-
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.
Gecko to get gun carriage funeral
- Thread starter Cthulhu
- Start date
Ya, I was shocked too. It goes to show the dictator can do whatever he wants to glorify his own family. Goh Keng Swee never have such honour. Seem like the country is making such QUEENLY funeral, for a housewife, no other past leaders can compare with. This is getting absurd. I wonder which dogs suggested such idea too, to please his master.
Some more comes from the PMO. What a blatant abuse of power. Using states funds to organize the final journey for this.
Sekali gun suddenly goes off with a bang ....
she wakes up and shouts ''All the Way'' ..... everyone stunned !!
she wakes up and shouts ''All the Way'' ..... everyone stunned !!
Yeah gt gun carriage means got honor guard or not? papers said usu reserved for state or military funeral so is hers military funeral since it's nt state funeral?
The beauty of it all, she has never served in any official appointment and yet gets a gun carriage send off..obviously something is just not right..
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2005/yax-444.htm
May 2005
The mess that is our presidency
Wee Kim Wee (President of Singapore, 1985 – 1993) died recently and was given a state funeral. Many citizens had a collective cry. He was a genuinely well-liked man; his personal humility impressed thousands. He lived up to the role of a non-political head of state, as symbol and unifier, yet with a common touch. In his passing, he filled that role one last time: his state funeral gave people reason to feel Singaporean regardless of race, creed and political affiliation.
Once it was over, a tiny little question was asked and a huge can of worms opened.
Why, a reader wrote to the Straits Times to ask, was Ong Teng Cheong (President of Singapore 1993 – 1999) not likewise given a state funeral when he died in February 2002?
Presidents of Singapore since independence:
1965 -1970 Yusof Ishak
1970 - 1981 Benjamin Henry Sheares
1981 - 1985 C V Devan Nair
1985 - 1993 Wee Kim Wee
1993 - 1999 Ong Teng Cheong
1999 - present S R Nathan
The government's reply was an empty one (see the excerpt from the Straits Times on the right). Basically it said that the policy on state funerals was "still evolving" and is decided on a case-by-case basis by the Prime Minister and the cabinet. You'd notice that it completely failed to address the key question: WHY didn't Ong get a state funeral?
Two former presidents have passed away before. Yusof Ishak and Benjamin Sheares, the first and second presidents of Singapore respectively, both died in office and were given state funerals.
Thus, of the 4 former presidents who have passed away, only one, Ong Teng Cheong, didn't get a state funeral.
Most Singaporeans think they know the reason: Ong had taken his office too seriously and challenged Goh Chok Tong's government on a number of issues, particularly that relating to the value of the reserves. Worse yet, upon leaving office, he made his grievances public. It was nearly scandalous, coming from someone who had once been a Deputy Prime Minister and a People's Action Party (PAP) stalwart.
To understand what happened, we need to go back to the early 1990s.
* * * * *
In the general election of August 1991, about a year after Goh Chok Tong took over from Lee Kuan Yew as Prime Minister, the PAP lost an unprecedented 4 seats out of 81, compared to the outgoing Parliament that had only 1 opposition member. Their share of the vote (in the constituencies that were contested, and many were not) slipped to 61%.
Soon after, (although Ong himself said the idea had been bruited by Lee Kuan Yew as far back as 1982) the government began to speak of the need for a president with some "executive" powers. What they meant was a president with some blocking or veto powers. The fear, as expressed, was that of an "irresponsible" opposition party winning votes through profligate populism, promising tax cuts and subsidies at the same time. Singapore would be ruined, the government said.
So a constitutional amendment was passed (it's easy when you have 77 seats out of 81 in parliament) in order to establish a new rule. Under this new requirement, when a government leaves office, the state assets are sequestered. The incoming government can spend what revenue it acquires through its taxation or other policies, but it cannot spend the "nest-egg" built up by the previous government without the consent of the president.
The idea is that no new government (meaning the opposition) can raid the bank so carefully built up by the previous thrifty government (the PAP) in order to "buy" votes to keep themselves in power.
14 May 2005
Straits Times
PM and Cabinet decide who gets state funeral
Singaporeans who have made 'truly exceptional contributions' will receive a state funeral.
But it is not feasible to have a set formula on who gets one, based on a person's previous rank or appointment, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's press secretary said yesterday.
'The decision to hold one is made by the Prime Minister and the Cabinet,' Mr Chen Hwai Liang said in his letter to the Today newspaper and Chinese-language daily Lianhe Zaobao.
[snip]
As a young country, Singapore's practices and customs for public ceremonies and observances are still evolving, added Mr Chen. 'As the years pass, we will gradually establish norms and traditions that will reflect the Singapore way of honouring our best sons and daughters who have passed away, that is dignified, restrained and expresses the gratitude and sense of loss of the nation.'
Goh foresaw that in the event of a showdown between a government that wanted to spend the reserves and a president that wanted to be more prudent, it would be necessary for the president to have a stronger mandate from the people. Thus, at the same time as the veto powers were enshrined in the constitution, provision was also made for direct elections (i.e. by citizens) to fill the office of President. Previously, when the presidency was just a ceremonial position, it was Parliament who voted the candidate into office.
Furthermore, to ensure that only candidates who were financially trustworthy could every make it to the newly empowered presidency, the constitution was changed to stipulate that only those who met these criteria were eligible to stand for election: they had to be at least 45 years old, and have had at least three years' experience as ministers, heads of statutory boards or key government agencies, or have headed a company whose minimum paid-up capital was $100 million, or had equivalent experience.
These conditions make it virtually impossible for the opposition parties to field any candidate for the foreseeable future, which is hardly a surprise since the whole idea of veto powers is to put a safe person in place in order to deny any non-PAP government freedom of manoeuvre with the finances.
However, while all this was very neat in theory, in practice, it's been unraveling ever since.
Ong Teng Cheong was elected to the presidency in 1993. One of his first moves was to ask the civil service for a list of assets that the government had started off with. Six years later, one of his complaints at the end of his term of office in 1999, was that he never quite got a full accounting. Another of his complaints was that he was never given enough staff to check the numbers given to him.
Here is the relevant portion of Asiaweek's interview with Ong (issue dated 10 March 2000)
It was this issue that caused the dispute between you and the government?
Yes. But I don't want to go into details and upset everybody. The thing is that the elected president is supposed to protect the reserves, but he was not told what these are until five years later. From the day the Constitution was amended in 1991 to provide for an elected president, he was supposed to fulfil that role. My predecessor, Wee Kim Wee, although he was not elected, was supposed to play that role during the last two years of his term. But he did not actively check. So, when I came in in 1993, I asked for all this information about the reserves. It took them three years to give it to me.
The holdup was for administrative reasons?
Either that or they did not think there was any urgency. You see, if you ask me to protect the reserves, then you've got to tell me what I'm supposed to protect. So I had to ask.
Why did they not want to tell you?
I do not know. Don't ask me, because I don't have the answer. I've been asking them. In fact, in 1996, exactly halfway through my term, I wrote prime minister Goh a letter. At that time, everybody was expecting a general election in December or January. After the election, a new government would be sworn in. When that happens, all the reserves, whether past or current, become past reserves and are locked up on the changeover date. As president, I have to safeguard them and they can only be drawn upon with my permission. So I said to Mr Goh It's already halfway through my term, but until today I still don't know all these figures about the reserves.
So the government had been stonewalling you, the president, for three years?
Yes. What happened actually was, as you know, in accounting, when you talk about reserves, it's either cash reserves or assets reserves. The cash side is straightforward investment, how many million dollars here and there, how much comes from the investment boards and so on. That was straightforward -- but still we had to ask for it. For the assets, like properties and so on, normally you say it's worth $30 million or $100 million or whatever. But they said it would take 56-man years to produce a dollar-and-cents value of the immovable assets. So I discussed this with the accountant-general and the auditor-general and we came to a compromise. The government would not need to give me the dollar-and-cents value, just give me a listing of all the properties that the government owns.
They agreed?
Well, yes, they agreed, but they said there's not the time for it. It took them a few months to produce the list. But even when they gave me the list, it was not complete.
It seems the Singapore government does not know its own assets?
Yes. It's complicated. It's never been done before. And for the assets of land, I can understand why. Every piece of land, even a stretch of road, is probably subdivided into many lots. There are 50,000 to 60,000 lots and every one has a number. If you want to value them all, it would take a long time. In the past, they have just locked everything up and assumed it is all there. But if I am to protect it, at least I want to know the list.
When they eventually gave you the list -- the incomplete list, did you have enough staff to do the checking and other work?
No, I did not. I only had one administrative staffer and two part-timers from the auditor-general's office.
You can see the Asiaweek article at
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000310a3.htm
The government took exception to many of the points Ong made in this interview. You can see their response at
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000310st.htm
As you can sense from the tone of Ong's words, there was some acrimony. We can deduce two things from these remarks Firstly, Ong obviously felt very strongly about living up to his job, and secondly, the government was either embarrassed they couldn't give an accounting, or too injured in their pride to co-operate ("He had the temerity to ask! Who does he think he is? The President?")
To make things worse, Ong contemplated standing for reelection again in 1999. The government, citing his lymphoma, refused to support his proposed candidacy, and instead arranged to put up S R Nathan as their preferred candidate. Even then, Ong still considered contesting and if he did, observers felt, he would likely have trounced the government's Nathan. Ong had the benefit of wide respect, name-recognition, incumbency and belonging to the majority race. Moreover, he had the fierce loyalty of many Chinese-speaking Chinese, being one of them, unlike Prime Minister Goh. Nathan, on the other hand, was unknown, and of Indian descent.
Although it didn't come out into the public till later, it was a moment of crisis. It risked splitting the PAP down the middle, and making Goh's government look like a loser.
Fortunately for the PAP, Ong changed his mind and retired. Nathan's name was submitted on Nomination Day... and no one else's. So it was a walkover. There was no contest. President Nathan, the elected president -- the one who was supposed to have a strong mandate to stand up to the government of the day if necessary, remember ? -- came to office without being elected.
May 2005
The mess that is our presidency
Wee Kim Wee (President of Singapore, 1985 – 1993) died recently and was given a state funeral. Many citizens had a collective cry. He was a genuinely well-liked man; his personal humility impressed thousands. He lived up to the role of a non-political head of state, as symbol and unifier, yet with a common touch. In his passing, he filled that role one last time: his state funeral gave people reason to feel Singaporean regardless of race, creed and political affiliation.
Once it was over, a tiny little question was asked and a huge can of worms opened.
Why, a reader wrote to the Straits Times to ask, was Ong Teng Cheong (President of Singapore 1993 – 1999) not likewise given a state funeral when he died in February 2002?
Presidents of Singapore since independence:
1965 -1970 Yusof Ishak
1970 - 1981 Benjamin Henry Sheares
1981 - 1985 C V Devan Nair
1985 - 1993 Wee Kim Wee
1993 - 1999 Ong Teng Cheong
1999 - present S R Nathan
The government's reply was an empty one (see the excerpt from the Straits Times on the right). Basically it said that the policy on state funerals was "still evolving" and is decided on a case-by-case basis by the Prime Minister and the cabinet. You'd notice that it completely failed to address the key question: WHY didn't Ong get a state funeral?
Two former presidents have passed away before. Yusof Ishak and Benjamin Sheares, the first and second presidents of Singapore respectively, both died in office and were given state funerals.
Thus, of the 4 former presidents who have passed away, only one, Ong Teng Cheong, didn't get a state funeral.
Most Singaporeans think they know the reason: Ong had taken his office too seriously and challenged Goh Chok Tong's government on a number of issues, particularly that relating to the value of the reserves. Worse yet, upon leaving office, he made his grievances public. It was nearly scandalous, coming from someone who had once been a Deputy Prime Minister and a People's Action Party (PAP) stalwart.
To understand what happened, we need to go back to the early 1990s.
* * * * *
In the general election of August 1991, about a year after Goh Chok Tong took over from Lee Kuan Yew as Prime Minister, the PAP lost an unprecedented 4 seats out of 81, compared to the outgoing Parliament that had only 1 opposition member. Their share of the vote (in the constituencies that were contested, and many were not) slipped to 61%.
Soon after, (although Ong himself said the idea had been bruited by Lee Kuan Yew as far back as 1982) the government began to speak of the need for a president with some "executive" powers. What they meant was a president with some blocking or veto powers. The fear, as expressed, was that of an "irresponsible" opposition party winning votes through profligate populism, promising tax cuts and subsidies at the same time. Singapore would be ruined, the government said.
So a constitutional amendment was passed (it's easy when you have 77 seats out of 81 in parliament) in order to establish a new rule. Under this new requirement, when a government leaves office, the state assets are sequestered. The incoming government can spend what revenue it acquires through its taxation or other policies, but it cannot spend the "nest-egg" built up by the previous government without the consent of the president.
The idea is that no new government (meaning the opposition) can raid the bank so carefully built up by the previous thrifty government (the PAP) in order to "buy" votes to keep themselves in power.
14 May 2005
Straits Times
PM and Cabinet decide who gets state funeral
Singaporeans who have made 'truly exceptional contributions' will receive a state funeral.
But it is not feasible to have a set formula on who gets one, based on a person's previous rank or appointment, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's press secretary said yesterday.
'The decision to hold one is made by the Prime Minister and the Cabinet,' Mr Chen Hwai Liang said in his letter to the Today newspaper and Chinese-language daily Lianhe Zaobao.
[snip]
As a young country, Singapore's practices and customs for public ceremonies and observances are still evolving, added Mr Chen. 'As the years pass, we will gradually establish norms and traditions that will reflect the Singapore way of honouring our best sons and daughters who have passed away, that is dignified, restrained and expresses the gratitude and sense of loss of the nation.'
Goh foresaw that in the event of a showdown between a government that wanted to spend the reserves and a president that wanted to be more prudent, it would be necessary for the president to have a stronger mandate from the people. Thus, at the same time as the veto powers were enshrined in the constitution, provision was also made for direct elections (i.e. by citizens) to fill the office of President. Previously, when the presidency was just a ceremonial position, it was Parliament who voted the candidate into office.
Furthermore, to ensure that only candidates who were financially trustworthy could every make it to the newly empowered presidency, the constitution was changed to stipulate that only those who met these criteria were eligible to stand for election: they had to be at least 45 years old, and have had at least three years' experience as ministers, heads of statutory boards or key government agencies, or have headed a company whose minimum paid-up capital was $100 million, or had equivalent experience.
These conditions make it virtually impossible for the opposition parties to field any candidate for the foreseeable future, which is hardly a surprise since the whole idea of veto powers is to put a safe person in place in order to deny any non-PAP government freedom of manoeuvre with the finances.
However, while all this was very neat in theory, in practice, it's been unraveling ever since.
Ong Teng Cheong was elected to the presidency in 1993. One of his first moves was to ask the civil service for a list of assets that the government had started off with. Six years later, one of his complaints at the end of his term of office in 1999, was that he never quite got a full accounting. Another of his complaints was that he was never given enough staff to check the numbers given to him.
Here is the relevant portion of Asiaweek's interview with Ong (issue dated 10 March 2000)
It was this issue that caused the dispute between you and the government?
Yes. But I don't want to go into details and upset everybody. The thing is that the elected president is supposed to protect the reserves, but he was not told what these are until five years later. From the day the Constitution was amended in 1991 to provide for an elected president, he was supposed to fulfil that role. My predecessor, Wee Kim Wee, although he was not elected, was supposed to play that role during the last two years of his term. But he did not actively check. So, when I came in in 1993, I asked for all this information about the reserves. It took them three years to give it to me.
The holdup was for administrative reasons?
Either that or they did not think there was any urgency. You see, if you ask me to protect the reserves, then you've got to tell me what I'm supposed to protect. So I had to ask.
Why did they not want to tell you?
I do not know. Don't ask me, because I don't have the answer. I've been asking them. In fact, in 1996, exactly halfway through my term, I wrote prime minister Goh a letter. At that time, everybody was expecting a general election in December or January. After the election, a new government would be sworn in. When that happens, all the reserves, whether past or current, become past reserves and are locked up on the changeover date. As president, I have to safeguard them and they can only be drawn upon with my permission. So I said to Mr Goh It's already halfway through my term, but until today I still don't know all these figures about the reserves.
So the government had been stonewalling you, the president, for three years?
Yes. What happened actually was, as you know, in accounting, when you talk about reserves, it's either cash reserves or assets reserves. The cash side is straightforward investment, how many million dollars here and there, how much comes from the investment boards and so on. That was straightforward -- but still we had to ask for it. For the assets, like properties and so on, normally you say it's worth $30 million or $100 million or whatever. But they said it would take 56-man years to produce a dollar-and-cents value of the immovable assets. So I discussed this with the accountant-general and the auditor-general and we came to a compromise. The government would not need to give me the dollar-and-cents value, just give me a listing of all the properties that the government owns.
They agreed?
Well, yes, they agreed, but they said there's not the time for it. It took them a few months to produce the list. But even when they gave me the list, it was not complete.
It seems the Singapore government does not know its own assets?
Yes. It's complicated. It's never been done before. And for the assets of land, I can understand why. Every piece of land, even a stretch of road, is probably subdivided into many lots. There are 50,000 to 60,000 lots and every one has a number. If you want to value them all, it would take a long time. In the past, they have just locked everything up and assumed it is all there. But if I am to protect it, at least I want to know the list.
When they eventually gave you the list -- the incomplete list, did you have enough staff to do the checking and other work?
No, I did not. I only had one administrative staffer and two part-timers from the auditor-general's office.
You can see the Asiaweek article at
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000310a3.htm
The government took exception to many of the points Ong made in this interview. You can see their response at
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000310st.htm
As you can sense from the tone of Ong's words, there was some acrimony. We can deduce two things from these remarks Firstly, Ong obviously felt very strongly about living up to his job, and secondly, the government was either embarrassed they couldn't give an accounting, or too injured in their pride to co-operate ("He had the temerity to ask! Who does he think he is? The President?")
To make things worse, Ong contemplated standing for reelection again in 1999. The government, citing his lymphoma, refused to support his proposed candidacy, and instead arranged to put up S R Nathan as their preferred candidate. Even then, Ong still considered contesting and if he did, observers felt, he would likely have trounced the government's Nathan. Ong had the benefit of wide respect, name-recognition, incumbency and belonging to the majority race. Moreover, he had the fierce loyalty of many Chinese-speaking Chinese, being one of them, unlike Prime Minister Goh. Nathan, on the other hand, was unknown, and of Indian descent.
Although it didn't come out into the public till later, it was a moment of crisis. It risked splitting the PAP down the middle, and making Goh's government look like a loser.
Fortunately for the PAP, Ong changed his mind and retired. Nathan's name was submitted on Nomination Day... and no one else's. So it was a walkover. There was no contest. President Nathan, the elected president -- the one who was supposed to have a strong mandate to stand up to the government of the day if necessary, remember ? -- came to office without being elected.
月朗朗，乾坤高悬，
雾重重，宫阙万间。
风萧萧，十全武功，
浩渺渺，四海经典。
帝王也终成，落日残烟。
看兴衰，全在弹指一挥间.
雾重重，宫阙万间。
风萧萧，十全武功，
浩渺渺，四海经典。
帝王也终成，落日残烟。
看兴衰，全在弹指一挥间.
Wao I can't understand why you have to use such a strong word on this issue. Did the PAP gang kill your parents or something worst happen to your family? I believe you will not like it if it happens on your family members...
I might dislike the PAP but like others I have a mercy heart when thing like this has happened.
Get your facts rights.
1. Gecko was not a housewife - she was a secretive powerful figure in Singapore.
We all only know the OFFICIAL political structure of Singapore that PAP presents to us. But we have no idea of the REAL power structure. Usually, only when someone dies that you know his/her real status.
eg. When the Taiwanese mafia chief passed away, even the Taiwanese President has to attend.
2. The sooner people face up to the facts that Lee and PAP are "too big too get rid of" and that they can do what they want and use the shit times to say :oIo: to the people in the nice way, the sooner you will be able to accept that this is the norm.
Many people are in denial and showed indignation.
I hear that they will have 7 SIA 747s as the flyovers at the funeral.
It became clear that the PMO (being the prime minister, son of the deceased) are exploiting taxpayers fund again to honour his mother and give her grand departure. This is a total conflict of interest. The father is like that, son also like that. No wonder we have Temasek and GIC losing billions without any head roll because who is holding our key to the reserve. Fxxk!!!!
The Bedok Camp Guards have been practicing with full dress rehearsals for this using an improvised coffin. We should have reptile currency notes soon.
Similar threads
