Image: Fabrications About The PAP
Image: SG Infernal Affairs
Image: Fabrications About The PAP
Image: Shutdown TRS
Monday, November 30, 2015
[Defending the Lion City] One SAF Clerk's opinion
I'm no warfighter. I think many of us serving our two years in the army aren't. But I know of a good number of people who, at moment's notice, are more than willing to get up, put on their Full Battle Order, and defend Singapore.
Because we know what is at stake. Because we know that the peace we enjoy is not free. Because we know how much blood sweat and tears was poured into the building of this miracle nation.
When we leave home everyday and tell our family we love them, we look in their eyes and we know what we fight for, what we defend. We know we have the luxury of coming back home to a house intact, a family intact. Many people in war torn zones don't get this chance we take for granted.
When we walk past a mosque next to a temple next to a church, we know this is something completely inorganic. That it took and still takes effort, understanding, racial harmony, to enjoy such things as non-event.
You type from your office chair in your 8-5 job in your air conditioned room, which you drove to in your air conditioned car, and mock the preparedness of the SAF in the event an incursion occurs.
But you forget, not everybody passed out a lance corporal like you, unfulfilled and bitter that the government "stole" two years of your life. And whilst everybody counted down to their ORD the same way you did, they didn't waste their two years lamenting the fact.
"And they all learned things you complainers and naysayers of the SAF never will : purpose, camaraderie, drive, determination, grit, sacrifice."
They learnt to accustom themselves to communal living, they lost their hair, wore the same number 4 as everyone else, ran in the same PT kit as everyone else, and learnt that in the army, there was no strata. The bungalow kid and the HDB kid all slept on the same beds, ate the same food, got punished all the same. Army was and still is the great equalizer.
The Haircut that marks the sometimes emotional transition from civilian to soldier
Then some went on to go through 9 months of vigorous training, many attritioning throughout the course. Those that made it, we call them officers. Others went on to don three chevrons, spending 6 months in the grueling hell they call Sergeant Cadet School.
Most get sent to the Infantry Regiments, 1 to 12 SIR as riflemen, and as they say, life for them is 2 years of Tekong. Not to forget those that got sent to commandos, guards, naval diver unit. They all became more comfortable in the humid forest, drenched in perspiration, long 4 covered in mud, than you ever will be in your crisp white shirt and business pants.
And they all learned things you complainers and naysayers of the SAF never will : purpose, camaraderie, drive, determination, grit, sacrifice.
You pay 200 a month for a manicured gym to go to with towels provided, protein shake bars, steam and shower rooms. The jungle is their gym. Flipping tyres, running in the full heat of the sun.
You haven't seen the Master Warrant Officers who have badges so plentiful, they run out of space on their uniform to sew it on. The ones with ranger and guard tabs. The ones who went to America, trained as navy seals, and passed out navy seals. Yes, we have navy seals in Singapore, and they are Singaporean.
The ones who everyday, hold themselves to the highest standards in the execution of their jobs, because they know, they're not just doing a job for a pay : they're keeping Singapore safe.
So that naysayers like you who passed out lance corporal with neither testimony nor combat skills badge can mock the very system and organization that allows you the safety and peace of mind to even think of mocking them.
I know these soldiers, I know these men, I've seen these enciks. They might drink beer and talk nonsense while off duty, and you dismiss and discount them, but inside they possess the grit you never will. They are proud to be part of the SAF, and their stories, scars and experiences they will forever carry with them as badges of honor. They've done much and gone through much worth remembering, i can't say the same for you complainers.
A Master Warrant Officer who is a special ops commando once told me this : "why 国家 and not 家国? Because if there is no country, can you even have a home?"
These people who do, and not just talk, have all my respect.
Yours sincerely, a clerk in the SAF.
Source:
And they all learned things you complainers and naysayers of the SAF never will : purpose, camaraderie, drive, determination, grit, sacrifice.
You pay 200 a month for a manicured gym to go to with towels provided, protein shake bars, steam and shower rooms. The jungle is their gym. Flipping tyres, running in the full heat of the sun.
You haven't seen the Master Warrant Officers who have badges so plentiful, they run out of space on their uniform to sew it on. The ones with ranger and guard tabs. The ones who went to America, trained as navy seals, and passed out navy seals. Yes, we have navy seals in Singapore, and they are Singaporean.
The ones who everyday, hold themselves to the highest standards in the execution of their jobs, because they know, they're not just doing a job for a pay : they're keeping Singapore safe.
So that naysayers like you who passed out lance corporal with neither testimony nor combat skills badge can mock the very system and organization that allows you the safety and peace of mind to even think of mocking them.
I know these soldiers, I know these men, I've seen these enciks. They might drink beer and talk nonsense while off duty, and you dismiss and discount them, but inside they possess the grit you never will. They are proud to be part of the SAF, and their stories, scars and experiences they will forever carry with them as badges of honor. They've done much and gone through much worth remembering, i can't say the same for you complainers.
A Master Warrant Officer who is a special ops commando once told me this : "why 国家 and not 家国? Because if there is no country, can you even have a home?"
These people who do, and not just talk, have all my respect.
Yours sincerely, a clerk in the SAF.
Source:
Mark Farha Kon Facebook
Friday, November 27, 2015
hahaha.... Reform Party Chief claims that declining productivity will lead to a full blown recession!
 |
| Image: Shut Down TRS |
Look at Kenneth Jeyaretnam trying to pull a fast one by claiming our declining productivity will lead to a full blown recession!
Come on leh, there are many economic factors that causes full blown recessions and declining productivitiy isn't one of them!
FYI based on our lastest MTI report, productivity have actually stabilized at 0% which fared must better than the past and our economic outlook isn't as bleak as this Kenneth made out to be!
[Labour productivity, as measured by value-added per worker, was unchanged (0.0 per cent growth) in the third quarter compared to the same period a year ago. This represented an improvement from the five consecutive quarters of negative growth.]
Source: https://www.mti.gov.sg/
Come on leh, there are many economic factors that causes full blown recessions and declining productivitiy isn't one of them!
FYI based on our lastest MTI report, productivity have actually stabilized at 0% which fared must better than the past and our economic outlook isn't as bleak as this Kenneth made out to be!
[Labour productivity, as measured by value-added per worker, was unchanged (0.0 per cent growth) in the third quarter compared to the same period a year ago. This represented an improvement from the five consecutive quarters of negative growth.]
Source: https://www.mti.gov.sg/
Source
Shut Down TRS
Ensuring there's enough water - always
The Linggiu Reservoir in Johor is FIVE TIMES LARGER than all of the 17
reservoirs put together. It was constructed by the PUB following a 1990
treaty supplementary to Singapore's 1962 Water Agreement with Malaysia.
Image: Singapore Matters
Not many people know that there are 17 freshwater reservoirs in Singapore, or that we have a large reservoir across the Causeway in Johor.
Constructed by the PUB following a 1990 treaty supplementary to Singapore's 1962 Water Agreement with Malaysia, the Linggiu Reservoir dwarfs them all. In fact, with an 18km girth and 55 sq km in area, Linggiu is five times larger than all of Singapore's other reservoirs combined.
RESERVOIR STOCK RUNNING LOW
Two weeks ago, my boss, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Masagos Zulkifli, made the bumpy trek to Linggiu. He did so with one aim: to tell the Singaporean public that - because of persistent dry weather - Linggiu Reservoir is more than half empty and that, while water supply in Singapore remains steady and resilient, the dry weather may eventually also affect us.
As I write, several parts of Johor Baru are well into the fourth month of water rationing. Many of Johor's own reservoirs are at critically low levels and a "one-day-on- two-days-off" scheduled water supply has been in operation since early August. The water authority there has asked PUB to augment its supply during this period with an additional five million gallons a day (mgd) of potable water from our treatment plant in Johor, which we readily agreed to do.
Imported water - which can meet half of Singapore's daily demand for drinking water - is under threat and steadily depleting, but the taps continue to flow for consumers here. This is an unappreciated blessing. For sure, this outcome is not in any way due to good fortune. It stems from long and careful planning, and conscientious implementation by PUB and other parts of the Government.
Singapore's continued ability to ensure water security and sustainability guarantees our national survival and economic prosperity. This was the case at Independence and it remains so now, when Singapore has turned 50.
Singapore's current demand for water is approximately 400 mgd, roughly 730 Olympic-size pools full of the life-giving stuff, with each person using an average of 150 litres a day.
As industry and commerce grow and our population increases, the demand for water can only rise. We expect total demand to double by 2061, to 800 mgd. This is also around the time our 99-year water agreement with Malaysia will end.
By 2030, 15 years from now, total demand would have reached 560 mgd, or a third more than today's.
This is water that we do not have now - water that we will need to find and treat.
Singapore's continued ability to ensure water security and sustainability guarantees our national survival and economic prosperity. This was the case at Independence and it remains so now, when Singapore has turned 50.
Singapore's current demand for water is approximately 400 mgd, roughly 730 Olympic-size pools full of the life-giving stuff, with each person using an average of 150 litres a day.
As industry and commerce grow and our population increases, the demand for water can only rise. We expect total demand to double by 2061, to 800 mgd. This is also around the time our 99-year water agreement with Malaysia will end.
By 2030, 15 years from now, total demand would have reached 560 mgd, or a third more than today's.
This is water that we do not have now - water that we will need to find and treat.
 |
| Image: Fabrications about the PAP |
There is just not enough space in Singapore to collect and store all the water that we need.
Although right on the Equator and in the tropics, Singapore is actually a severely water-challenged country. We spend a lot of time and devote a lot of resources in planning for the future. PUB always builds ahead of demand. Construction of Singapore's third desalination plant will soon commence. Plans for a fourth have just been announced. And you can be sure that we are busy working on the one after that.
Water security is a matter of life and death for us in Singapore. Our existence as a sovereign nation is directly contingent on enduring water security. The late Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's first Prime Minister, recognised this fact from day one, and worked tirelessly throughout his life to secure our water future. He once said: "Water dominated every other policy. Every other policy had to bend at the knees for water survival."
Singapore's water strategy comes in three parts. First of all, we have to maximise our own yield. So we strive to collect every drop of rain that falls here. This means turning as much of Singapore as possible into a water catchment, and keeping our drains, canals and waterways pristine.
Second, we have to think of water as an endlessly reusable resource. In our minds, the H2O molecule is never lost. Water can always be reclaimed and re-treated so that it can be drunk again.
PUB is a world leader in this. Today, we are able to turn wastewater into sweet water for very little money. We reclaim every drop of sewage and turn much of it into drinking water again.
And third, because Singapore is surrounded by sea, we turn seawater into drinking water. When membrane separation technology made desalination economically viable, PUB adopted it with great zeal. And we continue to research better desalination technology to find less expensive ways of desalting water.
Our plan, in the long run, is for fully 80 per cent of Singapore's water needs to be met by desalinated and recycled water.
TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION, INGENUITY
The future of water security in Singapore may lie with desalination and reuse, but we also know that if we just do more of the same, the next drop of water will always be more expensive to collect, to treat and to deliver. So, PUB is always looking for new ways of doing things, new innovations that will let us produce water cheaper, and in an easier way.
Because the heavens do not give us enough water or the space to keep it, we have looked to clever science and high technology, and to human ingenuity, for improvements... It will be technology and innovation that will allow us to collect and clean our wastewater, and continue to keep our soil, rivers, lakes and seas clean and hospitable.
We are crystal clear about achieving three outcomes for research and innovation in the water sector: to increase water resources; lower the cost of production; and improve security and system resilience.
In order to achieve and sustain these outcomes, PUB has invested and continues to invest a lot of money in water-related scientific research, in nurturing human talent in water technology and engineering, and in actively developing a thriving and globally competitive water industry.
Water R&D is an exciting and fast-moving area. The cutting-edge science that PUB is supporting in research laboratories all over Singapore suggests that we are on the cusp of realising some truly game-changing technologies. Let me provide a few examples.
• Desalination may be weather- resistant, but it is energy- intensive and a costly means of making seawater drinkable. Working with collaborators, PUB is ready to demonstrate electro-deionisation - the use of a new separation technology - as a far more energy-efficient way of taking salt out of seawater. But why stop there? Mother Nature, as always, does it best. Mangrove and fish in the sea need fresh water too, and they are able to remove excess salt with minimal effort. Biomimicry offers great promise and is another area of research that we have devoted considerable resources to.
• PUB engineers who have made wastewater treatment their life work will tell you that there is "gold" in sewage. Sludge, an inevitable by-product of sewage treatment, is concentrated organic material. Energy can be readily recovered from sewage sludge in the form of methane gas. Because sludge management technology is advancing by the day, modern sewage treatment facilities are fast becoming waste-to-energy plants. PUB's planned Tuas Water Reclamation Plant will be just that. To be developed jointly with the National Environment Agency's Integrated Waste Management Facility, this combined unit will be a world first, bringing unprecedented synergies in terms of land use, energy savings and operational efficiency.
• Leaky pipes are enemy No. 1 for water network engineers. It is quite senseless to expend effort and energy in making water potable only to lose it through leaks in the water transmission network. Losses because of leaks are a perennial challenge for water utilities the world over, and the water systems in some countries can lose as much as half of their production due to leaks. Despite fastidious attention to finding and plugging pipe leaks here, keeping our losses at the current 5 per cent is a daily challenge for our engineers and technicians. Again, technology offers a solution. PUB is busy fitting out our extensive water conveyance network, most of which is underground, with sophisticated pressure and acoustic sensors. These not only detect pipeline ruptures, but careful study of sensor data will even help us predict imminent leaks before they happen, allowing us to do pre-emptive repairs.
Despite severely limiting geographic constraints, today's Singapore is not short of water.
As long as we at PUB continue to be smart and clear-eyed about our nation's water situation, and do our work well, there should always be enough water. This is possible only because we have used our imagination, researching and testing continuously, and have exploited technology to overcome our water challenges.
In this way, we have turned disadvantage into strength, and seemingly insurmountable vulnerability into endless opportunity.
Water security is a matter of life and death for us in Singapore. Our existence as a sovereign nation is directly contingent on enduring water security. The late Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's first Prime Minister, recognised this fact from day one, and worked tirelessly throughout his life to secure our water future. He once said: "Water dominated every other policy. Every other policy had to bend at the knees for water survival."
Singapore's water strategy comes in three parts. First of all, we have to maximise our own yield. So we strive to collect every drop of rain that falls here. This means turning as much of Singapore as possible into a water catchment, and keeping our drains, canals and waterways pristine.
Second, we have to think of water as an endlessly reusable resource. In our minds, the H2O molecule is never lost. Water can always be reclaimed and re-treated so that it can be drunk again.
PUB is a world leader in this. Today, we are able to turn wastewater into sweet water for very little money. We reclaim every drop of sewage and turn much of it into drinking water again.
And third, because Singapore is surrounded by sea, we turn seawater into drinking water. When membrane separation technology made desalination economically viable, PUB adopted it with great zeal. And we continue to research better desalination technology to find less expensive ways of desalting water.
Our plan, in the long run, is for fully 80 per cent of Singapore's water needs to be met by desalinated and recycled water.
TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION, INGENUITY
The future of water security in Singapore may lie with desalination and reuse, but we also know that if we just do more of the same, the next drop of water will always be more expensive to collect, to treat and to deliver. So, PUB is always looking for new ways of doing things, new innovations that will let us produce water cheaper, and in an easier way.
Because the heavens do not give us enough water or the space to keep it, we have looked to clever science and high technology, and to human ingenuity, for improvements... It will be technology and innovation that will allow us to collect and clean our wastewater, and continue to keep our soil, rivers, lakes and seas clean and hospitable.
We are crystal clear about achieving three outcomes for research and innovation in the water sector: to increase water resources; lower the cost of production; and improve security and system resilience.
In order to achieve and sustain these outcomes, PUB has invested and continues to invest a lot of money in water-related scientific research, in nurturing human talent in water technology and engineering, and in actively developing a thriving and globally competitive water industry.
Water R&D is an exciting and fast-moving area. The cutting-edge science that PUB is supporting in research laboratories all over Singapore suggests that we are on the cusp of realising some truly game-changing technologies. Let me provide a few examples.
• Desalination may be weather- resistant, but it is energy- intensive and a costly means of making seawater drinkable. Working with collaborators, PUB is ready to demonstrate electro-deionisation - the use of a new separation technology - as a far more energy-efficient way of taking salt out of seawater. But why stop there? Mother Nature, as always, does it best. Mangrove and fish in the sea need fresh water too, and they are able to remove excess salt with minimal effort. Biomimicry offers great promise and is another area of research that we have devoted considerable resources to.
• PUB engineers who have made wastewater treatment their life work will tell you that there is "gold" in sewage. Sludge, an inevitable by-product of sewage treatment, is concentrated organic material. Energy can be readily recovered from sewage sludge in the form of methane gas. Because sludge management technology is advancing by the day, modern sewage treatment facilities are fast becoming waste-to-energy plants. PUB's planned Tuas Water Reclamation Plant will be just that. To be developed jointly with the National Environment Agency's Integrated Waste Management Facility, this combined unit will be a world first, bringing unprecedented synergies in terms of land use, energy savings and operational efficiency.
• Leaky pipes are enemy No. 1 for water network engineers. It is quite senseless to expend effort and energy in making water potable only to lose it through leaks in the water transmission network. Losses because of leaks are a perennial challenge for water utilities the world over, and the water systems in some countries can lose as much as half of their production due to leaks. Despite fastidious attention to finding and plugging pipe leaks here, keeping our losses at the current 5 per cent is a daily challenge for our engineers and technicians. Again, technology offers a solution. PUB is busy fitting out our extensive water conveyance network, most of which is underground, with sophisticated pressure and acoustic sensors. These not only detect pipeline ruptures, but careful study of sensor data will even help us predict imminent leaks before they happen, allowing us to do pre-emptive repairs.
Despite severely limiting geographic constraints, today's Singapore is not short of water.
As long as we at PUB continue to be smart and clear-eyed about our nation's water situation, and do our work well, there should always be enough water. This is possible only because we have used our imagination, researching and testing continuously, and have exploited technology to overcome our water challenges.
In this way, we have turned disadvantage into strength, and seemingly insurmountable vulnerability into endless opportunity.
Mr Ng Joo Hee, 49, leads PUB, Singapore's national water agency.
In this role, he is responsible for the supply of potable water, the
reclamation and treatment of used water, and the management of storm
water in Singapore. He also holds a concurrent appointment as the Deputy
Secretary (Special Duties) in the Ministry of the Environment and Water
Resources.
Source:
Straits Times
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ensuring-theres-enough-water-always?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#xtor=CS1-10[Defending the Lion City] US eyes Singapore-made troop carrier
The Terrex is being used by the Singapore Armed Forces to provide foot soldiers with added cover and speed in the battlefield. PHOTO: ST KINETICS
By Jermyn Chow, Nov 26, 2015, 5:00 am SGT, ST
The Singapore-made Terrex 2 armoured infantry carrier has been shortlisted by the United States Marine Corps as the war machine that could be ferrying the elite troops to war zones as soon as 2020.
If chosen, the eight-wheeled amphibious vehicle will replace the ageing and lumbering troop carriers that the marines have been using since the 1970s.
2 SIR in an urban operations exercise with the Terrex personnel carrier at the Murai Urban Training Facility
Today, the Terrex is being used by the Singapore Armed Forces to provide foot soldiers with added cover and speed in the battlefield. It also gives them invaluable near real-time updates of enemy and friendly troop positions.
Clinching the Marine Corps deal, worth some US$1.5 billion (S$2.1
billion), will be the biggest coup for Singapore Technologies (ST)
Kinetics, which designed and built the Terrex 2.
The defence contractor also sold more than 100 Warthog - also known as the Bronco - armoured personnel carriers to the British military in 2008 for $330 million.
ST Kinetics' rival in the two-year- long evaluation is British defence manufacturer BAE Systems.
The Pentagon on Tuesday said each firm will have to build 16 vehicles to be delivered from January till 2017 for field tests, with the eventual winner producing more than 200 vehicles by 2020.
For this project, ST Kinetics is teaming up with US defence firm Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). The Fortune 500 scientific, engineering and technology company, based in Virginia, will be in charge of wiring up the Terrex's weapons systems, among other things.
The Singapore-US consortium beat three other rivals, including industry heavyweight Lockheed Martin, to get this far.
Mr Jon Grevatt, Asia-Pacific defence industry analyst at military publication IHS Jane's, said it was an achievement for ST Kinetics to emerge as a serious contender for a major US military contract, adding: "Singapore's defence technology community is moving in the right direction and Singapore's continual investments in indigenous capabilities are paying off."
He noted that many countries, faced with shrinking defence budgets, want to get bang for their buck with customised, rather than off-the-shelf, capabilities.
"ST Kinetics knows it cannot just export now. It's about joining hands with foreign companies with local know-how to accurately meet the market's demand."
Sources:
Straits Times
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/us-eyes-spore-troop-carrier?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#xtor=CS1-10
The defence contractor also sold more than 100 Warthog - also known as the Bronco - armoured personnel carriers to the British military in 2008 for $330 million.
A ‘Warthog’ Fighting Vehicle is pictured on patrol in the Loy Mandah District of Afghanistan, during an operation to clear out an insurgent hotspot. - ThinkDefence.co.uk
The Pentagon on Tuesday said each firm will have to build 16 vehicles to be delivered from January till 2017 for field tests, with the eventual winner producing more than 200 vehicles by 2020.
For this project, ST Kinetics is teaming up with US defence firm Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). The Fortune 500 scientific, engineering and technology company, based in Virginia, will be in charge of wiring up the Terrex's weapons systems, among other things.
The driver's console features increased digitisation, with two touch screen consoles facilitating speedy access to information and settings on the vehicle's health, driving configuration, and other critical functions. Instead of physical gauges located out of the driver's immediate visibility, dashboard information is overlaid on the LCD display immediately underneath the viewports to improve usability and driving safety. (ST Kinetics)
The Singapore-US consortium beat three other rivals, including industry heavyweight Lockheed Martin, to get this far.
Mr Jon Grevatt, Asia-Pacific defence industry analyst at military publication IHS Jane's, said it was an achievement for ST Kinetics to emerge as a serious contender for a major US military contract, adding: "Singapore's defence technology community is moving in the right direction and Singapore's continual investments in indigenous capabilities are paying off."
He noted that many countries, faced with shrinking defence budgets, want to get bang for their buck with customised, rather than off-the-shelf, capabilities.
"ST Kinetics knows it cannot just export now. It's about joining hands with foreign companies with local know-how to accurately meet the market's demand."
Sources:
Straits Times
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/us-eyes-spore-troop-carrier?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#xtor=CS1-10
Read more about the Terrex 2 here:
IHS Jane's 360 - ST Kinetics unveils next-generation Terrex 2 amphibious armoured vehicle
http://www.janes.com/article/54107/st-kinetics-unveils-next-generation-terrex-2-amphibious-armoured-vehicle
FoxtrotAlpha - One Of These Will Be The Next U.S. Marines Amphibious Combat Vehicle
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/one-of-these-will-be-the-next-u-s-marines-amphibious-1746202361
FoxtrotAlpha - One Of These Will Be The Next U.S. Marines Amphibious Combat Vehicle
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/one-of-these-will-be-the-next-u-s-marines-amphibious-1746202361
[The Home Team] Officers go beyond the Call of Duty
 |
| Source: Fabrications about the PAP |
On 23 October 2015 at about 11:30pm, off-duty police officer Staff Sergeant (SSGT) Muhammad Fareez bin Makmor had just picked up his girlfriend, paramedic Ms Nurul Fatin binte Naim from Yishun Fire Station after her shift. Whilst riding off on his motorcycle, they heard a commotion and saw a group of men running away, leaving behind a victim who was limping and bleeding from the head.
Concerned, SSGT Fareez immediately turned around while Ms Nurul, 22, quickly got off the motorcycle to administer first aid to the injured man. She said, “As a paramedic, it was second nature for me. I sat him down on the kerb and tried to stop the bleeding.” The injured man told SSGT Fareez that the group of unknown men had kicked and punched him. “I knew that I had to prevent the suspects from getting away as an assault had occurred”, said the 27-year-old officer from Bukit Timah Neighbourhood Police Centre.
Realising that he was outnumbered, SSGT Fareez decided to approach officers at the fire station for help. Without hesitation, 24-year-old Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) fire fighter Sergeant (SGT) Muhammad Khairi Bin Abdullah came to his aid. He hopped onto SSGT Fareez’s motorcycle and both officers gave chase.
The officers subsequently spotted two of the suspects along the main road of Yishun Avenue 2. SGT Khairi got off the motorcycle and started pursuing the suspects on foot while SSGT Fareez made a u-turn so he could intercept the path of the suspects from the front. SSGT Fareez managed to detain one of the suspects, while SGT Khairi managed to catch up and pin the second suspect down as well. Both suspects were arrested by responding police officers from Ang Mo Kio Division. 6 other subjects were subsequently arrested in relation to the case of rioting, and investigations are ongoing.
Reflecting on the incident, SCDF officer SGT Khairi said, “While chasing suspects is not something I’ve had experience with, I responded because help was needed. I feel a great sense of accomplishment in assisting with the arrest.” On why he decided to respond even though he was off-duty, SSGT Fareez said, “It was instinctive. As a police officer, I feel that it is my duty to protect the public and nab the suspects. Of course, I was able to do so with the help and cooperation from my Home Team colleagues and I am thankful for that.”
Realising that he was outnumbered, SSGT Fareez decided to approach officers at the fire station for help. Without hesitation, 24-year-old Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) fire fighter Sergeant (SGT) Muhammad Khairi Bin Abdullah came to his aid. He hopped onto SSGT Fareez’s motorcycle and both officers gave chase.
The officers subsequently spotted two of the suspects along the main road of Yishun Avenue 2. SGT Khairi got off the motorcycle and started pursuing the suspects on foot while SSGT Fareez made a u-turn so he could intercept the path of the suspects from the front. SSGT Fareez managed to detain one of the suspects, while SGT Khairi managed to catch up and pin the second suspect down as well. Both suspects were arrested by responding police officers from Ang Mo Kio Division. 6 other subjects were subsequently arrested in relation to the case of rioting, and investigations are ongoing.
Reflecting on the incident, SCDF officer SGT Khairi said, “While chasing suspects is not something I’ve had experience with, I responded because help was needed. I feel a great sense of accomplishment in assisting with the arrest.” On why he decided to respond even though he was off-duty, SSGT Fareez said, “It was instinctive. As a police officer, I feel that it is my duty to protect the public and nab the suspects. Of course, I was able to do so with the help and cooperation from my Home Team colleagues and I am thankful for that.”
Source:
Singapore Police Force
https://www.facebook.com/singaporepoliceforce/photos/a.449307704407.236365.56706929407/10154451234544408/?type=3
Straits Times
MustShareNews
Tuesday, November 24, 2015
[Defending the Lion City] A CO’s Personal Note to His Battalion
 |
| 823 SIR |
To Officers, Specialists and Men of 823 SIR.
Dear family,
Family. That's what we have become.
It has been my tremendous joy and privilege to serve you as your CO in the last 7 years, culminating this year at our ATEC 2 evaluation. Though we missed the REDCON 1 grading, I'm very proud to say that we have left a legacy for Battalions to aspire to.
Honestly, I was bitterly disappointed, likewise many of you. We would have never been disappointed if we did not believe. You believed. The depth of your disappointment demonstrates the depth of your commitment to the cause. You believed with your heart, mind and soul.
You were all in.
To put this in perspective, the REDCON 1 grading was only awarded in history to 3 active battalions, with 1st CDO Bn the ultimate example. No NS battalions have ever been awarded REDCON 1. To know that we came so close shows the impact you have made in our military history. The REDCON 1 grading, as it stands today, remains perhaps a bridge too far for NS Battalions with aging bodies and who come together only once a year for a short 2 weeks. Even full time battalions with young and conditioned soldiers could not achieve this "Gold" standard.
823 SIR, we are not at the pinnacle of readiness condition. This I can concede. This is not our day job. But you have given REDCON 1 a run for it's money. Yet, you have demonstrated something that even active battalions can only aspire to. You have heart, a REDCON 1 heart.
In my 26 years wearing the uniform, I've not experienced a battalion like 823 SIR. When we first came together 7 years ago, crafting our mission statement, we put in place the foundations of what 823 SIR would become.
Our mission statement as it stood then and stands now: One family with unwavering passion to excel in the protection of our home. Our emphasis was on "family".
If we would become a family, we would serve because we want to, not because we have to. This was the philosophy undergirding my leadership thinking throughout the last 7 years. We had an idea that if we emphasized relationship and care, we can obtain a greater buy-in than what we could achieve by mere military regimentation. We suspected that we will achieve something significant together. You have proven this. Again and again.
Some notable moments and awards 823 SIR has achieved:
- The first and only Bn to turn operational in our 2nd year. Today NS Battalions turn operational in their 4th year.
- Runners Up in the Army Half-Marathon Competition amongst NS Units. We were #1 in 2 PDF and our BDE.
- Best Unit in Evaluation in 2014.
- Best Unit in Safety in 2014.
- Most Qualified Commanders Award in 2014.
- You volunteered to form the marching contingent for our BDE for the DIV COMD COC, where more than 90% came from 823 SIR.
I have been overwhelmed by the commitment of 823 SIR. We have commanders and men asking for medical upgrades so that they can participate in outfield exercises. We have men with expectant wives or newborns coming in for ICT. We have men who were married over the weekend showing up for ICT. We even had someone who had just overcome cancer coming outfield with us. We have men whose employers request for deferments but pleaded with me to reject their deferments. You have become an enigma to CHRC and all active personnel who handle administration. This can't be an NS unit! Perhaps a compliment you can be proud of is when commanders and men from other units doing MUT with us, write letters asking to be transferred to 823 SIR!
Personally, leading 823 SIR has made me a better leader. Being an officer of the SAF, the Officer's Creed has become even more real to me. The most significant portion is as follows: I am an officer of the Singapore Armed Forces. My duty is to lead, to excel and to overcome. I lead my men by example. I answer for their training, morale and discipline.
RSM and myself decided to identity with you as many of you went through the Combat Skills Badge qualification during your active time. And so we took on the challenge of qualifying for this at our ripe old age of 40+++. Throughout the CSB journey, I was constantly questioning myself if I really wanted to do this. Perhaps this was our baptism of fire that hardened our resolve to see 823 SIR succeed.
In the last 4 years, you have spurred me to achieve "Gold" in IPPT. As CO, this was to me a part of my commitment to leading you. The 4 years of unbroken IPPT Gold was the longest I have achieved in the SAF. This even coming at an age when it takes so much more.
This year's ICT has been the most fulfilling. Walking around the Coy lines, I encounter ready smiles and greetings. I received salutes and compliments from commanders and men, at a frequency unheard of even in active battalions and training schools today. I hear joyful batter and laughter amongst brothers in arms. There was an atmosphere of freedom and willingness. I watched you put on your equipment and head out for training, there was no dragging of feet but only cheerful dispositions and determination to do well. Thinking of this right now brings a smile to my face.
I remember the day we moved out for our last combat exercise together as a battalion. You were decked out in war paint loaded up onto the military vehicles. My heart swelled with pride. I was thoroughly enjoying each moment. Later, a well-meaning officer from another unit remarked that we shouldn't have applied our camo so early. I thought in my heart, you don't know my 823, we wouldn't want it any other way.
The whole exercise, over the course of 4 days, was the most fulfilling exercise I have ever participated in. You were ready for anything thrown at you. Much of the exercise play and ground conditions presented dilemmas to you but you met each challenge with a great attitude and dogged determination. The example of note was when the whole battalion helped fill sandbags for Delta Coy when she was called away on a Frag-O mission. The final battle demonstrated your resilience, that nearing the end of 4 exhausting days, you were up to the task and defeated the enemy thrown into your sectors.
The Bn HQ functioned like a well-oiled machine. The performance during the final battle can only be described as a symphony, with each cell working in tandem to provide updates and execute orders. It was a beautiful sight to behold.
Alas, despite all your heart and commitment, REDCON 1 remained elusive. Because we aimed for the stars, 823 you have reached the moon. This has been our destiny and this will be our legacy. I doubt that I will ever command a finer battalion. You will forever remain in my heart as the best of the best.
You have distinguished yourselves and you can always hold your head up high. The story of 823 will be told to your families and generations of soldiers entering NS in the days to come. I wish each one of you the very best in your families, careers and health.
God bless always.
Darren Tan
CO 823 SIR
================================================
This account by the CO of 823 SIR is remarkable and inspirational.
The amount of effort that has to put in by the Officers and Specs of the unit in order to build up to such an admirable level of cohesion and commitment is truly amazing, herculean even.
And the response from the men are equally astounding, even unbelievable if this had not be collaborated by the comments found on the CO's facebook post.
When you are faced with three hundred or so men who have been called away from their families, loved ones and careers, it's not always an easy or pleasant task. Not everyone is as patriotic. Not everyone sees their reservist time as serving a larger noble cause. Not everyone likes it. Some just downright hate it.
I've been with 2 different NS units and I know how hard it is just to keep the men generally satisfied with the training program and logistics.
Mr Tan, Sir you are simply amazing.
The SAF should really work with you and your men to find out exactly what you did right and try to spread it to the other NS units.
But there is one thing that 823 SIR has certainly shown us, is that when you have men that are deeply committed to each other like family, nothing can stop them.
Update: Here is a screen-cap of the comments on the CO's post (as of 8 Dec 15)
Sources:
Darren Tan - A CO’s Personal Note to His Battalion
https://www.facebook.com/notes/darren-tan/a-cos-personal-note-to-his-battalion/10153060133321076
Mothership's reaction to the CO's note - http://mothership.sg/2015/11/according-to-this-commanding-officer-the-camaraderie-of-823-sir-is-too-damn-high/
The New paper - Band of brothers: The extraordinary morale in 823 SIR
http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore-news/extraordinary-morale-ns-unit?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook
This year's ICT has been the most fulfilling. Walking around the Coy lines, I encounter ready smiles and greetings. I received salutes and compliments from commanders and men, at a frequency unheard of even in active battalions and training schools today. I hear joyful batter and laughter amongst brothers in arms. There was an atmosphere of freedom and willingness. I watched you put on your equipment and head out for training, there was no dragging of feet but only cheerful dispositions and determination to do well. Thinking of this right now brings a smile to my face.
COMMANDING
OFFICER: LTC (NS) Darren Tan (front) places emphasis on bonding and
teamwork. - See more at:
http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore-news/extraordinary-morale-ns-unit?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#sthash.wjZCblG0.dpuf
COMMANDING OFFICER: LTC (NS) Darren Tan (front) places emphasis on bonding and teamwork.
COMMANDING
OFFICER: LTC (NS) Darren Tan (front) places emphasis on bonding and
teamwork. - See more at:
http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore-news/extraordinary-morale-ns-unit?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#sthash.wjZCblG0.dpuf
I remember the day we moved out for our last combat exercise together as a battalion. You were decked out in war paint loaded up onto the military vehicles. My heart swelled with pride. I was thoroughly enjoying each moment. Later, a well-meaning officer from another unit remarked that we shouldn't have applied our camo so early. I thought in my heart, you don't know my 823, we wouldn't want it any other way.
The whole exercise, over the course of 4 days, was the most fulfilling exercise I have ever participated in. You were ready for anything thrown at you. Much of the exercise play and ground conditions presented dilemmas to you but you met each challenge with a great attitude and dogged determination. The example of note was when the whole battalion helped fill sandbags for Delta Coy when she was called away on a Frag-O mission. The final battle demonstrated your resilience, that nearing the end of 4 exhausting days, you were up to the task and defeated the enemy thrown into your sectors.
The Bn HQ functioned like a well-oiled machine. The performance during the final battle can only be described as a symphony, with each cell working in tandem to provide updates and execute orders. It was a beautiful sight to behold.
Alas, despite all your heart and commitment, REDCON 1 remained elusive. Because we aimed for the stars, 823 you have reached the moon. This has been our destiny and this will be our legacy. I doubt that I will ever command a finer battalion. You will forever remain in my heart as the best of the best.
You have distinguished yourselves and you can always hold your head up high. The story of 823 will be told to your families and generations of soldiers entering NS in the days to come. I wish each one of you the very best in your families, careers and health.
God bless always.
Darren Tan
CO 823 SIR
================================================
This account by the CO of 823 SIR is remarkable and inspirational.
The amount of effort that has to put in by the Officers and Specs of the unit in order to build up to such an admirable level of cohesion and commitment is truly amazing, herculean even.
And the response from the men are equally astounding, even unbelievable if this had not be collaborated by the comments found on the CO's facebook post.
"We have commanders and men asking for medical upgrades so that they can participate in outfield exercises.
We have men with expectant wives or newborns coming in for ICT. We have men who were married over the weekend showing up for ICT.
We even had someone who had just overcome cancer coming outfield with us. We have men whose employers request for deferments but pleaded with me to reject their deferments."Anyone who's ever had to managed a NS battalion knows that such events as describe above are a rarity, perhaps more likely in the realm of impossibility. Heard of but never seen in real life like the Loch Ness Monster. Macham like win toto liddat.
When you are faced with three hundred or so men who have been called away from their families, loved ones and careers, it's not always an easy or pleasant task. Not everyone is as patriotic. Not everyone sees their reservist time as serving a larger noble cause. Not everyone likes it. Some just downright hate it.
I've been with 2 different NS units and I know how hard it is just to keep the men generally satisfied with the training program and logistics.
Mr Tan, Sir you are simply amazing.
The SAF should really work with you and your men to find out exactly what you did right and try to spread it to the other NS units.
But there is one thing that 823 SIR has certainly shown us, is that when you have men that are deeply committed to each other like family, nothing can stop them.
Update: Here is a screen-cap of the comments on the CO's post (as of 8 Dec 15)
Sources:
Darren Tan - A CO’s Personal Note to His Battalion
https://www.facebook.com/notes/darren-tan/a-cos-personal-note-to-his-battalion/10153060133321076
Mothership's reaction to the CO's note - http://mothership.sg/2015/11/according-to-this-commanding-officer-the-camaraderie-of-823-sir-is-too-damn-high/
The New paper - Band of brothers: The extraordinary morale in 823 SIR
http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore-news/extraordinary-morale-ns-unit?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook
Squeaky Hammer caught squeaking
 |
| Source: Shut Down TRS Facebook |
It would seem that Bernard Chen, WP's candidate for MacPherson SMC in GE2015, has been caught out trying to give the impression that he visited a charity organization when he actually didn't.
 |
| Source: Talking Singapore |
"Mr Chen, thank you for tagging us in your Facebook. Your presence at the walkway in front of our Senior Activity Centre at Blk 98 Aljunied Crescent before the General Elections 2015 via the sharing of your archived photo is noted.
Geylang East Home for the Aged
Here's what Talking Singapore had to say.
WP's Bernard Chen's misleading FB post out-ed by charity organization. Apparently the charity is unhappy with Bernard for posting an old photo implying that he had visited them on Sunday when he didn't.
Mr Chen must really be feeling that burn.. because the post and the pictures don't seem to be on his facebook account anymore.
Oh and in other squeaky news... WP has a "GE2015 candidates' lunch get-together at JJ's place" without some of their former MPs.
 |
| Source: Fabrications About The PAP |
==========================
Notes
In GE 2015, MacPherson SMC saw a three-cornered fight
between
(1) NSP’s Mr Cheo “new Mothers are a Weakness” Chai Chen
(2) PAP’s Tin “Kate spade” Pei Ling
(3) WP's Bernard “Thanks for tagging us” Chen
Tin Pei Ling won handsdown.
Lee Li Lian stood as a WP candidate for Punggol East SMC where it was widely expected that WP would hold on to that seat. However, Lee lost the seat to PAP's Charles Chong. The Punggol East seat is the PAP's closest win for SMCs.
The Elections Department had declared Lee Li Lian as one of the elected as Non-Constituency MPs (NCMPs) but she has publicly said that she will not take up NCMP post. WP released a statement of its own shortly after, saying the party's leadership backed Ms Lee's decision not to take up the seat.
Monday, November 23, 2015
SDP's Pathological Liar
Since GE2015, what else has the SDP Chief been up to, apart from taking a walk around Singapore?
Nothing new really. He's been rehashing the same old tired lies as new material for a "shocking" expose of what PAP is doing to Singapore.
On 19 Nov 2015, Chee SJ warns us in a FB post of the "serious" situation that Singapore is in due to its private debt levels. While referring to a previous SDP article, he quotes a single graph from the Economist and says:
Chee's post is, at best, misleading and intended to give his readers and supporters an impression that there are aspects about Singapore and its governance that is wanting.
At worst, Chee is lying through his teeth again and attempting to selectively quote out of context to support his lies.
So is Singapore really in trouble over its private debt? Is there any basis to support Chee's claim?
Let's see what else the Economist article says.
What do others say about Singapore's high private debt levels?
So is this really a dark, scandalous secret that the Singapore PAP Government is hiding from her citizens?
Is Chee really pulling back the curtains on a corrupt government, or is Chee actually pulling the wool over his readers and supporter's eyes?
Contrast what these various publications are saying against what Chee is claiming. Do you still think Chee is telling the truth or simply trying to lie and deceive you?
Look at it another way - International bankers and investors are not stupid and gullible. They will do their own homework and will seek out safe markets where their cash and investments can be safe and make them money. Do you really think that these investors would not be astute enough to see pass any govt propaganda that attempts to window-dress the situation and assess the the actual state of the economy for themselves?
And how about the fact that so many publications give a similar explanation for the high private debt. Do you really think that these international publications would gamble with their reputations and put up a poorly researched article? Would these publications stand to gain by simply publishing "propaganda" from the Singapore government, or actually lose more by doing so?
Or it is more likely that Chee has more to gain politically from propagating his lies to Singaporeans?
As Chee sufficiently put it himself. Reputation is temporary. Character is permanent.
Chee has been, and always will be a liar.
But guess what, you don't have to believe me. Just do your own research and decide the facts for yourself.
Sources:
Global Risk Insights:
http://
Mckinsey Global Institute
http://www.mckinsey.com/
The Economist
http://www.economist.com/
Singapore Government Borrowings - An Overview, Jul 2011
http://app.mof.gov.sg/Portals/0/Feature%20Articles/Feature%20Article%20Singapore%20Public%20Debt%20Report.pdf
SG Government FAQ - Is it fiscally sustainable for Singapore to have such a high level of debt?
http://www.gov.sg/factually/content/is-it-fiscally-sustainable-for-singapore-to-have-such-a-high-level-of-debt#sthash.oYlyvVCJ.dpuf
Nothing new really. He's been rehashing the same old tired lies as new material for a "shocking" expose of what PAP is doing to Singapore.
On 19 Nov 2015, Chee SJ warns us in a FB post of the "serious" situation that Singapore is in due to its private debt levels. While referring to a previous SDP article, he quotes a single graph from the Economist and says:
"I cited the record debt of Singaporeans as one of the problems. This week, The Economist reported that Singapore's private debt among the emerging markets is the highest at 250% of GDP. As I said, we need a serious and urgent scrutiny of where PAP is taking Singapore...."
Chee's post is, at best, misleading and intended to give his readers and supporters an impression that there are aspects about Singapore and its governance that is wanting.
At worst, Chee is lying through his teeth again and attempting to selectively quote out of context to support his lies.
So is Singapore really in trouble over its private debt? Is there any basis to support Chee's claim?
Let's see what else the Economist article says.
"Growing debt in emerging markets is not of itself something to worry about. It may be that savings are getting into local capital markets more effectively or that there are more, better investment opportunities...."
"...The most highly indebted emerging markets, such as China, South Korea, Singapore and perhaps Thailand, mostly fall into Mr Pradhan’s second category. They are unlikely to suffer an abrupt crash brought on by capital flight; most of them have formidable defences against a balance-of-payments crisis..."
What do others say about Singapore's high private debt levels?
"... Singapore’s real economic debt has increased by a staggering 162 percentage points, amounting to a debt-to-GDP ratio of 382 percent—almost as high as Japan’s 400 percent, topping the list. However, Singapore’s unusually high debt-to-GDP ratio does not signal imminent danger.
The Southeast Asian city state is a major business hub, and the high debt being raised by (foreign) corporations is used to fund operations across the region. Earnings in other countries support such debt...."
Global Risk Insights, 2 May 2015
"... For some nations, an unusually high debt-to-GDP ratio does not signal imminent danger. These are places that serve as business and financial hubs. The high level of financial-sector and corporate debt that results may or may not involve heightened risks.
Singapore and Ireland, for example, have tax regimes and other regulations that make them attractive for locating operations of global corporations. The debt incurred by these entities is used to fund activities in other nations, so its relationship to the host country’s GDP is not indicative of risk.
As a major business hub, Singapore has the highest ratio of non‑financial corporate debt in the world, at 201 percent of GDP in 2014, almost twice the level of 2007. However nearly two-thirds of companies with more than $1 billion in revenue in Singapore are foreign subsidiaries. Many of them raise debt in Singapore to fund business operations across the region, and this debt is supported by earnings in other countries.
Singapore has very high financial-sector debt as well (246 percent of GDP), reflecting the presence of many foreign banks and other financial institutions that have set up regional headquarters there...."
McKinsey Global Institute, Feb 2015
So is this really a dark, scandalous secret that the Singapore PAP Government is hiding from her citizens?
Is Chee really pulling back the curtains on a corrupt government, or is Chee actually pulling the wool over his readers and supporter's eyes?
Contrast what these various publications are saying against what Chee is claiming. Do you still think Chee is telling the truth or simply trying to lie and deceive you?
Look at it another way - International bankers and investors are not stupid and gullible. They will do their own homework and will seek out safe markets where their cash and investments can be safe and make them money. Do you really think that these investors would not be astute enough to see pass any govt propaganda that attempts to window-dress the situation and assess the the actual state of the economy for themselves?
And how about the fact that so many publications give a similar explanation for the high private debt. Do you really think that these international publications would gamble with their reputations and put up a poorly researched article? Would these publications stand to gain by simply publishing "propaganda" from the Singapore government, or actually lose more by doing so?
Or it is more likely that Chee has more to gain politically from propagating his lies to Singaporeans?
As Chee sufficiently put it himself. Reputation is temporary. Character is permanent.
Chee has been, and always will be a liar.
But guess what, you don't have to believe me. Just do your own research and decide the facts for yourself.
Sources:
Global Risk Insights:
http://
Mckinsey Global Institute
http://www.mckinsey.com/
The Economist
http://www.economist.com/
Singapore Government Borrowings - An Overview, Jul 2011
http://app.mof.gov.sg/Portals/0/Feature%20Articles/Feature%20Article%20Singapore%20Public%20Debt%20Report.pdf
SG Government FAQ - Is it fiscally sustainable for Singapore to have such a high level of debt?
http://www.gov.sg/factually/content/is-it-fiscally-sustainable-for-singapore-to-have-such-a-high-level-of-debt#sthash.oYlyvVCJ.dpuf
The Little Red Dot that could, and still is
President Obama met PM Lee Hsien Loong one on one at the 10th East Asia Summit. After the meeting, the President said: --
"I think around the world people admire the incredible progress that Singapore has made in creating prosperity and opportunity for its people and for being an excellent international partner. And here at ASEAN, and previously at APEC, I think we’ve seen that although Singapore does not have a large population, it punches above its weight because of its wise policies and ability to work with all countries."President Obama
Here are the full Remarks by President Obama and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of the Republic of Singapore After Bilateral Meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 22 Nov 2015.
PRESIDENT OBAMA:
Well, it’s a great pleasure to spend some time with Prime Minister Lee and the delegation from Singapore as Singapore celebrates 50 years. And as the relationship between the United States and Singapore moves into its 50th year, it is wonderful to report that the state of our bilateral relationship is very, very strong.
I think around the world people admire the incredible progress that Singapore has made in creating prosperity and opportunity for its people and for being an excellent international partner. And here at ASEAN, and previously at APEC, I think we’ve seen that although Singapore does not have a large population, it punches above its weight because of its wise policies and ability to work with all countries.
Prime Minister Lee and I have now been able to discuss a wide range of issues, many of them that were echoed during the EAS Summit. We expressed concern about the work we need to do together to counter ISIL and to improve our intelligence and counterterrorism efforts.
We talked about the South China Sea and the importance of upholding the basic principles and norms that have underwritten prosperity and stability in this region for many, many years. We are two of the countries that helped to get TPP over the finish line, and we are both excited about prospects for the creation of jobs and new businesses and new opportunity in both our countries.
And we discussed a wide range of multilateral issues, such as climate change, that are going to require the support of large countries and small if we’re going to be able to succeed.
So I want to thank the Prime Minister for the excellent cooperation that we have between our two countries. We’re looking to build on it in the future. And as Prime Minister Lee mentioned before the press walked in, one of my goals as President has been to show the consistent engagement of the United States in this region, and it’s made much easier when we know we’ve got outstanding partners like Singapore.
So thank you very much.
PRIME MINISTER LEE:
I thank President Obama for making time for this meeting with my delegation. We discussed what President Obama has described to you. The point that I made to the President was that the countries in this region all appreciate America’s engagement and participation in the region, its contribution economically, and security issues in terms of the overall strategic balance.
And what matters most to the countries is to know that this will be maintained. The President himself has made six trips to this region, every year attending the ASEAN meeting. And that’s greatly appreciated. And it’s important to know that this will continue beyond November 2016.
The President said, well, it depends who wins the next election. But whoever wins the next election, America has interests in this region, which are enduring and which are worthy of attention and focus to advance them and to continue to be a constructive and strategic player in Asia for many years to come.
Sources:
The White House
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/11/22/remarks-president-obama-and-prime-minister-lee-hsien-loong-republic
Image : Fabrications About the PAP
https://www.facebook.com/FabricationsAboutThePAP/photos/a.245735922149090.70599.213440582045291/928096133913062/?type=3&theater
Friday, November 20, 2015
We Need To Get The Queen Bees
In light of the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, this article shows how clearly LKY analysed the root cause of the problem and what he thought should be the most effective approach to dealing with terrorism.
===================================================
By Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek, 30 Nov 2003
Richard Nixon once remarked that had Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew lived in a different country in a different time, he would have achieved the status of a major historical figure--a Churchill, Disraeli or Gladstone. Lee recently turned 80, having for 45 years carefully observed international trends and maneuvered to keep his city-state secure and prosperous.
While in Singapore last week, I asked him what he made of the European-American divide so evident in London.
"The Europeans underestimate the problem of Al Qaeda-style terrorism," he said. "They think that the United States is exaggerating the threat. They compare it to their own many experiences with terror--the IRA, the Red Brigade, the Baader-Meinhof, ETA. But they are wrong."
He went on:
"Al Qaeda-style terrorism is new and unique because it is global. An event in Morocco can excite the passions of extremist groups in Indonesia. There is a shared fanatical zealousness among these different extremists around the world. Many Europeans think they can finesse the problem, that if they don't upset Muslim countries and treat Muslims well, the terrorists won't target them. But look at Southeast Asia.
"The Europeans underestimate the problem of Al Qaeda-style terrorism," he said. "They think that the United States is exaggerating the threat. They compare it to their own many experiences with terror--the IRA, the Red Brigade, the Baader-Meinhof, ETA. But they are wrong."
He went on:
"Al Qaeda-style terrorism is new and unique because it is global. An event in Morocco can excite the passions of extremist groups in Indonesia. There is a shared fanatical zealousness among these different extremists around the world. Many Europeans think they can finesse the problem, that if they don't upset Muslim countries and treat Muslims well, the terrorists won't target them. But look at Southeast Asia.
Muslims have prospered here. But still, Muslim terrorism and militancy have infected them."
Lee pointed out that Singapore and Thailand have both been targeted in recent years, though neither has mistreated its Muslim populations.
"The Americans, however, make the mistake of seeking largely a military solution. You must use force. But force will only deal with the tip of the problem. In killing the terrorists, you will only kill the worker bees. The queen bees are the preachers, who teach a deviant form of Islam in schools and Islamic centers, who capture and twist the minds of the young."
Lee pointed to the trial of Amrozi bin Nurhasyim, one of the plotters of the Bali bombing, sentenced to death by an Indonesian court. On hearing the sentence he said, "I'll be happy to die a martyr. After me there will be a million Amrozis."
Lee contrasted Amrozi with the charismatic religious leader Abu Bakar Bashir, spiritual head of Jemaah Islamiah, the group that many of the Bali bombers belonged to.
"Men like Bashir are the real force behind the terror," said Lee. "It is Bashir who churns out these kinds of people. But he was acquitted on the serious charges and was convicted on minor offenses for a four-year term."
I asked Lee how to handle this broader problem.
"Well, America can't do it alone," he said. "You can't go into the mosques, Islamic centers and madrassas. We don't have any standing as non-Muslims. Barging in will create havoc. Only Muslims can win this struggle. Moderate, modernizing Muslims, political, religious, civic leaders together have to make the case against the fundamentalists. But the strong, developed countries can help. The NATO allies must, as they did during the cold war, present a solid block. Muslim modernizers must feel that the U.S. and its allies will provide the resources, energy and support to make them winners. No one wants to be on the losing side."
Lee was critical of both sides of the Atlantic alliance on Iraq.
"When America and Europe are divided, when Japan is hesitant, the extremists are emboldened and think they can win against a divided group. The terrorists' tactics for the time being are to hit only Americans, Jews and America's strong supporters, the British, the Italians, the Turks, warning the Japanese but leaving others alone. They intend to divide and conquer."
In an essay in Forbes last May, Lee criticized France and Germany for continuing to publicly oppose the United States over Iraq.
"They help Islamic extremists recruit more terrorists," he wrote. But he then urged Washington to use the United Nations, predicting (accurately) that "if the U.N. is not involved in postwar Iraq, Islamic extremists will exploit what will be portrayed as an American-British colonial occupation of Iraq.
If, on the other hand, the Atlantic allies get their act together in the United Nations, it will signal to the world that they have set aside their differences to work for a higher cause--that of bringing peace and stability to the Mideast."
I asked Lee what to do in Iraq.
"Iraq has become a test of American perseverance," he said. "You must see it through, and I believe that you will. It is related to the larger struggle. You must put in place moderates who can create a modern society. If you walk away from Iraq, the jihadis will follow you wherever you go. You may think you've left them behind, but they will pursue you. Their ambitions are not confined to any one territory or people."
Sources:
Newsweek - We Need To Get The Queen Bees
http://www.newsweek.com/we-need-get-queen-bees-133219
Singapore Government Press Release
http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/speeches/view-html?filename=2003112601.htm
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lee-kuan-yew-on-islamic-terrorists/
Council on Foreign Relations - Who is Abu Bakar Bashir (aka Ba’asyir)?
http://www.cfr.org/indonesia/profile-abu-bakar-bashir-k-baasyir/p10219
Straits Times - Jailed Indonesian terrorist Abu Bakar Bashir has been funding ISIS: Anti-terrorism chief
http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/jailed-indonesian-terrorist-abu-bakar-bashir-has-been-funding-isis-anti-terrorism-chief
Newsweek - We Need To Get The Queen Bees
http://www.newsweek.com/we-need-get-queen-bees-133219
Singapore Government Press Release
http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/speeches/view-html?filename=2003112601.htm
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/lee-kuan-yew-on-islamic-terrorists/
Council on Foreign Relations - Who is Abu Bakar Bashir (aka Ba’asyir)?
http://www.cfr.org/indonesia/profile-abu-bakar-bashir-k-baasyir/p10219
Straits Times - Jailed Indonesian terrorist Abu Bakar Bashir has been funding ISIS: Anti-terrorism chief
http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/jailed-indonesian-terrorist-abu-bakar-bashir-has-been-funding-isis-anti-terrorism-chief
Thursday, November 19, 2015
Water water everywhere but not a drop to drink?
On 16 Nov 2015, our neighbours in JB experienced a storm due to the annual northeast monsoon. The two-hour long heavy rains resulted in severe flash floods right in the heart of JB town.
Ironically, in the previous months JB had been experiencing a dry spell which has resulted in the water level of Johor's Linggiu Reservoir dropping down to a historic low.
According to the Straits Times report, the reservoir is at about 43% capacity. And many parts of Johore are already being subjected to water rationing.
So what has all this got to do with Singapore?
Well, first of all, the Linggiu Reservoir regulates the flow of Johor River, from which Singapore and Johor draw water for treatment. So if the Reservoir runs out of water, Singapore would lose a part of its water supply.
But wait, wasn't there a flood in JB? Should the storm have at least filled up the reservoir a little?
Well, the answer is no, it didn't. The heavy rains that caused the JB floods had little impact on the reservoir's water levels.
"The heavy rain and subsequent floods in JB are in a different catchment area from the Linggiu Reservoir, which is further upstream," a PUB spokesman told The Straits Times yesterday. "While there has been some rain in the Linggiu Reservoir catchment, the water levels remain largely the same, at around 43 per cent."
In other words, all that rainfall in JB was "lost" to the sea instead of being diverted and captured in their reservoirs.
But how come Singapore hasn't been subjected to water rationing like JB? Don't we get most of our water from Malaysia?
Well, this article will shed some light on the mystery.
Tech Insider: Singapore has come up with an ingenious way to save water
In a nutshell, we have been described as a "giant sponge" that soaks up all the rain water we get and channel them into our own reservoirs. This together with an almost obsessive building up of reservoirs and catchment areas, and reclaiming sewage water with the NEWater technology, is providing Singapore with a substantial hedge against drought.
And all this wouldn't have been possible if Singapore hadn't taken a long term approach to invest and build up her self-sufficiency in water.
As to why Singapore could do this, and Malaysia couldn't, well, I leave it to the readers to discern for themselves.
Read more here:
ST: Water level in Linggiu Reservoir hits record low, continued dry spell could affect Singapore
ST: JB downpour fails to raise reservoir level
 |
| Severe flash floods in the heart of JB (FiveStarsAndAMoon) |
 |
| Severe flash floods in the heart of JB (Fabrications About The PAP) |
According to the Straits Times report, the reservoir is at about 43% capacity. And many parts of Johore are already being subjected to water rationing.
 |
| Picture from Masagos Zulkifli Minister, Environment and Water Resources |
So what has all this got to do with Singapore?
Well, first of all, the Linggiu Reservoir regulates the flow of Johor River, from which Singapore and Johor draw water for treatment. So if the Reservoir runs out of water, Singapore would lose a part of its water supply.
But wait, wasn't there a flood in JB? Should the storm have at least filled up the reservoir a little?
Well, the answer is no, it didn't. The heavy rains that caused the JB floods had little impact on the reservoir's water levels.
"The heavy rain and subsequent floods in JB are in a different catchment area from the Linggiu Reservoir, which is further upstream," a PUB spokesman told The Straits Times yesterday. "While there has been some rain in the Linggiu Reservoir catchment, the water levels remain largely the same, at around 43 per cent."
In other words, all that rainfall in JB was "lost" to the sea instead of being diverted and captured in their reservoirs.
But how come Singapore hasn't been subjected to water rationing like JB? Don't we get most of our water from Malaysia?
Well, this article will shed some light on the mystery.
Tech Insider: Singapore has come up with an ingenious way to save water
In a nutshell, we have been described as a "giant sponge" that soaks up all the rain water we get and channel them into our own reservoirs. This together with an almost obsessive building up of reservoirs and catchment areas, and reclaiming sewage water with the NEWater technology, is providing Singapore with a substantial hedge against drought.
And all this wouldn't have been possible if Singapore hadn't taken a long term approach to invest and build up her self-sufficiency in water.
 |
| NEWater plant. Photo: PUB |
As to why Singapore could do this, and Malaysia couldn't, well, I leave it to the readers to discern for themselves.
Read more here:
ST: Water level in Linggiu Reservoir hits record low, continued dry spell could affect Singapore
ST: JB downpour fails to raise reservoir level
'All lose, lose all' risk if political provocateurs win
The Straits Times Online
Published Jun 12, 2014, 6:15 am SGT
By Devadas Krishnadas
The People's Action Party (PAP) has made a sustained effort since the 2011 general election to engage with the ground, update its policies and increase its investments in social issues. It has also appointed new political leaders and publicly introduced potential election candidates.
Such moves are implicit signals of a "New PAP" - one that is concerned about social and not just economic issues, one unembarrassed to provide Singaporeans with social spending and one which wants not to be seen as elitist.
Yet, there is considerable cognitive dissonance between what the PAP views as the "New PAP" and the public perception of the same.
First, with public sentiment shifting towards emotive nationalism, political leaders still come across as objective technocrats rather than patriots. Singaporeans want to hear, see and feel that political leaders recognise that leading Singapore means taking care of the interests of Singaporeans.
Second, the moves to govern the social media and artistic spaces through rule changes by the Media Development Authority give the public the impression that the PAP rule is still characterised by information control and censorship. Political leaders may have to choose their battles more wisely.
In such issues, it is impossible to separate policy from politics and the latter will define any discourse. Interventions therefore become the issue rather than the subject they address.
Third, the use of the defamation law, however justified, is politically outdated as a mechanism for political leaders to safeguard their reputations. They should perhaps let their record be their reputation and trust that reasonable Singaporeans will be able to judge fact from any malignity.
Taken together, the public perception is that while the PAP has done new things, this is but new wine in an old bottle.
To prove the case that the PAP has transformed from within, it will have to show more empathy, display less of a need to control and have greater faith in the good sense of the people.
As Singapore enters the second half of the current term of government, there is a sense that we are also entering the final lap of the political race to the next election. Policy adjustments have now spanned all the main areas. In parliament, the Prime Minister has started the countdown to the next general election with a combative stance towards the opposition on constructive politics.
While many real policy changes have resulted since the last election, it is an uncomfortable truth that many real political changes remain to be realised.
The upshot of complicated policies and the muddied perception of the "New PAP" is that public discourse is in danger of being captured by critics at the margin who fall into three categories.
One category is the utterly ignorant who have not bothered to educate themselves on the facts or who are poorly equipped to understand the policy system and hence resort to erroneous simplifications or totally false analysis.
Another category is those with a political axe to grind. These individuals cast every policy into an alleged wide web of conspiracy of government against the interest of the people.
What we are now beginning to see is the conflation of the two categories into a new collection of political provocateurs bound together solely to attack the PAP by creating as much doubt, distrust, cynicism and anxiety as possible in the citizenry. They offer many criticisms, few facts and no solutions. It would appear that baiting the Government to take counter-action is the best way to get public sympathy, if not legitimacy; and shrill suggestions that Singapore is facing a "doomsday" scenario the best way to play up fear in our future. This is neither helpful nor healthy for the public discourse on important issues which concern every citizen.
Citizens need and deserve facts, intelligent analysis and rational arguments, not vitriol and demagogy disguised as patriotism and martyrdom. The noise created by these critics at the margin sucks the oxygen away from more rational and balanced critiques of policy and national direction.
The real struggle is not between the opposition or this new collection of political provocateurs and the PAP.
The real struggle is about whether Singaporeans will allow themselves to go down a seductive and slippery slope of anxiety, despair, fear and anger about our future or whether Singaporeans will choose to have faith in themselves and what they already have and can achieve by working together, staying rational and committing to being invested in the Singapore project. The former road needs only the suspension of objectivity, giving in to emotional and irrational, even if human, fears and conspiracies and a relinquishing of personal responsibility to play an individual role in making our collective future.
The latter road is a harder road which requires hard work to be informed, staying positive and a willingness to participate and endure a process of public debate of policies based on facts, good ideas and an ability to make tough trade-offs. In short, we need good politics to get the good policies.
For the PAP, this means not only better communication but also greater transparency and willingness to tolerate - better still, engage - in meaningful debate.
For the opposition, this means stepping up their game to offer effective alternative ideas, not to just be an alternative. It also means not free riding on the antics of extremist political provocateurs. They should also take a stand.
For Singaporeans, it means focusing on the issues and engaging with their Members of Parliament regardless of political stripe, to push forward their concerns and ideas. Most importantly, there must be, and Singaporeans should insist upon, the recognition by the PAP and the opposition that both have a responsibility to ensure that Singaporeans take the harder road regardless of who gets, or loses, political points.
Because if they do not, and we slip down the murkier and more sinister path laid out by the provocateurs, then we all lose and we could lose all. That is the real doomsday scenario.
stopinion@sph.com.sg
This is an edited version of a longer post on the writer's Facebook page. He is the chief executive officer of Future-Moves Group, a strategic risk consultancy and executive education provider based in Singapore.
Sources:
The Straits Times Online - 'All lose, lose all' risk if political provocateurs win
http://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/all-lose-lose-all-risk-if-political-provocateurs-win
Fabrications Led by Opposition Parties (FLOP)
Opposition Media A.S.S makes claim that LKY is not fit to be a Founding Father of modern day Singapore
Reprint of The Battle For Merger will provide 'reality check for revisionist views': DPM Teo
POSTED: 09 Oct 2014 13:35 UPDATED: 10 Oct 2014 18:25
SINGAPORE: The re-publication of a book of former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s radio talks from 1961, The Battle For Merger, will provide a “reality check” for revisionist views, said Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean at the launch event on Thursday (Oct 9).
“I hope it will awaken interest among younger Singaporeans in the events of this crucial period in our history, educate them into what actually happened, what the battle was about, and why it was so crucial that the right side won,” he said in his speech at the launch.
Originally published in 1962, The Battle For Merger is a book that contains a series of 12 radio talks delivered by Mr Lee between Sep 13 and Oct 9, 1961, giving a vivid account of the ongoing political struggle over merger.
Below is the speech in full:
I am pleased to be here today to launch the reprint of the Battle for Merger publication, which comprises a series of radio broadcasts by Mr Lee Kuan Yew in 1961. I am lucky to own a copy of the original Battle for Merger printed in 1962. It belonged to my father. I remember hearing these radio broadcasts as a child. Although I was too young then to understand them, I could sense the magnitude and gravity of the events that were swirling around us. But Singaporeans of my father’s generation, and those just a little older than me, will certainly remember those tumultuous days, and Mr Lee’s radio broadcasts.
It was a time when momentous decisions had to be made for Singapore. A wrong decision then would have been calamitous and Singapore might still be trying to shake off the dire effects today. Mr Lee’s broadcasts electrified the population, and were crucial in making Singaporeans understand what the battle was about, and persuading them to support Merger with Malaysia.
THE BATTLE FOR MERGER
Some may wonder: Why should the Battle for Merger be reprinted now? In 2015, we celebrate Singapore’s 50th anniversary. This is a significant milestone, especially when we consider our precarious and tumultuous beginnings. While we only became an independent nation in 1965, our road to independence began earlier, with our attempt to forge a shared destiny with the then Federation of Malaya. Our hard-fought attempt to gain independence by merging with Malaya was in fact a battle for the future of Singapore. On the surface, it was a battle for merger. But this was only on the surface. Below the surface was another deeper, more momentous, more dangerous battle – that between the communists and noncommunists in Singapore.
At the heart of this battle were two contrasting visions of how society should be ordered and how we should govern ourselves. It was not simply a fight to get rid of British colonial rule; rather, the communists and their allies had a larger agenda. Their objective was to impose a communist regime in Malaya and Singapore through all means, including subversion, and ultimately, armed revolution. They never gave up on this larger agenda. That is why the communists continued to pose a security threat to us long after both Malaya and Singapore had gained independence in 1957 and 1965, respectively; and even after all British forces had left in 1971. In one incident in June 1974, the Inspector-General of Police in Malaysia was gunned down in broad daylight by a Communist hit squad.
The events vividly described in the Battle for Merger bear testament to the resourcefulness, will and spirit of pioneer Singaporeans, led by Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his colleagues in the government and the PAP. Our pioneers were confronted with difficult challenges and dilemmas, and had to make critical choices not just for themselves, but for future generations of Singaporeans. This is why, despite the vast changes that have taken place in the world and in Singapore over the past 50 years, this crucial turning point in our history continues to be relevant to us today.
SINGAPORE IN 1961
What was Singapore like in 1961, when Mr Lee Kuan Yew made these radio broadcasts? What was the broader strategic environment? The Cold War between communism and the free world was at its height. The Berlin Wall, which for decades signified the divide between the two contending sides, had just been built. In fact, construction started on 13 Aug 1961, exactly a month before the first of Mr Lee’s broadcasts on 13 Sep 1961. Proxy wars and ideological battles were being fought in many countries. Southeast Asia was a hot spot. Malaya and Singapore were not spared. There were grave security concerns over the growing communist influence in Malaya and Singapore.
In the 1950s and early 1960s, communism was in the ascendant in Singapore. The Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) had waged a violent armed insurgency since 1948 and fomented urban strife in its attempt to establish a communist Malaya (which included Singapore). The CPM targeted those who opposed them, including civilians, and security and police personnel. In Singapore, between 1950 and 1955, CPM hit squads carried out at least 19 known murders, as well as numerous acid attacks, arson and other acts of violence. When the CPM’s violent, armed guerrilla war and their intimidation of the civilian population failed to turn Singapore and Malaya ‘red’, the communists switched strategy to place more emphasis on subversive Communist United Front (CUF) tactics instead. Through the CUF, the CPM intended first to drive out the British from Singapore, and then to topple the Malayan Government. From 1954 to 1963, the CPM penetrated student bodies, labour unions, political parties, and cultural and rural organisations in Singapore to spread their ideology and influence, attract supporters, and mobilise activists to mount a campaign to destabilise and take over Singapore.
The CUF organisations instigated unrest and dissatisfaction among the population by exploiting unhappiness over socio-economic issues and particular government policies. Singapore went through a period of great upheaval and civil unrest. Protests, sit-ins, strikes and demonstrations were frequent. The trade unions and student bodies were the front organisations for these confrontations. But they were controlled and manipulated from behind-the-scenes by communist hands. Some of these events resulted in the deaths of innocent Singaporeans and security personnel. The result, which was intended, was tension, anxiety and instability in Singapore.
Why did the CPM and their pro-communist allies operating in the CUF organisations decide to oppose Merger? When Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his colleagues in the People’s Action Party (PAP) were elected to form the government in June 1959, it was on a pro-merger platform. Merger was also supported by the communists and pro-communists who at that time were in the PAP.i Other political parties also had similar pro-merger agendas. Merger was deemed essential for Singapore’s economic survival. People travelled across the Causeway frequently and co-mingled freely. Even the CPM considered Singapore a part of Malaya – there was no “Communist Party of Singapore”, because in their eyes, Singapore was an integral part of Malaya. There was only the Singapore Town Committee of the CPM.
Yet, when the PAP announced its support for merger and the concept of Malaysia to attain full independence from the British, the communists and procommunists opposed it and tried to capture the PAP and the Singapore Government in July 1961 . Merger was against the communists’ interest, for two reasons. First, it would result in the quick end of British rule in Singapore and make it harder for the CUF to disguise its agenda to establish a communist regime as an anti-colonial struggle. Second, the CPM expected the anti-communist Federation Government to clamp down on them as internal security would come under the Central Government in Kuala Lumpur once merger was achieved.
The CPM never believed that Singapore should be independent of Malaya. Indeed, much later, when Singapore separated from Malaysia in August 1965, the CPM denounced Singapore’s independence as “phoney”. The Barisan Sosialis took the same line, when it decided to boycott and later withdraw from Parliament and take to the streets instead. But in 1961, the communists wanted to capture power in a self-governing Singapore and use that as a base to subvert the Federation and in due course establish communist rule over the entire Malayan peninsula.
As Mr Lee said in his preface, the Battle for Merger broadcasts were pivotal in lifting the curtain on the communists and exposing their hidden manoeuvrings. It was necessary for Mr Lee to make public the communist threat and reveal key CPM personalities, as well as how the communists operated, including their objectives and methods. Singaporeans, whether they were for or against merger, needed to know the real communist agenda in order to make their choice.
This was why Mr Lee decided to speak to Singaporeans directly on the matter. He gave three talks a week, each one delivered in English, Mandarin and Malay, totalling 36 broadcasts in less than a month. This gruelling effort left him thoroughly exhausted. But he got his message across. The talks played a vital part in defeating the anti-merger campaign of the communists and pro-communists. In the referendum on merger held in September 1962, 71% supported the PAP’s position while 25% cast blank votes as advocated by the anti-merger group.
Although public support for merger was unequivocal in 1962, and Singapore joined the Federation of Malaysia on 16 Sep 1963, the differences in views between the Singaporean and Malaysian governments as to how a multi-racial, multi-religious nation should govern itself caused merger to fail. In 1965 when independence was thrust upon Singapore, we were struggling with poor economic prospects, fraught communal relations, and a continuing communist threat. The Cold War raged on, and the Vietnam War was intensifying. The Gulf of Tonkin incident, which led the US to engage in Vietnam, had occurred in 1964. The Cultural Revolution which brought turmoil to China for a decade started the next year, in 1966.
Even after independence, the communists persisted in their violent attempts to destabilise Singapore. The CPM revived their armed struggle in the 1960s and 1970s. In 1970, a seven-year-old girl was killed by a booby-trapped bomb in Changi planted by a CPM unit. In 1974, three communists were on their way to plant homemade bombs in Telok Kurau when one bomb exploded prematurely in Katong, killing two of the bombers. The third bomber was injured, but escaped, and eventually fled to Johor with the help of CPM supporters. The following year, in 1975, the security authorities recovered two caches of 298 hand grenades in Loyang and Tampines accumulated by another CPM unit which had carried out vicious attacks in Singapore in the 1950s. Indeed, the Voice of Malayan Revolution, the CPM radio station, was broadcasting up till 1981, preaching revolution and communism. Several Singaporeans worked at this radio station.
The spectre of communism receded only after the People’s Republic of China abandoned its support for the CPM in the 1980s. The CPM finally ceased hostilities and signed the Peace Agreements in Haadyai with the Malaysian government and the Thai authorities. The date, 2 December 1989, when the CPM finally laid down its arms, was barely a month after the Berlin Wall was breached on 9 November 1989 – that same Berlin Wall, the symbol of the Cold War, whose construction began in 1961, just a month before the first Battle for Merger broadcast.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BATTLE FOR MERGER TODAY
Today, the events surrounding Merger are no longer at the forefront of the minds of Singaporeans. For the older ones, the tumultuous years described in the Battle for Merger are a receding, distant memory. The younger ones, especially those born after 1965, would have no personal memory of these events. They would only know of these years through history books, or from their parents and grandparents.
The Battle for Merger provides a powerful contemporaneous account of the events at that time. It captures the flavour and the intensity of the exchanges, the battle for the hearts and minds of Singaporeans over merger; and more fundamentally, the fierce struggle between the communists and the non-communists over the future of Singapore.
As we approach our 50th year of independence, some revisionist writers have attempted to recast the role played by the communists and their supporters on the merger issue. They portray the fight as merely a peaceful and democratic disagreement over the type of merger. They ignore the more fundamental agenda of the communists to seize power by subversion and armed revolution.v The CPM’s armed struggle and the CUF’s efforts to destabilise Singapore before, during and after the Battle for Merger, have been well-documented by various academics and writers, including top leaders of the CPM such as Chin Peng and Fong Chong Pik.
These multiple sources support the argument that Mr Lee Kuan Yew made in the Battle for Merger more than five decades ago: Namely, that there was a communist conspiracy to take power being played out over the merger issue, which he felt compelled to expose in his broadcasts. The re-publication of the book will provide a reality check to the revisionist views. I hope it will awaken interest among younger Singaporeans in the events of this crucial period in our history, educate them into what actually happened, what the battle was about, and why it was so crucial that the right side won.
Indeed, one might ask: what if the communists and their pro-communist CUF allies had won, and Singapore had fallen under communist rule in the 1960s? We would have gone on a completely different path. Where would we be today? Singapore would probably not have survived, as a small communist outcast in South East Asia, as the Cold War raged in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. Even if Singapore had survived, life would have been harsh and miserable. We need only look at the communist world since the Russian Revolution of 1917, and countries that continue to subscribe to communism today. The more successful ones have made major adaptations in recent decades, and adopted drastic reforms and policies to make themselves more competitive and to enable the standard of living of their citizens to catch up with the free market economies.
The 1960s were tumultuous times. We should respect the personal conviction and determination of those who held different views then and fought on the side of the communists. As Mr Lee said in his broadcast, “they are not crooks or opportunists. These are men with great resolve, dedicated to the Communist revolution and to the establishment of the Communist state believing that it is the best thing in the world for mankind”.
But we should, even more, acknowledge and give our respect and appreciation to the Singaporeans who had the courage and wisdom to reject the CPM’s ideology and tactics, including its violent methods, and those of its procommunist supporters. Singaporeans who rallied to support the non-Communist cause under the leadership of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who fortunately mustered a majority to defeat the Communist side in a democratic contest.
Among those who have contributed to our nation building are some who initially joined or supported the communists. It took special courage for them to turn away from the communist cause after recognising its serious flaws and inadequacies. They made a brave choice in the face of intimidation and threats to their lives and their families. They had the courage to acknowledge that the path advocated by the CPM was the wrong one, and to join the majority of Singaporeans who had made that critical choice for a non-communist, democratic, peaceful and constructive path forward.
There were others, including several senior CPM figures, who had fled Singapore in the 1950s and 1960s, but returned home with their families after the CPM laid down its arms in 1989. They made no pretence about their past activities and beliefs, and were reconciled to the fact that theirs was not a cause shared by the majority of Singaporeans. They had seen the road that communism had travelled and admitted that it had failed. After providing an account of their communist activities to the security authorities, they and their families settled back into Singapore as loyal citizens, and contributed to our country’s progress.
But it was a close call. Then as now, Singapore has little room to manoeuvre. The wrong decision, and it would have gone the other way, and Singapore would have turned out very differently.
Our pioneers’ spirit and their determination to rise above the hardships of the moment, including the dire threat of communism, and to focus on making Singapore a better country for the next generation is an inspiration for all Singaporeans. This spirit, epitomised in the Battle for Merger, is a precious heritage which we all as Singaporeans should honour, recognise and emulate.
Thank you.
Source: Channel News Asia - Reprint of The Battle For Merger will provide 'reality check for revisionist views': DPM Teo
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/specialreports/battleformerger/news/reprint-of-the-battle-for/1405604.html
==================
Those who champion revisionist account of Singapore's fight against communists are distorting history: Sam Tan
Published Jan 14, 2015, 11:25 pm SGT
By Zakir Hussain Deputy Political Editor, ST
"Historical discourse and debate requires academic rigor, intellectual honesty, and respect for evidence.
"These qualities have been sadly lacking among those championing a revisionist account of a key fight on our road to independence."
He said that in distorting history, "they disrespect the memory of those who made sacrifices and lost lives to defeat the communist threat and build the Singapore that we have today".
His remarks come a month after Singapore's High Commissioner to Australia Burhan Gafoor wrote to Australian website New Mandala to rebut claims in an article by former Coldstore detainee Poh Soo Kai that the arrests were a "set-up" against political opponents of then prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, including Barisan Sosialis chief Lim Chin Siong.
Mr Burhan said the Barisan was the principal open united front tool of the banned Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) in Singapore. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong also included a link to Mr Burhan's letter in a Facebook post on Dec 20.
But Ms Teo Soh Lung - detained in 1987 after being accused of being part of a Marxist conspiracy - and revisionist historians rejected these statements.
"I don't care if Lim Chin Siong was a communist or a CPM member...What we need to know is whether Lim Chin Siong and his colleagues committed any acts of violence and acted against the interest of Singapore," Ms Teo said in a recent online commentary.
Mr Tan said Ms Teo and the revisionists "continue to maintain the hollow claim that the Communist United Front was an 'invention'. They have not refuted the evidence presented, drawn from both the British archives as well as published accounts by key CPM leaders."
He also cited the British archives and ex-CPM leader Chin Peng who said the Barisan was the CPM's principal political tool, and that Coldstore shattered the CPM's underground network throughout Singapore.
He added that Ms Teo's remarks showed she "has conceded that her previous assertion that Lim Chin Siong was not a communist was untenable, in the face of the evidence cited by Mr Burhan".
"It does matter that Lim Chin Siong was the CPM's key Communist united front leader in Singapore, because the CPM advocated armed struggle, and through the united front was fomenting unrest and disorder in Singapore in order to establish a communist regime throughout Malaya."
Source:
Straits Times Online - Those who champion revisionist account of Singapore's fight against communists are distorting history: Sam Tan
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/those-who-champion-revisionist-account-of-singapores-fight-against-communists-are
===================
Source:
Image: Fabrications Led by Opposition Parties (FLOP)
https://www.facebook.com/fabflop/photos/pb.430232843680692.-2207520000.1445843992./892356294135009/?type=3&theater
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)