TOC: Is SDP Misunderstood, misguided or misaligned?

[one2unite]

When you fling missiles at the opposite side for being not SDP enough, do you not expect people on that side to fling it back?

Me? I just wanna point out the obvious that these to-and-fro exchanges are not helpful, and its clear this issue wasn't about one hand trying to clap; it was both. So both sides have to share the blame.

Besides magazines like the Economist have noted that until the opposition parties unite and stop being petty, PAP would continue to rule this country. We have to see the bigger picture. Getting immersed in this squabble and now lambasting the messenger isn't gonna help your side even more.

In no way I'm after the messenger. What I requested was for some specifics. On my part I've asked you for your take on someone labeling a fellow opposition as "mad dog" and yet another person giving high marks to the judiciary while opposition members and supporters are hauled up before the 'courts" on trumped-up charges that do not sit well with rule of law.

Magazines like Economist are free to air their views but they may not have proper grasp of the ground reality in authoritarian Singapore. But this does not mean that one has to dismiss their views or accept them in their totality.

As you have rightly pointed out, we have to see the bigger picture. But we have to be also mindful of fakes and charlatans.

 

[leetahbar]

[Liberalising the Speakers’ Corner: A fruit of civil disobedience?]

i knew the sdppies would claim credit for this! but now SC is liberated, do we see them ranting regularly there any more? NO! why?

let this be a caution to u guys:

as we try to probe deeper into the unfolding dramas, we would realise that all the lowdown antics fr the old kopitiam re-surface.

IT'S DEJA VU all over!!:p

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear One

The following has been extracted from the SDP's " Why we do what we do segment " on their website. The SDP has chosen to give a slap in the face to those numbers who have toiled and worked for opposition MPs of all stripes and colors, from JBJ to LTK to CST and even CCH and LHD :_)). It is offensive fundamentally because I see no need for the SDP to push its agenda in its mission statement without degenerating the work of others. For example a less offensive statement would have " The opposition might win a few more seats against overwhelming odds but this is in the SDP's view not fundamental electoral change in Singapore ". I wold of course disagree but it would be infinitely less offensive.

The mad dog remarks did not reference any particular opposition party in Singapore but rather what model the opposition as a whole for better or worse should take. In that model perhaps mad dog should be seen in reference to " taiwanese" or even " thai politics." neither of which hold much attraction for me for Singapore.

The degree and the extent to which a party and its leaders should state what they believe in personally in political debate is a choice best left to individuals in the line of fire and some mistakes have been made. With regards to the legal system and the rule of law, I believe not enough credit has been given to SL for bringing up in parliament issues such as the independence of the law society and the tenure of judges and their appointment which is in effect indirectly addressing the concerns of the SDP about the rule of law and judicial independence in Singapore. Two differing methods , the same ends. I believe there is more that can unite then divide.

On the issue of world consumer day :_)) The police would have done far better in saying that the theme of the protest as stated by the SDP was not in line with the official theme for world consumer day and was hence not approved.

On another note I would like to add that many of the limited rights won by the sweat of Dr Chee and CO might in fact be taken advantage of by others. Such is the nature of the political game.



Locke

"It is important to add at this juncture that the PAP may allow a few more opposition MPs to be elected in future elections in order to counter the SDP’s strategy. When this happens, the PAP can then say that the election system is democratic, thus, negating the need for mass protests. But even if Parliament has a few more opposition members, how will that alter the decision-making process when the PAP overwhelmingly controls the house? The PAP can easily change the rules again in following elections and “win” back the seats they lost, and we’ll be back to square one. In the meantime, another 5 or 10 years would have passed and little would have changed. "


" What is your take on the person who had called a fellow opposition "mad dog"? What about someone who had said Singapore's judiciary is fair, independent and world class when SDP and other activists are facing countless trumped up charges in LKY's kangaroo courts?

When SDP does something, it's called criminal but the same act by CASE is termed legal. Where is the rule of law "

 

[leetahbar]

[Is Ng E-Jay now repudiating his guilty plea in court?]


[Only time shall tell whether Dr Chee/SDP is really "misguided"]

ejay is there only becos she is there. and she is there becos of another HE is there. if HE is not there, she won't be there...and if she isn't there ejay won't be too.

it's a chain reaction. but becos of ejay sudden about turn and not sticky together, i believe fissure has already taken place. of course, they still have to present themselves as "united" or whatever pretty image they were trying to conjure up would be exposed.

FAITH, TRUST AND CONFIDENCE among each others are very hard to maintain when each of them harbour a certain personal motive or objective which were cleverly designed to wayang that they were "sincerely" aim for the real objective, ie., to topple the paps' LEEgime.

what we are seeing was instead of toppling the common enemy, they are assasinating the opp parties like wp, nsp and their members more often. did we see them glorifying SDP in the past before they seek refuge there?

think abou it.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

LOL your paranoia and wayang games appear to affect your ability to discern and think rationally.:p

Porf, I notice you have been fishing for information, are you from some organization ?

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

To put it simply, this appears to be all about AGENDAS

in politics, there is no such thing as non-partisan. everyone takes sides and those who are sit on the fence were usually accussed as been siding with one side or another when actually they are not. and in the end, forced top take sides even when they are unwilling to. so what gives??

democracy and freedom of expression has lost its orginal meaning. sad but this is showing how true things have become.

 

[cleareyes]

Unfortunatly the issue regarding SDP is not just about the party itself but also with regards to the members and "supporters" of whom the party has no control over its action and reaction. The party could set any direction, but with a weaker than ever central control and the lack of willingness to cooperate even within the party itself, let alone with other parties, SDP will always carry al sort of baggage, some of which is not their doing but of their "supporters" intention to curve political spheres for themselves.

AS For TOC, it was meant to be a non-partisan alternative news and sharing corner, however, the "branding" and "labeling" made by its opponent of its poltical affiliation, even when there is none, is not helping. Indeed, if we were to talk about promoting freedm of press and expression, one area we just cant control and even reshape are the "labeling" given by your opponents no matter how much work you have put in and how things should really be.

 

[The_Latest_H]

In no way I'm after the messenger. What I requested was for some specifics. On my part I've asked you for your take on someone labeling a fellow opposition as "mad dog" and yet another person giving high marks to the judiciary while opposition members and supporters are hauled up before the 'courts" on trumped-up charges that do not sit well with rule of law.

Magazines like Economist are free to air their views but they may not have proper grasp of the ground reality in authoritarian Singapore. But this does not mean that one has to dismiss their views or accept them in their totality.

As you have rightly pointed out, we have to see the bigger picture. But we have to be also mindful of fakes and charlatans.

When you state the example of the courts, and you seem to imply that only SDP has been right while WP has not- and then directly attacking SL( perhaps personally in the views of others for that) shows that somehow you believe SDP is right, and thus have some sort of superiority because of that.

I understand that SDP has a point- but they could have put it in a more mindful manner that people would respectfully disagree. Instead it was a direct attack that was taken personally and by SDP supporters who doesn't give an impression that they had empathise the WP for doing so.

In the end, name-calling perhaps by both sides doesn't help. And I think its time guys like you, while being big contributors to this forum, understand that name-calling and insults to those like Rubirosa and Scroobal- who remain non-partisan and moderate- doesn't help your case and in fact has worked against you.

If you guys start becoming a bit more diplomatic publicly, perhaps you know, there could be more co-operation and co-ordination between the opposition parties. After all, there are back channels that opposition insiders can use to settle differences.

I mean you don't see Obama insulting the left flank of his own party; neither has he insulted the ultra- conservative wing of the GOP. And when it came down to the m&d by this neo-con GOP group, it just couldn't stick to Obama.

 

[scroobal]

Unfortunatly the issue regarding SDP is not just about the party itself but also with regards to the members and "supporters" of whom the party has no control over its action and reaction. The party could set any direction, but with a weaker than ever central control and the lack of willingness to cooperate even within the party itself, let alone with other parties, SDP will always carry al sort of baggage, some of which is not their doing but of their "supporters" intention to curve political spheres for themselves.

AS For TOC, it was meant to be a non-partisan alternative news and sharing corner, however, the "branding" and "labeling" made by its opponent of its poltical affiliation, even when there is none, is not helping. Indeed, if we were to talk about promoting freedm of press and expression, one area we just cant control and even reshape are the "labeling" given by your opponents no matter how much work you have put in and how things should really be.

Agree with you on the first part. As for TOC, I can't agree. The setup is something that I see that is no different to SPH or Roundtable. Only difference is the that they don't have Tan Sai Siong, Chua Sisters, Koh Buck Song and company that plug shamelessly the PAP do or die.

TOC operates clearly within a confined space and it cannot be a coincidence that Andrew, Choo and Airframe and all the rest were associated with PAP in a formal manner.

They will criticise the issues that are mundane and obvious but they will never question the regime or touch taboo subjects.

Unless like Tan Kin Liang, where they have formally stated thir displeasure with the PAP, they will in my eyes will provide a semblence of objectivity that would be superficial.

Remember Mr Brown and Catherine Lim. Were they evil or socially concerned. Why were they not given the leeway. TOC is a creation of the PAP and the people in it might not even understand the role they are playing. They probably think that they are genuinely serving the community.

If in doubt, just ask yourself what did Mr Brown and Catherine Lim do that was so evil that kuckledusters had to be mentioned.

 

[guavatree]

ejay is there only becos she is there. and she is there becos of another HE is there. if HE is not there, she won't be there...and if she isn't there ejay won't be too.

pondan temple thief PAP bootlicking dog

day in day out keep repeating the same old fucking long winded whinge

go and get a job and don't be a fucking kaypohji!

your appalling gay behavior is worse than a menopause woman!

chao ah kwa when you last had menses?

LOL

 

[silverfox@]

To summarise

SDP is misguided by XXX, who misaligned their true political mission, causing the public to misunderstand them. :p

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Yes, looks like it. In fact Andrew and TKL recently giving kudos to PAP for taking a purported "pay cut" speaks volumes.

Btw I think the 'disappearance' of former PAP gadfly Lee Han Shih also raises curious questions.

TOC operates clearly within a confined space and it cannot be a coincidence that Andrew, Choo and Airframe and all the rest were associated with PAP in a formal manner.

They will criticise the issues that are mundane and obvious but they will never question the regime or touch taboo subjects.

Unless like Tan Kin Liang, where they have formally stated thir displeasure with the PAP, they will in my eyes will provide a semblence of objectivity that would be superficial.

Remember Mr Brown and Catherine Lim. Were they evil or socially concerned. Why were they not given the leeway. TOC is a creation of the PAP and the people in it might not even understand the role they are playing. They probably think that they are genuinely serving the community.

If in doubt, just ask yourself what did Mr Brown and Catherine Lim do that was so evil that kuckledusters had to be mentioned.

 

[leetahbar]

GUAVATREE LOVES LEETAHSAR!!

LOL

oh sorry! forgot all about u. when they are not there, then GUAVATREE wouldn't be stalking here all over. there happy?

 

[Wisely]

In no way I'm after the messenger. What I requested was for some specifics. On my part I've asked you for your take on someone labeling a fellow opposition as "mad dog" and yet another person giving high marks to the judiciary while opposition members and supporters are hauled up before the 'courts" on trumped-up charges that do not sit well with rule of law.

Magazines like Economist are free to air their views but they may not have proper grasp of the ground reality in authoritarian Singapore. But this does not mean that one has to dismiss their views or accept them in their totality.

As you have rightly pointed out, we have to see the bigger picture. But we have to be also mindful of fakes and charlatans.

What's your own take on someone putting words into the mouth of a fellow opposition and then criticizing this fellow opposition for saying those words he put in that was never said?

 

[guavatree]

leetahbar - Bob Sim Kheng Hwee LOVES PAP cock sucking sessions ... LOL

 

[one2unite]

Unfortunatly the issue regarding SDP is not just about the party itself but also with regards to the members and "supporters" of whom the party has no control over its action and reaction. The party could set any direction, but with a weaker than ever central control and the lack of willingness to cooperate even within the party itself, let alone with other parties, SDP will always carry al sort of baggage, some of which is not their doing but of their "supporters" intention to curve political spheres for themselves.

In all honesty, one can't fault the SDP for the behaviour of those claiming to be its supporters.

 

[one2unite]

When you state the example of the courts, and you seem to imply that only SDP has been right while WP has not- and then directly attacking SL( perhaps personally in the views of others for that) shows that somehow you believe SDP is right, and thus have some sort of superiority because of that.

All that the SDP did at the IBA meeting was to state the point that the judiciary is not independent and is beholden to the executive. It was in no way an attack on WP.

Most of the delegates, including the president of the Malaysian Bar Council were in agreement with what was raised during the symposium on the rule of law. The SDP was vindicated by a subsequent lengthy report by the IBA's human rights body that questioned the independence of Singapore's judiciary.

 

[wayangbaobao]

ha ha very smart way to wayang. supporter wayang not sdp fault.

In all honesty, one can't fault the SDP for the behaviour of those claiming to be its supporters.

wayang sdp = wayang pap

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear One 2 Unite

I refer you to the following quoted excerpt from the IBA Summary which is generally Pro Human Rights and Democracy in fact page 70 out of 72

" The judiciary in Singapore has a GOOD international reputation for the integrity of their judgements whilst adjucating commercialk cases that do no involve the interest of PAP members or their asscociates. However in cases involving PAP litigants and PAP interests there are concerns about an appearance or and actual lack of impartiality and or lack of independence which casts doubt on the judgement cast in such cases. Although this may not go as far as claimed by the NGO thats the judiciary is entirely controlled by the will of the executive, there are sufficient reasons to worry about the influence of the execuitive over the judicial decision making. "

I believe the question is to what extent vis sa vis non political cases and the normal day to day court system and whether the SDP differentiates between the two.





Locke

All that the SDP did at the IBA meeting was to state the point that the judiciary is not independent and is beholden to the executive. It was in no way an attack on WP.

Most of the delegates, including the president of the Malaysian Bar Council were in agreement with what was raised during the symposium on the rule of law. The SDP was vindicated by a subsequent lengthy report by the IBA's human rights body that questioned the independence of Singapore's judiciary.

 

[cleareyes]

Unfortunatly the issue regarding SDP is not just about the party itself but also with regards to the members and "supporters" of whom the party has no control over its action and reaction. The party could set any direction, but with a weaker than ever central control and the lack of willingness to cooperate even within the party itself, let alone with other parties, SDP will always carry al sort of baggage, some of which is not their doing but of their "supporters" intention to curve political spheres for themselves.

In all honesty, one can't fault the SDP for the behaviour of those claiming to be its supporters.

THis i have to agree. SDP cant be blamed for everything their supporters do. But could SDP "advice" their supporters on what sort of action that could be taken to foster oppsotion harmony?

Its ironic that we had seen "SDP supporters" calling others opposition supporters to foster such harmony and yet at the same time attacking other oppositiions for not "supporting" them when some antics just cant be supported for various reasons.

If SDP cant control their own members and supporters, how could they show singaporeans that they could be trusted and supported at all?