Welcome

This site serves as a “backup” for my main site Where Bears Roam Free.

Yankees, go home (Quran burning in Afghanistan)

In the last few days, we have seen the MSM reporting about the protests against a Quran burning incident in Afghanistan. Obama was quick to condemn the incident. So was the Commander of the NATO forces. But that didn’t calm down the situation.

Quran Burning Sparks Angry Afghan Protest

0:49 min – Commander of NATO Forces apologises profusely.

The issue isn’t just about Quran burning. It is a whole host of issues which includes:

1. Hypocrisy of US and its allies, using “war on terror” as an excuse when the intention is to control Afghanistan so that an 800 km oil/gas pipeline could be built from the Caspian to India/Pakistan through Afghanistan. That was discussed here. 911 10th Annivesary: Remembering the Lies (Part 1). Scroll down to the sub-header “Invasion of Afghanistan was planned long before 11 Sep 2001″.

2. In the process of occupying Afghanistan, which is now more than ten years, US and its allies have indiscriminately bombed civilian targets like hospitals, schools, govt offices. They also bomb funeral gatherings, wedding functions and children’s parties. That’s on top of using munitions that contain Depleted Uranium which affects the population and future generations. Depleted Uranium: Dead Babies in Iraq and Afghanistan Are No Joke

3. US and its allies also round up young men and torture them without trial. They are detained indefinitely, never to see their families again. Guantanamo Bay detention camp

4. In the process, the Bush Admin followed by Obama’s Admin, keeps targetting Islam and Muslims (its own Muslim citizens included) as a terror source. This shows that the govt of US is suspicious of Muslims in general (just like in S’pore). So for all the talk that the ‘war on terror’ is not about against Muslims, it actually is. NYPD says it is legal to conduct surveillance on Muslims in city and in Newark

Needless to say, the Quran burning is just “the last straw” for the Muslims in Afghanistan. While the US and its allies portray themselves as liberators, the true picture in the minds of these Afghans is that they are nothing more than oppressors and usurpers. Ask the Afghans what they want from these soldiers and they will tell you that they want those troops to go home.

“War on terror” just an excuse to invade lands of Muslims because of their oil and other resource -

Afghanistan -

Afghanistan was invaded because the Taliban halted the construction the 800 km oil pipeline during Clinton’s presidency. The purpose of the invasion was to replace the Taliban with a more US friendly govt so that the construction of pipeline could be resumed. Unfortunately, US isn’t winning the war, and that pipeline still isn’t completed either.

It must be remembered that prior to this Afghan War, the Afghans were fighting against the Soviets in the last century. And who trained Osama bin Laden and his forces (now called Al Qaida by US) to fend off the Soviets? Yep, the United States of America.

After the Soviets were booted out of Afghanistan, America uses Osama as a tool and excuse to invade Afghanistan.

Iraq -

Likewise for Iraq, US supplied Saddam Hussein with Chemical Weapons in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq War. The war ended when both sides decided to a ceasefire.

Iraq was the second largest oil producer during Saddam’s reign. Since Saddam’s use to the US was no longer valid, it was decided that he was to be disposed of. And what better way than to accuse Saddam of stockpiling WMDs (never mind that it was the US that supplied him that!) as an excuse to invade.

Prior to the invasion of Iraq, Hans Blix, then Head of IAEA made it clear to Bush that Saddam had no more stockpile of WMDs. Bush decided to invade anyway.

Unfortunately and embarrassingly for the US, Saddam got rid of whatever WMDs he had after the Iran-Iraq War. That turned out to be a big PR disaster for the Bush Admin because after US invaded Iraq, they found no WMDs.

Bush sheepishly said that US troops couldn’t find those WMDs because Saddam had destroyed it. But that’s what Blix said earlier, didn’t he, dumbo? =.=

Iran, next possible target -

Of all the Muslim nations in the Mid East and North Africa, Iran is the most challenging for the US. Many of the young population don’t know that Iran was once America’s strongest ally.

This short video gives a quick explanation of the recent history of Iran’s relationship with the US.
History of Iran & USA in 10 min, Every American must watch this!!

Iran is the third largest oil producing country. That makes it too tempting for greedy US and its allies not to invade. But invading Iran is not like invading Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya or any other Muslim state in the region. Iran is battle hardened and has the backing of Russia and China. Here are four posts I published about the challenges facing Iran’s would be invaders.

Bomb Iran? Let’s lay out the cards (Part 1 – Military Perspective)

Bomb Iran? Let’s lay out the cards (Part 2 – Geopolitical Perspective)

Bomb Iran? Let’s lay out the cards (Part 3 – Economic Perspective)

Bomb Iran? Let’s lay out the cards (Part 4 – Israeli Involvement)

Quran burning protest must be seen in context -

So let’s get back to the issue of the protests against the Quran burning in Afghanistan. The MSM would like to portray this issue as a hyped up, over reaction from some Afghans. However, the issue is much deeper.

The issue is about the anger, the frustration and the deep resentment these Afghan Muslims have towards the invading oppressive troops of the US and its allies.

Afghans are not stupid. Like the Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, Iranians and many other citizens of nations who have been America’s targets, the true message of the protests against the Quran burning is loud and clear.

The message is, “Yankees, go home!”

Aiding accident animal victims – what if it attacks?

There’s a lot of talk from Animal Rights groups that in an event of an accident, the driver should stop and render aid even if the injured is an animal. In fact, the law also states that.

However, the law although explicit about helping animals, by definition within that law itself, does not include cats. So the SPCA would like to have the law to include cats too.

That sounds OK. But what struck me is that while Animal Rights and Welfare Groups give a whole load of advice on what is to be done when someone knocks down an animal, it pays zero attention to the fact that the injured animal may turn aggressive and attack the aider. No advice is given to handle that situation.

Yeah, talking about how these groups are more concerned about animals than humans!

In the meantime, here’s the article from ST reporting that SPCA would like to see that the law includes cats. The “simisai animal also must be included” recommendation….

Cats, other mammals neglected under Road Traffic Act

Cast a wider net of protection for animals under the Road Traffic Act, animal welfare groups are urging. The law states that any motorist involved in an accident where a person or an animal is injured must stop to help the victim.

However, as now defined, an animal is any horse, cattle, ass, mule, sheep, pig, goat or dog. This leaves out many others, such as cats.

The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) has approached the Law Ministry about reworking the legislation, said its executive director Corinne Fong.

I don’t have a problem with that. After all, if we exclude other animals like cats, cat lovers will scream discrimination.

Where I have a problem is the advice given by these groups. They talk and give advice so much, but with all the minute details left out, it puts drivers who do knock animals down in a more confused and perplexed state as what really he/she should do. Continued below.

HELPING INJURED ANIMALS
WILD ANIMALS

Call the Acres Wildlife Rescue Hotline for advice on 9783-7782. It operates 24 hours.

Fine. Clear and concise. No problem doing that.

Do not pick animals up with your hands, even if you are wearing gloves.

If the animal is severely injured or immobile, place a container over it, slide the lid or a thin board underneath, gently turn the container so the animal ends up at the bottom, then cap it.

But, but… what if injured wild animal attacks? Can I sue Acres for giving ill-advice?

Furthermore that advice is practical for only small animals like say an anteater. Or a squirrel. What if it is a larger animal like a wild boar?

Make sure that there are breathing holes.

To treat for mild shock, keep the animal warm, quiet, and in a dark container.

How does one recognise shock in animals? How does one treat shock? What good is that advice for someone who is not medically trained?

OTHER ANIMALS

Call the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals on 6287-5355. It operates 24 hours.

Place a distress cone or triangle to cordon off the space.

Check if the animal is moving or breathing. If it is still conscious or breathing, prepare to move it to the side of the road.

So far, no problem with that advice.

Use a strip of cloth to wrap the muzzle tightly and tie it behind its neck, to prevent the animal from snapping defensively.

Now this really makes no sense at all. You want the driver to muzzle the animal so that it won’t attack? How is that driver going to do it, knowing that most people are not trained to handle animals?

In other words, what good is such advice when it is not practically sound?

Use a piece of cardboard and slide it under the animal.

Avoid carrying the animal as the spine or bones may be fractured, but use the cardboard to slide the animal safely to the side of the road.

All said and done, note that there’s a helluva lot of advice on how to lessen the pain of the animal while rendering aid to it.

No advice on what precautions the driver must take in order to be safe from attack from the injured animal while rendering aid.

Now, why do I feel that some Animal Rights groups are Human haters?

Isn’t forcing Christian group to stop all activities against freedom?

Oh the irony of it all. Secularists, who have been using Democrazy, er I mean Democracy, as their benchmark to judge others, are only too quick to use the iron hand against religion themselves, aren’t they?

Isn’t banning all activities that a Christian group can undertake just as repressive and draconian as the very actions secularists decry against religion? Hellooo?

NUS orders Christian group to stop all activities on campus

The National University of Singapore (NUS) has ordered a student Christian group to cease all activities on campus, after it came under fire for its insensitive remarks about Buddhists and Muslims.

The NUS Campus Crusade for Christ received flak over the comments, which appeared on posters around campus and on its website last week.

The group, which has around 80 to 100 members, had put up the posters to promote a mission trip to Thailand. They said the country, known as the Land of Smiles, was actually ‘a place of little true joy’ because few there believe in Jesus Christ. The posters then urged students to help take Christianity to the Thais.

It made a similar gaffe on its website, where it promoted a mission trip to Turkey and said the country needed ‘much prayer and work’ because ‘much of the population is M’, referring to Muslims.

The group has taken down the offending posters. They have also acknowledged their mistake. What need to ban all activities?

The whole irony is that the “offended” parties, namely the Buddhists and the Muslims, have been largely silent. It is the non-religious guys who are making the most noise. Then in the name of democracy and freedom of expression, the Christian group has all activities banned! Huh?

This is nothing but an opportunistic attempt to engage in some Christian bashing, isn’t it? If these people are serious in freedom of expression (but done sensitively), there’s no need to wield the iron arm and ban all activities.

This isn’t the first time such an opportunistic blatant attempt at Christian bashing has taken place. If you recall, there was a Christian Pastor named Rony, who ridiculed Buddhist teachings. His speech was posted online and it created an uproar.

The main victims, the Buddhists, were not the most noisy. It was a non-religious group – the LGBTs. It just so happened that prior to Pastor Rony making fun of Buddhists teachings, he took a swipe at the LGBT Community.

Again, in the case where Buddhism was ridiculed, while the Buddhist Community forgave Rony for his swipe at Buddhism and moved on, the LGBTs blew hot and cold – about his ridiculing of Buddhism! Why was that needed? Because if the LGBT Community had talked about how he ridiculed LGBT ideals, no one would care? Therefore they tried to “instigate” a docile Buddhist Community into attacking Pastor Rony?

For those who are new here, or have forgotten my religious affiliation, I am no Christian. So this post is not a knee-jerk response to the banning of all activities against a Christian group. It is based on months and years of observation how non-religious groups are quick to attack certain religions in the name of democracy, only to commit the same “sin” they accuse religions of – restricting freedom of the followers to practise and preach their ideals!

=========

PS – As a Muslim, I can tell you I am not too offended by the Christian group about its take on Turkish Muslims. That has been the way Christians talk about Muslims when it comes to “evangelizing Muslims” since the Crusades.

What truly needs to be addressed is the consistent, deceitful portrayal of an existence of “extremist Muslims”, when these so called Muslim extremists are actually victims of oppressive wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine, fighting to get their rightful land back from foreign oppressors.

Then to top it up, anyone (and I really mean anyone, even non-Muslims including Jews!) who shows sympathy for these victims, he/she is portrayed as a Jew-hater, American-hater, anti-Semite, freedom-hater and/or a terror supporter.

So non-Muslims who think they are doing Muslims a favour by whacking Christian groups even after these Christians realise their mistakes and have rectified them, please know where the Muslim heart really is.

Stop bashing Christians pretending you are trying to protect Muslims (or Buddhists or any other followers of religion), when your intent is to stem freedom of expression of religion in the first place.

Demonizing Iran

The warmongers have been trying to bomb Iran for the last few years. As far back as during GW Bush’s term. With all the unsubstantiated allegations against Iran flying around and perpetuated by MSM, it is no wonder we have people believing in distorted lies about Iran.

From ST Forum dated 23 Feb 2012
Threat of a nuclear Iran

TWO months into the new year, Iran has halted its oil exports to Britain and France. The prospect of a military conflict with Iran looms on the horizon (‘How dangerous is the Iranian threat?’; Monday).

To understand the extent of the danger a nuclear Iran poses to the world, one has only to look at the pro-regime rallies in Iran calling for the destruction of Israel, as well as naming the United States as ‘the Great Satan’.

Those who claim the Iranian regime will be deterred from using its nuclear power as a military option, due to the fear of mutually assured destruction, must first understand that Iran itself has not engaged in a conventional war since the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988).

Instead, the Iranian regime fights using its proxies, having been a long-time sponsor of militant groups such as Hamas of the Gaza Strip and Hizbollah of Lebanon.

Plausible deniability is what the Iranian regime seeks and should Iran arm itself with nuclear weapons, one cannot help but wonder if such devices might fall into the hands of the numerous terror groups that the regime funds. Chances of that happening are arguably greater than Iran directly launching a nuclear warhead at the states it detests.

The untold horror that may unfold should a nuclear weapon fall into the hands of such terrorist groups is inconceivable.

The world should always be watchful of nuclear weapons, even more so when a terror-sponsoring regime like Iran’s has desires for them.

Diplomatic sanctions, however biting, seem to have merely delayed the Iranian regime’s quest for nuclear weapons rather than stopping it entirely.

The threat Iran poses to the world has never been greater, especially so when it is a nuclear Iran.

Kenddrick Chan

Iran has not attacked or invaded another country the last 200 years. On the other hand, the US and Israel, two nations that have been beating the wardrums to invade Iran, have invaded and pillaged other nations since last century.

Together with other war mongering nations in Europe, which are complicit in the war crimes committed in Afghanistan and Iraq the last ten years, US and Israel are now trying to demonize Iran, a country that has not invaded any other nation.

Here are some facts.

1. Iran is a member of the IAEA, which allows them to build nuclear power plants. US and other European states are also members. This means that US and Europe recognise Iran has a right to build that nuclear plant. Israel on the other hand is a non-member, has 200 over nuclear warheads and no one seems to notice that big, fat elephant in the room. Isn’t the assumption that Iran’s nuclear site is for building nukes a lie?

I posted a more detailed discussion on the IAEA in this post – Beating the War Drums on Iran

2. During the Iran-Iraq War from 1980 to 1988, it was US who armed Saddam with chemical weapons to be used against Iran. US hypocritically then invaded Iraq in 2003 for that very WMDs they supplied! Unfortunately for US, Saddam disposed those chems long before 2003. So now it makes US look stupid, invading Iraq for some non-existent WMDs, which US supplied in the first place.

3. If Iran supports Hamas and Hezbollah and that makes them terror supporters, what makes US who supports Israel? Super terrorist?

Finally, what’s this talk about Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map stuff? Iran has the third largest Jewish population in the world, after US and Israel itself.

Israel has an immigration policy that gives any Jew around world Israeli citizenship. If living in Iran is hell for Jews, why are these Iranian Jews not migrating to Israel?

Stop the lies. Stop the madness. Stop the wars.

Hougang by election a necessity, Marine Parade 1992 by election a circus

If you thought ministers gave you crazy replies, their subordinates are even worse. It is clear as daylight that WP hit the nail on the head, turning the tables on the PAP claiming that WP was irresponsible by “forcing” a by election on Hougang. Low Thia Khiang reminded how the PAP frivolously called for a by election at Marine Parade in 1992.

But lo and behold, we have the Press Secretary to Senior Minister Emtitus who of course, disagrees. Just take a look at how lame his argument could be.

WP’s Low Thia Khiang wrong to cite 1992 by-election

TUESDAY’S report (‘WP ‘had absolutely no idea of Yaw’s alleged affairs”) described the letter by Mr Low Thia Khiang, secretary-general of the Workers’ Party (WP), published in Lianhe Zaobao on Monday.

Mr Low had cited the 1992 by-election in Marine Parade GRC called by then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, to rebut an allegation that the WP had ‘abused the democratic system’ by causing a by-election in Hougang when the WP expelled Mr Yaw Shin Leong.

The reference to the 1992 by-election is inappropriate.

When Mr Goh announced on Aug 17, 1991 that he would call for an early general election to secure a strong mandate to govern, he said at the same time that he would call for by-elections within 18 months to field more good candidates for self-renewal and to give (the late) Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam a chance to contest for election into Parliament.

Mr Jeyaretnam had complained that Mr Goh had called for an early general election to keep him out of Parliament, as he was still disqualified from standing for elections at that time.

Mr Goh had been transparent about the reasons for the 1992 Marine Parade GRC by-election from the beginning.

The by-election was also expected.

Mr Low therefore cannot compare the reasons for his causing a by-election in Hougang with Mr Goh’s purpose in having one in Marine Parade GRC in 1992.

Foo Kok Jwee

Press Secretary to

Emeritus Senior Minister

What’s this crap about calling an early election in 1991, only to have a by election 18 months later for “renewal”? The 1991 GE was a snap election. A GE was not due till 1993. Everyone knew that if the GE had been held in 1993, JBJ would have been eligible.

To say that the 1991 snap GE was to call for a strong mandate, only to call for a by election 18 months later is like the PAP slapping its own face. That’s because:

1. It implies that the previous GE in 1988 was not a strong mandate for PAP to govern, never mind the fact that it recaptured and won back one seat from the opposition. In 1984, the opposition captured two seats – Anson and Potong Pasir. In 1988, the opposition captured only one – Potong Pasir. And to that fact, PAP admits it did not have strong mandate! What Kok talking Foo Kok Jwee?

2. It means that even with the snap 1991 GE, PAP still will have no strong mandate and hence, need a by election later to get that strong mandate! An even Kokier talk!

The fact was that on the ground in 1991, everyone was talking about the comeback of JBJ and PAP was shivering in their pants. The snap elections in 1991 was to prevent JBJ from returning to politics because if the GE had been in 1993, JBJ would have qualified – and won in an SMC.

PAP came up with a master plan to stop JBJ. Hold a snap 1991 GE to prevent JBJ from contesting any single seat against a weak MP. Then when a by election is held later, get a strong heavyweight GRC (in this case Marine Parade headed by PM Goh himself) to take on JBJ.

The Hougang by election is a necessity. It has been vacated due to unforseen circumstances. The 1992 Marine Parade by election was nothing short of a circus. It was a wayang show to everyone that PAP gave JBJ a chance to contest.

Heck, if PAP really was serious in allowing JBJ to contest, there was no need to have a snap GE in 1991, followed by a by election. They could have waited till 1993. Period.

Some civil servants should stop talking Kok.

=======

PS – Incidentally, that by election in Marine Parade did not see WP (and JBJ) contesting. No thanks to no cow sense pair Chiam See Tong and Chee Soon Juan (then SDP) who hijacked that by elections.

Shouldn’t it be humans first, animals second?

Before I start, let me make my stand clear. I do love animals and nature. But between humans and animals, humans come first.

I was brought up in an environment where I had the chance to be close to nature. Animals included. I learned to love animals, domesticated, stray or wild. It also led me to learn more about animals. It therefore makes me wonder if today’s “animal lovers” who have been brought up in urban environment, who don’t even know what animals’ needs are, know what they are talking about, when it comes to Animal Rights or Welfare.

One of points I contested in this blog is the call to release dolphins into the wild because “dolphins need space”. Little do these lobbyists know why dolphins need space in the first place. I discussed that here – Food, strongest bond between Man and Animal; Territory, the most contentious

In this post, I would like to look at three instances where it has come to a point that some sections of society put animals so high up the hierarchy, humans are left second to them. Here is the first incident.

Case 1 – One cat’s and many rats’ lives are more important than many people’s health

Ban on glue board urged after cat death

SINGAPORE: The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) has called for an “immediate ban” on glue board traps used by pest control companies.

This comes after it found a cat stuck on such a trap.

SPCA posted on Facebook a photo of a dead cat which was extricated from the glue board.

The board had been placed by a pest control company hired by the Jurong Town Council to trap rats.

SPCA said the case was reported last Friday and by the time the cat was brought in, it was in “deep distress and panting heavily”.

The cat was eventually put down to prevent further suffering.

SPCA has written to the Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority (AVA) to request for an immediate ban on the traps.

It is also calling for action to be taken against the parties responsible.

SPCA executive director Corinne Fong said: “The animals, when they get trapped on these traps – as the case with this cat – they die a slow and very painful death, so we are urging the authorities to ban the use of these products.”

SPCA said it has contacted both the town council and pest control company.

Of course it was a cruel way for the cat (the unintended victim) to die that way. It was meant for the rats. But that too, SPCA says it is a cruel way to get rid of rats.

This is the first time a cat was killed. The glue trap has all along done its job perfectly – catching rats. And that’s what SPCA has been grumbling about long before this cat incident, because it feels that itself is cruel to the rats.

Let’s face this fact. Rats are not just pests. They spread diseases. Rats breed fast. In fact, in many HDB estates, they breed faster than the pest control companies can get rid of them. If not for the glue traps, which is one effective way, what other methods do we have to stem the rat population?

Has the SPCA come up with any other alternatives that is just as effective? Or is SPCA just saying that the kind treatment of animals is so important, human health is secondary?

Case 2 – Doggone it, if you hit a canine and run

This is about animals involved in road accidents.

Dog’s death: SPCA gets Remy Ong’s statement

Animal rights group says it will work with Traffic Police on case

Animal welfare group SPCA has obtained a statement from national bowler Remy Ong over an alleged hit-and-run incident he was involved in outside the Safra National Service Resort and Country Club on Sunday.

His black Porsche Boxster was said to have hit a stray dog shortly before 1pm along Changi Coast Road.

‘We have the authority to take statements… and obtained Mr Ong’s this morning,’ said the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ executive director Corinne Fong. As part of its role as an animal welfare group, SPCA also looks into animal cruelty complaints and would obtain statements in such cases to facilitate investigations.

‘I’m unable to share contents (of the statement) as it may jeopardise Traffic Police investigations,’ she added, noting that the SPCA would work with the Traffic Police in this matter.

Little known to many motorists is that you are to stop and render assistance to an accident victim, even if the victim is an animal. But there lies the problem. If the victim were human, call 995. What if the victim is an animal? Mouth to mouth resuscitation? Call the ambulance? You mean there’s an animal ambulance?

The SPCA again is ever so eager to get involved in this, helping the Police. Small wonder why. If you read the full article (you need to be an ST Online subscriber), you will note that SPCA recommends that the person who knocks the animal down takes the victim to a vet.

Well, if these Animal Rights groups love animals that much, how about putting their money where their mouth is? How about raising and/or spending money to have animal ambulances, trained animal first aiders and what not, so that when an animal does get knock down, there is a number to call for aid during that emergency?

Case 3 – A few shark species endangered and its licence to persecute anyone who kills any shark

No sense in shark’s fin ban: Marine life experts

It may be politically incorrect, but three marine life experts said at a forum on Thursday that it makes no sense to ban the sale of shark’s fin.

But a fourth expert stood his ground, insisting a temporary ban on shark’s fin and meat would reduce the killing.

Yes, that’s right. “Politically correct” here refers to the societal acceptance, but not supported with scientific fact, that the craving for shark’s fins is damaging both the ecosystem and the shark population.

Only a few species of sharks are endangered. If these campaigners against shark’s fin are so adamant, how about producing data to show which species are the ones endangered, instead of having a blanket statement such that those who want to eat shark’s fin have to give up their favourite dish?

I am no shark’s fin lover. Neither am I a shark lover. So I have no vested interest on either side. My point is that if lobbyists want to convince the public that shark’s fin should be banned, they have to come up with hard data and not just blanket statements and talk.

Shark’s fin is a delicacy. It is also a means of livelihood for many in the trade. Are these shark huggers not worrying about an unproven theory, that eating shark’s fins would cause extinction of sharks, more than the livelihood of many people?

Final Word

Being raised close to nature allowed me to love animals and nature. What makes me shake my head is that today’s so called animal lovers, who mostly have not had the chance to live in the rural areas to be close to nature, think they know animals so much, they have to love these beings more than they think of human needs.

To me, I take this stand. Love animals and nature all you want. But the line is crossed when that love for animals precedes love for humankind.

Shouldn’t it always has to be humans first, animals second? Let’s get our priorities right.

The slow but steady deconstruction of the Family

The slow but steady deconstruction of the family is taking shape right before our very eyes. It all started in the last century during the Woodstock era, where casual sex and live in partners are the in thing. Next thing, it was legalising abortions as a means of birth control.

Today, about half a century later, the latest slew of actions that’s out to destroy the very fabric of society, criminalizing rape in marriage, is about to take place in Singapore.

Criminalising marital rape ‘worth looking into’

Law Minister K. Shanmugam said in Parliament on Tuesday that he found the arguments for criminalising marital rape worth looking into.

But as the law that grants immunity to husbands who force their wives to have sex with them is in the Penal Code, it comes under the jurisdiction of the Home Affairs Ministry, not the Law Ministry.

He was replying to Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang GRC), who advocated the repeal of this law during a debate on amending the Evidence Act to prevent a rape victim’s sexual history from being used to discredit her in court.

Mr Nair said the marital rape law was related to the amendment under debate – which Parliament later endorsed – as both disadvantaged the victims of sexual assault.

Wazzat again? Rape in marriage? Isn’t this a misnomer? By definition, isn’t rape the forcing of sex by a man unto an unwilling woman? But by definition and cultural acceptance, isn’t marriage a blanket understanding between the two spouses that they can have sex?

Now if the issue is about violent forcing of sex on an unwilling spouse, isn’t that battery, rather than rape?

Classifying an action as “rape in marriage” is akin to saying that there’s “rape in consensual sex”. Duh.

No to Rape’s objective is to destroy the family -

The founders of No to Rape are the very parties who were involved in the promoting of sex between minors, even teaching underage schoolgirls how to have sex. Its main founder, Jolene, once even made a post in her blog (now defunct) that the Family is supposed to be treated as a loaded gun.

But isn’t the term “No to Rape” when it refers to the Family misleading? Imagine a lobby group named “No to Men Bashing” and its objective is to stem the tide of Feminism. Then when feminists object, these lobbyists ask, “You mean you support men bashing?”

Here’s one of No to Rape’s misleading ads, which I posted in 2009. Say NO to bastardizing marriage

Interestingly, the same campaigners who are trying to criminalize “rape” in marriage, are trying to decriminalize sex between the underage! What a topsy turvy world these guys are living! I wrote about that in this blog too – Agenda of Notorapers exposed – followed by Damage Control

But isn’t the argument that these minors are unable to consent to sex in the first place, and that’s why sex with a girl below 16 is considered pedophilia in our secular society? So what’s with this decriminalizing of sex for the underage?

Isn’t violence what the issue is about? -

It is not that there is no protection laws in Singapore, against rape of spouse who have been separated. It is there.

It is also not that there are no laws against a husband who forces on his wife to have sex. It is also there. The husband could be charged for battery.

But these No to Rapers, who have been influenced by the so called “developed world”, would like to bring in their weird cultural practices to destroy the Family. To them, sex between minors is OK. But the Family structure is not.

Family the basic unit of society

It is no overstatement that the Family is the basic unit of society. Destroy the Family, and you destroy society. If you can’t even respect your parents, don’t expect that you will respect teachers in school. Don’t expect you will respect your commanders in the military. Don’t expect you will respect your superiors in the workplace. And of course, don’t expect you will respect the law in society.

Isn’t it clear that respect for others and society starts from the Family? And these guys want to destroy the very fabric that binds society?

As a matter of interest, have you noticed that the very parties who are pushing for the No to Rape cause in Singapore, happen to be the LGBT and pro-LGBT groups? AWARE is pushing for it. So is Constance Singam. So is Jolene, the founder of No to Rape. So is Mr Wang, a pro-LGBT ex PP. So is TOC. Interesting. Very, very interesting.

PE, the next pressure cooker for schools?

As if there isn’t enough of pressure in schools already. You have to be bilingual. You have to be good in contrasting subjects. You have to be good in project work. You have to be good in CCA, preferably sports.

Now comes the latest “well rounded” student item to be added into the overflowing basket of “must haves” for students to remain among the top. Physical Education.

Extended PE: Some schools set early pace

Change to curriculum aimed at shaping more well-rounded students

St Hilda’s Secondary student Neo En Cheng, 15, practising volleyball in school yesterday. Since last year, some primary and secondary schools have been increasing their weekly PE lessons by an hour, to about two hours in total. This will be implemented in all schools by 2017. — ST PHOTO: ALPHONSUS CHERN

When Neo En Cheng was told in Secondary 1 that he did not make the cut for his school’s volleyball team, thoughts of ever learning the sport properly faded.

‘It’s not a common sport, which is why I really wanted to learn how to play it,’ he said.

But when he was in Secondary 2 last year, his school – St Hilda’s Secondary – revamped its physical education (PE) lessons.

One more hour of PE a week was added to the curriculum, and students were also taught the ins and outs of not just volleyball but also hockey, handball, softball, basketball and tchoukball, which is similar to handball.

I can imagine what’s going to happen. Now that this extra hour is put into the curriculum, you can expect some sort of grading that would be done on the student’s performance for PE! Yeah, that’s gonna be yet another thing to be pressurized with!

Sometimes I wonder what MOE is up to. They want our students to be well-rounded. And good at everything too! Now how many students can achieve that gargantuan task?

Then when many fall through the cracks, not because they are lousy, but because they are weak in just one area, be it MT, a particular subject, sports, CCA or project work, but are brilliant in all other areas, they are placed in a difficult position to qualify for local Uni education, because the criteria for entry is that gargantuan task of being good at everything.

So, to replace those “lousy students” who are not well-rounded, our local Unis fill those “vacant” places with foreign students – who don’t need to fulfill that almost impossible criteria of being well-rounded and good at all things at the same time!

This, I find is the biggest irony perpetuated by MOE. They set the standards so high, many students can’t achieve. And to fill the shortfall, foreign students fill in, but they are without those very high criteria MOE wants and set in the first place!

Can someone knock some sense into the heads of the civil servants working at MOE HQ Policy Dept?

Now PM sends Hatchet Man to TRE

And so for the second time in less than a week, the Hatchet Man knocks on your door. First, it was Shanmugam. Shanmugam’s veiled threat against Alex Au?

Now, it is non other than the PM himself. PM Lee sends lawyer’s letter to editors of TR Emeritus

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Sunday sent a lawyer’s letter to the editors of the TR Emeritus (TRE) sociopolitical website, asking for a post alleging cronyism in the appointment of Madam Ho Ching as head of Temasek Holdings to be taken down. — ST PHOTO: LIM SIN THAI

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Sunday sent a lawyer’s letter to the editors of the TR Emeritus (TRE) sociopolitical website, asking for a post alleging cronyism in the appointment of Madam Ho Ching as head of Temasek Holdings to be taken down.

Madam Ho is PM Lee’s wife.

He also asked for an apology to be posted on the website by Feb 24, and which must remain on the website for the same number of days as the offending post had been.

In addition, he also wanted the TRE editors to give a written confirmation by Feb 23 that they would comply, failing which he would start legal proceedings against them.

This talk about Ho Ching being favoured has been around for years. Not that with this lawyer’s letter the public is going to start believing the PM’s words. It is only going to fuel the belief that PAP is reverting back to its old ways, ie the use of the Hatchet Man to intimidate political commentators and dissenters.

Sigh.

=====

PS – as a point of interest, the term “Hatchet Man” was used in the 1980s, when LKY sued JBJ. There was much disquiet and the public was more than convinced the suit was nothing but a political move.

LKY, in an attempt to quell the “rumours”, strongly objected that he used the Hatchet Man to silence JBJ. But in his haste, he said, “I don’t need a hatchet man. I am my own Hatchet Man!”

Duh. So he confirmed that it was a political move after all!

That’s one of LKY’s rare self-pwned instances for the record.

(For those who still don’t know what he self-pwned, here it is. In an attempt to argue that it was not a political move, using the Hatchet Man, he confirmed that it was a political move – the Hatchet Man was none other than himself!)

=========

News update – TRE editor apologises to PM Lee

Israel’s cowardice exposed again

For all the trumpet blowing and chest thumping Israel makes, sounding as if they are the meanest military force in the Mid East, when it comes to the real deal, Israel hides its tail between its legs like a beaten dog.

Iranian warships dock at Syrian port after crossing Suez Canal

Two Iranian warships docked Saturday at a Syrian port, the Iranian broadcaster Press TV reported.

The vessels – a destroyer and a supply ship – are to provide maritime training to Syria’s navy under an agreement between the two countries, according to the report.

Wazzat again? Baaaad Iran sent two military ships across the Med Sea to baaaad Syria and Israel did nuthin? Where’s that usual table banging and relentless war cries from Israel now?

Didn’t Israel hijack a Turkish civilian Flotilla like bandits in the Med Sea which was on route to Gaza to deliver civilian aid? Didn’t Israel kill those on board like terrorists? And all because the civilian flotilla was delivering humanitarian aid to Gazans? See these links:

Links on Massacre on the Flotilla

ST Forum – Attack on the Flotilla

Let’s get the facts straight. So when a Turkish civilian flotilla was sent to Gaza to deliver humanitarian aid, Israel hijacked them in international waters like bandits and killed its crew like terrorists. When Iran sent military ships to Syria (and Iran is known to have armed Syria as well as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Syria’s neighbour) chest thumping Israel runs miles away and dares not even approach the two military ships!

This is not the first time Israel runs away from Iran’s military ships. It is the second time. Here’s the first. Coward Israel shows its true colours. Yep, again two military ships from Iran sailing across the Med Sea, right in front of Israel’s borders – and coward Israel, who killed civvies on the Turkish flotilla, took no action!

But wait a minute. Right after that first incident where Iran’s ships sailed across the Med Sea, another civilian flotilla again tried to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza. Guess what? It was intercepted by Israel again! Coward Israel stops humanitarian ships…again

So what does this tell the world? Here’s a timeline of the events that took place in the Med Sea.

Timeline -

1. May 2010 – Israel hijacks Turkish Civilian flotilla delivering humanitarian aid to Gaza in international waters and kills civilian crew. Israel even crows that this was to show its miitary dominance and to reclaim its “invincibility status” in the aftermath of its humiliating loss to Hezbollah in 2006.

2. Feb 2011 – Iran sends two military ships through the Suez, and sails across the Med Sea which is the very sea the Turkish Flotilla was hijacked. Iran is known to have supplied arms to Syria and Hezbollah, the very guerilla group that humiliated and defeated mighty Israel in the Israel-Hezbollah War 2006. That was discussed quite in detail over here: Fallacy of the Mean Israeli Defence Force – Part 2. Coward Israel took no action against the two Iranian military ships when they sailed across the Med Sea.

3. Nov 2011 – Israel stops civilian humanitarian ships again! What the heck?

4. Feb 2012 – Another two Iranian warships sail across the Med Sea. And again coward Israel does nothing!

My Conclusion -

Although Israel boasts and crows about its military might, it has actually nothing more than a heart of a mouse. That is why although Israel wants to have Iran bombed, it does not dare do that itself. It keeps goading US to do it for them.

Bring on civilian ships delivering humanitarian aid, and Israel will roar like a lion, attack like a vicious snake and tear the flotilla to bits, before claiming its military might and dominance in the Mid East to the world.

Bring on two military ships (possibly carrying arms and ammo to arm Syria and Hezbollah, two of Israel’s arch enemies), and Israel suddenly turns into a beaten dog with its tail between its legs, whimpering and whining away.

That’s no way to behave like a tough guy everyone is supposed to be afraid of, which is Israel’s trademark (and adopted by SAF), is it?

=====

PS – a further note of interest is that Israel keeps killing Gazans, who are unarmed civilians and are unprotected. But they are very, very reserved when it comes to killing Lebanese (especially after it got buttkicked in the Israel-Hezbollah War 2006), who have the protection of the well armed Hezbollah.

Note the same display of cowardice and hypocrisy?