Serious InderjitPeo: ple with alternative views are not “traitors”

Confuseous

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
12,730
Points
113
People with alternative views are not “traitor”, most are “patriots”: Prof Inderjit Singh, on pro-establishment perspective on critical voices
Responding to Mr Sadasivan’s question on how he felt when handling strong dissenting opinions during his time as an MP, Prof Singh said that as a backbencher, he spent a lot of time listening to his residents, who he said gave him “a lot of input” that he brought to Parliament “to try to convince the leaders that change is needed”.

Along the way, said Prof Singh, he received opposition — and sometimes even ridicule — during the Parliamentary debates.

“But I was not deterred … I observed, over a long period of time, you know, that I was not wrong. And finally the leaders understood. It took a long time,”

He cited the shift from a “growth at all costs” economic strategy to that of a more inclusive one after the 2011 General Election as an example.

Prof Singh criticised the current leadership for coming down “hard” on critical voices, which may lead them to stop giving “frank feedback”.

Seeing recent comments such as “some of us are traitors to the country now”, Prof Singh said: “This is completely wrong … I can give I give you my own example. Actually the Prime Minister wanted me to do one more term in 2015. I declined. I wanted to step down and focus on other things.”

“So I stepped down not because I was unhappy — I did 20 years, four terms — and I wanted to change. I have Singapore at heart, and whether I am in Parliament or outside, I continue to do the same thing.

“So we are patriots, and I think leaders need to realise that anyone with an alternative view is not a traitor,” said Prof Singh.

Responding to a question on whether certain members of the PAP presently see him as “a turncoat” and “trying to score points” after stepping down as an MP, Prof Singh said that he is still the same person before, during and after his time in politics.

“I have not changed, and so many people have many different views of me. I mean, I’m very passionate about doing what is right for the country,” he said.

“So whether I was in Parliament or now [out] of Parliament, I continue to do this. I know it does make some of them uncomfortable, but I think anyone who thinks that I am not patriotic is wrong and is making a silly mistake,” Prof Singh continued, adding that he is “as patriotic as before” and that it does not matter if other think of him otherwise.
https://www.onlinecitizenasia.com/2...-of-society-a-crucial-issue-among-4g-leaders/
 
Litmus test : If one or more of the below are present, then the society is under authoritarian rule.

Does the government clamp down on dissent and dissenting views?
Are there political exiles living overseas?
Are there strict controls on media and broadcast?
 
People with alternative views are not “traitor”, most are “patriots”: Prof Inderjit Singh, on pro-establishment perspective on critical voices
Responding to Mr Sadasivan’s question on how he felt when handling strong dissenting opinions during his time as an MP, Prof Singh said that as a backbencher, he spent a lot of time listening to his residents, who he said gave him “a lot of input” that he brought to Parliament “to try to convince the leaders that change is needed”.

Along the way, said Prof Singh, he received opposition — and sometimes even ridicule — during the Parliamentary debates.

“But I was not deterred … I observed, over a long period of time, you know, that I was not wrong. And finally the leaders understood. It took a long time,”

He cited the shift from a “growth at all costs” economic strategy to that of a more inclusive one after the 2011 General Election as an example.

Prof Singh criticised the current leadership for coming down “hard” on critical voices, which may lead them to stop giving “frank feedback”.

Seeing recent comments such as “some of us are traitors to the country now”, Prof Singh said: “This is completely wrong … I can give I give you my own example. Actually the Prime Minister wanted me to do one more term in 2015. I declined. I wanted to step down and focus on other things.”

“So I stepped down not because I was unhappy — I did 20 years, four terms — and I wanted to change. I have Singapore at heart, and whether I am in Parliament or outside, I continue to do the same thing.

“So we are patriots, and I think leaders need to realise that anyone with an alternative view is not a traitor,” said Prof Singh.

Responding to a question on whether certain members of the PAP presently see him as “a turncoat” and “trying to score points” after stepping down as an MP, Prof Singh said that he is still the same person before, during and after his time in politics.

“I have not changed, and so many people have many different views of me. I mean, I’m very passionate about doing what is right for the country,” he said.

“So whether I was in Parliament or now [out] of Parliament, I continue to do this. I know it does make some of them uncomfortable, but I think anyone who thinks that I am not patriotic is wrong and is making a silly mistake,” Prof Singh continued, adding that he is “as patriotic as before” and that it does not matter if other think of him otherwise.
https://www.onlinecitizenasia.com/2...-of-society-a-crucial-issue-among-4g-leaders/
Sound traitorous to me. :cautious:
 
In a totalitarian shithole with a de facto one party rule, with presstitutes instead of journalists, with no checks and balances, with a leeder who has no term limits, alternative views are problematic. :cool:
 
Wasnt he once part of the establishment, PAP which sues anyone who criticises them even family members?
 
Everybody seems to be a Prof nowadays.

I thought this Inderjit Singh is an entrepreneur. Since when did he turn into an academic?
 
Inderjit has spoken out many times before in the past against PAP policies and was the only one to abstain from voting.....to me that took greater courage than anything knowing ur surrounded by a den of vipers.much like ong teng Cheong and far more than u can expect from a company of yes men.

He probably joined PAP with the best intentions over 20 years ago wanting to serve the country,it must have pained him greatly to see the direction the country and PAP was taking in the 2000s and 2010s.
 
Stop being fooled lah ..Sikhs are Sikhs and Inderjit is a Sikh ..,they know their locus standing more than anyone of you do ...they are a minority with minority eking a living ...will never go against the tide whether politically or otherwise ...even in india their country of origin usually thy never go against the tide

the last time was for their independent state called Kalistan ...but Indra Gandhi ,the PM , ordered Sikhs holiest temple to be raided with tanks which resulted in mutiny of Sikhs in the army and 2 Sikh bodyguard murdering Indra in cold blood ...which resulted in the entire India slaughtering of Sikhs in thousands ...many Sikhs fled India
mainly to UK and Canada

so, Sikhs outside India has an axe to grind with india ...many do not consider themselves Indians ...PAP used that to its advantage ..,show a turbaned face as representing Indians but actually not ...if you notice opposition figures are turbaned guys in the past and now non turbaned like Pritam who is a Sikh
To put in a nutshell Sikhs are used to play the good cop and bad cop by PAP
 
thats why u can clearly tell hes conflicted between his loyalty to PAP and his love for singapore.

hands are tied,there is only so much u can do.
 
Everybody seems to be a Prof nowadays.

I thought this Inderjit Singh is an entrepreneur. Since when did he turn into an academic?


At his peak , he was worth more than sgd 200m if i remember correctly mostly from his shareholdings in his former company.

read somewhere Mah BT is a Professor along with a few others chaps.
 
Everybody seems to be a Prof nowadays.

I thought this Inderjit Singh is an entrepreneur. Since when did he turn into an academic?



IMG_20200620_031831.jpg

IMG_20200620_031848.jpg
 
thats why u can clearly tell hes conflicted between his loyalty to PAP and his love for singapore.

hands are tied,there is only so much u can do.
So much? You mean nothing. Nothing he can do. :cool:
 
There's room of opposing views within PAP. There' no need to resort to treason by joining opposition just to make your opposing voices heard.
 
Back
Top