• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Chitchat Chee offended by Minister's rebuke of Alice Fong

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
https://www.facebook.com/cheesoonjuan/posts/10155201200433849Facebook © 2016

Chee Soon Juan 徐顺全
13 hrs ·
Tan Chuan-jin stands on shaky moral ground when he chides Alice Fong for berating a food-court cleaner. The Minister should address his PAP colleagues instead: Chan Chun Sing labels me a political failure, Grace Fu criticises me for not having a job, and Tan himself belittles my Hokkien.
It's the kind of viciousness displayed by the PAP that breeds such ungracious behaviour in some Singaporeans. Alice Fong is not the first and she certainly won't be the last to mimic the PAP's crassness. Government leaders who are constantly extolled in the media cannot do one thing and then preach something else to the public.
This is what I meant when I talked about character during the election: We don't have to step on others to get ahead, we don't stigmatise failure, and we don't condemn those who are not like us.
Character is about lifting people up, not kicking them – especially when they are down. It certainly isn't about saying one thing and then doing another.
Alice Fong demonstrated weak moral character. Hopefully, she will learn. The PAP?
 

tanwahtiu

Alfrescian
Loyal
PAP candidate for election army generals are only following orders.

What can army generals do in public service? They know nuts about public services.



https://www.facebook.com/cheesoonjuan/posts/10155201200433849Facebook © 2016

Chee Soon Juan 徐顺全
13 hrs ·
Tan Chuan-jin stands on shaky moral ground when he chides Alice Fong for berating a food-court cleaner. The Minister should address his PAP colleagues instead: Chan Chun Sing labels me a political failure, Grace Fu criticises me for not having a job, and Tan himself belittles my Hokkien.
It's the kind of viciousness displayed by the PAP that breeds such ungracious behaviour in some Singaporeans. Alice Fong is not the first and she certainly won't be the last to mimic the PAP's crassness. Government leaders who are constantly extolled in the media cannot do one thing and then preach something else to the public.
This is what I meant when I talked about character during the election: We don't have to step on others to get ahead, we don't stigmatise failure, and we don't condemn those who are not like us.
Character is about lifting people up, not kicking them – especially when they are down. It certainly isn't about saying one thing and then doing another.
Alice Fong demonstrated weak moral character. Hopefully, she will learn. The PAP?
 

halsey02

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
All the deaf, mute should now, go out & do something silly, get admonished & get people to film that & upload to FB, etc....& your minister will come, soothing you......wtf! all these wayang for Brownie points..

Alice, Alice....you remove the A...you get LICE....now she had been label a vermin....your bak chang is not welcome anywhere not even in Nee Soon...& Jamban woman will not even take selfie with you....they don't want to be contaminated with "LICE"..
 

chongpangchixwings

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Chee is correct but only to a certain extent because these are 2 separate issues. In Chee's case he is venturing into the arena of politics and should expect this kind of rough play. Heck it is not even rough compared to the mudslinging in US politics and the fist swinging in Taiwan.
As for the Alice Fong incident the cleaner was innocently doing his job but made a mistake. Alice could have taken issue with the cleaner in a totally different manner. She didnt have to be so abusive and callous.
The bottom line is both Chee and the cleaner got screwed while they were doing their different jobs. The rewards for Chee if he is successful would be far greater than anything the cleaner can ever dream of, but the risks and attendant criticisms are greater too.
 

Satyr

Alfrescian
Loyal
Chee is correct but only to a certain extent because these are 2 separate issues. In Chee's case he is venturing into the arena of politics and should expect this kind of rough play. Heck it is not even rough compared to the mudslinging in US politics and the fist swinging in Taiwan.
As for the Alice Fong incident the cleaner was innocently doing his job but made a mistake. Alice could have taken issue with the cleaner in a totally different manner. She didnt have to be so abusive and callous.
The bottom line is both Chee and the cleaner got screwed while they were doing their different jobs. The rewards for Chee if he is successful would be far greater than anything the cleaner can ever dream of, but the risks and attendant criticisms are greater too.

If Chee had greater support the PAP would not get away with using unfair means. They know it. His problem is the lack of support. Sinkies are pretty stupid. If I were him I wouldn't bother. The Singapore worth fighting for is long gone. We can no more change it then the Red Indians can reclaim America.
 

fanta

Alfrescian
Loyal
While Chee is justified in his criticism of the PAP breeding ungracious behaviour, that is not the reason why Chee failed to get elected for 5 times in previous elections. Chee could not get elected, not because he is a failure but because he is convicted of deliberately falsifying data in Parliament and was fined for Contempt of Parliament.

"In 1996, Dr Chee and some of his SDP colleagues made written and oral representations to a Parliamentary Select Committee with fabricated data. The claims made were startling and untrue, like a claim that the Government’s share of total health expenditure had fallen from 40% in 1970 to just 5% in 1990. In November 1996, Dr Chee and his three other SDP colleagues were charged by the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges for “deliberately falsifying data and misleading the public”. During the Committee of Privileges hearings, they continued to evade and prevaricate. Dr Chee and his colleagues were found to have been in Contempt of Parliament and were fined"



https://www.facebook.com/cheesoonjuan/posts/10155201200433849Facebook © 2016

Chee Soon Juan 徐顺全
13 hrs ·
Tan Chuan-jin stands on shaky moral ground when he chides Alice Fong for berating a food-court cleaner. The Minister should address his PAP colleagues instead: Chan Chun Sing labels me a political failure, Grace Fu criticises me for not having a job, and Tan himself belittles my Hokkien.
It's the kind of viciousness displayed by the PAP that breeds such ungracious behaviour in some Singaporeans. Alice Fong is not the first and she certainly won't be the last to mimic the PAP's crassness. Government leaders who are constantly extolled in the media cannot do one thing and then preach something else to the public.
This is what I meant when I talked about character during the election: We don't have to step on others to get ahead, we don't stigmatise failure, and we don't condemn those who are not like us.
Character is about lifting people up, not kicking them – especially when they are down. It certainly isn't about saying one thing and then doing another.
Alice Fong demonstrated weak moral character. Hopefully, she will learn. The PAP?
 

virus

Alfrescian
Loyal
paper general tan is overstepping so many other peer in their territory, their ministries, their RC bounds and PA bounds trying to score a political point?

did he invite DeafMute to makan cake with AF?

did he invite Jamban LeeBW to have breakfast at GEM?
 

virus

Alfrescian
Loyal
All the deaf, mute should now, go out & do something silly, get admonished & get people to film that & upload to FB, etc....& your minister will come, soothing you......wtf! all these wayang for Brownie points..

Alice, Alice....you remove the A...you get LICE....now she had been label a vermin....your bak chang is not welcome anywhere not even in Nee Soon...& Jamban woman will not even take selfie with you....they don't want to be contaminated with "LICE"..

she's s shrew 泼妇 ... not a lice. but Jamban LeeBeeHwa would not know the difference

http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?229387-Jamban-Lee-dont-know-what-a-rat-looks-like
 

halsey02

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Chee is correct but only to a certain extent because these are 2 separate issues. In Chee's case he is venturing into the arena of politics and should expect this kind of rough play. Heck it is not even rough compared to the mudslinging in US politics and the fist swinging in Taiwan.
As for the Alice Fong incident the cleaner was innocently doing his job but made a mistake. Alice could have taken issue with the cleaner in a totally different manner. She didnt have to be so abusive and callous.
The bottom line is both Chee and the cleaner got screwed while they were doing their different jobs. The rewards for Chee if he is successful would be far greater than anything the cleaner can ever dream of, but the risks and attendant criticisms are greater too.

Chee had not heard of this story...

" A Duchess sued a man for calling her a PIG, & the man was fined a certain amount in British Pounds for insulting the DUCHESS, after sentencing the man asked the judge, " is it true, I can't call the DUCHESS a PIG?, "true", said the judge, "you honour, call I call a PIG DUCHESS"???

Chee must learn from this story, on how to call the "DUCHESS" ( ) a "PIG"..
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Chee must realise that he must speak to the people and not the PAP. The PAP do not cast votes, the people do. In this case he could have spoken up for the cleaner yet no mention of him. He spent so much of his time and focus on the PAP and the Chiams. I am surprised that he still bringing up Grace Fu, Chan Chun Sing etc.

He still has poor handle on Singaporeans and Singapore's past. Later this afternoon, SDP is organising a panel discussion with 4 individuals - Roy Ngerng, Teo Soh Lung, G Raman and Paul Thambyah. The last time G Raman got involved a whole bunch of people ended up in Whitley Holding Centre, one fled overseas, a number lost their citizenship including him. Even their spouses ended up in Whitley. Then years later he apologised for dragging every man and his dog.

And the topic is Cooling off period. They might else well talk about the cost of noodles in Singapore which makes more sense to voters.
 

gatehousethetinkertailor

Alfrescian
Loyal
Chee must realise that he must speak to the people and not the PAP. The PAP do not cast votes, the people do. In this case he could have spoken up for the cleaner yet no mention of him. He spent so much of his time and focus on the PAP and the Chiams. I am surprised that he still bringing up Grace Fu, Chan Chun Sing etc.

He still has poor handle on Singaporeans and Singapore's past. Later this afternoon, SDP is organising a panel discussion with 4 individuals - Roy Ngerng, Teo Soh Lung, G Raman and Paul Thambyah. The last time G Raman got involved a whole bunch of people ended up in Whitley Holding Centre, one fled overseas, a number lost their citizenship including him. Even their spouses ended up in Whitley. Then years later he apologised for dragging every man and his dog.

And the topic is Cooling off period. They might else well talk about the cost of noodles in Singapore which makes more sense to voters.


Wherefor art in '77 Mr Caldwell? https://www.docdroid.net/ny41/g-raman-caldwell.pdf.html

And of Lord Bala of Lambeth?


That We May Dream Again
14 June 2014
TAN JING QUEE – 3 YEARS ON by Dr G Raman
The Mid-fifties

I first met Jing Quee in 1954, 60 years ago, when we both entered Raffles Institution. Its campus was where Raffles City now stands. Entry into RI was based on the results of the state-wide entrance examination, the predecessor of the present PSLE. The best were admitted to RI. Jing Quee had already displayed brilliance at an early age.

We are products of our age. The social and political forces at play determine our values and attitudes. 1955 was the year of the protest by Chinese middle school students against conscription for national service. The French had been defeated by the brave Vietnamese people at the Battle of Diem Phien Phu under General Vo Nguyen Giap.
Barely five years earlier, Mao Tse-tung had stood on the parapet at Tiananmen Square calling upon the Chinese people to “stand up”. One-fourth of humanity heeded his call and stood up.
Though the Korean War had ended dividing the nation into two, the Cold War was raging. Russia and China were ring-fenced by military treaties stretching from the North Atlantic (NATO) through the Middle East (METO) to East Asia (SEATO). Russia and China were experimenting with a new social order to establish a more equal and egalitarian system. Russia had succeeded to a certain extent and China was adopting the socialist model of economic and social development.

Anti-colonial and liberation movements were raging from the Caribbean to Asia through Africa. The UN had launched a de-colonisation programme and the metropolitan powers were against the wall trying frantically to retain a foothold in their former colonies through proxies.
The clamour for independence and democracy had created political groups in Singapore. One of the organisations among the English speaking activists was the Malayan Democratic Union a gathering of liberals – lawyers, doctors, journalists and teachers. The Chinese educated had their own organisations Like the Old Boys’ Association which joined other like minded groups struggling for independence with Singapore as an integral part. Singapore was a crown colony ruled autonomously by the British after the Straits Settlements comprising Malacca, Penang and Singapore was dismantled in 1948. “Merdeka” was in the air.
1954 was also the year PAP was formed. It had among its members, lawyers, doctors, teachers, journalists, workers and businessmen. It published two slim brochures containing its manifesto and policies. The policies were enunciated by authors covering different areas like education, the trade unions, multi-racial unity and multilingualism. It stood for an independent, democratic, socialist Malaya including Singapore. Singapore was treated as an integral part of Malaya by everyone.

1954 was also the year that the British government proposed a Constitution for Singapore to grant self-government and for holding of island-wide election. The Randell Constitution as it was called, paved the way for the election of 25 members to the Legislative Assembly.
This was the political milieu during Jing Quee’s RI days. I remember him attending the Legislative Assembly meetings and PAP rallies. Most students were politically conscious at that time and they formed Literary and Debating Societies in their schools. They discussed the political issues of the day. Jing Quee became the President of the RI Literary and Debating Society.

Not only did Jing Quee have brain power, he also had brawn power. He played football and was the striker for the RI 1st XI. He was known for his speed in the field which matched his oratorical speed.
Days in the Varsity

Jing Quee joined the University of Malaya in 1960 and read for an Arts degree. Political talks, forums and debates were the order of the day. There was no restriction as we have now on political matters. There was no requirement that a political club should be registered before students can embark on political activities. There was no rush to complete the courses in time to make up for lost time on national service. Jing Quee became the President of the University Socialist Club and the editor of its thought-provoking publication, Fajar (Dawn).
The University in 1960 was truly an intellectual hub. The PAP had captured 43 of the 51 seats in parliament at the 1959 election. Many of the undergraduates joined the campaign in support of the PAP as it was then the vanguard of the progressive forces in Singapore. Its Secretary General was the champion of freedom at that time but he was soon to jettison all the ideals that he and his party stood for.

Jing Quee’s articles and editorials in Fajar were known for their depth and literary flair. After graduation he did not look for a highly paid job in the private sector or in the civil service. With his mastery of the English language he could have got a teaching job in the Ministry of Education with security of tenure and the perks that go with a government appointment. He shunned these and joined the trade union for a small pay of $500 per month. To him, living up to his ideals were more paramount than amassing material wealth.
Entering Politics

The PAP has been a monolith for a long time but not in the early years after its formation. One of the senior members of the PAP, Ong Eng Guan even challenged Lee Kuan Yew for the post of prime minister. The cadres had to vote on who they wanted as the PM. The voting took a surprising turn. The result was a tie. The chairman of the party, Toh Chin Chye cam to Lee’s rescue by giving him th casting vote. Jing Quee watched all these with disdain. He knew the meaning of the words “treachery” and “aggrandizement.”
The inevitable split within the PAP between the progressive forces and the reactionary (anti-people) forces took place in 1961. The breakaway group of intellectuals and political activists formed the Barisan Sosialis with Lim Chin Siong as its secretary general. Though not organisationally linked with the Barisan at that time, Jing Quee stood as its candidate for Kampong Glam. Jing Quee lost by only around 100 votes. The votes for candidates opposing Rajaratnam weresplit with the unprincipled Harban Singh of the United PeoplesParty polling around 1000 votes which should have gone to Jing Quee if Harns had not entered the fray.
Detention in 1963

Jing Quee’s detention was part of Lee Kuan Yew’s p[lot to eliminate all those who dissented against his policies. The label that was fixed on them was that they were subversive and being members of the communist united front out to destroy Singapore! Was there any evidence to support this allegation? This was the same label that was pasted against more than 200 activists during Operation Coldstore of February 1963 when Lim Chin Siong and a host of others were detained. In February 1963 Singapore was still a crown colony whose members were Singapore, Malaya and Britain. Lee tried to distance himself from the Internal Security Council’s decision on the detentions but records show that he was actively involved in it.

The British have opened their archives after the passage of 30 years. None of the minutes, exchange of correspondence and documents show any proof of the existence of a communist united front or that Lim was a communist (see the very informative books, “Comet in our Sky” and “The 1963 Operation Coldstore in Singapore – Commemorating 50 Years. The detentions were to satisfy Lee’s lust for power.

Trip to London
Jing Quee came out of prison in 1966. He headed for London to read law and to escape the stifling atmosphere in Singapore. London in the mid-60s was a hothouse of political activities. One could read any book, attend any forum and meet any social activist from whichever part of the world he came.
Jing Quee was a voracious reader. His regular haunts were the bookshops and libraries. There were no computers or internet. He attended talks, seminars and workshops shoring up his intellectual arsenal.
Return to Singapore and Law Pratice

Jing Quee returned to Singapore overland. He travelled through Europe and Asia with his wife to be, Rose. The trip was to satisfy this curiosity and discover new horizons. Jing Quee’s quest for knowledge knew no bounds. One can talk to him on any topic and he will haveto say something on it. He was a polymath.
Jing Quee joined J B Jeyaretnam’s practice for a while before setting up a partnership with Lim Chin Joo. Jing Quee and Chin Joo as the firm was styled, flourished. The firm expanded and made a mark for itself. Jing Quee handled the litigation work and enjoyed practice. He once told me how he succeeded in a case involving complex questions on company law against a lawyer who was a top notch in corporate law. But Jing Quee remained humble despite such successes and the accompanying monetary rewards. He was looking forward to retirement soon after he touched 60 so that he could spend more time with his first love – books and writing.
Jing Quee wrote extensively – essays, short stories, poems and books. These contain a wealth of information and edifying prose and poetry.

The 1977 Detention
In February 1977 Jing Quee was detained together with about 16others accused once again of being subversive and promoting the cause of the communist unite front. I was the first in this group to be detained and anther label was fixed, that of being “Euro-communists”, a creature hitherto unknown. There was international outcry against these repressive actions but the PAP government paid no heed to them. After a few months, most of us were released after making the usual template “confessions” or “admissions”. Alas, truth was a major casualty in all the detentions including the arrests of 22 social workers, lawyers and professionals in the 1987 Operation Spectrum.

Jing Quee the Man of Letters
He was a man of letters in both senses of the word. He not only read widely. He also wrote extensively and edited books on history and politics. He gave expression to his ideals in poetry some of which were light-hearted but stimulating. His poem on his detention stirs the soul.

Jing Quee the Man

Jing Quee was an icon. He is an exemplar of what an intellectual should be – erudite, humble and a champion of the rights of every person. He evokes all those ideals that we yearn for and want to see realized. I shall forever cherish his contributions towards the cause of freedom.
 
Last edited:

ForFun

Alfrescian
Loyal
Chee should have just welcome TJC's rebuke and added that he wished the Papies could be better role models by setting better examples. And then cite the various examples he mentioned. This would have put him in a better light with the public.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Thanks Bro. I wish he does not drag everyone in another mess again. They called it Eurocommunist because it did not fit the profile of the usual subversion cases. Lord Bala as you eloquently titled him was banging his captive chicks in the name of Mao and Caldwell was murdered after meeting Pol Pot. And these were going to lead a revolution ???

The majority he dragged in were do-gooders.

Wherefor art in '77 Mr Caldwell? https://www.docdroid.net/ny41/g-raman-caldwell.pdf.html

And of Lord Bala of Lambeth?

.
 

chongpangchixwings

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Chee must realise that he must speak to the people and not the PAP. The PAP do not cast votes, the people do. In this case he could have spoken up for the cleaner yet no mention of him. He spent so much of his time and focus on the PAP and the Chiams. I am surprised that he still bringing up Grace Fu, Chan Chun Sing etc.

He still has poor handle on Singaporeans and Singapore's past. Later this afternoon, SDP is organising a panel discussion with 4 individuals - Roy Ngerng, Teo Soh Lung, G Raman and Paul Thambyah. The last time G Raman got involved a whole bunch of people ended up in Whitley Holding Centre, one fled overseas, a number lost their citizenship including him. Even their spouses ended up in Whitley. Then years later he apologised for dragging every man and his dog.

And the topic is Cooling off period. They might else well talk about the cost of noodles in Singapore which makes more sense to voters.

This is exactly how Chee has allowed himself to be marshalled. He is so occupied being on the defensive that he has little capacity to go on a proper offensive which basically would be to reach out to the peoples' hearts and minds. In the grand scheme of things, he is sweating the small stuff and neglecting to address the big. His political prospects look grim at the moment.
 
Top