FoodPanda Hostage

It's amazing how far downhill FoodPanda has fallen in Singapore. Oh sure it's great, as long as everything goes according to plan, but once you hit a problem, and I'm going to be brutally honest here, you are fucked.

 

I say this because FoodPanda does not care about you or your order in the slightest. Once your order is delayed they basically hold you hostage. It will start off with .. a slight delay ... and as you've been watching the time count down suddenly it goes back up, in some cases to what it was when you first ordered. Clearly their understanding of a "slight delay" very much on a different level to anyone else.

Then when you check the order a little later you'll get the ... there is a surge of orders for this restaurant ... which of course is usually bullshit, the real reason is they cannot find a rider. Or worse (which I've witnessed personally on the app) the rider cancels the pickup and it goes to another rider, and then it's rinse and repeat for a few times. Meanwhile you are still waiting, and yes still being held a hostage.

On the app itself there is absolutely nothing you can do. You can try to cancel the order after you've waited for over an hour (yes there's no option to cancel until then because FoodPanda doesn't care about you in the slightest), but the last time I looked at that option it was a cancel with no refund, so not only was I held hostage they had taken to mentally torturing me as an added bonus.

Of course it compounds the issue when you've also paid for priority delivery, something I advice everyone never to do, because it means absolutely nothing. I mean if they can't find a rider, or riders are changing like the weather and you're food gets delayed it just adds salt to the wounds they've inflicted as part of their mental torture. 

Next day I even tried doing an advance order for 6:30pm. At 7:30pm+ Foodpanda cancelled the order, I'm pretty certain that it was done because I was trying to talk with them on Facebook messenger trying to find out when my order would be delivered (at 7:30pm there was still a 50min wait by the way). So people take note, if you even try to find out what's happening you risk your order being cancelled so they don't have to deal with you. 

There's no chat, no email you can complain to, just nothing you can do. And why is that, because FoodPanda does not give a shit about you or your order. They couldn't care less. They already have your money and clearly view anything that could remotely pass for customer service as completely unnecessary.

So if you're reading this and can relate, then you know what I mean. And if its never happened to you have no fear it absolutely will, and when it does feel free to come back to this post and vent your fury.

FOLLOW UP  4th MAR 26

So I attempted to raise my issue with FoodPanda after finding a number of emails. One was sent to the corporate devision (corporate@foodpanda.sg). A nice guy by the name of Michael (an assumption just based on the fact that he actually replied) sent me back an email asking me to use the in app help function. Yeah the in-app help function that I've mentioned in the post above. So it seems even their corporate office don't give a shit about their customers either. 

Singapore Repeals 377A

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced in his National Day Rally speech on Sunday 21st of August that section 377A of the constitution, a law that criminalises sexual intimacy between two males, will shortly be repealed.

.

According to another article in Today published on August 22, Minister for Culture, Community and youth, and Second Minister for Law Mr. Edwin Tong is reported as stating that "with recent Constitutional challenges to Section 377A, there is a “significant risk” that the law could be held unconstitutional and struck down by the courts, on the basis that it is a breach of the Equal Protection provision." 

Mr. Edwin Tong goes on to mention that "If Section 377A is struck down, Singapore’s marriage laws could also be challenged on the same grounds, leading to the recognition of same-sex marriages, and this in turn will also have an impact on other laws and policies that are built on our existing definition of marriage – such as laws on adoption, public housing, school curriculum, advertising and so on."

So it's clear that the plan to repeal of section 377A is to remove the risk of any further constitutional challenge to section 377A. And just as equally, the decision by the government to make a series of constitutional amendments to protect the current definition of marriage in the Women’s Charter and in the Interpretation Act is to project that definition of marriage from any constitutional challenge once section 377A is repealed. 

In the same article Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam is quoted as saying "So, if a party, a group of people, want to allow same-sex marriage, they will have to put that in their manifesto, fight elections, win the elections, get a majority, and then change the definition of marriage." 

Meanwhile in an article in the Straits Times published on the 22 August, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong is quoted as stating that " the Government is fully committed to upholding its family-centred policies and marriage as defined between one man and one woman". He is further reported as stating that “the PAP Government will not change the current definition of marriage" inferring that any such change "will not happen under the watch of the current Prime Minister, and it will not happen under my watch "

So, what does all this mean. Well for the project managers out there this is an abject lesson in risk management and mitigation, if not a masterclass. For the LGBTQI+ community the repeal of Section 377A means that homosexuality will no longer be considered a criminal act, but that's all.  There is still some way to go before it will be considered socially acceptable, or dare I use the words, a social norm. 

Meanwhile the government has drawn a line in the sand facing off to the LGBTQI+ community and much like Gandalf in the movie Lord of the Rings can be imagined to utter those famous words "You Cannot Pass", well unless they say you can which if we take the reported statements made by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam will be in the far distant future, if at all. 

So while we can applaud the Government’s decision to repeal section 377A, understand that this is a well-planned strategy and nothing more. If anything, it is time for the LGBTQI+ community, their families, relatives, friends, and allies to come together like never before. To work within their respective communities at changing perceptions, breaking down barriers and stereotypes so that ultimately when the time comes for the next general election that more people use their vote in favour of building a democratic society based on justice and equality regardless of religion just as every Singaporean has pledged to do. 

Sunset Dinner Cruise

So as we enter yet another lock down (of sorts) thanks to the rising cases here in Singapore I have to consider myself fortunate. I was supposed to go on a cruise to nowhere in July which got postponed to August which got post-phoned again so I cancelled the whole thing. I can only handle so much disappointment it seems.



Friends asked me to join them for a cruise in October which I seriously thought about but in the end also declined because I didn't want to get excited about it only to have it dashed on the rocky shores of covid lockdowns (been there, done that twice already), which as it happens would have been the case, it seemed as though cruises and I were never meant to be.

That all changed last night when I was giving a surprise birthday sunset dinner cruise onboard the Royal Albatross.

The food was amazing, totally surpassing my expectations, the staff were warm, friendly and attentive. Each dish was cooked to perfection and beautifully presented and the whole meal beginning to end was well paced. It really was a unique dinning experience with exceptionally good food. The ship itself is well maintained, with a beautiful air conditioned lounge below deck just adding to the experience. And you get to see the amazing city skyline from a distance (which is a view I have always loved) and as the sunset it cast a beautiful orange glow across the water that just adding to the magic of the moment.

I left feeling full and content, and lighter in mind and spirit.  It was the first time I have set foot off my island home in almost 2 years, and even if it was only for a few hours it certainly helped to recharge my internal batteries as we enter another lockdown (of sorts) here in Singapore.

A really memorable and enjoyable experience that I highly recommend.

For those intereseted you can make a booking HERE

Museum of Ice Cream

The Museum of Ice Cream (MOIC) is the latest immersive experience to hit the shore of Singapore and if people's Instagram accounts are anything to go by is certainly worth a visit, or is it?

I mean who doesn't love ice cream, the plethora of flavours, the many many ways to eat it, not to mention that it just about goes with every desert there possibly is. So the thought of "all you eat" at the MOIC was indeed very tempting. 

Myself and couple of friends visited on Saturday 11th of September and a fun time was had by all, although I need to be up-front and honest that had nothing to do with the ice cream on offer. You basically move from room to room, each room tells you a little bit more history or fun facts about everyone's favourite dessert. Each room has a specific theme and walls and ceiling are done in shades of pink. There are plenty of photo opportunities throughout and we absolutely made use of those.

The staff made the whole experience even more fun. They were bubbly, energetic, enthusiastic and fun to interact with. Clearly they wanted everyone to have a great experience (and side note, whoever was in charge of the bouncy castle on the above date .... Marry me!).

Despite the above, which was great, the whole experience was let down by the ice cream itself. 

Station one has two flavours of Häagan Dazs, and I wish I had stayed at that station and filled up but the anticipation of even more to come after such a great start was too strong. Two flavours here, good old chocolate, and our favourite Pina Colada (with alcohol) which was delicious!.

Station two was a soft serve station serving watery soft-serve that tasted more of ice and less of cream. It was a gluten free vanilla (insipid) and a apple pie, which was unusual, tasted like apple pie for sure, but the texture was just so completely wrong in both cases that it was totally unenjoyable. 

Station three was glutenous black rice brick. It's a very local flavour and although some friends thought it wasn't bad, none of us went for seconds. 

Station four was Yam, and the only reason I knew that was because of the colour as it totally lacked any flavour at all. 

And that was it, a total of 6 flavours, 4 of which I could happily never have again. So if you are going for the ice cream you are going to be very very disappointed. If however you are going for the experience, the Instagram moments and the staff (who really make the experience) then you will absolutely enjoy yourself. 

But, take my advice visit an ice cream desert bar afterwards (there are quite a few to select from in Singapore) to enjoy some really delicious ice cream because the MOIC is, unfortunately, sadly lacking in this department. 

Hong Kong Travel Bubble

With the first travel bubble opening between Singapore and Hongkong on November the 6th, without need for quarantine at either destination. But travellers will have to undergo mutually recognised testing for Covid-19 that show they are negative possibly on departure and arrival at both destinations although that is still unclear.



They will also have to take dedicated flights that do not accept transit passengers and the number of these flights can be raised or lowered, depending on the pandemic situation in both cities. Air travel bubbles will be for general travellers and they have no requirements for a controlled itinerary (as is the case with some of the current green lane travel options), which is good news!

Of course, as is typical given the demand the cost of air tickets between Singapore and Hong Kong increased over night since the announcement and no doubt as demand increases, given that many people have felt trapped on this island of Singapore since the Covid-19 pandemic, we can expect the fare to continue to increase too. 

But on the plus side, it's a start of returning to normal and shows what the future of travel has in store for us. Until such time as a vaccine becomes widely available we can expect Covid-19 tests to become the new norm as more of these travel bubbles become available. And you can expect to pay a premium price for those travel options too. 

Let's keep fingers crossed that more and more countries manage to successfully control the spread of Covid-19 domestically, and that more and more people take personal responsibility for doing the same. There has been too much loss of life already with this virus. 

Thum and Operation Coldstore

Probably the hottest bouncing ball in Singapore right now is the ongoing back and forth with respect to Thum Ping Tjin's paper on Operation Coldstore which he claims was politically motivated contradicting the Singapore governments position that claims it was to prevent a communist plan to mount an armed struggle against the state and as such the arrests where in the interest of state security.



In a twist of irony, it was the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods that brought out the debate of Operation Coldstore. Thum Ping Tjin submission to the committee accused the government of being the arbitrator of fake news itself, specifically referencing Operation Coldstore. His appearance at the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods resulted in what has been discribed by some as a six hour grilling of Thum Ping Tjin's original research paper.

That was shortly followed by an open letter addressed to the chairman of the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods in the defence of Dr Thum Ping Tjin and academic freedom with 284 signatories worldwide. The reaction to this open letter was to accuse them of being foreign actors attempting to “influence and subvert Singapore’s parliamentary processes”. Indeed Thum himself has been suspected of engineering academic support for himself. Since then Thum has maintained that his arguments on Operation Coldstore remain substantially unchallenged while yet others have stated that claims of attempting to influence or subvert parliamentary process are clearly preposterous.

Soooooo ......... why all the kerfuffle?

Well Operation Coldstore was a turning point in Singapore's history ultimately leading to, for first time, a fully-elected government led by Lee Kuan Yew, whose People’s Action Party (PAP) was voted into power with a strong majority. Lee Kuan Yew has been described as the father of Singapore and is effectively responsible for the position that Singapore as a country currently enjoys. And while there is no doubt of the many great things he accomplished for Singapore, this ongoing debate on Operation Coldstore effectively undermines the foundation on which his government was established.

Needless to say, it has polarised Singapore net-citizens from those who support Thum's position, those that do not, and those who are on the fence saying it is impossible to decide who is right unless more information is released into the public domain. And as more information becomes available with respect to the arrests made under the then PPSO (now ISA) act, such as "Evidence showing Lim Chin Siong’s detention was wrongful emerges", it seems that more questions than answers are appearing.

So, to give this whole debate some context, in a country where even a single individual can be charged with unlawful public assembly this bouncing ball is riveting stuff!

Singapore Presidential Election

As we move forward to the next presidential elections here in Singapore I can't help but feel less than enthusiastic about the prospect.



When I became a Singapore citizen, among the many things I had to learn was the Singapore pledge. For me it had meaning, a promise and a commitment not only of myself but of all Singaporeans that was something to aspire towards. However, recently that very same pledge, those aspirations spoken by millions of Singaporeans through the years, has in my opinion been undermined.

The Singapore government has recently announced what it is calling a "reserved" presidential election. What this means is that the election for the office of the President will be reserved for a certain community (i.e. Chinese, Malay or Indian and other minority communities) if no person belonging to that community has held the office of the President for any of the last 5 terms of office, in an attempt to ensure multi-racial representation in the office of the Presidency.

On the surface, it's an understandable goal and some newspapers here have printed articles that the move "affirms values of multiracialism & meritocracy", but in implementing this change it in effect limits the candidates for election to a single race. I fail to see how that makes Singapore more democratic. In my opinion it is the very definition of racism since it denies candidates of other races the opportunity to run for that office, and as such I fail to see how it supports the political philosophy that power should be vested in individuals almost exclusively based on ability and talent?

One could argue that it is fair because the criteria for candidates for the office of president remains the same regardless of race, or that it will rotate between races if no one of that race has held the office in the last five years. But fair and democratic are two separate words. If, as a voter, i am forced into a position where I am required to vote for a candidate based solely on the race of that candidate as the first and foremost criteria of eligibility, while their ability to hold that office takes on a supporting role, how does that support meritocracy?

In my opinion limiting eligibility for candidacy of the presidential office to a single race, regardless of how well intended the motives behind such a decision may be, is the very definition of racism and a move that is totally in contradiction to the words of the Singapore pledge that promises "as a united people", "regardless of race", "to build a democratic society"

It has to be said that my faith in the government of this country has reached new lows. The pledge that I firmly believe in seems to have been put to one side, and the words that have been spoken by millions of Singaporeans since it was first written in 1966 now ring empty and hollow.

Meenah and Cheenah

Dream Academy presents Meenah and Cheenah. I was convinced by my friends to attend this show and at first I have to admit to doing so under duress. I have lived in Singapore for 18 years so I really do understand the culture but my sense of humour tends towards left of center and I have never found local productions funny as a result. In fact shows like "The Noose" serve only to irritate me rather than make me smile.



So as I sat down in my seat and girded myself for some very local entertainment I have to admit to being totally wrong in this case.

Meenah and Cheenah was hilarious. True it was very localised in terms of humour and you would have to be Singaporean to get many of the references, but I could not stop laughing at so many points throughout the entire show. Maybe that makes me more Singaporean than I give myself credit for.

This was a show with minimal sets and props that focused on the interplay between two people with almost perfect comic timing and delivery. Well structured, well balanced, and equally well delivered it did not disappoint and when it ended I found myself wishing it hadn’t as I really wanted to see more.

This was Singapore comedy at it's finest at least from my perspective. There were so many skits in such rapid succession that to be honest it is hard to pick a favourite. But if I had to pick one I would say the Ghost scene not only because of the amount of humour it had but also the subtle references it contained that had me and all of my local friends laughing so hard.

I loved it and would gladly watch it again.

For those that missed it, you really did miss out.

We Wear White (not)

Once again we reach that time of year when Pink Dot, a celebration of the freedom to love regardless of sexual orientation, gets ready to take off in Singapore. And once again self proclaimed evangelist pastor and part time magician Lawrence Khong takes exception and plans a We Wear White campaign to coincide on the same day.



Mr. Khong is reported as stating that "there is a conservative majority in Singapore who will push back and will not allow them (LGBT) to promote their lifestyle and liberal ideologies that openly and out rightly contradict our laws, our Governments stated polices, our national core values, and the conservative majority's view on public morality, marriage and family".

I would love to know what the hell he means by that statement because for me it makes very little sense. I read it a couple of times and I'm still no wiser. So I decided to break it down to see if I missed anything.

"To promote their life style"
I have no idea what lifestyle he is referring to. I get up brush my teeth, shower, go to work, come home, eat dinner, catch up with friends. Weekends I might do some shopping. I support my family when they need me too, and the same for my friends. I have the same dreams and aspirations as anyone else, I look forward to holidays as I'm sure everyone does and yes I pay a mortgage and bills too. It's a normal mundane lifestyle with the same worries as everyone else.

"Liberal Ideologies"
Again I have no idea what he means here at all. I think like any person, I have similar politic views as many. I have my own views on religion (which incidentally have taken a bashing at the hands of Mr. Khong it has to be said). I respect and admire the many different cultures and religious beliefs that my friends here in Singapore hold, and I accept that my views and my friends may differ from time to time and even lead to heated debates on certain subjects. In fact it it wasn't for the Liberal Ideologies of the founding fathers of Singapore, Singapore would not be the country it is today.

"Openly and out rightly contradict our laws, our Governments stated polices"
I can only assume here he is referring to section 377A. Given that the Government is already on record as stating that what two people of the same sex do in the privacy of their own home is their own business, and that they will not enforce 377A, I am at a lose as to why he makes this statement. Singapore is also on record as stating the same to the International Human Rights committee. Clearly Mr. Khong is out of touch with reality and seeks to justify his campaign by such a sham alignment.

"our national core values"
The Singapore Pledge, something every person in Singapore has said many times in their lives reads as follows. "We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion, to build a democratic society based on justice and equality so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation". This represents the core values of every Singaporean. If anything Mr. Khong's misguided We Wear White campaign is in direct volition of this pledge. Clearly his message is that equality for all citizens in the eyes of the law is irrelevant and that his religious views are the only ones that matter since clearly his arguments are based on them.

"the conservative majority's view on public morality"
While I can understand people being conservative, and even such a group being in the majority, I donít' really understand the public morality connection. I think he needs to explain what he means by that last part because I really don't get it at all. Even if section 377A was repealed there are plenty of other laws already in place to protect public morality. In fact it's one of the reasons that the Government is on record as not enforcing it and why many other countries have already repealed it.

"marriage"
Well, now we get to the juicy stuff. The core argument from Khong and his like is that should section 377A be repealed that gay people will want to be married next and that such a proposal runs contrary to all of his religious beliefs. Well I doubt he has much to worry about as I'm pretty certain no gay man of sane mind would actually propose to him. That said, in no country in the world has any religious organization EVER been forced to perform a same-sex marriage where it goes against the core set of that religions beliefs. NO WHERE. Yes there are many posts of people being sued for not doing so etc, but read up more on them, many are government related jobs where the person refuses to do their job and have been sued on that basis. Others are for stores/shops/public services etc that have openly practiced discrimination based on sexual orientation which was a criminal offence in those countries according to that countries constitution. If same sex couples want to marry in the eyes of the law, then it is the law that makes that decision and certainly not Mr. Khong or any religious organisation for that matter.

"family"
We all love our family, the ups the downs, the argument, the laughter. We don't judge each other, our love is unconditional. Regardless of the make up of that family or any individuals sexual orientation in it. In fact if anything Mr. Khong seeks to undermine that family unit by driving wedges between it's members simply because of an individuals sexual orientation within it. Through no fault of your own should you happen to be LGBT Mr. Khong would ensure that you remain less than equal in the eyes of the law. Such views can no longer be tolerated in a modern progressive society like Singapore. No Singaporean should ever believe that any fellow Singaporean should have less rights than they enjoy. Everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law.

I have to say that when you pick apart Mr. Khong's points they don't really stack up. In my opinion this is really nothing more than his attempt to enflame passions among the people of Singapore and his own religious following. Why pick a date for the We Wear White campagin that clashes with Pink Dot if his motives are so pure and above board, in my opinion the answer is they are not and Mr. Khong is directly attacking Pink Dot wether he chooses to admit it or not. Unfortunately however, he is entitled to his own opinion of course, regardless of how misguided it may be, but the rest of the people in Singapore should take them with a pinch of salt.

In my opinion Mr. Khong is following his own agenda here and I say that because he clearly doesn't speak for me or anyone I know in the slightest. . Indeed, he seems to be shouting so loudly on LGBT related topics that given the recent scientific study's on people who are overly negatively vocal on LGBT related topics one has to wonder.

I think Margaret Cho summed it up perfectly with her opinion of Mr. Khong in her recent performance in Singapore, enough said.

On the Church in Singapore

Before I begin this post I really do what to emphasis that regardless of what religion you may subscribe to that it is a personal choice. As an individual regardless of that choice I hold nothing against you and judge you solely on your personality and not that chosen religious preference. That said I am within in this post going to comment on religion more specifically on the Church in Singapore.



You can choose to continue reading or not but remember that you make that choice willing and that this post contains my own opinions which may or may not be shared by you. Any offence caused is unintentional (i.e. a by-product of the way your own brain processes information, a refelction of the morals and standards that have been super imposed on you since childhood coupled with the influences that have exerted themselves on you throughout the same period for which I can take no responsibility).

And so I begin.

There are many religions here in Singapore, Buddhism, Hindu, Muslim and Christian to name a few. Singapore is in fact a secular society. By that I mean there is near-complete freedom of religion (beliefs on religion generally are not subject to legal or social sanctions), and the lack of authority of religious leaders over political decisions. The separation of religion and state is the foundation of secularism. It ensures that religious groups don't interfere in affairs of state, and makes sure the state doesn't interfere in religious affairs.

Secularism seeks to defend the absolute freedom of religious and other belief, and protect the right to manifest religious belief insofar as it does not impinge disproportionately on the rights and freedoms of others. Secularism ensures that the right of individuals to freedom of religion is always balanced by the right to be free from religion. Religious people have the right to express their beliefs publicly but so do those who oppose or question those beliefs.

And so moving onwards.

Of all the religions present in Singapore the most vocal is the Christian Church, indeed painfully so. It has been vocal on a concert here by Adam Lambert solely because of his sexual orientation. It has been vocal on Pink Dot which is a day that celebrates the freedom to love regardless of sexual orientation and has since been adopted by many other countries globally. It has been vocal on section 377a which is an old colonial law that criminalizes the intimacy between two men even as the government has openly stated that it will not enforce this law (the latest declaration of the same to the Human Rights commission).

And more recently the Catholic Archbishop has slated Madonna’s first ever concert in Singapore (yes, seriously). Indeed one of the reported comments in relation to the last item was “Nevertheless (the Church) has a moral duty to enlighten and speak the truth on moral issues unflinchingly for the good of humanity”. And it is for that reason that I decided to write this particular post.

While the Church has the freedom to publicly express their beliefs it does not have the freedom or the right to impose those beliefs on the wider society many of whom do not share those beliefs. It is not now, nor has it ever been, nor does it even have the remit to be the moral compass for humanity. That statement shows an ignorance that is beyond contempt.

Don’t get me wrong by all means feel free to instruct those that choose to follow that religion but you do not, nor will you ever have the right to speak for me or millions like me who do not share those beliefs. With that statement in my opinion the Church has over stepped its boundaries in relation to the definition of a secular society. It is not the first time and it will not be the last either. The Church’s definition of “moral issues” is tainted by its religious beliefs, it cannot be otherwise.

Take section 377a for example. The Church has repeatedly and publically called for this to remain on the statute books in Singapore based solely on it’s religious beliefs. This runs contrary to the definition of a secular society as it is clearly an attempt to interfere and/or influence the affairs of state and force its’ moral view on a wider society. It is not acceptable. “Secularism seeks to defend the absolute freedom of religious and other belief, and protect the right to manifest religious belief insofar as it does not impinge disproportionately on the rights and freedoms of others” in my opinion the Church’s is in direct conflict to this fundamental ideal of secularism.

Again and again the Church seems to take every opportunity it can to push it’s beliefs into the wider society and I have to admit that I am totally sick and tired of it. Enough is enough. It throws those beliefs around like stones, concrete and absolute ideologies that are unquestionably morally correct and yet the beliefs of the Christian church are as malleable as clay.

In the past you could not touch the holy communion with your hands, that’s changed. In the past women were required to bring the bloody sheets to the church and be shriven from the sin of losing their virginity to their husband, that’s changed (incidentally the husbands committed no sin in the act of consummation only the women). In the past you had to attend mass on a Sunday, but with the congregation dwindling the Church changed it so you could go to mass on a Saturday evening and it still counted. In fact as and when the Church looks to be in danger of losing its congregation it changes.

While I can take or leave religion I find the Church to be an insidious institution that is almost malicious in its attempt to impose its religious and moral views on the wider society. In fact I would almost go as far as to say that on a personal level I find it, and its double standards given all of the scandal in the news on child abuse it has had to dodge, almost repugnant.

The government here has a difficult task. It needs to maintain and manage a multicultural multi-religious society. And that is not easy. Indeed the government has mentioned the need for its citizens to actively work towards maintaining religious harmony. It has also taken action against citizens who have stepped too far over the line.

But what is to be done when the Church itself steps over the line, when it states that it “has a moral duty to enlighten and speak the truth on moral issues unflinchingly for the good of humanity”. What happens when the Church violates the tenets of secularism and seeks to impose its beliefs or morals on that wider society. It simply cannot be acceptable. I certainly do not accept it.

The Church is absolutely free to encourage its followers but that is where the line must be drawn and any encroachment on the views, beliefs or morals of the wider society must not only be ignored but firmly rejected not just by that society but by the Government responsible for maintaining that society as a secular society.

Ministers and members of that government must always remember that regardless of their own personal religious views they have an obligation to the citizens of Singapore to ensure in all of their official duties they are guided not by their religious beliefs but by the fundamental precepts of secularism as much as by Singapores national pledge “one united people regardless of race, language or religion to build a democratic society based on justice and equality”

The continued interference of the Church within Singapore's secular society needs to stop.

And I am sure that I am not alone in that view.

A tamed down (or politically correct) version of this post can be found in the ST Forum

4xFour - Chef Paco Morales

Having attended the 4xFour event at the White Rabbit, with Michelin Chef Paco Morales doing the culinary honours, I thought it was time to do a quick review of the experience. I have eaten at the White Rabbit a couple of times and could never fault the venue or service or even their own menu which is always solid and recommended for anyone to try, you won’t be disappointed.



This 4xFour event however failed to impress. In hindsight maybe our expectations of Chef Paco Morales given his Michelin status where simply set too high. Overall everyone at our table was disappointed with the meal and agreed that this was simply not money well spent. It's such a shame because it has to be said that we were all very much looking forward to it.

1st Course
Puerta del Perdón
handmade pastry, presented in the Door of Forgiveness motif with chive mayonnaise and local herbs paired with a complimentary glass of Badoit.
It was basically a poorly dressed up Chinese cracker. Tasteless and oily. Not sure what the actual goal of this little starter was suppose to be but the blank faces at our table summed it up. The Badoit never appeared. On the 4xFour facebook page they refer to this food item as legendary, clearly they need to revisit the definition of the word as it simply did not apply. It was a novelty and not much more.
(1 out of 10)

2nd  Course
Aubergine Fritter
fresh brioche with an aubergine purée, cane syrup gelee and delicate edible flowers.
This at least was interesting. The combination worked well and texture and flavour while not intense played against each other nicely. The delicate edible flowers failed to make an appearance but for this morsel we forgave. It was a unique starter, not only looking good but tasting as good as it looked with the slight sweetness of the gelee helping to elevate and balance the flavours well.
(6 out of 10)




3rd Course
Turmeric & Sea Bream
turnip pudding with turmeric, lemon and crisp sea bream.
I was looking forward to this dish and the presentation was on point. But that's where it stopped. The sea bream was not crisp at all. In fact it was simply coated in flour and fried, but badly. The taste of flour overpowered the delicate taste of sea bream completely leaving nothing but a floury aftertaste. The turnip pudding with turmeric was tasteless which had us all wondering if there was any salt or pepper in the kitchen. To top it all off it was doused in a lemon and soy sauce that was just way too harsh to the palette. The clash of lemon and soy sauce quite simply did not work at all. This dish failed to impress anyone at our table and none of us could finish it. Had the Chef used pickled ginger juice and a much lighter soy sauce  it might have worked out better as a euorpean play on chawanmushi, but as it stood it failed miserably I am sorry to say.
(2 out of 10)




4th Course
Vegetable Stew
textures of seasonal vegetables, cooked with different techniques, served in a beef broth with tahini and saffron
After the last course we were on guard. Again presentation was on point but when we looked at the dish we were wondering where the broth was, even stopping the waiters to ask if they had forgotten it. In the end it had been substituted for a sort of pork flavoured gelee (or so we were informed). Again a complete lack of seasoning killed this dish, although the over cooked vegetables didn't help it either. There was no slight crunch left in any of them and that freshness that you would expect as a result fell flat. The different techniques where also not apparent at all to any of us and too much saffron left a bitter after taste. The gelee was just that, gelee, bland and tasteless. Once again none of us finished this dish.
(2 out of 10)




5th Course
Perfect-Imperfect Corn
sphere of corn mousse filled with crab and smoked herring caviar, dusted with smoked bacon powder
This was interesting. The crab and smoked herring caviar where indeed served under a dome of corn mousse. And then a hot corn sauce was poured over it dissolving the delicate mousse shell. I'm not sure if it was suppose to be a play on hot/cold, but the main components where simply too cold, icy almost and cooled down the sauce far too quickly. While the corn sauce had full flavour the other ingredients in the dish where quite simply bland. Although we can respect the technique here and the artistry in terms of presentation, the balance of flavours was just off with the sauce becoming an over powering element so much so that the delicate taste of crab and smoked caviar were completely buried as a result.
(5 out of 10)




6th Course
Roasted Pigeon
slow roasted pigeon with handmade polenta gnocchi served in a rich pigeon broth
Elegant and simple presentation. Pigeon was cooked perfectly for me but many people in Asia are not use to this poultry and the medium raw cook turned the rest of my table off this dish. That said the rich pigeon broth wasn't rich, wasn't a broth and was instead merely a smear on the plate. I could have done with more to elevate this dish and add a counterpoint flavour to really make the gamey flavour of the pigeon stand out more. As it was, it was simply a well seasoned roast pigeon. I had much higher expectations given Chef Paco Morales Michelin status, but clearly he was aiming for simplicity here because that's what we got.  It's such a shame because given the little exposure this poultry has had in Asia this could have been a culinary sensation. Instead what we got was a very simply roast pigeon dish with no frills. Disappointing.
(6 out of 10)




7th Course
Orange Blossom & Ginger
orange cake with orange blossom water infused with basil and ginger
Without doubt the show stealer. Presentation was perfect and the touch of basil really helped the delicate taste of orange blossom to shine through. Deliciously light sponge and orange blossom ice cream added to the experience. The ginger element wasn’t' really present for me which is just as well as orange blossom is such a delicate flavour that it could have all to easily been over powered. As it was this was a perfect dish. Well balanced and flavourful. We all wanted more.
(10 out of 10)




8th Course Textures of Carob
carob 3 ways: as a mousse, as an ice cream and as a sablé served with a Pedro Ximénez slush
Unfortunately the only good element on this dish was the ice cream. Everything else just didn't work. The sable, and the small cake where both chalky and the after taste was far too bitter. One taste was enough and then it was reach for a drink as your mouth dried out instantly as though all moisture had been sucked from it. I'm not a carob fan myself, I have always found the taste to be too harsh. Apart from the ice cream that proved to be true for this dish and once again no one at my table finished the other elements. A really disappointing end to a disappointing meal.
(4 out of 10)

City Harvest Criminals

And so City Harvest megachurch scandal (as reported by the BBC News) starts to wind down after so many years and the accused have been found guilty and are no longer accused but rather criminals in the eyes of the law (one must now assume given the verdict). Although lets be honest as I’m pretty sure the world already found them guilty of bad taste with their Crossover project to begin with, never mind the criminal breach of trust with respect to the $50m.

The whole Crossover project was effectively a scheme to fund Ms Ho's career and spread the gospel through her music. I mean did anyone listen to the trash that Ms Ho actually produced. China Wine and Kill Bill to name but two which are so terrible that I’m still expecting Wyclef Jean to jump out of the shadows and shout out “you’ve been punk’d”. How could anyone of this cults (sorry but I can’t in good conscious refer to it as a church) members consider any of these songs as gospel, or even remotely christian for that matter given the subject matter and lyrics of these two songs along. 

Indeed Ms Ho - who was not on trial is reported to have said in a statement that the church leaders had "placed our faith in God and trust that whatever the outcome, He will use it for our good". And the out powering of “God Bless” and well wishes from this cults members clearly shows a complete disconnect to the real world, which lets face it is pretty much the kind of response you would expect from cult members anyway.

I really don’t understand this cult. I don’t understand how people can be sucked into it or even donate such large sums of money to it to begin with. How does that even happen. Is there a certain kind of individual that is more susceptible to their kind of influence, or so insecure in their own mortality that they clutch at anything that provides them with the option of eternal life (albeit a spiritual one).  And why are they happy to throw millions of dollars at it even though it’s impossible to buy your way into heaven. After all I firmly believe that God has absolutely no interest in material wealth whatsoever. Obviously the cult seems to have a different view on the matter, and people are subscribing to it.  It totally baffles me. 

Do these people openly admit they are member of this cult. I mean if I met someone and they told me they where it would almost be enough for me to turn around and walk away. And you may think that’s a bit of a strong reaction but lets face they have to be so brain washed on any manner of subjects that having a normal conversation with them on social or religious issues would most likely be a strain. 

And while I would never profess to be angel in any shape or form, after all lets face it which of is, I’m pretty certain that there’s gonna be a few refused entry when they knock on the pearly gates. If not for the criminal offences they have committed certainly for their taste in music.

Meanwhile here's a suggested read for you. It's a post by a former member of this cult titled "9 Reasons Why The City Harvest Church is the Devil to Me". Have a read through and see how many WTF moments you have.

FCBC Wear White

Pink Dot, an annual event celebrating the freedom to love regardless of sexual orientation, was held here in Singapore on Saturday 13th June with a huge turnout of 28,000 people.



And while 28,000 people came together in the spirit of friendship and to express their support for the freedom to love by wearing pink, it would seem that LoveSingapore, a network of about 100 churches, called on members to turn up for services over the same weekend dressed in white in protest.

Network chairman and Faith Community Baptist Church senior pastor Lawrence Khong was quoted by media as saying: “It’s a powerful statement of our belief. The natural family is a universally accepted norm and a public good.” Obviously there are at least 28,000 people who would like to differ, not to mention many other countries around the world, including the predominantly Christian and catholic community of Ireland which became the first country in the world to legalise same sex marriages.

So I guess Lawrence Khong has his head buried in the sand and is ignoring the world around him.

“I want to pray that we will continue to wear white as long as there is pink, and we will wear white until the pink is gone, and even if the pink is gone we will continue to wear white,” Khong is also quoted as saying. Well again we can clearly see the ignorance of the individual. Pink will never be gone because there will always be LGBT members of society. In fact that statement is actually a little worrying to be honest as it's almost hostile in its intent. Maybe he's a little pissed off because almost 3 times the amount of people wore Pink compared to white this year. In my opinion he does kind of come off as being a little disturbed, almost manic even.

Khong added: “My prayer, my dream is that the day will come where in this weekend half or three-quarters of Singapore’s population will be wearing white as a statement of commitment to the family.” Well guess what, the rest will still be wearing Pink. And they are still members of society and always will be. That fact that you continue to spew such nonsense should clearly worry your congregation. Meanwhile, the fact that you have a congregation to begin with of course should probably worry everyone else.

In his sermon, he decried the “homosexual act” as “the greatest blasphemy against the name of God” and said that “a union between a man and woman is the highest expression of the very image of God”. What a load of antiquated rubbish. Sorry, but I have to call it that since in my opinion that's exactly what it is. It just sounds like pure evangelistic pulpit rhetoric aimed at inflaming passions and nothing more. It's also such an outdated view that it shows how deeply in the sand Lawrence Khong has his head buried.

“I’m concerned about the moral majority, people who are Christians especially, who believe that it’s wrong, but who (are) just too cowardly to stand up and make a statement,” he added. And now he brings out the whip to target other Christians who may be on the fence on the issue and calls them cowards directly acting them and their personal beliefs. It's quite sad really and I feel sorry for the people who have to listen to all the nonsense he talks. In my opinion any good Christian, and I know many in my life, would walk away from this man's influence and quite frankly laugh in his face. In fact the whole of Ireland has just done that recently I might add.

And then we have Daniel Foo who is reported to have told media "Every human being is precious and loved by God and hence we extend our love for all. However, we will continue to stand firm as one to express our support for pro-family values and the preservation of our moral norms for the well-being of our society.” Personally speaking, and pointing out the Singapore is a secular society, I find it disturbing that these religious organisation would even attempt to have their values and beliefs integrated into the larger society as a social norm. In fact everyone in Singapore should stand up and take note.

So, to the people of Singapore you all need to wake up because these people are extremely vocal and that should worry you. And to the 28,000 people who attended Pink Dot don't let it stop there because if you do people like Lawrence Khong and Daniel Foo will hold influence in our society and that should not be allowed to happen.

And lastly to the people of Ireland. Thank you for showing the entire world the true meaning of Christian values.

Singapore's Armchair Politicians

I have to admit to being sick and tired of all of the anti-governement and anti-PAP noise on the internet in Singapore recently. While I can understand the root cause, lets face it when a 16 year old gets arressted and charged for ranting there's something terribly wrong, the point is these same people aren't doing anything in the real world to effect change.



A like on facebook does absolutely nothing in the real world. A comment on facebook does absolutely nothing in the real world. And while at the the time both may give us a "Feel Good" moment for doing or saying the right thing, it's a moment in time that is lost in cyber space without any impact in the real world. None, and anyone who thinks it does are simply deluding themselves.

The elections are next year so if people aren't already reaching out to the opposition parties to understand their agenda's and how they will do things differently and to support them openly then nothing will change. If these same people are not convincing their family, their relations and their friends to vote the right way then don't be surprised when the results finally come in.

Personally I am predicting that PAP will win with a landslide again. Yah, they may lose 1 or 2 seats and give everyone the .... "we have woken up speach, we hear you Singapore"... but it's all smoke and mirrors. They are simply not going to change. Everything they have been doing will continue and everything that they have ignored will continue to be ignored. For each election they have given promises laced with threats about who gets priority for HDB upgrades. Many people will just vote them in as before for that reason.

Many will vote them in because they don't want the pain of change (and yes it will be painful not that it's going to happen of course), and thats just a stupid reason to vote for them.

And if after PAP get elected again I hear one person complain about it within ear shot I'm going to slap them, seriously. Because if they are not working to create change then there will be none.

Say what you want about the late Lee Kuan Yew but he brought change, and without him every Singaporean needs to step up to the plate and be the change that they want to see happen.

So all of you armchair politicans get the hell of your collective butt and do something in the real world to help things change (it isn't going to happen online), be the voice for change, support the opposition party of your choice with the same levels of passion and commitment that the late Lee Kuan Yew had for Singapore, you can do no less!.

And if not, then you all know what to expect, it's really that simple.

Singapore After Lee Kuan Yew

As the Singapore moves on from the funeral of Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew (LKY), no doubt we can expect some new publications celebrating the life of the man who has been called by many as the founding father of Modern Singapore.

It is a lofty title and one some Singaporeans believe is not quite as deserving as it seems. After all in 1965 Singapore wasn’t a back water fishing town, indeed it was already a thriving metropolis with a solid transportation infrastructure, health care, school system and so on and certainly far ahead of its’ neighbours too in many of these areas. 

Lets face it LKY certainly did have a hand in continuing the blue print that was laid out and to forge Singapore as it is today. And yes its' also true he didn’t do this alone and if credit is to be given to him as a leader then let credit also fall to the many individuals behind the scene who performed all of the actions that made it possible for Singapore to continue to grow. Nevertheless LKY deserves nothing less than our respect for being the leader that he was. He was the man his country needed him to be for the time that he lived in, and his love for his country and his desire to see it prosper was one of his driving forces.

Indeed, there are also many stories of how ruthless a leader LKY was of how he never gave his enemies a chance. In fact some never even saw it coming and ended up in Jail as a result or banned forever from their home, their own stories now blacklisted from Singapore’s bookshelfs. One day that may change and perhaps we can lift up the hood a little a learn a little more about the real Singapore but for now those stories will remain hidden, locked away for fear of how Singaporeans themselves may take them.

LKY also helped to form the PAP, a democratic party that has been in power for so long that some people believe it will never change.  And although the world has moved on since 1965 the party still seems to employee the same heavy handed tactics of old. The vote for us or you won’t get your HDB upgraded approach and the squashing of the media that has lead to Singapore being ranked 150th out of 180 countries globally in the Worldwide Press Freedom Index in 2014 still continues today.

There is no minimum wage in Singapore and yet despite that fact that in 2014 the Cost of living survey ranked Singapore 1st, as in the most expensive city in the world to live. There is a clear divide between the earning power of individuals in Singapore, and many at the lower end are in fact Singaporeans themselves. And while there are the plus sides like CPF, a fund that is in essence each Singaporeans retirement policy, as the community continues to age the government have made sure that it won’t have to foot the bill for elderly care by making it mandatory to maintain a minimum amount there forcing many elderly Singaporeans back into the workforce in order to survive.

So yes, LKY may have been one of the founding fathers of Modern Singapore and helped to make Singapore what it is today. But that still needs to improve and change with Singaporeans being put first, ahead of the needs of the country. That won’t happen with PAP which is still continuing with the same tired old polices of old, a party that has become so entrenched in Singapore that removing it and replacing it with any other is a herculean task and one that will cause a year of disruption if not more, and to say that of any political party is a very scary thing indeed. Many will vote for PAP out of habit, others out of fear of that very change itself and the fallout that will ensue. All wrong reasons for voting for PAP of course, but then the good reasons are much fewer than they use to be.

So, farewell LKY, thank you for your help to bring this country to where it is today. But now it’s time for change, for a new leader to emerge who will put Singaporeans first and find the balance between maintaining a country and it’s citizens that in my opinion has been lacking for so long. Here’s to the next generation of politicians, it is time to make yourselves known. And I wonder who the next leader will be who can fill the shoes of LKY and lead Singapore to the next stage of its maturity in this shrinking global economy. Who will put it’s citizens first, and profits second. Who will put education for it’s citizens first and others second. Who will put health care for the elderly first and the balance of your medisave account second. Who will actually earn the millions of dollars that they are paid and do what needs to be done and do away with the bullshit.

As we move into the next general election in 2016 let us remember that we are voting for the future NOT what has happened in the past, that we are voting for a party that will bring with it the right degree of change to continue to make Singapore a great nation, and if that means some unrest as part of a transition then so be it. If it’s the right party with the right polices in the end it won’t matter.

So, roll on 2016, and let us hope that a new leader emerges for this new age as the world watches and wonders what changes will take place in Singapore after Lee Kuan Yew.

Why PAP will win the 2016 General Election

There are so many online posts questioning the current PAP governments views across a whole wide variety of topics and issues. And as you read through them, and the many comments people have written, you are left with the sense that here in Singapore there is an strong under current of opposition supporters. Indeed many of the online comments are quiet vocal in NOT voting PAP for the 2016 election.



So how does that impact the current PAP government?

To be honest it doesn’t impact them very much. Probably just sounds like a few mosquitos buzzing around, annoying if anything, but no real world damage.

And that’s pretty much why I am convinced that the PAP will win the next general election in 2016.

Because despite all of this online chatter, as long as it remains online and does not translate into open support for the opposition in the real world then it will have no impact. People need to get off their cyber soap box and contact the opposition party in their GRC to find out how they can help and support them in the run up to the next general election. People need to challenge the opposition to explain their polices and how they would run the country if they were elected. People need to stand up and find their real voice, because it’s only that real voice in the real world that will make a difference. How many have talked to their parents, friends, relatives about voting for the opposition and convinced them of the argument of a need for change.  How many opposition supporters have converted others to be the same. Great that everyone comments and shows that support online, but so what.

Lets be real here. If people are not doing that then no matter how much noise people make online it will have very little effect. In the last general election people voted for the PAP because “better the devil you know” and the change would bring a lot of problems.

Yes, a change in government is going to bring a huge upheaval to Singapore, any transition of power between parties will not be smooth. Any government that replaces the PAP will have it’s work cut out for it in trying to understand the PAP legacy. And for at least 2 years it’s going to be damn messy. BUT in the end if Singapore emerges stronger for that then it is so going to be worth it. And you can expect during that time the PAP will be reminding everyone of how while they were in power everything was so much better.

So, if people really don’t want a PAP government in 2016 then get out in the real world and start making a difference by working with and supporting your opposition parties. And if you are not prepared to do that then you might as well stay silent on the issue because all of those comments online are just noise without substance and useless in forming a new government in 2016.

NLB Refuses to Tango

The National Library Board (NLB) has come under intense fire from netizens after it decided to pull three children’s book titles off its shelves.



The books were removed after the board received complaints from a member of the public stating that the titles "And Tango Makes Three", "The White Swan Express" and "All About Our Families" were not in line with traditional family values. The first book depicts two male penguins acting like a couple raising a young penguin, the second talks about a single mother, adoption and a lesbian couple while the third features various family structures.

The NLB removed the books citing that they did not align to it's "Pro-Family" stance and despite petitions and feedback from local authors, who have since opted out of a number of NLB events in protest, as well as a wave of online criticism from citizens the NLB made the decision that it would  proceed to pulp the books in question.

Of course the "Pro-Family" stance is one that is being pursued by the Government in Singapore in an attempt to raise the declining birth rate. This on the whole makes the reaction of the NLB even more troubling because it's not policy they are reacting too (which could almost be forgiving since no one could blame them if that was the case). In fact the books in question are not even banned in Singapore and are available for purchases through a number of outlets over the counter already which makes the NLB’s reaction even more extreme not to mention unreasonable.

Communications and Information Minister Yaacob Ibrahim is reported to have written on his Facebook that "NLB’s decision was guided by community norms. Public libraries serve the community and it is right that they give consideration to community norms. The prevailing norms, which the overwhelming majority of Singaporeans accept, support teaching children about conventional families, but not about alternative, non-traditional families, which is what the books in question are about. This approach is shared between all public agencies dealing with the education and care of young Singaporeans"

In my view while one cannot argue community norms, it is the people in power, the government, that should be ensuring that those same community norms cover all of the community and that there is no discrimination on any basis. For any member of the government or indeed any public figure to hide behind the phrase “community norm” is no longer acceptable. The term "Pro-Family" could be a very positive and powerful statement when it's all inclusive. And if we intend to continue to build a society based on "Equality" then it needs to be.

Doing nothing leaves the door’s open for those radical elements of society who can use those same unchallenged “community norms” to push their own agenda. It's no secret that those same camps are extremely anti-homosexual and have actively been pursing an agenda of discrimination continually striving to have their views (which are based on religious belief) accepted as the only community norm. They succeeded in having these books removed from the NLB, and as disturbing as the NLB removing and pulping the books in question may be, that is even more terrifying.

We are suppose to live in a secular state with a separation of state and religion but it seems to me lately that the lines are getting very blurred.

In the meantime here's one of the authors responses to recent events.

Update
Communications and Information Minister Yaacob Ibrahim has instructed the National Library Board to place controversial children's books in its adult section, instead of pulping them. He went on to state that "The decision on what books children can or cannot read remains with their parents. Parents who wish to borrow these books to read with their children will have the option to do so." This is an excellent result and what the NLB should have done to begin with. Thank you minister for stepping in and doing what was right.

Singapore CPF Challenges

One has to wonder what the rest of the world is thinking as they look to Singapore and see it's Prime Minister (one of the most highly paid Prime Ministers in the world) sue one it's citizens for damages. 

Well known blogger Roy Ngerng went a tad too far in one of his recent postings on the woes of the CPF system here in Singapore which implied that Prime Minster was criminally misappropriating CPF funds. I can't argue with the smack on the wrist he received for the post which has subsequently removed and an appology issued for, however in addition the Prime Minister is also seeking financial damages with respect to the impact to his reputation.

Personally, I think that a Prime Minster suing a citizen for financial damages for a blog post is going to do more damage to his reputation than the post itself could ever have done. Net citizens are seemingly outraged by this what some are refering to as "bullying tactic" and while Roy Ngerng may have been misguided with respect to his implications about the Prime Minister, his post about the lack of transparancy into the investment strategy of the CPF was nevertheless an interesting read.

Meanwhile Law and Foreign Affairs Minister K Shanmugam has pointed out that citizens are free to criticise the government but they must back up any criticisms with facts. I think the good minister needs to understand the definition of the word criticise, it is a word defined as "to find fault with or indicate the faults of (someone or something) in a disapproving way". I'm not sure why you would need facts to do that since by definiton it is not an acqusation meerly an opinion. Although that said, how any member of the public is suppose to get their hands on such facts wasn't mentioned.

Tan Chuan-Jin has also reportedly blogged about the CPF although it still doesn't seem to address many of the points raised by Roy Ngerng (and others). For example, in relation to the rate of interest earned by the CPF Tan Chuan-Jin reportedly says "We then make sure this CPF account grows at a reasonable interest rate without risk", the point on transparency of how CBF money is invested and used missed it would seem.

The CPF is a good system, I don't think anyone can deny that and I don't think anyone is calling for it to be scrapped. But even as Tan Chuan-Jin reportedly posts in his own blog "CPF is your money" then the question of what the government is doing with it is still an important one to ask, just as the question on how the CPF can be improved is equally important. 

Many citizens opinion's seem to be changing with respect to what they want from their government with this latest flurry of activity around the topic of CPF not doing much to help. There seems to be a lot more mummerings of disapproval recently, understandably so it has to be said. 

I also think that much of Roy Ngerng post and subsequent video etc on this issue (as well as others) needs to be addressed. In my opinion he made many valid points that so far have gone unanswered as the focus shifts from those points to the story of the Prime Minister suing him for the implications made in his original story. 

Indeed since the original request PM Lee's lawyer has asked Roy Ngerng to remove 4 more additional articles that he had written and a video seemingly for no other reason than the articles in question (all related to CPF it would seem) would “aggravate the injury and distress to their client”.

It's a shame. I believe that PM Lee could have handled this in a much different manner but instead seems intent on alienating himself and his party just a little futher from the people it's there to serve. I don't think there is anyone I have talked to on this subject that has been impressed.

Singapore Songkran Failure

I have to laugh when I heard that Singapore will hold its own “Celebrate Songkran 2014” festival at the Padang open field opposite Singapore’s City Hall. In my opinion it is nothing more than a blatant attempt to try to cash in on the festival itself by the Singapore Tourism Board. Songkran is a festival that welcomes in the Lunar New Year and is celebrated in many countries but famous in Thailand for the uninhibated celebrations with water a plenty.



Just as the Grinch stole Christma now Singapore is trying to steal Songkran, chasing visitors to attend its own version of the traditional Thai New Year water festival. No doubt the Singapore Tourism Board realised that at this time of year tourism figures go down as many people all over the world and even from Singapore head to Thailand during this period for the festivities. So they decided to jump onto the bandwagon in what has got to be the most dismal failure ever. So much so that I would advise the organisers to quietly quit their jobs to save themselves from further embrassment.

Yes, Singapore will celebrate Songkran but there will be no water pistol fights, celebrity dunk stations, or really, any kind of water fun at Singapore's first Songkran water festival on April 12 and 13. The organisers of Celebrate Songkran 2014 at the Padang have taken heed of the national campaign to conserve water and dropped the water-based activities.

Instead, (sic) they will host a Water Conservation and Water Heritage Exhibition in conjunction with national water agency PUB.

And so the very meaning of Songkran has been diltued (pun intended) before it's even got of the ground. You see the use of water isn't just a frivalious activity, no, it is meant as a blessing and a sign of respect. In fact it is the most fundemental element of the festival itself, so without it there can be no Songkran.

Local reaction in Thailand has been swift to the news that Singapore intends to hold its own Songkran festival at the same time as Thailand's traditional festival. Indeed the Culture Surveillance Bureau director Yupa Taweewattanakijbaworn is reported to have said "Singapore is using the festival to promote tourism, without acknowledging the value of the traditions behind Songkran". And it would seem given the distinct lack of water available at Singapore's small scale copycat version the words have proven to be true.

In my opinion Singapore simply cannot compete for this Thai festival and it's attempt to do so it quite frankly laughable. It will be the LAST place anyone with any interest in Songkran would want to be. You see Thailand doesn't celebrate Songkran in a tiny little field with no water, no, it's a Country wide celebration involving every member of the community because THAT is what Songkran is really about.

I have been to Songkran many times, and although I hadn't planned on going this year I might just change my mind in silent protest.

Shame on you Singapore.

An Open Letter

An open letter sent to Faith Community Baptist Church, Nation Council of Churches in Singapore  and to The Real Singapore.



To whom it may concern

While I appreciate anyones right to follow the religion of their choice, that choice is between them and their God. Any beliefs they may hold as a result of that choice cannot be placed across the wider society as a whole, many of whom do not follow that same religion. With respect, while as an individual they are free to challenge any decisions the government may make with regards to the laws of the land, that challenge should not be one that is based solely on their religious belief. We are a secular country with a separation of religion and state and are striving to build a society based on “Justice” and “Equality” regardless of “Religion” as enshrined within our Nation’s pledge.

Any religion is free to advise it’s followers on how they should conduct their life in accordance with that religion’s morals, principals and/or beliefs. However, such advice should be limited to those individuals and in the correct forum. I did not, nor will I ever give anyone dominion over my beliefs.

In my personal view the Christian religion is clearly biased in relation to anything to do with LGBT and seeks every opportunity for that biased view, based on its religious beliefs, to be aired publically. I, like many others, do not support that same view. I will not challenge your religious beliefs in this area as I have no right too, but likewise you have no right to challenge mine or to try to impose your view on me or the wider society. If you feel that followers of your religion need to have such religious beliefs made law in order to adhere to them then there is a fundamental disconnect with your understanding of the role of religion in a secular state.

Already in Russia innocent people are being bullied, raped, mutilated, tortured and murdered simply because of who they are. In Uganda the same is happening now as a result of a change in the law there. In both cases these changes have been in part driven by religion. I cannot believe that any God would endorse this violence against individuals who have broken no law, who have committed no crime, who are worthy of our love and respect. And just as religion is in part to blame for this situation, religion must by association hold itself accountable for the direct suffering of these same people.

Recently a federal Judge has ordered Pastor Scott Lively to stand trial for crimes against humanity under international law for his alleged role in the persecution, arrest and murder of gay people in Uganda. The federal judge went on to say that ‘The history and current existence of discrimination against LGBTI people is precisely what qualifies them as a distinct targeted group eligible for protection under international law. ‘The fact that a group continues to be vulnerable to widespread, systematic persecution in some parts of the world simply cannot shield one who commits a crime against humanity from liability.’

Religious beliefs, like mankind must evolve and we have seen examples of this evolution already.  Gone are the days of drunken debauchery of its clergy and the mass murder of innocents through the inquisition and crusades and witch hunts. Gone are the days when a wife must be shriven for consummating her marriage, gone are the days when it was forbidden to handle the Eucharist and so on. History, if anything, shows us that change is possible.

I am saddened to the very core of my being as I write this knowing that it will do little to change anyone’s views today, and though I am not a Christian I pray that the Christian community see’s the light and love of the God they follow and come to understand that all of his creations are equal in his eyes and worthy of our love and respect and not our condemnation for simply being who God intended them to be.