TOC:NG E-JAY's CRITIQUE ON WP;KEN JEYA(RP) REBUTS & BOB SIM GET'S AXED!!

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Sparks appeared to fly in TOC with Ng E-Jay's robust critique of WP's ND Message which seemed to attract the ire of Ken Jeya(RP) no less...and low and behold SBF's very own 'martial arts local politics exponent extraordinaire' Bob Sim no less get's in on the act but unfortunately get's canned...whatever next?!:p

On a serious note, i am not sure whether the Ken Jeya post originates from RP's Ken Jeya...however Ng E-Jay (or anyone else for that matter) should be entitled to express his views and thereafter stand open to scrutiny...


http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/08/...#comment-96871

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

I am all for free speech Bob

44) leetahsar on August 18th, 2009 6.59 pm Firstly, ngejay joined RP as a member. for no reason, he was out in a jiffy with ng teck siong. why? any guesses?

next, ngejay was and maybe still is active with SDP. theoretically, he should be with the SDP, why the ship jump? so now where is ngejay?

{All in all, this is not the kind of National Day message I expect from an opposition political party that has openly expressed its vision of being a credible check on the ruling PAP and possibly becoming large enough one day to form an alternative Government.}

SDP sent 4 mamasan grade of laukuaybus to speak in 4 major languages. if we listen to it, i m sure many would be ROTFL!

i m specifically pinpoint JASLYN GO aka LAMEI who lives near ABC hawker centre. she accused HDB of “profiteering” from gov flats. one question must be asked: if u bought your flat at IPO “hdb profiteered price”, later at what pirce would u wanna sell?

the original profiteer price or even a higher market sales price? of course the latter. the higher the better! ain’t this the natural cycle of greed in everyone of us?

as can be seen, SDP talks lots of craps but do they accept any criticisms. u go decide.

back to ngejay specially targeting at WP – it’s already an old sung song played and rewound so many times….his criticsm must be taken with more indepth as it hides another insiduous motive.

SDP IS SIMPLY JEALOUS OF WP which is the largest opp in singapore and winning the other opp wards. what does SDP accomplish so far? sending sanction instigative videoclip to president obama in the guise of a congratulatory msg.

SINGAPORE BEING SANCTIONED BY USA….now that would be very interesting! what would become of every singaporean and with such distressed economic dire situation?

was there any criticisms to SDP? there are i believe but again i strongly believe it was CENSORED! they would print what they want readers read.

so before we get brainwashed by ngejay’s usual warped and prejudices, ask yourself this very simple question:

WHAT’S NATIONAL DAY? it’s our country SINGAPORE’S BIRTHDAY!! it’s a day of well wishing and rejoices for what singapore has accomplishd over the 44 yrs. it’s that simple and joyous.

why do clowns like ejay need to complicate it?

you criticism n political views could jolly well save or the GE RALLY SPEECH. what a clown!

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

46) leetahsar on August 18th, 2009 7.25 pm we sure would love to hear ur view in SDP NDP msgs from the 4 laukauybus. did they wish SINGAPORE HAPPY BIRTHDAY? or did they hoping to be “from dust to dust….”?

maybe TOC should share more WHAT I REALLY WANT FOR SINGAPORE:

Originally Posted by leetahbar
1. that the gov would NOT nanny us so much to even convert our CPF to become their cpfs. return us ALL OUR MONEY when it’s due. dun stir up some craps to witheld it.

THIS ISN’T LEEGAL NOT DEMOCRATIC!

2. STOP asking us to reproduce. u have turn our lifestyle into such extravagance that there isn’t anymore excess to breed TRUE BLUE SINGAPORE BABIES. the FTs that blend in, they could cos they were from cheapo country. once they landed here in our shore, they have found an haven for their breeding ground.

MAY I ASK: are FT BABIES TRUE BLOODED SINGAPOREANS? IF NO, THEN YOU FAIL. IF YES, GOD BLESS YOU, YOU FAILED EVEN MORE!!

3. please STOP telling us GST helps needies and poor. just be frank with us. don’t worry most citizens are already numbed with such craps. so just simply and franky tell us:

GST IS FOR THE PURPOSE OF FURTHER PAYS HIKES : NAMELY YOURS THE MINITOOTS!

4. Cut the craps! cut cigarettes totally!

DON’T TELL US U CONCERN FOR OUR HEALTH AND THEREFORE U RAISE CIGARETTE TAXES. YOU ARE JUST BEING HYPOCRITES! BAN CIGARETTE TOTALLY LIKE U BAN CHEWING GUMS.

5. so u really boasted u wanna help citizens? why can’t u start from the top? like reducing hawker centre’s rentals….and everything shall come down naturally.

OK. GOT IT! U CANNOT AFFORD LIVE EXTRAVAGANTLY WITHOUT YOUR MILLION$!

6. if there are obscene losses by GLC or tamasick, just be bold to admit.

PLEASE DO NOT USE THE WORDS LIKE “LONG TERM”. citizens cannot live so long term to verify your words unlike the grand o’ dame who can be expensively and indefinitely supported LONG TERM by the latest techno life support. to a normal singaporean, he/she would have been dead and reincarnated.

7. u speak of talents and yet u kill talents. u kill the local talents to appease the foreign talents. maybe their reproductive machinery is all that u are really after for.
LTs find it hard to build a family while the FTs breed like wild rabbits!!

8. u can tax us but u cannot prove your CLARITY & FAIRNESS.

HOW COULD PUBLIC TRANSPORT LIKE SMRT & SBS MAKE SUCH OBSCENE PROFITS? ISN’T IT PROFITEERING FROM A MONOPOLISTIC BUSINESS THAT EVEN SHOULD NOT BE PUBLICLY LISTED IN THE FIRST PLACE?

there are more and there shall be more…but you forget how much MORE the citizens could take this and how much more and longer before the pressure cooker explodes.

would you guys love to see that day happening?

48) leetahsar on August 18th, 2009 7.38 pm of course nobody is qualified to criticise SDP. but this is TOC – A OPEN FREE SPEECH SITE.

maybe u got the wrong #.

please do not turn this place into a raucous kopitiam like delphi last time by deploying nasty clones again. if u do, u r a confirmed COWARD & LOSER!!

51) leetahsar on August 18th, 2009 8.41 pm before ejay criticises other opp party, how come he doesn’t clean up his SDP. he still hasn’t confirmed whether he’s a SDP member yet. why the suspense? his other pals, jaslyn go and chiatilik are all taking refuge there. are they SDP members? they never declare or heard declaring themselves. then what is their motive hidding there?

to exploit SDP as a stronghold so that they could get even with WP – what else? the old records have shown they ve linked to the party they once with and deserted and still witholding unresolved petty grudges only they know best.

LTK is in a way iconic to WP as the late JBJ. he has served the party well by winning hougang every GE. sylvia has yet to prove her worth. if she could win a ward in the next GE that would put her on par with ltk.

LTK is still so young, suave and charming. why insist he to retire? we have lots of old bags and deadwoods in the paps horde, have they ever considered retiring? even our respectable but cranky chiam is still holding firm and steady. then why should ltk be pinpointed?

ltk’s great plan could have been foiled or complicated into a disarray by betrayal of pretty posterboy who quit the party ungraciously bearing all the resentment he carries until today.

THAT’S THE BIGGEST PROBLEM NOW FACING WP! SDP has now been made into an instrument to be freely utilised and exploited by all those stooges. let’s see how chee outshrewd them or they outdo chee eventually.

so here again, there is another hidden motive which is very obvious where that posting was coming from. just go crack your brain. it won’t be difficult about who is/are behind those craps.

53) leetahsar on August 18th, 2009 8.48 pm ok, u try one simple criticism at SDP and see what’s their reaction

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

48) Ng E-Jay on August 18th, 2009 9.22 pm Dear leetahsar (comment 53, amongst others),

Your comments towards me in this TOC page are getting personal. But I neither mind nor care.

However I would like to clarify just once more that we should welcome criticism from all corners. Even if directed at SDP, which I support, it should be welcome.

Otherwise, we are no different from PAP.

E-Jay

49) theonlinecitizen on August 18th, 2009 9.38 pm Everyone,

Please direct your comments to the substance of the article and not the person who wrote it.

Any such comments aimed at the writer will be disallowed – with no exceptions.

Also, the article is about the Workers’ Party’s ND message. It is not about the RP, SDP, PAP, SPP, or the NSP.

All comments which deviate from the above will be disallowed.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

56) leetahsar on Your comment is awaiting moderation. August 18th, 2009 11.35 pm what is really wrong with the so called opp parties members is not their agenda: TO TOPPLE PAPS. it’s the people preaching that agenda.

why do so many see LTK ineffective? is chiam effective then? is chee effective?

NO! none of them is effective. the reason is the opp representativs in parleement is only 2 out of the 82. how can it be effective?

to aggravate the matter, here we are slamming at our own opp leader LTK accusing him of ineffective management of his opp and his handling of parleement debates and whatever. tell me, if LTK says NO, how many YESes will there be to retaliate?

ngejay is a brilliant in writing but is not very balanced in views. he’s gifted with big bombastic words but the words are not used to enhance and strength the weak opp unity among different parties.

like for this instance, more doubts and aspersion are cast over the prowessness of LTK. if he’s out of the game, who would take over as the biggest opp leader? ngejay or chee soon juan is it?

the motive behind this article is very diabolical. TOC reminds posters not to attack personal and what is the writer doing?

the feud is rather personal. it’s definitely not stemmed from ngejay alone. it’s a ganged up carefully schemed slow attack on LTK. i do not find LTK in anyway less better than chee but i do find chee very much worst than he instead.

why do people support chee then? cos he dares to create public ranting and unfearful to being handcuffed? then you all are very very wrong!!

he wants to be handcuffed and hopefully manhandled then he could affirm his accusation and defamation against the gov. doesn’t anyone here already seen through his so frequent and similar antics?

SDP after chiam has never been for the good of singapore and singaporeans. it’s more a more sinister plot to bring singapore down onto its knee to some foreign forces probably backing chee.

we have to be alert not only to the terrorism lurking outside or nearby singapore but we must be made to be more aware and perceptive of the actual agenda hidden in SDP under the guise of citizen’s welfare and concern.

again, what good has chee contributed to singaporeans? practically NONE!

by the way, u do not see many criticism now in SDP website. go think about it…about their free speeches and all those craps!

 

[Perspective]

Sparks appeared to fly in TOC with Ng E-Jay's robust critique of WP's ND Message which seemed to attract the ire of Ken Jeya(RP) no less...and low and behold SBF's very own 'martial arts local politics exponent extraordinaire' Bob Sim no less get's in on the act but unfortunately get's canned...whatever next?!:p

On a serious note, i am not sure whether the Ken Jeya post originates from RP's Ken Jeya...however Ng E-Jay (or anyone else for that matter) should be entitled to express his views and thereafter stand open to scrutiny...

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/08/...#comment-96871

Thanks for the link, bro. LTB is really getting out of hand.

Anyway some observations:

I think there is no real Ng E-Jay in terms of political stand, after some time observing this intrepid blogger. He's more aligned towards / against parties rather than policies in the sense that once it comes to SDP doing/not doing something he would nearly-by-default support (sometimes with token criticism) while the earlier same things done/not done by WP it would be outright critical. In the sense how many here would describe PAP supporters.

That kind of leads to the view that his support for SDP may not be general, but less than a fraction of specific things but thereby expanding on the other areas he defends so as to strengthen his case albeit weakly at times.

His alignment is also different from the average opposition supporter. If you give a survey chart to any of them that contains the usual Most Agreed (5) Neutral (3) and Most Disagreed (1) rankings they would mark PAP as (1) and either opposition party between (3) to (5). He would probably place WP at (1) and PAP at (2) and, needless to say, SDP at (5).

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Perspective

You have to forgive E Jay, his politics and thus his writings mirror those of his compatriots. On and Off, Black and White and No shades of Grey. As a mathematician by training, it would appeal to him, the back and white approach. I believe some of his critiques were valid and the party should take it to heart, the elegance of Tommy's prose is something well worth emulating. His desire for "attack", and "confrontation" blinds him to the fact that politically being "state mans" like or "dignified" is another political mode.



Locke




Geneva of the East, Venice of 21st century — Tommy Koh
AUG 19 —

This year, Singapore celebrates 50 years of self-government and 44 years of independence. We can be proud of what we have achieved. We should, however, never be complacent. We must continue to strive to build a more perfect Singapore. In that spirit, I would like to share some of my aspirations for Singapore and Singaporeans.

First, I wish we would be less obsessed with money. I have always heeded my mentor S. Rajaratnam's warning that we should not become a people who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. I think we are in such danger.

We seem to calculate everything in terms of money. We think that a person's worth is measured by the amount of money he or she makes. We have imitated one of the worst aspects of American capitalism, by paying our senior executives inflated salaries while, at the same time, stagnating the salaries of our middle and lower strata. As a result, Singapore has become a more unequal society than the United States.

I am glad that President SR Nathan recognises annually outstanding members of the professions that do not pay well but contribute enormously to our society — such as teaching, nursing and social work. I also thank the media for showcasing selfless Singaporeans who help the poor and the disadvantaged.

Money is important. We all need enough of it to live in reasonable comfort. But money cannot buy you a happy family, good friends, good health, peace of mind and joy. We should not allow the greed for money to weaken the moral fabric of our nation and to undermine the integrity of some professions, such as law and medicine.

Second, I would like Singaporeans to be kinder and more gracious. Are we a kind people? I am inclined to say “yes” when I remember the generosity with which we responded to the victims of the Boxing Day tsunami, Cyclone Nargis and the Sichuan earthquake. I am impressed by the letters in this newspaper thanking Singaporeans for the kindness they have shown strangers.

At the same time, I am shocked by the unkindness of some Singaporeans towards foreign domestic workers and foreign workers generally. As for the reports of wanton cruelty towards animals, I wonder who are these monsters. And as for graciousness, there is much room for improvement in our driving manners and in the way we conduct ourselves in trains, buses and elevators.

Third, I would like Singapore to become the Geneva of the East and the Venice of the 21st century.

Singapore can become a diplomatic centre like Geneva. It is a comfortable, efficient and secure venue.

Venice existed as a city state for nearly 800 years. One of the reasons for its longevity was that it welcomed talented people from different countries and civilisations. In the same way, Singapore should continue to welcome the talented from all nations. It can also act as a facilitator of inter-faith and inter-civilisational dialogue.

Fourth, Singapore can be the cultural hub of Southeast Asia. It has the best cultural infrastructure in the region. Because of its small size and short history, it has no choice but to collect, research and display the heritage of the region. As a result, we have the best collection of the visual arts of Southeast Asia, of the 19th and 20th centuries. When the new National Art Gallery opens, it will showcase this collection.

Singapore can also serve a larger region. It can bring together the civilisations of Southeast Asia, Northeast Asia, South Asia and West Asia. The Asian Civilisations Museum is a symbol of our aspiration to be an exemplar of the Asian cultural renaissance.

Fifth, Singapore can be Asia's greenest city. It is already Asia's greenest in the physical sense. It is green too in its policies on water, sanitation, air pollution, land use and transportation. But Singapore can and should do even better.

There is room for improvement in the efficient use of energy. We should progressively phase out incandescent light bulbs in favour of energy-saving bulbs. We should emulate the examples of Japan and the US to encourage car-owners to switch to hybrid vehicles. We should follow the example of Japan, South Korea and Taiwan to require commercial establishments to separate food waste from other waste for recycling.

We could be more energetic in promoting renewable energy. We should consider adopting Hong Kong's rule that no building below the age of 50 can be the object of an en bloc sale. We should develop Singapore as a centre for the financing of green business and technology.

Sixth, I would like Singapore to become an intellectual centre. We are making progress. The National University of Singapore and Nanyang Technological University are already recognised as world-class universities. I am confident the Singapore Management University will soon join them.

Our schools, polytechnics and arts colleges are much admired. As a result, Singapore is attracting many foreign students. Our think-tanks are expanding in quantity and quality. There has been a quantum leap in the percentage of our GDP that is invested in research and development. Our respect for learning is growing. What more can we do?

I would suggest three things: more funds for research in the social sciences and humanities; greater willingness on the part of the government to release official data to and de-classify documents for researchers; and a stronger culture of tolerance for alternative and dissenting views.

Those of us who attended this year's National Day Parade were inspired and moved. Sitting at Marina Bay, I could feel the spirit of our people — their unity, resilience and optimism. — The Straits Times
Reply With Quote

 

[Perspective]

You have to forgive E Jay, his politics and thus his writings mirror those of his compatriots. On and Off, Black and White and No shades of Grey. As a mathematician by training, it would appeal to him, the back and white approach. I believe some of his critiques were valid and the party should take it to heart, the elegance of Tommy's prose is something well worth emulating. His desire for "attack", and "confrontation" blinds him to the fact that politically being "state mans" like or "dignified" is another political mode.

Sorry but I was not criticising the man. I was stating with facts based from observation. The only part critical was "albeit weakly at times" which I am prepared to retract. Whoever or whichever party he criticises, it is up to them to take stock.

And I think you missed my point. There was nothing I said on black and white or shades of grey. I tend to think he would see the SDP in all shades and colours and the WP as all the wrong shades and colours. That is evident in his criticising WP for all the same things he praises SDP for. That is why I concluded as such. Above all, there is nothing wrong with taking that approach and attitude. He's just a extremely staunch party loyalist, that's all.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Seems that way...which makes one curious as to why he joined RP albeit for only a short time?...

Ng E-Jay if you are reading this, would appreciate if you could answer this query...no obligations though

And I think you missed my point. There was nothing I said on black and white or shades of grey. I tend to think he would see the SDP in all shades and colours and the WP as all the wrong shades and colours. That is evident in his criticising WP for all the same things he praises SDP for. That is why I concluded as such. Above all, there is nothing wrong with taking that approach and attitude. He's just a extremely staunch party loyalist, that's all.[/QUOTE]

 

[Perspective]

Seems that way...which makes one curious as to why he joined RP albeit for only a short time?...

Oh yes, forgot that, but not sure of the reasons and do not want to speculate or cast doubts. However did get the notion that RP was partner and affiliate of SDP except that the former was not in danger of dissolution. Obviously it has changed not a bit since KJ took over - indications that RP is now more criticised by netizens purportedly SDP supporters and KJ's defence or cover fire of WP on two occasions.

Above all, there is nothing wrong with taking that approach and attitude. He's just a extremely staunch party loyalist, that's all.

Well, a party loyalist can also be a non-member.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

agreed...that is why i put the Q to E-Jay himself without any obligations...btw i always thought RP (from JBJ's time) was distinct from SDP even though they may have shared certain values...if not JBJ would probably have long since joined SDP...JBJ appeared to always believe and stay steadfast in the parliamentary route approach only...son KJ seems to have followed on in his own way...SDP under CSJ appears to take another approach...

Oh yes, forgot that, but not sure of the reasons and do not want to speculate or cast doubts..

yes

Well, a party loyalist can also be a non-member.

 

[Perspective]

agreed...that is why i put the Q to E-Jay himself without any obligations...btw i always thought RP (from JBJ's time) was distinct from SDP even though they may have shared certain values...if not JBJ would probably have long since joined SDP...JBJ appeared to always believe and stay steadfast in the parliamentary route approach only...son KJ seems to have followed on in his own way...SDP under CSJ appears to take another approach...

I would think RP under JBJ had more issues with WP than SDP given JBJ's history with LTK and the rest. The circumstances of RP's founding and how it mainly consisted of older ex-WP members. But you are right that when RP was finally formed it aligned neither with SDP or WP. Although JBJ was seen with CSJ often, this reduced and on the other hand he drew closer to his ex-party and Chiam. Maybe to be more open and neutral now that his new party came to being and felt he couldn't be too overaligned to an exception or make "enemies".

In fact I now recall that RP drew closer with SDP after JBJ left and Ng Teck Siong called the shots but Ng was ousted by KJ and it seems KJ keeps a further distance from SDP than his dad did. All my observations and I stand corrected.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

No doubt JBJ was bitter with the way he felt LTK & gang treated him, rightly or wrongly...however i got the impression JBJ & CSJ were also always at loggerheads over the fundamental issue of the pure parliamentary route vs ex-parliamentary route...long before RP was formed, back during open centre, perhaps even before then...

I would think RP under JBJ had more issues with WP than SDP given JBJ's history with LTK and the rest. The circumstances of RP's founding and how it mainly consisted of older ex-WP members. But you are right that when RP was finally formed it aligned neither with SDP or WP. Although JBJ was seen with CSJ often, this reduced and on the other hand he drew closer to his ex-party and Chiam. Maybe to be more open and neutral now that his new party came to being and felt he couldn't be too overaligned to an exception or make "enemies"..

perhaps this is where E-Jay could shed some light?...again no obligations

In fact I now recall that RP drew closer with SDP after JBJ left and Ng Teck Siong called the shots but Ng was ousted by KJ and it seems KJ keeps a further distance from SDP than his dad did. All my observations and I stand corrected.

 

[NgEjay]

Seems that way...which makes one curious as to why he joined RP albeit for only a short time?...

Ng E-Jay if you are reading this, would appreciate if you could answer this query...no obligations though

Hi Porfirio R.,

On hindsight it was not a well-considered decision, given that my own values and beliefs are more aligned with SDP's than RP's.

At that time however, I joined because I was helping Teck Siong behind the scenes for some time and we both thought it would be better for me to officially become a party member. That might also spur me to become more committed.

Had to do a lot of introspection when Teck Siong decided to leave RP. Eventually realized that I should go back to SDP whose outlook, philosophy I am more in agreement with. So I left with Teck Siong.

Contrary to popular belief, my exit had nothing to do with Teck Siong's speech at Speaker's Corner, nor did my entry have anything to do with desire to contest elections. Those issues were never on my mind.

E-Jay

 

[NgEjay]

JBJ appeared to always believe and stay steadfast in the parliamentary route approach only...son KJ seems to have followed on in his own way...SDP under CSJ appears to take another approach...

SDP has also stated clearly on numerous occasions that they are committed to contesting elections.

E-Jay

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

ok...interesting...appreciate the reply

Hi Porfirio R.,

On hindsight it was not a well-considered decision, given that my own values and beliefs are more aligned with SDP's than RP's.

At that time however, I joined because I was helping Teck Siong behind the scenes for some time and we both thought it would be better for me to officially become a party member. That might also spur me to become more committed.

Had to do a lot of introspection when Teck Siong decided to leave RP. Eventually realized that I should go back to SDP whose outlook, philosophy I am more in agreement with. So I left with Teck Siong.

Contrary to popular belief, my exit had nothing to do with Teck Siong's speech at Speaker's Corner, nor did my entry have anything to do with desire to contest elections. Those issues were never on my mind.

E-Jay

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

sorry may be i did not make myself clear on this point...JBJ appeared to be pro parliamentary route only...SDP under CSJ appeared and still appears to take a wider view both parl and ex-parl...this i believe was a big contentious point between JBJ and CSJ

SDP has also stated clearly on numerous occasions that they are committed to contesting elections.

E-Jay

 

[NgEjay]

I tend to think he would see the SDP in all shades and colours and the WP as all the wrong shades and colours. That is evident in his criticising WP for all the same things he praises SDP for.

So in other words, two people can say the same thing but only one is right.

Well, I don't agree with your assessment of me, but I guess that's your view.

E-Jay

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Por

You might like to read the following from the SDP's website and decide for yourselves how, far E Jay's statement " SDP is "committed to contesting elections" from its actual position of " taking part in elections because "election rallies are an important means of educating the populace about democratic strengths."


Locke





When the political process is democratic, when the media is free and pluralistic, and when opposition parties are allowed to freely campaign for votes, the SDP is confident that the majority of Singaporeans will vote for it and give us the chance to lead Singapore into an exciting and democratic future, one that is full of hope, security, and prosperity not just in material terms, but spiritual ones as well.

If the SDP feels that the elections are unfair, then why doesn’t it boycott elections?

Boycotting elections is a worthy gambit if all opposition parties would cooperate and take a united stand. Given present circumstances, however, this is unlikely to happen. But boycotting elections is only a part of a bigger strategy that is needed to reform our election system. What is even more important is that Singaporeans must be empowered to rid themselves of authoritarianism. In the meantime the Singapore Democrats will take part in elections because election rallies are an important opportunity to reach out and educate the people of the strengths of democracy. We will not stop there, however. The SDP will also urge the proactive use of non-violent action to work towards reforming the election system.

 

[Perspective]

So in other words, two people can say the same thing but only one is right.

Well, I don't agree with your assessment of me, but I guess that's your view.

E-Jay

I'm sorry if my assessment is wrong but believe I am not the only one who see things that way.

Anyway there is nothing wrong to be a staunch party loyalist and one should not be ashamed. I am the kind who don't even think PAP supporters should be called names like "dogs" and all, something quite common on the net.