Lees ready to b X-exaimned.''Dr Chee,what r u waiting for?''
-
Mr Lee, who cut short his speech because of a sore throat, said he needed to save his voice for a court case involving Dr Chee Soon Juan on Monday.
"I've got to save part of my voice to let him cross-examine me. Of course, in the course of the cross-examination, I have a few things to say," he said.
The High Court has set aside three days for the hearing on damages claimed by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and the minister mentor against the Singapore Democratic Party and its leaders. CNA news 25 may 2008
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/349929/1/.html
What does CSJ waiting for to cross examine MM and PM,on tomorrow?
While CSJ accuses they avoid to be cross-examined by him,
They said they are ready to be cross examined on Monday
26 May 2008 .
So,is it fair CSJ busy on writing but not prepare to cross examine them.
i post their views here as records let u see who is right.
What CSJ said
http://www.yoursdp.org/component/content/article/1-singapore/475-vintage-lee-kuan-yew
Vintage Lee Kuan Yew 
Saturday, 24 May 2008 Singapore Democrats
While accusing Dr Chee Soon Juan of avoiding him in court, Mr Lee Kuan Yew was working feverishly through his lawyer to restrict Dr Chee's cross-examination of him.
This is vintage Lee, thumping his chest in public while working behind the scenes to ensure that his opponents are crippled even before the fight begins.
He did this to the late Lim Chin Siong. While pretending to defend Lim, Mr Lee Kuan Yew was working behind closed doors to ban his then party comrade from standing for elections.He said publicly that introducing a law (by the British colonial government) to ban ex-detainees, of whom Mr Lim Chin Siong was one, is "disturbing because it is a departure from the democratic practice."
But a recently declassified British memo contradicts the Minister Mentor: "Lee Kuan Yew was secretly a party with Lim Yew Hock in urging the Colonial Secretary to impose the ‘subversives ban'." (See here for the full report.)
He also did it to Mr Francis Seow. While challenging anyone who criticizes him to join a political party and stand for elections, he threatened Mr Seow not to join the opposition.His ISD goons threatened Mr Seow during detention: "For your information, Lee Kuan Yew is running for another term. And you will be locked up here...You can give up all your ideas of going into politics." (Quoted from To Catch A Tartar by Francis Seow)
He's doing it now to Dr Chee. While issuing a press statement saying that Dr Chee is trying to "avoid having to cross-examine" him and his Prime Minister son, his lawyer was working overtime in Judge Belinda Ang's chambers yesterday to ensure that the Judge limits the cross-examination when the plaintiffs take the stand.
Mr Davinder Singh was hell-bent on ensuring that Dr Chee's Affidavit Evident in Chief (AEIC) was struck out. This would severely curtail the defendants' cross-examination of Mr Lee. The MM even instructed his lawyer to apply to expunge Dr Chee's AEIC from the courts' records because the document would "embarass" him.
Mr Singh gave a hint of what was to come at the cross-examination. He urged Judge Ang not to allow the defendants a "roving enquiry" when the Lees' took the stand and to disallow the defendants to "cross-examine the plaintiffs on political matters that had no relevance."
He also said that the defendants cannot prove corruption, nepotism, cover-up, etc because "we're past that point."
Contrast this with Mr Lee's brag that "if you defame us [and] if I'm involved, I go to the witness box. And you can question me, not only on the particular defamatory issue, but all issues in my life."
Aping the MM, Mr Singh said in 2004, "[Dr Chee] has been carping about the lack of democracy and transparency. He now has the opportunity of a lifetime - a chance to cross-examine the plaintiffs and extract answers to his pressing questions. What does he do? He flees."
Mr Singh was, of course, referring to the previous suit in which the hearing was convened before Dr Chee could return to Singapore following a five-month fellowship at the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington, DC.
Mr Lee dares to play such games because he has control over the mass media and he knows he can continue to tell such lies with impunity. Dr Chee can only depend on the Internet. The fight to communicate with the public is as tilted as ever.
But we do not fret for we have one thing that is stronger than even the mightiest of despots. It is called the truth.3.What Lees said
Channel NewsAsia - Saturday, May 24
''SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew have said they are ready for a court hearing to determine damages claimed by them against the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) and its leaders Chee Soon Juan and Chee Siok Chin.''
<!-- if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['H7btGXxseNE-']='&U=13f9raq9l%2fN%3dH7btGXxseNE-%2fC%3d660932.12706473.13014566.2013436%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d5361163%2fV%3d1'; // -->ADVERTISEMENT
In a statement issued on Thursday evening, both leaders said they are ready to be cross—examined in open court on Monday.
Both leaders had sued the SDP and its leaders for an article, headlined "Government’s role in the NKF scandal", published in the party’s publication "Demokrat" in April 2006.
The High Court found the article defamed PM Lee and MM Lee and both leaders successfully obtained a summary judgement against SDP chief Dr Chee Soon Juan, his sister Chee Siok Chin and the party.
In their statement on Thursday, both leaders said it appeared Dr Chee was once again trying to avoid having to cross—examine the Prime Minister and Minister Mentor.
Hearing resumed in Chambers on Thursday to strike out statements of evidence filed by Dr Chee.
Senior Counsel Davider Singh, who is acting for the leaders, said Dr Chee was attempting to drag out proceedings to avoid next week’s hearing to assess the amount of damages. The opposition politician, he said, was employing delay tactics.
Giving a detailed account of these tactics, Minister Mentor Lee’s press secretary noted the assessment of damages hearing was originally scheduled from May 12—14.
Both leaders had set aside time to attend and be cross—examined, but Dr Chee tried his best to avoid the hearing. Instead, he had asked Justice Belinda Ang to excuse herself.
Dr Chee knew that if the Judge did so, the assessment of damages hearing would have to be postponed.
When this attempt failed, he asked for an adjournment to consider the two leaders’ application to strike out the affidavits filed by the Chees. The assessment of damages hearing was then re—scheduled to May 26—28.
Furthermore, two days (May 22 and 23) were set aside to hear the Striking—Out Applications so as to complete all preliminary matters before the main hearing starts. But Dr Chee went on to make all sorts of last—minute applications.
The hearing in Chambers on the Striking—out Applications will continue on Friday afternoon before Justice Belinda Ang. — CNA/ir
-
What the Lees' will do in court
-
CSJ and followers,
Lets make things clear.No politician,from SG to Washington,from
Sydney to Beijing ,will help opposition party nicely.
Dunt expect any political ''hand outs ''from ruling party.
U have to fight with current rules of games.
Read LKY books see how he play games LEGALLY
to kick Colonist ,Communalists and Communits out!!
Have CSJ filed for any defense in 2006 on time?
The answer is ''No''.CSJ just has to answer for NOT filing defense.
It is damn not fair accusing Court went straight into
Summary Judgement.CSJ just wants darken the names of
SG,and Lees in western medias.
As SDP chose not to file a defence, it was found to have defamed PM Lee and MM Lee in the default judgment given by the High Court last Wednesday.
http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=47647
SINGAPORE: PM, MM Lee want summary judgment against Chees
''Singapore Democratic Party ask instead to see the Prime Minister and Minister Mentor in court for defamation suit
Straits Times
Thursday, June 15, 2006By Sue-Ann Chia''
Read what did CSJ write in 2006.
http://singaporedemocrat.org/articlenkflawsuit3.html
http://singaporedemocrat.org/articlenkflawsuit4.html
http://singaporedemocrat.org/news.articles.html
CSJ tactics is simple.Do whatever he can to make
Lees looks repression on him.
Keep out of jail ,not purposely goes into jail
How can u lead from jail?U are not a mafia boss in jail
in a third world country.
-
Mr Lee, who cut short his speech because of a sore throat, said he needed to save his voice for a court case involving Dr Chee Soon Juan on Monday.
"I've got to save part of my voice to let him cross-examine me. Of course, in the course of the cross-examination, I have a few things to say," he said.
The High Court has set aside three days for the hearing on damages claimed by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and the minister mentor against the Singapore Democratic Party and its leaders.---end of quoteCNA news Sunday 25 may 2008
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/349929/1/.html
Dr Chee,do u still have any excuse.LKY is waiting for u lah...
Today is 25 May 2008,the day before LKY to be cross examined by CSJ
-
Noisy Lion,
Sometimes you tend to over-simplify issues and problems concerning the way government is treating the oppositions.
No body really is or has been asking the government to help the opposition like allowing them to use the TV or estate banner posts to display their pictures as our MPs are doing for full 5 years of office without paying advertisement licence sees as citizens are being made to pay.
No body nor the oppositions are asking the government for million-dollar salaries for the oppositions when they are doing just as important if not more arduous jobs in our circumstances where government is going all out to fix them.
So it is not true as you are saying that citizens or anyone are expecting government to help the oppositions. But propagandists of the ruling party is clever or tricky in putting it like it is not the job of government to help the oppositions. Why this assumption when it is not the truth at all.
Don't help the opposition never mind but do we have to run a government which uses the whole media taken over and controlled by them to fire at the oppositions and worse constantly threaten to fix them or sue them for any slightest remarks made in the course of election where both sides are trading insults which are made out as defamatory in the courts where judges are appointed by or with their consent.
When you hear of opposition defamation cases in our type of courts where judges are appointed by or with the consent of our executive of government where the media are controlled and where the anti-opposition propagandas are blasted in the media day after day can you still say that oppositions are being helped in any way by the government as you seem to imply.
The way MM/PM are taking the stand in court and asking CSJ to question them is like putting a multi-barrel machine gun at them and say I let you ask anything you want.
So don't fool the citizens with such assumption that government is expected to help the oppositions. If the government does not go out of the way due to its own paranoid behavior to conduct non-stop lies and propagandas for fixing of oppositions and is prepared to change its own mindset and leave well alone and not try to help like raising GST to help the poor it will be a big step forward to get out of our selfish governing system
-
What has been posted is vintage LKY - can one seriously believe the objectivity in CNA's version of events ?
Perhaps we should understand the Man behind his words by reading the historical track record in the development of The MAN.
THE WISDOM OF LEE KUAN YEW
"If we are to survive as a free democracy, then we must be prepared, in principle, to concede to our enemies - even those who do not subscribe to our views - as much(sic)constitutional rights as you concede yourself." - Lee Kuan Yew Legislative Assembly Debates Sept 21, 1955
"But we either believe in democracy or we not. If we do, then, we must say categorically, without qualification, that no restraint from the any democratic processes, other than by the ordinary law of the land, should be allowed... If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought, and no excuse, whether of security, should allow a government to be deterred from doing what it knows to right, and what it must know to be right... "- Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates April 27, 1955
"Let us get down to fundamentals. Is this an open, or is this a closed society? Is it a society where men can preach ideas - novel, unorthodox, heresies, to established churches and established governments - where there is a constant contest for men's hearts and minds on the basis of what is right, of what is just, of what is in the national interests, or is it a closed society where the mass media - the newspapaers, the journals, publications, TV, radio - either bound by sound or by sight, or both sound and sight, men's minds are fed with a constant drone of sycophantic support for a particular orthodox political philosophy? That is the first question we asked ourselves. I would like to see minds stimulated and debate provoked, and truth refined and crystallized out of the conflict of different evidence and views. I, therefore, welcome every and any opportunity of a chance to agree, or to dissent, in order that out of thesis comes synthesis - thesis, anti-major premise, anti-premise, synthesis, so we progress... I welcome every opportunity to meet members of the opposition, and so do members of my party, over the radio, over the television, university forums, public rallies. We never run away from the open encounter. If your ideas, your views cannot stand the challenge of criticism then they are too fragile and not sturdy enough to last. I am talking of the principle of the open society, the open debate, ideas, not intimidation, persuasion not coercion... Sir, the basic fundamentals we asked ourselves...is whether the duties of the Minister of Information and Broadcasting are to produce closed minds or open minds, because these instruments - the mass media, the TV, the radio - can produce either the open minds receptive to ideas and ideals, a democratic system of life, or closed and limited. But I know that the open debate is a painful process for closed minds...But let me make this point: that 5 million adult minds in Malaysia cannot be closed - definitely not in the lifetime of the people in authority. It is not possible because whatever the faults of the colonial system, and there are many...they generated the open mind, the inquiring mind." - Lee Kuan Yew Dec 18, 1964 Malaysian Parliamentary Debates" Repression, Sir is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love-it is always easier the second time! The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course with constant repetition you get more and more brazen in the attack. All you have to do is to dissolve organizations and societies and banish and detain the key political workers in these societies. Then miraculously everything is tranquil on the surface. Then an intimidated press and the government-controlled radio together can regularly sing your praises, and slowly and steadily the people are made to forget the evil things that have already been done, or if these things are referred to again they're conveniently distorted and distorted with impunity, because there will be no opposition to contradict." -Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition PAP member during 1956 speaking to David Marshall
"One-man-one-vote is a most difficult form of government. From time to time the results can be erratic. People are sometimes fickle. They get bored with stable, steady improvements in life and in a reckless moment they vote for a change for change's sake. This is the danger for Singapore, not in this election, because the results cannot be a disaster this time. But it can be in the future." - Lee Kuan Yew, pre-election speech 1984
The "vagaries" of the one-man-one-vote system "makes it an extremely hazardous system to run anywhere in the under-developed and the under-educated world...We are not exceptional: we are neither more intelligent nor better educated than many of our neighbours. We have been more fortunately endowed and enjoy a better standard of living, but I do not think the basic factors are materially different. Where the majority of your population is semi-literate, it responds more to the carrot than to the stick, and politicains at election time cannot use the stick, so this leads to a situation where he who bids the highest wins. At a time when you want harder work with less return and more capital investment, one-man-one-vote produces just the opposite. I do not think that it is a co-incidence that it has flopped in Pakistan, did not succeed in Burma, nearly came to grief in Ceylon..It has been abandoned, decried and condemned in Indonesia, and it is not held in high-esteem anywhere in Asia. It is not a tradition with the Malays nor with the Chinese to count heads: their custom has always been to listen to the dictum of the elder... Government to be effective must at least give the impression of enduring, and a government which is open to the vagaries of the ballot box when the people who put their crosses in the ballot boxes are not illiterate but semi-literate, which is worse, is a government which is already weakened before it starts to govern. If I were in authority in Singapore indefinitely, without having to ask those who are governed whether they like what is being done, then I have not the slightest doubt that I could govern much more effectively in their own interests. That is a fact which the educated understand, but we are all caught in this system which the the British export all over the place hoping that somewhere it will take root." - Lee Kuan Yew 1962http://policestate.blogspot.com/2004_07_01_policestate_archive.html
1950s
[edit] In opposition
- "But we either believe in democracy or we not. If we do, then, we must say categorically, without qualification, that no restraint from the any democratic processes, other than by the ordinary law of the land, should be allowed... If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought, and no excuse, whether of security, should allow a government to be deterred from doing what it knows to be right, and what it must know to be right... " - Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates, April 27, 1955
- "If it is not totalitarian to arrest a man and detain him, when you cannot charge him with any offence against any written law - if that is not what we have always cried out against in Fascist states - then what is it?… If we are to survive as a free democracy, then we must be prepared, in principle, to concede to our enemies - even those who do not subscribe to our views - as much constitutional rights as you concede yourself." - Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates, Sept 21, 1955
- "Repression, Sir is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love-it is always easier the second time! The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course with constant repetition you get more and more brazen in the attack. All you have to do is to dissolve organizations and societies and banish and detain the key political workers in these societies. Then miraculously everything is tranquil on the surface. Then an intimidated press and the government-controlled radio together can regularly sing your praises, and slowly and steadily the people are made to forget the evil things that have already been done, or if these things are referred to again they're conveniently distorted and distorted with impunity, because there will be no opposition to contradict." -Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition PAP member speaking to David Marshall, Singapore Legislative Assembly, Debates, 4 October, 1956
- "If we say that we believe in democracy, if we say that the fabric of a democratic society is one which allows for the free play of idea...then, in the name of all the gods, give that free play a chance to work within the constitutional framework." - Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore Legislative Assembly, Oct 4, 1956
- "Repression can only go up to a point. When it becomes too acute, the instruments of repression, namely the army and the police, have been proved time and time again in history to have turned their guns on their masters." - Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, May 5, 1959
- "I pointed to an article with bold headlines reporting that the police had refused to allow the PAP to hold a rally at Empress Place, and then to the last paragraph where in small type it added the meeting would take place where we were now. I compared this with a prominent report about an SPA rally. This was flagrant bias." - Complaining about the Straits Times in 1959.
-
[edit] 1960s
[edit] Pre-merger
- "If I were in authority in Singapore indefinitely without having to ask those who are governed whether they like what is being done, then I would not have the slightest doubt that I could govern much more effectively in their interests." - Mr Lee Kuan Yew, 1962
[edit] Federation of Malaysia, 1963-1965
- "Let us get down to fundamentals. Is this an open, or is this a closed society? Is it a society where men can preach ideas - novel, unorthodox, heresies, to established churches and established governments - where there is a constant contest for men's hearts and minds on the basis of what is right, of what is just, of what is in the national interests, or is it a closed society where the mass media - the newspapers, the journals, publications, TV, radio - either bound by sound or by sight, or both sound and sight, men's minds are fed with a constant drone of sycophantic support for a particular orthodox political philosophy? I am talking of the principle of the open society, the open debate, ideas, not intimidation, persuasion not coercion..." - Lee Kuan Yew, Before Singapore's independence, Malaysian Parliamentary Debates, Dec 18, 1964
- "How does the Malay in the kampong find his way out into this modernised civil society? By becoming servants of the 0.3 per cent who would have the money to hire them to clean their shoe, open their motorcar doors?" — Lee Kuan Yew in the Parliament of Malaysia, 1965 [1]
- "Of course there are Chinese millionaires in big cars and big houses. Is it the answer to make a few Malay millionaires with big cars and big houses? How does telling a Malay bus driver that he should support the party of his Malay director (UMNO) and the Chinese bus conductor to join another party of his Chinese director (MCA) - how does that improve the standards of the Malay bus driver and the Chinese bus conductor who are both workers in the same company? If we delude people into believing that they are poor because there are no Malay rights or because opposition members oppose Malay rights, where are we going to end up? You let people in the kampongs believe that they are poor because we don't speak Malay, because the government does not write in Malay, so he expects a miracle to take place in 1967 (the year Malay would become the national and sole official language in Malaysia). The moment we all start speaking Malay, he is going to have an uplift in the standard of living, and if doesn't happen, what happens then? Meanwhile, whenever there is a failure of economic, social and educational policies, you come back and say, oh, these wicked Chinese, Indian and others opposing Malay rights. They don't oppose Malay rights. They, the Malay, have the right as Malaysian citizens to go up to the level of training and education that the more competitive societies, the non-Malay society, has produced. That is what must be done, isn't it? Not to feed them with this obscurantist doctrine that all they have got to do is to get Malay rights for the few special Malays and their problem has been resolved." — Lee Kuan Yew in the Parliament of Malaysia, 1965 [2]
- "They (the Malay extremists) have triggered off something basic and fundamental. Malaysia — to whom does it belong? To Malaysians. But who are Malaysians? I hope I am, Mr Speaker, Sir. But sometimes, sitting in this chamber, I doubt whether I am allowed to be a Malaysian. This is the doubt that hangs over many minds, and the next contest, if this goes on, will be on very different lines." — Lee Kuan Yew in the Parliament of Malaysia, 1965 [3]
- "Once emotions are set in motion, and men pitted against men along these unspoken lines, you will have the kind of warfare that will split the nation from top to bottom and undo Malaysia. Everybody knows it. I don't have to say it. It is the unspoken word!" — Lee Kuan Yew in the Parliament of Malaysia, 1965 [4]
- "According to history, Malays began to migrate to Malaysia in noticeable numbers only about 700 years ago. Of the 39 percent Malays in Malaysia today, about one-third are comparatively new immigrants like the secretary-general of UMNO, Dato' Syed Ja'afar Albar, who came to Malaya from Indonesia just before the war at the age of more than thirty. Therefore it is wrong and illogical for a particular racial group to think that they are more justified to be called Malaysians and that the others can become Malaysian only through their favour." — Lee Kuan Yew (in 1964 or 1965), — Ye, Lin-Sheng (2003). The Chinese Dilemma, p. 43. East West Publishing. ISBN 0-9751646-1-9.
- "Three women were brought to the Singapore General Hospital, each in the same condition and needing a blood transfusion. The first, a Southeast Asian was given the transfusion but died a few hours later. The second, a South Asian was also given a transfusion but died a few days later. The third, an East Asian, was given a transfusion and survived. That is the X factor in development." - 27 December 1967
[edit] Singapore Independence, 1965
- “For me, it is a moment of anguish. All my life, my whole adult life, I believed in merger and unity of the two territories.”, on August 9, 1965, when Lee announced the separation of Singapore from Malaysia.
- “Do not worry about Singapore. My colleagues and I are sane, rational people even in our moments of anguish. We will weigh all possible consequences before we make any move on the political chessboard...”, 1965, when he responded to concerns of the British government after Singapore's independence. London was concerned that the young government was not able to keep things in control and might take foolish measures.
[edit] Post Independence
- "We must encourage those who earn less than $200 per month and cannot afford to nurture and educate many children never to have more than two... We will regret the time lost if we do not now take the first tentative steps towards correcting a trend which can leave our society with a large number of the physically, intellecually and culturally anaemic." -Lee Kuan Yew in 1967.
[edit] 1970s
[edit] 1980s
- "Let us not deceive ourselves: our talent profile is nowhere near that of, say, the Jews or the Japanese in America. The exceptional number of Nobel Prize winners who are Jews is no accident. It is also no accident that a high percentage, sometimes 50%, of faculty members in the top American universities on both the east and west coasts are Jews. And the number of high calibre Japanese academics, professionals, and business executives is out of all proportion to the percentage of Japanese in the total American population." - 1982
- "If you don't include your women graduates in your breeding pool and leave them on the shelf, you would end up a more stupid society...So what happens? There will be less bright people to support dumb people in the next generation. That's a problem." -Lee Kuan Yew in 1983 National Day Rally
- "(Without the CPF), Singaporeans would buy enormous quantities of clothes, shoes, furniture, television sets, radio, tape recorders, hi-fis, washing machines, motor cars. They would have no substantial or permanent asset to show for it." - Asian Wall Street Journal, Oct 21 1985
- "We have to lock up people, without trial, whether they are communists, whether they are language chauvinists, whether they are religious extremists. If you don't do that, the country would be in ruins." - Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, 1986
- "I am often accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yes, if I did not, had I not done that, we wouldn't be here today. And I say without the slightest remorse, that we wouldn't be here, we would not have made economic progress, if we had not intervened on very personal matters - who your neighbour is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit, or what language you use. We decide what is right. Never mind what the people think." - Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, 20 April 1987
[edit] 24 December 1984, election aftermath
- "At this rate, the one-man, one-vote system could lead to decline and disintegration" - after the Opposition won 2 seats
- "Every election campaign starts off on a reasonable note, then in order to get the crowds excited, they make more and more brazen, scurrilous, wild accusations." - Accusing the Opposition of "gutter politics"
- "The party would withdraw services to the two opposition-held seats of Anson and Potong Pasir" - On Potong Pasir and Anson electing non-PAP MPs
[edit] 1990s
[edit] Leadership transition, pre-1991
- “I'm prepared to banter with you. I'm prepared to humour you. But if this were an Orwellian society with an Orwellian leader, would we be having this conversation?”, Sunday Mail Magazine 1990 on being a "state out of 1984"
- “Even from my sick bed, even if you are going to lower me into the grave and I feel something is going wrong, I will get up.” 1988 National Day Rally, when he discussed the leadership transition to Goh Chok Tong in 1990.
-
[edit] Senior Minister
- "With few exceptions, democracy has not brought good government to new developing countries...What Asians value may not necessarily be what Americans or Europeans value. Westerners value the freedoms and liberties of the individual. As an Asian of Chinese cultural backround, my values are for a government which is honest, effective and efficient." - Lee Kuan Yew (educated in Cambridge and speaks English, called Harry when young) in speech entitled 'Democracy, Human Rights and the Realities', Tokyo, Nov 10, 1992
- "In America itself, after 30 years of experimenting with the Great Society programmes, there is widespread crime and violence, children kill each other with guns, neigbourhoods are insecure, old people feel forgotten, families are falling apart. And the media attacks the integrity and character of your leaders with impunity, drags down all those in authority and blames everyone but itself." - Lee Kuan Yew, Sept 1995.
- "I have visited (Burma) and I know that there is only one instrument of government, and that is the army...If I were Aung San Suu Kyi, I think I'd rather be behind a fence and be a symbol than after two or three years, be found impotent." - SM Lee Kuan Yew, Reuters, Jun 6, 1996, which sparked a flurry of protests from Burmese students.
- "Between being loved and being feared, I have always believed Machiavelli was right.
If nobody is afraid of me, I’m meaningless." - Lee Kuan Yew, 6.10.1997
- "Mine is a very matter-of-fact approach to the problem. If you can select a population and they're educated and they're properly brought up, then you don't have to use too much of the stick because they would already have been trained. It's like with dogs. You train it in a proper way from small. It will know that it's got to leave, go outside to pee and to defecate. No, we are not that kind of society. We had to train adult dogs who even today deliberately urinate in the lifts." - Lee Kuan Yew on Singapore society, The Man & His Ideas, 1997
- "Supposing Catherine Lim was writing about me and not the prime minister...She would not dare, right? Because my posture, my response has been such that nobody doubts that if you take me on, I will put on knuckle-dusters and catch you in a cul de sac...Anybody who decides to take me on needs to put on knuckle dusters. If you think you can hurt me more than I can hurt you, try. There is no other way you can govern a Chinese society." - SM Lee Kuan Yew, The Man and His Ideas, 1997
- "Supposing I'm now 21, 22, what would I do? I would not be absorbed in wanting to change life in Singapore. I'm not responsible for Singapore...Why should I go and undertake this job and spend my whole life pushing this for a lot of people for whom nothing is good enough? I will have a fall-back position, which many are doing - have a house in Perth or Vancouver or Sydney, or an apartment in London, in case I need some place suddenly, and think about whether I go on to America." - SM Lee Kuan Yew, The Man & His Ideas, 1997
- "What people mean by consultation is an imitation of what they see in America; pressure groups and lobby groups..It's an unthinking adoption of Western practices of development without any pruning and modification to suit our circumstances." - Lee Kuan Yew, The Man & His Ideas, 1997
- "The Bell curve is a fact of life. The blacks on average score 85 per cent on IQ and it is accurate, nothing to do with culture. The whites score on average 100. Asians score more ... the Bell curve authors put it at least 10 points higher. These are realities that, if you do not accept, will lead to frustration because you will be spending money on wrong assumptions and the results cannot follow." - Lee Kuan Yew, The Man & His Ideas, 1997
- "I started off believing all men were equal. I now know that's the most unlikely thing ever to have been, because millions of years have passed over evolution, people have scattered across the face of this earth, been isolated from each other, developed independently, had different intermixtures between races, peoples, climates, soils... I didn't start off with that knowledge. But by observation, reading, watching, arguing, asking, that is the conclusion I've come to." - Lee Kuan Yew, The Man & His Ideas, 1997
- "Put it this way. As long as Jeyaretnam [Workers' Party leader] stands for what he stands for -- a thoroughly destructive force -- we will knock him. There are two ways of playing this. One, a you attack the policies; two, you attack the system. Jeyaretnam was attacking the system, he brought the Chief Justice into it. If I want to fix you, do I need the Chief Justice to fix you? Everybody knows that in my bag I have a hatchet, and a very sharp one. You take me on, I take my hatchet, we meet in the cul-de-sac. That's the way I had to survive in the past. That's the way the communists tackled me. He brought the Chief Justice into the political arena." - SM Lee Kuan Yew, The Man & His Ideas, 1997
- "If, for instance, you put in a Malay officer who's very religious and who has family ties in Malaysia in charge of a machine gun unit, that's a very tricky business. We've got to know his background... I'm saying these things because they are real, and if I don't think that, and I think even if today the Prime Minister doesn't think carefully about this, we could have a tragedy." - SM Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, September 19, 1999 on Malays in the Singapore Armed Forces
-
i refer to the above postings.
hi robertteh,u are right.Oppositions in SG have not asked
the help fr PAP.BUT,judging fr CSJ behaviour,
it looks like he did not help himself.
He just led the DSP,found and built for decades by another
gentleman,into hell.
CSJ just think that ,to make story for western medias to write,
he should went into jail every year.Then the staff in Dept of State
in US has somethings to write in their annual human report!!
Otherwise,it is MI to write anythings politically interesting in SG!!
2.Rule no.1 for opposition party.Dunt commit mistakes.
Rule no. 2--read no.1.CSJ just did the opposie.
3.Who's going to have Dentist 's MC today.
In 2006.''Mr Ravi was "physically and mentally exhausted".''
A dentist issued a MC for him 1 day to excuse him from court hearing.
Have u heard a dentist certify a patience
''physically and mentally exhausted''?
http://udhr19.blogspot.com/2006/09/paps-prostitutes.html
4.Question: will any party produce MC today?
LKY is the one u will excuse him
''physically and mentally exhausted'' if he produce one today,
26 May 2008.
He is few months short of aged 85 and his wife just discharged
from ICU .
Lets see any one few decades younger than him
and without old and sick wife in hospital will produce
a MC!!
-
I wander what happened to CSJ from the morning on 22 May Thursday to Sunday evening.
STimes already reported on Thur 22.05.2008 that Lees prepared to be cross exam
by CSJ today,25.05.2008.
But from Thur to Sunday evening,at least in SDP web site ,
he did not mentioned this .What a strange!!
He has been working so hard to cross exam Lees in court.
Now Lees said ok and he did not response positively.
Was he busy getting instructions from some one?
Learning how to cross exam Lees?
Read for yourself what did he write in these few days?
was he sick?
http://www.yoursdp.org/
2.The comments in SDP site speak for me.
http://www.yoursdp.org/component/content/article/1-singapore/467-m-ravi-argues-that-lees-bad-reputations-are-relevant-to-assessment-of-damages
Anonymous - Fri, 23 May 2008 7:56 am The crux of the issue is will CSJ dare to cross examine the 2 Lees? Or will CSJ chicken out like the last time. The truth will prevail. Strangely SDP website did not mention this worthy news as yet.
g_e - Dr Chee is a SLY and downright EVIL man. Fri, 23 May 2008 12:09 pm
PM Lee, MM Lee say they're ready to be cross-examined in their case against SDP
At last it looks like the Lees have finally been cornered, cannot escape being cross-examined, and are trying to put a brave face on a bad outcome. This is a classic demonstration of political bluster, vain and empty gas-bagging that takes their already tattered reputations to a new low.
Made me laugh to read their statement.
Apparently it's cowardly Dr Chee who's now trying to avoid having to cross-examine the Prime Minister and Minister Mentor.
The cunning opposition politician is employing 'delay tactics'.
Naughty Dr Chee went on to make all sorts of last-minute applications.
Nasty Dr Chee tried his best to avoid the hearing!
Astonishing how black can be portrayed as white, with a straight face, isn't it?''2.Read who is the chicken today!!
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/349929/1/.html
What does CSJ waiting for to cross examine MM and PM,on tomorrow?
While CSJ accuses they avoid to be cross-examined by him,
They said they are ready to be cross examined on Monday
26 May 2008 .
So,is it fair CSJ busy on writing but not prepare to cross examine them.
i post their views here as records let u see who is right.
What CSJ said
http://www.yoursdp.org/component/content/article/1-singapore/475-vintage-lee-kuan-yew
3.What Lees said
Channel NewsAsia - Saturday, May 24
''SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew have said they are ready for a court hearing to determine damages claimed by them against the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) and its leaders Chee Soon Juan and Chee Siok Chin.''
ADVERTISEMENT
<!--Vendor: Motif, Format: Expandable -->In a statement issued on Thursday evening, both leaders said they are ready to be cross—examined in open court on Monday.
Both leaders had sued the SDP and its leaders for an article, headlined "Government’s role in the NKF scandal", published in the party’s publication "Demokrat" in April 2006.
The High Court found the article defamed PM Lee and MM Lee and both leaders successfully obtained a summary judgement against SDP chief Dr Chee Soon Juan, his sister Chee Siok Chin and the party.
In their statement on Thursday, both leaders said it appeared Dr Chee was once again trying to avoid having to cross—examine the Prime Minister and Minister Mentor.
Hearing resumed in Chambers on Thursday to strike out statements of evidence filed by Dr Chee.
Senior Counsel Davider Singh, who is acting for the leaders, said Dr Chee was attempting to drag out proceedings to avoid next week’s hearing to assess the amount of damages. The opposition politician, he said, was employing delay tactics.
Giving a detailed account of these tactics, Minister Mentor Lee’s press secretary noted the assessment of damages hearing was originally scheduled from May 12—14.
Both leaders had set aside time to attend and be cross—examined, but Dr Chee tried his best to avoid the hearing. Instead, he had asked Justice Belinda Ang to excuse herself.
Dr Chee knew that if the Judge did so, the assessment of damages hearing would have to be postponed.
When this attempt failed, he asked for an adjournment to consider the two leaders’ application to strike out the affidavits filed by the Chees. The assessment of damages hearing was then re—scheduled to May 26—28.
Furthermore, two days (May 22 and 23) were set aside to hear the Striking—Out Applications so as to complete all preliminary matters before the main hearing starts. But Dr Chee went on to make all sorts of last—minute applications.
The hearing in Chambers on the Striking—out Applications will continue on Friday afternoon before Justice Belinda Ang. — CNA/ir
In opening this thread, you did give an extract from the SDP website entitled - What CSJ said - while you printed volumes of words in defense of LKY, why did you not go deeper into what was said by CSJ to find out the reasons for CSJ's purported attempts at delay tactics ?
Do you know the significance of having your Affidavit Evidence in Chief being striked out - especially the major portions of it ?
You litterally have nothing to stand on - simply no case to present your side to defend.
Davinder Singh - the lawyer for MM and PM - has been accused by CSJ to be working overtime in the judges chambers ''to fix'' this before MM and PM appear in court, and prevent the bulk of CSJ's materials being mentioned in open court that will embarass both MM and PM.
Is there any need for the trial to continue, or is this another "Political Show Trial" to hang CSJ ?
In the first place, is the trial necessary when the charges by MM and PM are a result of their own self-inflicted imagined damage done to their own reputation - based on the words expressed by CSJ and the SDP concerning the various issues of public interests that started with the NKF scandal ?
If the words have damaged the reputation of MM and PM, why will they not allow CSJ to defend himself and given reasons for the words used ?
Why will MM and PM allow their lawyer - Davinder Singh to apply for the bulk of CSJ's defense in his Affidavit to be deleted ?
How is CSJ to defend himself and the SDP ?
Try to be a "lionnoisy", when someone remove your tonsils - and see how loud a squeak you can make.
-
CSJ made history today 26.05.2008 by cross exam LHL!!
But CSJ and CSJ was late,arriving at court 2.41 pm
and 2.43 pm respectively,later than LHL 2.28 and Ravi 2.32.
The court supposed to be started at 2.30.LKY arrived 3.58.
4 SDP note takers just behind Ravi,CSJ and CSC
Singh objected note takers in court.But Judge allowed.
CSJ questioned SO in court
Before Ravi cross exam LHL,CSJ asked for identity of
about at least 5 Security Officers in court.Judge disallowed.
Judge asked Ravi to start few times before CSJ sat down
unwillly.
While Ravi asked Judge consider if it is suitable LKY present
in court,CSJ stood up and asked LKY leave.Singh said this was
CSJ tactic ,reflecting CSJ fear.LKY was allowed to stay.
Ravi cross exam LHL
During cross exam,Ravi referred to note and asked.
Most of the times,LHL had to wait 30 seconds before Ravi started
asking.Singh looked at Ravi while waiting.
Ravi said LHL sued SDP to split SDP and sued SDP during
9 days GE period in order to cripple SDP.
LHL said he had to defend the entire system and sued SDP
in his personal capacity. Ravi asked why other cabinets mambers
did not sue.LHL asked Ravi to ask them.
Ravi asked LHL refer to a certain news article.
While Ravi looking for details,LHL told Ravi a certain statement
was said by GCT.
-
Great! Time to watch CSJ make a fool of himself yet again.....Everyone knows he has no case and deserves to lose his case yet again..but still it makes good entertainment.
-
CSJ lied again.He claimed in this story (which was posted after my above
posting posted on 7.01 pm today)
Developing story: Lee Kuan Yew barges into courtroom:26.05.2008
Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew barged into the courtroom this afternoon when Mr Lee Hsien Loong was being cross-examined by the defence in a defamation case brought on by the Lees against SDP and its leaders.
Before the senior Lee made his unannounced appearance together with at least seven bodyguards, the door of the courtroom was flung open by one of his securities who had quickly rushed in front of Justice Belinda Ang who was hearing the case at Court 4 B.
Judge Ang and all the others present were clearly startled as to what was going on before they spotted a hunched Mr Lee Kuan Yew slowly made his way into the courtroom to take his seat next to SDP chairman Mr Gandhi Ambalam. But quickly, an alert lawyer of the plaintiff realized the unintended proximity and showed Mr Lee to another chair further away.While all this drama was taking place, Mr Lee Hsien Loong was in the witness stand, making everyone wonder whether there is any truth to the maxim that "everyone before the law is equal" or some more equal than others.
This developing report will be updated in a few minsutes. Please check back.http://www.yoursdp.org/
2.MM Lee arrived at 3.58 pm,just after the Judge sat down.
After LKY sat down,CSJ started question the roles of SO
and objected the present of LKY.
Ravi started questionning LHL from 4.18 pm.
So,CSJ claimed:
Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew barged into the courtroom this afternoon when Mr Lee Hsien Loong was being cross-examined....
In my humble views,is either a mistake or a lie.
Would u pl tell Dr Chee amend the posting.
read my above posting:I wrote
CSJ questioned SO in court
Before Ravi cross exam LHL,CSJ asked for identity of
about at least 5 Security Officers in court.Judge disallowed.
Judge asked Ravi to start few times before CSJ sat down
unwillly.
-
Singh critized (almost?) all questions raised by CSJ are irrelevant!
At about 4.50 pm,CSC asked for adjourned at 5.35 for
her swalloned face.It looks like there is an egg in her mouth.
She asked again at 5.35.After some thought,Judge adjourned
to tmr .
-
Our learned CSJ is again misleading the public.
He made u think that Singh prevented him continuing asking LHL.
The truth was at 4.55 pm and 5.35 pm ,
CSC asked for adjourment and Judge adjourned at about 5.40pm.
2.So,it was not Singh preventing CSJ cross exam LHL.
The swallon face of CSC made the court adjoured.
They requested for adjourment at 5.35pm.
...Turning to Judge Ang, Dr Chee said now was the chance for him to cross-examine the plaintiff and to elicit answers to those pressing questions that Mr Singh had accused Dr Chee of avoiding in the past. Dr Chee said now that he had been given this chance, Mr Singh kept preventing him from posing such questions of great public interest to Mr Lee.
The cross-examination of Mr Lee Hsien Loong continues tomorrow.http://www.yoursdp.org/component/content/article/1-singapore/479-lee-kuan-yew-barges-into-courtroom
2.In the hearing today,Ravi said,without jury, the Judge represent the public...
-
'lionnoisy' were you in court today to witness the proceedngs ?
If you were not in court today, how would you know if CSJ description of LKY's arrival was a lie ?
Do you know that it is very unusual for two plaintiffs to be present in court at the same time - when one is giving evidence under cross-examination and when the other plaintiff has still not been cross-examined in court ?
Even in the Subordinate Court, no one can simply barge in when the court is in session, let alone a body-guard gate crashing and approaching the Judge's bench without permission ?
Did the body guard bow to the bench and ask permission to approach the bench ?
Who is this body-guard to be so arrogant when his civil service grade is lower than the judge ?
Surely this is a clear contempt of court ?
Clearly court proceedings are not followed, if MM LKY is allowed to sit in when PM LHL is giving evidence - as MM has still not been cross-examined by the Attorney for the Defendants, and should not be listening in during LHL statements under cross-examintion - for obvious reasons. .
Is the Law equally applied ?
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
'lionnoisy' were you in court today to witness the proceedngs ?
If you were not in court today, how would you know if CSJ description of LKY's arrival was a lie ?
Do you know that it is very unusual for two plaintiffs to be present in court at the same time - when one is giving evidence under cross-examination and when the other plaintiff has still not been cross-examined in court ?
Even in the Subordinate Court, no one can simply barge in when the court is in session, let alone a body-guard gate crashing and approaching the Judge's bench without permission ?
Did the body guard bow to the bench and ask permission to approach the bench ?
Who is this body-guard to be so arrogant when his civil service grade is lower than the judge ?
Surely this is a clear contempt of court ?
Clearly court proceedings are not followed, if MM LKY is allowed to sit in when PM LHL is giving evidence - as MM has still not been cross-examined by the Attorney for the Defendants, and should not be listening in during LHL statements under cross-examintion - for obvious reasons. .
Is the Law equally applied ?
Atobe, I would like to ask you opinion on the following: -
- Do you think CSJ has a case against PM and MM or do you think that he is just taking this opportunity to side track himself and talk about other things which are not related to the case?- Do you believe that the defamation charges against CSJ has made a significant impact on SDP's 2006 election result?
-
Originally posted by Gutturosa:
Atobe, I would like to ask you opinion on the following: -
- Do you think CSJ has a case against PM and MM or do you think that he is just taking this opportunity to side track himself and talk about other things which are not related to the case?- Do you believe that the defamation charges against CSJ has made a significant impact on SDP's 2006 election result?
This is an interesting point. If speaking about the NKF case, Durai got sentenced to three month in prison in which he has not served his term b second he managed to go out of the country n employed in UAE in spite of his status as a bankrupt. Richard Yong only served some month out of his 15 month jail term n is serving on home detention scheme.
-
Originally posted by Gutturosa:
Atobe, I would like to ask you opinion on the following: -
- Do you think CSJ has a case against PM and MM or do you think that he is just taking this opportunity to side track himself and talk about other things which are not related to the case?- Do you believe that the defamation charges against CSJ has made a significant impact on SDP's 2006 election result?
Does it matter what I think ?
What do you think of CSJ's chances, considering the manner that LKY and LHL is treating the Court standing rules and procedures ?
Are the political elites above the Law ?
Do you think that all any threats to anyone do not affect anyone's chances at success ?
Will you do business with someone who has been accused by competing rivals with unsubstantiated or to be proven charges - all done with the purpose of spoiling the deal with you ?
Will you continue to work with someone who will be embroiled in legal suits rather than having the time to see the deal to a successful conclusion ?
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Does it matter what I think ?
What do you think of CSJ's chances, considering the manner that LKY and LHL is treating the Court standing rules and procedures ?
Are the political elites above the Law ?
Do you think that all any threats to anyone do not affect anyone's chances at success ?
Will you do business with someone who has been accused by competing rivals with unsubstantiated or to be proven charges - all done with the purpose of spoiling the deal with you ?
Will you continue to work with someone who will be embroiled in legal suits rather than having the time to see the deal to a successful conclusion ?
Maybe you have misinterpreted my question. I was asking if CSJ has what it take (as it facts and evidence) to substantiate what he said about Singapore government and NKF.
IMO, SDP was never a threat to PAP in the 2006 election because majority of Singaporeans dont agree with CSJ's conduct and knew that SDP under the leadership of CSJ will get to nowhere. I believe SDP's votes and rally turnout speaks for itself. So, I would say, that whatever charges PM and MM press against CSJ has got no material impact on outcome of the election because that was not the first nor will it be the last.
-
lol, so exciting.
-
By gate crashing the court, MM Lee is guilty of contempt of court, if the hearing is held in England, MM lee will be shown the door. This shows that he does not respect the law, this shows that the judge is under Lee. He is above the law. It does not matter CSJ win or lose the case, it is the arrogance of MM Lee that make the people fed up. Look at TT Durai, he can go overseas work, but CSJ can't leave the country. One sided law. Who swallowed our money, TT Durai or Chee ? What Chee get? Fame ? The crux of the matter is not Chee, it is the high handedness of the pap, and the bullying tactic of the pap. As long as you dont disturb the fami Lee, it will be ok for you to stay in spore. Try cheating to pay less income tax, no problem. If you are Francis T Seow, then better pay full income tax. That is what I mean. Low TK dared not bring up the NKF issue because he will be marked and lose his seat. Chee is daring .
-
Originally posted by t_a_s:
By gate crashing the court, MM Lee is guilty of contempt of court, if the hearing is held in England, MM lee will be shown the door. This shows that he does not respect the law, this shows that the judge is under Lee. He is above the law. It does not matter CSJ win or lose the case, it is the arrogance of MM Lee that make the people fed up. Look at TT Durai, he can go overseas work, but CSJ can't leave the country. One sided law. Who swallowed our money, TT Durai or Chee ? What Chee get? Fame ? The crux of the matter is not Chee, it is the high handedness of the pap, and the bullying tactic of the pap. As long as you dont disturb the fami Lee, it will be ok for you to stay in spore. Try cheating to pay less income tax, no problem. If you are Francis T Seow, then better pay full income tax. That is what I mean. Low TK dared not bring up the NKF issue because he will be marked and lose his seat. Chee is daring .
I think the whole Singapore is more interested in what CSJ has to back up his accusation, because it is in the interest of Singaporeans to know truth and not if MM Lee is Mr Nice Guy.
So please dont distracted by side shows, be focus!!
-
Originally posted by Gutturosa:
Maybe you have misinterpreted my question. I was asking if CSJ has what it take (as it facts and evidence) to substantiate what he said about Singapore government and NKF.
IMO, SDP was never a threat to PAP in the 2006 election because majority of Singaporeans dont agree with CSJ's conduct and knew that SDP under the leadership of CSJ will get to nowhere. I believe SDP's votes and rally turnout speaks for itself. So, I would say, that whatever charges PM and MM press against CSJ has got no material impact on outcome of the election because that was not the first nor will it be the last.
Was your question misinterpreted, or did you mean something more then the simple questions asked - which you has now surfaced in a more ''baiting manner" ?
Did you read what CSJ had written that resulted in MM and PM feeling that their reputation had been affected ?
Much has been linked even by participants in several forums - not least by our very venerable robbertteh in this Speakers' Corner.
If I should claim that my reputation has been affected by your writing on a general topic of public interest - { such as your accusing participants in this thread as being ''sheep and wankers'' for their die-hard cynicism towards the MEW } - and my over-sensitivity or guilt will demand that I see your acts as inflicting damage to my reputation - can you defend yourself in a litigation proceeding that I will take out on you for the many different ways that I will infer your writings to have affected me ?
MM's conduct and attitude towards his political challengers in the 1997 election - Francis Seow, Tang Liang Hong and J.B.Jeyaratnam - is already indicative of the type of politics that he is prepared to sink to.
Ironically, as the God Father adapt in such hard politics he will accuse a young puppy in CSJ to practice gangster politics.
His remarkable comments in rebuttal to Dr Catherine Lim's writing is even more revealing of the hoodlum dressed in white.
Could he be a sheep in wolf's clothing, or a wolf in white sheep wool ?
Either way he strive to be No 1 - as a Sheep or as a Wolf - you got to be careful who you call next as ''sheep''.
"Supposing Catherine Lim was writing about me and not the prime minister...She would not dare, right? Because my posture, my response has been such that nobody doubts that if you take me on, I will put on knuckle-dusters and catch you in a cul de sac... Anybody who decides to take me on needs to put on knuckle dusters. If you think you can hurt me more than I can hurt you, try. There is no other way you can govern a Chinese society." - SM Lee Kuan Yew, The Man and His Ideas, 1997
