Everyone? Everyone in WP you mean?
Rest assured, if you are constantly putting up your rubbish analysis of anything WP centric is right and anything else is bad. I will be a constant thorn in your side.
-
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.
Ravi Philemon: Hougang is not WP’s own little fiefdom
- Thread starter Thick Face Black Heart
- Start date
Everyone? Everyone in WP you mean?
Rest assured, if you are constantly putting up your rubbish analysis of anything WP centric is right and anything else is bad. I will be a constant thorn in your side.
A 3 or multi-cornered fight could work for or against WP. Whether or not should Hougang be reserved for WP, boils down to just one question, why is there a need (if at all) for having opposition to PAP?
Unlike other countries, PAP the ruling party has pretty overwhelming powers, resources and influence over all other political parties. They had been in power since independence, and will continue to do so unless some party somehow managed to build up their strength to offer a clear alternative to the default ruling party. And the reasoning for having a balance of powers - which I am very sure most people will agree to, is that PAP do not have the monopoly to talents and wisdom as to how best to run the country. In fact they have been proven in the years leading to the latest GE, that they do falter and make mistakes.
The fight over Hougang should be seen in the bigger picture. Are we willing to risk having Hougang retaken by PAP? The implication would be that the hard earned grounds towards a more balanced of powers and towards a first world parliament would be loose, even if it's just by one seat. This would be a real risk that would become a reality if there is no unity amongst the opposition. It is very attractive reasoning to mask personal selfish ambitions with giving the Electorate a choice. This logic would had been valid in a GE or PE scenario. But this is a By-Election, and it is clearly opportunistic if other Opposition teams decide to throw their hats into the ring at this time.
Let's remember this BE happens only because WP has taken the moral high ground at the first place, in order to be accountable to the Electorate in Hougang. It is a very hard decision to take, and they risk loosing the seat, whether to PAP, or to other opportunistic opposition parties. But they do so, to show to PAP what accountability is all about. Something that we Singaporeans have been deprived of since Independence.
Unlike other countries, PAP the ruling party has pretty overwhelming powers, resources and influence over all other political parties. They had been in power since independence, and will continue to do so unless some party somehow managed to build up their strength to offer a clear alternative to the default ruling party. And the reasoning for having a balance of powers - which I am very sure most people will agree to, is that PAP do not have the monopoly to talents and wisdom as to how best to run the country. In fact they have been proven in the years leading to the latest GE, that they do falter and make mistakes.
The fight over Hougang should be seen in the bigger picture. Are we willing to risk having Hougang retaken by PAP? The implication would be that the hard earned grounds towards a more balanced of powers and towards a first world parliament would be loose, even if it's just by one seat. This would be a real risk that would become a reality if there is no unity amongst the opposition. It is very attractive reasoning to mask personal selfish ambitions with giving the Electorate a choice. This logic would had been valid in a GE or PE scenario. But this is a By-Election, and it is clearly opportunistic if other Opposition teams decide to throw their hats into the ring at this time.
Let's remember this BE happens only because WP has taken the moral high ground at the first place, in order to be accountable to the Electorate in Hougang. It is a very hard decision to take, and they risk loosing the seat, whether to PAP, or to other opportunistic opposition parties. But they do so, to show to PAP what accountability is all about. Something that we Singaporeans have been deprived of since Independence.
Of course it's not everyone in your family, but misrepresent all you want because we know you have something against WP specifically only, so all forummers will be WP to you. It's not new and we have seen it from Joe Ong and the disbanded F4 and now their former enemy GMS and you. (The same goes to most people who are against PAP but that is because we are under its power.) The fact that you have raised nearly nothing about the PAP-government says something. In the same vein, I am not shy to speak words that favour WP if they do well and vice versa. Why should I. Everyone may note this warning that this "Sadist", rightly self-named, will prevent and gun after anyone from speaking specifically in favour of WP.
Last edited:
Right from the beginning, the WP crowd has set their turf in this forum, rubbishing anything not WP and chasing away many a good many foummer away, enough is enough. As a pro-Singaporean I would like to see a more level playing field here and not being hijack by you guys. As long as your comment and analysis is fair, I'll stay away.
So now WP is like PAP, denying other's a level playing field?
I can see why PAP will be there forever. With this sort of mentality, nothing will grow when constant bickerig exist.
Can't win an argument over me then start to use insult... I say A, you say B. I don't even paying attention what you are writing.
Dear Rams
Is quite simple and I say this as a WP member and supporter. Hougang is definitely not WP's little fiefdom and democracy is about choice and free choice, but WHEN the PAP treats Singapore likes its liffle fiefdom, with GRCs, Gerrymandering, Use of the PA during elections, etc etc, Why do we shout scream abt democracy at a small opposition constituency when the PAP has been systematically suppressing it nation wide ?
The Malaysian Opposition at least did not bother with a facade of cooperation when they had SOME SEATS or some semblance of numbers of seat. They regretted it when they saw how splitting the vote costs them more seats and swung together with gritted teeth the next round.
Ravi and GMS are all advocating killing each other before anyone one person has gained sufficient seats against the PAP. Its the equivalent of saying if I cannot be the strongest opposition party against the PAP I would rather help kill the strongest opposition party against the democracy killing PAP and yes ALL In the NAME of democratic choice.
Locke
Is quite simple and I say this as a WP member and supporter. Hougang is definitely not WP's little fiefdom and democracy is about choice and free choice, but WHEN the PAP treats Singapore likes its liffle fiefdom, with GRCs, Gerrymandering, Use of the PA during elections, etc etc, Why do we shout scream abt democracy at a small opposition constituency when the PAP has been systematically suppressing it nation wide ?
The Malaysian Opposition at least did not bother with a facade of cooperation when they had SOME SEATS or some semblance of numbers of seat. They regretted it when they saw how splitting the vote costs them more seats and swung together with gritted teeth the next round.
Ravi and GMS are all advocating killing each other before anyone one person has gained sufficient seats against the PAP. Its the equivalent of saying if I cannot be the strongest opposition party against the PAP I would rather help kill the strongest opposition party against the democracy killing PAP and yes ALL In the NAME of democratic choice.
Locke
Last edited:
Aiyah, its the same old thing repeated so many time in many different ways by the same small group. First it was WP Baru, then PAP allowed WP to win, followed by WP behaving like PAP, etc. You can see the theme emerging constantly in their arguments.
There are 89 seats in parliament. The way these guys write, a newby will think that only one opposition party has the right to sit in parliament so they are fighting among themselves to be the sole opposition party given that right.
They come to this forum proclaiming to be pro Singaporeans and want a level playing field. So who are the rest in this forum? - pro Mexicans. Arguments are won on good foundation and not on the basis of flowery and flowing prose.
NSP has every right to contest any seat. So has M Ravi, Harbans Singh or even Zeng. Everyone in Singapore will Rubbish the latter 3 if they dare stand. Why? I am sure I don't have to explain. If NSP has built up its credentials and evolved in a measured and respected way, Singaporeans might actually encourage NSP to contest in Hougang as it might indeed be time for a change. That is not the case.
Does NSP have the right to reserve their judegement on whether to contest? Sure they do just as they have right to contest it. But they should have kept it to themselves rather than making a fool of themselves and shortly after a member of their own CEC made the statement. Now they do look like clowns. Poor management skills, poor political acumen and ppor judgement.
There are 89 seats in parliament. The way these guys write, a newby will think that only one opposition party has the right to sit in parliament so they are fighting among themselves to be the sole opposition party given that right.
They come to this forum proclaiming to be pro Singaporeans and want a level playing field. So who are the rest in this forum? - pro Mexicans. Arguments are won on good foundation and not on the basis of flowery and flowing prose.
NSP has every right to contest any seat. So has M Ravi, Harbans Singh or even Zeng. Everyone in Singapore will Rubbish the latter 3 if they dare stand. Why? I am sure I don't have to explain. If NSP has built up its credentials and evolved in a measured and respected way, Singaporeans might actually encourage NSP to contest in Hougang as it might indeed be time for a change. That is not the case.
Does NSP have the right to reserve their judegement on whether to contest? Sure they do just as they have right to contest it. But they should have kept it to themselves rather than making a fool of themselves and shortly after a member of their own CEC made the statement. Now they do look like clowns. Poor management skills, poor political acumen and ppor judgement.
All this while you are playing the hatchet man at SDP and playing along you are a PAP supporter of some sort. Now it is proven you are indeed a WP supporter or member ( base on some reference by Ramseth ), coming out aggresively defending WP position.
Bickering at WP IB, yes I am, so?
cleareyes is the Ron Ron for WP ... he is eroding support for WP with all his postings ....
Ron Ron hardly engage in this folder. And I don't think he belongs to any poltical party. In IMO, he is only interested in giving an opposing voice and kept this forum going.
me? hatchet man? for who?
WP IB? I never know WP has enough manpower to even start a IB.
interesting......
WP has never had any IB. Forummers like myself, Locke, Perspective, Cleareyes et al have been forumming for years well before we join or support WP. And Cleareyes put it well, WP doesn't have the manpower for an IB too. The term IB came into being from PAP, that has the manpower, when Denise Phua (my dear Kg. Glam playground MP) let slipped in a NUS forum that she was shocked that some 85% or so on internet were anti-PAP. She called for "management" and that was how PAP IB came into being. She's basically a nice and well-meaning lady. I didn't blame her for being shocked. It's good to have both sides of the story anyway.
Again you are dragging into picture and hence misrepresenting people. If I had been defending WP as a supporter, then I make a pathetic supporter. Pyro-ing NSP over the BE issue was taken as support for WP simply because the other component was WP, that is their business. Pyro-ing GMS because his issue is with WP makes me labelled as with WP by GMS and his clones is GMS and his clones' own business. And for the second case, most of the time I only use the words of the originator against himself (or itself). I am not ashamed to be associated with WP if I was really their staunch loyalist, but don't see the need to since we have differences in many ways including principles and admittedly personal which precipitated my resignation years ago. At least I am not shy to admit that I have changed rather than claim I am "as principled as ever". That also does not mean I will blare to the press or support anyone inventing lies against WP simply because of some "mutual hatred" ex-WP alumni.
Last edited:
I m part of the ex-WP alumini now.
Your sense of self-righteousness sometimes strikes me as nearing and bordering GMS. Don't think that you're always right. Don't think that others don't have the right to say it. If privy info came from you, I'd respect you and never quote you and never reveal it. If I have my own sources, it's up to my discretion, fair enough?
Don't start accusations like misrepresenting or dragging other people. That's GMS way. I only say facts, well known facts for years or even decades, not secrets.
Now, I present myself here standing on trial submitting to you as self-appointed judge. Which part have I said are mispresentations or revelations of secrets?
Last edited:
You should measure your mouth and balls as a yardstick to GMS if you want to compare. If I had my sources that you were starting clones like IreneYeoh, does it give me the right to make such an accusation? In fact, it is better that you omit mentioning me in any way. I am saying do not misrepresent me - that is self-righteous? Are you on crack? Not only is that label so out of the way, you are saying that you can read my heart?
If you think IreneYeoh is me or have sources to such, level your accusation and prove it. That's all. I can't read your heart.
All I said was "forummers like myself, Perspective, Locke, Cleareyes et al have been forumming for years before becoming WP members or supporters." Misrepresentation?
I accuse nobody here of anything. I state and reiterate public facts. It's you accusing me of misrepresentation. If you're here, you'd be mentioned by other forummers now and then. What now? Copyright against mentioning Perspective in any posting even as a matter of factly?
Last edited:
Your statement means that currently at this point, I am either a WP member or supporter. Is that what you were trying to relay - that I am a WP member or supporter? Then you prove it.
Can't you understand the conjunctive for the alternative "or"? I have to use that "or" since I'm referring to a group of persons who may be "or" or "and." Anyway, cool down over it my dear friend, you should see by now I meant no malice over it, just to make a point that there's no such thing as an orchestrated WP IB.
Similar threads
