Originally posted by Lin Yu:

you should join a political party

  

 

Lin,

Upholding good simple virtues and values for our politicians to follow in the face of oppressions, hypocrisy and self-glorifications is just as important as taking part in politics.

It is a fact that not everyone is cut out to be a politician and I happen to be one of them. I will support anyone who has such virtues to step into the arena to serve fellow citizens as Chiam See Tong or Sylvia or Low Thia Khiang have done.

Originally posted by PRP:

I think uprightness is the most important character for a politician.Surely we wouldn't want to get a Chan Sui Bian.

We need leaders who are caring and concerned for others' welfare and wellbeing. Just be a gentleman and practise good conduct like "do not do unto others what one does not want others to do unto oneself".

The Chinese has a saying "Ji shou bu yi gu shi yi ren".

Originally posted by 333225520:

Sylvia, Chiam, etc are some of the few who managed to survive in Singapore politic (mainly due to their moderate view in politic).

If you are of the profile of Ms. Sylvia Lim or Low Thia Khiang or Chiam See Tong you are at best only the moderates or middle-path politicians who could merely make some noise not effective enough to expose wrong doings or providing effective alternatives to lead the masses to stay ahead in the new age.

If indeed the ruling party is so interested in cultivating and maturing our own oppositions alternative political successions for the good of all, they should have welcome and cultivated people such as Tang Liang Hong or even allowing some of their own old blood like Tan Soo Khoon or Ong Teng Cheong to have their ways and mature a different multi-functional more creative democracy to bring us higher.

So to me it is full of hypocrisy to try to run down CSJ or give praises to Low Thia Khiang or Sylvia Lim as this is still part and parcel of the devilry to divide and rule by selective comparison as was constantly done to deny problems by comparing our situations to worse-case scenarios to stay in power and control for the selfish motives of the few in power.

A system which runs on top-down and arrogant agendas of this type will not last and even if we are materially and economically successful due to over-exploitations of the people, there is still no future and that is why we are having many problems from perpetual over-taxing and hoarding of monies causing struggling of the ordinary people just to survive the economic race.

Do not be deceived by propagandas and hypocrisy. What we need is a open and consultative political environment allowing all and the best to take part in political renewal and evolution to a true democracy one which will bring out the best of our citizens for only on such a base will we produce the best form of government and only that will assure us of highest qualities of leadership and talent.

History will prove once again those who are boasting of themselves and their own success will eventually be exposed as charlatans and liars and be made to eat the humble pie.

What are talents, leadership, world-best and what are all the hubs which they have boasted so very often? Have they created the real hubs where their own citizens are benefiting from real promotions of ordinary talents from one skill to another or from one job to another ?

How many of our own citizens are being given the encouragement to attain highest of skills or professions  as compared to the 200,000 foreign workers who were given their dues all because of failures of the whole system in promoting real skills and hubs.

Real abilities are real leadership to mobilize the whole people not just a few elites or family ties or connections claimed to be world best as we are witnessing here in this little red dots.

Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:

I'm sorry robertteh, but that is naive thinking.

In the first place, sanctions has never brought down any regime.

In the second place, USA would never make trouble for PAP regime.

Why?

PAP regime is pro-USA.

Simple logic.

Too much bullshit propaganda about USA in our state media, that is the problem.

Generally people must decide the kind of governing system they wish to have. Is what they want democracy? Is it Westminster model of democracy complete with three realms of the government namely the executive, legislature and judiciary with each functioning independently yet instutitional coordination overseen by parliamentary laws and processes?

If people are still vague and political parties uncertain about such governing processes and system that they want they will be at the mercy of propagandas of all sorts which at the end only cause more problems and more suffering of the people.

I would say from my observation Westminster model if not hijacked by the executive to serve its own selfish control and clinging on to power should serve us well for many years to come. The urgent task now appears to be to free up the one-man control and manipulations of the whole parliament and judiciary and return such control back to parliament. The secretary general should only stand on his record of being able to stand up to scrutiny by a parliament fully respected to perform its bigger role and function of coordinating the whole of the three realms of parliament. Under such western model backed up by the constitution which is updated to prevent tweaking or interpreting by anyone of the executive there is hope the westminster model will still serve us well for years ahead. Without such safeguard the PM will be too powerful and no one will be able to raise issues and questions but be subjected to governing by power and fear tactics of the kind witnessed. There will then be no need to talk about freedoms leading to unrest or instability or power being abused since there is a proper balance with is sustainable for the long term with all the proper safeguard to prevent abuses. Citizens will then respect laws and rule of law and government and be willing to cooperate for any laws and governing party to do their proper jobs.

Our political parties must lay clear what democratic institutions and processes should be put forward to the people in the next election in its agenda or manifestos.

After too many years of unopposed governing, through use of power in legalistically tweaking laws and its controlled parliament and media to do as it likes, it is not possible to change any wrong doing now.

A government that is addicted to power is very much like a drug addict so drugged that it can no longer kick the habit.

It is doubtful if such a government so addicted to its power will see reason or ever give up its drug addiction. Not so easy.

So the only way such a government will behave will be to keep telling craps to the citizens like the previous NKF CEO and board with the connivance of the power that be.

Reasons did not count with the former NKF CEO or board or the power behind lending support to its wrongful policies of hoarding donation for surpluses and its own extravagance at the expense of dying patients or donating public.

The root cause is power as corrupts and absolutely power corrupts absolutely.

Citizens could not do anything even with better and sounder logic in opposing such power behavior of those in power who will go on contending with such power reasoning to protect its power with craps for years until a fortuitous change of climate or dynasty.

This is the situation Singapore is in today totally addicted to and corrupted with power and this will go on with a government in power contending with its citizens through power reason and craps like the NKF has been doing for years until it was forced to change course due to change of dynasty.

Say sorry? Admit tardiness in not admitting that it is government protectionism which leads to such misconduct or misbehavior of the whole board and its CEO?

Again this is another real-life example showing how power corrupts and how absolute power corrupts absolutely. The world has another lessen to learn from our way of a government refusing to change its wrongful policy due to its addiction to power.

Such a power-addicted government will never say sorry or use reason to deal with people.

When will power reasons give way to rational conduct and behavior ? History has shown that a minister in power will never say sorry. It is when a minister is likely to lose his seat that he is prepared to change and say sorry for mistake or incompetence. We have seen such behavior in the recent Mas Selamat lame escape from duty. With power what inquiry or good reason do we need to justify wrongfulness as almost any reason is good enough to mull over the worse of incompetence.

A change of climate or dynasty or a pending embargo from a superpower or external force like a big brother US president about to impose sanction for breach of human rights is the only way out to change wrongful behavior. <!-- / message --> <!-- edit note -->

Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:

Why increase birthrate?

How can a government expect any support from its people which has no second thought in selfishly pushing away responsibility towards its own citizens by kinds of uncaring policies like leaving them in a lurch in bad time or replacing its own dischanted citizens just to get even or branding them as quitters.

Has such a government any more moral authority to expect citizens to listen and cooperate with any such revival or loyalty programs for its survival sake?

In other words everything has a price.

If we let the government become the most expensive government in the world taxing citizens to the tune of $500,000.00 – $700,000.00 per family we will end up with the highest costs of living.

With this kind of cost of living we will end up having the lowest birth rate in the world, as simple as that.

Don’t our ministers and MPs have the simple common sense to understand this simple fact?

Do our many talented world-class leaders even have the common sense to understand the root cause of our many problems like our having the world’s lowest birth rate?

Don’t they understand that citizens need to pay for higher and higher costs of living just to survive due to the government’s wrongful taxing and hoarding of monies that deprive the citizens of the means to start families?

Will an average citizen say of household income say of the range of $1,000.00 – $1,500.00 pm be able to get married and start a family?

If say he is at age 25-30 and he has not made it to the top or middle income earner and having to face the prospect of paying the super-expensive public housing at almost $1,000.00 pm for a moderately sized HDB flat will he honestly convince himself he could pay for the basic living expenses and his or her children education up to universities or polys by age 35-40?

Do all the calculation he likes he is going to find the odd against his getting married and starting a family unless he wants to take a gamble.

It looks like by today’s costs of living as pushed up by the government by all kinds of policies either to keep talented ministers corruption free or to keep the road congestion free, only the top 10-20% of population belonging to the rich and super-rich can afford to marry and start families.

Surprisingly, none of the Ministers and MPs are willing to question the high-handed callous government push to impose higher taxes, profiteering and hoarding of monies against its own citizens is the no. 1 cause of our reaching the current plight of having the lowest birth rate in the World.

If the leaders of such world-class talents and leadership as we are told we have cannot understand such simple common sense and basics and fundamental cause of the whole problem of low birth rate, is this kind of leaders relevant to our needs today and will we do better with this kind of leadership to govern the country in the next lap?

Originally posted by sgdiehard:

 

robertteh,

don't twist my words to suit your agenda,

(Is PAP having an unfair advantage over all of us? Yes, very much so. It is a fact of life. )

(meaning the government can do as it likes to exploit the so-called unfair advantage over all?)

 

 This is not included in the “words in my mouth”. But I have no disagreement with you on the understanding of my sentence.

 

(Even if they are not the government, PAP itself is a big organization with money and ability. If anybody think of taking on any big organization, a rich man, a lawyer (if you are not), then they have to know that these big organization, with big money, big knowledge…are unfair advantages against you from the very beginning. You have to find out how to tackle them.)

 (meaning the rich and power can bully the weaker ones?)

 

Again, this is not taken from my post on “putting words in my mouth”. And what I said about the unequal distribution of wealth and power is a fact in life, isn’t it? But can the rich and power then BULLY the weaker ones? And will the rich and power then BULLY the weaker ones? The answer is not a definite yes, because there are other factors involved. I know for sure the common law protects the weak, especially the uneducated, poor and old women. You one of them? You interpreted my statement to your advantage, or should I say twisted?

 

REPLY: I do not have any agenda except as a loyal citizen with a view or sense of justice.

 

Do you know what is deduction? If you say government like a powerful organization has certain power or unfair advantage over the small and weaker people, what is the meaning of these words?

 

Does it not convey to the rational people that by virtue of that unfair advantage or power it could therefore by implication use the unfair advantage as it likes vis-a-vis the small people or ordinary citizens?

 

To avoid misquoting you I have actually produced your own words within brackets to let you better appreciate the possible deductions or interpretations of your exact words used. It my interpretations in that context is that of a rational reader how could I have misquoted you or put words into your mouth.

 

Just re-read the possible import or deductions of your words from the context in which you wrote them. See if I have substantially misquoted your choices of words out of their natural context?

 

The real issue today with regard to freedoms of expressions in the light of government taking over control of the mainstream media would only serve to support my reading of your words within those context written.

 

So read your own words carefully again to see if my interpretations of those words used is by inference the government will have the right or tendency to use of government's unfair power or unfair advantage to bully the citizens.

 

If you still think my interpretations are wrong or substantially out of your intended meaning then why do you go on inferring bigger corporations like the US immigration officers would use their power over the helpless Punjabi travellers if this is not to make your own intended meaning even clearer?

 

So have I interpreted your words substantially out of point or context?

 

 

(Go to the most democratic country in the world, the US. When you face the immigration officer and the custom officer, you will know that in the name of counter terrorism, they can subject you to any kind of searches and checks and fine. And if you are a Punjabi, or wear moustache, good luck. They are not our government, but I travel there with a passport that the US government recognizes, why should we be subjected to all these kind of harassment, all in the name of national security? Isn’t that what you hear in Singapore, all in the name of national stability?)

 (Selective comparison again to avoid or deny problems ?)

 

Is it selective or a fact of life you chose to ignore because it doesn't support your agenda?

 

REPLY

 

The above-stated only serves to confirm that you have inferred that any one with power or unfair advantage will exert those power or unfair advantage to its own advantage. In other words power corrupts absolute power corrupts or tends to corrupt absolutely. Do you agree with such inference or deduction of your words about the use of immigration officers' power to his advantage over the weaker Punjabi travellers?

 

(There are many other examples. What you see, is that the Singaporeans, when faced with these angmoh, lan lan. but in Singapore, they would curse and swear at PAP.)

(Selective comparison with worse case scenarios elsewhere to avoid or deny problems?)

 

Worse case scenarios, but does it exist? or again it is a clear and simple fact that you chose not to admit?

 

REPLY

 

Haven't I replied you before that internet being the only available venue of communications among citizens the powerful government should not be so paranoid as to want to deny citizens of this only medium of communication giving all sorts of excuse like it has the right of reply to criticisms as it it has not hijacked the mainstream media for all the rights of reply it wishes to impose on citizens. So isn't it a case of government being too paranoid of any dissent in whatever media people may choose to communicate in. If this is the reasoning why not go to the coffee shops next and start talking back to the uncles for scolding the government for the right of reply to any such communications.

 

(Don’t expect equal and level playing ground. When LKY was fighting against the colonial government, the Malaysian government, he did not have a level playing ground. Do you think Anwar has a level playing ground now? LKY had to have people like Goh KW, Toh CC, Rajaratnam…just to name a few.  It may be difficult to find good people to join politics, is it because they prefer easy life making money? Or many of them already join PAP? And if you form an opposition with people like drawer, Fantagf, leeky, AndrewPKYap…and ask for a level playing ground, then the PAP will have to go underground, may be that is why they are wishing for the death of LKY and all…)

(Past success does not guarantee problems solutions for future? Occupying political office without new solutions is a great opportunity cost to the country)

 

No record of any success definitely do not guarantee problems solution for future! No office and no solutions is no position to even justify taking up any official and country’s time.

 

REPLY

 

Does it mean that just because people disagree with government therefore they must be made to agree with your various views as posted failing which you would call them names or draw interpretations like you are drawing that they are up to no good as often slandered by you and deerhunter, gazelle or O o O.

 

One would have thought that Minister Teo Chee Hean has just announced recently that in future government will try not to use the common carrot and stick approach in presenting its views and policies but here you and the like of other undercover anonymous cyber-agents are precisely using undue pressure on people putting the government into bad image. By your inferrences to bigger corporations having unfair advantage over smaller weaker people you are implying that the government with such power or unfair advantage has the right to use them against smaller people like the citizens. With Suzhou local officer why not use its power and take them to court or some international forum over such unfair leasing of cheaper local industrial lands to compete with the Suzhou venture?

 

(Does PAP have the right to answer? Well I don’t want to speak for PAP, but I think everybody has the right to answer! No? It is from the answer that the audience get both sides of the story. Don’t doubt the intelligence of the people, we know what to think. The difference is some will accept some will not.)

(If PAP only has mandate to rule with reasons not to serve its own selfish agendas or deny problems with selective comparisons or hypocrisy)

 

There is no IF. The mandate is the same. Take note of my last sentence, don’t just read what you want to read.

 

REPLY

I will read of your words within the context of your words as posted drawing rational inference as it occurs to me as a rational reader of your words. Yes PAP has every right to answer to any criticisms but just keep in mind that it has become paranoid after taking fullest controls of broadcast and print media to purvey its propagandas it does not know what is enough and seems to be bent on carrying on suppressions totally forgetting the adage that if one kicks the dog to the wall is may well bite back.

 

(As for people like Deerhunter, you better wish they are more like him to speak for the PAP, then the votes would swing to the opposition. Hahaha….know why the PAP have been winning? Too much vulgarities and name callings from some opposition. The real opposition are people like Low, Sylvia, Chiam…and some others. They can stand in the parliament and spoke against the PAP, right at their nose, how to put the idea across, how to use the right words, definitely no vulgarities…how many of these opposition you had in mind that had this caliber? Chee SJ? hmmm….)

(Excuses given to cover up wrongful behavior or conduct of own camp? Selective praising of oppositions to divide and rule)

 

Excuses? Own camp? Selective praising…? Learn to accept others who are different from you and get a real life!

 

(We were never born equal, and in politics, it is worse….The Chinese says, “胜者为王，败者为寇.”At the end of the day, the百姓 are the one who truly suffer. If we are already suffering, we don’t want our suffering to get worse.

 

You have to prove to us what you have, not what PAP is not giving you.)

(Re-confirming your earlier admission the government is using its political power to bully the people who are loyal citizens giving their views to benefit all in nation building for the next era)

 

I know what how the country is built to what it is today. As a citizen of Singapore who makes the difference between the political parties and country, and am a loyal citizen of Singapore, I well come true views that benefit Singapore. The views from many people like you, that the PAP should fall, LKY and even his wife should die… are not accepted as beneficial to anybody, less the few of you, in nation building for the next era!

 

REPLY

You are being paranoid about forumers who posted their views here just because they do not agree with government's views or policies. There is nothing new. By your negative attitude towards the forumers they are not likely to agree with you or government policies more. If there is any goodness in your presence here please let us hear your substantive views based on logics and stop inferring that anyone who disagree with government policies are people up to no good. For your information I have never posted any article wishing any body dead or bad. If Minister Teo Chee Hian is to be taken for his words he has said recently that the government will try in future to avoid using the carot and stick approach in presenting its policies in future. If that has the true meaning of change for the better, you should stop all these pressure on forumers to agree with your posts or slander people with name calling as you deerhunter and gazelle seem to be doing here.

You have stated many times just because the government's has been elected or deemed to be elected due to GRC walkovers it seems to be having the right or power to do as it likes because of its mandate of being elected.

My interpretation is that The fact it is elected does not automatically give the government carte blanche power to use its position as government to unfair advantage does it?

 

 

 

When Ho Kwong Peng the then chairman was asked the question years back whether privatisation would result in cost saving to consumers, his answer was he could not guarantee it.

The whole government is passing costs of providing basic government services back to the people through the scheme of privatization of previously government services on necessities to the people and many GLCs were created.

These GLCs were set up taking over the assets previously owned by people paid through taxes lock stock and barrel with the transfer of profits from privatization to the government which keeps them for their own surpluses.

At the end people pay all the infrastructural costs together with higher wages incurred on all the GMs and CEOs who were previously civil servants paid bill collector civil servants' pays.

Thus GLCs will be charging higher costs for every basic government services from medicare to postal, telecommunications, utilities and transportation.

The root cause of our constantly rising costs of medicare, utilities and transportation is precisely because the government has made huge profits by transferring all the tax payers' infrastructural profits from privatisation to its own surpluses leaving the citizens to be fleeced by all the GLCs who now not only recover all the infrastructural costs all over again but are charging higher fees to cover higher costs of engaging glamorized GMs/CEOs for doing the same jobs and extra profits to pay shareholders and their own options.

Solution: Government use the privatization profits amounting to billions and return the monies back to taxpayers through endowment funds generating interests earned on such privatization profits to absorb the amortization costs on lands, buildings previously owned by people and all the utility assets, electricity networking charge, capacity charge etc. as was finally resolved in setting up MRT.

Originally posted by Fantagf:

Singapore is 5th, can't be that bad right?   Would you want to share why is it the worst?   

By logic if we are the most expensive city, our citizens probably should also be enjoying the highest or close-to-highest standard of living.

Will be be logical if we are among the most expensive cities say at the 5th most expensive and yet most of the citizens are not earning sufficient incomes to make ends meet or prepare for retirment at 55-62.

Such lopsided ranking of our costs of living as compared with our disposable income ranking is most disasterous of all governments suggesting serious fractures and failures and problems in governing of a country.

Let our expert economists think over this fact.

For years he had the chance to turn around the economy from the basic old-fashion merchandizing and retailing type to value-adding knowledge-based economy. He lacked the higher strategic mastering ability to create new technology start-ups other than pet high sounding projects which turn the heads until Lee Wai Ling called it bluff. Lee Wai Ling was right in this expose because as we can now see our biomedical and biotech are not producing the breakthrough apart from paying big monies for R&D,

His ability to speak like a no. i is second to MM Lee but the goodness of the pudding is in the eating. Result-oriented leaders of the calibre of Goh Keng Swee and Hon Sui Sen and Sim Kee Boon are few and far in between.

Without this type of go-getters all will be talk and no action. Have we reached world class or swiss standard of living but our many talk only type of leaders seem to think so. I think Goh or Hon will feel shy to talk if they cannot do anything to reach the final goal which really benefit all.

Originally posted by Melbournite:

for those who travelled and lived  overseas for a significant amount of time , u will find that the type of governance and regulatory systems found in singapore are mostly modelled after the US, UK and Australia.

 

So let me ask u a Qn, are we original and claim that we boosted our country to 1st world in 40 years when the other countries were around much longer than us and did it through  their own hard work.

Please dont refute me cos i am very sure we are not original in the first place.Coz a very balant observation when they cant solve problems during times of crisis, it shows off very clearly how "öriginal' we really are. Dont tell me 40 years of progress but cant solve even simple problems ...So isit fair for "some people" to claim all the credit for themselves?

Parliamentary system, One man one vote, Three estates of government the executive, the legislature and judiciary  were probably invented by LKY not USA. UK, or Europe from the way he is claiming leadership under such system for building our so-called unique Singapore system.

Problem is he needs all the goodness of democracy and cannot do without it as it is this type of governing system that people respect and will fight for and which will give him legitimacy without which he cannot attain power. So he has to put on the good clothing to cover ugly snarl to avoid being exposed which will put him into real trouble.

After having captured the innocent lamb in his power he of course does not care two hoots now how people think and his current mode is I am a big woofie come and get me if you can,

Originally posted by SevenEleven:

to the second question, i think is a yes. however do the consumer have the expertises and have the cost of engaging a licence electrical worker to maintain the system being considered? What about engineering problems such as noise pollution and enviromental pollution being considered? I think this is a not practical solution.

however, there is fear that our power station being sold to foreign companies will have an impact in the future. How will the authority have control over them. Let's assume X/Y & Z power station sold to the foreign company demand a raised in the traiff charges and on being turn down could ransom us by not providing maintenance to their power station thus causing power interruption. Would that happened one day?

we will have to wait an see

 

Of course I do not mean any tom dick and harry should install their own generator sets to supply their own in-house electricity. Larger users like big shopping centres or factories can any time afford to engage their own LEW and save monies using their own generator sets. I have sent such generator sets to the job sites in Indonesia before for my ex-employers who did not cost that much as the SP is currently charging. A 200KVA genset is less that $100K.

Originally posted by Fantagf:

These are not answers, these are crap.    The utilities charge does not lower when petrol prices are cheaper.   

I have asked these questions before but not been given any sensible answers to this day. In asking these questions, of SP I mentioned that in the case of SMRT initially the government found that the MRT could not make monies to cover the whole construction cost but later it has after so much internal public discussions finally decided to bear of the cost of construction of the MRT lines passing the operations to SMRT. This move has benefited us Singaporeans today for MRT has generated much more economic spin-offs to the rest of the economy.

If electricity supply infrastructure is to similarly borne by government as a one-time cost out of taxes or surpluses collected under extraordinary income nstead of allowing the government pocketing the whole profits from transferring the whole set-up to the privatized SP making all citizens to bear the high costs today we would be having a much more competitive business environment just like in the case of MRT.

I asked SP to do a study to compare how other countries are charging for electricity whether their charging is fully including the infrastructural or network costs.

Two questions asked by me at the workshop at Somerset Auditorium today:-

(1) Why is SP Service charging the electricity supply in Singapore at such an extraordinarily high price as compared with OZ?

Is it because way back in the 1980s when government decided to privatize the electricity supply it has past all the infrastructure and asset costs to SP lock stock and barrel with consumers having to bear the infrastructure costs already paid previously by them under taxes all over again?

Answer: Singapore has to pay higher infrastructure costs as its supply cables are mostly underground as compared with other countries where cables are just carried over the air in pylons. Also 3/4 of the electricity tariff comprises the costs of imported oil. (3/4 of power used to generate electricity is generated by gas which is lower in cost not well explained)

(2) Will SP allow bigger consumers to supply their own electricity using their own generator sets to lower costs?

Answer: No given.

Originally posted by Melbournite:

Which one do u think offers a higher quality of education?

I do believe that of all the universities the greatest is your own if you could educate yourself while you are receiving your education.

A very strange donation of $1.0 miion bounty by two Singapore businessmen. These donation cannot be to Singaporeans or Mas Selamat's betrayer.

The donors might be someones extremely grateful to whoever they did this for for some good turn we don't know. There is no free lunch.

Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:

If majority of Singaporeans become politicised and their level of political knowledge is raised to high level, PAP rule in Singapore will be destroyed.

The truth is that only non politicised and ignorant people will support PAP, if we exclude PAP running dogs.

According to Plato, if people possess knowledge, they will not do wrong. Of course this is debatable as many can still do wrong even though they have knowledge.

In our case we may want to ask why are our government doing so many wrongs against its people like taxing and not providing the necessary basic services and with so much taxes it has collected it is still squeezing and profiteering as seen by its HDB charging double on lands and LTA doubling and tripling taxes on vehicles even when they fail to solve the congestion problems.

This means Plato is wrong in saying that with knowledge ministers will not do wrong against the people or our leaders are very ignorant in managing or governing for the best interest of its people.

Sgdiehard,

Since you say I have misquoted you I will just reproduce your own posts (within brackets) in full to show whether I have paraphrased (shown in underlined) your remarks correctly as saying you have admitted or asserted directly or indirectly the government will use its power as it likes to deal with dissent, control the media and sue oppositions in the course of electioneering or now it is using cyber-agents to intimidate forumers in the internet for exposing wrongfulness of the government.

(Is PAP having an unfair advantage over all of us? Yes, very much so. It is a fact of life. )

(meaning the government can do as it likes to exploit the so-called unfair advantage over all?)

(Even if they are not the government, PAP itself is a big organization with money and ability. If anybody think of taking on any big organization, a rich man, a lawyer (if you are not), then they have to know that these big organization, with big money, big knowledge…are unfair advantages against you from the very beginning. You have to find out how to tackle them.)

 (meaning the rich and power can bully the weaker ones?)

(Go to the most democratic country in the world, the US. When you face the immigration officer and the custom officer, you will know that in the name of counter terrorism, they can subject you to any kind of searches and checks and fine. And if you are a Punjabi, or wear moustache, good luck. They are not our government, but I travel there with a passport that the US government recognizes, why should we be subjected to all these kind of harassment, all in the name of national security? Isn’t that what you hear in Singapore, all in the name of national stability?)

 (Selective comparison again to avoid or deny problems ?)

(There are many other examples. What you see, is that the Singaporeans, when faced with these angmoh, lan lan. but in Singapore, they would curse and swear at PAP.)

(Selective comparison with worse case scenarios elsewhere to avoid or deny problems?)

(Don’t expect equal and level playing ground. When LKY was fighting against the colonial government, the Malaysian government, he did not have a level playing ground. Do you think Anwar has a level playing ground now? LKY had to have people like Goh KW, Toh CC, Rajaratnam…just to name a few.  It may be difficult to find good people to join politics, is it because they prefer easy life making money? Or many of them already join PAP? And if you form an opposition with people like drawer, Fantagf, leeky, AndrewPKYap…and ask for a level playing ground, then the PAP will have to go underground, may be that is why they are wishing for the death of LKY and all…)

(Past success does not guarantee problems solutions for future? Occupying political office without new solutions is a great opportunity cost to the country)

(Does PAP have the right to answer? Well I don’t want to speak for PAP, but I think everybody has the right to answer! No? It is from the answer that the audience get both sides of the story. Don’t doubt the intelligence of the people, we know what to think. The difference is some will accept some will not.)

(If PAP only has mandate to rule with reasons not to serve its own selfish agendas or deny problems with selective comparisons or hypocrisy)

(As for people like Deerhunter, you better wish they are more like him to speak for the PAP, then the votes would swing to the opposition. Hahaha….know why the PAP have been winning? Too much vulgarities and name callings from some opposition. The real opposition are people like Low, Sylvia, Chiam…and some others. They can stand in the parliament and spoke against the PAP, right at their nose, how to put the idea across, how to use the right words, definitely no vulgarities…how many of these opposition you had in mind that had this caliber? Chee SJ? hmmm….)

(Excuses given to cover up wrongful behavior or conduct of own camp? Selective praising of oppositions to divide and rule)

(We were never born equal, and in politics, it is worse….The Chinese says, “胜者为王，败者为寇.”At the end of the day, the百姓 are the one who truly suffer. If we are already suffering, we don’t want our suffering to get worse.

You have to prove to us what you have, not what PAP is not giving you.)

(Re-confirming your earlier admission the government is using its political power to bully the people who are loyal citizens giving their views to benefit all in nation building for the next era)

Originally posted by stupidissmart:

Did I intimidate by insinuation or name calling ? Wat name have I called u ?

Wat have u got to say for

Well we r here discussin about politics openly isn't it ? Atobe and u have been publicly criticising the gov and your identities r not a secret (if my memory serves me well) R u caught or something before ?

Isn't tat already a sign of opening up ? It seems to me tat u just like to repeat your points and never read wat others had write...

My id is real and it stands on its own merit. Surely it is worth more than a pseudonym. Since you proclaimed to be know all why not reply to my points on their own merit instead of dismissing them as repetitions or pasting of other views.

Originally posted by stupidissmart:

tat is true... But I also have the right to express my thoughts and I just find tat many replies... largely similar...

your latest reply is different though...

It is evident that you are speaking in double tongue.

Originally posted by stupidissmart:

Well we r here discussin about politics openly isn't it ? Atobe and u have been publicly criticising the gov and your identities r not a secret (if my memory serves me well) R u caught or something before ?

A mistake is a mistake, and I am not from the gov and cannot answer for them. Which country never make mistake ? US also made mistakes, and many of them labeled as crisis. Have u ever make mistakes ?

U know which country never make mistake ? The one tat don't do anything. There used to be a saying tat if u didn't make any mistakes, u did not try hard enough

Let the views stand on their own merit like you said in so many posts. Do not try to intimidate any one by insinuation or name calling. If you think like sgdiehard there is no equal playing field because as government it has the right to use its power to get to what is wants then you do not need to convince us by any pretentious reasoning all will be able to see as sheer hypocrisy. Just say so there is no freedoms to give views over the net criticising the government so that all will stop posting here or replying to one-sided propaganda of  yours.

Originally posted by stupidissmart:

Lets go through your discussion again

U say the gov made mistakes

I agree with u.

U say they deny taking the responsibility

Wat "punishment" do u expect ? Does george bush admit his own mistake ? Does any politician goes about telling people they made mistake ? Don't need to even mention about politics... does businesses go about broadcasting their mistakes ? Come on la...

U say they did not restructure the economy

Is tat right ? I have seen changes to the economy these few years. Last time is is more of manufacturing, but now it had diversify to become more of R&D and fiancial + service

The truth is many alternative solutions have been put up by people over the years which are more than worthwhile to look into but has the government ever been bothered to listen or pay attention

Example ?

These past years there r some mistakes made. But can u consider them as failure in running the country ? I think tis is a bit exxagerating

R u cutting and pasting from somewhere else ? Because tis is the thread of "minimalist taxing and maximalist facilitator" which is just a slogan

 

If as sgdiehard has admitted it is in the final analysis a government which is governing not by rationality or interest of the people but one believing in using its power including use of civil libel laws to sue opposition politicians then it is in the final analysis of not much use giving any views or constructive criticisms at all don't you think so?

So is PM Lee honestly telling the people he will work towards openness to bring about an inclusive government ?

What will be the point in asking for examples of which government policies have failed as requested whenever you could not answer to the failures brought up.

Obviously it is the same hypocrisy characterizing the whole government the way you are countering views critical of government policies. Where any point of criticism is of merit you will say something like talking about past success or worse case scenarios to deny the problems.

To the point which catches it by the throat like Mas Selamat the reply will be "who does not make mistake let's move on" or "it cannot be equal to failure in running of a country"

What else is this sort of views if such views are not sheer hypocrisy to deny problem?