you have ; if so how so from last gazelle and paper gazette papyrus complimentary without affirmation of eco efficient facilities that could prolong. right
It smacks of double-standards - that the government would slam others for the slightest infringements while turning a complete blind eye to shortcomings from its own side. While the government may think this is inconsequential, it in fact is not - for over time it will drain public trust from the authorities who will increasingly be seen to be lacking integrity. Such biased attitudes will also harm the government itself - its officers will start to think that they can get away with anything, even when they propagate falsehoods in the public domain. Yet, the false allegations of the protesters “heckling” the children are not the first or only incident of false information from the authorities or from the government-controlled mainstream media.
The problem lies, instead, with Singapore's attitude towards offense. Nowhere else in the entire western world would you find the national reaction to being offended on a par with what we have recently witnessed. Fines imposed, scholarships revoked, jobs lost, these punishments are all over and above what a liberal society's response to feeling offended should be. So just how should a liberal society respond to feeling offended? The answer is very simple: it shouldn't. Offense is a self-inflicted injury. It makes no sense to hold other people accountable for your own self-inflicted injury. The Singaporeans who are claiming to be offended argue that the government's liberal immigration policy is to blame. Singaporeans are losing out to foreigners who come here, steal our jobs, enjoy privileges that we don't get, aren't required to do NS, etc. It is adding insult to injury to call us 'dogs', or tell us we are worth less than 'fart', or whatever. That is their argument. I don't buy it.
Singapore is my favorite country and I haven’t even been there! 😀✌️💯
That's a very reliable s'pore govt. 👍👍
third affirmation in eco efficient facilities technological ; capacity of umbrella unfolds in breathability against natural wind draft
it's alike saying the Burj Khalif without insult to architecture awhile she sweated
you have ; if so how so from last gazelle and paper gazette papyrus complimentary without affirmation of eco efficient facilities that could prolong. right
The old botanic garden was heritage. Current botanic garden is not. Excessive , unnecessary alterations and over building destroyed it.
Damn bots these days are pretty wild...
It smacks of double-standards - that the government would slam others for the slightest infringements while turning a complete blind eye to shortcomings from its own side. While the government may think this is inconsequential, it in fact is not - for over time it will drain public trust from the authorities who will increasingly be seen to be lacking integrity. Such biased attitudes will also harm the government itself - its officers will start to think that they can get away with anything, even when they propagate falsehoods in the public domain. Yet, the false allegations of the protesters “heckling” the children are not the first or only incident of false information from the authorities or from the government-controlled mainstream media.
The problem lies, instead, with Singapore's attitude towards offense. Nowhere else in the entire western world would you find the national reaction to being offended on a par with what we have recently witnessed. Fines imposed, scholarships revoked, jobs lost, these punishments are all over and above what a liberal society's response to feeling offended should be. So just how should a liberal society respond to feeling offended? The answer is very simple: it shouldn't.
Offense is a self-inflicted injury. It makes no sense to hold other people accountable for your own self-inflicted injury.
The Singaporeans who are claiming to be offended argue that the government's liberal immigration policy is to blame. Singaporeans are losing out to foreigners who come here, steal our jobs, enjoy privileges that we don't get, aren't required to do NS, etc. It is adding insult to injury to call us 'dogs', or tell us we are worth less than 'fart', or whatever. That is their argument. I don't buy it.