SPF at it again

SDP pair again contest charges Accuse police of 'selective enforcement'
Today Online
Wednesday • November 28, 2007

ANSWERING charges of speaking in public without a permit for the third time, Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan and party supporter Yap Keng Ho yesterday accused the police of "selective enforcement".

The duo, who represented themselves in court, claimed that they and about nine other SDP members, did not flout the rules by promoting their party newspaper in front of Causeway Point on April 8 last year.

Comparing themselves to hawkers who peddle their wares in public without permits but are not prosecuted, they questioned if the action against them was "politically motivated".

Cross-examining the first witness, Mr Loh Zhen Hong, a former police officer who had reported the incident, Yap tried to show there was "unfairness in enforcing the law between the ruling party and the opposition".

He used examples of banks holding roadshows to promote their credit cards and people who sell their products with loudhailers to argue that the party's activities on that day were "nothing out of the ordinary".

Yap also grilled Mr Loh, who was off-duty when he spotted the SDP's activities, on whether he would have gone to the police if he had seen members of the People's Action Party or Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew making speeches.

Mr Loh said that he would have done the same thing in those instances.

District Judge Jasvender Kaur cut off Yap several times to remind him that his cross-examination should focus on proving that Mr Loh "had ill motivations to report to the police".

After the court was shown the video clip of the SDP's activities that day, Yap contended that the police, by filming the proceedings, had already assumed the party had committed an offence.

The court also allowed the footage to be released to the duo to help them prepare their defence. The hearing continues today and is scheduled to last till next Monday. If convicted, the pair face a maximum fine of $10,000 each.


More from Singabloodypore on Coporal Loh's performance in court:

http://singabloodypore.rsfblog.org/archive/2007/11/27/witness-might-not-have-called-police-if-sdp-event-had-a-roof.html

Asked if he had come across other people promoting and selling products (such as credit cards) along Singapore streets (such as Orchard Road), the witness replied in the affirmative.

Question: Did you think they had a permit?

Answer: Yes.

Question: Why?Answer: Because they have a booth. SDP's did not have a booth, no roof.

Question: So if there's a roof, you think that it's legal?

Answer: Yes.

Mr Loh added that he might not have called his police colleagues if the SDP had a roof at their event.

Dr Chee, who is also acting-in-person, then asked the witness that if he saw other people talking and selling products without a roof, would he call the police?

Mr Loh said yes. (Joke of the Day!)

Dr Chee then asked the witness if he had seen hawkers and street vendors selling and verbally promoting their ware "without roofs", to which Mr Loh said no.


I bet my last dollar Mr Loh WILL DO NOTHING if he saw the ruling party making a speech in public.

Also police corporal Loh claims that’s if he saw other people talking and selling product without roof he would have call the police. The reason he did not do so yet is because he had not seen one yet.

Corporal Loh not only telling us he is a liar but also blind since he claim he had never in his life see people selling product without roof.

Also if indeed calls are made whenever from a police, no matter whether was he on or off duty, when he see anyone selling stuff without a roof. Then our police are really busy man!!

Anyway can’t the police just admit that it was a selective discrimination? I am sure we all can accept this fact in Singapore.

Noise on Public Transport

Bus, MRT and Chinese restaurant among S'pore's noisiest locations: Survey
TODAY Online 27 November 2007

SINGAPORE: Taking a bus, getting on the MRT or having dinner in a Chinese restaurant - everyday activities that we hardly think twice about. Yet they may cause damage to your hearing, according to the results of a Reader's Digest test released on Monday.

In its June test, Reader's Digest measured the sound levels in public spaces in four Asian cities for five minutes at a time, using a certified sound level meter.

The magazine visited places such as shopping malls, restaurants, train stations and streets in Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Bangkok and Hong Kong.

The results were staggering. Nearly all locations, tested mostly during office hours, registered sound levels above 70 decibels.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) considers this as the threshold beyond which hearing may be damaged if a person is continuously exposed to the noise.

Someone speaking in his normal voice would register about 50 decibels, while music played loudly would typically reach 80 decibels. In some cases, the sound from the headphones of a music player can reach a deafening 120 decibels and cause physical pain, according to the magazine.

Dr Lynne Lim, a consultant at the Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck at the National University Hospital, said high noise levels could lead to "permanent hearing loss, ringing sound in the ears, stress and difficulty concentrating and resting."

She said noise levels at 85 decibels would be dangerous if a person is exposed to them continuously for eight hours, while "permanent hearing loss can happen after 15 minutes" of noise at 115 decibels.

People also need to be aware that different loudness levels affect people differently, and young children and people with illnesses such as diabetes and hypertension are more susceptible, she said.

In Singapore, the Reader's Digest team found that the average sound level was 80.5 decibels on the MRT from Paya Lebar to City Hall and 81.3 decibels on a bus in Orchard Road.

This is markedly higher than the 60 to 65 decibels in a typical office here, as stated on the National Environment Agency's (NEA) website.

The average sound level inside a Chinese restaurant here was 76.7 decibels, but it peaked for three seconds at 109.5 decibels.

"At 110 decibels, that's like standing next to a jet engine," according to Mr Jim Plouffe, editor-in-chief of Reader's Digest Asia.

An NEA spokesperson told Today that the results of the Reader's Digest test "would not be conclusive" since it measured noise levels for only short periods of time. The WHO recommends that the measurements be taken over 24 hours.

"In Singapore, there are control measures put in place to protect the public from being exposure to excessive noise. For example, the NEA regulates noise from factory premises and construction sites. It is also built into the licensing conditions of public entertainment outlets that licencees must abide by noise control regulations, the NEA said.

Frequent MRT commuter Jason Chia, 38, told Today he felt the noise on the MRT was "quite okay", while 53-year-old Shok Lin said the noise levels "could be lower". Diners Polly Poon, 47, and Marcus Ong, 15, said noise levels were "okay" at their food outlets.

But this does not mean our ears are safe. We may have gotten used to the noise, but "our bodies are reacting to the situation as though we are being attacked", Mr Plouffe said. "Noise pollution is like an infection you are constantly battling … weakening the body to other infections."

I love the crap reason given by NEA. So if they think the result is not conclusive, then shouldn’t they do a more conclusive measurement since they already know WHO recommendation? Why wait till Reader Digest to do the survey?

I guess none of the Elites class take the MRT or Buses that’s why.

These days the noise level on MRT and Buses can be quite unbearable especially when you get teenager blasting their $#$ Music HP at maximum level or a “dear” man speaking on his mobile.

Wonder why they don’ t name that NEA idiot, then we can ask him to take a ride on our World Class Transport System for him to find out how serene it is.

Also NEA is avoiding the problem, instead of admitting further study need to be carry out, they went on to quote how noise at other area are being regulated.

To me this open up another can of worms, Why don’t NEA regulate noise at restaurants and Public Transports?

Idiot

PSLE

'Shattered' by Maths paper, but they did finePass rate for subject not much different from previous year, says a director from examinations board
Today online Friday • November 23, 2007

ONE parent said his son returned home "shattered" and countless others concurred.But after the uproar caused by the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) Mathematics paper this year — which many parents had described as exceptionally difficult — all seems to have ended well following the release of the results yesterday.

At St Hilda's Primary School, most parents Today spoke to approved of their children's grades. "He did all right, even better than he had hoped for," said Madam Ivy Ng of her son, who scored an A for Mathematics.

But concerns remained for others, such as Mr Satish K Khattar, one of the parents who had written to this newspaper regarding last month's examinations.

Although his son managed an A for the subject in the end, he did not feel the commotion last month was an overreaction.

"As parents, we have the right to worry about whether our children are prepared for their exams and not unfairly thrown off by something they are not prepared for," said Mr Satish, a copywriter.

"It's not about the final result ... In principle, it is still unfair, even with moderation, to the average student if they have been set questions that they haven't been prepared to handle.

"For administrative officer Lisa Mak, her daughter's Mathematics grade was "disappointing", but she acknowledged that it was not a subject that her child was strong in.

"The toughness of the paper is still a factor, but I understand that other students have managed to do all right," she said.

Ms Piyali Roy, a freelance teacher, said her son had achieved an A star — much to her surprise.

"He was devastated after the exams," she said. "But even though he did well, he was so affected by the maths exam that he couldn't concentrate on his two other papers and that affected his grades for those."………….


Yesterday was the release of this year PSLE results. As usual yesterday news are bombarded by So and So is the top scorers…follow by some sort of interview blah blah blah.

But I was thinking… So what? Is the result day such a big deal that our local news have extensive coverage? There are other more important things happening in Singapore and the world.

Looking the the new articles…. Primay School student these days are “shattered” just because they did not achieve what they think they deserve in their grads. These young kids are being taught to do well no matter what! They cannot accept failure!!

Yesterday some guy in my office told us that his son cannot sleep the day before he get his PSLE results. I was thinking what happened to Childhood in Singapore?
At the end of the day, doing well in school doesn’t mean you are smart. Also certainly does not guarantee that you will turn out to be a nice person.

Stupid Standard Chartered Bank Still at it.

I wrote to Standard Chartered Bank CEO on 10th Oct.

http://javertworld.blogspot.com/2007/10/stupid-standard-charted-bank.html

Its regarding the haressment I got from their 3rd party agents.

Their Customer Experience Manager called and assured my data had been updated into the "Do Not Call list". I insisted she send me a letter to back their claims.

Last week, I again received calls from Standard Chartered's agent on the 14th and 15th.

Bravo you stupid Bank!!

I also called and the stupid Manager is on leave and her collegue really cannot make it.

I wrote to the CEO again on Friday. See what they say this time.

So people help spread to your friends how Screw Up Standared Chartered Bank is and ask them to cancell all theri credit cards or accounts.

NOTE:


CODE OF CONSUMER BANKING PRACTICE

17. Safeguarding Your Information

Your bank will:

i. treat all your personal information as private and confidential;

ii comply at all times with the Banking Secrecy provision of the Banking Act (Cap.19),Last Update -10 Oct 2001;

iii. stop using your personal information for its own marketing purposes if you inform your bank that you object to this practice;

Yet another effort for babies.

Baby-making: Get on board earlier, says woman MP
Straights Time Nov 11, 2007

AS people look set to live and work for longer, women ought to consider putting their career on hold to have children as they will a lot of time to focus on work later, said a woman MP.

Making the pitch to young couples on Sunday, MP Josephine Teo (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC) urged them to include both work and family in their lives.

Mrs Teo, who has a son aged nine and twin daughters aged seven, was responding to PAP members who raised concerns during a dialogue with PAP leaders about the low birth rate, despite national efforts to boost it.

The efforts have included a slew of cash and tax incentives - including a parenthood package of $575 million in 2005.

But the increase in the birthrate has been small: there were 400 more babies in 2005 than the year before. Last year, 36,200 babies were registered, 700 more than those in 2005.

Mrs Teo urged young couples to relook the conventional approach of putting career before children, as lifespans stretch.

'If we think of...85 and beyond being a likelihood, what is the hurry to do the things that can be done later?'

'I would arrange my life so that I have more children, start a family earlier, start it sooner, and then when the children are a little bit older, I can put my heart back to work,' said Mrs Teo, a human resources director with the labour movement.

But putting children as a top priority was no easy decision, she conceded.

In fact, she and her husband, had made a tough call to give up careers in Suzhou, China, to return to Singapore, so Mrs Teo could tap on their families to care for the babies.


Once again we see yet another articles of our government trying to con (encourage) Singapore couple to product babies.

Why are they so eager? Again in all boiled down to workforce replacement. So the gahment will still have enough people to tax tax tax and tax.

Again I like to stress that if a couple really want kids, they will just have it no matter what the government says. Infact, I think these constant efforts from our government will only backfired sometime.

I already am sick of these millionaires trying to convince the peasants (people) to have babies.

Look how careful they select the right MP to give the speech. Josephine is a good “role model”, with a successful career and 3 kids.

Note these following female MPs are single or have no kids.

Indranee Thurai Rajah, Single, 44
Ellen Lee Geck Hoon, Married no kids, 50
Sylvia Lim, Single, 42
Low Penny, Single, 40
Ng Phek Hoong Irene, Married no kids, 44
Eunice Elizabeth Olsen, Single, 31
Thio Li-ann, Single,39

So my point is, we all choose the way we want in life. Not all people love children or like to be near one. So the “carrots” our gahment are dangling will only attract a small portions of those couple that are still deciding whether they want to have babies or not.

If the gahment truly wants Singaporean to have more babies the I urge them to seriously do something about it.

Some things my non-million dollar brain can think of:

1) 6 months maternal and paternal leaves.
2) Free childcare
3) Free basic medical for pregnant women.
4) Childcare center open 24 hours.
5) Companies which sacked pregnant women are to be fined.

Also I also try to come up with some reason why couple are not having babies:

1) High cost of living.
2) Need to plan for retirement.
3) Lousy child-care.
4) Lousy education system.
5) Not family orientated workplace.
6) Freedom – Couple with no kid and just go oversea tomorrow. Try to do that if you have kids.