Blog

  • Hamas Condemns Charlie Hebdo Attacks

    Hamas Condemns Charlie Hebdo Attacks

    GAZA – The Hamas group that controls the Gaza Strip on Saturday issued a condemnation of the deadly attacks by Islamist gunmen in France this week, saying there was no “justification for killing innocents”.

    The Palestinian Islamist faction, which is designated as a terror organization by most Western countries, also challenged Israel’s “helpless attempts” to draw comparisons between its activities and the violence in France.

    In the worst assault on France’s homeland security for decades, 17 victims lost their lives in three days of violence that began with an attack on the Charlie Hebdo satirical newspaper on Wednesday and ended with Friday’s dual sieges at a print works outside Paris and a kosher supermarket in the city.

    “(Hamas) stresses that its position on the latest events in Paris is in line with the statement issued by the International Union of Muslim Scholars which condemned the attack on the Charlie Hebdo newspaper and that any differences in opinion are no justification for killing innocents,” Hamas said in a rare statement in French.

    Islamist Gaza militants led by Hamas, whose charter includes a pledge to destroy Israel, fought a 50-day war against Israeli forces which ended in August.

    According to the Palestinian Health Ministry, more than 2,100 Palestinians, most of them civilians, were killed. Sixty-seven Israeli soldiers and six civilians in Israel were also killed.

    Hamas added in its statement that Israelis should be tried for war crimes and condemned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “helpless attempts” to draw parallels between “the resistance of our people from one side and the terrorism across the world in the other side.”

    The Palestinians will formally become a member of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on April 1, when the court could exercise jurisdiction over war crimes committed by anyone on Palestinian territory, without a referral from the U.N. Security Council.

    Israel is not a member of the Hague-based ICC but its citizens could be tried for actions taken on Palestinian land. Palestinians could also be liable for prosecution for actions against Israelis.

    On Friday, the leader of Lebanon’s Shi’ite group Hezbollah said the attacks in France had done more harm to Islam than any cartoon or book, a reference to the attack on Charlie Hebdo.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • SDP Considering Contesting A GRC In Upcoming General Elections

    SDP Considering Contesting A GRC In Upcoming General Elections

    At the next General Election, which is due by January 2017, the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) plans to contest the same four constituencies that it contested at the last GE in 2011.

    But the opposition party, which does not have any seats in the current Parliament, has not ruled out contesting one more Group Representation Constituency (GRC) – possibly Tanjong Pagar. In 2011, the SDP contested two single seats – Yuhua and Bukit Panjang – as well as two GRCs – Sembawang and Holland-Bukit Timah GRC. It did not win any of the seats.

    The party’s Secretary-General Chee Soon Juan revealed the SDP’s plans as the party launched its election campaign on Saturday (Jan 10). When asked if he would contest the next election, Dr Chee said it has been a long time since he stood for election and it would be an “interesting contest this time around”. However, he added that it was “premature” to say where he would contest.

    Launching its party slogan, “Your Voice in Parliament”, the SDP said it will introduce its potential candidates at a pre-election rally in Hong Lim Park in October. The party also plans to release an economic policy paper in February and its manifesto in May. It also plans to unveil a town council management manifesto in June, which will spell out how the party plans to manage estates if it was to win in any of the constituencies it is contesting.

    Besides saying it would focus on the same constituencies it had contested in the previous GE, the SDP also said it intended to campaign on several policy ideas it had raised earlier.

    These included advocating the abolishment of Medisave, Medifund and MediShield schemes in favour of a National Health Investment Fund, and the introduction of a non-open market scheme for public housing which would see new flats being sold at a price which does not factor in the cost of land.

    The party is also advocating the scrapping of the PSLE, a point system for foreigners to qualify to work in Singapore and abolishing the CPF’s Minimum Sum scheme.

    Mr Chee expressed enthusiasm about the upcoming elections: “I’m excited about the prospect of leading the SDP into the next elections, excited about the opportunity of presenting our alternative vision to the people of Singapore, and excited that right now, we have the opportunity to effect change and take Singapore up a different path. One that is democratic, dynamic, just, equal and compassionate.”

     

    Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

  • The Need For Flexibility In The CPF System

    The Need For Flexibility In The CPF System

    SINGAPORE: Singapore’s national savings scheme, the Central Provident Fund (CPF) system, should provide flexibility in areas such as lump sum withdrawals while maintaining its role of providing for retirement.

    The CPF Advisory Panel chair, Professor Tan Chorh Chuan, shared this with the media on Saturday (Jan 10) after the end of the first round of focus group discussions, which sought views on topics related to enhancing the CPF system.

    One of the questions posed during the discussion was how much should CPF members be able to withdraw at age 65. One of the participants of the focus group was Ms Triena Noeline Ong, who is 69 years old and director of etymology at International Book Publishing & Editorial Services. She said: “When I turned 55, which was some time ago, I could withdraw all the CPF that was permissible, which I did. Then it was the economic crisis, so I lost a lot of it. I feel that the lump sum withdrawal is not a good idea but if you have excess of the minimum sum, perhaps you could withdraw that.”

    Another praticipant, social worker Benjamin Ho, was supportive of more flexible lump sum withdrawals. He said: “For legitimate reasons such as unemployment and other medical issues that are not covered at the moment… Would they be allowed to withdraw a certain amount of money? So that at least they are able to foot their debt and are able to start off on a more stable footing and plan towards retirement.”

    About 40 people attended the focus group discussion, with participants from different age groups and diverse backgrounds. This is the tenth focus group discussion by the CPF Advisory Panel. Around 400 people have given their views thus far. During the discussions, participants were consulted on topics such as CPF payouts and lump sum withdrawals at 65 years old. The panel has also received about 150 written submissions.

    “What we have heard is that many people would like the flexibility of a lump sum withdrawal, but yet they also recognise that there has to be some conditions set so that it does not erode into the long-term payouts, which are also very important,” said Prof Tan.

    “Again, we will take this on board to make sure that we can provide some flexibility, but yet at the same time, ensure that we maintain the very important role that CPF has – to ensure some level of adequate support over the much longer lifetime that most Singaporeans now enjoy.”

    Currently, a Minimum Sum of S$155,000 is set aside for CPF members who turn 55 from July 2014 to June 2015. When the member reaches 65, there is a monthly payout of about S$1,200 for life. In July 2015, the Minimum Sum amount will be adjusted to S$161,000.

    Prof Tan said the discussions threw up a “wide diversity of needs” but the panel recognised that if it tried to encompass all concerns, it would make the system complicated. He added: “The CPF is one very important element of retirement adequacy provision, but it cannot also cater for all types of circumstances – otherwise the scheme would just become too difficult to understand and administer. So fundamentally, it requires us to stay very focused on what are the most important roles of CPF and how best can we provide that flexibility so that it can serve Singaporeans better.”

    The panel will submit its first findings to the Government by early February 2015. These will touch on issues such as the Minimum Sum, lump sum withdrawal and payouts.

    There will be further focus group discussions on how to provide more flexibility for members seeking higher returns, be it through private investment plans or annuities. These recommendations should be out by the middle of 2015.

     

    Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

  • Activities To Do In Malaysia Over The Weekend

    Activities To Do In Malaysia Over The Weekend

    The main difference between Singaporeans and Malaysians is this: One is “divide by 2.5”, the other is “multiply by 2.5”. Any other aspect is almost similar: the language, the complaints about the weather, the “got free gift?” face we show to the sales assistant.

    Every weekend, the causeway will be jammed because Singaporeans head north to Malaysia. No matter what their purpose is, there are the things that, despite how early or late it is, Singaporeans will definitely do.

    Have breakfast, bunch, lunch, tea, dinner, supper and late-night supper

    Whatever you can find in Malaysia, you can find in Singapore. The only difference is the “divide by 2.5”. While taste is very subjective, the “divide by 2.5” is absolute. Therefore, we can conclude that the “divide by 2.5” is the main reason why we do that, not because of the taste.

    But to be fair, sometimes, the food at Malaysia better lah.

    Buy groceries

    Have you seen those middle-aged women stocking up on discount stuff in NTUC? Well, if they’re in a Malaysia supermarket, they’ll stock up everything in the supermarket, because after “divide by 2.5”, everything becomes a discount item. If possible, they might even buy the entire shopping centre.

    Buy chewing gum and cigarettes

    The law says that we can’t buy them. But honestly speaking, if one doesn’t buy one bottle of chewing gum and one pack of cigarettes back to Singapore, people would wonder whether you go to the City Square at Farrer Park MRT Station (Singapore) or the City Square at Johor Babru (Malaysia).

    Pump petrol (for drivers)

    You don’t just do the “divide by 2.5” with petrol. You just pump without looking at the price. You don’t even give a damn about what card have what discount. You just pump, for you know it’s always cheaper. Even when you just need to pump one litre, just do it. Even if it cost more to drive into a petrol station, you just do it. Pumping petrol in Malaysia is in Singaporeans’ blood.

    Wash car (for drivers)

    Let me illustrate this for non-drivers:
    A car wash in Singapore is about SGD$7 and they just throw soap and water at the exterior of your car and wipe them off—all done within five minutes.

    A car wash in Malaysia is about RM 8 (do the “divide by 2.5” now!!) and they take about forty-five minutes to clean everything—including your seat. Sometimes, after a wash, you might not recognize your car.

    Bonus: one thing Singaporeans don’t do in Malaysia
    Have a meal in McDonald’s. I mean, what the hell?

     

    Source: www.lowkayhwa.com

  • #Je Suis Ahmed: A Message For Everyone

    #Je Suis Ahmed: A Message For Everyone

    After the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, the phrase “Je Suis Charlie” — “I am Charlie” — became the unofficial slogan of solidarity with the shooting victims. #JeSuisCharlie trended on Twitter, and people held up signs featuring the phrase at rallies all over the world.

    Je Suis Charlie’s message is an important one in the wake of this horrifying crime. But now a new hashtag campaign, #JeSuisAhmed, has arisen to augment it. Its message of tolerance deserves — perhaps needs — to be heard as well.

    Terrorist vs Muslim

    #JeSuisAhmed

    #JeSuisAhmed honors Ahmed Merabet, the French police officer who was murdered outside the Charlie Hebdo offices by the same gunmen who went on to murder the magazine’s staffers. Merabet, in addition to being a police officer, is believed to have been part of France’s large Muslim community.

    I am not Charlie, I am Ahmed the dead cop. Charlie ridiculed my faith and culture and I died defending his right to do so. #JesuisAhmed

    — Dyab Abou Jahjah (@Aboujahjah) January 8, 2015
    Twitter users have rallied to the hashtag to argue that Merabet, like the murdered journalists, should be honored as a defender of free speech — particularly because he died trying to protect a publication that had mocked and derided his own religion:

    “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” Voltaire #JeSuisAhmed

    — Adalia Conti (@AJ_Conti) January 8, 2015
    #JeSuisAhmed does not dispute the sentiment of Je Suis Charlie. Rather, it adds to it, by calling attention to the importance of tolerance as well as solidarity. That is important in its own right, but it’s also an elegant response to those who might respond to the attack with broad hostility towards Islam, or suspicion of Muslims as a group.

    Many people have pointed out that the actions of a few Muslims aren’t representative of the entire religion. But those reminders can feel like an abstraction in the context of an emotional debate over a terrorist attack. #JeSuisAhmed sends that message far more powerfully, by pointing out that the same logic could be used to conclude that all Muslims are heroic police officers.

    The hashtag was also a reminder that the victims of Islamist terrorists are primarily Muslim:

    Il faut pas l’oublié, les musulmans sont la 1ere victime du terrorisme #JeSuisAhmed

    — Lincoln Osiris (@Bill9011) January 7, 2015
    Other users tweeted #JeSuisAhmed to point out the injustice of focusing on the attackers’ Muslim faith, while failing to mention Merabet’s.:

    In case you are confused… #JeSuisAhmed pic.twitter.com/ckpchvqHey

    — HibHop (@misshibhop) January 9, 2015
    Ahmed Merabet protected people. He was the true face of modern Islam. His murderers were not. #JeSuisAhmed

    — Imran Ahmed (@Imi_Ahmed) January 7, 2015
    Je Suis Dalia

    In a Facebook post entitled “Je Suis Dalia,” Dalia Mogahed, the Director of Research at the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding, further extended the message of #JeSuisAhmed, using it to highlight the prejudice inherent in the demand that Muslims like her denounce or reject the Charlie Hebdo murders.

    Post by Dalia Mogahed.
    Mogahed’s post layers a new, individualistic message of tolerance onto the communal “Je Suis” rallying cry: a reminder that Muslims are individuals, and that the actions of murderous extremists should not be attributed to others who happen to share her faith.

    The post hit a nerve, garnering more than 1500 likes and 600 shares within a day. In an email, Mogahed noted that others were sharing the same words under their own names.

    Its popularity is understandable, because Mogahed’s post is, at its most basic level, a rejection of bigotry and prejudice. As Max Fisher wrote yesterday, blaming an entire group for the actions of a few individuals is “the very definition of bigotry.” Worse, that same logic perpetuates extremist violence itself, both from Islamist extremists and from others. “It is also, by the way, the very same logic that leads French non-Muslims, outraged by the Charlie Hebdo murders, to attack French mosques in hateful and misguided retaliation.”

    Mogahed’s post serves as a polite but meaningful request that such bigotry end — and an implicit reminder that it can leave innocent people in danger.

    Update: A number of outlets, including The Telegraph and The Guardian, have reported that Merabet was Muslim. The Telegraph reports that Merabet’s family plans to bury him in a Muslim cemetery, and that a friend of Mr. Merabet referred to him as a Muslim. However, other outlets, including the New York Times, say that his religion is unconfirmed. Social media users citing his name have widely presumed that he was Muslim.

     

    Source: www.vox.com

deneme bonusu