Former SCDF and CNB chiefs arrested

[Lilac66]

tankee:

3Boys:

[quote=\"ammonite\"]insider, exactly! I think the men are more at fault than the woman.

Well, I don't agree.

If this situation is indeed accurately depicted, would it not have been the protagonist who actively sought out favours knowingly? They know full well the possible vulnerabilities of men in these positions, and they were exploited.

Were the men fools to have been taken in? Absolutely, and now they deservedly bear the full consequences. But unless they have actively sought favours (as sometimes occurs) in exchange for business, then the fire is well and truly lit by the female party here, is it not?

My boys are young, but my wife and I both agree 100% that apart from a moral upbringing, they need to be taught to GUARD GUARD GUARD against womenly wiles. One moment of weakness, and if they fall prey to a predator, all the good works they had done in the past would vanish is a puff of smoke. They will always be at the losing end of such situations.

Flame away....

倚天屠龙记 :goodpost:[/quote]

agree agree agree.....3boys :salute:

I'll teach my boy to guard guard guard also.

[HVR]

WeiHan:

Our top police and army officers have been taught since day 1 to be careful of pretty women since they can be spies send by foreign intelligence to espionage on us. I always imagine that our top police officers to be the most cool headed people but to fall into such a small trap like \"this one\" really prove me otherwise. Even little low ranking officers have been reminded repeatedly not to fall into such traps, not to mention top officers who actually get the system in place. I am abit worry about all out trainings that we have gave to out police and army officers, does the training packages have substance or are they just wayang show?

I see your point but you have to agree at this stage, we do not know what happened actually. Therefore, it is premature to cast doubts on 'training packages' and its effectiveness against espionage.

Though we don't know exactly what happened, the latest statement released by CPIB said that it is \"Premature to assume ex-chiefs of SCDF, CNB liable for criminal proceedings\" (CNA:http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1179134/1/.html) and this again tell us we don't know exactly what they had done. All we know is they are under investigation for 'serious personal misconduct' (MHA's statement) and this statement also did not state they are accused of any specific criminal offence and in my view, though we are free to express our view on the matter, we have to base it on known facts and be objective about it. Saying things that are sensational or scandalous without any ground is not helpful.

[HVR]

insider:

HVR:

[quote=\"deminc\"]Well, you can't exactly force a man to 'Shang gou', right? The onus is on the men to take or reject the bait. Speaking as someone who has rejected advances from married superiors. There is always a way to turn the other party down diplomatically, esp when in different companies, and no cornered positions. A man is not a baby. There is full awareness of the situation.

Women have been advocating equality with men in every sense but when something happened, it will always be man more at fault. To me, they all knew what they were doing and they should bear all consequences, be it man or woman, equally.

I think for this 'at fault' OT discussion, we should not view it as from whether 'woman at fault' or 'man at fault' point of view.

ksi brought out the terms of 'the tempted' and 'the temptress/er' which I find is more objective.

The one who is being tempted is more at fault, whether that someone is a man or woman.

deminc, dont mind I use your good self as an example.

Take for example deminc was 'invited' to have EMA with her superior and she accepted. In this case, deminc will be more at fault than her superior coz she knows there is a hole in front and she still jumps into it...

Take the example further if one day my son really makes a girl pregnant even he is the one being 'seduced' with short dress / low cut / whatever, I will hold him more at fault than the girl. To me, it is only when we can take up the responsibility truly on our own instead of trying to shift fault that we can learn / teach meaningfully...[/quote]Ok, this I can agree

[corneyAmber]

HVR:

insider:

[quote=\"HVR\"]

Women have been advocating equality with men in every sense but when something happened, it will always be man more at fault. To me, they all knew what they were doing and they should bear all consequences, be it man or woman, equally.

I think for this 'at fault' OT discussion, we should not view it as from whether 'woman at fault' or 'man at fault' point of view.

ksi brought out the terms of 'the tempted' and 'the temptress/er' which I find is more objective.

The one who is being tempted is more at fault, whether that someone is a man or woman.

deminc, dont mind I use your good self as an example.

Take for example deminc was 'invited' to have EMA with her superior and she accepted. In this case, deminc will be more at fault than her superior coz she knows there is a hole in front and she still jumps into it...

Take the example further if one day my son really makes a girl pregnant even he is the one being 'seduced' with short dress / low cut / whatever, I will hold him more at fault than the girl. To me, it is only when we can take up the responsibility truly on our own instead of trying to shift fault that we can learn / teach meaningfully...

Ok, this I can agree [/quote]It's never meant to be a sexist discussion here and glad that insider caught my meaning. So it's not only boys who need to guard guard guard against seducers, girls also need to guard guard guard against sugar daddies.

[Dawnie]

I thought someone mentioned about the pic of the lady? Where is it? Interested to know who she is, as I know quite a handful in the same industry KPO mode on

[WeiHan]

HVR:

WeiHan:

Our top police and army officers have been taught since day 1 to be careful of pretty women since they can be spies send by foreign intelligence to espionage on us. I always imagine that our top police officers to be the most cool headed people but to fall into such a small trap like \"this one\" really prove me otherwise. Even little low ranking officers have been reminded repeatedly not to fall into such traps, not to mention top officers who actually get the system in place. I am abit worry about all out trainings that we have gave to out police and army officers, does the training packages have substance or are they just wayang show?

I see your point but you have to agree at this stage, we do not know what happened actually. Therefore, it is premature to cast doubts on 'training packages' and its effectiveness against espionage.

Though we don't know exactly what happened, the latest statement released by CPIB said that it is \"Premature to assume ex-chiefs of SCDF, CNB liable for criminal proceedings\" (CNA:http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1179134/1/.html) and this again tell us we don't know exactly what they had done. All we know is they are under investigation for 'serious personal misconduct' (MHA's statement) and this statement also did not state they are accused of any specific criminal offence and in my view, though we are free to express our view on the matter, we have to base it on known facts and be objective about it. Saying things that are sensational or scandalous without any ground is not helpful.

Our system places alot of emphasis on ideas generation but tolerates slacked execution. People get promoted for beautiful ideas proposed but doesn't care much if he executes it workably. I am making a conclusion here and really hope that I am wrong but evidences point to a not too optimistic picture. Mas Selamak manage to escape to Malaysia and evaded island wide hunting. I started another thread in the \"money matter\" forum but scam companies operating in Singapore and many have been around for 10years. Our authority don't manage to collect sufficient evidences to arrest and indict them? Evidence points toward many victims filing police reports but they have been brushed aside and the police have not even file any statistics. I'll not release more info here but I hope to work closely with the police on this and maybe they will prove me wrong.

[corneyAmber]

Dawnie:

I thought someone mentioned about the pic of the lady? Where is it? Interested to know who she is, as I know quite a handful in the same industry *KPO mode on*

It was only mentioned in the wanbao that a reporter saw her picture but no pictures published....so KPO mode can turn off now...

[cnimed]

Original post deleted. I realized insider already clarified my post wonderfully. Yes, that was exactly what I mean. The MEN in this particular case, and whoever succumbed in general.

[ammonite]

HVR:

ammonite:

insider, exactly! I think the men are more at fault than the woman.

Must you go there? Who is more at fault? From what was reported, the woman was 2 timing the 2 ex-chiefs and what do you think of this? She is less at fault?

I think it must be pride and hubris that clouded the two men's judgement. At the end of the day, it's the men that broke the law and hurt their families.

[3Boys]

This is definitely OT, but let me use an imperfect analogy, if I may.


Who is more at fault, a drug dealer or a drug user?

The drug user hurts himself and his family, the drug dealer hurts many more, by exploiting known human weaknesses and vulnerabilities. Many will not succumb, but some will, and therein lies the business model.

One could argue that the drug user can always walk away, but that does not absolve or lessen blame on the drug dealer.

Of course, one could provide a general moral upbringing to our children in a sense of saying ‘be good, be moral, be nice to people’ etc. But one would be foolhardy not to also the highlight specific threats that need to be avoided. Would one not say, ‘stay clear of drugs, they will destroy your health’, ‘watch what you surf on the internet’?

In the same vein, would one not say, ‘Beware of sexual immorality, there are consequences and some women will use that to compromise you.’? I think its just common sense and I don’t see this as a difference between chinese helicopter or potato way of raising children at all.

To the families of those men, they must be cursing their men for having been weak and failed them, but equally, imagine the rage at this woman who created the situation, a stranger who worked her wiles for a few hundreds of thousands of dollars of business. How many more men out there who are ‘victims’? I betcha any company who did business with this ‘Japan’ IT company would be doing a review of their procurement records for the last 3 years. Who knows, this may not be the end of the show.