> On Jul 21, 4:20 am, baldeagle yahoo.com.sg> wrote:

>> On Jul 21, 2:32 pm, Bryson virginia.usa.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>>> On Jul 21, 6:37 am, baldeagle yahoo.com.sg> wrote:

>>>> On Jul 21, 12:28 pm, Bryson virginia.usa.com> wrote:

>>>>> On Jul 20, 5:00 pm, "abianc...@my-deja.com" my-deja.com>
>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>> Stupid bitch!

>>>>> Hey, Chink Boy, you say a whole load of bullshit but can't prove any
>>>>> of your accusations, don't you? All you can do is throw insults. Go
>>>>> on, prove that I am the same person whom you accuse me of being by
>>>>> providing IPS and IDs. Can't, can you, wimp homo ApeManChink!

>>>> Is there a need to prove that you are a moron..?
>>>> It is what you are, a brainless moron...by whatever names
>>>> you called yourself.
>>>> Just review your postings so far...you will see..a brainless
>>>> moron in yourself.
>>>> Show us that you are not a moron...able to debate and
>>>> discuss intelligently, logically and rationally.
>>>> Can you ?
>>>> Show us !

>>> I know that a third of the world's trade--including 90 percent of
>>> China's trade and 80 percent of Japan's trade--flows through the
>>> bordering Straits of Malacca - the country of about 4.5 million people
>>> could find itself a lucrative terrorist target.That's why the
>>> government of Singapore is interested in unmanned drone aircrafts.
>>> Since the late 1970s, shortly after the British withdrew from the
>>> colonial outpost, Singapore's military has been testing out unmanned
>>> aerial vehicles (UAVs) in an attempt to make up for its limited human
>>> resources. They've now become "indispensable" for tackling the dreaded
>>> four d's of military missions--"the dull, dirty, dangerous and
>>> demanding" ones. Earlier this year, the Singapore government unveiled
>>> plans to revamp its Air Force organization into five commands--
>>> including a new one devoted solely to building up UAV "expertise and
>>> capabilities." In late May, the Air Force added to its lineup Israeli-
>>> made Hermes 450 UAVs, which are designed for surveillance and have
>>> also been used by the British government and by U.S. Customs and
>>> Border Protection. The country is also trying to get "people who never
>>> worked in defense before" interested in the UAVs. The government
>>> announced a contest in January to build the best "urban warrior"
>>> robot, backed by a $1 million cash prize. The idea is for teams to
>>> devise an unmanned ground vehicle that's the swiftest at completing a
>>> sequence of tasks--climbing stairs, navigating pavement, moving along
>>> corridors, entering rooms and even operating elevators. A country
>>> whose area is less than a quarter of Rhode Island's does encounter
>>> some unique challenges in its UAV rollout, though. If a UAV goes out
>>> of control it will go into our neighboring countries (to help get
>>> around the skimpy-airspace problem, the government has taken to using
>>> a simulator). I am working on the latest UAV. What do you do? What do
>>> you contribute to your country?

>> The topic of discussion here is "the new Beijing"....
>> NOT the volume of trade passing through Malacca Straits...or
>> Singapore's interests in unmanned aerial vehicles..
>>
>> It may help, if you can stay focus...discuss about the new
>> Beijing...
>> Irrelevant material is like... you bring dog food for a picnic
>> outings ...only you would be interested...your friends would
>> think that you are strange.
>>
>>

>
> Why? Don't you want to know what's been going on in the military in
> Singapore? New Beijing? Ha! You mean "white-washed Beijing"? I know
> that at a high-level meeting in London recently, participants noted
> that concern about China's repression of the press was not confined to
> the usual suspects: human-rights organisations have long been sounding
> the alarm over the renewed repression, but now businessmen and
> government officials are beginning to voice concern that trade with
> and business in China are being damaged by Beijing's repression.
> Business and trade, they argue, depend on an open environment, in
> which corruption can be exposed and legal abuses checked. Without a
> culture of free criticism, they fear that business will be unable to
> operate in a stable environment. Now three former senior party
> officials are pointing out the practical dangers of such extreme media
> repression. The three – Li Rui, a former aide to Mao Zedong; Hu Jiwei,
> former editor of the Communist Party newspaper the People's Daily; and
> Zhu Houze, former party propaganda chief – wrote in a letter: "History
> demonstrates that only a totalitarian system needs news censorship,
> out of the delusion that it can keep the public locked in ignorance…".
> Far from ensuring stability, they argued, such media repression would
> "sow the seeds of disaster". I also know that Chinese textbooks
> conceal the government's responsibility and blame others instead for
> China's troubles. This series of incidents presents a sharp question
> for China's censors: what is the greater danger for China, to allow
> official corruption and abuse to continue unchecked, or to allow a
> free press to investigate such abuses? The current government in
> Beijing appears to have decided that the price of holding on to power
> is increased repression. The warnings that are now coming from inside
> as well as outside China say this policy is dangerously self-
> defeating. Why don't you go back and live in China? See how long you
> will survive.