Kangaroo Court Step Up PR. Reconvict CSJ After Next GE?

[makapaaa]

Dec 10, 2009

Chee, supporter cleared

<!-- by line -->By Jeremy Au Yong
<!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar -->

Singapore Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan (right) and party supporter Yap Keng Ho (far left) have been cleared of three charges each of speaking in public without a permit. -- ST PHOTO: WONG KWAI CHOW

<!-- story content : start -->
SINGAPORE Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan and party supporter Yap Keng Ho have been cleared of three charges each of speaking in public without a permit.
The Attorney-General's Chambers on Thursday confirmed that the prosecution withdrew the charges last week and the Court ordered a discharge amounting to an acquittal.
The three charges were part of a set of eight similar ones filed against the two for their activities in the lead up to the 2006 General Election.
A trial date for the remaining charge is due to be set at a pre-trial conference next Tuesday.
The conclusion of that trial will bring to a close a series of cases that started soon after the May 2006 election. Both Chee and Yap had been found guilty of the four charges already heard.
Chee was jailed for 10 days because he did not pay the fine for the first conviction. He is appealing the other three convictions. Yap also refused to pay his fines and was jailed for a total of 35 days on different occasions for his convictions. Each charge carries a maximum fine of $10,000.

 

[Char_Azn]

Must be a slap in the face for the moron who claimed that there was a media blackout on this

 

[soIsee]

Dec 10, 2009

Chee, supporter cleared

<!-- by line -->By Jeremy Au Yong
<!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar -->

Singapore Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan (right) and party supporter Yap Keng Ho (far left) have been cleared of three charges each of speaking in public without a permit. -- ST PHOTO: WONG KWAI CHOW

<!-- story content : start -->
SINGAPORE Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan and party supporter Yap Keng Ho have been cleared of three charges each of speaking in public without a permit.
The Attorney-General's Chambers on Thursday confirmed that the prosecution withdrew the charges last week and the Court ordered a discharge amounting to an acquittal.
The three charges were part of a set of eight similar ones filed against the two for their activities in the lead up to the 2006 General Election.
A trial date for the remaining charge is due to be set at a pre-trial conference next Tuesday.
The conclusion of that trial will bring to a close a series of cases that started soon after the May 2006 election. Both Chee and Yap had been found guilty of the four charges already heard.
Chee was jailed for 10 days because he did not pay the fine for the first conviction. He is appealing the other three convictions. Yap also refused to pay his fines and was jailed for a total of 35 days on different occasions for his convictions. Each charge carries a maximum fine of $10,000.

AssLong might have heeded some advice from Obama when he stopped by recently.

 

[Perspective]

All in all I would say there was a misalignment of SDP's strategy. The civil disobedience route was a market differentiation strategy that won it fans but it should have been carried out closer to an election rather than after an election. They would have been charged right to the election to maybe the embarassment of the govt.

The method of doing so after an election so that it can focus on groundwork closer to the next election is obvious that it doesn't want to lose out in the parliamentary battle as well, meaning that not able to win a seat in this system is more propagandic and for 'market differentiation' purpose (ie saying different things to stand out) rather than what it really believes in.

 

[Char_Azn]

I agree. The civil disobedient route is not for everyone. While the best example, Ghandi, gets more and more support as time goes by. Chee loses more and more support with each passing election.

U need to understand the mentality of the local population. The local populace is made up of conformist. We all know that Singaporeans in general are very conservative. They obey the law and do not like pple who stand out. Chee on the other hand likes to do the complete opposite. his failures has little to do with propaganda but a hell lot more to do with the mentality of the local voters.

Voters want a voice and want change but they do not like it to be drastic and they certainly do not like radicals, which is why opposition leaders like Chiam and Low are so successful during elections. Even with the multi gazillion dollar carrots dangling right in front of them, the voters choose to go with the opposition leaders. For SDP's case, the PAP didn't even need to run such a campaign against them but are yet practically trounced them during the last election. For the record, SDP have the worst record of any party with regards to the % of votes in the last elections.

The pple have spoken and they don't like the way Chee is conducting his campaigns. It is easy to claim that propaganda from the government is the cause of all this but it does not explain why Chiam and Low were able to win in the last 2 elections. The simple fact is that they do their homework, they work the grounds, they go directly to the pple and work hard to win each vote. They are also very cautious, they do not allow PAP's propaganda machine to have anything to shoot. They are careful with what they say and only make their point when they are certain it is questionable. Chee on the other hand constantly provides the local media with fresh ammunition with his radical antics and accusations which he himself cannot prove

Chee tries to do it the easy way and blame the government for his own failures. Instead of going down and work to win every single vote, he creates events which only his few supporters and his henchman Yap ever takes part in and gives PAP more bullets to shoot at him. Most claim that PAP have loss touch with the average guy on the street however compared to Chee, Chee seems to be living in a world of his own.

 

[Char_Azn]

That whoever moron claimed the SPH prostitutes released this news only after a week later.

I think its obvious to anyone that this is pretty low piority news for the local media who isn't exactly known for being efficient in the first place.

 

[scroobal]

Civil disorbedience strategy does not work before, after or any where between elections. It only works when the country is in the hands of foreigners ( british as colonials) or when the population is facing immense hardship. Both these situations do not exist.

When you see Golf courses well patronised, food courts and shopping malls filled with families and people, nitespots entertaining throngs of youths well into the night, Macdonalds and other fastfoods having a roaring trade, singaporeans leaving for holidays to Disneyland, Australia and Europe, deploying Civil disobedience as a strategy would make one a fool no less an idiot.

Civil disorbedience is not 2 to 20 people ( especially the same chaps)protesting every now and then. Civil disorbedience is people based and requires mass demonstrations such as nation wide work stoppages and boycott of law and order crippling large segments of the country.

On any given day in the US, Europe there are hundreds and thousands of protests many of them political. It will be number from one joker to a few hundred. Some are arrested and spend the day in jail. The issues will range from Minke whales, fur coats, town council and their lack of actions to tyrannical mayors. No big shit. Every other Hollywood actor has gone to jail for one protest or another.

Chee was aiming for martyrdom which is not a strategy by itself but more an individual identity or ego addressing issue. Sometimes it draws followers and other times it does not. If lucky it might be the catalyst to spark civil disobedience but other environmental factors such as first 2 as suggested in para 1 must exist. It does however give false sense of success when small number of followers begin to treat the person as some god or leader with power. Thats when the trouble begins and they keep repeating it to please their tiny band of followers. Like David and Goliath, most people will sympathise with the chap because of the enormity of the endeavour but nothing else. This sense of sympathy from the genral public further gives the impression that progress has been made.

All in all I would say there was a misalignment of SDP's strategy. The civil disobedience route was a market differentiation strategy that won it fans but it should have been carried out closer to an election rather than after an election. They would have been charged right to the election to maybe the embarassment of the govt.

The method of doing so after an election so that it can focus on groundwork closer to the next election is obvious that it doesn't want to lose out in the parliamentary battle as well, meaning that not able to win a seat in this system is more propagandic and for 'market differentiation' purpose (ie saying different things to stand out) rather than what it really believes in.

 

[leetahbar]

I agree. The civil disobedient route is not for everyone. While the best example, Ghandi, gets more and more support as time goes by. Chee loses more and more support with each passing election.

U need to understand the mentality of the local population. The local populace is made up of conformist. We all know that Singaporeans in general are very conservative. They obey the law and do not like pple who stand out. Chee on the other hand likes to do the complete opposite. his failures has little to do with propaganda but a hell lot more to do with the mentality of the local voters.

Voters want a voice and want change but they do not like it to be drastic and they certainly do not like radicals, which is why opposition leaders like Chiam and Low are so successful during elections. Even with the multi gazillion dollar carrots dangling right in front of them, the voters choose to go with the opposition leaders. For SDP's case, the PAP didn't even need to run such a campaign against them but are yet practically trounced them during the last election. For the record, SDP have the worst record of any party with regards to the % of votes in the last elections.

The pple have spoken and they don't like the way Chee is conducting his campaigns. It is easy to claim that propaganda from the government is the cause of all this but it does not explain why Chiam and Low were able to win in the last 2 elections. The simple fact is that they do their homework, they work the grounds, they go directly to the pple and work hard to win each vote. They are also very cautious, they do not allow PAP's propaganda machine to have anything to shoot. They are careful with what they say and only make their point when they are certain it is questionable. Chee on the other hand constantly provides the local media with fresh ammunition with his radical antics and accusations which he himself cannot prove

Chee tries to do it the easy way and blame the government for his own failures. Instead of going down and work to win every single vote, he creates events which only his few supporters and his henchman Yap ever takes part in and gives PAP more bullets to shoot at him. Most claim that PAP have loss touch with the average guy on the street however compared to Chee, Chee seems to be living in a world of his own.

has it occurred that chee's wish is to go into the gov holiday resort? chee's hoping to get his wish comes true.

the judges could have realise that and hence rejected his prior booking into those resort.

if chee checks into the resorts, he would have helluva complaints to enhance his accusation about poor room service he gets there.

 

[Communist]

has it occurred that chee's wish is to go into the gov holiday resort? chee's hoping to get his wish comes true.

the judges could have realise that and hence rejected his prior booking into those resort.

if chee checks into the resorts, he would have helluva complaints to enhance his accusation about poor room service he gets there.

What the fuck are you talking about? Can't make heads and tails out of your mutterings! Maybe you are confusing this forum with your home where you can scold your own mother, the one who had raised and fed you for the past 50 years, a "Lau Cheebye"! You ungrateful bastard of a son!:oIo::oIo::oIo:

 

[methink]

AssLong might have heeded some advice from Obama when he stopped by recently.

Pappies beginning to get cold feet? Further jail time for Dr Chee is not going to do any good for their image. I believe AG Walter Woon is taking a hit on this.

Any one man protesting and getting charged for it, will be a real test of their stupid POA that on one man also constitute an assembly!!! I am looking forward to this happening. Then... the whole world will be laughing at us!

Rest assured, Walter Woon wont last as AG much longer.

 

[Perspective]

Civil disorbedience strategy does not work before, after or any where between elections. It only works when the country is in the hands of foreigners ( british as colonials) or when the population is facing immense hardship. Both these situations do not exist.

When you see Golf courses well patronised, food courts and shopping malls filled with families and people, nitespots entertaining throngs of youths well into the night, Macdonalds and other fastfoods having a roaring trade, singaporeans leaving for holidays to Disneyland, Australia and Europe, deploying Civil disobedience as a strategy would make one a fool no less an idiot.

Civil disorbedience is not 2 to 20 people ( especially the same chaps)protesting every now and then. Civil disorbedience is people based and requires mass demonstrations such as nation wide work stoppages and boycott of law and order crippling large segments of the country.

On any given day in the US, Europe there are hundreds and thousands of protests many of them political. It will be number from one joker to a few hundred. Some are arrested and spend the day in jail. The issues will range from Minke whales, fur coats, town council and their lack of actions to tyrannical mayors. No big shit. Every other Hollywood actor has gone to jail for one protest or another.

Chee was aiming for martyrdom which is not a strategy by itself but more an individual identity or ego addressing issue. Sometimes it draws followers and other times it does not. If lucky it might be the catalyst to spark civil disobedience but other environmental factors such as first 2 as suggested in para 1 must exist. It does however give false sense of success when small number of followers begin to treat the person as some god or leader with power. Thats when the trouble begins and they keep repeating it to please their tiny band of followers. Like David and Goliath, most people will sympathise with the chap because of the enormity of the endeavour but nothing else. This sense of sympathy from the genral public further gives the impression that progress has been made.

Good points and I agree, but I venture to think that it doesn't matter to them and the strategy was for the purpose of market differentiation. Else, how would one explain that SDP turns out to be the second or third largest party despite the smallest scoreboard.

No matter how similar or different are the rest, the SDP is clearly far distinct. Guess it gives them a survival chance rather than have 10% more votes but sink among those myriad of 10-member parties.

 

[cleareyes]

Must be a slap in the face for the moron who claimed that there was a media blackout on this

Dont think there is a media blackout. More of a case of "delaying" news as lets be honest, this sort of news affact very very few in the Singapore general public apart from the SDP people themselves.

 

[scroobal]

I suspect that it began as an attempt to get publicity and a profile as the media is controlled by the State. They only way was to engage the public is to engage in the govt by confronting and breaking the law. The media then gets involved. However they packaged it wrongly. This is despite the presence of a media professional like Gandhi.

I don't think it was a differentiation strategy but something that they lost track off. They certainly got bucket loads of publicity and many times more than all the opposition parties combined but unable to package or harness it. The protests became their identity and the goal itself.

I have spoken to people who have met Chee and had decent conversations with him. They cannot relate those protest with him. Similar to his books which has no links to his actions. Look at his followers and him, also no connection. An enigma at best.

In fact, as to your last comment, they have progressively done worse at each and every subsequent outing. That speaks volumes.

Good points and I agree, but I venture to think that it doesn't matter to them and the strategy was for the purpose of market differentiation. Else, how would one explain that SDP turns out to be the second or third largest party despite the smallest scoreboard.

No matter how similar or different are the rest, the SDP is clearly far distinct. Guess it gives them a survival chance rather than have 10% more votes but sink among those myriad of 10-member parties.

 

[Communist]

The biggest mistake that Chee had ever made was the confrontation that he chose to make with Goh Chok Tong. I believe his emotions got the better of him then. That incident had seared into the minds of many who permit a little of politics into their overworked hard drives dedicated to making a living.

All that said, I believe he is a very different man from that Chee of the Suharto question.

Another thing about Chee's focus and dedication. He has no time for suck ups and glory refraction seekers. He will take seriously only doers, not talkers. He will not give my type, the time of day.

 

[Perspective]

I suspect that it began as an attempt to get publicity and a profile as the media is controlled by the State. They only way was to engage the public is to engage in the govt by confronting and breaking the law. The media then gets involved. However they packaged it wrongly. This is despite the presence of a media professional like Gandhi.

I don't think it was a differentiation strategy but something that they lost track off. They certainly got bucket loads of publicity and many times more than all the opposition parties combined but unable to package or harness it. The protests became their identity and the goal itself.

I have spoken to people who have met Chee and had decent conversations with him. They cannot relate those protest with him. Similar to his books which has no links to his actions. Look at his followers and him, also no connection. An enigma at best.

In fact, as to your last comment, they have progressively done worse at each and every subsequent outing. That speaks volumes.

On the contrary to losing track, I feel that things were more messy at the start, but packaged into something more organised later yet more alien.

At the start CSJ went the route the rest were headed except wanting enhanced "strength" of how he lobbied the issues. The outcome was something not seen anywhere, including the shouting. After all the suits and 2006 it started to follow something that exists but in a different context. It was at that point of time his overseas network strengthened and ARDA and int'l awards came about. Propagandas such as "no autocratic govts have ever been voted out", "we do this to take the place of the absent civil society" or the "5 myths" came about only later. Some are circular or factually flawed but even circular arguments have to be organised. Although not necessarily able to withstand dwelling at times, they can be used as bite-sized statements their supporters go around using. Gone is the hunger strike and shouting. Recall that in the past no SDP supporter had material to defend them even if they wanted to. Also note that drumming up the "firsts" (first Youth Wing, first Twitter, first talkshow, first human rights forum) to show the progressive-ness is later.

To me it's quite clear that unlike other parties it has a strong advisory network behind that is not local and did not start from 1994 or 2001. The PAP's is presumably within the cabinet and the rest presumably the party executive (CEC) and its membership. Not for them, at least not totally.

 

[kingrant]

Could it have been a case of deliberate misportrayal of his image by the govt media? The example of CSJ shouting at GCT could have been overplayed and exaggerated by the press to cast him in the worst light. In the West, shouting and chanting slogans are acceptable acts of a liberal democracy. Did he shout because it was too noisy, or did he shout to gain attention, as I imagined there might have been a sufficiently high noise level from the normal cheering and jeering from the PAP supporters as well as Chee's during the hustings period. Our population has been drummed senselessly by the PAP that we have to regard our Ministers as 'jun zhi' (mandarins), so that we have to be polite and respectful of them. To detractors, Ministers are mere servants of the people, and during the hustings, fair game for shouting at or robust talk. Nothing disrespectful and definitely not illegal to do so. So the press painted that one sided picture of perhaps an erstwhile even-toned and even quiet politician, and if loud, perhaps it is on social principles and points of law??

 

[Perspective]

Could it have been a case of deliberate misportrayal of his image by the govt media? The example of CSJ shouting at GCT could have been overplayed and exaggerated by the press to cast him in the worst light. In the West, shouting and chanting slogans are acceptable acts of a liberal democracy. Did he shout because it was too noisy, or did he shout to gain attention, as I imagined there might have been a sufficiently high noise level from the normal cheering and jeering from the PAP supporters as well as Chee's during the hustings period. Our population has been drummed senselessly by the PAP that we have to regard our Ministers as 'jun zhi' (mandarins), so that we have to be polite and respectful of them. To detractors, Ministers are mere servants of the people, and during the hustings, fair game for shouting at or robust talk. Nothing disrespectful and definitely not illegal to do so. So the press painted that one sided picture of perhaps an erstwhile even-toned and even quiet politician, and if loud, perhaps it is on social principles and points of law??

In printed words, the newspapers tend to misquote those aligned to the Singapore opposition. The latest case was Philip Jeya. They are not called the 154th for nothing.

However, a video footage is harder to distort. Unless it was a CSJ-lookalike hired from among calefares, it was a real deal with a real holler. I have heard CSJ speak and the voice in the footage was surely him even if one wants to argue that it was a lookalike. The only thing is that the media doesn't cover the times when CSJ carries himself well (and he does many a time) but that is no excuse to say that the shouting episode was distorted.

Which other country did an opposition leader heckle his opponent? I do not recall that it is an acceptable thing and only not to Singapore. Shouting and chanting during protests are a different thing.

 

[scroobal]

Actually the press did not have to play it out. Both the Washington and the Jurong Incident were shown and Singaporeans drew back as they were not used to such displays. The Washingston incident was perceived as particularly boorish as its was not the appropriate forum.

In the West, such displays by politicians with the exception of Italy are not acceptable conduct. The ones who engage in such acitivities are their proxies and henchman while they themselves do not get their hands soiled.

Even the likes of Jesse Jackson, and ever so ubiquitous Rev Al Sharpton do lead protests and marches but they themselves give well measured and even tempered speeches that are loaded with innuedoes and allegations that are even wild. Notice however that their supporters are deemded hooligans and certainly boisterous.

Chee's fundamental approach to Politics is flawed. He addresses the Lees and the Gohs but not the voters as in both the incidents. In both the Washington Incident and the Jurong Incident, he addressed Goh. It was the Jurong incident that he was labelled a "hooligan" by the PAP. Notice however that even Jackson and Sharpton always addressed the crowd. Chee's latest attempt to address George Yeo but has no time to address the voters per se is still a big issue.

I have no doubt that media does more than its share of slant journalism, latest was on JBJ's sons. Everyone in opposition cops it from the state media.

Could it have been a case of deliberate misportrayal of his image by the govt media? The example of CSJ shouting at GCT could have been overplayed and exaggerated by the press to cast him in the worst light. In the West, shouting and chanting slogans are acceptable acts of a liberal democracy.

 

[makapaaa]

Re: Kangaroo Court Step Up PR. Reconvict CSJ After Next GE?
<HR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #989898; COLOR: #989898" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->The biggest mistake that Chee had ever made was the confrontation that he chose to make with Goh Chok Tong. I believe his emotions got the better of him then. That incident had seared into the minds of many who permit a little of politics into their overworked hard drives dedicated to making a living.

[COLOR=_______]The 66% are stoopid for short?
[/COLOR]