The identity of “swine flu”

The identity of “swine flu”

They call it “swine flu,” but it is the exact same virus as the “Spanish flu,” the influenza A virus strain of subtype H1N1, or A/H1N1, which killed 50 million.

This is the exact same virus which caused the influenza epidemic that swept the world in 1918 killed an estimated 50 million people. One fifth of the world’s population was attacked by this deadly virus. Within months, it had killed more people than any other illness in recorded history.

Some victims died within hours of their first symptoms. Others succumbed after a few days; their lungs filled with fluid and they suffocated to death.

The term “swine flu” is being used to avoid panic among the public. This may not be a good idea, as an informed populace will have a better chance of survival.

The Associated Press has been spreading the false propaganda that the current outbreak is the H1N1 virus, which is a dangerous lie. The US Center for Disease control confirms that we are being attacked by the A/H1V1 virus, which was the same virus as in the 1918 Pandemic (Wikipedia).

The world population in 1918 was about 1.8 billion. Today it is about 6.5 billion. In 1918 3.6% of the world’s population died from Spanish flu. 3.6% of today’s global population is 234 million.

Mexico has only about 1 million anti-viral doses for its 90 million people. The U.S. has refused to state its capacity to treat the pandemic.

Mexico is questioning the origin of the viral outbreak, which occurred immediately after U.S. President Obama’s visit to that country. Was the virus unleashed to kill off the Mexican drug traders? In any event, now that the deadly virus is “out of the bottle” its deadly wind is spreading around the world like a cyclone.

We are in the Great Pandemic of 2009.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28014.1

Why you should not cancel your DBS cards because of Josie Lau

Why you should not cancel your DBS cards because of Josie Lau

Led by Mr Wang, it seems quite a few people are cancelling their DBS cards and services.

I actually think that this move is neither justified nor prudent.

It is not justified because DBS is not in any way involved with Josie Lau's private life. Over last year's Focus on the Family brouhaha, a case could be made for boycotting DBS, because it was a corporate decision (even if it was silly to assume that everything a religious group did would be religiously-tainted), but what Josie Lau does in her free time should not concern DBS.

Furthering the logic of endangering the jobs of people whose actions you disagree with, one could do the same to people whose opinions you disagreed with (e.g. racists, misogynists, homophobes and the whole shebang) and in so doing, effectively criminalise thoughtcrime (in contrast, Operation Leper has the lesser aim of ensuring the group of 9 are not "appointed to future leadership posts in politics, voluntary/social welfare groups, and NGOs"). Ironically one could imagine, not so long ago, that it was those who were seen as gay or gay-friendly who would have their jobs threatened, but the moral here seems to be that it's okay as long as you're the one doing it - and not the one it's being done to.

Furthermore, a boycott is a very blunt tool indeed. If I oppose Israel's colonization of the West Bank, is a boycott of Israeli products the best way for me to express my displeasure, especially considering the wonky Israeli political system which gives minority parties a lot of political power (i.e. a majority of Israelis might be in favour of dismantling settlements)? In the urge to make a political point, lots of innocent people are affected; this puts me in mind of the old file sharing site Putfile (which seems to have been taken over by ebaumsworld) which, in protest of hanging, blocked Singaporean IP addresses from accessing it until "any positive move from the government of Singapore towards abolition of hanging as an execution method".

Meanwhile, it is not prudent because it just makes gays and gay-supporters look bad - spiteful and angry, and plays into the hands of the anti-gay lobby.

Even worse, the attempt to force a clash between work and personal life is a spectacular own goal for the cause of civil society since, if enough people cancel their DBS cards and services, DBS and other organizations are going to enact even stricter policies about their staff serving various causes outside the organization, even in their personal capacities.

The end result?

Gays and gay-supporters look bad and the pool of individuals active in civil society shrinks (as if it wasn't already small enough)

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.95

Civil Engagement in a Civil Society

Civil Engagement in a Civil Society

A lot has happened over the AWARE saga, and because of exams, I have not been able to do a commentary on it. Not that there would be a lot for me to say, every possible angle has been thoroughly canvassed by the bloggosphere and media. It is really quite clear that I do not support the new exco after them using such shady methods and knowing their background. I do not find my confidence in them bolstered after the revelation that Dr Thio Su-Mien is behind it. I have already had a run-in with her daughter, Dr Thio Li-Ann before, as some people would remember - and while I disagreed with her and found her remarks in parliament insulting, I was one of the first ones to stand up and say that she should not be fired or receive death threats because of what she said. My principles, or stance, have not changed. I believe, and still believe, in civil, dignified debate, not name-calling or personal attacks.

So, whoever send that death threat to the new exco - cut it out. You are making us look bad. While I have strong doubts about the veracity of the said death threat, or even any real intention, I am going to treat it as real for the purposes of this discussion, and repeat, once again, that no one, NO ONE, should be doing anything remotely despicable. Having said that (and this is directed at you, new exco) receiving death threats does not make your cause a noble one (Harvey Milk got death threats on a regular basis, and I doubt you are going to agree his cause is noble).

Secondly, as to Josie Lau’s job. I have absolutely no idea what DBS is doing to her position, and frankly, I don’t care. While the revelation that she is the one who led DBS-FOTF linkup is infuriating but not surprising, I believe that issue has already been dealt with and buried. DBS has learned its lesson. But this new saga really has nothing to do with them. I know some of us already cancelled our DBS accounts after the FOTF saga - and now there is a new call from Mr Wang to cancel our DBS cards so that Josie can get fired.

I have to say, this is not a strategy I am comfortable with, or will ever endorse. Boycotting a business that might support an anti-gay cause is one thing, but trying to target it at a person is not acceptable unless she’s a mass murderer/fraudster etc.

Josie is as much as human being as the rest of us, and she has a family to support too - two kids, in fact. She has the full right to have a career and do things outside this career, and express her own views. As do any of us. How would any of you like to be fired because you supported a gay cause? What if all the fundies called in and boycotted the business/company you worked for, just to get you fired? Her job performance has nothing to do with her beliefs - DBS can decide whether to keep her on or not.

I will not, and cannot, endorse such a blunt tool tactic. That’s going too far. Not to mention it will only backfire on us, because we are going to look petty and undignified. Let’s try to do justice to YawningBread’s assertion that we are a mature bunch on this issue.

Not to mention I do not want to hear the new exco play the victim again. It is kind of getting tiring, really. Morever, when they play the victim, they avoid the real issues and hard questions. They are already good at that, lets not give them more opportunities.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.93

Civil Engagement in a Civil Society

Civil Engagement in a Civil Society

A lot has happened over the AWARE saga, and because of exams, I have not been able to do a commentary on it. Not that there would be a lot for me to say, every possible angle has been thoroughly canvassed by the bloggosphere and media. It is really quite clear that I do not support the new exco after them using such shady methods and knowing their background. I do not find my confidence in them bolstered after the revelation that Dr Thio Su-Mien is behind it. I have already had a run-in with her daughter, Dr Thio Li-Ann before, as some people would remember - and while I disagreed with her and found her remarks in parliament insulting, I was one of the first ones to stand up and say that she should not be fired or receive death threats because of what she said. My principles, or stance, have not changed. I believe, and still believe, in civil, dignified debate, not name-calling or personal attacks.

So, whoever send that death threat to the new exco - cut it out. You are making us look bad. While I have strong doubts about the veracity of the said death threat, or even any real intention, I am going to treat it as real for the purposes of this discussion, and repeat, once again, that no one, NO ONE, should be doing anything remotely despicable. Having said that (and this is directed at you, new exco) receiving death threats does not make your cause a noble one (Harvey Milk got death threats on a regular basis, and I doubt you are going to agree his cause is noble).

Secondly, as to Josie Lau’s job. I have absolutely no idea what DBS is doing to her position, and frankly, I don’t care. While the revelation that she is the one who led DBS-FOTF linkup is infuriating but not surprising, I believe that issue has already been dealt with and buried. DBS has learned its lesson. But this new saga really has nothing to do with them. I know some of us already cancelled our DBS accounts after the FOTF saga - and now there is a new call from Mr Wang to cancel our DBS cards so that Josie can get fired.

I have to say, this is not a strategy I am comfortable with, or will ever endorse. Boycotting a business that might support an anti-gay cause is one thing, but trying to target it at a person is not acceptable unless she’s a mass murderer/fraudster etc.

Josie is as much as human being as the rest of us, and she has a family to support too - two kids, in fact. She has the full right to have a career and do things outside this career, and express her own views. As do any of us. How would any of you like to be fired because you supported a gay cause? What if all the fundies called in and boycotted the business/company you worked for, just to get you fired? Her job performance has nothing to do with her beliefs - DBS can decide whether to keep her on or not.

I will not, and cannot, endorse such a blunt tool tactic. That’s going too far. Not to mention it will only backfire on us, because we are going to look petty and undignified. Let’s try to do justice to YawningBread’s assertion that we are a mature bunch on this issue.

Not to mention I do not want to hear the new exco play the victim again. It is kind of getting tiring, really. Morever, when they play the victim, they avoid the real issues and hard questions. They are already good at that, lets not give them more opportunities.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.93

Better to convince, and not impose your views

Better to convince, and not impose your views

Yeah, I know everyone’s sick of reading about the AWARE saga in Singapore. Me too. I thought it was all pretty futile and the whole blogosphere has gone nuts about it. See the massive number of blog posts on this one topic, with everyone dishing out their two cents on the matter.

In a nutshell, here’s what happened. Encouraged by their female mentor who was upset by the increasingly pro-lesbian agenda of AWARE, a bunch of females made an aggressive takeover of the female-focused civil society organization, kicking out the old guard overnight with a co-ordinated electoral strategy. Half the island goes nuts because the new guard refused to reveal their agenda, and the other half goes nuts because they’ve never understood what AWARE was about. Heated exchanges in the press, death threats, police reports and changing of locks ensue, and you can bet this is the most publicity AWARE has ever gotten in its two decades of existence.

Everyone has their idea on why the whole saga matters, but let’s face it, the raw nerve was touched when two camps fought over the issue of homosexuality.

This is an incredibly divisive issue, and nobody really likes to discuss it in public, no matter which country you’re in. But the fight came boiling out into the open and things were made worse when the church was dragged into it (most the new guard belong to the same church).

Now let’s get one thing straight first (no pun intended) – anyone who truly believes in Jesus Christ knows that God opposes homosexuality. The Bible states it several times, the clearest being 1 Corinthians 6:

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

This decree by God upsets people to no end, be they Christians with gay friends or the whole gay community. As Christians, our dilemma when we work and play in the secular world is “how do we state our stand here to our friends and families? We don’t want to be criticised. We don’t want labels like homophobic or bigot.”.

After all, to state upfront that you do not support this sort of lifestyle immediately elicits two major responses from many people: You’re intolerant or you’re ignorant. Never mind that the majority of Singaporeans remain in the conservative camp and keep to themselves on such matters.

The churches here also mostly keep silent on the matter, leaving it to sermons on the pulpit and refusing to comment on the recent AWARE debacle. The last time a church openly stated its stand on this, it received a lot of backlash (but the church didn’t stand down).

The Gahmen too, has tried to divert attention from the religious and homosexual angle by stating the whole saga was more a matter of poor communication. Christian politicians have also kept silent to prevent fanning more flames.

But let’s call a spade a spade, and this is where the new exco of AWARE didn’t anticipate when they decided to bring our beliefs Bible into the secular space. They were stunned by the level of hostility brought upon them, and I must say getting a death threat was most unexpected by everyone, including myself.

I write this post for fellow believers, and will probably get flamed. But there are some things I really feel a need to speak out on with regards to our faith:

1. The Bible’s stand on many difficult issues is crystal clear – we need not be apologetic for it. But you don’t contest the world on its own terms because we have to detach ourselves from it. The secular world demands tolerance for all beliefs, otherwise Christians will have to spend a lot of time going after other religions.

The worst label people and fellow Christians can give a person is a “fundamentalist”, because it implies a dogged insistence on a skewed agenda. But believing and acting on the words of Christ do not make you a fundamentalist – it is when you reject all other points of view and refuse to listen to believers and non-believers alike that you become intolerant in the worst possible way.

This is one of the reasons why there are so many denominations of churches today and why I simply refuse to be called “Baptist”, “Methodist”, “Bible-Presbyterian”, “Anglican” or whatever. I’m just a Christian, and I believe in God’s Word, plain and simple. If you want to speak in tongues, fine, but I can’t. Doesn’t mean I won’t see you in Heaven, bro. In the past decade, I’ve seen a respected pastor kicked out of his own church he founded because he just became too dogmatic and refused to see it.

George Bush claimed he was a born-again Christian but created death and destruction of many Muslims through war and torture methods. What kind of role model is he for believers? Let God deal with the world as He sees fit, but we do good where we can. (Proverbs 3:27)

Tolerance is a virtue in itself, as it helps us to control our tongue from creating further damage. (I wish I can remember this on a daily basis!). I may not agree with the lifestyles of other people, but what better way of convincing them than trying to lead the life God asks me to?

2. Practice what you preach, but imposing your views on others is not the way to go. When I was young and didn’t believe in Christ, I was most upset by the “holy-moly” ACS classmates or teachers who insisted on telling me I was going to hell if I didn’t believe. It only increased my resistance to Christ because it was shoving doctrine down my throat. Only by God’s grace did I hear and understand his message when I was older.

AWARE’s new exco had a clear agenda from the start (as revealed by their internal emails that the press pounced upon) but refused to come clean during their aggressive takeover. As Christians, why should we be afraid to lay the facts down when asked what we are doing in the public space? What is upsetting now is that the new Exco keeps claiming it remains secular in its focus when all evidence as dragged up by the media points otherwise. This just puts the majority of Christians – who are always prime fodder for criticism and derision – in further bad light.

3. Why go to extremes?

Ecclesiastes 7:16-18 has the verse which sticks in my mind all the time and is very applicable in this instance.

Do not be overrighteous,
neither be overwise—
why destroy yourself?

Do not be overwicked,
and do not be a fool—
why die before your time?

It is good to grasp the one
and not let go of the other.
The man who fears God will avoid all extremes

Was there a less abrasive way of stating the Bible’s stand on homosexuality than taking over a high-profile secular civil-society group? Look at the secular world today – it is drenched in love for materialism, for power, for money…not very different from the days of Sodom and Gomorrah actually. We grapple with the same sins and influences our forefathers did..the good fight continues daily in the physical and spiritual world.

But as Christian parents, our job is to guide our children through the inevitable morass of sin out there. NOT to block all incoming signals, but to teach them God’s ways.

I am not advocating inertia and passivity – but instructing our children in the way to go so they will not waver when they grow up. When was the last time you tried to tell another parent how to bring up his kid? Surely you would have been told to mind your own business.

The AWARE saga has been a public airing of poor public relations, poor people management and resulted in unnecessary hostile labelling of Christians in the public sphere. The society will be tainted for a long time by everyone’s poor handling of the crisis. Trials and tribulations are part of the package when you bear the cross, but what happens if the new exco failed to get its original message across?

If we were to be truly objective, all Christians are bigots in the eyes of the world because we reject the world utterly for what it is. We tolerate the world because we have to live through this physical stage as we look to an eternity with Christ. But then again, Jesus came down among the masses to spread his message, hung around prostitutes and hated tax-collectors, and showed those who would listen that God truly loved the world.

You can call a person a homophobic, which implies he fears gays. But no, Christians are not homophobic because we simply reject the lifestyle, not the person. Such hostile labels don’t help when they stick and is not rebutted against in a clear and honest manner.

My bottomline is – if we want to fight for what we believe in, how can we do it with love and not aggression? How can we get the respect and understanding of the secular world for the things we do? Honestly, only God has the answers and we need to ask for them.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.83

Aware: I am a Liberal

I am a Liberal

The recent AWARE issue has shown how the conservatives are now going on the offensive. I am very much against their stand. Basically they think that homosexuality is immoral and should not be 'encouraged', and that gay activists have a long term agenda they are pursuing that goes beyond repealing certain laws.

What we need to recognize is that 'encourage' is the wrong word to use here. Gays are starting off from a position of being discriminated against, and all that gay activists want to do is to remove these discrimination. The key word here is 'discrimination'. Does removing discrimination constitute encouragement?

Homosexuality to me is a neutral word - just like what colour I like. A fact of life, personal orientation, no moral overtones. What's there to encourage? Not like it is a courtesy movement, where there is a broader social good to be achieved.

Also, does encouragement work? Does it mean I will change my sexual orientation if someone encourages me to? It's like food - I dont like to eat pig liver and no amount of encouragement will persuade me to have a bite. It doesnt matter if it's environmental conditioning or biological.

What these people are doing is they want to perpetuate discrimination, so as to 'discourage' people from being gay. Again using my food argument - does it work? People who are gay are gay, and people who are not are not!

And the government? It always say that as a responsible government, it will make some decisions even if it will cost them some votes. But it has been hands off on the gay discrimination issue, . Either there are significant conservative forces in the govt, or they simply dont care. Why bother upsetting voters for such a minority issue of no great consequence to the nation.

The government has preached acceptance on the part of the conservatives, and moderation in pursuing their rights for the gay activists, warning that gay activists risk facing a backlash from a largely conservative society.

Are we largely conservative? Anyway acceptance is not the same as non discrimination. And as long as there remains the belief that homosexuality is immoral or disgusting, discrimination cannot be eliminated (can still remain in psychological form even if laws are changed), and only acceptance can be achieved.

I understand that discrimination can never be rooted out. What I hope to see though is a world where discrimination is criticized and recognized as contemptible in public opinion. Would Thio Li Ann and friends have gotten away if they talked about racial discrimination rather than gay discrimination? Yet both are the same and fundamentally contemptible. There was a time where slavery, gender discrimination and colonialization were not viewed as immoral, and I hope gay discrimination will go the same way and gradually be recognized as abhorring in time to come.

It is very timely that I am reading Conscience of a Liberal by Paul Krugman now. I would like to see how these conservatives move their agenda forward. Maybe they can take a leaf from the Republicans, but I dont think they will succeed. Unlike the hippies generation in America where there was rising crime rate and stuff, or in Europe where immigrants from Eastern Europe led to rising support for racists, dont think there's much happening in Singapore that will contribute to a rising tide of support for the conservatives and their anti-gay stance.

Hope I'm right.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.81

Aware: What do they want?

What do they want?

The truth about Aware’s takeover came out in the papers. JL lied to the press that the takeover was not planned but TSM revealed at a press conference held at Raffles Town Club that she was the “feminist mentor” who has been instigating all these behind the scene all the while. She even claimed to know the founders of Aware, and her reason for stepping in is because she believes that Aware has strayed from its founding principles. However, all these were also debunked by the real founders of Aware, who maintained that TSM was never known as a “feminist mentor” and neither was she known or acquainted to the founders in any way.

Lying through their teeth surely makes them lose a lot of public favour. Even for those who don’t have a stand in this matter, who’re just merely sitting on the fence and watching the fight all along, could very much swing over to the old guards’ side. Just why, why did they lie so openly? Were they too stupid to think of the consequences, or is there a greater agenda behind the lies?

I would say, the women we’re dealing with here are not stupid. They may be blinded by their fundamentalist interpretation of the holy book but they are not stupid. They all hail from high society, with doctorates and high corporate positions and all, and are definitely capable of planning a simple battle like this. So I believe all these, what seem to be careless public faux pas, are also part of their orchestration to achieve what they really want.

But just what do they really want? I don’t know for sure. But it’s likely that they’ve decided that they don’t even need the support from the moderate public. If you look at the public as a spectrum stretching from the highly conservative to the highly liberal, I suspect they are trying to recruit the highly conservative through this. The conservatives are always at a more advantageous position in policy decision. When deciding on policies, the government only bothers to look at how conservative the general public is, without caring too much about the liberals because the liberals are expected to be able to adapt. The repeal 377a saga showed that the collective power of the conservatives is strong – so strong that our PM and MM can only talk about their beliefs on why 377a should go, but still nothing can be done about it because “we’re still a largely conservative society”.

Rationally thinking, with most of the decision makers in the new Aware attending the same church, and having replaced the center manager with someone who also attends that church, it is tempting to think that Aware is turning into a subsidiary of COOS. But what’s the deal? There is a huge implication on society in general for COOS to wield so much power in an organisation as influential as Aware. For those who don’t know about COOS’ stand on issues as basic as “family”, feel free to click on the link to take a look. They have a very misogynistic view on family. They believe that the man is the head of the family and a wife should be subordinate to her husband just as her husband is subordinate to god. And they define the head of every woman as her man. How feminist can someone who believes in this be? How fit would such beliefs guide the operations of an organisation which supports women’s rights?

What I believe is that they intend to shape Singapore into their biblical society, as a pastor from COOS once said, he wants “a nation of righteous Christians”. Apparently, COOS’ agenda is clear. They want to take over this nation and merge their religion with our politics. This is dangerous, but they have already taken the first step with Aware, to brainwash whoever they can touch and transform the layman’s belief system into their misogynistic interpretation of “family”. This, they believe is in accordance to their god and thus, good. And this, they also believe is the essence of “pro-women, pro-family and pro-Singapore”.

From this, it seems easy to understand why they chose to err so publicly. They don’t need support from the moderates. Neither do they need support from the liberals. They only need the conservatives. They have a trump card in hand – homosexuality. Every conservative person is against homosexuality. By maligning the old Aware to have been pro-homosexuality, they are gathering a lot of empathy from the conservatives. If nothing more, the conservatives want one thing to be done – to get formal mention of “homosexuality” out of the classroom so that their offspring will not be led into thinking that being gay or lesbian is okay. That is their wish and the new Aware will be more than willing to help them achieve this dream.

So I wish for my message to go out to all the atheists or non-Christians out there who want Singapore to stay secular. Join in the fight to reverse this takeover before COOS takes over all other civil societies one by one until they have full control over our social structure and public beliefs. We need secularity, and the first battle against our secularity has already begun with the ascension of the COOS members into Aware’s Exco.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.80