Danger in Switzerland: Keep your Windows Closed

The square and streets leading to the Federal Palace in the capital, Bern, were being sealed off completely by police, the Federal Chancellery said.

Employees in the building and adjacent houses were advised to keep all windows and balcony doors leading to the main square closed, it said. The public in general and photographers in particular were ordered to stay away from balconies and rooftops.

read more

Is the SPF being partisan? - by mrbiao

Strangely, mrbiao deleted this insightful article, so I thought it would be in the public interest to republish it.  Nevertheless, I would like to note I disagree with this article in some points. I do think all parties should have to organize open air events if they do not cause chaos. However, since on party in Singapore has a record of doing that, there is no basis for refusing a permit!

Is the SPF being partisan?

By mrbiao ⋅ September 9, 2008

Today’s ST Forum carried a response from the SPF about a letter written by someone who questioned why the Workers Party’s application for a permit for its anniversary cycling event last year was rejected, while a similar event held by the PAP Community Foundation’s was allowed.

Police do not issue permits for outdoor political events in public places due to the potential for disorder and unruly behaviour. This applies to events organised by all political parties. For this reason, police rejected WP’s application to hold a mass cycling activity in East Coast Park, to commemorate its 50th anniversary in September last year.

The event on Aug 31 was very different. The permit was issued after [1] taking into account the organiser and the nature of the event. It was organised by the PAP Community Foundation, which is a registered charity and [2] not a political party. The event was [3] not assessed to have the potential for disorder and unruly behaviour. It was a carnival that involved children and families from various kindergartens and educational institutions. [4] The Prime Minister, as guest of honour, and a few other guests, made their entrance by cycling a short distance. During the event, a sum of $664,000 (which had been raised earlier) was distributed to 17 charities, including Beyond Social Services, Children’s Aid Society and Chung Hwa Medical Institution.

I attempt to explain this response from the SPF using the Theory of Reasoned Action.

The Theory of Reasoned Action states that behavioural intention is a function of attitude and subjective norms. Attitudes is defined as ” the sum of beliefs about a particular behavior weighted by evaluations of these beliefs”, while subjective norms is defined as “the influence of people in one’s social environment on his/her behavioral intentions”.

We can apply TRA in various areas, including politics in Singapore.

From SPF’s reply, we can derive that they probably have positive beliefs and evaluations for the PAP, and negative ones for the WP. [1] implies that the SPF issued the permit as it believes the PAP Community Foundation is a law-abiding organization. That’s fine, until you see how it implies that the WP, comparatively, is deemed as less credible. I thought Singaporeans are often taught not to discriminate?

[2] is an attempt to justify the SPF’s decision (the behaviour) based on a techicality - that the PAP Community Foundation is a charity. However, we all know that the PCF is at the end of the day, an orgajization related to the PAP which is obviously a political party. Nice try. Perhaps the opposition parties should register some charities to do good for the society as well as to use them for applications to the SPF for permits to hold events where opposition MPs are the VIPs.

[3] tells us about the SPF’s attitude towards PCF (not assessed to have potential for unruly behaviour and disorder). This again when looked at in the context of the SPF’s nay and yay decisions for the WP and PCF respectively, tells us that the SPF has no faith in the WP’s ability to keep their events orderly and, worst, implies that WP members are deemed to have potential for unruly behaviour.

[4] is the outcome of these predispositions, beliefs and attitudes. While it is a factual statement describing what happened at the event, it is odd that such a statement included in the SPF’s reply. It seems to be an endorsement of the PCF’s good work, which is strange since the police should not be seen as taking sides with a charitable organization, or any other private organization (remember, the basis for the decision to issue a permit was based on the technicality that the PCF is a charity).

As for subjective norms, I am wondering if it can be applied to this situation based on the hypothesis that the pro-PCF attitude may be a result of SPF’s norms of siding with pro-government organizations (i.e. those related to government organs or the ruling party).

I am of course not saying that the SPF was wrong in its decision not to issue a permit for the WP. Afterall, the anniversary event is primarily held for the purpose of commemorating a political party’s anniversary. The pertinent issue is about how the SPF’s reply seems like it is taking sides.

At the end of the day, I think whatever decision (and media statements) the SPF makes should be based solely on merits of each case and not on generalizations based on the identity of applicants.

John McCain - Reformed Maverick - Must see!

John McCain is the Flip-Flopper of the Century!

Sarah Palin - My Worst Nightmare

First-time Governor Sarah Palin (Pale-In) may have delivered a great speech at the Republican National Convention, but... If appearance is really what counts the most, I think she has a mountain to cross.

She is the kind of woman that I can only imagine in my nightmare. Straight-laced, joyless, and tough with moral values. She would be the aunt I gratefully never had but would have feared the most. I just couldn't bear watching her speech in its entirety. It pains my eyes, it raises nightmares. Hillary (Clinton) is also a tough woman but at least she looks good! Better than the other choices of former President Clinton, anyway.

Even watching her mute gives me the shudders. I just hope that she will disappear from TVs after this year is out.

Of nationalism

Nationalism makes people blind. When the nation is more important than the rights of the individual, it is dangerous. When there are censorship in the name of the nation, a few priviliged profit, while the mass loses. And the best part: the mass does not complain because it is in the interest of the nation!

"If the government takes harsh measures to crack down on protesters, of course I support that," she said. "This is an issue of national pride and national esteem. The Olympics are our best opportunity for the outside world to see how far we've come."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/18/asia/18china.php?page=2

This quote shows that the Chinese can never understand what the West really thinks about the Tibet issue. It has nothing to do with negative media coverage, but all about censorship of the press, suppression of dissent, and the lack of visibility in China. When the Chinese block journalists, it is just normal that there is speculation emasse.

US$30,000,000.00 in Shenzhen, Republic of China

Today, I received another spam e-mail. This one is really funny. It claims to be from the Bank of China in Shenzhen, but the author mixes the People's Republic of China up with the Republic of China (which is Taiwan). Bad mistake! Furthermore, the Bank of China website is: www.bank-of-china.com, not www.bankofchina.com!

I am Zhu Li, Bank Manager of Bank in China, Shenzhen branch.
I have urgent and very confidential business proposition for you.

On November 6, 2001, a British Oil consultant/contractor with the
Chinese Solid Minerals Corporation, made a numbered time (Fixed)
Deposit for twelve calendar months, valued at US$30,000,000.00
(Thirty Million Dollars) in my branch. Upon maturity, I sent a
routine notification to his forwarding address but got no reply.

After a month, we sent a reminder and finally we discovered from
his contract employers, the Chinese Solid Minerals Corporation
that he died from an automobile accident. On further investigation,
I found out that he died without making a WILL, and all attempts
to trace his next of kin was fruitless.

No one will ever come forward to claim it. According to Laws of
Republic of China, at the expiration of 6 (six) years, the money
will revert to the ownership of the Chinese Government if nobody
applies to claim the fund.

Consequently, my proposal is that I will like you as a foreigner
to stand in as the next of kin to the man so that the fruits of
this old man's labor will not get into the hands of some corrupt
government officials. This is simple, I will like you to provide
immediately your full names and address so that the attorney will
prepare the necessary documents and affidavits that will put you
in place as the next of kin.The money will be paid into your
account for us to share in the ratio of 60% for me and 40%
for you.

There is no risk at all as all the paperwork for this transaction
will be done by the attorney and my position as the Branch Manager
guarantees the successful execution of this transaction.
If you are interested, please reply immediately via the
private email address: zhuli23@yahoo.com.cn

Thanks and regards.

Zhu Li.

A Perfect Prediction

This quote fits well with Singapore today. Guess who said this.

I am told [repression] is like making love – it's 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 and in the scope of the attack.

All you have to do is to dissolve organizations and societies and banish or detain the key political workers in these societies.

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.