Only 4o minutes disruption lah!

Why we should no longer read the 150th-ranked nation-building main-stream media:

Channelnewsasia.com:

"The disruption began at 6am, and lasted just 40 minutes. But trains were delayed for more than five hours as a result of the disruption....

Kong Simi Lan Jiao?

Truly not worth the toilet paper it was written on!

Guess: which TWO politicans?

Politician A, in 1984:

I am not worried whether the new admission policy will lessen the chances of children of non-graduate mothers not getting the schools of their choice. The main problem is whether the policy will have any significant effect on graduate mothers wanting to have more children."

"I will certainly support any move which will help to reverse this trend [of graduate mothers not having their 'fair share of children']. So, in my view, the [graduate mother] priority scheme is worth a try."

Politician B, in 2011:

"I fought against the Graduate Mothers Scheme. I persuaded my colleagues that it was unfair to put the children of mothers without university degrees at a disadvantage. I got the policy changed."

Question: Who's that bastard politician A who was "not worried" about the unfairness ("lessen the chance of") of the Graduate Mother Scheme, and who thought it was "worth a try"?

Question: Who's that heroic politician B who "fought against" the unfairness and "persuaded" others that it was unfair?



Answer: who else, but (again!!!), that very same man who "face thick thick", is now everyday busily (passively) shaking the hands of fishmongers and saving fainting children (on camera), desperately hoping that such comical last-minute manoeuvre can help fool Singaporeans.

Meet Tony Tan, Politician A.

Meet Tony Tan, Politician B.

That's right - there are no "TWO politicians".

Just one - a double-headed snake with forked tongue!

This man had done nothing of positive significance at the Ministry of Education or any other ministry he headed!

He has no record to back him up! He is desperate for some credentials! And that's what a desperate man does: lie through his teeth!


At the flick of his forked tongue, he can switch history around to suit his convenience:
- from an asshole who was "not worried", to a hero who "fought against"!
- from a piece of shit who would "certainly support", to a savior who "got the policy changed".

Is he suffering from multiple personality disorder?

No lah! He is very sane; A sane, desperate politician, fighting and lying, so as to live in a super-huge mansion called Istana, with $4,000,000 per year for 6 years, all for doing nothing!

Is this the kind of person whose photo you want your children to look up to, in the school hall everyday?

SAY NO TO TONY TAN!

You and I deserve better! We are not paying peanuts; We should not be getting a monkey (or a double-headed snake!)

We deserve an honest, fair and active president who intends to do lots of work and has a mission to fulfill! Such a person will be worth the money we pay him.

That man is Tan Jee Say.

Tan Jee Say, HO SAY!
陈如斯，好势！

Who said: "FOOLISH ENOUGH to build MRT"?

On the one hand, we had President Ong Teng Cheong (then Minister of Communication):

"The MRT is much more than a transport investment, and must be viewed in its wider economic perspective. The boost it'll provide to long term investors' confidence, the multiplier effect and how MRT will lead to the enhancement of the intrinsic value of Singapore's real estate are spin-offs that cannot be ignored."
- 28 March 1982

"The MRT will usher in a new phase in Singapore's development and bring about a better life for all of us."

On the other hand, we had a "visionary" Minister who went out of his way to deliberately, publicly, and rudely slam President Ong - the chief advocate for the MRT system - as being "FOOLISH ENOUGH":

"The construction industry has become over-heated and if Singapore were to be foolish enough to want to build its proposed mass rapid transit (MRT) system now, it will find itself in trouble."
- Forum on economic affairs at NUS, 17 December 1981.

Question: So, who was this "visionary" Minister who was not as "foolish enough" as President Ong?



Answer: Who else, but (again!) that very same man who "face thick thick", is now everyday busily (passively) shaking the hands of fishmongers and saving fainting children (on camera), desperately hoping that such comical last-minute manoeuvre can help him to get $4,000,000 per year as our President.

Meet Tony Tan, the "not-foolish-enough" Minister for Trade and Industry in 1981.

Yes, this is the same Tony Tan whose forecast that Singapore had too many university graduate went wrong (again!), and whose forecast that pumping billions of dollars into failed western banks is good investment went wrong (again!)

Oh, by the way, when he made that wrong forecast on education, he was the Minister for Education.

When he made that wrong forecast on investment, he was in charge of GIC.

And yes, you guessed it, when he made that wrong forecast on the impact of MRT on the construction industry, he was the Minister for Trade and Industry!

Just what's wrong with this Minister? 他妈的，he made the wrong forecast in every ministry he headed and when he had finally done enough screwing up all these ministries, he went right into the "private" sector (i.e. GIC) and immediately proceed to lose billions of dollars of our CPF money!

Is this the kind of President you want?

Not me.

I am not "foolish enough" to want to listen to any of his Presidential "visions"!

More importantly, I am not "foolish enough" to vote him to let him scold me; Notice that President Ong Teng Cheong was then his colleague in the cabinet and yet, despite having already had the opportunity to counter Mr. Ong privately during cabinet meetings, he was not contented. No, not enough! He had to 'suan' his colleague publicly and make sure the "nation-building" newspaper reported on it!

So, do you think he will have any problem labelling you - an ordinary citizen - as "foolish enough", when he becomes the President.

His good friend LKY has already called you "daft". Not enough meh? You want to be called "foolish enough" next?



So, Singapore did "foolishly enough" went ahead with the MRT construction. Did Singapore "find itself in trouble"?

The VERY ANGRY minister for trade and industry

President Ong Teng Cheong
(Asiaweek, March 10, 2000):

in January 1986 I did sanction a strike, the first for about a decade. It was in the shipping industry where the management was taking advantage of the workers.

I did not even tell the cabinet about sanctioning the strike. And some of them were angry with me about that. The minister for trade and industry was very angry, his officers were very upset. They had calls from America, asking what happened to Singapore? -- we are non-strike.

I said: if I were to inform the cabinet or the government they would probably stop me from going ahead with the strike.

It only lasted two days. Then all the issues were settled. It showed that management was just trying to pull a fast one. So I believe what I did was right.

So, who was this "very angry" Minister for Trade and industry, who could not be bothered with solving the exploitation of Singapore workers, and whose interest and concern was with protecting a management which was "taking advantage of the workers"?



Answer: The very same man who is now busy (passively) shaking the hands of fishmongers and saving fainting children (on camera), desperately hoping that such comical last-minute manoeuvre can help hide his true colour from voters!

Meet Tony Tan, the very angry Minister for Trade and Industry in January 1986, who now wants us to pay him $4,000,000 per year as our President!

Is this the kind of President you want?

Someone whose interest is aligned with unscrupulous employers who demand cheap foreign workers and/or obedient work-till-you-drop-dead Singapore workers?

Someone who will become "very angry" if Singaporean workers refuse to be exploited?

Someone who will never, ever, speak up for ordinary Singapore workers like you and me?

Please think carefully:
Which of the 4 "Tan, Tan, Tan, Tan" is most likely able - and willing - to continue the unfinished work of President Ong Teng Cheong?

Perhaps the following "How to vote 101" video will help?

No NS deferment for postgrad degree

The Straits Times
4th Sept 2001
NS deferment limits set for fairness
(Young-pap: though the date of this letter is 2001, it is talking about things that happened in 1993, which is exactly the time period we are interested in)

I REFER to the letter, “Inflexible policies could lead to brain drain” (ST, Aug 23), by Dr Ronald Paul Ng.

The Ministry of Defence (Mindef) understands the desire of Singaporean males to pursue their university studies prior to national service (NS) enlistment.

However, this has to be balanced with the duty to serve NS.

For Dr Ng’s son, Mindef had exercised flexibility by granting him deferment from NS to pursue his overseas undergraduate studies.

However, there is a limit to how long a person’s NS obligations can reasonably be deferred when others in his cohort have already been enlisted and some have even completed their NS.

In our universal conscription system where equity is a key tenet, Mindef has to apply its policies fairly and consistently.

When Dr Ng applied for NS deferment for his son in 1993, he was aware that further NS deferment could not be granted for his son to pursue a postgraduate degree after his undergraduate studies, and had agreed to this in writing.

COLONEL BERNARD TOH
Director Public Affairs Ministry of Defence

Indeed, "how long [can] a person’s NS obligations reasonably be deferred"?

Well, the answer clearly depends on who "a person" is.

If "a person" is a nobody, then 3 to 4 years is a reasonable period.

But if "a person" happens to be Patrick Tan Boon Ooi, son of Minister Tony Tan Keng Yam, 12 years is a reasonable period!


Oh, by the way:

The Straits Times
14th August 2006
Mindef lets violin prodigy defer NS

Violin prodigy Ike See, 17, will get to study at the prestigious Curtis Institute of Music in the United States after all.

The talented youngster, who was twice turned down by the Defence Ministry (Mindef) when he applied to defer national service training to pursue a three-year course, has opted for a two-year diploma programme instead.

He will leave for Philadelphia late this month to make it in time for the institute’s placement examinations, which decide which classes he will attend. His studies are fully paid for by a Curtis scholarship, but his family will have to post a bond of more than $75,000 for the NS deferment.

Ike’s music career was the subject of much debate in May, when Mindef rejected an appeal to defer his military training until after his university studies.

Mindef’s position was that it allowed students to attain educational qualifications up to A levels, polytechnic diplomas, or their equivalent, before requiring them to do national service. Deferments to pursue university studies were granted only under very exceptional circumstances, and such cases were rare and could be considered only for ‘exceptionally strong reasons’.

Mindef maintained that allowing Ike to defer his NS would have been unfair to others who put their personal aspirations and goals on hold to serve NS. There is no change in this position.

Colonel Benedict Lim, Mindef’s director of public affairs, explained that, in the latest appeal, Ike had sought deferment for a two-year diploma programme, which Mindef had assessed to be a non-degree course that is equivalent to GCE A levels or a polytechnic diploma.
.....

What a fool Ike See is!

Instead of downgrading from a 3-year bachelor degree to a 2-year diploma, he should have done the opposite: upgrade to a 12-year PhD cum MA cum BA package!

That will ensure his success in getting a deferment.

After all, there is precedent in the form of Minister Tony Tan Keng Yam's son - Patrick Tan Boon Ooi, who was granted a 12-year disruption from NS for his PhD cum MD cum BA studies.

And as we all know from the 1st letter, "In our universal conscription system where equity is a key tenet, Mindef has to apply its policies fairly and consistently."

Tony Tan for President?

He will have to Tan ku ku (wait long long) for my vote!

Political joke of the year!

Joker Lee Kuan Yew speaking at NTUC's 50th anniversary celebrations and dinner on 13 May 2011

"In government, I have never forgotten that it is in the interest of the workers and their unions that we must strive for growth and development.

"In other words, growth is meaningless unless it is shared by the workers - shared not only directly in wage increases but indirectly in better homes, better schools, better hospitals, better playing fields and, generally, a healthier environment for families to bring up their children."

This must be the biggest joke of the year!

Here's the man who pushed for GDP growth at all cost, who defended the import of foreigners because according to him, GDP growth will slow down without such massive import, and who specifically said that he is not concerned at all with Singapore's almost-world-record GINI coefficient!

And mind you, he said all these only a few months ago!

Maybe this is what the Chinese called: 老頑童

(Old man behaves like little boy! And as we know, mischievous little boys love lying!)

Then again, it may be an omen: 人之將死，其言也善

(A person who is about to die will start talking good)

The price for being ARROGANT

Emperor Yeo:

"Remember your place in society before you engage in political debate... Debate cannot generate into a free-for-all where no distinction is made between the senior and junior party... You must make distinctions - What is high, what is low, what is above, what is below, and then within this, we can have a debate, we can have a discussion... people should not take on those in authority as 'equals'
[video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4tUBcyC8co]

Cynthia Phua:

'Who are you? What are you doing? Why aren't you working?'... The mother said she wanted to explain her son's condition (low IQ, attends special school, has blood disorder), but wasn't given a chance. 'I felt like we were being scolded,' she said. The meeting ended after two or three minutes

Lim Hwee Hua:

'I made it very clear to (the mother) that this is unacceptable behaviour. It is not justifiable in any circumstance. There's no excuse to be violent,' Mrs Lim told The New Paper.

She also explained that she was not in a position to excuse or forgive the boy (who has low IQ. attends a special school and suffers from thalassemia, a blood disorder that renders him weak and sickly, and who has already written an apology letter:

'Please fodgive me for what I dad I am sinelely truely I'm sorry (sic),' the teenager had written in big, neat handwriting.)

What arrogance!

Well, I guess the three of them now have 5 years to repent! Repent for treating citizens like peasants and pests!

But, it's more than just arrogance:

Geroge Yeo was the minister responsible for reviewing our health and legal sector in the early 1990s and his conclusion then - published in some white paper - was that we have way too many doctors and lawyers! He debated the medical and legal fraternity and insisted that he was right, specifically that

(paraphrased) "the more doctors we have, the more expensive medical cost is going to be, because the health sector is unique and does not follow the usual market commonsense that greater supply = cheaper product."

But he was unable to explain his anti-commonsense "health sector is unique" argument, thereby frustrating the medical fraternity, especially the doctors in public hospitals and polyclinics, who were clearly overworked and stressed out.

He was the one who cut medical school admission from 200+ to 150 per year, and heavily restricted foreign medical school qualification to less than 10 universities.

Fast-forward to 10 years later, we have so few doctors that we were forced to double medical school admission to 300 - heavily straining resources at NUS medical faculty and the teaching hospitals - and to now accept more than 100 foreign medical schools. Most of these doctors - from India, Myanmar and China - cannot communicate with our senior citizens in dialect / Malay / Tamil and yes, English! Many need to rely on busy nurses doubling up as untrained translators, to understand the symptoms of patients!

A pair of doctors from Myanmar and India was responsible for causing a death at our public hospital when they failed to do a chest tube procedure properly. I am sure there are many other cases which were not reported by our "nation-building" press.

Meanwhile it was reported in the newspapers in 2010 that most Singaporeans who went overseas for their medical degree refused to return to Singapore! That's a severe brain drain (for the past 20 years and continuing) coupled with insufficient doctors in Singapore (for the past 20 years and continuing)!

As for lawyers, the AG office has been lamenting for years that we do not have enough lawyers, and a new law school had to be opened at SMU to, hopefully, redress the situation in a few years time. Meanwhile, the new medical school at NTU, is still in the planning stage!

So, 20 years of insufficient doctors and lawyers. All because of George Yeo and please be reminded, the situation is still not remedied, and will NOT be remedied - unless you think importing foreign doctors who cannot speak local languages and who are not familiar with diseases that are prevalent locally and who are less well-trained than local doctors (NUS has just been ranked the number 1 medical school in Asia) - can be called a remedy?

So, George Yeo, I say: Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish!

And btw, I want to see if George Yeo and Lim Hwee Hua can earn multi-million dollars in their new private sector jobs. Let's see for ourselves if Bargain Hen was correct to say that we got our ministers at a bargain because they can earn much more in the private sector.

Please don't let me catch the two of you hiding behind some pathetic excuses of wanting to retire to spend more time with families. For then, we Singaporeans will all know the truth: PAP ministers are not worth their million-dollar salaries. PAP's justification for their $X,000,000 salary is nothing more than a greedy attempt to LeeGALISE CORRUPTION.

GE2011: Many years from now...

“Many years from now, your grandchildren will ask you: Did you do your part for Singapore in Aljunied?”

- Workers’ Party’s Chen Show Mao, in WP's final rally speech on Thursday, 5 May 2011

If you support EMPEROR Yeo

...please be prepared to be an eunuch, for that's what he has demanded:

So, ask yourself, voters of Aljunied:

• Are you prepared to have your ah gong, ah ma, spouse, children and grandchildren all kow-tow and kneel down to an Emperor?
• Are you prepared to turn Singapore from a democratic republic to a dynastic monarchy?

Because that's what Emperor Yeo implied and that's who Emperor Yeo thinks he is: Your Emperor! Only an emperor would dare to make such demands of his subject. No where on this earth does a politician do that!

So, are you prepared to castrate your children to bow down to his royal highness's demand that you remember your place in society before talking to him?

IS THIS THE KIND OF MAN / MP / POLITICIAN / EMPEROR YOU WANT FOR YOUR FAMIILY?

GE2011: 1 picture = 1000 words

The "creative" photograph (by the "nation-building" whore-paper):

The inconvenient truth:

GE2011: STOP WASTING SALIVA - Just 1 Qn is ENOUGH!

ARE YOU BETTER OFF

THAN YOU WERE

4 YEARS AGO?

现在的生活，

比四年前更好吗？

If you think this blog post makes sense, PLEASE, forward it to your friends and family members!

Working for Singapore does not mean standing up for elections only.

Even behind the scene, we can do our part for our country!

Majulah Singapura!

URGENT ADVICE NEEDED: Should I sack my maid?

I need your urgent advice about employing a maid. As a busy mother, I need someone reliable to help out at home.

My maid is from Profits Agency Pte (PAP) and she has worked for me for a long time. Her mother worked for my parents and did an excellent job, so I had faith in her. For several years her performance has been very good, but recently she has become arrogant and insensitive, and is making lots of mistakes.

For example:
1) She flooded my kitchen – she told me that the drain pipe has blocked (she was supposed to clear it once a month but didn’t). Then she assured me that it is very rare (once in 50 yrs) and won’t happen again in the near future. Guess what? It flooded again within a year!

2) She didn’t close a window and my terrier dog escaped. I was so worried cos he is dangerous and could bite lots of people. After the incident, she didn’t apologise and just shrugged her shoulders saying “What to do, it has happened.” Fortunately my neighbor found the dog and we locked it up again.

3) Without consulting me, she has been bringing in strangers for my house's maintenance work. She says they charge low wages and keep costs down, but they eat my food, make a lot of noise and rest on my bed. I think they even tried to seduce my husband. It stopped feeling like my home, more like a cheap hotel, and I don’t always want to come back at the end of the day.

4) When she first came to work for me, I instructed her to clean the different parts of the house at least once a week. But for some time she has stopped taking care of the bedrooms of PP and H; they are now dirty and messy. I asked why and she told me that the kids had been disobedient, so she was neglecting their bedrooms as a punishment (she has forgotten that she is paid to clean all the rooms).

Even though my maid has worked for me for many years and I value what she has done in the past, I think she is now getting complacent. Her attitude is imperious and dismissive. She ignores my comments and basically treats my feedback as "noise". I wrote to the agency about her behavior; they assured me that they are the best agency around and all their maids are “Commited to Serve” – but I think it is just rhetoric and I don’t see that in her actions. Her salary is much higher than maids in other countries, but the agency say this is to keep her honest and stop her moving to another employer. They say there is a limited supply of maids, and isn’t big enough for more than one good maid agency, so I should not trust their competitors.

I have to decide whether to renew my maid’s 5-year employment contract. When we discussed this she said that she is now part of a team, and if I want her I must also accept her friends doing part-time work for me. One friend is very inexperienced, can't do basic tasks or explain what she intends to do. I suspect that she is actually underage. When interviewed, she only seemed interested in her days-off and visiting Universal Studios. When she couldn't answer my questions she stomped her foot and exclaimed, "I don't know what to say!" But I am still expected to pay her a high salary.

Now there happens to be a few other maid agencies - Workhard Pte (WP), New Solutions Pte (NSP), Super Personnel Pte (SPP) and Star Domestica Pte (SDP) - that offered me some helpers who seem sincere, genuine and intelligent. They are keen to work, willing to assist me and have a good attitude. I know that they may take a bit of time to learn how everything works, but frankly I am inclined to give them a chance.

People say that the devil you know is better than one you don’t. But I feel that I can’t tahan my current maid anymore. Do you think I should sack my current maid and try out a new one?

-------------------------

I didn't write this.
Copied it from the internet.
If you like it, please disseminate it widely - I do not think the author of the post will mind.

First Hokkien 2011 Electoral Speech

If you care about Singapore, you should show this video to your Hokkien-speaking family members - right now!

Because this video not only conveys important messages in Hokkien, but more importantly, it helps dispel some not-so-nice notion about SDP that PAP has managed to instill in the minds of dialect-speaking Singaporeans who do not access the English-based internet.



So what are you waiting for? Get your family members in front of your computer right now!

Lion Dance Banned in Singapore!

That's right: soon, lion dance may be banned in Singapore!

Far-fetched?

Not really!

Today, we are already witnessing our fellow Hindu Singaporeans being bullied and forced to give up their traditional way of celebrating Thaipusam. And what do we - non-Hindus - do? Nothing!

Tomorrow, it will be Chinese Singaporeans' turn! It is not far-fetched at all that some people will come along and complain about the noise generated by the lion dance troupes, and force the government to ban lion dance during Chinese New Year! And what will non-Chinese Singaporeans do at that time? Nothing!

And the day after tomorrow, it will be Malay Singaporeans' turn: Malay drums to be banned during Malay weddings! And what will non-Malays do at that time? Nothing!

And so, with this kind of attitude - each of us minding our own business, unless and until some policy affects us in a personal way - slowly every race in Singapore is bullied and one by one, forced to give up on its tradition and culture.

Not far-fetched at all!

For 45 years since our independence:

• Thaipusam has always been celebrated with loud music, gongs and drums.
• Chinese New Year has always been celebrated with loud lion dance performances.
• Malay Weddings have always been celebrated with loud drumming

All these years, did anyone complain?

No!

But now, suddenly, for the first time ever since independence, someone complained - and complained so much - that the authorities decided to give in to them and chose to ban our local traditional celebration.

Who are the "residents of new homes along the procession’s 4km route from Serangoon Road to Tank Road"?

Native Singaporeans or new immigrants from ____, unfamiliar and unwilling to appreciate our local culture (but expecting us to "integrate" and "show respect" to their culture instead)?

And now that I have written this piece, what is going to happen to me? Get arrested under the Sedition Act, just in time before lion dance is banned in the upcoming Chinese New Year? Who is the one that is really causing disharmony and ill-feelings among the different races/religious groups in Singapore - the person who bans tradition which generate "noise" for just 1 out of 365 days (during the day time, btw), or the person who highlight the banning?

To the "residents of new homes along the procession’s 4km route from Serangoon Road to Tank Road", I say to you:

Fuck you! This is Singapore and this is how we have been living since 1965 and this is how we will continue to live, for as long as Singapore is an independent country: we will celebrate our multi-racial, multi-religion society with its varied and yes, loud, celebration. So if you are not happy, fuck off and get out of Singapore! Because we will not change ourselves to "integrate" with you! You should be the one adapting and accommodating.

(And that's assuming you are not from Singapore. If you are, wake up your cheebye idea: Thaipusam has always been celebrated like that since you were a baby! You, as a native Singaporean, don't know meh? If you cannot even tahan loud Indian music for one day (during the day-time), why the fuck you go buy a house along that stretch of road? You never watch how Thaipusam was celebrated on TV before meh?

If you can't even tolerate a traditional Singapore festival for 1 of out 365 days (and it's not at 10pm, but 10am!), you shouldn't be living in Singapore, because apart from Thaipusam, we also have Chinese New Year's lion dance, and Malay wedding drums, and Chinese traditional funeral - all of which occur on more days than the one-day Thaipusam! You better go live in some mono-race, mono-religion country which hopefully will celebrate its mono-culture without any loud music or drumming or street parades, or fireworks!)

The Straits Times
Friday, January 7, 2011
Thaipusam set to turn down volume
New guidelines ban traditional loud music and drumming from the annual procession
By Yen Feng

This year’s Thaipusam celebrations will be a quieter affair if guidelines made public for the first time on Thursday by the Hindu Endowments Board (HEB) are enforced.
Those participating in the procession on Jan 19 and 20 are barred from playing recorded music or sounding gongs or drums.

Traditionally, the music – often played at a deafening volume – is seen as encouragement for those who pierce their bodies as an act of faith. Now, only the singing of hymns will be permitted.

Other rules include no shouting, and no paint or makeup to be used on either the devotees’ faces or bodies. Those who flout the rules may be barred from future processions – or face a fine of up to $5,000 under the Public Order Act.

And for the first time, spike or chariot kavadi bearers are required to nominate a representative who will be responsible for their conduct.

The HEB said the rules mirrored guidelines set by the police for permits to hold Thaipusam celebrations. But they were put together for the first time this year for the public to address long-standing issues of crowd and noise control, officials from the two temples organising the procession said.

The temples are the Sri Srinivasa Perumal Temple in Serangoon Road, and the Sri Thendayuthapani Temple in Tank Road. Sri Srinivasa Perumal Temple chairman K. Rajandeeran said the move would not compromise the procession’s religious nature, and would “ensure public safety and that it takes place in an orderly manner”.

Every year, tens of thousands of Hindus take to the streets to give their thanks to Lord Murugan, an important Hindu deity. Sometimes, expatriates unfamiliar with HEB guidelines have joined in.

Last year a 10-year-old visitor from India was seen carrying a spiked kavadi – wood or metal structures fied onto devotees’ bodies – when only those above 16 are allowed to pierce their bodies.

Mr K. Kannappan, trustee of the Sri Thendayuthapani Temple, said residents of new homes along the procession’s 4km route from Serangoon Road to Tank Road complained about the noise last year. “So this year, we will be better neighbours,” he added.

The rules evoked mixed reactions among devotees, with Mr Raj Kumra, 34, who walked in last year’s procession, saying they are a dampener. “The music, the sounds, all that is part of celebrating Thaipusam. It’s our way of giving thanks for our blessings,” he said.

But they will not mean much to Mr Sankar Suppiah, 40, a devotee who has carried a kavadi for the last 20 years. He said: “This is a powerful religious experience for me. I do it for myself, for my family. Rules do not change that.”

Before any non-Hindus reading this dismiss this issue as "trivial", imagine how you will feel if your Chinese lion dance / Malay wedding drums etc is banned! How would you feel then?

Today, we don't speak up for them.
Tomorrow, it will be our turn.
Singaporeans should stand up for each other, regardless of race, language or religion!

And no, that's NOT a highfalutin ideal.
That's our National Pledge!