Return My CPF Thread: Han HuiHui & Roy Ngerng vs the CPF/NParks

[Isogallardo]

Re: NParks vs Han Hui Hui and gang

they are young and tend to make mistakes. Your uncle Lee also made mistakes when he was young. He held Hock Lee Bus protest?

Sorry hor Hock Lee Bus protest is not uncle lee leh.

http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_4_2005-01-06.html

 

[bakkuttay]

Re: NParks vs Han Hui Hui and gang

bastard oldfart is the instigator, arsehole behind the scene, no=one else.

 

[bakkuttay]

Local social worker: Pap keeps taking money away from family with special needs kids

source: http://therealsingapore.com/content...s-taking-money-away-family-special-needs-kids


Post date:
1 Oct 2014 - 3:46pm

I refer to the comment made by Reform Party Secretary-General Kenneth Jeyaretnam. He said: "Why the sudden interest from the PAP in special needs children? LKY believes in eugenics and PAP philosophy is not to provide any help leading directly to sad cases like Rebecca Loh. But if there is a chance to make use of them to discredit the CPF protests they will. Sadly HHH and Roy appear to have walked into a trap."

I have to agree about this, because i work with special needs children as a social worker and the government only knew how to take away support and money from the day activity centres knowing how poor many families who send the children to the centres are.

The families who sent the children can't cope with the children for the whole day as taking care of special needs children are tough work, and many need the money to take care of them, hence, the need to have someone who is specialized to take good care of them, but what happened was that the government was taking away more financial support from the centres and wanted the centres to somehow either get more money from fundraising, or increase the centres' fees which means the parents, even poor ones, have to pay more.

So, i definitely have to agree with what Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam said.



Diane Tay

Comment first appeared on Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam's Facebook page.

 

[wusangui]

Re: CPF Protest versus YMCA event - unedited video

Teo ser luck return our CPF.HAHAHA

 

[Yingge]

Re: Local social worker: Pap keeps taking money away from family with special needs k

What you mean by government taking away support??? I thought the government do not give support to those kids??? Maybe the writer need to advise what support the government took it way???

Like a lot of peoples here said that the government use their money... However when asked... They said they paid tax so all those money spent by government on each ministry belong to them...

Just like I told people I own Singtel because I have 1 lot of it shares... Ha...ha...

That is why our PM said that Singapore belong to everyone include ah tiong and ah neh because they pay taxes too like gst... The PM get your message loud and clear...

 

[SockPuppet]

Re: Chee Soon Juan spoke on YMCA saga

Dr Chee identified Roy as his successor? SDP needs new blood anyway

the natural progression for people so involved with activism is to advance into politics, given this situation, it might not be too bad

 

[Isogallardo]

Re: NParks vs Han Hui Hui and gang

bastard oldfart is the instigator, arsehole behind the scene, no=one else.

Yes yes everything is him. Not Fong who admitted he instigated it. All a conspiracy!

 

[bakkuttay]

Re: The hong lim affair – more than uniquely singapore

EVENTS AT HONG LIM PARK, CAN YOU SMELL POLITICS?


source: http://therealsingapore.com/content/events-hong-lim-park-can-you-smell-politics

Post date:
1 Oct 2014 - 11:57am

Singapore will be fifty next year. If Singapore were a human, fifty is considered old (especially in Singapore). It could be the end of a person’s economic life (fired). And if it is the end of his economic life, it could also be the end of his physical life (suicide). Hence, at such an old age, one would have thought that it would have matured and become wiser. It is sad to see that a recent incident at Hong Lim Park showed otherwise.

For those who are familiar with the current Singapore politics, it is common knowledge that there is a group of activists who holds a monthly protest against the government at Hong Lim Park. So, for the protest that was held on 27 September 2014, what was the sense for the approving authority to approve another event to be held there on the same date?

While the two events may not be described as “conflicting”, it was certainly “incompatible” as one event was against the government while the other event had a guest-of-honour who was from the government.

It should not be difficult to foresee that unpleasantness could erupt when the two events were “allowed” to be held together at the same time and at the same place – which was exactly what happened. Further, what made the incident really bad (inhuman) was that it involved some innocent children of special needs. How on earth could the organizer of the other event, which had religious affiliation, bring these children to such a potential eruptible situation? They were meant to protect and keep these children at a safe place – and they did exactly the opposite. So, the protesters were accused to have heckled the children. And many MPs came out and condemned the protesters when they were “normally”quite quiet on other more “important” issues. Can you smell politics?

So, Singapore is nearing fifty and should be old enough to think deeper. Why were the two events “allowed” to be held at the same time and at the same place? Could it be because of politics? If yes, was it necessary to draw in the children? Does Singapore have to get so low to “use” the children for political gain?

Grow up, Singapore and show the world you are better than this!

TW

 

[bakkuttay]

Re: The hong lim affair – more than uniquely singapore

The Hong Lim Disgrace: A Fence Sitter’s Disgust


source: http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/10/01/the-hong-lim-disgrace-a-fence-sitters-disgust/

October 1, 2014 at 11:00 am by Contributions

Chia Seng Jiang, Director of Parks 1 of the Parks Division in NParks, attempts to intimidate Roy and Hui Hui to move their site at the 11th hour

I am writing to express my disgust and disappointment in the events which unfolded at Hong Lim Park during the CPF Protest held last Saturday (27 September 2014).

My disgust and disappointment is in the way NParks and YMCA used YMCA’s Proms @ the Park for political purposes and dirty play.

NParks, which manages Hong Lim Park, was certainly aware that the CPF protest would clash with YMCA’s Proms @ the Park. Yet, they arranged both the events to happen around the same time, knowing that Mr Teo Ser Luck, a minister of state would be present.

Given the record that such a protest on a controversial matter such as the CPF would be emotionally charged, scheduling the protest close to an event where a Minister of State from the PAP would be present would certainly lead to tensions.

Certainly NParks would have been aware because the emotionally charged nature of such rallies can be seen on news reports on Channel News Asia or News 5 Tonight. A logical assumption would be that most of the participants would be pro-Opposition and I’m sure NParks would have been fully aware of what happened to Dr Tony Tan and Tin Pei Ling in the last elections.

Yet, the 2 events were arranged by NParks to be held around the same time. A logical inference would be that NParks deliberately arranged for such an arrangement to create an opportunity for the Opposition in general to look bad before the public.

This is not an unsubstantiated statement. Han Hui Hui claimed on Facebook that Grassroots leaders told her that if she did not call off the CPF protest they would plant more loudspeakers and ferry 5000 people to disrupt it. Those Grassroots leaders have not answered to the allegation and the silence is telling. YMCA’s event was being designed to stage a clash between the government and the CPF protesters.

After the incident had occurred, The Sunday Times ran a skewed story on the incident to make the protesters and the protest organisers look bad, including a misleading picture showing Roy Ngerng and Han Hui Hui behaving aggressively, whereas in actual fact, they did not harass anyone and turned away upon learning that the children on stage were special needs children.

YMCA may have claimed that they were unaware of the CPF protest and had made reservations to use Speaker’s Corner before Han Hui Hui did. I can give YMCA the benefit of doubt on this point. However, why was their emcee reported to have been leading the crowd to chant:

“We love CPF!”

Why did they release the special needs children on stage to perform just when the CPF protesters were conducting their march? Any sensible organiser would have held back the performers until the commotion has cleared.

What made the matter worse was the way Chia Seng Jiang, director of NParks, attempted to intimidate Han Hui Hui and the others into shifting out of the site which they reserved for the protest and abuse his position to revoke Han Hui Hui’s permit to speak at the 11th hour.

Through an examination of the chain of events which have occurred and hearing the accounts by both sides about the incident, a logical conclusion would be that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the YMCA event was deliberately arranged to set up a clash with the CPF protesters to make the Opposition look bad, or at least to disrupt the CPF protest, by preventing the CPF protest from taking place, through foul means such as abuse of authority, intimidation and arrangements for a clash of events.

Personally, what is disgusting that these fascist actions are still being used by the government on dissenting voices at this present day. Was it not Lee Kuan Yew who uttered these words:

“Supposing Catherine Lim was writing about me and not the prime minister…She would not dare, right? Because my posture, my response has been such that nobody doubts that if you take me on, I will put on knuckle-dusters and catch you in a cul de sac… Anybody who decides to take me on needs to put on knuckle dusters. If you think you can hurt me more than I can hurt you, try.”

They have been doing it to residents of Hougang, Potong Pasir, Chiam See Tong and JBJ. This is the same Lee Kuan Yew and co who spent a dialogue session with Chiam See Tong and a few other Opposition politicians intimidating and interrupting them:

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6NTRAOaIwU

Hong Lim feels like a deja vu of the PAP’s modus operandi. As a fence sitter, I am thoroughly disappointed with the events at Hong Lim Park and if the PAP is thinking of reclaiming lost ground from the last elections, such actions serve to turn away fence sitters like me.

If the PAP thinks that the CPF policy is good and working, instead of playing foul, have a fair debate or dialogue with Roy Ngerng, Han Hui Hui, Leong Sze Hian and the Opposition and let both sides iron out their differences.



Ronald Tan

* Submitted by TRE reader

 

[tanwahtiu]

Re: CPF Protest versus YMCA event - unedited video

next time add malay drumming and lion dance to merry a bit.

 

[laksaboy]

Re: The hong lim affair – more than uniquely singapore

How else could the pappies and their 'civil society' dogs conveniently demonise Roy, HHH and the CPF protesters, if not for the YMCA and the Down's Syndrome kids?

Admit it: it was an elaborate 'fix job', and NParks was probably the mastermind.

The PAP govt is nervous and/or annoyed by the talks of CPF (so much so that even its media dogs such as S. Ramesh had opined on it). It had even tried to counter the queries with 'town hall dialogues' and videos such as this:

[video=youtube;XabYTU2MFJQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XabYTU2MFJQ[/video]

I do not believe in coincidence.

 

[bakkuttay]

Re: NParks vs Han Hui Hui and gang

奸人出口，笨人出手。

a mastermind is a mastermind.

 

[WongMengMeng]

Re: CPF Protest versus YMCA event - unedited video

Please see below post and click on it to see rest of the thread. In my humble opinion, YanDao is a confirmed PAP IB.

EGGcellent, all my PAP IB colleagues are coming out of the closet. Banzai!

YanDao, you are not directing a movie OK. Even those directing historical movie include disclaimer that it is not based on actual facts and the discrepancies are A, B, C.

.........................

From the point of view of my, ahem I mean OUR masters, the last straw must be the book “Legal Consensus: Supreme Executive, Supine Jurisprudence, Suppliant Profession of Singapore", which was published a few months before his arrest and the description is available at this link: http://www.law.hku.hk/ccpl/pub/TeyTsunHang.html

YanDao, if you can make the last link disappear or alter its contents even though it is on Hong Kong University's website, I say your, ahem I mean OUR masters are truly powderful! Banzai!

 

[bakkuttay]

Alfian sa'at: Nparks should not side with the pap and it should be impartial

source: http://therealsingapore.com/content...hould-not-side-pap-and-it-should-be-impartial


Post date:
1 Oct 2014 - 5:05pm

So NParks tried to issue a clarification regarding the double-booking of Hong Lim Park. From a CNA report:

"NParks said there have been multiple events held on the same date at Hong Lim Park previously. "For example, on June 29 2013, the Pink Dot 2013, anti-haze speech and protest against the LTA Cross Island MRT Line took place. Other examples include May 1 2013 - 'Stand up for the Rest', and 'Say No to 6.9m population' and others - and Nov 29 2008 - Mini-bond and General Election, and Dance India, Taste India," a spokesperson said."

Unfortunately, there was no information on whether those events were held concurrently and whether there was staggered timing. For example, the 'Stand Up for The Rest' event in May 2013 was held in the morning, whereas the 'Say No to 6.9m population' protest only started at 4 pm. Additionally, NParks was silent as to whether the organisers were given ample notice that they would be sharing the space with other groups (and information on what groups these were).

What we got instead from NParks was this:

"[The members from the Return Our CPF rally] caused alarm and anxiety to a group of special needs children who was about to perform a dance item on stage and left some of these children as well as elderly members of the audience shocked and traumatised."

Seriously, when did NParks become the spokesman for the children performers and the elderly audience for the YMCA event? I believe NParks was asked about a seeming procedural weakness in the registration process--it would be prudent to limit their comments to this, instead of going on overkill and rolling out words like 'alarm', 'anxiety', 'shocked', 'traumatised' etc. It's always sickening when stat boards and public institutions start looking like loudspeakers for the ruling party, whether it is HDB and their selective upgrading projects and NEA weighing in on hawker centre spats. We expect them to be transparent and accountable, but please we don't mean for them to be so transparently partisan and accountable only to the PAP. If you want public trust then at least try to conduct yourselves with impartiality.

Alfian Sa'at

Playwright at W!LD RICE



*Article first appeared on https://www.facebook.com/alfiansaat

 

[Jah_rastafar_I]

Re: Alfian sa'at: Nparks should not side with the pap and it should be impartial

What kind of fucking stupid article is this. The press shouldn't side with the govt, the police, civil defence and so on but they do so it's like he's stating the most obvious thing.

 

[Rogue Trader]

Re: CPF Protest versus YMCA event - unedited video

What's the matter? The establishment can't stomach a little non-violent face off?

Like that how to contest election?

The vanguard Pap MPs are so respected because they fought street to street battles against political opponents and won. Yet ah gua P65 MPs like Teo ser fuck will only grace social events on red carpets sprinkled with flower petals. Once anything unscripted arises immediately kalang karboh.

This is not the kind of soft cock MPs my friends and I want sitting in the parliament house.

Next better player please ....

 

[laksaboy]

Re: CPF Protest versus YMCA event - unedited video

Next better player please ....

Hahaha! P65 MPs... anyone remember this?

[video=youtube;FvNa2UUEc_A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvNa2UUEc_A[/video]

 

[tanwahtiu]

Re: Alfian sa'at: Nparks should not side with the pap and it should be impartial

you are stating the obvious too.

“I make no apologies that the PAP is the Government and the Government is the PAP.”
- Lee Kuan Yew, Petir, 1982

What kind of fucking stupid article is this. The press shouldn't side with the govt, the police, civil defence and so on but they do so it's like he's stating the most obvious thing.

 

[tanwahtiu]

Re: The hong lim affair – more than uniquely singapore

operation cold store 2 next?

 

[bakkuttay]

Re: Local social worker: Pap keeps taking money away from family with special needs k

SDP: LET'S WATCH WHAT THEY SAY AT THE NEXT PARLIAMENT SITTING


source: http://therealsingapore.com/content/sdp-lets-watch-what-they-say-next-parliament-sitting

Post date:
1 Oct 2014 - 5:12pm

Singapore Democrats

Minister of State for Trade and Industry, Mr Teo Ser Luck, chastised Mr Roy Ngerng and Ms Han Hui Hui for frightening the children with special needs during the protest at Hong Lim Park on Saturday.

He said: "The children are my utmost concern." His party mates wasted no time in piling it on, waxing eloquent about how special needs children need to be protected.

Below is a compilation taken from the blogsite Singapore Notes of what the PAP MPs said:

Manpower Minister Tan Chuan-Jin: “I am appalled. We now heckle special needs children? Vile. Total and absolute disgrace.”

Social and Family Development Minister Chan Chun Sing: “To cause alarm and distress to special needs children, and disrupting their routine cannot be right no matter how righteous you think your own cause may be.”

MP Janil Puthucheary: “No excuse for bad behaviour, but especially not directed at kids.”

MP Zaqy Mohamad: “A pity that special needs children were heckled by protesters at event by YMCA at Hong Lim Park.”

MP Ang Wei Neng: “There was no good reason for the bloggers to heckle children with special needs and hurl vulgarities.”

MP Tin Pei Ling: “What have these special needs children done to deserve being heckled down?”



If these MPs cared so much for children with special needs, it would save everyone a lot of trouble if they amended the Compulsory Education Act (CEA).

In 2003, the Government passed the CEA to make it compulsory for families to enroll their children in school. The stated objective of the Act is to "give our children a common educational experience which will help to build national identity and cohesion."

But the CEA excludes children with special needs, that is, it is not compulsory for these children to attend school. Education for them is left entirely to their parents who are often unable to afford sending them to special schools.

At the moment, only children with mild disabilities attend regular schools. The rest have to attend special schools run by Voluntary Work Organisations (VWO).

The question is why. Why are they not given a similar experience to "build national identity and cohesion"? Are they lesser Singaporeans? Are they any less worthy of government support? Why are they discriminated against?



We raised this subject in our alternative education policy paper Education for Creativity and Equality: An Agenda for Transformation which we launched in May this year. We proposed, among other measures, the following:

Amend the CEA to include all children. Don't discriminate against children with special needs, they are Singaporeans too and they deserve to be treated equally.

MOE takes over Special Needs Education instead of leaving it to VWOs. In this way, special needs children from poorer families can also attend school.

Provide effective training for MOE teachers to enable them to undertake special education.

Click here to read the full paper.

The MPs can take the lead by proposing these measures at the next Parliament sitting and show Singaporeans that they genuinely care for children with special needs.

Otherwise, they run the danger of being accused of using the children to take potshots at the protesters and score cheap political points.

Singaporeans will be watching.



Source: YourSDP.org