Anti pap, or genuinely here for country
-
I oso PAP liao leh. donno why.Originally posted by Qitai:Aiya, wanted to give up liao lah on these people.
Their thinking are like this
Qitai don't trust GMS ==> Qitai against opposition ==> Qitai from PAP ==> Qitai represent PAP.
Amazing right? Then all pour all their unhappiness about PAP on me like got use like that.
Just because I ask for more information...
-
Want to sue also sue GMS first. But not so eng lah. Anyway, I small fly, reputation not worth much, not like those big shot.Originally posted by SnowFlag:u can always sue nelstar for deframing u.
-
Guess my reaction when Geogre Bush made the statement on the war on terrorism - "you are either with us or against us".Originally posted by Nelstar:I oso PAP liao leh. donno why.
Just because I ask for more information... 
-
I think GMS speaks more sense than you.Originally posted by Qitai:Want to sue also sue GMS first. But not so eng lah. Anyway, I small fly, reputation not worth much, not like those big shot.
Because u speak out of point most of the time. -
Ha ha ha. Don't disagree with that.Originally posted by SnowFlag:I think GMS speaks more sense than you.
Because u speak out of point most of the time.
I lazy to type long essay liao. Being through that with Atobe. Sick liao.
GMS is definitely more serious than I am. But he gives me an impression of having an agenda here. So, I don't trust him. Also, I had my few rounds of debates with him earlier, with him calling names in the end which is one of the reasons why I don't like him. Of course, his habit of putting words into my mouth did not help. -
Too bad no Pro-PAP activists for us to shoot down.Originally posted by Qitai:Ha ha ha. Don't disagree with that.
I lazy to type long essay liao. Being through that with Atobe. Sick liao.
GMS is definitely more serious than I am. But he gives me an impression of having an agenda here. So, I don't trust him. Also, I had my few rounds of debates with him earlier, with him calling names in the end which is one of the reasons why I don't like him. Of course, his habit of putting words into my mouth did not help.
They no longer care about us... -
I thought there are many here?Originally posted by Nelstar:Too bad no Pro-PAP activists for us to shoot down.
They no longer care about us... -
I dont see topics like:Originally posted by SnowFlag:I thought there are many here?
PAP is good!
Support PAP for life!
Down with opposition!
Etc.
I see many who are, GIMME a good reason to support! -
So far only one I can remember - cooleo. Got shot down almost immediately if I remember correctly.Originally posted by Nelstar:Too bad no Pro-PAP activists for us to shoot down.
They no longer care about us... -
........do u see replies like above.Originally posted by Nelstar:I dont see topics like:
PAP is good!
Support PAP for life!
Down with opposition! -
That one?Originally posted by Qitai:So far only one I can remember - cooleo. Got shot down almost immediately if I remember correctly.
He's still around but not participating here. Too bad I didn't have time to entertain him too. -
Originally posted by SnowFlag:
Rarely. But they die too soon.
........do u see [b]replies like above.[/b] -
Dear Qitai,
Let's put it this way, I may have jumped the gun but that's how I read you.
If you don't trust me, what's the basis of your distrust? As you have said, it is through my postings; thus, you must be skeptical about what I have said? Even to the extend that this is not tested, that is not tested? Right or not?
Well, the foundation of your distrust is similar to Nelstar's skepticism; just that you have formed your opinion about me already.
I did not say you are from PAP, neither did I say you represent PAP. If your distrust of me isn't form on the foundation of any slightest skepticism of my posting, then obviously, that's personal bias. Which one isit?
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by Qitai:Aiya, wanted to give up liao lah on these people.
Their thinking are like this
Qitai don't trust GMS ==> Qitai against opposition ==> Qitai from PAP ==> Qitai represent PAP.
Amazing right? Then all pour all their unhappiness about PAP on me like got use like that. -
When you sell an idea to a customer.Originally posted by goh meng seng:Dear Qitai,
Let's put it this way, I may have jumped the gun but that's how I read you.
If you don't trust me, what's the basis of your distrust? As you have said, it is through my postings; thus, you must be skeptical about what I have said? Even to the extend that this is not tested, that is not tested? Right or not?
Well, the foundation of your distrust is similar to Nelstar's skepticism; just that you have formed your opinion about me already.
I did not say you are from PAP, neither did I say you represent PAP. If your distrust of me isn't form on the foundation of any slightest skepticism of my posting, then obviously, that's personal bias. Which one isit?
Goh Meng Seng
Convince the customer.
I don't want you to talk about the competitors for the products. I want to know the product and how much benefit it can bring. Customers are always skeptical about salesperson. That is where your marketing skills come into play. TO prove your worth.
Stop telling me how worthless your competitors are. I want to see and know your products.
Wah liew. I simplified this liao hor. -
Is a government truly professional if it sees opposition frequently only as threats frequently lambasting them as people who are untrustworthy.Originally posted by Qitai:I don't know about the opposition. But I don't trust GMS at all. And this feeling grows each day I see him post. I only see him bash PAP and brag how good he is.
Is such a government truly successful if the people are divided into pro- and anti-government or anti-PAP?
The result of many years of governance seems obvious - people are divided into pro- and anti-PAP as can be seen in this forum.
To be worthy of their salt, our elected government leaders should have the magnanimity and wisdom to win the hearts and souls of all their people and unite them to be pro-Singapore. Don't keep blaming anyone who disagree with their policies or actions. -
Sorry, wrong answer. I don't remember saying anything along the line of tested or not. Quote me if I did said that before. If you can find a quote, I apologize. If you cannot, stop trying to force an image on to me.Originally posted by goh meng seng:Dear Qitai,
Let's put it this way, I may have jumped the gun but that's how I read you.
If you don't trust me, what's the basis of your distrust? As you have said, it is through my postings; thus, you must be skeptical about what I have said? Even to the extend that this is not tested, that is not tested? Right or not?
Well, the foundation of your distrust is similar to Nelstar's skepticism; just that you have formed your opinion about me already.
I did not say you are from PAP, neither did I say you represent PAP. If your distrust of me isn't form on the foundation of any slightest skepticism of my posting, then obviously, that's personal bias. Which one isit?
Goh Meng Seng -
Then sorry lor, I apologize to suggest that you would view it as untested. But your skeptism still exist, right?
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by Qitai:Sorry, wrong answer. I don't remember saying anything along the line of tested or not. Quote me if I did said that before. If you can find a quote, I apologize. If you cannot, stop trying to force an image on to me. -
Qitai, it was not GMS who said you are a PAP's person. It was I. You are also no different, jumping to conclusions.
At least for me, I am new here. And reading for posts for the 1st time, I felt that you really sounded like doing PAP's job until you clarified that you are 'neutral'.
Anyway what's wrong with having agendas? When you date a girl/boy you also have a agenda right?
You are like many citizens of Singapore, that although do not agree with PAP all the time, have been brainwashed by PAP into perceiving what opposition politicians ought to be in a cerrtain mould. One aspect is that they cannot have agenda. Which is dumb. PAP wins elections by having hidden agendas all the time. Tell me why NSS and ERS payment always coincide with election? If opposition clears their table of having hidden agenda, then even Hougang and PP will be lost!
And also, brainwashed that non-partisanship is high and mighty and being non-partisan gives the right to be 'lazy' whereas your fellow human being, more honest with himself, is 'punished' for his honesty by being expected to produce more content in this forum. Nelstar too, can argue before coming up with facts and we should forgive him just because he is 'neutral', whereas he sets higher standards for GMS just because GMS is honest about his political stand, so he as opposition must have facts before arguing.
Really...
EmptyCage -
Aiya. Definitely you have to provoke these opposition into thinking and straight talking without people bashing.
If they start bashing people up when ppl don't agree, they are as bad as the lightning ones up there.
Frankly speaking, Singapore is a long way from having equal competition at different GRCs... This is even made more difficult by dividing such a small country into so many different GRCs and the amount of money needed to be thrown in before contesting...
We won't be seeing much success in opposition. The opposition itself is another problem, having only identified mistakes and rarely promoting solutions. And when they promote solutions, they lose it when they are not shown support.
I don't see wish to see PAP decaying since we do not have stronger opposition yet. That doesn't mean I will listen to only PAP.
But convincing me might be harder when one cannot be capable of being objective and bringing more solutions for the welfare of everyone. -
I did not direct that reply to GMS, but GMS choose to reply on that.Originally posted by EmptyCage:Qitai, it was not GMS who said you are a PAP's person. It was I. You are also no different, jumping to conclusions.
At least for me, I am new here. And reading for posts for the 1st time, I felt that you really sounded like doing PAP's job until you clarified that you are 'neutral'.
EmptyCage
Read the reply carefully, nowhere did I direct that particular reply to him.
What did I do to make you think I am doing a PAP's job? Just because I do not trust GMS? -
btw, in the 1st place, there is something wrong with the question
Anti pap, or genuinely here for country
Since u r required to make a choice between them.
This question implies that if u r anti-pap, u r not genuinely here for the country. It also implies that if u r genuinely here for the country, u r not anti-pap.
really? -
Another brainwashed comment. Can I rebuttal you back and said you have been brainwashed by the opposition? Do you like that? You guys keep saying the same comment that I really have to suspect all of you has been brainwashed by opposition to say this. Now, tell me how do you feel with this comment?Originally posted by EmptyCage:You are like many citizens of Singapore, that although do not agree with PAP all the time, have been brainwashed by PAP into perceiving what opposition politicians ought to be in a cerrtain mould. One aspect is that they cannot have agenda. Which is dumb. PAP wins elections by having hidden agendas all the time. Tell me why NSS and ERS payment always coincide with election? If opposition clears their table of having hidden agenda, then even Hougang and PP will be lost!
And also, brainwashed that non-partisanship is high and mighty and being non-partisan gives the right to be 'lazy' whereas your fellow human being, more honest with himself, is 'punished' for his honesty by being expected to produce more content in this forum. Nelstar too, can argue before coming up with facts and we should forgive him just because he is 'neutral', whereas he sets higher standards for GMS just because GMS is honest about his political stand, so he as opposition must have facts before arguing.
EmptyCage
Tell you what - I do not trust ST reports or PAP either. GMS is not the only one. All have agenda, all have told half-truths, selectively presenting information that puts them in good light or their opponents in bad light. In the case of GMS, his biasness in presenting information is evident. An example is the recent Temasek report, ST choose to only report the good numbers. GMS choose to only pick reports that gives the bad numbers. Both are bias. Aren't they? So, if I trust GMS, I only see the negative numbers. If I trust ST, I only see the positive numbers. Now, is this enough reason not to trust him and his information? What did I choose to do on this subject? I look for a copy of the report and look at it myself and from there realise both speaks the truth, half-truths.
Now now, just to moderate things a bit. He made many good post. Providing a lot of information that may not be reported by ST. These are good read. But if I take those at face value, then I must think Singapore is in a terrible shape? Is Singapore really that bad? I do not think so.
Just to make you happy. I do always feel that opposition is given an unfair playing field with PAP. But does that mean I should support opposition? To me, a bad idea is a bad idea, PAP or opposition. Same thing for good ideas. -
I think you still don't get the gist of what I am trying to say.Originally posted by Nelstar:Aiya. Definitely you have to provoke these opposition into thinking and straight talking without people bashing.
If they start bashing people up when ppl don't agree, they are as bad as the lightning ones up there.
Frankly speaking, Singapore is a long way from having equal competition at different GRCs... This is even made more difficult by dividing such a small country into so many different GRCs and the amount of money needed to be thrown in before contesting...
We won't be seeing much success in opposition. The opposition itself is another problem, having only identified mistakes and rarely promoting solutions. And when they promote solutions, they lose it when they are not shown support.
I don't see wish to see PAP decaying since we do not have stronger opposition yet. That doesn't mean I will listen to only PAP.
But convincing me might be harder when one cannot be capable of being objective and bringing more solutions for the welfare of everyone.
Whether Singapore collapse or not does not depend on PAP or opposition, but it is the people living in this particular piece of land.
PAP is bad, opposition is worse, the rest of the country with its 3 million population (excluding you at the moment) will collapse. Now onto you. You can do something about it. What about you, are you doing something about it?
Anyway, I don't agree opposition has no ideas. You don't see them as solutions but I bet you don't even know why.
EmptyCage -
Hahah...... can opposition brainwash when it does not even have much access to reach out to 3+ million Singaporeans?
Yes, partly because you said you don't trust GMS. Not because of your distrust, but because you were not able to substantiate your distrust. And when asked you just said you are 'lazy'. How can a lazy thinker's words be credible? Who knows if you are saying he cannot be trusted because you happen to be in a 'lazy' mood?
And also because of all people here, you don't trust him and he happens to be a member of an opposition party. So many posters here, how come you only don't trust him? If you are treating kindly the neutral posters and only gunning for opposition, doesn' t this sound like what PAP does?
But anyway, since you clarified, then I shall leave it. Your recent post is objective enough. Enough said.
EmptyCageOriginally posted by Qitai:Another brainwashed comment. Can I rebuttal you back and said you have been brainwashed by the opposition? Do you like that? You guys keep saying the same comment that I really have to suspect all of you has been brainwashed by opposition to say this. Now, tell me how do you feel with this comment?
Tell you what - I do not trust ST reports or PAP either. GMS is not the only one. All have agenda, all have told half-truths, selectively presenting information that puts them in good light or their opponents in bad light. In the case of GMS, his biasness in presenting information is evident. An example is the recent Temasek report, ST choose to only report the good numbers. GMS choose to only pick reports that gives the bad numbers. Both are bias. Aren't they? So, if I trust GMS, I only see the negative numbers. If I trust ST, I only see the positive numbers. Now, is this enough reason not to trust him and his information? What did I choose to do on this subject? I look for a copy of the report and look at it myself and from there realise both speaks the truth, half-truths.
Now now, just to moderate things a bit. He made many good post. Providing a lot of information that may not be reported by ST. These are good read. But if I take those at face value, then I must think Singapore is in a terrible shape? Is Singapore really that bad? I do not think so.
Just to make you happy. I do always feel that opposition is given an unfair playing field with PAP. But does that mean I should support opposition? To me, a bad idea is a bad idea, PAP or opposition. Same thing for good ideas. -
I don't see how I can engage in political activities since I'm more biased than PAP, more critical than Opposition and I'm still screwed up in life. I'm still in the midst of not having enough free time to engage in many things I want to do.Originally posted by EmptyCage:I think you still don't get the gist of what I am trying to say.
Whether Singapore collapse or not does not depend on PAP or opposition, but it is the people living in this particular piece of land.
PAP is bad, opposition is worse, the rest of the country with its 3 million population (excluding you at the moment) will collapse. Now onto you. You can do something about it. What about you, are you doing something about it?
Anyway, I don't agree opposition has no ideas. You don't see them as solutions but I bet you don't even know why.
EmptyCage
When I argue against these ideas or solutions. I'm not totally against them. I just want to understand more. When they start bashing PAP like there's no tomorrow. I just feel they are no better than who they bashed against.
I don't see why they should start gauging and weighing the pros and cons like we deserved to be spoonfed these ideas of theirs.
In most societies, the people are more passive and are not strong participants in politics. They still managed to strive and live, though conditions may not be better.
What I'd like to highlight is that credibility counts more than anything. Less than 5% makes the decisions, more than 95% suffers. Thus these people who wants to make a difference have to ensure the big audience listens to their speech.
As for what you said in Red, I hope you understand that I'm trying to learn more. If I wanna be totally passive, I would have ignored this forum all together.