Dr Allan Ooi’s farewell letter and last word before his death: Questions for SAF

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Aiyah even if SMC blacklists him, if what Ooi alleges is true then I am sure the Auz medical council would give him a fair reasonable hearing. You just have to look at the Shorvon case. SMC and the Singapore authorities black balled him and tried to do the same to him in the UK but neither the UK GMC nor the UK courts followed SMC and declined to do so notwithstanding the fact that SMC went to the UK to try and get him blacklisted there.

I raised this point in one of my previous post.It is highly plausible that Allan was trapped into a corner.SMC like the Bar Council serves PAP.!

So far all this has been pure speculation and conjecture.

SAF must answer this.Is there an escape clause in that contract?...Was liquidated damages specified ?...Was the contract beyond any reasonableness !

 

[moosekaka]

from what i read so far from posts of some of his friends, he really wanted to practice medicine, just not in the SAF. some one said since he AWOL he would not be able to get insurance to practice in australia? insurance as in malpractice insurance?

porfirio rubirosa, i agree he had a free choice. however this must be tempered with the fact he signed when he was 18. from what i read he was NOT allowed to break his bond ; this is surely unreasonable if he is expected to serve out his entire bond without ever an option to leave. i think it was the despair about the LACK of an option other than to serve 12-16 years in the SAF that got to him.

people should be allowed to have some control over their lives, otherwise they will react like a cornered animal. i feel most sorry of all for his family,imagine the despair they are in.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Should not Ooi have doen his own independent objective due dilligence even before going for the scholarship interview? And don't tell me he cannot, particularly since he comes from a savvy sophisticated background.

If you scrutinizes Allan's email it pretty much stresses on this reasonableness.

 

[moosekaka]

Aiyah even if SMC blacklists him, if what Ooi alleges is true then I am sure the Auz medical council would give him a fair reasonable hearing. You just have to look at the Shorvon case. SMC and the Singapore authorities black balled him and tried to do the same to him in the UK but neither the UK GMC nor the UK courts followed SMC and declined to do so notwithstanding the fact that SMC went to the UK to try and get him blacklisted there.

shorvon was :
1) uk citizen
2) a renowned scientist

obviously this is not the case for dr ooi. what i dont understand is why he might have trouble been insured to practice in australia even if he AWOL.

 

[Nice-Gook]

Now Ooi appeared to have been in an even more favourable position because he came from a rich family and he did not appear to have fallen out with his parents. There is no good reason why Ooi did not have a free choice, none whatsoever.

Let me simply for you.If LKY through Temasek Holdings offers Bill Gates free lunches to all his employees in US why should he not take it?...Who is foolhardy.LKY or Bill Gates?

If you still fail to fathom.Let me simplify.Why offer scholarships to the rich.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Is this an incontrovertible fact? In any event, even if this is true, which I doubt, then Ooi should have done his own due dilligence before going AWOL if he truly wanted to continue praticising medicine in other jurisdictions. He was not a slave to SAF notwithstanding what he and his friends and supporters appear to be making out. No doubt conditions were not to his liking, but he appeared to be acting like a spoilt child because he could not get his way.

from what i read so far from posts of some of his friends, he really wanted to practice medicine, just not in the SAF. some one said since he AWOL he would not be able to get insurance to practice in australia? insurance as in malpractice insurance?
.

Sorry I cannot agree on the 'age defence' particularly in this day and age of modern technology travel and globalisation, more so since Ooi comes from a savvy sophisticated background. Sorry but Oooi was no babe in the woods, not even at the age of 18. He should have done his own independent objective due dilligence before even going for the scholarship interview. As for the bond breaking issue, again this is still speculation and conjecture.

Like i said before, Ooi was no slave to SAF.

porfirio rubirosa, i agree he had a free choice. however this must be tempered with the fact he signed when he was 18. from what i read he was NOT allowed to break his bond ; this is surely unreasonable if he is expected to serve out his entire bond without ever an option to leave. i think it was the despair about the LACK of an option other than to serve 12-16 years in the SAF that got to him.

people should be allowed to have some control over their lives, otherwise they will react like a cornered animal. i feel most sorry of all for his family,imagine the despair they are in.

 

[Nice-Gook]

Aiyah even if SMC blacklists him, if what Ooi alleges is true then I am sure the Auz medical council would give him a fair reasonable hearing. You just have to look at the Shorvon case. SMC and the Singapore authorities black balled him and tried to do the same to him in the UK but neither the UK GMC nor the UK courts followed SMC and declined to do so notwithstanding the fact that SMC went to the UK to try and get him blacklisted there.



So far all this has been pure speculation and conjecture.

If your above post is not speculation what is !!!!

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Sorry but I think you are misconceived. The UK courts and quasi judicial/professional regulatory boards are well known for their independance, objectivity based on fairness, justice and reasonableness borne through convention and tradition through centuries. Likewise I think Auz follows UK traditions because of their close heritage connections. Ooi would have got a fair and reasonable hearing in Auz.

shorvon was :
1) uk citizen
2) a renowned scientist

obviously this is not the case for dr ooi. .

 

[moosekaka]

yes whether its a fact or not only some1 in the medical community would be able to answer.

as for age, let me ask you, compared to when you were 18, would you say you are mentally and emotionally different now? i know for one that at the age of 18 'independent due diligence' hardly registered in my mind. put another way, i was young an stupid at age 18 and im sure lots of others were too!

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

What has this got to do with Ooi's freedom of choice? Just because Ooi is offered a scholarship (regardless of whether he is rich or not) must he accept the scholarship "free lunch"? Is he obliged/forced/coerced to accept the scholarship/"free lunch" or does he have a free choice?

Let me simply for you.If LKY through Temasek Holdings offers Bill Gates free lunches to all his employees in US why should he not take it?...Who is foolhardy.LKY or Bill Gates?

If you still fail to fathom.Let me simplify.Why offer scholarships to the rich.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Where is the speculation? Shorvon's case is a fact. It is also a fact that UK and likewise Auz (similar through heritage connections) act in a fair reasonable manner, so i don't think it is wrong of me to say that Ooi would have got a fair reasonable hearing in Auz.

If your above post is not speculation what is !!!!:

 

[Nice-Gook]

What has this got to do with Ooi's freedom of choice? Just because Ooi is offered a scholarship (regardless of whether he is rich or not) must he accept the scholarship "free lunch"? Is he obliged/forced/coerced to accept the scholarship/"free lunch" or does he have a free choice?

<style></style>You appear confused.Let me rephrase and spell it out.Why qualify Allan for scholarship or similarly rich people.You place the onus on the morality of rich people not to take that choice.I am asking why give that choice to rich people since they have deep pockets.I am simply saying why must PAP give the rich people that choice in the first place.

Why do I ask this ?Simple ! Because by not giving a choice of a scholarship to rich people destroys your argument that because Allan is rich he can blah,blah blah and therefore the onus/choice is entirely his not to accept scholarship.

Let me spell it out once more.Allan and people of his ilk are not disadvantaged because the choice of scholarship is not offered to them.Therefore your argument that . " is he obliged/forced/coerced to accept the scholarship/"free lunch" or does he have a free choice" ...is untenable.

Why give free food to the full fed?

 

[Nice-Gook]

Where is the speculation? Shorvon's case is a fact. It is also a fact that UK and likewise Auz (similar through heritage connections) act in a fair reasonable manner, so i don't think it is wrong of me to say that Ooi would have got a fair reasonable hearing in Auz.

<style></style>If you believe your speculations has logical basis..Than I cannot convert you.Others would call it circular logic.

 

[scroobal]

shorvon was :
1) uk citizen
2) a renowned scientist

obviously this is not the case for dr ooi. what i dont understand is why he might have trouble been insured to practice in australia even if he AWOL.

He will be allowed to practise Medicine in OZ or anywhere where the qualification is recognised. As to his conduct, it must not be related in anyway to impinge the good character of being a practising doctor. AWOL based on an oppressive bond in my view will not hamper his application. SMC will be consulted but if its pure awol and not related to a medical incident, they cannot influence it negatively.

There are quite number of people that have broken their bond, failed to complete their NS obligation and are just doing fine in their new home country.

There is more to this than meets the eye.

 

[scroobal]

Where is the speculation? Shorvon's case is a fact. It is also a fact that UK and likewise Auz (similar through heritage connections) act in a fair reasonable manner, so i don't think it is wrong of me to say that Ooi would have got a fair reasonable hearing in Auz.

Mavis......!

 

[miosux]

Let me simply for you.If LKY through Temasek Holdings offers Bill Gates free lunches to all his employees in US why should he not take it?...Who is foolhardy.LKY or Bill Gates?

If you still fail to fathom.Let me simplify.Why offer scholarships to the rich.

some time back, the PSC responded in the ST forum that scholarships are for them to recruit top talent, or something to that effect. basically they say scholarships not a tool to lift the poor out of poverty etc.

 

[scroobal]

some time back, the PSC responded in the ST forum that scholarships are for them to recruit top talent, or something to that effect. basically they say scholarships not a tool to lift the poor out of poverty etc.

Scholarship are awarded around the world for scholarstic aptitude. In most countries including developed countries there are no bonds attached. Its should however be noted that Singapore scholarships tend to be lucrative.

Bursaries and grants are given the world over including Singapore for those that have difficulty funding their tertiary education. There are also loans that are liberally granted.

I still cannot understand why some Singaporeans associate scholarship with family hardship. I suspect in the early years, top students tend to be from humble backgrounds while rich kids tended to coast thru life and the local press played up the humble and lowly parents bit. With scholarships now providing doorway to lucrative careers in civil sevice and GLC and giving priority to political office even the rich have decided to join the gravy train.

 

[DerekDear]

Sorry but I think you are misconceived. The UK courts and quasi judicial/professional regulatory boards are well known for their independance, objectivity based on fairness, justice and reasonableness borne through convention and tradition through centuries. Likewise I think Auz follows UK traditions because of their close heritage connections. Ooi would have got a fair and reasonable hearing in Auz.

Australia is racist country - he is nothing in australia in their eyes, but an overstayer.

http://www.doctorconnect.gov.au/internet/otd/Publishing.nsf/Content/work-General-guide

How can he fulfill police checks etc? Can't even finish paperwork without lots of trouble.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

The man has lots of connections. He's npt a poor scholar. His parents mingle with the elites. All this talk about him not being able to break his bond and yet taking on courses that lengthen his bond should not be discounted.

Writing articles and doing mundane work actually allowed him to do extra curricular activities that enjoyed. And yet he complains?

Notes from his friends all sound alike. They talk alike and along the same line of thought. Even people who know him from JC days, write in as though they know his recent self. It's silly and utterly awkward for them to do so.

If I were to smell a conspiracy I would say that this guy is still alive.

All this talk about being upright and all is pure BS. Either he is sick in the nead because his reason(s) for suicide are illogical or he has cleverly led many to believe in this death.

If he was so upright he wouldn't leave his family in such a manner unless his head was messed up.

There is definitely more to this story and I reckon that he is still alive.

 

[Seee3]

Many civil servants love to go for further overseas study because they need not work and are yet fully paid for in both salaries and expenses. A guy who follow such path is no simple man. One who is capable of such a scheme would not take his own life because of some lousy bond. Most likely just an excuse to hide something more personal and damaging. From the responses in this forum, I think one of you know the real reason behind.