• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

"WHo wants to take MRT?" as PAP laugh at President Ong Teng Cheong

ChewCheng

Alfrescian
Loyal
I still think President Ong Teng Cheong is one of the best President besides Wee Kim Wee who is a really nice person.

On the one hand, we had President Ong Teng Cheong (then Minister of Communication):
"The MRT is much more than a transport investment, and must be viewed in its wider economic perspective. The boost it'll provide to long term investors' confidence, the multiplier effect and how MRT will lead to the enhancement of the intrinsic value of Singapore's real estate are spin-offs that cannot be ignored."
- 28 March 1982

"The MRT will usher in a new phase in Singapore's development and bring about a better life for all of us."


On the other hand, we had a "visionary" Minister who went out of his way to deliberately, publicly, and rudely slam President Ong - the chief advocate for the MRT system - as being "FOOLISH ENOUGH":
"The construction industry has become over-heated and if Singapore were to be foolish enough to want to build its proposed mass rapid transit (MRT) system now, it will find itself in trouble."
- Forum on economic affairs at NUS, 17 December 1981.

Question: So, who was this "visionary" Minister who was not as "foolish enough" as President Ong?



Answer: Who else, but (again!) that very same man who "face thick thick", is now everyday busily (passively) shaking the hands of fishmongers and saving fainting children (on camera), desperately hoping that such comical last-minute manoeuvre can help him to get $4,000,000 per year as our President.

tonytanMRT1.jpg


tonytanMRT2.png


Meet Tony Tan, the "not-foolish-enough" Minister for Trade and Industry in 1981.

Yes, this is the same Tony Tan whose forecast that Singapore had too many university graduate went wrong (again!), and whose forecast that pumping billions of dollars into failed western banks is good investment went wrong (again!)

Oh, by the way, when he made that wrong forecast on education, he was the Minister for Education.

When he made that wrong forecast on investment, he was in charge of GIC.

And yes, you guessed it, when he made that wrong forecast on the impact of MRT on the construction industry, he was the Minister for Trade and Industry!

Just what's wrong with this Minister? 他妈的,he made the wrong forecast in every ministry he headed and when he had finally done enough screwing up all these ministries, he went right into the "private" sector (i.e. GIC) and immediately proceed to lose billions of dollars of our CPF money!

Is this the kind of President you want?

Not me.

I am not "foolish enough" to want to listen to any of his Presidential "visions"!

More importantly, I am not "foolish enough" to vote him to let him scold me; Notice that President Ong Teng Cheong was then his colleague in the cabinet and yet, despite having already had the opportunity to counter Mr. Ong privately during cabinet meetings, he was not contented. No, not enough! He had to 'suan' his colleague publicly and make sure the "nation-building" newspaper reported on it!

So, do you think he will have any problem labelling you - an ordinary citizen - as "foolish enough", when he becomes the President.

His good friend LKY has already called you "daft". Not enough meh? You want to be called "foolish enough" next?

http://forums.fuckwarezone.com.sg/e...g-teng-cheong-who-wants-take-mrt-4229762.html
 

halsey02

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
SINgapore is paying top money for such a visionary?? is he the one, that recommend the long investment of the various bank's shares..that will take 52 man years or more to get back the principal sum?

Such a visionary...thank you 60% or in his case 30% + or something like that.. I never voted for him..
 

Narong Wongwan

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Ong Teng Cheong was the first executive President.......though it was partly a 'power struggle' to make him do the things he did. Nonetheless he tried to perform his duties as president as he interpret it. No one to compare him to as the previous ones had no powers. Prataman no need to use to compare.


Wee Kim We also a LEE relative but no arguments the man is NICE....and its not wayang......he was the one who started the tea session (not the pap type) with common sinkies.
 

HTOLAS

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Sir, OTC and his successors were / are not 'executive' presidents. 'Executive' presidents can initiate action and are active participants in the execution of power. Our jiakliaobis are still mainly ceremonial heads of state who have specific and limited custodial and veto powers (that are reactive).

Ong Teng Cheong was the first executive President.......though it was partly a 'power struggle' to make him do the things he did. Nonetheless he tried to perform his duties as president as he interpret it. No one to compare him to as the previous ones had no powers. Prataman no need to use to compare.


Wee Kim We also a LEE relative but no arguments the man is NICE....and its not wayang......he was the one who started the tea session (not the pap type) with common sinkies.
 

I_Hate_Pappies

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Cos TT is stupid and stupid is forever.

[video=youtube;IVfOnjrCFCs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVfOnjrCFCs[/video]
 

Narong Wongwan

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Sir, OTC and his successors were / are not 'executive' presidents. 'Executive' presidents can initiate action and are active participants in the execution of power. Our jiakliaobis are still mainly ceremonial heads of state who have specific and limited custodial and veto powers (that are reactive).
me bad....executive presidents in the pap context.......you know pap bend the meaning of many words like subsidy, affordable etc.
actually Ong did try to use some of that 'power'........they reply with a 56 man years answer...........so ended up he spent his time renovating the Istana.
 
Top