Has CSJ lied?Chiam See Tong was kicked out by CSJ:Mrs Chiam.
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
lionnoisy is just a chinaman turned singaporean with shitty english. Go back china la.
Rock^Star is someone who has no roots of what your race is, go back to US / UK la.
-
Originally posted by Samuel Lee:
Rock^Star is someone who has no roots of what your race is, go back to US / UK la.
I think you are confused between racial segregation and racial roots.
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
I think you are confused between racial segregation and racial roots.
It makes no difference, especially the former is generally outlawed.
-
Originally posted by Samuel Lee:
But whatever it is, we must analyze the facts given.
1:) Mdm Chiam said that those CEC were too proud of themselves, believing that they can win in the next GE and possibly forming their own government.
Why? Because CST had such proud feeling, more or less.
What? Evidence: Actually, I could say that the reason why 1991 was a huge success for the oppositions who won 4 SMCs and many near to win a seat (40% and above was common) , the highest record ever, was because apart of isolated incident such as Lady MP wiped her hands after shook her hands with a fishmonger or whatever "peasants", the disqualification of the late JBJ. Yes, because the last election prior to 1991 was 1988, which was a shocking election / sudden election / early election but not a by election where effectively bar JBJ from election, which the effect for JBJ's conviction will be ended after 1991/2. Thus, people are not happy with the fact that the ruling party is using such tricks to bar JBJ and vote for the oppositions.
Can this be considered evidence, or simple speculation based on personal preferred interpretation of what events were then ?
2:) It was more or less Chiam's fault for recruiting Chee in, because the very fact that the response from GCT, the then PM to public's anger, was to hold a by election in Marine Parade GRC, which was his consitiutency. GCT said that he will hold all the responsibilities should he lost his seat. However, the oppositions was not in united, and resulted into SDP wants to fight GCT, WP should have sent JBJ and his team to fight GCT, and 2 other smaller parties (NSP and SJP --- a more or less defunct party by now since most of the people had switched to SPP) also want to contest against GCT. Lol! This is why Chee is in, and created a lot of fuss. And, obviously, the reason for SDP to fight GCT is because should the WP wins, 1MP (Hougang -- won in 1991) + 4 MP from this GRC = 5MP from WP and the opposition leader's position is given to Low instead (Since SDP had 3 seats back then, Chiam is the official opposition leader). Anyway, it was Chiam's folly to create such a mess. It was his over confidence that led to his downfall since such effects was spreaded to the whole SDP.
What a sad convulted muck of events that serves more to confuse a wild theory then offer any clearer vision to prove Mdm Chiam's words to be any more hollow.
However, the above seemed to be critizing Chiam a lot, now let's look at why Dr Chee should be "Chee Bye Kia" or Dr Cheezy.
1: A hunger strike is a hunger strike. It is not supposed to use Glucose to replenish body, except, possibly, water. While people can say this is a disgrace to himself, what is certain is that "CBK" is an iconic figure for SDP, people will naturally associate this with SDP, despite it was not SDP's protest against PAP but rather a personal retaliation against his senior on NUS. I think that a 16 year old boy can do better than him in this regards. (I got even tried to save $8 a day, by skipping lunch and dinner and even water, which the water was drank minimally, although I did have some milo ONLY at late night at home lol!)
Is " skipping lunch and dinner and even water, which the water was drank minimally" anything similar to "hunger strike with water and glucose" ?
Before calling anyone a CBK - have you tried to survive on water -minus the glucose - for thirty days ?
If you have not then you may wish to wear a tag by dropping the letter "K" and replacing it with a "M" - that will spell you accurately as another "CBM".
2: It seemed that CSJ is manipulating the CEC. If not why would the then vice chairman needs some "bodyguards" to block their members for observing the hearings? Neither is such acts a democratic act!
Were you present at the event in 1993 - when the CEC was preventing members for observing the hearings, or are you simply depending on Mdm Chiam's version of what events were then ?
It seems to be such an irony that CST - who created Singapore Democratic Party - had preferred a mirror image of the non-democratic CEC model used in the PAP to control his SDP.
It resulted in his CEC kicking him out of the SDP - with him and Mdm Chiam now crying "Foul".
Since the departure of CST, the CEC in the SDP has been made more open, and nothing similar to the old PAP style CEC.
Unfortunately, CST had continued to prefer this non-democratic CEC method of controlling his minions in his new SPP.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Is " skipping lunch and dinner and even water, which the water was drank minimally" anything similar to "hunger strike with water and glucose" ?
Before calling anyone a CBK - have you tried to survive on water -minus the glucose - for thirty days ?
I try to discuss objectively and not to again spark a flame war. However, it is similar because both do not eat anything afterall!
And why should I try to survive on water minus glucose for 30 days when he is not doing that as well (Usually the 7th day or approaching that will seriously need a medical staff to be around or so, but there was records on other countries who have tried that)?
What a sad convulted muck of events that serves more to confuse a wild theory then offer any clearer vision to prove Mdm Chiam's words to be any more hollow.
What is this again??!! Fact is fact, fact is that the Marine Parade by election in 1992 was meant for the late JBJ to participate in the elections and the 're-rise' of him, because the GE held in 1991 instead of 1992 / 1993 and the intention is no clearer than to prevent him from rising again from a GE! Sadly, Chiam failed to see this point and insisted on fighting GCT in 1992 Marine Parade BE, and the reason is no obvious than he is self-fish, worrying that he will lose his 'opposition leader' position, after the win by JBJ (IF) in this BE, with a clear of 5 WP and 3 SDP (Including Chiam) MP in parliment.
It is because Chiam's selfishness / lack of tactics, that results in a folly to recruit CBK, who have a CBM supporter like you. However, even if how CBK is he, still better than a Puppy Bolt dog anyway.
No -- All these are not my interpretion and copyrights attributed to me. There was an article pointed this very fact somewhere. By the way, the then DPM Lee, did mentioned in private that Chiam was not that smart regarding the Marine Parade BE. So afterall, the downfall of SDP and the opposition can only blame on CST and CSJ, while the former make the opposition's image looked not as smart and capable while the CSJ made the opposition's image looked like a crook, ...., and dishonest --- Since a hunger strike is still a hunger strike, should go without glucose at all, probably not for 30 days but 4 days surely can. (I did almost reached there just for the sake of pocket money, so dont try to be funny)
-
Originally posted by Samuel Lee:
I try to discuss objectively and not to again spark a flame war. However, it is similar because both do not eat anything afterall!
And why should I try to survive on water minus glucose for 30 days when he is not doing that as well (Usually the 7th day or approaching that will seriously need a medical staff to be around or so, but there was records on other countries who have tried that)?
Your present remark is quite a change now that you have stated that - "it is similar because both do not eat anything afterall!" - compared to your earlier statement about CSJ and your own bravado act of skipping meals.
What is this again??!! Fact is fact, fact is that the Marine Parade by election in 1992 was meant for the late JBJ to participate in the elections and the 're-rise' of him, because the GE held in 1991 instead of 1992 / 1993 and the intention is no clearer than to prevent him from rising again from a GE! Sadly, Chiam failed to see this point and insisted on fighting GCT in 1992 Marine Parade BE, and the reason is no obvious than he is self-fish, worrying that he will lose his 'opposition leader' position, after the win by JBJ (IF) in this BE, with a clear of 5 WP and 3 SDP (Including Chiam) MP in parliment.
Your interpretation of events are merely perceptions of what you think you are seeing as an general observer to the unfolding events - and even if you are present in 1992/1993 - you are still an outsider observing and interpreting.
Perceptions are merely perceptions - it is quite different from hard evidence.
It is because Chiam's selfishness / lack of tactics, that results in a folly to recruit CBK, who have a CBM supporter like you. However, even if how CBK is he, still better than a Puppy Bolt dog anyway.
It is those with a brain that is the size of a clit that will think about CBK as it flaps its own CBM - is it any surprise that there are quite a few around lately that indulges in exercising the CB's ?
No -- All these are not my interpretion and copyrights attributed to me. There was an article pointed this very fact somewhere. By the way, the then DPM Lee, did mentioned in private that Chiam was not that smart regarding the Marine Parade BE. So afterall, the downfall of SDP and the opposition can only blame on CST and CSJ, while the former make the opposition's image looked not as smart and capable while the CSJ made the opposition's image looked like a crook, ...., and dishonest --- Since a hunger strike is still a hunger strike, should go without glucose at all, probably not for 30 days but 4 days surely can. (I did almost reached there just for the sake of pocket money, so dont try to be funny)
"for the sake of pocket money" - even a beggar will be willing to go on a hunger strike - can this be any funnier ?
You cannot disclaim your own positon to be a rehash from some article - unless you can produce that article that you claimed - it remains to be your own interpretation.
Even if that article is produced - the author is also subject to critical reviews of his or her work, which must be substantiated from clear, justifiable and reasonable view or interpretation of events that can stand up to scrutiny by the intended readers..
If you shoot a sweeping statement in public - you better be prepared to make a stand to hold your position, or modify it so as to make it more reasonably acceptable.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Your present remark is quite a change now that you have stated that - "it is similar because both do not eat anything afterall!" - compared to your earlier statement about CSJ and your own bravado act of skipping meals.
Your interpretation of events are merely perceptions of what you think you are seeing as an general observer to the unfolding events - and even if you are present in 1992/1993 - you are still an outsider observing and interpreting.
Perceptions are merely perceptions - it is quite different from hard evidence.
It is those with a brain that is the size of a clit that will think about CBK as it flaps its own CBM - is it any surprise that there are quite a few around lately that indulges in exercising the CB's ?
"for the sake of pocket money" - even a beggar will be willing to go on a hunger strike - can this be any funnier ?
You cannot disclaim your own positon to be a rehash from some article - unless you can produce that article that you claimed - it remains to be your own interpretation.
Even if that article is produced - the author is also subject to critical reviews of his or her work, which must be substantiated from clear, justifiable and reasonable view or interpretation of events that can stand up to scrutiny by the intended readers..
If you shoot a sweeping statement in public - you better be prepared to make a stand to hold your position, or modify it so as to make it more reasonably acceptable.
http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.com/2010/03/chee-soon-juan-blames-everyone-except.html
Read the above. The Factor 1 is what I have read from ages!
And to make things not as confusing, a hunger strike is not to eat things as to spread out the protest / unhappy view out while a skipping meal just for pocket money, for the word itself, is meant to save money by not using it for food.
While the intentions for both are different in any apsect, but the consequences is similar, by having a successful hunger strike, people may give in somewhat (May not in a failed case, just like this joker) and the latteral is having more pocket money, for whatever uses (Unless the person quits after a temptation to eat). Both are not so good for health either. So it is similar in some sense. Also, for beggar case, is more towards the latteral rather than hunger strike, since the intention is different.
-
Rebels fighting amongst themselves, how exciting it is to know.
-
Originally posted by Samuel Lee:
http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.com/2010/03/chee-soon-juan-blames-everyone-except.html
Read the above. The Factor 1 is what I have read from ages!
And to make things not as confusing, a hunger strike is not to eat things as to spread out the protest / unhappy view out while a skipping meal just for pocket money, for the word itself, is meant to save money by not using it for food.
While the intentions for both are different in any apsect, but the consequences is similar, by having a successful hunger strike, people may give in somewhat (May not in a failed case, just like this joker) and the latteral is having more pocket money, for whatever uses (Unless the person quits after a temptation to eat). Both are not so good for health either. So it is similar in some sense. Also, for beggar case, is more towards the latteral rather than hunger strike, since the intention is different.
Who is the Bear in your referenced article that you have depended on for your views - http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.com/2010/03/chee-soon-juan-blames-everyone-except.html ?
What are its credentials ?
It is just another blogger that is no better then the opinions offered by you and I - and you consider it an authority of the events that unfolded in 1992 / 1993 ?
The Straits Times being a propaganda mouthpiece of the PAP would have been more credible.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Who is the Bear in your referenced article that you have depended on for your views - http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.com/2010/03/chee-soon-juan-blames-everyone-except.html ?
What are its credentials ?
It is just another blogger that is no better then the opinions offered by you and I - and you consider it an authority of the events that unfolded in 1992 / 1993 ?
The Straits Times being a propaganda mouthpiece of the PAP would have been more credible.
But what is certain is that portion (Like the first part) of it are spreaded widely on the net, do some research please.
-
Originally posted by Samuel Lee:
But what is certain is that portion (Like the first part) of it are spreaded widely on the net, do some research please.
There are many bloggers on the internet equipped with a loose lip and a clit for a brain.It will be prudent for you to learn to be more circumspect with the details offered, and take all that come your way with a pinch of salt to be acutely discerning in filtering out what is clearly speculatively controversial and derogatory of anyone..
Too much hot air can surely get one into trouble, especially when you will prefer to accept such views and proudly repeat the same hot air as your own.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
There are many bloggers on the internet equipped with a loose lip and a clit for a brain.It will be prudent for you to learn to be more circumspect with the details offered, and take all that come your way with a pinch of salt to be acutely discerning in filtering out what is clearly speculatively controversial and derogatory of anyone..
Too much hot air can surely get one into trouble, especially when you will prefer to accept such views and proudly repeat the same hot air as your own.
Ok, but what it is is still a majority of Singaporeans, except the maybe 20% of the hardcore oppositions supporter who will still support CSJ and his SDP, is willing to vote for PAP or spoilt their vote. And all these is caused by CST and CSJ, both caused some shame to the oppositions in the different perspectives. (Remember, even CST managed to remain his seat, his whopping majority of 69% votes in 1991 had drastically fallen to no more than 56% in 1997 up to today.
-
Originally posted by Samuel Lee:
Ok, but what it is is still a majority of Singaporeans, except the maybe 20% of the hardcore oppositions supporter who will still support CSJ and his SDP, is willing to vote for PAP or spoilt their vote. And all these is caused by CST and CSJ, both caused some shame to the oppositions in the different perspectives. (Remember, even CST managed to remain his seat, his whopping majority of 69% votes in 1991 had drastically fallen to no more than 56% in 1997 up to today.
It will be safer for you not to indulge with numbers as matters stand.CSJ is a non-factor in the political equation until he gets out of his bankruptcy.
SDP under a new leadership and with its role as a public educator and champion to the political rights of Singaporeans will soon draw new favor - when one consider the dismal performance of the two successful Alternative Parties in Parliament - and their role to protect Singaporeans' political rights and interests.
Reform Party will be the next political party to watch and it will make a few surprises on its own merit.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
It will be safer for you not to indulge with numbers as matters stand.CSJ is a non-factor in the political equation until he gets out of his bankruptcy.
SDP under a new leadership and with its role as a public educator and champion to the political rights of Singaporeans will soon draw new favor - when one consider the dismal performance of the two successful Alternative Parties in Parliament - and their role to protect Singaporeans' political rights and interests.
Reform Party will be the next political party to watch and it will make a few surprises on its own merit.
Maybe, but that is true for 2001. 1997 is considered he being lucky as he managed to get 34 or 38% of the votes in Macpherson?? I really wonder what if he went for another SMC -- will he get like 22% of the votes, same as Ling?
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
There are many bloggers on the internet equipped with a loose lip and a clit for a brain.It will be prudent for you to learn to be more circumspect with the details offered, and take all that come your way with a pinch of salt to be acutely discerning in filtering out what is clearly speculatively controversial and derogatory of anyone..
Too much hot air can surely get one into trouble, especially when you will prefer to accept such views and proudly repeat the same hot air as your own.
You got tits for brains like hum7030 and clitoris for mouth.You only got hot air and no ideas.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
I guess no more newsworthy stuff so dig out some old stories and create some propoganda.
Why never do some anniversary piece on the limping MS escape instead?
You get the picture.
LOL,true.
I believe it is another PAP's plot to discriminate the opposition party members again.
-
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
You got tits for brains like hum7030 and clitoris for mouth.You only got hot air and no ideas.
Yes, your readers can surely believe in the ability of a "zwei-siao-Hog" to speak from its ‘clitoris’ - when its ‘Labia Majora’ and ‘Labia Minora’ are sewn up for the impetuous loose lips that create all the loose talk.How did a "zwei-siao-Hog" come to know that tits have brains ?
Could such a belief come about from the hours of feeding on your mother's tis that spurred you to believe that your brain rest in the tits ?
Sadly for all that your mother had done - you will proudly insist on being such an accomplished ‘mother fucker’ (*1)
Should anyone doubt your ability to know what 'hot air' is about ?
Surely, no one will doubt your understanding about having "no idea" - in the obvious manner that you have shown yourself to be one all through this period ? .
Do you need to repeatedly make your expertise so embarrassingly obvious ?
-
Originally posted by Howlheje:
LOL,true.
I believe it is another PAP's plot to discriminate the opposition party members again.
so true.
-
Now Mdm Chiam See Tong is part of a PAP plot, ah?
-
to me the spat is so silly and uncalled for at a time like this.
It makes me go hmmmmmm...... what is the REALity?
If only CST debated more in the house to contribute more to the country.
To be fair, he did contributed. But if only more.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
Now Mdm Chiam See Tong is part of a PAP plot, ah?
Perhaps no,but the PAP ministers are using a magnifying glass to enlarge the dispute between various opposition party members.
And yes,it is despicable n unhonorable for the PAP to do that.
-
Where is the $130,000 raised by Chiam?
Can CHEE SOON JUAN tell us how did he spend the $130,000 raised by
Chiam? Mrs Chiam said in opening post:
也失去他多年æ�¥ä¸ºæ°‘主党辛苦ç¹å¾—çš„13万元æ�� 款。
What was agenda of Chee by expel ling Chiam from SDP ?
Chee could demoted Chiam from Secretary General to a ordinarymember. I think this punishment could be big enough for the Founder
of SDP. But Chee was so eager to kick Chiam from SDP and
reported this expellion to Speaker of Parliament on the same day!
Chee asked Speaker what to do next!
I think Chee either wanted he was the replacement or he wanteda By Election!!
Chee accomplished what PAP could not achieve: Mrs Chiam
Mrs Chiam said PAP failed to defeat Chiam in several elections.
But by show of hands, Chee and his gang just kicked the Founder
out of SDP.
“人民行动党å�ƒ 辛万苦è¦�æŠŠæˆ‘çš„ä¸ˆå¤«å‡»è´¥ï¼Œå‡ æ¬¡å¤§é€‰éƒ½ä¸�æˆ�功。å�¯æ˜¯æ°‘主党大笔一挥，ä¸�è´¹å�¹ç�°ä¹‹åŠ›å°±åŠžåˆ°äº†ï¼Œå¸®äº†è¡ŒåŠ¨å…šä¸€ä¸ªå¤§å¿™ã€‚”
vv
-
Good job done by the resident noisy pussy - fanning the ambers when the fire has been doused.
What is the agenda of the noisy pussy in bringing out a moot point that was settled 17 years ago ?
Is Mdm Chiam attempting to win sympathy votes when she is bankrupt of any ideas in dealing with the political challlenges in tangling with the PAP ?
With CST planned retirement from politics - it is obvious that she needs the $15,000 a month MP allowance to continue with her lifestyle that CST has been collecting every month.
Sadly, she and CST seems to have forgotten that the $15,000 is not considered a MP's wage but allowance from the State to help with the MP's expenses incurred in running the affairs in the constituency.
Are those expenses now being paid from the collection of conservancy charges and not from the MP's allowances ?
Mdm CST should look again to find if she is up to the task to represent the interests of the residents in Potong Pasir when CST can hardly make any dent against the hard hide of LKY and his PAP - which surely will need sharp big spurs to dig into their sides.
-
Just go down to the bare basics.
Walk out, or be thrown out.
There are lots of broughaha for all the wayang on both sides.
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
Where is the $130,000 raised by Chiam?
Can CHEE SOON JUAN tell us how did he spend the $130,000 raised by
Chiam? Mrs Chiam said in opening post:
What was agenda of Chee by expel ling Chiam from SDP ?
Chee could demoted Chiam from Secretary General to a ordinarymember. I think this punishment could be big enough for the Founder
of SDP. But Chee was so eager to kick Chiam from SDP and
reported this expellion to Speaker of Parliament on the same day!
Chee asked Speaker what to do next!
I think Chee either wanted he was the replacement or he wanteda By Election!!
Chee accomplished what PAP could not achieve: Mrs Chiam
Mrs Chiam said PAP failed to defeat Chiam in several elections.
But by show of hands, Chee and his gang just kicked the Founder
out of SDP.
vv
But Chee was so eager to kick Chiam from SDP and reported this expellion to Speaker of Parliament on the same day!
Chee asked Speaker what to do next!I think Chee either wanted he was the replacement or he wanted a By Election!!
Nope. I think what Chee is doing is just go according to standard procedures, but maybe demote to an ordinary member is a suitable punishment, since Chiam did wrong as well apart of Chee, as said by Sin Kek Tong and the other SDA guy on Wanbao.
But mark my words, with such incidents, I doubt Chiam can win in a GRC contest, regardless on Mah or Wong's seat. Neither can SDP send anybody to the parliment, and even a risk of losing deposit when it is involved in a 3 cornered fight, or garnered less than 25% of the votes, so long as it is leaded by Chee.
