PBM Jack Neo’s apology on shared blog with George Yeo: I am just “human” and can make mistake

Written by Our Correspondent

After being flamed mercilessly by the Singapore media and netizens alike for his press conference yesterday marked by the dramatic fainting of his wife Irene Kng, PBM Jack Neo has apologized on blogkaki, the blog he shared with his close friend of more than 10 years Foreign Minister George Yeo.

Writing in Mandarin, PBM Jack Neo apologized to his family and friends and beg them to give him a second chance:

“I can’t reverse what I have done. I am just human and can make mistake. Although I have already admitted my fault, I beg you again to forgive me and give me a second chance,” he wrote.

Though he is a Christian, he said his public fall from grace was a “retribution”:

“There is a saying: You reap what you sow……..What Man does, Heaven sees. Do no think that Heaven will not see if you hide in a dark place and do bad things.”

He claimed that the scandal is a “painful awakening” for him and vowed to treasure his wife and stay “faithful” to her while being “very careful with his own behavior and how he treats women from now on”.

Arguably the most successful Singapore movie director to date, PBM Jack Neo was awarded a public service medal in 2004 and a Cultural Medallion in 2005.

The scandal erupted last Saturday when a former mistress Wendy Neo went to his place to confront him and alerting the media in the process.

It was subsequently revealed that Jack was involved in or tried to pursue at least 10 other women as well including a 16 year old girl of French descent.

Even before the sensational news reached the public, Jack called up George Yeo to inform him of the misfortune who immediately wrote an article on blogkaki calling on Singaporeans to “rally” around Jack.

George Yeo has since maintained a dignified silence after being slammed by netizens for his “inappropriate” support for Jack. As expected, the mainstream media dared not publish the story which will put the Foreign Minister in a bad light.

Another PAP MP Lim Biow Chuan was also flamed for saying that such scandals are “unavoidable” for successful men like Jack. He later claimed that he was “misquoted” by the press.

After screwing many girls and screwing his own life up in the process, PBM Jack Neo has at least contributed something to fellow Singaporeans by screwing up the political careers of two PAP MPs.

 

Jack Neo and wife Irene Kng’s press conference on 11 March 2010:

1. Video recording of press conference

2. Irene Kng fainted at press conference

3. Photo Gallery

4. Field Report: Jack Neo and wife broke down in tears

5. Live coverage of press conference

 

Related articles:

1. George Yeo slammed by netizens for supporting Jack Neo

2. Jack Neo makes advances to 16 year old French girl

3.Jack Neo’s 10 other flings after Wendy Chong

4. Wendy Chong on how Jack Neo initiated sex with her in his car

5. George Yeo supports PBM Jack Neo

6. Foyce accuses PBM Jack Neo of sexual harrassment

7. Wendy Chong: I had sex with Jack Neo twice a week

8. Jack Neo’s wife forgives him for extra marital affair

9. Jack Neo begged Wendy Chong to let him off

GLC Employee AL: Voting is not the only solution

When voting comes.. When voting comes..”

A familiar quote we hear from most Singaporeans which shows that people are not pleased with the current government. It shows that they want change and that they understand they have the right to vote the PAP out. In the last election in 2006, 33% of Singaporeans voted for the opposition in contested areas. In a way, that is a good sign because we know that with  18% more on our side we can kick the PAP out.

I feel that we need to take a closer look at the situation. The GRC system on which the elections are based on is a fail-safe way to ensure victory for the ruling party. The press AKA mouthpiece of the PAP, glorifies them and says almost nothing positive of the opposition. Being the political coward that it is, the PAP has removed all its strong oppositions in any way possible. Being in control of the elections department, it can call for elections as and when it wishes. It also gains the upper hand by, in PM Lee Hsien Loong’s own words, “Fixing the opposition and Buying votes”.

Each vote has a serial number pegged to our IC numbers, which can only be seen as a fear tactic in a country like Singapore. This clearly shows that they can find out who you vote for very easily, and is yet another fear tactic. Citizens who hold jobs in the government, or government affiliated and/or invested companies are afraid to vote against the PAP as they have this almost sure opinon that their bonuses or jobs will be affected.

I’ve spoken to someone who works in the army as a regular and he said, “We must vote for the PAP. We are government servants, and if we don’t vote for them our performance grading will be affected.” And when I asked him in return about the future of the rest of the people, he said, “Don’t have time to worry about other people, we get good pay and good life can already. Why I want to spoil my own rice bowl, thinking about the rest?”

For all you know, the majority of votes the PAP gets is because of people like him. Pathetic and selfish sheep who are not only queuing up to get slaughtered, but dragging us along with them as well. Now, I’m not using this guy to stereotype everyone else, but I’ve personally met many more civil servants with mindsets like his.

We do have the chance to make a change during the elections, but that is not the only battle. The problem is bigger than just the government. The problem is staring at us in the mirror.

We need to educate our less politically-aware families and friends, not by giving daily lectures, but bit by bit, through casual talk. In my opinion, the older generation are a bit too “kiasee” and the fear tactics work really well on them. Its the younger generation that doesn’t buy the government’s bullshit that easily.

In a country like ours where all the mainstream media is controlled by the government, alternative information is the key to opening minds. We should start by educating a few friends and convince them to influence their families. We should also talk to our colleagues at work and forward thought provoking articles to them.

Think about it, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of critical articles on websites like Temasek Review that we read and comment on, but how many of our own friends and families have read them? We’ve got to do our part to get this information to them, and let’s start with short and easily digestable articles.

 It’s always the small things we do that make a big difference in the end. Let’s start this small campaign of talking about issues we read about over the dinner table, forward links of TR articles to our social circles. Over time, let’s see if we can band together and do something bigger.

Till then, the dreaded daily grind of work and life continues. And AL will continue writing and sharing.

PAP MP Lim Biow Chuan claimed he was “misquoted” by the media after being slammed by netizens for defending PBM Jack Neo

Written by Our Correspondent

After being slammed by netizens for his callous comments made in an interview with Shin Min Daily on 7 March 2010 which appeared to endorse PBM Jack Neo’s sexual exploits as he has a successful career, PAP MP Lim Biow Chuan (Marine Parade) now make an amazing U-turn and claimed that he was “misquoted” by the media.

His initial comments in the interview are as posted below:

“Over the years, to me, Jack Neo is a good son, father and also a good husband. Since he is remorseful over this incident, he should be forgiven. Actually, a man who has good career development would find such scenarios unavoidable,” Mr Lim was quoted as saying.

His comments sparked a massive outcry in cyberspace with many irate netizens flaming him for it.

A day later, Mr Lim issued a clarification on both his Facebook and STOMP that he has been “misquoted” by Shin Min Daily:

Mr Lim wrote that he meant to say:

“Mr Jack Neo had a reputation for being a good son, a good father and a good husband. For a man who has good career development and had allowed such an incident to happen, it is so sad and such a pity.”

His “clarified” remarks were in stark contrast to what was reported by Shin Min Daily. It is most unbelievable that he could be misquoted. Either the journalist was deaf or he had deliberately fabricated the last sentence. Since Mr Lim is a lawyer by training, he should proceed to sue Shin Min Daily to clear his name as is the classic modus operandi of the PAP.

Judging from the gulf in meaning between the two, it is highly unlikely that Mr Lim had been misquoted by Shin Min Daily. PAP MPs had a knack of making outrageous comments in the media only to blame it on the hapless journalist who interviewed them after it sparked a public backlash.

When Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan was rapped last year for wanting to send Singapore elderly to die in JB nursing homes, he used the same excuse that he was misquoted by the media.

Mr Lim should have the courage to stand by his remarks or retract them and issue a public apology immediately. Otherwise get the Shin Min journalist who interviewed him to apologize to him and print a clarification on the paper the next day. Stop insulting the intelligence of Singaporeans, we are not daft!

10 most unforgettable quotes from PAP MPs during the recent parliamentary “debate”

OPINION

The PAP has always boasted that their MPs are the best talents in Singapore. The parliamentary sessions last week had been an eye-opener to see these MPs flaunt their “talents”.

Based on their speeches, it is quite obvious that many of them, with the exception of Inderjit Singh are living high up in their own ivory towers and completely out of touch with the ground.

This is not surprising given the fact that some had found their ways into Parliament without contesting an election. Tanjong Pagar MP Koo Tsai Kee, for example, had been a MP since 1991. He had never fought in an election before.

From the most callous to the most juvenile remarks, we compiled them into a list here for our readers to enjoy, recap and to remember when the next election comes:

10. Dr Vivian Balakrishnan (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) on why he has ordered the removal of homeless Singaporeans camping out in the public (forcefully):

“I have taken such an active stand to make sure we do not have people camping out on beaches, or parks or void decks, even though these may be safe and indeed, sometimes even pleasant areas for adults. These are not good and safe areas for children. And so I have insisted that (to) anyone with children. The children must be put in a proper home; they must continue to go to school. They must continue to get access to good food, good hygiene”

9. Jessica Tan (East Coast GRC) expressing her worries that the hike in foreign worker levy will turn away foreigners:

“The hike in the foreign worker levy which if not calibrate, will send the wrong signal to companies looking to invest in Singapore or to foreign talents that the country is not open.”

8. Josephine Teo (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC) rejecting WP MP Low Thia Kiang’s suggestion to scrap the foreign worker levy:

“”I can speak on behalf of the union leaders that we totally and firmly reject Mr Low’s disastrous suggestion that we remove the foreign worker levy as it will harm our workers’ interest.”

7. Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade GRC) asking the PAP to spend more taxpayers’ monies to help the new citizens feel welcomed in Singapore:

“We have not done any large scale survey, we do not know their problems but we have already gone ahead and decided that the funds will go towards organizing activities…..What we ought to do is first – find out what new Singaporeans need, and then target funding at helping them meet these needs.”

6. Teo Chee Hean (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC) on the ruling party’s renewed focus on productivity which has declined consecutively for the last three years and being caught napping during a speech made by DPM Wong Kan Seng:

““We are now a more developed economy – further up the productivity curve. We have made progress, but those ahead of us have also progressed and moved up as well. And those behind us have made rapid advances and are catching up with us.”

5. Koo Tsai Kee (Tanjong Pagar GRC) trying to lick the boots of his superior, Teo Chee Hean:

“The SAF, despite its manpower constraints, has been able to face up to a widening range of security threats in recent years under Defence Minister Teo….And I am not saying this because he’s my boss.”

4. Baey Yam Keng (Tanjong Pagar GRC) who told the media a few days ago that he planned to raise issues concerning his residents in Parliament

“Food is an important part of our rich cultural heritage – one which has been and will always been an attraction to locals and foreigners alike……The Food Museum could delve into aspects of local cuisine, such as ‘why Hong Kong noodles did not originate from Hong Kong’, and ‘why our Hainanese chicken rice is different from that found in Hainan Island’” .

3. Mah Bow Tan (Tampines GRC) who appeared lost after being grilled by fellow PAP MP Inderjit Singh:

“PRs make up only one in five resale flat buyers and have minimal impact on resale prices.”

2. Ong Ah Heng (Yishun Central) in an impassioned speech to defend foreign workers:

“I know of one family who complain the cleaners in their precinct are lazy and too old. They don’t want local workers who are old, they want young foreign workers. To satisfy the demand, I changed the local workers to foreign workers. Foreign workers are not a burden to us. Their presence here is not negative. Without foreign workers, things will be worse.”

And the quote of the year so far goes to Lim Swee Say for revealing the truth about the PAP MPs – that they are deaf to all feedback and criticisms.

1. Lim Swee Say (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) to Low Thia Kiang for bruising his ego:

“We never give up……. We are deaf to all these criticisms…..So instead of telling us that low-wage workers are having problems, why not be part of the solution?”

We can’t really blame them for being deaf when they have been taught all along to sing in tune with their piper master PAP’s octogenarian leader Lee Kuan Yew:

“To be the prime minister, you don’t have to know every instrument, but you got to recognise, ah, he’s a good violinist, he’ll be the first violinist, he’ll be the double bass. He will play the viola, he will have the trumpet, he will do the drums. Then you coordinate them and then you have great music. And if you already have a great orchestra, you can put a dummy there and you still got great music.”

[Source: Channel News Asia, 5 March 2008]

Singaporeans, do you still see any value in voting for the PAP in the next election? This are the kind of MPs you will get raising your concerns in Parliament! And don’t forget you are paying them $13,000 monthly to sprout such highfalutin stuff!

Remember the PAP election slogan of 2006 – “Staying together, Moving ahead”? The PAP MPs are indeed staying together and moving ahead without us! While the pay of the PAP ministers, ministers of states and parliamentary secretaries are expected to increase by 8.8 percent this year, will you even dream of a pay rise?

When your PAP MP put up a “wayang” house visit to your home in the next few months before the election and pretend to “listen” to you, don’t forget this gentle reminder from Lim Swee Say:

“We are DEAF to all criticisms!”

The “hoax” by Gopalan Nair on Lee Kuan Yew having a heart attack: More than meets the eyes

OPINION

(DISCLAMER: The below article is sent to us by a reader who chose to remain anonymous and does not represent the views of TR which do not endorse, support or condemn the hoax perpetuated by Gopalan Nair.)

When Gopalan Nair posted the article last Saturday claiming that PAP octogenarian leader Lee Kuan had “suffered a massive heart attack”, it sounded so real that it soon spread like wildfire in Singapore’s blogosphere.

24 hours later, he updated the title to clarify that it is a “hoax” before penning another article to explain why he did so. Gopalan’s “hoax” naturally did not go down too well with netizens especially those who have “popped the champagne” too early to celebrate the news, many of whom flamed him for spreading “malicious” lies.

As expected, the Straits Times jumped into the fray by portraying Gopalan as a nutcase while casting doubts on the credibility of the New Media. Some bloggers even tried to make use of the saga to boost their own “credibility” by condemning Gopalan on their blogs and demanding an apology from him.

Netizens should not fall into the trap set by the establishment and mainstream media and start to play according to the rules set by them using their own contorted version of “credibility” as a yardstick.

In today’s wired world, there is such thing as “absolute truths” or “absolute lies” – everything else exists somewhere in between in a gray area.

Gopalan has the right to post whatever he wants on his blog. The onus is on netizens themselves to decipher for themselves the degree of truth in his article and to expose the fallacies if any.

That is what the New Media is all about – a free-for-all world where nobody can control the flow of information or has the monopoly on the truth.

And the most beautiful part is that everybody is interacting with one another on an equal footing – no one is more “credible” or “truthful” than the other.

Gopalan Nair has been blogging for many years, far longer than the existence of this site. Though some of his views may be outlandish, he has never posted any “hoax” at least till last Saturday.

Being a lawyer by training, he should know that he will be discrediting himself by posting such unverified reports on his blog. Even if it is really a hoax, it is unlike him not to post a disclaimer at the bottom of the article.

Now consider the following anomalies:

1. There was no immediate response from the Prime Minister’s Office to refute the statements made by Gopalan Nair. In this instance, there are sufficient grounds for suing him, even in the United States.

2. The best way to dispel the rumors is to get SGH to issue a public statement that Lee was never admitted to the hospital. The Straits Times mentioned that SGH received numerous phone calls from the public, but did not reveal if Lee was ever admitted.

3. Lee made a trip to the United Kingdom yesterday. He had not been seen in public for more than a week. Given the possible damage done by the rumors, shouldn’t Lee made a public appearance in Singapore to allay lingering anxieties and concerns?

If you realize, till now, amidst all the cacophony, it has yet to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt that Lee was never admitted to SGH last week for a heart attack or otherwise. Whether it is indeed a hoax as claimed by Gopalan is another matter altogether.

The burden of proof is on the authorities to show us that Lee is indeed in the pink of health and since the matter had already been brought up by the mainstream media, why didn’t it proceed to clarify it completely now and then?

There are two ways to refute such rumors: either issue a public statement to demolish them once and for all or ignore them altogether. It is strange that the state media has gone on a merry-go-round to discredit Gopalan Nair without addressing the crux of the matter. Is Lee’s health less important than Gopalan’s online credibility?

Let us recall a sensational murder case which rocked Malaysia last year.

One of its key witnesses Balasubramaniam had made a statutory declaration implicating Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Najib Razak in the murder of Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu. He retracted the declaration a day later and made a new one removing all mention of Najib before disappearing.

He finally surfaced 8 months later in India where he claimed that he was forced to retract the first statutory declaration and that its contents are true in an interview with Malaysia Today.

Reading is not believing. There’s more than meets the eye in this case.

PAP MP Ong Ah Heng slammed by angry netizens for callous remarks on Singapore elderly workers being lazy

Written by Our Correspondent

Previously little known PAP MP Ong Ah Heng became a “celebrity” almost overnight with his most outrageous remarks about Singaorean elderly workers being “lazy and too old.”

During speech made in Parliament this week to defend foreign workers, Mr Ong admitted that he had sacked Singapore elderly workers and replaced them with foreigners:

“I know of one family who complain the cleaners in their precinct are lazy and too old. They don’t want local workers who are old, they want young foreign workers. To satisfy the demand, I changed the local workers to foreign workers. Foreign workers are not a burden to us. Their presence here is not negative. Without foreign workers, things will be worse,” he was quoted as saying in the Straits Times.

Our article on it has drawn more than 3,000 views and 100 comments in less than a day with the majority of respondents lampooning the 66 year old MP for his insensitive remarks and calling him to be “replaced” as well.

Z3roin wrote:

“Mr Ong is old himself too, maybe he shld be replace too. What is the goal of being a MP? To help the needy people in the area under him/her, hearing the voices of the people…Did he in the first place ask and know more about what happens at that situations? One complain and get replaced…One without a kind heart, is not worth the respect as a fellow human beings.”

Senior citizen concurred:

“Did they not tell the elderly to work until their last breadth? Why was that elderly worker slow or lazy? Was she suffering from some ailment? If the worker is slow or lazy, the problem lies with the management – what did the management do to motivate her? Pay her peanuts and expect her to work? Have you ever watched foreigner road sweepers? Have you seen that the ends of their brooms do not even touch the ground, let alone the garbage? Was the resident who complained a foreigner so that they could get their friends over? Ong Ah Heng – you ought to be replaced too. You are too old. What a sad day for Singaporeans! To have MPs like him… sigh…”

Sigh felt sorry for Singapore elderly workers who still have to work well into their twilight years:

“These senior citizens should be enjoying their golden years …. why are they working so hard to make ends meet? Can they withdraw all their CPF money which is supposed to be their retirement fund? Complain about their laziness and lack of skills and replace them with foreigners, pleaseee …. what a lame statement. I am really sad that MP Ong has bend so low to raise this incident to justify the foreign workers policy. The billions we lost through TH and GIC would have been enough for a social welfare prog for these seniors who have been part of the nation building workforce. Very sad …. is there no conscious in the policy makers now?”

Disappointed opined that the PAP government has let the people down:

“In LHL’s PAP 50th anniversary rally, he said the following : In order to win elections the party must maintain the support of majority of Singaporeans, we are not representing just one group – the young people, the old people, women or a particular race – we’re representing all groups young middle aged the elderly – they are all our supporters.

Actions speak louder than words. How does the PAP take care of the people ? I am not expecting too much. Nevermind about the influx of lower cost foreigners replacing the younger Singaporeans. But for the elderly ? Their MP takes care of the elderly cleaners by expecting them to be on their toes and work like younger people? If they can’t be as productive, sack them ? Even if they are lazy or not productive, at least they are willing to work instead of relying on the government for handout. Also I don’t think these elderly cleaners are the highest paid cleaners in the world. Why not be more forgiving to these old folks and let them live their remaining years graciously instead of feeling that the society they are in is cold and heartless?”

Singaporeans should not be too harsh on Mr Ong Ah Heng. He is only reciting the PAP’s mantra: “You die your business!”

PAP MP Seah Kian Peng argued for more spending to help new immigrants “integrate” with Singaporeans

Written by our Correspondent

In yet another sign that the ruling party is fast losing touch with the ground, another PAP MP Seah Kian Peng has spoken out forcefully in support of immigrants.

Not satisfied with a mega $10 million dollar Community Integration Fund unveiled by Minister Dr Vivian Balakrishnan last year to tackle a snowballing problem that is largely its own doing – the inability of the immigrants to assimilate into Singapore society as too many of them have come within too short a period of time, Mr Seah now calls on more spending to make the newcomers feel “part of us.”

“First, we need to make sure that they are called new Singaporeans rather than new migrants. They are not even new migrants – they are an old hand at migrating, and want a new life. They want to settle down and to make Singapore a new home,” he said during the parliamentary session yesterday.

Due to the PAP’s liberal immigration policies, foreigners now make up 36 percent of Singapore’s population, up from 14 percent in 1990. Of the remaining 64 percent who are citizens, an increasing number are born overseas.

According to figures from the Home Affairs Ministry, there were over 70,000 PRs and 20,000 new citizens in 2008. Two out of every three PR applicants are successful and there is no minimum residency period unlike in other countries.

“We have not done any large scale survey, we do not know their problems but we have already gone ahead and decided that the funds will go towards organizing activities…..What we ought to do is first – find out what new Singaporeans need, and then target funding at helping them meet these needs,” he added.

Instead of spending precious public resources to find out what the new immigrants need, why not ask what Singaporeans really need?

Why should taxpayers’ monies be used to pay for a glaring mistake made by the PAP? If it had not opened the floodgates to accept so many foreigners at the same time, will we be experiencing problems in integrating them now?

There are few incentives for the newcomers to fraternize and reach out to the native Singaporeans as so many of their compatriots are already in Singapore that they don’t feel out of place.

As a result, they tend to congregate among themselves within a closely-knitted community leading to the emergence of ethnic enclaves in the HDB heartlands.

Had the PAP slowed down the intake of foreigners and exercised more discretion in the selection of those to become new citizens, we will not need to spend a single cent more on such ineffective integration policies.

With elections around the corner, this may be another gimmick to woo the new citizens to the PAP’s side and shore up its flagging support base.

Singaporeans should send a strong message to the PAP in the next general election that they will not allow anymore public monies to be spent on the immigrants.

Perhaps Mr Seah should set up a fund contributed by all PAP MPs to sponsor his own “integration” programs since he is so infatuated with the new citizens and whatever.

Dr Silviu Ionescu was with a Korean singer on the night of the double hit-and-run accident at Bukit Panjang

Written by Our Correspondent

Former Romanian diplomat Dr Silviu Ionescu, who was implicated in a double hit and run traffic accident at Bukit Panjang in December last year was with a Korean opera singer and voice teacher Jeong Ae Ree on the night of the accident.

Ms Jeong was testifying at a coroner’s inquiry into the death of Mr Tong Kok Wai, a victim of the accident who had since passed away.

According to Ms Jeong, Dr Silviu Ionescu picked her up from her place in a black Audi driven by his chauffeur. He invited her to a birthday party elsewhere. They went to Clark Quay and then to Legend Palace KTV where he had a few classes of drink. He took her home at about 2am.

An eye-witness had told Lianhe Wanbao earlier that he saw a Chinese girl quarreling with Dr Silviu Ionescu in his car.

Dr Silviu Ionescu who had returned to Romania, claimed that he was unable to attend the inquiry due to “failing health” and that he might die on the journey.

The Singapore government has received much flak for allowing Dr Silviu, a prime suspect in the case to leave the country three days after the accident.

There were no comments from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) for weeks in the aftermath of the accident except a forgettable “What happened was very bad” remark from Foreign Minister George Yeo.

Strange enough, after maintaining weeks of dignified silence on the matter, MFA suddenly recalled the Romanian Ambassador Neagu to pass a series of diplomatic notes after Dr Silviu embarrassed the Singapore government by accusing them of “framing” him in an interview on a Romanian TV station.

Though MFA has vehemently denied the accusations, it has refrained from taking legal action against Dr Silviu and sue him for defamation.

As there are no extradition treaties between Singapore and Romania, it is highly unlikely that Dr Silviu will return to Singapore soon.

From a Catholic lawyer on the Rony Tan fiasco: Let’s fight free speech with free speech

By George Hwang

The recent police reports filed by 85 people against Rony Tan for his anti-gay speech right after he was rapped by the Internal Security Department bemoans the sad state of affairs in our laws on this subject. In a more democratic society, where the law does not discriminate against LGBTQs, this would not happen. This is because criticisms and discourse would have been generated in the press once his anti-gay speech is known. This is likely to be when Kenneth Tan’s article, “Singapore Pastor Castigated for Offensive Remarks Against Buddhism Should Apologise to Gays and Lesbian Too”, has been published on www.fridae.com and not when the story of the 85 complaints was broken by same site. He would have already been censured publicly and no legal recourse against him will be considered necessary.

In the short run, the AG will have to inform Singapore on how he is going to handle the speech which has incensed a part of our nation. As it has obviously created ill will and hostility, it could possibly be seditious. At the very least, the AG will need to inform the 85 complainants, which can now be more, his decision on what to do. This is a substantial figure. One that the police has not refuted.

As the incident show, Singaporeans no longer take what they consider disinformation or misinformation sitting down. In the long-run, we need to decide whether to have greater state intervention against such inappropriate remarks or to change its laws regarding the subject of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Freedom of speech guards the common space which all Singaporeans share. As society morphs, our rules on fairplay should enable this to take place in an orderly manner. Therefore, changes made should level the playing field. Let the likes of Rony Tan continue what many consider as ill-informed rhetorics. However, balance them with accurate information and healthy opinions. In a democratic society, we need to create a marketplace of ideas and allow them to be exchanged.

 

Discriminatory Legal Scenario

Whilst the good Pastor can be prosecuted under the Penal Code for his speech against the Buddhists and Taoists under s298A, Penal Code, the same cannot apply to his speech against people of different sexual persuasion or gender identity. Strangely, this section, made law in October 2007, could have accommodated the LGBTQ community had it remain the same as the draft in the Consultative Document published by the Ministry of Home Affairs for public feedback in November 2006. The Consultation Paper version reads:

“Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion or race and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony
298A. Whoever —

(a) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, knowingly promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion or race, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious or racial groups or communities; or

(b) commits any act which he knows is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious or racial groups or communities and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquility,

shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years, or with fine, or with both. “

At the bill’s first reading, the words “or communities” went missing.

Section 298A was introduced to replace the use of the Sedition Act for situations such as Rony Tan’s. This Act was exhumed to prosecute some bloggers for making inappropriate comments against the Muslims. However, the Sedition Act has never been used where the bane of the remarks is a person with different sexual orientation. Though the phrase promoting “feelings of ill-will and hostility between different … classes of the population of Singapore” is broad enough, it is not defined in the Act or by cases. We are, therefore, in uncharted waters.

On the other hand, not only do we have s377A, Penal Code, the section retained in October 2007, which criminalises sex between men, Singapore’s censorship laws gag most healthy depictions of gays, lesbians, bisexuals or transsexuals. A look at the Internet Code of Practice and the Free-to-Air Television Programme Code testifies to this lopsided situation.

 

Unhealthy Soundbites

Our discriminatory laws have led to the likes of Rony Tan passing inappropriate remarks and misinforming the public. He has likened gays to monkeys and donkeys. His is the most recent in a string of such comments. The most infamous is, of course, Thio Li-Ann’s speech in Parliament when debating the repeal of s377A.

In the same sermon, Rony also obfuscated homosexuality with paedophilia. This is misinformation. Another example of misinformation I have witnessed was made by another pastor, Derek Hong.

When a bill on equal employment opportunity in USA was being tabled in 2007, Derek took this opportunity to scare his congregation. In that year, Bill No. H.R. 2015, “Employment Non-Discrimination”, which clearly excluded religious organisations from its ambit was mooted in the US legislature. However, Derek decided to paint the bill as a tool to be used by gay activists, who according to him were used by Satan and were going to bankrupt churches and other Christian organisations. In his own words:

“The gay activists lobby is actually being used by Satan to undermine the gospel and the word of God …There’s a bill now … and this is carrying it to its Nth degree … before the American Congress … And they twin this bill that relates to equality in employment so nobody is to be prejudiced whatever their religious background, whatever their sexual orientation … and if this bill gets through, this is what the gay activists are going to do. They are going to target every church, every Christian church … every gospel preaching ministry with this strategy. They are going to go in, openly declare themselves as gay …, with their lifestyle … and they are going to apply for positions … child care, child minders, youth pastors, and if they are turned down … on account of their declared sexual lifestyle, they are going to sue this organisations. And you know what the judicial system can be like in America. Their goal is to bankrupt churches and Christian organisations … so what we are facing, brothers and sisters, is an issue that all of us should be aware of …”

 

You can listen to it on http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2007/son-788a.mp3

On the other hand, the strict censorship laws against the “promotion of homosexual lifestyle” have led to healthy information being censored.

We are all fully aware of the cut on Sean Penn’s acceptance speech for his performance in “MILK” at the Oscar last year. What is more interesting is the lesser known cut on director Cynthia Wade’s acceptance speech the year before.

The director won the best director for documentary award for her film, “Freeheld”, about a dying policewoman, Lieutenant Laurel Hester’s fight for equal rights so that her partner and care giver, Stacie Andree can afford to keep their house after her death. It chronicled the alliance between “macho cops” and gay activists who fought alongside Lieutenant Hester. It showed us what humanity is.

There is also the Ellen DeGeneres Show where a 3 minute segment met the scissors on Channel 5. Ellen condemned homophobia and spoke about the fatal shooting of a 15-year-old gay student Lawrence King in school. Her remarks were a response to American (Oklahoma) state legislator Sally Kern’s anti-gay remarks. In a speech addressing her fellow Republican colleagues, she claimed that “the homosexual agenda” posed a bigger threat to the United States than terrorism.

These cuts were self-censorships by MediaCorp. The scissors fell on Ellen’s remarks probably because it came in the same week where the station was fined $15,000 for airing an interior designing programme from Canada with an episode featuring the nursery of a same sex couple. This is a country which legalised gay marriage and it merely reflects its society.

Ellen’s remark was in response to a politician’s speech. This is current affairs. As for Cynthia Wade, take a look at the trailer for her documentary and decide for yourself if it in anyway glorifies or promote homosexuality. This trailer can be viewed on www.fridae.com’s article on this subject:

http://fridae.com/newsfeatures/2008/02/26/2015.docu-about-dying-lesbians-equality-fight-wins-oscar-directors-acceptance-speech-snipped

The censorship laws have not only created self-censorship, which in itself is unhealthy, it has conditioned our journalists and media to automatically ignore important information regarding equal rights.

 

Towards a more Democratic and Healthier Society

Remarks such as Rony’s do not contribute to healthy perspectives on the LGBTs, much less a teenager awakening to his sexuality, whatever it may be. They reinforce stereotypical images of homosexuals as paedophiles, deviants and psychopaths. The 85 consider it as disinformation. More importantly, the episode shows that if left unchecked, these remarks could polarize society. It has stirred up ill-will or hostility. Such complaints take up manhours.

The question is: do we check his irresponsible conduct by hauling him in each time he makes them or do we take a step back and look objectively at our laws, abolish those which are discriminatory, those which create an unhealthy and ill-informed population? The other question we need to ask is: whether we want to be a liberal society or a democratic one?

A liberal society is one where we have lots of liberal minded people or a substantive amount of liberal minded people. I do not know if Singapore is one, given the current state of our censorship laws. However, we do have liberal minded people, yours truly included. And they will increase, given the nature of Singapore.

A democratic society is one where freedom of expression is treasured, where the laws on censorship and media promote, facilitate or allow different opinions, creating a marketplace of ideas, where creative ideas and solutions flourish. To progress as a nation, we need a plurality of voices.

We are seeing more and more LGBTQ people taking their place in society. The Nepalese Parliament has Sunil Pant, the Indonesian Human Rights Commission has Yulianus Rettoblaut (also known as “Mami Yuli”), Australia has retired J. Michael Kirby in its Supreme Court and South Africa has J. Edwin Cameron in its Constitutional Court. Singapore will be no exception. As her sons and daughters of different sexual orientation and gender identity take their rightful place society, we need make room for them.

Yet, we need to reserve some space for the ultra-religious conservatives, the extreme fundamentalists.

The government can decide that Singapore is to be a liberal minded society tomorrow and shut all the Rony Tans up. This is not the solution. There will always be Rony Tans. In the long run, we cannot keep hauling Rony Tans up for intolerant remarks against people who prefer oranges and not apples.

How then do we accommodate different opinions, regardless of correctness, and accommodate change? We create a level-playing field in the media and “public arena or spaces”, where there will be public discourse, where healthy images of LGBTQs are seen and heard. To do so, we need to counter the disinformation and misinformation with accurate and up-to-date ones. Leave the insults and inappropriate remarks alone, unless they incite or cause physical harm to the victims of the remarks. Once given the correct tools, accurate information and well informed opinions, Singaporeans will be able to judge for themselves independently. They will know that what these remarks are mere reflections of the speakers and not the victims, the LGBTs.

Therefore, we need to lift the censorship on “homosexual lifestyle”. It is gagging important and healthy information from coming through. It results in the likes of Rony Tan creating unhealthy images of your neighbours, fostering intolerance and disrespect in our pluralistic society. Almost every straight person in Singapore knows an LGBTQ person. We need to abolish s377A. Not only is it unconstitutional in our secular society, it does not conform to international human rights standards on non-discrimination. For a society based on the rule of law, it makes a mockery of it. It allows Rony Tans to justify themselves. It confuses Singaporeans.

If we are to progress as a democracy, where we live as one united people regardless of race, language, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity, we need to be able to agree to disagree. We fight free speech with free speech. The current one-sided law does not facilitate this.

 

About the Author:

George Hwang is a Roman Catholic lawyer whose practise includes Entertainment & Media Law. He is a member of the South East Asia Media Legal Defense Network and a Steering Committee member of the International Media Lawyers Association.

Chorus of Change for Singaporean: Survival Guide to Sustainable Nationhood

By Voice of Citizens

We, the Citizens, are not against Immigration Policy per se. We are deeply against the ill-conceived manner in which huge and rapid influx of FT/PR are admitted into our country recently.

We are frustrated with the HDB policy and poor planning which does take into account housing needs of increasing population. It is inexcusable to say that HDB could not have anticipated such shortage.

The effects of rapid accelerating growth in FT/PR and housing shortage have are severe impact on many citizens in terms of their housing needs and employment.

What is the solution? What do we need to do re-define, refine and build a sustainable growth and Nationhood?

Broadly for layman terms, the next steps forward will be:

1. “FT/PR” population growth impact /HDB housing shortage must be immediately resolved to dampen the intertwining vicious effects of escalating cost of housing and employment marginalization of citizens.

2. “FT/PR” policies must drastically reduce the quantum and growth of population attributable to foreign intake and allow moderate sustainable growth which;

1. will be consistent with the level of living standards of citizens

2. will not stifle livelihood and hopes of citizens, inducing stress and strain, fear of future cost

3. will allow a sustainable employment growth and alleviate many other concerns associated with it.

3. The “FT/PR” & Housing Policies must not put adverse pressure on services, amenities, housing and employment to the extent as felt now.

4. “FT/PR” & Housing Policy must consecrate within it the “Ten Commandments” of Citizen Privilege & Right. Simply said, the Policy must:

1. be discriminative to FT/PR to ensure maximum benefits of citizens

2. not be prohibitive to citizens, creating long-term housing debt, especially lesser privilege class, middle-class and singles.

3. be less disruptive to citizen livelihood and sense of hope and purpose

4. not be de-motivating to citizen drive to betterment in livelihood

5. not be depriving of citizen rights and privileges for affordable housing

6. not be constraining on citizen lives

7. not create inflationary-inducing, cost escalation inducing, speculative-inducing effect that are disruptive

8. not bias towards selective classes

9. not be politically motivated.

10. above-all be citizen-centric, Singaporean First

5. Resultant effect of reducing the intertwining impact of FT influx and housing cost must bring cost down to level for future sustainable trend, commensurate measured growth amenable to the citizen.

6. Polices must be in-place to limit PR purchase of Re-sales and cost escalation, increase the supply of HDB much more and quicker to bring housing cost at level not disadvantaging the middle, sandwiched, lower class.

7. HDB policy should de-peg new HDB price to Resales Value and provide cheaper land cost.

8. Immigration Policy must be in-place to limit FT/PR and have stricter criteria of selection for FT/PR.

9. Government must stop artificial inflation via monopoly of land and housing and refrain from exhortation of future price raises, giving way to speculation and false “wealth creation” for political motive or otherwise pandering to mass lemming instinct and greed.

10. Resale HDB must be for Singaporeans only and there must be distinctive and restrictive criteria for PR ownership of HDB housing which will not give way to runaway COV and escalating housing cost.

11. Cramping down on Resale asset valuation will bring about amenable and beneficial asset appreciation to all citizens in long-run:

1. For all-those who have seen “value” raise recently, they will be affected in the short to medium terms but they will still benefit in longer terms

2. For those are adversely affected by recent escalation, they have chance to buy without incurring huge debt

3. For those who upgraded to stay long-term they will still see appreciation in future.

4. On the average, more will benefit on the broader front and longer terms

12. Another beneficial effect is lower cost of business operation as rental cost goes down across-the-board, thus providing lower cost base for business operation as employers pay lesser to foreign staff for housing accommodation.

13. There will be “temporary” loss or reduction of National Reserve due to expenditure/sacrifice of reserve to bring cost down and capital reduction of asset value, but on the whole, with lower housing and other cost mitigation measures, the overall cost of business will go down as well as expectations of citizens.

14. Citizens will be prepared to take lower salaries since their basic housing and other needs are satisfied, amongst other concomitant savings as the result of cost reduction in other services, food and others.

15. The indirect result of having being able to satisfy much lower cost housing and employment needs in higher motivation to self-actualize for higher goals.

16. Re-engineering of productivity-based economy must come about with higher investment in citizen skills and upgrading, more and better sustainable industries. Once this is realized, more skill-based national productivity can be realized with manageable general trend of salary increase with higher living standard and manageable costs in longer term.

17. The initial period may see our National Reserve decline but it is worth-while effort as we pursue the course of re-engineering our economy to allow sustainable growth of selective industries, re-building a Nation utilizing our reserve productively such that every citizen has sense of hope and purpose in the Nation, not as a “sacrificial sheep” following the Lion, but a “beaver” in each individual, the clever, smart and hardworking maker of “dams”.

18. Together, we, “beavers”, will re-build the “dam of reserve” for future generation as our forefather did for the present generation.

19. The heavy-weight government machineries must be leaner and leaders show sacrifice, not speaking virtues with obscene pay. Only then can they hold hand in hand with the citizens to re-build a Nation.

20. There is no such thing as inevitability of rich-poor divide. “Divide” there is but surely there is way to close the” divide” by refining our policies.

21. With our excellent infrastructure, lower cost base for citizens with privilege and rights preserved, we can once again grow gradually to new heights with collective spirit of one Heart & Soul of Nation.

22. We need, now, to re-charge ourselves create impetus and drive from lower cost base start where cost of owning home and living is not prohibitive in citizen terms, not too prohibitive that it stranglehold their lives and dampen hopes and aspirations.

23. From here we aim forward to build better and affordable home for next generation, knowing each economic cycle of limits of growth and cost clearly over a projected frame, plan, anticipate and adjust accordingly without the disruptive burst of ill-conceived policies ramming down our throats, recently, in desperation.

24. We must the citizens from the “Animal farm” claustrophobia and start teaming in an “open farm” belong to citizens where we once again “till the land” for the current and next generation.

25. In short, we need a period of economic re-engineering, convalescence at slower growth as we re-define and refine our Nation, starting from a lower cost base favorable to the Citizens.

PAP must have the moral courage to say “SORRY” to citizens for not anticipating the adverse impact due to the intertwining effects huge foreign influx and ill-conceived HDB planning.

The present policies of accelerating population growth will not work, without knowing clearly the impact of such rapid growth on the cost of living, housing and employment, the limits of strain and stress our Nation can take in terms of infrastructure, relation, space, individual livelihood and etc.

The consequence to the Nation in future will be disastrous. Even now many citizens are feeling the limits of stress and strain.

Will our great Ministers sign off their wealth on paper to the Citizens, as guarantee of their superb leadership in return for Citizens to entrust their stake in Nationhood in their hands?

If NOT DO NOT CREATE false hopes that housing of Resales will sustain continuously uptrend, thus raising value of asset artificially across the board. Validity, inherent risks, potential pitfalls and limits of their rationale must be communicated earnestly, impartially and clearly to the citizens or lives of many innocents will be jeopardized. DO NOT DICE with citizen debt as they are NOT GOD.

Good Government governs with citizen interest, NOT lead them into eternal debt. Current “wealth” of Rich & Powerful is always at the expense of others and next generation.

They know it. So why create such a humungous cost to next generation with present housing policy and rapid foreign influx, knowing the adverse ramifications, if left unchecked?

It is imperative a solution must be put in place as quickly as possible.

This is the challenge to the Multi-million dollar Ministers.

Voice of Citizen

Next Page »