Memorified Moments

Sunday, April 24, 2005

I've been called 'extremely cynical' by two different people in three days.

Not really sure whether I should be flattered or insulted. For one thing, I've always been thinking of myself as a skeptic. I know the price of everything, but trust me, I know the value very damned well.

After all, my backup plan if i fail to become a lawyer is to be a psychiatrist. Which involves knowing the value of, say, a sentimental necklace.

Besides, and it really pains me to admit, I'm really a fluff kind of person. (After all, you are the reason I live, you're my light in the dark, my fallen angel, my shining star. *Evil grinz*)

But then again, I really don't care for the value of things. Haha, I'm an idiot. That I know. And you're the shit on the road, the poo that smells, the grim reaper in the night, the messanger from hell.

I'm really stuck on these two phrases.

ANYWAY, I'm blogging. Sucks to Christabel. Y'know what she said? "Oh, I, unlike someone, blog everyday...Oh, 'cept the days that I don't."

Smart, chrissie-poo. I also blog everyday, cept the days that i don't. *grinz*

I realised that i actually know why Lee Hsien Long and his father are promoting chinese. Let's take a look at that guy's english: "Let me tell you about a controversial issue. It's quite a controversial one."

If we don't start being fluent in chinese, no one will understand him at the next rally or anything.

And since we're doing Freedom of Expression at the moment (S'pore govt. very stupid LEH. SO not observing FOE and still doing it for Social Studies. Oh, I mean, not observing foe HOR, still doing SS LOR. Haha, chatting to Lola has that kinda effects on people. She's so interested in Singlish she's mutilitating her proper engish for these lousy kinda thingies. Idiot.) lemme raise some points. After all, Singapore needs, 'as a government, to encourage participation and debate' (excerpts from PRIME MINISTER LEE HSIEN LOONG'S NATIONAL DAY RALLY 2004 SPEECH, SUNDAY 22 AUGUST 2004, AT THE UNIVERSITY CULTURAL CENTER, NUS. the above lousy english thingie also came from there.)

Lets start with the letter: Free speech venues may threaten order

The Sing govt says they agree that 'part of maturing as a society involves recognising the value of ideas, even when one disagrees vehemently with their source.'

Someone point out to our -oh-so-accepting-of-ideas government they conveniently forgot to mention that they would accept th value of ideas, even when they disagree with the idea (eg: Lee Hsien Loong is an idiot and cares more for himself than Singapore's welfare? Just an example, don't sue me. Can't blame my thoughts for taking that direction. JUST AN EXAMPLE. Take that, Lees!) itself.

'However, Singapore is a multi-racial and multi-religious society. Race, language and religion remain potential devisive fault lines which can lead to social unrest and low and order problems if not managed carefully.'

Ha, how to put it to you, hun (mind if i call you call you hun? Or do you prefer cat? Nevermind, hun), WE'VE ACCEPTED THAT WE'RE A MULTI RELIGIOUS COUNTRY. No one really cares or make big trouble about the forementioned three anymore. Wait a minute, is that all the arrested people jailed and fined for talking about these? NO! Good excuse, i have to admit, but not good enough. Anyone with enough brains can tell that it's a load of shit to shut people up.

'Speeches which are political in nature, or touch on race, language and religion, can elicit disaffection or highly emotional responses.'

Hohoho, let slip see. Disaffection: so does NOT mean discontent. No, the Home affairs Ministry is not referring to friction between races. Disaffection. Disaffection for who? Can't be our dear monarchy government can it? *Gasps! Shock! Scandal!* Lookie here, hun, do you mean that you're not going to let people have their say just because YOUR POSITION IN THE GOVERNMENT MAY BE THREATENED???

'Applicants, including opposition parties, have been routinely granted PELs for events at these venues.'

Oh dear, I really don't know what to say about this. Is your english so crappish that you're spewing your darkest and deepest secrets unintentionally, or is your english so crappish that you're spewing your darkest and deepest secrets unintentionally? 'Routinely granted'. Ha. Read that. 'Routinely granted'. Oh no, does it mean that these people are not granted the right to speak up because they're supposed to have these rights, but because it's a routine to win public support and explain to the public when the time comes?!? My dear government, you're REALLY slipping.

'They consider factors such as the proposed programme, nature of the speeches, suitability of the site and timing of the event.'

Where to start, where to start. Oh, this has absolutely too many goodies hidden inside. 'Proposed programme' - nothing to do with the government is allowed through, i suppose? 'Nature of the speeches' - Yep, it could mean race, language and religion. Could it also mean politics? My spectaculation, of course. This has absolutely no basis cept for my bias. I apologize.

Then here's the bomb: 'timing of the event'. Sincerely, I cannot think of a single time the government shouldn't be open to criticisms and ideas. Oh my gawd, they cannot mean ELECTION TIME, can they? As in, you know, the opposition raises valid points against the current government right before the election? Spectaculation again, yet this has much more basis. Tell me, dear, what other events can there be? My birthday?

'The police do not require the proposed speeches to be submitted with the application. There is no "prior censorship"'

Hun, of course there isn't. You've made the other points that need to be submitted thorough enough already. Anyone with a speck of a brain can figure out the rest. Say the form in filled in this way: 'the proposed programme: the government changes for the better', 'nature of the speeches: Political; opposition', timing: 'Chrissie-poo's birthday'. Are they going to agree? Well, THAT i don't know, though I bet everyone can read my mind at this time. Are they going to know the contents of the speeches? Hell, yes.

'A "Hyde Park" setting is not appropriate for discussion of serious issues. These are thoroughly debated in existing forums, such as parliament or the media. Dr Chee Soon Juan has received extensice coverage in the media. His problem is not inadequate publicity, but full exposure.'

That, i have to admit, was a smart move. However, your refusal to accept crits is too strong. It so totally overrules your excuses, both the pathetic and the good. For one, the opposition members in the Parliament make ah, how do i put it, routine trips to the jail whenever they talk bad about the Lee family et al. I was about the say 'We only have one point of view in the media, and that is FOR the government in the television, FOR the government in the newspapers, and BOTH in the newspaper forums, though the newspaper, which is FOR the government in the first place, has the right not to print out anything against the government when the little conveniently put there reminder stopped me in my tracks.

Yes, how do we explain Dr Chee Soon Juan's media attention? Simple. Firstly, Dr Chee Soon Juan made himself public. He screamed in public, raged in public, and basically gave the government a hard time in public. If the government tried to cover this up, there're be so much rumours (which spread pretty damned fast) and people will be like, "Oh my gosh, the government is covering this up. There's something going on." Besides, by the time the word got round to the rest of Singapore, there'll be so many distortions and who knows how the govt would look by then? Why not opt for the easier method of getting the media to report the govt's biased version of stuff and brainwash the citizens while at it? Furthermore, despite majority of the media being for the government, you get bet they'll lose support quickly if the govt refuses to let them public a matter so big as that. In the end, if they did that, the article will still be published, but you can just bet it wouldn't be for the government. Furthermore, and this is a sick (which is actually a slang for 'cool' overseas) trick whereupon journalists in newspapers frequently write rather controversial but never full-blown dangerous articles, for example, "Singapore females need to be more like other countries'". I'm not sure whether the govt actually planned this (but you gotta admit, much as I think Lee Hsien Loong is a bastard [his father made too many contributions for me to have that bad an opinion of him, I'm not THAT much an ingrate] he's gotta be smart to be able to quel the fire raging all these years for so long) Yet ANYWAY, be it intentional or not, we all know what will happen to the journalists if they shoot bullets at the government, especially since you have to put your name there. Smart trick, and effective. I doubt journalists will risk their career and freedom for such things. (Look at the article in our newspaper collection about 'Down with misguided self-censorship'.)

Dirty political tricks, yes, but what else can you expect when you have a country where adjacent Prime Ministers are father and son?

'we cannot put at risk the racial harmony and sense of public order, peace and safety built up painstakingly over the years. For this reason, we cannot support the setting up of "free-speech" venues.'

Darling, I'm not going to persuade you am I? For goodness sake, you probably can't tell the difference from the crap that comes from your mouth and the shit that comes from your ass. We Singaporeans, despite having cultivated Singlish, are a reasonable and cultured bunch. We won't set fire to buildings anymore. The current society the world is in won't allow us. There is little need to talk about 'peace and safety' cause you don't even allow us to have demonstrations. What crap, there's still loads of these going on overseas, and I bet they didn't have such a low FOE rating.The only thing you have to censor is talk about religion, race and language stuff. Stop caring so much about your face. If there's so much dirt that we HAVE to point it out, then you might as well not have that face and step down coz cuz, you don't deserve it.

Whew! Well, that was my rant for one article. There may be more to come, there may not. For the record, I say it here: If i were in the government, there'll probably be so much corruption I have to take the same measures. (Oh dear, really doesn't speak well of the current govt, does it?) But that's because I'm a selfish bitchy person. The government has no business being selfish and bitchy. If you wanna be selfish and bitchy like me, then don't become the government, LIKE ME.

Haha, I SOOOO rock.

Â -capture those moments ;