• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Serious Ass Loong Still Dreaming of Harmony in SG52, sweeping under his torn carpet!

war is best form of peace

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Jul 9, 2011
Messages
2,759
Points
48
Carpet is already shredded into pieces at this time, in this world of TOTAL DISHARMONY, and idiot LHL still dreaming that he could make a collection of people from all these places of FEUD WAR VIOLENCE HATRED TURMOIL BLOODSHED into his tiny Pee Sai and have fucking Harmony?So sad to see LKY son so fucking childish!


http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...ublicly-could-damage-singapore-s/3652470.html


Championing divisive issues publicly could damage Singapore's harmony: PM Lee

Posted 05 Apr 2017 09:03 Updated 05 Apr 2017 09:27

Email More

A A

SINGAPORE: Championing divisive issues publicly, to pressure the Government and win communal votes, will only stir up emotions and damage Singapore's multi-racial harmony, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said late Tuesday (Apr 4).

Mr Lee was commenting on an exchange in Parliament between Workers’ Party (WP) Member of Parliament Faisal Manap and Environment and Water Resources Minister Masagos Zulkifli on the issue of Muslim women not being allowed to wear headscarves in uniformed services.

The exchange on Tuesday, took place during the debate in parliament on the proposal to express support for women in Singapore.

“Parliament is the forum for serious discussion on important issues. This Parliament has not shied away from discussing difficult or contentious matters,” Mr Lee wrote on Facebook, citing vigorous debate on changes to the Elected Presidency. But he said some sensitive issues of race and religion “have no easy or immediate solutions.”

“The best way to make progress on them is quietly, outside the glare of publicity,” he said.

MP Faisal Manap, in his speech during the debate, noted that many Members of Parliament had called for unanimous support for the motion to affirm the role of Singaporean women in fulfilling their career and familial aspirations.

Mr Faisal said he hoped they would not exclude Singaporean Muslim women who also want to fulfill their career aspirations in line with their religious obligations "which is in allowing the wearing of the headscarf in the nursing and uniform vocations such as in the Home Team and armed forces."

The WP MP was then asked by MP Tan Wu Meng whether the tudung issue is the most important faced by Muslim women today and for his personal and his party's views.

"As a Muslim husband, and father to a daughter, yes it is obligation for Muslim women to don a hijab in whatever circumstances,” Mr Faisal replied. “In terms of the party stand on this, Workers' Party had actually issued a statement in November 2013, where the gist of the statement is that WP does not oppose wearing of the tudung, but we call for more dialogues among stakeholders, as well as larger community and it should be based on mutual understanding.”

Mr Masagos labelled Mr Faisal’s approach “worrisome”. “He has used this motion, which is focused on the aspirations of all women in Singapore to raise again the issue of the tudung, to focus on differences instead of rallying people to be united. He dwells on issues that can injure or hurt the feelings of the community rather than to inspire them,” he said.

He also said the WP MP has used many occasions to raise “politically discordant” issues in the House.

“I sat and listened to him many times, champion divisive issues many times - like the need for Halal kitchens in our naval ships, and his perceived discrimination of the Malays in the army. Is it his or his party's position that these issues are the top concerns of the community? There are real socio-economic problems we have to deal with in our community -education, housing, jobs,” Mr Masagos said.

Government leaders and community leaders of all races and religions have been actively discussing sensitive and deeply emotive matters in a number of closed-door platforms, he said. “I caution the member against making this a state versus religion issue," he stated.
Mr Faisal defended his move, pointing to the sensitive issues of race being touched on in parliamentary debates on changes to the Elected Presidency. “If not, where else can I as an elected MP voice out the concerns of the community?"

In response, Mr Masagos said he personally has spoken about the issue as far back as 2002 and was involved in discussions with the Government on similar issues about uniforms in schools. “Did I have a platform? Yes I do. Did I have to go out and try to wreak havoc? I did not.”

He continued: “Finally, the outcome of that episode was one that the Mufti - knowing very well what is the priority of our community - made a statement to tell us that knowledge is important for us to pursue, and not just covering of heads.”

The community moved on because community leaders came together to calm the situation down, Mr Masagos said. “I bet you a similar situation elsewhere will not happen. It will continue to rile the community, it will continue to make the community upset because nobody will cede what is their right."

- CNA/ly
 
Old fuck is turning in his grave looking at his fucking useless son ruining his Simcity.
 
During LKY's short decades of post WW2 surge overflowing resources, he had a unique opportunity of temporary harmony, to mix up a bastard Rojak of multiracial SG. As resources got squandered away, fights resumes automatically. And much more so globally brutal and massively, when the Over-Population got to 8 billions levels, all and each much more hungry for resources than grandpa grandma LKY era.

Long kiss my ass to dream harmony! Kiss right here! Kiss now!

WW2 ended with a temporary surge of peace and industrialized production [consumption] of resources, at only way lesser than 3 billions global population. At that time most people use water from wells, and no electrical power at home. Most people have no TV nor Telephone at home. They got spoiled by surge of peace post WW2, suddenly felt safe and comfortable, so harmony at that time had good prerequisites.

70 years past since. LKY is ashes already.

70 years of massive squandering of planet earth's massive resources, pampering man to grow to 8 billions levels. Each want to live good lives in 1st world cities, with air-conditioning, MRT, planes, cars, internet, smart phones, and Fucking DREAM to have peace and harmony? Where are resources going to come from? Where the fuck are wastes going to, after you turned resources into wastes?

You can only fight your ass dead to slightly prolong before reaching Total Extinction and Exhausted Resources on planet earth. Definition of Resources include Quality Environments suitable for survival.
 
Last edited:
Poor Mr Faisal Abdul Manap, he just cannot understand that the Minister's salary is the sole and only measure of dignity in PAP talk. Cannot blame him I guess cos he isn't a PAP coat tail minister or MP and cannot be easily bought with $$$.

====
"If the annual salary of the Minister of Information, Communication and Arts is only $500,000, it may pose some problems when he discuss policies with media CEOs who earn millions of dollars because they need not listen to the minister's ideas and proposals. Hence, a reasonable payout will help to maintain a bit of dignity."
- MP Lim Wee Kiak apologises for comments on pay
YqUYU.jpg
[IMG URL]


Almost guaranteed golden parachute into parliament for those agreeing to obey the PAP gahmen whip and rubber stamp/ endorse PAP HQ tabled policies with closed eyes:

'Without some assurance of a good chance of winning at least their first election, many able and successful young Singaporeans may not risk their careers to join politics,' Mr Goh Chok Tong, June 2006 ['GRCs make it easier to find top talent: SM'].
Intoparliamentjpg.jpg
[Pict= [URL=http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2012/04/disassembling-grc-benefits-pap-1/]Disassembling GRC system benefits PAP (Part 1 of 3)[/URL]]
 
Last edited:
Stupid Loong trying to 掩耳盗铃, pretending that disharmony is not already in Singapore. But it is!

https://sammyboy.com/showthread.php...ing-Chinese-girls-quot-and-beat-up-shop-staff

17796085_10155316063917334_5294557666147123407_n.jpg


Racism attacking and conflict are RIGHT HERE ALREADY, and Loong pretending still that he could not see it at all.

There is strong tension between China & India, while Chinese kept exporting arms in huge quantity to India's arch-rival Pakistan to keep India pinned down. The woman in this case is from India, and she is picking on the 2 salesgirls of Tiong Bahru Owndays shop because they are Chinese, she beat them up on racial motive. These kinds of conflicts connected to and originated from the international conflicts and tensions outside Singapore, and are brought into Singapore by Loong's stupid policy of importing migrants from EVERYWHERE! In his self-deceptive dreams of Harmony.

Harmony my ass! Kiss my ass!

This Indian woman insulted the 2 victims RACIALLY scolding FUCKING CHINESE GIRLS while she beat them up! Harmony is like this Loong? Huh? This conflict is originally not involving Singapore, until only because Loong you IMPORTED the conflicting countries people here in SG!
 
photo6264892087291979713_0.jpg



This is the false representation of PAP LHL's Harmony, you fucking can believe it? There is Harmony? My ass! They are still wanting to kill each other, even as they are playing up a Wayang Drama for SG52!


This is PAP's rosy falsehood and consolation pacifier for foolish peasants and psychological sedative to hide the terrible truth that SG52 coward Kiasu Kiasi Peasants can not handle.

Disharmony is in SG52 just like the rest of the world, it will develop further for the worse and bloodshed + civil war will arrive in only just a matter of time.
 
Global population were kept very low in whole of man's history, consuming only tiny amount of resources in total.

world-population-growth-through-history.png


In the ancient time of stone age way less than quarter of a billion, time of Buddha Jesus Mohd Confucius less than half billion, at only time of Beethoven reach 1 billion.

All these times, people had plenty resources left unexploited on the planet. All of the oil and gas and uranium were not exploited at all. Earth climate had no crisis, seasons and weather were normal. Pollution crisis were not heard off. Ozone layer was not fucking broken. Energies used were firewood coal charcoal windmill watermill. Ships used sails and oars. No car nor planes, animals driven carriages on land, with small amount of dirt roads.

Today we squandered too much of all sorts of resources and exhausted many of them, and caused many forms of lives to extinct on planet earth. The consumers at 8 billion level, and each competing to enjoy and squander more of the limited resources left, at fastest possible speed. Eventually money / peaceful trades can not buy anyone any more resources, when there are very little left. War and carnage have to be fought over the tiny amount of resources left. To an extend, elimination is necessary to prevent others from staying alive to use up resources. There is no future to consider after resources are exhausted and environment ruined by wastes of resources.

The dream of PEACE and HARMONY is too childish and impractical. Won't find any chance of these.
 
[quote='qiqiha' (sgfuck)]
Will he and Bw2013 further demand that burqa be allowed?
images

[/quote]

Tudung (?hijab?) exposes full face: should be necessary for all customer/ client facing jobs, in addition, some restrictions on loose clothing will prevail: e.g. on board ship around machines, aircraft/ wind tunnel, Navy seals must wear tight fitting camouflage clothing to maneuver well underwater etc. Burqa I think is not suitable for front counter staff nor amongst parliamentarians (even in Saudi Arabia, Burqa wearing people are not allowed to walk alone in streets, let alone drive motor vehicles: AWARE will definitely not champion Burqa in Singapore).

If change of clothes necessary (sterile environment), $$$ bill can be passed to the respective employees demanding exceptional treatment to pay for purpose made sterile coverings equivalent of Tudung if usual hair coverings are insufficient on religious grounds.

SG gahmen created GRC system of elections in 1988 claiming to have guarantee, entrenched minority racial/ religious groups opportunity to debate in parliament. By shutting up and out the Tudung debate, PAP is sewing serious doubts about both its competence in holding mature, informed debate as well as if racial inclusion were a mere ruse and an undeniable act of bait and switch (subterfuge) which is in fact an act of dishonesty/ deceit.
 
Last edited:
Another reason why more religious persons might want to dress more conservatively is because some of PAP's overpaid senior civil servants (within an equally bloated civil service including the 'propaganda agency's, ahem PA) are actually sheep in wolves clothing, or else have zero moral discipline (e.g. the MP of B Batok Mr Ong, a married man who hanky lanky with the PA staff of his constituency n then had to resign as MP) as well as senior uniformed home team staff who blatantly procure/accept sexual favours from staff/ business partners etc, so maybe, dressing conservatively in such an unsafe work environment can help one avoid being the victim of sexual harassment/ unnecessary work distractions etc:

bmUZ6nw.jpg

Once again, 'It's an honest mistake: let's just move on... '...:
qOiWjPs.jpg
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/ex-cnb--scdf-chiefs--cases-addressed-in-parliament/192862.html
 
Last edited:
meister00 (HWZ) said:
Orang asli and malays are just like pinoys & malays, or mongols & hans. Both come from same major ethnic group, but are in different denominations.

Orang Asli are mostly from central asia, while malays are from the now defunct sunderland, where they once share it with the native taiwanese. They have 3 major clans: Negrito, Senoi and Proto-Malay. The malays today are mostly deutero-Malay.

And yes, they have conflicts with malays in the past. Similar to the old american whites & native americans, or a better one would be the old american whites & the irish (both are from same major group casculoid, but the irish were deemed same social class as the blacks, asian, native amercians in the past)

According to Wikipedia, Sunderland is a place (w football team) in the UK: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunderland , so where is your version abt the Orang Asli origins located?

In a separate note, yes, conflicts between indigenous people and others will always exist and may not be easily solved (like ownership of Pedra Blanca issue/ artifacts looted from China by Britain etc) but since PAP promised (unless that was just hype/ a populist propaganda) that they are "first class", and even have GRC branded minority MPs since GRC programme inception in 1988 to boot, then we must see first class debate and understanding on the relative importance and weights of each issue, wisely and intellectually debated in parliament rather than listening to stupid robotic and bimbotic ministers waxing lyrical about the benefits of stuffing more skeletons into the closet or kicking the can down the road. PAP had amassed significant authoritarian rule and minority mandate from its haughty promises in the past (GRC system of elections, nominated NMP scheme to introduce essential experts into parliament, world class salaries for political elite et. al.), were these just EMPTY promises/ subterfuge. PAP must stop focusing on "fixing the opposition, buying explorer's votes" but focus on delivering the wise, considered and democratically debated answers NOW.

ST23Mar2007-%20Why%20pay%20must%20go%20up.JPG


fixing opposition parties; actually just creating an authoritarian, monolithic political state, with little or no political vibrancy/choice...
6524aee4-7b56-47ac-b0c7-0062766c0db4_zps311f8507.jpg
(YouTube; LHL: "fix the opposition")
 
forumbot (HWZ) said:
Point to us where the PAP created the Sikh-turban law based on the number of Sikhs, as one of their reasons?
Give reference to the law number and other amendments to this law.

If you cannot, then you are just guessing.

Regardless, the natives of Singapore should have the freedom to practice their own religion.
All other religions should also be able to freely practice their own religions, in Singapore.

The only hindrance to this is the PAP mindset, and all other racists and people who cannot co-exist with other religious beliefs.

PAP is the main problem.

They want to keep their fat fingers in the cookie jar and fix everyone else up ...
---------

"If the annual salary of the Minister of Information, Communication and Arts is only $500,000, it may pose some problems when he discuss policies with media CEOs who earn millions of dollars because they need not listen to the minister's ideas and proposals. Hence, a reasonable payout will help to maintain a bit of dignity."
(MP Lim Wee Kiak apologises for comments on pay)
YqUYU.jpg
[IMG URL]

fixing opposition parties; actually just creating an authoritarian, monolithic political state, with little or no political vibrancy/choice...
6524aee4-7b56-47ac-b0c7-0062766c0db4_zps311f8507.jpg
(YouTube; LHL: "fix the opposition")
 
Last edited:
Meat Bao (HWZ) said:
The way I perceive this issue is like this, :

Muslim women serving in Singaporean military or police, wearing their uniforms, serving the country, interacting with people and citizens of all creed and colour,

It is a very unifying thing.

It unifies the country, and also encourage religious moderation.

It shows that Muslim people can also have a space in their hearts for nationalism, and some small amounts of secularism.

If a Muslim woman wear tudung and wear military / police uniform at the same time, there are too many pulls from different directions. On one hand she must salute the Singapore flag and Singapore president, on another hand ISIS says she must obey Abu Bakar Al Baghdadi.

This is really about ideology.

:crazy:

Pls do not conflate Tudung with ISIS/ Abu Bakar Al Baghdadi, it is just like an umbrella, jacket or a hat: a small addition to normal human clothing with good/acceptable intent (some women consider it immodest to show off their necks/hair).

Likewise, there are many many makes of cars visible on Singapore roads, trucks, motorcycles and bicycles even: but is there significant mayhem?: no because they all obey clear and commonsense traffic light signals and directional traffic rules. As long as tudung or hijab wearers show full face for identity + security reasons, I have no objectionh various uniforms in public service ought to be designed to accomodate this MODESTY requirement so long as Muslim(/modest) women demand so and there remains labour shortage in Singapore.

What is more important is the the public servant in question does his/her job well and doesn't accept bribes. (I believe that a hijab wearing LTA parking enforcement officer is less likely to be bribed as compared to one with long hair, make-up, tight clothing with ciggie pack in tight breast pocket) or even foreigner.

Singaporeans must look beyond demanding absolute conformity/ uniformity if Singapore is to survive in a diverse world. Having obvious Islamic presence even if just tokenism of hijabs being worn will also dissuade terrorist from attacking because otherwise, Singapore will be even more attractive a target considering that By geography, already I believe 200 million Muslims in population (Indonesia + Malaysia) surround Singapore 360deg.

PeopLe whose pride lie in the design and uniformity of home team/SAF uniform designs (which are ever evolving and also involve multiple versions for different occasions (no. 1,2,3,4,5 dress etc) btw); ought to get out from under their rock and STOP NAVEL GAZING.
 
Just for laughs, the issue of women's safety + modesty is fairly new concept to PAP/ Singapore because the concept of appropriate attire probably only began in 01 Sept 2011. That is why the minister was so taken aback by the opposition MPs concern for women's modesty issues as tabled in parliament.
F4vS2WV.jpg
(photo from public swimming pool in Singapore, circa ~ 1 month ago).
 
Meat Bao (HWZ) said:
Hmm....how should I put it.

I am not very good with words, and I think I am not able to fully convey my thoughts in this complex matter.

The issue from my perception is like this,

I think religion is a positive force for humanity. It teaches many good values, like helping poor people, being patient, forgiving others, etc all these.

But taken to the extreme, it can be an excessive force. It can also divide people, and be used as a wedge to differentiate people. Many other strange things will happen too, like the destruction of ancient monuments and statues because they are deemed heretic, etc etc, lots of things, once the mind has become set in a certain way.

This is where it's important to drink religion but don't be drunk with religion.

To me the military and police are really the symbolic representation of a state. The state is the suprastructure of our social organization.

It is good to have some semblance of religious moderation in the form of having these symbolic representation of the state to fully project out the values and image of nationalism.

My concern is really one about the balance between religious moderation and religious fundamentalism, and how the society organize themselves and which way they lean to.

:crazy:
I think u must be an extremist who cannot stand anyone looking in the slightest way different from U or r u camp RSM near retirement age and upset that mindless conformity isn't in vogue nor productive anymore: wear hat= cannot, jacket= cannot, excuse boots= chao keng issue. As long as whole face is visible, I don't see what's wrong especially when the focus is on modesty.

I think that as long as the full face is visible from front, there is zero security issue and we can work harmoniously together. Or do u need to see more???!!!
E.g.
Cf-w--mWsAAUhVx.jpg

There is difference between safety + modesty vs religious symbolism and where there is ambiguity / conflict, I believe that priority should prefer the former.
 
VeryHot(HWZ) said:
Pls lah. Most Muslims don't even pray 5 times everyday. Some even eat pork and many drink alcohol ... and want to kpkb about this tudung issue?

I see many wearing tudung. There's no ban. Just that can't do it in uniformed service. That's all.
I think that tudung (NOT burqa) should be allowed in uniformed service if no safety or operational requirement issue because what is most important is the comfort and security of staff issue.

More visibility of Muslim women in uniformed service will also give Muslim girls more future job options to look forward to and lesser dependence on Malaysians/Taiwanese (in certis Cisco) or PR (SPF) to fill the ranks. Tudung (hajib) is so ingrained in conservative religion (Roman Catholic, muslim women IIRC). Unless PAP is intent on plodding the way of Mao Tze Tung communism (burning books and banning religions), I don't think that is is any wiser to make headscarves an issue than to expect all to be scantily clad. What is most important is for uniformed staff to be honest and diligent and unless it can be proven that tudung wearing promotes laziness or corruption, I don't see the PAP argument holding any water at all.

Perhaps the PAP should audit its own ranks off lecherous males and hanky panky MPs guilty of sexual impropriety if not harassment (and the excessive degree to which political brainwashing is conducted in Singapore under the auspices of the PA) which make some women feel either uncomfortable or unsafe at work before it has any business to imposing any directive wrt dispensation of modesty in dressing at work:
bmUZ6nw.jpg

Once again, 'It's an honest mistake: let's just move on... '...:
qOiWjPs.jpg
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/ex-cnb--scdf-chiefs--cases-addressed-in-parliament/192862.html

Proof of the people's Association (PA) being used as a political instrument(subsidiary) by the PAP to win votes:
liftupgrade.jpg
ref: http://heresthenews.blogspot.sg/2009/10/over-mp-raises-many-questions.html?m=1
======
Fr Wikipedia:
Headscarves or head scarves are scarves covering most or all of the top of a woman's hair and her head, leaving the face uncovered. A headscarf is formed of a triangular or square cloth folded into a triangle piece of fabric, with which the head is covered. Apart from the keffiyeh of the Middle East, headscarves worn by men are much less common and usually for practical purposes.

Reasons for wearing a headscarf Edit

Headscarves may be worn for a variety of purposes, such as protection of the head or hair from rain, wind, dirt, cold, warmth, for sanitation, for fashion, recognition or social distinction; with religious significance, to hide baldness, out of modesty, or other forms of social convention.[1][2] Headscarves are now mainly worn for practical, cultural or religious reasons.

Until the latter 20th century, headscarves were commonly worn by women in many parts of the Southwestern Asia, Europe, North Africa, and the Americas, as well as some other parts of the world. In recent decades, headscarves, like hats, have fallen out of favor in Western culture. They are still, though, common in many rural areas of Eastern Europe as well as many areas of the Middle East.
 
fox1(HWZ) said:
Thanks.
Good that you understand there are no rules to disallow hijab, just rules on how to wear uniform.
You wouldn't want a police officer wearing a crucifix attending to a case you report, right?
Or SCDF rescue personnel wearing a crucifix entering your apartment, right?
Thus, rules on how to wear uniform.
:)
I think hijab is a modesty attire, not a religious one (even if the modesty standards stem from religious belief). People should be freely allowed to maintain their modesty where they feel the need too. I rather a Muslim policewoman chase a thief bravely then retreat because she somehow feels spooked or ill equipped due to 'inadequate' dressing as may be the case.

Worse, she hesitates to pursue an ISIS terrorist because she is afraid the her lack of hijab will make the Muslims residents less supportive about her efforts as they may (mistakenly) perceive her dress (and thus allegiance) as non-Islamic: so wouldn't that be penny wise and pound foolish?

Small, discreet religious symbol is okay lah (turban is quite obvious I guess) but so is marriage ring which not few uniformed personnel wear (except surgeons who need to clean/scrub hands). Big heavy flashy swinging crucifix is not allowed: reasons incl. safety, weight limit, camouflage, cause confusion (priest or police or moral police???!!) But as mentioned, hijab is modesty attire/ outfit (like sunglasses is for sunlight protection), if it gets the job done more effectively, then what is there to complain about???!!
 
meister00 (HWZ) said:
I merely pointed out that using a minority's privileges to support the argument for a privilege for a bigger group is not a strong point.

I did not mention anything about the govt law giving privileges on it. Are you trying to lead words into my sentences?

The main issue could be the variation that the tudung/hijab has, which is the niqab. I have no qualms with tudung, but if somehow the moslem society ends up to having them wearing a niqab, it can pose security issue, due to failure of means of identification. Anyone can hide behind the mask. Of course the govt can properly define the laws to allow inclusion of the tudung (with mentions like that they still have to adhere to industry safety standards even with a tudung, akin to how sikhs still have to wear a helmet while on a bike), while disallowing the full face variant as part of the anti-mask law, with allowance of masks in public for health reasons (flu mask), or under controlled environment (those performancers with license to wear one in their acts)
FYI, Sikhs DO NOT wear army helmet NOR motorbike helmet when they have turban on (unless u can invent a plus sized one for them). I suppose that if a Sikh seeks work @ construction site, it might be legit for employer to inform that any injury compensation would be calculated as per if helmet were worn, and excess injury due to lack of effectiveness of turban as head protection would be borne by employee himself. On this note, I have witnessed m'cycle helmets flying off but never have I ever witness a turban fall to the ground (lotsa hair apparently involved).
However, hijab is no excuse against army/ m'cycle helmet use because the material is usually light weight and thin. Of course limits and specifications can be imposed for safety against heat stroke/ loose clothing caught in machinery is concerned but a total ban reeks of highhandedness I believe.
 
Courage (HWZ) said:
If the govt does not want MP to talk about religion, then can pap scrap the GRC system?

I believe the GRC was set up to ensure minority representation in parliament.

Or is pinky expecting minority MP to keep quiet and let him roll over?

What's the whole effing point of having minority MP then?
Manap is the fly in PAP ointment, PAP never expected any opposition MP to get into parliament with all the yes men PAP MPs and NMPs that $$$ can buy...Masagos is a progeny of that political dynasty/despotic experiment, paying back his PAP masters for his ticket into parliament. U can stuff only so many skeletons into the closet and sweep only so many things under the carpet before it gets too obvious: which is why the cracks in PAP intellect are getting More and More obVious as the days go by........


'Without some assurance of a good chance of winning at least their first election, many able and successful young Singaporeans may not risk their careers to join politics,' Mr Goh Chok Tong, June 2006 ['GRCs make it easier to find top talent: SM'].
Intoparliamentjpg.jpg
[Pict= [URL=http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2012/04/disassembling-grc-benefits-pap-1/]Disassembling GRC system benefits PAP (Part 1 of 3)[/URL]][
 
jowter(HWZ) said:
That's why I said technically lol but don't expect Malay Muslims to drop the tudung issue cos the constitution states their religious interests should be supported and fostered
18883381373_7c1155ff54_b.jpg

Tudung issue is a women's modesty issue which is a Sisyphean task to oppose in which the PAP will miserably fail (hell hath no fury like a woman scorned): if the writing is on the wall on this issue, PAP will win the battle but lose the war. On this issue, opposition 1: PAP 0; Mark my words, PAP will have to eat theirs in due course.
 
fox1 (HWZ) said:
Uniforms and rules are not created to make things difficult for religious muslims.
Singapore is secular.

Likewise, uniforms and rules are not created to make things difficult for creative individuals who like wearing big pink hats and wooden clogs.

:)
In singapore, the rules are created by overpaid "creative individuals" people secretly hired from all over the world who "wearing big pink hats and wooden clogs", eschew traditional Asian modesty values because it makes growing the GDP difficult and because the secret ambitions of the ruling PAP Junta(dynasty) include beating the N Korean Kim dynastic despots in % 'democratic' support (Kim's was 99.9% at last count IIRC).

1455200502610.cached.jpg
 
Back
Top