got this interesting piece from my friend.. traced the source and it's actually written by a blogger.. i'm not revealing his nickname and title of this entry has also been changed to protect his identity.. he's quite a young chap though and i would have to say: "i agreed!".. read it!
P/S: As you finished reading, he had taken down the post from his blog.. so, risk my life, i shall fully 'copy & paste this in my blog instead.. don't be surprised that soon i may be asked to remove this entry too..
~~~~~~~~~~
That so many Singaporeans behave like sheep and recite the prescribed mantra all the time about our government (namely, that we owe it all tothem) really only reveals the plight of our people. Not only are Singaporeans amongst the lowest earners in the developed world in monetary terms, they are also almost definitely the poorest in the faculty to think for themselves, as a result of the education system.
Now that I am of age to vote, I am unable to vote for the PAP in the coming election because there is such an urgent need to send across astrong signal through their very thick skulls that there is a problemin the way it's running this country. I am not a member of the Opposition, and I do not want the Opposition to take over this country, but because there will always be too many sheep in Singapore anyway, we need every vote FOR the Opposition just to manage to produce a dent in the PAP's smugly expected results. There will always be the apathetic, the boot-lickers, the cowardly, and the ignorant to ensure they win eventually anyway.
The difference we can make, however, is how much it wins by. Perhaps if it loses a GRC or two (and the GRC is a PAP invention), they will shake off their slumber and start ruling Singapore as a Republic, that is, for the public, for the People (rather than for personal interests).
Remember how LKY said he will send in the army if there ever is a "freak election" and the PAP is voted out of Parliament? In every other country, when the people vote out the ruling party, it is called a mandate. It is only in Singapore that such a vote is called a "freak election". Also,whose Army is it anyway? Is it the Army of the people of Singapore - who have just voted out the PAP? Or is it the Army of the PAP?
I list here ten out of the many other reasons why I am unable to votefor the PAP:
1. I will not render unto Caesar what is not Caesar's
Given that Singapore's poor are amongst the Developed World's poorest, while living standards are amongst the highest in the world, it is not difficult to see why the Government's ridiculous salaries are distastefully inflated.
The President earns $3.9 million, the PM $3.8 million, the MM and SM$3.5 million each, all other ministers between $2 to $3.2 million and allministers of state between $1.5 to $1.8 million. These salaries do not include MP allowances, pensions and other sources of income such as Directorship, Chairmanship, Advisory, Consultancy, etc to government-linked and government-related organisations or foreign MNCs, etc. And why are they allowed to work for foreign corporations in the first place? Weren't their ridiculously-high salaries justified with the excuse that it'll be THIS excessive precisely so that they will focus on doing their ministerial jobs? Where is the check and balance in this government?
How much do you earn in a year?
In contrast, President Obama earns a more reasonable US$400,000, with US$50,000 expenses. Our most junior ministers are paid more than twice of what the most powerful man in the world gets! Hong Kong, with the same scarcity of resources as Singapore, half the developable land area, but with double the economic success, only pays its Chief Executive Donald Tsang HK$371,885 (US$47, 678). That is good enough to show that the PAP rhetoric about their pay cheques is plain rubbish (incidentally, "rubbish" is one of LKY's favourite words).
Adding to that, it had the cheek to raise its own salary right before a GST hike in 2003 and 2004. GST was raised again in 2007 to 7% from the original 3%. And of course, the PAP salaries have been rising accordingly as well.
It claims it needs to be paid similar to the private sector, but this is the public sector for a reason - you choose to work in the government to serve the country, not your pockets. Arguing that "talents" need this monetary incentive to join the government only goes to show what kind of people are being attracted - greedy, selfish, money-minded elites whosee the Civil Service as nothing but a more glamorous avenue to the big bucks since their main reason for serving is not for the good of the country, but for money.
I cannot vote for a government that decides its own ridiculous salaries DESPITE a very strong public opinion against it.
2. Incompetence
Despite paying astronomic salaries to these patron saints of Singapore, there is much to be desired from their performance. Surely, if we arepaying the highest government salaries in the world, it is not unreasonable to simply expect these people to do their job. The recent Bukit Timah Floodings, however, is a case in point showing why this expectation may be misplaced.
Environment Minister Yaacob Ibrahim said that the government knew the diversion canal was not big enough to take the rain waters. He claimed that because this sort of "freak events" occur only once every 50 years, there was nothing the government could do about it. The Bukit Timah Canal was constructed in 1972, almost 40 years ago - about time something that happens "once every 50 years" would occur. Additionally, meteorologists reported that 'this flood comes three years after one of Singapore's worst floodings in recent history, in December 2006'. 50 years indeed. But alas, our $2.8 million/year Minister was unable to foresee such a simple thing - even while knowing the canal was not big enough! Well, the PUB is planning to work on expanding it now - pretty late or early (depending on where in Singapore you live), since the next time we really need it will be 50 years from now, according to the Minister.
3. Double standards
It is a well-known fact that GIC and Temasek Holdings, Singapore's two sovereign wealth funds, are both headed by members of the Lee family. Both have reported a ridiculous loss of $41.6 Billion and $39.91 Billion respective and have yet to answer to the real stakeholders - Singaporeans - on how this could have happened. No one has taken responsibility or issued explanations or anything at all. In fact, the state media has been glaringly silent on the issue. Why aren't we Singaporeans hearing anything about our money?
"When we invest, we invest for the long-term", Lee Kuan Yew, who heads GIC, said when Temasek Holdings purchased Bank of America shares and then sold it off a few months later, losing between US$2.3 to US$4.6 billion just like that.
That is more than $80 Billion in total from the blood and sweat of Singaporeans, down the drain because of bad decisions made by individuals whose multi-million dollar pay cheques remain secure no matter how many mistakes they make. In contrast, the Resilience Package tapped into Singapore's official reserves to withdraw $4.9 billion, and that effort to help Singaporeans in genuine need required hours and hours of debate.
While we should rightfully acknowledge the good that the PAP has done for Singapore, it is often taken for granted that Singaporeans believe a blatant lie that the country's affluence is owed to the PAP and Lee Kuan Yew's efforts. No, it came from the efforts of all Singaporeans. Hong Kong did not have a strongman like Lee Kuan Yew to dictate their lives from toilet habits to whether they could hear their own dialect on TV, and yet they have achieved double of what we have - and their people are involved in the political process, not dead and apathetic like our population. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Singapore, with itsstrategic location and hardworking population, would not have reachedits present affluence under a less money-minded David Marshall or someoneelse.
Moreover, the oft-used justification for the lofty salaries of the government is that the private sector pays its leaders similar salaries. Well, in the private sector, there is such a thing as accountability. Where is Temasek Holdings' accountability? Where is GIC's accountability? Where was Wong Kan Seng's accountability when his Ministry slipped uptime and time again? Where is Yaacob Ibrahim's accountability? What exactlyhappens when a minister makes a mistake in Singapore? Where is the Fourth Estate to play its role as a watchdog?
4. Blatant lies
We are probably the only country in the world that has its MPs blatantly lie in Parliament and yet achieve high rankings on corruptibility. Anyone remember the mention of White Horses in Parliament? Practically every NSF knows that there is such a thing as White Horses, yet right there in Parliament, an affront to the ideals of democracy, transparency and integrity in this country, our leaders lied to its people. If it can do that once, it could have done it before, and it can do it again. What is the point of wearing white, trying to look pure, if you are a liar?
I cannot vote for such blatant liars to be my leaders - especially whenthey lie about such things NOT for the good of the country, but for their own interests, for the unfairly selective comfort of their own children at the very expense of the equality this country was founded upon.
The media in Singapore is entirely controlled via Singapore Press Holdings, headed by a former PAP minister, Dr Tony Tan. Masquerading as an independent paper, the Straits Times, while not necessarily fabricating facts on its own (at least I hope not), blatantly twists them. For example (extracted from here), the media was full of praise of Temasek CEO Ho Ching for earning a few million dollars on paper, but failed to highlight her disastrous investment decisions such as buying the shares of Barclays bank at a high and selling them at a low a few months later.
The Straits Times credited the Singapore Internal Security Department for providing the crucial "intelligence" which led to the capture of escaped terrorist Mas Selamat Kasteri by the Malaysian Special Branch. It turned out that the operation was part of a joint collaboration by the Malaysian, Singapore and Indonesian police and the Singapore ISD actually played only a minor role in the capture of Mas Selamat, but the Straits Times did not mention this to give the public the full picture, choosing rather to mislead Singaporeans into believing that ISD had indeed "redeemed"itself.
Without a free press in Singapore, Singaporeans are robbed of access toreal and accurate news that does not include propaganda and spins that mislead. They are robbed of a crucial check and balance in the form of the Fourth Estate that acts as a watchdog to ensure the government is doing its job. In the end, it is Singaporeans who stand to lose.
5. Operation Coldstore and the 1963 General Elections
The 1963 Singapore General Elections was the toughest and most criticalthe PAP ever faced. It had already suffered two by-election defeats and the number of seats it held was 26 - holding a majority by just one seat. On 2 February 1963, just a few months before the elections, Operation Coldstore was launched and more than a hundred people were arrested and detained without trial, including the Secretary-General and other keymembers of the Barisan Sosialis, the PAP's biggest threat.
Despite the heavy blow, which was an obvious attempt to undermine the Barisan Sosialis' success at the Elections, they won 33.2% of the popular vote and the PAP took 46.9%. What do you think the PAP would have gotten if it hadn't carried out Operation Coldstore?
And why do Singaporeans not know about such an important aspect of their national history?
6. Lim Chin Siong
Lim Chin Siong was recruited into the PAP by Lee Kuan Yew in 1954, and his immense popularity amongst the Chinese won a large amount of support for the PAP. When Lim Chin Siong was arrested by the British in 1955 foranti-colonial activities, the PAP promised the electorate to release him if they were elected, in order to gain votes.
At the age of 22, Lim Chin Siong was elected into the LegislativeAssembly, and he was so popular among the people that Lee Kuan Yew wasprompted to promise that he would be 'our future Prime Minister' (guesswho became PM instead?).
However, he soon grew disillusioned with the PAP and left to form the Barisan Sosialis in 1961. Under the pretext of being a communist, he was detained without trial under Operation Coldstore for SIX YEARS until hewas forced to renounce politics and went into exile in 1969. Up til ltoday, there is no evidence at all that he was ever a communist. It wassimply used it as an excuse to eliminate him from the precarious 1963 General Elections. Imagine being removed from your family, being lockedup for 6 years, NEVER given a trial, and then thrown out of the country, all because you are popular and the government fears you?
Lee Kuan Yew himself said of him "I liked and respected him for his simple lifestyle and his selflessness. He did not seek financial gain or political glory. He was totally committed to the advancement of his cause". This was the kind of men who sincerely fought with their lives for the good of the country. And they were persecuted and crushed by the PAP in order to snatch power. Contrast the lives of such men with the kind of PAP MPs we have today.
[13th Dec '09 - Edit: Click here to read about Operation Spectrum, launched in 1987 under that terrible ISA again. Over 20 people were detained without trial under the accusation of a Marxist conspiracy. After being released a few months later, they repudiated their earlier confessions, alleged ill-treatment by ISD officers while in detention, and were arrested the very next day (how come this sort of efficiency islacking with real threats like Mas Selamat?). Ten days later, the government announced that a proposed commission of inquiry into the allegations made by the detainees was no longer necessary as the signatories have since recanted their statement while in detention. Hmm, I wonder why.
Excerpt from their statement:"...we were subjected to harsh and intensive interrogation, deprived of sleep and rest, some of us for as long as 70 hours insides freezing cold rooms. All of us were stripped of our personal clothing, including spectacles, footwear and underwear and made to change into prisoners' uniforms.
Most of us were made to stand continually during interrogation, some of us for over 20 hours and under the full blast of air-conditioning turned to a very low temperature.
Under these conditions, one of us was repeatedly doused with cold water during interrogation.
Most of us were hit hard in the face, some of us for not less than 50 times, while others were assaulted on other parts of the body, during the first three days of interrogation.
We were threatened with more physical abuse during interrogation.
We were threatened with arrests, assault and battery of our spouses, loved ones and friends. We were threatened with INDEFINITE detention without trial. Chia Thye Poh, who is still in detention after twenty years, was cited as an example. We were told that no one could help us unless we "cooperated" with the ISD.
These threats were constantly on our minds during the time we wrote our respective "statements" in detention.
We were actively discouraged from engaging legal counsel and advised to discharge our lawyers and against taking legal action (including making representations to the ISA Advisory Board) so as not to jeopardise our chances of release.
We were compelled to appear on television and warned that our release would depend on our performances on tv. We were coerced to make statements such as "I am Marxist-inclined..."; "My ideal society is a classless society..." ; " so-and-so is my mentor..."; "I was made use of by so-and-so..." in order to incriminate ourselves and other detainees."
This is another reason why I will not be able to vote for the PAP. I cannot bring myself to support such a brutal and callous government which treats its people as such. And I cannot support its continued use of the ISA in Singapore, in spite of its usefulness in handling terrorists (who is the real terrorist here?), because time and again, history has shown that it is innocent Singaporeans who will suffer most from such a law that allows the government to conveniently eliminate all threats to itself - not the nation - without trial, without evidence, without accountability of any kind.]
7. Singaporean students need to learn a fair and accurate history inschool
The fact that practically no young Singaporean knows about important people like Lim Chin Siong, or even David Marshall, our first Chief Minister, is testament to the spectacular failure of our education system. All they ever learn about our country's history is LKY and Raffles, LKY and Raffles, LKY and Raffles, and maybe a bit about the War. No wonder our students find history boring. No wonder our students do not feel attached to this country because their knowledge of its history is so shallow.
Why has MOE removed the important bits of Singapore's history from school books? The bits about Operation Coldstore (and the realities behind it), the historic Anson by-election, the real founder of the PAP (who,by the way, is not surnamed Lee), our ex-President Devan Nair, Ong Teng Cheong's request - which was never granted to the day he died - to be given a list of Singapore's reserves (because as President he needed toknow what he is protecting, since the President's role is to be Protector of the Reserves - and did you know that the President's role is that, by the way?), etc. Why are Singaporeans being robbed of their history and then accused of being apathetic?
8. Traumatic MP-experiences and MPs who fear death by The Chair
The kind of PAP MPs that Singapore is ruled by today is a worthy cause for Trauma.
In short, a married couple went to see their MP because their eldest son recently passed away from a naval accident while serving NS. Theyexplained that their younger son will be serving his NS soon and requested for an exemption because of what had just happened. They said that it's been a traumatic time for them. And the MP replied "What traumatic? After two months, you won't be traumatic".
As if insensitive MPs are not enough, the PAP is fielding hyper-sensitive wimps behind the shadows with their GRC Trick.
The GRC, by the way, was invented by the PAP. The fact that it engages in gerrymandering (drawing up election borders in its favour) goes to show the extent it is willing to go just to stay in power. The GRC is also unfair because constituents are forced to vote into Parliament men and women they do not really want to have. This whole system, however, was implemented without asking Singaporeans, of course. The PAP decided it wanted to have the GRCs, and it passed the law to have the GRCs. No say from the people at all. Is this democracy? Is gerrymandering for the good of the people?
With such people ruling the country, it is honestly difficult to believe we are in good hands. Contrasted against the lives of men such as Lim Chin Siong, it is hard to rule out the severe suspicion that the MPs we have today are joining the Government for personal interest, not the nation's.
9. Money. Of course it's all about money
Singapore claims it pays its ministers astronomical salaries because "talents" need to be attracted from the private sector - this is simply saying that our ministers serve the country just for money.
Also, their pay is pegged to GDP growth - which is why it is no wonder that everything in this country seems to be focused on the economy. The government is so caught up in money-making because its salaries are pegged to it! Moreover, if Singaporeans are attuned to the mentality that money is all there is to life (and many, many Singaporeans are), then theywill be less bothered about the other compromises to their civil rights, andless likely to be concerned about what their government is really doing, so long as the money keeps flowing in. What a cheap people we have become.
10. What Singapore needs is change
Lastly, by voting for a significant change to the status quo, Singaporean youths will become less apathetic, seeing that, for the first time intheir lives, CHANGE is really possible in this country, and that they can make a difference in deciding for the future of Singapore.
The PAP will also be less complacent if it meets with a stunning defeat. Its cold Point 8-type ministers will also learn that it is Singaporeans they are supposed to be serving, not themselves. They will learn to treasure their constituents, to sincerely listen their opinions and to truly help them - all these are SUPPOSED to be their job in the first place.
People will also start to dare to join the Opposition. The only reasonwhy I do not wish for the Opposition to take over the government is because it is incompetent, and it is incompetent because talented men and women who are concerned about the aforementioned issues, do not have the courage or faith in the system to step forward and join the Opposition (hell no, not with a law like the ISA in place). But if the PAP faces a defeat that is significant enough, trust in the democratic system of Singapore will finally be restored and the politics of Singapore can be revived to more than just dead rhetoric.
Of course we are grateful for the many, many good things the PAP has done for Singapore. It has been an excellent government in many ways (especially economically - I wonder why). However, it has also been found lacking in many aspects. Politics is not a charity, as they would themselves say with regard to the Opposition, and we cannot vote for agovernment simply because it used to serve the people well. If it has lost its focus, then support for the Opposition is the only way to make them regain this focus.
My vote counts. So will yours. Vote wisely.
[Original Author's Addendum: 15th Dec '09 - Government salaries quoted here were mostly sourced from various websites on the internet, some of which may look dubious, but they are the best I can find because the Government does not seem to display Ministerial Salaries anywhere to be easily found - I wonder why. I will happily correct the numbers, or any other mistakes in this post, if the right digits and facts are pointed out to me. Still, I have confidence that the real salaries cannot be that far off.
This note was written the day after I finished my exams, just to kill time, and was meant to be shared amongst my friends simply as a private opinion. I certainly did not expect the stir it has caused on the internet since (the flood of opinions it has released does give a glimpse of the sentiments of the people of this country, though). As such, the quality of this note may be found wanting in certain aspects, to certain people, for certain reasons. This is not a pamphlet, nor a call to a political war, much less a revolution (come on...). My intentions were not to defameany one or to attack anyone's character, but to bring to light what is dark, simply because people have the right to know what their employees are doing at work - the Government is employed by the people to work for the people not the other way around - and then decide if they will continue to use their service.
Like I have mentioned in a comment on this Facebook note, we OUGHT to be appreciative of whatever we have, and that includes the incumbent government and the good it has done. But being appreciative does not equate to complacence and dumb acceptance of everything. We speak out because we want the problems solved. And the solutions are simple and obvious: cut the ridiculous salaries of these people, pick genuinelycivic-minded citizens to run the country, LISTEN to what the peoplehave to say, give us a free press with unregulated content, become accountable, be transparent, stop lying to the country, teach a fair and accurate history in schools, ensure Singaporeans that the ISA will not be misused AGAIN, punish errant ministers/MPs, stop gerrymandering because that makes people lose faith in the electoral process, etc. That's what Singaporeans want from their government. We have spoken up and we have written in; there is only so much we can do. But how much has actually changed? How receptive is the government to its people? There is hardly anything else Singaporeans are able to do (we can't even demonstrate) to send the message across (like I said, through their very thick skulls) but to let their sentiments be heard through their vote.]
All the students thought for a while. One answered, 'Because we lost our cool. That's why we SHOUT.'
Asked the professor again, 'But the person is just right next to you, why can't we talk softly but have to SHOUT?'
Everyone gave their opinions but none was accepted by the professor.
Finally, the professor explained, 'When we are ANGRY, our hearts drift apart. To mask the DISTANCE we felt, we instinctively SHOUT instead of speak so the other party can hear us.'
'But as we SHOUT, we get ANGRIER. And we felt we drift apart further. So we SHOUT even louder...'
'It is the opposite when we are in love. Not only we do not shout, we whisper into each other ears. Why?'
'This is because our hearts are very close, almost never apart. As our love deepens, we reach a state of communication where there is no need for words.'
'We understand each other well enough just by exchanging look.' concluded the professor.
