SDP/CSJ support SIA boycott?
-
We do what we think is right, we do what we think is wise, we certainly do not make ourself crowns.Originally posted by Atobe:Yes, he will "boycott oxygen if he thought it'll gain him some publicity" - but he will not be foolish if it brings him to the edge of death.
Yes, I believe he will - but how many Singaporeans - for the sake of Politics, for personal beliefs will take a strong stand and sacrifice family life, and bring hardship to one's family ?
He did it, didn't he? went on a hunger strike, boycott food, then what happened??
Politicians use their brains, and tell those who has only gut, to do their job for them. CSJ has only gut, but want to be a politician, so you get a clown.
-
You can check out all of Atobe's posts. He hates Singapore and wants to tear down and destroy Singapore. Thats why most of his posts don't make sense, its a modus operanti of being anti for the sake of anti.
-
You could choose to see the posting on SDP's website as (a) support of the boycott or (b) denouncement of the use of the law to curb peaceful demonstrations and protests. Seeing how there are other articles posted on SDP's website on the latter topic, I would think that (b) is the more rational conclusion to reach.
-
Yes unfortunately, he neglected to hide the fact that he tucked into a warm bowl of noodles before his hunger strike. And worst, he got caught on camera....Originally posted by sgdiehard:We do what we think is right, we do what we think is wise, we certainly do not make ourself crowns.
He did it, didn't he? went on a hunger strike, boycott food, then what happened??
Politicians use their brains, and tell those who has only gut, to do their job for them. CSJ has only gut, but want to be a politician, so you get a clown.
So there...his credibility exposed for the sham it is. We are already seeing the results of systematic character assassination bearing fruit....shame that chee helped himself along the way. -
First of all, there is nothing wrong with eating noodles before the start of a fast.
But don't accuse others of character assasination. If Chee wants to be a public figure, then don't lament scrutiny. -
It wasn't a fast, it was a hunger strike. Kinda comical that you should fill up before publicly going on a "hunger" strike.Originally posted by Yi Peng:First of all, there is nothing wrong with eating noodles before the start of a fast. -
How convenient that you lump 'fasting' with 'hunger strike' without differentiating the two.Originally posted by Yi Peng:First of all, there is nothing wrong with eating noodles before the start of a fast.
But don't accuse others of character assasination. If Chee wants to be a public figure, then don't lament scrutiny.
Character assassination is a basic tool of politics. As you have alredy pointed out, the whole idea is to stand up to scrutiny. There is no lamenting, no accusations. There is merely arguments and counter-arguments. If you argue correctly, you're never wrong. -
actually u r right n "wrong".....right in a sense dat LKY was a bit like CSJ, starting their politics career in the similiar way......Originally posted by Atobe:Actually those people whom he sought to champion IS the 'rest of the pack' .
The 'rest of the pack' prefer to remain blind to the abuse of the Political Rights that Singaporeans are entitled, and prefer to be cowed by the strong sense of insecurity that the Ruling Political Party has allowed to perpetuate to benefit the Ruling Party and the POWER OF ONE.
Is it any surprise that the 'rest of the pack' find it safer to wait at the side of the table of the POWER OF ONE, and wait for crumbs to fall from the table at the pleasure of the POWER OF ONE ?
It is unfortunate that CSJ's delivery lack polish, seemingly crude, impolite, and brash despite his tertiary professional qualification as a Psychologist.
This unpolished manner could actually be taken as sheer honesty, compared to the guile propaganda speeches made with a glib tongue by the Ruling Political Party.
Is CSJ the only one who began a political career in this manner ?
LKY was exactly like CSJ in the 1950s, and was disliked by the largely Chinese educated population towards a fellow Chinese - who behave arrogantly brash, and could not speak a word of Chinese dialect or even Mandarin.
however, things has changed and look at the situation when LKY was in when he started his politics career......singapore faced reallie many problems such as poverty, basic needs and many many other problems dat could endanger the survival of singaporeans.....so dat time dey need a leader dat could speak well, be confident so dat the citizen would vote fer him to guide the country thru........
now, look at the situation dat CSJ in......nowadays singaporeans r quite rich, n even if some singaporeans r poor or hav financial difficulties, i do nt deny dat government is actually helping dem.... it has become our culture dat we singaporeans do not wan to stir up unecessary trouble as because singapore has been "peaceful"....the older generation noes how bad n jia lat could be if the riots n unrest dat happened in the 50s n 60s happens again in the 21st century of singapore.......
it is gd dat someone like CSJ exist, as he provides another view abt singapore n government........however i feel dat he has done it the wrong way.....if he were in the 50s or 60s he might hav won the hearts of singaporeans but den, this is the 21 st century n the society is different....he nids to change the way he is doing things otherwise he isnt going to get far in politics...... -
Fast of hunger strike, call it what you want. I personally do not mind Chee filling up before the 'hunger strike'. As long as he does not eat during the period of the stated strike, thats good enough for me.
Again, if Chee chooses to be a public figure, don't complain about public scrutiny and call it character assasination. -
The problem with CSJ is that he goes overboard, becomes emotional and somewhat irrational, and takes things very personally. Makes you wonder how level headed he is when making decisions. But back to the topic, I don't think either he or SDP are supporting the call for a boycott.
-
Originally posted by Yi Peng:Only fools from Malaysia will support CSJ.
Now.... I wonder who is the fool from whichever country that is in support of CSJ ? ..Originally posted by Yi Peng:Fast of hunger strike, call it what you want. I personally do not mind Chee filling up before the 'hunger strike'. As long as he does not eat during the period of the stated strike, thats good enough for me.
Again, if Chee chooses to be a public figure, don't complain about public scrutiny and call it character assasination.
Noodles only ? .
You should feed him with some Salman fish cake.... -
Originally posted by hiphop2009:
Many thanks for your very fair comment but I would defer from your position on one issue which you state that .... "nowadays singaporeans r quite rich, n even if some singaporeans r poor or hav financial difficulties, i do nt deny dat government is actually helping dem.... "
actually u r right n "wrong".....right in a sense dat LKY was a bit like CSJ, starting their politics career in the similiar way......
however, things has changed and look at the situation when LKY was in when he started his politics career......singapore faced reallie many problems such as poverty, basic needs and many many other problems dat could endanger the survival of singaporeans.....so dat time dey need a leader dat could speak well, be confident so dat the citizen would vote fer him to guide the country thru........
now, look at the situation dat CSJ in......nowadays singaporeans r quite rich, n even if some singaporeans r poor or hav financial difficulties, i do nt deny dat government is actually helping dem.... it has become our culture dat we singaporeans do not wan to stir up unecessary trouble as because singapore has been "peaceful"....the older generation noes how bad n jia lat could be if the riots n unrest dat happened in the 50s n 60s happens again in the 21st century of singapore.......
it is gd dat someone like CSJ exist, as he provides another view abt singapore n government........however i feel dat he has done it the wrong way.....if he were in the 50s or 60s he might hav won the hearts of singaporeans but den, this is the 21 st century n the society is different....he nids to change the way he is doing things otherwise he isnt going to get far in politics......
Are Singaporeans quite rich today compared to the 1970s, 1980s or even the 1990s ?
With a new class in Singapore - called the New Poor - which was created largely by THREE CONSECUTIVE Economic downturns in 1987, 1997 and 2002 - the Singapore as an Asian Tiger has become a whimping cat struggling to find its claws again.
No Singaporean can afford to have a single wage earner to grow a young family.
No retiring Singaporean - with an average income of $3,000 p.m - can afford to retire and keep the house without thinking of downgrading.
No retiring Singaporean working since the 1950s and retiring in the 1990s can continue to live on his CPF till 2010.
No retiring Singaporean working since 1980s to 2020 will be able to afford to retire at the age of 65years, but will have to continue working till 70 and more.
Is the Singapore Government aka the Ruling Political Party helping the poor ?
Recently it was discovered that many poor were not even aware of the help available, as they have no access to the broadcast or print media - being even unable to find a full meal for each day.
The help that the Singapore Government has given is based on the poor having to spend their own money to get a little bit more in return from the Government, and this square off to neglible help being given.
If welfare is such a dirty word in the vocabulary of the Government aka the Ruling Political Party, can any positive HELP program be focussed on those who need such help the most ? -
Personal attack again instead of joining the discussion.Originally posted by Atobe:Now.... I wonder who is the fool from whichever country that is in support of CSJ ? ..
Noodles only ? .
You should feed him with some Salman fish cake.... -
Originally posted by Atobe:
hmm ok.....am i right to say the rich r getting richer n the poor r getting poorer?....
Many thanks for your very fair comment but I would defer from your position on one issue which you state that .... "nowadays singaporeans r quite rich, n even if some singaporeans r poor or hav financial difficulties, i do nt deny dat government is actually helping dem.... "
Are Singaporeans quite rich today compared to the 1970s, 1980s or even the 1990s ?
With a new class in Singapore - called the [b]New Poor - which was created largely by THREE CONSECUTIVE Economic downturns in 1987, 1997 and 2002 - the Singapore as an Asian Tiger has become a whimping cat struggling to find its claws again.
No Singaporean can afford to have a single wage earner to grow a young family.
No retiring Singaporean - with an average income of $3,000 p.m - can afford to retire and keep the house without thinking of downgrading.
No retiring Singaporean working since the 1950s and retiring in the 1990s can continue to live on his CPF till 2010.
No retiring Singaporean working since 1980s to 2020 will be able to afford to retire at the age of 65years, but will have to continue working till 70 and more.
Is the Singapore Government aka the Ruling Political Party helping the poor ?
Recently it was discovered that many poor were not even aware of the help available, as they have no access to the broadcast or print media - being even unable to find a full meal for each day.
The help that the Singapore Government has given is based on the poor having to spend their own money to get a little bit more in return from the Government, and this square off to neglible help being given.
If welfare is such a dirty word in the vocabulary of the Government aka the Ruling Political Party, can any positive HELP program be focussed on those who need such help the most ?
[/b]
i dunnoe...but den at least fer mos of us the basic necessities are met......
-
muz be u anger or provoke him in the past........Originally posted by Yi Peng:Personal attack again instead of joining the discussion. -
One must never forget, if SIA falls, thousands of jobs at Changi Airport are also at stake...
-
Is it any wonder why you have difficulty interpreting other views, regardless of how many clones you intend to sprout? That fact that you cannot even discern the DIFFERENCE between FASTING and HUNGER STRIKE smacks of supreme and deliberate IGNORANCE.Originally posted by Yi Peng:Fast of hunger strike, call it what you want.
It is precisely because he was unable to stand up to scrutiny which LED to scrutiny becoming CHARACTER ASSASSINATION. His credibility was wholely dismembered and ripped to shreds, no thanks to his own firebrand antics.
Again, if Chee chooses to be a public figure, don't complain about public scrutiny and call it character assasination.
Who's complaining? -
Originally posted by Atobe:
I thought the economy had recovered already. Which source u get local cannot get makan for a day?
Many thanks for your very fair comment but I would defer from your position on one issue which you state that .... "nowadays singaporeans r quite rich, n even if some singaporeans r poor or hav financial difficulties, i do nt deny dat government is actually helping dem.... "
Are Singaporeans quite rich today compared to the 1970s, 1980s or even the 1990s ?
With a new class in Singapore - called the [b]New Poor - which was created largely by THREE CONSECUTIVE Economic downturns in 1987, 1997 and 2002 - the Singapore as an Asian Tiger has become a whimping cat struggling to find its claws again.
No Singaporean can afford to have a single wage earner to grow a young family.
No retiring Singaporean - with an average income of $3,000 p.m - can afford to retire and keep the house without thinking of downgrading.
No retiring Singaporean working since the 1950s and retiring in the 1990s can continue to live on his CPF till 2010.
No retiring Singaporean working since 1980s to 2020 will be able to afford to retire at the age of 65years, but will have to continue working till 70 and more.
Is the Singapore Government aka the Ruling Political Party helping the poor ?
Recently it was discovered that many poor were not even aware of the help available, as they have no access to the broadcast or print media - being even unable to find a full meal for each day.
The help that the Singapore Government has given is based on the poor having to spend their own money to get a little bit more in return from the Government, and this square off to neglible help being given.
If welfare is such a dirty word in the vocabulary of the Government aka the Ruling Political Party, can any positive HELP program be focussed on those who need such help the most ?
[/b] -
You sure the retail sector is doing well?Originally posted by will4:I thought the economy had recovered already. Which source u get local cannot get makan for a day?
It is only the govt monopolised biz that are doing well -
I agreed on this statement. He will never make a good leader.Originally posted by Rexdriver:The problem with CSJ is that he goes overboard, becomes emotional and somewhat irrational, and takes things very personally. Makes you wonder how level headed he is when making decisions. But back to the topic, I don't think either he or SDP are supporting the call for a boycott. -
it was a suicide, or self inflicted injury, not assassination.Originally posted by BillyBong:It is precisely because he was unable to stand up to scrutiny which LED to scrutiny becoming CHARACTER ASSASSINATION. His credibility was wholely dismembered and ripped to shreds, no thanks to his own firebrand antics.
Who's complaining? -
Is this not quite similar to the other 'fishy' character who posted :Originally posted by Yi Peng:
Personal attack again instead of joining the discussion. [/quote]Personal attack again instead of joining the discussion.
[quote]Originally posted by Yi Peng : 8 March 2006 - 9.15AM - SDP/CSJ support SIA boycott
You can check out all of Atobe's posts. He hates Singapore and wants to tear down and destroy Singapore. Thats why most of his posts don't make sense, its a modus operanti of being anti for the sake of anti.
The "fishy smell" lingers from 'fishy Salman' to 'Fish Cake'Atobe is a traitor that wants to destroy Singapore, thats why he supports terrorists like Mahathir.
I'm not sure I want popular opinion on my side -- I've noticed those with the most opinions often have the fewest facts.
- Bethania McKenstry
There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity.
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749 - 1832 )
Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
- Martin Luther King Jr. ( 1929 - 1968 ), Strength to Love, 1963 -
Originally posted by will4:
Have you not heard of the Neighborhood Meals Programme ?
I thought the economy had recovered already. Which source u get local cannot get makan for a day?
There has always been a group of lower than Low Income Group that can hardly have three meals a day, let alone having one meal with full dietary consideration.
From an indepent report on Income Distribution And Inequality Measures in Singapore : by the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (19 - 21 June 2002) - in a Conference on "Chinese Population and Socioeconomic Studies : utilizing the 2000/2001 round Census Data"
Whatever you see and read in the national print media - concerning the poor - is only the tip of the iceberg.
II. Growth in Household Income from Work by Decile
With recovery from the 1998 economic slowdown, household income growth had resumed for the majority of household in 2000 (Table 2).
For the lowest two deciles, the average household income in 2000 had declined compared with 1999.
This was mainly due to the increase in the proportion of household with no income earner from 75 per cent in 1999 to 87 per cent in 2000 for the lowest 10%.
Within the lowest 10% of household, there was still a decline of 14 per cent in average household income for those with income earners - from $531 in 1999 to $459 in 2000.
Such comparisons, however, must be viewed in context, as the proportion of household with income in the lowest 10% had become much smaller, from 25 per cent in 1999 to 13 per cent in 2000.
This means that average household income in 2000 is computed for a smaller pool of income-earning households, who are more concentrated at the lowest extreme of the income distribution.
IV. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Household income distribution in Singapore, which had remained relatively stable during 1990 - 1998, became increasingly unequal in 1999 and 2000.
This was mainly due to the increase of households with no income earners in the lowest 10% and the faster income growth among higher-income households in these years.
The widening income disparity was a reflection of globalisation and Singapore's transition into a knowlege-based economy. Many countries had experienced similar increases in income inequality in the 1990s.
If you have the opportunity to visit some of temples and mosques that feed the poor and destitutes, you will begin to see the reality of life in the lower strata of Singapore in a sham First World. -
Don't believe the 140th if you want to know the real picture.Volunteers will tell you a much more coherent one than the filtered strain of cheap coffee that you get at 645am.
-
I have seen poor people in Spore but at least help is being offered. I think everybody has his opinion but what about Yi Peng has to comment about this?Originally posted by Atobe:Whatever you see and read in the national print media - concerning the poor - is only the tip of the iceberg.
If you have the opportunity to visit some of temples and mosques that feed the poor and destitutes, you will begin to see the reality of life in the lower strata of Singapore in a sham First World.