If Trump unravel and dismantle the Finanical regulations to manage the bank in US ---- it will be doing US and the World a disfavor - by unloading another global financial crisis down the road.
'Not true' that ministerial committee is bent on preventing demolition of Lee Kuan Yew's home: DPM Teo
Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/not-true-that-ministerial-committee-is-bent-on-preventing-8982560
Peeling
the onion approach - layer by layer - require patience, objectivity,
calmness, iteration ---- will help to narrow the gap - without needing
to stoke emotion and let temper fly.
Eventually both sides will come to a mid-point - where both sides can accept.
This is the Middle Path approach of dispute resolution - known as the "onion peeling approach".
The
key to be able to come this "adult-to-adult" method of dispute
resolution --- is to "Break the taboo" - the "unwavering determination
to demolish" ---- "the fear of Legacy".
And how to
"break the taboo" ---- is to comprehensively, thoroughly, pervasively -
match and even exceed the justifications of demolish as oppose to
preserve ---- by overcoming without any doubts on "the fear of Legacy".
The stature of Mr Lee KY provide an insurmountable challenge to overcome the taboo.
Only when this can be done - will break down the siblings challenges - to adopt the "Middle Path - onion peeling approach" to dispute resolution.
And of course, the latent unsaid surrounding this "taboo" is "leadership succession - the 5th Generation".
By
separating the "Heritage" justification with "Legacy fear" --- is the
key to break the resistance - as they will become 2 separate entity.
In future, this Oxley House is all about "Heritage" & "Meritocracy" - this will have break Mr Lee KY's fear and taboo.
"Meritocracy" will ensure the continue survival and future prosperity. "Heritage"
is useful to reinforce this ideal - as Singapore's success is anchor on
"Meritorcacy" temper with "Compassion" with the foundation based on
"No-Self (Selfless)".
And Wisdom, Compassion anchor on No-Self ---- is the key for Singapore continuous survival and future prosperity.
These 3 attributes will be the 3 Cardinal Values of Future Leadership.
This is Mr Lee Kuan Yew's inherent "Heritage" - that must be preserved.
大地万法唯 "心" 造。 由因缘而生。 由因缘而灭。 ----
Everything that is build that now form the Singapore - arise from the
"心" (the Heart) --- which is Mr Lee Kuan Yew's Heritage of 3 attributes
:- (1) Meritocracy (of His Wisdom) (2) Compassion (3) anchor on "Selfless" attribute
Mr Lee Kuan Yew in Oxley House once declare :- "Today this is a Marshland (0 - zero development). 10 years down the road, we will make this a cosmopolitan city - a developed Nation". From (0) zero - to today's Modern Singapore.
Thus
the "O"xley House - represent "Emptiness" from Mr Lee Kuan Yew's Heart
"心" - with 3 Leadership attributes - build today's Singapore. Literal interpretation of the above "Chinese Zen" - Everything in Singapore we build, arise from the Heart. When condition arise, it appear and everything can be build. When condition vanish, everything demise.
REALLY, DO WE WANT TO DEMOLISH "OXLEY HOUSE" - our this very precious Heritage?
Chinese Premier Li Keqiang accepts invitation to make official visit to Singapore Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/chinese-premier-li-keqiang-accepts-invitation-to-make-official-8981972 (Updated:)
We've never asked Govt to let us demolish 38 Oxley Road house now: Lee Hsien Yang
In a Facebook post, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said that he and Dr Lee Wei Ling had suggested that the house be demolished after Dr Lee's departure and a memorial garden be built in his place but their brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, rejected the offer.
In fact, as a Filial Son - the preserving of this ery core of Mr Lee Kuan Yew's Heritage - the real memory of Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his contribution to Singapore's birth, survival and our continuing thriving that come from Oxley House ---- is worth defending --- even to the point of not complying to option (1) of Mr Lee Kuan Yew's wish to demolish --- but fulfilling Mr Lee Kuan Yew's option (2) of preserving with attached conditions.
How
did Indranee come to the conclusion that LHY and LWL wanted immediate
commitment on demolition when both of them didn't even want a committee
to be formed?
My father's previous shop has been earmarked to give way to MRT and has to move. That location is a high-traffic volume - and is very good for business. But since this is law, there is no choice and have to move - because MRT serve the National Interest and benefit many Singaporeans.
My father just dutifully negotiate with the Government for compensation and move to alternative location without fuss. No fuss was make - though initially unhappy. He know that he should just move on instead of making a big fuss.
So does he decry "abuse of power", "lose confidence in leadership" - like this 2 siblings do - and activate the whole Nation by stoking emotion and sentiment to serve their own "personal cause and interest" - really needed?
Just move on - if the Preservation law say so and if the Cabinet think this is the right thing to do - as Cabinet is democratically elected to do what is best for the Nation.
By stirring emotion for "personal cause" - don't make sense and distract the Nation from more worthy and important issues - like economic transformation and terrorist threat.
Ricky Lim Spoken like a true dictator! The cabinet and LHL are using the guise of heritage to prevent the demolition of the house and you have blindly bought it hook, line and sinker. flimsy reasons like yours give credence to dictatorships everywhere. Singapore will survive without the house. But will LHL's PAP?
Wei
Foo - what you eat, what you talk, how you act, where you shit --- will
have to subject to your children's vote in order not to be dictator, is
that what you mean - not to be a dictator?
Wei Foo - the Government did not say they are not engaging Mr Lee HY for talk on how to deal with the Oxley House. But Mr Lee HY choose to go public and make a big hoo-ha about it - saying "abuse of power", "lose confidence in leadership".
The Government did not act like dictator - but in fact work in a consultative manner.
But if was the siblings - that levy a serious charge - where the Government, with no choice have to respond.
Ricky Lim Are you saying this government is so weak that it cannot withstand the controversy of its own making? If this issue is so trivial, why can't LHL just follow his father's will and make it all go away? LHL's ego is so big but his stature is so small, that he needs to cling onto a house for validation. Shameful.
Ricky Lim LHL, please stop hiding behind the cabinet. They have no decision over a private house and will. Sure they can use the law to preserve the house, but they will pay a very high price in dishonouring LKY's wishes. Stop abusing government machinery to get you own way.
May I remind you that the small man thought it was his full discretion not to call a by-election in Hougang. The courts proved him wrong. So yes, the government's decision can be challenged, especially when laws are perverted.
LHL did not challenge when probate was given, ostensibly because he knew he couldn't prove the allegations he is now making against his siblings. He now has to resort to setting up committees and wasting taxpayers' money in parliament when it is very clear the correct avenue is the court. This again, is an abuse of power.
Wei Foo - (1) (a) You say Court decide - decide what? Preservation Law supercede private will. Court no need to decide. (Every time there is a need to preserve sites - need to go Court is it? Then what is the purpose of enacting the Preservation Law? Preservation law is under the function of the Government not Court. You don't even know how the Government operate and how the Court function operate.) (b) If you say Court decide on the last Will due to the dubious circumstances arising from the drafting and signing of the final Will - it will depend sufficient evidences are gathered or whether the Elder brother want to do it on his brother or a better approach to resolve it and not to escalate it.
(2) "Stop hiding behind a law that is very clearly being perverted to suit a man's needs. That in itself is abuse of power". You have make a serious allegation, repeating the same allegation by siblings. You may want to check with your lawyer - whether you have committed "defamation". 1 (a) already explain the Preservation Law - for all heritage sites that qualify for Heritage and Preservation. And this law have been enacted long ago - not just for this Oxley House. You claim abuse of power?
(1) The siblings unhappy that - dubious circumstances of the last will were raised. (2) Preservation law is under consideration (that will override private will).
Based on these 2 pretexts :- The siblings raised the allegations :- (1) Abuse of power (2) Lose confidence in leadership
You repeat the same allegations as per the siblings.
The siblings make allegations that - exercising Preservation Law (enacted by their Father) ---- is :- (1) abusing power (2) lose confidence in leadership.
If the siblings and Wei Foo - take the Government to Court or vice versa claiming :- exercising Preservation Law (enacted by their Father) ---- is :- (1) abusing power (2) lose confidence in leadership
Ricky
Lim you seem to think that laws cannot be challenged and the cabinet
and LHL are entitled to make/interpret laws as they fit. The courts will
always have the last say. You are naive to think that laws cannot be
misused.
Ricky
Lim internal security act, public entertainment act, town councils act
etc. Dont pretend none of these have ever been used against opponents of
the government. Redress? Don't make me laugh. See abuse of power if you
haven't seen victims trying to seek redress.
Why do you have to worry - if you think what you say did not infringe "defamation"? People have to be accountable and responsible for what he say or do.
You are very brave. It can be either :- (1) You think no one will have time to bother about you. (2) You are a vip that no one will want to touch you. (3) You think you cannot be identified. (4) You are in fact the aggrieved party "testing the ground".
Well, good luck. Just remember - always be accountable for what you say or do.
