Reflections on the tragic bombing

      Patriots' Day is a day of celebration for the US public, for the people of US to remember their founding fathers, the people who had brought independence and liberty to the land. And this year is no different, with the Boston Marathon held on the same day. But this year's Boston Marathon and Patriots' Day will be different from the others. 3 bombs exploded, with 2 very near to the finishing line of this event. 3 people have been reported dead, with about 144 injured. I shall express my condolences.

      Right now, investigations are ongoing to find out who was responsible for these bombings. Though no official words are said yet, the Internet, as always, sprung up first. I have seen 3 types of sayings; the Muslims, the Government and an unexpected one. It seems that many netizens' first reaction was "Muslims". What can I say? Many of the terrorist acts were caused by Muslim radicals, and I don't fully blame these people who immediately accused Muslims for what they have done. But this is clearly a bias, there can be suspicions, but we must make sure that the investigation will not be clouded by bias. Then there are the conspiracy theorist guys, who believe that everything that happened was caused by the government and secretive men in suits behind the curtains on a round table. I personally do not believe in conspiracy theories (they are just stupid for me), but we can't do anything about it, right? Internet. The last one that I have seen, perhaps the most ridiculous one, is from the Westboro Baptist Church. Well, I will not venture into this much, but to let you know, this church believes that God hates homosexuals, and that many events that happened are caused by God to punish the fags. Wow. Simply wow.

      Another question is, what will America do after this attack? What I am afraid of, is that the government might use this and restrict the freedom of people of America, like what they did after the 911 attacks. The Government might turn this tragedy into something political and push their agendas, like what they did with the 911 and various school shootings. Look at this: after the 911, the US government has passed the Patriot Act, an Act of the US Congress to regulate and conduct surveillance on various activities. It also allows the detention and deporting of terrorist suspects. And this might only apply to immigrants, but since this very act has expanded the definition of terrorism to include domestic terrorism, US citizens will also be under this act. This act allowed wiretapping, controlling transactions etc. Then there is the Indefinite Detention Clause of the NDAA, which allows the indefinite detention of people without trials. Bye 4th Ammendment. Then after various school shootings, the government has also tried to push legislation for gun control, although the usefulness of it remains debatable, but nonetheless it is still protected by the 2nd Ammendment, and thus it is still a right (for the Americans). Goodbye 2nd Ammendment, too. I wonder what the US government will do next? Maybe they should just cross out the whole Bill of Rights, for safety. As Benjamin Franklin once said "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither". I just feel that freedom cannot be breached in all cases. Happy Patriots' Day.

       There would be mainly 2 groups of people: those who think that terrorism will happen to them and those who really can't give a damn about this. The first group are most likely those that are willing to trade freedom for security, betraying the American concept of "Give me liberty or give me death".I personally feel that there is little to no point trying to worry and stop these from happening. Terrorists appear everywhere. They are dangerous, but can we do anything 'bout it? As long as there are different people, different ideologies, conflicts and clashes happen. Terrorism is just a form of it. It is inevitable, firstly, because it seems that human beings love to segregate ourselves to different groups and factions of people, albeit in religion, nationality or in political ideology. Secondly, it is not possible to prevent something from happening. Can we check every bag in a crowded square? No. And thus we cannot prevent anybody from blowing up a couple of other people and possibly himself. But maybe this number can be reduced. Well, there are 'solutions' like the Patriot Act and declaring war on another country and sanctions, but maybe we should move away from these things. Terrorists do not do these just to scare the shit out of a nation, they are actually doing this to push a political or ideological objectives. If the objective is about ideology, we can really do nothing about it, like what I said just now. What about the political objective? Many of us have learned about staying strong even in terrorist acts, to not "negotiate with terrorists". Maybe we should forget all that and try to negotiate with them? Israel had humanitarian efforts to raise the standard of living for Palestinians  and this has decreased the number of Palestinians terrorist attacks, more than the offensive measure like blowing the terrorist suspects up. Maybe to save lives we should just understand what the terrorists want. If they are unhappy about US troops in Afghanistan, then move the f*** out. If they are unhappy about the way we treat Muslims, then we treat them properly. Of course there are lines that cannot be crossed. We can only negotiate with terrorists if their demands are reasonable. And there is no way we can negotiate with terrorists who blow people up for religious objectives, as it is not possible. Maybe it is time to start thinking where have we done wrong that caused terrorists to attack us, and see if we can improve it.

       I would say that this event had left me thinking. We must no let bias to affect our judgement. We cannot investigate just to find somebody to blame, rather we should investigate to find out the truth. And we should also put some blame on ourselves and ask ourselves have we offended them too much? And I hope that this tragedy would not be used as an excuse to make policies that restrict our freedom. But I have seem to make a very big assumption; that it was a terrorist act. This is the sort of mindset we should avoid from having. Assumptions and bias.

Take on Capital Punishment

                Singapore is a state with many death penalties, for homicide, drugs and possession of firearms. Last year, Singapore has reviewed its mandatory death sentence, and check if there was any areas they could lighten sentences. Not surprisingly, our Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs, Mr Teo Chee Hean said that death penalties since this review will be deferred. However, is the system of death penalty flawed and should it be reviewed again by the Parliament?

                The decision was that there are two conditions in which a drug trafficker can escape this death penalty. Firstly, this trafficker must have only acted as a courier, and not involved in the supply and the distribution of the drugs, and secondly, either the trafficker has cooperated with the Central Narcotics Bureau in a substantive way, or he has a mental disability. Teo Chee Hean also stated that “Singaporeans understand that the death penalty has been an effective deterrent and an appropriate punishment for very serious offences”. However, I have some evidence to show that death penalties had no significant effect on the homicide rate. From the New York Times, it is stated that “homicide rates had risen and fallen along roughly symmetrical paths in the states with and without the death penalty, suggesting to many experts that the threat of the death penalty rarely deters criminals.” This is the case, when a murderer is out, he won’t be thinking about consequences when he is killing somebody. It is either the emotions, which affects the neo-cortex to stop, causing somebody not to think logically, or there is a mental illness in the person. If one can think logically in many different situations, then chances are they will not go around killing others and be criminals. People also has many reasons to be involved in drug trafficking. Their family might be poor, or he was forced to. These reasons should be enough for the accused to have an exemption from the mandatory death system.

                Does the death penalty make Singapore a better place to live in? Is it death penalty that makes our country safer? I would beg to differ. As we are getting more and more educated, we are also getting more and more civilized. It is because we are more educated than the past, that we have lower crime rates. In the United States, states with no death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with death penalties. As listed in the 24/7 Wall Street Journal, of the top 10 most peaceful states in America, 7 has abolished death penalty, and the number one, Maine, has abolished death penalty in 1887, one of the earliest to do that. I can very safely say, these states are the most educated ones in the United States, and most are lying in the North, the centre of economics and politics in America. Of the top 10 least peaceful states, all of them have death penalty, and all of the states have some of the lowest literacy rate and graduate students from high school. We can clearly see that death penalty plays very little part in decrease of homicide rates throughout the years, but rather, it is the education and the development of society that has caused this change. And what does the Singapore death penalty look like on the international level? Most humans’ rights activists have been against death penalties for a long time. And Singapore had once reached the 2^nd most people executed per capita, in 1994-1999, before Turkmenistan, which now is an abolitionist country, with no death penalty. So, does the death penalty really helped us or harm us?

Earth Hour

     Later during 8:30 pm to 9:30 pm, the city where I live in will conduct the Earth Hour. This activity is supposed to remind and raise awareness about saving the environment and Earth, through reducing carbon emission. It is important to reduce carbon emission, but I will say this: Earth Hour is stupid, pointless and useless.

     Many people believe that the Earth Hour is here to reduce carbon emission, whereas it is supposed to only raise awareness and send a message. These people spread the wrong message, and it is bad for the event. One hour of blackout is equivalent to nothing. There would be no impact on carbon usage. Power stations would still be burning fuels to create energy regardless even if everyone off the light. If they decided to shut down the power stations, hospitals will have a bad night. Hospitals require energy to keep patients alive. If they were to shut down power stations, we would need very powerful stations that can cope with the upsurge of energy after an hour. Guess what type of fuel is good and efficient for this? Yep, fossil fuels. And the emitted carbon will just cancel out whatever was reduced in the hour, as alternative energy would take a longer time to start up. The huge upsurge of energy could also be created if a lot of people were to turn on their lights at once after the Hour, and there would be a chance that a substation would have a fuse blown. A small chance, but nevertheless a higher percentage than that of Earth Hour's impact on the environment. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation boasted that the energy saved is equivalent of taking away 48,000 cars off the road. There is about 8766 hours per year, and with elementary Maths, we would get about 5.47 cars off the road a year. Wow. That's a lot of energy saved. And then there are people who use candles to light up their homes. I believe they have forgotten that candles is made of hydrocarbon, and they release carbon dioxide. We can clearly see that Earth Hour does not reduce carbon emission, rather it might even increase it.

     Another thing to note is that this event might be sending out a wrong message. Through this event, we turn off all electrical appliances, or at least try to. However, this is actually putting technology in a bad light. It makes electricity look bad. Electricity has been a sign of human progress through the past few decades, and the progress of technology is equivalent to human progress. And this event might cause people to believe that technology and electricity is the Devil that has caused global warming. It is true that they have caused global warming, but they are merely tools of the Devil, which is actually us misusing them. Furthermore, I strongly believe that technology can solve this problem. Solar energy, wind energy and other alternatives that do not release carbon. And to make them cheaper and more affordable, technology is needed. I do not blame the organisers for this, as they did not meant this, but it is somewhat dangerous that people would get the wrong idea and the wrong message caused by this event.

    Perhaps the best way to solve the environmental problem is to observe what we do not only during the Earth Hour. We should try and reduce carbon emission everyday. Turn off appliances that we do not need, observe the 3 R's, make sure the (right) message gets to people. Governments should also encourage research on alternative sources of energy, educate people. One hour is not enough, we need our whole lifetime.

Cyprus Bailout

Today's worldwide shares dropped, partly because of the bailout for Cyprus, an European nation that is about to go bankrupt. The Cypriot government has reached an agreement with the Euro-zone, to have a bailout for Cyprus's troubled banking system. And the agreement was not a free bailout -- there will be a bank levy, a tax on the people's savings in banks. Above 100.000 euros in your savings account, you pay 9.9%, below it you pay 6.75%. This money will add up to about 5.8 billion Euros, a part of the 13 billion Euro bailout. And now everybody in Cyprus is trying to retrieve the money to soften the blow. There are different views on it. Some people feel that it is unfair for the people. They feel that Cyprus is being the scapegoat for the European countries. Many Russians also have their savings in Cypriot banks, and Vladimir Putin believed that "it would be unfair, unprofessional and dangerous". Angela Merkel said that “anyone having their money in Cypriot banks must contribute in the Cypriot bailout. That way those responsible will contribute in it, not only the taxpayers of other countries, and that is what’s right.” The president Nicos Anastasiades also said that he does not like the bailout, it is a tragic moment for Cyprus, but it has to be done. The parliament only had a slim majority for the vote, and the voting that is scheduled to take place on Sunday would be delayed to allow more time to build a consensus. I personally do not have much opinions on this, although I do not really believe in bailouts. Comments would be greatly welcomed on this issue.

American Funding of IME

In June 2012, an American research engineer, Shane Todd, was found hanged in his apartment. Dead. Of course. The Singapore Police Force has looked into this case, and they believe that his death was suicidal. That Dr Todd had died because of stress at work. However, why is it that this case has still not been closed? Dr Todd "had told his parents that he felt he was under threat because of his work with the 'Chinese'"  months before the incident. And this rose suspicion. Singapore Police Force has said that he "drilled holes into his bathroom wall, bolted in a pulley, then slipped a black strap through the pulley and wrapped it around the toilet several times. He then tethered the strap to his neck and jumped from a chair." However, no holes were found in the walls when the family visited his apartment, and of course no bolts and screws. Dr Todd also looked like he was about to move, stated by Financial Times, as he had clean clothes folded on the couch, about to sell his furniture, air ticket on the table and had packed boxes, ready to leave. Why would he do all these if he wanted to kill himself? In fact, there were many inconsistencies between the police report and the crime scene. Dr Todd's colleague also told his parents that no one believed that it was a suicide. A pathologist from USA also believed that there was a struggle, though the Singaporean pathologist dismissed that, as the American pathologist have only seen pictures.  Then, a hard-drive was found, and inside was schedules and plans with Hua Wei. Yep, that Chinese company. It seemed that it was possible that the Chinese company could have plans to take the semi-conductor technology for military purposes, and this scared the shit out of the American authorities. The IME also requested the Todds not to contact them, after the Todds fired questions at them. Then there are the Senators, who have tried to push legislation to stop funds to IME. I can totally understand that, and I have no objection to that until the situation is improved. USA is afraid that their technology might end up in China's hands, a good reason, and that Singapore Police Force was too inefficient, the Senators are also afraid that if any more things happen, the SPF would not give right answers. Thus, I believe that this legislation is completely justified.

About myself

I just started this blog. It is for me to comment. About events that took place. Try to keep it updated. Try to keep it clean. I am a vulgar person. I am a student. That was a strange thing to do, trying to keep all my previous sentences to be lesser than 10 words. Cut to the chase, I am an atheist, a little radical, a pessimist, I try to be a realist, and right now I am a libertarian, not those anarchist type, and I may change my views as I mature. Comments are useful to me, as it will make me rethink my views. Thank you.