SDP is SINGAPORE DEMORALIZE PARTY.
-
Both. Accurate portrayal or not, well, who's to judge? How do we know if our own observations of Singapore currently are accurate? Is it not like how the fable of the blinds describing the elephant where we must all put in our own piece of puzzle?Originally posted by maurizio13:So in the 3 years that you were there? What were you doing? Studying or employment? Are your observations an accurate portrayal of the total population? -
Oh and one more thing, the observations were also shared by some of their own academics, so that might just add a little bit more to the accuracy level.
-
Well, if you don't have the facts to substantiate your claim. What else is there to argue about? You are entitled to your guesses.Originally posted by wisefool83:Both. Accurate portrayal or not, well, who's to judge? How do we know if our own observations of Singapore currently are accurate? Is it not like how the fable of the blinds describing the elephant where we must all put in our own piece of puzzle?
Your statements are mere conjectures, not valued judgement based on substantiated facts.
Therefore when confronted, you sidetrack as usual. That is the most preferred modus operandi of most PAP supporters here. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
Maybe you can provide some answers as to how these youths incur such debts?
The home loans and other other form of loans are readily available. The youths were used to spending future money from young and many took loans for school, cars and houses. High school students were often seen driving 4WD which is definitely outside of their purchasing power. The problem has been recognised and was featured by a number of news program in the country. The society over there is getting worried about it(basically older generations getting worried about the younger ones) because it seems like it's developing into a culture where the youths are used to living a good life and wants more than they could actually afford.
How is the taxation and income distribution communistic? Could you provide some facts and figures from relevant sites to stake your claim?
I'm unable to do that at the moment as I'm in my office now, less I wish to get sack from my boss, but I'll try to do that after some research, prob reply in a night or two.
[b]No point stating baseless claims, anybody can do that to win arguments. Show us the facts and statistics.
Facts and statsitcs requires time to research, most of the time after I do that, the topics and threads had already gone way off.
If your allegations against New Zealand is true, I hate to imagine the level of corruption in Singapore. After all New Zealand is ranked by Transparency International to be No.1, whereas Singapore is ranked No.5.
Yes, that is something that I've been pondering too. While I was there, the level of corruption does seem to be outrageous, but most of these cases were on the grey area as they were also trying legal manner to say that they weren't corrupt such as the retrospective law case.Consider yourself corrected by facts.
I am however, not saying that the place is terrible, no, I've enjoyed myself there very much. I'm just saying that the govt aren't perfect either.
Source: http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi[/b] -
curious, exactly what is this suppose to represent? I've seen them all over the forum but haven't quite understood what it meant.
-
What observations might that be? You made alot of conjectures there, so I can't be sure which guess work you are referring to.Originally posted by wisefool83:Oh and one more thing, the observations were also shared by some of their own academics, so that might just add a little bit more to the accuracy level.
Ermmm......
Can you substantiate with the name of the academician that made the observation and when he made that observation?
There are lots of academician here making contrarian claims against the government here too.
So can I clarify, that you accepted my statement that the level of corruption in New Zealand is less than Singapore. Or can you come up with facts to counter the report by Transparency International? -
So what if you have friends who had lived there for 7 - 8 yrs. I don't have Singaporean friends who migrated there but have 4 HK families who migrated there, after 10 years, they went back to HK with all their children (now grown-up). Their comments were that NZ is a beautiful place but you need to get along with sheeps, for them to leave Hk for NZ is like running for refuge, or as fugitives.Originally posted by maurizio13:On the contrary, I have friends who emigrated there, they provided me a picture contrary to what wisefool83 has provided. I am sure my friend who has lived there for 7-8 years provide a more credible and unbias view as to you or wisefool83 (who probably stayed there 3 years studying using his parents money).
Judging from his nick suffixing with 83, probably his year of birth, he most probably was studying there as a student. His scope is limited to only student friends, not working friends, therefore his view is only limited to school life. 
the point is: do you have anything to say about what was posted:
1. I don't necessary think their standard of living is better than ours.
2. Most of their youth are in debts and they never quite clear it till they die.
3. They help their poor a lot, so much so that I often see people who deliberately choose not to work because the income from working is actually lower from the government grant.
4. The taxation system and income distribution is almost communist,
5. University lecturers for examples don't earn much more than Kindagarden Teachers, which led to regular strikes.
6. but it's not as perfect as it would seem from here.
7. although their ministers are not paid as much as ours, they often run into money scandals, Don Brash and his party were associated with Exclusive Bretham due to some dodgy donations. The Attorney General didn't pay his own company's tax or something, some trade minister got Thais to work on his house for free in exchange for rights to stay and the ruling Labour party attempting to pass retrospective laws to clear themselves of misusing campaign funds and such.
any truth in any of the above statements?
you were invited to correct (Pls not that I'm pulling this off the back of my head and if any of these don't seem right to you, please feel free to correct me and I will edit the post accordingly), but you choose to discredit his life there. Shame on you. -
(1st post)Originally posted by wisefool83:Oh, on a second note, although their ministers are not paid as much as ours, they often run into money scandals, Don Brash and his party were associated with Exclusive Bretham due to some dodgy donations. The Attorney General didn't pay his own company's tax or something, some trade minister got Thais to work on his house for free in exchange for rights to stay and the ruling Labour party attempting to pass retrospective laws to clear themselves of misusing campaign funds and such. (Pls not that I'm pulling this off the back of my head and if any of these don't seem right to you, please feel free to correct me and I will edit the post accordingly)
Your statements seemed to imply that the PAP government is corruption free, whereas the New Zealand government is corrupt because they have a lower pay structure.(2nd post)Originally posted by wisefool83:I am however, not saying that the place is terrible, no, I've enjoyed myself there very much. I'm just saying that the govt aren't perfect either.
But in fact, Transparency International ranked New Zealand No.1 and Singapore No.5. So if your statements are indeed true, then Singapore would be 4 ranks more corrupted than New Zealand.
So based on this misstatement of fact which I have corrected you. Are all your other unsubstantiated claims reliable, or are they the same as this erroneous claim?
You need to have a backbone, learn to stand your ground and prove me wrong with facts, instead of making baseless claims and side tracking when confronted with facts. -
Suggest you read all the post and try your best to understand, I know it's difficult, but you have to start somewhere.Originally posted by sgdiehard:So what if you have friends who had lived there for 7 - 8 yrs. I don't have Singaporean friends who migrated there but have 4 HK families who migrated there, after 10 years, they went back to HK with all their children (now grown-up). Their comments were that NZ is a beautiful place but you need to get along with sheeps, for them to leave Hk for NZ is like running for refuge, or as fugitives.
the point is: do you have anything to say about what was posted:
1. I don't necessary think their standard of living is better than ours.
2. Most of their youth are in debts and they never quite clear it till they die.
3. They help their poor a lot, so much so that I often see people who deliberately choose not to work because the income from working is actually lower from the government grant.
4. The taxation system and income distribution is almost communist,
5. University lecturers for examples don't earn much more than Kindagarden Teachers, which led to regular strikes.
6. but it's not as perfect as it would seem from here.
7. although their ministers are not paid as much as ours, they often run into money scandals, Don Brash and his party were associated with Exclusive Bretham due to some dodgy donations. The Attorney General didn't pay his own company's tax or something, some trade minister got Thais to work on his house for free in exchange for rights to stay and the ruling Labour party attempting to pass retrospective laws to clear themselves of misusing campaign funds and such.
any truth in any of the above statements?
you were invited to correct (Pls not that I'm pulling this off the back of my head and if any of these don't seem right to you, please feel free to correct me and I will edit the post accordingly), but you choose to discredit his life there. Shame on you. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:What observations might that be? You made alot of conjectures there, so I can't be sure which guess work you are referring to.
Ermmm......
Can you substantiate with the name of the academician that made the observation and when he made that observation?
This I can do without research. The observations and comments were made and overheard by the following academics. Dr Piers Reid (Ex-Chief of Army, CBE, currently lecturer in Massey University), Dr Glen Harper (Currently Director of Massey University's Defence Centre), Dr Lancer Berth (Currectly lecturer in Victoria Univeristy and member of Centre for Strategic Studies; New Zeland) and Briadiger Roger Mortlock (Ex-Military officer, currently lecturer in Massey University). And one Australian Prof from ADU whom I've forgotten his name.
There are lots of academician here making contrarian claims against the government here too.
So can I clarify, that you accepted my statement that the level of corruption in New Zealand is less than Singapore. Or can you come up with facts to counter the report by Transparency International? -
Ermmm.....Originally posted by wisefool83:This I can do without research. The observations and comments were made and overheard by the following academics. Dr Piers Reid (Ex-Chief of Army, CBE, currently lecturer in Massey University), Dr Glen Harper (Currently Director of Massey University's Defence Centre), Dr Lancer Berth (Currectly lecturer in Victoria Univeristy and member of Centre for Strategic Studies; New Zeland) and Briadiger Roger Mortlock (Ex-Military officer, currently lecturer in Massey University). And one Australian Prof from ADU whom I've forgotten his name.
What comments did they make?
Can you cite any press reports, media releases, books, publications, internet sites on what was said or commented? Or is it just chit chat and humour, where entertainment is primary and facts are secondary. -
With your kind of deduction, you have just shown yourself to be Chiam himself - seeing the ghost of CSJ in every shadow that flit by....Originally posted by Daddy!!:
Quote: Original post by Atobe:
Being a new kid at this Corner, you have alot to learn - first thing first, do you think I need any help so far ?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have just admitted that you are Chee himself.
Or low and behold....could you just be Loong himself - trying to 'FIX' me as being CSJ himself ?
Unfortunately, he had 'Tripos' from Cambridge, which cannot be reflected in your dull mind that can only scream ''Daddy!!''
Does this not also speak how useless and powerless you can also be with your empty allegations and speculations ?Originally posted by Atobe:
Being a new kid at this Corner, you have alot to learn - first thing first, do you think I need any help so far ?
You seem quite obsessed for an answer - what is with the obsession ?
Chee has been an underdog, and deserves all the help that underdog deserves - despite his situation, I give him credit for perseverance and not attempting to be like some who are adapt at being obedient dogs on the carpet - some very learned carpet beggars.
If you want to know how I can be of use to underdogs, you should consider yourself to be a good underdog like Chee, and you may also receive my supportive attention.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atobe, if all you can do is to give credit to an underdog and cannot do more, you are powerless and useless.
What is with your obsessions in labelling me as Chee, if not merely seen as a typical MIW response in discrediting those who are effective and able to upset their master scheme of ''Filling the Stomachs, and Dull the Minds '' ?
With your childish insistent allegations, you have shown the traits of an overfed brat with a dull mind that is unable to go beyond the spoilt brat's opinion of someone. Will you cry louder and scream for Daddy!!
Do you know as much ? Even ''Daddies'' do not know as much as the younger generations, do you think you know more then us, or are you just a kid calling out for ''Daddy!!'' to help you with your English and History ?Quote: Original post by Atobe:
Do you want a lesson in English or History ?
If the Manchu is an unknown factor, will you not get them to help you overthrow the Ming - who is already a known card on the table ?
Have you not learnt anything from the Mentor's own methods of riding the Tiger to reach the top of the hill ?
You avoided answering my question if you will not help Sun Yat Sen to overthrow the Manchus, or will you prefer to keep to the status quo and not disrupt the social peace of the day ?----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your reply just confirmed my assumption that " you would let the gates down for the Manchus to come in to destroy the Ming dynasty if you were there. The general who collaborated with the enemy whom he had been fighting for years so that he could become a king/duke himself."
well done Atobe. You dont know nothing.
If you are a Chinese from China, I suppose you will live with the Mings and reject the Manchus - living and submitting yourself to the cruelties of the Mings ?
What about Sun Yat Sen - will you support him to overthrow the Manchus when he offered himself as an opportunity to redeem the Hans ?
Twice I have asked this question about Sun Yat Sen, twice you have avoided and prefer to move on in your own preferred direction towards your own goals.
You should thank the Mentor for his valued lessons at betraying people whom he has cultivated as friends, and kick them out when others who can help turn up at his Corner.
In the 1950s, LKY had used those accused of being Communists to help him grow the Ruling Party to fight for independence from Colonial Rule, and will kick them out with false and unproven charges when the offer to join Malaysia came up in the 1960s; then he will kick the Malaysians in the groin when he will not play by their rules, and will work with the Americans as much as he detest the manner that they play their games.
Will you help the Manchus to keep Sun Yat Sen out of China ?Originally posted by Daddy!!:
Is this the best that you can do with your persistent obsession ?
So Atobe, did you meaningfully help him (chee) out? Of course, unless, you are chee himself.
Come on Atobe, if you are Chee himself. Spell out how the other forumers can help you.
Come on Atobe, if you are not Chee himself. Spell out how you could help Chee.
Repeating your obsession and wishing that I am Dr Chee Soon Juan ?
How would you like to help Dr Chee ?
''Meaningful'' is a value judgment and I will leave others to judge how I have helped their understanding of Dr Chee and others in the Alternative Parties.
What is your agenda and interest in this matter ?
Do you think LHL or Chiam need help ?
Or are you here simply for the entertainment, or to be a troll and burn the thread ? -
Wow, you are really testing my memory aren't you.Originally posted by maurizio13:Ermmm.....
What comments did they make?
Can you cite any press reports, media releases, books, publications, internet sites on what was said or commented? Or is it just chit chat and humour, where entertainment is primary and facts are secondary.
Ok, Newspaper, I'm sorry, but if you've ever read a New Zeland newspaper, you would notice that it's basically about Rugby, rugby and rugby. From my memory, Singapore had only hit their newspaper twice, once was when we hung the Australian Viet guy and the other time was when LHL visited NZ and the Dominian Express featured a photo of him and Halen Clark watching Rugby a Rugby game.
Oh, and now to think of it, Don Brash did make a comment which was featured on the Newspaper, something like saying how he was impressed at how Singapore had developed over the years and how when he was young during the late 60s he met a diplomat who told him that Singapore won't make it and now Singapore is doing better than New Zeland. (But you can disregard his comment or at least discount as he was the opposition leader and prob using the chance to just the ruling party a bit. He subsequently lost his post as opposition leader a few months down the road but wasn't due to this comment.)
The comments that I've overheard were informal comments, some I stumbled upon when I was in school, (no prize for guessing which school I went to). The Dr Lance Berth was clearer in my head at the moment. He commented that LKY was one of the most brilliant men he ever met, along with Benard Loo and some others whom I've forgotten. Apparently Dr Lance Berth specialised in South East Asia Politics and Strategy.
The Mortlock's comment was along side Dr Lance Berth, basically telling us (the entire lecture theatre) to go read LKY's memoir.
Dr Piers and Dr Harper's comment were overheard when I was working. I worked as a waiter in a conference facility which therefore allows me to overhear a lot of big shots comments but most of the time I don't know who they are and hence didn't list them in the above post. Forgot the exact words they were using but the conversation started with colonial masters which went on to the Malayan emergency which then went on to about Sg and LKY. The comments were that Lee did a fantastic job bring Sg out and such and such. Perhaps as ex-military personel, they weren't exactly the hottest fan of western liberal democracy either.
And now that my mind is back into that page, I've also recalled that a certain LTC who was my lecturer for a while, was posted in Sg for a number of years. He subsequently made comments about how he actually prefers Sg and suffered from culture shock when he came back to NZ.
Note that, however, not all Kiwis were saying that Sg is good. Some of the political groups that I've particiapted when my time allows me to had more negative comments about Sg, but mostly on our death sentence rather than corruption.
There was an article that I had come across in some Economic mag that did say something rather negative about Singapore's economy prospect, to which the Dominian Express put it on one of it's economy column and to which the Singapore High Commissioner Office wrote a reply to. Can't exactly remember what the article was about, just remember that it's not good and the High Comm Office wrote something about "Singapore don't need foreigners to comment on us" to which I have already written a letter to ask the high comm office not to write such nasty things in the future and to which they replied that they will take note. -
Does the opinion of a ''mental spastic'' count for anything ?Originally posted by Mat Toro:
Quote: Original post by Atobe:
Being a new kid at this Corner, you have alot to learn - first thing first, do you think I need any help so far ?---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think daddy has a lot more wisdom than you atobe.
It is not my concern and he can be your daddy and have your support - good luck to him.
Only with his DNA can produce another like you.
Can ''mental spastic'' think let alone absorb what they read without any spasmodic seizures ?
You seem quite obsessed for an answer - what is with the obsession ?---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think its a very relevant question.
Is it any wonder that no one is helping a ''mental spastic'' with your kind of integrity displayed ?
Chee has been an underdog, and deserves all the help that underdog deserves - despite his situation, I give him credit for perseverance and not attempting to be like some who are adapt at being obedient dogs on the carpet - some very learned carpet beggars.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Principally wrong.
Chee does not have integrity and therefore does not deserve help just because of being a dog.
Any ''Dog'' as an animal can be a trained ''carpet beggar'', but an ''Under-Dog'' takes alot of effort to stay alive and keep going for another day.
With attitudes like yours, is there anything to speculate about the neglect of your Mentor and Company towards the many vagrants and underclass under-dogs in Singapore Elitist Society ?
The offer to help under-dogs goes to you as well.
If you want to know how I can be of use to underdogs, you should consider yourself to be a good underdog like Chee, and you may also receive my supportive attention.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
when you can't compete in the arena of ideas, you insult. typical liberal mode of operation.
Can you compete in this arena - with at least some substantive ideas that go beyond your characteristic useless ''ONE-liners'' that says nothing on any topic of some public interests ?
What have you contributed by way of even a controversial topic of public interest to the attention of everyone at this Speakers' Corner ?
BTW - we do not usually compete with ''mental handicaps'' - it is simply unethical, so if you want us to compete with your idea, you have to express your thoughts beyond the usual useless ''ONE-Liners''. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
You helped in their understanding by listing out his history without censorship. Thats all. I expected you to add more substance. Sigh. I dont get it.
[b]
How would you like to help Dr Chee ?
[b]''Meaningful'' is a value judgment and I will leave others to judge how I have helped their understanding of Dr Chee and others in the Alternative Parties.
What is your agenda and interest in this matter ?
[/b]
Without anywhere else to turn to, you ask me back the question I have been pressing on you. Another sigh.
By the way, about the Sun Yat-sen question which you are also pressing on me. My answer is : The Qing dynasty screwed up China. China's economy was weak, people suffered a lot etc, Sun Yat-sen put his head out and tried to make things better for his own people. In this situation, I support Sun Yat-sen. IF China was doing well under Qing dynasty, then what Sun Yat-sen did would make himself an idiot to the Chinese population.
Singapore is doing fine. If you put your head out today thinking you are behaving like Sun Yat-sen, I assure you that Singapore's population and the rest of the world would also think you are an idiot too. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
Ya, blah blah blah. Dont you have work to do?
[b]
The offer to help under-dogs goes to you as well.
Can you compete in this arena - with at least some substantive ideas that go beyond your characteristic useless ''ONE-liners'' [b]that says nothing on any topic of some public interests ?
What have you contributed by way of even a controversial topic of public interest to the attention of everyone at this Speakers' Corner ?
BTW - we do not usually compete with ''mental handicaps'' - it is simply unethical, so if you want us to compete with your idea, you have to express your thoughts beyond the usual useless ''ONE-Liners''.
[/b] -
Atobe, haven't you realised that you have accumulated political knowledge that is useless even to people like Chee? What is he looking for so that he can advance his cause? What should he do ? You presented nothing.
-
What more do you want to know that has been offered without censorship ?Originally posted by Daddy!!:You helped in their understanding by listing out his history without censorship. Thats all. I expected you to add more substance. Sigh. I dont get it.
Is it the non-censorship of information that you are trying to ''FIX'' the label of Dr Chee on ME, or is it more substance you want from me so as to help you in your obsessive mission to prove that I am Dr Chee ?
Googles will throw up as much - unless you have not learnt to use the PC being a ''Daddy!!'' from a previous generation; or are you crying for ''Daddy!!'' to help you move along ?
Without anywhere else to turn to, you ask me back the question I have been pressing on you. Another sigh.
Tell me so, and I will help you by seeing you also as an under-dog like Dr Chee.
If you do not support anyone to ''help open the gate for the Manchus to overthrow the Ming Dynasty'', why should we believe that you will help Dr Sun Yat Sen ?
By the way, about the Sun Yat-sen question which you are also pressing on me. My answer is : The Qing dynasty screwed up China. China's economy was weak, people suffered a lot etc, Sun Yat-sen put his head out and try to make things better for his own people. In this situation, I support Sun Yat-sen. IF China was doing well under Qing dynasty, then what Sun Yat-sen did would make himself an idiot to the Chinese population.
Are you not also opening the gates of destroying the peaceful settings of the Manchus by supporting Sun Yat Sen's call for revolution ?
If you will help Dr Sun Yat Sen to help China turn into a more open society, why will you not help Dr Chee to help Singapore into a more open society ? -
read again what i wrote. you are wasting my timeOriginally posted by Atobe:If you do not support anyone to help over the gate for the Manchus to overthrow the Ming Dynasty, why should we believe that you will help Sun Yat Sen ?
Are you not also opening the gates of destroying the peaceful settings of the Manchus by supporting Sun Yat Sen's call for revolution ?
If you will help Dr Sun Yat Sen to help China turn into a more open society, why will you not help Dr Chee to help Singapore into a more open society ?
By the way, about the Sun Yat-sen question which you are also pressing on me. My answer is : The Qing dynasty screwed up China. China's economy was weak, people suffered a lot etc, Sun Yat-sen put his head out and try to make things better for his own people. In this situation, I support Sun Yat-sen. IF China was doing well under Qing dynasty, then what Sun Yat-sen did would make himself an idiot to the Chinese population.
Singapore is doing fine. If you put your head out today thinking you are behaving like Sun Yat-sen, I assure you that Singapore's population and the rest of the world would also think you are an idiot too. -
Originally posted by Daddy!!:
Is the opinion of an antiquated ''Daddy!!'' worth anything, let alone someone crying for ''Daddy!!'' ?
Atobe, haven't you realised that you have accumulated political knowledge that is useless even to people like Chee? What is he looking for so that he can advance his cause? What should he do ? You presented nothing.
Is your opinion of any worth ?
It is your value judgment of what my political knowledge is - and you are entitled to it.
It is ''no skin off my nose''.
With your ending statement - do I detect a change in your useless and relentless insistence that I am Dr Chee ?
My knowledge is to help others to view things in a different and some alternative ways from the usual jingoistic lines that have been assisted by the propaganda of the state controlled mass media.
Does the jingoistic lines need any further help from me, or should Singaporeans be helped to think with an open mind that challenges the established line of thoughts ?
Is this not what the MIW Government want from Singaporeans ?
Am I helping Dr Chee or am I helping the MIW Government ? -
Not so clever to dismiss what I have written in reply to your post - by simply claiming that I have wasted your time.Originally posted by Daddy!!:
Quote: Originally posted by Atobe:
If you do not support anyone to help over the gate for the Manchus to overthrow the Ming Dynasty, why should we believe that you will help Sun Yat Sen ?
Are you not also opening the gates of destroying the peaceful settings of the Manchus by supporting Sun Yat Sen's call for revolution ?
If you will help Dr Sun Yat Sen to help China turn into a more open society, why will you not help Dr Chee to help Singapore into a more open society ?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
read again what i wrote. you are wasting my time
By the way, about the Sun Yat-sen question which you are also pressing on me. My answer is : The Qing dynasty screwed up China. China's economy was weak, people suffered a lot etc, Sun Yat-sen put his head out and try to make things better for his own people. In this situation, I support Sun Yat-sen. IF China was doing well under Qing dynasty, then what Sun Yat-sen did would make himself an idiot to the Chinese population.
Singapore is doing fine. If you put your head out today thinking you are behaving like Sun Yat-sen, I assure you that Singapore's population and the rest of the world would also think you are an idiot too.
Do you think that my time is not wasted by your useless any posts ?
Consider yourself lucky that I am concern with your call for ''Daddy!!''.
Your answer show that you will help an unknown Dr Sun Yat Sen to destabilize the ''status quo'' that prevailed in China - ruled by the Manchus - as much as it was an attempt by you to bait me to give a reply if I will help the ''Manchus to overthrow the Ming''.
Grow up and be a real ''Daddy!!'' - stop your foolish efforts at baiting and trolling in this Speakers' Corner. -
I did not insist relentlessly that you are Dr Chee. You admitted it. Read again what i wrote.Originally posted by Atobe:Is your opinion of any worth ?
It is your value judgment of what my political knowledge is - and you are entitled to it.
It is ''no skin off my nose''.
With your ending statement - do I detect a change in your useless and relentless insistence that I am Dr Chee ?
[/color]
if you are as blur as you sound now, i really suspect that i am talking to the wrong person. -
Sighs.Originally posted by wisefool83:Wow, you are really testing my memory aren't you.
Ok, Newspaper, I'm sorry, but if you've ever read a New Zeland newspaper, you would notice that it's basically about Rugby, rugby and rugby. From my memory, Singapore had only hit their newspaper twice, once was when we hung the Australian Viet guy and the other time was when LHL visited NZ and the Dominian Express featured a photo of him and Halen Clark watching Rugby a Rugby game.
Oh, and now to think of it, Don Brash did make a comment which was featured on the Newspaper, something like saying how he was impressed at how Singapore had developed over the years and how when he was young during the late 60s he met a diplomat who told him that Singapore won't make it and now Singapore is doing better than New Zeland. (But you can disregard his comment or at least discount as he was the opposition leader and prob using the chance to just the ruling party a bit. He subsequently lost his post as opposition leader a few months down the road but wasn't due to this comment.)
The comments that I've overheard were informal comments, some I stumbled upon when I was in school, (no prize for guessing which school I went to). The Dr Lance Berth was clearer in my head at the moment. He commented that LKY was one of the most brilliant men he ever met, along with Benard Loo and some others whom I've forgotten. Apparently Dr Lance Berth specialised in South East Asia Politics and Strategy.
The Mortlock's comment was along side Dr Lance Berth, basically telling us (the entire lecture theatre) to go read LKY's memoir.
Dr Piers and Dr Harper's comment were overheard when I was working. I worked as a waiter in a conference facility which therefore allows me to overhear a lot of big shots comments but most of the time I don't know who they are and hence didn't list them in the above post. Forgot the exact words they were using but the conversation started with colonial masters which went on to the Malayan emergency which then went on to about Sg and LKY. The comments were that Lee did a fantastic job bring Sg out and such and such. Perhaps as ex-military personel, they weren't exactly the hottest fan of western liberal democracy either.
And now that my mind is back into that page, I've also recalled that a certain LTC who was my lecturer for a while, was posted in Sg for a number of years. He subsequently made comments about how he actually prefers Sg and suffered from culture shock when he came back to NZ.
Note that, however, not all Kiwis were saying that Sg is good. Some of the political groups that I've particiapted when my time allows me to had more negative comments about Sg, but mostly on our death sentence rather than corruption.
There was an article that I had come across in some Economic mag that did say something rather negative about Singapore's economy prospect, to which the Dominian Express put it on one of it's economy column and to which the Singapore High Commissioner Office wrote a reply to. Can't exactly remember what the article was about, just remember that it's not good and the High Comm Office wrote something about "Singapore don't need foreigners to comment on us" to which I have already written a letter to ask the high comm office not to write such nasty things in the future and to which they replied that they will take note.
Any web links? Any specific books? So all of this is purely hearsay and gossip. -
when you cannot response, dont rub in confusion. Who is baiting who? Please stop imagining so much. CALM DOWN and stay focused.Originally posted by Atobe:[b]
Not so clever to dismiss what I have written in reply to your post - by simply claiming that I have wasted your time.
Do you think that my time is not wasted by your useless any posts ?
Consider yourself lucky that I am concern with your call for ''Daddy!!''.
Your answer showed that you will help any unknown Dr Sun Yat Sen to destabilize the ''status quo'' that prevailed in China ruled by the Manchus - as much as it was an attempt by you to bait me to give a reply if I will help the Manchus to overthrow the Ming.
Grow up and be a real ''Daddy!!'' - stop your foolish efforts at baiting and trolling in this Speakers' Corner. -
Originally posted by Daddy!!:
Denials will get you nowhere.
I did not insist relentlessly that you are Dr Chee. You admitted it. Read again what i wrote.
if you are as blur as you sound now, i really suspect that i am talking to the wrong person.
It is written in all your repeated questions that have been summarised in all my response to your posted allegations - at least four allegations on 1 August, and at least twice on this date up till this moment.
How can one who cry for ''Daddy!!'' know who they are speaking to ?