Sunday, July 31

The Pilot n' Jo Show
by
Steven
on Sun 31 Jul 2005 12:22 PM IST
Been listening to these two guys all morning. Check out their views on the IOC and other recent news events. The language is natural and contains a few swear words. But don't let that put you off clicking on the link.
Great work guys and I hope you don't mind the plug by some damn white guy who doesn't give a...
The Push-Pull
In this episode, we drop our two cents' worth on the recent IOC (which was really one of the biggest embarrassments for S'pore), the London Bomb Blast and the hot, hot news of concerning the NKF CEO who eats up most of the donations that we've so long believed were going into helping those kidney patients. All I can say is DAMN S'pore officials for putting up a lame show, DAMN those fucking terrorists who have nothing better to do and DAMN this corporate so-called non-profit organizations that love to just to suck our taxpayers money through false advertising and giving kidney patients false hope. I hope the NKF CEO can really sleep at night, knowing that he's living, eating and drinking on these ill people's hopes.
And Osama, this NKF scandal has nothing to do with your kidney problems or dialysis shit. I think you just need to smoke some weed, chill out and stop all this Al-Qaeda and JI nonsense.

Singapore may hold early election this year
by
Steven
on Sun 31 Jul 2005 12:21 PM IST
By Geert De Clercq
SINGAPORE, July 30 (Reuters) - Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who has been in office nearly 12 months, may call elections later this year, media and analysts said on Saturday.
A parliamentary election does not have to be held until mid-2007. But the city-state's pro-government Straits Times daily quoted several analysts and a member of parliament as saying they expected Lee -- son of founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew -- to seek his own mandate as early as the last quarter.
Lee was handed power in August 2004 by Goh Chok Tong, who was prime minister between Lee senior and Lee junior.
"PM Lee has been in office a year and shown he is a capable leader. It would be a good time to get public endorsement of his time in office," the Straits Times quoted veteran member of parliament Mohamad Maidin Packer as saying.
Chen Hwai Liang, press secretary to the prime minister, told Reuters: "The prime minister has said earlier that elections will be held before they are due."
A precedent for early elections was set in 1991, when Goh called an election just nine months after he was handed power.
Analysts say that to secure strong leadership, Lee must at least match his party's tally in the last poll in 2001, when Goh won 75 percent of the vote for the ruling People's Action Party (PAP), which controls all but two seats in parliament.
COMFORTABLE MAJORITY
While there may be uncertainty about the margin, analysts say there is no doubt that the PAP, which has swept every election since independence in 1965, would win a comfortable majority against a fractious and cash-strapped opposition.
"The opposition is too weak and not seen as an alternative to the government," Cherian George, author of "The Air-conditioned Nation", a book on Singapore politics, told Reuters.
The Straits Times quoted political watcher Viswa Sadasivan as saying "the ground is as sweet as it possibly can be" for Lee.
"After the London blast, people are obviously going to be more conservative with their votes and will vote in the stable ruling party," Sadasivan said.
But it quoted other analysts as saying that the Singaporean public may harbour resentment over the Lee government's decision to allow casino gambling, an issue that generated a rare wave of protest in the tightly controlled island state.
In recent weeks the government has also been embarrassed by a scandal surrounding the country's leading charity, the National Kidney Foundation, whose chief executive resigned following uproar about his pay and perks.
Analysts say the Singapore economy's rebound -- it grew an annualised 12.3 percent in the second quarter from the first after contracting in the first quarter -- and a series of measures to boost the real estate market would help the PAP.
"Sentiment 12 months down the road is expected to improve on the back of a stronger feel-good factor on the property market and on the economy front as well. So somewhere towards the year-end and into early 2006, could be the time for elections," Song Seng Wun, senior economist at CIMB-GK, told Reuters. (Additional reporting by Muralikumar Anantharaman)
Thursday, July 28

Singapore's first gay and lesbian PrideMonth
by
Steven
on Thu 28 Jul 2005 03:54 PM IST
First spotted at Sg Review
28 July 2005
IndigNation: Singapore's first gay and lesbian PrideMonth
This year, there will not be a Nation Party in Singapore. Instead, there will be IndigNation, Singapore's first gay and lesbian Pride Month, August 2005.
Fridae.com was refused a permit to hold Nation Party '05 in Singapore, simply because it was expected to be gay event.
IndigNation is a gay community response to this unreasonable ban, as well as to heavy censorship of publications, such as Manazine, serving this community. Gays and lesbians are indignant over what these say about their equal rights and their place in this nation.
The events in the IndigNation calendar are contributed by various organisers to Singapore's Pride Month.
It opens with an art exhibition by Martin Loh, followed by a series of talks and poetry and closes with a bash organised by the gay and lesbian sports and adventure club, ADLUS.
This collection of separately-organised events under a common umbrella is a demonstration of the initiative and spirit of grass-roots civil society in Singapore – civil society that the authorities say they want to encourage, but then go out of their way to suppress, just because we happen to be gay.
All events are open to everyone regardless of sexual orientation. The talks that are being organised especially welcome heterosexual persons, so that their perspectives are also heard.
The Calendar of events can be seen at www.plu.sg, and at www.yawningbread.info/indignation/intro.htm
For general information about the IndigNation calendar, please contact Charles Tan +65 9633 8541 Alex Au +65 9630 2172 Russell Heng +65 9380 0460
For details about any particular event, please email the contact person listed for that event on the Calendar. Human Rights

Who do we think we're fooling?
by
Steven
on Thu 28 Jul 2005 03:46 PM IST
First spotted on Sg Review. A nice article regarding the problem of the development of a national identity in Singapore.
Thursday • July 28, 2005
Liang Dingzi news@newstoday.com.sg
AS SINGAPORE prepares to celebrate 40 years of nationhood, there's a certain level of disquiet about our national identity.
This is evident in the debates about Singlish, the despair over our lack of social graces and, most recently, the controversy over the sale of Raffles Hotel to non-Singaporeans.
Part of the angst appears to stem from the lack of a visible Singapore icon. New York has its Statue of Liberty, Paris its Eiffel tower, and at Agra, not far away from New Delhi, is the Taj Mahal.
Some are ready to discount Singapore's prime candidate — the Merlion — for most would rather have a beautiful lady with the torch to gaze upon, as they do on Staten Island, than a half-fish, half-lion.
We're not sure if the Durians — sorry, the Esplanade theatres — would be as popular as Sydney's Opera House, either. So, perhaps we need to construct a new icon, we say. Some think the answer is the yet-to-be-built integrated resorts.
We are an impatient people who believe in quick fixes. Encouraged by our successes in constructing the world's No 1 airport and other architectural feats, some think we can dream up and construct, just like that, an icon that will radiate the spirit of Singapore.
But think about it: Why has the Merlion failed to impress?
For most Singaporeans, the Merlion doesn't evoke the sense of endearment associated with a treasured myth or a historical moment. There's little one can tell a visitor about it.
It hasn't earned the pride of a nation. Indeed, "to merlion" has become the local slang for "to vomit" – in reference to its ceaseless water-spouting.
Visitors to Singapore may be more interested in seeing the spot in Raffles Hotel where the last tiger to be killed in Singapore was shot, under a billiards table.
The sale of the hotel to a foreigner has been lamented by some citizens, who have deemed the move a betrayal, akin to selling off a national treasure.
It is an icon that represents part of our island's colonial history; it is the birthplace of the Singapore Sling. It has the nostalgic distinction of having hosted famous writers including W Somerset Maugham, Joseph Conrad and Ernest Hemingway.
The Merlion, on the other hand, is little more than a commercial symbol. And it is laughable to think that a playground incorporating roller-coaster rides and a casino could inspire the same kind of awe as a structural icon, say the Leaning Tower of Pisa.
Even Changi Airport cannot be held up in the same light. I once asked a much-travelled Frenchman what he thought of the terminal. He said it was modern, functional, very well-organised and efficient ... but it lacked character.
The Singapore Tourism Board makes much of Singapore as "a city that thrives on modernity". There's no denying visitors enjoy convenience and comfort here. But Bangkok, with its slums and smells, has more character than Singapore, with its towering skyscrapers.
Yet do we truly need a physical icon to forge an identity? At 40, Singapore is a young nation. Neither history nor culture can be wrought off a blueprint.
Remember, some years ago, the attempt to design a wearable national costume featuring a Chinese collar, an Indian sash and a Malay sarong? That didn't take off.
Likewise, entertaining friends from abroad with songs about our homeland shouldn't have to mean blurting out songs about nation-building, or about how proud we are to be Singaporeans — songs penned specially for the official national birthday celebrations.
Perhaps we try too hard to develop icons, structural or otherwise. Such artificial results just don't do the trick because they are not about us as a people.
It's quite different when something is constructed purely for the tourist dollar. After all, as far as forgettable icons go, who really remembers that the world's highest man-made waterfall is at Jurong Bird Park?
Wednesday, July 27

Singapore and Burma
by
Steven
on Wed 27 Jul 2005 12:45 PM IST
Singapore and Burma
First seen at Singapore-Windows.
Isolating Myanmar would not be in Southeast Asia's interests because the military regime has its "gates" open to emerging regional giants China and India, Singapore's foreign minister said Tuesday, July 26. Foreign Minister George Yeo said he did not believe that with ramped up pressure and "the wave of a wand, all the problems (in Myanmar) will be solved and everybody will live happily ever after."
US and EU sanctions on Myanmar's internationally condemned junta have done little to bring real change to the country.
"But Myanmar has the back gate to China wide open. India, in its own geo-strategic calculation, has decided to keep its side gate to Myanmar open," Yeo said at a news conference.
"So it must be in the interest of ASEAN to keep our side gate open whatever happens in Myanmar.
Nonetheless, "Myanmar has decided from very early that it would rather be a part of Southeast Asia than be a part of South Asia and we welcome that," he said.
Yeo was speaking after foreign ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) announced that Myanmar had taken the unprecedented decision to skip the chairmanship of the grouping next year.
Myanmar said the decision, which came after months of pressure from the United States and European Union, was to enable it to concentrate on its "democratisation process". Something tells me that keeping the gates open to Myanmar might have something to do with the following considerations.
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - A Singapore firm has won a $10.6 million deal to expand the Yangon International Airport in Myanmar.
Singapore information technology company CNA Group said in a statement that under the deal, the firm will design and install engineering systems at Yangon airport.
Myanmar said in January that with $1.57 billion for 72 projects, Singapore tops the list of the 25 foreign investor countries in Myanmar. According to official data from Myanmar, Singapore is the largest exporter to Myanmar, and its second-largest trading partner after Thailand. Whether you refer to 'gates' or 'doors' I think the relationship between Singapore and Burma is not one of mutual movement to Democratisation.
"Singapore is by far the most important 'back door'"(Pilger 1999)for Burma. Pilger also argues that the arms industry is a speciality for Singapore. How far would Singapore go? In 1988, when the majority of the Burmese population were on the streets in a popular protest against SLORC(The junta), the Burmese Army was running out of bullets... Guess which ASEAN country helped out?Related Articles: Burma's PR consultantContructive Engagement Free Aung San Suu KyiHuman Rights
Monday, July 25

ASEAN split over Myanmar
by
Steven
on Mon 25 Jul 2005 04:47 PM IST
ASEAN split over Myanmar Vijay Joshi in Vientiane, Laos | July 25, 2005 15:12 IST
Southeast Asian nations were split over whether military-ruled Myanmar should forgo their bloc's chairmanship under US pressure, marring their annual security dialogue with Western and Asian partners, diplomats said Monday.
The conference through Friday among the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations and 14 Asia-Pacific partners had anti-terrorism efforts on the agenda. Australia was set to join a regional nonaggression pact to warm ties with neighbors that often have viewed it with mistrust.
The meeting received a blow Monday when host Laos announced that Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura would not attend. No reason was given.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had announced earlier that she would not attend.
ASEAN diplomats read that as a snub over the group's failure to get Myanmar's junta to hand power to a civilian government and free pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
An ASEAN diplomat said the Myanmar issue split the group, with most members pushing for the junta to give up its turn while Cambodia and communist countries Laos and Vietnam urged it not to buckle under pressure. He spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid a diplomatic row.
Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia and Myanmar are ASEAN's poorest countries and traditionally support one another.
The US and European Union have threatened to boycott ASEAN meetings if Myanmar takes up the chairmanship, and Southeast Asian nations fear that could endanger trade ties with the West.
The diplomat said Myanmar Foreign Minister Nyan Win would indicate the junta's stand during an informal dinner with his ASEAN counterparts later Monday.
ASEAN's mixed signals to Myanmar have complicated efforts to get the country to reform, said UN envoy to Myanmar Razali Ismail, who was in Vientiane to meet with Nyan Win.
"It is not as if ASEAN countries have been collectively strong in putting out a clear signal to Myanmar," Razali told The Associated Press.
Countries like Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore have been "quite forthright, but we have not heard from the others," Razali said.
Criticism from the West tends to have little effect on Myanmar's leaders, who decide matters "in their own time," he said.
Still, there were indications that Myanmar could voluntarily give up the chairmanship, Thai Foreign Minister Kantathi Suphamongkhon said in Bangkok on Monday.
"Myanmar has sent a good signal that it will take into account the importance of ASEAN's interests and will not do anything that will obstruct the development of ASEAN and its relation with other countries," he said.
Meanwhile, Laotian Deputy Foreign Minister Bounkeut Sangsomsak said Japan's absence "will not effect most of the meeting," and should not be seen as a Myanmar-related pressure tactic.
Machimura went to London on Sunday for talks with European leaders on Japan's proposal to expand the UN Security Council and to give Japan and some other countries permanent seats. He was due back in Japan this week, and it wasn't clear why he couldn't attend any of the Laos meetings ending Friday.
One of the highlights in Vientiane will be Australia's signing of a declaration of intent to join a nonaggression pact with ASEAN. Canberra would then be expected to sign the pact by December, helping its campaign to boost trade ties with Asian neighbors.
The meetings also will discuss terrorism and agreements on sharing intelligence, officials said. ASEAN officials also planned to meet with human rights activists to discuss setting up a regional human rights commission, an idea floated by Indonesia in 2003.
ASEAN nations Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam are holding ministerial meetings this week.
They are joined for meetings of the broader, security-oriented ASEAN Regional Forum by Australia, Canada, China, European Union, India, Japan, Mongolia, New Zealand, North Korea, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Russia, South Korea and the United States.

Skypecast: Andrea Monti of ICTlex
by
Steven
on Mon 25 Jul 2005 01:51 PM IST
Lawyer Andrea Monti, who blogs in Italian at ICTlex, is winner in the Europe category of this year’s RSF Freedom Blog Awards.
Monti is concerned that people in Western democracies are not sufficiently aware of the extent to which their freedoms of speech are being eroded - and while the erosion starts online in the virtual world it has real physical implications. He argues that people need to stop thinking about online space as something “less real” than physical space, because as far as the law is concerned, rights and freedoms on and offline are the same. The problem is even more extreme, he believes, for people who do not live in democracies. He hopes more people will blog about these issues and raise awareness.
I spoke to Andrea via Skype, recorded the conversation and uploaded it here as a podcast. Click here to listen (MP3, 13MB).

Government uses fear to stifle freedom of expression
by
Steven
on Mon 25 Jul 2005 01:17 PM IST
LRWC Press release – July 18, 2005
SINGAPORE: Government uses fear to stifle freedom of _EXPRESSION
Singapore police used plain clothes officers to seize a video screened at the July 9, 2005 launch of the latest book by opposition leader Dr. Chee Soon Juan. Dr. Chee has long been an outspoken critic of the government, and the recent release of his book, The Power of Courage: Effecting Political Change in Singapore through Nonviolence, was no small step toward exercising a meaningful right to freedom of _expression in Singapore. The attendance of the police at the event was a disappointing indication that the Singapore government, while professing to "open up Singapore" and adhere to democratic values, continues to use heavy-handed methods to rein in peaceful political dissent.
The book launch was held indoors at Singapore's Grand Plaza Parkroyal Hotel and attracted about 50 people. Plainclothes officers videotaped the proceedings, which included various speeches and a question and answer session. As the event drew to a close and Dr. Chee was signing copies of his book, a 2003 video clip of Hong Kong residents protesting peaceably against a proposed anti-subversion law was projected on to the wall behind him.
At that point, the police demanded to know whether the organizers had a permit for the video clip. They questioned Dr. Chee, then seized the CD and said that it would be used for further investigation. Police spokesperson ASP Victor Keong asserted that the CD was seized under the Films Act for investigation because it did not possess a certificate for public exhibition. Licensing rules were eased last year with respect to indoor public talks, but restrictions remain for public assemblies.
The officers also demanded identifying information from two activists who had spoken before Dr. Chee's presentation. Charles Tan and Jonathan Siow, both in their twenties, had said that they found non-violent action to be an effective tool in helping to empower Singaporeans.
Dr. Chee is Secretary General of the opposition Singapore Democratic Party (SDP). The Singapore government is led by the People's Action Party (PAP), which has held power, uninterrupted, for the last half-century. The PAP has repeatedly targeted Dr. Chee throughout his public career. In 1992, three months after he joined the SDP, he was forced out of his university teaching position and faced charges of defamation when he attempted to dispute his dismissal. He was forced to sell his home to pay legal costs. In 1999, he served jail time on two charges of violating the Public Entertainments Act, which required police permits for public events involving more than five people. Dr. Chee had made public addresses, without a license, protesting the lack of freedom of speech in Singapore. In 2001, he faced a second lawsuit by government officials for allegedly defaming them during an election campaign, and subsequently signed an apology in order to avoid becoming ineligible to run in the election. for more information from Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada regarding those incidents, please see http://www.lrwc.org/pub2.php?sid=45 In The Matter Of An Addendum To The Report To Lawyers' Rights Watch On The Trial Of B. J. Jeyeretnam As A Result Of Observations On The Trial Of Chee Soon Juan; and, http://www.lrwc.org/pub2.php?sid=21 Newsletter VII, item I.3
The Singapore Constitution guarantees every citizen of Singapore the right to freedom of speech and _expression, the right to assemble peacefully, and the right to association. The PAP, however, has a history of using fear to stifle those very rights that the Constitution guarantees.
For example, in May the government refused entry into Singapore to international non-violence expert Yeshua Moser-Puangsuwan to prevent his interfering in Singapore's domestic politics. On another occasion, the police disrupted a forum on the death penalty by demanding the particulars of the moderator, Salbiah Ahmad, a lawyer from Singapore. On that occasion, uniformed officers were summoned in an apparent attempt to cause alarm to those present. The authorities also barred an Amnesty International spokesperson from speaking at the forum.
In the past, Singapore has also silenced dissent by using its draconian Internal Security Act - ISA, which allows for detention without trial. In 1966, opposition politician Chia Thye Poh accused the PAP of harassing opposition leaders, and staged a boycott of Parliament. Soon afterwards, he was arrested and detained under the ISA. He was never charged and never received a public hearing, but nevertheless remained in detention for 23 years. Selective application of an array of criminal laws against government critics is a display of force by the state that serves to intimidate anyone who wishes to publicly express a dissenting political opinion. By doing so, the Singapore government strips meaning from its citizens' fundamental human rights and demonstrates its lack of commitment to a free and democratic society. -30- Contact Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada Gail Davidson Tel: +1 604 738-0338; toll free Canada/U.S. 1 877 662 7344 Fax: +1 604 736-1175 Email: lrwc@lrwc.org OR Kelley Bryan Email: K_j_bryan@yahoo.ca Website: www.lrwc.org Gail Davidson Lawyer's Rights Watch Canada 3220 West 13th Avenue Vancouver, BC Fax: 1-604 736-1175 Tel: 1-604 738-0338 Website: www.lrwc.org CANADA V6K 2V5 Tel: +1 604 738-0338 Fax: +1 604 736-1175 Email: lrwc@portal.ca
Sunday, July 24

The unOfficial Yeo Cheow Tong Website
by
Steven
on Sun 24 Jul 2005 04:46 PM IST
All I am doing is providing a link to this site. I did not create nor do I know who created it. Made me laugh, then I was concerned that maybe there is a law that bans everyone from laughing at the leaders of the Singaporean government. I wonder if it is considered worthy of a defamation case or if it is crossing an Out of Bounds marker?

1.Goh Chok Tong's wife has destroyed his chances to become President, thanks to her hunk, Durai, and the NKF scandal. 2.That means Tony Tan will become President and will give up his position as Deputy Prime Minister (DPM). 3.Yeo will be picked over Wong Kan Seng for DPM as Yeo is even less competent than Wong.
Friday, July 22

Expensive no-name name change
by
Steven
on Fri 22 Jul 2005 04:40 PM IST
Expensive no-name name change
Singapore - After spending 400 000 Singapore dollars (about R1,6-million) to come up with a suitable new name for the revamped downtown Marina Bay, Singapore has decided to stick to, well, Marina Bay, media reports said on Friday.
The city-state's urban development authorities and global branding company Interbrand spent months deliberating over 400 potential names before settling on the original moniker, according to the Today newspaper.
The 400 000 Singapore dollars financed a massive branding exercise that involved market tests, focus group discussions and consultations with developers and the general public, Today said.
Finding the right name for the city state's revised downtown, which will include the much-debated resort casino, a new business district and swanky retail outlets, was a process akin to parents deciding on a name for their child, said National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan.
| 'The name that really tugged at the heartstrings was in front of us' |
"We started off with (the name) Marina Bay and after looking at everything, the name that really tugged at the heartstrings was in front of us," Mah said. "The name itself is not new, but what has been used informally so far has endeared itself to all parties."
Not suprisingly, many Singaporeans were quick to lambast the government's latest publicity efforts as an utter waste of public funds.
"Waaah, you so clever... (you) think and think and think and come up (with) this new old name," Rockson Takumi Tan wrote on his popular blog, rockson.blogspot.com. - Sapa-AFP
Click above to go to rockson. And be aware that the language may be offensive.
"I also read today the newspaper that they wanted to change the Marina Bay name. Gahmen call some overseas new name expert people to think of new names. You know how much they pay these fuckers? $400,000!!!!
And you know what is the name they choose in the end?
MARINA BAY!!!!!"
Thursday, July 21

Weblog Ethics Survey Results
by
Steven
on Thu 21 Jul 2005 12:33 PM IST

What this study is all about
This study seeks to explore ethical principles in blogging through a quantitative survey of bloggers from around the world. It is our honors thesis as undergraduates at the School of Communication and Information , Nanyang Technological University (SCI/NTU).
Why is there such a long delay from the initial results release date in May?
We needed time to properly analyse all the findings. The response was more overwhelming than we expected, with over a thousand bloggers completing our survey. We thank everyone who had did the survey, and apologise for the delay.
Who are we?
We are three undergraduates from SCI/NTU. Ordinary undergraduates who found the issue on blogging ethics interesting, and decided to do a thesis on it.
Dr. Benjamin H. Detenber and Dr. Mark Cenite are our thesis supervisors.
Why are we publishing our results here on blogspot?
Beyond just a final year thesis, we hope that our study can contribute to the blogging community amidst the debate on ethics and ethical codes in blogging. Feel free to post comment on this blog or email <"mailto:S8033419B@ntu.edu.sg"> us feedback. us feedback. If you are a blogger, you can also provide a link this blog to share this URL with your friends.

MIGRANT WORKERS DEMAND ABOLISHMENT OF DEATH PENALTY IN S`PORE
by
Steven
on Thu 21 Jul 2005 11:56 AM IST
Found the following at the ThinkCentre
Antara 9 July 2005
Dozens of migrant workers grouped in the Working Forum on Justice for Migrant Domestic Helpers staged a protest outside the Singaporean Embassy in Jakarta Friday demanding the abolishment of the death penalty for domestic helpers and other migrant workers in the city state.
"We have also launched worldwide actions to take our protest to the International Labor Organizations (ILO)," an activist of Migrant Care who coordinate the action, Anis Hidayah said.
The protesters also demanded that Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia ratify the international law to protect migrant workers as more workers were facing distressing situations and many others were facing the death penalty.
"After Sundarti Supriyanto, Purwanti Parji, and Sumiyati, now Juminem and Siti Aminah are waiting for the death sentence in Singapore which is scheduled to be announced on July 11," Anis said.
According to Migrant Care sata, some other Indonesian migrant workers were serving their jail sentences and some were facing the death sentence.
Among these workers are Hasanudin, Sintring, Lili Ardi Sinaga, Nur Laela, and Suhaidi bin Asnawi.
The demonstrators also demanded the eradication of any form of violation, physically, mentally or sexually against domestic helpers and migrant workers.
"The crimes committed by migrant workers were a reaction to the accumulation of resentment against unjust treatment by their employers. This fact must be used as a point of consideration," Yanti Muchtar of non governmental organization Kapal Perempuan said.
Earlier, last week, the NGO organized a similar action in front of the embassy but they were only received by the embassy`s first secretary.
"Because the ambassador is on leave, we hope that we can meet with the political attache," Anis said.
During last week`s meeting, the embassy official said they could not do anything to stop the death penalty as it was the authority of Singapore`s courts.
"But we will continue to pursue efforts to have the death penalty scrapped," Yanti said.
The demonstrators wearing black plastic sacks on their heads as a symbol of people waiting for execution.
They also spread black banners saying "free our foreign exchange earning heroes", "stop women and children trafficking", "SBY do not only send SMS".
Anis said, they would move their protest to the Malaysian embassy for the same demand.
Responding to the demand, the Singaporean Embassy said it would convey the workers` demand to its government.(*)

Singapore to monitor its citizens Pak madarassas visits
by
Steven
on Thu 21 Jul 2005 11:56 AM IST
I am fully aware of the current 'terrorist' threat but surely this is an infringement of civil liberties. Is Tony Tan saying that they are monitoring where you go on holiday? The article says, 'begun' but the statement from Tan implies that it has been monitoring for sometime.
Singapore: Following media reports suggesting that at least three of the four 7/7 London bombers received training from Islamic radicals at Pakistani madarassas, the Singapore government has begun monitoring the movements of its citizens visiting Pakistan, particularly the madarassas there.
Singapore Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan confirmed this while speaking in the country’s parliament.
He, however, said that the government could not control every movement of its people.
“Yes, we do keep track. We try to keep track of who goes there, but we are a free society so we cannot be sure of everybody. We do know that there are Singaporeans who have gone to some madarassas in a neighbouring country and from there went on to Pakistan,” The News quoted Tan as saying.
Monday, July 18

The Singapore Rebel
by
Steven
on Mon 18 Jul 2005 05:10 PM IST
The Singapore Rebel
Singapore Rebel appears to be back online and available here. As usual I would like to state that I am not responsible for uploading the documentary. All I am doing is placing a hyper link to the site that contains the download file.
I am currently having problems downloading the avi file but will keep trying.
Singapore Rebel - Documentary on an opposition politician in Singapore: This is the film Singapore's censorship board doesn't want people to see. It's the story of opposition politician Chee Soon Juan, who has been imprisoned twice for championing democratic change in the city state. The censors declared it a 'party political film' and it was pulled from last month's Singapore International Film Festival line-up after the director was warned he could face two years in jail if the screening went ahead. DownloadSingapore Rebel Cinepack (105 MB)

"An empty language for empty heads"
by
Steven
on Mon 18 Jul 2005 11:05 AM IST
From Sg Review
by John Kay (Visiting Professor, London School of Economics)
Financial Times 11 July 2005
When George Orwell wrote his magisterial essay, Politics And The English Language, in 1946, bullshit was political bullshit.
There is still a lot of that about. Election campaigns in Britain, constitutional arguments in Europe and global summits in Scotland have produced political bullshit in quantity.
But the worst abuses of the language now come from business people and management gurus.
Lies and spin communicate, but what they communicate is false. The defining characteristic of bullshit is that it does not attempt to communicate at all. Bullshit has the vocabulary and syntax of ordinary language but not the meaning.
And, in fact, the metaphor is not apt. What we describe as bullshit is more like candy floss --- when you bite into it, there is nothing there.
The symptoms of bullshit are familiar. Stock phrases are parroted without thought --- change drivers, organisational transformation.
Words are given meanings different from their ordinary sense --- government spending is called investment.
Bullshit creates new words --- empowerment, creovation --- but these do not define original ideas. They describe concepts too nebulous to be expressed by terms with known meaning.
Bullshit is characterised by prolixity --- "serving customers better" becomes "striving for continuous improvement in the customer relationship management space".
Why do people talk or write when they have nothing to say?
Sometimes there are good reasons. When the Queen pays a royal visit, her remarks tell people nothing other than that she is present. But that purpose is important. Some of what senior executives do has this symbolic role. Such speeches are properly short and banalities suffice.
So most bullshit is simply to fill space. Sometimes, people do not want to speak but are required to. The growing culture of audit and accountability has stimulated such obligatory communication --- read any corporate risk assessment or statement of auditors' responsibilities. Written by word processor, read by nobody, this material is generally innocuous.
But the purpose of bullshit is often deceptive. The squirming politician, forbidden to lie but unable to tell the truth, must bullshit.
[see "Lifting The Veil On Singapore Politics"; http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/1755]
But not all the audience had noticed that the words they heard meant nothing. If you are asked to report on implementation milestones towards Key Performance Indicators, you are obliged to reply in the same language. Before long, you speak this way yourself.
Proper academic training, which emphasises substance over form, is an antidote, and many universities still provide it. Business schools, where both the faculty and students must disguise how little they know, sometimes do the opposite.
The most powerful enemy of bullshit is ridicule, and the most powerful ally of bullshit is the corporate conformity* that makes such ridicule impossible.
The more authoritarian* the culture, the more bullshit.
If bullshit tells you nothing else, it tells you something about the organisation* that excretes it.
[* hallmarks of the PAP political organisation] Human Rights
Sunday, July 17

Legitimized Corruption Understood
by
Steven
on Sun 17 Jul 2005 10:56 AM IST
From: Carl Kapeland To: Mellanie Hewlitt 16 July 2005 Singapore Review Legitimized Corruption Understood
Dear Mellanie
In the latest developments the entire NKF Board and its CEO have taken the easy route out and resigned. That's leadership for you, when things get messy, just get up and leave the mess for someone else to clean up.
But I don't think the new CEO or Board will do much cleaning up. Looks like they are replacing one bunch of rotten apples with another bunch of potentially more rotten apples. It does not address the real problem.
WHAT IS THE REAL PROBLEM?
There are several recurrent issues here. Singapore is in this current mess because Lee's PAP Government has forgotten that not everything can be reduced to money. You cannot throw money at all your problems and expect it to magically disappear.
The material base that motivates Singapore's "leaders" is only too evident when the NKF's transit CEO (Gerald Ee) hinted that "SGD600,000/- may not be sufficient for the new replacement to take office"!!! Money is the only motivating factor and if they have elected a leader and a board who is motivated only by money, its only a natural and unavoidable result that they will end up with an organization which has forgotten its once noble purpose and replaced it with more materialistic pursuits.
Have they (Singapore) appointed a Wolf in sheep's clothing to guard their precious flock? For positions like these in charity organizations, THE CHIEF MOTIVATING FACTOR CANNOT BE MONEY! as they are not running an investment bank. The same applies senior public service positions and for ministerial positions. NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE REDUCED TO MONEY. But Lee's PAP Ministers have used this holistic approach to address any and all issues under the sun.
Lee and his ministers simply CANNOT RUN A COUNTRY THE SAME WAY THEY RUN A COMPANY. Why? Because a country comprises of flesh and blood and spirit. A company is merely a corporate vehicle that is often set-up for the sole purpose of reaping a monetary profit.
SINGAPORE AS A COUNTRY, IS NOT SINGAPORE INC!!!! And even if it is, its directors (and that means Lee and his million dollar cabinet) have to remain accountable to the shareholders (Singapore citizens). Singapore MINISTERS have to be transparent, and they are not especially as regards their salaries and the management of the country's reserves.
Consider this, the NKF was originally set up as a supposedly charitable organization. In form and function it appeared above board and reputable. But in actual practice it had a hidden agenda to siphon wealth from the public into state coffers. And what happens to all this money (all SGD200 million of it?) No body knows.
These same similarities in the NKF saga are reproduced on a grander scale in overall state administration in Singapore. Whether its the CPF, LTA, GLCs, Temasek etc they all relate to the the same basic issue. It goes back to the same bunch of corrupt leaders paying themselves and their cronies humongous rediculous salaries, approved and legitimized under a set of bogus laws that they legislated in the first place.
But even before this NKF scam, transparency issues have dogged Singapore's state administration for decades and repeated requests by the World Bank, IMF, FTA and other NGOs for greater accountability and transparency havebasically fallen on deaf ears.
These are basic transparency issues which plaque management of public moneys by all state entities (whether its the CPF Board, GLCs, Temasek, LTA etc). There is massive deception on a grand scale and I suspect the latest NKF debacle only surfaced due to internal friction within Singapore's "inner-circle of elite politicians." Perhaps someone amongst Singapore's Ruling Elite wanted a bigger portion of the loot.
Think about it. Durai commenced his latest law suite on the confident assumption that it would be a "no contest" walk-over like his two previous suites. But whilst the Singapore sham courts had no problems finding in his favor in the 2 previous suites (which were taken against private individuals and a volunteer who correctly questioned his lavish spending), the latest suite was against another state bureaucracy. And it was inevitable that the sham court found in favor of the bigger devil. So even amongst the thieves there is a power struggle over who gets a bigger piece of the loot.
So this then is justice ala Singapore styled. Who you are and who you are connected with ultimately decides the outcome of the law suite. The material facts of the case (and legal premise) have little relevance in the kangaroo's court final assessment.
But by far the most troubling problem is that of Legitimized Corruption. You (Mellanie) have used the term "Legitimized Corruption" very accurately, but failed to elaborate on its true meaning and implications.
Legitimized Corruption means essentially that the corrupt act itself is made perfectly legal. That is why there is a possibility that the external audit on NKF may turn out nothing because Durai and his actions may have been all perfectly legitimate and authorized according to the internal constitution of the Board.
In a normal organization with bona fide controls in place, the Board would not have approved and allowed such unreasonable and lavish expenditures. However, in Singapore's setting where "anything goes" it is possible that the board were within their discretionary powers to authorize such lavish expenditures. Mind you these are expenditures which (by any ordinary definition) would have amounted to an immoral mis-management of public moneys for unauthorized applications. But if the internal rules of conduct of NKF allowed the Board to act in this manner, it would then be an authorized and legitimate act.
So even after the process of audit has concluded it is perfectly possible for the auditors to conclude that the use of donor funds for; a) Durai's pay of SGD600,000 and his salary of SGD1.8 million; b) All expenses and application of donor funds used for purchase of SGD990/- god taps; c) All expenses for first class air travel; d) The levying of a 30% Admin Fee; e) The hiring of personal drivers and limos. All of the above are authorized and legitimate.
Anyway we all know that the so called "audit" of the NKF accounts is merely a publicity stunt to show case to the world that the current government and the new board is taking steps to remain accountable.
But does this make the above acts any more acceptable and morally correct. NO! Of cause not. An atrocity is still an atrocity even though it is legitimized. One clear example is prostitution in Singapore. It is legal and the fact that it is legal does not detract one iota from the fact that it is still immoral, depraved and inhuman.
Of cause there are critics who will argue that moral values are to subjective concepts and we cannot always use these imprecise measures to define what is right or wrong. And I concede that there is some truth in this as we live in a world coloured in grey.
However, there will always remain some acts which are so blatantly wrong that they remain morally objectionable and immoral by any standard and yardstick. And the NKF scam (as well as Singapore ministerial salaries) fall within this category. It is morally wrong by any measure and this is not a grey area at all.
This same logic applies on a larger scale as regards ministerial salaries and the process that is orchestrated to "approve" such unreasonable and lavish salaries (amounting to millions of dollars per minister).
Legitimized Corruption works much like Money Laundering, but is worse. In essence Legitimized Corruption is corruption which is made legal. These perpetrators attempt to do what drug cartels and money launderers do;- basically "launder" the money (or the dishonest act) and make the final product appear nice and clean.
But senior politicians differ from your average drug lord or mafia boss in one important respect;- these ministers are much more sophisticated. They know the system (and probably designed it) and know how to manupulate and tweak the system so that they can have access to the ill-gotten gains without getting their hands dirty. Next to them, Gordon Gecko and the God-Father look like novices and vestal virgins.
However make no mistake the underlying act itself remains wrong, dishonest and morally objectionable but is hidden under a cloak of legitimacy. Drug money (and money from dishonest trades) is still ill-gotten loot. Behind this elaborate sham are a host of corporate and state entities (GLCs, state owned entities and yes, charitable organisations) which are set-up to place a corporate veil between the real perpetrators and the morally objectionable and dishonest transaction.
The fact that it is perfectly legitimate does not itself make it MORALLY CORRECT. This is especially the case when you have a legislature that is totally removed (and remains out of touch) with the moral values and aspirations of the people it is supposed to serve and protect.
In fact, this kind of legitimized corruption is the worst possible kind as it means the corruption has infiltrated the most senior ranks of management (and the political leaders). Compared to this elaborate deceit, the more obvious corruption in Indonesia are crude by comparison and far easier to identify and correct as it is acknowledged that such objectionable acts itself are WRONG and are not endorsed by the country's laws.
How do you ask a cop to catch a thief when the cop himself is a thief?
Legitimized Corruption by its very nature is more sinister and difficult to identify. For instance, a government official who accepts bribes worth $1.6 million a year is guilty of corruption. But what happens if this same official or minister receives this money as part of his "LEGITIMATE" salary. In both cases the act itself is the same unconscionable and immoral act. But in the later case, there is no need for the official to hide his ill-gotten gains as it is formally endorsed by an equally corrupt legislature/parliament who has a hand in the ill gotten gains.
The definition of a Parasitic Leech is as follows: "leech: a follower who hangs around a host (without benefit to the host) in hope of gain or advantage" http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=RNWE,RNWE:2004-48,RNWE:en&oi=defmore&q=define:parasite The kind of legitimized corruption already endorsed and prevalent in Singapore's state machinery is far worse. It is a cancerous malice which is more surreptitious and insidious. The festering rot is not immediately apparent to an external casual observer but is eating away the core of the its host. Left unchecked, such parasites will consume a once healthy body before discarding the empty shell and relocating to another unwary host.
Legitimized Corruption is also like cancer. It is a chronic ailment which rooted itself very deeply within the host (and the state machinery). Such a chronic ailment did not occur over night but took place over decades of accumulated unchecked accesses. Durai himself was in the NKF for over 30 years and it is no mere coincidence that Singapore has been under the same government (and people and family) for over 30 years.
This is precisely the reason why in the US and other bona fide democracies there is a mandatory change in administration every 4-8 years. A new administration brings forth a completely new government which will was away unchecked accesses and commence things tabula rasa.
But somehow in Singapore it appears that only families starting with the Lee surname or who are closely affiliated with this first family are the only candidates who qualify for election. What a quaint and family friendly arrangement! Its just too bad that the average Singaporean is excluded from this elitist inner-circle.
However, Singapore's Ruling Elite also have to be wary of the accompanying dangers of in-breeding which can occur from a small and exclusive gene pool. Cancerous deformaities can result after generations of in-breeding.
And the Cancer has many signs and symptoms. There have already been many evident tell tale signs of the internal rot and its accompanying putrid stench. However, Singaporeans in their numbed state of awareness may be mistaking the over-powering stench of decay for sweet perfume. The entire state machinery is orchestrated to maintain this state of illusion and deception.
In the normal mechanics of an open and transparent state legislature and government, the moral values of the mans on the street is reflected (although not perfectly) in the policy formulation process. This is not the case in Singapore and your "leaders" know it. Just challenge them to run a referendum regarding their salaries and it will be evident that 90% of the population are totally disgusted by such blatant acts of greed. Of cause the local state owned media will somehow always paint the picture of an adoring and obedient public as part of an elaborate charade. So the truth never ever gets out.
Corruption of this scale starts form the top and slowly works its way down the ranks to pollute every senior arm of the state machinery from the Judiciary to Legislature to the Executive and especially to a docile and compliant state managed local press. It cannot be stopped easily without external intervention.
Slowly but surely what started off as a morally unacceptable issue becomes part and parcel of "accepted norm" which is disguised behind a pile of state endorsed laws and bills. Even the once sacred document, the Constitution, is not spared and is re-written to the whims and fancies of those they serve. How many Singaporeans are aware of the fact that the country's Constituion has been amended to allow state owned entities and GLCs easier access directly to the country's reserves? And it also does not take a genius to work out that it is the close affiliates of the Ruling Elite who sit on the management boards of these state owned entities and GLCs.
The following is a fascinating observation. The exact size of Singapore's foreign exchange reserves and the management of thses funds is designated as a STATE SECURITY FOR INTERNAL SECURITY REASONS. Is it mere co-incidence that the conservative ball park estimate of the net worth of the Lee family is roughly equivalent to your country's reserves? (USD130-140 billion?)
What you have in Singapore are a bunch of hired mercenaries who are ripping off the very people they are supposed to look after.
Singaporeans. This is your country and your life. If you continue in this state of drugged apathy, you will cease to have any control over your own faith and destiny.
Do you really want to hand over your life to the devil?
Do you want to have a Singapore with No Singaporeans?
Its time to wake up from your state of denial and confront the harsh reality before your very eyes.
Yours faithfully
Karl Capeland Ohio State
For more details on the above, see "Lifting The Veil On Singapore Politics"; http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/1755
Does splashing white paint on a black car make the black car white? You decide.
Saturday, July 16

Public welcome Gerard Ee as NKF's interim chairman
by
Steven
on Sat 16 Jul 2005 05:46 PM IST
According to Lawrence Tan, the 20-year-old full-time national serviceman who started the petition which gathered 40,000 signatures in three days, "Singaporeans signed something which not only called for the NKF board to step down, but for them to show greater accountability and transparency."
Suddenly the requests for transparency and accountability are ignored. As if by magic the problem has dissappeared and no one will ever again refer to the two nouns for fear having their own organisation become the unmentionables. And "the public", all of them, are happy again in lala-land according to Channel News Asia after having done a highly rigourous, indepth, and representative survey with a sample of 2 respondants. Charity groups and public welcome Gerard Ee as NKF's interim chairman
The public also expressed support for NKF with Mr Ee at the helm.
"He will bring more confidence," said one member of the public.
"I hope the new chairman will restore their confidence, the people's confidence and continue to raise funds," said another.
"The general consensus among members of the public and the various charity organisations is that with a new leadership in place at the NKF, it is time to move on and concentrate on the future to rebuild public confidence and continue to lend a helping hand to kidney patients." To read the article click here.Surely claiming 'General consensus' after interviewing an anonymous 2 people in a population of approximately 4 million is a joke. I wonder if the 'journalist', and I use that term loosely, actually interviewed 2 people, or simply copied what they were told to write contained in the memo from upon high. NKF
Thursday, July 14

Singapore Kidney Charity Chief Quits Amid Controversy
by
Steven
on Thu 14 Jul 2005 09:48 PM IST
July 14 (Bloomberg) --
The head of Singapore's National Kidney Foundation T.T. Durai resigned after newspaper reports about his salary and perks prompted a public outcry and calls for him to step down.
Durai, the charity's 56-year-old chief executive, offered his resignation two days after scrapping a defamation suit against Singapore Press Holdings Ltd., owner of the Business Times and Straits Times newspapers.
"The NKF board and the CEO sought the minister's intervention and offered to resign," Singapore's Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan said today in a statement, noting the government will name an interim chief to run the charity and will reconstitute the foundation's board. "Shattered public confidence must be restored."
The National Kidney Foundation's offices were this week vandalized and more than 34,800 people signed an online petition calling for Durai's ouster, after the Business Times reported that he was paid S$1.8 million ($1.06 million) over the past three years and sometimes traveled first-class. The newspaper cited disclosures made in a court hearing Monday.
The controversy led more than 3,800 donors to cancel their monthly contributions to the charity as of 5:30 p.m. yesterday, according to foundation spokeswoman Juliana Khoo.
The charity will suspend fund-raising activities until the new board completes a review of its operations, the Ministry of Health said in a separate statement today.
Balaji Sadasivan, senior minister of state for health, today urged that the controversy shouldn't disrupt the care of kidney dialysis patients.
"Looking at the events in the past 24 hours, it appears this trust that the public had in the NKF has suffered," Channel News Asia quoted Sadasivan as saying. "It is very important that NKF rebuild the trust of the public by being transparent."

NKF Board Resigns
by
Steven
on Thu 14 Jul 2005 09:34 PM IST
An unprecedented wave of public anger has swept Singapore after the head of its largest charity disclosed this week that he was paid up to S$600,000 ($350,000, €290,000, £200,000) annually and took first-class flights. The headquarters of the National Kidney Foundation was covered with protest graffiti, in a rare act of vandalism for the normally placid city-state, and the topic has dominated internet chatrooms. The issue could prove embarrassing for the government since the chief patron of the NKF is the wife of Goh Chok Tong, Singapore's senior minister and former prime minister. The public outrage also reflects complaints that Singapore's elite appears to be enjoying a lavish lifestyle when the income gap between the rich and poor is widening. NKF, which helps to finance dialysis treatment for kidney patients, has been one of Singapore's most popular charities. But it also has been criticised for a lack of transparency, including refusing to reveal the salary of its chief executive, T. T. Durai. The controversy surrounding NKF was triggered after Mr Durai filed a defamation lawsuit against the Straits Times, Singapore's leading newspaper, over an article that said he had installed gold-plated taps in his office bathroom. Mr Durai said the article suggested he was misusing the charity's funds. But potentially damaging information concerning NKF was revealed when the defamation trial began this week. In addition to his high salary and first-class flights, Mr Durai and other staff had access to eight company cars and drivers. Davinder Singh, the lawyer acting for the Straits Times, alleged that the NKF was misleading the public since it claimed it was treating more patients than it had, while its reserves of S$220m were adequate to help kidney patients for decades, instead of three years as NKF claimed. Mr Durai was also alleged to have a “commercial relationship” with an NKF board member who had interests in a call centre that NKF was using. After two days of tough questioning, Mr Durai decided to drop his defamation suit. Mr Durai is under public pressure to resign, with an online petition urging his dismissal having gathered 7,500 signatures in the past day. NKF also reported that 2,700 people had cancelled donation pledges. Public attention has also focused on Mrs Goh, the senior minister's wife, after she defended Mr Durai's salary. “For a person who runs a million-dollar charitable organisation, S$600,000 is peanuts as [NKF] has a few hundred millions in reserves,” she said. The controversy has led to calls that disclosure guidelines for charities should be tightened, including revealing the salaries of top executives. Related Links:Singapore Windows - Charity Chief Reveals $60,000 salaryNewSintercom - STi July 12, 2005Sg Review - The Board Behind The NKF Scam Sg Review - The PetitionPAP Endorses NKF Deception - Birds of the Same Feather Rampant Legitimised Corruption in Senior Govt Positions

Police concerned over public reactions to NKF issue
by
Steven
on Thu 14 Jul 2005 09:32 PM IST
The picture was found at Commentary Singapore and Mr Wang would like to explain that the Chinese characters spray-painted on the wall mean FRAUDSTER.
And just on the off chance any Singaporeans have forgotten - I found this rather short and to the point 'article' at Channel News Asia. It is copied exactly as it appears on the site. It hardly amounts to an article. It could be viewed as a blog or simply a message from your local friendly neighbourhood cop.
SINGAPORE : The Singapore police has expressed concern over public reactions to the National Kidney Foundation issue.
It said police officers were called in following vandalism at the NKF compound.
They were also alerted about an intention to organise a group demonstration.
Police urged the public not to take the law into their own hands.
It reminded them that it is an offence to organise a public assembly or procession with five or more people. Human Rights

Holly Q
by
Steven
on Thu 14 Jul 2005 11:49 AM IST

Found some thought provoking material at Holly Q...
As usual, though, one must turn one's attention back home, as far as it can be described as "home" anymore. At least half our population has been drilled, for anywhere between 24 to 28 months of their lives, in the values of the military. These are values that don't sit well with the values needed for a democracy. It breeds an unhealthy obedience to authority, and a most unsavoury misogyny. It increases the palatability of violence.

AcidFlask Interview
by
Steven
on Thu 14 Jul 2005 11:48 AM IST

I received the notification of the following via email and thought others might be interested in listening to the interview. I have yet to give feedback regarding the podcast but will do so as soon as time permits.Kevin Lim interviews Elia Diodati (a.k.a. AcidFlask)...
From our point of view, we speak constructively about where we see Singapore on a global scale, and what we could possibly do to improve Singapore's outlook. An emergent theme was for individuals to think for themselves and not to rely on existing local norms for socio-economic cues. Adding to this, I share my views on why I think it is important for Singaporeans to see and experience cultural differences (e.g. by travelling), while Elia Diodata elaborates on this by saying how we need to see the box in order to be able to step out of it (or realizing we can't step out of it at all). I hope for this podcast to serve as an 'idea springboard' on how we can jumpstart Singapore's future.
Monday, July 11

Police harassment at non-violence book launch
by
Steven
on Mon 11 Jul 2005 03:07 PM IST
From singapore democtrat.org 11 Jul 05
Police seized a CD and demanded the particulars of two young activists who spoke at Dr Chee Soon Juan's launching of his latest book The Power of Courage: Effecting Political Change in Singapore through Nonviolence. 
Several police officers in plainclothes had attended the event and filmed the proceedings (see photos). At the end of the presentation, they demanded to know whether the organizers had a permit for a video clip that had run. They then seized a CD and said that it would be used for further investigation.
There was one officer in particular who seemed intent on offending as many people as he could. Incredibly at one point, after rudely demanding to see the CD, he wanted to borrow Dr Chee's laptop computer to view the CD he had seized whereupon Dr Chee replied: "The next thing you'll want is to borrow some money from me to take a taxi back to the police station." 
Another police officer then filled out a form and wanted Dr Chee to sign it to acknowledge that they were seizing the CD. At this point lawyer Mr M Ravi who was also present took a look at the form and said that it was ridiculous for the police to seize someone's property and then ask that person acknowledge it. Dr Chee then said to the officers: "If you want to take it, take it. Do whatever you want to do with it but return it when you're finished with it."
Upon hearing this, the rude officer barged in and threatened, "So I take it that you are refusing to sign the acknowledgment?" 
"It doesn't make sense for the police to seize something and then ask its owner to acknowledge that the property was taken as if the item was gladly handed over," Mr Ravi chipped in. "I'm trying to explain that..."
"No point wasting time, let's go! We have more important things to do!" the officer yelled to his colleagues. 
Earlier, some of the officers had demanded to see the Identity Cards of Mr Charles Tan and Mr Jonathan Siow, both in their twenties. The officers took down the particulars of the two young activists who had spoken before Dr Chee's presentation and they said that they found non-violent action to be meaningful and an effective tool in helping to empower Singaporeans. Messrs Tan and Siow had attended workshops on non-violence in recent months.
The Singapore Government had earlier refused Nonviolence International trainer, Mr Yeshua Moser-Puangsuwan, entry when he at the Singapore Airport and deported him. The non-violence expert was invited to conduct a workshop for Singaporeans activists.
On a previous occasion, the police also disrupted a forum on the death penalty by demanding the particulars of the moderator, Ms Salbiah Ahmad, a lawyer from Singapore. On that occasion uniformed officers were summoned in an apparent attempt to cause alarm to those present. The authorities had earlier banned Amnesty International spokesman from speaking at the forum. http://www.todayonline.com/articles/60786.aspSingapore News // Monday, July 11, 2005 Police seize video at Chee's book launch
THE police made a late guest appearance at Saturday's launch of the latest book by opposition leader Chee Soon Juan. Held at the Grand Plaza Parkroyal Hotel, the indoor public talk, attended by about 50 people, had ended, and the few who remained were having refreshments when the police arrived — after receiving word that video images had been screened. . The 2003 footage of Hong Kong residents protesting peaceably against a proposed anti-subversion law had been projected onto a screen as Dr Chee autographed copies of his book, The Power of Courage, after a Q&A session. . Police spokesperson ASP Victor Keong told Today: "During the event, a video disc was screened to the public. As the disc did not possess a certificate for public exhibition, it was seized under the Films Act for investigation." . The police questioned Dr Chee and will take statements later for their investigation. . During his presentation, Dr Chee cited the "unjust" introduction of laws, as well as their selective application and interpretation, as reasons to effect political change in Singapore through non-violent campaigns. . In his book, he cited the Public Entertainment and Meetings Act as "perhaps the most damaging to the development of democracy in Singapore". . Although licensing rules for indoor public talks were eased last year when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, in his National Day Rally, encouraged greater freedom of expression, restrictions remain for public assemblies. . Asked why he chose the topic of non-violent civil disobedience for his sixth book, Dr Chee said there needed to be a rethink of strategy because, after 40 years, "it real1y didn't matter what civil society or political society did, because nothing changes". . The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief referred to electoral reform in particular, likening the Opposition's predicament to that of a high-jumper training to clear a certain height for a competition, only to have officials raise the bar just before he is about to jump. . The SDP has helped organise two workshops this year to train people on the principles of non-violent campaigns, with a third coming up this month. — Derrick A Paulo Human Rights
Sunday, July 10

Freedom of the Press 2005
by
Steven
on Sun 10 Jul 2005 12:24 PM IST
 Singapore Status: Not Free Legal Environment: 23 Political Environment: 24 Economic Environment: 19 Total Score: 66
Media freedom in Singapore is constrained to such a degree that the vast majority of journalists practice self-censorship rather than risk being charged with defamation or breaking the country’s criminal laws on permissible speech. The constitution provides the right to freedom of speech and expression in Article 14 but permits restrictions on these rights. Legal constraints include strict censorship laws; the Newspaper and PrintingPresses Act, which allows authorities to restrict the circulation of any foreign periodical for publishing news that interferes in domestic politics; and the Internal Security Act (ISA). Although not implemented in recent years, the ISA gives government powers to restrict publications that incite violence, arouse racial or religious tension, or threaten national interest, national security, or public order. Given the government’s record of successfully suing critics under harsh criminal defamation laws, journalists most often refrain from publishing critical stories about corruption or nepotism. The Economist agreed to pay a fine of more than US $200,000 in September in order to avoid a lawsuit over an article it had published that charged a government-linked investment company with lacking transparency.
The government has mastered the art of “calibrated coercion,” in the words of a veteran Singapore journalist. The vast majority of print and broadcast media outlets, as well as Internet service providers and cable television services, are either owned or controlled by the state or by companies with close ties to the ruling party. Moreover, annual licensing requirements cause media outlets to limit or moderate their criticism of the government. The primary development on the media scene in 2004 was the mega merger between two giants—Singapore Press Holdings, which publishes 14 paid newspapers and one free paper in four official languages, including the flagship Straits Times, and Media Corp TV Holdings, which operates five television stations, one free newspaper, and Media Corp Studios. The merger was agreed upon to stop four years of cutthroat competition, ending any semblance of competition and diversity in the Singapore mass media, which virtually without exception supports the government line. International newspapers and magazines are available, although authorities have at times banned or censored foreign publications that carry articles the government found offensive. The circulations of some Western-owned publications are “gazetted,” or limited. The entire pdf file is available here.
The criteria: This study is based on universal criteria. The starting point is the smallest, most universal unit of concern: the individual. We recognize cultural differences, diverse national interests, and varying levels of economic development. Yet the Universal Declaration of Human Rights instructs: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers (Article 19). The operative word for this survey is everyone. All states, from the most democratic to the most authoritarian, are committed to this doctrine through the United Nations system. To deny that doctrine is to deny the universality of information freedom—a basic human right. We recognize that cultural distinctions or economic underdevelopment may limit the volume of news flows within a country, but these and other arguments are not acceptable explanations for outright centralized control of the content of news and information. Some poor countries allow for the exchange of diverse views, while some developed countries restrict content diversity. We seek to recognize press freedom wherever it exists, in poor and rich countries, as well as in countries of various ethnic, religious, and cultural backgrounds.
This survey does not assess the degree to which the press in any country serves responsibly, reflecting a high ethical standard. The issue of “press responsibility” is often raised to defend governmental control of the press. Indeed, a truly irresponsible press does a disserviceto its public and diminishes its own credibility. A governmental effort to rein in the press on the pretext of making the press “responsible” has far worse results, in most cases. This issue is reflected in the degree of freedom in the flow of information as assessed in the survey.
Our sources: Our data come from correspondents overseas, staff travel, international visitors, the findings of human rights and press freedom organizations, specialists in geographic and geopolitical areas, the reports of governments and multilateral bodies, and a variety of domestic and international news media. Full article on Methodology available here.Human Rights
2 Attachments

Freedom in the World 2005
by
Steven
on Sun 10 Jul 2005 12:23 PM IST
 Freedom in the World 2005 Table of Independent Countries Comparative Measures of Freedom
Since 1978, Freedom House has published Freedom in the World, an annual comparative assessment of the state of political rights and civil liberties in 192 countries and 14 related and disputed territories. Widely used by policy-makers, journalists, and scholars, the 600-page survey is the definitive report on freedom around the globe.
Freedom in the World is the Michelin Guide to democracy's development.
—The Wall Street Journal
While there are many sources of economic data, good political data is hard to find. Freedom House's survey is an exception. For anyone concerned with the st |