The P65 Blog

170 Responses to ““Damned if you do, damned if you don’t””

1. Robert Tan
   December 2nd, 2009 at 8:54 pm

   All these changes to the political landscape would not have been necessary if the Elections Department had not come under the control of the PAP PM’s office.And that the PAP did not come up with the Group Representative Constituency (GRC) System of course.

   The Elections Department has to be independent to be fair to all political parties.There is a need for an Independent Elections Commission.You see, in Singapore, Elections are not Free and Fair.

   This is coming from a retired Civil Servant mind you.I am very much older than you and I was at the steps of City Hall during seperation.I have seen Singapore change over the years.And I have Grandchildren.Where were you all this while?

   Fredric Fanthome, you are a new citizen to this country and you probably do not understand or have no semblence of the dynamics behind and the history of the Group Representative Constituency (GRC) System.

   You are one of the 4500 new Grassroots leaders from overseas that the PAP has recruited and probably the 1000 that the PAP has recruited recently.My grandfather migrated to this region when it was a British Colony.We lived through history.

   Why is a new Citizen schooling us Singaporeans on how the country should be run?

   You have probably no clue about the Defamation Suits that the PAP exclusively uses to silence and bankrupt its’ detractors.

   Are you aware of the Internal Security Act that the PAP uses to put its’ opponents behind bars?Do you know that we have the longest held political prisoner in the world?

   Are you aware of the constant redrawing of boundaries at every elections?It is called Gerrymandering.

   Do you know that there is a sizable amount of Singaporeans who have never voted in their lives?Do you know that it was mooted at one point to give the educated and chosen few two votes to dilute the masses?

   Are you aware that the PAP government gives a cash ‘gift’ during the elections?Isn’t this vote buying?

   Or threatening citizens with the withdrawal of the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP)?Isn’t this Pork Barrel politics?

   Why can’t the PAP release the Electoral Boundaries in advance?Why does it only release it within days of Nomination Day?Is it because it wants an advantage of almost 5 years on walking the ‘ground’?

   Why can’t the PAP release the dates of the General Election?

   When will this continuous attempt to manipulate the already opaque and unfair electoral process ever end?

   Were you in Singapore to see the reportage during elections?I have seen countless elections, I have even manned Polling Stations.We are very far from having a free and pluralistic media that reports fairly on all contesting parties.

   Unfortunately, as long as the rules and regulations continue to be changed to benefit the PAP, elections in Singapore will remain a charade staged by the ruling party to hoodwink the people once every four or five years.

   Non Partisan Retired Civil Servant
   P.S. Please do not sue me for defamation.

2. sgcynic
   December 2nd, 2009 at 11:45 pm

   Amen, Robert.

   Sgcynic
   Labelled as one of the “anonymous hordes online”
   If we are indeed a “horde”, post-election day will be celebrations day. Merdaka!

3. To Increase Your Dwindling Viewership
   December 3rd, 2009 at 1:03 am

   Some comments from the “anonymous hordes online”.

   heathers:

   MediaCorp is state owned, I don’t expect objective reporting from them.

   For example, during 2006 GE, how often do u see the camera pointed towards a crowded WP rally, or any other rally by opposition parties on TV?

   Journalists reporting on the site of opposition parties almost always stand before rundown kopitiams with drunks in the background, while those reporting on site of PAP almost always report before an uplifting environment. It could be a blatant attempt at swaying public confidence, could simply be coincidence. Who knows?

   You’ll have to know those who work in the news and current affairs dept for MediaCorp to know what exactly it is they do.

   Alp:

   Cool what? How about cooling down their outrageous pay check and doing the right things for the citizens of singapore? Not initate another pathetic, futile attempt to bait the attentions of the hip-hop scenery.

   Seriously speaking, whatever they are doing right now isn’t helping the citizens on the common ground. It’s doing more harm than good. And, I believed they know it as well. Those past events that happened irreversibly have become one of the biggest scandals in sg history. It’s a sad thing to hear how many people do actually know and care about it.

   Precisely, we need politicians who are sincere to serve on the ground without any form of prejudice, not a jumbo pay check delivered on golden wheels to justify their committment to serve.

   Fantagf:

   I believe there is something up their sleeves when they make this decision. PAP will never do anything that will not benefit themselves.

   “Suka suka” – normally election is held once in 4 to 5 years, this time they arrange it to be 6 years after the last election. hahaha, perhaps they have done some risk calculations and know that next year may not be a good year for them to win. Afterall they are not putting in their utmost effort during this worst global recession to help Singaporeans cope, instead they keep increasing charges to add on financial burden for the people.

   Was watching the news on TV. Sylvia Lim was interviewed on this topic. Unfortunately, Mediacorpse did not show the full reponse from Sylvia, they cut her off. Well, if Sylvia is a PAP member she will not treated such. Mediacorpse is practising double standard. Pity our oppositions in Singapore, they have to work with limitations, unfair treatment from the ruling party.

   lhl, the sicko was smiling when he talked about not letting public knows the date of the election. This is the one and only country whose politicians are so damn bloody hush hush about election date. A leopard never changes its spots. “Jiang shan yi gai ben xing nan yi”.

   charlize:

   Wait they use it as an excuse to disqualify opposition candidates.

   Maybe on that day, one candidate eating at the kopitiam suddenly talk about politics with the kopitiam owner and he gets kicked out of the election.

   Or a candidate forgots to take off his party logo T shirt and goes downstairs to buy bread and then he also gets disqualified.

   Remember, one person standing alone doing nothing can also be considered as illegal assembly.

   Go figure.

   BJK:

   What “cooling off” day is PM talking about when our GE over the decades have not been hot. Usually, our GEs were quiet and unexciting as many electorates were uncontested. I can only think of the advantages the ruling party can make during the one day before voting ie maybe for damage control on certain topics oppositions have highlighted or gain some grounds through our pro-mass media.

   rockfire:

   What is the purpose behind this cool off period ? sound like girl having their period.

   if i am going to vote i have make up my mind long time, Who to vote i don’t need any cool off day,

   Are the garmen going to give me free massage to cool me down so i can make right decision on who to vote?

   Imagine i change my mind on who to vote during the voting day itself due the election office can’t answer my question.

   My question is” Why u need to write down my serial number on my voting slip”

   Answer ” it for record purpose” The answer don’t make me happy.

   So i say to myself go and die if they want to know who i vote for. Guys out there, Don’t care what they do, the main we choose who we like. End of the story,

   How good u try to sheild/hide your gold, oneday people will find out too..

   Lionnosy:

   Haha.. Tricky Dick is at work here.

   Everybody will have to shut their mouth on that day… or face fines / imprisonment, except for The Straits Times…

   ..which will have articles singing heavenly praises about their puppet master, the MIW.

   You have to admit it, the MIWs are forward planners… and will do anything to win an election / keep their jobs.

   Afterall, they have to protect their Million $$$$ salaries, you know.

   http://www.yeocheowtong.com/Salaries.html

4. Here's how not to be damned
   December 3rd, 2009 at 1:49 am

   Abolish GRC. No one will damn it except the PAP themselves.

5. Purpose of Opposition
   December 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 am

   Frederic does not seem to understand the role of opposition. Such an important basic operation of a decent or civil society and he can be so ignorant about it to the point of writing this article. And this is the type of people the PAP loves.

6. Views of 'Wilyy Nilly' from the ST Forum
   December 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 am

   Thank you Mr Robert Tan, a true Singaporean.And also ”To Increase Your Dwindling Viewership”.

   More comments from the “anonymous hordes online”.This is from the Straits Times.

   augustus_cesar:

   When PAP cannot take the heat, it legislates changes in its favour. Electoral campaign is not a robotic process devoid of true passion and emotion such as that witnessed in PAP rallies. A cooling-off day will allow the PAP-controlled media to run amok with indirect campaigning on behalf of the PAP to alter public minds, and to allow PAP to practically have the last say.

   Any lingering expectation of Lee Hsein Loong bearing a more manly stature of leadership than his 2 predecessors should now be laid to eternal rest. Cowards simply do not make good leaders.

   dustmask:

   The PAP always changes tactics to suit their cause by stifling the opposition to using methods that they (the opposition) are strong in. Previously, they banned campaigning on the internet when they realised the opposition was savvy in that front. In the last election, the WP attracted huge crowds at the Serangoon Stadium on the eve of polling day and that caused a shift in the %age of votes in favour of the opposition (although WP didn’t win). Now, rallies, door-to-door visits, etc. are not allowed on the eve of polling day. Wow, first time in the world – Uniquely Singapore!

   darkestknight:

   Generally sick of this “false” democracy that we are living in. With so many walkovers, and unfair election practices, no wonder the government rules us with an iron hand. Democratic in name, communist in fact!

   But, amidst all these acts of cowardice and unfair competition, the extra day off is extremely good piece of news! For any constituency that is “walk-ed (all) over”, it means 2 days’ off, which easily translate to a possible short trip overseas.

   jamesng27 :

   I had a very strong feeling that this cooling day will also be the day when some assistance packages.enters our bank account…$$ money come $$ come

   gordonli:

   I am very very sceptical about this proposal, and indeed all changes to our political system in general. Instead, PM Lee should focus on REAL changes such as abolishing the GRC system, enshrining in law the prohibition of pork-barrel politics, taking the electoral committee (which draws constituency boundaries) out of the PM’s Office, reducing the electoral deposit required per electoral candidate, and making our presidency a truly elected one where the electorate has CHOICES!

   richesse:

   They do not have to worry about me having to ‘cool-off’ or insult my intelligence as I have already long decided how to vote in the next GE. Election gimmicks galore, pfff!! Why not just spare the charade and make every constituency a 20-person GRC eh? Oh I forgot, there has to ‘exist a form of fairness’ in our political arena. The tooth fairy must exist then…

   Anyone needs a change of air around here?

   handy2008 :

   Why introduce a rule and use the excuse that other countries have this rule, we should then introduce it. And when it come to welfare or benefits that other countries have and not, the excuse is Singapore should not follow blindly. This cooling day benefits the ruling party than the opposition. But by now, most Singaporeans have made up their mind who they should vote in the next general election.

7. More Views of the 'Willy Nillies' from the Straits Times
   December 3rd, 2009 at 2:20 am

   augustus_cesar:

   It is a relief to see that the Singapore press is living up to its label as a PAP-controlled stooge with the article “In some places, curbs are in place for 3 days, By Nur Dianah Suhaimi”

   In MANY places, INDEPENDENT electoral commissions (who are not structured under the Prime Minister’s Office or President’s Office) oversee the fairness of elections. Is there one in this city? Does this paper have the courage to mention the subject?

   This just about presages what can be expected from the media during the so-called cooling-off day.

   david222 :

   hmm……… I wonder which party is the one that is really feeling the heat? Think about it, we voters don’t need to be pampered for an extra day to cool down….. did we ask for it or it’s just someone’s imagination? it may be you who needs it more

   vbauthor :

   The thot that PAP still need to change the rules to have advantage puzzles me. It sounds like Tiger Woods asking me (one who hardly know much abt golf) to give him handicap.???

   Juosterr :

   One day is not going to dramatically alter the outcome. However this time, I believe PAP will take a beating owing to the foreigners issue. Singaporeans are at their extreme levels of frustration due to import of foreigners which has robbed them of the rice bowl. It is a pity to stand singaporeans virtually on streets without jobs as all jobs are taken away by cheap foreigners. and the govt insists that it ti wll favour foreigners. All these will probably find reflection in the election result.

   checkpoint :

   One day cooling period before polling day.

   Whelther it is good or bad for the PAP or the oppositions parties, let us all wait and see.

   But if this is a non-political issue, why is the Prime Minister taking it upon himself to make the announcement?
   The PAP is simply asking for trouble.
   Can the general public be blamed for reacting so cynically.

   The line between the PAP and the civil service has became too grey. And even if the Election DEparftment were to make the announcement, the public’s thinking and reaction will not be too much different.

   Talking about a level; playing field. Just fat hope for those contesting on an opposition ticket.

   lobo_respawned :

   During the polling day, channel 5, 8 and U … maybe even Okto will show all kinds of documentaries highlighting how far Singapore has come (hinting at PAP’s PAST glories). Maybe in the evening, there will be something on how some people are jailed for decades for no reason… hinting at PAP’s …. I mean the govt’s powers.lolz

8. Even More Views of the 'Willy Nillies' PAP 65 Blog
   December 3rd, 2009 at 2:46 am

   To continue the tradition from the above posters,I give you more comments from the “anonymous hordes online”.

   bornloser: They only know how to win with the opposition’s hands tied. Can’t they learn to fight fair and square and find out what their real support is?
   You end up with ministers who give all the bullshit figures to the public; whose forte is to find excuses for their shortcomings instead of doing the real business of serving the people.They are giving their butts to be kicked.

   ErniesUrn: Our PM only seems to have only acheive to plant seeds on doubt on the electorate with this ‘cooling off’ gimmick.

   Seriously, why do I have such a cowardly PM. Can’t he just be a man and hold elections free and fair without twitching the rules each and everytime GE comes.Worse, not everyone gets to vote everytime. What kind of democratic country is this?!Dissapointing display of leadership. He is loosing the populist vote.

   Get real: How do you and the Government mysteriously discover that for some ghostly unknown reasons all voters need a cooling off period to decide on their votes? Clairvoyant or mind readers of citizenry or are we all irrational like you?.

   Changing the rules of the game evidenced desperation and lack of confidence of the incumbent – NOT the other way around you claimed.

   The opposition can take on them any day – barring electoral witchcrafts or chicanery. We seen that in GRC already, haven’t you?

   Jim: The government is very creative in introducing such changes. However I wish they should be using their creativity and energy in formulating better public policies and other measures to help ordinary citizens instead!

   Rainnix: Having a “cooling-off” day is telling opposition that it is the day where PAP can campaign, oppositions cannot. Why is that this rule change is before the election when it should be AFTER the next election?Is Lee Hsien Loong so afraid to lose?

   Neil Bishop: Of course LHL (aka Dear Leader, aka Larry son of Harry) is afraid to lose. If the PAP were thrown out of office the new government would be able to publicise (1) the true extent of the Temasek and GIC losses, (2) the exact undeclared shareholding of the Lee Family in Temasek and (3) the true amount pumped into Temasek and GIC by the PAP to bolster returns over the past 30 years. The Lee Family cannot afford the truth about their mismanagement and maladministration to become public knowledge.

   Dear One & All…: Please go to this website video and see if you see any parallel and connective spins with The Truth About Dubai’s Shiek’s EXCESS in his Kingdom!!!… Especially by his HIGHLY Paid minister od development in answer to Western INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST!!!…

   And know WHY Liesky is so so afraid of investigative journalism!!!… Because he always have something to hide from us. Do True to Goodness and Honesty people… EVEN National leaders… need to hide… with GARBAGE VERBAGE???
   Please SEE and Hear for yourselves people of Singapore…
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUW9MWLIQYw

9. Further Views of the 'Willy Nillies' for the discerning readers of the PAP 65 Blog
   December 3rd, 2009 at 2:51 am

   Oh yes, more comments from the “anonymous hordes online”.

   Sad : There is no elements of truths that i can see in sg elections.
   Media is biased. If you are democratic as claim, then everybody should get to vote. Sg media should be independent. Why change the level playing field? Most people make up their mind, of course, but the fear factor changes that. Elections is about selection a good MP to speak up for them and not a freak event. Speak up for jobs, for housing, for unemployment support, min pay, for freedom of speech, freedom of expression.

   Gerrymandering PAP: Yes they can do whatever they want, re-sizing, re-zoning, cooling period, maybe in future, one man two votes, graduate more votes, mother with more kids more votes…..etc. many of us have long decided what we should do in the next election in order to change this fake democratic system. They were good in the past, (with all respect to the first generation pioneers); coping well enough at present, but past glory does not guarantee continue success. Post LKY era need to be different. Do not worry that only they will have talent, because once you have established opposition in future, there will be talent on both sides. Just citing one of the examples, even though WP is still relatively small, Silvia is its rare found excellent individual. More will emerge if we citizen make it happen. Borrow a phrase, Time for Change.

   fpc: PAP didn’t fight back to win votes vigorously because they didn’t want to.They prefer to change rules to benefit themselves.And they are too fat to run anyway.

   If the most known “pappy loved” is SO AFFABLE, TRUTHFUL and SINCERE like he was with his 1st Gerneration of “OLD-GUARDS”…. :

   Why then MUST he play PUCKS with the GE System? Talks enuendos, cliches and spin like a FALLING “garseng” top that has runned out of “spinning momentum”???…

   When one has been truthfully like he used to behave more humbly with the likes of TOUGH SUBSTANCE OLD-GUARDS Dr. GKS, TCC, the late S. Rajaratnam, etc who WERE “NO-PUSHOVERS… THEY in fact TEMPERED him to a level of reality humility. But for some 25 years without them… he’s been faltering and scrambling to create CRAFTY-TRICKS as “wools to pull over oureyes”… “Haoxes to mislead us”… “Boomerang” swirls to spin our brains into “giddy” submissions that pappy ‘IS’ still the best like in “Freak Election Results” without even being able to define it…

   HOW GOOD IS HE and for WHAT HAH???… iT SHOWS DOESN’T IT!!!

   ByebyePAP: simple take home message:

   NEVER VOTE FOR PAP COS EVEN THEY HAVE NOT CONFIDENCE OF WINNING

   Sinkapore: It is rally IMPOSSIBLE to be expecting to vote the PaPies out of power BUT remember that the core of the problematic equation is the famiLEE, with them gone, PaPies or no PaPies, even if they remain in power, they will be at war internally, their demise is inevitable.

   So basically what LHL is aiming to do with all his tricks is to ensure that he and his father(ie: LHL & LKY) will remain in power so that GIC, TH and others’s dirt will remain UNDER THE CARPET.

   As long as one of them is in power, the famiLEE is safe. LKY is now MM, so removing LHL should do the trick but surely he will remain in a strong GRC to ensure that he gets returned to power.

   If accidentally a freak election caused his GRC to fall, then calling in the army or framing the opposition will be the next SURE BET, not the slightest doubt about that!

10. SingSong
    December 3rd, 2009 at 5:29 am

    As long as GRC stays, how can anything the PM does be for the good of the country and the people?

    As long as Straits Times and other MSM are for nation building, how can alternative views be heard?

    Why must the PM always come out with something that is so irrelevant? Did we have a problem of chaos prior to election day? Were there threats of heat? Why when there are so many other issues, he must propose something so alien?

11. pimpmaster
    December 3rd, 2009 at 9:54 pm

    Someone is out-of-touch…..so deeply.

    It is strange that folks like Fredreric, journalists and all, consider the idea of having pseudonyms as an alien and unacceptable idea. But of course, they call it “anonymous” nowadays. I’m not sure if it just his lack of sophistication, or lack of education. I guess it’s both.

    It’s not a mystery. If there is one, it’s the reasoning behind the “cooling off”. Fredric, with all his talk, can’t even explain the need for it.

    Bottomline is – PAP only manages to get 60% of votes ,yet it holds 98% of seats. Even Lee Hsien Loong almost got booted out of his own GRC by a thin 1% margin.

    Whatever the opposition does on the eve of election works. It’s an insult to disclose WHAT IT IS to Fredric. I’d recommend that he get out of the office once in a while and discover for himself what is happening in the middle class areas of Singapore….and what exactly they do in the eve of election.

    Then you’d understand why PAP wants to prohibit campaigning on that important night.

12. sgcynic
    December 3rd, 2009 at 10:13 pm

    “I don’t see how the 24 hour cool-off period is designed to bolster the PAP and damage the opposition. Elections – at least where there is no vote-rigging and the voters are not bought or commandeered – as happens in several “democratic” countries- are not won on the eve of polling nor even in the 10-day campaign period – but in the 5-6 years prior to the day of voting – on the basis of progress achieved by the incumbent and alternatives on offer by the challengers.”

    Frederick, I would love to hear what progress has been achieved by the incumbent in the 4 years since the last election. I’m sure the “anonymous hordes online” would be able to “find, willy-nilly something to nit-pick and criticize”. The mature and educated electorate would be able to make a reasoned comparison of both viewpoints.

13. Reservist Officer
    December 4th, 2009 at 12:24 am

    PAP Recruit Frederic,

    Have you served National Service or currently in Reservist? What cooling off period are you are talking about?Explain young man.

    In war, is there a cooling off period?Do our generals take cooling off period when the enemy is within sight?

    Or has the general loss control of his soldiers?

    Don’t come into my country and tell me and my brethren how we should do things.I am my fellow commissioned officers will put you and your punk friends in place recruit.

    Duty.Honour.Country.

    We Serve Singapore.

    Don’t forget that.And not some personal interest of certain individuals.Don’t equate your party as our country.

    And recruit, I will not defend you .And my coy will not defend you.You better go find your own protection.And get some insurance.

    Don’t you even try to school my fellow Singaporeans.

14. Simi Lan Jiao Cool Period
    December 4th, 2009 at 2:12 am

    Are you saying that people who do not vote for the PAP are unreasonable?You do not believe in Democracy?Oh yes, new recruit, its Leetrocacy now for you right new PAP slave.PAPpymendering.It’s the PAP style of Gerrymandering.Anyhow call people unreasonable.

    Please elaborate on the overall good of the proposals being laid?The PAP is not as confident as before going into the coming elections.Thats why PM say this overseas.mas Selamat disappear, took him like 2 weeks to say something.This fella somemore a general.You know winsston choo or not boy?

    The PAP already redraws boundaries,jails its opponents,sues and bankrupts them,controls the press and has this GRC concept to get weak MPs into parliament.

    If I have qualifications and have good language skills I will surely put myself as candidate.But I provide my lorries to support.My family and clan all change shirt now.I am a businessman and when my family gets hurt by policies I know how to hurt back.

    My neighbour get evicted.My friends lose job get retrenched.Your Temasek loose money.My CPF dunno when I can take.Anyhow suka suka raise bills.You think what?We SIngaporeans all very stupid.Give old man chance.Simple.Now different.

    I know all seats being contested so don’t think only PAP have manpower.I am my fellow bosses will provide labour to make sure no New Citizens like yourself try to impose you rule over my Singaporeans.

    I got local indian friends.All my makkal.Anakku Ahda Theriyum.Unnale Moodiyuma?We all buddy.You Indian from India think you so great?Learn a thing or two about humility.
    Want to create divide with my indian and malay brother ah?Atas?Kepada Pisang.Never do NS want to talk so much.Wayang Kulit PAP.

    No wonder PAP very How Lian.It’s the How Lian Party.It’s your party.But PAP forget we are the Grassroots.the real clans and communities.

    And yes, PAP may have a 10000 Foreigners brigade now to join them as activists and grassroots leaders to sing to their tune and kick out the Singaporeans.And they have this Foreigners brigade to tell Singporeans how to behave and vote?Hello, PAP you forget that we used to support you and now you kick us aside.

    I won’t forget how our favourite branch secretary was overlooked for a post.He work so hard and do your every bidding and you bring some young punk.Now young punk is ebverywhere and got no time for residents.Are you sure or not.Now you send all this young fellas come to engage us?

    Hello Officer ask you.I just NTC cert.I ask you.We street.

    Have you served National Service or currently in Reservist?

    Please elaborate on the sensibility of this proposal and don’t jump on the Obama bandwagon.The PAP was supporting the Republican tune during the presidential elections.Everybody also know.Now change tune.

    What ‘hullabaloo’?You guys make boo boo.Need to change the rules so scared for what?Got balls or not?You balls grow hair already?Still need papa to take care of you issit?Still need father around.Let him retire go enjoy and play with the grandkids la.

    ‘The usual vitriol by the anonymous hordes online who randomly spray venom at every government move from behind pseudonyms.’?

    So PAP, I am not anonymous, I am Huat and I sit at Tekka/ Zhu Jiao.Look for initials GPK.Bring your hokkien friends along.You go around the market and ask the drink stalls owner.Please pay me a visit.I am Singaporean.Got a lot of sound and fury.

    And I know politics.On the Ground politics.I am from the Street.Remember GPK.

    So stop spitting your nonsense.Damn this,damn that, Damn you.

    So reply to me.Put time put place.You think I am scared issit?

15. pee65 bravery
    December 4th, 2009 at 12:08 pm

    “…not to mention the usual vitriol by the anonymous hordes online who randomly spray venom at every government move from behind pseudonyms.”

    Sometimes, it’s better to hide one’s real stupidity by using pseudonyms. Try it, Fredric Fanthome.

16. Fredric Fanthome
    December 4th, 2009 at 3:00 pm

    Hi All,

    Apologies, I had a problem with my email and so did not see that there had been so many comments to this post, and have been a little tied up as well (courtesy the Penguin Book Sale where I spent all of yesterday getting awesome bargains) so I have not had a chance to read through what are certainly lengthy responses.

    I don’t intend to to respond to every poster – especially those that have simply copy pasted some one else’s remarks here or simply wish to hurl insults for the sake of it – but to those that have taken the trouble to write what they think negative or positive – do give me a little time to revert as currently I am a little tied up. I will respond for whatever it is worth by tonight or latest tomorrow.

    Regds,

17. local guy
    December 4th, 2009 at 7:14 pm

    Please let your audeince know what is to simply “hurl insults for the sake of it”. Why do you think the posters here don’t hurl insults at the opposition this time?

18. Abdul Rahim Bin Osman
    December 4th, 2009 at 7:34 pm

    Wow, good points to see on all posts.

    First of all, I must say that desmond lim of the SDA should not perceived PAP has no confidence.Rather he should look at himself first before commenting such a silly statement.Argue with good solution.

    Dame this n dame that, is nothing new.It’s the human instinct to dame whatever it’s new or disadvantage to them.PAP n Opposition always dame one another so it’s fair, argue with facts and good solution for all to see n hear, before we go to the Polls.

    Secondly, the Opposition should look at this issue as a plus factor if they workout well for this change.Fact finding for advantages must take off.

    Thirdly,Fredric Fanthome must respond all posts whether negative or positive which I believe worth reading for everyone here.You write to respond comment, so just reply it with good reasoning.

    So good day ladies n gentleman.

19. Stop Gerrymandering PAP
    December 4th, 2009 at 10:15 pm

    Looks like the PAP has lost touch with the ground when reasonable comments are regarded as ”hurl(ing) insults for the sake of it”.

    It’s not a two way channel anymore.They won’t listen to Singaporeans anymore.Now they have their foreigner brigade telling us what to do.People who do not sacrifice for this country calling us Willy Nilly and what not.

    I for one, and like many other of my reservist division mates will not fall in when there is a freak election result and the tanks are called in.The people of Singapore have spoken.We had reservist and the tension was there for all to see.Even our officers are not happy with a lot of things.The men, well that’s obvious isn’t it.

    I am clearly seeing the picture now why they are bringing in the foreigners to replace the Singaporeans.What next, the PRs get to vote in elections?The New Singaporeans get 2 votes?

    Is it true that they stuffed ballot boxes in Cheng San 1997?The PAP is crooked.The Gerrymandering has to stop.They have enriched themselves enough.

20. Just a local guy
    December 4th, 2009 at 11:38 pm

    Its such a shame. We have sincere, loyal citizens willing to serve the people and the country, willing to do it the hard way, thats debating it out (Fredric calls it “damn it if you do, damn it if you don’t”), and willing to work side by side each other no matter what each individual’s ideals are and no matter what skin colour, but such loyal citizens never get the chance. I have come across many I consider will be good to serve in this way but they belong to opposite camps.

    I guess it is not about ideals anymore, it is about how much one can enrich oneself. I don’t believe Fredric, an educated and intelligent man does not accept others ideals but rather he does what he does to get ‘accepted’, to conform, to a certain group he aspires to be in for a reason. The reason or motivation is exactly what the PAP tells us clearly and blatantly – the money (millions of dollars).

    Do we really want people like this to have a say in our policies, nevermind leadership. I have no qualms about foreigners; in fact anyone from Amnesty UK might be good for our policy making.

21. Singapore Girl Next Door
    December 5th, 2009 at 12:23 am

    The cool off is a euphemism for censorship. If you read the provisions of this new law, it prohibits any form of campaigning and reporting on matters related to the election except by the mainstream media.

    Fredric, you and PAP have failed to explain why there is a need for this;

    except to say that those who are against it can’t form constructive arguments;

    it still does not explain lucidly the need for it.

    The fact you have to cite Obama clearly shows the veiled desperation to come up with justification.

    The PM’s rationale that things need to calm down is unbelievably childish.

    Do you and the PM honestly believe that people are driven only by stirred emotions? You said that voters are intelligent, but you advocate the law which is grounded on the premise that voters don’t vote logically.

    It is insinuating for the PAP to suggest and for you to bolster it that we vote the opposition (or at least some of them) only because our emotions got stirred by their emphatic speeches on the eve of election, and a day is needed for us to come to our senses.

    You then bootlick that we are logical, and therefore must support this law, because damn if we don’t.

    THIS IS THE MOST SHAMEFUL ARTICLE TOWARDS SINGAPOREANS I’VE READ IN MY ENTIRE LIFE.

22. Singapore Girl Next Door
    December 5th, 2009 at 1:08 am

    To quote an article on the same topic -

    “Rational choice is not made by meditating alone in the corner, facing a wall, and talking to no one but yourself. In a society where voters have little time to digest every bit of political news before campaigning day, reflection is most effective through a dialogue and not disengagement. When dialogue in an IT age takes place over the internet due to its ease of communication, information access, and information sharing, clamping down on that space deprives the voter of a crucial thought process.

    In principle, imposing silence will not lead to rational reflection as all sides of the argument must be heard, digested, and processed for it to happen. In practice, clamping down on online non-political society, including sociopolitical blogs, will do nothing but promote ‘emotional voting’ based on fear. Worse still, if it incites a reaction and voters irrationally turn against the establishment out of anger”

    http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/12/%e2%80%98cooling-off%e2%80%99-does-not-mean-%e2%80%98no-talking%e2%80%99/

    It does not take a genius to know what every VOTING SINGAPOREAN does on eve of election day (and note that many SINGAPOREANS eligeable to vote never had the chance to vote in their entire lives).

    And for Fredric’s sake – after the rallies, we all go online.
    But with the new censorship law called “cool off”, none of us including the opposition can do that anymore.

    It does not take a genius. Beejezzus. Our tax dollars pays for your salary.

23. What of the views of Chinese PAP65 members?
    December 5th, 2009 at 2:07 am

    I notice that the minority PAP members are bearing the brunt of netizens here.See how your Chinese PAP Masters know how to delegate the dirty grunt work to you guys.Just like how they get Tharman to clean up the Education and Finance Ministry.Get used to doing the ‘dirty work’.

24. JB
    December 5th, 2009 at 6:48 am

    What a silly article based on logical fallacies. the phantom might want to attend some logical reasoning classes before writing more silly pieces. He’s doing himself and his masters no favors.

25. Cooling down the PAP Milli Vanilli
    December 5th, 2009 at 9:20 am

    PAP is starting to look like an offshoot of the Communist Party of China.Looks like they are implementing strategies of their big brother from the lessons they learn on their numerous field trips.Now recruiting Maoist rebels from India.

    I think they want to replace North Korea as the favorite little brother.The PAP is really losing it.What next?Eligibility certificates for Opposition Candidates.Opposition Candidates must have a PSC scholarship.Opposition Candidates must be CEO of Fortune 500 company.Opposition Candidate must have Oxbridge or Ivy League qualifications.

    This calls for a referendum.I think we should declare Potong Pasir and Hougang independent states before they remove it from the electoral wards.Maybe both Potong Pasir and Hougang will be part of Tanjong Pagar,Marine Parade or Ang Mo Kio GRC.These three leaders are really asking for it.Think we Singaporeans are imbecile and asking us to bow down to some rhetoric from some New Singapore Citizen who has never even done a single day in BMT.

    I have a feeling that PRs will get 2 votes in the coming elections.They will do everything necessary to win an election.This is Gerrymandering to the extreme.Really no shame.

    Like that how to lead the country.Hoodwink here and hoodwink there.And use bombastic words like Milli Vanilli, Damn this,Damn That.

    Hello, PAP Weapons of Mass Destruction is the lawsuits,detainments,jailings,redrawing boundaries.Please don’t sully Obama’s name.Change is not PAP.Trying to defy logic.

26. Singapore Girl Next Door
    December 5th, 2009 at 1:25 pm

    Dear Fredric,

    Allow me, a Singaporean, to lecture you on history, as much gusto as you had in “educating” us.

    There are two PAPs – the past, and the present.

    The present PAP is so different and alien, they might as well be a different party.

    So no, despite this being the summation of what they do best, they can not continue to ride on the successes of the past, and demand gratitude from us.

    The cool off, if I am to believe the PM, is afterall intended for us to calm down and recollect on who exactly made Singapore it is today.

    But no – it’s not the him, nor is it the majority of folks who currently sit on the sturdy chairs of the Parliament.

    The legacy of the past can only bid them so much time. But there a new issues, new concerns which require new ideas. Not the same out-of-touch rhetoric which insists that we are reminded of the 60’s. That formula worked for several elections, but not anymore.

    We have recollected for decades, and know very well who exactly made this nation great. Many are dead, some are old, one is senile, and we have their respect.

    Cooling off. What a fancy name. And it could only come from a generation of leaders who have no respect for the sacrifices of many Singaporeans. We have given up so much, liberty, freedom and all so that they can have power and bring us out of the rut.

    If there is need to cool-off, and time for recollection, it’s the PM who needs it best.

    He needs to be reminded on the foundation of this nation, and that we, the next generation of Singaporeans, had come to demand that he should stop living in the past, and instead live up to our expectations.

27. Fredric Fanthome
    December 6th, 2009 at 3:32 am

    @ Robert Tan

    First of all, I have no intention to sue you for defamation! I would say yours is the kind of reply that, while disagreeing, and indeed, disagreeable to me, is welcome on this site – and frankly any debate. I do not have a problem with opposing points of view. However, you do make some rather damning assertions, and if I were you, I would ensure I had hard evidence before I accused anyone of vote-buying in Singapore.

    Now to the substance of your post – I would distil it down to two points – (a) I am new in Singapore, so I should shut up and not talk about something I have no idea. (b) I do not know the details of how unfair the political system is in Singapore.

    Well, to (a) I have to say – perhaps being new and not burdened by too much historical baggage is an advantage. The oldest people, with all due respect, do not necessarily make the best decisions, and sometimes it pays to listen to younger people. Age does not bestow on one the gift of infallibility.

    Further – the argument you use to some extent is that I ‘do not belong’ – this argument is of course repeated by several others – the perennial “have you served in the NS?”, “Where were you when xxy happened?” etc. Well, you know what – everyone one in Singapore is an immigrant, the son of immigrants or the descendent of immigrants – and not all that distant ancestors either. Where do you draw the line? The Chinese as a whole don’t really “belong” in SE Asia – they are immigrants too – at some point or the other. Once Singapore was an Indian satellite state – the name “Singa Pura” of which “Singapore” is an anglicized corruption is itself Sankrit for ‘place of the lion’. It’s not Chinese, it’s Indian. We can play the game of ‘don’t belong’ all the way back through the centuries – so just because you draw the line regarding immigration arbitrarily to suit yourself doesn’t mean you belong any more than I do. I AM a citizen, and whether you like it or not, I now belong. I have as much right to voice how I think the country should be run as you have. Where you have age and experience, I have youth and ideas. I don’t accept your position as superior to mine on any count.

    On whether (b) the election process is unfair – let me assure you, if your advanced age and experience has not already informed you of this fact – life is unfair. We just have to play with the cards we’re dealt. While I was not here in person during the occurrence of several of the instances you speak of, I have researched the history of Singapore in much depth, because I found it a fascinating case study of superlative leadership in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. I have read deeply and am familiar with the ISA , the defamation suits, and all the other stuff you refer to, including the fact that several Singaporeans have not voted.
    You have seen countless elections in Singapore. But have you seen elections anywhere else? Do you have any yardstick to compare the elections here by – or do you simply have some nebulous “ideal” that Singapore does not match?

    Do you have any idea what “unfair” means in any of the countries you might reference as “democracies”? Your points of the “unfair” tactics of the PAP seem to me almost pedantic when I consider that “unfair” in the Philippines means the massacre of the opposition candidate’s wife, daughter and 55 other people, including journalists and unfortunate witnesses by the incumbent’s militia. And that’s only what gets to the news – the usual political murders, vote commandeering and ballot box fraud are so par for the course they do not even get media attention. “Unfair” in India is the persecution of Muslims in Gujarat to the tune of over a thousand dead in riots, scores dead in other non-religious political violence and rampant vote-rigging. The connection between the mafia and politics in Taiwan – another bastion of “democracy” – complete with political murders is more than well documented. “Unfair” in Malaysia is being slapped with a sodomy suit and sentenced to years in jail for having the temerity to oppose the ruler.

    And you’re complaining about what? Defamation suits? Really, if I were in the opposition, I would rather be in Singapore than in any other Asian “democracy”. Life is unfair, but I daresay I would rather be sued for defamation than shot in the head.

    Now, certainly no system is perfect, and I am sure improvements can be made. But my point is that as far as real, on the ground systems go the democratic system here is a lot better than many others. And it is no charade – as far as I can see. Politics is not about charity. It was an uphill battle for the PAP to win power back in the 1950s and it was even harder task to ensure Singapore didn’t collapse post the 1965 split. I do not expect it to make it easy for any rival political party to win power from it. Any party that wants power should expect to have to fight a hard uphill battle. That’s the way it is in every state in every system. Why should Singapore be any different?

    Now as to the concrete suggestion of an Independent Election Commission and the elections department being fair to all parties – I would absolutely agree with this, and if this is not the case, then steps should be taken to make sure it happens soon. I do not buy the case for the abolition of the GRC though, because with a 77% population majority, that would mean that almost every political candidate would be Chinese – to appeal to the overwhelming Chinese majority – and other races would find meager political representation – a very dangerous situation in a tiny multi racial and religious Singapore. I think the GRC system is an innovative way to ensure a good mix in Parliament.

    Finally, coming back to the point I actually made in my post – which you actually did not even talk about – how does putting a “cooling off day” particularly disadvantage the opposition? I would say it makes no difference either way and with the steps being taken the next parliament will be more plural than the current one.

    You never did address these points.

    @sgcynic

    As the Spartans replied to Phillip II of Macedonia –
    “If”
    But in all fairness, if you win, why not? I would be happy to congratulate you.

    On your other point – what progress – that’s for you to judge, and for you to compare with the alternatives offered by the opposition candidates. My opinions are mine, and yours are yours. My point was that the decision reached by the voter would be based on factors in which the last 24 hours, cooled off or not, would be of insignificance compared to the balance of progress/alternatives as judged by the voter, so the cool-off period can hardly be “designed” to hurt the opposition.

    @”To increase your dwindling viewership” & “Views of Willy Nilly” from the ST Forum and others of the same ilk.

    Much obliged for increasing our dwindling viewership.
    However, if you have read any of my earlier threads and responses, you would have realized that I do not pay any attention to copy-pastes, especially since they were not responding to my post in the first place. If you actually write something original, and relevant to what I wrote, I will read it and respond. As it stands, it’s just wasted vitual real estate. The comments you copy pasted were not responding to me, and I don’t see any need to respond to them.

    @Purpose of the Opposition

    The role of the opposition is (or should be) not simply to oppose everything proposed by the government, but to provide constructive opposition – oppose what is felt to be harmful and support (even if you are in opposition) policies that are good. If this is considered ignorant as per your definitions, suit yourself. It’s not something I would lose sleep over.

    If you merely oppose every single policy on the grounds that everything proposed by the government must be by definition harmful, in my view that is a useless opposition because clearly they cannot be depended upon to exercise any sort of judgment. It is not possible that every single policy proposed by the government is wrong – especially so in the case of Singapore that has seen such a remarkable ascent in the living standards of it’s population in the hands of this government. Singapore is living proof that the government has got a LOT right.

    In my view the cool off day does not disadvantage the opposition unduly and hence I felt that the strong negative response was really not well thought out, but merely a knee-jerk reflexive and unintelligent response.

    @Here’s how not to be damned

    If you were an Indian or a Malay, you would probably not want the GRC abolished as you would lose almost all MPs of your race. You are clearly Chinese. Think beyond your race and more along the lines of what would work for all of Singapore. Singapore does not have the luxury of allowing a tyranny of the majority race. It could lead to social breakdown.

    @Pimpmaster

    First, I actually live in a very middle class area of Singapore – Bedok – not in some high class area on East Coast or Bukit Timah. I often eat at the local food court, I shop at NTUC, and I do volunteer work. And I talk politics with local folks at the kopi shop, at my bike servicing shop, at the park with the cleaners, at office with colleagues. I am not as out of touch as you would like to believe or portray. In fact I would say I am more in touch with the ground than a lot of Singaporeans, simply because I am interested in politics, whereas the vast majority of people I talk to, actually are not and are more than happy to let the government continue as it has and get on with their own lives.

    Second, I do not find pseudonyms alien or unacceptable. I simply find them cowardly. It is so easy to hide behind false identities and throw insults at someone else. It takes far more character to stand up for your words and be identified as the author so you can be held to account.

    As an example, I respect Andrew Loh of the TOC for posting comments here openly, while the rest of you who hide behind pseudonyms – especially those who both hide and throw insults about my lack of sophistication and education (I have an MBA from a business school that is 10 times tougher to get into than Harvard) I do not really give any regard to. When you have the guts to stand by your words, then you will get my attention.

    Next, if you know anything about politics, 60% of the popular vote is very strong mandate in a first-past-the-post system and can very well lead to a complete landslide victory given a weak opposition. If you are not aware, Barack Obama’s share of the popular vote in a win portrayed as a landslide with 349 electoral college votes compared to McCain’s 162 (68% of the Electoral College) was just 52%. Yes, just 52%, and against a powerful opposition . By comparison, a 60% share of the popular vote is a massive mandate and against a weak opposition will generally lead to a very high % of seats won. And are you counting the non-contested constituencies or only the contested ones? If you are counting all the seats in parliament to get your 98% figure, then you need to include 100% of the population of the uncontested constituencies in the PAP share.

    @Reservist Officer

    Elections are not war.

    And if you ever find yourself in a real war, (which, let’s be honest, you have never seen – it’s not like you’re one of several of my school friends who fought in an actual war – the 1999 Kargil war between India and Pakistan and saw real action), you will do what your commanding officer orders you to do.

    Personally, I don’t need physical protection, as anyone who knows me and has sparred with me at any of the several martial arts I practice, knows. I can more than take care of myself, against most unarmed or armed adversaries.

    @ Simi Lan Jiao Cool Period aka Hua who sits at Tekka/Zhu Jiao (!!)

    Your post is certainly very entertaining. But beyond that, I don’t think there’s anything it to respond to. I don’t even know if you read my post – I never said those who did not vote for the PAP are unreasonable.

    @pee65 bravery

    Obviously you are following your own advice.

    @local guy

    Hurling insults is for example calling me stupid, calling me someone lacking education etc. Given that there is no basis for such statements – i.e. the fact that you/others hold a different opinion does not mean I am necessarily stupid nor are you – such statements amount to insulting someone for the sake of it – more out of a desire to seem more forceful than a weak argument and poor articulation allows.

    Isaac Asimov said, “Violence is the last resort of the incompetent”

    Online like here, insults are the equivalent of violence. People resort to them when they have in fact nothing really strong enough to say, and are afraid that their positions will be shown up to be weak and without merit. In order to hide this they resort to trash talking.

    @Stop Gerrymandering PAP

    It’s like a broken record now “PAP has lot touch with the ground….”

    Well if it has, it will be clear in the next election.

    Anyway, I do not refer to everyone as hurling insults for the sake of it. But you have to admit several do. You have not, so while you remain anonymous, I do not include you in the mix of insult-hurlers. Why be so sensitive and think I am referring to you? If you read some of the other comments, there are people who have called me stupid, and other things for which they have no justification, really. That’s hurling insults, isn’t it?

    As for tanks being called after a freak election result – maybe you should take to being a novelist or a film-maker – you certainly have a knack for hyperbole. I don’t see myself or other “foreigners” every replacing you “bhumiputras” – isn’t that the term you would like to use, son of the soil, to differentiate yourself from me who is naturalised? And I have no intention to. I just see myself contributing in my way. And you are certainly welcome to contribute in your own.

    @Just a local guy

    I was referring to the fact that regardless what the Government does, the Opposition will find fault with it – whether in Singapore or overseas, and I took two examples of the same. It was not a commentary on constructive debate.

    I am certainly not in this for money. That is a grave insult and you owe me an apology. You have no idea what kind of person I am if you think I do what I do to get accepted and conform and for some sort of monetary reward. I suggest you get to know me first before you mouth off. You do not have the faintest idea about me, and you are engaging in blatant character assassination.

    And as for the people who I know who are within the PAP, they are sincere loyal citizens as far as I cant tell. Just because they are in the PAP doesn’t make them less loyal and sincere than those that in the opposition. Similarly just being in the opposition doesn’t confer noble ideals on you. There might well be people in the opposition for their own selfish ends.

    Notice, I am not passing any judgment on your character. I suggest in future you pay me the same courtesy.

    @Singapore Girl Next Door

    Most shameful article towards Singaporeans you have read in your entire life?!

    In that case
    (a) You haven’t read much, especially western articles critical of Singapore and
    (b) You have completely misread what I wrote – or at least misinterpreted it.

    First – I never said there was a need for the cool-off period. I am indeed completely indifferent to it – and would have thought so would anyone else be. What difference does it make if you cool off 24 hours or not? That’s why I found the strident response of the opposition to be knee-jerk. That was what I was talking about. As to the cool-off period itself – I personally don’t see its benefit one way or another – so I wonder why would the opposition be so certain that it was designed to harm them – that is what I was wondering about – perhaps you can lucidly explain, since you are so good at lecturing.

    If you read desperation into my reference to Obama – well, you read too much.

    You also read too much when you say I that I suggest that those who vote for the opposition vote out of stirred emotion. Where have I said it? When I referred to voters I said they would be intelligent enough to spot blatant misuse of media and also that they would make their decision weighing the progress delivered by the incumbent against alternatives offered by the opposition. Is that insulting? If so, I would really like to know what your idea of a reasonable voter is. Someone who does NOT judge the options offered? Someone who does NOT judge the progress delivered by the incumbent?

    Were you even reading what I wrote or did you just fly off the handle and draw all sorts of conclusions that I did not even write? I think you need to re-read what I actually did write and compare it with what you think I wrote. There appears to be a chasm between the two.

    About going online – I believe it was made clear that online conversations and chats and posting (except on official websites) would not and could not be policed. I hardly think that is a consideration – if you want to talk online – really that’s your private business. I doubt you will make your decision on the eve of elections, anyway…. But even if you do, private conversations are not the subject of this cool off period – official public campaigning is. The TOC article you pointed to appears to confirm the point that political discussions will not be banned during the cool off period. So how does this amount to censorship of political discussion? Again I think you’re reading a little too much.

    You’re last post was hardly a lecture on history as much as a statement of your disdain for the current leadership of Singapore. Well, you have a right to your opinion. There’s nothing really I have to say about that.

    I wonder though, where you got the impression I was “educating” you. I believe it was another self proclaimed “bhumiputra” like yourself (implying that I as a naturalised citizen was “less” than a son of the soil, a bhumiputra like him or you) who said I was “educating” your type. I certainly never claimed to be doing so, and I frankly have no intention to. I was commenting on what I thought was “much ado about nothing” on the subject of the cool-off period.

    @What of the view of Chinese PAP65 members

    Your petty post does not deserve a response.

    @JB

    You certainly belong to the club of those cowards who hurl insults, hiding behind pseudonyms.

    @Cooling down PAP Milli Vanilli
    Your post was certainly an entertaining read – but like Simi Lan’s, it does not appear there is anything in it that I need to respond to.

28. Singapore Girl Next Door
    December 6th, 2009 at 1:43 pm

    Dear Fredric,

    You have written a lengthy response but still failed to address the main inquiry – why do we need the cool-off period?

    I find it ironic that you claim to not defend it, but you are cetainly quick to argue against those who oppose it despite failing to understand yourself the need for this new law.

    You yourself said that it does little or no good nor harm to anyone. So if it does not have a real benefit, why would you need it?

    LHL’s suggestion that people need to calm down is a great insult to the voting population. It’s silly and childish, and for a man who is the PM, we just don’t buy those arguments.

    The State simply has no business telling the citizens how it should “feel”. And for it to be a law, it must be because of necessity.

    Putting it in a nice little box with flowers and artsy pleasantries does not hide the veiled disdain this law has towards the voting public….because it misconstrued’s our passion towards restoring balance of power in our government as nothing but a one-night stand with our hormones.

    And in similar fashion, over and over again, our government has never ceased to undermine the democratic process in this country.

    Which is why the western media find fault in our government, not in Singaporeans. And I’m smart enough to know the distinction between an attack to our government, and attack to our people.

    I’m not surprised you don’t feel incensed as much as the rest of Singapore’s voting population. After all, you don’t vote, hence, you don’t have a stake.

    So I don’t blame you for thinking that the “cool off” do little benefit or harm to any party.

    But for the many young volunteers who work hard every election, the “cool off” obviously seeks to undermine the main strategic tool of the opposition – the “surprise” last minute campaigning, both door-to-door and online. IT IS EVERYTHING TO US. It certainly is not illegal, it is neither undemocratic, nor does it do injustice to Singaporeans.

    But the PM feels the need to strip us down of what is left in our arsenal.

    Because the government knows how effectiveness it is. We are aware of it. The voters are aware of it.

    YOU ARE NOT. BECAUSE YOU DON’T GO OUT AND VOTE.

    And please, like many other laws from PAP, the provisions of the “cool off” are vague. The TOC article only stated that it hoped it does not prohibit dialogue online, but clarity is lacking. But one thing is clear, proxies are also not allowed.

    So for heaven’s sake, we are not dumb. We’ve seen this happen election after election, and for several times, those who reflect the views of the opposition (despite not knowing them personally) are immediately accused of being proxies to the opposition…and fines follow.

    So tell me, if I write an article about the opposition’s policies, is that campaigning or proxy?

    I’ve experienced it first hand, the police, the officials, the arrests….and if you are there, and I hope you do….please join Singaporeans when we celebrate democracy, and restore balance of power.

    Not in front of the TV which is your only source of information.

    With Love,

    Singapore Girl Next Door

29. Singapore Girl Next Door
    December 6th, 2009 at 2:04 pm

    Dear Fredric and the rest of your Young PAP colleagues,

    Forgive me. And with the sincerest apology that I say that I don’t intend to undermine your character.

    This platform, after all, for me is a way for us to have a dialog, and when politics are involved, it can get unpleasant, but I hope we can still level with each other.

    But many young Singaporeans such as myself, we are passionate about these issues. I know we still have lots to learn when it comes to being diplomatic, and meaning the exact opposite.

    Despite our eagerness, unfortunately we are always accused of being politically apathetic, but that is only because all avenues for which we can participate are shut….except online.

    It’s easy for you or the PAP to say that we should participate and organize.

    But everytime we do, we get arrested for illegal assembly. And these are all young people who just want to be a part of the political dialogue.

    Of course, we learned our lessons, and applied licences, only for them to be denied most of the time.

    And if there is a chance for us to organize, that is really only during election….and it gets particularly exciting during the eve of election.

    You’d see how Singaporeans have so much love for this country.

    So I’m extending my invitation for you to please join us. Of course, I don’t mean the opposition but you are welcome.

    I meant – at least take a peek at what we do. And you’d realize if there’s any real opportunity for us to be HEARD, we’ll grab it with all our hearts.

    Even if it’s just a comment page of a PAP blog, we’ll take it!!!

    That’s how desprate we are, and only because there’s a voice that needs to be heard.

30. Singapore Boy Next Door
    December 6th, 2009 at 3:52 pm

    Dear Singapore Girl Next Door,

    We will see change soon… the youth will have to come forward to have discussions and debates that are Pro Singapore.

31. Rodolfo
    December 6th, 2009 at 11:06 pm

    I don’t see it as unjustifiable criticism from the Republicans. Personally, I think there is something fundamentally and seriously flawed in the way these Republicans (and in particular the last President) view democracy. These comments come from a bunch of people who have applied so many horrendous solutions (as a result of a combination of ignorance and arrogance) to problems in various countries.

32. J
    December 7th, 2009 at 12:09 am

    @girl next door

    I dont think this is a PAP blog? the PAP blog is at another site aint it?

    Just because you have one or two contributors from PAP does not automatically qualify this as a PAP blog?

    Look at other popular sociopolitical sites, they have opposition party people writing, does that make it an opposition blog? i dont think so.

    I suspect why every year amidst all the criticism, the pap still wins because they are the ones that really action. Instead of protesting, why not do something tangible and positive for your fellow Singaporean in need? perhaps thats why through their grassroots and MPS systems, they are able to win the votes.

    Personally i am neutral, but i’ll vote the party that does the most for the people, tangibly and visibly. (yeah you might say its unfair etc.. but Hougang and Potong Pasir are undoubtedly still unbroken by PAP)

33. Singapore Girl Next Door
    December 7th, 2009 at 11:58 am

    Dear J,

    P65 was created by the PAP during 2006 to reach out to young Singaporeans online.

    —–

    This is the problem in Singapore. We are always led to believe that everything can only be either BLACK or WHITE, GOOD or BAD, RICH or POOR….and no shades of gray.

    Which is why many Singaporeans believe that supporting or voting the opposition meant that the PAP will be completely replaced.

    Of course, we’d still want majority of the seats by the PAP. But the PAP, believe it or not, is no longer representative of everything Singaporean.

    For the past 2 decades, we’ve seen a big rift. The PAP, for both good and bad, had become more elitist and had slowly ceased to be pro-masses. It had become more pro-business, and that’s not bad, but it had become too much of it.

    This is evident by the fact that they are ready to overlook the concerns of many middle class Singaporeans in exchange for cheap foreign labour because it’s good for business.

    What we desire is a voice, and just a sufficient amount of it.
    And a voice by the constituency, and not someone nominated by them.

    For decades, that voice had been suppressed.

    If the PAP thinks that Singapore owes everything to them, that’s fine. I have voted for them, people will continue to vote for them, and we want them there.

    But for heaven’s sake, that does not mean only them have the right to be there.

    So this time, I will vote for the opposition. They are not a bad bunch if you come to know them personally, and they are just as educated, and sophisticated, mind you.

    ….for the sake of that voice, a balance of power. We are still a democracy after all.

    Someone need to speak up on behalf of the “other” Singaporean.

    Regards,
    SGND

34. bystander
    December 7th, 2009 at 1:56 pm

    You already have covert sites like wayang party aka Temasek review faking doss and ddos attacks every two weeks, use your brain why do you think they have been trying to sell us that idea,

    Simple, if no one observes the cooling off period, then the lights will be switch off.

    George yeo and Teo ser luck were both wrong, they said to influence people, you have to build up trust, but how can you even build trust with an outfit like TR that goes around regularly pulling the wool over other peoples eyes? Puiiih now no one trust TR any longer as for their hope for trust, it is with my garbage, guess what some of us have even been told to go there and pretend as if all is normal,

    a big one is coming, you just watch and see. A very big one.

35. bystander
    December 7th, 2009 at 2:01 pm

    This TR caused so much fear and panic in the gaming networks, the brotherhood have pulled out their entire gaming network from Singapore and rebased it in Malaysia!

    Others will be following suit, great work George Yeo and Mr Teo Ser Luck, next time, if you want to mount a covert cyber operation please dont get us gamers involved, we have all always been apolitical and very indifferent, but now I am going to take an avid interest to vote both of you losers out.

    Remember the gaming community did not start this ddos nonsense, it was started by your golden elite cyber warrior proxy site, the temasek review, just bear that in mind.

    Now our subscripton charges have gone up by a whopping 30% and guess who they are blaming?

    Tell me since Admiral Liu came in, how much money has he grown online? Does he even know how to start online enterprises?

    This is the last time I am visiting here, I am too disgusted to speak any longer.

    No trust, no talk

36. shoe thrower
    December 7th, 2009 at 3:54 pm

    Why I cannot understand is why involve the gaming community in this whole issue of politics?

    If you want to win an election and secure your hold on power then why not do it the gentlemenly, why fake a doss or dos attack and keep on throwing the switch every two or three weeks just to convince us, this only insults my intelligence.

    Now the trust in wayang is gone along with the people who signed off on this hair brain scheme.

    The brotherhood have also impose additional taxes, increasing all our underground gaming subscription by a whopping 120% and they are blaming it all on people like TR. I suspect they are doing this so that we will all hate them, the mainstream gamers will feel the pinch some time in february when their other servers migrate to Malaysia. We had a good chance for a group of talented to built a real gaming hub in SG, but just because of a few short sighted and selfish people, its all burnt

    The worse thing abt all this is if one day Singapore really suffers from the a real ddos attack, they will not even lift a finger to help.

    This is worse than someone calling up the fire brigade just for fun, so dont talk to me about your stupid cooling off period, I have decided to switch off from now onwards, people who can even sign off on a site to fake a ddos attack deserve only my shoe

37. muse
    December 7th, 2009 at 6:17 pm

    “I don’t see how the 24 hour cool-off period is designed to bolster the PAP and damage the opposition.”

    The reason why you dont see how this can ever happen has nothing to do with how reality would actually unfold, it just means you have a very poor understanding of the internet, in the way cavemen do not understand why Uranium glows in the dark or what it can even do under skilled tutelage.

    Why do you think, for there is a site out there who recently came in pretending to be one of us and kept on broadcasting the idea someone up there is trying to fix them by fooling around with their servers? When they faked it all themselves?

    But guess what? We the internet sent our best home boy role playing strategist right into the lions lair. The counter insurgents kena countered insurgent instead The joke was he didnt even have to cut through the wires or scale any walls or swim through croc infested moats. All he did was knock on the front door holding his traditional plastic roses and they actually roled out the red carpet for this guy. Now this guy has alot of stuff in his head, I reckon when he was there he went through the whole system and kept meticolous records of in and outs and so they are looking high and low for him. Last count, the bounty has been tripled to 3,000,000 standard Shekelians, by normal going rate if you traded that in ebay, you could buy yourself a brand new 3 series BMW.

    It all fits now. The truth must be surpressed at every cost, why call it cooling off when the right term to us is cold storage?

38. Fredric Fanthome
    December 7th, 2009 at 8:49 pm

    @Bystander, shoethrower & muse

    I haven’t the faintest clue about what you are talking about with all this gaming business. I would be quite skeptical about the gaming world being so important in Singapore politics as to require a government sponsored sabotage effort. I would suggest that you have a considerably inflated estimation about the importance of gaming to Singapore socio-politics. But beyond this I have nothing to say on the subject as I have no knowledge, and even less interest, in it.

    @SGND

    I can see that you don’t intend to attack my character, and you are welcome to disagree with me, robustly, on this platform. That is what it is there for. If you want a voice – by all means grab this one and express yourself.

    If you imagine that I am going comb through your words to find insults and then start a defamation suit against you, please be at ease – I went to boarding school at the age of 12 and I am a lot tougher and thick skinned than most people I know. I really don’t give a damn about insults – it’s just that some commentators say nothing of substance and simply put up a stream of meaningless insults backed by no substance. That does not in any way advance debate, and hence I try to discourage it. Your writings on the other hand, clearly demonstrate that you are doing your best to articulate passionate convictions and well-reasoned positions. The fact that you disagree with me is immaterial – it is your type of writing and argument that we would love to see more of on this site – and indeed in the political space in Singapore. Hence please feel free to keep writing.

    I would only ask you to correct this assumption you seem to have that I am a foreigner and unaware about Singapore. I have lived here very long time, have done a lot of research about the country and am very deeply involved in several aspects of local life. So there is really no need to keep talking about how I “don’t understand” and “don’t know”. I understand and know a lot more than I think you realize. Just because I don’t agree with your position doesn’t mean I don’t comprehend. Many of my friends are Singaporeans born and bred (not naturalized) and they hold the same positions I do – many volunteer for the YP and work because they believe they are doing good – not for some personal gain. So the fact that I disagree with you is not because I don’t know what I am talking about. I know how things are and I disagree with you still.

    To put it succinctly – you do not need to invite me to join you – I did a long time ago – it’s just that I did not join your camp.

    Now as to your points –

    Why should I justify the cool-off period? I personally do not think it is necessary.

    What I was commenting about was the opposition’s knee jerk negative response to what seemed to me to be a minor tweaking of the rules – and the claim that it was “designed to harm the opposition” – which I cannot understand. My question was – is simply opposing everything the government does the mark of a good opposition – or is it intelligently opposing what considered harmful to society? If a change in rules does not disadvantage the people one way or another why make such a big deal of it? That was my question. The precise rule change made little difference to me. If I were the government/PAP leadership intent on tilting the field in my favour I would actually propose allowing campaigning all the way to the election day end, because with the vastly superior resources at the disposal of such a dominant party, it could extract more of an advantage the last day. I feel giving a day of no-campaigning before the election actually gives more ground to the Opposition. Hence the loud reaction of the Opposition seems to me to be simply the knee-jerk, unintelligent response that by definition whatever the Government proposes is “bad”, and this is what I was referring to. It’s not about the rule – it’s about the reaction.

    Does this rule change undermine democracy? I am not convinced.

    Oh and I am not talking about western media finding fault in the government. I am talking about articles that refer to the common Singaporean in less than flattering terms. I too am smart enough to know the difference between comments on the government and comments on the people.

    Most western commentators actually give Singapore’s government a lot of grudging respect since, having dismissed their way of doing things as nonsense MM Lee built a country that the glib commentators in the west would never have been able to. I find western condescension and their attitude that their “democratic” way is the only right way to develop, infuriatingly imperial, and never accepted it, even before I came to Singapore. Singapore would have been much the worse had MM Lee not taken things in hand when he did, and Singapore had simply aped the West. Right now, Singapore would likely be a poor communist outpost – probably like the Cuba of SE Asia with the “Plen” as the communist dictator for life – or have been subsumed by Malaysia again – on very unpalatable economic terms.

    As for the impact of the rule change to young volunteers – do you imagine only the opposition has young volunteers to campaign “surprise” door to door and online. Whatever the opposition does, the PAP does – and at a much larger scale. So any “disadvantage” is equal. I really doubt the opposition campaigns are that much more effective than the PAP ones – given the results of contested wards – as far as results show – in all wards (PAP and opposition), the incumbents have been winning for years. I don’t thing the campaigning has changed anything and I don’t think any method has been enough to make a difference. If the last minute campaigning was all that effective, wouldn’t they have won more than the usual Hougang and Potong Pasir? It’s no use saying, “well next time we will.” The PAP could just as easily say “next time we will win back Hougang and Potong Pasir”. Future statements are all quite meaningless. The results so far don’t seem to show any magic last minute bullet that will change things. I am therefore not convinced that a cool off period disadvantages the Opposition.

    My source of information is not the TV. As I mentioned earlier I am more in touch with people on the ground than you probably realize.

    On your question – I am not a legal expert – but writing an article about any party’s policies – as long as it is balanced and not followed by a “Vote for us” – is not campaigning.

    Why you would want to bother people by campaigning on the eve of elections, though, I cannot fathom. If anyone came to my door I would send them packing forthwith – regardless of party affiliations. By the time the eve of elections arrives, campaigning activists would be more annoying than cold-calling salesmen. In fact I would think that vigorous campaigning at such a time might just turn the harassed voter against one’s candidate simply because he’s just about had enough of campaigners knocking on his door.

    Come to think of it, perhaps that’s why the cool off period was put in place: because the PM got feedback from hundreds of poor residents who asked him to find a way to stop their misery and said if they had another last-minute campaigner knocking on their door, they might lose their minds and do him grievous bodily harm.

    I would surely have signed up for such a petition had I known about it….!

39. Abdul Rahim Bin Osman
    December 7th, 2009 at 11:17 pm

    u guys are fantastic!
    I like the way u guys write in silver but get a golden response, especially Frederic, u are awesome.

    Good writing with good solution is the way to go, after this batch of PAP n Opposition, I hope so.

    I always maintain that GRC, ISA are the real fabrics of our Singapore, n not PAP or the Opposition to uphold for their demise.

40. sgcynic
    December 7th, 2009 at 11:57 pm

    Frederrick,

    To reiterate what SGND said, which was conveniently overlooked:
    “There are two PAPs – the past, and the present. The present PAP is so different and alien, they might as well be a different party… they can not continue to ride on the successes of the past, and demand gratitude from us.”

    “You have seen countless elections in Singapore. But have you seen elections anywhere else? Do you have any yardstick to compare the elections here by – or do you simply have some nebulous “ideal” that Singapore does not match?” Er so we use poorer benchmarks to congratulate
    ourselves life is good and overlook the points that need to be improved? We get enough of that in the mainstream media.

    “And you’re complaining about what? Defamation suits? Really, if I were in the opposition, I would rather be in Singapore than in any other Asian “democracy”. Life is unfair, but I daresay I would rather be sued for defamation than shot in the head.” LOL. Tools differ in different cultures I guess. In any case, false dilemma. Though I must add that sueing for defamation is more elegant than sueing for sodomy.

    “Now as to the concrete suggestion of an Independent Election Commission and the elections department being fair to all parties – I would absolutely agree with this, and if this is not the case, then steps should be taken to make sure it happens soon.” I too agree with this suggestion, made decades ago, except we know who’s dealing the cards.

    “But in all fairness, if you win, why not? I would be happy to congratulate you.” Thank you, it’s not I, it’s the people of Singapore.

    “On your other point – what progress – that’s for you to judge, and for you to compare with the alternatives offered by the opposition candidates. My opinions are mine, and yours are yours.” Hmm, why compare? Just ask ourselves whether we can continue coping with the “progress” achieved
    by the current batch of PAP candidates since the last elections. Secrecy, lack of accountability, mini-bombs, over-crowding, affordable 30-year 30%-of-income HDB loans (and still increasing), condescending leadership. The “remarkable ascent in the living standards of it’s population” often harped by the PAP politicians is true before this millenium; we can see how living standards are now. In all good conscience and fairness, I would be hard-pressed to list genuine progress by this government (at least in the last decade). So I understand that discretion is the better part of valor.

    “The role of the opposition is (or should be) not simply to oppose everything proposed by the government, but to provide constructive opposition – oppose what is felt to be harmful and support (even if you are in opposition) policies that are good.” Agree.

    “Next, if you know anything about politics, 60% of the popular vote is very strong mandate in a first-past-the-post system and can very well lead to a complete landslide victory given a weak opposition… By comparison, a 60% share of the popular vote is a massive mandate and against a weak opposition will generally lead to a very high % of seats won.” By any yardstick, this “popular” government is facing overwhelming defeat in cyberspace given the extent of dissenting vis-avis pro-government voices.

    “Elections are not war.” Really?

    “As for tanks being called after a freak election result – maybe you should take to being a novelist or a film-maker – you certainly have a knack for hyperbole.” Hmm… you’ll have to do further research whether Lee Kuan Yew mentioned anything to this effect. It’s on public record in the main stream media.

41. lim pang seng
    December 8th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

    I haven’t the faintest clue about what you are talking about with all this gaming business. I would be quite skeptical about the gaming world being so important in Singapore politics as to require a government sponsored sabotage effort. I would suggest that you have a considerably inflated estimation about the importance of gaming to Singapore socio-politics. But beyond this I have nothing to say on the subject as I have no knowledge, and even less interest, in it.

    If you have no clue that doesnt mean you are right to adopt a dismissive attitude towards others who may be stakeholders in cyberspace, it just means you have no clue what is happening and you do not know how closely the social political scene is linked with the internet underground economy. Let me share my own personal story. I happen to be an ex banker, I found myself retrenched. To supplement my meagre income, I play online games. I would have you know I am in my fifties. I mine a type of raw material that I sell through a virtual metal exchange, that is processed by virtual factories to produce non existent products, to cut a long story short, on average I get abt $900 on average sometimes I can reach $2,000 if things are good. I have a mother who suffers from chronic liver complications, a wife who is constantly requires heart medication and our daughter is in her final year in Sydney. Recently, we bought her a ipod, it was the happiest moment that I have had for a long time. Now both me and my wife will have to break the news to her that she may have to take on another job to supplement her school fees.

    So please dont come down here and lecture me on what is important and what is insignificant.

    The point is very simply this, the actions of a few irresponsible people have meant that ordinary hard working people such as myself who have perhaps given their best years to the betterment of this country has been sabotage by a group of people who would do anything and everything just to increase their readership and this is why this whole DDOS nonsense has led to a backlash by people like the brotherhood. When we ask them why we now have to register in Malaysia, they say only, the water here is no longer sweet. What that means we shall probably never know. What I do know is if covert sites like temasek review did not do what they did

    If you want to sustain a blog please learn not to talk down to others, I dont expect much, but a bit of respect will go a long way. Thank you for allowing me to say my piece.

    By the way can I go to either MICA or MDA to help me earn morning online by selling minerals to rich americans?

42. lim pang seng
    December 8th, 2009 at 1:10 pm

    Mr Fredric Fanthome

    Please kindly do not talk down to me again. This is my first time here and from your reaction to other posters, it will probably be my last. Begin Mr Fanthome by not presuming your reality is the only one that exist and no other can exist alongside that reality. You may think it is stupid for a 50 something to mine fictitious minerals in some fictitious mine to be processed into fictitious space ships that travel to distant places that no more exist than we can talk about disneyland as the real thing,

    But what remains very real and so real is all this is not gaming as much as it remains a gainful way to put real food on the table, for one it puts money in the pocket of my daughter, who I worry endlessly about as she is already working and probably needs to get another job. Your indifference is just what is it indifference, but to me, it means instead of her having to work in Starbucks, she can at least spend the time somewhere in a library mugging for her final exams to see her through a better life. All these things are very real. Cut your hand and blood will flow out, that is how real it is.

    As for your cooling period, I dont really care, it doesnt affect the bottom line. Next time please try to be respectful and not come up with comments like,

    “I would be quite skeptical about the gaming world being so important in Singapore politics as to require a government sponsored sabotage effort.”

    It is alright to try to control blogosphere, but it is not all right to use every means at your disposal even if it flies against the face of ethical and moral considerations in such a way where you put others in such a difficult position when the economy is already in a rut.

    Now if you dont mind, both me and my wife will have to break the news to our daughter. Pls try not to reply to my post. I have a feeling you will just make things worst. This is just a friendly advise from a man who knows that you know nothing about what you are talking about.

    And remember I am not the only one in this predicament, there could even be thousands out there.

    Was it all worth it?

43. shoe thrower
    December 8th, 2009 at 3:56 pm

    Do your math p65sers, for every blog surfer who takes an avid interest in social political affairs, there are more than 1,500 gamers. So dont you think they are just as much valid stakeholders in what happens in our net?

    As for you Mr Lim I happen to have very good guanxi with the Liaison officer based in Caseream Maritima, his name is Gubara, it is a planet off the Alderean system that has FTZ status, I will drop him a line and we will sort out your problem pronto without having to physically make the trip to Malaysia.

    Never ever forget Mr Lim, we are a community based on kinship and brotherly ties, we always take care of our own and I wish you and your daughter in Oz a happy Xmas.

    In future, should any of you have similar problems do raise it up with your respective tribal cheftians, rather than voice it out here. They will only make fun of you here or call you names. From what I can see there is only talk, talk and talk here and very little in the way of action.

44. mediacorpser
    December 8th, 2009 at 5:15 pm

    Cooling period or not what is the big deal, it is a one horse race, we all know how it will end.

    As for this whole idea of Fredric’s take when he said<

    “I would be quite skeptical about the gaming world being so important in Singapore politics as to require a government sponsored sabotage effort.”

    Maybe reading this thread will change his mind
    , notice the red herring the tr guys are throwing out by the spadefulls and each time when he gets cross examined by one of our home boys, he gets pinned down again and again, moral, never send a sheep to do a wolfs job.

    http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/10/31/temasek-review-site-down-by-another-massive-ddos-attack/comment-page-4/

    I really dont see how it could have got so ugly. I really dont. But faking a ddos attack is a very serious thing that is all I can say and you cant blame those guys if they just say, this is getting very complicated, it time to get into our cars and drive off to greener pastures. Besides if what darkness said is not true why has anonymous backers contracted bounty hunters to fix him. I mean, if someone talks nonsense doesnt it make sense to just give him the cold shoulder? Instead they up the bounty to historical levels. The last count I heard, he has done in at least 7 of them.

45. ErniesUrn
    December 8th, 2009 at 6:17 pm

    Honestly, I think there is no way PAP can do the online battles with any success …while living breathing heartlanders are suffering under the current polices and what not.

    PAP go on with your online crap …people aren’t going into cyberspace to delve into more ‘lost-touch’ propaganda. They are seeking opposition voices.

    Really PAP guys…’online battles’ ? ..as if..

46. Fredric Fanthome
    December 9th, 2009 at 3:48 pm

    @Abdul

    Glad you like the site – and do spread the word – happy to have people agree or disagree here as long at it is done with decorum and intelligence

    @sgcycnic

    I do appreciate the time you have taken to respond to the points one by one. I know only too well it takes effort and while you disagree with me, I am grateful for the effort put in.

    On the points:

    Two PAPs? Perhaps. That’s the view of SGND, and you – and probably many others who share your views. I don’t, and I know several others who don’t. So all I said was she and you are welcome to your views. That’s not overlooking. That’s accepting reality. You will not be able to get me to agree with you for all he arguments you may put up here, and I suppose the same would be true of you. There is no point debating opinions. Just letting you know I did not “conveniently overlook” it. I just do not agree with it.

    I think you have to live in the real world. The ideal “democracy” that you hanker after is illusory and unreal. So you should benchmark yourself against what democracy REALLY leads to, not so fancy idea of what is “should” be. If you want a good benchmark – look around. That’s what I did. It’s not “poor” benchmarks – its REAL benchmarks. Who would you rather benchmark against? The USA? They are totally corrupt as well – in fact in USA money talks more than anything else – if you know anything about the disgusting lobbying, party funding shenanigans that go on. I do not accept the USA as a beacon of democracy at all. In any case, it’s not relevant because the people in Singapore are Asians, not immigrant Europeans so you have to compare against benchmarks of democracy in Asia.

    Certainly there will be areas for improvement, but what I was commenting about was that if you want to talk about things being “unfair”, things are far less unfair in Singapore than they are in every single other Asian “democracy”, bar none. So before we start whining about unfairness, we should be thankful that Singapore politics is not full of murder, vote rigging, mob violence, mafia control etc. You wouldn’t be laughing online about getting shot if you were an opposition blogger in most other countries. Here you laugh. In several other countries it actually happens. So you should recognize that and give credit where it is due – to the government which keeps things far cleaner than anywhere else.

    If you have such a low opinion of progress and living standards in Singapore – why don’t you live in one of your “model democracies” for a while and get a feel for what living standards mean there? I have lived in the UK, HK, Seoul, India and have accounts from close friends and relatives about life in several other countries in America and Europe. Based on my knowledge and experience, Singapore is one of the best places to live for me, and that’s why I made my decision to settle down and contribute here. I find most Singaporeans complain about Singapore without realizing how bad things are outside. It would be good if every Singaporean spent a year living outside the country – not as a tourist with dollars to spend, but working and living “like the locals”. I think they’d change their opinion about progress in Singapore very rapidly.

    I do not really think of the cyberspace is the litmus test of a government’s popularity. There is a very vocal minority in cyberspace beating a drum about how bad the government is. However there is a massive skew towards the opposition online which is not reflected on the ground. Most of the pro-government people I know – and there are hundreds – could not be bothered to argue with those online. They simply know they support and will vote for the PAP. They don’t need to yell it in cyberspace. So the apparent overwhelming majority that opposition voices have online is not a reflection of reality on the ground as far as I can tell.

    Now that is not to say that there are more people in the real world who may be against the government and will vote against the PAP in the next election. There may well be. And I am not saying it is necessarily a bad thing. All I am saying is you should not be crowing about cyberspace victories – until you can demonstratably convert them to real votes. Otherwise it’s mere venting. The true test of a government’s popularity is at the ballot box, not at rabid anti-government web portals.

    If you think elections are war – especially in Singapore, then really you do not have any idea what war is like, and you do a considerable disservice to all soldiers who have ever had to fight in any war and all civilians who have ever been caught up in it. This may be a result of your very sheltered life here in Singapore, but really, if you can ask such a question, I must say you are talking through your hat. No one who has ever been anywhere near a war would make such a flippant remark.

    Regardless of what MM might have said, and how his words were taken (probably out of context, but even if not), I doubt the situation would arise. Of course, that has happened in other “democracies” like Thailand, Cambodia – do you think they are more democratic than Singapore’s “unfair” system?

    @Lim Pang Seng

    There is no need to be so sensitive. I stand by my words. I was saying I have nothing further to say on the subject of gaming because I have no interest and no knowledge. I did say I do not think it is all that important, and I meant politically. Given that gamers have before hijacked my threads – which have nothing whatsoever to do with gaming – to rant about some issue with gaming, I stand by that statement. This is not forum about gaming. I really do not see why issues with gaming need to be aired on this thread. The topic on hand is whether the opposition’s reaction the cool-off period is reflective of a knee-jerk “government is bad” mindset or not. As you yourself write – you don’t care about the cooling period. Why then are you bothering to write here? This thread is about precisely the cooling period. It is not about gaming and it’s issues and ills. In fact if there are any more posts that focus only about gaming and not about the topic at hand, I will delete them. Such posts belong in a gaming forum, not here.

    I did not say I think it “stupid for a 50 something to mine fictitious minerals in some fictitious mine to be processed into fictitious space ships that travel to distant places that no more exist”. This is your pre-supposition not mine. Whether you do it for fun, or to earn a living, it’s your choice, and you are free to do it. In fact I think it’s an innovative way to earn a living – and if the Singapore government had not put in place the top quality infrastructure that allows you to game, you would not have been able to earn the living you do.

    My question is how is gaming relevant to the topic at hand? My view is that it is not, and hence any discussion on gaming and its ills, complaints etc, does not belong here.
    I still find it hard to believe there is a government sponsored effort to sabotage gamers. But as I said, I have no interest in the matter and no knowledge so until that changes, I will say nothing more on this subject. I hope your game-related problems are sorted out. I am not sure they have anything to do with politics though…..

    @shoethrower

    Gamers may well be stakeholders on the net. I am not disputing that. What does that have to do with the topic of this thread? Did you read my post at all? If you have something to say on it – do. If you are going to rant about something related to gaming but not my post, I will find it irrelevant. I am sure there are several gaming forums for you to discuss those issues.

    @mediacorpser

    Actually, reading this thread has not changed my mind.

    @ErniesUrn

    There is no online “battle”. It is obvious that a very vocal anti-PAP minority preaches to the choir online.

    @Cowboy Caleb 2

    Your post, with its extended discussion about gaming heroics etc is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. I have therefore deleted it. Since your take was that the there’s no big deal about the cooling off period, I am sure you wont mind.

    If you have anything to say on the topic, please write again. Any more discussion on gaming will be deleted.

47. operatorianon
    December 9th, 2009 at 4:44 pm

    Read what Darkness wrote, thanks for the link, not a gamer myself, but have to admit, it all seems to fit, the logic that is, fits like a jig saw puzzle. I mean it boils down to this, how would a covert site actually project into blogosphere? Would they have PAP splashed and plastered all over the place? Or would it be exactly like the way TR did it, gain my trust my smelly foot, btw where does one get in touch with this Darkness chap? Is he married?

48. operatorianon
    December 9th, 2009 at 4:47 pm

    Hi Fred

    “Actually, reading this thread has not changed my mind.”

    hohohoho

49. sgcynic
    December 9th, 2009 at 5:10 pm

    “If you think elections are war – especially in Singapore, then really you do not have any idea what war is like, and you do a considerable disservice to all soldiers who have ever had to fight in any war and all civilians who have ever been caught up in it. This may be a result of your very sheltered life here in Singapore, but really, if you can ask such a question, I must say you are talking through your hat. No one who has ever been anywhere near a war would make such a flippant remark.” Really, you do have a rather narrow definition of war. I would not enage further in a war of words.

50. ErniesUrn
    December 9th, 2009 at 5:13 pm

    You are so right about anti-pap. But whether minority or not, you won’t know, just like I won’t know if this website is dead or faking to be alive & kicking, the point is .. at the end of the day…you’ll be tired and demoralised..and give up.

    You have talent for writing ..just stop writing for PAP. You can’t go very far lah…cause even PAP won’t take your writings seriously.

51. JKL
    December 9th, 2009 at 5:37 pm

    Hi

    “I still find it hard to believe there is a government sponsored effort to sabotage gamers.”

    Where did anyone say that here? Pls dont conflate the case. Pls show me the quote, All they are saying is the cooling off period is just one of the many means to gain competitive advantage in the political struggle and its not really a big deal when compared to outfits like wayang, and their questionable tactics, that is the main issue as when they raise the issue of DDOS attacks, this is bound to have an impact on the gaming industry as well as the social political scene, especially the underground gaming genre, we are not talking about microsoft or sony, but rather the suppliers of spaceships and what nots. So it is not realistic to presuppose u can draw an imaginary line to separate social political from gaming anymore than you can talk about Paris without mentioning the Seine or eiffel tower, most blog readers have one feet here ans there.

    As for this statement “if the Singapore government had not put in place the top quality infrastructure that allows you to game, you would not have been able to earn the living you do. ”

    Pls dont undermine my confidence further in this blog. You dont seem to have a firm grasp of hardware and thoughtware. Philip Yeo started a great experiment to transform singapore into a biotech hub, if you go to biopolis you can find anything and everything under the sun, but how many of our homegrown talents are making the trip to stockholm to collect the nobel prize? They havent even squared off the accounts let alone grown any whales amongst the guppies, sure he says its indirect benefits, but I say if you want to do that, then go and build more libraries and give away free glasses, so lets get real and not con ourselves into a state of complacency, there is always a need for homegrown intellectual capital, that is a strategic imperative for success, without that you have nothing, have you asked yourself why China doesnt have a gaming industry? Thats your homework.

    I think you can give our govt some credit, but you should not be so dismissive and contemptous of our local gaming talent. You come across as a tad personal imho and that does not reflect well on many of your well behaved colleagues here who seem to be far more interested in connecting with the crowd in a genuine manner.

    Live and learn, good bye

52. ben
    December 9th, 2009 at 10:15 pm

    All we are saying is this ddos fakery is a big hassle, as we all need to register new accounts in Malaysia now, the other thing I think most ppl are saying is between cooling periods and sites masquerading as the real Mc Coy sites, the latter is more dangerous.

    I am not a fan of darkness personally, but what he said does stick like chewing gum and hard to put off

53. sgcynic
    December 10th, 2009 at 12:40 am

    PS:
    “Regardless of what MM might have said, and how his words were taken (probably out of context, but even if not), I doubt the situation would arise.”"

    Do not be so quick to make your conclusion about what LKY might or might not have said or meant without research. Perhaps he was engaging in hyperbole?

54. tiredman
    December 10th, 2009 at 12:41 am

    Fredric Fanthome ,

    Put the cool off shit aside… let talk about some bread and butter issue. Probably serve the army to show your loyalty.
    How much do you know about leadership?
    If you have written in this blog, it means you are either concern about your rice bowl or concern about the well being of the citizen. Which one is true? Only you know the answer.

    How much do you know about us, Singaporeans?
    Do you know what we are thinking? What are our needs? Do you know what we have been discussing during our lunch time with our friends and at night with our parents?

    Are you aware that there are growing numbers of elderly in Singapore and yet “public” transport operators are taking of seats and provide less bus trips/longer waiting time?

    Do you know that the disabled are not using the disabled facilities on the buses as it is probably inconvenient for them and there is no transport subsidy for them?

    Citizens need a group of understanding leaders to implement policies that is alter to citizen’s needs but first they need to understand the citizen. Have you done your part as a YPAP member?

    Do you know the problem with blogger(s) representing PAP? They intend to make the majority citizens understand them rather the minority understanding the majority citizens. I hope you can understand that like every citizen, I have my own problem to face. If the same problem is felt by most of us and no one is listening; instead people like you giving us a piece of your mind, it will not work. In my view, you as a new comer, in any way are not in any position to tell us this nonsense is good for us.

    If you can solve all these outstanding problems I have mention, you are qualified to be one of us else you are just another opportunistic personnel.

55. Purpose of Opposition
    December 10th, 2009 at 8:35 am

    Fredric

    Quote:”it would be good to see politicians being more discerning – supporting initiatives that are good for the people and opposing those they see are harmful – rather than just opposing everything.”

    I am not an opposition politician, neither am I partisan but I oppose most of PAP policies too because I see them all as harmful, not just for opposing sake.

    Your opinion is different from mine. I would like to see oppos opposing everything. You may not believe or comprehend but everything IS wrong in Spore. If only oppos can do that, I as a citizen have hope and they are getting better in recent times, thats why you come out with this nonsense. Hooray!

56. Why so desperate?
    December 10th, 2009 at 8:37 am

    Quote:”it would be good to see politicians being more discerning – supporting initiatives that are good for the people and opposing those they see are harmful – rather than just opposing everything.”

    I am not an opposition politician, neither am I partisan but I oppose most of PAP policies too because I see them all as harmful, not just for opposing sake.

    In fact I would like to see oppos opposing everything. Everything IS wrong in Spore. If only oppos can do that, I as a citizen have hope of a better life and they are indeed getting better in recent times, thats why Fredric has to come out with this nonsense. Hooray!

57. AN
    December 10th, 2009 at 2:16 pm

    Fredric,

    There is no need for lengthy replies. Just tell your New Boss, ie, PAP to fight the election gentlemenly.

    Change all to SMCs, abolished GRCs, No boundaries redrawing at their whims and fancies. Elections department should be independent, not the current one that is under PMO. All counting agents to be neutral. If need be, engage an Overseas Commission to ‘oversee’ our elections. Allow pluralistic media covering the elections, not the current ‘Shitty Times’.

    Until all of the above are changed, then we can seriously talk about how good is the PAP Team. Whether they are ‘popular’ with the masses. Or I should say whether they are popular with the ‘lesser mortals’.

    Its all one-way traffic now. Seriously, we don’t need to pay ‘Out of this world salaries’ to govern a city like ours. Why I said a city and not a country? Go ask our Law Minister, Mr K Shanmugam.

    It has never been a ‘free & fair’ elections in the past 40years. Go figure the ‘entire system’ and perhaps, maybe perhaps, you’ll have a change of mind!

    Do visit TOC website and read all the comments (including mine) on what you quoted

    ‘ [If] I were in the opposition, I would rather be in Singapore than in any other Asian “democracy”. Life is unfair, but I daresay I would rather be sued for defamation than shot in the head.

    What kind of bloody comparison are you driving at? When it comes to your kind of convenience, you compared us with 3rd World standards? Have you forgotten we are First World? Why don’t you compare with South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, US, Australia?

58. Peiyu
    December 10th, 2009 at 2:32 pm

    Wow, there are some really disgusting comments here. Most of us are descendants of immigrants, people.

    To Fredric Fanthome, I’ll take that the point of your original post was a plea for rationality from the opposition parties & voters and not an attack on the usefulness of the existence of opposition parties in the democratic process? I argue here that there is a right for everyone to nitpick because every detail counts, and this is an area I find frustrating because there is a reluctance (which in non-PC terms, seems to be a relative lack of transparency) on the part of the government to release full details on financial reports and other information. Instead, we get just politically correct data. These information would be, and should be, swarmed over and analysed at the wrath of independent auditors had it been given by a company firm. Frustrating for the average Singapore citizen and resident, and the only way most of us can desperately hope for change is to look at the opposition parties who might be able to provide a different insight on the issue on hand (it seems that debate within the same party is uncommon in Singapore).

    I quote: “Strikes me that no matter how sensible the proposal, the opposing party simply has to find something to fault.”

    It is not fair at all to disregard opinion from opposing parties simply because they appear to ‘find, willy-nilly something to nit-pick and criticize’ when each politician has different life experiences and comes from various socio-economic backgrounds, which helps prod the governing process along from a decent compromise that best benefits the people as different opinions are heard and considered.

    On sensible issues, I know nothing of the Congress opinion on troop withdrawal from Afghanistan but the Healthcare debate has been interesting so far. Not denying the existence of weird claims, but arguments against the Bill (that came not only from Republicans) have been sensible AS WELL, and it stems from the ‘nitpicking’ you appear to dislike.

    Like what John McCain (R) said of Ted Kennedy (D) on the Daily Show after he passed, they may have differing opinions but the system has allowed for open debate that has led to many passed motions that are for the people they serve, and they remain friends after a long day of heated debates.

    This is what we need, not the dismissal of opposition voices simply because it hinders the progress of the nation. I would rather have a more comprehensive proposal set in motion later than a slipshod one earlier but which requires extensive correction. No system is perfect, and I think it is time for change in the ruling government instead of continuous denial.

59. Lee Hsien Long
    December 10th, 2009 at 2:37 pm

    Hi All,

    This Indian new citizen simply missed the point on 18 non-PAP MPs.

    These are actually puppets in parliament as they don’t have voting rights. He said “this is remarkable by any standard.” I would say, it’s one of a kind in this world!

    Even if the PAP allows for 40 NMPs in parliament, so what? They cannot vote, and PAP will still pass laws unchallenged as usual, since the majority still belongs to PAP!

    Only the naive will think this is opening up of political space or democracy in action.

60. Jamie Wong
    December 10th, 2009 at 2:40 pm

    “I don’t see how the 24 hour cool-off period is designed to bolster the PAP and damage the opposition.”
    This sentence sums up the ignorance of this non-Chinese, non-Malay, and non-Indian. In all probability, he’s one of those PRs or “new citizens” who’s sucking up to the ruling party in the hope of being invited to tea. But we won’t waste time educating his kind, come election day, if he has an IQ higher than 100, he should be able to see for himself.

61. Leslie Wong
    December 10th, 2009 at 3:04 pm

    Fredric Fanthome & foreign hordes, open your eyes before you embarass yourselves further:

    “But we either believe in democracy or we not. If we do, then, we must say categorically, without qualification, that no restraint from the any democratic processes, other than by the ordinary law of the land, should be allowed… If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought.”
    - Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition leader, April 27, 1955

    “If it is not totalitarian to arrest a man and detain him, when you cannot charge him with any offence against any written law – if that is not what we have always cried out against in Fascist states – then what is it?… If we are to survive as a free democracy, then we must be prepared, in principle, to concede to our enemies – even those who do not subscribe to our views – as much constitutional rights as you concede yourself.”
    - Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates, Sept 21, 1955

    “If we say that we believe in democracy, if we say that the fabric of a democratic society is one which allows for the free play of idea…then, in the name of all the gods, give that free play a chance to work within the constitutional framework.”
    - Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore Legislative Assembly, Oct 4, 1956

    “One-man-one-vote is a most difficult form of government.. Results can be erratic.”
    - Lee Kuan Yew, Dec 19 1984

    “What are our priorities? First, the welfare, the survival of the people. Then, democratic norms and processes which from time to time we have to suspend.”
    - Lee Kuan Yew, 1986 National Day Rally

    “Now if democracy will not work for the Russians, a white Christian people, can we assume that it will naturally work with Asians?”
    - Lee Kuan Yew, Asahai Shimbun symposium, May 9, 1991

    “With few exceptions, democracy has not brought good government to new developing countries…What Asians value may not necessarily be what Americans or Europeans value. Westerners value the freedoms and liberties of the individual. As an Asian of Chinese cultural backround, my values are for a government which is honest, effective and efficient.”
    - Lee Kuan Yew in speech entitled ‘Democracy, Human Rights and the Realities’, Tokyo, Nov 10, 1992

    “I’m not intellectually convinced that one-man-one-vote is the best. We practise it because that’s what the British bequeathed us.”
    - Lee Kuan Yew, 1994

    “If we had considered them serious political figures, we would not have kept them politically alive for so long. We could have bankrupt them earlier.”
    - Lee Kuan Yew on political opposition, Straits Times, Sept 14 2003

    “Lee is like a banana –yellow of skin, white underneath.”
    -Zhou Enlai, Premier of the People’s Republic of China, at the Bandung Conference (1955)

    “More like a Hitler or Mussolini but with less polish and skill.”
    - Socialist Front on Lee Kuan Yew, Malay Mail, March 28, 1964

    “A chameleon, a remarkable creature which can adjust its colour to its surroundings.”
    - Tan Siew Sin, Malaysian Chinese Association, in Malay Mail, March 29, 1964

    “Lee Kuan Yew’s political power has always been built over the dead bodies of his friends and allies.”
    – Malaysian Chinese Association, circa 1964

    “Harry, you’re the best bloody Englishman east of Suez.”
    - George Brown, Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom (1966-68)

    “Kuan Yew, I can never trust you as a politician.”
    - Tunku Abdul Rahman, Prime Minister of Malaysia, in 1975

    “[Lee] is bloody-minded and ruthless with his adversaries. He stomps them into the ground.”
    - Dennis Bloodworth, journalist, 1989

62. alex tan
    December 10th, 2009 at 4:32 pm

    to Pei Yu:
    the day we went through 1965 independence, Singaporeans are no longer a race of immigrants. it is very insulting of you to compare us with the migrants today, you should be sent to serve NS in DB for 2 years.

    to Jamie Wong:

    this fredric farker is probably a non-Singaporean or a new citizen who got his citizenship by sucking hard to his PAP masters.

    vote for Change, vote the PAP out

63. Because of FREDICK, I am voting anyone but the PAP
    December 10th, 2009 at 5:01 pm

    Elitist PAP has done it again.Now getting new citizens to tell ordinary ‘lesser mortals’ Singaporeans to get out of their ELITE UNCARING FACE.Telling us how SIngapore should be run.

    My friends email me this blog and I am sickened by the response by New Citizen PAP members.I am not going to volunteer at PA anymore as I reliased that the PAP is doing its very best to get rid of true blue Singaporeans just to stay in power.They are going to increase the PR crap.Everyone knows they are doing it to get their Citizenship faster.PAP is killing true blue Singaporeans.

    It all makes sense now why they have brought in like more than 2 million foreigners these past couple of years.They are exterminating us through the ballot.

    I,my colleagues,my friends,my family will all vote the PAP out.This is a promise.There is going to be a major swing of votes.

    If the PAP comes up with more gerrymandering,cooling off period,biased reports in the press,arrest or detain oppositions,redraw further the election boundaries.It all going to BACKFIRE.

    YES.I dare PAP to gerrymander and cheat some more.

    PAP, if you reading this, you are not getting our votes.We are going public and will vote you out WHOLESALE.The e-mails that we sent out to use this morning at work numberred in the hundreds.If these posts by FREDICK get forwarded, you guys are going to ask for it.

    VOTE PAP OUT!

    VOTE PAP OUT!

    VOTE PAP OUT!

    MERDEKA MERDEKA MERDEKA !!!!!

64. PAP 66.6% The True Mark of the Beast
    December 10th, 2009 at 5:14 pm

    Be warned.You have no rights.You will be replaced if you do not conform.The Devil has spoken.Democracy is dead.How do we win back our country?VOTE THEM OUT.MERDEKA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

65. Yueheng
    December 10th, 2009 at 9:53 pm

    While I may not necessarily agree with the opinions expressed in Fredric Fanthome’s post, I am alarmed by some of the sentiments expressed by my fellow Singaporeans. Fredric has valiantly attempted to express his views in a calm and reasonable way. Many commentators simply proceeded to shout him down with name-calling and irrational rhetoric that is simply bothering just on the hysterical. The PAP is doing it’s very best to stay in power by “getting rid” of “true blue Singaporeans”? Come on lah.

66. PeterL
    December 10th, 2009 at 10:20 pm

    I found your blog through TR which I comment at times and the flaks comes from all angles which I find rather bewildering at times.

    I do agree with you on the gaming issue,I am totally unaware of its existence or its purpose,probably its something that non IT savvy people do not understand and I am a novice in this field.

    Like Abdul Rahim I find the debate in this blog interesting and rational.

67. Ronin
    December 11th, 2009 at 12:13 am

    “I have lived in the UK, HK, Seoul, India….”

    Fredric,

    Are you implying all S’poreans are the proverbial frog in the well??? And that only you have seen the world???

    You are also naive and ignorant, maybe it’s because you are still young and impressionable. Do you know that every year, about 1,000 talented S’poreans give up their pink I/C to live elsewhere where there is far better work-life balance???

    If S’pore is such a great country, why do our govt have to beg foreigners to take up citizenship or PR here??? Wouldn’t foreigners be giving an arm and a leg to get S’pore citizenship?? Wouldn’t S’pore’s population be 1 billion by now??

    Wake up and smell the roses…….or maybe you are merely drifting with the wind……sycophanting your political master in the hope of gaining some benefits for yourself?

68. Singapore Girl Next Door
    December 11th, 2009 at 1:12 am

    Dear Fredric,

    We come to know of “failures” of governments other than Singapore because the media outside of Singapore are free to report on them.

    I hope your view that Singapore is an astounding success does not stem from the fact that the media here fear for its survival and only know how to sing praises.

    Throughout human history, no world government was ever free of failures.

    I don’t think you live in fantasy…I just think that when you chanced upon the beautiful garden and lofty skies of Singapore, your feet may have failed to kept themselves on the ground.

    But I’m not here to correct your perspective.

    I’m here so that your readers will come to know why discernment is a virtue.

    So please allow me to say these to your readers…

    * It is only due to arrogance and lack of perspective when one says that western democracies have failed when the very survival of Singapore depends so much on their socio-economic success.

    * Democracy’s sole purpose is to ensure good governance thru representation. Singapore may have achieved good governance without democracy but only because our past leaders where benevolent. They built a system around meritocracy in order to gain the people’s trust.

    But the reality on the ground is that PAP finds it increasingly difficult to maintain good governance because it ran out of good leaders.

    The qualities of the MM and SM are no longer shared by majority of the party members, which is why the next generation PM is not among them.

    That is not to say we need to replace the PAP. We instead need, more than ever, a voice of conscience in our government. This is to ensure the current PAP generation is still grounded, and not self-righteous despite not having any major accomplishments to speak of in the present.

    What we don’t need are monopoly of leaders who live too much in the successes of the past and claiming it to be theirs just because of they wear the PAP badge.

    * I hope Singapore does not fall from graces like the Philippines. We have been burdened everyday in class rooms of lessons of democracy’s failure in that once promising country.

    Filipinos were lured to abandon democracy by a cruel dictator who hid behind cultural relativism and promise of economic growth to justify seizure of civil liberties.

    Singaporeans were lucky. We live under similar conditions except we had benevolent leaders.

    If Lee Kuan Yew was a Marcos, the same system that brought Singapore success today could have been easily used to enrich the elite, suppress the masses, and devoid us of our freedom to conscience.

    If you don’t live in fantasies, you’d know that this is the catalyst which gave birth to civil liberties. A discerning media, opposition, right to assembly, balance of power, freedom of opinion – these are tools which prevent bad leaders from holding the nation hostage.

    When western countries moulded civil liberties to their constitutions, it was after emerging from the ashes of bad governance.

    That is how we come to know democracy today, a means to and end, rather than an end to iself.

    Democracy for Singaporeans, likewise, is an insurance policy when we wake up from the fantasy which is meritocracy – throughout human history, no one can ever guarantee a succession of good leaders.

    The MM and the SM are good leaders. But who can really succeed them?

    I hope Singapore does not learn the lessons of democracy the hard way. When the world had shown that economic success thrived the most in democracies, suppression of civil liberties is nothing but a blunt tool.

    * Fredric is right about one thing – you can never gauge the support for either the opposition or for the PAP by reading online comments.

    You gauge it thru election.

    And when 44% of our population are dissastified with the PAP, the latter no longer hold the monopoly of mandate, and it is beyond logic that they still hold 98% of the people’s representation.

    A voice has emerged. They are the 44%.

    I’m fighting to prevent blunt tools from being used to suppress that voice.

    * Like many young Singaporeans such as myself, we were once in love with the PAP, because once upon a time, the PAP was the opposition. And as the opposition, it fought for our collective voices.

    It is with pride that I share with you these words, from a once promising opposition leader -

    “Let us get down to fundamentals. Is this an open, or is this a closed society? Is it a society where men can preach ideas – novel, unorthodox, heresies, to established churches and established governments – where there is a constant contest for men’s hearts and minds on the basis of what is right, of what is just, of what is in the national interests, or is it a closed society where the mass media – the newspapers, the journals, publications, TV, radio – either bound by sound or by sight, or both sound and sight, men’s minds are fed with a constant drone of sycophantic support for a particular orthodox political philosophy? I am talking of the principle of the open society, the open debate, ideas, not intimidation, persuasion not coercion…”
    - Lee Kuan Yew

    With Love to all of my fellow Singaporeans,
    Singapore Girl Next Door

    PS.
    We are young, and we are the Opposition 2.0.

69. PeterL
    December 11th, 2009 at 11:51 am

    At 65 and considered a dinosaur to most young Singaporeans I wish to contribute my 2cents say of which I believe I am entitled to being 100%Singaporean and having gone through the motions since 1959-2009 i.e. 50years.

    Our little vulnerable red dot was built not through talk,talk and more talk.It was built through work,work and more work to ensure we have not three but two decent meals on the table.

    Today we have arrived,cars,condominiums,maids, three meals done by the maids and a couple of snacks in between.Hook on the net from sunrise than to school,poly,uni and workplace than back to the net.All this is fab and fantastik but it came about through hard work and foresight of the people,repeat!!! people!!! and the govt. not like countries with plenty of resources where work is minimal and play with welfare is the norm i.e. Australia,USA and most 1st world countries.I do wish at times that I was born in the land of milk and honey but alas fate dealt a cruel blow but not as cruel as those in worse off 3rd world countries.Knowing hard life early I live within what I am capable of providing for my family.We i.e. my family and I too would like to announce that we have arrived,buy a car,upgrade to a condo and not the three room we bought and still living in but reality tells us we cannot and we do not envy others who can.

    My point fellow Singaporeans is, we only have a little red dot that we can call our own and should others join us to make it any better why not?one thing is for sure I would not like to sing Negaru Ku again on their terms,three years of that is enough to last us a lifetime.For Singaporeans who uproot and leave I wish them well in their new found home. For me and most who would love to uproot for a better life elsewhere but unable to, lets face reality that this is the only home we have and no other.

70. New Foreigners Action Party FAP (ex-PAP) is mediocre
    December 11th, 2009 at 12:20 pm

    There is a clear distinction between the old PAP which won Singapore Independance and this offshoot which is doing its all to remain in power through gerrymandering,tweaking the constitution,bankrupting its opponents,etc.

    It is sad that it has come to this state that they have in their midsts, people like Frederic Fanthome,Calvin Cheng,etc.This is the sad state of affairs.The quality is getting poorer every five years.Now they resort to New Citizens to hold mantle.What about the Singaporeans?

    The PAP is afraid of intelligent debate and uses its Weapon of Mass Destruction called the controlled 160th Ranked Press.

    Looks like good quality people are shunning away from the PAP.No wonder they introduced the GRC to hide all this ‘weak’ talent.It is a good thing that the PAP leaders I identify with like Goh Keng Swee,S Rajaratnam and Toh Chin Chye all retired from the PAP in 1988.This is when all the ridiculous Gerrymandering started.

    Singapore died in 1988.More well meaning patriots were imprisoned.I am sure we will see more cowardice in the coming elections.It shows that the PAP is insecure of winning the people’s mandate.And now we have Foreigners defending the Cooling Off Period.

    We are as good as dead.The Foreigners Action Party has taken over.Singapore Patriots please rise.A New Merdeka Generation is warranted.I urge all Singaporeans to reclaim back our country from the True Communist-Capitalist Authoritarian Hegonistic Foreigners Action Party.

    Stand Up and Speak Up against Tyranny.

71. ErniesUrn
    December 11th, 2009 at 12:30 pm

    So…Mr Fathome,

    You are a new citizen …now I understand the the gap between the time you were in India till the day you collected your Pink IC.

    That’s like taking the ‘Out of touch with the ground’ to a hold new level of dumb.

    PAP ..I shake my head.

72. And The Best Online Comment Ever Goes To… « Gimme Some Truth!
    December 11th, 2009 at 12:35 pm

    [...] Simi Lan Jiao Cool Period December 4th, 2009 at 2:12 am [...]

73. JB
    December 11th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

    Ronin – of coz sgreans are frogs in the well. that’s how they gulp down nonsense and fallacies dished out by the PAP and those lackeys like fredric.

74. Voice Of Citizen
    December 11th, 2009 at 1:08 pm

    Dear Fedric,
    You have a gift of writing. You should spend time understanding the reasons and bases behind the “irrational rhetoric” as one commentator has put it.

    Only the biggest FOOL will think such rhetoric is rubbish

    You have not been brainwashed by the media in your lifetime, nor voices and lives controlled in every manner by the PAP to understand the citizen behavior. You are not in the continuum of true-bred citizen lives as you are dealing with the hearts and souls of the Nation. You will never understand the underhanded politics, the money politics and many polices the PAP use to control and stay in power.

    For many citizens the release of pent-up frustration and anger, irrational as it may seem in the rhetoric of expression, which can only be released through cyberspace, is not something to be disregarded.

    Your support of PAP, officiously and beguilingly, using your superb intellectual rationality of argument could be perhaps perceived as treason to the hearts of many true-bred citizens in this forum who value dearly the sacrosanct meaning of citizenship and nationhood.

    Rationality of argument is one thing, the reality is another. If you are a lawyer, you will understand. Rational reasoning with misguide agenda or concealing hidden agenda is as deadly and dangerous in hand of people with immense power.

    With your gift of writing you can help many true-bred citizens who are helpless against the powerful intellect of the PAP who, unfortunately, use guise of rational reason to justify their actions.

    I hope one day you will be like a new true-bred citizen, perhaps a party leader for the citizens, bringing glory to the citizen once more as the great PAP did once upon a time.

    Perhaps, one day you may and I hope you will use your gift properly.

    I hope you are not one of those dogs in YPAP who serve as grass-root leader for self-interest (free HDB parking, priority of HDB selection, etc) as I know of many in my life-time.

    I was a true PAP supporter for many years but now my loyalty is gone. I am not a true-bred citizen but I had served the army and can empathize with the feelings of many true-bred citizens. I am also thankful to the past Gov for giving my family a life which we may not have gotten in our native country. You may say I am the second generation voice.

    This is my first time I wrote in the forum. Why did I write?

    So please read on what I have written if you want to know. I may not have the polish of your writing, the prose and style, the rationality of your thoughts as it was written with my heart, feelings and empathy with the citizens.

    Dear Citizens,

    CHORUS OF CHANGE: VOTE FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOME, BETTER LIVELIHOOD, BETTER GOVERNANCE, MODERATE IMMIGRATION POLICY:

    We are thankful for the prosperity that our Gov has brought to us in the past.

    However, in the last few years or decade, in particular the last three years, our Gov has morphed-they seem less compassionate, seem to lose tune with the chords of the citizens.

    We need to send a message, however rhetorical the tunes of the message, to resonate the spirit of the citizens, the lesser privileged. We OWE it all to ourselves to make a better NATION, a better country.

    The beautiful vase of the Nation, exuding the prosperity of the Nation, built through the blood and sweet of citizens, extolled by many outsiders, belongs to the credit of many citizens who struggled and sacrificed, who died for the Nation, NOT just the Gov and self-acclaimed achievement of PAP.

    The vase, appealing from the outside, admired and enjoyed by the rich, elite, and regaled by our leaders in their Ivory Tower; an Ivory Tower capping the neck of the vase, entrapping the voices inside. The inner side walls of the vase are marked by cracks of fragility, of suppressed voices of the present and lost generation reverberating with disillusionment, discord, frustrations, dashed hopes and miseries of many heart Landers, echoing to be heard.

    Our Gov seems to have lost focus in the mad pursuit of GDP growth and money politics and is disconnected with reality at the ground and with the citizens.

    Their policies are heavily biased towards in elitism/pro-business politics, foreigners and pro-business and to support their continuous staying of power.

    They have lived in their supreme Ivory Tower for far too long to be able to empathize with the citizen hard-ship and anxieties. They see through their own prism of self-deception, obsessive self-righteousness.

    They proclaim that they are the ONLY one and OLNLY one deserved to govern and rule, no one is better than them-without them the Nation will collapse.

    They speak virtues on a podium of high self-enrichment of wealth and power with absence of nobility of leadership: Is it real that only with super-high pay that good governance can be sustained? ; Is it true that there is no one without their kind of intellect who is capable to govern? ; Is it true there is NO NOBLE citizen that will govern with much lesser pay and their kind is the only kind that can govern the NATION.

    In their name of Current and Future Growth they have opened the gate widely, too abruptly, for many foreigners/PRs to come in without sufficient consideration of the impact such relentless influx will have on commoner lives, housing and infrastructural constraints.

    The current immigration influx policy will soon displace the citizens in no time, take away citizen jobs, relegating citizens to minority second-class status, depressing salary with higher living costs. The policy itself is not flawed; the desperation of implementing as seen recently is.

    In the name of “wealth creation”, more so to support the developers, the rich and powerful, and their cash needs, they have manipulated the land prices, pegging HDB to resale prices, resulting in huge price increase in times of the worst recession in the century.

    The PAP shield was once for the people, citizens. Now the shield, gilded in gold and power, is wielded to shield the Rich, the Powerful and the Elite. The increasingly huge divide between depressed salaries of lesser mortals and the ever-increasing costs of living which only the elite and rich can enjoy cannot be allowed to continue.

    This in sum is the dichotomy of the Nation: the money politics that drives huge and widening divide between the super-rich, super-paid ruling elite and highly costly, top-heavy governmental and institutional machineries which continuously milk the livelihood of, and marginalizing the lesser privileged true-bred citizens or lesser mortals as branded by the leaders.

    Lately, the PAP, the Gov, are using the FT/PR policy and propaganda, welcoming them openly, using indiscriminately 10 Million public funds, apparently with hidden agenda or misguided agenda, to garner their support in the guise of social integration. In times to come we true-bred citizens will be marginalized.

    The increasing number of new citizens, many sycophants, new citizens and PRs lately, eager to join PAP grass-root organization, some spoke so officiously and beguilingly for PAP to counter the voices of the true-bred citizens, not knowing the truth beneath the dissonant voices of the citizens, is very disconcerting; a making of divide amongst the new and true-bred citizens that may lead to social disharmony.

    The huge influx of FT/PRs and the desperation of getting PRs to convert to new citizens belie the intention of immigration policy. It seems there is political agenda to recruit new citizens as grass-root leaders to SUSTAIN THEIR OWN KIND.

    PAP will pamper to populist appeal but once in power they espouse and practice unpopular polices, even to extent of using “ policies of eugenics” to eliminate lesser mortals, the true-bred citizens, through importing of “new citizens”, a hidden agenda, in the guise of population replacement.

    We NEED to send an overwhelming strong message to PAP that we need a people’s Government that listen to the citizens. We need the PAP shield, and the wealth of the nation, to uplift the citizens more, NOT mainly for itself, the Elite, the Rich and Powerful. We need PAP to not forget the spirit of the words “People Action Party”; that PAP should act FIRST for the PEOPLE, the true-bred citizens.

    It is now time for all Citizens to band together urgently, to stand-up as ONE to vote for our FUTURE, NOT to fear for CHANGE under the THREAT of PAP that the NATION will not survive without them.

    We must STAND-UP NOW for ourselves, our NATION-HOOD, our COUNTRY.

    It is time for all Citizens to come together to build a BETTER future based on our CONVICTION:
    • that there is a cause for all genuine Singaporeans who believe that Singapore is the place for our next generation where civil liberties, justice, equality and all quintessential privileges of citizens are preserved as every right of individual, not provided according to the calibration of the elite.
    • that we need to let our Gov sees that the voice of people must count much more in their equation of progress, not just the progress tilted towards largely for benefit of few elitism, the rich, the business, the powerful, the fortunate and according to their self-proclaimed “THE ONLY “ right way
    • that growth has to be balanced, moderated; not in the present form, in name of rigorous and obsessive pursuit of economic numbers, the foreigner flood-gates are fully opened indiscriminately resulting in steep competition, lost of jobs and depressed salary; whilst the inflationary cost as result of the same action causes cost of living to escalate, creating untenable juggling of costs and debts for many, more in the future, if the current situation goes unchecked..
    • that there is need to have adequate adjustments, provisions and allowances in life and works in policies of Manpower, Health and etc, in the manner and way such that people themselves do not becomes own LIABILITY in themselves in the future due to artificial asset inflation, as a result of necessity to eke a living in this intensely competitive environment.
    • that our esteemed Ministers has to be cautioned, rebuked, restrained as they have lost touch with the ground, the people, and the reality of cost of living for many
    • that as a Minister in a vantage position of powerful influence to say Resale value will go “UP, UP and UP”, forgetting that such remark(perhaps, irresponsible), pandering to the greed of citizens, has an insidious impact on inflating asset
    • that Singapore in a longer horizon, the “stark reality” in 20 years times, we will NOT become the Swiss of Asia BUT a Monte Carlo of Asia for the elites, rich and powerful if we allow the present polices to continue unchecked.
    • that the nation’s lost SOUL needs to be re-discovered, identity lost to be re-instituted.
    • that progress based only on relentless soulless pursuit of GPP dictated by policies and rules of elite intelligentsia with little regards for citizens and impact affecting mass lives cannot continue without moderation,
    • that Singapore shall survive without PAP and that we shall not allow the sole existence of elite to rule and implement policies that Singapore will vanquish without them; that we want a hand in dictating the course of the Nation to ensure that NO PARTY can destroy or degrade the Nation in its absence.
    • that we need a Nation with dignity of free speech and assembly without fear and censorship, to express views, even political dissents, for general betterment of governance and its policies
    • that we want a Government that works towards the interest of citizens with duty and accountability
    • that we want a government that is caring for the interest of citizens, providing much greater discrimination between citizens and foreigners/PRs; not with the present policies giving too much welfare and advantages to huge number PRs as if PRs are more exclusive than the citizens at expense of many citizens in terms of competition for housings, jobs and etc.
    • that we want a forthright governance that is apologetic for its mistake; not a government that is arrogant and speaks to the citizens in condescending manner; a government that upholds humility and respect for citizens, NOT pride and arrogance.
    • that we want to have back our a Nation which has been “Misplaced”, a COUNTRY which has been disregarded, Nation Pledge which is “Lost”, Voice which has been “suppressed”, Citizens interests which have “subordinated” to foreigners/PRs interest.
    • that we want passionate leaders, with hearts, to serve the citizens first with equitable policies, not with desire to govern dependent on the salary scale
    • that we want a revamp of policies fairer to the citizens, lesser taxation of reserves due to having to dispense hugely on sustaining wasteful governmental machineries, like excessive use of fund for Army, and huge pay package of incumbent and cronyists.
    • that we want to have cheap land that is rightfully belongs to all citizens to build affordable homes payable over shorter loan period and yet have reasonable decent disposable income to live decent life for family commensurate with the higher living standard, yet save enough for retirement and contingencies.
    • that we have only OUR last chance to stand together for the betterment of ALL and future generation to cast our votes before we are overwhelmed by NEW CITIZENS beholden to the incumbent, else we will be forever be subjugated by the PAP dictate and policy.
    • that fifty years of authoritarian rule is Enough, fifty years of political suppression, fifty years of super-rich pay leaders who earned enough for their own generations for many years to come regardless of Nation survival; fifty years of media censorship and brain-washing is Enough; fifty years of voice suppressed, living in fear of ISD is Enough.
    • that Singapore needs a refreshing political facelift of leaders that inspires, that shares the wishes, hopes , woes and aspirations of the citizens, that unite citizens NOT divide by envy of huge and growing wealth creation biased for the Rick, Powerful and ruling Elite.
    • that this Nation will NOT fall without PAP as there are many good gentlemen and women, more capable that the Incumbent, who can serve for much less, who are ready to serve the Nation for the Citizens.
    • that we want to build a sustainable nationhood that can survive through many generations to come regardless of any political party in power; not espousing the inevitability of rich-poor divide BUT espousing the inevitability of better standard and living costs for middle and lower income groups at the expense of the Elite, Rich and Super-Rich who can afford such expense if they desire to stay in this pearl of Asia..
    • that we need now citizen-pro policies that benefit more “lesser mortals”; we need commensurate growth, commensurate policies that help lower living costs, not at expense of the citizens; a more moderate immigration policy, not the relentless, thoughtless and unplanned FT/PR influx policies to satisfy growth numbers which ultimately benefit the super-scale masters.
    • that we can come together as ONE, to have more opposition to represent the electorate to challenge the incumbent to listen to the wish of the people, to get rid of callous leaders within PAP-a PAP facelift or be voted out eventually
    • ……………….
    • ……………….

    LET US ALL SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE to PAP that policies have to be more citizen-friendly.

    LET US ALL STAND-UP TOGETHER to make sure we are not STRANGERS IN OUR OWN HOME.

    LET EACH OF US SPREAD THE CHORUS OF CHANGE VEHEMENTLY, to reach every heart, mind and soul of true-bred citizen.

    From Voice of the Citizen

75. Boboshooter
    December 11th, 2009 at 2:29 pm

    I’m not xenophobic, and I’m not certainly not racist either.

    But I lived here all my life and this is my home. It is not my company or a hotel or dorm where you just come and go. This is my home. So from this episode it should be obvious enough to real Singaporeans that for strategic reasons we need to ensure we retain control of who has a say in “our own house” and who doesn’t. I don’t need a whole bunch of newbies who just arrived yesterday to tell me how my own house should be run.

    Its ok if from time to time there are additions to the family and I would welcome it. But trust and relationships are not built overnight. If suddenly the number of strangers arrive in my home and suddenly have big say in how my home should be, then surely I have a problem with that.

    If the family is in crisis, I don’t know if they’ll be on our side.

    And also bear in mind that our house happens to be one of the smallest in the world. We have finite space for which to expand. There are only so many beds. I hope poor Ah Kong is not sleeping on the floor somewhere because he didn’t have money to bid for the ever-rising price of the bed.

    I don’t care how “world-class” this house looks from the outside and how many LCD TVs we boast and how many mercs parked outside, if it ain’t my house no longer. If the person-in-charge doesn’t get THIS fundamental right, then no other policy it gets right is worth anything.

    As such I am determined not to vote for the government who made it so, and make my vote count to stop any more of this nonsense going forward, while my say still counts.

    And for our collective sake I hope it is not too late.

    Sorry Fredric, I’ve got nothing against you personally, but there’s just been too many of the likes of you in my house recently.

    Surely, even you can understand that.

76. We are voting PAP out
    December 11th, 2009 at 5:12 pm

    It’s Decided.I would like to confirm here that we are starting a petition to vote the PAP out.

    If you guys are reading this, you guys obviously do not understand Singapore anymore.Can’t believe you are now recruiting foreigners to tell us how to vote and decide our futures.

    We have an e-mail petition going out with all these posts and we have already gathered more than 100 signatories.We are aiming for 5,000 by the end of the month.We shall show you our grassroots network.

    To my fellow singaporeans, we will have a website up soon and would encourage you to sign up.Thanks for your support.

    And for the opposition, you have our support.Watch the swing in electoral votes this election.My colleagues, there are 20 of us all voted for PAP last election and we are regretting.We talk about our votes and we don’t care if it is a secret.We don’t even care if the PAP decides to track our IP address to our office.

    And we have received more than 100 votes of supports from our friends in just one day.We thank all the Pro Singapore posters here for educating us and expressing our heartfelt feelings about our country.

    Continue the good work.Vote the PAP out.Vote for Change.

77. PeterL
    December 11th, 2009 at 5:29 pm

    I am truly proud to read my fellow Singaporeans commenting with such pride, loyalty, and sincerity i.e. Boboshooter & voice of citizen.

    Here is an opportunity for True Singaporeans to voice without vulgarity or ???……… Like you Mr.Fahntome I too am a naturalized citizen after my family crossed the causeway 60 odd years ago.Unlike you Sir, we had to go through hell and high water to arrive to this 1st world status.

    I am sure you are fully qualified and would be most welcome in any 1st world country in the West but you chose Singapore and I do welcome you to our shores.

    However, the points and comments by true Singaporeans without ulterior motives,agendas or vendettas should be taken as Food For Thought and any reply must be honest and constructive as how an ordinary Singaporean may look at the current situation.I will not question your loyalty should a crisis arise. I have no doubt you will stay, if your roots are sunk in and that is an answer no one but you can provide.

    I know of Singaporeans with home overseas and a passport ready to travel when the siren whistles. Sad but true.

    I wish you well Mr. Fahntome and I hope like me my family and majority of ordinary Singaporeans when the time comes for us to stand and be counted, you will be one of them.

78. Ju
    December 11th, 2009 at 6:57 pm

    PeterL,

    Quote: “I know of Singaporeans with home overseas and a PASSPORT (my caps) ready to travel when the siren whistles. Sad but true.”

    Do you mean these people have dual citizenship? How did they obtain it? I did suspect some Sporeans are privileged enough to be allowed. Can we get to the bottom of this please?

79. Let's Vote PAP and the Fanthome out
    December 11th, 2009 at 7:07 pm

    We are voting PAP out

    I am supporting you and will now get my side of SIngaporeans to agther and sign your petition.Please set it up soon so that the Oppsotion know that we are supporting them and changing sides.

80. TBK
    December 11th, 2009 at 7:23 pm

    PeterL: “we had to go through hell and high water to arrive to this 1st world status.”

    1st world to you, not to me. I would not have known had I not lived in a real first world. It is an entirely different world!

81. PeterL
    December 11th, 2009 at 8:24 pm

    Ju- you don’t need dual citizenship,a PR and sufficient funds will suffice to see you through till the crisis is over.Palavu???

    TBK-should you consider Australia 1st world,we are not far behind than again what is your yardstick of 1st world besides freedom of speech, free this and free that ,amnesty international,etc.etc.Should you still think Singapore is not 1st World thats ok with me, I am happy with it, after its the only world I have and the others don’t belong to me.

82. Fredric Fanthome
    December 11th, 2009 at 8:42 pm

    @Peiyu, Tiredman, SGND, PeterL, Voice of Citizen,

    It’s always a pleasure to see, amidst the shrill ranting of spiteful commentary, a few genuine thoughtful voices making a case for the positions they hold.

    I know only too well how much effort it takes to take all the passion, the not always well defined convictions one holds from a lifetime of experiences, select those that are relevant to a topic at hand and then painstakingly articulate a response, a rebuttal, or a question that is meaningful. The fact that you have gone to all this trouble is something that I note with gratitude.

    Your posts deserve more than a cursory reply and I will respond, as fully as I can, as soon as I can. You can appreciate, though, that writing on this blog is something I do in my spare time, of which I do not have much, and given the volume of commentary it is difficult to do justice to your remarks. I will therefore ask you for a little more patience so I can get back to you and respond to your posts such as I am able to, in some time .

    Right now, I would like to quickly respond to the other commentators who have not paid me quite the same compliment of attention and effort as you have.

    @operatianon

    I really do not know what link and logic you are referring to. From reading what Darkness wrote on my previous post (“Miss Singapore and Credit Card Fraud – which, btw I am no longer responding to), he is clearly a very intelligent, dynamic man who is a master of the gaming and internet domains.

    I do not know about his marital status, but I would venture that he is a “catch” if he is not already hooked. I do not know if he still reads this blog, but I believe that if you comment on a thread it sends an email to all people who have commented on it informing them of the new comment (I am not quite sure of this – perhaps the notifications I get are because I am the author.) So you could perhaps put in a comment on that thread noting your interest, and he might see it. Beyond this, I am, unfortunately not in a position to help.

    @sgcynic

    What you call narrow, I call precise. I doubt any of your elders who lived through the WWII and the Japanese occupation would use the war as broadly and carelessly as you, who have absolutely no notion of what it means, do.

    I have close family members who lived, fought, killed and saw their good friends killed in wars. I have heard their stories, and seen the indelible mark that such experiences leave on men. I have seen them haunted by nightmares decades after those wars are over. I am thankful they fought that I might be spared, and their immense sacrifice is such that I cannot use the word war as lightly or as broadly as you do. Let us not use grandiose terms to describe conflicts that are puny in scope and effect when compared to war. An election is not war. A debate, online or in person is not war. War is war. And if you ever find yourself in the middle of one, I wager you will never forget the difference.

    @ErniesUrn

    While this is the p65 site and I am a YP member, in all honesty, I am not writing “for” the PAP. I am writing what I think. It may be hard to believe, but it really is true. My next piece may well be one that comments on something that could be taken to be “against” the PAP. I just write what I feel – there is no agenda.

    In this particular case, if you read my note – and my response to SGND earlier – even though I have been described as “putting up a spirited defence of the cool off period” I never defended it and state quite clearly in my note to SGND that I do not think the cool off period is necessary at all. My point was about the opposition knee-jerk reaction to what I thought was something that could actually be used in their favour. The point that overall the next election will lead to a more plural parliament is something I do believe – not because it is PAP propaganda, but it seems to follow from the fact that 1/5 of the house will be non PAP. Just seems logical then.

    And I am not writing with a view to being ’invited to tea’/rise in the party etc as some people have insinuated. I have no wish “to go far”. I am well aware of the limits that an immigrant faces in a new country – rampant xenophobia as expressed here, notwithstanding. I am just one of those type of people who gets involved in the community he lives in. This is one of the ways.

    @JKL

    It was implied, as far as I could make out, that there was some government hand behind the ddos attacks on the TR and other sites. I have no knowledge of wayang site and their tactics. I have equally no knowledge about the underground gaming scene. I would agree that a ddos attack that affects the gaming fraternity is something that should not happen. Who the perpetrators are and what should be done about it, though I am in no position to resolve.

    I am hardly dismissive of local gaming talent. I believe the Singapore team (or teams from Singapore) do very well at the global gaming competitions. It’s just that I have no interest in such things. I prefer to live in the real world.

    The role of a government is to put in place the policies, legal and physical infrastructure and other enabling factors that allow their people to seize economic opportunity. Not to hand-hold the people to the Nobel or other prize. With a population of little over 3 million “true bred” citizens (to use another commentator’s terms) Singapore simply doesn’t have the depth of population to find the kind of talent that is needed to be world beating. Talent is inborn, and it is honed through competition. Singapore has neither a large enough population base to find that kind of talent, nor is it competitive enough to polish it. That is why it, very intelligently, imports talent to make up. This is just good strategy. If Singapore adopted a “juche” model like North Korea, trying to be totally self-reliant and protectionist, the country would be absolutely nowhere economically.

    @Ben

    If this ddos thing is inconveniencing you, I would absolutely agree that it should stop. That and fake sites. But really that has nothing to do with me or my post, don’t you think?

    @sgcynic

    Thought you said you would not engage in debate any more ? ☺

    Anyway, on MM Lees words as quoted by you. Maybe he was engaging in hyperbole. May be not. I think we will never find out, because I think things will never come to such a pass. I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it.

    @Purpose of Opposition/why so desperate

    Are you the same person – the posts seem remarkably similar.

    If you see all of the PAP policies as harmful, then I can certainly understand your desire to oppose all of them, and have the opposition oppose all of them. Obviously we disagree on this fundamental position, but there is nothing wrong with disagreement. I would not call your position nonsense, and I do not think mine is either.

    @AN

    I have already stated my views about the SMC/GRC, and the elections department. I agree that counting agents should be neutral. I wont bore everyone with a repeat. About an overseas commissions overseeing our results, I don’t recall the opposition parties stating that they had no confidence in the vote-counting process. I may be wrong but ballot-box fraud has never been an issue in Singapore.

    I disagree with you completely on the question salaries of the ministers. The corruption endemic in the rest of Asia is due considerably to the fact that the pittance paid to the ministers of their governments leave them open to huge temptation to barter political clout for cash.

    Our ministers may be officially paid a lot more than ministers in other countries, but they cost the country and the people much less. You will only understand this when you actually live in other countries and see how their leadership ‘unofficially’ amasses wealth at the expense of its people. There is nothing like that in Singapore.
    It takes enough of my time to respond to the people who comment on my own post. I have no time to trawl other sites. Anyone who wants me to respond to his comments has to write here.

    Singapore is in Asia. I take Asia as comparison. Let’s get off the 1st world/ 3rd world self-congratulatory arrogance. Anyway, lets look at the countries you mentioned –

    South Korea – owes it’s economic progress and “first world” status to policies put in place under the dictatorship of Park Chung Hee. Korea only became a democracy in 1987. The corruption and money politics in the country is of gargantuan proportions, and President Roh Moo-hyun committed suicide after being implicated.

    Japan – the nexus between the LDP and the government would dwarf anything of the type in Singapore. With it’s hold on every element of the bureaucracy the LDP ruled Japan almost without interruption until this year. The involvement of the yakuza in Japanese politics is also well known, with candidates having been assassinated. You seriously cannot be suggesting Japan as a model for Singapore, if you have a problem with the Singapore system.

    Taiwan – the corruption in Taiwan and the involvement of the mafia in politics is ubiquitous. Every party and probably every politician is involved with the underworld at some level. Chen Shui Bian is a perfect poster boy for the kind of politics that goes on.

    So that’s your list of “first world” countries in Asia. Try being a new unknown upstart opposition politician in them. You wont have to worry about defamation. Your problems will be far more life-threatening.

    USA – the self proclaimed “leader of the free world” defines money politics. I am of the view that it is the huge well-funded corporations that run the USA through their industry lobbyists and their hold over the funds available to elected representatives who would not be able to do a damn thing without millions coming from “donors”. There’s no free lunch – least of all in the bastion of capitalism. Look at what the tobacco, oil, fincance and defence industries are able to do to laws that might affect their bottom line.

    Australia – I have not studied in any depth and cannot comment on.

    So there are your comparisons. In Asia physical violence in politics is a reality. I stand by my statement that I would rather be in the opposition in Singapore than any of these countries

    @Lee Hsien Long

    I said it is a step towards more plurality – more voices than the current. Even without votes, I think it is still makes a difference. I don’t think the opposition is at the level that then can threaten the PAP’s majority yet- vote or no vote. It will take time to get to that level. In the mean time, any more room to express your views would be a step in the right direction.

    @Jamie Wong & alex tan

    Cowardly insults aside, you have no idea what kind of a guy I am. Sucking up is probably the last thing anyone who knows me will think about me.

    @Leslie Wong

    Copy pastes. There is nothing new in your posts that I have not read before. There is always a difference between a party and politician fighting to gain office and then, having gained it, having to face the realities of responsibility and governance. All in all I find MM Lee great statesman who played a masterly game with a weak hand. And personally I quite agree with his views – including those on democracy’s failure to deliver good governance in developing countries. I too value honesty, effectiveness and efficiency in a government more than political freedom. In my life outside Singapore I have seen all too much of the latter with a near total lack of the former, and I value the former far more.

    @Because of Fredick etc &PAP 66.6%

    Hysterical xenophobic histrionics will get you everywhere.

    @ Yueheng

    Thanks for your note. Disagreements are all very natural, but xenophobic paranoia as displayed by some others here is a little much, don’t you think? Here I write one note that happens to be positive for the establishment and there are people losing their heads. Funny thing is I am welcomed by most of the “true blue” Singaporeans I interact with on a day to day basis, and they especially welcome the fact that instead of staying aloof in an “expat” enclave I am totally involved as a Singaporean in every aspect of life – including now – political.

    Then suddenly online there is this other bunch that is so intent on kicking foreigners out, I am almost reminded of the Third Reich’s rhetoric of racial purity and keeping the fatherland for the “true son of the soil”.

    @Ronin

    If you tell me you have travelled to several countries, I wont take it as direct corollary that you imply that I have been to none. Perhaps that is because I am not so insecure about my own travels and experience that I immediately draw the most negative conclusion possible from a range of possible meanings.

    I know Singaporeans leave Singapore. Everyone has their own priorities. It is a global world. If they find another part of the world more suited to their tastes than here there’s nothing wrong with that. That doesn’t mean Singapore is a bad place – it means in their eyes some other place is better. Given my experience, I find Singapore a great place and so I have chosen to settle here. Of course if the xenophobia that is expressed by some here takes hold of the whole “native” population, I will be forced to relocate. When the “true blue” population has kicked out every last foreigner and foreign-born citizen, though, there will be very little of value left in Singapore.

    @AN, bs, singapaoreans, thc

    If you start your posts with abusive language, of it consists of primarily of a hateful racist curse, you can expect it to be deleted.

    Ok folks, the comments are coming in faster than I can respond to them. This is the best I can do for now. I have to stop here. I probably wont be able to write for a couple of days as I am going to be tied up.

83. X
    December 11th, 2009 at 10:00 pm

    This is what you wrote

    “It was implied, as far as I could make out, that there was some government hand behind the ddos attacks on the TR and other sites. I have no knowledge of wayang site and their tactics. I have equally no knowledge about the underground gaming scene. I would agree that a ddos attack that affects the gaming fraternity is something that should not happen. Who the perpetrators are and what should be done about it, though I am in no position to resolve. ”

    There was no DDOS attack Fredric on that site. There never was even one. They made it all up. So that begs the question why? That I believe is the main and only point why this was linked for your attention

    http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/10/31/temasek-review-site-down-by-another-massive-ddos-attack/comment-page-4/

    If you read the thread carefully it gives a blow by blow to anyone, but I admit, he needs some working knowledge to realize the responses given to the line of questioning by Darkness can only lead to one logical conclusion – they faked it perhaps to boost readership (or is there another reason? I dont know, but I know darkness knows because he spied there once upon a time 99% of netizens know that, so he definitely had access to the system). That is the point Fredric.

    Let me say this, the underground gaming community has always been respectful of P65 blog commentaries and many other blogs, that was is what their Liaison officer in the gaming forum always stressed to us, he says keep gaming gaming and politics politics, treat them like oil and water.

    All I can say is when a site fakes a DDOS attack.It mucks up things for everyone, no one is going to subscribe to an unstable system, online trade stops, online currency trading ceases, so now we all have to go to Malaysia and register new accounts, most gamers have no choice, the underground players especially, if they dont go there, we stand to lose all our e-money, that is the reason why the DDOS issue got blown up, as when compared to cooling period and DDOS which do you think is more dangerous when it comes to winning an election?

    Have a nice day and I dont agree with many of the racist comments here abt you either. Neither do I agree that new citizens are lesser than stock. You are part of the Singapore fabric, it begins and ends there, I speak for every gamer, as we play with all nationalities so we know this well. If you have the time Fredric play the game, you will discover as time goes by it is a community with real people and with time you will experiemce the reward of cammaraderie, friendship and kinship that makes life worthwhile

    Good Luck

84. PAP New Citizens Votes replace Singaporeans
    December 12th, 2009 at 11:09 am

    PAP New Citizen Fanthome, unlike true Singaporeans who had to bear the brunt of PAP rule and policies for decades, was one of those new ‘citizens’ recruited by the PAP to suppress the voice of Singaporeans like myself.

    Many Singaporeans believe that new citizenship are so readily granted to foreigners, who do not have to sacrifice years of their lives to serve National service and who were largely unaffected by many of PAP’s draconic policies dating back to the 60s, was because the PAP need new blood to bolster their ranks and their share of the votes for the next election.

    A quick fix if you will. If you can’t get your own people to support you because you have failed so abysmally, simply recruit new followers to edge out the old timers. Whether or not these new recruits will have the same loyalty as citizens born and bred in Singapore doesn’t seem to be an issue the PAP are concerned with.

    In fact, when PR Zhang Yuan Yuan went back to China and publicly declared her loyalty and support for mother China, the PAP seemed unfazed and even went so far as to DEFEND Yuan Yuan’s actions! That was a marked contrast from the way the PAP used to treat citizens merely suspected (usually falsely) of being communists.

    Now they are actually defending one of their pet PRs when she publicly declared support for China. How low will they go just to secure votes from new ‘citizens’?

    Thank you.

85. Nando
    December 12th, 2009 at 12:26 pm

    Fred,

    The question in your essay is this cooling period important or not? In the relative scheme of things it is certainly important, but I dont think some of the gamers are completely wrong when they say, there is a far greater risk in the form of a DOS attack. It can shut down the whole network. They know what is a DOS attack. Frankly, I know a bit only. But you should familiarize yourself with the risk along with motives etc.

    http://dotseng.wordpress.com/

    You need to scroll, he post everywhere it seems even in dead second hand tractor sites based in Bolivia, but this is the one I have found that doesnt require to jump through hoops.

    Learn Fred, understand what a hassle all this is to all of us time wise etc. It was never our intention that gaming and social politics should mash, but what do you expect when someone cries fire, fire, fire? What is funny is this, when a man lies to investors and hoodwinks them, he is put to jail. But what do you can we all do when a site like TR do the things they do and so many of us have to suffer? Do you notice no one even cares about us? Absolutely no one. Who protects us? Now you understand why Darkness had to go into TR and spy on them. The irony now is now that he has extracted the information to incriminate them, his own people want his to keep quiet. Ironic. I can tell you, its no fun going down to KL just to log on, I rather do it here in Singapore and benefit my fellow countrymen along with keeping the brains here so that we can grow an industry, but what to do? When all you have is ministers talking about playing police and thief, when was the last time you ever heard of a minister saying, I am going to help singaporeans put food on the table for their loved ones by using the internet? When? Pls be reasonable and try to see their point of view.

86. May Chan
    December 12th, 2009 at 1:10 pm

    “Then suddenly online there is this other bunch that is so intent on kicking foreigners out..”
    Let’s make one point clear: No Singaporean wants to “kick foreigners out”, they were never expected to take root here. Not when generations supported and believed in a government that was supposed to take care of their needs – jobs, housing, welfare. If you plant a tree, and patiently nurture it to fruition, you look forward to partaking of the harvest. Not to have it be given away gratis to strangers. The orginal stakeholders do not expect to see their equity diluted, not without due consultation. Those who have creamed million$ off the backs of the toiling masses may have the luxury of flying off to greener pastures, but lesser mortals do not have that choice – their place is in the heartlands, they were born there, they will die there. They may even be prepared to die for the dignity to be buried in their birth place. Yes, thank God, nationalism is alive in Singapore. We hold true the symbolism of the stars on our flag, democracy, peace, progress, justice and equality, and damn anyone if they dare take it away from us.

87. tiredman
    December 12th, 2009 at 2:19 pm

    Fredric Fanthome ,
    You must be joking. Citizen’s problem can be delayed till you have time to answer. What more is important when you are actually showing that you are concerned about Singapore and be one of us? You are showing that people’s needs can be delayed because you are very concerned about your own obligation. So, why write? It is a waste of your time, isn’t it? No wonder, you join Ypap. Birds of the same feather flock together.

88. SingaShadow
    December 12th, 2009 at 2:27 pm

    Here’s my take:

    Cooling day — I think the intention of the extra cooling day is have an extra buffer for people to deal with possibly surge of campaigning since the political scene has opened up a bit.

    Is there a worry that a freak might arise? Of course. Does it then give the PAP an “advantage”? Of course, if your desire is to topple the PAP at all costs. But do you really want an election to be won in a freak? Seriously, any strong opposition doesn’t need the extra cooling day try to create a freak to get elected. The extra day is neither absolutely necessary nor give any contestant any significant advantage. So I think issue is blown out of scale.

    On opposition — I think if the opposition better understands the PAP, they can devise a better election strategy.

    What’s PAP’s objective? They want to stay in power so that they can do what they think is best for Singapore. What’s the biggest problem PAP has with oppositions? Stupid oppositions. As long as they think a stupid freak would spoil all their hard work for Singapore, it’s only natural for them to enact barriers. The only way play the game is to convince them an alternative is as capable as them. And that is not just pointing out what the mistakes are, asking tough questions, showing why their policy doesn’t benefit you (which doesn’t necessarily mean for the whole of Singapore on aggregate), or grabbing them by the neck and shouting into their face. It has been 50 years, the quality of opposition has to improve.

    Before you jump the gun to challenge what makes them perfect, you have to realize that they don’t think they are perfect. They don’t. In fact, they find their job tough. They merely find themselves better qualified at the job than the oppositions. Is there an air of arrogance? Yes, but keep rubbing on that isn’t going to convince them why they can be replaced.

    The oppositions have to show that they understand the problems, can devise better public policies, create jobs, generate growth, handle foreign policies, draw long-term plans — in short, run a country — and that they can be replaced, at least in some area. Only then, can you vote them out without hoping for a freak. The oppositions have to convince the PAP stark in their face, not just the voters’. This is really where the the bottom line is.

    If the oppositions haven’t tried hard enough, don’t say it’s impossible and then revert back to brute force and luck. And don’t tell me that if I’m that smart, why don’t I do it. The onus is on the contestant.

89. PeterL
    December 12th, 2009 at 2:29 pm

    Dear May Chan,

    Like you I am a heartlander, like you I help plant and nurture this plant and hope to share its harvest and like you with the majority of heartlanders we will stand and be counted when the need arises.

    At 65 I must admit I had enjoyed much of the fruits and probably many more if all goes well.
    I am for migrants who will sink in their roots like our forefathers did to have a better life than where they come from and I agree totally with you that the govt.should not hand out PR & pink i/c so easily i.e after only 6ths,1yr,2yr stay and enjoy our hard work.Lets hope that the dept. and minister in charge hear this loud and clear especially Wong Kan Seng who had boo boo on the Selamat case and getting off lightly.I would resign in his position instead of allowing LHL to defend my shame.(Salary too good???)

    All told lets hope that the true citizens old or new good or bad super smart or just ordinary like me and most heartlanders will do what is right for our little RED DOT and not allow a SEA of GREEN drown us because of our own follies.

90. SingaShadow
    December 12th, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    On opposition — One suggestion: If an opposition can convince the public to adopt an unpopular policy (which nevertheless benefits Singapore) when the PAP can’t, then it’s already a huge progress for the opposition.

91. tiredman
    December 12th, 2009 at 3:07 pm

    SingaShadow,
    Remove the GRC and let me vote.

92. matchmaker
    December 12th, 2009 at 6:00 pm

    In can help.

    In response to your questionmiss operatianon directed to Fanthome concerning Darkness @ December 11th, 2009/ 8:42 pm, . the private accounts of darkness remain sketchy. but from what little I have heard from others in the Ekunaba site where he sells love e-novels. I know it is definitely a waste of time, this gives a clue, it is not much to go by but it gives a peek into the mind. Damaged goods.

    http://dotseng.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/the-incredible-koreans/

93. Ronin
    December 12th, 2009 at 11:38 pm

    Fredric,

    So you are saying we are all “insecure”?? Why is there a need for you to trumpet that you have lived in this and that country when all you wanted to say was how “great” S’pore is?? The only reason one does this to imply that the other party is a “frog in the well”.

    Using you logic, the fact that you find S’pore such a “great” place to live in does not mean that complaining S’poreans are wrong??!!

    This has nothing to do with “xenophobia”. 36% of the population are foreigners/PRs (PRs are really foreigners, given how easy a foreigner can obtain S’pore PR). Name me a developed country with this proportion of foreigners??

    There are very good reasons why NO developed country in the world are following the footsteps of S’pore. 10 years ago, LKY boasted that many countries would soon follow S’pore’s lead in paying their ministers top private sector salary. 10 years later today, S’pore remains the ONLY country paying their ministers outrageous salaries….plus cushy post retirement jobs.

    I really wonder if you would still find S’pore such a “great” place if you were forced to serve NS.

94. Goh Meng Seng
    December 13th, 2009 at 12:47 am

    Dear Fedrick,

    As an opposition politician, I must say that you have done a great service to us and I must thank you for it.

    Initially I thought Singaporeans, brothers and sisters here in the internet, would not bother about what fundamental fairness and social justice is after Prime Minister Lee has come up with this “cooling off period” thousand miles away from Singapore. But it seems that you have unwittingly become the catalyst that start the wild fire here.

    If you truly believe what you say, life is unfair, then I must advise you here, you have to believe in your own mantra. It is not going to be “FAIR” to you as a new citizen here because the locally bred citizens will question your position as to whether you have served what we have. If you truly want a “fair” treatment, try to volunteer yourself for national service. As a PAP member who truly believe in integration of new citizens with the rest, you should make your first move here, join the conscript service, then many people here will respect what you say here. Talking down on people who make such comparison using “Life is unfair” will not help you winning votes for PAP but rather, putting many people off.

    Yes, we are all descendants of our migrant parents. No doubt about it. But we share the common experience in building this country up and maintaining its safety by contributing to our national defense. We may welcome people like you with good talents and qualifications to join us but no, we will not tolerate people like you to talk down on us. Well, put it this way, since you say life is unfair so you may have a better treatment by the system, but please don’t expect other citizens to treat you with respect if you continue to have such snobbish attitude. They are not going to treat you fairly either.

    You claim to research well in Singapore’s history, as well as its political history but yet you claim that the Malays and Indians won’t want to remove the GRCs because it is going to be a disadvantage for them to win any elections in Singapore with Chinese as the majority. Let me revise Singapore political history with you. BOTH PAP as well as Opposition Malay or Indian candidates have won in past general generations prior to the introduction of GRC system in 1988. Notably, JB Jeyaratnam as an opposition member has won against PAP’s Chinese candidate in Anson TWICE. So your reasoning doesn’t really stand at all.

    In fact, when PAP increased the GRC system to 5 or 6 members, it is actually reducing the proportion of Malay and Indian representation in parliament technically. Instead of a comparable 25% to 30% representation, such 5 or 6 member GRC has reduced the representation to 20% or less. Do you seriously think the Malays and Indians welcome such changes?

    I would suggest that you should mix around with more down to earth Singaporeans more before you continue to create further damage to your party PAP. Not that I don’t welcome that as an opposition politician but I guess your passion is well misplaced.

    Goh Meng Seng

95. Yueheng
    December 13th, 2009 at 10:57 am

    My essay on cosmopolitan S’pore & the tension between “old” and “new” citizens:

    http://youareheng.blogspot.com/2009/12/sunday-essay_12.html

96. PeterL
    December 13th, 2009 at 12:28 pm

    Dear Mr. M S Goh,

    Thank you for writing a very rational comment without being overly emotional. I do agree with most point you raise but allow me a mention on JBJ.
    He is an icon who fought with everything he had,lost it and went to his grave with his IDEALS & BELIEF intact, before him under the HAMMER Mr. D. Marshall an Iraqi Jew won that seat and that race is almost non existence today in Singapore.

    It is the MAN & HIS PRINCIPAL IDEALS that matters most not his RACE.

    Singaporeans with 75% Chinese had used their heads when it matters most unlike the many comments that we are living in fear,stupid herd of lambs etc.etc.If a politician makes his stand rationally, I am sure Singaporeans and I mean majority Singaporeans of all races will support him like JBJ ,DM,CST and LTK. Unlike those, even when elected” talk cock” and was left at the wayside the next election.(no excuse of underhand tactics.Potong pasir with SHARKSFIN SOUP failed)
    Singaporeans are called by many names here, there and everywhere, i.e. KIASU, KIASI,and even STUPID.Let me state here categorically that being an ordinary heartlander,we may be called by many names but one thing is for sure, we are NOT IDIOTS.

    We the people build Singapore to what it is today, the PAP and LKY may claim otherwise or sole credit so be it,who cares!!! this is the only country I have and I will not trade it for any other.
    I will and I am sure the majority Singaporeans will stand and defend it to the very end.

97. Tah Thein How
    December 14th, 2009 at 10:21 am

    “I will and I am sure the majority Singaporeans will stand and defend it to the very end.”
    Bravo, Mr PeterL, bravo!! Please let us know when we can join you at the barricades. It will be an honour to serve with your command, sir!

98. Jackie
    December 14th, 2009 at 11:12 am

    Dear SingaShadow, we beg to differ.

    We think the extra cooling off day is the latest in a bag of tricks the PAP has drummed up: on that day, the mainstream media will dominate the campaigning while others are gagged, flooding pages with praise articles of how great Singapore is today, and horror tales of how neighboring countries are suffering without an “enlightened” government with world class salaries.

    What is this “freak” you speak of? That Chiam See Tong trounced Mah Bow Tan in a fair fight? That an ethnic minority of Indian origin, JB Jeyaratnam, was voted in by a Chinese dominated constitutency? The real freak is an octogenarian who hangs on perniciously to office, drawing millions from the taxpayers’ toil and sweat, and who claims he “is not working.” Right, a paid fortune teller would have been sacked long ago for buying BOA shares high, and selling low.

    Regarding your assessment of the opposition’s intelligence, find a mirror, gaze before it. Truth hurts. The PAP wants to stay in power simply because, like despots worldwide, they know their use-by-date has long expired. They have nothing new to contribute. That’s why the old man keeps regurgitating tales of old, and the syncophant press even rush into print books of white washed history.

    This has to be the mother of all oxymorons: “they don’t think they are perfect” and “they merely find themselves better qualified”. Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people, for the people. Not a coterie of elitists who consider themselves the best creations sliced bread.

    Oh, regarding your doubts about the opposition’s capability to run a government, do you know about the PAP Town Councils who burnt good money in toxic financial products? And rewarding themselves with 14 months of bonuses while doing it? If the opposition fails to perform after being elected to government, they will be voted out the next round – you know of Democratic Progressive Party’s Ling How Dong? He didn’t last too long. But Wong Kan Seng will still be collecting his millions even if Mas Selamat wannabes blow up a couple of buildings. You insult the general population of Singapore if you think otherwise. Believe you me, with MM Lee setting up the precedent “I am the exception” there will be lots of ministerial guys unwilling to give up the good life.

99. PeterL
    December 14th, 2009 at 11:29 am

    Dear Mr. TTH,

    It will be sooner than you expect but I hope not to see it during my lifetime and I am sure there will be sufficient commanders of ability in the SAF to do the job unless we capitulate within 3 weeks and drown in a sea of green.
    The lucky???ones will be off when the siren blows and DAD”s army of which I am one I don’t know about you Mr. TTH but I am sure you will be there with me.
    Should the barricades be meant for politics, I have done my part.I voted opposition and supported those I believe can be a rational voice the past 30 years for an alternative view as I wrote earlier these are the Davids in Parliament not the “talk cock” that don’t walk the talk.

100. PeterL
     December 14th, 2009 at 12:07 pm

     Dear Jackie,

     Your points are rational and I agree that a number of ministers with the exception of “i am the exception”are hanging in there for the PERKS.OK “i am the exception”being paternalistic may be the exception to the rule but time is creeping up fast on him, but the others??? especially,Wong Kan Seng, Jayakumar,and a few others,they should be out in the pastures enjoying their retirement.Should their need arises they owe us to serve on senior citizen allowance and not the monthly $$$$$$$ they currently receive. You don’t need a ROCKET SCIENTIST to come to this logical conclusion.( sorry if you guys disagree,I am entitled to my opinion too )

101. Abdul Rahim Bin Osman
     December 15th, 2009 at 8:01 pm

     I just want to say that if the Opposition seems to be dissatisfied with the GRC system than boycott it, and don’t ever contest on that GRC tickets, but contest the SMCs’ tickets instead. This is how I think positively.

     Carry on doing your door to door to win the hearts and minds of the people that you want to represent.

     So do not complain, do your rounds everyday and soon you would find that you could win a seat just for your hardwork done. Keep it intact by way of becoming fulltime MP. And that’s where as an incumbant, I am sure your opposing side would not win that seat at all!

     That goes also to the PAP.

     So this is a challege for all would-be MP of the tommorrow Singapore, be it PAP or Opposition.

     Think about it guys.

102. Lachlan
     December 17th, 2009 at 2:31 pm

     To: bystander, muse, shoe thrower, lim pang seng, mediacorpser, JKL, ben, X

     I play pc games, less so for online games. I share bystander’s desire for Singapore to become a gaming hub. I would like to do what I can to help make that happen.

     From your comments, i understand there is a suspicion that Temasek Review (TR) faked a DOS attack. On whether TR is a covert site of PAP, there are proponents on both side of the theory. Game servers are said to be migrating to Malaysia, because of some feel the servers here are vulnerable to DOS attacks.

     I don’t know… I find it hard to believe that TR is a covert site of PAP. The PAP websites are nowhere as well supported and as sophisticated as TR. To do that PAP would need 2 teams of web administrators, as I see it PAP is stretched enough to form 1 team. Once I was talking to someone senior from Ministry of Finance, he seemed genuinely displeased when TR changed its name from Wayang Party. Temasek Review is the name of the annual publication of Temasek Holdings.

     How can I do my part to help the online gaming industry of Singapore? Would it help if I write a feedback to MICA? What can MICA do to promote online gaming in Singapore?

103. gamer
     December 17th, 2009 at 9:01 pm

     The comments against TR are obnoxious!!!!

     These are veiled but futile attempts of ‘agents’ to discredit an independent news source.

     “Inventing facts as fast they put words in other people’s mouth” as one blogger aptly calls them.

     Their pretense that they belong to the gaming community is laughable. Their attempt at gaming linggo and erroneous references to non-existent but imaginary online subject matters make me cringe!!!

     My grandmother can best them anytime in pretending.

104. gamer
     December 17th, 2009 at 9:14 pm

     If Fredric and his likes believe that the mainstream media won’t sing praises for the government during the cool off period, if that is truly the case, then by all means, we shall VOTE for the PAP!!!!

     But if I see the opposite, and I dare people here, if we see nothing but 24 hours worth of government ball-licking which is the latest form of mainstream media “self-cencorship”, are we going to let PAP get away with it?

105. Singapore Lim
     December 18th, 2009 at 10:59 am

     Chiam See Tong (Secretary General of Singapore People’s Party & Chairman of Singapore Democratic Alliance), on the cooling off period:

     The “cooling off” period is an attempt by the PAP to stave off the pressure put on it by the opposition.The opposition seige is for PAP GRCs and PAP SMCs to fall.

     There is no need for a change.

     It is one step backwards for democracy when Singapore is striving to be a first world Democratic country. If Singapore is to follow Australia,Italy,etc in having a”cooling off” period then, we should know the polling date 6 months to1 year beforehand.

     The Opposition will meet any challenges that it confronts from the PAP.

106. Singapore Girl Next Door
     December 18th, 2009 at 6:04 pm

     A good look at the latest bill which is the “cooling off” reveals that 24 hours before election, all campaigns are prohibited….

     EXCEPT…

     EXCEPT….

     EXCEPT…..

     Drums rolling…..

     EXCEPT…..PARTY POLITICAL BROADCASTS, which are free airtime on TV given to the “main” parties. They are allocated time in proportion to the number of parliamentary seats they contest.

     And how many seats are the PAP contesting again?

     The PM certainly knows how to contradict himself wrt the need for the voters to calm down 24 hours prior to election.

107. Fredric Fanthome
     December 18th, 2009 at 6:46 pm

     Hi All,

     Apologies for my absence. I was held up by circumstances somewhat beyond my control. I notice that in the mean time the comments count has gone up to 100 (not including my own replies) and I have been quoted in the TOC and TR as well. Interesting. More gratifyingly, I noted that the comments that are coming in now are almost all genuine points of view and not mindless insults. I suppose the wheat has been winnowed from the chaff and those who are still here are interested in earnest debate rather than shrill sloganeering.

     Anyhow, I owe a great many of you replies and let me get right to it.

     @Peiyu

     Absolutely my post was about a plea for rationality in the opposition and voters and not on the usefulness of the existence of an opposition. Obviously though, an opposition that exists has to be sensible and rational in its policies or else it will be useless. This was my point. If one opposes every single policy put in place by a government that is clearly doing a lot right (let’s not argue this point as the evidence is everywhere) then very soon one fades into the background noise because one’s input is undifferentiated and cannot be constructively listened to.

     The solution to Singapore’s ills, cannot possibly be dismantling every single policy the government has put in place over the last 44 years. Anyone who suggests that will have to accept being ignored because such a suggestion stretches the limits if credulity. If, on the other hand, one says, “Well, your policies work in areas 1,2 & 3 and no issues there – but on this issue #7 you really need to rethink – and here is my solution.” then immediately you will be taken more seriously. This is what I was saying. Thus if the opposing party finds fault with everything (this happens a lot all over the world, I am not singling out Singapore’s ‘opposition’ in particular – but I could not be giving examples from all over the world or else my post would be interminable), it will begin to be given less importance because listeners will not be able to differentiate substantive policy disagreement from media-friendly cacophony. Whether it is fair or not, listener fatigue is real. The cooling off period, in my view was one such unimportant issue which I felt was being blown out of proportion.

     That doesn’t mean the opposition opinion is disregarded. In fact I think given how small the Singapore opposition is, it is easy to keep track of their voices. This is in marked contrast to places like India and Indonesia where there are so many parties and so much noise that it’s near impossible to sift fact from fiction. I was not dismissing opposition voices at all. I was saying they might be better advised focusing on issues that I felt were of more substance, and I raised two examples – one in the USA and one at home.

     On the issue of transparency, were you referring mainly to financial information – such as the results of Temasek and GIC? Or more broadly? If to the former I have a different opinion from you, and it is informed by my experience in the financial industry. I honestly think it is counter productive for investment companies (and even ordinary public companies) to release too much information too frequently about their performance. I personally think that the quarterly reporting rule for all public companies is one of the worst rules that exists, and is one of the key policies that is responsible for the short-termist, boom/bust behaviour of several firms that are being forced to think of ways to satisfy investors for the next quarter when they should be thinking over a 5-10 year horizon. The pressure to impress investors every quarter is what gave rise to Enron and Worldcom and other frauds. Had they not been interested in such short term goals and if analysts were not pressuring them for better results every quarter, it is conceivable that they would not have cooked their books.

     The most successful investor of all time, Buffet has repeatedly spoken out against the quarterly reporting rule. He does not offer any guidance on the performance of his Berkshire Hathaway, nor does he talk about his strategies. He merely delivers over the long term, and his firm’s share price performance speaks for itself. He bought $10billion worth of Goldman Sachs shares at $110 and they fell to $70 after he purchased them causing him (and investors) hundreds of millions of dollars of paper losses. But he wasn’t voted out of office. No one decried his “bad judgement” from this “bad call”. This is a long term game. Sure enough, Goldman’s shares bounced back and he is now hundreds of millions of dollars in the black. There were other purchases he made that never bounced back and he did actually lose hundreds of millions. But single losses like that do not negate overall performance.

     Similarly, getting upset with Temasek and GIC for losing money in the last year (a year where everyone except short sellers lost money) is ridiculous. With the size of investments that these firms make, these are long-term plays and you need to evaluate their performance over a 5- 10 year horizon. Money lost on one or two trades doesn’t count. It is overall performance that is important, and on this front, they have been doing well. More transparency regarding long term performance may surely be useful, and yes, independent auditors going over their results would also be good, but given the strategic nature, the size and the time horizons involved I would think that the detailed reports (of holding, trades etc) should be made available to only selected members of the Parliament (members in charge of looking at government finances perhaps) while for the broader public the report should be more summarized and over larger times scales and should not include details that could move markets, give other investors too much information of the SWF’s detailed strategy or indirectly put pressure on the fund managers to deliver quick results to please public opinion.

     @SGND

     I must say, if the Opposition parties in Singapore have half a brain, they should be recruiting you into their leadership (if they haven’t already). You’re the kind of person that should be in Singapore politics – a well reasoned, well given person who wants to do her best for the people. As long as there are people like you (regardless of party lines) involved in Singapore politics, I think the country will be safe. You write with singular feeling and power. Thanks for writing on this thread.

     Now as to your points:

     I do not look at the media to judge that Singapore is an astounding success. As I said earlier, I have lived in a fair number of cities across the world – including London and Hong Kong, and I have relatives settled in the USA and compared to all these cities that I have experience of, Singapore is far and away the place I want to live in and be a part of. Our folks in Chicago and San Francisco have often said, “What are you doing in Singapore – come to the USA!” and I invariably respond, “What are you doing in the USA? Come to Singapore!” It’s got nothing to do with media – it is everyday life in Singapore that is a testament to its success – and when you consider it got to this level in 44 years it is astounding.

     I agree with several of the statements you make. However do not forget that democracy is not a panacea. As you pointed out Marcos came to power in a democracy. And even more surprising perhaps to some will be the fact that Hitler was elected to power in a free and fair election. Yes. Hitler was elected to power, in a “free and fair” democracy. And all the free press, civil liberties etc that existed in the democracy were to no avail when he clamped down on the country.

     You hit the nail on the head – if MM had been a Marcos, Singapore would have been worse off than the Philippines is now. The key then is not the system. The key is the people. It has always been and it always will be. The real challenge in any system is to ensure that the right leaders govern. Democracy doesn’t have all that remarkable a record in this regard. In fact, I would disagree with your view that democracy is even an insurance policy against bad leadership. In some cases it can be subverted (Philippines), in some cases the entire political class is so pathetic that it doesn’t matter who you vote for, it’s all the same bunch of crooks (several states in India) that loot the country.

     That doesn’t mean I am advocating replacing the democracy we have with another system, but what I am saying is that we should not lose sight of the real issue – which is good leadership – regardless of the system. And all political parties should spend a large proportion of their energy searching for and grooming leaders whom they will feel happy to leave Singapore in the hands of, regardless of party lines. At the end of the day, Singapore is far too small and resource poor to afford the kind of damning political fractures that rive countries across party lines and where downing the rival party even at considerable cost to the people is more important than doing good for the people even if it means that the rival parties benefit. In contrast to you, I think in this area Singapore politics has got it right, and I think the policies of the government have played a very positive role in making it so.
     I cannot fully judge your comments that the PAP has lost touch with the ground, is self-righteous, lives in the past and has no longer any good leaders etc. From what I have seen, the leaders strive to listen very hard indeed. If you have ever tried getting access to your MP in India you would find it absolutely incredible that in Singapore you can simply walk into an MPS session and get to meet your MP. I do not know all the leaders of the PAP. The few leaders I do know of, I have developed a considerable respect for.

     I do not know how you get the figure of 44% of the population dissatisfied with the PAP. Was this the average share of the vote won by the opposition in the last GE? If it is as large as that, and growing, then certainly it will be reflected in more seats in the future. The first-past-the-post system means that even a small majority in the popular vote will lead to a large % of seats because it is a winner takes all system. As I pointed out in an earlier comment, Obama won 68% of the electoral college seats with only 52% of the popular vote (Bush won the 2000 elections having lost the popular vote!).

     I really don’t see much “suppression of civil liberties” in Singapore. If anything, suppression is less now than it was in the time of MM’s premiership. While one can argue that we don’t have the kind of freedom to “protest and demonstrate” and “strike” as in western democracies. I have never been a fan of such tactics, and I am quite thankful for example that I did not book a flight with BA this Christmas. I more than glad that Raffles Place cannot be picketed, SIA crippled by disgruntled unions, our whole public transport network brought to a standstill by some political party or we have the kind of chaos that is currently visible in Copenhagen (in fact, I think they should consider having the next climate change summit in Singapore – it won’t be as abysmally chaotic)

     There are avenues for the expression of contrary voices without fear of being locked up. You are certainly not being harassed for expressing your anti-PAP views on this thread. In fact, I welcome your voice here. And when election time comes, you will be volunteering for some opposition party, I am certain – if not actually standing as a candidate yourself. I don’t think a “blunt” suppression of civil liberties will be invoked to prevent you from doing so, and indeed I think regardless of party lines, you will be a force for good in Singapore politics.

     @PeterL

     The voice of someone with 50 years experience in Singapore is very welcome indeed. I think the word “dinosaur” has no place here. You have a long way to go (65 million years) before you would qualify for that!

     Your point that Singapore has been built by its people is absolutely valid. I would venture though, that government policies do have a significant role to play as well….! I think Singapore a great showcase for what can be achieved when the government and the people work in harmony. When I came here 10 years ago, I was blown away by what the country had achieved and as I lived here my appreciation for Singapore grew not diminished – which lead to my deciding to become “Singaporean by choice” and this was a place that I could truly identify with. And being the pro-active sort of person I am I got involved as best I could and have been welcomed by the vast majority of the people I interact with. I do hope to continue to contribute to the fabric of life in Singapore for a long time. I don’t know if I will get booted out when a xenophobic party comes to power, but thanks for welcoming my contribution to Singapore until that time comes…!

     @Voice Of Citizen

     Thank you for your compliment regarding my writing. I do not believe my penmanship is that remarkable, however. Perhaps I am able to convey my thoughts with some accuracy. More important than mere polish is substance and sincerity and you have a fair measure of that in your post. Thanks for writing here.

     Your post was long, and much of it was a call to arms of much flourish and vigor. I must confess that I do not agree with many of your statements though and since you have not backed them up with any evidence I do not find them particularly compelling. However, I will take what I gather are the main thrusts of your argument and respond as far as I am able to.

     On the question of rhetoric – I do not deny that heated rhetoric even if irrational on the surface could have a basic truth that it is built on. However the onus is on the writer/speaker to clearly present the argument, not on the listener/reader to somehow extract the facts from the venting. If a commentator does no more than call me names and suggest that I don’t know what I am talking about – and goes on to say I am a sycophant (or worse) using my talents officiously and beguilingly in the service of some dark force, you can hardly expect me to pay such a voice too much attention. If on the other hand he raises a few key points of difference with me regarding matters of policy and then proceeds, rationally, to explain why his position is superior to mine, I will be much more inclined to listen. All I am saying is that on this thread, this latter sort of debate is much more preferable – and the onus is on those who take part to present their views in a suitable manner. If they do not, readers will sooner or later tire of empty rhetoric.

     You accuse me of supporting the PAP and suggest I am doing so because I don’t know any better or am doing it with a personal agenda. First off, I do not have a personal agenda, least of all of wealth accretion via political office. If money was my sole purpose in life I would have kept my head down and glued to the financial markets and earned fat paychecks there without getting involved in anything else. Some of my peers are already earning more than Singapore ministers while still in their 30s, sitting in bulge bracket banks in Wallstreet, London, and other big financial centers – including Singapore. I didn’t need to get involved in Singapore politics to make money – I would have followed the money trail perhaps to New York instead. I am not that sort of person. Chasing money is not the purpose of my existence. Second, I am not going to take your word for it that supporting PAP is something immoral and unbecoming of a thinking human being and that by supporting the PAP I am necessarily a sycophantic dark force who is working against the people. I am not one to be influenced by the talk of anyone else. I will have to see the evidence for myself and I will make my decision. So far, what I see is a government that works and does more for the people than others I have seen. Perhaps I am wrong and in time will come around to your point of view – but it will have to be based on what I see, not on what you say. If I am going to be so easily influenced by your words, I would be just as easily influenced by another voice. I do not bend whichever way the wind blows. I make an evaluation based on what I know and what I see. You cannot expect it to be otherwise. When I see evidence that I need to revise or change my position, I will do so. As of now, I don’t.

     You make a lot of statements in your piece.

     The government is disconnected from the ground realities. You make this statement without evidence – or assume it is self-evident. I don’t see it that way – but of course I am not everyone everywhere. I tend to feel that if MPs meet their constituents face to face week in week out, they will not be shielded from reality to the level that you suggest. I could be wrong in my view. If enough people think so, there will be some truth to it but then again, the views of a vocal minority may not be the views of the silent majority.

     On pay for ministers – I disagree with you entirely. ‘Noble’ and ‘idealistic’ in my view are impractical qualities to look for in a minister, and the remuneration of the role has to be such that it attracts quality candidates and discourages corruption. The immediate consequence of low pay for “noble” ministers and senior civil servants in every single democracy in Asia barring Singapore – I repeat – barring only Singapore – is rampant corruption. As I have said before, we may pay the government more than other countries do, but they cost the country much less.

     On the foreigners issue – I can understand some disquiet on immigration – and perhaps the scale of it is getting some people upset. But to suggest that the newcomers like me can displace “true-bred” Singaporeans is just opportunistic scare-mongering and really hard to take seriously. Are you suggesting that the PAP is deliberately recruiting 3 million foreigners to take the place of 3 millions true-bred Singaporeans all of whom are dissatisfied with the PAP? That the PAP has come up with specifically this strategy to marginalize the true-bred citizenry and hold on to power? It beggars belief that you expect such a claim to be taken seriously. You will need to provide evidence of immigration numbers to substantiate your case.

     Foreigners are critical to Singapore’s survival and standard of living. Foreign firms bring jobs. Without the foreigners, there would be far fewer and poorer jobs. Singapore doesn’t have enough of a local market to sustain the lifestyle that most Singaporeans take for granted now. The standard of living here depends on leveraging international trade and export and that requires importing talent from all over. The fact that people like me (and better than me) who could really settle down anywhere in the world choose Singapore as home is a compliment to the country, the people and the government. While one can calibrate the inflow of foreigners to suit the needs of the people, if the welcome that we find here turns to wholesale rejection and all non-true-bred Singaporeans and foreigners our forced out, the true-bred Singaporeans that are left behind will suffer. Let us have no illusions about that.

     You say the PAP is now protecting the rich and powerful. Well from what I have seen of countries with violent “vibrant” democracies, plutocracies, mobocracies, dictatorships or really any sort of government at all – the rich and powerful elite can always take care of itself – whether one party is in power or another. They maintain their relationships and hedge their bets with all. The PAP doesn’t have to protect the rich and powerful, they can look after themselves in Singapore and wherever else, regardless of who’s in power.

     You made a lot of unsubstantiated statements in your post which I will briefly mention – that the PAP thinks “only they can rule”, manipulates land prices, is deliberately working to relegate true-bred citizens to second class status, shields the rich elite, is a costly-top-heavy government, is using 10M public funds indiscriminately, is marginalizing true bred citizens, is following “policies of eugenics” to eliminate true bred citizens and engineer population replacement.

     Frankly, until you come up with some evidence to back these claims these are just empty statements, and I cannot discuss them further. The claim of the PAP following a policy of eugenics to engineer population replacement is absolutely outlandish and farcical. I would refrain from using such language.

     Your final call to stand up for Singapore is stirring, and while it is a little long, I can appreciate many of the points you include – especially about equal privileges for all citizens – not just the rich (curious though – would you extend new citizens like me equal privileges once you are in power, or will I be considered second-class to a true-bred citizen?), balanced growth and more accountability and humility.

     I am sure there are many people who have heard your call, and will respond. Thanks again for writing here, and I am sure we’ll “cross pens” (or keyboards?) once again!

     @Boboshooter

     I understand your point of view. However I would hardly say newcomers like myself are telling you how your house should be run. If you imagine that the PAP is listening avidly to voices like mine as opposed to yours, I think you’re quite wrong. I personally have had no input on any government policy so far! So I am not telling you how your house should be run.

     On the other hand, if you have a 4yr old child and 10 yr old child, are you telling me that the voice of your 4yr old child is never taken into consideration when deciding what the family should do? Do you tell the 4yr old to shut up because he is too young to know anything about the family decisions, history, etc. You may take his words more lightly than his elder sister who has been around longer and knows more, but you do listen, don’t you? You never know when the input may actually be valuable.

     I think we really need to take a cold hard look at the facts regarding the immigration. I think it is a far cry to suggest that there is are too many new citizens around to the point that they will somehow replace or endanger the “true-bred” Singaporeans.

     I did a quick search for numbers of new citizens and this is what I found from various sources online – none of which I can vouch as 100% accurate but we only need approximations. In 2005, 12,900; 2006, – 13,200; 2007- 14,600. I read somewhere that in 2008/09 the numbers were around 20,000 or thereabouts. Assuming an average of 20,000 new citizens a year over the 5 years 2007-11 that’s 100,000 new citizens in a population of about 3.8million or about 2.6%. Can that really be called “too many” or a flood that is replacing the true-bred Singaporeans? I think immigration policy is driven more by Singapore’s really low birth rate and the need to bring fresh blood in to support a rapidly ageing population, rather than a calculated scheme to replace the current population. If Singapore’s total fertility rate was at 2.1 as opposed to a 1.29, there would be much less immigration.

     This is as far as am able to get in this session. I will respond to the remaining comments hopefully by tomorrow.

108. sgcynic
     December 18th, 2009 at 10:18 pm

     Frederick,

     Iit is indeed refreshing to read your post without the usual “talk-down” tone. Mellowed?

     You claim that this is “a government that is clearly doing a lot right (let’s not argue this point as the evidence is everywhere)”. Not terribly precise, are you? To use your words, “you make this statement without evidence – or assume it is self-evident.” After all “that’s for you to judge… My opinions are mine, and yours are yours”. “If I am wrong and in time will come around to your point of view – but it will have to be based on what I see, not on what you say. If I am going to be so easily influenced by your words, I would be just as easily influenced by another voice. I do not bend whichever way the wind blows. I make an evaluation based on what I know and what I see. You cannot expect it to be otherwise. When I see evidence that I need to revise or change my position, I will do so. As of now, I don’t.” (An apt para that says nothing substantial.)

     A few strawman arguments tat you thrown up:

     “The solution to Singapore’s ills, cannot possibly be dismantling every single policy the government has put in place over the last 44 years. Anyone who suggests that will have to accept being ignored because such a suggestion stretches the limits if credulity.” I think you are the only one that suggested this. I’ve not heard any of the “anonymous hordes online” discussing about “dismantling every single policy”.

     “I honestly think it is counter productive for investment companies (and even ordinary public companies) to release too much information too frequently about their performance. I personally think that the quarterly reporting rule for all public companies is one of the worst rules that exists, and is one of the key policies that is responsible for the short-termist, boom/bust behaviour of several firms that are being forced to think of ways to satisfy investors for the next quarter when they should be thinking over a 5-10 year horizon.” I agree. But who’s asked for GIC and Temasek to release information frequently about their performance? The public is only asking for accountability into why “long term investments” were sold off in only a few months at great loss, the exact losses not disclosed notwithstanding. What is the country’s reserves that is kept such a closely guarded secret that president Ong Teng Cheong, elected to guard our reserves, was also not privy to? A system tat places trust in individual indeed.

     You claim that we “need to evaluate their performance over a 5- 10 year horizon. Money lost on one or two trades doesn’t count. It is overall performance that is important, and on this front, they have been doing well.” What is your basis for this conclusion? The figures that the government is occasionally forced to disclose? They are vague and for different time periods that no one can make sense of. No one knows the real returns excluding all cash injections that the government has made from our surplus over the years.

109. Voice Of Citizen
     December 19th, 2009 at 12:39 am

     To All,
     Use your energy and time effectively and collectively for common goal.

     Do not waste your time anymore on this fellow, Fedric.

     Spread your words to everyone you know that the opportune time has come to vote in more oppositions or vote out PAP in the next election.

     It is IMPERATIVE that we must do it NOW as this may just be our last OPPORTUNITY with the fast increasing number of new citizens in likes of Fedric.

     Voice of Citizens.

110. sgcynic
     December 19th, 2009 at 1:16 pm

     Frederick,
     “what I am saying is that we should not lose sight of the real issue – which is good leadership – regardless of the system.”
     So what is “good leadership”?

     “At the end of the day, Singapore is far too small and resource poor to afford the kind of damning political fractures that rive countries across party lines and where downing the rival party even at considerable cost to the people is more important than doing good for the people even if it means that the rival parties benefit. In contrast to you, I think in this area Singapore politics has got it right, and I think the policies of the government have played a very positive role in making it so.” I still find this hard to swallow in light of Lee Hsien Loong’s candid admission: “Supposing you have a Parliament with 10, 15 or 20 opposition members out of 80, then instead of spending my time thinking what is the right policy for Singapore, I will spend all my time, I have to spend all my time thinking of what is the right way to fix them, what’s the best way to buy my own supporters over”.

111. Singapore Girl Next Door
     December 19th, 2009 at 1:56 pm

     Dear Fredric,

     If I will subscribe to your logic, then Singapore wouldn’t be what it is today.

     The PAP65 was once the opposition, and if the British did not recognize the universal right to assembly and freedom of speech, which were the PAP65’s tools during their heyday, they may all be in Changi Prison til today.

     …and if Filipinos had failed to come to the same realization, they will still be living under the rule of a 80-year old despot.

     The British built Singapore and made no hesitation to proclaim that the thriving metropolis owes everything to them…..from a squatter dump to a world class city, they made Singapore.

     If one has respect over history, it requires no effort to realize that the PAP is starkly similar to the British except the former does not respect the basic freedoms of assembly and free speech….these freedoms were instead demonized and became taboo in our schools and media.

     Coppenhagen….and in many similar rallies and protests, if you have been into one, they are composed of teachers, journalists, economists, students fighting for a cause.

     They are not spoiled and stupid citizens like the Singapore government would have you believe it.

     One may call them a mob.

     I call them passionate human beings fighting for a benevolent cause.

     It depends on how you see pass the dehumanized and oftentimes demonized picture behind the TV screen, and live into one.

     I hope the PAP remembers….that it too was once on the streets.

112. Singapore Girl Next Door
     December 19th, 2009 at 2:06 pm

     Dear Fredric,

     On a separate note, on behalf of my fellow commentators, let me say thank you, for spending time to comment and participate on a debate.

     The dialogue is much appreciated eventhough sometimes unpleasant words are used.

113. PeterL
     December 20th, 2009 at 12:15 pm

     Singapore Girl Next Door-

     Dear young lady,

     To be able to “agree to disagree” is a true sign of maturity and I can proudly say that you are indeed Singaporean and may more of your kind surface with rational and not emotional comments.

114. General Santos
     December 21st, 2009 at 3:42 pm

     “gamer
     December 17th, 2009 at 9:01 pm

     The comments against TR are obnoxious!!!!

     These are veiled but futile attempts of ‘agents’ to discredit an independent news source.

     “Inventing facts as fast they put words in other people’s mouth” as one blogger aptly calls them.

     The main question is the cooling period a bigger threat or a blog site that is masquerading as the means to slowly burrow its way to influence public opinion in blogosphere?

     http://dotseng.wordpress.com/

     I have read what is written here. All five essats. What abt the 300 or so sites where it resides in other threads? TR is wrong if it thinks people will just forget, as for their masters they are over confident, this is just the first wave.

     Let see what this so called great site TR has done. First it started as wayang party. Now it is Temasek Review. Give it some time and it will be the online version of the ST.

     Do I agree with what this man has written. To be honest with you. I dont know. I am keeping an open mind. But I do know it is definitely 100 times more dangerous than this cooling period nonsense.

     Time will tell. And another thing, you cannot win without the element of surprise. Now that most of the internet knows of this hidden agenda, the main point is it will always have the power to disturb for a very long time.

     As for those cyber troopers what can I say? You go up against a professional with a butter knife, what did you really expect. I can tell you something we talk about guts and action, but all I see is one man who put everything on the line and by the looks of it TR is limping already.

     Ever wondered why all the so called DDOS attacks they use to suffer every two weeks have mysteriously stopped?\

     I wonder why?

     I wonder.

     Prognosis: he outplayed you cybertroopers and you came out with your panties.

115. SingaShadow
     December 21st, 2009 at 4:03 pm

     @Jackie

     I believe the staffing of senior management and their sky-rocketing salary reflect the emphasis of leadership retention in the administration, which to a large extent is understandable.

     (Despite the seemingly exorbitant salary, it’s still a small fraction of the budget compared to the total government expenditure, fiscal stimulus, welfare funding, etc. if you check out the budget reports.)

     What I’m willing to doubt is whether the compensation scheme is optimal, and how effective it is.

     But are you even willing to question if that one extra cooling really matters for the PAP? If your premise is “damn if you do, damn if you don’t”, then it’s easy for people (who disagree with you) to ignore you.

116. sgcynic
     December 22nd, 2009 at 2:29 pm

     I invite all readers to visit the Online Citizen to read about the “affordability” of our HDB flats (”Higher HDB prices good for Singaporeans?” http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/12/higher-hdb-prices-good/comment-page-1/#comment-122469).

     Make your own conclusion whether the evidence supports that this is “a government that is clearly doing a lot right”. Reflect on the numerous lapses over the last 4 years and the lack of accountability (”let’s not argue this point as the evidence is everywhere”). Do we really have “good leadership”. Do you trust this current batch of “leaders” to bring us forward, to meet future challenges?

117. Just a thought
     December 23rd, 2009 at 10:35 pm

     SingaShadow

     >>>”I believe the staffing of senior management and their sky-rocketing salary reflect the emphasis of leadership retention in the administration, which to a large extent is understandable.”<<>>”Despite the seemingly exorbitant salary, it’s still a small fraction of the budget compared to the total government expenditure, fiscal stimulus, welfare funding, etc. if you check out the budget reports.”<<>>”What I’m willing to doubt is whether the compensation scheme is optimal, and how effective it is.”<<<

     - Absolutely right to ask how effective is the compensation scheme. How do we measure this? Private companies measure against previous years profit or profit targets. Can a country really measure the GDP alone? A country's Govt is there to serve the people and there is nothing to measure if this is achieved with the GDP. So how are the MIW's performance measured? No one knows except for GDP growth.

118. Ronin
     December 24th, 2009 at 9:18 am

     Fredric,

     If Warren Buffett was running GIC and Temasek, we would be happy even if these 2 SWFs reported financial performance only every 5 years. But alas, we have lesser mortals running these 2 SWFs.

     We are not focusing on the short-term, but losing $100 billion in total in less than a year is shocking by any measure. We are told that Temasek is a “long term” investor, yet it sold its huge positions in banks in less than a year. Why? Did it do sufficient due diligence prior to taking massive stake in these banks?? It literally bought high and sold at the bottom.

     And the best part is, no senior executive was sacked!!! Had it been a private fund, the manager would have been sacked.

119. Lachlan
     December 26th, 2009 at 2:58 pm

     @Ronin, December 24th, 2009 at 9:18 am

     There was a debate on Temasek Holdings’ performace on YP’s website. It is under Editorial > Economy. Please contribute your comments at http://www.youngpap.org.sg/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=43&Itemid=36

120. Ronin
     December 29th, 2009 at 12:47 am

     Lachlan,

     Am not going to boost YP’s web traffic. You can argue yourself silly there!!

121. Fredric Fanthome
     December 29th, 2009 at 2:31 am

     Hi All,

     Sorry been tied up, and then with all the Christmas stuff to get through, was not able to make time to reply. However, it’s fair to say that the thread has run its course with over 120 comments and we should all be moving on. Still let me briefly try and respond to the remaining comments since I last wrote.

     @ X
     Sorry, I had earlier only read the main article in that link hence my impression of the DDOS attack. I read the whole thread after you posted it, and what you and Darkness seems to suggest appears quite well evidenced (to an untrained eye, I have to admit). I suppose all’s fair in love, war and publicity. I completely agree with you that a system that suffers from significant down-time – for any reason, is a real problem for all those that need it running – though I didn’t quite make the connection between the TR site’s issues and why gamers need it running. Do gamers need the TR servers for their activities? I would think not. Was it because gamers thought that the government might target their servers so they rushed to get out of Singapore cyberspace? I think that is somewhat of an overreaction. As far as I know the government is trying to promote the gaming industry here – so it would not make sense for them to clamp down on gamers like this.

     As an aside – I don’t get involved in gaming not because I find it ridiculous but because I know exactly how easily I will become wholly sucked into it. I used to play games (back in the ancient dinosaur age of late 1990s) and was especially addicted to strategy games. I realized then that if I continued down that path I would end up hikikomori glued to my PC and virtual life. So I very definitely do understand your remark about it being a real community.

     @ PAP New Citizens Votes replace Singaporeans
     I would not call NS a “sacrifice”. It’s a privilege. Had I been born, or come to Singapore when I was a kid, I would have been more than happy to do NS. It’s just not possible for economic reasons to do a full time NS stint later in life when you have to support a family. I find it sad that so many here refer to NS as a “sacrifice” and a “waste” of “years”. I would never have thought of it as such, and I rather suspect many proud Singaporeans don’t.

     If you imagine that the PAP needs foreign born citizens because it can’t get its own people’s support – you’re obviously not following local elections where the margin of victory for the PAP has in every single election far exceeded the 2.6% (or even 3%) of new foreign born citizens that now are in the population (compared to the last election) and you contend are replacing the “true bred” citizens. Quick fix? A 3% increase in foreign born citizens every 5 years means it will take at least 117 years before they make up more than 50% of the population – by which time those that were the initial “foreign” immigrants would have had “true-bred” Singaporean children, so in fact it would take a lot longer than even 117 years at the current rate to have more foreign born Singaporeans than locals. Does that sound like a quick fix to you? The entire argument of “replacing” true-bred Singaporeans is completely idiotic and secondary school mathematics will show you that it is utter nonsense and irresponsible sowing of divisions between citizens of Singapore.

     I think you need to make a clear distinction between a PR (who remains a citizen of his/her home country) and a citizen – who has taken up Singaporean identity and loyalty. Why should the PAP be fazed by a Chinese citizen declaring her loyalty for China? That has nothing whatsoever to do with Singaporean citizens being communist (and a threat to Singapore during the communist insurgency). There is no comparison to draw. The PR you refer to is NOT a Singaporean citizen and will NOT vote in Singapore – and is not in anyway linked to Singapore politics. You should at least check on these basic facts before bringing up an argument that is completely irrelevant to a discussion about Singapore citizens.

     @nando
     I don’t think the cooling period is important. That was the point of my initial article.

     I have to confess, I got tired of the link you posted a quarter of the way through. The writing was turgid and full of unnecessary overly dramatic similes and metaphors – like someone trying a little too hard to sound learned and important. I can’t put up with that sort of thing too long. It also seemed to be obsessing about the TR- a site in which I have vanishingly little interest (to be fair I really do not spend time on any blogs, so I don’t exactly mean to single the TR out). I really don’t’ give a damn what the TR says, does, doesn’t do or claims others do or don’t do.

     Of course if the TR’s actions cause you to suffer, that’s an issue (I didn’t quite get why what the TR does should affect gamers), and I completely agree that you should not have to suffer and if no one is there to defend you, I fully support your operatives doing what it takes to defend your interests.

     You didn’t specify whose point of you I am supposed to try and see (your last line). I don’t think you mean the ministers you mentioned. You must mean your gaming brotherhood. Well I didn’t mention a word about the gaming fraternity in my post, and I am not sure the cooling off day affects gaming or that the gamers affect the cooling off day. If there’s an issue between the gamers and the TR – please do sort it out and I will root for you in hands-off sort of way. How that’s linked to this thread, though, I really do not have the faintest clue.

     @May Chan
     If you didn’t want foreigners to come to Singapore you needed to do something about the 1.29 fertility rate that Singaporean women are keeping below replacement level of 2.1. If things keep going on as they are, without foreign blood to make up the ranks, Singapore will die out, and long before that, the place will fall to pieces as you will not have enough able-bodied young people to economically power an ageing population.

     No one is trying to take your peace, progress, justice, equality yada yada away from you. I thought I was contributing to it. And, trust me, nothing is being given away gratis to me or other foreign born citizens. I earn my keep just as you do, and I had to meet rather stringent criteria to be accepted as a citizen. It was not as easy as simply being born here. Being an immigrant, strange as it may sound, is actually harder than simply growing up in country.

     @tiredman
     I thought you were talking some sense earlier, but this post of yours is really without the slightest merit. I would like to see you keep up to date with 120 comments in as detailed a manner as I am doing, while managing the rest of your normal life. I am doing the best I can given several demands on my time. I am not showing up just twice, writing a little snide paragraph belittling another’s time commitments and then waltzing off like I have done something very constructive. It takes time for me to get back to this thread because quite contrary to what some have surmised, I lead a very active offline life, and this blog is not the centre of my existence – not by a long shot. And its not like people are coming here to ask my help for their needs (I see some of that in my volunteer work). Here people are arguing against me or trying to berate me. I don’t really have to give that so much attention. Still I try to respond as far as I am able – especially to people like Singapore Girl Next Door, Peiyu and PeterL who made very reasonable points. If you do the same, I will pay you more attention.

     @Singashadow
     Agree with you totally….!

     @Matchmaker
     Aww that was harsh! Damaged goods? Aren’t we all at some level? Darkness does sound smart, whatever else may be true.

     @Ronin
     I did not trumpet I lived in xyz country. I stated it to provide a reader with the background information that I had some experience to back my position on Singapore’s attractiveness as a place to live, and was not merely comparing it to a “third world” metropolis like Delhi or Mumbai. It is your insecurity that reads this as “trumpeting” and implying others are “frogs in the well”. Perhaps you’re used to “trumpeting” your achievements and experiences, so you impute that to others when they merely mention experiences without any sinister subtext. Self aggrandizement is really not something I’m into.

     PRs are not involved in Singapore politics and cannot vote. So their population is irrelevant to Singapore politics. Raising the question of their proportion to the citizen population in Singapore is a red herring.
     And if you want another country with a high proportion of foreigners – ever heard of Dubai? Emirate citizens make up about 17% of the total population and expatriates 83%. And they boast of being more developed than Singapore. So I have named you one “developed” country that has a far higher population of foreigners on its soil.

     And you have heard of the USA? Well if you compare the number of people who emigrated to the USA after 1776 (when it became independent), to the few who were there before, you would have to conclude that the majority of the population of the USA today consists of “foreign born” or “sons of foreign born” citizens. They don’t seem to have a problem with it. That’s kind of an inconvenient fact for you, isn’t it?

     And if you say neither of these two examples is relevant to Singapore – well actually that’s part of my point – no other country’s system or experience is relevant to Singapore. Whether there are 1, 10 or 20 countries of any description with low numbers of foreigners resident, or 1, 10 or 20 democracies, monarchies or dictatorships in the rest of the world – it has no relevance to the Singapore experience, which is unique – so don’t point to foreign countries for a model for how Singapore should behave.

     On the question of the ‘Singapore model’, actually China has been following the Singapore model (or a modified version) ever since Deng Xiao Ping visited Singapore in the 1978. He attributed his trip to Singapore as the inspiration for his model for China’s economic progress starting in the 1980s. So the most successful economic powerhouse in Asia (and arguably, the world) has learnt from Singapore. As for ministers salaries, well it’s a pity other countries do not follow the Singapore model. That’s why they still have endemic corruption, while here we have almost none. As I have said before – we may pay them more, but they cost the country much less than ministers in any other Asian “democracy”.

     On NS, I have already said, had I come to Singapore when I was youth, I would have gladly served NS. My family comes from a long line of military men. My ancestors are recorded as military adventurors in the history of the Indian Raj and immediate family members of mine fought in the world wars. I wonder if you can say the same for your lineage. I would have been proud to serve in the armed forces. Military blood runs in my veins. I just came to Singapore too late.

     @PeterL
     I am certainly trying to contribute in whatever way I can to Singapore – because I have said before, this place is the one that is closest to my idea of an ideal place to live, and I will do my best to keep it so.

     @ Goh Meng Seng
     First of all, let me thank you for writing in. I appreciate the fact that you are the only other person here with the courage to write in your own name instead of hiding behind a pseudonym – and this means I put a lot more store by what you say. Indeed I went and read up a little about your thoughts on the alternative to the PAP Singapore and have been impressed by some of your arguments and reasoning especially your points on the economic growth of Singapore, your raising of the Nordic countries education policies, and your minister-specific long term policy strategy for your party. While I may not agree with everything you mentioned, clearly you are following a well-intentioned, well thought out plan for Singapore – and really that’s what matters.

     Now to your comments. First, it would be nice if you didn’t mangle my name. It’s not like I am calling you “Gah-Men Seng”, am I? Not that I care so much about my name since I am used to people messing it up, but in your position as a leader in the opposition, spelling the name of the person you’re addressing correctly shows you’re paying attention. One doesn’t really want a careless leader of the opposition, does one?

     If you think I am doing you a great service, I accept your thanks. I think if there was an underlying dissatisfaction that has been brought to the fore, then I am doing everyone (government included) a service by bringing people’s attention (unwittingly or otherwise) to a hot-button issue that otherwise might have gone un-addressed until it was too late. As it is, now that it is in everyone’s consciousness, I am sure measures will be taken to address the issue.

     Now on the question of “unfair” – where did I ask for “fair” treatment? I don’t ask for or expect fair treatment. I have seen enough unfairness in real life – bread and butter issues – all over the world. I simply deal with what I face. A country’s political philosophies hardly impacts my daily life. Covert and overt racism, however (like Chinese landlords refusing to rent to Indian tenants) has a much more direct impact than airy stuff about free speech and political pluralism – and I have faced racism and other discrimination here and other places I have lived. So what? That’s life. I don’t whine about it. I deal with it best I can.

     I don’t “talk down”. I rebut and demolish arguments that are made against me with whatever skills I have to debate with. If someone can dish it out here (hiding behind a pseudonym at that), why can’t they take my giving it back? Why is the ego of some people so fragile that the moment their arguments are shown up to be hollow and nonsensical they’re immediately whining about “talking down”? If you can stand up and criticize, stop whining and take it on the chin like a man. You don’t see me flinching from the trash being talked about me, do you? I am not complaining about people “bashing” me or “talking down” to me. I am not that fragile. If some one wants to be in this space, they better not be either, because while I respect an opponent, I am not going soft-pedal to seem “nice”. I talk straight and I hit hard. That’s just how I am.

     I am not talking down – I am debating. Hard and with no punches pulled – but that’s what debate is supposed to be like. If you get in the ring, you should be prepared for it.

     On the point about NS – is it the only way your highly qualified mind can think of on how a person can to contribute to a country? Or is it just a convenient issue to talk up since everyone knows that first generation citizens and PRs are not asked to serve and so it’s a great “divider”? As an economist you would know, given financial commitments, it becomes economically near impossible to go through 2 years of NS when you’re in your 30s and have a family to support. It’s a very different matter when you’re 16-17 and financial concerns generally are little more than grouses about pocket money. I have said before, had I come to Singapore at that age, I would have been happy to serve. Since given economic realities, I cant do it at this point, I try to contribute in other ways.

     On the question of minority representation I do know my Singapore political history – there is only ONE non-Chinese opposition candidate that has won an election in the entire history of independent Singapore – the redoubtable JB Jayaratnam. That is the example you “notably” mentioned – conveniently leaving out the fact that it was also the ONLY example that existed at all. That is not exactly a ringing endorsement of multi-racial representation by non-PAP voters now, is it? All the other opposition winners before and since have all been Chinese. You are using ONE example to support your entire argument?

     From where did you get the figure of 25% – 30% minority representation being reduced to under 20%? Other than JBJ all non-Chinese MPs have been PAP members – and I am surprised you are looking to the PAP’s internal decisions about candidates to field to support your statements about multi-racial representation.

     It’s interesting that you club yourself with the anonymous others here in trying to insinuate that I am some sort of ungrounded, glib talker who really has no clue about realities of Singapore life. I have been here 10 years now, and certainly, while that is not a lifetime, and I don’t pretend to know everything about everything here, I have lived here long enough to be able to offer a point of view. And I do not belong to some super-wealthy tiny minority living in ivory castles. I am quite middle of the road, and I like it like that. I do see and talk to people and I form my opinions on several issues. Some of them will form topics for other posts. Right now we’re discussing the cooling off period (or we were, though here of course I am responding to your unsolicited advice about how to be more Singaporean).

     By the way, since you are an identified leader in the opposition, and you have identified the influx of foreigners as a key hot-button issue, let me ask you this, – beyond criticizing the government – what are your concrete, constructive proposals to deal with foreigners? Do you have a plan? Will you ask the MNCs in Singapore to move out with their foreign talent and leave Singapore to Singaporeans? And what about foreign born, “non-true-bred” citizens like me – will you be asking us to get out too? Let’s hear your proposals so that both your supporters and people like me know what to expect when you come to power.

     Don’t worry, I don’t expect “fair” treatment. I just want to hear your plans so that I know what to expect and can prepare for it if it comes to pass that you do come to power.

     @Yue Heng
     Thanks for the link – nice piece, but typically I don’t respond to links as they are not replies to my post. As you can see, I have my hands full just responding to those who actually do write here!

     @Lachlan, gamer & SGND
     I guess you guys were not really addressing me? I would tend to think that the TR is not a covert PAP site – though I really don’t know much about the way these things work. I don’t recall saying anything obnoxious about the TR, so I hope it wasn’t me you were referring to.

     I personally would find it quite distasteful if the mainstream media took advantage of any loopholes in the cool off period to drum home a PAP driven political message. Frankly I think it would backfire. Let’s see if it comes to pass.

     @Jackie, Singapore Lim, Abdul Rahim Bin Osman, PeterL. TTH
     Your posts were welcome, but I guess you were either not addressing me or making a general statement to which I don’t see any need to respond specifically. So just wanted to acknowledge your taking the time to write – thanks for writing.

     @sgcynic
     I have not mellowed or changed. Perhaps it’s just that you are now less inclined to impute condescension when none was ever intended. As I noted in my reply to Goh Meng Seng, I merely debate hard. If my opponent’s ego is so fragile that he can’t take it and starts whining about condescension, that’s his look out. If you attempt to quibble about the use of the word “war” with me, I will respond as I did. If you make reasonable points like Peiyu, SGND and PeterL did on issues of import, I will respond in kind. It’s as simple as that.

     On the question of Singapore doing a lot right – there is so much evidence all around that if you refuse to see it, you have to be blind. I do not have time to discuss all the evidence, but I think the massive improvement in living standards from 1959 to 2009 says enough.

     On the question of dismantling every policy of Singapore, I was responding to people like “Purpose of the Opposition” and “Why so desperate” who did say precisely that they oppose everything that the government has done and that everything is wrong with Singapore. May be you should have a word with them about it – or perhaps you should do your homework before you start saying I am the only one suggesting something.

     On the question of GIC and Temasek – I agree with you – there should be accountability. I do not know if there is enough and more is needed. I am against public short term reporting and public justification for individual buy/sell decisions (even at a loss – no one asks for explanations when they are sold at a profit, do they?). But certainly, accountability to a Parliament Committee should be put in place.

     On the long term performance, Temasek holdings reports a 16% CAGR since inception.

     http://www.temasekholdings.com.sg/media_centre_news_releases_170909.htm

     GIC reports a 5.3% CAGR

     http://www.gic.com.sg/faq.htm#05

     Certainly if you choose not to accept the figures you can say no one really knows. But ultimately in the financial industry you have to trust someone. Management, auditors, stock exchanges etc – if you doubt everyone and everything, it’s not like you wont be able to check them all.

     By the way, I thought our President was SR Nathan, or are you dragging up a pre-1999 grouse more than ten years later?

     It seems you didn’t understand my point on political fractures and how the PAP has so far managed not to let the country be politically torn. What PM said is exactly the reality in most other democracies – especially Asian democracies where the focus in NOT on governance but on “fixing” the other party. That is the reality of a “vibrant” democracy such as India, Indonesia, Philippines where politics is not about governance but about winning power and retaining power regardless of the cost to the country. It is a good thing that Singapore politics is not like that because if it were, we would not be enjoying the kind of living standards we have. Even the Plen admitted that. Try spending some time in the hurly burly of politics in India or Taiwan – these countries progress not because of the political leaders but in spite of them. Singapore is not big enough to afford itself that luxury.

     What is good leadership? There are scores of tomes on the subject if you would care to look them up, but in the context of Singapore governance in a word, LKY. He epitomizes good leadership. Much greater minds than mine single him out as one of the greatest statesmen of our time. You may disagree, but again the evidence is everywhere, even if you choose to blind yourself to it.

     @SGND
     Please do not imagine that the British were some moral authority that let Singapore protest their rule and then go independent because of some high-minded ideals. They were a rapacious imperial power that found it expedient to garb their colonizing greed in the genteel couture of a assiduously cultivated anglophile upper class of natives who would aid them in governing the rest. Had the rights to assembly and freedom of speech really got to the point of seriously threatening them, they would have done away with them. It happened several times in India – perhaps you might like to read up on a very British response to a civil protest they didn’t much care for.

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jallianwala_Bagh_massacre

     The PAP has never done anything even remotely close to this.

     The reason the British lost the empire (and left Singapore) was not because they felt it was time to let go, but because they simply could not hold on. After being bombed to near oblivion and losing a huge number of their young men in WWII they simply did not have the strength for the type of measures it would take to keep the lands they had annexed in their plunderous rampage in the 1800s. And even as they left, they made sure to sow seeds of division and hatred – dividing both Palestine and the Indian Subcontinent against themselves. Having seen the kind of policies the British followed up close, I can assure you that any illusions that they were superior to the PAP are completely false. They systematically plundered the lands they colonized. The most famous of the “crown jewels” of England comes from India, for crying out loud! And why is the Rosetta stone in London, or the Parthenon Marbles?

     In 1965 Singapore was by no means a world-class city. I don’t see how you say the British were taking credit for something that did not exist.

     I have a very different view of rallies. Whether you are a teacher, journalist or a student, if you behave like a mob – attacking law enforcement, destroying property etc, you are a mob. If I were passionate about global warming, I would start by not using plastic bags, not buying a new mobile phone (shipped from China) every few months, buying only local fresh produce instead of processed food at a supermarket etc. If all the so-called passionate humans fighting in Copenhagen did that instead of flying there and dumping lord knows how many tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere, they’d probably be doing more for their cause.

     Thanks for your note about the dialogue – the feeling is mutual, and I hope you will continue to frequent this blog and write. I fully second PeterL when he writes that he is proud of you as a Singaporean and may more of your kind surface!

     @General Santos
     You’re commenting on the question of whether TR is a government site or not. I don’t think it is in the least relevant to the topic at hand.
     Seems to me that you’re a fan of Manny Pacqiao though… (If so, that makes two of us.) And you sound suspiciously like Darkness himself. Certainly imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but here I am given to believe the flattery is a little too sincere.

     Anyhow, next time you’re on this thread, do reply to the post at hand. chances are irrelevant comments will be deleted.

     @Sgcynic
     I will get around to reading your link when I have the time. But if you are going to cherry pick your grouses, you will certainly have a long list. Since you’re so upset with the HDB, perhaps you would prefer a Singapore without it at all – chockfull of slums and squatters – or completely built up like HK where the really poor live in cages and even the middle class live in homes that are smaller than the average living room here? It’s easy to criticize things in 20/20 hindsight – much harder to put up viable alternatives.

     As you would probably know that there are three levels of activity in any campaign – strategic, tactical and operational. Leadership is most critical at the strategic level – and that is where the PM and cabinet of ministers operate. Mid to senior civil servants operate from the tactical to strategic theatres. Lower level operatives are responsible for operational matters. If your grouses are operational, which most complaints regarding HDB are, you can hardly blame the strategic direction taken by the leadership. It’s the lower level officers responsible for operational matters that are to blame. If you have a problem with the entire strategy of the HDB – and by implication its existence, then lets hear your alternative. If you do not wish an alternative, to the HDB – or cannot come up with one – then you really have no viable answer to the strategy currently being pursued by the leadership, and you still don’t have a real counter to my point that the government has done a lot right.

     The same is true for all those baying of the Minister’s head for the Mas Selamat episode. It was an operational oversight. It makes no sense to fire a Minister for the lapse of a guard. It’s not his responsibility. If on the other hand you can show a systemic security problem in Singapore, the Minister’s resignation is justified. It certainly is not required for an isolated jail-break. Asking for a Ministers’ resignation on such an operational failure is simple populist rabble rousing and is completely without any merit. Would you shoot a general if a lieutenant or captain were unable to take an important target? Only Commanders in Chief like Hitler and Stalin behaved in such an unreasonable manner towards their general staff.

     @gamer
     No one here is trying to undermine TR. Your post is completely irrelevant, and this is not job portal. I have therefore deleted your post.

     @Ronin
     I don’t now how familiar you are with the investment industry, but Warren Buffet is not the only investor who has a stellar record in investing. Just because you are familiar with him doesn’t mean others cannot do a very good job at GIC and Temasek. And I am sure even if Buffet was running the funds, you would probably be asking for his resignation if he lost you $100b in one year. Yes, the amount is a lot, and perhaps it was a bad call, but one trade is not enough to judge a manager – nor even one year. As I said, longer term performance is the key – and in the links I posted above (reply to sgcynic) you can see both firms report very credible long term CAGRs.

     Certainly I agree there should be checks to see that due diligence was done. My take on this is that a detailed annual performance report including an analysis of major trades (particularly loss making ones) of the 2 SWFs should be made to a Parliamentary Committee charged with oversight of the country’s finances assisted by a top level audit house to clarify technical matters if members of the committee are not sufficiently familiar with the intricacies of financial investment. The detailed report should remain confidential but a summary version should be released publicly so that long term performance can be tracked publicly. Now I actually don’t know if this is already being done – it might well already be the case, but if not, that’s my proposal for what should be done.

     I certainly do not think that senior management should be fired for one bad year. I personally do not agree with “hire-fire” policy of most private banks and funds anyway – it is one of the principal reasons for the short-termist self-enriching behaviour that is rife in most private investment firms and was one of the key drivers of the financial crisis.

     Well, that’s it for now. I daresay this thread has run its course. I will not be replying in such a detailed manner going forward, unless there are posts that make compelling arguments that should be discussed further. I am sure everyone is quite done with the current topic anyway, and will be looking forward to the next sensational subject to flame…!

122. goldfinger
     December 29th, 2009 at 4:25 pm

     “As far as I know the government is trying to promote the gaming industry here – so it would not make sense for them to clamp down on gamers like this.”

     Lets look at who our govt is attracting, lets be specified, MDA< EDB – they are attracting the big boys, the so called fortune 500 firms. They are established service and product providers. In some cases they are innovators on a mega scale.

     The Brotherhood and many of their channel partners, along with other brotherhoods as they are too many to count as not in the same league as those guys. These are people who work during their spare time, mostly in garages and with borrowed or beg components and support gear. In a sense they are like the Bill Games and Steve Jobs when they were just working in their garden sheds.

     What we have here is a strategic vision that differs, like heaven and earth. It is natural for people like the brotherhood to believe in this amateur army. Did you know their most important technological break through came out from a converted ice cream van based in Wisconsin which they converted into a research lab? And when you consider 99% of the stuff that is regularly produced doesnt come from the big boys as they do from these amateurs. Then it becomes clear.

     One day these tinkerers are going to grow up. Some may get regular 9 to 5 jobs. Others may strike off on their own. You put your bets. I put mine on the small.

     Did you know that if you invested just $50 in Steve Jobs when he couldnt even afford taxi fare to make the trip to the local radio shack, that same money would be worth 1,200,000 today.

     Who would you bet on govt or brotherhood model? Besides all this is now dust, this ddos nonsense has thrown everything out of orbit, someone has decided wisely or stupidly singapore is a bad investment. May have the best it infrastructure in the world, but without the foresight, it is all wasted, so a decision has already been made, they have all packed off and moved to China, so you are right this entire discussion is over and purely speculative.

     I am just replying to complete the missing link in your otherwise compelling argument.

123. Singapore Girl Next Door
     December 29th, 2009 at 5:22 pm

     Dear Fredric,

     This shall be my last post as well which I intend to be short and sweet.

     Going back to the original theme of your article, it is with great emphasis I again say that PAP was once the opposition.

     And during the British rule, it did Singapore a great service that opposition figures such as the PAP were not marginalized and inhibited of their rights.

     For if they were, where shall we be?

     I therefore hope that the next generation of PAP leaders carry with them the same spirit of…….but i don’t want to say the word…….i should just let them remember what it is.

     And so as parting gesture, I hope this serves as a reminder….

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvvhY6DtfZs&eurl=http://ramblinglibrarian.blogspot.com/search?q%3D1938&feajture=player_embedded

124. sgcynic
     December 29th, 2009 at 7:34 pm

     “Over time, Singaporeans have become less hard-driving and hard-striving. This is why it is a good thing that the nation has welcomed so many Chinese immigrants”

     ‘If native Singaporeans are falling behind because “the spurs are not stuck into the hide”, that is their problem.’

     Lee Kuan Yew’s comment, published in the National Geographic Magazine (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/print/2010/01/singapore/jacobson-text)

     According to Frederick, LKY epitomizes good leadership. “Much greater minds than mine single him out as one of the greatest statesmen of our time.” Indeed, the comment above is typical of those that have come from LKY, a great ruler who does not care about the lower rungs of the society, an engineer who fears the lower class if allowed to breed freely, would lead to a degeneration of our gene pool?

125. sgcynic
     December 29th, 2009 at 7:43 pm

     “On the question of Singapore doing a lot right – there is so much evidence all around that if you refuse to see it, you have to be blind. I do not have time to discuss all the evidence, but I think the massive improvement in living standards from 1959 to 2009 says enough.”

     Frederick, I can see you have not lost your touch, only your sight. Did you see the peak we hit at the turn of the millenium? If you only see “the massive improvement in living standards from 1959 to 2009″ and refuse to see the massive increase in our underclass (now emerging ultra-underclass), you have to be blind.

126. Goh Meng Seng
     January 1st, 2010 at 3:59 pm

     Dear Fredric,

     I appreciate your effort in replying me. Thank you.

     First, I hope that I get your name right this time.

     I have yet to address your points brought up in this particular posting because I guess, since we are standing on the different sides, we will have to agree to disagree.

     Besides, unless you would declare that you are going to be a PAP candidate in the next General Elections, I wouldn’t see the need to help you and others in PAP to learn about the faults and flaws in your argument. Let the Singaporeans on the net comment about your points here.

     You claim that you are debating points but alas, I have tried in the past and some have tried recently to get YPAP to open face to face debates in public forums to no avail. It seems that PAP isn’t particularly interested in public debates at all and your comments do surprise me.

     Nevertheless, if you so claim that you are actually debating an issue here, which I could really see the amount of effort you have put in replying comments, why not organize a proper public forum for policy debates? I am very sure many young Singaporeans as well as opposition members would be glad to participate in such open forum, held in a fair and just manner. In fact, I have suggested to TOC and some other people that we should organize such open policy debate forums and YPAP or PAP itself should be invited as well, else you will start to throw stones at them accusing them as “opposition mouthpieces”. For your information, nobody from opposition paid a single cent to them to be “opposition mouthpieces”, nor do we control them via utilizing public funds to make them our “mouthpieces”.

     I am very tempted to answer all your questions that you have raised here posted to me and believe me, I do have the answers or rather, the “rebuttals” hands on. However, I am more interested to see PAP members to open up themselves to REAL public debates. More open to criticisms and eggs thrown at them… you should well learn from your veteran MM Lee to take whatever eggs thrown at him as such. The recent debacle about YPAP members running down on public individuals like Alex Tan is something contrary to perception of compassionate and open mind.

     Do email me or just inform me by posting on my blog if you are interested in real public debate and discourse. Until then, may you have a Happy New Year.

     Goh Meng Seng

127. sgcynic
     January 5th, 2010 at 5:47 pm

     Read about rising HDB prices here

     http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2010/01/property-market-stays-hot.html

     And note Fredericks’ wisdom: “you can hardly blame the strategic direction taken by the leadership. It’s the lower level officers responsible for operational matters that are to blame.”

     LOL.

128. PeterL
     January 6th, 2010 at 7:10 pm

     Mr. Fantome. Whatever the comments, you are one of us today foe better or for worse.

     Welcome to the world of reality “Singapore” where we strife as one,no one will be left behind unless he/she wants to,no excuse for the failures unless they try to be winners if not they will remain as whiners.The unfortunates will be help along but the self inflicted/imposed unfortunates through their own follies like gambling,spending more than they can afford and not willing to face reality should face their own destiny without blaming society and everyone except him/herself.

129. Jackie　Ｌｉｍ
     January 7th, 2010 at 10:11 pm

     Dear Mr. Goh Meng Seng,

     I have felt you were one of the promising opposition party candidate to look out in the last election. Savvy with internet, having an independent mind and willing to engage constructively. But on the issue of Alex Tan, you may not have done your homework. Do find out more about the issue.

     As for open debate, you can always join one of the dialogues. Alex did. So can you.

     By the way, you never know where the eggs will land.

130. Goh Meng Seng
     January 8th, 2010 at 3:29 pm

     Dear Jackie,

     Thank you for your compliments.

     I don’t really know Alex but just met him a couple of times.

     Admittedly, I did not follow closely what the “quarrel” is about in YPAP facebook because I hardly visited that site until this saga broke off.

     Having said that, I was a youngster before and I believe, I can empathize with young people like Alex and even YPAP members.

     My assessment of Alex as a person is that he may be hot headed, just like any youngsters at his age. But here is a certain passion in him as I observed. Rightfully or wrongfully, he represented the frustration of the “underdogs” in this society’s lowest 20% percentile.

     Alex Tan, is just a nobody as compared to people who identified with YPAP before this saga evolves. YPAP, as a political party’s youth wing, has to manage a wider responsibility on Public Relations. In fact, I would say that in any democracy, the Youth Wings of any political parties are usually the Avant Garde of the political movement. However, in Singapore’s context, I do not think YPAP is that bold enough to take that prestige into its direction. But, at least, it must be ready to stand up for what it believes in, be more confident in debating any issues in public domain, especially with the young people in this society.

     Sad to say, YPAP may just become an “ELITE social club” instead of behaving like a political party’s arm. From the responses from the YPAP members and its associates, it gave a very contrasting image of how YPAP has lost touch with society. The contrast is further enhanced when you have somebody like Alex who are basically street smart because he is from low income family that made him fend for himself financially as well as psychologically, going into confrontational engagement with YPAP members who unwittingly demonstrate their “Uncaring Elite Faces”.

     I am not supposed to teach my “opponents” about the flaws faults and ignorance of their doings. But I guess I will be more charitable this time to put a million dollar into your pockets just for this time round.

     Goh Meng Seng

131. PAP Inside Information Exclusive
     January 8th, 2010 at 4:08 pm

     From the YPAP website:

     An Attendee – Depolitisation of Peoples’ Association |2009-12-11 21:22:52
     I am doing so anonymously as I fear repurcussions from my branch and grassroots.This substantiates a point raised by a YPAP member on the fear of discussing politics in school.

     Another YPAP member was bold enough to ask about the independence of the Elections Department or the presence of an Independent Elections Commission.The fact is 1/3 who voted for opposition are not represented in parliament proportionally as there are only 2 seats in parliament.

     When MP Sam Tan said that the Elections Department was independent, he was rebutted by members of the floor who said that it comes under the PMO office.I have checked and verified and it does come under the PMO’s office.

     Is there a reason why the Elections Department is not independent?Does this give an advantage to the PAP at every polls?Has it always been like that?

     I am perplexed also by the redrawing of boundaries raised by the audience.

     Also, the YPAP asked why that Opposition Members are not appointed as Grassroots Advisers at their respective communities since they have won the elections legitimately.This is a very fair question.

     Both MPs Sam Tan and Chris De Souza did not answer the question.There was no mention of the depolitisation of Grassroots.

     Why was an important question not answered?Did the YPAP member get answers after the session?What is the reason?

     I think that the PAP should be gracious and practise what it preaches and leave politics outside of PA and Grassroots.This could probably win back the hearts of Singaporeans.

     Opposition are Singaporeans as well and they should be given their space.They care for Singapore as well.The PAP should remember that.

     From my understanding of the forum, Singapore Youth are apathetic.They are not allowed to take part in politics.Their views were quickly dismissed by the 2 MPs.Are our leaders living in denial?

     There was one young man who voiced his opinion on One party Rule,National Policies,Foreign Talent,etc.Which were valid and which I understand now…

132. PAP Inside Information Exclusive
     January 8th, 2010 at 4:08 pm

     PAP Activist |2009-12-12 01:39:45
     I always thought that the Grassroots are non-partisan.I think we should start raising this at our respective branch levels.The PAP should be more gracious in this aspect.

     But honestly, how many would ‘dare’ to raise such issues when you should know better that there are so many who are ready to ’suck the toes’ of the MPs.

     You have asked valid quesions.And I also think Mr Sam Tan should have been more forthright about the independence of the Elections Department.

     We need to do some serious soul searching.

133. Jackie Lim
     January 8th, 2010 at 7:41 pm

     Dear Meng Seng(if you don’t mind),

     Thank you for the reply.

     I have a different perspective with regards to the Alex Tan issue. It should probably be attributed to my knowledge of both Alex and YP and in tracing the comments he left.

     Alex is indeed hot-headed from his comments and the few interactions we had. He prefers to be seen, heard and push from the front. Nothing wrong with that. In fact, not everyone would be willing to do that unless you might just have that ambition to be somebody……very quickly. There comes the issue. The issues and comments he left were words and more words, some of which probably should not be public. Whether it is factual or not, makes sense or not, isn’t important as long as the perception to his advantage is painted out there. For that, you have to credit his ’street-smartness’. But where would it lead this young man ?

     As for your comments about YP being a elite social club, my first reaction was one of disappointment. Not of YP but of your understanding about YP and now, a lack of a match for debate. I have been pinning hopes that you, who was once in the youth wings of a large opposition party would have provided a different and more insghtful perspective or criticism of YP compared to others. That you would not join the rest to just comment on simple, ‘easy way out’ type of criticism such as elite social club and not forgetting…’low income ‘, etc. You can do better and be able to engage in a more thoughtful discussion than that.

134. Goh Meng Seng
     January 8th, 2010 at 7:58 pm

     Dear Jackie,

     YPAP is a big organization but in politics, it will only take a couple of people who are in respectable position to say the wrong thing or “political incorrect” statements that will bring the whole organization down.

     I think by now, it is not just me who have such impression after the Alex Tan’s saga plus Eric How who is regarded as YPAP member (rightfully or wrongfully). Any normal persons who read their comments will come to such conclusion.

     In politics, perception is everything, regardless of what you really are. And YPAP is part of a political organization, its members should understand the kind of implications that would come from shooting from the hip.

     As a person who respect Democracy, I have to take into account popular views as well, not just what I think or choose to think. I guess, that’s what make different from PAP or YPAP members, who tend to live in Ivory Towers and perceive that they must not be talking like normal lay persons and they should differentiate themselves by talking otherwise. It is a misconception and misunderstanding. Maybe, even elitist to think and act so.

     There is nothing wrong to think, talk and sleep like a normal person. If not, that would be totally abnormal and out of touch on how people feel on the ground.

     I guess I am puttining another million into your pocket. I should stop doing so.

     Goh Meng Seng

135. Jackie Lim
     January 8th, 2010 at 10:16 pm

     Thank you. That’s more like it, Meng Seng.

     I haven’t felt any richer but may just be poorer from the last two exchanges. But it could be different this time ?

     Yes, sometimes it is about perception. Unfortunately, that perception may or may not be shared by many. Who can tell ? Virtual space ? Virtual space is a game of perception and deception, and depending on your preference for the type of views, belongs to specific groups of vocals. What about reality ? We should really wait….and see.

     Yes, indeed, politics can be about perception. But just taking in that perceptual/political correctness and inclining towards a populist view that feels good but may hurt the people, don’t you think you would have short-changed the people ？Then the question is does that make those who think differently and making unpopular decisions, elitists ? It comes down to a question of facts and who has done it and did it right. Time will tell and polls will tell more.

     You are right, no organization can be perfect. There will always be the ones that spoil the party(literally) and spoil the chance of the rest. Could that explain your political journey thus far ? You could have been in the house, isn’t it.(a full-stop with respect)

     What is considered ‘normal’ people ? The ones that pay taxes or the ones that doesn’t？The ones with the broken family or the one with the family intact ? The ones with a car or the ones that take public transport ? Meng Seng, we are all Singaporeans. You could consider not to classify anyone, including yourself, as normal or abnormal because in taking care of Singaporeans, let’s try to leave something for everyone. Don’t let segregation cloud your mind. It is not healthy for a start.

136. Is it just me?
     January 8th, 2010 at 10:30 pm

     I am trying very hard to find reasons to continue my support for PAP but it is getting harder as each time a PAP supporter responses to a non-PAP-favourable comment, it just negates my support. There is no substance, only unreasonable ‘telling-off’. I am still waiting for convincing or simple factual arguments. There were no comments quoted, no numbers or references and no illustrations or egs of cases. They are not even philosophical, making sense, believable (like Mr Goh Meng Seng’s above). My freshest eg is in Jackie Lim’s response here. I find the whole response childish, even nonsensical but just pick 2 points to illustrate:

     Quote: “The issues and comments he (referring to Alex Tan) left were words and more words, some of which probably should not be public.”

     - What is wrong with “words and more words”? Jackie might be bored with more words from Alex but this is not the point is it?

     - What “should not be public”? Is it not disclosable because it is harmful to PAP or harmful to the public? If the former, no wonder Alex got the public’s applause and the opposition’s. Jackie is forgetting that Alex’s family & friends are members of the public. If it is the latter, Jackie needs to explain why it is harmful for the public to know.

     Quote: “Whether it is factual or not, makes sense or not, isn’t important as long as the perception to his advantage is painted out there.”

     - Crazy statement because Alex wrote the things he did to make a point to others, not to convince himself. If the things he wrote are not factual and do not make sense but only to Alex’s own advantageous perception, why would Jackie or indeed other PAP supporters worry about it?

     - Jackie is even accusing Alex of clamouring for fame or position. It is bizarre because if Alex wanted to do that, he would not have chosen to do what he did. He would have taken the route of Fedrick Fanthome or even Jakie himself and he could have spouted non factual and nonsensical things “as long as the perception to his advantage is painted out there” favouring the PAP.

137. Goh Meng Seng
     January 8th, 2010 at 11:03 pm

     Dear Jackie,

     In some ways, nobody is perfect and in this era, we could even have a divorced and remarried man as minister. No big deal now but it is a big taboo back 20 years ago.

     However, people do evolve, grow and change. If you chose to believe that most people will not perceive the way I put it up here, so be it. It does not benefit me either way…or well, it does benefit me if you continue to believe in your own ways.

     Whether I am in the house or not, doesn’t really matter. The only objective is to break the monopoly of power by PAP. Whether it is by me or other people, that’s ok. But I must qualify, I have not given up to break the fortress of PAP yet. :0

     Goh Meng Seng

138. Jackie Lim
     January 9th, 2010 at 1:32 am

     Meng Seng,

     You are right. The world and the society have changed. (Makes you wonder when did the police change to long pants.)

     I respect your beliefs, appreciate your views and advocacy, though we may disagree. Accept the fact that there will be differences and disagreement is a healthy start. It also makes life more interesting. Thank you for the exchange.

     When we meet, I will stretch out my hand to offer a handshake. Hopefully, there will be a handshake.

139. sgcynic
     January 9th, 2010 at 2:55 am

     Is it just me?
     Why do you want or have to try very hard to find reasons to continue your support for PAP? If the party is indeed good (doesn’t even have to be excellent or world class), then we would not need to try to find reasons to continue our support for it.

     Probably Frederick would say that we are blind not to find the reasons easily or young PAP member Eric Ho would advise to blame our karma and forefathers. LOL.

140. PAP 'Fixing' Starts
     January 9th, 2010 at 1:38 pm

     The PAP ‘FIXING’ continues.Please refer to the YPAP Facebook pages,Temasek Review and the Wanbao article.The Media in Singapore deserves its poor rankings.This is an excerpt from an online article:

     For all his follies, MM Lee Kuan Yew is probably right in his frank acknowledgement that Singapore’s bilingual policy has been an abject failure as more than amply demonstrated by the English comprehension skills of Lianhe Wanbao journalist Mr Xu Xiangyu.

     As SPH has not yet resorted to employing PRCs like most other industries in Singapore, we presumed that Mr Xu is a Singaporean who has gone through the Singapore education system like most of us.

     That he can completely twist and distort the truth and conjure a fairy tale out of nothing to suit the interest of his political masters is a damning indictment either of Singapore education or the training he received as a journalist here.

     In an article published on page 5 of Lianhe Wanbao on 8 January 2010, Mr Xu tried desperately hard to exonerate the PAP from any blame in the ongoing saga involving YPAP members Sear Hock Rong and Fong Yoong Keong’s business dealings with Eunos grassroots organizations and to assassinate the character of the messenger Alex Tan who made the complaint to various key government agencies such as PA, CPIB and AGC.

     One basic tenet of journalism is to always provide accounts from both opposing sides to allow readers to judge the matter for themselves. Mr Xu has contacted the two YPAP members to provide their side of the story, but not Alex at all.

     Furthermore, instead of contacting the MPs in Eunos grassroots organizations such as Mr Zainal Abidin to solicit their views on the matter, he chose to interview two MPs in other constituencies which are not implicated in the controversy in the first place.

     (Notice that the Chinese papers have been giving Lee Bee Wah frequent interviews to repair her battered image in the eyes of Singaporeans ahead of the next GE which will be another story for another day)

     Lastly, he made the most juvenile mistake of mis-spelling Alex’s name. The second Chinese character of his name should be “zhi” for “intelligence” (智) and not “zhi” for ambition (志).

     This continues: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
     Please Educate yourselves.They are policing our minds and our future.We need to reclaim the country back for the people.The Real Singaporeans.We will stop the ROT and CORRUPTION.We will stand against INJUSTICE to HUMANITY.

141. gapy
     January 9th, 2010 at 11:33 pm

     The journalist should be afraid that Mr. Alex Tan will use his now famous vulgarity of axx and fxxk which he has been posting and using on other forum users on the YP facebook.

142. sgcynic
     January 11th, 2010 at 9:14 am

     Read “HDB housing policies – tilting the advantage towards PRs?” (http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/01/hdb-housing-policies-%e2%80%93-tilting-the-advantage-towards-prs/)

     As Frederick alleged, “if [I am] going to cherry pick your grouses, you will certainly have a long list”. Seems a long list. LOL.

     And recall Fredericks’ wisdom: “you can hardly blame the strategic direction taken by the leadership. It’s the lower level officers responsible for operational matters that are to blame.” LOL.

143. sgcynic
     January 13th, 2010 at 10:28 pm

     A very interesting chart and table.

     http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2010/01/opposition-election-strategy-part-2.html

     Such a chart showing the increase in HDB flats applied to ANY asset class would indicate a bubble. Here it’s called asset enhancement (and HDB flats remain affordable! They must have been dirt cheap in the past! LOL) Read how Mah Bow Tan was unable to anticipate that demand would outstrip supply. The table showing the increase in population vis-a-vis supply of flats should have indicated a clear trend by the third year (2006) and raised alarm bells, but Mah says in Dec 2009: “Nobody, no matter how prescient, no matter how clever, would have been able to predict that this is what is going to happen this year. All of us were caught off-guard”. Are you convinced? Talk about blindness, Frederick. LOL. have I produced enough evidence? I hope readers can view my posts as they are ALL under moderation. Why not let them read and decide for themselves? Or do you want to keep them ignorant and blind?

144. sgcynic
     January 16th, 2010 at 1:40 pm

     Quotes from a Minister earning $2 million annual salary an d a “lesser mortal” who wrote in to the Straits Times Forum.

     “Nobody, no matter how prescient, no matter how clever, would have been able to predict that this is what is going to happen this year. All of us were caught off-guard…I did not expect the prices to go up. But the point is, are we able to respond to this change. And the answer is yes.” Mah Bow Tan commenting on HDB demand and prices.

     ‘From 2001 to 2005, the HDB built more than 50,000 units, an average of 10,000 a year. However, from 2006 to 2008, an average of only 3,650 flats were built, a reduction of 63 per cent. (Data taken from the HDB Annual Report.) Given that the number of marriages over the same period remained steady at about 24,000 a year, additional factors like the influx of permanent residents and greater investment in property after the economic downturn have added to the normal demand for flats. It was inevitable, even predictable, that the reduced flat supply from 2006 onwards would impact the housing market as it has today. A simple case of supply and demand. In fact, the situation was obvious much earlier with price increases causing a steep uptrend in the price index of HDB flats since the start of 2007. It seems now the HDB is scrambling to correct the situation instead of raising concerns earlier.’ MR GURMIT SINGH KULLAR (Straits Times Forum, 16 Jan 2010)

145. Fredric Fanthome
     January 21st, 2010 at 8:01 pm

     Hi All,

     I would have thought that after 120 comments this thread would have trundled off into the sunset and a well deserved retirement. However its seems there is still plenty to say and plenty who will say it.

     I will respond below, as briefly as possible, to those who may have addressed me. Fortunately it seems these are a minority!

     @goldfinger

     I think the government strategy is two-fold. They attract the big Fortune 500 firms so that those firms will provide jobs for Singaporeans. The overwhelming majority of the population is not entrepreneurial and needs big firms that provide many jobs. If we depended solely on start-ups that typically have very few employees in their initial years, it would be disastrous for employment.

     But they also nurture small garage-shop entrepreneurs. I do not know specifically about the gaming super-special sector, but in Tech and IT, absolutely: I have first hand knowledge of several start up firms that are being supported by government programs. Google SgEntrepreneurs, Bansea which are just 2 of the groups that are being supported and aided by the government in helping start-ups.

     @SGND

     I do hope you will be back in the future on this or other threads.

     That was a nice marketing video targeted at the European expat. But did you notice the date?

     1938.

     I would have liked to interview that smooth talking presenter – first 3 years later when Singapore was being ruled not by his fellow Brits but by a power who’d resoundingly crushed them and taken over all the sections of the segregated city including the “European” sections, and then 10 years later when his country had lost all its empire and was literally living on American charity. Singapore in the 1960s was a very different place from Singapore in the 1930s.

     @sgcynic

     Your comments all follow the same tiresome pattern. You take one line or statement by someone, LKY, a minister, the HDB, TOC or me, then you make a smug comment about it ending, often enough, with an all-knowing LOL.

     Very witty indeed.

     I have challenged you to come up with your alternatives to what you feel are the gross errors of the government. You have completely evaded the issue hoping that no one will notice that you are not contributing any ideas to make things right if you make enough noise about what is apparently “wrong”.

     If you have nothing to offer, at least give credit to those who are trying. Maybe they are coming up short, but until you have a better way to do things – and I mean administration, not merely winning an election and believing that the rest will take care of itself – we have to follow what we have, because that’s the best that we have for now. If you have a better idea, let’s hear it.

     It’s very easy to campaign and make a loud noise when you don’t actually have to do anything except point a finger. It’s a different kettle of fish altogether to actually step into the arena and fix what you think is wrong. Obama is finding that out the hard way in the USA, and you here are not offering a single suggestion. Well, if you get your way and the PAP loses the next election and your “side” comes to power – what are you going to do about the problems you are talking about? Have you thought about the solutions?
     You seem to be able to do no more than criticize.

     Suit yourself, but when you come up with concrete suggestions as alternatives to the current malaise you see, I will give you some respect. Until then, your posts come across as no more than whining.

     @Goh Seng Meng

     I really do not buy your point of not having any forum to debate. There are a large number of sessions held by MPs over the year where they take questions from the floor. Why don’t you avail yourself of these opportunities?

     I am not a YP or PAP leader. I cannot speak for the PAP, nor do I necessarily agree with everything that the PAP does – though on balance I clearly agree more than disagree. What I have to offer as a platform for debate is this forum – you can put your points up here and if they are powerful enough I am sure PAP seniors will respond. And if they do not, you can point out to the world that they are not responding and let readers judge.

     So if you have “all the answers” as you claim, then let’s hear them. If you keep mum, I am sorry, but I have to conclude that it’s just a bluff and you really have nothing to offer. The burden of proof is on you. You really cannot expect me to believe that you have the answers when you keep it all to yourself. It doesn’t do your cause any good either, since the voters also do not know what you have to offer, and in the absence of any information will only be guessing as to your intentions. Not exactly a vote-winning position – even against the PAP.

     The refrain that there is no opportunity for free debate is a red herring. Even the presidential debates in the USA happen once a term – not every now and then at the beck and call of the opposition. And during elections there is enough room to get your message across. As for this site, I have definitely not prevented your comments from being aired, have I? I have only deleted comments with obviously unbecoming language. And you cannot possibly be serious if you’re suggesting I still need to learn to take eggs being thrown at me. Have you read some of the comments against me here, on the TOC and the TR? Are you suggesting I am not taking the “eggs”? It helps that I have never cared a whit for what people say about me, but I have certainly not flinched from the commentary.

     @PAP Inside Information Exclusive

     If you are reposting this from the YPAP website, it’s hardly “exclusive” is it? It’s being openly discussed on that site. Until I read the whole thread there (which may not be a for a long time since my time is limited), I wouldn’t really be able to comment with full information.

     On the face of it, though, regarding the independence of an election department, I think we need to draw a distinction between reporting lines and independence in operation. In any country the election department can be influenced by the government. It is, after all, part of the administrative arm. The question is, whether this situation is abused. If the election department is allowed to maintain impartiality in its operations and conduct free and fair elections, it doesn’t matter so much if there is a directing reporting line from the elections department to the PMO. It is better, probably to have the reporting line going from the Elections department to the President – but at the end of the day, the reality remains that in any country even such an arrangement can be abused should a government desire to do so.

     The real issue is whether any bias is extracted or imposed on the civil servants at the Election Department, and this is determined not by nominal reporting lines but by the professionalism and ethics of the people in question – within the department and within the PMO. I have not heard of any irregularities in this regard being raised by anyone. Perhaps I am not sufficiently well informed, but as far as I know the civil servants of Singapore are well known for the impeccable ethics and professionalism. I would trust in their doing their jobs fairly and to the best of their ability.

     @PAP ‘Fixing’ Starts

     I have not followed this saga, so really not in a position to comment one way or another. I would have to submit that it has nothing to do with my original post nor is it a reply to anything anyone has said so far so I wonder why you put it up here.

     BTW, if you want to talk about the spelling of names, you can check how many ways my name has been spelt here – even by repeat commentators. Juvenile mistakes abound.

     @gapy

     Apparently he has a liberal vocabulary of unprintable words? Ah well!

     I will be overseas for a time, with limited access to the internet, so I may be delayed in responding to any further comments.

     Not that I think my absence should make the slightest difference to anyone, but just by way of information!

146. sgcynic
     January 25th, 2010 at 7:31 pm

     Frederick,
     To date, you have not even attempted to substantiate what you claim are “self-evident” achievements by the present government. I posted links to well-substantiated arguments on negative consequences arising from the government’s economic, population and housing policies, to which you dare not even reference. What you do is to side track the issues. At least have the decency to admit that I pinted out are genuine “current malaise”. What else can I do but to LOL knowing this is the typical tactic of the PAP?
     BTW, I do give the government credit where credit is due (few and far between in the past few years), and critic strongly where deserved!

147. sgcynic
     January 25th, 2010 at 7:57 pm

     PS: What is the point of pointing out alternatives when someone refuses to admit there is a problem in the first place? LOL. Chiam See Tong himself pointed out alternatives in Parliament and was ridiculed by his PAP counterparts who then quietly implemented some of his suggestions several years down the road.

148. sgcynic
     January 26th, 2010 at 7:47 am

     http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/OnlineStory/STIStory_481863.html
     Damn, they didn’t.

149. PAP and New Citizen Votes
     January 26th, 2010 at 1:10 pm

     From ST Forum:

     olin1965
     Today, 10:24 AM
     Immigrants are not Buffers my fellow Singaporean, they are “Numbers” added to their coming Election especially if you study the PAP well enough it’s the Number they are trying to obtain. Look put yourself in the shoe of the PR or New Citizen, when come to election, you basically think ..Aiyah why not vote them as they have help me with my Citizenship and a short wait to get Approve. Thus when you seriously think about it versus those who have stay here for 15-20years stil have not got Citizenship and someone else got it. Not forgetting these people who have stayed 10-15-20years have sink in Properties, shophouse and even bough building in Little India but never got Citizenship. So how do you explain that???

     Basically we are very tired of the PAP same old selfish and self interest from the older to the younger MP or NMP, basically you all know the facts that cost keep raising and your excuses that everything around us or the world is rising cost. Don’t push the blame to others, just look at that same Coconut Tree around you all. Just say that you needed the money to pay your MP or NMP for their salary and allowance. Btw everyone grows old and Death is the reality so just cannot wait for “HIM” to kick the bucket. Like the old Chinese saying “When the Trees Fall, all the Monkeys run away.” Sorry for being Rude but at one stage I have respect for the Party but NOW after 45 year in age, you all are just TOO MUCH, Greed at the expense of the Citizen. And for Fellow Citizen, this is not to a Joke, and seriously you guys have the Pen & Pencil decide something not out of what you feel for them, but for HEAVEN Sake your children, family and relatives too are Concern People that is effected by this Group of Government which tend to that advantage of matters. Look around you and decide not for yourself but the socities as a whole. If they have really cared for you all then why foreign telant, why cost cut, look at the ERP around you and many more to come. Please for the sake of our children and friends, give the Opposition a Chance in Life, give them beyond 5-10-15 years. Dont expect them to do miracle but give them a Chance. Remember the old rumor of PAP (Pay and Pay) well that ramour don’t come from nowhere. The basic saying Smoke come from nowhere except the present from sources like heat, sunlight and materials. So for Haven Sake Wake UP.

150. Fredric Fanthome
     January 27th, 2010 at 2:23 am

     @sgcynic

     I am traveling and I wrote my last response on the eve of my travels so I didn’t have time to look at your links. That’s all. When I am back and have time, I will respond. My point was that certainly there are times when criticism is due. But you have never offered alternatives – no point referring to Chiam See Tong – my challenge was to you and your whinging – not him. I challenged you to offer some original positive alternatives instead of merely whinging. Give it a shot – you’ll find it a lot harder than merely pointing to links of other people’s thoughts.

     That doesn’t mean that I won’t take criticism on board. But the credit for doing the work (even if they are mistakes and mess ups) belongs to those who try to make things happen – not those who sit on the sidelines and snipe. So I would have more respect for you when you offer a positive alternative with every criticism you have. Whenever I think something is wrong, I always consider how it can be done better before piping up about how bad it is. Perhaps that’s not your style, but in my book that earns far more credit that merely criticising – even if the criticism is deserved.

     It’s easy to point out faults, a lot harder to actually fix them.

151. sgcynic
     January 27th, 2010 at 4:18 am

     I have respect for people who have put in the effort in their endeavour. Their success or failure and its extent is a learning experience for them and all. However, those who only claim credit for successes and attribute failures to others and external factors are not fit to lead. Head – my boss gets the credit, tail – I get the blame?

     I do not know if this post will get published as my earlier posts containing the following links are all still “under moderation” since mid January although I can see them on my workstation.

     furrybrowndog.wordpress.com/2010/01/11/productivity-and-singapores-economic-growth-model/

     furrybrowndog.wordpress.com/2009/12/19/evidence-that-housing-prices-in-singapore-are-unaffordable/

     Compare the following 2 articles and note the strategic short sightedness of our “leadership”

     http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/01/11/grace-fu-hard-to-predict-short-term-demand-for-housing/

     tankinlian.blogspot.com/2010/01/hdb-flats-and-population-growth.html

     I do not dispute that it is easy to point fingers. I doubt anyone can or should argue about it. However based on the links that I have posted, I doubt anyone can dispute that the evidence stacks against the current government for not only lacking in foresight but is also myopic and certainly not deserving of the world class salary paid. Why do so many and increasing numbers of citizens “snipe” at this “world class” government? Could it be that we have lost respect and faith in the leadership? It is a sad state of affairs and a damning indictment of the leadership in any organization to face loss of respect and faith of the stakeholders. It is not a case of agreeing to disagree but people having the view that the party is condescending and unable and unwilling to take criticism on board. The point about Chiam See Tong is pertinent as a case illustrating the actions of your party and why people react in the way they are doing.

152. sgcynic
     January 27th, 2010 at 4:22 am

     Finally managed to post the above, after I removed some of the “http://” tags. Was that the reason my earlier posts are under moderation since mid-January?

153. Fredric Fanthome
     January 27th, 2010 at 5:03 pm

     @sgcynic

     Your last post was far more creditable than most of your past ones. I will respond to the links when I have time.

     On the issue of moderation – probably. Must have been some automatic setting. I do not moderate or remove a post unless it is (a) abusive in its language (b) totally irrelevant or (c) a massive copy-paste dump from another site rather than an original write up, and your comments do not fall into any of these categories so I have never deleted/unapproved or moderated your comments.

154. Fredric Fanthome
     January 27th, 2010 at 5:06 pm

     @ PAP Member

     Done as requested. Sorry about it, but the comments you were responding to were completely irrelevant to the original post and were also massive copy-paste dumps from other sites, so they broke two of my cardinal rules for posts on the site.

155. Simplicity
     January 27th, 2010 at 10:50 pm

     “Whenever I think something is wrong, I always consider how it can be done better before piping up about how bad it is.” – F Fanthome

     What if the criticism is monopolised profiteering, lack of transparency, neglect of Govt services, insufficient spending on Govt services, escalating inflation & unemployment caused by loose immigration policy, overflooding of foreign non-talents suppressing pay, increasing prices of goods with higher consumer demand, taking away jobs, school places and homes, overcrowding public places and trains.

     Isn’t the solution in the criticism itself, that is, to de-monopolise power, enforce regulations, be transparent, be honest, regulate immigration, have a quota etc, do something, anything, for goodness sake!

     If you mean alternatives positive to your party, I am afraid there really is NONE. The people are already completely sucked dry!

156. sgcynic
     January 28th, 2010 at 6:53 am

     LKY has spoken on the affordability of HDB flats:

     “What is affordabilty? From the point of view of the buyer? And the government that is subsidising you? The government has to price it at a level that is fair to the revenue it is collecting and fair to the individual, not only the present buyer but past and future buyers. If Mr Mah is unable to defend himself, he deserves to lose.”

     “No country in the world has given its citizens and families an asset as valuable as what we have given every family here. And if you say that policy is at fault, you must be daft.”

     Reminds of of “On the question of Singapore doing a lot right – there is so much evidence all around that if you refuse to see it, you have to be blind.” LOL. Let’s hope our asset does not implode in our faces.

157. Simplicity
     January 28th, 2010 at 7:52 pm

     “No country in the world has given its citizens and families an asset as valuable as…..” – sgcynic

     It would have been more accurate to say “No country in the world has given its citizens and families a liability as expensive as…..”

     LKY is forgetting that HDB is 99 yr leasehold. Is your car an asset, with the high depreciation as it gets closer to scraping?

     To benefit from the so called “asset”, you would have to do either of the following:

     - Downgrade to smaller units before your flat surpasses 25 yrs
     - Apply new flats, assuming they are really SUBSIDISED and cheaper than resale like in the past
     - Sell the flat and leave the country

     The last option is the best but you would have to leave your country, and you can buy freehold and better properties overseas (real assets). What leader come out with such a policy and praise himself?

     Don’t forget too, that the resale value of a 50 yr old flat would be only 50% of its 99 yr lease value. So, if a 5 yr old flat’s current resale value is £500K, the 50 yr old flat would only be worth $250K. Who pays the full price if a flat’s lease is only half its life left? Ya, foreigners may be, thats why we love foreigners? Are we pig headed or what?

158. sgcynic
     February 1st, 2010 at 9:24 am

     Extracted from http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=3802:

     “As Mr Goh further elaborated to Sgpolitics.net, it would be good for politics in Singapore to be conducted based on informed choice drawn from open and thorough debate. This will result in greater accountability.

     I agree with this sentiment. Currently, it is PAP’s monopoly on political discourse in the mainstream media that leaves a huge void and results in complacency and lack of accountability on the part of ministers. The flaws in PAP’s policies are not given a free and fair airing in the public arena. Faults are allowed to fester and misguided policy actions accumulate over time, resulting in an avalanche that buries the masses. This is precisely what has happened to our housing policies which have buried many existing home owners in a pile of lifelong debt.”

     Amen. Evading issues through throwing strawman arguments and stereotyping while throwing up counter-challenges doe not advance one’s cause. What else can the other party do but LOL?

159. PAP and Gerrymandering
     February 4th, 2010 at 3:06 am

     So I ask you a simple question what do you think of PAP Gerrymandering Mr Fanthome?

     You are a PAP member.I think this is the most basic of questions.

     Why does the PAP gerrymander at every election? Feeling insecure?Many skeletons in the closet? Something about our reserves or the non existance of it.

     Are you aware new citizen of the questions Ong Teng Cheong asked about the reserves?

160. PAP and Gerrymandering
     February 5th, 2010 at 5:59 pm

     Dear Mr Fanthome.

     If you are a new citizen of Singapore what happened to your old citizenship?Have you denounced your Indian citizenship?

     Would you consider serving National Service if it were voluntary?Because we do till we are well into our 40’s so it is not too late for you.

     Don’t forget to give me and Singaporeans your views on Gerrymandering.

161. sgcynic
     February 12th, 2010 at 8:38 am

     Deafening silence here… So…

     The final nail in the “HDB affordability” coffin? http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/02/the-final-nail-in-the-hdb-affordability-coffin/#more-19860

162. PAP Member
     February 13th, 2010 at 3:24 am

     PAP and Gerrymandering, i like your line of questioning, sound very like that Sear Hock Rong when he ruled the facebook, haha!

163. sgcynic
     February 14th, 2010 at 7:20 pm

     Wrong policies will serve the people, no matter how good the execution.
     http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2010/02/economist-welfare-in-singapore-stingy.html

     If one still does not see the things Singapore is doing wrong – there is so much evidence all around that if you refuse to see it, you have to be blind. LOL

     May this new year bring forth a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Merdeka!

164. sgcynic
     February 26th, 2010 at 5:12 pm

     While waiting for someone to respond to the links I posted more than a month ago, here’s two more from the opposition Reform Party and Mr Leong Sze Hian. Perhaps those who have the time to read these links would find concrete proposals and would not then jump to conclusions that others just “sit on the sidelines and snipe” and “find, willy-nilly something to nit-pick and criticize, regardless of the overall good of the proposals being offered”.

     Go to
     http:// theonlinecitizen.com/2010/02/a-complacent-budget/

     http:// theonlinecitizen.com/2010/02/budget-does-little-to-address-main-issues-faced-by-sporeans/

165. youcan't think
     March 7th, 2010 at 1:13 am

     sgcynic ‘May this new year bring forth a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Merdeka!’ – you fortune teller ? Know it is this year ?

     You are very funny. Keep posting links and quotes. You don’t have your own mind ?　You can’t think ?

166. sgcynic
     March 9th, 2010 at 5:18 pm

     youcan’t think and you can’r read!?

167. Sgporean
     May 28th, 2010 at 7:59 am

     I dun understand how the GRCs can help, same for the case if the opposition wins the GRC, 3-6 PAP MPs would be booted off and 3-6 oppositions would take the seat. You win big you lose big.

     The fact is that even if all constituencies had been broken to SMCs, the opposition will still be, and then can you blame PAP for not, or should we blame the oppositions for not fielding enough candidates and letting us vote?

168. Fredric Fanthome
     June 21st, 2010 at 12:16 pm

     @sgcynic, simplicity

     My sincere apologies – I was traveling for a few months and have been extremely busy since I returned, and as a result did not have time to look at the thread – and it completely slipped my mind that there were some posts I needed to respond to. Since I need to re-read the posts and figure out where we were at, it will take me some time more to have my reply to your points. Allow me a few more days and I will respond.

     Apologies again for this inordinate delay.

169. sgcynic
     July 21st, 2010 at 7:48 pm

     I too have not visited this thread for months… Wow it’s exactly a month since your last post too. Time flies…

170. Fredric Fanthome
     July 21st, 2010 at 11:58 pm

     @sgcynic

     Indeed – how many posts do you think I can keep responding to? You have me busy on the other one. This will have to wait. I dont think anyone is paying attention anyway, so perhaps we can just keep our discussions on the other post – your issues are pretty much the same there too, I’d say.