SQ pilots dig deep for colleagues on SQ006
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: India
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I second the Gladiator on the general direction of his posting above.
Having lived in many countries in Europe and Asia, it was a "first" for us to receive a circular letter from the principal of our boys' international school in Singapore one day, reminding parents to either refrain from discussing Singapore's internal politics in front of our children and/or to urge our kids not to make any comments on Singapore's politicians outside of the house.
And we'd arrived thinking that Singapore had the best politicians money could buy......
Having lived in many countries in Europe and Asia, it was a "first" for us to receive a circular letter from the principal of our boys' international school in Singapore one day, reminding parents to either refrain from discussing Singapore's internal politics in front of our children and/or to urge our kids not to make any comments on Singapore's politicians outside of the house.
And we'd arrived thinking that Singapore had the best politicians money could buy......
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alpha Leader:
Perhaps I can offer an alternative view to your experience. There are many people in Singapore who still remember life under the British colonial masters. And like most former subject people, they are very sensitive when outsiders especially westerners are perceived to be interfering with their domestic politics.
If you are an American, it would be like a British lord talking down to you about American lack of manners and culture, just after the American Revolution. I would think most Americans would be more than defensive in such a situation. So why not Singaporeans?
Think about it.
Perhaps I can offer an alternative view to your experience. There are many people in Singapore who still remember life under the British colonial masters. And like most former subject people, they are very sensitive when outsiders especially westerners are perceived to be interfering with their domestic politics.
If you are an American, it would be like a British lord talking down to you about American lack of manners and culture, just after the American Revolution. I would think most Americans would be more than defensive in such a situation. So why not Singaporeans?
Think about it.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: India
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4eyes:
This has nothing to do with colonialism - in fact, Harry Lee and his Pakistani-Malaysian friend Mahatir are quite happy to keep certain laws in place that they inherited from the Brits (I am neither British nor American).
So Harry and Mahatir quite happily fall back on the internal security act the Brits used in their respective countries to silence any criticism. You call this progress after colonialism?
However, my dear friend, regardless of your nationality, you can stand up in Hyde Park and tell anyone who cares to listen to you that Tony Blair is an idiot, that British politics are rotten to the core, etc. And the same holds true in the US. The point being, that in the UK and the US, the governments generally believe that their citizens are sufficiently mature to gauge whether any criticism - no matter how extreme - is justified or not.
In Singapore not even a Singaporean may utter disbelief at the wonderous good fortune that has befallen this city in the form of the Lee family, who seems to be the only one who can produce capable leaders. Marry a Lee (like Ho Ching did), and presto - you go right to the top of Singapore Inc.
It's called universal freedom of speech, and it is not conferred selectively upon citizens and non-citizens. At the very least, if you pay tax in a place, you are equally entitled to speak your mind about the leaders who live off it.
Of course, if we all think back to what it was like 50 years ago, then the present is much better in most countries. The point is that Singapore (and let's keep the debate focused on this place) asks its people to measure progress in purely economic terms and not in respect of cultural and political maturity.
This has nothing to do with colonialism - in fact, Harry Lee and his Pakistani-Malaysian friend Mahatir are quite happy to keep certain laws in place that they inherited from the Brits (I am neither British nor American).
So Harry and Mahatir quite happily fall back on the internal security act the Brits used in their respective countries to silence any criticism. You call this progress after colonialism?
However, my dear friend, regardless of your nationality, you can stand up in Hyde Park and tell anyone who cares to listen to you that Tony Blair is an idiot, that British politics are rotten to the core, etc. And the same holds true in the US. The point being, that in the UK and the US, the governments generally believe that their citizens are sufficiently mature to gauge whether any criticism - no matter how extreme - is justified or not.
In Singapore not even a Singaporean may utter disbelief at the wonderous good fortune that has befallen this city in the form of the Lee family, who seems to be the only one who can produce capable leaders. Marry a Lee (like Ho Ching did), and presto - you go right to the top of Singapore Inc.
It's called universal freedom of speech, and it is not conferred selectively upon citizens and non-citizens. At the very least, if you pay tax in a place, you are equally entitled to speak your mind about the leaders who live off it.
Of course, if we all think back to what it was like 50 years ago, then the present is much better in most countries. The point is that Singapore (and let's keep the debate focused on this place) asks its people to measure progress in purely economic terms and not in respect of cultural and political maturity.
Last edited by Alpha Leader; 22nd May 2002 at 04:04.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gladiator
Yes the name of the best game in town does appear to be control, whether it’s of content of tame mouthpiece, The Straits Times, to prep the population for upcoming policy changes, or the courts, to give “correct” judgments, as in the latest furore over erstwhile opposition politician Dr Chee’s plea to the court to sanction representation by a foreign QC (denied as a foreign barrister would not show sufficient “respect” to a Singapore court whilst defending Chee), in his upcoming defamation action brought jointly, post the last General Election, by those grievously maligned and sensitive souls, the PM and SM.
4eyes
Well….. up to a point Lord Copper. It would seem that the only people who are really “very sensitive when outsiders especially westerners are perceived to be interfering with their domestic politics” are the political elite. Every Singaporean I ever talk to (very much non-elite) seems to have no reservation in endorsing even the mildest observation of politics, Singapore style, and further bemoan the constraints placed on their freedom to express, publicly, similar or more direct observations (please do not offer Singapore’s own “Speakers’ Corner” as evidence of such freedom), or to ask, Chee style, focused questions as to where exactly their tax dollars go to.
Alpha Leader
Absolutely spot on. Well done.
Yes the name of the best game in town does appear to be control, whether it’s of content of tame mouthpiece, The Straits Times, to prep the population for upcoming policy changes, or the courts, to give “correct” judgments, as in the latest furore over erstwhile opposition politician Dr Chee’s plea to the court to sanction representation by a foreign QC (denied as a foreign barrister would not show sufficient “respect” to a Singapore court whilst defending Chee), in his upcoming defamation action brought jointly, post the last General Election, by those grievously maligned and sensitive souls, the PM and SM.
4eyes
Well….. up to a point Lord Copper. It would seem that the only people who are really “very sensitive when outsiders especially westerners are perceived to be interfering with their domestic politics” are the political elite. Every Singaporean I ever talk to (very much non-elite) seems to have no reservation in endorsing even the mildest observation of politics, Singapore style, and further bemoan the constraints placed on their freedom to express, publicly, similar or more direct observations (please do not offer Singapore’s own “Speakers’ Corner” as evidence of such freedom), or to ask, Chee style, focused questions as to where exactly their tax dollars go to.
Alpha Leader
Absolutely spot on. Well done.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: berlin
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SIA has just gone on record as standing by the pilots of SQ006 and has confirmed that it has retained a leading Taiwanese legal firm to represent the pilots (not SIA) in any potential prosecution there.
It has also committed to cover legal expenses and award of damages for other potential claims arising from the SQ0006 accident.
As this seems to indicate that SIA remains four square behind its pilots, exactly why does ALPAS need S$1000 and S$500 from Captains and First Officers respectively, for the same legal defence? And has the membership voted yet in favour of this scheme?
It has also committed to cover legal expenses and award of damages for other potential claims arising from the SQ0006 accident.
As this seems to indicate that SIA remains four square behind its pilots, exactly why does ALPAS need S$1000 and S$500 from Captains and First Officers respectively, for the same legal defence? And has the membership voted yet in favour of this scheme?
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MI185
Tosh & Gladiator,
By not releasing the CVR transcripts, the good professor can avoid disclosing who did NOT pull the CVR circuit breaker. By deduction, therefore, that information could be used to indicate just who DID pull it! Singapore Inc does not wish to be compelled to acknowledge that fact.
By not releasing the CVR transcripts, the good professor can avoid disclosing who did NOT pull the CVR circuit breaker. By deduction, therefore, that information could be used to indicate just who DID pull it! Singapore Inc does not wish to be compelled to acknowledge that fact.
Guest
Posts: n/a
a reply to jstars2
Only reason why the heartless management decided to
state in ink the support the SQ 6 guys
Is because the ALPA_S is better at taking care of the guys
then the paymaster. Shame shame
To think that nothing was mentioned for the past 1 year +
just affirms the opinion that the paymasters have no
intention of protecting the same guys who help earn the
1 billion dollars.. shame on them
That is the reason why the association is collecting a fund to
help the guys.
Why SQ has such bad / irresponsible paymasters ? one can
only guess.
Only reason why the heartless management decided to
state in ink the support the SQ 6 guys
Is because the ALPA_S is better at taking care of the guys
then the paymaster. Shame shame
To think that nothing was mentioned for the past 1 year +
just affirms the opinion that the paymasters have no
intention of protecting the same guys who help earn the
1 billion dollars.. shame on them
That is the reason why the association is collecting a fund to
help the guys.
Why SQ has such bad / irresponsible paymasters ? one can
only guess.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: berlin
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
0.88M
Are you suggesting that Singapore Airlines management don't give a toss about the SQ006 trio and will be quite happy to "throw them to the wolves" when the opportunity arises?
If this is what you mean, can you be a little clearer in your explanation as to why this is the case? I found your previous post a little disjointed.
Thanks.
Are you suggesting that Singapore Airlines management don't give a toss about the SQ006 trio and will be quite happy to "throw them to the wolves" when the opportunity arises?
If this is what you mean, can you be a little clearer in your explanation as to why this is the case? I found your previous post a little disjointed.
Thanks.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe in light of CI611 and future fingers that may be pointed, the Taiwanese Government will back off the idea of prosecuting the SQ6 pilots. The alternative, of course, could be that a lot of CI personnel also end up in jail, if screw-ups within CI are proved and blame can be pinned.
Fingers crossed lads.
Fingers crossed lads.
