Police handcuff kids for safety reason


Overheard :

  • Reference – > Attorney-General’s Chambers
  • Section 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) (‘CPC’) requires a police officer or other person making an arrest, to actually touch or confine the body of the person to be arrested, unless there is a submission to the custody by word or action. If arrest is resisted, or an attempt made to evade the arrest, the officer may use all means necessary to effect the arrest. Where there is submission the use of force is not permitted.
    Simultaneously, s 28 of the CPC provides that the person arrested shall not be subjected to more restraint than is necessary to prevent his escape.

    The principle is clear:
    Restraint may be imposed where it is reasonably apprehended that the prisoner will attempt to escape. The restraint should be sufficient and necessary to prevent escape. Weapons may be used only against prisoners using violence or when the police officer has reasonable ground to believe that a police officer is in danger of life or limb or that grievous hurt is likely to be caused to him


  • Without any facts established, some “experts” already condemning the law enforcers.

Pre-judging before knowing the details does no one any good. It is especially bad for law enforcers. It will be a sad day when law enforcers begjn to do what they think the public expect of them instead of what they think is in the interest of the public.


to a fellow Singaporean, who hates PAP with a passion

Overheard  from Daniel Tan Boon Huat :

My thoughts and responses to a fellow Singaporean, who hates PAP with a passion,

For the record though, I know this govt is no super angel, anyone who thinks our govt is purist must have his or her head checked. In fact no govt in the world is.

I will never know whether this govt is truly the best until I see competition, and there are lots of talents out there who would not be seen near the alternative parties side with a 10feet pole, why?

Because it’s not credible, it’s monopolized with people mostly who sprout rubbish and make angry remarks all day long, they spit and twist on every single damn thing. This monopoly of hatred and anger attracts the fellow angry section of society but nothing more.

The majority of folks wish to make their mark in life, carve out careers, date in peace, get married, have kids, perhaps retire when old. If they have a credible alternative to support, maybe so.

Ask them to stand amongst people who curse and swear at everything under the sun related to PAP, it’s not going to be comfortable.

To the rest of would be topplers of the “PAP dynasty”, I suggest we take the credible path instead of trying to foster a all out revolution or spread by anger, it’s going to be messy.

I love my nation more than loyalty to ANY party, don’t tear it apart while fostering change, do so in a responsible manner, don’t cry and whine about playing field, life is never fair.

Play to win and if you lose, lose respectably. Be a good sport. Be passionate, dare to dream


image source : People’s Action Party


My Singapore, Good, Bad and the Ugly

Overheard :

My Singapore, Good, Bad and the Ugly

Singapore has been known for many achievements. The accolades are thick and there are reasons to have more. We are a success stories every nation big and small would like to emulate.

The word Success is synonymous to Singapore. Then again, we need to understand, Singapore is successful because we are a new nation, then. We have little or no history, there is no precedence. Our Curriculum Vitae is short, we are starting on a relatively clean slate. Then we have a brilliant artist, and his team, Mr Lee Kuan Yew and the first generation of cabinet ministers. They rose to the occasion and made this clean slate a masterpiece.

That doesn’t mean we have no failures. To have that much about of success under our belt, we must have failed even more. Just because we are Singapore, does not mean we are exempted from the cruel statistics, we have our fair share of failures.

The problem is, we let our success get to our head, we gloat over what we have achieved, and are actually resting on our laurels! And being Asian, compounded the problem, when we fail, we fail privately, sweep these embarrassing failures under the proverbial carpet. We celebrate our success, and only if we celebrate our failures just as much!

We don’t.

From young, we are not allowed to fail. From young, we are connecting fail equals to bad. And we keep pushing the future generation to greater heights of success. and if we are not able to, we do not acknowledge the failures of not being able to attain success.

The hindsight is missing, we’ve became a nation so bent on finding the next spark of success, that we failed to acknowledge the past struggles. Every National Day Parade paraded pretty much the same theme, our tumultuous past, our national building heritage, how our island nation was founded, the ever popular ‘Singapura’ theme. People are complaining staid. As staid as it may seem, it is part of national brainwashing, for a good cause. in those stories, lies the our foreparents’ insecurities about their future, their struggles, and their Failures, mistakes, and other errors. never once, was there an attempt to draw lessons from those experiences. Instead, we celebrate, and celebrate like crazy.

As our great, albeit young nation approaches 50, there will be more achievements, granted, much more failures, a lot more humble pies to eat. We need to bring this reality to our new population.

There is a general impression that Singapore have a bright shiny past, our history is magnificent, truth to the matter we have a checkered and dark story, not told, swept under the carpet of success. Many many countless faces and names have perished to make our nation great. Many countless funny, stupid, embarrassing mistakes has been made, where are they? Bringing them out, is not an exercise of exorcising the demons of our past, rather, it is an act of maturity as a nation, we can look at our past, with equanimity, for lessons, for teachings, not for forgiveness, or remembrance, we need to do that reflection, so that we can have a future forward as a greater, more matured nation.

However too many parents are not telling their kids why the NDP is done as such. Even though every theme every year is quite the same I make a point to tell my kids what we’ve gone through as a nation. And of course enjoy the fire works at the end of it! I love every bit of NDP.


images ->Singapore50




What Victor Lye has to say about WP Sylvia Lim and APEHTC (Worker Party)


AHPETC trade fairs are about greed, not about benefiting shopkeepers & residents in Hougang

In the 25 Dec 2014 ST article “WP-run Town Council fined $800 over unlicensed fair”, Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) Chairman, Ms Sylvia Lim said, “we are unable to organise activities to benefit residents and businesses in the area.”

Do not be fooled by this desperate playing of the “victim card”.  The record shows that AHPETC trade fairs have hurt shopkeepers due to high frequency and long duration.

Instead, Ms Lim revealed AHPETC’s true motive when she said, “The town council has also lost a source of revenue to manage its operations.”

It is very clear. AHPETC’s trade fairs are about money. It has little to do with benefiting residents and businesses in the area.

Here is the background.

After AHPETC was formed, it took over common property at Hougang Central and at Kovan where Hougang Mall and Heartland Mall are located respectively. Hougang and Kovan MRT stations there ensure good crowds. It became apparent to AHPETC that it could generate revenue by renting out common property for commercial activities.

The more frequent and the longer the duration, the more money AHPETC gets. AHPETC pockets money from the highest bidder with little risk. The trade fair organiser takes the risk because he has to sublet and rent out the stalls to cover what he paid AHPETC. The stalls often sold items similar to those of the surrounding HDB shopkeepers.

At first, Hougang HDB shopkeepers were friendly and tolerated. As the trade fairs became more frequent and longer,their businesses were affected. They became unhappy. When the shopkeepers complained, AHPETC staff called the police. The issue was reported by the press. AHPETC’s gravy train was derailed.

AHPETC does not want to be restricted from making money by renting out common property for commercial activities.

The NEA trade fair application form states that “consensus of shopkeepers” and/or “letter of support from the Citizens’ Consultative Committee (CCC)” are required, depending on where the fair is held.

The rules are meant to protect local shopkeepers against unfair competition and to balance community interests. Even trade fairs organised by grassroots organisations need approval from the authorities. There are self-imposed limits on frequency and duration with guidelines to minimise adverse effects and to benefit the community.

AHPETC questions the need for a letter of support from the CCC. This was not a show stopper for AHPETC’s earlier trade fairs. The CCC does not approve trade fairs. The National Environmental Agency (NEA) does. The CCC’s role is to assess if community interests are safeguarded. Nonetheless, the shopkeepers’ consensus appears paramount in the case of trade fair permit applications to the NEA.

In fact, AHPETC organised many trade fairs after it took office. It was not hampered at all. Truth is greed likely got the better of AHPETC. Its trade fairs became more frequent and longer in duration until the gravy train was derailed by angry shopkeepers.

How can AHPETC believe it is special and exempt from such checks and approvals?

AHPETC has cynically disregarded our laws and disrespected civil servants doing their duty. In chasing easy money, AHPETC trade fairs have hurt shopkeepers in Hougang. Based on AHPETC’s poor financial management, it appears that every two Aljunied households are paying for one other. Is there a shortfall of funds available to maintain the estate? Can Aljunied residents say the standard of cleanliness is as good as before?

In playing the “victim card”, Ms Lim has deviously failed to reveal that the CCC had given its support to the AHPETC trade fair in question. Yet AHPETC chose not to submit the application so that it could contest its case in court. Why?

AHPETC wants to challenge the checks and approvals required by law so that it can raise money freely using common property under its management.


The key questions to ask are:


  • Are town councils allowed to earn money by renting out common property for commercial activities?
  • Is AHPETC facing cash flow problems that it must raise funds, but for whom really, and for what purpose?

Thanks to Ms Lim’s revelation of AHPETC’s true motive, it is now of utmost public interest for AHPETC to disclose how much money it has generated from trade fairs held on common property, the number of trade fairs and the duration of each since it has been in charge.

When one says that “so what if Lim Chin Siong was a Communist”

Overheard :

The problem of “presentism” in Singapore’s historical debate

The storm that erupted when PM Lee talked about his visit to the Merger exhibition and his link to an open letter penned in response to Dr Poh Soo Kai makes for a most interesting case study in the discipline of history.

As usual, whenever the Government gives its version of history, it elicits a flurry of negative reactions.  Usually, you have on the one hand activists who know naught about history and just demolishes whatever the Government says by falling back on romantic ideals of human rights et al.  In truth, these activists do not care about whether Lim Chin Siong is a proxy of the violent Communist Party of Malaya. To quote Teo Soh Lung’s rather child-like argument, “But honestly, I don’t care if Lim Chin Siong was a communist or a CPM member. After all, the PAP does lots of business with communist Russia and China.” 

They do not care about Merger, Separation or historical accuracy for that matter. They constantly harp on the need for government to declassify its records and from there, they assume that some great wrong committed will be revealed and hence, demand a COI to seek redress for past detainees and ultimately remove the ISA. As a prominent socio-political website often claims, “As it stands, releasing the official documents of the secret branch would be the surest way of verifying this fact,” and ” it would be in the best interest of the government to open official documents”. 

But where do these activists get the idea of declassifying records from?  Behind these activists, there are actually some historians who were really the ones who started this historiographical debate by arguing that either there was no Communist threat in Singapore in the 1950s and 1960s or that this threat was inflated.  These historians actually did cite from declassified records by the British government which makes some sense since Singapore was in effect, ruled by the British until 1963.  These records did show doubt by some administrators of the extent of communist threat in Singapore then.  But the Government cleverly also cited from the same declassified British records of a shift in the administrators’ positions with regard to the Communist threat.  What’s more is, there are primary source materials of the Malayan Communist leaders at that time, who themselves profess to instigating violence, riots and political subversion to achieve a communist state.

That’s why, when you see the responses to PM Lee’s attempt at teaching history, you hear only the activists voices most clearly; simply because they are not historians and do not know or care that a fait accompli has been achieved.  When an activist says declassify all records, what does he mean? It is actually an empty call.  Even the CIA redacts sensitive information from what they declassify.  Does declassifying records mean that great wrongs will be found?  I am afraid not. And if wrongs are not found but justifications found, what happens then?  The activist will just accept meekly? Or perhaps they will say that some of these documents are forged?

This is the problem when “presentism” seeps into the study of history.  It tends to blind objectivity.  When one says that “so what if Lim Chin Siong was a Communist”, it is clear as day to those who study history that it is a statement with great ramifications.  Today, admitting that you are a communist makes you a harmless laughing stock; but in the 1950s/60s, if one was a Communist, one was a terrorist, supporter, sympathizer of terrorism and a criminal.  There is no “so what”. 

It’s a very slippery slope and therefore the historians who really started this debate, have been very smart to stay in the sidelines, preferring to use the activists to fight their cause. The activists are not historians, they do not profess to be and they do not need to put forth sound arguments backed by sources. Romantic, emotive arguments and ideas are what move the present internet. 

But what about the historians watching this show, of their own doing, unfurl?  What are their intentions?  Are they truly noble and seeking historical truth or are they just seeking, like the activists, to redress present political concerns?


  Lee Hsien Loong   <-link
20 December 2014

I visited the Battle for Merger exhibition in October. This was the book of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s radio talks in 1961, explaining what the fight against the Communists was about, and why Singapore needed Merger with Malaya. 

The Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) was a violent, illegal organisation. So it operated secretly, underground. But the Communists infiltrated open, legal organisations like trade unions, student associations and political parties. These supported the Communist cause, but denied that they themselves were Communist. Mr Lee exposed this Communist united front tactic.

I took these photos of a fascinating exhibit: a pair of original handwritten documents. One was a trade union document, signed 林清祥 Lim Chin Siong. He was the leader of the Barisan Sosialis, the main open front political party. The other was a Communist study cell document, signed 王明 Wang Ming. The handwriting was identical. In fact Wang Ming was Lim Chin Siong’s party name; Communist cadres took party names to conceal their real identities. So Lim Chin Siong was a Communist, and the Barisan Sosialis was Communist controlled.

This was more than 50 years ago. Many old Communist and pro-Communist activists have reconciled with their past, and become good citizens. But a few hard core ones still deny these historical facts. They don’t want to admit that they had fought on the wrong side, and that luckily for Singapore they lost. Some “revisionist” historians make this argument too. One motivation: cast doubt on the legitimacy of the PAP government, not just in the 1960s, but today.

The British have been declassifying documents from their archives in London, and making them available to the public. Also senior CPM leaders like Chin Peng, Eu Chooi Yip, Fong Chong Pik (aka the Plen) and others have published memoirs. Their first person accounts, like the British documents, confirm the extent of the Communist united front in Singapore, and leave no doubt that the Barisan was formed at the instigation of the CPM, and that Lim Chin Siong was a Communist cadre.

We have put together an account using evidence from the British archives as well as CPM sources, which confirm that Mr Lee Kuan Yew told the truth. Here it is, for your weekend reading – > Reponse to Poh Soo Kai’s allegations

 http://bit.ly/16BGul3 – LHL


(Photo by me)


Reponse to Poh Soo Kai’s allegations

How oppressive hor?

Overheard :


Huh? So this is one of the “heroes” purportedly voicing out the grievances of the people against an oppressive PAP? 

Just thinking out loud. Don’t look quite the underdog to me. Wonder what’s the PAP done to him or his family and what qualified him to be a mouthpiece for the “people”?

Or is this a restless youth trying to do a “popular” thing? I hear it is now quite popular to slam PAP. If you slam, you must be right. You must be a hero.

Irony is that “the Courts controlled by the oppressive PAP” (i.e. what dudes who love to slam the PAP often say… which, for the avoidance of doubt, I disagree completely) is considering probation to rehabilitate this “hero”. 

How oppressive hor?


One of five Toa Payoh vandalism suspects pleads guilty


SINGAPORE – One of five youths allegedly involved in a rooftop graffiti case in Toa Payoh in May pleaded guilty yesterday (Dec 24) to theft and criminal trespass.

David William Graaskov, 18, pleaded guilty to three of the six charges he was facing.

He admitted to stealing four cans of spray paint from a lorry on May 6 along with four others – Goh Rong Liang, Boaz Koh Wen Jie, Reagan Tan Chang Zhi and Chay Nam Shen.

His four accomplices allegedly used the cans to spray profanities against the People’s Action Party and the police along the rooftop of Block 85A at Toa Payoh Lorong 4.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Tang Shangjun told the court that while Graaskov had agreed to take part in defacing the rooftop, he “realised it was getting late” and took the bus home at about 11.50pm that night and was not there when the spray painting took place.

The unemployed man also pleaded guilty to trespassing at the rooftop area of Marina Bay Suites in March and into a construction site at Jalan Rajah between October and December of 2013.

Three other charges – including trespassing onto the same Toa Payoh rooftop and stealing a $5 reflective vest from there – were taken into consideration.

If found guilty of theft, Graaskov could be jailed for up to three years’ jail and fined. For trespassing, he faces up to three months’ jail and a fine of up to S$1,500, or both.

The other four youths are due to appear in court next month. CHANNEL NEWSASIA

Source link – > One of five Toa Payoh vandalism suspects pleads guilty






Stay calm and united, not divide or destroy our society- PM Lee

  Lee Hsien Loong  <-

I am saddened by the loss of innocent lives in the Sydney hostage taking. I had just held a briefing with our community and religious leaders on extremist terrorism last month. We talked about how it remained a live threat to us, and in particular the danger of self-radicalisation.

This incident teaches us to keep up our guard. Despite all our precautions, we can never completely rule out such an incident here. If it ever happens, we need the cohesion and resilience to deal with it calmly and as one united people, and not let it divide or destroy our society. – LHL



Singapore stands in solidarity with Australia: PM Lee

Source : Todayonline link ->Singapore stands in solidarity with Australia: PM Lee

Excerpt : 


16 December 2014

Dear Prime Minister Abbott,

I have followed news of the hostage incident in Sydney with great concern. The hostage taker has committed an abominable crime, invoked the name of Islam in vain, and perpetrated an affront to all civilised societies. The incident reminds us of the threat that terrorism and extremism, and in particular the danger of self-radicalisation, pose to all societies.

The Australian police and officials acted with great professionalism in dealing with a very difficult situation. I am deeply saddened by the tragic loss of innocent lives and injuries in the final outcome.  But I have no doubt that they did what they needed to do, and helped to save many lives.

On behalf of the Government and people of Singapore, I offer our deepest condolences to the victims and their loved ones. Singapore stands in solidarity with Australia.

Yours sincerely

Lee Hsien Loong


Overheard :

  • I am ashamed of how my religion has become a tool for vicious criminal acts. These acts of violence are not condoned in Islam and I hope people will see that many muslims do not support such deranged acts. I hope the people of Syndey stay safe and that this incident will not spark further hate. Having originated from a country of ethnic violence, I understand all too well the implications of isolated hate crimes. May such things never happen here.

You and the majority of Muslim people have NOTHING to be ashamed of. The acts of a minority sect of your religion does not define the majority of your religion. If anything, hold your head high and let the world know that the Muslim community unites together with the world, to stand against such horrible acts of terror. I stand with you.


  • The first step is to know yr neighbours. Getting engaged in lively conversation will disperse
    doubts and suspicions. My two Neighbours are from Mynmar and India.I am a practising Muslim.We knew each other backgrounds. So if this network of communication
    spreads across all living quarters in Singapore it will serve as a safety net. What we need is a vigilante population. Our Govt is On the alert. We have a pro-active Religious council from every faith. 
    As Singaporeans with the right frame of mind we conduct our lives peacefully. ONLY those with mental cracks chose to live otherwise. For this, protect us ALLAH (in my case) GOD, JESUS, BUDDHA LORD SHIVA…etc..depending on yr beliefs.


  • When we are too vigilant, people say we kiasu, when we slack a little n things happen, the people question the authority why they ‘slack’…outsiders commented we are too up tight…but safety is something we can’t just slack because we want freedom in this and that…freedom comes with a price…you have to choose what price you are willing to pay for the freedom you want…


  • To my Muslim friends and fellow Singaporeans, rest assured that there will be zero tolerance towards discrimination against the religion or anyone. These individuals with their radical extremist ideas do not represent all of Islam and all Muslims. Like wise, those of other religions who discriminate against Islam do not represent the majority. We are all Singaporeans, all citizens of a world we live in together. We will stand hand in hand against terrorists threats as a nation united, regardless or race, language, or religion!


  • I am living in Australia and I am appreciative how religious tolerance were taught back during my school days in Singapore. Religion must never be used to propagate a political motive nor must it be twisted to push a personal agenda. What happened in Sydney is a lone gunman using a distorted view of his religion to create terror and sorrow among people.


  • 反恐之心不可无也!也提醒国人同心合意的重要,以及时时建立反恐意识!同时更不忘我们的内政群英,你们的每日辛劳,我们才能得以安眠,在反恐工作,你们功不可抹!


  • Singapore preaches acceptance and there is greater interaction among the various races who grew up together. We are sensible enough to see this as separate from Islam.


  • Good day,my fellow Singaporeans,
    Let’s us stay united as one nation and be caring and helpful to one another regardless of race or religion.
    Our government are always on top of all major national issues to maintain peace and order for the nation.
    We as citizens need to co operate with them by being proactive and vigilant to keep the country safe, stable and peaceful at all time.



Members of the Australian Muslim community pray after placing floral tributes amongst thousands of others near the Lindt cafe, where hostages were held for over 16 hours, in central Sydney Dec 16, 2014. Photo: Reuters