Thursday, April 24, 2025
27.6 C
Singapore
Home Blog Page 5124

Prime Minister Weighs in on HK Protests and Tan Pin Pin Documentary

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong recently gave a speech at the National University of Singapore Society. Following the speech, the Prime Minister held a question and answer session with the press where he touched on a range of topics including the recent “Occupy” protests in Hong Kong and the documentary film by Tan Pin Pin, titled To Singapore With Love.

Prime Minister Lee was questioned on the rating policy that essentially banned the movie from being screened or distributed to the public. The film is about political exiles and the Media Development Authority banned its distribution and viewing, claiming that the content of the film is a threat to national security and that it is an untruthful account of the subject matter.

In response to these questions, Mr. Lee said,

“Why should we allow through a movie to present an account of themselves, not objectively presented documentary history, but a self-serving personal account, conveniently inaccurate in places, glossing over inconvenient facts than others which will sully the honor and reputation of the security people and the brave men and women who fought the Communists all those many years in order to create today’s Singapore?”

The Prime Minister was also questioned on the way that he viewed the student protests that are currently going on in Hong Kong. He went on to cite the importance of the protests remaining peaceful and he stated that China and Hong Kong need to come together to find a solution that can satisfy both sides without hurting the interests of either party.

He also spoke on the dangers of outside groups getting involved, saying,

“These are things best of all Hong Kong can sort out for itself. But if other groups get involved and use this to pressure China or to change China, or I read international newspapers, former activists from Tiananmen have come to help the students – I don’t think they need such help. Or the students who were doing the Sunflower movement in Taipei also coming to compare notes, teach you how to occupy something, also coming to occupy something – I don’t think such help is in anyway helpful. I think that will only make things much more complicated.”

 

Tenureship and Gaza

This is an opinion column by Steven Salaita, an American professor of part Palestinian ancestry, about how he was denied a tenured job by university of Illinois supposedly because he supported Palestinians against Israel over gaza.

Professor Steven Salaita, whose job offer was rescinded by the University of Illinois, gave a public response Sept. 9 at the university YMCA in Urbana, Ill.

By Steven Salaita

7:36 am, September 30, 2014

Being recruited for a tenured faculty position at a major university is no small feat, nor should it be; tenure represents the pinnacle of an academic career. In my case, it involved numerous interviews with faculty in the American Indian studies program at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and an intensive review of my scholarship, pedagogy and professional service.

I survived this rigorous review and, having accepted an employment offer from the dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, resigned my tenured position at another university and prepared my family to move. A few weeks before classes were to start, and without any warning, I received a letter from the chancellor, Phyllis Wise, informing me of my termination.

How did this happen?

In the weeks before my move, I watched in anguish as Israel killed more than 2,100 people during its recent bombing of Gaza, 70 percent of them civilians, according to the United Nations. Like so many others, I took to my Twitter account. I posted tweets critical of Israel’s actions, mourning in particular the death of more than 500 of Gaza’s children.

A partisan political blog cherry-picked a few of those tweets from hundreds to create the false impression that I am anti-Semitic. Publicly disclosed documents reveal that, within days, University of Illinois donors who disagreed with my criticism of Israeli policy threatened to withhold money if I wasn’t fired. My academic career was destroyed over gross mischaracterizations of a few 140-character posts.

This is not only devastating to my family; it is a grave threat to faculty and students everywhere. Principles of free speech, academic freedom, and shared governance enable faculty and students to ask difficult questions and find answers that challenge conventional wisdom. It is anathema to this tradition to allow the elite to dictate to a public university who gets hired and what ideas are acceptable.

For this reason, nearly 6,000 professors nationwide support boycotting the university, 16 departments have voted “no confidence” in the administration, and the Modern Language Association and Association of American University Professors, among dozens of other organizations, have demanded my reinstatement.

In response to the overwhelming criticism, the university and its supporters argue that, constitutional and contractual obligations aside, my challenges to Israeli government action were anti-Semitic, and my discourse on Twitter — a medium that is designed to be quick and sometimes cutting — was “uncivil.”

Such tactics are increasingly being used to silence faculty and students on campuses across the country for speaking in support of Palestinian human rights. Too often universities acquiesce to external pressure, as in this case, where in their rush to accommodate donor demands, the trustees disregarded the judgment of the faculty hiring committee and failed to review my teaching and scholarly record, or even my other tweets.

In fact, as my Twitter followers know, I vocally condemn anti-Semitism, as when I tweeted, “My stand is fundamentally one of acknowledging and countering the horror of anti-Semitism,” or when I criticized the rapper Macklemore for wearing a costume that evoked age-old Jewish stereotypes. As I noted during the Gaza bombing, “I believe that Jewish and Arab children are equal in the eyes of God.”

The point that Jewish people and the behavior of the Israeli state should not be conflated is one I have made consistently both in my academic writing and on my personal Twitter account, I have tweeted, “I refuse to implicate all Jewish people in the practices of the Israeli state.” I have also tweeted, “I refuse to conceptualize #Israel/#Palestine as Jewish-Arab acrimony. I am in solidarity with many Jews and in disagreement with many Arabs.”

And so when I wrote in one of the controversial tweets, “Israel: transforming ‘antisemitism’ from something horrible to something honorable since 1948,” my point was not that there is any honor in anti-Semitism, but that calling legitimate criticism of Israeli government policies an act of anti-Semitism drains the word of meaning and undermines the very real experiences of those who suffer its horrors. Likewise, the intent of my tweet that settlers should “go missing” was a call for an end to the settlements, which the international community largely agrees are counterproductive to peace, not a call to violence.

As for the vague and subjective charge of “incivility,” it has nothing to do with my classroom performance. My former students have spoken overwhelmingly about my strength in accommodating conflicting viewpoints and in their evaluations I have never been criticized for being unfair or intolerant of contrasting opinions.

Narratives never encompass the totality of the stories they attempt to tell. They emerge from a long editing process. Think reality TV: Thousands of hours of raw footage are condensed to 40 minutes, selected to convey calculated storylines. Any time we tell a story, we omit what we consider unimportant, and in worse moments, we ignore information that contradicts a predetermined conclusion.

If we consider the parts of my record left on the cutting-room floor, my story looks quite different. In taking the extraordinary step of terminating me from a tenured position, University of Illinois leadership adopted a false narrative in order to appease a few wealthy donors rather than uphold critical principles of free speech and academic freedom. This is the reality-TV version of my story, which has disturbing implications for the future of American universities that reach far beyond my job prospects.

The original story was first published here.

Women On Wednesdays (WOW): Singapore’s first hotline EXCLUSIVELY for lesbian, bisexual & queer-identified women

0

Oogachaga is proud to announce that from 1 October 2014, we will be starting a new hotline service called “WOW” which stands for “Women on Wednesdays”.

WOW is a service for women who identify as lesbian, bisexual or queer, and runs on Wednesday evenings from 7pm – 10pm. All calls will be handled by trained women hotliners. Callers can dial the number 6226 6629 if they wish to have a listening ear, to seek emotional support for their issues, or get connected to community resources.

Sharon Sng, team leader for Oogachaga Women (OCW), said:

“This initiative was started in response to a call from within the women’s community for a specific point of contact to access supportive services for gay women. We hope this hotline will help build a more connected and supportive community in Singapore.”

Since April this year, Oogachaga has been preparing its women volunteers as part of a structured training programme to equip them with the necessary skills to attend to callers who may present a range of issues, including relationship difficulties, questions about sexuality, sexual health and violence.

Since 2006, Oogachaga has been running Singapore’s first and only hotline for the LGBTQ community, called the OC Hotline [tel: 6226 2002]. The service continues to operate 4 days a week, and averages 20 – 30 calls per month, attending a range of issues. Additionally, a Whatsapp service is run alongside the hotline to offer greater convenience to callers.

Oogachaga’s executive director, Bryan Choong, said:

 “The range of direct services offered by Oogachaga, which includes the hotline, Whatsapp, email and face-to-face counselling, offers various accessible means for our service-users to reach us. While our hotline, Whatsapp and email counselling services offer convenience and anonymity, our face-to-face counselling by trained counsellors and social workers offers a professional service delivered with an LGBTQ-affirmative stance. We provide an assurance of confidentiality for all our services.”

About Oogachaga:

Oogachaga (OC) is a counselling and personal development organisation for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) individuals in Singapore. We are a non-profitable organisation under the umbrella of SPACES Counselling and Community Limited. SPACES (Registration No. 200402955N) in a company limited by guarantee with registered charity status in Singapore (Charity no. 01812).

Website: http://www.oogachaga.com/congregaytion/news/detail/386/WOW-hotline

LGBTQ portal: http://www.congregaytion.sg

 

Oogachaga’s Counselling Services:

WOW Hotline: 6226 6229 (Wed: 7pm – 10pm)

OC Hotline: 6226 2002 (Tue, Wed, Thu: 7pm – 10pm; Sat: 2pm – 6pm)

Whatsapp: 8592 0609 (Tue, Wed, Thu: 7pm – 10pm; Sat: 2pm – 6pm)

Email: www.oogachaga.com/CARE

Counselling appointments: 6224 9373/ [email protected]

Scottish Referendum Could Result in Big Changes for UK Politics

Scotland’s recent vote on whether to stay with the UK or make a split and go it on their own is over and the nays have it. Scotland will remain in the union and the two countries will work from here on how to delegate governing powers. The vote had a record turnout and the result had leaders on both sides of the debate looking to the future.

British Prime Minister, David Cameron, said of the result,

“the people of Scotland have spoken… they have kept our country of four nations together,” and he also went on to make a promise that there would be “a new and fair settlement that applied to all parts of the UK.”

While this may be the end of the vote, the discussion is far from over. Scotland is expecting more governing powers in return for staying with the union and the debate about the structure of such a deal could become heated. This will likely mean not only a new deal for Scotland, but also a restructuring of powers in regard to Wales and Northern Ireland. This will force the Prime Minister to walk a bit of a tightrope between his own MPs and the aspirations of England’s fellow union members.

With proposals on how these new agreements are to work expected this year, Cameron stated that any deal must respect all of the countries involved and he hinted that it might not be that easy to come to a satisfactory settlement, saying, “The rights of these voters need to be respected, preserved and enhanced… The question of English votes for English laws, the so-called west Lothian question, requires a decisive answer.”

With the vote now being part of the past, it will be interesting to see what the future holds for the UK and Scotland as a member. Points that will need to be worked out include tax rights and the question of individual parliaments. As Prime Minister Cameron pointed out, a sizable portion of the Scottish population did vote for independence and a deal needs to be made that can appeal to all parties involved.

3 Important Lessons From the Fall in Private Home Resale Prices

I could try to reassure you that property prices falling is natural, and that “in the long run” it won’t matter. But that’s stupid. Because in the long run, we’ll all be in urns and nothing will matter. In the meantime, the failing property market is causing its fair share of pain – and here are some lessons you better pick up from it:

How Bad is the Property Market?

The property market was already reeling in June. But as of now further declines have brought property prices to their lowest in almost two years. And the rental market seems to be racing it to the ground: rents are now at a 38 month low.

The two are intertwined by the way – as rental rates fall, the value of property follows suit.

Now, property agents like to reassure people that this is all cyclical. And that’s true; as the supply of housing dries up again, prices will rise again, etc.

But it’s weak. Like trying to reassure Ebola sufferers by explaining that, hey, you may croak next month; but in some future century mankind will find a cure.

The “cyclical market” speech does nothing to help someone who bought an expensive house in, say, 2012.

Instead, note these three preventative lessons:

1. Property CAN Turn into a Bad Investment

Some people will insist it can’t. Even if the home value drops, you can still rent collect rental. And it will rise eventually, right?

Yes, but here’s the issue: Let’s say you buy a house for $2 million and the value plummets to $1.5 million. After about five years, another cycle starts up and your house appreciates back to around $2 million.

After 10 years, it finally reaches a value of $2.2 million.

On the surface, it may look okay to you – that’s still $200,000 in gains. But that $200,000 took 15 years to earn. You could have made significantly more money investing in other things, without tying up $2 million in the house.

And this is optimistically assuming there are no margin calls (the bank asking you to fork out cash because the value of your home to your loan has fallen), and that no emergency forces you to sell during your long 15 year wait.

When buying property, don’t be afraid to cut your losses when it becomes a liability. Follow us on Facebook, to find out when it’s best to sell off.

2. Don’t Count on Rental Being Consistent

A lot of landlords adjust to a particular level of rental income. And for the most part, rental in Singapore is consistent – except when it’s not.

Every now and then, a huge supply of housing hits the market. Too many developments are completed, too many resale flats enter the market, etc. On top of that, you can have global factors kicking in as well – even in 2013, when the worries about QE tapering hit, some rental fell (the assumption was that companies would lower expat packages).

Landlords who were too dependent on rental income are now in trouble. That happens when you bank on the fact that rental will cover the cost of the home loan. It can be a dual shock, when rental income falls and the interest rate rises.

If you’re forced to sell under those conditions, you could be selling at a loss – exactly the jam some landlords are in now.

3. Patience is Rewarded When Buying

In general, you can buy faster than you can sell. Although property agents will urge you to buy as soon as you can, that’s not always a hot idea.

The ones who’ve hit the jackpot are the buyers who had the money in 2012, but patiently waited for two years or so. They knew the bubble had to burst at some point, and this is the moment they’ve waited for. With cash already on hand, they can move in quick and buy on the cheap.

So the next time property prices are soaring, keep your cool and don’t rush in just because you’ll “miss out”. Keep following us for news on property, and our experts will give you a heads up when they see prices falling or bottoming out.

How much more do you think property prices will fall? Comment and let us know!

Read more here: http://blog.moneysmart.sg/property/3-lessons-from-the-fall-in-private-home-resale-prices/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=3-lessons-from-the-fall-in-private-home-resale-prices

VIBER LETS THE MINIONS DO THE TALKING

Viber has been taken over by Despicable Me! The leading mobile communications platform offering free messaging and HD-quality phone calls has teamed up with Universal Partnerships & Licensing to create an exclusive Despicable Me Sticker Pack based on the Minions and characters from Universal Pictures and Illumination Entertainment’s phenomenally successful Despicable Me franchise.

despicableAvailable in the Viber Sticker Store today, the pack features Gru, his adorable girls and the dynamic Minions. There is a sticker for every mood and every type of message, so users have the opportunity to express themselves with the help of their favorite characters from the film series.

“Viber users love to communicate with one another in fun, creative ways,” said Mark Hardy, Viber’s CMO. “To maintain this spirit of originality, we’re always on the lookout for cool new characters to add to our collection, and we’re thrilled to welcome the Despicable Me franchise to the Viber family.”

The Despicable Me Sticker Pack is available to download now from Viber for SG$ 2.58.

About Viber:

Viber is a pioneering mobile messaging, voice and video service. Viber lets everyone in the world connect. Freely. Users can send free text messages, fun stickers, photos, videos and doodles, share locations anywhere in the world, make free HD-quality phone and video calls and communicate with Push-To-Talk. With Viber Out, users can make low-cost calls to any phone number around the world. Viber is available for iPhone®, Android™ phones and tablets, Windows Phone, BlackBerry®, Blackberry® 10, Windows®, Windows 8®, Mac, Linux, Symbian, Nokia S40 and Bada devices over 3G/4G or WiFi connections. With over 400 million unique users and 608 million registered users in 193 countries, Viber is constantly innovating by introducing new platforms and adding fun new features. Viber is a Rakuten Group company.

See more at:

https://www.facebook.com/viber

https://twitter.com/viber

Han Hui Hui rebuts Allegations

Han Hui Hui who conducted a protest at Hong Lim Park on Saturday 27 September 2014, posted a message on her Facebook page rebutting criticisms about her conduct. She has also raised several points contesting the legality of holding the YMCA event at Hong Lim Park. In an email to TISG Ms Han asked,

“Why did Nparks approve YMCA, a Christian Association holding an event at Hong Lim Park?”

She has also denied in her email that she “heckled the event” and questioned the authenticity of the officers who approached her.

We have republished her entire email in this article.

Do you agree with her? Leave your comment below.

1. Should YMCA be allowed to organise an event at Hong Lim Park?

According to Nparks “relates, directly or indirectly, to any religious belief or to religion generally” are not allowed.

Why did Nparks approve YMCA, a Christian Association holding an event at Hong Lim Park?

2. Must we have a tent before giving speeches at Hong Lim Park?

According to the officers, they have tents and so we have to leave.

Does it mean that we can’t give speeches if we do not have tents or are we like 1st world democratic countries where the government provide resources for protest organisers and have police to help assist the protests?

3. Why did the organiser of YMCA not come out to negotiate?

The moment I arrived at Hong Lim Park, I was confronted by officers.

When I asked for the organiser to come out to negotiate, they refused and chose to publish statements against me via the newspapers instead.

4. How can the Nparks officer revoke approval at the very last minute when all speakers and volunteers have arrived?

When the Nparks officer came, he did not show any documents but only a name card without any face, what if he’s another Yang Yin?

The Commissioner of Parks and Recreation did not give any letter or document to say that I am not allowed to organise any event at Hong Lim Park.

5. Are they impersonator or liars?

Under the PSIA (Cap 250A) Private Security Industry (Private Investigation and Security Agencies) Regulations 2009, Regulation 20 states that where a licensed private investigator or a licensed security officer is deployed for duties, he shall carry his ID card at all times while he is on duty.

However, the ID card does not confer any legal or statutory powers to the holder and is merely a mean of identification purposes, the security agency or employer must still check the enquiry module to confirm the status of a security officer or private investigator.

6. Why did the Nparks officer said to revoke my rights to protest after we agreed to move?

Our event was supposed to be at 4pm and right after we told the sound system people that we will move to the other side, he came and said he wanted to ask the police to arrest me.

If he did not say that he’s going to ask the police to arrest me then wouldn’t I have immediately spoke through the microphone and would people gather around me to prevent me from being taken away?

7. Did YMCA postpone their event on purpose so that their participants can take part in the protest?

We’ve already prepared all the evidence to prove that YMCA’s event was a short one and they indeed postponed it but we are grateful about it.

Precisely they postponed it and their participants actually joined in our march as well as chanted with us.

8. Why must YMCA hold their event at Hong Lim Park when they have other alternatives?

Since a protest can only be held in Hong Lim Park, we have no choice but for an event like YMCAs they could and did use another venue last year so why do they need to use Hong Lim Park?

If every organisation is encouraged to hold their events at Hong Lim Park, what’s the purpose of designating Hong Lim Park as the only place where Singaporeans can protest?

9. Are we hackling the event?

We did not hackle their event but we’re shocked at how YMCA pushed the children out when we were near the stage so we went off immediately as shown in Yahoo’s video.

It’s heartening to see YMCA’s volunteers and participants turned to listen to our speeches and shouted in unity with us.

10. Are we politicalising events?

We have never said YMCA belongs to PAP, we merely said the grassroots came out just like how the Nparks and police came too.

Do you think YMCA, Nparks, police and grassroots are working for PAP?

Source: https://www.facebook.com/HanHuiHui

Hong Lim anger: Roy, Hui Hui are wrong and I am speaking up

By Vignesh Louis Naidu

Thank you Roy, Hui Hui and Return our CPF protesters for your disgraceful behaviour on Saturday.  Your actions have forced many, who have been politically apathetic, to speak up. Over the weekend many of my peers, who rarely comment on political issues, took to Facebook and other social media networks to criticise your actions at Hong Lim Park.

Politics is like a sport – and just like a sport, if political discourse is to be constructive and goal orientated, there needs to be defined rules.

Unlike many Western democracies, Singapore does not have a long defined tradition of free speech and expression. Singapore has achieved much of  its quick success because of an autocratic government that used a top down, paternalistic approach.

Today, modern innovations  —  such as the internet and social media platforms — have forced the government’ to liberalise its stance and allow for greater and more vibrant political discourse and involvement.

The government is still grappling with how to define this new, more open field of play. What rules should be enforced? What are the no-go areas, OB markers? The government has made it clear that accusations  and speech that may inflame racial or religious tensions will not be condoned. But we must not simply sit by passively and allow the government to craft the rules. We have to provide our input. Judging by the reactions to Saturday’s protest  – by people of differing political and ideological leanings – I would venture to say that the bullying of the most vulnerable in society is certainly unacceptable.

The impact on the special needs children from all the shouting is the greatest tragedy of Saturday’s incident. I have had the good fortune of meeting many people with special needs and they are some of the most loving and caring people I know. But for many of them building self confidence is a genuine struggle. Going up to perform on stage is not only about mastering their performances, it is also  about having the courage to stand up in front of a large crowd – many of whom are strangers – and to perform with confidence and grace. I do hope that the children will regain their confidence and once again perform in public to entertain and enthral us with their talents and bravery.

NParks could have certainly handled the matter better. It should not have allowed for the double booking of the venue – especially in light of the nature of the two events. Having watched the video of the confrontation between Hui Hui and Chia Seng Jiang of  NParks, I do have to commend the director of parks for his patience. Although NParks should have resolved the matter earlier, he displayed immense patience when dealing with the protestors. In the video Hui Hui is heard repeatedly saying, “tell me which law?. A society cannot simply be governed by laws, we must also respect cultural and societal norms.

I am a young Singaporean who strongly believes in the need for a greater liberalisation of the public sphere. I would like our country to transit towards being a democracy that values and protects the rights of individuals to free speech and expression, but that can only be achieved when we have the courage to speak up and condemn unacceptable behaviour. We must also be careful that we do not create folk heroes out these jokers, as the late Margret Thatcher once said we must deprive them ‘of the oxygen of publicity’.

We must never allow the struggle for greater liberties to be hijacked by those who have no regard or respect for the most vulnerable in society. Righteousness acts never in its own interest, but in the interest of fellow men.

Hard Questions for Singaporean Values

If you consider the progress of Singapore in its relative short time as an independent state, it is a rather astonishing success story. In this time, it has risen to be a world leader in a range of fields and a country that is a respected partner of the international community. This leads many to assume that Singapore is on the right path and that it should stick to many of the ideals that have helped it to gain this position. However, there are some who are questioning this premise and believe that change is needed for the future to remain bright.

Two of these individuals are Sudhir Vadaketh and Donald Low. In their new book, Hard Choices: Challenging the Singaporean Consensus, they pose a range of tough questions to the ideologies that many Singaporeans take for granted.

The issues that they cover in the book are wide-ranging and they point to certain assumptions that the government has operated under for decades as the potential causes for some of the current problems that exist in Singaporean society. Along with that, they also identify problems that could arise in the future as the result of continuing on this path.

Included in the book is a critique of the strictly meritocratic society that the nation has come to embrace and how the blind devotion to this type of society has lead to problems of income inequality and stagnation in the ability of lower class Singaporeans to achieve upward mobility. In addition, they also question whether the levels of repression that were once accepted as part of keeping the nation safe and orderly are still necessary and if they are even compatible with the modern society that exists in Singapore today.

This book can be an interesting read for both Singaporeans and foreigners alike. Some of their points are worth consideration and you can certainly find data that supports some of their claims. If you accept the idea that the nation needs significant change, then what you must also address is what these changes are and how they should be made into a reality.

Using Mosquitoes to Fight Dengue Fever

Dengue fever is a disease that can cause a range of problems for a society. It can be difficult to combat when outbreaks occur and there can often be hurdles to administering the necessary treatment. In light of these facts, some researchers have started using some creative measures to combat the disease.

One nation that has significant problems that are related to outbreaks of dengue fever is Brazil. The nation recently started a program to limit the cases of infection by releasing mosquitoes that have bacteria that combats the disease in insects. Other countries that are trying this method include Australia, Indonesia and Vietnam.

The Mosquitoes that are being released are infected with a bacterium known as Wolbachia. It works sort of like a vaccine for the insects and it prevents the reproduction of the dengue virus. The bacteria cannot be transmitted to humans and the hope is that the Wolbachia carrying mosquitoes will supplant the position of the dengue carriers and thus, reduce the cases of humans infected with the dengue virus.

The program basically works under the biological principle of natural selection. If a male mosquito that carries the bacteria fertilizes the eggs of a female dengue carrier, the eggs will not produce offspring. If the female or both parents have the bacteria, then all future generations will carry the protection against dengue. As a result, the mosquitoes that carry the bacteria should become the dominant form in the regions where they are released.

In the coming years, researchers intend to gather data in regard to the cases of human infection and mosquito population in these regions. The plan is to analyze this data and study the effects of the program in order to determine whether this is a viable option for combating the disease worldwide.