Blog

  • Col (Ret) John Morrice:  The Passing of a Heroic SAF Pioneer

    Col (Ret) John Morrice: The Passing of a Heroic SAF Pioneer

    SINGAPORE: “Without John and his generation of officers, we would not have today’s SAF (Singapore Armed Forces),” Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong wrote of the late John Morrice.

    The retired Army Colonel died on Oct 24 of a heart attack. He was 79.

    In a Facebook post on Monday (Oct 27) evening, Mr Lee said he was saddened to read of the news. “John helped to build the SAF,” the Prime Minister said in his tribute. Mr Morrice joined the Singapore Military Forces when Singapore was still a British colony and decided to continue to stay with Singapore when the Republic left Malaysia. He also trained the “legendary first batch” of officers to graduate from the Singapore Armed Forces Training Institute (SAFTI) as their Officer Commanding. He was also President of the SAF Veterans League after retirement.

    Mr Lee reminisced that he had worked under Mr Morris as a young SAF officer. “When I joined the General Staff, he was one of the senior commanders we worked closely with. So I was happy to see him do this video for the Pioneer Generation Package,” he said, referring to a video by gov.sg.

    “My deepest condolences to Mrs Morrice and the family,” Mr Lee added.

    Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen had earlier expressed sadness on the colonel’s death. “He is a shining example of a devoted soldier who served his country to the best of his abilities and for as long as he could,” he wrote on Facebook.

    The Singapore Army also posted a farewell note on Facebook, describing Mr Morrice as “a shining example of devotion and service, a faithful soldier and son of Singapore.”

    Source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore

  • Chiam See Tong: Political Survivor

    Chiam See Tong: Political Survivor

    By Howard Lee

    The silence that overcame the crowd gathered outside Deyi Secondary School in the wee hours of 8 May 2011 consumed the night. Only the voice from the radio of a car parked outside, announcing election results, continued to drone on.

    Then someone let out an exasperated sigh. A stifled sob. Curses muttered in anger. The Singapore People’s Party had lost both Potong Pasir SMC and Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC.

    Only a few hours back, this crowd had gathered outside the counting station to support Mr Chiam See Tong, secretary-general of the SPP, in his bid for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, jubilantly talking about his campaign and his chances. They were full of hope that his team would win the GRC.

    When the gates to the school-turned-counting centre finally opened, Chiam was standing with his team to thank the supporters. Unable to contain their emotions, the group surged forward, paying no heed to the police officers manning the gates, nor the reporters caught in the front.

    All they wanted to do was reach out to Chiam, affirm their support, shake his hand – do anything to make him feel like a champion. Chiam did not win the election, but he won their hearts.

    Any sane observer present would have immediately realised that this group did not just invest emotionally in his campaign. They were his extended family. They have invested emotionally in Chiam the man. No other Singaporean politician living today would be able to make such a claim.

    And any sane observer would ask two questions: Who is this man, and why does he have such an impact on people?

    * * * * *

    SPP team Bishan Toa Payoh GE2011
    The SPP team for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, GE2011.
    “Let The People Have Him – Chiam See Tong: The Early Years”, written by Loke Hoe Yeong – associate fellow at the European Union Centre and assistant secretary-general of the SPP – provides an invigorating insight into the character of the man who has become the epitome of gentlemanly politics in Singapore.

    Loke traces Chiam’s early history – from his birth to his political awakening, his landmark Potong Pasir win in GE1984 and his first speech in Parliament – giving readers a much needed peek at what drives Chiam as a person and politician.

    “It was actually a rather innocuous idea that I had after GE2011,” shared Loke. “I wanted to read more about the opposition and opposition leaders, but there was no biography on Chiam. So I decided, why not do it myself? It was a labour of love, piqued by my interest as a researcher, to find balance in the narrative of our political history.”

    Suport for Chiam Deyi Sec GE2011Mild-mannered for a reason

    Indeed, the popular narrative that surrounds Chiam has been less than favourable. He lacks oomph as a Parliamentarian and public figure, preferring to take a non-confrontational approach. He was careful and mild for fear of antagonising the ruling People’s Action Party. He is an easy target for the ruling party. He is token opposition.

    However, Loke’s simple and straight-forward account of Chiam’s childhood, youth and bumbling foray into the lion’s den as a novice politician takes us out of the one-dimensional portrayal of Chiam, and presented a warm and at times humorous account of Chiam as a person.

    We learn from Chiam’s colourful childhood, from his aversion to studies to his easy-going nature and helpful personality, that his mild-mannered approach to life has always been a part of him. Loke described the instance when he won a catapult in a tree-climbing dare, but thought nothing of lending it to a friend immediately afterwards. When his friend returned it broken the next day, Chiam registered disappointment, but not anger.

    There is little wonder when Loke revealed that Chiam’s unprecedented win in the defamation lawsuit against S Danbalan, and the subsequent public apologies he received from him and Howe Yoon Chong, was not even something that Chiam thought was necessary.

    Politics for democracy, policies for the people

    Cover of “Let The People Have Him”, Epigram Books
    Cover of “Let The People Have Him”, Epigram Books
    In many ways, Chiam’s affable personality was the only constant in the constantly changing social and political environment of the 70s to 80s. Loke gave a historical account of the various policy issues that led to growing resentment against the ruling People’s Action Party, which were instrumental to Chiam winning the hearts of the people.

    Loke believes that Chiam’s story is also one about political and policy discourse in Singapore, and how a political newbie has brought an important change to how people looked at politics and policies.

    “If you look at the policy discourse leading up to the 1984 elections, there was a lot of talk about the CPF (Central Provident Fund), housing,” said Loke. “We see people reacting to the government’s policies in a way that indicated there was a rupture in the social compact. Some people call it looking at bread and butter issues, and the need for democracy was fairly abstract for people to grasp.”

    Loke recognised that Chiam struggled with getting his ideas across in his early political life. “To the ordinary people, Chiam came across as a fine chap, but they can’t see how his ideas and ideals can affect their lives.”

    But as Chiam matured as a politician and developed the Singapore Democratic Party, he was better able to strengthen the link between policy and politics. “People began to realise that the social compact was broken, and they can no longer leave it to the (PAP) politicians to run the country alone.”

    “In that sense, I believe that Chiam reinvented opposition politics in Singapore. I have the greatest respect for Barisan Sosialis and JB Jeyaretnam, but the policy manifesto of Barisan then was a little outdate, and the people then didn’t think it was realistic. They also preferred a less confrontational approach than what we had in the 50s and 60s.”

    “It was a different set of problems they faced, worrying about livelihood and rapid progress. Chiam basically reinvented the image of the opposition as people who are viable to be elected. What helped greatly was his ability to draw reference to real policy issues, and made people realise that the opposition’s voice in Parliament was necessary.”

    More to be said

    An adventurous Chaim with Lina and “Herbie”, road trip from London to Singapore.
    An adventurous Chiam with Lina and “Herbie”, on their road trip from London to Singapore. (Image from the Chiam family)
    Despite a timeline that spans decades, “Let The People Have Him” is a joyous trip of exuberance documenting Chiam’s early life, in a narrative that is extremely easy to follow.

    “This is a human story of a man who did something rather brave for his time, given the fear that hung over the many political arrests at that time,” said Loke. “I wanted to offer an idea of what drove him to go into politics, especially since it was such a high risk thing to do. His life story, family background, education background, his exposure to politics, following his father’s wishes, how he eventually found his passion – all this coloured what he sees as problems in Singapore’s history.”

    “I hope to contribute to the literature of biographies of Singapore’s politicians, pioneers who have made a difference to Singapore in different ways. I want readers to know the different facets of what happened in the past, so that they can make up their own minds (about Singapore’s history).”

    Was he concerned about his political affiliations with Chiam? Loke said that the idea of the book preceded his SPP membership, and it was actually in the course of writing the book that he learned more about the Chiams, understood and liked the SPP’s mission, and started to volunteer with the party. “I think readers can see for themselves that there is no real bias, that the book is basically a historical account of Chiam’s life.”

    There is, of course, more to come. Loke is working on his second volume, which will document Chiam’s subsequent life as a Parliamentarian and highlight some of his key speeches made.

    Nevertheless, “Let The People Have Him” offers an important, if not comprehensive, look into what motivates and forms the political mind of one of Singapore’s most recognisable political icons, but the personal approach of the book would make you believe that he is just an ordinary man.

    Ironically, it was this ordinary man who against the odds of his time, won over the people of a little constituency called Potong Pasir, and forever stole the heart of our nation.

    “Let The People Have Him – Chiam See Tong: The Early Years” is available for sale at major book stores starting today. It is also available for purchase online at Epigram Books.

    Source: www.theonlinecitizen.com/2014/10/chiam-see-tong-understanding-the-man-behind-the-politics

  • Muslim Stereotypes: Untruths and Generalisations

    Muslim Stereotypes: Untruths and Generalisations

    5 things idiots believe about Muslims which just aren’t true…

    Posted on October 20, 2014 by hugowaters

    Let me lay my cards on the table. I am not a religious person. I don’t discount all faiths in their entirety, but I wouldn’t say I believe in enough of any of the mainstream religions to even lean towards one in particular. I do however respect people’s religious beliefs, whilst also myself believing that religion shouldn’t be beyond question or criticism. This article isn’t about me somehow glorifying Islam or putting it’s teachings beyond question. It is about leveling the playing field so we don’t discriminate against the faith significantly more than we do with others. There is a growing consensus that the more liberal-thinking people are wrongly pandering to some sort of Islamic lobby, and in that sense we are aiding a kind of Fox News, Daily Mail Special Addition of The Armageddon. I have been called a ‘traitor’ (and much worse) many times for simply challenging ignorant and bigoted views about Muslims. This article is simply about how when people use the term Muslim in such a broad way, it is not only extremely discriminatory, but also quite simply, stupid.

    1. Female Genital Mutilation is a Muslim problem

    Before we delve into this first point, as I mentioned before, no religion is beyond question, and I’m quite comfortable in making the assertion that all religions are male-dominated. They all still have a very long way to come, both in their views of women in society in general, and also the role of women within the faiths themselves. But it is beyond question that when it comes to discrimination against women, Islam is seen as being way out on its own in not only its views and attitudes towards women, but its treatment of them too.

    The number one worst lie in this respect (and believe me there is a big list) is the portrayal of Female Genital Mutilation (or FGM) being a ‘Muslim problem.’ Now for those who don’t know, this barbaric practice involves babies having an incision (also described as circumcision) without any anesthetic, which essentially removes the clitoris. The deluded reasoning behind the practice is that by removing the clitoris the child will remain pure. Now before we go into facts and figures, there is absolutely nothing in the Quran about FGM. This alone should be enough to prevent people being able to call it a Muslim problem – how can it be when there is nothing in it’s teachings about it? But let’s go further, nowhere in Muslim majority states does this practice occur, apart from in isolated parts of Central Africa. It doesn’t happen anywhere in the Middle East, it doesn’t happen anywhere in North Africa, and it doesn’t happen anywhere in Asia. Furthermore, staying in the same region of Africa, did you know that Ethiopia has a 75% rate of FGM amongst it’s population, and that it’s a Christian majority country? Did you also know that Eritrea has almost 90% of FGM, and again, it is a Christian country? FGM can therefore more accurately described as a regional problem. Consequently, if it only occurs in nations within the same cluster of central Africa, it can quite justifiably be labelled a central African problem. Along with the Quran there is nothing in The Bible about the practice, so the two religions cannot legitimately be brought into the argument. It is a good example of people doing something in-spite of their religion, not because of it. But regardless, I hear of the issue being a ‘Muslim problem’ almost every time there is a debate on it. This is a prime example of the media portraying something to push an agenda, which sadly a large portion of the general public lap-up without question.

    2. Muslim Societies Don’t Advocate Equal Rights

    Again, equal rights for women is lacking in pretty much every part of the world. But as with the previous point, Muslim women seem to be used as the example of an unequal society. The driving ban for women in Saudi Arabia is the main course in the long set-menu of accusations seemingly attributed only to Muslim majority countries. People are very quick to forget that Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world to have such a ban. In fact there is no doubt that the most extreme country when it comes to equality is Saudi Arabia, which is all the more bizarre when you consider that Saudi Arabia is the US and UK’s closest ally in the region. When people talk about how double standards by The West harm its relationship within the Middle East as a whole, it’s not a myth, the reputation is earned by our politicians criticising human rights violations, equality issues, and democracy/dictatorship in the poorer countries in the region, whilst simultaneously having friendly relationships with an oil-rich country in Saudi Arabia who have by far the worst rights for women, zero tolerance for other religions, and not only do they not have any elections, the country is named after the family that rule it and probably always will be. Did you know for example that in the month following The West’s offensive against ISIS that Saudi Arabia beheaded 19 people? 19 people in 4 weeks. No-one knows what they did, and they definitely don’t seem interested in finding out or telling anyone about it either. Of course ISIS is a problem, but it’s the blatant hypocrisy of going to war (and literally flooding the news with nothing else in the process) against a group of people you could fit into an averagely sized football stadium while perpetuating a myth that it’s really against some sort of Islamic ideology that all 1.6 billion of the worlds Muslims believe in, in addition to selling the most extreme nation our weapons is what gives our leaders in The West a bad rap, and deservedly so.

    Using the driving ban in Saudi Arabia as leverage against all Muslims worldwide would be the equivalent of using Uganda’s anti-gay laws – which currently advocate homosexuals being hunted down by the authorities, beaten freely, and sentenced to 12 years in jail, as leverage against Christianity. With Uganda being an 84% Christian country and the majority of the population lobbying to go even further and allow the death penalty to be used as the punishment for homosexuality, not once was the fact that they were a Christian country even brought up. Yet in stark contrast, stoning in Iran and the driving ban in Saudi Arabia are very much thought of as Muslim problems. The anti-gay law in Uganda is a Ugandan problem, stoning in Iran is an Iranian problem, the driving ban in Saudi Arabia is a Saudi Arabian problem. At best these points can be described as regional problems, as with the FGM point above, but how can they be classed as Christian or Muslim problems if the overwhelming majority of people within the faiths don’t do it?

    Within Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim majority state with a population of 250 million, females have exactly the same rights as males, which I definitely wouldn’t say is represented in our media’s portrayal of the faith. But we’ll get onto how facts like these can be conveniently disregarded later in the article.

    A few more facts about women’s equality in what people would describe as the Muslim world:

    While the USA is still waiting for its first female president – did you know that Muslim majority countries have elected 7 female head of states in the last 50 years? In fact, continuing with politics, it’s also worth mentioning that the USA only has 18% of women currently elected to run and serve their country – that’s even less than Saudi Arabia, driving ban and all, who at 19.9% only started allowing women to even be elected a year ago. Further still that’s even less again than Pakistan, another nation who need to come a long way in regards to gender equality but somehow further beat the US at 20.7%. Like I’ve said, by no means am I saying that women in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia have a sweet deal, in fact I feel very comfortable in stating that women’s rights in those two particular countries leave a hell of a lot to be desired. So the fact that they have more women involved in their governments than the USA is particularly scorning at a time when extreme measures are being taken worldwide to increase female participation in politics.

    3. Most Muslims are Arabs

    One of the main reasons the issues above are misunderstood by so many people is that large parts of Western society believe that all or most Muslims are of Arabic origin and only live in the Middle East. When people are negatively ranting about Muslims they are usually referring to people in Middle Eastern countries, particularly the troubled spots they hear about on the news virtually all day, every day. States that often have hugely complex issues where frankly outside antagonists from both Western countries, along with China and Russia do not help. But all that aside it’s staggering to think that there are actually more Muslims living in Malaysia and Indonesia, countries which are both in Asia, than the whole of the Middle East and North Africa combined. In fact some may find it surprising that only around 25% of the worlds Muslims actually live in that particular region. About the same (if not slightly more) of the worlds Christians live on the African continent. Regardless of this, when people are talking about Christians I doubt the image they have in their mind is of a native Malawian, Ugandan, or Zimbabwean. The truth is that no other faith is so crudely generalised as the Muslim faith. Whenever atrocities occur in the Middle East, we always hear of how the ‘Muslim world’ or ‘Muslim Community’ needs come out and distance themselves or even apologise for the acts. Why would leading clerics or politicians in largely peaceful countries such as Malaysia, Turkey, Bangladesh, or Indonesia have to apologise for something that has happened in a competely different country by people with which they have virtually nothing in common with. The paradoxical equivalent that the Christian leaders in the UK would have needed to come out to apologise for Anders Breivik’s terrorist attacks in Norway sounds completely insane, and it is. The fact that the majority of the world’s Muslims live in the far east, in more secular countries which don’t advocate extremism, is a massive inconvenience for the media. It is so easy to get the general public on side if they project the idea of some sort of global religious war, one where a whole religion is actively setting out to eradicate other faiths and non-believers. I know it’s easy because I know so many people who genuinely believe that it is happening. The people I’m talking about aren’t exclusively made up of those paranoid delusional social media users who continue to baffle me with each comment on news feeds or Facebook posts. They are people I know in my personal life. But my question to them is: if you know that the idea you have in your head of what a Muslim is cannot possibly be correct, how can you continue to be so bigoted and make such outrageously ignorant statements about them?

    4. “Most Muslims are Terrorists”

    Some of this has been covered in the previous section but I’d like to explore just the terrorism part alone, together with some facts and figures. Our media is often quite rightly accused of scaremongering, and excessively flooding pages and air-time with exaggerated fear about terrorism. Fear, in-particularly related to race, religion or immigration satisfies their agenda in diverting the general public’s attention away from the very real economic situation we are in – an aspect of society which unsurprisingly large parts of the mainstream media and leaders in the country have a vested interest in. An exaggerated media predictably leads to a large proportion of the general public being so wide of the mark and misinformed in their understanding of some really important issues. We hear regularly from Fox News anchors and Daily Mail journalists that around 10% of Muslims are terrorists. Predictably a lot of the general public estimate the figure to be significantly higher. We hear 20%, 30%, or in some cases the numerical system is seemingly discounted all together and ‘most’ Muslims are branded as terrorists (presumably the non-figure of ‘most’ implies that the number has to be greater than 50%) which is simply ludicrous, but there’s no doubt that we’ve all seen or heard it. Now even just using the 10% figure, which I would say is very much on the conservative side of what many people (particularly those I’m aiming this piece at) genuinely think: 10% of 1.6 billion is obviously 160 million. If there was 160 million Islamic Terrorists in the world as a group they would equal more than ten times the amount of active members of the US Army, which in itself is the second biggest armed forces in the world, and the biggest in the Western World by a huge margin. Logically the figure has to be inaccurate, or as mentioned there would most definitely be more than 20 to 30 thousand members of ISIS. Again, I’m not saying ISIS aren’t a problem, but the group equate to approximately 0.002% of the world’s Muslims, so if you therefore feel comfortable labeling them a Muslim problem then you have been well and truly reeled in, and you most certainly are one of the people to whom I’d be asking the question which concluded my last topic. Now I know that ISIS aren’t standing alone in the arena of Islamic terrorism, but using a generally excepted definition of the word terrorist i.e. someone who uses violence or terror to advance political gains, there can’t possibly be 160 million active Islamic terrorists in the world, especially bearing in mind that there are only 315 million Muslims living in the whole of the Middle East and North Africa. Given that this is the region we are told to be most worried about, and that this would falsely imply that over half of the entire population of Muslims in the region are terrorists (a part of the world comprised of approximately 22 different countries, many of whom are our allies) then no wonder people are worried. You see when the right-wing media outlets in The West report on Muslims, they don’t mean those in Indonesia, or Malaysia, or Bangladesh, or Turkey. It’s simply much easier to pretend that these countries don’t exist, as they are a total contradiction to their constant propaganda that Muslim majority countries can’t be moderate or secular. Even further, and I don’t apologise for stressing the point again, the fact that these countries also far outnumber the population of Muslim majority countries in the Middle East, it is absolutely scandalous that they are allowed to just disregard such a huge proportion of the faith they almost continually report on.

    5. Only The Quran Promotes Extremism

    One of the easiest and quickest methods right-wingers use to get Joe-public on their side (a tactic I’ve seen used very frequently by groups such as the English Defence League, and the British National Party) is quoting passages out of The Quran in isolation. We hear of how Islam, through the teachings in The Quran, is condoning the killing of non-believers as well as encouraging the stoning of women for adultery, amongst other things. This next bit is easy, here are some of the values promoted in The Bible, do please click on the links to be taken to the full passage:

    – Kill people for working Sundays: Exodus 31:12-15
    – Kill Homosexuals: Leviticus 20:13
    – Kill people for swearing at parents: Leviticus 20:9
    – Kill non-believers: 2 Chronicles 15:12-13
    – Kill women who are not virgins on their wedding night: Deuteronomy 22:20-21

    (I should add that this was all found after only searching for about 5 minutes)

    In Conclusion

    The whole label of ‘Islamic Extremism’ simply cannot be applied to all Muslims if it obviously isn’t true. Sure some Muslim majority countries have issues with religious extremism, but that is their problem, not Islam as a whole’s problem. When you describe the fictional idea of ‘The Muslim World’ what you are essentially doing is grouping together 1.6 billion people made up of different races and nationalities, who live on different continents, who have different cultures, histories, economies, wealth, living standards, practices, who enjoy different art and music, and you are lumping them all together as if they are all the same. You are suggesting that Turkey is the same as Saudi Arabia, that Malaysia is the same as Iran. It just simply isn’t true. In contrast you would struggle to even get a general Christian consensus between those within the faith in the United States and United Kingdom, let alone than with others in Russia (where recent polling suggests Christianity is at 65%), Uganda, Zimbabwe, Mexico, or any other of the Christian majority nations. If it is virtually impossible to define what a globally accepted form of Christianity would look like, why are we so quick to presume that we can do it with Islam?

    As I said at the start, I’m not for or against any religion. But what I am against is singling-out one particular religion as being significantly worse than the others, when in reality that just simply isn’t true. Couple this with the fact that the reasons for perpetuating such a myth are so blatantly corrupt. It essentially pushes an agenda that is undoubtedly going against many of the people’s values who have been reeled in. That, my friends is the real problem. There will always be a far-right, and there will always be racism. But when it’s sane, reasonable people who are being warped into believing that a whole race or religion can be classed as a problem that needs a solution, well, we all know where that belief takes you don’t we…

    If you agree with the points in this article then please follow @Hugo_Waters on Twitter

    Or like his Page on Facebook

    Source: hugowaters.com/2014/10/20/5-things-idiots-believe-about-muslims-which-arent-true/

  • Rage Against Poor Service at KOI Outlet

    Rage Against Poor Service at KOI Outlet

    Popular bubble tea franchise KOI Café posted an apology on its Singapore Facebook page Sunday after a customer’s videocomplaint about service at one of KOI Express’ branches went viral.

    In a five-minute video uploaded on her Facebook page on Saturday, video blogger Gia Munaji Salamat ranted about how a staff member named Rachel at the beverage chain’s Boon Lay MRT branch cursed and called her an “ugly b***h”.

    “With regards to the KOI Express incident [at] Boon Lay MRT. We already got in touch with the relevant parties and will clarify further. We are very sorry to make our valued customers feel disappointed and we believe we will do better with your kind support!” KOI Café said on Facebook.

    According to her video, Gia was visiting the store with her husband at around 8:45pm to order some drinks but had not noticed a sign saying the store was already closed due to a blackout.

    While making an attempt to order her drinks at the store, which normally closes at 10pm, Rachel had “shrugged” her away instead of bringing her attention to the sign.

    Unhappy with the way she was treated and having noticed that the store was still well lit, Gia and her husband returned to confront Rachel, who then responded with an expletive and called her an “ugly b***h”.

    She ended the video saying, “Please guys, make this video viral. KOI Express, shame on you.”

    As of Monday afternoon, the video had garnered over 70,000 views.

    Source: www.sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs

  • Becoming an SAFVC Volunteer

    Becoming an SAFVC Volunteer

    SAFVC Facts: How are SAFVC Volunteers selected?

    “The SAF will screen through applicants carefully to find those with suitable aptitudes and skills to be pioneer batches of the SAFVC that can strengthen our national defence.” – Dr Ng Eng Hen, Defence Minister

    To be an SAFVC Volunteer, you’ll first have to be a Singaporean or Permanent Resident between the ages of 18 and 45.

    SAFVC Volunteers will need to meet the SAF’s requirements so that they can contribute in their roles safely and effectively. The requirements vary. Some of these include relevant work experience, physical fitness levels and aptitude. For example, requirements for the Field Psychologist role include a degree in Psychology and at least three years of professional work experience.

    Like our active personnel and NSmen, SAFVC volunteers will also undergo the necessary screening to ensure their suitability for the various roles.

    Head to www.mindef.gov.sg/SAFVC for more details.

    Source: www.facebook.com/cyberpioneer.connect

deneme bonusu