Police Reject Permit For Workers' Party's Cycling Event
-
But then somebody must empower the youths by organising them into a strong political force that can make a change for the better for themselves and their own children....Originally posted by kilua:i think PAP should address this double standard issue or they would gradually lose moral authority among the young. It tries to potray itself as full of integrity yet it constantly abuses its power and authority to its advantage. -
Its just a cycling event.
With all due respect to the party I support, if WP is unable to persist and get a cycling event organised, then what else is there to expect from WP? -
So what do you expect? Not everyone is like the SDP, who are willing to get arrested for their beliefs.Originally posted by LimSianTong:Its just a cycling event.
With all due respect to the party I support, if WP is unable to persist and get a cycling event organised, then what else is there to expect from WP?
The PAP government uses the Police to stifle activities of opposition parties and now the onus is on the those parties?
They might or might not persist, but the fact of the matter is, the police rejected it in the first place....
-
yea, and even if they persist,they still won't get what they want. Cos' this is Singapore. Opposition party in S'pore is always at the losing end. so whatever.
-
boohoo the police is scared, cowardly police shivering and pissing their pants!
-
So, nothing can be done to cycle.Originally posted by CryOnMyShoulders:yea, and even if they persist,they still won't get what they want. Cos' this is Singapore. Opposition party in S'pore is always at the losing end. so whatever.
and this is what the majority dont mind also?
if so, I wonder how other country political observers and researchers would describe this mentality and phenomenon which seems to remain for eternity. -
not everyone like CSJ lehOriginally posted by LimSianTong:Its just a cycling event.
With all due respect to the party I support, if WP is unable to persist and get a cycling event organised, then what else is there to expect from WP?
-
it's only cycling in an open park...just bring the bikes and cycle...no need to organize anything, bri your own food and have a picnic, like any social event....
-
My two-cents' - I am unsure if "persist" mean persist with the permit application or persist with the event?Originally posted by LimSianTong:Its just a cycling event.
With all due respect to the party I support, if WP is unable to persist and get a cycling event organised, then what else is there to expect from WP?
I believe at this point of time, a re-application would see the same results, but perhaps it is worth a try.
As for persisting with the event, this would mean that the event will be deemed illegal. WP could break the law and the worse case scenario would be Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim lose their Parliament seats. Perhaps not everyone feels it is a big deal but I believe, based on feedback, that they want opposition MPs to bring up issues like annuity, which they deem is more important than a party's cycling event.
I think there are other things WP could do minus this. For one, the party already has regular activities around the weekly clock.
Regards -
I do browse SBF every now and then. The main reason for not posting there is due to what I perceive is an "overcrowding" of a forum. There is a post every 1 to 5 minutes in the day, more than what other forums enjoy.Originally posted by hawkeye1819:Honestly your WP pals, supporters are not being helpful. You shd go to Sammyboy form to take a look...
As a result, individual posts are diluted as there is too much to read and respondents are largely unable to spot one another's posts that can serve as a reply to them such that they have to keep repeating themselves.
Personally, I do not feel that it should be the only well-visited forum, although as one individual I can't do much.
As far as I know, only one WP member is a "regular" there. As for supporters of WP, I have neither authority nor inclination to control what they write.
Apologies to all to digress from the topic of this thread
Regards -
i do agree. apply again. if is is being rejected again, it goes to show the pettiness of the ruling party. meanwhile it is the ultmost concern with regard to the complusory annuities scheme and the unclear string attached to itOriginally posted by Melvin Tan:My two-cents' - I am unsure if "persist" mean persist with the permit application or persist with the event?
I believe at this point of time, a re-application would see the same results, but perhaps it is worth a try.
As for persisting with the event, this would mean that the event will be deemed illegal. WP could break the law and the worse case scenario would be Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim lose their Parliament seats. Perhaps not everyone feels it is a big deal but I believe, based on feedback, that they want opposition MPs to bring up issues like annuity, which they deem is more important than a party's cycling event.
I think there are other things WP could do minus this. For one, the party already has regular activities around the weekly clock.
Regards -
Originally posted by royston_ang:
Do take note that this guy is known to be immature in other forum, so he is exhibiting his immaturity here as well. Need to stoop to his level when communicating with him.
I think your argument is rather silly. So, you mean WP can only try to organize thing which PAP has done before?
So what if PAP managed to get a go ahead to organize a cycling event in [b]west coast park instead of east coast park? Maybe you will said its because the location is different next?
The question here is why the police classify an outdoor cycling event as "have the potential for public disorder and mischief, and may disrupt community life." ? Aren't there countless cycling events held successful in Singapore before? And I don't see how indoor and outdoor activities will make a different? Maybe you can enlighten me on this point?
[/b] -
Police are scared of the tyrants they work for, to ordinary folks they just go on to bully when they feel like it.Originally posted by SuperProPAP:boohoo the police is scared, cowardly police shivering and pissing their pants! -
how to cycle INDOORS? -
Ever watch Olympics?Originally posted by CryOnMyShoulders: how to cycle INDOORS? -
Go gym cycleOriginally posted by CryOnMyShoulders: how to cycle INDOORS? But seriously, this is ridiculous. -
I cannot reply with quote to de_middle and melvin tan.
So, I post directly here.
Melvin ,
By 'persist', I mean re-apply.
De_middle,
CSJ is a joke. by doing what you think is not wrong, is not being CSJ.
CSJ has a bad name whether by design or accident.
Equating a re-application to cycle with CSJ seems to tell people that cycling is illegal, rash, wrong, and very CSJ.
Its like the method of saying other 1st worlds have less suicides than 1st world singapore. So, does this mean singapore is doing well or can afford to have more suicides, having been a 1st world only a few years compared to other 1st worlds?
I see many people trying to use this method to convince people who are quite naive really. -
Maybe WP is so hated 'cause of GMS and this guy quit WP still defending WP in a bad way. Last time he ask pple who don't agree with him to join politics...... sound like Wooden Goh ask Catherine Lim to join opposition..... ????Originally posted by Melvin Tan:I do browse SBF every now and then. The main reason for not posting there is due to what I perceive is an "overcrowding" of a forum. There is a post every 1 to 5 minutes in the day, more than what other forums enjoy.
As a result, individual posts are diluted as there is too much to read and respondents are largely unable to spot one another's posts that can serve as a reply to them such that they have to keep repeating themselves.
Personally, I do not feel that it should be the only well-visited forum, although as one individual I can't do much.
As far as I know, only one WP member is a "regular" there. As for supporters of WP, I have neither authority nor inclination to control what they write.
Apologies to all to digress from the topic of this thread
Regards -
Melvin your (WP excomrade?) said WP cycling event is open to public. True or not??
From sammyboy:
From: F-4E Phantom II - Lord (TiLik) 14:10
To: KwonZ unread 123 of 123
150808.123 in reply to 150808.120
From: KwonZ 12:59
To: F-4E Phantom II - Lord (TiLik)
What you and your crony have done is to strip away the basis for the questions to support your stand.
The fact of the matter is that hopengkee was being less than truthful. The fact that pappies have done similar cycling get-togethers is a clear sign that he was less than truthful in his initial response to LTK.
KwonZ
Sigh. I don't think you understand LaMei's statements enough to even know what she was asking. Let us have it all in context:
1. WP MPs question Ho Peng Kee on refusal of permit for cycling event.
2. LTK exchange with HPK does not go well, Ho Peng Kee makes an unpleasantremark.
3. Internet activists like you speak up against HPK, YoungPAP cycling event brought out to show unfair discrimination against WP.
4. LaMei questions nautre of WP cycling event - open to public or not? which may be the reason why YoungPAP's event allowed and WP's event is not. It seems that Young PAP's event was just for its members.
5. WP representatives have not replied on LaMei's queries.
6. Discussion goes on on why remark is avoidable or not and whether or not remark is unacceptable or is acceptable robust parliamentary engagement?
7. You make the statement that my and my crony strip away the basis for the questions to support my stand.
Do you see it clearly now? -
singaporeans pls be united, and bring WP to parliament esp in Aljunic GRC, we need opposition badly to debate the CPF scheme, they suka suka change this and that according to thier whims and fancy, enough is enoughOriginally posted by reddressman:And its only WP's 1st such attempt , i mean fielding so many more talents and competiting for the whole GRC! correct or not?
I really support Sylvia Lim and Low. Goh Meng Seng impressed also but he left?
If WP given the same rights to use so much money to hire top talents, I am 100000000% sure WP will have even more people of the same competency as Sylvia and Lim to run a GRC.
PAP has the money to hire . Not difficult to attract talents at all. Comparatively, WP does not have the money and yet manage to find a few good men and women. That shows they are committed and really work hard at talent recruitment.
I support the WP because I see a need for stronger opposition and WP has arrived. They are good enough now and time has come for them to expand further. -
What has the cycling being opened to the public got to do with the licensing issue? East Coast is a public place, if the WP members gather there to celebrate their 50th anniversary, there will be bound to have people who recognize them and join.
-
I think it is quite strange that the application was denied given that other parties could get the permit before.
We should ask ourselves what is the implication if WP accept the decision without appeal.
Its not just the cycling thing the way I see it. It implies many more things.
In future, what if someone apply for other activities and also get the same reason for denial of permit? And everyone also accept without appeal?
How 1st world is singapore?
Cycling is not illegal. Why cannot approve? Many Singaporeans support the WP , not just the PAP. Why WP cannot organise for its supporters a casual cycling event? If something is done wrong, they can charge WP. But nothing has happened! Singapore is made up of singaporeans. Singaporeans also support WP. Lets not ignore this fact. We should respect this fact.
As suggested in the forum, WP should apply many other activities and see if all are denied. Try 101 activites and see if they can give the same excuse for 101 activities and let the public judge our leaders.
Having legal assistance could do no bad also , I think. Doesn't WP have such talents?
I hope the HPK can give a more convincing reason for disapproval. -
Hi,Originally posted by SevenEleven:i do agree. apply again. if is is being rejected again, it goes to show the pettiness of the ruling party. meanwhile it is the ultmost concern with regard to the complusory annuities scheme and the unclear string attached to it
I understand that there were several, not one, penned exchanges between SBF and Mr Eric Tan, the organiser. I don't have the details.
As for the annuity scheme, I believe there will be a discussion in Parliament as they need to amend the laws. If it is a concern, I am sure the WP MPs will raise the issue. I am unsure, though, of what they will raise.
Regards -
Hi,Originally posted by hawkeye1819:Maybe WP is so hated 'cause of GMS and this guy quit WP still defending WP in a bad way. Last time he ask pple who don't agree with him to join politics...... sound like Wooden Goh ask Catherine Lim to join opposition..... ????
I can't speak for others. Personally, I have previously suggested to some netizens that one can make a bigger difference contributing to any opposition political party than internet debate or blogging, not that the latter cannot make a difference but it would be a smaller one "per capita" individual.
I meant it as an invitation, not a challenge and am open to disagreements.
In my opinion, the PAP will feel more pressure with 84 opposition candidates than 84 serious bloggers. The same level of pressure can be applied only if there are, say, 8,400 serious bloggers.
I beg to differ with SM Goh's message to Ms Catherine Lim, which I deem as a challenge. Furthermore, the SM told Ms Lim to join his opponents, whereas I am inviting others to replace people without talents in opposition parties like myself
In other words, SM was showing Ms Lim the entrance of a dungeon; I am laying out a red carpet
As to your other post, the following are all that I wish to comment from my understanding:
1) WP's cycling event was only for WP members and their family members whom the Party will register beforehand.
2) As far as I know, Mr Low isn't offended by AP Ho's remarks. The former happened to have removed his ear piece for a few seconds due to an itch, which caught the eye of the latter and led him to make the impromptu response in jest. Hence, I feel Mr Low can't be said to be unable to acceptable robust parliamentary engagement.
Regards -
I see a pattern but cannot confirm correct or not:
1. If organised by non political parties, mass cycling approvable.
Is it true that if WP organises it, not approved everytime?
When was it ever approved?
2. If non-political parties free to organise, are WP members allowed to join as members of the public? No? Suggest to take part in mass activities like mass run/jog/walk/swim/aerobics/line dance.
I like mass activities. mass activities need not be political even if political members are involved.
I suggested this before but no one given a comment. Is this feasible?