TR EMERITUS

I just read the report about the minister of education being let off by the police and the Elections Department. [LINK] Ong Ye Kung has committed an offence under section 83(1) of the Parliamentary Elections Act. This offence is an "arrestable offence" under section 83 (7) which reads: "Every offence under this section for contravening subsection (1), (1A) or (2) shall be an arrestable offence within the meaning of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (Act 15 of 2010)." This means that the police have the power to seize electronic equipment, video cameras, computers, mobile phones etc. Instead of summoning Ong to the police station and interrogating him for hours, the Elections Department and the police let him off with this statement: "Confirming that a police report was received, the joint statement read: “As the Assistant Returning Officer had looked into the matter, the police will not be taking any further action.”" Ong didn't even receive a police warning. Roy Ngerng, Ravi Philemon, Kumaran and I had to endure humiliating police treatment under the same law in 2016. I was visited by plain clothes police officers late in the night. They tracked my movement and left me a letter under my door. The next day, which was a Sunday, police officers came knocking at my door at 9 a.m. I was asked to go to Cantonment Police HQ the following day. At the police HQ, I was interrogated and threatened by several tough looking police officers and told to hand over my mobile phone. I was told that the offence I committed was an "arrestable offence" similar to what Ong Ye Kung had committed. I refused to hand over my mobile phone and was threatened with arrest by several police officers. Four plain clothes police officers then escorted me to my flat in a police car. Imagine my shock when I arrived at my block to meet another team of 4 police officers who introduced themselves as forensic officers. I didn't commit a murder but I was escorted home by 8 police officers. What kind of police force do we have that needs 8 officers to arrest an unarmed 5 feet tall old person? Luckily my friends were at my flat before me and so they witnessed how the police seized my electronic devices including my mobile phone. I believe Roy and the others were similarly treated. Many months later, we were given a warning and our electronic devices returned. But they were damaged due to negligence and disuse. By that time, I had purchased a new mobile phone and computer. Will the Elections Department and the police tell me and the public why Ong Ye Kung was accorded special treatment and treated differently? Why was Ong Ye Kung given the opportunity to remove the video while we were not given the opportunity to remove our posts? Why were we treated like criminals while Ong was not even summoned to the police station?   Teo Soh Lung      Read More →

It was reported in the New York Times that US President Donald Trump paid just US$750 in federal income taxes in 2016 (the year he won the election). The POTUS paid no income taxes at all in 10 of the previous 15 years because he reported "losing much more money than he made". Trump is now in a bind. Either (a) he's a terrible businessman who hemorrhages money and thus owes no taxes, or (b) he's a deceitful very wealthy man who uses shady methods to shield his riches from taxation. When I research and study tax law & policy, I saw one fine line - Most of the important criteria are usually things that can't be seen! The " very people that would pass legislation are the same people who don't want any transparency when it comes to how they made their money and how they plan on growing that money". Not that "making money" is a bad thing but, in the case of politicians, they'd rather the public didn't know just how wealthy they really are or how they, like Mr. Trump, use loop holes they created to protect and enhance power and privilege. For greater riches once connections are made by quid pro quos, not to mention cushy benefits for "public servants" paid for by the public. As long as men and women see government as a way to enrich themselves, the pigs will gorge themselves at the public trough (my apologies to pigs). Remember, they work for us, not the other way around. So, when WE THE PEOPLE say JUMP, they must ask "How high?!" It's We The People who tell them what to do, Country first and We The People first NOT party. For what it's worth, in Norway everyone's tax returns are public records. Just google a Norwegian's name, and his or her tax return will be one of the first items that pops up. I can't see that ever happening in most countries, but Norway seems to stay functional and prosperous, with this high level of transparency. (The newspapers also cover the tax returns of leading political and public figures when the tax returns are posted -- front page news in all the dailies and the lead story in all broadcast news.) It's scary that politicians feel we should simply trust that they are honorable people. If politicians are honorable people they should be proud to meet a simple standard of releasing their tax returns. There should be nothing to hide if they are honorable people. It seems prima facie evidence of something to hide if a politician refuses to provide his tax returns to the public from whom he seeks public office. If you seek the goodwill of the people, show goodwill to the people.   SojoüRner      Read More →

I refer to these 3 articles on ST, Today and ST. After a case where a molester was sentenced to probation, it drew public anger. However, the most important thing to Minister Shanmugam is this: Don't cast aspersion on the judge! In the most recent case where a maid is acquited after being sentenced to jail prior, this was Minister Shanmugam's main concern: NO WITCH HUNT! And it is now easy to see what the source of our problems is. It's this guy sitting in his ivory tower. I strongly disagree with our esteemed law minister. A witch-hunt is precisely what we need. All these "witches" that are so busy screwing up the system need to be rooted out. If there is no witch hunt, then you might as well tell us Singapore no more blame culture! Their pain and regret is punishment enough! You see, everybody makes mistakes. Including  judges! The question is, when you make a mistake, do you come clean about it? Or do you cover it up, pretending nothing ever goes wrong? In Singapore, when the system makes a mistake, no one is allowed to say anything about it. They tell you to sit down, shut up, and mind your own business. Don't point fingers! Don't anyhow say! Don't criticise! And don't demand apology! But what happens if someone does say something bad about it? Well, take a good look at what happened to Li Shengwu and Jolovan Wham. You see, the system is made up of people. And people make mistakes, and then people learn from their mistakes, and that's how they improve! When you have some high and mighty overlord shushing people up, and handing out punishment to those who dare speak up, how the hell is any of them able to improve? They only way for the system to improve, is for the people running it to ADMIT they are wrong, WHEN they are wrong. And then learn from it! If they are not willing to admit wrong when they make mistakes, if they are are not willing to improve, then I think there is only one thing left for us to do at the next General Elections. To quote a very famous line from a very famous person: “The rot is at the top.”     Angry Citizen      Read More →