Google Translate Poem

To
Ming
The edge
With
Live it
Between
Ears cut magic show bite
Knife
Ordered by calling Table Tennis
Bamboo shoot
Remember
Help
Chau
Play

A
Magic Ear
State
Coffee
State Bar of intestinal
Double
Mountain hundred
Do not mind pouring a few to
The
Shan Mian

Singapore election survey

Please help and fill out this election survey for the 2011 parliamentary elections. Results will be released after the election:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dDBnZ2JfMEFNMkl2aVZVaXdsRHd6cmc6MA

Shadrake on Justice Singapore Style

This is an open letter that I have received from Alan Shadrake, who presently faces prison time in Singapore. I am publishing this letter to help in whatever form I can. I believe Alan wrote his book to throw light on a problem that needs to be reformed. He should not be seen as a threat to the Singaporean government.

I am being prosecuted and facing jail for exposing prosecutorial scandals in Singapore – scandals this PAP dictatorship doesn’t want decent Singaporean citizens to know about. One particular heinous scandal concerns Guiga Lyes Ben Laroussi, a Tunisian and valuable ‘foreign talent’ who was the main drug supplier to Singapore’s so-called High Society Drug Circle in 2004.

This destroyer of lives was allowed to escape Singapore after facing a mandatory death penalty charge. The charge was then ‘negotiated down so he would receive a jail sentence of between 20 and 30 years in prison instead.

Then another miracle happened: He was allowed bail in the sum of $280,000, given his passport back and allowed to leave Singapore. This could only have been done with the connivance of top government officials because they feared he would expose bigger names if he were to be sent to the gallows.

I exposed this and other prosecutorial scandals in my book Once A Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock, because I hate injustice. While this evil drug baron – friend of the rich and privileged in Singapore - is enjoying his life of luxury in his mansion on his family estate in Le Bardo, Tunisia, Singapore is preparing to hang more pitiful drug mules – perhaps some who helped Guiga get rich.

How is it that this evil drug trader managed to escape justice? I cannot get my passport back and be allowed to leave Singapore. They are determined to punish me first!

I am facing a six months prison sentence for exposing this and many other prosecutorial scandals. There are two other charges hanging over me arising from my book one of which carries as two year prison sentence. My medical and mental problems have been horrendous. I almost bled to death in the street six weeks ago from internal haemorrhage. Had I not been rushed to hospital I would have collapsed and died without anyone knowing the cause until it was too late.

Where is the justice in what they are now doing to me? Did anyone notice that Guiga Lyes Ben Laroussi had escaped justice? Did the Straits Times publish this scandal and demand with massive headlines that Guiga should be extradited back? It did not. Why not? The answer is in my book. But what happened when a Romanian diplomat ran away in March 2010 following a fatal traffic accident? Screaming headlines in the Straits Times and all the local media for him to be brought back and tried.

Guiga Lyes Ben Laroussi, big time destroyer of lives – including his own Singaporean girlfriend, Mariana Abdullah – has been on Interpol’s wanted list for five years. The head of Interpol is Singapore’s very own former police chief Khoo Boon Hui! No attempt has been made to bring him back. His lawyer, Subhas Anandan, has said his powerful family will tell the Tunisian police to ‘go fly a kite’ if they attempt to arrest and have him extradited.

This is yet another scandal in this saga. Perhaps I would have been better treated had I been a major drug syndicate boss.

Amazingly, Law Minister, Mr. K. Shanmugam recently told TODAY that the death penalty for drug offences here is a “trade-off” the government must make to protect “thousands of lives” if drugs became freely available. He further explained that if Yong Vui Kong (now on death row with 36 others) escapes the death penalty, drug lords will see it as a sign that young traffickers will be spared and will then use more of them as drug mules. “You save one life here, but 10 other lives will be gone. What will your choice be?” he added.
My choice, Mr. Shanmugam? If anyone has to be hanged, start with drug barons like Guiga Ben Laroussi!

Here are some of those young people Mr. Shanmugam believes should have been hanged: Flor Contemplacion, Angel Mou Pui-Peng, Vignes Mourthi, Shangmugam Murugesu, Amara Tochi, Thiru Selvam, Zulfikar bin Mustaffah, Rozman Jusoh, Chuek Mei-mei, Nguyen Van Tuong, Tsang Kai Mong Elke, Poon Yuen-chung. I will continue my fight to get justice for all of the above and those who are bound to follow and I will remain a thorn in Singapore’s side regarding injustice until the day I die!

Alan Shadrake
A Prisoner of Singapore
October 29, 2010

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.