Very succinctly different when it comes to money and politics, mind you.

Lesson One

Man selling kidney due to poverty and circumstances - this one gets two weeks jail plus one more week for not being able to pay his fine, the loser.

Man buying kidney because he has the money and “had no intention to exploit the poor and socially disadvantaged.” - now Mr Tang who of course has no problem paying a measly fine of S$17,000 gets to walk away after only one day in jail - and even that is discounted to three hours.

Lesson learnt - if you are rich in Singapore, you can get away with anything, even someone else’s kidney. Money talks, bullshit walks.

**

Lesson Two

When it comes to politics, there is a big difference between EAST and WEST. And it’s all WP’s fault for not applying to have the cycling event in WEST Coast Park. Tsk.

Of course it has nothing to do with double standards, dictatorship, oppression and suppression.

Professor Ho (Senior Minister of State, Ministry of Law & Ministry of Home Affairs) said to Mr Low Thia Khiang of WP, ‘You may be well-behaving, but there may be other people whom you come across when you cycle who may stop you, may want to debate with you and that may attract a crowd, and therefore will result in problems the police want to avoid.’

Of course, people will not do this to the PAP team! Who, in their right mind, would debate with people who simply 1. do not listen and 2. do not accept any other views except their own?

Conversely, following the same line of argument, it is correct of Professor Ho to assume that Singaporeans would then love to engage with WP . So astute, this Professor Ho.

After throwing a prima donna tantrum, Ms Lee Bee Wah later back-wheeled - “I didn’t say Antony and the coach will be sacked” and “I don’t want to be entangled in this whole issue”.

In my house, if my children were to pull such a stunt, there will be consequences. I love my children dearly but I will not accommodate lying and twisting of words - herein lies the issue of honesty, responsibility and integrity.

When contacted by ST last night, her first words were “I’m bruised”, which indicated a lack of remorse in her actions and a self righteous indulgence.

When asked if she would have done things differently in hindsight, she replied,

‘No, I don’t think there was anything wrong. Maybe the only thing is that I would not have talked to Peh Shing Huei. My intention was blown out of proportion.’

See, people, it’s all Peh Shing Huei’s fault. Of course.

I think she should zip it because the more she talks, the more she reveals the lack of integrity and responsibility.

This woman is not fit to be the president of the Pussycat Dolls Fan Club, much less our STTA and much less a MP. This is the same MP who talks about “pang sai” in parliament. How unbecoming and inappropriate, not to mention, extremely crass.

**

In a bid to stop the downward spiral of matters, Dr Balakrishnan, the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports said,

‘I’m very concerned about the way it seems to be spinning out of control because I don’t want a situation where people say things or do things which destroy relationships, relationships and partnerships which we need in order to keep Team Singapore intact and in order for us to perform at the highest level,’ he said.

I guess it is too late. 过河拆桥. The trust, relationship, partnership, faith, goodwill and morale in question have already been destroyed. Given the trigger happy tendency to fire and replace people at a whim -  and these are people who are deemed to have performed - good luck to getting your next team for London.

Credit: Chua Chin Hon of ST

Singapore Table Tennis Association (STTA) president Lee Bee Wah told The Sunday Times yesterday that the services of team manager Antony Lee are not needed anymore.

The shock move, which some view as not only too rash but also harsh, is sure to put a dampener on the team’s scheduled celebrations when they arrive back in Singapore tomorrow. Mr Lee will return to the Singapore Sports Council, where he was seconded from.

Ms Lee, who took over as STTA president last month, her first foray into sports, said: ‘I have a new team and will have a new CEO and technical director. It is best that the manager is chosen by them. Antony is welcome to apply for the position when we ask for applications.’

But a clearly upset Mr Lee, 39, did not take kindly to the news.

‘I find it funny that after we achieved the greatest success in 48 years, I am no longer needed. It is baffling,’ he said, close to tears, yesterday.

The silver - won by the women’s team of Li Jiawei, Wang Yuegu and Feng Tianwei - was Singapore’s first since 1960.

‘I’m surprised she did not tell me directly. That would be the courteous thing to do. I have to hear this from third parties. After doing so much for Singapore, I deserve a little respect,’ he said.

Ms Lee, an engineer who is also an MP for Ang Mo Kio GRC, had said last Thursday that Mr Lee and the team’s head coach Liu Guodong should be responsible for the ‘Gao Ning incident’ at the Games.

Gao, Singapore’s top men’s table tennis player ranked 12th in the world, had to play without a coach on courtside. He crashed 0-4 to unheralded Tan Ruiwu of Croatia in the first round.

More here.

**

Someone screwed up and Gao Ning didn’t win. That is not acceptable, seeing how much we spent on buying bringing Gao Ning over. Of course, “someone will have to be accountable for this”. Of course. Otherwise, how does PAP account for all that money down the drain? Of course, there has to be a fall guy and you can be sure it is not the one who said that “our ministers are only drawing S$1.2 million.”

Who dares to say it is an honest mistake - let’s move on?!

No, of course not.

Accountability

As an MP and as the newly elected president of STTA, did she handle this matter well?

The lack of social grace and the PR gaffe is so appalling that Project 0812 chairman Ng Ser Miang said he was ‘shocked at the timing as well as the manner in which this decision had been made‘.

1. She didn’t even know how many accredited coaches were brought to the Olympics. It was 4 and she claimed there were 5. This is unacceptable. Someone has been sleeping on her job. Who then “have to be accountable for this?”
2. The Olympics Games are not over yet and to make such a huge PR gaffe in the face of the world is unacceptable. We have set ourselves up as a laughing stock. Who then “have to be accountable for this?”
3. Why the choice for such an unfortunate timing? Can’t it wait till the team is back and for a decision to be made after proper and fair investigations? I can’t help but feel that it is a play for the eye of international media attention. Well, not all publicity is good publicity. Who then “have to be accountable for this?”
4. Gao Ning is a Olympic competitor and one of the top Table Tennis Men’s players. Does a player of such calibre need hand holding from a coach? Does he need to be babysit by a coach to win? Is it crucial? Should he himself not bear some responsibility and “accountability” for his own poor performance?
   
5. Sportsmanship - a basic trait that should be proudly worn on the sleeve of every STTA official and member, is being mocked and trampled upon. The president herself made a mockery of the spirit of sportsmanship. Who then “have to be accountable for this?”
6. The manager was not extended the basic courtesy of being informed of such a grave decision. He had to know from third party sources. Is this the best that a MP and president and committee member on various committees could do in a matter of international impact and exposure? Where is the social grace?
7. Last but not least, if there were not enough accredited coaches sent to the Olympics - such a huge event in the eyes of the government, that we have to spend millions to buy a medal - it is poor planning at its epitome. Shouldn’t it then be the responsibility of the president herself to ensure such a slip should not have happened? Who then “have to be accountable for this?”

Mr Ng said, ‘I’m quite puzzled as to how a decision like that can be made by the STTA president, who has been in office for just over a month.’

Well, I am sure the whole of Singapore is equally puzzled, if not disturbed. 过河拆桥 - is this in the spirit of Singapore?

Just a few days ago, our PM urged us to be more gracious as a nation and to improve on our social graces. It seems that his directive might have missed Ms Lee.

**

Additional reading:

Andrew touches on courtesy and professionalism.

Yaw Shin Leong (WP) recommends STTA to review the future of its current president

Looking back when I blogged about Foreign Talent (FT) two years ago, I feel now I had sounded cold, callous and hardnosed then. And it was true. I tackled life and what it dealt me with in that manner - cold, callous, relentless and pitbullish. After all, this is not a welfare state. There are no handouts. When you are in an abusive marriage, when money becomes an issue, when you have to be steely and think on your feet so that your children have food, when you have to be independent, fight for survival and a better life for yourself and your children - you would probably be what I was like. Which explains why I am so fiercely protective of what I have now. I worked for it.

Fast forward two years later, life is much better. I am independent and I can have what I need and I want, for myself and my children. Strangely, now I am more empathetic towards my fellow people whereas in the past, I was contemptuous of their defeatist attitudes. There are of course others, who in their perceived state of security and wealth, cannot be bothered about the Foreign Talent policy because they think their jobs or industry is such that they will not be affected by FT. And thus they make a big show of generosity and acceptance towards FT. I cannot respect or accept this magnanimosity. In all reality, it is selfish and short sighted thinking.

My view towards Foreign Talent and the policy is still the same though. I object to the lax policy that allows any Tom, Muthu and Xiao Qiang in. I still think that Foreign Talent should be exactly that - talented individuals in aspects of either highly specialized knowledge, industry or experience. These people contribute to the greater good of our economy and be rightfully compensated for their efforts and contribution.

To address the issue of a non existential minimum wage system here, foreign labour serves to fill in the lower tier jobs eg. construction, heavy labour, service and even retail.

I think it is safe to assume that the locals generally do not object to the top tier of foreign talent and the lower tier of foreign labour.

The problem that most of us have to grapple with -  is the so called mid-level tier, which should not exist in the first place. After all, tell me, which other countries have a immigration policy as lax as that of Singapore? It’s literally “come, all ye people”.

This mid-level tier consists of too many folks like our people out there -  averagely holding a diploma or degree, typically in the IT or customer service industry. One good example would be the famous Amit Nagpal who had the misfortune of having his personal details CSI-ed, after writing a rather vacuous letter to the Straits Times insisting on rights on par with that of citizens.

His qualifications and experience were revealed to be on par, if not inferior to that of one of us. What do you have to offer then? How many Amit Nagpals are there out there, depriving our locals of these jobs they could have had? Are these “FTs” really asking for a significantly lower salary? Many of these qualifications and experience as proclaimed in their applications tend to be largely exaggerated too, as many a recruiters might have found out. Some, I have learnt, were even caught redhanded in brandishing bogus degrees. Why we would tolerate such faux pas in the Immigration screening process is beyond me. *edit: update - After considering the point raised by Cobalt Paladin, I agree that it is on the onus of the employer to ensure that we are getting monkeys and not peanuts. This might be something to explore further.

So, where is the wisdom in a policy that brings in people - not to complement with one’s own, but to clash and conflict with one’s own? We see ourselves as  a developed nation and yes, we should welcome immigrants to encourage growth and challenges. But there has to be a criteria, a justification, an economic and social thermostat to gauge the influx. Not an indiscriminate “come all ye Tom, Muthu and Xiao Qiang” laxity for sure.

Some points for consideration would be:-

• same obligations and responsibilities as citizens (eg National Service) I think it is logical to assume that no, these people are not going to sacrifice for the nation and do two years of National Srvice. That’s fine. Just don’t expect the same privileges and rights as the citizens and no one will make a peep.
• Contributions to the nation - as the government loves to reiterate that we are not a charity nation and not a welfare state, the same shrewd pragmaticism should be applied to the selection process in FT. How much value can you bring to this partnership? What can you offer? Admittedly Singapore is a most well run and excellent corporation country for business and work opportunities, so what are you bringing as an offering?
• Remember and honor the pledge, especially this part - “based on justice and equality“. Are we really equal, or some people are more equal than others? For us to really accept FTs into our society, equality is a sensitive issue.
• Ever wondered why people aren’t as vocal or unhappy about Lim Kim San, Khoo Swee Say and Tan Howe Liang? All three were not Singapore born and bred. All three won honors for Singapore which we gladly accepted and were proud of. Why? There is a Cantonese saying - “we don’t need to draw the picture on the wall” for you to get it, do we?

Having said the above, of course I disagree with what Vivian Balakrishnan said when he addressed the students in Republic Polytechnic last year:

The next concern was raised was about foreigners entering the workforce and leaving Singaporeans with fewer places. Dr. Balakrishnan’s response to this concern was that Singapore is an open country. Therefore, foreigners must come. Singapore is a place of opportunity and there are many more good opportunities for locals as well as for foreigners. Yes, there will be competition, but healthy competition.

It’s a parallel argument. How open is “open” and what constitutes as “open”? Who determines that it should be “open” in the first place?  On a lateral note, how about some healthy competition for the opposition too? That’s when they will bring in the One People, One Nation, One Singapore spiel. Which should be about unity and equality, but which was twisted into One Country, One Party, One Dream. The nonsense we have to put up with, I tell you.

This of course, is the same guy who sprouted this gem during a review of the PA scheme:

Dr Lily Neo: Sir, I want to check with the Minister again when he said on the strict criteria on the entitlement for PA recipients. May I ask him what is his definition of “subsistence living”? Am I correct to say that, out of $260 per month for PA recipients, $100 goes to rental, power supply and S&C and leaving them with only $5 a day to live on? Am I correct to say that any basic meal in any hawker centre is already $2.50 to $3.00 per meal? Therefore, is it too much to ask for just three meals a day as an entitlement for the PA recipients?

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?

The hot brash passionate anger of the past is no longer. In its place, is a cold steely anger that will not cease its silent scream. Where is this “justice and equality” of our pledge, I wonder.

**

Back to the Olympic issue which started this debate on Foreign Talent. Contrary to claims that the Americans are “happy and accepting” about welcoming FTs for the Olympics, this seem to indicate otherwise. Please bear in mind that this is only with a mere offering of a Green Card and no mention of moolah being thrown frivolously to entice those FTs. In any case, even if Americans are really all accepting of this disturbing trend, why should we have to blindly follow suit? I object to a unilateral argument that if America does it, we should do it too. One of the reasons why we are educated - to think and analyse objectively and not follow the herd blindly.

I am also puzzled as to the apparent inability to isolate the point of reference. The spotlight is not on the players. There is no argument that yes, they have trained very hard for many years, suffered for their passion, and deserve every penny of their prize. No one begrudges them that. The point of contention is the way the government engineered the propaganda of how they brought us national glory and how proud we should be that they are Singaporeans (highly debatable, this point, to some of us). They may feel like they are one of us, this, no one else will know but them. They might feel the connection after living here for a few years, yes. But don’t foist the propaganda wholesale on us. It is mildly insulting and extremely inelegant.

I can be happy for them and I am happy for them as individuals that they made good. However in the spirit of the Olympics and on the level of national pride, I have my doubts.

I wonder why we are being so machiavellian about winning a medal. I see people tooting about Singapore having won a medal. That, in itself, is another point for debate but I’d leave it just yet. So what, I ask you? Is winning that important? How you win is equally important, if not more important. I would rather not win than to have won at the expense of pride, dignity and integrity. Is that the message we are sending to our children too? Never mind lah boy, mummy don’t care how you win..  as long as you win.

I hope not.

People seem to totally miss that point. We’ve won, we’ve won!! They jump in joy. What we have, is lots of tax money (GST, ERP, income tax etc) and we have bought a medal, that’s what we have done. They (Li Jiawei, Feng Tianwei and Wang Yuegu) won. We bought a medal.

Will the Olympics ever come to a day where all the rich countries simply buy out the talents for trophies? What would the spirit of the Olpympics be then?

A few days ago, people were positively outraged that this Foreign Talent (and you can imagine them saying it in a very contemptuous and derisive tone) dragged the National flag on the floor during the opening ceremony, and now people are positively proud that she is one of us, she won a silver medal for us! Excuse moi while I go to that corner and roll my eyes silly.

*Goes to corner and rolls eyes silly* *Comes back prim and proper again*

Where is our pride and dignity, that we forsake it so readily for a bit of gain?

The BBC pens its article. starting off with

Feng Tianwei, who, like the rest of the Singapore team, is an import from China, won both her singles matches to help them clinch a tense 3-2 victory.

You feel proud? You feel that Singapore has won a Silver medal?

I don’t. And I am not the only one it seems.

And this doesn’t sit well with me too.

Their table tennis coach Liu Guodong said: “I feel very honoured. I’ve been in Singapore for just over two years and can help it get an Olympic medal, at least a silver, for the first time in 48 years.”

好大的傲气啊！

I am going to be scathing here and say - that you are only here in Singapore because you know you cannot make it in China.

And it shames me greatly to say that.

And since we are into such capitalism and buying of National pride, why go for the second best? They should have bought Wang Nan and Zhang Yining over! Then, we would have won our first gold metal in 48 years, or ever.

**

I have nothing against people choosing to immigrate to this country. I shake my head at the whole Foreign Talent nationwide propaganda because I think most of them are a big joke, including the now very famous Mr Amit Nagpal. I used to think that Foreign Talent belong in the category of private bankers who specialize in certain niches, highly specialized industry experts and so forth. Apparently our government disagrees. These days, even a foreigner with average qualification and professional experience is considered as a “Foreign Talent”. Thankfully I don’t need to write an entire diatribe to express how appalled I am and how ridiculous this whole ruckus is. Endoh has done it very nicely.

With that kind of direction from the government, I wonder how much stronghold the citizens have in this landscape of rapidly increasing foreign talent. There are many of these foreign talent in the estate I live in now. They are rude, aggressive and have no common sense of living in Singapore. I wonder if they can truly assimilate in the lifestyle and culture of Singapore, or are we merely a stepping stone for them to move on to US or Canada?

As for the Foreign Talent playing in the Singapore team, I do not blame them for coming here for the money. Anyone would. I blame the government for yet again, choosing the short term solution route. You may say that with the Sports School changes everything. We are now nurturing our own, encouraging our young - no expenses spared. Really??

Yet another foreign talent.

And you think she is one of us? That she thinks she is one of us?

In January 2008, Tao became embroiled in controversy after the Singapore Swimming Association (SSA) introduced a 15% levy on the cash awards given to swimmers, with about 6% set aside for youth development. As part of the government’s Multi-Million Dollar Award Programme (MAP), she received S$23,750 for winning three individual titles and one team gold at the 2007 SEA Games.

She was therefore “taxed” S$3,562.50, with S$1,425 going to youth development. Unhappy with this, Tao said: “If they [the SSA] want to cultivate youth, they should find their own money, not pay using our awards. It’s through our hard work that we got the money. So, I don’t see the point that we should give the money to the youths.” She also said it had been her school and not the SSA which had borne the expense of her overseas training. The SSA said it was “very disappointed” with her comments, and pointed out that the association had spent “easily in excess of $20,000″ in sending her for competitions abroad such as the World Championships, Hong Kong Open and Japan International, and a stint at the Australian Institute of Sport. SSA Vice-President Oon Jin Gee told the press, “Even with the Sports School funding it, it’s our taxpayers’ dollars going into her development. It doesn’t matter which avenue it comes from, it’s still Singapore’s support for her.

And now they are using the taxpayers’ money to fund her million dollar makeover.

I am so sick of the level of stupidity of this government.

Can we entice Obama Barack and Hillary Clinton in as Foreign Talent to replace this lot of grossly overpaid and highly complacent peacocks?

Oh. I don’t think so. It slipped my mind that Mr Barack and Ms Clinton are in politics for totally different reasons than our local chosen ones. Silly me.

and there are parents. I thought I have seen the worst of child abuse cases in the form of neglect or violence but this … is appalling.

Why give birth to a child if you are not prepared to give him or her the best you can? And what if your “best” is hardly acceptable?

Would the child have been more “fortunate” if she was aborted from the beginning? Would this make a classic case for a pro choice argument?

The many grey shades in life. They sadden me.

That’s a nice poof of smoke! A good healthy dose of toxic second hand smoke for your child!

Look at how intently the kid is, looking at the mother smoking merrily away.

Starting young, thanks to mama.

I hate it when parents smoke in front or near their children. I hate it even more when mothers do it ala Britney, or worse, smoke when they are pregnant (some “warped” idea that a mother is the caregiver or nurturer and therefore should know better)

My dad was a smoker too, but he will go out of the house or go to the balcony, close the sliding door and smoke. I can’t even imagine my MUM smoking.

I find it strange when people believe that they are being good parents  - spend a bomb on tuition or whatnots BUT treat their kids to second hand smoke.

Seriously, cut the crap about stopping being too hard, withdrawal symptoms (do they last forever?), this ah that ah.  All crap.

There are some things I have zilch tolerance for and one of them would be crappy excuses for crappy things.

If you want to do something, you will find the ways and means to do it. My uncle smoked for thirty freaking years and was the most hardcore smoker I ever knew - he smoked Camel cigarettes with no filter, ok. Guess what? He quit last year.

Just to share - I was smoking for five years - at least one to two big packs a day. When I found out I was preggers with Ger, I stopped smoking pronto cold turkey. No lesser sticks per day, no nicotine patch, no acupuncture lalala, nothing. Just came out from gynae, threw away the cigarette box (still had 17 sticks! I remember!) and that’s it.

Of course it’s tough. I would be lying if I said it was a breeze. Headaches, crankiness, tempers, running nose, cough, sore throats as my body purged the toxins accumulated over five years.

Yeah it’s tough. So?

**

As for Britney, I think she is damn messed up and would be better cleaning up her act. AND PLEASE stop interviews on how great a mother she thinks she is. I know I sound mean but it’s better for her kids (for now) that she lost custody to Federline.  It’s amazing how a mum like that can think she’s a “good mum“. Delusion is a dangerous thing.

I don’t dare to proclaim myself as a good mum, but I try my best and I definitely don’t and can’t pull fantastic stunts like that.

Via Diane in M4M

This time, it is a display of ugly prejudice and ostracism of Singaporean parents against a child. A CHILD! A bunch of ADULTS jeering at and insulting a CHILD.

Bravo. Just when I thought I have seen it all, these Singaporean kiasu parents have again proven me wrong.

What a Class A narrow minded pompous idiot.

Thank God there are still intelligent reasonable parents like Mr William Wong around:

I am embarrassed that there are parents like these amidst us. Deeply ashamed, even.

And I am bristling with indignation and anger that a child, A CHILD(!!), is subjected to such appalling abuse.

That’s right!

And if I knew they were going to crop off my body chest down, I wouldn’t have bothered with the turtleneck.

But yes, it is indeed thrilling to be featured in a magazine that I have immense respect and liking for. I feel deeply honored, appreciative and touched.

So pardon me, if I have plastered the good news all over the place.

*PS: As a celebratory gesture and to thank my dear customers and friends for their support, the store is giving away an environmentally friendly recycled cotton tote with every purchase of two items. Have fun shopping!

As much as we would think of ourselves being racially tolerant, and harmoniously even, comes along a clown like the Sexy Fragrant Prince (like seriously?! It hurts, just typing out that moniker). He’s taken off the original post reeking of blatant racism towards Malays but it can be found here. The good people of Hardware Zone scare me. A very good example of online vigilante justice? Not that it is a totally bad thing though.

Latest update is that he has been arrested on seditious charges.

Seriously, are our youths having it too easy these days? Too spoilt, too pampered, to the point of idiotic narcissism. He is not the only young idiot around, whining about all manners of trivial stuff. This one whines about heartlanders (oh, the irony), Singaporeans not being like Italians “everyone.. so well dressed and well mannered” (is he for real?) Others whine and cringe about jobs when they have neither the expertise nor the experience. And then there are others.

To play the devil’s advocate, I have to, of course, offer an alternative view. Certainly I am not a tree hugging hippie who extols the virtues of one for all. Indeed, I guard my personal sphere violently and am fiercely allergic to people brushing up against me when a wide space is available. I detest bad smells and poor hygiene habits that lead to the bad smells. My point is, you can have an objection to the behaviour and the external factors in an elegant sophisticated manner, and not get crudely vulgar like what the delusional self proclaimed prince had. I would hardly think he would get arrested if he had taken offence to the lack of hygiene which might have been an inconsideration to the other passengers.

Instead, I get the impression that he has a bone to pick with the race. This is not an uneducated close-minded old man. This is a purportedly educated young man.  And as educated and informed a society as we are, this is distasteful and crass to say the least.