However, the damage was done, Aliya started crying, ‘Ma, they want me to leave the plane because of how I look??…’. I hugged Aliya and held her tight. My older daughter also started crying, saying, ‘Ma, how could they say all that? It was not fair. How could they do this to Aliya?’ I had no answer.
To be fair, the government’s reaction was prompted by a genuine concern for cybersecurity. In the news, the agency spearheading this move seems to be the Cyber Security Agency (CSA). Speaking at a briefing with the press yesterday, CSA’s chief executive Mr David Koh addressed the media and revealed that the government has been the target of up to 16 waves of cyber attacks since last April.
Being straightforward offends many people, but it’s hard to lie when you’ve been taught not to. Honesty is a trait that isn’t really valued much. When I think I’m being considerate by asking a question or doing something extra, it is sometimes met by suspicion and offence. But consideration for others is something we’ve been taught too. So conflicting.
Pasting stickers, drawing cartoons, releasing a comic book, interviewing SMRT drivers, posting on Facebook on Cooling-off Day, are all apparently deemed more serious than the EIGHT Hepatitis C deaths in a hospital.
Closer to home, on 8 June the Straits Times reported that from May next year, “Web surfing can be done only on the employees’ personal tablets or mobile phones as these devices do not have access to government e-mail systems.” The emphasis on government email systems leaves little doubt regarding Hillary Clinton’s influence on this domestic policy shift.
Since we are on the topic, why not ban all public servants from using the internet altogether. After all, these public servants are walking repositories of the government’s secrets! They need to be kept under lock and key. So no Facebook, no personal emails, no internet, nothing!
In this case, the pitch forks have come out, but for what cause? To demonize bad behaviour and teach that arrogant woman a lesson? That’s probably part of the reason, but before we rush to join the mob, maybe we should give some thought to how we can use our energy for the betterment of the very people we claim to protect, that is, the poor, the elderly and the disabled.
One would submit that the post by FAP was made to discredit Dr Chee – using the political credibility of Dr Tan – and to gain political advantage for the PAP candidate on Polling Day itself. And thus, the question is raised: Why is the Elections Department not taking the FAP page owners to task, in the same way it has taken others to task?
The recent closure of a particular film production company has left a group of local freelance film crew frustrated and upset because none of them have been paid for X number of jobs. While I understand that this is an unfortunate situation, I believe something needs to be done for this group of skilled professionals who are not protected by any union or association.
What’s disturbing to me is the way the man behaved: is this the way an “educated expat” should be? And did he forget he’s a guest, not a privileged scion here in a country where it’s all about meritocracy, not entitlements?