Goh Meng Seng attacks Yaw Shin Leong on his blog

[Goh Meng Seng]

Don't try to talk about opposition unity to a party that doesn't believe it. I am not in opposition party now.

I am not the one who is talking about opposition unity. Some other people here keep talking about opposition unity and that we should not criticise WP even though they have screwed up, especially for Yaw-gate. Do you agree with them?

Goh Meng Seng

Funny you're talking about opposition unity. Try harder and you may become the modern Su Qin wearing the prime ministerial seals of six states.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Long time no see, goldenmonkey.

Well perception is politics. It is not my work that such a perception has been formed for Yaw-gate. Not denying allegations which aimed directly at his integrity, YSL will definitely create a perception of guilty. It is not my work.

You have written the most slanted article by quoting out of context from this forum. Never mind about that. But if you would have read carefully, I have listed many things which went wrong for WP's ministerial proposal. In essence, the only "difference" in their proposal is the quantum of the pay is slightly lower. Other than that, the fundamental result from their proposal will not be much different from PAP's but yet, they try so hard to sound different. Which in the end, that's where Gerald Giam fumbled. Hedging to MX-9 isn't very much the same to hedging to the top income earners because both enjoy higher growth rate in income than ordinary people of middle and lower income.

I am not even attacking WP, just criticising their ill-thought policy and the way they handle the Yaw-gate. There is a thin line between attacking vs criticising. You are not being "neutral" here as you claim. Neutral people will criticise whatever screwed up policies and such method of handling scandals of this sort. You are saying that because it is WP, therefore I shall not criticise. Why?

But you are right, criticising WP is not my agenda. I criticise PAP also but nobody "accused" me of having an agenda in criticising PAP. It is about national interests. You want to promise a First World Parliament, you better perform better than that; not only on WP's side, PAP's side as well. You want a First World Parliament, then get your own MPs buck up, not trying to cover up scandals. You want Transparency and Accountability, make sure it starts from your own party first. Unless you are ok for us to condone hypocrisy in our First World Parliament.


Goh Meng Seng

Mr Goh, you have saying so much about the impression made on people rather than the real action of YSL (even though it may be false).

By the same token, what you have just did (writing on your blog) have made an impression on commoners that oppositions are again divided and have more interest in in-fightings and back-stabbing. Notice why the press has reported on SPP-TJS case also.
You are talking about keeping the middle-ground voters, but what you have done is about just the reverse.

Believe it or not, I am a neutral - a middle-ground voter.
I would like to hear from you what would be your added values in commenting on other parties policies?
I think it will only carry weight if you are well-respected and of a certain position to comment (and I am not putting you down).

I really think you should let WP sort out their own problems, if attacking WP is not your agenda.

 

[Ramseth]

Don't try to talk about opposition unity to a party that doesn't believe it. I am not in opposition party now.

I am not the one who is talking about opposition unity. Some other people here keep talking about opposition unity and that we should not criticise WP even though they have screwed up, especially for Yaw-gate. Do you agree with them?

I don't believe in so-called opposition unity. If there's unity, there wouldn't be so many parties. I'm sure you know your history. Su Qin wore the prime ministerial seals of six states against one state and he lost to a single Qin Shihuang. Yuan Shao led an 18-lord alliance and all lost to a single Cao Cao. Zhuge Liang wisely opined that it wasn't feasible an alliance like that could work with varying agenda and objectives and settled with the tripod Three Kingdoms standoff.

As for Yawgate, there's neither convincing evidence nor confession. Even if or when there is, it's personal for them to sort it out privately.

 

[TracyTan866]

Don't try to talk about opposition unity to a party that doesn't believe it. I am not in opposition party now.

I am not the one who is talking about opposition unity. Some other people here keep talking about opposition unity and that we should not criticise WP even though they have screwed up, especially for Yaw-gate. Do you agree with them?

Goh Meng Seng

Opposition unity is the right concept to aim for. Implementation may be more difficult but it is worth pursuing

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

You are despicable.

Whether Yaw-gate is convincing or not, it all depends on others, not what you say what means what. You are trying to tell others that it is not confession and not convincing, that's really bullshit. If we have to wait for people to confess, then our judge's job would be very easy. Not convincing? It is not up to you to say because you are WP member. It is up to the public to decide and different people will come to different conclusions. So be it. But the simplest view is, it just take one word to deny. What so difficult to deny instead of come up with lots of words that say nothing?

I think other WP members have more integrity than you even though they would just shut up. Though they may not know the whole truth, they have come to the conclusion that Yaw may be guilty as charged. Just that they do not want to lose the seat for WP. I can understand that party loyalty but it is totally misplaced. It is short sighted and it is not right to put party's interests above nation's interests. You got to weed out the bad and encourage the good. Even if their dilemma is misplaced, at the very least, they just shut up and not try to wiggle out by giving such a crap answers like yours: "neither confession nor convincing".

Goh Meng Seng

I don't believe in so-called opposition unity. If there's unity, there wouldn't be so many parties. I'm sure you know your history. Su Qin wore the prime ministerial seals of six states against one state and he lost to a single Qin Shihuang. Yuan Shao led an 18-lord alliance and all lost to a single Cao Cao. Zhuge Liang wisely opined that it wasn't feasible an alliance like that could work with varying agenda and objectives and settled with the tripod Three Kingdoms standoff.

As for Yawgate, there's neither convincing evidence nor confession. Even if or when there is, it's personal for them to sort it out privately.

 

[TracyTan866]

You are despicable.


I think other WP members have more integrity than you even though they would just shut up. Though they may not know the whole truth, they have come to the conclusion that Yaw may be guilty as charged. Just that they do not want to lose the seat for WP. I can understand that party loyalty but it is totally misplaced. It is short sighted and it is not right to put party's interests above nation's interests. You got to weed out the bad and encourage the good. Even if their dilemma is misplaced, at the very least, they just shut up and not try to wiggle out by giving such a crap answers like yours: "neither confession nor convincing".

Goh Meng Seng

Is it a law that YSL cant be MP if he is guilty?

 

[Ramseth]

You are despicable.

That's a strong word, my friend. But having been a friend for so long, I understand your temperament and won't take offense. And you have to understand me too, being police trained, I'm geared toward the line of evidence or confession. Nobody needs to deny any allegation or accusation. Evidence or confession speaks.

Is it a law that YSL cant be MP if he is guilty?

Of course not. I'm not saying MPs are womanizing but there's no law saying MPs can't be womanizing. It's up to the party and electorate. Bill Clinton, rings a bell?

 

[TracyTan866]

Of course not. I'm not saying MPs are womanizing but there's no law saying MPs can't be womanizing. It's up to the party and electorate. Bill Clinton, rings a bell?

That's what I thought

Adultery is not a criminal offence. There are also rumours of PAP MPs womanising and commiting adultery.

 

[Ramseth]

YouEven if their dilemma is misplaced, at the very least, they just shut up and not try to wiggle out by giving such a crap answers like yours: "neither confession nor convincing".

They may not know what to say but I have even more words like "not conclusive," "not beyond reasonable doubt," "not probable on the balance," etc.

 

[skponggol]

deleted.....

 

[Ramseth]

我的个人风范是，咖啡店论唇舌，后尾巷论拳脚，亮刀亮枪也奉陪。

 

[Perspective]

That's what I thought

Adultery is not a criminal offence. There are also rumours of PAP MPs womanising and commiting adultery.

Tracy, if you are an opposition supporter, what would you do?

- If you are trying to protect the particular opposition out of biase and say you do not see it as an issue, or really believe it is not an issue because the PAP has done the same but is more accountable and unless it happens to someone from PAP, or don't believe in the guilty verdict based on judgement, you will defend this point and stay on threads.

- If you do not see it as an issue as an opposition supporter and even if it happens to someone from PAP you have never and will never make it an issue, you will say your piece and that's it.

- If you see it as damaging, it affects you that you have wasted your time supporting since they will lose other votes, or disappointed by "no comments", you will lament, attack for few days then stay on. Every now and then for the next few years, you will bring it up.

- Of course you might be an opposition supporter or neutral who is merely itched by the matter to keep commenting.

Two nicks obviously do not fall under any of these above four categories, but pretends to. It's day 14 or two weeks some have nearly only talked about this topic, on a nearly everyday basis.

What I think people need to do is to take off the hypocrispy, but what's new since it has always been so.

 

[Fook Seng]

If I am not mistaken, adultery used to be criminal in Singapore following after British Common Law. Today adultery is still criminal in India but only the male is chargeable. In the region, adultery is still a crime in many countries and some states even in the US.

But generally in the West, it has stopped being a crime as social norms changed. Instead of marriages lasting "till death keep us apart", the happiness of the individual now takes precedence over the sanctity of marriage and adultery is no longer a crime or something unethical even in Singapore.

Of course many people still carry old values on the sanctity of marriage but the increasing number of people who think otherwise make holding it as a crime or an unethical act untenable today. Today, among young people having sex before marriage is a common thing, so is adultery no longer viewed as an unethical act. Give another 5 years, it will even be more so.

To me it is no longer a big issue today and in time to come, even more so.

 

[scroobal]

Not in Singapore. There was an interesting law in the past where if the lady was promised marriage, she could lodge a magistrate's complaint and if there is veracity in the claim, they would charge the other party. Used to be popular until the 70s.

Bigamy yes, but not adultery. Chinese society had concubines, mistress etc and half the towkays would be in jail while the other half would have fled Singapore. OCBC, UOB, OUB and all other Chinese companies would not have existed.

 

[skponggol]

I don't believe in so-called opposition unity. If there's unity, there wouldn't be so many parties. I'm sure you know your history. Su Qin wore the prime ministerial seals of six states against one state and he lost to a single Qin Shihuang. Yuan Shao led an 18-lord alliance and all lost to a single Cao Cao. Zhuge Liang wisely opined that it wasn't feasible an alliance like that could work with varying agenda and objectives and settled with the tripod Three Kingdoms standoff.

As for Yawgate, there's neither convincing evidence nor confession. Even if or when there is, it's personal for them to sort it out privately.

六国封相 or 三国演义??? How many people actually know, understand or appreciate the story....Explain in simple layman-term like 新加坡版本的<爱>.......then people will know, understand and appreciate......

新加坡人的<爱>, Episode 530310 : “后港论剑”

Episode Summary :
海线派党员内斗愈演愈烈, 赖戊己和洪志忠各自带领一大帮人马准备在后港进行大火拼 !!!

赖戊己 was the former trusted protégé of unofficial 国会大老吴金生 and the spokesperson of 海线派. But he had since lost the support of 吴桑 after screwing critical temple election and political activities, especially that of the temple committee which 吴桑 has always placed great importance. 吴桑has never failed to attend any temple activities. 吴桑nearly scored an election upset in Nee Soon East years ago when he quietly secured the support of temple committess down there. Deeply angered, 吴桑 thus kicked赖戊己 out of海线派 as he deemed the latter as a worthless incompetent “阿斗”..

However, 赖戊己 blames 洪志忠, the ultimate successor to 吴桑’s parliamentary seat, for his sacking and has always tried to find opportunity for revenge. Moreover, 赖戊己 has always despised 賊仔忠 for his 2-headed sleaziness and flip-flopping, and believes that he will betray 吴桑 and destroy 海线派.

Upon hearing that groups of reporters are gathering at 后港 for 洪志忠’s weekly MPS, 赖戊己 summons his trusted 四大太保 to challenge and 单挑洪志忠...

赖戊己 also wants to make use of reporters’ presence and 向记者爆料: 洪志忠抛妻纳妾, 让情妇何晓莉借腹生子 !!! According to rumours, 洪志忠 has cheated and betrayed his wife who has sacrificed so much for her husband's career.

But 洪志忠 has been tipped off and quickly dispatches the party senior十大金刚来护架. Upon seeing that 洪志忠 has more troops than him instead of the usual 4 bodyguards, 赖戊己 chickens out and 逃之夭夭....

And thus like all Taiwan TV drama, the saga continues to drag on for another endless episode.....

Stay tuned for the next episode of 新加坡人的<爱>, when 山线派奸雄周英明 seizes the opportunity of 海线派 civil war to fix 吴桑, uproot his political power and thus monopolise the parliament........




Seriously, GMS bringing 4 "bodyguards" to "challenge" YSL who surrounded himself with an impregnable wall of 10 "bodyguards" is exactly the kind of comical scene which one can see so oftenly on Taiwan TV drama where most of the politicians are portrayed negatively....Now with the public exposure of the alleged adultery of an MP, it make those crooked Taiwan politicians portrayed on TV, who always like to cheat and bully their wives, more real and closer than ever......

Although it may not be advisable for PAP and the MSM to constantly attack YSL alleged affair for fear of public backlash as well as dwindling public interest so that they cannot revive the issue 4 years later, they could use its soft-power to subtly yet forcefully and brutally reinforced that negative perception of WP image. Using popular culture like Taiwan TV drama, comedy and entertainment program is one way to constantly shine that negative spotlight on WP, and yet remain behind the scene....

 

[Khun Ying Pojaman]

And you have to understand me too, being police trained, I'm geared toward the line of evidence or confession.

Bro, cool down lah. No need to put so much weight on evidence. You see, even before you showed us your pic most of us believed you were very handsome despite no evidence whatsoever to suggest that you're indeed handsome. Then after your pic has entered public domain, you continue to believe that you're handsome despite overwhelming evidence suggesting otherwise.

All this shows that you can actually put your "police training" aside. Relax lah.

 

[Alladin]

I am not even attacking WP, just criticising their ill-thought policy and the way they handle the Yaw-gate. There is a thin line between attacking vs criticising. You are not being "neutral" here as you claim. Neutral people will criticise whatever screwed up policies and such method of handling scandals of this sort. You are saying that because it is WP, therefore I shall not criticise. Why?

But you are right, criticising WP is not my agenda. I criticise PAP also but nobody "accused" me of having an agenda in criticising PAP. It is about national interests. You want to promise a First World Parliament, you better perform better than that; not only on WP's side, PAP's side as well. You want a First World Parliament, then get your own MPs buck up, not trying to cover up scandals. You want Transparency and Accountability, make sure it starts from your own party first. Unless you are ok for us to condone hypocrisy in our First World Parliament.


Goh Meng Seng

Very well argued. Many here are not as neutral as they claim. They actions can only harm the party that they try so hard to protect.

 

[Debonerman]

Kasiviswanathan Shanmugam
Minister for Law
Minister for Foreign Affairs

And I rest my fucking case!

 

[Ramseth]

Bro, cool down lah. No need to put so much weight on evidence. You see, even before you showed us your pic most of us believed you were very handsome despite no evidence whatsoever to suggest that you're indeed handsome. Then after your pic has entered public domain, you continue to believe that you're handsome despite overwhelming evidence suggesting otherwise.

All this shows that you can actually put your "police training" aside. Relax lah.

Handsome is subjective and comparative. Nobody dared to show pic of himself being more handsome than me. Therefore, I must be the most handsome here.

Police training means it doesn't matter who did what. If there's no tenable evidence against someone suspected, that someone is innocent until proven guilty. How can that someone accused be expected to deny or sue to prove his innocence? It's up to the accuser to prove it. Then, in a civil case like adultery, no third party not even police can take any action. Where's the plaintiff? There's not even anyone involved complaining or claiming to be aggrieved.

 

[goldenmonkey]

Long time no see, goldenmonkey.

Well perception is politics. It is not my work that such a perception has been formed for Yaw-gate. Not denying allegations which aimed directly at his integrity, YSL will definitely create a perception of guilty. It is not my work.

You have written the most slanted article by quoting out of context from this forum. Never mind about that. But if you would have read carefully, I have listed many things which went wrong for WP's ministerial proposal. In essence, the only "difference" in their proposal is the quantum of the pay is slightly lower. Other than that, the fundamental result from their proposal will not be much different from PAP's but yet, they try so hard to sound different. Which in the end, that's where Gerald Giam fumbled. Hedging to MX-9 isn't very much the same to hedging to the top income earners because both enjoy higher growth rate in income than ordinary people of middle and lower income.

I am not even attacking WP, just criticising their ill-thought policy and the way they handle the Yaw-gate. There is a thin line between attacking vs criticising. You are not being "neutral" here as you claim. Neutral people will criticise whatever screwed up policies and such method of handling scandals of this sort. You are saying that because it is WP, therefore I shall not criticise. Why?

But you are right, criticising WP is not my agenda. I criticise PAP also but nobody "accused" me of having an agenda in criticising PAP. It is about national interests. You want to promise a First World Parliament, you better perform better than that; not only on WP's side, PAP's side as well. You want a First World Parliament, then get your own MPs buck up, not trying to cover up scandals. You want Transparency and Accountability, make sure it starts from your own party first. Unless you are ok for us to condone hypocrisy in our First World Parliament.

Goh Meng Seng

Dear Sir, good that you remember me.

I am bringing this up for your good.
You have spoken on Yaw issue (which, to me, has as much to do with you as the death of my neighbour's cat), which left you having to refute claims that you have an hidden agenda against WP, aka dropping stones on a fallen guy in a well.
And then you are being seen at WP Hougang MPS, which again left you having forcefully to explain the coincedence of it all.

Isn't all these playing into the hands of your enemy for the next GE? Unless you are telling me that you plan to contest in Hougang or Aljunied in the next GE. Or the very least, you are quitting contesting altogether.

Politics is about winning. You have won nothing yet (barring a horde of enemies), and what you are doing is not helping that cause at all.
Politics is not even about sticking to principles - it is perfectly all right to critise anyone, anytime, but only to around immediately if it suits you.

Rgds,