations ought to be able to ‘take in criticism’.

Sure.

Albert Tay

Kuik Shiao-Yin’s questionable stance

Snip20170312_17.png

Footage of Kuik’s speech that recently made its rounds on social media.

Kuik Shiao-Yin, the PAP-appointed Nominated MP (NMP) who recently shot to fame with her ‘inspiring speech’ about income inequality in Singapore – but not before basing her position first on addressing the ‘global trust crisis’ where we see citizens of many democratic countries having more and more distrust over their government and their media.

In a later-teary speech, she dived lyrical – while reading from a script – on how many citizens – the working poor – do not have the ‘mental bandwidth’ to ‘deal with anything beyond everyday demands.’

But the CEO of “The Thought Collective”, or more accurately, the owner of the “School of Thought Learning Centre” tuition centre, far from being a dissident to the PAP regime – as what some might by now be led to think – told Asiaone earlier about what disturbs her: “the “groundswell of hate and deliberate blindness” online from those who show no interest in rational debate. “It’s an emotional thing now which comes down to I don’t care what you say, I don’t feel like I trust you.””

We cannot forget the way in which NMPs serve the PAP. Not to repeat word-for-word of what the PAP says, they are there to phrase the same rhetoric in a different way, using different words and proses, either to justify the PAP’s stance, or to ‘provide an acceptable, alternative view’ to give people the impression their voice is represented in Parliament, only to find that all is just air that does not even deal a blow to the regime but instead sing praises to it at the end.

Ultimately, it still builds up as LHL’s definition of ‘I don’t like yes-men’ and of ‘good criticism’ (refer below for full ‘definition’) no different from those also hollered by the hooligan likes of Lee Bee Wah and Louis Ng.

After all, Kuik herself, together with the other NMPs, are but shows of the regime, whose numbers have increased over the years to ‘deter Singaporeans from voting in more Opposition MPs into Parliament’, telling Singaporeans “You don’t need to vote Opposition, we have NMPs to voice opposing opinions.”

And as if ‘far-right’ NMPs like ‘kill the children of terrorists’ Calvin Cheng are not good-enough manifestations of PAP’s philosophies, now we have pseudo-liberal ones to wayang and hoodwink the population more effectively.

Now, let’s take a look at just one example in their track record.

kuik, contempt of court bill.png

Kuik, together with 2 other NMPs, had, as reported on Asiaone on Aug 13, 2016, submitted a petition on the proposed amendments to the Contempt of Court Bill, another piece of legislation to entrench the PAP’s power and further silence dissenting voices.

Lo and behold, 3 days later when Parliament was voting for the Bill, all 3 defected to the PAP side and voted ‘Yes’.

Would you trust these people to speak up for you?

PAP a fake-liberal, fake-conservative party

Snip20170312_13.png

Tharman claimed PAP is now ‘more left-of-centre’.

PAP really knows how to act liberal. If we are not careful, we would think the PAP is a liberal party while the Opposition are conservatives.

Be confused not. Just because NMP Kuik Shiao-Yin gave a ‘seemingly’ liberal speech in Parliament does not mean the PAP is liberal. In fact, it is far from it. Even Kuik’s speech is far from being liberal. It is just pseudo-liberal and actually PAP-supporting. And PAP is the most far right party the world has ever known.

The fact that we get confused could be due to one of two reasons: 1. The American ‘liberal’ movement itself is very confusing and flawed, take Hillary and the Democratic Party’s inability to associate with the middle class, its traditional stronghold for an eg. 2. Singaporeans have been so used to conservative PAP that even the slightest criticism sounds like liberalism to them.

I am not at all fascinated with Kuik’s ‘good speech’. And I am fascinated even some in the 30% camp are alluding to her. It is no wonder PAP managed to trick 70% of votes over to their side in GE2015. By pretending to be liberal, no less.

Just because Kuik said something liberal, does not make the PAP liberal. (Wayang does not count) Just because PAP is bringing in foreigners in droves, does not mean PAP is liberal. (We block ALL refugees) Just because Tharman says PAP is ‘centre-left’ or has ‘moved to the left’, does not mean it really is or really has.

I tell you what is liberal in Singapore – the WP and the SDP. But maybe they are also more conservative as they care more about our own people and our interests. PAP is a fake-liberal, fake-conservative, fake-centrist party that is actually, really, just a fascist party.

Albert Tay

Govt rejects WP’s suggestion to educate on vote secrecy – again!

leon, josephine.jpg

WP MP Leon Perera had asked before in Parliament for ballot secrecy – a critical subject especially in our political environment – to be taught in schools. His idea was rejected. Today, his idea got rejected again.

Our votes in elections are secret and can never be traced – no ifs, no buts.

So why does the government not want to expose new citizens to ballot secrecy education, as I suggested today in Parliament?

I have met many Singaporeans (old and new) who fear that their ballots can be traced and hence cast their votes out of fear.

As I shared in Parliament today, one new citizen I met told me that he would like to vote for the Workers’ Party but feared that he would lose his citizenship if he did.

There are around 20,000 new citizens joining the electorate every year. That’s the rough equivalent of one new Single Member Constituency each year and one new GRC every term of Parliament.

If many of them cast their votes out of fear, this will corrode our democratic society bit by bit. In time, our children and grand-children will grow up in what is effectively a non-democracy, where they cannot remove a failed government at the ballot box and would have to emigrate instead.

Last year, I asked in Parliament if the process behind ballot secrecy could be taught in schools. The answer was another no, on the grounds of “limited curriculum time” (how long does it take to teach this?).

Educating all Singaporeans (old and new) about ballot secrecy is critical. If the government does not act, I hope all of us who care about this issue can talk to our fellow citizens to ensure that no one buys into the urban legend about ballot tracing and casts their vote out of an irrational fear. What is at stake is the very survival of democracy in Singapore.

-as Leon posted on facebook

He Ting Ru, who shared Leon’s post, further added:

“While we do have limited time in schools, I believe we should make time to ensure that our children are taught the fundamentals about our country’s governance, which include our electoral process.”

 

Lee Hsien Loong lectures Japan, China and South Korea: You all should let the past be the past

n-singapore-a-20150531-870x827.jpg

Photo: KYODO

Maybe he saw how successful his father was in erasing the collective memory of Singaporeans with regards to their regime’s atrocities. Some Singaporeans today have never heard of Nanyang University (not Nanyang Technoogical University), Nanyang Siang Pau (closed down by his father’s regime), Chinese schools, Operation Coldstore, or Operation Spectrum.

Worse, they have no idea their “founding father” had worked for the Japanese army in Singapore during WWII when the rest of the nation was suffering under the cruel occupation by the Japs. They also have no idea how former ‘elected (walkover) President’ SR Nathan was a member of the Japanese secret police, Kempeitai, during WWII.

And now, Lee junior wants to teach Japan, South Korea and China how to let the past be the past. And while doing that, he doesn’t mind being insensitive, and offending the history that plagued South Korea-Japan and Sino-Japan relations for decades.

Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has urged Japan to admit to its misdeeds from World War II so it can play a more active role in the region.

“Japan needs to acknowledge past wrongs, and Japanese public opinion needs to be more forthright in rejecting the more outrageous interpretations of history by right-wing academics and politicians,” Lee said in a keynote speech at Friday’s opening of the Asia Security Summit conference, also known as the Shangri-La Dialogue.

“Japan has already expressed remorse or apologies for the war in general terms,” he said. “But on specific issues like the ‘comfort women’ and the Nanjing Massacre, its positions have been less unequivocal.”

He observed that even though this year is the 70th anniversary of the end of WWII, it “continues to cast a shadow over relations between the old adversaries, in particular between Japan and its neighbors China and Korea.”

“After 70 years, it is past the time to put this history behind us properly, like the Europeans have done. This requires statesmanship and largeness of spirit on both sides.”

While Beijing and Seoul do not think Tokyo has done enough to atone for the suffering caused by its aggression, Lee urged them to “accept Japan’s acknowledgements and not demand that Japan apologize over and over again.”

“The history of the war should not be used to put Japan on the defensive or to perpetuate enmities to future generations,” he said. “Such a reconciliation will also help Japan to become a normal country if it wishes to be.”

Concerning the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, he expressed hope that Japan and the United States will eventually join it. The two countries have not joined the launch of the bank for now due to concerns about its transparency and impact on existing financial institutions like the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank.

Lee went on to say that although most Southeast Asian countries want Japan to play a more active regional role, they are also wary of the possibility of being embroiled in the rivalry between Tokyo and Beijing.

“They will welcome a resolution of the war issues, as they themselves have done between themselves and Japan,” he said.

The annual Asia Security Summit opened on Friday evening with unabating tension over the South China Sea territorial disputes expected to take center stage, security analysts say.

In reference to the disputes, Lee urged China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to come up with a code of conduct on the South China Sea at the earliest opportunity, while warning against an outbreak of violence in the waters.

“But even if we avoid a physical clash, if the outcome is determined on the basis of ‘might is right,’ it will set a bad precedent,” he said.

Defense ministers from major powers and regional countries have gathered in Singapore to discuss security issues of concern to the region at the three-day forum, which was organized by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.

The speakers include defense ministers or military chiefs from the United States, Japan, China, Indonesia, India, Cambodia, Britain, New Zealand, Germany, Australia and Singapore.

On Saturday, Defense Minister Gen Nakatani, who is representing Japan at the security forum, warned in his speech that land reclamation projects in the South China Sea risked plunging the region into disorder and urged nations, including China, to behave responsibly.

“If we leave any unlawful situation unattended, order will soon turn to disorder, and peace and stability will collapse,” Nakatani said. “I hope and expect all the countries, including China, to behave as a responsible power.”

Tensions have risen in the South China Sea in recent months over China’s construction of artificial islands as it tries to assert its claim to the potentially energy-rich waters around the Spratly archipelago. The Spratlys are claimed by half a dozen countries including the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and China.

Nakatani proposed what he dubbed the “Shangri-La Dialogue Initiative,” three measures to bolster maritime and air safety in the region, including round-the-clock monitoring of airspace by ASEAN members.

Japan Times