Could this be our very own, Baghdad Bob/Comical Ah Lee?
Thanks to Youtube
Monday, July 17, 2006
It is sad that this person holds such views and if you listen to the latter part of the interview, he seems to be completely out of touch with the reality. The column is a humour column. If MITA thinks that the rag stepped out of their play pen, the editors and management should be taken to task not the columnist.
It has been described many a times that the so called "main stream media" is a government mouthpiece. I think it is wrong. They are actually finger puppets. They do not have a body and all they have is a painted face with a non moving mouth (hey at least they have a mouth, Hello Kitty does not have it!). Every so often, these marionettes show an independent thought only to have the supporting finger withdrawn!
I am wondering what constitutes "main stream media"? If a publication is not supportive of the government script, will it be deems alternative and therefore non-main stream? So, if the Edge carried mrbrown's column, this turn of events would not have happened? My sense is that the "main stream media" is a red herring. mrbrown was being targeted because of the bak chor mee satire and this was an easy 1-2 punch. Could Mr TalkingCock.Com be next?
Sunday, July 16, 2006
Don't Cry My Singapore - don't let the PAPy harm you!
I am deeply concerned that this country of mine seems to be tottering on an increasing level of non-tolerance for opinion that is not an echo of the ruling regime. Case in point is the humour challenged response to mr brown's blog-to-paper posting. Clearly there is a tripping of fuses that were held back during the election scam. Wong Kan Seng (a deputy prime minister at that) was shown to be wanting to place eloquent questions against James Gomez which were all then satirically put together by mr brown in a podcast. The humour challenged honchos at the ministry of information management had to bite their tongue and did not do anything - were they perhaps waiting for an opportunity to swing at mr brown? His column must have served as fodder and they chose to launch an attack which cost him his column with the rag that published his column. I am certain in the circles that got stung by the bak chor mee podcast, they must have popped a bottle (or two) of champagne. Will CNetAsia suffer the same fate?
The ruling regime would like the population to believe that they cannot possibly contribute anything useful (lack of talent you see) and that there are only a few "local talent" who can do things and so they shall be piled with a lot roles (a certain investment arm ceo comes to mind). But, I have, on the other hand, confidence that Singaporeans are brilliant people (save for those brainwashed by PAPy) and here's an example of it (No, I have no idea what the song is about, save that it is in Chinese - Cantonese I think).
I am deeply concerned that this country of mine seems to be tottering on an increasing level of non-tolerance for opinion that is not an echo of the ruling regime. Case in point is the humour challenged response to mr brown's blog-to-paper posting. Clearly there is a tripping of fuses that were held back during the election scam. Wong Kan Seng (a deputy prime minister at that) was shown to be wanting to place eloquent questions against James Gomez which were all then satirically put together by mr brown in a podcast. The humour challenged honchos at the ministry of information management had to bite their tongue and did not do anything - were they perhaps waiting for an opportunity to swing at mr brown? His column must have served as fodder and they chose to launch an attack which cost him his column with the rag that published his column. I am certain in the circles that got stung by the bak chor mee podcast, they must have popped a bottle (or two) of champagne. Will CNetAsia suffer the same fate?
The ruling regime would like the population to believe that they cannot possibly contribute anything useful (lack of talent you see) and that there are only a few "local talent" who can do things and so they shall be piled with a lot roles (a certain investment arm ceo comes to mind). But, I have, on the other hand, confidence that Singaporeans are brilliant people (save for those brainwashed by PAPy) and here's an example of it (No, I have no idea what the song is about, save that it is in Chinese - Cantonese I think).
(courtesy of YouTube)
Stress more on sciences, less on second language
[The following appeared in the July 11, 2006 edition of the straits times]
I AM very glad to see the launch of the Research, Innovation and Enterprise Council. The council's deputy chairman, Dr Tony Tan, observed that efforts to create new job opportunities will need Singaporeans and it would be a shame if the posts have to be filled by more 'foreign talents'.
That is a very telling statement. Why is it that we are not creating more deep-thinking engineers, mathematicians, biologists, chemists and physicists?
For the answer, we need not look any further than the school system. Instead of spending time and effort in the hard sciences, engineering and mathematics, our students are spending large amounts of time on Second Language (euphemistically labeled 'Mother Tongue').
Take, for example, my son who is in Primary 3. He has 10 Second Language periods a week, while having only three Science, 11 Mathematics and 13 English periods.
I do not expect him to be a master linguist, but I do expect him to be able to maintain a level of competency in the Second Language he is learning (Malay, which is not even his 'mother' tongue). He is also learning Mandarin (outside school hours) at a conversational level because I think it is fun to learn languages in general.
However, I would want him to be able to spend a significantly increased amount of time, in school, doing Science/Mathematics (at the expense of reduced Second Language exposure) for that is what is going to be of more critical use to him than any second language.
I would, therefore, urge the Education Minister to review the disproportionate amount of time spent on Second Language and reallocate the time to the sciences immediately. At least, students should be offered a choice to do more sciences or Mathematics and less of Second Language.
The present one-size-fits- all model is untenable and I am sure the Ministry of Education is well aware of this.
I dream of seeing a Singaporean win a Nobel prize in my lifetime, but the current skewed emphasis on Second Language means that this is, at best, a pipe dream. Years of exposure to a scientific and enquiring environment is needed before it will pay dividends.
If a significant amount of time during the formative school years is taken up trying to cope with Second Language (and the additional tuition classes), I think we are fooling ourselves in believing that we can have the type of mindset that an innovating economy needs.
I am not advocating a total eradication of Second Language, but a significant rolling back of the emphasis, perhaps to the levels when I was in school from 1966-1977, during which Second Language ended at Secondary 4 and was not a criterion for the pursuit of further education.
Harish Pillay
[The following appeared in the July 11, 2006 edition of the straits times]
I AM very glad to see the launch of the Research, Innovation and Enterprise Council. The council's deputy chairman, Dr Tony Tan, observed that efforts to create new job opportunities will need Singaporeans and it would be a shame if the posts have to be filled by more 'foreign talents'.
That is a very telling statement. Why is it that we are not creating more deep-thinking engineers, mathematicians, biologists, chemists and physicists?
For the answer, we need not look any further than the school system. Instead of spending time and effort in the hard sciences, engineering and mathematics, our students are spending large amounts of time on Second Language (euphemistically labeled 'Mother Tongue').
Take, for example, my son who is in Primary 3. He has 10 Second Language periods a week, while having only three Science, 11 Mathematics and 13 English periods.
I do not expect him to be a master linguist, but I do expect him to be able to maintain a level of competency in the Second Language he is learning (Malay, which is not even his 'mother' tongue). He is also learning Mandarin (outside school hours) at a conversational level because I think it is fun to learn languages in general.
However, I would want him to be able to spend a significantly increased amount of time, in school, doing Science/Mathematics (at the expense of reduced Second Language exposure) for that is what is going to be of more critical use to him than any second language.
I would, therefore, urge the Education Minister to review the disproportionate amount of time spent on Second Language and reallocate the time to the sciences immediately. At least, students should be offered a choice to do more sciences or Mathematics and less of Second Language.
The present one-size-fits- all model is untenable and I am sure the Ministry of Education is well aware of this.
I dream of seeing a Singaporean win a Nobel prize in my lifetime, but the current skewed emphasis on Second Language means that this is, at best, a pipe dream. Years of exposure to a scientific and enquiring environment is needed before it will pay dividends.
If a significant amount of time during the formative school years is taken up trying to cope with Second Language (and the additional tuition classes), I think we are fooling ourselves in believing that we can have the type of mindset that an innovating economy needs.
I am not advocating a total eradication of Second Language, but a significant rolling back of the emphasis, perhaps to the levels when I was in school from 1966-1977, during which Second Language ended at Secondary 4 and was not a criterion for the pursuit of further education.
Harish Pillay
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)