Dominatio Per Malum

The Crow(1994) 7/10

Whatever the merits of The Crow, it’ll always be remembered as that film where Brandon Lee died in the shooting of the film. It is Brandon Lee’s last film, and possibly his best. Indeed, the death of Lee gives the film a sombre and tragic undertone especially since Lee plays a character who was killed in the film only to be resurrected as an avenging angel to wreck vengeance on those who killed him.

The good points of The Crow will most certainly be its setting and mood, a darker and grittier version of Tim Burton’s Gotham City or Ridley Scott’s futuristic world of Blade Runner. Brandon Lee, no doubt puts in a haunting performance and while alot of the scenes may seem unremarkable by today’s standards, its still not too bad.

Now, the weak points, of which there are many. Bai Ling for one. She is really annoying. In fact, the entire cast of baddies are generic and boring. This is a film that seriously needs a charismatic bad guy. Plotwise, standard vengeance fare, but the fact that Brandon Lee’s character is nigh indestructible for the first 90% of the film takes out much of the enjoyment of the film. Even Superman has Kryptonite! An unstoppable superhero is no fun.

Anyways, as a throwback to the 90s, the Crow is a film well worth your time inspite of its rough edges.

UNITED STATES v. GONZALEZ-LOPEZ (No. 05-352) 399 F. 3d 924

The issue before the Supreme Court was: whether a trial court’s erroneous deprivation of a criminal defendant’s choice of counsel entitles him to a reversal of his conviction.

Under the 6th Admendment:

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. (Ie, the 6th gives the accused a right to a defence counsel, a right that is oft run roughshod in S’pore)

Held (By 5-4) : A trial court’s erroneous deprivation of a criminal defendant’s choice of counsel entitles him to reversal of his conviction

Scalia, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy and Thomas, JJ., joined.

There are 2 ways to see this:

1) Man gets accquited conviction reversed on technicality

or

2) Reaffirmation that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, and that you don’t try to mess with the 6th Admendment.

I believe that this case was decided correctly, but still i’d be apprehensive to accquit someone who is charged with a capital offence reverse the conviction of someone on mere account of technicality.

Via Volokh

Dark Water (2005) 6/10

Considering that Hideo Nakata’s Dark Water (2002) was one of my favourite horror films of all time, Walter Salle’s 2005 remake of the Japanese film seemed destined to disappoint. Normally, i would pass by a remake of an original, given that they almost always are a notch lesser than the original. Having said that, there was one main reason why i watched Hollywood’s take on Dark Water: Jennifer Connelly, who has been one of my favourite actress since Requiem For A Dream.

The best thing about Dark Water, and in fact the best decision that Salles made was to cast Connelly in the lead role, a move that would pay dividends because Connelly is indeed the only reason that makes Dark Water worthwhile. An excellent, intense performance, Connelly puts in a stellar performance that would have made this film a brilliant movie if not for the fact that the script and the supporting roles are so lacklustre.

Whereas the orginal Japanese version focused on the spooks and the water motiff, the remake focuses much more on the role of the mother (Connelly) and adds in more supporting characters that detract from rather than enhances the film. While Connelly accquits herself remarkably, the script and the scares leave much to be desired. The original wasn’t even scary in the first place, but this remake is 100% scare free and spook free. The plot lumbers on and on and on and the script simply lacks finess. It fails to hook the audience.

The good part about Dark Water is that it isn’t a shot by shot remake and does indeed change parts of the script. The bad news is that most of the changes, almost certainly weaken rather than enhance the film. A particularly weak scene that takes place in the basement’s washing machine room (which is not found in the Japanese version) shows clearly the weakness of the 2005 remake vis-a-vis the original. Clearly, Dark Water has some things going for it, mainly Jennifer Connelly’s stellar performance which is much better than her Japanese counterpart. However, Salle’s version is weaker on every other count.

Arrgh! Comparative Legal Tradition is a 3hr long class! And it streches till 6 on Thurs! Any hopes of getting a short wednesday have been dashed.

On the bright side, I have no Lectures on Friday! So i hope hope hope hope that i won’t get any tutorial slots on friday. There is actually a glimmer of chance to have a 4 day week next sem.

Childe Roland to the Dark Tower Came By Robert Browning
I.

My first thought was, he lied in every word,

    That hoary cripple, with malicious eye
    Askance to watch the working of his lie

On mine, and mouth scarce able to afford
Suppression of the glee that pursed and scored

    Its edge, at one more victim gained thereby.


        II.

What else should he be set for, with his staff?

    What, save to waylay with his lies, ensnare
    All travellers who might find him posted there,

And ask the road? I guessed what skull-like laugh
Would break, what crutch 'gin write my epitaph

    For pastime in the dusty thoroughfare,


        III.

If at his counsel I should turn aside

    Into that ominous tract which, all agree,
    Hides the Dark Tower. Yet acquiescingly

I did turn as he pointed: neither pride
Nor hope rekindling at the end descried,

    So much as gladness that some end might be.


        IV.

For, what with my whole world-wide wandering,

    What with my search drawn out thro' years, my hope
    Dwindled into a ghost not fit to cope

With that obstreperous joy success would bring,
I hardly tried now to rebuke the spring

    My heart made, finding failure in its scope.


        V.

As when a sick man very near to death

    Seems dead indeed, and feels begin and end
    The tears and takes the farewell of each friend,

And hears one bid the other go, draw breath
Freelier outside ("since all is o'er," he saith,

    "And the blow fallen no grieving can amend;")


        VI.

While some discuss if near the other graves

    Be room enough for this, and when a day
    Suits best for carrying the corpse away,

With care about the banners, scarves and staves:
And still the man hears all, and only craves

    He may not shame such tender love and stay.


        VII.

Thus, I had so long suffered in this quest,

    Heard failure prophesied so oft, been writ
    So many times among "The Band" - to wit,

The knights who to the Dark Tower's search addressed
Their steps - that just to fail as they, seemed best,

    And all the doubt was now—should I be fit?


        VIII.

So, quiet as despair, I turned from him,

    That hateful cripple, out of his highway
    Into the path he pointed. All the day

Had been a dreary one at best, and dim
Was settling to its close, yet shot one grim

    Red leer to see the plain catch its estray.


        IX.

For mark! no sooner was I fairly found

    Pledged to the plain, after a pace or two,
    Than, pausing to throw backward a last view

O'er the safe road, 'twas gone; grey plain all round:
Nothing but plain to the horizon's bound.

    I might go on; nought else remained to do.


        X.

So, on I went. I think I never saw

    Such starved ignoble nature; nothing throve:
    For flowers - as well expect a cedar grove!

But cockle, spurge, according to their law
Might propagate their kind, with none to awe,

    You'd think; a burr had been a treasure trove.


        XI.

No! penury, inertness and grimace,

    In some strange sort, were the land's portion. "See
    Or shut your eyes," said Nature peevishly,

"It nothing skills: I cannot help my case:
'Tis the Last Judgment's fire must cure this place,

    Calcine its clods and set my prisoners free."


        XII.

If there pushed any ragged thistle-stalk

    Above its mates, the head was chopped; the bents
    Were jealous else. What made those holes and rents

In the dock's harsh swarth leaves, bruised as to baulk
All hope of greenness? 'tis a brute must walk

    Pashing their life out, with a brute's intents.


        XIII.

As for the grass, it grew as scant as hair

    In leprosy; thin dry blades pricked the mud
    Which underneath looked kneaded up with blood.

One stiff blind horse, his every bone a-stare,
Stood stupefied, however he came there:

    Thrust out past service from the devil's stud!


        XIV.

Alive? he might be dead for aught I know,

    With that red gaunt and colloped neck a-strain,
    And shut eyes underneath the rusty mane;

Seldom went such grotesqueness with such woe;
I never saw a brute I hated so;

    He must be wicked to deserve such pain.


        XV.

I shut my eyes and turned them on my heart.

    As a man calls for wine before he fights,
    I asked one draught of earlier, happier sights,

Ere fitly I could hope to play my part.
Think first, fight afterwards - the soldier's art:

    One taste of the old time sets all to rights.


        XVI.

Not it! I fancied Cuthbert's reddening face

    Beneath its garniture of curly gold,
    Dear fellow, till I almost felt him fold

An arm in mine to fix me to the place
That way he used. Alas, one night's disgrace!

    Out went my heart's new fire and left it cold.


        XVII.

Giles then, the soul of honour - there he stands

    Frank as ten years ago when knighted first.
    What honest men should dare (he said) he durst.

Good - but the scene shifts - faugh! what hangman hands
Pin to his breast a parchment? His own bands

    Read it. Poor traitor, spit upon and curst!


        XVIII.

Better this present than a past like that;

    Back therefore to my darkening path again!
    No sound, no sight as far as eye could strain.

Will the night send a howlet or a bat?
I asked: when something on the dismal flat

    Came to arrest my thoughts and change their train.


        XIX.

A sudden little river crossed my path

    As unexpected as a serpent comes.
    No sluggish tide congenial to the glooms;

This, as it frothed by, might have been a bath
For the fiend's glowing hoof - to see the wrath

    Of its black eddy bespate with flakes and spumes.


        XX.

So petty yet so spiteful! All along

    Low scrubby alders kneeled down over it;
    Drenched willows flung them headlong in a fit

Of mute despair, a suicidal throng:
The river which had done them all the wrong,

    Whate'er that was, rolled by, deterred no whit.


        XXI.

Which, while I forded, - good saints, how I feared

    To set my foot upon a dead man's cheek,
    Each step, or feel the spear I thrust to seek

For hollows, tangled in his hair or beard!
—It may have been a water-rat I speared,

    But, ugh! it sounded like a baby's shriek.


        XXII.

Glad was I when I reached the other bank.

    Now for a better country. Vain presage!
    Who were the strugglers, what war did they wage,

Whose savage trample thus could pad the dank
Soil to a plash? Toads in a poisoned tank,

    Or wild cats in a red-hot iron cage—


        XXIII.

The fight must so have seemed in that fell cirque.

    What penned them there, with all the plain to choose?
    No foot-print leading to that horrid mews,

None out of it. Mad brewage set to work
Their brains, no doubt, like galley-slaves the Turk

    Pits for his pastime, Christians against Jews.


        XXIV.

And more than that - a furlong on - why, there!

    What bad use was that engine for, that wheel,
    Or brake, not wheel - that harrow fit to reel

Men's bodies out like silk? with all the air
Of Tophet's tool, on earth left unaware,

    Or brought to sharpen its rusty teeth of steel.


        XXV.

Then came a bit of stubbed ground, once a wood,

    Next a marsh, it would seem, and now mere earth
    Desperate and done with; (so a fool finds mirth,

Makes a thing and then mars it, till his mood
Changes and off he goes!) within a rood—

    Bog, clay and rubble, sand and stark black dearth.


        XXVI.

Now blotches rankling, coloured gay and grim,

    Now patches where some leanness of the soil's
    Broke into moss or substances like boils;

Then came some palsied oak, a cleft in him
Like a distorted mouth that splits its rim

    Gaping at death, and dies while it recoils.


        XXVII.

And just as far as ever from the end!

    Nought in the distance but the evening, nought
    To point my footstep further! At the thought,

A great black bird, Apollyon's bosom-friend,
Sailed past, nor beat his wide wing dragon-penned

    That brushed my cap—perchance the guide I sought.


        XXVIII.

For, looking up, aware I somehow grew,

    'Spite of the dusk, the plain had given place
    All round to mountains - with such name to grace

Mere ugly heights and heaps now stolen in view.
How thus they had surprised me, - solve it, you!

    How to get from them was no clearer case.


        XXIX.

Yet half I seemed to recognise some trick

    Of mischief happened to me, God knows when—
    In a bad dream perhaps. Here ended, then,

Progress this way. When, in the very nick
Of giving up, one time more, came a click

    As when a trap shuts - you're inside the den!


        XXX.

Burningly it came on me all at once,

    This was the place! those two hills on the right,
    Crouched like two bulls locked horn in horn in fight;

While to the left, a tall scalped mountain... Dunce,
Dotard, a-dozing at the very nonce,

    After a life spent training for the sight!


        XXXI.

What in the midst lay but the Tower itself?

    The round squat turret, blind as the fool's heart
    Built of brown stone, without a counterpart

In the whole world. The tempest's mocking elf
Points to the shipman thus the unseen shelf

    He strikes on, only when the timbers start.


        XXXII.

Not see? because of night perhaps? - why, day

    Came back again for that! before it left,
    The dying sunset kindled through a cleft:

The hills, like giants at a hunting, lay
Chin upon hand, to see the game at bay,—

    "Now stab and end the creature - to the heft!"


        XXXIII.

Not hear? when noise was everywhere! it tolled

    Increasing like a bell. Names in my ears
    Of all the lost adventurers my peers,—

How such a one was strong, and such was bold,
And such was fortunate, yet each of old

    Lost, lost! one moment knelled the woe of years.


        XXXIV.

There they stood, ranged along the hillsides, met

    To view the last of me, a living frame
    For one more picture! in a sheet of flame

I saw them and I knew them all. And yet
Dauntless the slug-horn to my lips I set,

    And blew. "Childe Roland to the Dark Tower came."

This may or may not mean anything, but Bethesda, who won the rights to Fallout 3 after Black Isle collapsed, has finally showed signs of actually doing something when it revealed the teaser poster for Fallout 3 @ E3 this year. Of course, it was so low profile that i didn’t notice it until one month later. Still, its better than nothing.

In an unrelated but interesting piece of Fallout trivia, there even seems to be a Fallout Card Game! No idea if its true ornot since the site is in some unknown language, but still, quite cool.

Black Hawk Down (2001) 7/10

Ridley Scott’s depiction of urban warfare in 2001’s Black Hawk Down is easily one of the most beautifully shot and technically proficient war movies ever filmed. Viseral, frenetic and powerful, it does not care to debate the merits of policy or politics but instead gives a close-up of that harrowing 24hrs in Somalia, where poor planning, arrogance and unexpected resistence turned what should have been a short and simple extraction mission into a bloodbath.

One problem with Black Hawk Down when i watched in a few years ago was that i didn’t know who was who and what they were doing. Several years and many movies later, i can recognise most of the cast by face alone: Eric Bana, Ewan Mcgregor, Josh Harnett, Orlando Bloom et al. For those film junkies, they would have no trouble following who’s who. They may not know what the character’s screen name is, but they sure can recognise the real name of the actors. The rest will likely get abit lost sometime, what with the frenetic and frenzied action.

One way to describe this film is that, after the 30 min mark, it is a bloodsoaked MTV. And that is mostly true, and yet it excels in this gritty realism of conflict after conflict, gunfight after gunfight. There is some attempt at setting out the background story in the first 30mins, but it is also the slowest and draggy part of the film. Once the true action starts, which is around the time the first black hawk goes down, the action flows fast and furious, and technically the film is excellence par none. Brilliant cinematography, direction and use of settings and music. But only when the action is thick.

Once the pacing slows downs, the flaws begin to surface, and at times threatens to derail the film. Clearly Ridley Scott falters in the character development department. But ultimately as a closeup look on that fateful October day in 1993, Black Hawk Down is an unforgivingly powerful film that scores with one of the best technical aspects in any film.

Mean Creek (2004) 7/10

In Stark contrast to Black Hawk Down, Jacob Estes’s Mean Creek is all about its characters. A riveting and rich potrait of the adolescence, Mean Creek features excellent performances by its young cast. Easily the best ensemble performance by a teenage cast ever. In particular, Josh Peck stands out with a brilliant performance as the bully George.

Featuring a beautiful, tranquil background juxtaposed with a prank gone horribly wrong, Mean Creek is hauntingly beautiful in its excellent characterisation and beautiful naturalism. While the plot and the film is predictable, the simplicity of the script belies the deeper social and moral ideals behind it.

“”Mean Creek” opens with a schoolyard bully picking on a smaller kid, develops into a story of revenge, and then deepens into the surprisingly complex story of young teenagers trying to do the right thing. It could have been simple-minded and predictable, but it becomes a rare film about moral choices, about the difficulty of standing up against pressure from your crowd.”- Ebert

“Such a simple plot barely fills the film’s 87 minutes, but writer/director Jacob Aaron Estes more than compensates with his labyrinth of moral dilemmas and complex characters.”- Metromix

Bad Guy (2002) 8/10

If you like your films safe, predictable and filled with brainless explosions, stay far, far away from Kim Ki Duk. The enfant terrible of Korean Cinema, Kim’s films belong in a class of their own. Often characterised by sex, violence and silence (although not always in that order), whatever you may feel about Kim’s works, you will never feel apathetic. Kim’s films provoke, sometimes intentionally so, and holds itself up as a mirror of society or of man’s failings. You’ll either hate or love Kim Ki Duk’s films, but i assure you that you will never feel indifferent.

And Kim’s Bad Guy is no different. Its theme of prostitution is a popular theme used by Kim, as seen in his other films like The Isle, Samaria or Birdcage Inn. As for the plot, it doesn’t matter, because its best to walk into a Kim Ki Duk film knowing as little about the plot as possible. In anycase, plots are rarely the strongest point of Kim’s film- instead it is his direction and the acting that are often the highlights.

The are obvious points where the logic of the film becomes tenous and even some supernatural elements of serendipity that may make audiences scratch their heads. Fret not, for this is not uncommon in Kim Ki Duk films, for logic is not what Kim cares about, as you can clearly see in 3-Iron. Certainly, you’ll wonder where all the police are in the entire film. And where the characters are thinking rationally.

But just sit back and enjoy the excellent performances by the two leads, the top-notch direction by Kim (as always) and the memorable soundtrack, and perhaps ponder upon the deeper meaning of the film.Take special note that, for much of the film, the male lead is silent and does not speak at all, save for a short outburts towards the end of the film.

“Few viewers are likely to leave the theater without strong feelings for or against this film. It features memorable images and music, considerable violence, strong acting, logic-defying plot threads, and an epilogue that seems designed to stir up controversy. The film makes perhaps the most sense if you read it as a clash between the lower and middle classes. Kim himself is the product of a difficult upbringing that has left him outraged at the inequities in Korean society.” - Darcy Parquet

June 17, 2006
Entrapment necessary for law enforcement

THE report, ‘Entrapment: Lawyers say narcotics officers crossed the line in quest to nab offender, but any method of entrapment is legal here’ (ST, June 9), suggested that the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) had acted unethically in the apprehension of Adrian Yeo for drug possession.

This led to various letters from concerned members of the public on the entrapment issue.

The Straits Times followed up on the subject with an editorial, ‘Entrapment: Fair or not?’ (June 14), advocating that CNB’s action against Yeo was somehow wrong because ‘fair-minded people are entitled to point out it seems neither fair nor ethical to encourage a person to break the law, just for enforcement agencies to gather evidence’.

The ST article published on June 9 regrettably did not report all the facts of Yeo’s case. A diligent reading of Yeo’s mitigation plea which was presented in court will show that he had been consuming drugs even before he came to the attention of CNB.

In fact, he would not have been of any interest to CNB otherwise; it was his drug abuse which led CNB to investigate him in the first place.

When Yeo was asked if he had any drugs, he volunteered to take drugs to the hotel where he was subsequently arrested with Ecstasy, ‘Ice’ and Ketamine.

Yeo was, therefore, not a law-abiding person enticed into committing an offence by CNB.

In omitting to highlight the fact that he was a habitual drug abuser, the ST report has misled readers into thinking that CNB had acted unethically when the circumstances of the case clearly showed the contrary and that CNB had acted professionally.
>> If he is a habitual drug user, why has he not been caught until now?

The ST editorial suggests that law-enforcement methods like entrapment should be reserved for only more serious offences involving drug trafficking and ‘national security’, rather than drug abuse. This demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the situation.

Drug abuse is a serious threat. The battle against drugs in Singapore faces a new challenge - even as we succeeded in addressing the serious heroin problem of the past, today we face a growing potential problem of synthetic-drug abuse.
>> The same can be said for ANY offence. It is most disturbing, is it not that public money and effort is spent not in solving crimes but in entrapment?

A majority of those arrested for synthetic-drug abuse are first-time offenders. One of the concerns this trend raises is the mentality of certain segments of our society who think that synthetic drugs are ’soft’ drugs which should be tolerated as they are acceptable as part of a modern ‘cool’ lifestyle. This is a dangerous attitude which we must not allow to take root in our society.

The ST editorial also suggested that because Yeo is a taxi-driver’s son who made it as a doctor, but whose future is now uncertain, the action taken against him will ‘reinforce in some people a sense that natural justice had been violated’.

This is a strange argument. Surely, the ST is not suggesting that the CNB action would be fairer and more just if Yeo had been related to a person of high social standing?
>> This point i agree with. The ST needlessly sensationalised the fact that he was a doctor.

This cannot be the way our criminal-justice system should work. Indeed, if the application of our criminal laws and the actions of our law-enforcement agencies were to be dictated by factors such as an offender’s family connections, income and social status, it would be highly unjust and perverse, and no Singaporean will stand for it.

Finally, the ST editorial concluded by referring to the ‘entrapment’ case of insurance agent Teo Ya Ling as another illustration of unethical action by the authorities. This is wrong and without basis.

Teo was not an innocent law-abiding party tempted by CNB officers into committing an offence. She was a small-time drug dealer who had all along been supplying drugs to her clients in return for their buying insurance policies from her.
>> Now this is most curious. IF she was a “small-time drug dealer”, then why is there a need to use entrapment? Can’t the police capture her by the normal, legit way? Or has entrapment become an easy way out for the police?

While a time-honoured tenet of natural justice is audi alteram partem - ‘to hear the other side’ - the ST reporter chose not to obtain and verify the facts of the case with any of the relevant enforcement agencies, other than to ask whether CNB polices chatlines and the Internet.

At no point did the reporter seek the views of any relevant enforcement agency on the issue of entrapment.

If the reporter and the person who wrote the editorial had done their research, your paper would have been able to present a more balanced perspective.

Ong-Chew Peck Wan (Mrs)
Director
Corporate Communications
Division for Permanent Secretary (Home Affairs)

>> I Think That the writer should be sentenced to watch Minority Report 10,000 times.

A more eloquent argument by Nicholls LJ, in Regina v Loosely [2001] UKHL 53:

1. Every court has an inherent power and duty to prevent abuse of its process. This is a fundamental principle of the rule of law. By recourse to this principle courts ensure that executive agents of the state do not misuse the coercive, law enforcement functions of the courts and thereby oppress citizens of the state. Entrapment, with which these two appeals are concerned, is an instance where such misuse may occur. It is simply not acceptable that the state through its agents should lure its citizens into committing acts forbidden by the law and then seek to prosecute them for doing so. That would be entrapment. That would be a misuse of state power, and an abuse of the process of the courts. The unattractive consequences, frightening and sinister in extreme cases, which state conduct of this nature could have are obvious. The role of the courts is to stand between the state and its citizens and make sure this does not happen.

RE-DRAWING THE BOUNDARIES OF ENTRAPMENT by Andrew Ashworth. (Crim. L.R. 2002):

The whole notion of protection implies that citizens have a right not to be subjected to certain forms of conduct by state officials–what Lord Nicholls referred to as “state-created crime”. Ordinary life is full of temptations, some of them temptations to commit crime, and the principle seems to be that citizens should not be at risk of being subjected to deliberate and excessive temptation by officials. As the High Court of Australia put it, the principle is “that a citizen’s precious right to immunity from arbitrary and unlawful intrusion into the daily affairs of private life may remain unimpaired.” [FN19] There must be limits to the extent to which officials may use deception to place temptations in front of citizens. We consider below (parts 3 and 4) what sorts of official conduct cross the boundary; for the present, the point is that the rationale of protection or prevention implies that citizens ought to be protected from, or at least protected from the consequences of, excessive temptation, “luring”, “enticement”, etc., by law enforcement officers.

June 17, 2006
Upgrading is a unique programme by Govt

I REFER to the commentary by Ms Chua Mui Hoong and the letters from Mr Basant Kapur, Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Yee Jenn Jong on the upgrading programme for public-housing estates (ST, June 13 and 16).

The writers argued that the Government has a fiduciary obligation to act on behalf of all Singaporeans who pay taxes and serve national service. I agree. Indeed, the Government has provided all Singaporeans with good and affordable health care, subsidised public housing, equal opportunity to receive a good education, and much more.

However, the upgrading of our older public-housing estates is over and above these basic obligations of the Government. It is funded out of Budget surpluses generated by the PAP Government. No other government in the world has anything similar, in terms of scale and commitment.
>>Ahem, and the budget surpluses come from where? From the sky? Or from the taxes that everyone pays, including Opposition Ward Residents. Also- “PAP Government” subtly conflates the political party with the govt. They are not the same.

The PAP presented upgrading as one of its key programmes during the election. It asked for the people’s support in order to carry out these programmes. Having received a clear mandate, the Government will now fulfil its promise to the people.

Upgrading is a national programme that will be implemented in all constituencies. But we cannot avoid prioritising upgrading, due to limited resources. It is not a question of generosity or otherwise by the Government, as Mr Yee suggested. Between PAP and opposition constituencies, other things being equal, PAP constituencies will go first, as the Government had made clear before the election. Ms Lim herself noted that no one living in an opposition ward expects special treatment, i.e. to jump ahead of PAP wards.
>> The question is, should upgrading even be offered as an incentive in the first place? Should not the sole criteria for upgrading be merit and not political loyalties? Again PAP & govt. is subtly conflated. It may be in PAP’s best interest to use govt. funds as an upgrading carrot, but is it in SINGAPORE’S interest to use partisan politics which is clearly divisive and unfair?

Ms Lim stated that election campaigns should be fought over long-term national policies which affect Singaporeans’ lives deeply. Again, I agree. Unfortunately, during the election Ms Lim did not ask voters to think deeply about long-term national policies and support the Workers’ Party because it offered better policies than the PAP. Instead, she told them to go ahead and vote opposition, even if they wanted a PAP Government and its policies, because they could safely assume that the PAP would win, anyway. If enough Singaporeans had taken her advice, the opposition parties would have ended up governing Singapore, even though at least two thirds of Singaporeans preferred a PAP Government.
>>Straw Man Argument. 1) The main platform of WP was to act as a check and balance and not really to form the next govt. Even the WP acknowledges this. 2) No one really is that naive to expect WP to win.

Hence, the need for the HDB upgrading-priority policy, so that Singaporeans’ votes will make a difference to their own lives in HDB estates, as well as decide which party will govern Singapore. Only then can our system of democracy work. Only then can we stay together, and move ahead.
>>Hmm, now the HDB is conflated with the govt. Should the PAP use the HDB, to achieve its political aims? Can you imagine what would happen if, say the Republicans used the FBI to to achieve its political aims? Anyway, the final sentence of the letter is deeply ironic considering that it is in defence of such a divisive and unequal policy.

Mah Bow Tan
Minister for National Development

One year on, life is good. Every day rocks!

Testing Radio Blog’s music function. Some of the songs that i like.

Spirited Away (2001) 9/10

2003 Oscar: Best Animated Film
2002 Berlin Film Festival: Golden Berlin Bear
2002 HK Film Awards: Best Asian Film
2002 New York Film Critics Circle Awards: Best Animated Film
All the king’s horses and all the king’s men

Couldn’t put Humpty together again.

All of Disney’s classics and all the Pixar’s men
Couldn’t best Hayao’s Spirited Away

Spirited Away is transcendant. It is a story that transcends age group, culture, language and time. It is a film that can be enjoyed no matter when you are, when you are. And its a darn good film, the best animated film i have ever watched in my short lifespan.

How many synonyms of awesome are there? Well, try : amazing, mesmerising, superlative, riveting, enchanting, unforgettable, brilliant, etc.

Easily Hayao Miyazaki’s crowning achievement, Spirited Away creates a new and refreshing world, not unlike Alice In Wonderland or The Wizard of Oz and pupulates it with engaging and refreshing characters, a compelling plot and tautly crafted drama. What results is pure cinematic magic, and even though its my second viewing of the film, it’s lustre is not at all diminished.

In short, if there is only one animated film you watch, make that Spirited Away.

“I struggled to find the source of imperfection in this film”-Draxblog

“Watching this movie, you immediately become aware of two things – the animation is excellent (something that will come as no surprise to anyone who has seen one of Miyazaki’s previous outings) and the story turns in unusual, often unexpected directions. One of the biggest problems I have with many animated films (even the best ones) is plot predictability. That’s not the case here.”- James Berardinelli

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Brothers spurn veg for 424 years
Children: next time parents order you to eat your broccoli so that you will have a long and healthy life, don’t believe them.

If they press the point, contact the Campbell brothers of Aberdeen, who have lived to a collective age of 424 years and have almost never eaten peas (they fall off the fork), carrots (boring) or any other vegetables.

The Campbells - John, 91, Jim, 88, Colin, 85, Sid, 82, and Doug, 78 - are all fit and well despite having defied medical advice and spurned cabbage, beans and purple sprouting, let alone asparagus and mangetout. All except Colin have outlived their wives.

Daisy (2006) 6/10

Gorgeous scenary and excellent production values but the film is let down by a weak plot, unrealistic characters and all round predictability. Jeon Ji Heon, easily the best korean actress around manages to bump this film up a few notches by sheer charisma. Ultimately, Daisy is a mediocre film which looks very good. Worth watching only because of the star presence of Jeon.

Ring (2002) 5/10

This 2002 remake of Hideo Nakata’s the Ring is a dilluted version of the original. Not even 1/3 as scary.

Rosemary’s Baby (1968) 7/10

Although not at all scary by today’s standard’s, Roman Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby still stands out for solid direction, plot and a stellar lead performance by Mia Farrow. Just as Stanley Kubrick struck gold when he dabbled in the horror genre, Polanski also shows that he is able to make a well crafted thriller. I say thriller and not horror because Rosemary’s Baby isn’t really a horror film but more of a psychological film.

BBC NEWS | Europe | Prayer vigil targets Devil’s Day
Dutch evangelical Christians are to hold a round-the-clock prayer vigil to ward off the forces of evil on Tuesday - the so-called Devil’s Day.

They believe that the sixth day of the sixth month of 2006 has great significance for evil-doers and Satanists who revere the number 666.

In a bid to counteract the forces of evil, more than 2,000 Dutch Christians will hold “a violent day of worship”.

….

The fear of the number 666 is known as hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia.

I think a better name would be paranoia.