Rilek1Corner

Tag: Singapore

  • Foreigner Tells Singaporeans Not To Expect Special Treatment Just Because of Local Status

    Foreigner Tells Singaporeans Not To Expect Special Treatment Just Because of Local Status

    If you’re qualified, employers will hire you. Don’t like low paying jobs?

    But now complaining your government doesn’t protect your rights.

    Yes, I don’t know Singapore much, I visited the country for just 3 days and in a very short period of time I see it’s a very expensive country to work and live in.

    If your country will hire me for a high salary of my demand, I couldn’t care less about your battle cry. If your country wouldn’t hire your young fresh graduates, highly qualified professionals, then why not find a job in other country?

    All you do is whine and complain, why don’t you put yourselves in the test and try finding a job in a foreign land.

    If you’re that confident about your qualifications but your country doesn’t want you to work for them, why continuously cry like a bunch of spoiled brats waiting for their parents to feed them.

    Explore your options if you have the qualifications. Don’t expect your country to give you special treatments just because you’re a local.

    It happens globally, if you’re a local with exceptional talent and very qualified, employers will drool all over you.

    But mediocre qualification and skill, don’t be too picky.

    That’s why other people call you racist, not me, just to be clear. If you truly believe you’re as qualified as the next foreign worker beside you, don’t push them out of your beloved country, compete with them head-on.

    And may the best employee win.

    Posted by: the game

    Editor’s note: this article is retrieved from a comment posted on our site.

     

    Source: www.transitioning.org

  • A Reality Check For All Opposition Parties

    A Reality Check For All Opposition Parties

    I might be flamed by fellow opposition supporters for saying this, but I feel it’s better if we opposition supporters voice out our concerns BEFORE the upcoming GE.

    Firstly, not all opposition parties have the same status. The strongest opposition party at the moment is the WP which has 7 parliamentary seats and 2 non-constituency members of parliament. The WP is stable, has good leadership, party discipline, a strong brand name, strong grassroots network and has managed to attract a critical mass of skilled professionals. These factors explain why the WP has a better image and thus a better chance of winning than the other opposition parties. As was seen in the Punggol East by-election, in a multi-cornered fight, the WP candidate will attract a much larger share of votes than the minor opposition parties.

    Next in the ranking of the opposition parties, is the SDP. Why? Because this is a party with a history, alternative policies and a clear ideology. SDP’s grassroots potential is underused but not lacking, as it seems to be able to attract social activists and other liberals. Say what you may about the SDP but at least it does not give the image that it is an unstable party that lacks people. The party website is well designed and is kept up to date. SDP’s decision to pull out of the Punggol by-election and avoid being a spoiler earned it goodwill from opposition supporters and thus the SDP’s image was not tarnished by a great defeat. The SDP may have committed some blunders such as implying that they were unwilling to run a town council, but they have corrected that mistake! They realized that they have to turn their attention to municipal matters too. And thus, earlier this year, they published a paper detailing their plans on running a town council. The SDP is not perfect, but if your constituency is not contested by WP, it’s your best bet if you want an opposition win.

    Why did I not list the SPP which has 1 NCMP as the second pick for opposition supporters? Last GE, we saw a nationwide 6.5% vote swing AWAY from the PAP. Thus, every constituency that was also contested by the opposition in 2006 saw a larger percentage of the votes gained by the opposition in 2011. All constituencies save for one – Potong Pasir. SPP instead saw their votes in Potong Pasir drop by 6%, leading to their narrow loss of a safe seat to the PAP’s Sitoh Yi Pin!

    This is largely due to the choice of SPP to field Lina Chiam who was intended to be Chiam See Tong’s successor. This is widely perceived to be the reason why SPP lost. Mrs Chiam was not eloquent enough at her rallies. Nor did she attack the PAP candidate sufficiently. Most importantly, she did not manage to convince the swing voters that she had a good chance of winning against the PAP candidate. That was why there were 242 spoiled votes. If just half these votes had gone to SPP, she would have won!

    I’m not against SPP but I’m just saying that SPP has to deal with these REAL perceptions if they intend to field Mrs Chiam in Potong Pasir again. A party only stands a decent chance if it can generate hype among its supporters. Supporters and swing voters have to be convinced that the party can win. Remember, Sitoh Yi Pin has been the incumbent MP for Potong Pasir for 4 years now and he has a huge advantage over Mrs Chiam. It is no longer 50-50 as was the case in 2011. Even other opposition parties like the DPP are doubting Mrs Chiam’s ability to win again. That is why these opportunists want to cause a multi-cornered fight in Potong Pasir.

    SPP can still win back Potong Pasir if they field someone younger, whose appeal to the voters is stronger. If they wish to revive Mr Chiam’s legacy while renewing SPP, then why not field Mr Chiam’s daughter? As Nicole Seah proved in the last GE, it is possible for a young, eloquent and inspiring female politician to generate sufficient hype to shift the vote towards her party, even against a strong incumbent from the ruling party.

    SPP has been gifted with the entry of strong opposition personalities like Ravi Philemon and Jeanette Chong-Aruldoss, who is poised to give the PAP a tough fight at Mountbatten SMC once again. So why not build on that to renew the party’s overall image? I hope SPP can see the bigger picture and try to attract back swing voters.

    All the other opposition parties are not main contenders. NSP received a lot of bad publicity after GE2011 because they went through a change of 5 secretary generals in such a short time and furthermore lost almost all their top candidates in the last GE to other political parties. Singfirst and PPP are new parties with no history and swing voters usually stick to established parties when they vote. RP and SDA have been discredited by their secretary generals losing their deposits in the Punggol by-election. These parties will be entering the upcoming GE with voters perceiving them to have a low chance of winning. They have a lot of hard work ahead of them. It will be an uphill task for them to win a seat in parliament.

    Harold

     

    Source: www.tremeritus.com

  • Zulfikar Shariff: Elected MPs Do Not Represent The Malay/Muslim Community

    Zulfikar Shariff: Elected MPs Do Not Represent The Malay/Muslim Community

    There is a common misunderstanding on the role and appointment of Malay MPs and the Minister in charge of Muslim Affairs.

    There are regular comments from the Muslim community that as our leaders and representatives, it is the duty of these MPs and Minister to fight for our interests. They ask why the MPs have not fought for the hijab, why they did not fight against the destruction of masjid, or the removal of wakaf.

    While it is expected that a Muslim will do all he can for the community, we should not be mistaken into thinking that these MPs and Minister are our representatives.

    Let us be clear how they were appointed. And what role the Muslim community played in their appointment.

    The Minister in charge of Muslim Affairs, according to the government, is the Apex of Muslim leadership in Singapore.

    And yet, he was not appointed by the Muslim community.

    He became a Minister by virtue of his political position.

    Lee Hsien Loong (and the PAP) nominated Yaacob Ibrahim to be a candidate in the last election.

    The Muslim community did not nominate him.

    He was elected by the Moulmein-Kallang GRC, of which about 80% are non Muslims to administer their constituency.

    The Muslim community did not elect him.

    Lee Hsien Loong then appointed him to be Minister in charge of Muslim Affairs.

    The Muslim community did not appoint him.

    In which part of this process was the Muslim community involved?

    He was nominated by the PAP as a candidate, elected by his constituency to be an MP and appointed by Hsien Loong to be Minister.

    How did he become our representative?

    Let us be clear…

    He is not our representative.

    He is the PAP’s representative to manage the Muslim community.

    His job is to represent the PAP’s interests to the Muslim community.

    Not the reverse. That he is a Muslim and may voice his opinions on the community’s concern is incidental. That is not his function as Minister.

    The community had no role in his appointment. We should not assume he is our representative.

    Treat him as the PAP’s representative. Thats it.

    Yaacob Ibrahim and the Malay MPs are not our representatives.

    They represent the PAP to our community.

    Once we understand that, Insha Allah, it makes our engagement with the government much clearer.

     

    Source: Zulfikar Shariff

  • Man, 26, Charged With Committing Sex Offences Involving At Least 10 Underage Boys

    Man, 26, Charged With Committing Sex Offences Involving At Least 10 Underage Boys

    A 26-year-old man was charged on Tuesday with committing sex offences involving at least 10 underaged boys.

    Goh Jun Guan faces 30 charges involving boys who were aged between 10 and 15 years old at the time.

    The alleged offences, which took place between 2012 and 2014, include giving and receiving oral sex from some of the boys as well as touching the genitals of some and getting them to touch his.

    He also stands accused of persuading some of the boys to send him photos of their genitals or videos of themselves masturbating, and of sending them similar photos and videos of himself via WhatsApp.

    These alleged acts happened at a different locations, including public toilets in Jurong West Public Library, Pioneer Mall, and Jurong Point Shopping Centre.

    For each count of sexually penetrating or being sexually penetrated by a boy under 14 years of age, Goh could be jailed up to 20 years and also fined or caned.

    For each count of procuring the commission of obscene acts by the boys, he could be jailed up to five years, fined up to $10,000, or both, on the first conviction.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Court: Headless Woman Killed By Husband

    Court: Headless Woman Killed By Husband

    Upset that his wife was making a long-distance call to a mystery party, he reportedly punched her in a fight and left her lying on the bed.

    It was only later, he told a friend, that he realised that she was not unconscious, but dead. That was when he decided to get rid of the body.

    A coroner’s court found yesterday that Indian national Jasvinder Kaur, 33, had been murdered by her husband, Harvinder Singh, 35, on Dec 11, 2013.

    Ms Kaur’s headless body was discovered floating in Whampoa River on the morning of Dec 12. Her corpse was wrapped in black trash bags, with the legs exposed and hands severed at the wrists.

    Harvinder, a senior logistics coordinator, remains on the run. His friend, fellow Indian national Gursharan Singh, 27, was jailed for 30 months in April for helping to get rid of Ms Kaur’s body.

    Gursharan, a forklift driver, had helped Harvinder carry a luggage bag from the latter’s residence at 228A Balestier Road to the canal near McNair Road.

    When Gursharan grew suspicious at how heavy the bag was, he demanded to know what was in it. Harvinder then explained that he had fought that morning with Ms Kaur and punched her once on the neck.

    He said she had fallen onto the bed and he had left her there. When he found her in the same position later, he realised she was dead and decided to dispose of her body.

    Although Gursharan was then aware that the luggage contained a corpse, he helped Harvinder carry it to the canal. Harvinder then told him to walk away. As Gursharan left, he heard a splash.

    Ms Kaur’s employer told investigators that after the deceased failed to turn up for work as a beautician on Dec 11, Harvinder called to say she was returning to India.

    Harvinder fled the next morning to Malaysia, and then to India, where the authorities were unable to trace him. He is now on Interpol’s wanted list.

    The exact cause of Ms Kaur’s death remains unknown as her head and hands were never found.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

deneme bonusu