Friday, September 7, 2012

Of Hate And Prejudice

The cheap pot shot from Sim Ann (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) was blatantly targeted at Gerald Giam ("I had expected better from Mr Giam") for speaking a hard truth:
"Anyone who examines the online comments about the foreigners will realise that much of the anger is actually not directed at the foreigners, but at the Government for its liberal immigration policies."

In other words, hate the sin, not the sinner. If it's not a sin to strain our little country's resources of housing, transportation, healthcare, education and job opportunities, why did the Government bother to make another U-turn and tighten the flow of immigration? Are we witnessing an act of repentance?

Sim Ann wrote about her personal experience of real-life disquiet on the ground, and ended up admitting as much: "I support the shift". In her tale of two neighbors bickering over common corridor space, she excluded the wife of one family from the mediation table because she had originated from a province in southern China. In her own words, the other disputing husband and wife were "true-blue locals". Why the discrimination against the PRC housewife if she still quotes PM Lee's personal appeal for fair play: "Singaporeans, let us treat foreigners as we would want to be treated ourselves"?

The word is hate for her political adversary. Hate to be reminded that from 2009, she was the Director of the National Population Secretariat, working under "population czar" Wong Kan Seng at the Ministry of Home Affairs to unleash the tsunami of foreign invaders. Hate to be at the receiving end of her own faulted policy making. Hate to have the skeletons in her cupboard exposed.

Sim Ann used the mainstream media disingenuously to claim support of vigorous and honest, but civil, debate. If that's the truth we wants us to believe, she should engage the Workers' Party in parliamentary debate on the subject. Not resort to underhanded tactics with a sycophantic press ranked 150th by U.S. NGO Freedom House.

83 comments:

  1. We have to prepare for even worse times. SG is still >1 million short for the lowest mentioned figure of 6.5 million people.

    I do not know how the great one got this crazy figure - maybe in a dream.

    Or maybe the MRT is not breaking down frequently enough haha.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For me it is still the same word: copycats. No one shud give the bureaucrats any credit for originality in policy making - everything they do is copying HK, US and UK - and first among those policies is using immigration as a tool to boost GDP growth. Of course they went one further, they created "GDP Bonus" for themselves before embarking on the open door policy. When a generation of rote learners scholars trained in Oxbridge chooses another (hello Ann!) you have more political plagiarism. Risk-taking destroys career, especially with 800-year olds breathing down one's neck.

      Delete
    2. Still got 60.1% support mah, can afford to lose a little bit more. We have to welcome more to the 40% camp.

      Delete
    3. You will soon get the other 1.5m of expected tourists coming into our shore just to see cuddly Panda Bears. I bet that's what they didn't warn you about eh?

      When River safari opens in Dec, in other words, you will start experiencing what 6.5m is like for a real taste, if it's not already happening now.

      Delete
  2. PAP Jokes
    =========
    Q: What did the MIW name his daughter?
    A: Sue.

    Q: Did you hear about the new sushi bar that caters exclusively to MIWs?
    A: It's called, Sosumi.

    Q: How can you tell when a MIW is lying?
    A: His lips are moving.

    Q: How many MIW jokes are there?
    A: Only three. The rest are true stories.

    Q: What do dinosaurs and decent MIWs have in common?
    A: They're both extinct.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very good ones!

      Delete
  3. If you want a message of hope.

    Watch President Obama's speech at the Democrats' convention.
    Hard to believe President Obama is probably paid less than MP Sim Ann.
    There is no justice in this world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We want Obama as Prime Minister of Singapore!!
      To restore hope to the Singaporean people.

      Delete
    2. Listening to him right now: No party has a monopoly on wisdom.

      Delete
    3. Chairman Mao was also a very good speaker on HOPE. He led 2 revolutions and millions to death. Today, his CCP still runs as a 1-party hegemony for 1.3billion people, offering them no choice, just oppression and violations of human rights; in the name of harmony and stability.

      Our PM and the delegation are there for best practice learnings at their academy. Just wait and see what new tricks they have up their sleeves when return.

      Delete
  4. If Sim Ann believes that Gerald Giam is not saying things that the ground truly feels, maybe she would like to take part in an open debate about this in 2016 just before the next GE. If she is so confident of her position, then it would be a great opportunity to win back the lost votes. I believe Holland/BT is ripe for the taking with such goondus around.

    ReplyDelete
  5. We don't have Obama to lead us here in Singapore.
    Let's vote for the political party that best resembles Obama's message of hope instead.

    I don't know which political party that is;
    I sure know which political party it isn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. May the opposition parties concentrate their best into their "A" teams and target those weaker GRCs- East Coast, Tampines, Bishan-Toa payoh, Kallang-Moulmein, Bukit Timah,Tanjong Pagar(LKY would stepdown by then) and maybe Marine Parade. Let PAP be slayed by the GRC double-edge sword.

      Delete
    2. Its doable if SDP, NSP and WP plan a joint strategy, NOW!

      Delete
  6. Sim Ann, wake up! You still don't know what is really happening on the ground? You are overpaid, very, very much overpaid. Thought we do not get monkey if we pay well?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I can NEVER accept that a joker and incompetent fool like Teo Ser Luck from a third tier JC a be paid MUCH more than Barrack Obama. No matter how PAP spin the story, it still stinks!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not impressed with TSL. In fact I am ashame to have him as my minister. Speak badly and does not carry himself well.

      Delete
    2. TSL is loyal to his bosses. Dont know if this loyalty is ever called into question when he measures the needs of Sporeans over his loyalty to his party.

      Delete
  8. Dr Mahathir :

    "And in ASEAN. Singapore has done well. But the people seem unhappy. 15% of the population are treated as second class citizens. They are poor. The other countries are so so."

    http://mahathir-mohamad.blogspot.hk/2012/09/merdeka.html

    Now I have no idea where the Dr plucked his data from, but let's say even our neighbour has some quiet insights about the real situation here. Perhaps Ms Sim would like to rebuke him based on her front row seat on the national migration policy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thought Dr.M was being generous, closer to 40% being treated as(closer to)third class citizens.

      Delete
    2. I agree. Maybe there's even another 10-20% from the silent majority who voted for them. They won't speak out because quietly they were also fed up with the overpopulation. But they are smart by relying on the vocal minority to do their voicing for them. So they can remain safe and pure white and noble while still benefiting from the Party's interest (whatever that may be)....

      Delete
    3. I am surprised, if there are people in Singapore who don't understand this divisive statement from Mahathir. Is he really generous in his statement? or he is insinuating that one particular group in Singapore is being discriminated and disadvantaged.

      Delete
    4. /// Anonymous9/07/2012 1:38 PM
      Thought Dr.M was being generous, closer to 40% being treated as(closer to)third class citizens. ///

      He is not being generous. He is being his usual mischievous, megalomaniacal shit stirrer. His 15% of unhappy Singaporeans refer solely to Malays. He thinks Singaporean Malays are under his constituency.

      Delete
    5. /// Anonymous9/07/2012 1:38 PM
      Thought Dr.M was being generous, closer to 40% being treated as(closer to)third class citizens. ///

      He is not being generous. He is being his usual mischievous, megalomaniacal shit stirrer. His 15% of unhappy Singaporeans refer solely to Malays. He thinks Singaporean Malays are under his constituency.

      Delete
  9. Mahathir is a racist. The 15% he's talking about would probably be the Malay population in Spore. Ask him how he treated the other races when he was PM

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LKY - sama sama

      Delete
    2. i am inclined to believe Satan will love LKY more than Mahathir...what do u think?

      Delete
    3. Sim Ann was PPS to LKY for a while.

      Delete
  10. The General Election is long over and the MPs are still more interested in attacking their political opponents rather than focusing on solving real problems. The talk about 'hope', 'heart' and 'home' is all hype. So, what's new?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All these talks are to attract votes. After that back to square one. Heard of Animal Farm?

      Delete
  11. Sim Ann is resolved to speak up against vitriol and hate. That's good. But as a moral being, why is she not resolved to speak up against the widening income gap and the high cost of living which are causing a lot of hardship to ordinary Singaporeans. Ah~, perhaps those are not the flavour of the month.

    It was said that before Kim Jong-un took his seat as the next N. Korea supreme leader, in order to show who's the boss, he ordered the artillery bombardment of Yeongpyeong Island and the torpodo attack on ROKS Cheonan, causing almost 50 innocents dead. If Sim Ann is eyeing Grace Foo's job, she can forget about being a moral being. Until now, I say she is doing fine.

    ReplyDelete
  12. We have a PAP MP here who sees fit for herself to make use of the National Shit Daily to proudly boast of her problem solving skills in resolving some petty neighbourly squabbles while more pressing national issues like inflation, housing transportation, immigration, health costs, etc., seems to be KIV for future attention.

    Aren't there some meditation committee tasked to resolve disputes between neighbors? If it is one of her immediate responsibilities to be personally involved, then shouldn't LKY also an MP, be similarly involved in settling neighborly disputes in his Tanjung Pagar constituency?

    So who was she trying to kid when she said it is one of the MP's responsibilities to be personally involved?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reading her post, I actually think she's handled it very strategically well, to circumvent an episode that she herself said could have been worse. In other words, she is also deeply wishing that she didn't have to personally encounter more of such situations or she'll be very busy solving petty squabbles. Honestly, I am glad she has to personally go through that, and I hope there will be more cases for her to experience so that she realized it's one thing to do your aggressive policy planning on paper without sparring any thoughts for the people who will suffer from it. Justified? You bet.

      You have bite off more than you can chew. So keep chewing.
      The people suffered last 5 years, and you only suffered 5 cases (or not??) and you want us to put a stop to this madness? I expected more resilience from the MP.

      Start putting a whip on your PA & their Integration Team. What the hell are they doing?


      Delete
    2. Strange that "Mrs D" who claims she's been living in singapore for "many years already" is still unable to resolve a neighbourly disagreement that involves the 2 native locals. Is not clear if she is a new neighbor, but surely, anti-foreigners sentiments has only been a new event. And you have to ask why? Does Mrs D have an integration or assimilation issue? Why didn't she get her Mr D who is a local to speak with them instead? What previous relational issues or exchanges had transpired before? Did she bother to find out who Mr/Mrs C care about, their values and their favorite activities? Readers are non the wiser in Sim's case, just like in Mr Shan's case.

      We were told there would be 2m of PRCs/Indians/others who will flood this island. We were told 6m or 8m later that this is the aim. And to then turn around and blame us for taking no responsibility for the share in the xenophobia? That was dangerously inflammatory.

      Delete
  13. Error correction : mediation instead of meditation

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL, when mediation fails, you bet they will start "meditating" that its the people's fault and nothing to do with the government's policies.

      Delete
    2. Mediating or Meditation, as long as there are no depressing or desperate people who will end up in Bedok reservoir, then is good already.

      世界没有解决不了的事情

      Delete
  14. Ironic how she premise it around the question of choice and responsibility.

    Don't recall Singaporeans were consulted on the choice and responsibility of an overpopulated society.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I now understand.
      PAP makes ALL the choices.
      The people resume ALL the actions and responsibilities.
      People's Action Party takes on a new meaning.

      Delete
  15. Politicians can be accused of being distant, cold, heartless. And so the good ruler must not only manage their emotions, but stage-manage them (like saying "sorry"), producing public displays of emotion when needed – Hillary Clinton another prime example. During 2008 Democratic primaries, she was accused of being unfeeling. The next press conference, she produced a tear with all the flourish of a chicken producing an egg. Said she found her voice.

    Glad to read Ms Sim has found her compassion.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The government know all those things that created by them one day may be used against them. For example, GRC; PA; electoral boundaries, HDB upgrading etc. These programs are short term gains and may advantage opposition party which gain governmental seat years later.

    It is a dangerous game to play.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly,
      and yet those PAP clowns ask us "why people hate PAP so much ?"

      PAP create their own game rules and self-serving policies and yet has audacity to tell us "why hate PAP govt ?

      Delete
    2. The idiotic reply should be "You ask me, I ask who?"

      Delete
    3. Imagine you have ruled with iron fist for 50yrs and still want to rule forever. You say competition is gd for people, but when it comes to competition within the political boxing ring, they tell the people who wants democracy or multi-party choices it is rotten idea.

      3m voters and 1 party will meet ALL their needs (happily). You tell me if that is realistic? Mcdonald offers you fish burger or hamburger or french fries or salad or nuggets, at end of the day, is still a fast-food.

      So the broken record continues.

      Delete
  17. Like any well-bred pappies, Sim Ann doesn't seem to get it.

    Neighbour dispute is nothing new. The infamous Everitt Road saga was probably the ugliest it has ever gotten. The good news is, the Chan's family has since moved on. Now, why is Sim Ann bringing foreigner into the picture of a clear-cut neighbour dispute? For goodness sake, many of the issues she have highlighted did not even take place, but a mere figment of her imagination.

    It bets the question, why is she so paranoid? I guess they are fearful because they aren't slowing down the import of foreigners as promised. Sooner or later, Sim Ann's "nightmare" might just become real. Yes, Gerald Giam is right to suggest, ultimately it's the Government's fault for perpetuating its ill-conceived immigration policy.

    ReplyDelete
  18. PIS syndrome9/07/2012 4:38 PM

    Wahlau eh, from US, to Malaysia to North Korea examples, maybe I'll contribute one here, from Canada. Something for Sim Ann to ponder about. Because issues are NOT always one way and so simplistic.

    http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2012/07/29/post-immigration-syndrome/

    ReplyDelete
  19. Aiyo please stop trying to solve a simple problem with a complicated solution. Just vote her out and we are done with her. If you truly believe that she's only carrying out the orders of her Party, just vote the PAP out wholesale. Life is already complicated enough, so let's give ourselves a big break; for me, she is the least problem to sort out.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Before we lay our blame on citizen's hate and prejudice, i want to share a very sharp observation by a commentator here : -
    ---
    By Tan Kok Tim

    If we continue with the elitist-population policies for well-educated locals to have some 30,000 babies a year, we will have to fill the lower end jobs [10,000 to 18,000 in headcount shortfall] with migrants each year.

    If our concerns continue that low-income groups of locals will have duds and more illiterates [18,000 of them a year] and do not wish to encourage them to have babies [relying for only babies from the well educated, have two or more if you can afford it], then we will have to open our doors to fill the lower end jobs with illiterate migrants.

    It is a choice we have to make :
    A) have our own local born of 18,000 or
    B) let in 18,000 each year to fill the low-wage jobs - both "illiterates or duds", but B is an assortment from overseas.

    This choice must be discussed at the National Conversation. Who is the MP who will dare to voice this up in Parliament or at the NC?
    ---

    Just think about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I resent the distinction of "well-educated" and "low income" stratification of society. In the example quoted in this year's national day rally speech, an illiterate construction worker and his uneducated housewife did pretty well, raising a son who ended up with a PhD and a daughter graduating as accountant and working in the civil service. Do people in this day and age actually swallow the flawed eugenics ideas of Lee Kuan Yew?
      The crux of the problem is not what Singaporeans are capable of achieving, but what lies behind the 30,000 babies target. We were a happy nation when the population was 3 to 4 millions, the problems started only when they brought in the hordes - from road sweepers to IT "consultants".
      Back to the NDR example, the guy had to attend Poly probably because the place in the local univ was given to a foreigner. And the poor father had to sacrifice $40,000 for his son to get a degree overseas. All because of problems created by you know who.

      Delete
    2. I still believe LKY's policies were correct at that point of time albeit harsh. Unfortunately, the effectiveness of these policies may have evaporated long ago. Its time for change.

      Delete
  21. Ms Sim, after you have collected enough of molehills, pile them up high enough to form a mountain, then come and talk to us about HATE. Same goes to Mr Shanmugam's Nuisance act.

    I know being overly clever and taking the short cut is very tempting and easier than working through the knots.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ms Sim,
    You have unleashed a monster (influx of foreigners) and now you are unable to control the monster. So you are desperately trying to defend your actions and trying to make us feel ashamed for not welcoming the foreigners. I can hardly wait for 2016 to come round so that you can be kicked out. The PAP sure knows how to inspire hate.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "If you want a 'you're on your own', 'winner take all' society, you should support the Republican ticket.
    If you want a country of shared prosperity and shared responsibility, a 'we're all in this together' society, you should vote for Barrack Obama and Joe Biden."
    Former President Bill Clinton.

    Our brothers-in-arms;
    The Democrats in USA;
    are fighting the same war we are fighting here in Singapore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests.
      We are fighting for our right to live.
      To exist.
      And should we win the day, GE 2016 will no longer be known as just another General Elections Day.

      Instead, it will be the day Singaporeans declared in one voice:
      We will not go quietly into the night!
      We will not vanish without a fight!
      We're going to live on!
      We're going to survive!
      GE 2016.
      We celebrate our Independence Day!

      Delete
    2. There is no difference between the far right Republicans and the PAP. But, maybe there is one: the Republicans left their countrymen jobless by shipping jobs out whilst PAP does likewise by shipping immigrants in.

      Delete
    3. Which brought back the basic question why the hell did LKY openly support the Republicans and voice his opposition against the Democrat President-elect Obama then ?

      He still hasn't tell us the hard truth what made him do that when he doesn't want others to interfere with our internal politics ?

      Delete
    4. Whether American or Singaporean.
      All Neo Conservatives are the same.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

      Neo Conservatives
      or
      Neo CONS

      Delete
  24. Whoever created the problem(s) has the duty to solve them.
    And there is nothing to brag about it.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Calling all true blue Singaporeans!
    Vote the PAP out, wholesale!

    ReplyDelete
  26. "The Government welcomes further debate on how we might fine-tune our population policies." In the first place, was there any debate when this Government opened the floodgates to foreigners in the last 10 years? No amount of fine tuning can reverse the damage already done.

    On local-foreigner relations, she was "particularly moved by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s decision to speak about this issue...It was an example of moral leadership". Ms Sim, give it a break, Ah Loong, your hero, is no paragon of moral leadership, and certainly falls short of being a leader.

    It is said that "immigration in the UK is bordering on a breakdown". The situation here is closer to an explosion, which can only be defused by voting you and your party out.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly 10 years ago in 2002, the national conversation was led by Vivian Bala.
      There was 100 people on the sub-committee.
      10 years later, we have an explosive over-population. I wonder if those people who participated in this big CON approved and contributed to the idea of this 5.2m population?

      If so, then I am very scared what this group will end us with by 2022. They better be very clear about the cost of hdb, the definition of talent, the gdp rate, the children education right down to preschool and their retirement shoebox house drawn up. If they can't, then they really should screw us like the previous batch did.

      Delete
    2. Dear cynic.
      Judge the intentions of Remaking Singapore 2002 by the results achieved in 2012.
      Action speaks louder than words.

      National CON-versation 2012.
      What do you think are the intentions now?

      You want a real National Conversation?
      Talk to the Opposition Parties.

      Delete
    3. Sim Ann most probably was on the committee.
      She ended up in VB's GRC right?
      And she end up in TalentDivision Planning right?
      Maybe she is eager to repeat after her monther's footstep- be the poster girl of a new hegemon PAP. Is that why she has no prejudice against PRCs nor pride being a Singaporean? If a war breaks out between China/SG, whose side is she on?

      http://www.zhui-hong.com/images/press/20100330_StraitsTimes_ChairmanMaosGoodChild.pdf

      Delete
    4. the latest joke going around is that PAP will only slay two sacred cows..the cowpeys and the cowbu. gd luck to everyone on your conversion to holycow.

      Delete
    5. Let's refresh some of the condescending terms MIWs have thrown out:

      Cowboy Towns - Lee Hsien Loong
      Lunatic fringe – Chan Chun Sing
      Cowpeh and Cowbu – Sim Ann

      They make Lee Swee Say looks like a saint when he said he spoke of "deaf frog".

      With all the name calling going around, you can judge for yourselves if they are really interested in hearing and acting on the midde-class's struggle and the downtrodden's plight.

      National Conversation is nothing more than a conversation between the MIWs and their supporters. It's just a tick on their checklist to "engage" the people. Nothing about them has changed. "You're either with us or against us", so said George Bush.

      Delete
    6. As far as I'm concerned, Sinkies have been having a National Conversation in the internet and with Opposition Parties over the last few years.

      In my book, it's been a very constructive, spontaneous and fruitful discussion.

      What's needed now is for Sinkies to ask ourselves;
      Are we ready and willing to slaughter the mother of all sacred cows.
      Are we ready and willing to vote in a regime change?
      Are we ready and willing to move beyond PAP and LKY?

      Delete
    7. With all the OB markers clearly fixed by PM and Minister of Education, there is really no point talking. The National Conversation will be another white elephant.

      Delete
  27. Does our Prime Minister even dares to admit honestly and truthfully that his father LKY is the sacred cow worth slaying?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Ms Sim, what is moral leadership, a term you lavished on the PM? "A moral leader is an individual who governs or makes decisions based on fairness and ethical guidelines, rather than personal, political, or financial considerations".(http//wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_moral_leader). So PM Lee showed great moral leadership when he uttered some airy-fairy words on social behaviour? He is a Gandhi or a Nelson Mandela in your starry eyes? Give me a break! Let's not kid ourselves, all his decisions are geared towards holding on to political power.

    If you want your leader to show real moral leadership, have the courage and political will to remove some of your biased, unethical, unfair sacred cows, like the ISA and GRC, to mention only two - you don't need a national conversation to do these. Is it morally right for you to take this cheap pot shot at Gerald Giam, to sow hatred towards your political opponents? Isn't it hypocrisy to slam others, directly or by innuendo, of spouting hate and vitriol, when you yourself practise it?

    China had a "national conversation" when in 1956 the Communist Party of China launched the Hundred Flowers Movement, encouraging it's citizens to openly criticize the regime and it's policies, to "Let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend." However in 1957 Chairman Mao started a crackdown on dissidents in an Anti-rightist Campaign, and said that he had "enticed the snakes out of their caves." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Flowers_Campaign

    Now Singapore is embarking on a National Conversation involving thousands, and according to the Education Minister, may take more than a year. In the meantime all the hot-button issues will be in limbo. Will the flowers bloom or just fade away? What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm ok with whatever conversations they want but just do us a favour, do it at your own time own target after office hours. Stop squandering and abusing taxpayers money doing all these during office hours. And never say I didn't warn you, don't let us catch you incurring consultancy fees like the ministerial salary review and the COI for SMRT/LTA.
      Thank you
      Xie Xie
      Kam Siah

      Delete
    2. Yes, good point.
      I can't wait for us taxpayers to be presented with the bill for the NatCON 2012.

      Personally, I think the bill should be sent to the Pro Alien Party for payment.
      And not to the Singapore taxpayers.

      Delete
    3. We have the highest paid ministers and I amsurprised they have no idea what the people want or are upset with. What do you think?

      Delete
    4. "China had a "national conversation" when in 1956 the Communist Party of China launched the Hundred Flowers Movement, encouraging it's citizens to openly criticize the regime and it's policies, to "Let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend." However in 1957 Chairman Mao started a crackdown on dissidents in an Anti-rightist Campaign, and said that he had "enticed the snakes out of their caves." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Flowers_Campaign"


      We have already have these wayang nato national conversation in the past, and so much that it is known as 白讲运动 , the equivalent of China Mao's 百花运动 ...

      Anyone agree with me please Kee Chiu

      Delete
  29. 40% of us voted for the Opposition parties.
    Why not Heng talk directly to the Opposition parties?

    I am confident the Opposition parties understand and are capable of representing my views.
    I will let the Opposition Parties speak on my behalf at NatCON 2012.
    No need for me to talk to PAP directly anymore.
    PAP can talk to my representatives.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree. Sim Ann can prove she's the better angel without hate and prejudice by welcoming the diverse voices from Opp parties.
      Please walk the moral high ground, and walk the talk.

      Delete
    2. All western democracies have a natural built-in National Conversation.
      They call it parliamentary democracy.

      Their national conversation takes place in a parliament.
      Where elected representatives, representing their constituencies, voice and debate the issues of the day.
      No 80 year old sacred cows are left unquestioned and unchallenged.

      Delete
    3. Asked why “alternative voices” such as bloggers and opposition MPs were not included in natcon, heng replied: “this is not a partisan exercise”

      There you have it.

      Delete
    4. Hear only the good stuff!

      I thot "inclusive" includes opposition parties and bloggers?

      Delete
    5. With all the problems Singapore is facing.
      Won't National Action 2012 be more appropriate than just a Conversation?

      NATO 2012
      Really no action. talk only.

      Delete
  30. I read the articles by both MPs.

    It was clear to me that Mr Giam has said there was no justification for angry citizens to engage in hate speech. He was stating a fact AFTER PM Lee said his sorry for messing things up at GE2011.

    OTOH, did Ms Sim feel the need to respond because of guilt that the immigration screw up had actually happened during her tenure at Talent Planning Division? Instead of apologizing, she merely acknowledged the tightening was sufficient for now. (In other words, is a comma, not a full-stop until they figure out how to sell this better.) She must felt her gratitude to PM for publicly playing the better angel which save her from further humiliation. Fortunately, the PM has lifted her into the Parliament thinking "You started this smoke, you damn well put out the fire".

    In short, Ms Sim's critiques may or may not be riddled with inexactitudes, but at least it goes to the core issue of her responsibility in this Immigration-gate. Facing the stark choices between 5m or 8m, his "I didn't say it" versus her "I didn't do it", I think the evidence is pretty damning against her role in which she has attempted to shirk off in this prejudiced piece whereby she tried misplacing it on us and Mr Giam.

    Let's hope the IPS has a better plan for the citizens, as opposed to Ms Sim's higher pride.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The "moral leader" has spoken:

    "Leave no stone unturned.... but some stones, after we look at them, the original place was quite nice, we put it back."

    "We discuss the issues but I don't think we are doing everything wrong..."

    So, NatCON is not an exercise in "culling sacred cows". It must then be an exercise in stone turning. People must decide if they want this sort of stone-turning exercise once every 10 years by the same bunch of people with the same mindset.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are we surprised that there is no Opposition members in the 26-member committee, but there are 7 PAP office holders. Non-partisan my foot. Before any conversation has even started, they have already placed their OB-markers. And from the moral leader's own lips: Managing expectations a key challenge. So people, don't set your hopes too high by this NatCon!

      Delete
    2. this is PAP CONversation.
      Not National Conversation.

      Where is the money going to come from?
      PAP should pay for this CONversation.
      Not the taxpayers.

      Delete