FAP Pushed Pri Sch Children to Road to Perform Show

makapaaa

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
33,627
Points
0
[h=2]‘Reflective obedience’ of Singaporeans demonstrated in ‘National Conversation’[/h]Posted by temasektimes on September 21, 2012


A definition of conversation by wiki is: Conversation is a form of interactive, spontaneous communication between two or more people who are following rules of etiquette. Spontaneity can only be achieved by across segment of people; which means a statistical representation of the Singaporean population,which according to the last GE 2011, was 60.1% for the incumbent, and 39.9% in the opposition camp.

Lets face it, even in the US, friendly journalists are planted in a forum to ask the appropriate questions that the politician has a ready answer. Hence, controlling the audience by pre-selecting the participants to benefit the panelists is a trick that all politicians use. But in the US, you will at least have other journalists who will probe without fear, getting a difficult question across and anticipating these tricks, so that a greater revelation or truth can be ascertained. In Singapore, when all the official media are beholden in one way or another to the Government/including its Sovereign Funds, then biases are expected.

Now, I am a skeptic not a cynic, we try to arrive at conclusions through inquiry not suppositions or inherent propensity.

Even if the PAP has not explicitly told the myriad of workers (which in these case would be the top brass) of the need to be pro PAP, the very fact that 65% to 70% of our workforce can be linked directly or indirectly to GLCs, and given its incumbency over a period of 55 years, the tendency is for the workers to practice “reflexive obedience”, which is to favor the PAP.

The words, “reflexive obedience”, can be understood from a report on Japan’s Fukushima Nuclear disaster: “Its fundamental causes are to be found in the ingrained conventions of Japanese culture: our reflexive obedience; our reluctance to question authority; our devotion to ‘sticking with the program’; our groupism; and our insularity.”

Just in case you think this is just a cultural specific issue, let me give you snippets of the wikileaks about press control in Singapore:
*Chua Chin Hon, was reported as saying that reporters had to be careful in their coverage of local news, as Singapore’s leaders were “likely come down hard” on anyone who reported negatively about the government or its leadership.

*He recounted how several ministers at the time routinely called editors to ensure that media coverage of an issue “comes out the way they want it.” Getting “tough with the media” was one way in which younger ministers tried to boost their credentials with the old guard, he added.
On one hand this shows the paternalistic control by the Government and on the other hand, the pandering to cater to their political masters by the bureaucrats, whether or not it is good for Singapore. Other examples: (1) as the above article shows, a controlled audience ,who are friendly to PAP’s governance, will they reveal Singapore’s discords and social divide, or are they merely there to give platitudes? (2) as reported, the organisers (CCC of Kreta Ayer-Kim Seng) of the Mid Autumn Festival, pushed children of primary school age to rehearse in the open road without closing it to traffic, forcing the parents and teachers to form a human barricade against incoming traffic.

The real danger is that our civil service like the managers of Fukushima Nuclear Plant, forget that their first duty is to protect the citizens and civilians, not to cover the asses of their political bosses.If you want a National Conversation, please do it with a certain robustness of adversarial content, it need not be rude, but it can be to the point and vigorous.

I wish that the national conversation will succeed. God knows we need it. We are not anti PAP, we are pro-Singapore. Dont confuse the two.

BK
 
‘Under the impression’ is not good enough, Dr Lily Neo

PostDateIcon.png
September 21st, 2012 |
PostAuthorIcon.png
Author: Editorial

On 19th Sept, TR Emeritus (TRE) reported on the organizer of the Mid-Autumn Festival rehearsal supposed ‘cock-up’ in failing to take the safety of the performing children into considering, in that it allowed the rehearsal to go on despite heavy traffic on the road [ LINK ].

Immediately on the same day, TRE wrote to Dr Lily Neo (the adviser to grassroots organizations in that area) for her comment on the supposed incident and also to the witness Mr Tan, requesting for the video of the incident.

In her reply to TRE, Dr Lily Neo said that she was “under the impression that the roads were closed” and promised that she “shall look into this and shall ensure that it won’t happen again”.

The witness Mr Tan, also replied to TRE and forwarded the following video, which was taken with his iphone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-XpCwDzTi0&feature=player_embedded

The human barricade (comprising of concerned teachers and parents) can clearly be seen and there were no police on the scene directing traffic. The metal dividers were, according to other witnesses, make-shifts put up by the parents and teachers, which were shifted from other locations in the vicinity.

Mr Tan, who was at the scene on that day, also called the Traffic Police (TP) after seeing the danger (posed to the performing children), he called the TP at 1800 547 1818 twice in the evening. On the first call, Mr Tan explained to the officer on the line that something should be done because the children were performing on the road while other lanes were not closed and he said he will send someone.

After a few minutes, Mr Tan said that he saw a mobile TP “rode through one round and disappeared and didn’t do anything”.

“So, I called the TP again at 8:47pm”, said Mr Tan, who asked the officer on the line “how can the TP just came and went off when the rehearsal has not ended?”; but TP took no further action.

According to Mr Tan, he stayed till the end of the rehearsal and during that period, he saw “a police patrol car that went passed the road during the rehearsal but nothing was done too”.

“This clearly showed that there was no request for a road closure. I do have video capturing the parent and teacher trying to block the lane and showing the heavy traffic”, Mr Tan added.

When asked to comment again on the incident, Mr Tan has this to say:

Dr Lily Neo said that she was “under the impression that the roads were closed”. As a professional (an Accountant, a Lawyer, an Architect, an Engineer or a Medical Doctor) and a MP who will represent thousand of voices in her constituency, how can anyone expect “under the impression” but not making sure herself as a reply?

As a manager and an Accountant myself, I can’t tell my Boss that I was under the impression that my subordinate has done something and yet he didn’t do what he was required to do, so I should not be blamed but my Boss will expect me, as the supervisor, to ensure that avoidable critical mistakes are at zero level. Let alone, in this rehearsal instance, it was the very precious lives of our children, their parents and the teachers.

To all the parents, those Minister and MPs that have children, would you not be furious and upset to see that your children are in a very dangerous stituation just like what was shown in the video?

Would you think “under the impression” but not making 100% sure a good reply to prevent the happening of an avoidable situation?
Whether an accident has indeed happened on that day or not is not the point.
In the meantime, netizens are not contented with Dr Lily Neo’s assurance of ensuring “that it won’t happen again”. They are asking for the organizer to be taken to task and for Dr Lily Neo to make public the result of her “look into it” (i.e. findings).

Netizens are also questioning why TP took no action when it was informed that there were possible dangers posed to the performing children. Isn’t it the job of the TP to ensure safety on the roads? Even if the TP were too busy ‘collecting parking summons to meet quotas’, why can’t a division patrol car be sent instead?

Despite of the fact that there were no road closure and no police to control the traffic, and even after being warned by the concerned teachers and parents, who gave the order to proceed with the rehearsal, with total disregard for the safety of the performing children? Even if the order to proceed did came from the top-ranking official in the field, why didn’t the deputy or assistant official bring this matter up to a higher level, for example Dr Lily Neo?

Hopefully, all these questions and more will be answered upon the completion of Dr Lily Neo’s “look into it” or by 2016, whichever is earlier.
.
Update: This is Dr Lily Neo’s reply after viewing the video. She agreed that the road was not closed for rehearsal on the video:
From: Lily Neo
Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: TRE Contact: Endangering the Lives of our Children for the President
To: Richard
Thanks Richard.
Shall investigate this issue.
The road was supposed to be closed for the rehearsal, but it was not so on the video.
I shall make sure that it will not happen again.
rw.loader.gif
 
Last edited:
To please the FAP elites and their Foreign Pets, what's the big deal risking a few al cheapo SG lives?
 
The PAP doggy eErotica69 seems rather fond of Lily Neo leh.

I know some bros here are very anti-PAP, some anti, some are slightly anti PAP, some neutral. Also, some are Dr Chee Bye's dog...

But no matter how anti-PAP you are, please vote for Dr Lily Neo!! She is the most worthy PAP MP to vote for in recent years!!

Of course those Dr Chee Bye's doggie, very difficult to convince you!!



:p
 
Back
Top