Excerpt from site:

“The origins of this website lies with an US citizen returning to his birth-country to observe a farcical court case, annoying some petty tyrants, and having to accept the consequences viz. criminal charges filed against him.”

Disclaimer:

“This website has no affiliation with Gopalan Nair or what passes for the opposition in Singapore. The sole purpose is to keep a vigil on the plight of a tolerably just man so he will not disappear from the public eye.”

Link: http://www.gopalan-nair.org/

I don’t think Gary Glitter will have a problem because his crime is non-political. Had he been arrested for public assembly without a permit instead of child rape, that might be a problem.

So… another ‘foreign talent’ for the PAP collection. Last year, we had a woman-beating European dude (I think he is still a PR here, and he even wrote a forum letter praising the PAP), and this year we will have a child rapist.

No worries Mr Glitter. So long as you remember to write in a few letters to the Straits Times praising the PAP, you too can be a ‘respectable citizen’ and a ‘foreign talent’. By the way, there’s some vicious liberal propaganda going around. You might have heard that the PAP do not welcome foreigners who stick their noses in our domestic affairs. That is simply not true. The PAP simply adores foreigners who praise their policies.

We would also like to remind Mr Glitter that we have rather professional lawyers here who will be willing to defend you in for a variety of offences ranging from child rape to murder. Just remember not to push your luck and cross the line to doing public assembly without a permit.

Crew

In his latest blog entry, Mr Nair exposed the farcical machinations of the PAP administration. His trial was held in Court 6, Subordinate Courts, Singapore at 9.30 am on Monday July 28, 2008. Readers may read the whole entry here: http://singaporedissident.blogspot.com/2008/08/...

Here are some revealing excerpts for readers to consider.

1) The police could not provide evidence that Mr Nair knocked on their police van.

“He then says he sent the fingerprints to the Criminal Investigation Department for results and that they “were unable to confirm that the fingerprints were mine” because, listen to this, “they don’t have any records of the accused person”!”
-Excerpt from blog entry

That’s an outright lie – a lie told so badly that you just have to laugh at the attempt! According to Mr Nair, the night he was arrested, the police fingerprinted him at the station. All they (the police) have to do now is to compare records, and if the prints on the van were indeed Mr Nair’s, the police would end up looking good in court. BUT they came up with a lame “they don’t have any records of the accused person”. One has to wonder why.

2) The phantom knocker

“Nair: You say that you saw a male Indian walk past your car. Did you see that male Indian continuously and loudly knocking your car?

Kang: No I did not.

Nair: Why is it that if someone continuously and loudly knocked your car, while you were in the car, you do not know who it was?

Kang: Your honor, I never saw, how do I know who it is?

Nair: Are you trying to say that you are inside a car; someone knocks your car continuously and loudly. Why did you not turn to look who it was?

Knag: When I heard someone knock the car, I only saw the male Indian walk past the car, and therefore as such I cannot see who knocked the car.”
-Excerpt from blog entry

Kang is one of the police officers involved in arresting Mr Nair on the 4th of July. According to his court testimony, he DID NOT see Mr Nair knocking on the police van. And he said ‘I only saw the male Indian walk past the car, and therefore as such I cannot see who knocked the car’. Was it a Freudian slip? Did he mean to say the male indian who walked past his van (allegedly Mr Nair) and the phantom knocker were 2 different persons?

Singa Crew

Sgpolitics did a special write-up on Amelia Fedo, the American girl who wrote the letter. She intends to forward the letter to every single member of the United States Congress.

You can read the article here—> www.sgpolitics.net

Crew

I am writing on behalf of Gopalan Nair, an American citizen who is currently forcibly detained by the Singapore government for exercising his right to freedom of speech.

On May 29th, 2008, Mr. Nair published a blog entry criticizing Singapore judge Belinda Ang’s biased handling of the high-profile case of democratic activist Dr. Chee Soon Juan v. authoritarian former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, during which she favored Lee and denied the defendant, Dr. Chee, a fair trial. In response to Nair’s criticism of the judge on his blog, Singapore government officials arrested him on May 31 at the hotel where he was staying. He had been in Singapore since May 26th, and, prior to his arrest, had expected to return to his home in the United States on the third of June.

It is clear that Mr. Nair did not send Judge Belinda Ang any e-mails. He has stated that there was no need for him to do so, as he had expressed his opinion about Ang’s actions on his blog, and did not have any desire to contact her personally. Rather, the Singapore government arrested him on an insubstantial charge of sending fantastical ‘threatening emails’ to a judge so that they could have an excuse to detain him. The Singapore government is keeping him in their custody and purposefully denying him the right to a speedy trial as they know that he has only American citizenship and cannot support himself financially on Singaporean soil; meanwhile, his work is being neglected in the U.S. On the Fourth of July they publicly escalated their aggression towards him; they sent plainclothes officers after him, who physically assualted him after he did not give them his name because he did not recognize them to be police. He is innocent of the official charges against him; as for the “crime” of criticising the government, yes, Mr. Nair is is guilty of that, but it also happens that his actions were protected under not only the United States Constitution, but also that of Singapore.

If the critic is not a Singapore national, the government of Singapore often dismisses their words as “foreign interference.” Nair was born in Singapore but has relinquished his Singaporean citizenship and is an American citizen only. About this characterization of Nair’s criticism, a cyber-activist based in Singapore who for his own safety goes by the name Singa Crew has this to say: “I for one do not consider his criticism to be ‘foreign interference’. How could it be ‘foreign interference’ when the Singapore government routinely cite this and that award given by international bodies? Was it ‘foreign inteference’ only when criticism instead of praise was offered?” The government is here exposed as being duplicitous and dishonest in its treatment of dissidents, and never more so than when the protest comes from a citizen of a country that has leverage in Singapore, a nation that Singapore does business with, a nation whose presentation Singapore tries to imitate and make into a façade to show the world.

Singapore––a nation that is considered to be first-world––has carefully cultivated an image of freedom and progressiveness, but the practical reality is that Singapore’s government is authoritarian and resistant to popular sovereignty, and as such it censures anyone who advocates democracy and greater freedom; in the process of censuring these individuals, it uses corrupt and unconstitutional procedures; when someone, such as Nair, points out the unfairness of the proceedings, he or she is penalized as well.

The United States is part of a collection of Western nations that value democratic ideals and civil liberties. Although the issue of how and when our government should intervene in cases of human rights abuses is a hotly contested one, it is fair to say in this particular instance that, as the Singapore administration is not following its own constitution, Singapore is a developed, capitalist, modern nation with which the United States has influence and ties, and Mr. Nair is an American citizen, the United States can and should intervene on his behalf, and on the behalf of advocates of freedom and democracy everywhere. The activist known as Singa Crew has said, “Mr Nair is a true son of Singapore and America because he lives up to the ideals of justice and freedom enshrined in both the Singapore and American constitutions.”

Whatever your stance as regards the amount of sovereignty Singapore should have over its people, Mr. Nair is an American citizen, and as such is entitled to all of the rights that the United States’ jurisdiction in Singapore may provide. It is the request of myself, and believers in freedom everywhere, that Gopalan Nair come home to the States as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

Amelia Fedo

Hey guys, some folks in the USA are thinking of doing a letter-writing campaign to their congressmen regarding Mr Nair’s case. We thought it would look better if Singaporeans offer their comments about the case to downplay the whole ‘foreign interference’ angle. So I offered my quote and I urge you to do the same.

“Mr Nair is a true son of Singapore and America. Because he lives up to the ideals of justice and freedom enshrined in both the Singapore and American constitutions. I for one do not consider his criticism to be ‘foreign interference’. How could it be ‘foreign interference’ when the Singapore government routinely cite this and that award given by international bodies? Was it ‘foreign inteference’ only when criticism instead of praise was offered?”

Singa Crew, cyber-activist based in Singapore

The original thread is here for references purposes:

http://www.sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/311471

It has already expired so readers will not be able to post there. Comments may be posted on this thread instead. The reason why I am revisiting that particular thread is because of this:

Singapore to sell off state electricity provider
Nesa Subrahmaniyan and Dinakar Sethuraman

Bloomberg

Posted to the web on: 08 July 2008

SINGAPORE — Singapore’s government-owned investment company, Temasek, has put the city-state’s largest utility up for sale, further opening the electricity sector to competition after selling Tuas Power earlier this year.

The sale of Senoko Power would be completed by the end of next year, Temasek said yesterday .

Built at a cost of S$2,6bn ($1,9bn), Senoko’s 3300MW of capacity supplies 30% of the island state’s electricity needs last year. The company earned S$245m before interest, taxes and depreciation on revenue of S$2,49b n for the year to March 31 .

The sale of Senoko Power comes at a time when mergers and acquisitions have slumped as the collapse of the US subprime mortgage market restricts banks from lending and curbs corporate purchases.

Transactions in Asia’s power industry have totalled $12,9bn this year, less than a fifth of those last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

“Of course there’s the market downturn and rising fuel costs, but Temasek has got more traction going from the sale of Tuas,” said Simon Powell, head of power research at CLSA in Hong Kong. “The price matters, but there were parties, including banks, that were eager for Tuas and lost out, and Senoko offers a chance to get into a stable cash-flow business.”

Sembcorp Industries, whose electricity unit accounts for about half of profit, would bid for Temasek’s two power generators after losing out to China Huaneng Group for Tuas Power, company president Tang Kin Fei said last month.

In March, Beijing-based China Huaneng agreed to pay S$4,24bn for Tuas, the smallest of Temasek’s three power generators, which supply 90% of the island state’s electricity.

Temasek, which manages more than $100bn in assets, last year revived a plan abandoned six years ago to sell the Singapore companies in order to tap rising demand for power assets. It has said it plans to sell its utilities, which also include Power Seraya , by early next year .

Senoko Power and Power Seraya were transferred in 2001 to Temasek from Singapore Power, the main electricity supplier, after the government separated ownership of generators from transmission and distribution. Temasek had owned Tuas Power since 1995.

The three generators are barred from holding each other’s shares, according to rules set by the government’s Energy Market Authority.

The MSCI index of regional utilities declined 20% this year, compared with a 22% fall in the broader MSCI Asia Pacific index, excluding Japan.

The Singapore government has been gradually introducing competition in parts of the economy, including banking, utilities and telecommunications.

Deregulation of the electricity industry started in 1995 and in the gas market in 2000.

After completing the second phase of liberalisation in 2006, 75% of total electricity demand was open to retail competition, and the total number of so-called contestable consumers rose to 10000, according to the Energy Market Authority.

Point_blank, stop using 'Alice in Wonderland' logic here.

 

To imply that material found on internet is worthless is not founded. Facts are facts regardless of the source.

 

A Wikipedia article stated Lee Hsien Loong is the current Prime Minister of Singapore. Does that mean it isn't true because Wikipedia mentioned it?

 

Crew

 

 

Point_blank said:

"I tried to be open minded and watch the video..."

"Out of the millions of citizens in Singapore, hundreds of other political figures, why are only 2 of them incarcerated under ISA act?''

My reply:

Open minded my a**! Please, you are not fooling anyone. Your post was filled with lies and I am going to start debunking your biggest one.

Only 2 people were incarcerated under the ISA act? Are you sure??

Instances of the application of the ISA:

• 1963 – Operation Coldstore, a joint Malaysian-Singaporean operation to arrest 117 opposition party and labor union leaders, some of whom were detained for up to 17 years.
• 1966 – Chia Thye Poh, a member of the Barisan Sosialis, was detained without trial for 32 years under the ISA. He spent the last nine years under forms of house arrest and civil rights restrictions, including confinement on the island of Sentosa.
• 1987 – In a security operation known as Operation Spectrum, 22 Roman Catholic church and social activists and professionals were detained under the ISA. They were accused of being members of a dangerous Marxist conspiracy bent on subverting the government by force and replacing it with a Marxist state.
• December 2001 – Fifteen alleged members of the Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) militant group were arrested for involvement in the Singapore embassies attack plot.^[4]
• August–September 2002 – Another 21 alleged members of JI were arrested.

Taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Security_Act_%28Singapore%29

Point_blank, either you can only count up to 2 or you were lying.

You went on to say:

"these ex-political figures can make all sorts of allegations and claims just to cover up their raggedly communistic racist asses..."

My reply:

"However, with new archives opened up in London, evidence linking Lim Chin Siong and Barisan Sosialis to be communist seems vague at the most. In other words, there was no direct evidence linking Lim Ching Siong and Barisan Sosialis to communist ideas.

Furthermore, according to Mathew Jones' article, Operation Coldstore was more a barter deal as Tunku Abdul Rahman stated that he would not take in Singapore if the Borneo Territories were not given up by the British and if there was no detention of the radical leftists in Singapore."

Taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cold_Store

By ex-political figures, are you including Chia Thye Poh? Why don't you go up to him, look him straight in the eye and call him a 'commie'? That is, if you have the guts to face braver and greater men than yourself.

Point_blank, if you want to discuss politics here, the least you could do is get your facts straight. Posting blatant lies here will only expose yourself as a liar and a PAP propagandist.

Crew

 

 

This was posted on the sammyboyforum by local activist Uncle Yap.

http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2008/05/familee-leegime-dogs-purchased-lots-of.html

famiLEE LEEgime Dogs Purchased Lots of Tak Boleh Tahan T-Shirts!

I have come to know that famiLEE LEEgime's dogs had purchase a significant quantity of Tak Boleh Tahan T-shirts. This became very obvious because famiLEE LEEgime's dogs can be told very clearly apart from opposition supporters that we are very familiar.

I wouldn't reveal how many had the famiLEE LEEgime dogs purchased, nor when, nor from where. But it is now necessary for me to preempt what they might do with these Tak Boleh Tahan T-shirts. :-)

They are simply up to getting themselves dressed in these Tak Boleh Tahan T-shirts to do something silly hoping to create backlash to the on going Tak Boleh Tahan Campaign.

My post here to preempt whatever they might do with these Tak Boleh Tahan T-shirts will thwart their objective sufficiently. :-)

***************************************************************************************************

My reply:

Thanks for bringing this to the public's attention.

This psyops tactic is nothing new. They did it before during the 70s. Tan Wah Piow was a student leader then, and during one negotiation with the PAP, some troublemakers present (Tan didn't think they were from his group) started smashing things up. That gave the PAP the perfect excuse to label Tan as a law breaker and to further clamp down on those with democratic ideals.

Now that the Tak Boleh Tahan campaign has made progress, they (PAP) probably want to hijack the symbol and turn it against the democracy movement.

What can we do? Spread the news around. Warn everyone. Assure everyone that the SDP, activists and their supporters are well-behaved law-abiding citizens. Please do not confuse us with the State-trained gangsters who are planning to hijack the Tak Boleh Tahan symbol.

Crew

'Opposition for opposition's sake' like 'art for art's sake' are overused terms and just like classical opera - Everybody knows it means something but nobody knows what exactly!

 

When Mr Yaw said he did not believe in 'opposition for opposition's sake', it would have been helpful if he explained his reasons for joining the opposition in the first place. Was it because he believed in the WP's manifesto or for other reasons? I sure as heck don't get it! If he believed PAP MPs to be 'better', why did he contest in the last election? Opposition for opposition's sake? And why did he join the Workers Party in the first place if he believed the PAP to be 'better'?

 

Mr Yaw also said: 'ultimately this WP candidate has to convince me that he/she has what it take to better serve the interests of our country and the constituents to win my vote.'

 

This statement reveals alot. His fellow WP candidates have to work at 'convincing' him before he can decide if he wants to vote for them! In other words, Mr Yaw is unsure of WP's policies and candidates! Why on earth is he still in the Workers Party then? Go join the PAP lah!

 

Now back to his 'opposition for opposition's sake' remark… When Mr Low spoke up against the obscene increase in ministerial pay, was he just 'opposing for opposition's sake'? Mr Yaw, can you explain to us what that term means to you? Are there certain PAP's policies opposition politicians shouldn't oppose? Are there certain PAP's policies (or all of them) opposition politicians should endorse? I guess what I am trying to say is: To be a 'responsible' and 'moderate' opposition politician, and avoid accusations of 'opposition for opposition's sake', does he have to oppose none of the PAP's policies and endorse all of them?

 

Crew

oxford mushroom,

What do you mean by my 'nonsensical nitpicking about whether Mas was arrested at our borders'? You do not think it is important whether our security agencies do their job or let their foreign counterparts do it for them?

As for why I mentioned the Commissioner of Police... Let me quote from an article on the SDP website:

"Likewise, the effective and fail-safe operation of the CCTV system is beyond the control of officers charged with the day-to-day guarding of the detainees.

Similarly, the guards cannot be responsible for the "cement ledge" that enabled Mr Selamat to climb out of the toilet or for the positioning of the so-called "weak perimeter fence."

Such physical structures can only be put in place by planners and administrators of the Centre. Who in the Singapore Police Force is responsible for the installation, design or construction of the WRDC's features?

The Director of the Internal Security Department and his superior the Commissioner of Police, of course."

http://www.yoursdp.org/media-release/30-media-release/411-mr-wong-kan-seng-resign

Someone mentioned on the comments page the Director of ISD do not report to anyone in the Police Force. Be that as it may, let me ask you who is ultimately responsible for police operations to find and capture Mas Selamat after his escape? If not the Commissioner, then who else?

By the way, I don't agree with the 'complacency' bull crap. I say we have a CULTURE OF MISPLACED PRIORITY instead of culture of complacency. Let me show you a classic example:

http://www.yoursdp.org/component/content/article/1-singapore/241-abuse-incompetence-and-arrogance-personified

And who can forget the times when they deployed dozen odd officers against 4 silent protesters in front of the CPF building and several riot vans against Ultraman action figures - yeah those death rays can be deadly. And several dozen officers against Chee Soon Juan and his sister at Speakers Corner. At one point, I counted at least 5 officers surrounding one Chee Siok Chin. The police officers were anything but complacent then.

Oh yeah, on the day of the first Tak Boleh Tahan protest, the police sprung into action just minutes after the protest started. Complacent? No way!

No, it is not a culture of complacency but one of misplaced priority. And that is because public resources are hijacked by the ruling elite for their personal agenda.

There are some questions we should also be asking.

On the day of Mas Selamat's escape and during the ongoing search for him, how many ISD or police officers were deployed to follow members of the SDP around Singapore? And until the order came through to look out for Mas Selamat at the borders, were the custom officers actively looking out for threats to national security or Chee Soon Juan (to see if he tries to leave Singapore for some democracy forums)?

Crew

 

Hello fellows and moderators,

This issue of hiring cheaper foreign talents to replace our over-paid ministers have been brought up several times already. I was wondering if it would be possible to consolidate all the posts into one single thread? Maybe make it a sticky because I do not see the ministers agreeing to a pay cut any time soon, so this topic will always have currency.

Here Lee 2008 suggested replacing ministers with foreign talents:

http://www.sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/316227

And last year, I started this 'Appeal to World Leaders' thing. Basically, it explores the idea of replacing over-paid ministers with cheaper (and better?) foreign talents in the form of a spoof article.

http://www.sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/309288

How about starting an online petition to see how many people like this idea? Quite frankly, their latest 'China beer lady' propaganda really tests the limits of incredibility.  And I see the clip on www.mrbrownshow.com has gotten a lot of comments. :-)

Crew

 

 

I can understand how drawer feels. He did not say it in his post, but I think one of the reasons he put down the PAP in front of foreigners is a way of asking for help. That and to warn those applying for PR or citizenship about the real state of affairs in Singapore.

Think about it. Many Singaporeans have already been brainwashed thoroughly by the PAP, so it would be difficult to have a meaningful discussion with them on topics such as human rights. And foreigners (those from 1st World countries) are more likely to respond with constructive advice and sympathy. They may also be in a better position to help - by pressuring their congressmen or MPs to take notice of human rights abuses in Singapore.

My only advice is to avoid making rhetorical speeches in front of your foreign friends. That may just turn them away instead of getting their attention.

Crew

Hello Oxford Mushroom,

Just to clear up some misunderstandings in your post.

Singapore authorities did NOT arrest Mas Selamat. He was arrested in Indonesia and handed over to Singapore.

If you are talking about the terrorist threat to blow up one of our MRT stations, that plot was not foiled by our security agencies. The tip-off was given to them by American intelligence.

Pandering to western ideas of human rights? LOL

Yeah right. The ISD are liberals who respect human rights. That’s a good one. You have what it takes to be a comedian (that’s a compliment!). Have you thought about sending this in to www.talkingcock.com?

Don’t give me that ‘due to complacency of the guards’ crap. What are you? A spokeperson for the Ministry? What about the ‘complacency of the Director of ISD’, ‘complacency of the Minister for Home Affairs’ or ‘complacency of the Commissioner of Police’?

Then they released some cock and bull story of a ‘toilet escape’. As ChiBet has pointed out above, the whole COI report is full of holes. Why not just tell us Mas Selamat was abducted by aliens? Singapore has a X-Files fan community, so at least some people would believe their story.

Crew

According to this Straits Times forum letter (Wed edition) written by a Peng Jiarong, we are facing a serious threat to national security.

Quote:

"In Britain, the authorities recently warned that security agencies are monitoring about 30 active terrorist cells. I am sure Singapore is nowhere near that situation."

How true! We are definitely nowhere near that situation! While the security agencies in Britain are doing their jobs, what are our ISD and SPF doing?

Busy bullying peaceful protesters and opposition politicians, that's what!

You know what this means fellows? We could have like 30 terrorist cells here and the authorities are not monitoring them because they have 'important' stuff to do, such as bullying peaceful protesters to make sure the PAP stay in power.

Crew

Hi there Poh Ah Pak, thanks for your reply.

Yes, I am well aware of the fact that Dr Chee's books are available at the libraries.

But the thing is... His books are not placed prominently so that passer-bys will, out of curiosity or act on their impulse, pick up a copy and start reading. You actually have to know about Dr Chee's and his works in the first place before you can or want to search for his books at the neighbourhood library.

This CSJ Book Club is about reaching the 'unreachable'. You know, the ones who don't visit this forum or know very little about Dr Chee Soon Juan. These people will not wake up one morning and suddenly decide to visit the library and search for his books.

I already admitted that this Book Club will not be as effective as advertising in the mainstream media, but we know that's not going to happen. In the absence of other ideas, why not give this project a shot? It is something anyone can do at anytime. No planning or huge budget required.

Borrowing CSJ's books from the libraries will not help the SDP financially. Buying his books will.

And yes, I agree with you about ending the State's monopoly on the media. But that's a grand plan that will take much time and resources to achieve. On the other hand, the CSJ Book Club project is something anybody can do at anytime. This is a chance for the average joes out there, who are too afraid to participate in public protests, to do something.

Crew

hmm... just to be absolutely sure I am being understood here. Because someone on another forum thought I was offering free books...

I am not offering forumners free books. I am encouraging them to buy CSJ's books and disseminate them amongst the populace by means of guerrilla communication.

In this case, by leaving copies of his books in random public places for people to see and pick up. Like I said, this is not the most efficient way of doing things but since conventional channels (such as distributing the books through big bookstores and newspaper vendors) are closed to us, we can only resort to 'guerrilla tactics'.

What I hope to achieve is to have copies of CSJ's books popping up randomly in public, to be picked up by interested members of public and to have these people become new members of the Book Club. The Ripple Effect is what I am talking about. And ultimately, these people who read the books would be educated on the issues affecting all Singaporeans. There you go, a new batch of educated voters.

And the costs involved in such a big scale project? Like I said, if I were the only one involved, it would amount to nothing. But if 50-100 people go out there and buy a copy each, that's something. And each person would probably end up paying less than 20 bucks for a copy. All they have to do is make a commitment to buy one book a month, and this movement would be on to a big thing. How much is 20 a month for an average person? 2 movie tickets?

I don't know about others, but I sure am more than willing to give up 2 movie tickets a month for a good cause. Especially since all Singaporeans (middle or working class) are affected by the issues Chee Soon Juan wrote about in his books. If they are not willing (yet) to take to the streets in protest, then at least they should know what's going on around them.

Crew

Questions we should be asking:

a) Is the source of our unhappiness structural or internal?

b) Are Singaporeans depressed because of the oppressive and uncaring policies implemented by the PAP or simply a state of mind?

By the way, 'unhappy' is a generic term and covers a broad spectrum of emotions ranging from 'aww... I am unhappy because mommy did not get me a pony for Christmas'

to

'I lost my job to a 'FT', now I can't pay the mortgage for my HDB flat and my wife just left me. I think I will go kill myself'.

Instead of asking Singaporeans if they are 'happy', a more accurate question would be: Are Singaporeans throwing themselves in front of incoming trains because they live under an oppressive regime and see no possibility of change?

'Happy'! Hah! Trust the PAP to trivialise the lives of Singaporeans with one word. They are truly the masters of disinfo!

Crew

 

Culture jamming is a resistance movement to cultural hegemony and the homogenous nature of popular culture, executed by means of guerrilla communication.

On a more general level, culture jamming can serve as a vehicle for bringing awareness of various social movements.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_jamming

Introducing the Chee Soon Juan Book Club! (CSJ Book Club)

Who can join?

Everyone!

How to join?

By declaring yourself a member and getting a copy of CSJ's books. Pick a book . Any book. Hey, get all of 'em if you want.

What we do?

I have been promoting CSJ's books since last year on both the sammyboy forum and here. So far, we have seen very limited success. I have no way of tracking exactly how many copies were sold since my 'advertisements' started appearing, but I can tell you that the last time I went to the Select Book Shop, I was informed CSJ's books were all sold out.

That is good, but not good enough. We are still not reaching the larger part of the populace who:

a) do not shop at Select Book Shop or the Politics section of Kinokuniya.

b) do not visit this forum.

What to do?

Here's what we as individuals can do (without getting into trouble with the police).

Buy CSJ's books and disseminate them amongst the populace by leaving a copy or copies of the books in public places. You know. Restaurants, parks or bus-stops. Take your pick.

Leave a message with the book. Something along the lines of:

"You can either choose to read the Straits Times and believe in whatever the PAP wants you to believe, or you can read this book and we show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Help spread the message of democracy and pass this book on when you finish reading it."

It will be helpful to leave a link to the SDP website so anyone picking up the book will know where to get more copies.

How helpful is this?

Well, not as helpful as putting an advertisement on TV or the Straits Times, but we know that is not going to happen. We just have to work with what's available to us.

And it will not have as much impact as a full scale public protest, but we already debated this to death already. Many of us, for one reason or other, cannot or will not go out there and defy direct police orders. Fine. But that doesn't mean we should just sit at home and do nothing!

This CSJ Book Club project enables us to:

a) spread the message of democracy. That's a big deal, especially since we are bringing the message to the part of the populace out of reach of the forums. New demographic.

b) support the SDP.

... without risk of exposure or getting into trouble with the authorities. Some 'critics' may call it 'pathetic', but I say it beats doing nothing.

And sure, if I am the lone ranger doing this, it will not have any impact whatsoever. But if 50 people reading this go out there and get a book, that's a good start to our project. Think about the ripple effect that will cause!

What we hope to achieve?

Ultimately, we hope to see a new batch of educated voters: people who understand the issues, can see through PAP propaganda and vote responsibly.

In the short term, we are just interested in getting the message of democracy across to those still untouched by the internet forums.

I am not going to be overly optimistic and say we can start a counter-culture movement just like that. Some times, the books we leave out might just get trashed or picked up by a Young PAP.

On the other hand, our books may get picked up by interested parties and cause a ripple effect! We will never know unless we give it a shot.

To those 'critics' who ask: Why?

My answer is: Why not?

Crew

Will4,

When they say 'locals not keen on F&B industry', you have to ask yourself which 'locals' did they interview? If you ask 10 NUS graduates if they want a career waiting tables, you are going to get 10 'NO's.

And you have to understand this: nobody will tell you they are 'keen' to work as waiters or dishwashers. So that's really the wrong question to ask. The question should be: how many locals need jobs in the F&B industry to survive?

The next question we should be asking is: By giving away jobs in bulk to foreigners, how many Singaporeans who depend on F&B jobs are affected?

Crew

 

Cabinet changes... Here in Singapore, that's like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Crew

Actually they tried that stunt before. Sometime last year. Here's a link to the discussion thread going on at that time.

 

http://www.sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/302445

 

I understand the government actually invited foreign reporters to come and throughout their expense-paid trips, those reporters went on their guided tours and the 'happy' side of Singapore was shown to them.

 

They probably left believing wholeheartedly in the happiness of Singaporeans.

 

The government must think we have very short memories to try and pull another stunt like that.

 

Crew

Oh someone asked how and why would China hold us hostage with our power plants.

 

Let's say the China government wants to strongarm our government into signing new deals or whatever. And the Singapore government say no or try to negotiate.

 

Fine. With the power plants in their hands, China can play hard balls. What happens if they shut down just one power plant? With one third of our power supply gone, you don't think that will affect us?

 

Ok, there's two more power plants right? So they step in and say: 'Look if you want us to produce more power, you gotta pay more.' And our bills go right up through the sky.

 

And before another bureaucrat step in to debunk my argument with 'The corporations won't do this 'cause they want to make money too.' Let me ask you: if the power plants are backed by the Communist Party, what is one or 3 power plants in SE Asia worth to them??

 

If whatever deal China wants Singapore to agree to is good enough and can make up for the losses of the power plants, this 'denial of service' attack could last for months. Then who would be the ones suffering?

 

Now let us work from the premises that these corporations are coming with honest intentions. We have to ask several important questions:

 

1) Would the power plants come directly under Chinese management?

 

2) If the answer is yes, would the Chinese managers retrench Singaporean workers and bring in Chinese workers who can work well under their system?

 

3) Can we trust their administrative capabilities? According to the news, China has been hit by one power outage after another. In summer and in winter.

 

Some links here for you folks to go through:

 

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/b/blackouts_and_brownouts_electrical/index.html

 

http://spectrum.ieee.org/oct04/4042

 

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/china/index.html?query=BLACKOUTS+AND+BROWNOUTS+(ELECTRICAL)&field=des&match=exact

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/world/asia/09china.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/world/asia/04snow.html

 

It seems to me that while bad weather played a part, their management skills (or lack of) should also share the blame.

 

Crew

Originally posted by purpledragon84:

hmm.. i'm not sure about that so i wun comment abt it..

but what they are doing now is that the singapore power market is governed by the Energy Market Authority, and under it there's the Energy Market Company(EMC).. EMC is in charge of the sales of electricity from the generation companies(aka genco) to the consumers..

between the gencos and the consumers, there is the transmission and distribution system(aka transco), run by SP PowerGrid, basically its the wiring business.. the gencos are the part which the temasek holdings is selling becoz the transco is run by them still.. and without wire, no electricity.. so basically, the govt still directly in control of the system.. the transco will remain a monopoly becoz its not feasible to let two companies run two different cable systems all over singapore as wires are undergrd.

how the gencos sell electricity is not "i want sell how much per unit, i sell".. the gencos have to sign agreements with EMC to take part in the bidding system before they are allowed to generate.. and as i mentioned, lowest bidder sells his electricity to the public.. and this bidding is half-hourly bid system.. they will send in 48 sets of bids(meaning for 1day).. and the lowest bidder will sell..

this way, they are in control of the whole thing, just that they see who can sell the cheapest priced energy.. they choose not to lower the rates for a few possible reasons..

one of them is coz monopolies do not have incentives to cut costs during generation, eg, use more efficient generators, buy better equipment, whereas for pte companies, lower cost = more profit..

 

Well purpledragon seems to be looking at the issue with a bureaucratic eye. With his 'gencos have to do this' and 'have to do that', he is assuming Chinese corporations are willing to play by our rules. That things will happen the way they are supposed to. And that when things go wrong, our leeders can take them on.

 

Remember Suzhou?

 

purpledragon also made a logical flaw in his argument. 

 

'the gencos are the part which the temasek holdings is selling becoz the transco is run by them still.. and without wire, no electricity.. so basically, the govt still directly in control of the system.. '

 

Well purpledragon, let me present my case using Economics 101. And I will keep things simple without all that technical jargon you spouted...

 

Anyone remember the supply - demand chain they studied in school? Using the vegetables market as an example. If Malaysia (the supplier) jacks up the price of the vegs they sell to the market hawkers (middlemen or distributer), the consumers (us) WILL end up paying more! We have seen it happen before. Unless the market hawkers absorb the extra cost for us.

 

Moral of the story: What the supplier does to the price of goods at their end of the supply chain will affect the consumer at the other end.

 

In the case of our power plants, does anyone here seriously think the PAP will want to absorb the extra costs for us if China jacks up the price? purpledragon is writing from a bureaucratic perspective: assuming the government will be benevolent and look out for our best interests and ensures lowest price. Yeah, right...

 

And don't cite commercial laws supposedly in place to prevent price fixing. Like I said, do you think China will play by our rules?

 

Remember Suzhou?

 

purpledragon's lower cost = more profit does not make sense here. It may be true that when you are selling items like t-shirts, low prices will attract more customers and hence more money coming in.

 

But in the case of the power plants... Like what another forumner pointed out: If they lower the price, we still need electricity. If they jack up the price, we still need electricity. Either way, we need electricity. And you don't think they will jack up their prices to maximise profits??

 

And don't give me the crap about 'privatising'. Even if they sell to 3 different Chinese companies, anyone with a brain can see through this wayang. All Chinese corporations either work with the Communist Party or at least have some Party officials on their board of directors.

 

Gee... You don't think they will close ranks and do a little price fixing?

 

Crew