Re: One Ye Kung - On Democracy
It boggles the mind who is his intended audience will comments like that. He obviously has no idea about our history and your quotes clearly points to that.
As for Sumiko Tan, when she agreed to service a previous Comissioner of Police, the dye was cast. She was rewarded with access to confidential investigation papers to write a book. She obviously knows what she has to do and has no qualms about it. By the way, no other journalist or anyone outside the legal and Police service have before and since have had access to the papers. The CP was thinking with his dick because there are personal details as well confidential matters that are in there which even the courts have no access.
It boggles the mind who is his intended audience will comments like that. He obviously has no idea about our history and your quotes clearly points to that.
As for Sumiko Tan, when she agreed to service a previous Comissioner of Police, the dye was cast. She was rewarded with access to confidential investigation papers to write a book. She obviously knows what she has to do and has no qualms about it. By the way, no other journalist or anyone outside the legal and Police service have before and since have had access to the papers. The CP was thinking with his dick because there are personal details as well confidential matters that are in there which even the courts have no access.
"Pingtjin Thum: "A regrettable and shocking ignorance of Singapore's history. We WERE a multi-party democracy in 1965. In 1963 General Election, the PAP won 37 seats and 46.9% of the vote; the Barisan Sosialis won 13 seats and 33.2% of the vote; and the United People's Party won 1 seat and 8.4% of the vote. Between 1966-67, arrests, detentions, and resignations steadily reduced the opposition presence in Parliament, leading to the first PAP sweep of Parliament in the 1968 elections. If not for multi-party democracy, Singaporeans would not have had the opportunity to elect the great first generation of PAP leaders in 1959; and as Lee Kuan Yew himself admitted in his autobiography, the PAP left-wing (who subsequently became the opposition Barisan Sosialis) forced his team to raise their game and to hold themselves to a higher moral and professional standard. Our success is founded in our period of vigorous multi-party democracy in 1955-65."
Only PAP can rule S’pore forever
No other party, period.
pap-rule-singapore-forever
Singaporeans from all walks of life, who recognise power is a form of aphrodisiac, are nodding in agreement.
This after they agree that only the PAP can rule Singapore forever and any talk of a two-party or multi-party system will lead to the ultimate destruction of Singapore.
One Singaporean, Jin Gong Ping, said: “PAP is a pluralistic political party.”
“They are doing a great job representing the diverse segments of Singaporean society and presenting all sides of the argument.”
“I can see that clearly when they have six Chinese men vying to be the next prime minister. Very diverse and egalitarian.”
Other locals said the PAP is all about putting Singaporeans first.
Another local, Fang Qian Mian, said: “PAP is a political party that will be there for you, always.”
“One moment can be Son of Punggol, next moment can be Son of Ang Mo Kio.”
“It’s like they are omnipresent.”
Still more locals concur the PAP is raising the stakes of the competition.
Another local, Fan Dui Dang, said: “They will say, anyone who is willing and able, can challenge their incumbency.”
“But that is true as long as you’re not the Workers’ Party.”
“You can always go far in Singapore serving the PAP’s interest, which coincidentally also happens to be Singapore’s interest.”
“A two-party or multi-party arrangement will result in the death and destruction of everything in this country.”
http://newnation.sg/2017/01/only-pap-can-rule-spore-forever/
Lunch with Sumiko interview marks official end of journalism
"Singaporeans from all walks of life, who are standing hunched over slightly with one hand over their heart as they wipe away tears of regret from their eyes, are waving goodbye to journalism.
This after they read the first Lunch with Sumiko interview in The Straits Times.
One Singaporean, Song Kah, said: “This marks the official death of journalism.”
“It is a sad day for democracy and this storied, noblest of noble vocation.”
“Humanity’s slow march towards civilisation has officially come to a screeching halt.”
Other locals said even though journalism is now dead, this is not the worst thing.
Another local, Qu Ni Mah, said: “The end of an era in journalism is already upon us and we thought looking into the future will provide some respite as we long to see some silver lining.”
“Turns out Lunch With Sumiko is slated to carry on with another edition, and another, and another.”
“Death to us all, please.”
http://newnation.sg/2017/01/lunch-with-sumiko-interview-marks-official-end-of-journalism/