Perhaps, that explains why Singapore’s economy and political state is in such dire straits.

They forgot who they serve.

When he was asked the question, he actually made a very valid point because there are two different perspectives of the crisis depending on where one was standing and he is able to put on two different pairs of lenses.

Vivian Balakrishnan is not your ordinary Singaporean and if you get to talk to him, you should try to get HIS perspectives – and he is telling you he has two. You want the perspective of the ordinary Singaporean, you just go down to the kopi tiam and ask an ah pek lah.

What have they been teaching you in the Political Science Department? I’m seriously unimpressed.

I believe what these brotherhood folk may be try to say here is this; if you come into a new neighborhood and you start to impose your beliefs on others, then how far do you think, you are going to go?

Personally, I don’t think that statement concerning credibility was warranted or even required.

If you want people not to be anon, just tell them your requirement and criteria. You dont even have to give them a reason. This is after all your project, you have every right but please dont preach and attempt to impose your understanding on others, where I come from, civilized people consider it rude and inconsiderate.

As it is this is a very bad start. You will all need plenty of luck.

Many thanks.

I have already sent a copy to the brotherhood. They will act accordingly perhaps to even cancel the final report to AIMs, I hope not, but if they do, the Enquirer will be famous, I think.

I reserve the right to disagree with you.

http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2008/10/message-and-messenger.html

There is no logic to your statement and I formally challenge you on its merits.

I have also forwarded this to the brotherhood.