TR EMERITUS

Hello everyone, I am currently a student at the National University of Singapore. Please understand that due to my ongoing studies I cannot reveal my name, faculty or year to you. What I'm going to share with you is a very riveting experience that I recently had. A few months ago I was approached on campus by a middle-aged man. I was having my lunch in the canteen and he came and sat next me. Although I found it slightly akward, he presented himself as being a late student that wanted to take up a degree at NUS and so I agreed to chat. He started out by just casually asking me about my studies and what I learn about in my course. After about 10 minutes, things started getting weird. The man kept asking me about whether politics are discussed in my class and what are my views on local and international issues. I replied most of them in a generic fashion, and he smiled at my every answer. He then asked me about my lecturer, what his teaching style is like and what are the kinds of reading material he recommends us. At this point I started feeling quite uncomfortable and wanted to leave, but curiousity got the better of me and I wanted to know what this guy's agenda really was because he mentioned my lecturer. We had talked for about 25 minutes, and he asked me how I'm getting by financially. I told him that I'm alright, trying to give him as little information about myself as I could. The man then popped the question, "How about I make you a good offer? I know you're not doing well financially. I am from the Internal Security Department. We are interested in knowing more about what your lecturer is talking about in class." "I'm sorry, I'm don't think I can do that sort of thing." I replied. "No don't worry, nothing is going to happen to you or your lecturer. Everything will be kept under wraps. You'll get $3000 for this simple project of reporting back to us" he said as he gave a light smile. Let me tell you, $3000 for a student like myself is a huge amount. But I just couldn't. For reasons I cannot explain here, I know why my lecturer was targeted and why I was approached for this "job". But I just need to get this out and I'm almost on the verge of tears as I write this. Singaporeans, let me remind all of you that this authoritarian state is playing a very sick game even in this day and age, even on the NUS campus. But that is all the more reason why need to stand up to them. To any of my fellow students or students-to-be reading this, please continue speaking up in class. When you are approached by the government to do such dirty work, turn it down politely and keep your conscience clear. Thank you.   NUS Student   Editor’s Note: This letter is published verbatim and the source of the accusation is not verified. Readers please draw your own conclusion.  Read More →

Controversial YPAP leader and new citizen from India Mr Sinha Satyabrata Shekhar has finally "clarified" his infamous "DOGS" remarks in a way on the YPAP Facebook to an aggrieved netizen who confronted him. Mr Sinha Shekhar sparked a massive outcry among Singaporeans lately when his remarks about PAP critics being "DOGS" is widely reported in the mainstream media: [Source: YPAP Facebook] Mr Sinha Shekhar had initially said he would explain himself to the public via the media, but nothing has been heard from him so far though he has resumed posting on the YPAP and REACH Facebooks. Last week, Mr Sinha Shekhar who has changed his Facebook profile photo, finally offered Singaporeans a sort of explanation as to why he made the remarks: [Source: YPAP Facebook] Mr Sinha Shekhar claimed that he has never called anybody "DOGS" and "the whole thing was taken out of context." He alluded his statement to that of a "proverb": "People use the proverb "Top money for the top dogs" Does that mean all are dogs? Proverbs are usually metaphorical statements," he added. His explanation cut no ice with most netizens with one even going to the extent of listing out all the proverbs with the word "dogs" in them to show that Mr Sinha Shekhar's statement is NOT a recognizable proverb. A speech therapist by training, Mr Sinha Shekhar is currently the Head of Rehabilitation at Ang Mo Kio Community Hospital. He was awarded an "Outstanding Contributor Award" by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in person not too long ago for his "contributions" on the REACH forum. Though he came to Singapore at 25 years of age, he has never served a single day of National Service unlike other Singapore males born here who have to serve two years of NS followed by 13 years of reservist.   Related articles: 1. YPAP leader Sinha Shekar accused of parking at inappropriate lot 2. YPAP leader Sinha Shekhar blamed Singaporeans for misunderstanding him 3.YPAP leader Sinha Shekhar threatened to sue whistle-blower for slander 4. YPAP leader Sinha Shekhar complains about low rent of his resale HDB flat 5. YPAP leader Sinha Shekhar described PAP critics as “DOGS” 6. YPAP leader Sinha Shekhar urged CDCs to reach out to immigrants 7. Indian new citizen Sinha Shekhar scolds unemployed Singapore NSman   Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →

OPINION The recent case of Malaysian drug trafficker Yong Vui Kong has sparked a campaign against the mandatory death penalty in Singapore among a small group of activists. In Singapore the death penalty  is mandatory for first-degree murder and for the possession of more than 15g of heroin in its pure form (dia-morphine), which is deemed to be evidence of trafficking. Amnesty International, a well-known human rights NGO, claimed in a 2004 report that Singapore has the highest execution rate in the world relative to its population: "More than 400 prisoners have been hanged in Singapore since 1991, giving the small city-state possibly the highest execution rate in the world relative to its population of just over four million people. The execution figures include a significant percentage of foreign nationals. It is not known how many prisoners are currently on death row, but the shocking death toll from executions continues to rise." [Source: Amnesty International] In a stern reply to the report, Singapore's Ministry of Home Affairs accused Amnesty International of resorting "to grave errors of facts and misrepresentations, which seriously calls into question the credibility of its Report." "AI is entitled to have its own view on the issue of the death penalty, and to campaign against it worldwide. But AI's position on abolition of the death penalty is by no means uncontested internationally. The issue of the appropriateness of the death penalty is one where there is no international consensus. Many, including Singapore, have determined that it is a necessary punishment for certain offences. Neither do the norms of international law constrain in any way each country's sovereign right to adopt the use of the death penalty in its criminal justice system." [Source: Ministry of Home Affairs] As we can see from the Singapore's government's strong stance, it will never buckle under international pressure to abolish the mandatory death penalty, let alone succumb to pressure from a few dozen Singaporeans campaigning against it. The Singapore opposition should and must stay clear of the anti-death penalty campaign for the following reasons: 1. The majority of Singaporeans actually support the mandatory death penalty. According to a survey done by Think Center in 2001, an overwhelming 83% of Singaporeans have voted to retain the death penalty. (Source: AFP) Though the survey is done nearly a decade ago, the figures are unlikely to change much today. Not only will the opposition not gain any political mileage from the fruitless exercise, it may even incur the wrath of the public by campaigning for a punishment which may deem necessary. 2. The issue lacks public interest and appeal. Few Singaporeans know anything about the legal aspects of the mandatory death penalty let alone the interest to see it being abolished. Even fewer will become activists to exert pressure on the government. The opposition should be spending its limited resources on more pressing issues such as the relentless influx of foreigners, sky-rocketing HDB flat prices and the rising cost of living which Singaporeans are concerned about. 3. It will only provide the PAP with easy fodder to shoot them during the election by resorting to the usual fear-mongering tactics. As an example, Kenneth Jeyaretnam, the Secretary-General of the Reform Party, who went to lend support to the campaign may be attacked by a PAP leader as such: "You vote for Kenneth Jeyaretnam, he is a vocal supporter of the anti-death penalty campaign. If you vote Reform Party into power, they will abolish the death penalty and Singapore will become like Australia, where cannabis is freely available in the streets. Do you want to see your children smoking pot in college? Do you want the drug peddlers to sell heroin to your child?" Sounds familiar? The anti-death penalty campaign will not gain any public support and will fizzle out after a while. The opposition should not jump on the bandwagon for some cheap publicity and should focus solely on bread and butter issues which most Singaporeans are obsessed about.   Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.    Read More →