Singapore Pledge is only an aspiration
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Firstly, it was not Singapore that was maligned, - it was the PAP imposed election process.
Secondly, you did ask about the election process being recognised, and my response stand that any election that involve less then 50 per cent of the population is invalid.
Even an AGM or EGM requires a quorum, least of all an Election.
Period.
Is there a quorum requirement for parliamentary elections?
Has any country specified a quorum for elections?
Corporations and Associations, yes, in their memorandum of associations and by-laws. In law, a quorum is the minimum number of members of a deliberative body necessary to conduct the business of that group.
But countries for elections, ??
P.S.
Sorry, I know you are busy on two threads, but I will also check up on the quorum requirements for elections. Good night.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
Appreciation from you? Please dont make me laugh again. I am positively splitting my sides at your pathetic responses.
Time and time again, hook, line and sinker you had been made to reveal what you actually are and where you really stand.
I am a nobody, and had sought to change no one's view, unlike you, It's about time others see the real you and the way to deal with a low life like you.
I hope others enjoy for posterity the posts made and intelligently discern your rhetorical frustrations and where they are comming from.
Have you decidedly drop your admiration of me as a 'girl' now ?
Too painful with the truth about being a transvee and prefer to be a nobody now ?
Surely, you are not abandoning the plagiarising efforts in the style that you try to imitate hopelessly from someone more honest than you ?
Why will you consistently view my present disposition as being negative ?
With the dishonesty that is known with your style, the truth is already evident in your reflection towards others.
You should not let your mind wander too far away, it is still too little to be out alone at this late hour.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
Is there a quorum requirement for parliamentary elections?
Has any country specified a quorum for elections?
Corporations and Associations, yes, in their memorandum of associations and by-laws. In law, a quorum is the minimum number of members of a deliberative body necessary to conduct the business of that group.
But countries for elections, ??
P.S.
Sorry, I know you are busy on two threads, but I will also check up on the quorum requirements for elections. Good night.
You can save your efforts, as there is no Singapore Legislation requiring the minimum number in population turnout to make an election valid in Singapore - (but I stand to be corrected by your diligent efforts).
After bastardising the Singapore Constitution with new amendment legislations that have been rubber stamped through a PAP dominated Parliament since 1957, do you seriously think that the legal mind of LKY would not have seen to this small detail that will sabotage his scheme in total domination of local politics ?
The manner in which the one and only Referendum ever conducted in Singapore - to get Singaporeans to agree to his Merger Plans with Malaysia - is already evident of his style. (Incidentally, the Referendum was a requirement from the UN as part of the legal process to recognise the merging of independent states).
In the recent Afghan Elections, the UN and NATO were striving for a turnout of at least 50 per cent of Afghan population to make the election results credible.
Similar elections under the auspices of the UN in East Timor also required this minimum level of participation from the population.
Even in the elections conducted by EU for their periodical leadership change, and referendums to some of the policies that require approval by the citizens of the member states, both these processes require that at least 50 percent of the citizens of the member states should be involved in the process - otherwise the election results and proposed policy measure will be void.
This is the minimum standard of an Election Process.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
Why talk about others, denigrate others when you yourself have NOT answered IF YOU WOULD HONOUR THE PLEDGE?
An oath, a pledge, an aspiration is uttered and not written down, afix with your signature. Under humanity's law, it is thus not legally binding.
But by a higher calling, beyond mortal laws, is our sacred pledge built upon, for it lies within your own conscience to behave towards your fellow citizens, failing which, only you are fully answerable to yourself, and subject to other civilised criticism should you fail to honour your very own words.
Isnt this the freedom all envison, rather than to enforce it with jail terms or subject to mortal justice for failure to adherence to our pledge?
Only you alone is answerable to your oath that each and everyone of us swore to our society. Those who have no intention to contribute to our society treat it with contempt and hypocrites utter one thing but do another, and can be easily distinguished and be equally treated with contempt.
So which are you?
Gosh, u look like u are Atobe, the way you write
So far, I only see you twisting and turning, without any concrete replies.
And you did not acknowledge your mistake. You used aspiration on a pledge, which is incorrect on all counts
Coming back to myself, why I am passionate about this topic is because I thought the pledge is an oath to ensure peace and stability in Singapore. And I have played my part on it, by keeping to its principles at least on the parts that I can control (race, language, religion). Now that LKY has demeaned the pledge to an aspiration, irks me.
The difference is huge. I am very surprised you continue to debate without acknowledging the mistake you made, therefore ensuring your comments hold no weight.
A good debater acknowledges points from the opposition that is valid and true. A lousy debater continues to delude oneself and others even when he is exposed on his lack of knowledge on the topic.
So which are you?
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Gosh, u look like u are Atobe, the way you write
So far, I only see you twisting and turning, without any concrete replies.
And you did not acknowledge your mistake. You used aspiration on a pledge, which is incorrect on all counts
Coming back to myself, why I am passionate about this topic is because I thought the pledge is an oath to ensure peace and stability in Singapore. And I have played my part on it, by keeping to its principles at least on the parts that I can control (race, language, religion). Now that LKY has demeaned the pledge to an aspiration, irks me.
The difference is huge. I am very surprised you continue to debate without acknowledging the mistake you made, therefore ensuring your comments hold no weight.
A good debater acknowledges points from the opposition that is valid and true. A lousy debater continues to delude oneself and others even when he is exposed on his lack of knowledge on the topic.
So which are you?
Oaths?? OMG! u think the whole singapore is a law court ar?? Aspiration is not fully wrong, it is a part of the pledge meaning, it can also be inspiration and motto or simply a sense of belonging. A kind of notion that said we are all for one and one for all. The pledge also in a way gives us an identity of a place we call home, a morale motivator and a reminder that we are a multi racial society.
It is never a Oath or a laws that you need to follow if not you get punished. Speak the word, if you want to pledge it out loud, keep it in your mind if you want to remain silent. Nobody is going to said anything.
Of course there are many opinons, individual thinking and feeling for this pledge, if you think that as tho these pledge is a oaths to be true nothing but the true, so be it, but then you got to respect other seeing it as an inspiration or aspiration. Not wrong either..just like if you like, display sing flag, if you dun like, nobody is going said that you must display it. It a kind of respect within one view towards his/her nation. So, take it easy, pledge or no pledge at 8.22 is not going to make much differences ya.
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Gosh, u look like u are Atobe, the way you write
So far, I only see you twisting and turning, without any concrete replies.
And you did not acknowledge your mistake. You used aspiration on a pledge, which is incorrect on all counts
Coming back to myself, why I am passionate about this topic is because I thought the pledge is an oath to ensure peace and stability in Singapore. And I have played my part on it, by keeping to its principles at least on the parts that I can control (race, language, religion). Now that LKY has demeaned the pledge to an aspiration, irks me.
The difference is huge. I am very surprised you continue to debate without acknowledging the mistake you made, therefore ensuring your comments hold no weight.
A good debater acknowledges points from the opposition that is valid and true. A lousy debater continues to delude oneself and others even when he is exposed on his lack of knowledge on the topic.
So which are you?
Me look like Atobe with the way I write? Is that a compliment or an offense? Lol! heavens no please. She's a low life and holds no value of lofty goals except to vent her rhetorical frustrations upon others.
An oath, a pledge, or how you wish to term is made on your own free will and to honour and uphold it is yourself. Look at the splinter in your own eye before you condemn others. Thus my question to you was - will you uphold your oath? which you had yet to reply directly as a man.
But i will not hold it against you, for you answer to yourself on an oath. Others will judge you only by the value of your words, or the lack of it.
It seems you have yet to comprehend 'debate' and what it is about. This is your mistake, but again, I hold it not against you, for none of us are perfect anyway.
A good debater or bad debater knows that it is others whom judge, and never judge or pride themselves.
You are only making more and more mistakes,of the judgemental kind with each post. Do you need help? I am no model of perfection, capable of helping you, but I can send you directions to go to for such help.
-
As long as there is Classes diversion we will never be equal.
-
there can never be equality even if Marx's doctrines was met. The world can never be equal because once equilibrium is reached, that is the end of human.
-
The foundation has cracked, it just how big the crack that will divide this society.
-
Good morning, so the transvertite had to walk away from its X-rated-yearnings after finding the solace to suck to sleep and now return filled with energy to write with more exaggerated hollow fluff that plagiarise the style of someone's honesty.
Originally posted by xtreyier:Me look like Atobe with the way I write? Is that a compliment or an offense? Lol! heavens no please. She's a low life and holds no value of lofty goals except to vent her rhetorical frustrations upon others.
Amazing style of debate that refutes honest truths but prefer to promote falsehood, and flourish on the excrements of lies.
Is it not typical of a transvertite unable to handle the truth of being stuck between the rock and a hard surface, and enjoying the moment while it is able to ?
An oath, a pledge, or how you wish to term is made on your own free will and to honour and uphold it is yourself. Look at the splinter in your own eye before you condemn others. Thus my question to you was - will you uphold your oath? which you had yet to reply directly as a man.
Yes, how eloquently laced with all the fluff, when the idiocy of a transvertite cannot makeout the difference between the gravity of an Oath to Principles based on "an aspiration" or on "an ideal" .
Should we be surprised that the transvertite cannot reply or avoid to reply directly as a man to this important difference ?
But i will not hold it against you, for you answer to yourself on an oath. Others will judge you only by the value of your words, or the lack of it.
How ironical that the transvertite will want others to judge all the fluff even as the words proclaimed that "you have to answer to yourself on an oath" ?
The controversies of the transvertite stems from the confuse origins of its DNA and will continue as long as this is not resolved, and will flow to affect all things and everyone with its half-truths mixed with false accusations.
It seems you have yet to comprehend 'debate' and what it is about. This is your mistake, but again, I hold it not against you, for none of us are perfect anyway.
How can a transvertite ever hope to be perfect when it refuse to comprehend honesty and truth - whether in its own gender, or least of all in "debate" ?
The chubby and amateurish Pakistani hijacking SQ117 who have been wrongfully compared to the vicious terrorists from the North West region, and the maligned Gurkhas and as well as the reputation of the SAF Special Force Unit - still remain without an apology from the transvertite who claim boastful knowledge of all their origins and activities in all the flowery fluffy prose.
A good debater or bad debater knows that it is others whom judge, and never judge or pride themselves.
You certainly took pride in your falsehood, and the plagiarising attempts of someone's honest writing skills with your debasing attitude towards others.
Can you continue to hide behind all the flowery fluff and perpetuate your dishonesty ?
Others may not be able to judge you in the manner that you wish, do you lash back like a true transvertite at the honest truth spoken about the reality of you ?
You are only making more and more mistakes,of the judgemental kind with each post. Do you need help? I am no model of perfection, capable of helping you, but I can send you directions to go to for such help.
Yes, it is always the mistake of others when the judgement that you seek becomes inconvenient to your false pride, and when it pinches on the truth till it hurts and demand that you demean the process of debate by calling others names from your mind fertilize with manure.
It is indeed the honesty spoken when the transvertite cannot cope with the tyranny of truth and honesty.
We can empathise with your tortured position in your display with wreckless retorts.
You certainly need help for yourself before attempting to offer help to others.
Can a transvertite be a perfect model for anyone except to another feminine kind ?
-
The pledge is but one of the numerous thought-conditioning instruments!
-
The pledge is but one of the numerous thought-conditioning instruments!
....that can't face the weather of time.
-
Originally posted by pearlie27:
The pledge is but one of the numerous thought-conditioning instruments!
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Oaths?? OMG! u think the whole singapore is a law court ar?? Aspiration is not fully wrong, it is a part of the pledge meaning, it can also be inspiration and motto or simply a sense of belonging. A kind of notion that said we are all for one and one for all. The pledge also in a way gives us an identity of a place we call home, a morale motivator and a reminder that we are a multi racial society.
It is never a Oath or a laws that you need to follow if not you get punished. Speak the word, if you want to pledge it out loud, keep it in your mind if you want to remain silent. Nobody is going to said anything.
Of course there are many opinons, individual thinking and feeling for this pledge, if you think that as tho these pledge is a oaths to be true nothing but the true, so be it, but then you got to respect other seeing it as an inspiration or aspiration. Not wrong either..just like if you like, display sing flag, if you dun like, nobody is going said that you must display it. It a kind of respect within one view towards his/her nation. So, take it easy, pledge or no pledge at 8.22 is not going to make much differences ya.
Dear angel7030
Aspiration is NOT a pledge.They are 2 different words with VASTLY different implications.
as I mentioned, please kindly understand and acknowledge before your postings.
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Dear angel7030
Aspiration is NOT a pledge.They are 2 different words with VASTLY different implications.
as I mentioned, please kindly understand and acknowledge before your postings.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
Me look like Atobe with the way I write? Is that a compliment or an offense? Lol! heavens no please. She's a low life and holds no value of lofty goals except to vent her rhetorical frustrations upon others.
An oath, a pledge, or how you wish to term is made on your own free will and to honour and uphold it is yourself. Look at the splinter in your own eye before you condemn others. Thus my question to you was - will you uphold your oath? which you had yet to reply directly as a man.
But i will not hold it against you, for you answer to yourself on an oath. Others will judge you only by the value of your words, or the lack of it.
It seems you have yet to comprehend 'debate' and what it is about. This is your mistake, but again, I hold it not against you, for none of us are perfect anyway.
A good debater or bad debater knows that it is others whom judge, and never judge or pride themselves.
You are only making more and more mistakes,of the judgemental kind with each post. Do you need help? I am no model of perfection, capable of helping you, but I can send you directions to go to for such help.
About you being similar to Atobe's writing style. I did not say its positive or negative. You are the one now making judgements of Atobe, and you are the one now committing the exact same mistake that you are trying to accuse me of. I see your three fingers and thumb pointing back at yourself as you make accusations at others.
Interestingly, I had already responded to your question on upholding of the oath. And yet, here you are asking me to be a man. Obviously, your need to rebut others has blinded you to seek only the answers that you want.
So, I agree with you one thing. You are certainly no model of perfection, and seriously, you are not a good role model for anyone in this forum. Pretending to be Atobe, you are NOT Atobe. From arguments, to insults, you are merely but a sad example of someone who replicates without thought. No substance at all.
Sad... how sad...
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
About you being similar to Atobe's writing style. I did not say its positive or negative. You are the one now making judgements of Atobe, and you are the one now committing the exact same mistake that you are trying to accuse me of. I see your three fingers and thumb pointing back at yourself as you make accusations at others.
Interestingly, I had already responded to your question on upholding of the oath. And yet, here you are asking me to be a man. Obviously, your need to rebut others has blinded you to seek only the answers that you want.
So, I agree with you one thing. You are certainly no model of perfection, and seriously, you are not a good role model for anyone in this forum. Pretending to be Atobe, you are NOT Atobe. From arguments, to insults, you are merely but a sad example of someone who replicates without thought. No substance at all.
Sad... how sad...
First you said I look like Atobe. Now you twist and turn. So what else do you wish to twist and turn to suit your self-centred self?
You made judgemental mistakes. Now you are confused, had to resort to twisting and turning to squirm your way out as your kind often do.
No wonder you are sad, a sad specimen of humanity similar with your kind? Birds of a feather do flock together i suppose.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:A good debater or bad debater knows that it is others whom judge, and never judge or pride themselves.
And I absolutely 'love' your statement, demonstrating how confused you are as a person.
So both good debaters and bad debaters know that it is others whom judge, and never judge or pride themselves? I ask you a question. You answered with a totally dumb statement.
You cannot even articulate properly on what your thoughts are, and you want to learn how to speak like Atobe?
Sad... how sad...
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
First you said I look like Atobe. Now you twist and turn. So what else do you wish to twist and turn to suit your self-centred self?
You made judgemental mistakes. Now you are confused, had to resort to twisting and turning to squirm your way out as your kind often do.
No wonder you are sad, a sad specimen of humanity similar with your kind? Birds of a feather do flock together i suppose.
Aiyo, just stop lah.
You are getting more and more confused. No longer answering the questions posed to you, but just hiding behind irresponsible remarks.
Yeah, you are no model to anyone. Go get a life, please.
-
By the way, philosophies are not meant for just anyone.
Sprout wrongly, and you will look stupid. Xtreyier is a negative example of someone who pretends to be philosophical, but then commits the very same mistake that he accuses others of.
He said, "Don't make judgements of others" (And he made judgements on others)
My fave
"A good debater or bad debater knows that it is others whom judge, and never judge or pride themselves"
Trying to look philosophical, but absolutely missing the mark. :D
Sad... how sad...
Philosophy is a double-edged sword. Used wrongly, and you might end up cutting yourself :)
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Dear angel7030
Aspiration is NOT a pledge.They are 2 different words with VASTLY different implications.
as I mentioned, please kindly understand and acknowledge before your postings.
Dear soul rage,Aspiration is an emotion drawn from the pledge, a desire to fulfil the pledge and if someone pledge to do something, it kind of like he makes his objective and promise to fulfil it within his means and plans, but that does not mean he will succeed or have to really fulfil it. Of course if you ask me, aspiration or inspiration are words different from the word "pledge", for eg, I pledge a toast, may all be healthy..yam seng!! the aspiration is that hope that all be healthy, but does not really mean that all will be healthy, same as we pledge (as a verb) to be equal, racial harmony and properity, a desire to achieve and fulfil all these above as far as possible, as you should no, no country will ever fulfil it, but if you can get close to it, it is a bonus for all of us to enjoy and live happily. Just like low crimes doesn't mean no crime ya..understand Uncle
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Aiyo, just stop lah.
You are getting more and more confused. No longer answering the questions posed to you, but just hiding behind irresponsible remarks.
Yeah, you are no model to anyone. Go get a life, please.
i really admire supporter of Uncle Atobe...never say die one -
Originally posted by angel7030:
i really admire supporter of Uncle Atobe...never say die oneI am not a supporter of anyone
I just acknowledge points made by sensible people, from both sides of the argument (or even the neutrals).
In my view, a mature debater, regardless of his stand, acknowledges the valid points made by the other party. To delude oneself that the other party is 100% wrong demonstrates how immature oneself is. These are people (BOTH pro-PAP and opposition) that should not be debating in parliament.
And, if you still cannot understand Aspiration is not EQUALS to Pledge, then I cannot help you.
Now you bring another new item in when you cannot even understand the above yet. Aspiration is an Emotion??? Hello??? Since when is aspiration an emotion? It's a goal or achievement that you want to achieve. The success or failure coming from the aspiration probably gives you emotions.
Sigh...
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
I am not a supporter of anyone
I just acknowledge points made by sensible people, from both sides of the argument (or even the neutrals).
But if you still cannot understand Aspiration is not EQUALS to Pledge, then I cannot help you.
Now you bring another new item in when you cannot even understand the above yet. Aspiration is an Emotion??? Hello??? Since when is aspiration an emotion? It's a goal or achievement that you want to achieve. The success or failure coming from the aspiration probably gives you emotions.
Sigh...
it both inspire and aspire you to achieve your desire. The feeling (emotion) of wanting to fulfil. As i said, Aspiration is just a word by itself use as one of the apparatus to inspire a pledge, a pledge contain many other factors, we are not saying aspiration is equal to pledge. As LKY put it, the pledge is an aspiration, does not mean that a pledge is equal to aspiration. It all depend on how you aspire it.
Anyway, people of different thoughts have different view. More so if people are influenced by the thought of being oppressed by LKY.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
it both inspire and aspire you to achieve your desire. The feeling (emotion) of wanting to fulfil. As i said, Aspiration is just a word by itself use as one of the apparatus to inspire a pledge, a pledge contain many other factors, we are not saying aspiration is equal to pledge. As LKY put it, the pledge is an aspiration, does not mean that a pledge is equal to aspiration. It all depend on how you aspire it.
Anyway, people of different thoughts have different view. More so if people are influenced by the thought of being oppressed by LKY.
the way I see it, you are twisting and turning to fit it into LKY's words.
It's just like supporters of prophets, they twist and turn current events to fit into prophecies made by the prophet.
Yeah, you are right, if you twist and turn, it can also be death = life.
So yes, you are right. LKY is right, and we should stop this useless debate. For what is the point if people can equate wrong terms together and still insist they are correct? :)