I see a vehement protest in you regarding the CPF retirement scheme. I shan't debate with you on this any further. I respect your views but do not bother to wrestle me over to yours. To each his own.Originally posted by Atobe:Thanks for the effort in responding to each carefully paragraphed points, and for the effort taken with the differentiated colored text.
Your considered explanation are accepted, with exception to the following; then again it is my own position that others and yourself may feel differently.
Even if 4% is paid on the retirement fund, it is applicable to a smaller portion of the CPF that is required to be further locked up from Age 55 till 84 years.
The 4% interest that is payable annually on a retirement amount fixxed at a maximum sum of $120,000 for each Singaporean is neglible, when any Fund Manager will be able to multiply this amount at a higher rate of return on a wide array of program.
Is the Government holding back some portion of the profits from the CPF monies that are managed by the Fund Managers ?
Originally posted by Atobe:
In this day and age, as an educated and sophisticated person, will you still be tied to simple images that can be so easily managed and distorted by others ?
The key to successful politics is distortion. Perhaps you may find a better answer in the bulk of Singaporeans who are living in this educated and sophisticated era but were distorted.
In his early political experience, LKY was averse to phototakings, as they never presented him in the most photogenic ways, and he even admitted that he looked like a typical Singaporean ruffian - even a 1950s gangster.
He had the benefit of controlling all print and broadcast media over the last 45 years of absolute power, and every event since then were stage managed, with camera angles and carefully selected photos published.
Why not?
On first appearance, politics maybe about image, but I believe that this simplistic criteria alone does an injustice to a more educated and discerning population that is able to judge for itself the message and the messenger, and not simply the appearance of the messenger.
It certainy does.
To your credit, at least you have the courage to say that you have found CSJ's writings to be 'in no way fanatic views'.
Thank you.
CSJ's image in the 2001 election was a single event that one perhaps could call it his fervent desire to have a off-the-cuff debate, when Goh Chok Tong refused to engage CSJ on the issues raised.
Why was the Ruling Party aka the Government avoiding giving a clear response to the public concerning the loan offer - (of $10 Billion ? ) by the Singapore Government to the striken Suharto Government ?
He jumped on a seat and shouted at Goh Chok Tong. Who can forget that? Then he made this allegation of all of a sudden and given S'poreans' mentality in "seeing is believing", coupled with a pro-govt press, he was on the wrong pedestal right from the start. Result? His actions were discredited as lunacy.
For that single event, the Ruling Party typecast CSJ as the villian gangster 'raping' the chastity of Goh Chok Tong's virginal image. For crying out loud, this is politics as LKY had experienced in the 1950s.
How many photo images of LKY - been published in prints and broadcast 'live' on TV - showed a combative LKY offensive demeanour, talking down to Singaporeans, ALPHA-S and Trade Unions ? Singaporean deferred in silence.
No denying, LKY played this card well but ruthlessly.
None taken - especially when sensible.
Thank you once again.
Originally posted by Atobe:continuation
Were we brought up to always look at both sides of the coin ?
For more then 45 years, I always thought that in Singapore there is only one side of the coin, one way of looking at things.
NO U-TURN.
Where did you come from ?
If you're referring to the govt's style of doing things, yes of course. What I meant by "both sides of the coin" is to always have balanced views. Only when we know what black is like, then may we discern the white. I'm no fan of this govt but I'm prepared to see the positives of it too. Simply hearing the negatives would make one suspicious. That's what Chee has been doing.
It is rare that someone is prepared to look at both sides of the coin.
Have you tried to understand CSJ's background, his family, his upbringing - why he would have given up a stable job as a lecturer in NUS, and went against his faculty head - (a diehard PAP hatchet man) - to enter politics on the side of the Opposition, when he was offered to join the Ruling Party ?
Was he ALREADY attempting to be a martyr at the time when he entered politics ?
Nope, I have never said he attempted to be a martyr. That's how the press painted him. CSJ is a very different person off the political scene. He behaves rationally and is a family man. Qn is.....how many actually know this?
All this is a matter of perception - yours - as you placed more weight on images than on the strength of the person, his message, and his willingness to stand-by his words and his actions.
So I was the cause of his low votes during the past 2 elections? This statement should be posed to the electorate. Let me reiterate, image counts. Whether I place more emphasis on it than strength of character or not, is unimportant here.
Can the same be said of any of the Members of Parliament willing to stand on the conviction of their views, and go against the Party Whip, and truly represent the position of their Constituents who elect them into Parliament ?
Or have they sold their soul to represent their Political Party and not the Constituents, and renegading on the promise of defending the Constitution and Singaporeans in Parliament ?
The Constitution has been raped a thousand times over with new amendments that make nonsense of the original text and meaning of the Singapore Constitution - and all made to the benefit of ensuring that the incumbent Ruling Party will retain the political status quo in perpetuity.
These bunch are mostly "yes-men", not worth a mention.
CSJ refused to play by the rules dictated and set by the Ruling Party, as these make nonsense to what is already spelled clearly in the Singapore Constitution.
Will you fight a war by the rules of engagement set out by the enemy ?
Will you fight Al Qaeda and the JI Groups on their ground rules ?.
Trust me, that's his biggest ever political mistake: not playing by the rules. He has not seen the last of prison yet and he will continue to be painted as a lunatic. Till the day he rests in peace, PAP will still be in power. No prizes for guessing who still has control of the press then.
Al Qaeda and JI do not count as relative comparisons. They are unexterminable, highly secretive and act on the sly. No govt has control over them. But Chee? He's always in the tiger's lair and one wrong move means serious trouble. Therefore, when in that lair, do as it says and make a move to kill it once it is low on guard.
Originally posted by Rock^Star:Not exactly vehement, but certainly a protest at the gross indecency of this Government borrowing the CPF funds at below market rate, using it for infrastructural developments, and profitting from the atrocious rate charged when the same infrastructural services are used or consumed by the same CPF holders.
I see a vehement protest in you regarding the CPF retirement scheme. I shan't debate with you on this any further. I respect your views but do not bother to wrestle me over to yours. To each his own.
Does fund manager guarantee the returns of investment, or is it subject to risk?Originally posted by Atobe:The 4% interest that is payable annually on a retirement amount fixxed at a maximum sum of $120,000 for each Singaporean is neglible, when any Fund Manager will be able to multiply this amount at a higher rate of return on a wide array of program.
Is the Government holding back some portion of the profits from the CPF monies that are managed by the Fund Managers ?
Did I even talk about the self centreness of the government? No.Originally posted by robertteh:For many years, I for one have posted many topical or constructive suggestions to the feedback unit and ministers on mistakes in their policies or actions ranging from mistakes in narrow-minded meritocracy policy which only benefited certain elites and double-charging on lands and infrastructures by HDB but all the constructive suggestions are simply not heeded.
Even NKF problems were posted to Feedback Unit but they were simply ignored. Now the latest problem with SGX is also the result of practising a self-centred "government knows best" arrogance.
Even people with all the constructive suggestions and ideas like ex-civil servant Mr. Ngiam Tong Dow or Dr. Toh Chin Chye and ex-president Ong Teng Cheong were ignored by autocracy and self-centredness.
If government cannot and does not change such a system of self-centred governance, it cannot convince people to cooperate with their ministers' many policies about creating a cosmopolitan and inclusive society simply because they are practising hypocrisy which the people can see for themselves in their actions.
Actions speak louder. Government must correct all their major past mistakes before trying to tell people how to complain and how to write details of their suggestions to be more pleasing to their senses.
In the face of all these track record of the government in handling complaints and problems, I am sure you will agree that people are being very patient to let government get away with many mistakes and not solve them by resorting to hypocrisy and denials. These are not the hallmark of a talented or world's best government. It will be hypocrisy too for you to pretend these arrogance of the government does not happen and exist only in people's imagination.
Can you therefore speak with moral authority on behalf of government and can you therefore assure that all the constructive suggestions and ideas will not continue to be ignored or brushed aside by ministers or MM Lee due to self-centredness and autocracy and hypocrisy which as I see it is the source and root cause of all our current problems faced by majority of citizens.
Originally posted by Rock^Star:Only the daff and unthinking will fall for the distortions.
Posted by Atobe:
In this day and age, as an educated and sophisticated person, will you still be tied to simple images that can be so easily managed and distorted by others ?
The key to successful politics is distortion. Perhaps you may find a better answer in the bulk of Singaporeans who are living in this educated and sophisticated era but were distorted.
Why not ? The blatant attempts at propaganda have not gone un-noticed, and the Opposition Parties have benefitted from a population that has been awaken to the raw display of political manipulation to benefit only one side of the political spectrum.
In his early political experience, LKY was averse to phototakings, as they never presented him in the most photogenic ways, and he even admitted that he looked like a typical Singaporean ruffian - even a 1950s gangster.
He had the benefit of controlling all print and broadcast media over the last 45 years of absolute power, and every event since then were stage managed, with camera angles and carefully selected photos published.
Why not?
If you believe that it does - then in this day and age, do you think that an educated and discerning population will fall for the same efforts of another Adolf Hitler in manipulating mass psychology that blur the message and enhance the role of the messenger only ?
On first appearance, politics maybe about image, but I believe that this simplistic criteria alone does an injustice to a more educated and discerning population that is able to judge for itself the message and the messenger, and not simply the appearance of the messenger.
It certainy does.
Did he jumped on a seat and shouted at Goh Chok Tong - "Where is {our} 10 Billion Dollars ?" ?
CSJ's image in the 2001 election was a single event that one perhaps could call it his fervent desire to have a off-the-cuff debate, when Goh Chok Tong refused to engage CSJ on the issues raised.
Why was the Ruling Party aka the Government avoiding giving a clear response to the public concerning the loan offer - (of $10 Billion ? ) by the Singapore Government to the striken Suharto Government ?
He jumped on a seat and shouted at Goh Chok Tong. Who can forget that? Then he made this allegation of all of a sudden and given S'poreans' mentality in "seeing is believing", coupled with a pro-govt press, he was on the wrong pedestal right from the start. Result? His actions were discredited as lunacy.
His actions were not lost on the population, everyone in Singapore and the World Community saw him in his true form that was hidden in a self-congratulatory autobiography.
For that single event, the Ruling Party typecast CSJ as the villian gangster 'raping' the chastity of Goh Chok Tong's virginal image. For crying out loud, this is politics as LKY had experienced in the 1950s.
How many photo images of LKY - been published in prints and broadcast 'live' on TV - showed a combative LKY offensive demeanour, talking down to Singaporeans, ALPHA-S and Trade Unions ? Singaporean deferred in silence.
No denying, LKY played this card well but ruthlessly.
Originally posted by Rock^Star:In a competition of ideas, it has always been a situation of two opposing camps.
continuation
Post by Atobe:
Were we brought up to always look at both sides of the coin ?
For more then 45 years, I always thought that in Singapore there is only one side of the coin, one way of looking at things.
NO U-TURN.
Where did you come from ?
If you're referring to the govt's style of doing things, yes of course. What I meant by "both sides of the coin" is to always have balanced views. Only when we know what black is like, then may we discern the white. I'm no fan of this govt but I'm prepared to see the positives of it too. Simply hearing the negatives would make one suspicious. That's what Chee has been doing.
If you have never said 'he attempted to be a martyr. That's how the press painted him.' - then I must have been wrong with my interpretation of your response of 2 May 2007 12.42 P.M in the preceding page:
It is rare that someone is prepared to look at both sides of the coin.
Have you tried to understand CSJ's background, his family, his upbringing - why he would have given up a stable job as a lecturer in NUS, and went against his faculty head - (a diehard PAP hatchet man) - to enter politics on the side of the Opposition, when he was offered to join the Ruling Party ?
Was he ALREADY attempting to be a martyr at the time when he entered politics ?
Nope, I have never said he attempted to be a martyr. That's how the press painted him. Qn is.....how many actually know this?
As the proverbial saying goes - 'every single drop of water fills an ocean'.
All this is a matter of perception - yours - as you placed more weight on images than on the strength of the person, his message, and his willingness to stand-by his words and his actions.
So I was the cause of his low votes during the past 2 elections? This statement should be posed to the electorate. Let me reiterate, image counts. Whether I place more emphasis on it than strength of character or not, is unimportant here.
As much as you believe them to be "yes-men" then there are the 66.6% of those eligible voters who got the opportunity to vote, did actually also sold their souls to them too.
Can the same be said of any of the Members of Parliament willing to stand on the conviction of their views, and go against the Party Whip, and truly represent the position of their Constituents who elect them into Parliament ?
Or have they sold their soul to represent their Political Party and not the Constituents, and renegading on the promise of defending the Constitution and Singaporeans in Parliament ?
The Constitution has been raped a thousand times over with new amendments that make nonsense of the original text and meaning of the Singapore Constitution - and all made to the benefit of ensuring that the incumbent Ruling Party will retain the political status quo in perpetuity.
These bunch are mostly "yes-men", not worth a mention.
Many opposition figures in many countries do not play by the unreasonable and unfair rules of those in Power.
CSJ refused to play by the rules dictated and set by the Ruling Party, as these make nonsense to what is already spelled clearly in the Singapore Constitution.
Will you fight a war by the rules of engagement set out by the enemy ?
Will you fight Al Qaeda and the JI Groups on their ground rules ?.
Trust me, that's his biggest ever political mistake: not playing by the rules. He has not seen the last of prison yet and he will continue to be painted as a lunatic. Till the day he rests in peace, PAP will still be in power. No prizes for guessing who still has control of the press then.
Al Qaeda and JI do not count as relative comparisons. They are unexterminable, highly secretive and act on the sly. No govt has control over them. But Chee? He's always in the tiger's lair and one wrong move means serious trouble. Therefore, when in that lair, do as it says and make a move to kill it once it is low on guard.
Originally posted by Gazelle:If you look at some of the more simple programs offered by DBS and UOB, they even dare to guarantee your Principal Sum and at a better rate of return than the CPF interest paid.
Does fund manager guarantee the returns of investment, or is it subject to risk?
Do you think it is a good idea to let someone to invest our billion dollars CPF monies in high risk investment? Can CPF contribute to negative return during bear market?
I believe CPF monies are invested through GIC, which maintain a portfolio of low risk investment such as property, gold, bonds etc. Hence a annual "riskfree" return of 4% is definitely more attractive than putting your money in Singapore fixed deposit.
Singapore and singaporeans are special because we are not white di.ck suckers and we dont live in a pussieland that is turning into a desert.Originally posted by Coquitlam:never believed the powers that be did lots for the old...its only the bare minimum..
Besides what's so special about Sillypore...I would say every country is equal and special in its own way...nothing much about sillypore to make it special....do wish all the best tho....but I won't cry if sillypore sinks either...
But are they guarantee you that sort of return throughout the lock in period of only on the first few years?Originally posted by Atobe:If you look at some of the more simple programs offered by DBS and UOB, they even dare to guarantee your Principal Sum and at a better rate of return than the CPF interest paid.
Originally posted by Gazelle:Sorry, you will have to visit any of the DBS or POSB, or UOB branches to look at the brochures available on their counters, or talk to their Program Officers.
But are they guarantee you that sort of return throughout the lock in period of only on the first few years?
Originally posted by Atobe:Only the daff and unthinking will fall for the distortions.
The better answer remains the counter-information to the official efforts in distortions by way of dissemination of information, bringing more light into dark areas, open up political awareness and conciousness to a higher level of political discussion.
Time will tell if CSJ is on the right track, as can be seen in the democratizing of politics in a formerly militarised South Korean society. .
That's how campaigns are won - on images. Propaganda? And once a scandal erupts, the politician's image goes downhill and loses votes. I'm referring to the world over.
Alright, let's look back and see if CSJ was on the right track 30 years from now.
Why not ? The blatant attempts at propaganda have not gone un-noticed, and the Opposition Parties have benefitted from a population that has been awaken to the raw display of political manipulation to benefit only one side of the political spectrum.
How long can this continue ? Singaporeans are not forever stupid and willing to accept an injustice or unfair treatment. There remains hope that the Singaporean's strong tolerant back may soon be broken with the proverbial last straw that broke the camel's back. .
When I said "why not", I meant to agree with you (that I have no doubt he manipulated the media etc etc). Maybe your distorted view of my beliefs and thoughts has affected your perception of my words.
If you believe that it does - then in this day and age, do you think that an educated and discerning population will fall for the same efforts of another Adolf Hitler in manipulating mass psychology that blur the message and enhance the role of the messenger only ?
When I said "it certainly does", I also meant to agree with you that the image factor is indeed an injustice to our literate and educated masses today. I have been misread once again.
Did he jumped on a seat and shouted at Goh Chok Tong - "Where is {our} 10 Billion Dollars ?" ?
I do remember that he was leaning over a standard hawker table, and was standing at slightly lower height than the taller Goh Chok Tong as he shouted the question in a noisy market place.
Yes. I have no pictures to prove but I am absolutely, positively and definitely sure that he jumped on a seat. Maybe because he was much shorter than Goh, that's why the extra elevation needed.
Your distorted assumptions are no longer inocuous and are the cause of the erroneous views of an already purposefully distorted event that has been milked to the last drop for propaganda material to discredit CSJ.
You should go back and read all my previous posts in Speaker's Corner. My views are hardly distorted. They are as clear as spring water. To the contrary, I believe it is your views of mine that are distorted.
His actions were not lost on the population, everyone in Singapore and the World Community saw him in his true form that was hidden in a self-congratulatory autobiography.
Of course. Another shrewd attempt at media manipulation.The truth is, this auto-biography is as you said, self-congratulatory. Qn is: how many see it this way?
To me, banks are all suckers, and thats why they are all acheiving records profit and offering multi million pay packages to the senior officers.Originally posted by Atobe:Sorry, you will have to visit any of the DBS or POSB, or UOB branches to look at the brochures available on their counters, or talk to their Program Officers.
The fact that they dare to guarantee your Principal Sum is comfort enough, and if they will hardly dare to cheat you for the rest of the programmed period when they will be sending you bi-annual or annual reports of the performance of each of their Programs.
Originally posted by Atobe:In a competition of ideas, it has always been a situation of two opposing camps.
How much of the black do you know - or are you allowed to know, or get to see the light of day - when the white is poured over all things ?
For those who are already accustomed to the pure white of cleanliness, they will naturally react negatively in an instinctive way to any black spots appearing to tarnish a seemingly pristine environment.
One can be conditioned to see only same sides appearing on both face of the coin - as in your case, as much as you claim to look at both sides of the coin.
See my comments that continue below.
[color=blue]I do not presume to know all. Let's all learn together.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, I have never said he attempted to be a martyr. That's how the press painted him. Qn is.....how many actually know this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have never said 'he attempted to be a martyr. That's how the press painted him.' - then I must have been wrong with my interpretation of your response of 2 May 2007 12.42 P.M in the preceding page:
How many ways can one interpret your position taken towards CSJ ?
Yet you change your position in a very fluid manner to describe 'CSJ is a very different person off the political scene. He behaves rationally and is a family man'. Seriously, how well do you know him to change your opinion so dramatically - or is it another assumption ?
He's been painted as a "pathetic martyr" by our press, isn't it? That's why I labeled him as "a martyr born in the wrong era". It's a world of difference from me ever saying that he attempted to be one. He could have been successful like Mandela of South Africa, Ghandhi of India, Martin Luther King of USA etc etc. But truth is, Singapore's political arena is of a totally contrasting structure from those of the countries mentioned aforesaid.
I believe he never attempted to be a martyr or to go down is history as one but he has unknowkingly made himself out to be.
My intentions have been misundertsood by your misperceptions once again.
As much as you believe them to be "yes-men" then there are the 66.6% of those eligible voters who got the opportunity to vote, did actually also sold their souls to them too.
The power of propaganda? Rising employment rates and a booming economy as reported in ST all of the time. Coupled with minimal coverage of opposition parties and an attempt to ridicule them whenever possible.
Image factor not at work? Haha.
Many opposition figures in many countries do not play by the unreasonable and unfair rules of those in Power.
Mandela in South Africa, Kim Young Sam of South Korea, Aquino of the Philippines, Martin Luther King of the USA, and even the Women's suffrage movement in the UK - all struggled against the stubborn set of rules of their time that seems to entrench unreasonable persons in power at the expense of others.
Yes, the examples you have mentioned above are indeed commendable political figures. But Singapore is no way like any of them, be it culture, history, economy and most importantly, political structure.
I think you need to research more on their products before you make sweeping statements (that banks offer higher rate of returns than CPF).Originally posted by Atobe:Sorry, you will have to visit any of the DBS or POSB, or UOB branches to look at the brochures available on their counters, or talk to their Program Officers.
The fact that they dare to guarantee your Principal Sum is comfort enough, and they will hardly dare to cheat you for the rest of the programmed period when they will be sending you bi-annual or annual reports of the performance of each of their Programs.
Originally posted by reyes:First I believe in those that I said not because of PAP but because of an old man. He was perhaps just as old as Lee Kuan Yew and is already a very rich man. Yet he had continuing working. Even during holiday he work. Even when he looked as if he could be died any moment in life. Even when he already has enough money to last through his life. And i want to be in his shoe. To be able to love working. To love it so much that i would not want to retire so early. Thats why i support this policy.
aint what you have said photocopy of PAP version??
why cant our govt take care those age above 65 years old enjoy free medical care. free transport and basic amount of money for livihood.[/b]
Originally posted by Rock^Star:CPF pays only 2.5% per annum on Ordinary Account till one reaches 55 years.
I think you need to research more on their products before you make sweeping statements (that banks offer higher rate of returns than CPF).
Did anyone mention anything about not reading any fine prints ?
What do you mean "dare to guarantee"? Of course they will guarantee your principal. Read the fine print.
If a bank like DBS is prepared to pay out an interest of 6% per annum on Fixed Deposit, this will indicate that they are in a position of certainty to 'milk' more for themselves from the deposit made.
Their rates may be higher than CPF's 2.5% but definitely not more than retirement account's 4%. Read the fine print once again.
Are you slandering the Singapore Banks as cheats ?
Bank brochures often give misleading advertisements and you were one of those misled. So much for "image being an injustice".
Originally posted by Rock^Star:LKY is already 84 years - do you think we need to wait another 30 years from now ?
Posted by Atobe:
Only the daff and unthinking will fall for the distortions.
The better answer remains the counter-information to the official efforts in distortions by way of dissemination of information, bringing more light into dark areas, open up political awareness and conciousness to a higher level of political discussion.
Time will tell if CSJ is on the right track, as can be seen in the democratizing of politics in a formerly militarised South Korean society. .
That's how campaigns are won - on images. Propaganda? And once a scandal erupts, the politician's image goes downhill and loses votes. I'm referring to the world over.
Alright, let's look back and see if CSJ was on the right track 30 years from now.
The simple two words - "Why not ?" were spoken straight, and certainly could not come from one accustomed to expert tasks at slithering, twistings and turnings.
Why not ? The blatant attempts at propaganda have not gone un-noticed, and the Opposition Parties have benefitted from a population that has been awaken to the raw display of political manipulation to benefit only one side of the political spectrum.
How long can this continue ? Singaporeans are not forever stupid and willing to accept an injustice or unfair treatment. There remains hope that the Singaporean's strong tolerant back may soon be broken with the proverbial last straw that broke the camel's back. .
When I said "why not", I meant to agree with you (that I have no doubt he manipulated the media etc etc). Maybe your distorted view of my beliefs and thoughts has affected your perception of my words.
Really, were you agreeable to my statement ? Will you not let yourself down with self-contradiction by agreeing to my statement with your three words ?
If you believe that it does - then in this day and age, do you think that an educated and discerning population will fall for the same efforts of another Adolf Hitler in manipulating mass psychology that blur the message and enhance the role of the messenger only ?
When I said "it certainly does", I also meant to agree with you that the image factor is indeed an injustice to our literate and educated masses today. I have been misread once again.
Even if you had the pictures to prove yourself, what does it prove ? You are more correct with your image in hand ?
Did he jumped on a seat and shouted at Goh Chok Tong - "Where is {our} 10 Billion Dollars ?" ?
I do remember that he was leaning over a standard hawker table, and was standing at slightly lower height than the taller Goh Chok Tong as he shouted the question in a noisy market place.
Yes. I have no pictures to prove but I am absolutely, positively and definitely sure that he jumped on a seat. Maybe because he was much shorter than Goh, that's why the extra elevation needed.
Is there any difference in style or technique between your writings in this thread with the others ? What is new ?
Your distorted assumptions are no longer inocuous and are the cause of the erroneous views of an already purposefully distorted event that has been milked to the last drop for propaganda material to discredit CSJ.
You should go back and read all my previous posts in Speaker's Corner. My views are hardly distorted. They are as clear as spring water. To the contrary, I believe it is your views of mine that are distorted.
Give yourself and others more credit that there are more cynics like you around with the same views - twisted or not.
His actions were not lost on the population, everyone in Singapore and the World Community saw him in his true form that was hidden in a self-congratulatory autobiography.
Of course. Another shrewd attempt at media manipulation.The truth is, this auto-biography is as you said, self-congratulatory. Qn is: how many see it this way?
Originally posted by Rock^Star:Who do you think you are kidding ?
Post by Atobe:
In a competition of ideas, it has always been a situation of two opposing camps.
How much of the black do you know - or are you allowed to know, or get to see the light of day - when the white is poured over all things ?
For those who are already accustomed to the pure white of cleanliness, they will naturally react negatively in an instinctive way to any black spots appearing to tarnish a seemingly pristine environment.
One can be conditioned to see only same sides appearing on both face of the coin - as in your case, as much as you claim to look at both sides of the coin.
See my comments that continue below.
[color=blue]I do not presume to know all. Let's all learn together.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, I have never said he attempted to be a martyr. That's how the press painted him. Qn is.....how many actually know this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have never said 'he attempted to be a martyr. That's how the press painted him.' - then I must have been wrong with my interpretation of your response of 2 May 2007 12.42 P.M in the preceding page:
How many ways can one interpret your position taken towards CSJ ?
Yet you change your position in a very fluid manner to describe 'CSJ is a very different person off the political scene. He behaves rationally and is a family man'. Seriously, how well do you know him to change your opinion so dramatically - or is it another assumption ?
He's been painted as a "pathetic martyr" by our press, isn't it? That's why I labeled him as "a martyr born in the wrong era". It's a world of difference from me ever saying that he attempted to be one. He could have been successful like Mandela of South Africa, Ghandhi of India, Martin Luther King of USA etc etc. But truth is, Singapore's political arena is of a totally contrasting structure from those of the countries mentioned aforesaid.
I believe he never attempted to be a martyr or to go down is history as one but he has unknowkingly made himself out to be.
My intentions have been misundertsood by your misperceptions once again.
No, there is also the politial meandering with the political boundaries that disperse the numbers in a constituency that showed strong support to the opposition in the last election.
As much as you believe them to be "yes-men" then there are the 66.6% of those eligible voters who got the opportunity to vote, did actually also sold their souls to them too.
The power of propaganda? Rising employment rates and a booming economy as reported in ST all of the time. Coupled with minimal coverage of opposition parties and an attempt to ridicule them whenever possible.
Image factor not at work? Haha.
South Africa was an ex-Commonwealth Country, and had adopted a Parliamentary system that is identical to ours; while history, culture, economy maybe different, the shared Human Desire for Political Freedom remains the same.
Many opposition figures in many countries do not play by the unreasonable and unfair rules of those in Power.
Mandela in South Africa, Kim Young Sam of South Korea, Aquino of the Philippines, Martin Luther King of the USA, and even the Women's suffrage movement in the UK - all struggled against the stubborn set of rules of their time that seems to entrench unreasonable persons in power at the expense of others.
Yes, the examples you have mentioned above are indeed commendable political figures. But Singapore is no way like any of them, be it culture, history, economy and most importantly, political structure.
Terms and Conditions:Originally posted by Atobe:CPF pays only 2.5% per annum on Ordinary Account till one reaches 55 years.
From the current DBS Website, it is offering the basic investments in Fixed Deposit at an Interest Rate of 6% per annum.
If DBS is prepared to pay out an interest of 6% per annum on Fixed Deposit, this will indicate that they are in a position of certainty to 'milk' more for themselves from the deposit made.
Cool it cool it...........as expected, your replies are as robust and zealous as ever. However, you are getting a little personal.Originally posted by Atobe:Are you slandering the Singapore Banks as cheats ?
You sure have a bad image of locals.
Or are you simply bitter from your own ineptitude and poor judgment with past investments ?
One bad apple do not spoil the entire cart. There may still hope for you.