Mahathir implies that it's S'pore's loss for leaving M'sia..
-
IDA in Johor will allow greater Singaporean control of their economy.
Interestingly, in the old days, the Johor-Riau Sultanate was made up of Riau , Johor and Temasek.
Those were the old boundaries..not the current British-drawn up Malaysia. -
Soon he will be speaking to himselfOriginally posted by sgdiehard:Mahathir really got big problem now. I remember years ago when he spoke in JB, it was at the stadium with 5000 people, now only 300 listened to him. The next time he would be speaking only to 20 people, may be those who agree with him should make a trip there to support him.
-
Hahaha.... and 'guess' which country will be blamed when the projet more or less comes to a standstill......Originally posted by dork3d:Just to side-track a bit, they have come out with a Iskandar Economic Area at Johore, under their 9MP, most of them are still shelved or ongoing at snail speed...
Just wondering how long will they take to build up this project in Johore which is slated to be 2.5 times bigger than Singapore?
Maybe never....... Just how many of those Mega Projet really comes in as planned...... I think, at the end...... the Iskandar Economic Area will be smaller in scale than 1st planned....... then we will be kena blamed again...... for not supporting them..... -
Let that fella say all he want lor. Afterall, everyone has his own point of view and that's the way history is..........
-
and so rite now.. mlys in singapore are second class?Originally posted by FireAndHell:hey, you forgot to add......n us chinese will be second class n workin our butts off to feed them malay elites in the mainland...and be last in the queue, not on equal terms...hahaha!
-
and cheap cigarettes!!Originally posted by ichi87:haha
i think if we are still wif Malaysia
1. We will still be chewing gums??
2. We will not be celebrating the winning of Tiger Cup??
3. All chinese will gather at Genting??
4. We will never need to use NEWater again??
5. We do not need to buy sand from Indonesia to reclaim as much land as possible??
6. There will not be any National Service??
haha -
LOL!!!Originally posted by Gary84:Dr M not think properly again....
think he gotta take some pork pills to wake up his bloody idea....
Msia is so badly run.... Potholes on the road... dirty toilets...
Simply YUCKS~! -
Don't forget that it was the referendum that revealed the majority's wish of Singaporeans to join the union. Even LKY thought that was the best prospect for Singapore. The Barisan Socialis was a firm opponent of the union. So was Brunei. Subsequent problems emerged during the union. I wouldn't go that far to be arrogant and say that it's Malaysia's loss. Singaporeans would have gained a lot too to be part of Malaysia.
-
i tot we were kicked out.
-
we were kicked out.
-
If he is so good, he would be able to transform Malaysia into 1st world during his long tenure as PM. Obviously, he is a loser and we know how loser behaves. Out of envy, he is even slamming his successor who is trying his best to do good for his country. he
tink no crooked bidge, money no enough. -
You can read part 1 of LKY's memoirs to get his personal first hand accounts of events leading to Singapore's independence. He can be biased, of course, but still a fascinating read.Originally posted by dumbdumb!:i tot we were kicked out. -
Uh.. uh.. doesnt anti-LKY sentiments seem underserving now in light of Dr.M?
-
Unfortunately, it was LKY who went against the grain of public opinions, and held a Referendum over three "choices" that were in effect no-choice at all - as they were all leaning towards only one direction, and without the alternative views being accomodated in the Referendum.Originally posted by Gauze:Uh.. uh.. doesnt anti-LKY sentiments seem underserving now in light of Dr.M?
This led to the Barisan Sosialist to walk out of Parliament in protest to LKY's seemingly underhanded political trickery to get Singapore into Malaysia at all costs.
Decades later, and in his memoir, LKY praised the father of the present Brunei Sultan for the wisdom and forward vision in not gaining Brunei's independence by being a State within Malaysia.
On hindsight, could Singapore have succeeded in any relationship, given LKY's doggedness in having things his way - as seen in the events before merger with Malaysia, and during Singapore's term as part of a Malaysian state - in his attitude towards the Federal Politicians ?
Mahathir may have his own view of history, and perhaps one could take his view as an old man consoling himself for not being in a position to control events at that time, resulting in his Malaysia losing a bigger prize in Singapore.
During the period when Singapore was in Malaysia, Singapore was the largest single State contributor to the Federal Budget, but got back less than 10 per cent of what was given away to develop the Singapore State.
If Malaysia had held on to Singapore, perhaps Malaysia would have continued to benefit from the talents of those who crossed over - and continue to cross over - into Singapore.
Malaysia could perhaps enjoy an equal status as Singapore, if not an even more superior development status than Singapore. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
The referendum might be skewed, but public opinion wasn't exactly against the merger. Brunei had a genuine reason not to join because of its oil wealth. We had none. In fact, it was fears from neighbours like Indonesia and Philippines concerning the merger of a greater Malaysia that resulted in the confrontation. We tend to see from today's perspective that it was wrong for Singapore to join Malaysia. In fact, we can categorize ourselves as a reluctant nation. We should pay heed to that, and not get too preachy and arrogant about our so called superiority.
Unfortunately, it was LKY who went against the grain of public opinions, and held a Referendum over three "choices" that were in effect no-choice at all - as they were all leaning towards only one direction, and without the alternative views being accomodated in the Referendum.
This led to the Barisan Sosialist to walk out of Parliament in protest to LKY's seemingly underhanded political trickery to get Singapore into Malaysia at all costs.
Decades later, and in his memoir, LKY praised the father of the present Brunei Sultan for the wisdom and forward vision in [b]not gaining Brunei's independence by being a State within Malaysia.
On hindsight, could Singapore have succeeded in any relationship, given LKY's doggedness in having things his way - as seen in the events before merger with Malaysia, and during Singapore's term as part of a Malaysian state - in his attitude towards the Federal Politicians ?
Mahathir may have his own view of history, and perhaps one could take his view as an old man consoling himself for not being in a position to control events at that time, resulting in his Malaysia losing a bigger prize in Singapore.
During the period when Singapore was in Malaysia, Singapore was the largest single State contributor to the Federal Budget, but got back less than 10 per cent of what was given away to develop the Singapore State.
If Malaysia had held on to Singapore, perhaps Malaysia would have continued to benefit from the talents of those who crossed over - and continue to cross over - into Singapore.
Malaysia could perhaps enjoy an equal status as Singapore, if not an even more superior development status than Singapore.
[/b] -
Everyone knows, even Dr M himself, that it's Malaysia's loss for being belligerent towards Singapore. Malaysia and Singapore could have been partners in progress.
Tengku Abdul Rahman kicked Singapore out of Malaysia because he did not expect that Singapore can survive on its own, and that Singapore will later come crawling back to join Malaysia. The Tengku was wrong.
The song "There was a time, when people said that Singapore won't make it, But we did" is in reference to this.
The Tengku was also afraid of the Chinese economic power, and of losing political power to the Chinese. Till this day they are against the Malaysian Malaysia idea, that LKY championed.
If Singapore did not separate from Malaysia, Singapore today would be underdeveloped, and tourist would come to visit Singapore for its old world charm, a former British colony, Raffles Hotel and Har Par Villa. There would still be kampongs in Singapore. And yes, Singaporeans.. opps sorry, Malaysians from Singapore would go to KL to find work.
Dr M is right in a way, in that its Singapore's loss, because Singapore lost its rustic life. Shees! I really miss those kampong days. My dad reared chickens, and, as a boy I was really good at running after fallen coconuts and getting them before the other housewives did. There was a sickly durian tree behind our house, but the small durians were delicious. The neighbours were fantastic, different ethnic groups and all living together in harmony. We could take short-cuts through their houses. In through the back door, out the front door, no problemo, only carry your slippers. Ah... what a loss.
But I am thankful I am not in Malaysia, because I am not a bumiputra. -
wa lao, ah pei, how old are you now, was already around in those days? I can still get that kind of life in the small town in Johore, right now, but there people turn on to channel 8 for the Zhao An Nin Hao, and not many young people stay around there anymore, all studying or migrated to KL, Singapore or Perth....sigh.....Originally posted by mancha:Everyone knows, even Dr M himself, that it's Malaysia's loss for being belligerent towards Singapore. Malaysia and Singapore could have been partners in progress.
Tengku Abdul Rahman kicked Singapore out of Malaysia because he did not expect that Singapore can survive on its own, and that Singapore will later come crawling back to join Malaysia. The Tengku was wrong.
The song "There was a time, when people said that Singapore won't make it, But we did" is in reference to this.
The Tengku was also afraid of the Chinese economic power, and of losing political power to the Chinese. Till this day they are against the Malaysian Malaysia idea, that LKY championed.
If Singapore did not separate from Malaysia, Singapore today would be underdeveloped, and tourist would come to visit Singapore for its old world charm, a former British colony, Raffles Hotel and Har Par Villa. There would still be kampongs in Singapore. And yes, Singaporeans.. opps sorry, Malaysians from Singapore would go to KL to find work.
Dr M is right in a way, in that its Singapore's loss, because Singapore lost its rustic life. Shees! I really miss those kampong days. My dad reared chickens, and, as a boy I was really good at running after fallen coconuts and getting them before the other housewives did. There was a sickly durian tree behind our house, but the small durians were delicious. The neighbours were fantastic, different ethnic groups and all living together in harmony. We could take short-cuts through their houses. In through the back door, out the front door, no problemo, only carry your slippers. Ah... what a loss.
But I am thankful I am not in Malaysia, because I am not a bumiputra.
If Singapore remains an undeveloped island, made up of small towns and kampongs, I guess many of us would be in Australia, UK or Taiwan. -
Nee Soon Village until the middle of 1980' was not as developed as it is now. Therefore what ah pek.
-
Originally posted by mancha:Nee Soon Village until the middle of 1980' was not as developed as it is now. Therefore what ah pek. , very sorry, really have no idea what Nee Soon Village was like in the 80s.
I thought even Ulu Sembawang was cleared for development in the 80s. Sorry lah brudder. 
-
No prob lah. If I was a geriatric as my story implys I could not be PC literate.
Anyway you are right, if Singapore is underdeveloped under Malaysia, people would be leaving for Australia, UK or even Taiwan, and elsewhere.
Ms Irene Ng, MP is from Penang.
And Penang is formerly of the Straits Settlement like Singapore.
Penang has been threatened by the elites in KL for not doing enough for the ethnic Malays in the island.
We could never be near as what we are now under Malaysia.
Therefore, overall, it's defiinitely no loss for us. -
why people always try to stir up nationalistic feeling. the T.S should not have talk about things like this malaysia cannot survive without singapore and singapore cannot survive without malaysia we are good neighbours and we should just forgive and forget.
-
if ppl think that malaysia elites have crossed over to serve singapore to help to make it successful today then I say thank you to them but they also thank us cos if they don't come over, they won't be the elites... maybe selling ahem dvd
noticed that when the new PM took over malaysia, all those ministers that used to barked at SG also become more sensible and start to talk like a thinking human. Although at times still show sign of not able to contain the animal in them -
Originally posted by chiabaliao:
How did you arrive at the conclusion that "public opinion was'nt exactly againste the merger" - when there were no option for anyone in 1962 to place a 'NO' for Merger ?
The referendum might be skewed, but public opinion wasn't exactly against the merger. Brunei had a genuine reason not to join because of its oil wealth. We had none. In fact, it was fears from neighbours like Indonesia and Philippines concerning the merger of a greater Malaysia that resulted in the confrontation. We tend to see from today's perspective that it was wrong for Singapore to join Malaysia. In fact, we can categorize ourselves as a reluctant nation. We should pay heed to that, and not get too preachy and arrogant about our so called superiority.
The three options in which all adult Singaporean had to participate by law in this Referendum was only for MERGER with Malaysia - each under a different sets of conditions :Merger Referendum of 1962
One could note that there was no option to vote against the merger amongst three options presented to the people:
Option A: All Singapore citizens would automatically become citizens of Malaysia, and Singapore would retain a degree of autonomy and state power, such as over labour and education. Singapore would also get to keep its language policies, such as to retain using all four major languages, English, Mandarin, Malay and Tamil.
Option B: Singapore would become a federal state like that of the other eleven states, with no more autonomy than the other states would, thus ceding control over issues such as labour and education policies to the Central Government in Kuala Lumpur. This also meant that there would be less multilingualism - only English and Malay would be used for official purposes, and possibly education. Only those born in Singapore or descended from the Singapore-born would become citizens of Malaysia. There would also be proportionate representation in Parliament from Singapore.
Option C: Singapore would enter on terms no less favourable than the Borneo territories, Sabah and Sarawak, both whom were also discussing merger with Malaysia. This was to ensure that Malaysia would not discriminate along racial lines, as that would mean discriminating against Sabah and Sarawak, which were predominantly Bumiputra as well.
There were 624,000 adult Singaporeans being eligible for this Referendum, which was made compulsory by Law, resulting in a voter turnout of 561,000 - which was approximately 90 percent turnout.
Considering that the 1962 Singapore Population of 1,750,000, this was a remarkable achievement in political conciousness of Singaporeans in the early Political History of Singapore - compared to the participation of Singaporeans in 2006 Elections, when our population is 4.5 Million.
Without any option to reject Merger, the entire exercise of Merger seems to be a foregone conclusion, with the choice merely that to select the Terms and Conditions of Merger - with Option A being the OBVIOUS CHOICE.
Was it oil alone that allowed Brunei to stay out of the merger, or was it the political implication of the Brunei Sultan losing his own Royal autonomy in deference to the 11 Royalties in the then Federation of Malaya ?
As much as Brunei was subjected to the threats of larger neighbors - (which actually reared its ugly head when Brunei's indigeneous Malay Political Party was instigated and funded by Indonesia to topple the Brunei Sultan) - it remained steadfast in its decision not to merge, but to live with British protection.
Why did Singapore not consider the same option then, when since its founding in 1819, Singapore was seen and planned - by Sir Stamford Raffles - to be the regional center of economic and entrepot trade ?
Could the reason for the insistence by LKY to merge with Malaysia due to his lack in confidence for Singapore to go it alone, which will be quite revealing to his ability that he did not have the same political calculation and economic vision as that of Sir Stamford Raffles ? (This view was contradicted when his vision was implemented vigorously after Singapore was ejected from Malaysia).
Or did LKY set his eyes on a bigger political pie by using Singapore as a "Trojan Horse" to gain himself a place in the larger Political Stage of Malaysia ?
The Malay Politicians have never stopped being suspicious of LKY, and feared his logic in argument and his linguistic abilities in local dialects - a mastery of both would have allowed LKY to challenge UMNO's supremacy in leading their Malay constituency in every Malayan State.
Did Indonesia and Philippines feared the creation of Malaysia ?
Or did the creation of Malaysia resulted in an inconvenient spanner being placed in Indonesia's President Surkano's own plan of a Malay Empire across the entire South-east Asian Archipalego, resulting in his conclusion that Malaysia was a Colonial Plan to perpetuate the British Colonial influence over the land that it has dominated for over 100 years ?
Philippines had a historical claim over a large portion of Sabah through the old Malay Sultanate - unfortunately, this claim is flimsy at best.
For better or for worse, Singaporeans have been burdened by the many decisions based on the domineering views from the POWER OF ONE. With regards to the ambivalent Singapore-Malaysia relationship, it will unfortunately be the political baggage that Singaporean will have to bear until the first generational leaders fade from the memories of those directly involved as Politicians and Citizens. -
Originally posted by blueheeler:
tis guy is seriously taking too much drugs...
According to http://www.malaysiakini.com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/news/65244, Malaysia ex-PM Dr Mahathir made a speech in Johor yesterday and said that “if Singapore had been mostly populated by Malays, there [b]might not have been a secession. Who knows what would have transpired in the event that the island was populated mostly by Malays…”
...
No thanks Dr Mahathir, SÂ’poreÂ’s independence is a loss to Malaysia, not SÂ’poreansÂ…
[/b] -
Originally posted by hloc:
So this is your explanation why "corruption, Cronizim.... etc " should allowed in Singapore?
Are you say the Malaysia goventment is free from corruption, Cronizim.... etc
Because I think their Anti-Corruption unit is [b]ITSELF under investation for Corruption...... Originally posted by hloc:
Blame the people and ignore the fact that they are overcharging HDB state land costs (which should be free for Singaporeans, since it is land that belongs to Singaporeans and is 99 years lease only) and COE (instead of balloting), raise GST so that they can use the money to pay themselves million dollars salaries that they still think is too little... and take Singaporeans hard earned money to give to Thai people...
[color=blue]Sorry..... debt is saddle by oneself. Instead of buying a car, super big HDB, mutli Credit Cards.... etc. One could always live within one's means. [b]''Suit Your lifestyle To Your Salary... Not The Other Way Around''[/b]