Sylvia Lim learning “White Crane” boxing as GE approaches
December 6th, 2009 | 
Author: 
Even as the next election is looming near, Workers’ Party Chairman Sylvia Lim is still able to find time to learn “White Crane” boxing or “Yong Chun Quan” in mandarin which has quite a large following in Singapore.
The origins of “White Crane” boxing is sketchy as it has historically been passed from teacher to student verbally rather than through documentation, making it difficult to confirm or clarify the differing accounts of Wing Chun’s creation.
In an interview with Shin Min Daily, Ms Lim revealed that her interest in the martial arts was sparked after watching the Hong Kong movie – “Yip Man” depicting the life story of the teacher of Bruce Lee.
Yip Man was the first Wing Chun master to teach the art openly in “Hong Kong” on a school fee basis. His students and their students therefore make up the majority of the practitioners of Wing Chun today.
Ms Lim had already attended two classes, but according to her, she still have not got the basic “posture” right and her knees hurt after the sessions.
Ms Lim is a NCMP in parliament after her credible debut performance in the last elections when her team garnered a respectable 43.7 per cent of the votes at Aljunied GRC.
Though many had placed high hopes on her initially, her performance so far had been mediocre compared to her predecessor Steve Chia.
Being overly cautious and conservative, Ms Lim dared not raise difficult or sensitive questions in parliament which might rattle the ruling party.
Ms Lim has largely eschewed adopting a more confrontational stance against the government in a style similar to her fellow colleague Hougang MP Low Thia Kiang.
During the International Bar Association Conference held in Singapore in 2007 where Ms Lim was a panel speaker, she spoke up in defence of Singapore’s laws, describing them as “fair and just” when criticized by the Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party Dr Chee Soon Juan.
Earlier media reports suggest that she may be contesting in a single-ward seat in Nee Soon South in the next election against PAP’s Lee Bee Wah if the seat is craved out from Ang Mo Kio GRC.
Despite her relatively low-profile, Ms Lim is one of the more credible opposition politicians in Singapore and she appears to have won the respect and trust of many Singaporeans.
Under the new rules which allow for more alternative voices in parliament, Ms Lim is likely to serve another term in parliament as one of the “best losers” even if she does not win her second election.
Posted in Headlines
74 Responses to “Sylvia Lim learning “White Crane” boxing as GE approaches”
Loading ...
Alex Tan Allan Ooi AWARE Chee Soon Juan Chiam See Tong Claire Lee David Widjaja DBS Dr Allan Ooi Dr Silviu Ionescu Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Foyce Le Xuan highnote5 Hong Lim Park Jack Lin Xinli Jack Neo Jack Neo affair Jack Neo scandal Josie Lau Josie Lau Meng Lee Lee Kuan Yew Lehman brothers Lighthouse Evangelism MAS minibonds Miss Singapore World NTU stabbing PAP Pastor Rony Tan Ris Low Romanian diplomat in hit-and-run Rony Tan S-League silviu ionescu Singapore Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games Tan Kin Lian Thio Su Mien Tiger Woods affair Tong Kok Wai Top 8 Vivian Balakrishnan Wendy Chong Y O G Youth Olympic Games
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
I have lost all respect for this lady.The question is,why the need to appear in front of thousands of foreign lawyers to defend our judiciary?..The very judiciary JBJ and Dr.Chee is up against.She had choice as a leader of an opposition party not to ; even if she is in favor of the way our judiciary treats the opposition parties and it’s members.But she chose to appear as a panel member to defend the SG judiciary to an international crowd and to the gallery of international press.Why?
I would not vote for her.
Singaporeans are impressed by what they see in Ms Lim.
I am absolutely positive she will easily win any ward she contests.
Although it’s good to know that TR also criticizes the opposition instead of being totally lop-sided, I DON’T think this article is fair criticism to Sylvia Lim.
She’s just an NCMP, but I believe she has raised more than her fair share of questions than many of the other highly paid MPs:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=sylvia+lim&search_type=&aq=f
We can’t expect one opposition voice to make much of a difference. We need more of them to make a greater impact for the benefit of Singaporeans.
I find the title just too anti opposition..
It’s not like they cannot have their own time doing their own stuff.
I have seen some MP drinking alone in a bar. So, does it meant that the title will write MP drinking alone even on tight schedules?
Well… the founder of Wing Chun, Yim Wing Chun is a woman… I guess maybe it’s a factor when she decided to choose the art… by the way I have been learning Wing Chun too and it’s very interesting…
Fitting facts into a proper legal framework to arrive at a just decision and fitting law to irrelevant facts to deny justice is where just and fairness are attained or failed of achievement.
JUSTICE IS ONLY FOUND OR DENIED IN LAW APPLICATION, now benign law as statutorily defined.
They can be very subtle, even if unspoken which is why some of the successful highest court judgements are pretty scathing of the ratio decidendi arrived in lower court decisions reversed.
It is probably wrong to assume law is somehow “moral” of fair and just. If law is moral of just and fair, all of Hitler’s military men and women should have been hanged as also all the Japanese soldiers involved in Nanking Rape and Massacre. Only a few “well-selected” face the firing squad and the rest protected even by the Chinese military when Japan surrendered.
Maybe that is why some sceptic even suggest law is an ass!! Quite rightly, I believe.
I think she is a more refined lady and more sincere as compare to those ah lian talking about jambun etc..etc..jumping up n down like monkey when asked to speak about certain subject..
A good choice to take on LBW in Nee Soon South. Springleaf Garden ppl will surely support you.
While she is learning Wing Chun, the other opposition members appear to be doing shadow boxing. Compared to the opposition in our immediate neighbourhood countries, these people are a bunch of jokers and slackers. NATO.
For my vote, I rather stick to the people I am already used to. They may not be perfect but then, who is?
Statutory law CANNOT BE DEFINED in a biased way like this law states in writing EXPLICITLY that party ABC shall be persecuted for this transgression which shall NOT be apply of the same if party XYZ infringe on that same transgression.
It is how that “transgression” is defined as “fact” which then invite the law application – even unjustly.
For example, A swears at B in the street for drunkard driving causing a serious accident. Policeman P will charge him for offence of disrupting public peace and use of offensive language. Fast forward in the police station, the officer P who charged A sweared even more violently to his colleagues. Does his colleagues then arrest and charge P for disrupting public peace and use of offensive language in the witness and offensive shame to A especially if P is his superior officer?
I bet not.
But even if he does and prosecuted. The defence grounds accepted in court judgement could be as frivolous as P was in a moment of thoughtlessness in the heat of work pressure – in the line of official duty. A is charged because A swearing is heard all on the street public arena. SUDDENLY PLACE WHERE THE TRANSGRESSION TOOK PLACE BECOME A RELEVANT FACT OF LAWFUL CONSIDERATION which acquitted one and convicted the other.
THE LAW CANNOT BE WRITTEN AS IF THE SWEARING TAKES PLACE ON A STREET, IT WILL APPLY BUT IF IT TAKES PLACE IN A POLICE STATION OR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CHAMBERS, IT DOES NOT APPLY!
See how the “facts” can be twisted in court judgement but in Australia, such convicted cases are often reversed in higher court of appeal because “morality” laws are dudious of fairness and equity.
The moral of the story is – LAW AS DEFINED IS NEITHER MORALLY JUST AND FAIR OR IMMORALLY UNJUST AND UNFAIR.
IT IS HOW LAW IS APPLIED AND INTERPRETED IN COURT ROOM DECISIONS.
//Maybe that is why some sceptic even suggest law is an ass!! //
“Jus naturale” is not a maxim. “Jus and lex” is not a maxim. A maxim is something like “In pari delicto potior est conditio defendentis” The semi-maxim ; more an aphorism than a maxim is “Justice must not only be done, it MUST BE SEEN to be done.”
The man who sits on the throne, the judge, is supposed to understand the legal framework, facts of the case, analyze the situation, points, past, precedents, consult and finally write a piece of judgment. Not judge per ce.In SG a common man has no objective outlook of right and wrong, lawful and unlawful. He gets punished for both. The powerful and influential get beyond the man made statutes and become statues of prominence. Governance and equity is only on paper.
Law is not a god sent instruction manual.
Sylvia being a True Singaporean defends her country first and foremast.The perception of Singapore’s judiciary remains a perception just like Tiger Woods squeaky clean image remain a perception till recent……the rest is history.
Sylvia having a train legal mind does not have a neurotic mind with neurotic perceptions but than each can perceive believe whatever they want.The fact that she is a NCP today and possibly an MP in the next election augers well for her.
Yes, thank you for the much needed constant reminder that law trained Sylvia Lim thinks that laws in Singapore are ‘just and fair’; it gives her a damn good excuse to sit on her fat ass in Parliament, earn the money that comes with it, and not raise her voice against the whole slew of unconstitutional – and therefore illegal – laws in Singapore.
This PAP-approved opposition member, Sylvia Lim is being approved by the PAP precisely because she will be just as ineffective as the other PAP approved opposition members like the two useless people, Low Thia Kiang and Chiam See Tong; she’s now being feted by the PAP media to enhance her chances of being voted into Parliament in the next election.
For one reason: inefectiveness in Parliament – Singapore’s world class PAP government is unfortunately not world class enough to handle a real opposition like the SDP.
PeterL on Sun, 6th Dec 2009 12:34 pm
“a neurotic mind with neurotic perceptions”????? OR NIAVETY AS ITS BEST???
Read this comment and a A Supreme Court of Canada judge – the highest court of the land in that country – and his comments that follow how the law of justice had been so badly flawed.
It is bordering on “fitting the facts to law” by very subtly shifting the burden of evidence in a real case – NOT A NEUROTIC MIND WITH NEUROTIC PERCEPTIONS.
…”The majority of the court rejected C.L.Y.’s argument that the trial judge, by considering the evidence of the girl first, had shifted the burden of proof. The dissenting judge concluded that the trial judge’s acceptance of the complainant’s evidence before even considering that of C.L.Y. resulted in at least a subtle shift of the onus of proof.”
http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2008/2008scc2/2008scc2.html
THIS IS A REAL CASE THAT WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA AND THE DEFENDANT WON!!!!!!!!!!
THAT IS WHY YOU FIND A LOT OF LAW ON PUBLIC ORDER GET THROWN OUT OF COURT IN AUSTRALIA AS WELL when the defendant appeared in court and NOTHING OF VIOLATION TOOK PLACE DISRUPTING PUBLIC ORDER AND SAFETY FROM THE TIME OF HIS OR HER ARREST until the appearance.
It is a fiction in evidence at criminal law.
The police can arrest somebody to prevent the risk of public order violation BUT THAT ARREST DOES NOT PROVED THAT PUBLIC ORDER AND SAFETY HAVE ALREADY BEEN ENDANGERED OR INFRINGED UPON.
Otherwise the accused would have been additionally charged for attacking member of the public or attacking the policemen watching at specific place and time over another incident. The accused are often peaceful of surrender.
Don’t you agree, PeterL???
“Compared to the opposition in our immediate neighbourhood countries, these people are a bunch of jokers and slackers. NATO.”
While a section of the Singaporean opposition champions causes like abolishing the death penalty and saving a Malaysian Chinese drug trafficker from execution, the main human rights story in Malaysian media whether be it MSM or online is about a Malay transgendered woman who is facing deportation from UK. Nice to see where their priorities lie.
Who are the jokers and the slackers?
“They may not be perfect but then, who is?”
Stupid “no one is perfect” excuse. Kids remember if you want to get out of any problem and evade any personal responsibility please quote this excuse from the Men in White.
“Sylvia having a train legal mind does not have a neurotic mind with neurotic perceptions.”
Does legal training confer immunity from neurotic disorders? Please if you want to spin propaganda, please do so in a way so as not insult the intelligence of the recipients.
Robox- With the GE around the corner and you seem to disagree with everything Singaporean Good or Bad lets see how the opposition will fair.
I do hope SDP will win a few seats with you possibly as one of them.Good luck and hope to see you not as ROBOX but your true identity in the hustings for the next GE.”THERE IS NOTHING TO FEAR THAN FEAR ITSELF”
to Robox, don’t talk cock too much, why don’t you go become one opposition party member yourselve and try it out?
Anon=
after reading your post I do agree with you Sir, but my point is human by nature are animals most difficult to understand that is why I suppose there must be laws to differentiate perception from facts.
The law of the land applies or else we will be living by the law of the jungle and I sincerely believe we are living in a civilized society.I am not trained legally to comment on judgement in the courts but I do believe we each are entitled to a vote to replace a perceived unjust Govt.
OmegaLee=
Agreed,having a trained legal mind does not absolve you from being neurotic,for the moment the perception seems to point to the fact that she is not one i.e Neurotic
To PeterL on Sun, 6th Dec 2009 2:58 pm:
Re: “Robox – With the GE around the corner and you seem to disagree with everything Singaporean Good or Bad lets see how the opposition will fair.”
First of of all how did you come to the daft conclusion that I disagree with everything Singaporean, and especially what is good?
Do you Stupid Sylvia Lim Supporters have any evidence to back your wild allegations about me?
If so, provide that proof.
And if it is something Singaporean and bad that I rile about, don’t you think that a responsible citizen SHOULD be speaking about against those?
And I can tell you EXACTLY how the opposition will fare, and not “fair” as you write, you stupid fool.
The PAP has ALREADY fixed the outcome of the next elections – even foreigners like Hong Kong’s Chief Executive, Donald Tsang have acknowledged that fact.
The theoretical minimum of nine seats from the opposition parties are also the MAXIMUM that the PAP has already fixed.
There is evidence for what I say.
Ever since the introduction of the NCMP scheme that provided for a theoretical minimum of three seats from the opposition parties, we have ONLY seen exactly three seats from the opposition parties in Parliament in every single election. In other words, the theoretical minimum number of seats from the opposition parties is also the maximum FIXED by the PAP.
YOU KNOW THAT VERY WELL.
And that’s why, in what you called your first foray into the online world, you did what you are being paid to do: the PAP and Combined Forces’ IB’s job of SDP-bashing and thereby ensuring that the political left will continue to be unrepresented in Parliament.
And that’s why you are here: to ensure that only the conservative PAP-approved opposition parties will get into Parliament.
Well, with only nine seats to fight for, I am definitely going to fight for the right of Singapore’s political liberal left to be represented in Parliament. And that can only be done if SDP candidates are voted in; not when the fellow compliant conservatives from the Workers Party and Chiam See Tong get elected in.
Well, guess what?
I can smarten up and fight you thugs back because I have something that you don’t.
It’s called brains!
To Don’t talk cock on Sun, 6th Dec 2009 2:58 pm
Re: “to Robox, don’t talk cock too much”
Practise what you preach.
@ Don’t talk cock on Sun, 6th Dec 2009 2:58 pm
If Robox and everyone sharing his/her thoughts stands for election, you may have millions of candidates contesting in 10 GRCs and 14 SMC seats (???), who is doing ALL the votes counting and deciding who is the winner if there are 88,888 candidates tie with the same number of voted casted in his or her favour of relevant contested constituency?
Or has madness of insanity corrupted the rationality of your little brain?
If it is completely permissible for EVERY SDP-themed blog to be met with Lee Kuan Yew-derived abusiveness, then doesn’t it follow that those opposed to it can also meet every other opposition parties-themed blog to recieve the same?
Doesn’t EQUALITY of ABUSE mean anything these days?
Jeez…
practising martial arts is a good form of relaxation. afterall, sylvia is going to fight a battle in 6 months time.
a well known china general in Jing dynasty was playing weiqi while a big battle is going on. He won eventually. that shows that the more tougher the battle, the more the general needs to relax. i am sure churchill and roosevelt did so too.
also, yong chun teaches the art of balance and 以柔克刚, just the thing for sylvia to use in politics.
老子
天下莫柔弱于水，而攻坚强者莫之能胜，以其无以易之。弱之胜强，柔之胜刚，天下莫不知，莫能行。是以圣人云：”受国之垢，是谓社稷主；受国不祥，是为天下王。
说的意思是：遍天下再没有什么东西比水更柔弱了，而攻坚克强却没有什么东西可以胜过水。弱胜过强，柔胜过刚，遍天下没有人不知道，但是没有人能实行。所以有道的圣人这样说：“承担全国的屈辱，才能成为国家的君主，承担全国的祸灾，才能成为天下的君王。”
Re: “Being overly cautious and conservative, Ms Lim dared not raise difficult or sensitive questions in parliament which might rattle the ruling party.”
That makes sense as far as everyone who is acting in the interest of PAP hegemony is concerned. Everyone like Sylvia Lim and her pathetic Workers Party included.
Would anyone – even those pretending to be in opposition to the PAP – who is in this only for the money, the fame, and the prestige, BUT NEVER THE PEOPLE do otherwise?
The true purpose of PAP approved opposition parties like the Workers Party and the one-man party called Chiam See Tong, EXACTLY like the NMP scheme, is that Singapore’s PAP DOES NOT ANY REAL OPPOSITION.
And the Workers Party and Chiam See Tong DO deliver.
The PAP is already perfection personified, and the Workers Party definitely agrees.
What the heck are all the rest of us ingrates demanding?
REAL, FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE and not the cosmetic ones offered so far?
What the heck for?
ROBOX-
please let me apologise for my poor command of english as compared to your Queen’s English.Calling me stupid does not make you any more smarter.After all being Chinese and able to write in English is in itself an achievement.Should I write in Chinese than between us you will reply by saying you will write in Tamil.
Even when writing in Chinese I will never stoop so low as to call someone stupid.
Good?what is good? with the subject of politics as I see it.I was present @ Raffless Instituition Grange Road when JBJ won a seat,I was there to witness Chiam See Thong in his Volkswagen contesting in Cairnhill and finally took a seat at Potong Pasir against Mah Bow Tan.I cheered for Low Thia Kiang when he won.That my dear Mr. Robox is good because an alternative voice can be heard.I do not know what good you see as good or what you have done that is good. Nobody knows who you are or what you are.Maybe, you are being paid to slime my country for a living.So tell me Mr.Robox what is the good you see and what have you done or can do to make it better in Singapore for us.
Should you happen to be a loser or a failure in your life please do not blame others .You have a vote use it,I use it to put an oppositon in Parliament and I feel good,if you cannot put your opposition in parliament that is too bad.
Once again very sorry to write in my poor English and feel free to correct my grammer and spelling as well.Thank you
dose csj have a hobby?
PeterL on Sun, 6th Dec 2009 3:20 pm
“but my point is human by nature are animals most difficult to understand that is why I suppose there must be laws to differentiate perception from facts..”
You agreed with my tenets of law arguments and case history illustrated of “fitting laws to fact” as not of neurotic fiction at least but add the above LOGICAL FALLACY in false defence.
If, by your propostion human are by nature animals difficult to understand ….there must be law to differentiate perception from facts , HOW IS THIS “ANIMAL” in human any DIFFERENT IN CANADA, AUSTRALIA, UK, HONG HONG, AND SINGAPORE such that, in those circumstances, require “different” law applications as between them to differentiate perceptions from facts??
These countries all follow Common Law jurisdiction and the facts as occasioned in Singapore or in China WOULD NOT CHANGED ONE AORTA IF THE SAME EVENTS OCCURRED IN HONG KONG, AUSTRALIA, CANADA, UK OR USA. Facts of legal case do NOT change by reason of geography or are they?
YOUR TENETS OF ARGUMENT IS INHERENTLY FLAWED.
The facts of any case remains the true facts until and unless corrupted by “fitting of laws to facts” in case decision judgement and that seems to have eventuated in the Canadian Supreme Court case of
http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2008/2008scc2/2008scc2.html
If this case had eventuated in Singapore, the established facts as ultimately recognised in overturned Supreme Court decision in Canada WOULD REMAIN EXACTLY THE SAME IN SINGAPORE or in China.
Or the facts would change because the case “transported” to Singapore for any good reason known to you, Peter L???
But looking beyond that – my point is that statutory law as defined is NEUTRAL – it is NOT inherently unjust or unfair.
The UNFAIRNESS LIES IN ITS APPLICATION.
To me, this application of unfairness is NOWHERE MORE CONSPICUOUSLY OF REDICULOUS PROPORTION THAN ANY CASE INVOLVING MATTERS OF “MORAL” LAW ENFORCEMENT.
As I have illustrated with my logic. Anyone detained by police for “disorder” infringement who submit to peaceful surrender cannot be charged in court of law in subsequent WHEN NO OTHER OFFENCE OCCURED FROM THE TIME OF THAT INITIAL ARREST AND THE COURT APPEARANCE.
IT IS A FICTION OF EVIDENCE AT LAW.
Why? Imagine if the case in a Canadian Supreme Court or Australian High Court, and the judge asked the prosecution this simple question:
- Did the accused murdered somebody or raped someone’s grandmother since his arrest for disorderly conduct?
If nothing untoward happened, What would the prosecution says?
Probably the most learned public prosecutor would say this – “nothing happened, Your Honour”
The judge then asked, “if nothing happened, how did this accused before me be charged of “disorderly conduct and disrupting peace” when no one was murdered or nobody grandmother was raped by him nor is there another police report to evidence peace-disrupting actions by the accused?”
SHOULD THE PROSECUTION THEN ANSWERED AFFIRMATIVELY – “SIR, YOUR HONOUR, I HEARD THE ACCUSED RAPED YOU!!!”
It is ludicrous. Why ludicrous? Because by charging the accused for disorderly conduct, the ATTORNEY-GENERAL OFFICE ARE INSISTING IN THE COURTROOM THAT THE ARREST IN THE FIRST INSTANCE PROVED DISORDERLY CONDUCT OF LAW AND ORDER.
NO TRUE OF MATERIAL FACT – the accused submitted meekly to arrest and detention TO AVOID THE RISKS OF DISRUPTING PEACE AND THEREFORE AVOIDED LAW VIOLATION OF DISRUPTING PEACE AND ORDER!!.
THE ACCUSED HAVE DONE EVERYTHING NOT TO VIOLATE LAW AND ORDER INSTEAD OF HAVING VIOLATED LAW AND ORDER!
The Canadian Supreme Court judge might lecture the Attorney-General Public Prosecutor with lesson one in law.
By charging this accused of disorderly behavior, you are abusing the law and due process of INSISTING IN THIS COURT ROOM THAT IT IS THE POLICE WHO MADE THE LAW AND INTERPRET THE LAW, NOT PARLIAMENT.
DOES DEMOCRACY OF OUR CONSTITUTION AGREEDS WITH THAT?
Policemen are public servants of the Crown – THEY DON’T MAKE LAW NOR INTERPRET LAW. Their job is to MAINTENING law enforcement to ensure peace and order and where appropriate act as necessary to prevent its violations.
It is Parliament who make the statutory law and ONLY the Courts to enforce those law. NOT EVEN PARLIAMENT OR ANYONE ELSE CAN OR SHOULD INTERFERE WITH LAW JUDGEMENTS.
BY INSISTING THAT POLICEMEN MADE LAW, INTERPRET LAW AND ENFORCE LAW, YOUR ARE IN EFFECT SUBVERTING LAW AND ORDER AND NOT MAINTAINING LAW AND ORDER!
Which is why whenever anyone in any country is charged of law violation of a “moral” domain, my mind is compelling to ask if the devil/s of 2 Cs ( cunning crooks) is working overtime!
Does that make sense to you, PeterL???
I am NOT a lawyer.
Anon- PHEW!!! very the “CHEEM” but it does make sense.Amen
Let’s be fair to Ms Sylvia Lim. She is NOT even paid half as much as PAP MP for her role. How many of you would want to take her position and speak in Parliament. Vote her into Parliament if you expect more from her!!! Otherwise, shut up!
PAP have an army of highly paid civil servants to dream up policies and ideas. Opposition party MPs or NMPs don’t have such luxury.
First, nothing wrong with learning martial art. Why can’t she have other activities outside of politics?
Second, the law is just and fair. However, it is up to the judges to manipulate it. The problem does not lie with the laws but with the people manipulating it. If the laws is rigid it may be unfair. However now it’s up to the interpretation of the judges so that depends on their values isn’t it? A inept judge makes stupid decisions.
I think Sylvia is a credible opposition. Articulate – she raises her points well without sounding rude. She raised issues in parliament but it seems PAP is more comfortable side-stepping the questions Sylvia posed, giving vague answers at best. No offence to CSJ but if Sylvia is going to charge head on and get herself arrested, wouldn’t there be lesser opposition in parliament?
I think Sylvia is making the best of the opportunities she has right now. Building her base and probably preparing to strike when the opportunity presents. The way the PAP is controlling now, there is little opportunity to strike and it is pointless to take on PAP over little issues. What’s the point in disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing? If opposition expect PAP to behave more civilised, opposition needs to show PAP how to do it since PAP seems pretty clueless about it. If PAP implement good policies, we applaud them. Otherwise, we criticise, and show them by vote at the GE. We can’t be emotional. Opposition needs to show PAP what ‘World-class’ standard is.
Some of you here talk nothing but crap! Saying how docile Sylvia is and how WP is an approved opposition party. However, if you guys think SDP had been doing things right, they would have gotten into parliament by now. SDP have no lack of talents and I’m glad that SDP seems a lot more sober these days. They seems a lot more coherent these days as compared to the days CSJ went around screaming till everyone got fed up and refused to listen anymore. It was really a waste to see a man of CSJ’s talents being fined, jailed and fined again. I’m glad CSJ and SDP has gotten their act together. I’m looking forward to SDP improving on their dismal performance from the last GE. Hopefully seeing CSJ in parliament.
It is not easy to take down PAP and we all know that. The only way to improve the political scene is to have more opposition leaders in parliament – not having more opposition leaders behind bars.
let’s say more often than not,the LAW as spelt out in words sounds fairer than in practice.
law is not justice nad justice may not be law.
for instance,it is not illegal to be greedy and all of you would agree.
however,in most instances, GREED LEADS TO SOME KIND OF
INJUSTICE!!!
indeed,we should all obey the LAW as long as it is being apllied JUSTLY.
BarelyAlive on Sun, 6th Dec 2009 10:29 pm:
Please refer to your insanity here:
Re: “…the law is just and fair.”
Care to explain how your own claim that the law is just and fair – just a pathetic attempt to echo Stupid Sylvia Lim’s own Singapore law trained stupidity in my educated opinion – is also ‘just and fair’ to gay male Singaporeans?
And that’s only just for a start.
I could go on with a whole slew of other laws but in the spirit of coming down to your level, the lowest common denominator, I’ll begin with that to begin with.
BarelyAlive on Sun, 6th Dec 2009 10:29 pm
Re: “I think Sylvia is a credible opposition. Articulate – she raises her points well without sounding rude.”
That’s SOOOOOO beautiful!
Sylvia Lim.
Articulate.
And never rude either.
Because rudeness would definitely stir up that big bad thing called EMOTIONS in the PAP, wouldn’t it?
And EMOTIONS are the direct opposite of RATIONAL, aren’t they? ‘Rational’ being what the PAP likes to believe of itself and what unsuspecting and uncritically-thinking Singaporeans will readily submit as the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
WRONG!
The opposite of RATIONAL is IRRATIONAL and not EMOTIONAL.
You can be emotional AND rational at the same time, but you can NEVER be rational and irrational simultaneously.
In my own opinion, here’s the true test of Sylvia Lim’s credibility, along with the credibility of all other PAP-approved non-confrontational opposition MPs such as pork ribs soup hawker Low Thia Kiang and the one-man party called Chiam See Tong:
How many private members’ bills have the combined Great PAP-Approved Opposition introduced into Parliament in the combined number of years that they were approved in Parliament.
Don’t bother to research the answer because I already have it for you: the answer is a big fat ZERO!
Do you know why it is important that a non-PAP member introduces a private member’s bill for first reading especially in a situation like Singapore’s where the so-called opposition is doomed to be – and remain – a minority in Parliament?
Or do you need us – lesser beings than your highly ‘rational’ self – to point it out to you?
Are you merely more interested in how articulate someone – ANYONE – SOUNDS in Parliament even if that quality of articulation cannot effect ANY change for the benefit of the country?
Sounds like you may only be interested in a token representation in Parliament so that NOTHING will ever change; Sylvia Lim, Low Thia Kiang and Mousey Tong have DEFINITELY delivered on that count.
Is that what ‘credibility’ means to you?
credibility (defn.): “If the PAP doesn’t misuse the law against, you are a good serf and subject of imperialistic PAP rule. YOU ARE CREDIBLE!”
Dear BarleyAlive,
You say , ”The only way to improve the political scene is to have more opposition leaders in parliament – not having more opposition leaders behind bars”….Now please pray tell me why opposition leaders must be put behind bars in SG like any other common criminal?….Does this happens in any civilized nations?..Even Indonesia after the demise of Suharto’s regime do not imprison it’s opposition leaders any more.Gandhi of India and Nelson Mandela of S.Africa spent much time counting bars..You mean to say it is because they made no attempt to sit in their parliament?
Opposition is not a dirty word and do equate to to traitors.In most democratic countries a ruling party sits as opposition when it lose an election.Sylvia Lim is defending a system of judiciary that imprison and bankrupts our opposition leaders.She may be a wonderful person.So was Saddam of Iraq to his own family.But in law if you are privy to a crime you are deemed a criminal too.Likewise,if you defend an unjust judiciary you are no less an unjust person too.
WHO JUDGES THE JUDGES?
Here is an interesting read of Australian experiences.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/who-judges-the-judges-20091206-kcrx.html
Australia has a very strong tradition of judicial independence and fairness but the judges THEMSELVES still support INDEPENDENT public scrutiny of their own conduct.
Amazing of public accountability!
i wonder if she trains gongfu in preparation of SDP winning a seat in parliament.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=taiwan+fight+parliament&search_type=&aq=f
This article is wacking another alternative party as a form of making positive way for PAP to get into parliament again.
Indeed, Silvia Lim is one of the strongest voices among other alternative party and PAP fear her the most. Let’s give her the personal space to do something healthy for herself and not trying to dig bone out of porridge to favour PAP now. Otherwise TR will be seen as pro-pap support against WP candidates. This will not be seen as unity among alternative parties in a time like this.
The best way to let PAP win is to cause opposition and their supporters to fight among themselves.
Hence, all opposition and supporters must unite. Or be destroyed.
Dear btan,
You say”The best way to let PAP win is to cause opposition and their supporters to fight among themselves.”
I have 2 questions;
1.How sure are you that Sylvia Lim do not represent the interests of our ruling party?
2.How sure are you that our ruling party will allow any opposition to win any constituency if they are not approved by them?
note:please refer to all those opposition members who are either jailed or bankrupted or are fugitives -over the past 40 years.
@btan on Mon, 7th Dec 2009 12:35 pm
do u really believe it when u say “all opposition and supporters must unite” ?
i tot ..Chee Siblings n SDP Supporters, the-singapore-democratic-warriors-who-never-conduct-election-for-their-own-party’s-CEC, believe that other oppositions r fake / on PAP’s payroll (the exterme view) ..or that they r week, scared, PAP-complience, n has never achieved anything towards alternative choice in singapore. correct?
r u no longer a member of Chee Siblings, the-democratic-duo-who-didn’t-believe-in-party-election, civil-disobedience cult movement? ..have u switched side to the Grey-side of the like of CST n LTK?
whatever it is,let’s put more of our “own voices’ into
parliament…it’s ok to change our minds at the next election.
it is still better than to return the same old jesters who think of no one but their own selfish interests as has been
continuously proven election after election.
so,net of all real or presumed evil/s,i say VOTE FOR MORE
OPPOSITION TO STOP THE EVER-INCREASING TIDE OF LOCAL UNEMPLOYMENT.
Let’s not forget our purpose to maintain a more balanced in number of parliament seats for opposition.
We must know the purpose opposition is not to oppose for the sake of opposing. We can’t oppose at everything the govt put on the table without suggesting a good alternative. In this way, opposition would be more credible and stronger in their views…
“art of balance” needs to be supplemented by the opposition with the art of “Asking Loaded Questions” and may I add to this wisdom skill… “And just like Shifting Sands too”… So as to FLOOR the pappies most INSTANTLY EVERYTIME. As only only “Superman” can escape from shifting sands… and those pappies dpends so much on “Prepared White Sheets” made for them by trained yes-man!!!… And now…
QUOTE
also, yong chun teaches the art of balance and 以柔克刚, just the thing for sylvia to use in politics.
老子
天下莫柔弱于水，而攻坚强者莫之能胜，以其无以易之。弱之胜强，柔之胜刚，天下莫不知，莫能行。是以圣人云：”受国之垢，是谓社稷主；受国不祥，是为天下王。
说的意思是：遍天下再没有什么东西比水更柔弱了，而攻坚克强却没有什么东西可以胜过水。弱胜过强，柔胜过刚，遍天下没有人不知道，但是没有人能实行。所以有道的圣人这样说：“承担全国的屈辱，才能成为国家的君主，承担全国的祸灾，才能成为天下的君王。”
UNQUOTE
Anyone going to give English translation for the non-Chinese linguitic ones as this is afterall and English blog???… Perhaps dear cy himself???… and teaching Chinese has failed for some 40+ yrs haw!!!(sic)
deoxin on Mon, 7th Dec 2009 2:22 pm
Please refrain from spreading your carcinogen poison here. Collectively or separately, we will kick Pappies’ butts and sent them out the back door!
You have not heard nor read MIW’s shambles?
to those who like to self proclaim to have huge brain and more brainy than others, oh yes we all have little brain than you because your larger than normal brain are stuff with shit…..
@Democracy rising on Mon, 7th Dec 2009 4:56 pm
actually, i feel the “shambles” in u with ur refrained posting. why haven’t u used any Hokkien expletives on PAP n me?? ..r u scared?
u n ur CCB (Chee & Chee Brotherhood) fellows for Disobedience-Cult-Movement ..r the one whose butt gonna be kicked.
but i hv to commend u for asking me to “refrain”. u hv learned something from ur master, the-democratic-warrior-who-never-conduct-election-for-his-own-party’s-CEC. afterall, he kicked CST from SDP for having alternative view on an issue.
deoxin on Mon, 7th Dec 2009 7:07 pm
No No No and No.
Intelligence in this world is not measured by your limited Hokkien expletives vocabulary. Probably for you it is. We understand your low IQ from your baby-burping postings. We don’t need expletives to get the msg across. TR readers are all very bright.
Democracy rising, is as told to you before, is very refined and charitable of thoughts.
And you?
Dead rats smell better than you!!!
And the very humble little green pea is more intelligent than your rotting dessicated coconut.
@deoxin-Anonymous
it’s fishy to say the least why you go around here and there
branding pro-opposition bloggers as CCB???
don’t attempt to exhibit your foolishness doggedly by trying to sow discord among opposition supporters because sooner or later,bloggers would grasp your cheap “MIW” gimmicks.
if you must,be like that BryanT who speaks his mind more DIRECTLY!
I’m concern of media reports that suggest that Sylvia Lim will contest a single-ward seat because if she so decides I’m sure she will loose her credibility as a leader, who abandons her team mates in the last election, in desperation for a parliament seat.
I’m also concerned the way some readers had portrayed Sylvia, she had done exceptionally well in the last few years – she’s not yet perfect but will be a leader to be reckon in the future!
And to all those who prefer confrontational politics, the workers party is not in that league, the SDP is a better party in that arena and we in Singapore should respect these opposition politicians and their guts instead of finding faults and belittling them.
One of my other concerns is TR going the ST way? Was it really necessary to state her performance as an NCMP, a panel speaker at the International Bar Association etc in this article?
@claude tnt on Mon, 7th Dec 2009 10:00 pm
But TR’s reference to…”panel speaker at the International Bar Association etc in this article” did PROVIDE an interesting platform of rigorous discussions on “just and fair” laws as just legislations or its “unfair and unjust” application possibilities as illustrated by various bloggers here.
WTF?? She’s only an NCMP. Can only squeak, squeak? As far as Im concerned, NCMP CARRIES NO WEIGHT!!
There’s no point getting into an argument with Robox. He can only criticize but cannot motivate. If he thinks he’s that good, better than Sylvia, why not have the balls to be politician? ha ha.
In their haste to see a change, I hope the opposition don’t forget that earning the support and respect of the people is more important than bringing down the PAP.
@ Democracy rising on Mon, 7th Dec 2009 10:52 pm
Yes it did perhaps provide “an interesting platform”
but a separate article could have been better! What has this to do with her interest in the martial arts?
claude tnt on Tue, 8th Dec 2009 5:09 pm
Martial arts could be sports, recreation or just healthy living but you might be surprised of its relevance to a sharp mind and physical stamina at work.
Ryutaro Hahsimoto, a former Japanese Prime Minister is known to be a Kendo expert
http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/apec/1997/rh_profile.html
Interviewed, he said that skills are very useful for his career pursuits in politics.
Another former Japanese Prime Minister renowned for Kendo and samurai sword play is Yashuhiro Nakasone.
Is Sylvia Lim adding to her skills set to lead more robust debates in Parliament on all matters of national interests including those subject-matter in this “interesting platform”??
Will have to wait and see I guess.
Democracy rising on Tue, 8th Dec 2009 8:00 pm
Sure Martial arts is not only to strengthen the body, it’s also to sharpen the mind and heighten the spirit too.
Sylvia is young, beautiful and intellectual professional so every action she does, need not necessary have to be read in context with politics!
claude tnt on Tue, 8th Dec 2009 9:17 pm
You specifically asked..
“What has this to do with her interest in the martial arts?”
So I offered a LOGICAL answer looking at different perspectives – from sports, health, recreational and even a surprise relevant to work and politics in real life examples.
But is is a mooted point though.
Btw, just for mere mutual sharing of thoughts here. What is a connection between a big legal case and a coincident holiday vacation out of town? Who has ever thought of this? BUT I KNOW ONE CASE OF A BIG WINNER AND AN EASY ONE AT THAT -an ex-parte case of someone WHO DELIBERATELY CHOSE VACATION RATHER THAN ATTENDING HIS COURT CASE!!. I doubt even a sharp legal mind might figure out that seemingly mooted connection easily. This is reality, thinking out of box I guess.
So you think your offer is LOGICAL? Good for you and “thinking out of box”, too!
It is the quality of the brain that counts and not the size. Unless of course if the that or some humans have brains the size of “birds”… then it is a very different thing all together… As they will be in “The Bird-Brain” Category!!!
“LOL on Mon, 7th Dec 2009 7:04 pm
to those who like to self proclaim to have huge brain and more brainy than others, oh yes we all have little brain than you because your larger than normal brain are stuff with shit…..”
@claude tnt on Tue, 8th Dec 2009 10:47 pm
can’t u see a pattern ?
they r under influenced of CCB (Chee & Chee Brotherhood), the-democratic-warriors-who-never-haver-party-election-after-Chiam-kicked-out.
they bashed everything n everyone, except their fellow CCB Disobedience-Cult-Movement members.
deoxin on Wed, 9th Dec 2009 1:43 am
You sounds like a canary rattled in a cage.
Please do NOT get kinky and emotional an irrefutable discussion of law applications and backed by evidence of substance of truth in discussions. PeterL agreed with it twice of the good sense and logic of debate and it is supported by a Canadian Supreme Court (the Highest Court in Canada of a case of judicial unfairness.
Either you don’t understand law applications or you are ignorant of subject-matter or you are just PLAINLY HOSTILE TO TRUTH AND SUBSTANCE OF DISCUSSIONS or all of those I described.
Perhaps, you might like to cool your brain off on the beach instead of risking a heart attack here! If that does not entertain you enough, go and smell some glue, it gets you really cloud nine high!
Here we intend to have democracy of thoughts and sharing!
SORRY WE DON’T HAVE TIME NOR GRACE FOR YOUR USUAL RAT CUNNING HERE!!
@Democracy rising on Wed, 9th Dec 2009 9:11 am
to be very honest with u, if u don’t believe anything else i said ..u still hv to believe this one, that:
am trying my very best to sound n speak like any of u from CCB (Chee&Chee Brotherhood) Disobedience-Club-Movement. am gonna assemble an army and am gonna trained them to be gutless like SDP IB. With a twist, am gonna attack each n everything u stands for. AM GONNA BURY YOU in ur own game!!
Fortunately for Dr Chee, chances r ..am just talk big, JUST LIKE U.
r u rattled by me, Democracy-rising ?
Gentlemen and maybe some ladies,comments like all debate or forum can be interesting without getting Vulgar or personal.
We are discussing or voicing our opinions young or old,graduates with Phd.MBA or whatever UNIs award and those with lesser education.
Our interest is Singapore not sinkapore or whatever derogatory names you may give my country.I have only one country and no other and proud of it.I am truly happy when my fellow country men voice their opinions bravely without fear constructively for the better of Singapore.
When PAP rule with 100% in parliament only coffeeshop talk by scribes and “MBA” taxi drivers were heard.With opposition in parliament through JBJ and much later a few more some sustained others could not owing to reasons best known???Why are we still harping??? is it the quality of our people in opposition or mindset?? I have no answer. I supported the govt.PAP or PAP/Barisan during its infant stage and thank them for making Singapore a country I can call my own and be proud of.
I switched when PAP started shoving policies down my throat but that is after we are stable as a nation knowing full well that one mistake and we will be singing Negaru Ku again.
An alternative voice from oppositions is necessary for the people to hear a different view, with the internet & blogs available more views can be heard.Why “kill” it before it can be effective.
My generation and the generation after may be KIASU or submissive but definitely we are no idiots repeat NO IDIOTS.We stood up and can be counted when the need arises I hope the Heroes of the NET/BLOG can do likewise.
Please forgive my English or grammer as I am not a Graduate writing my comments in Oxford or Queens English but I do hope it can be understood.
@True Singaporean on Mon, 7th Dec 2009 2:08 pm
[[1.How sure are you that Sylvia Lim do not represent the interests of our ruling party?]]
How sure are you that LKY is not secretly an opposition fan?
If you suspect any opposition candidate as being “approved” or “co-opted” into PAP, then you have fallen into the trap of PAP of sowing confusion and paranoia among opposition supporters. As far as I am concern, if someone running as an opposition candidate, then he or she is an opposition figure. I do not subscribe to the believe of the “approved”-opposition.
[[2.How sure are you that our ruling party will allow any opposition to win any constituency if they are not approved by them?]]
1984. Anson. Go check it up. Unless you are saying JBJ is an “approved” opposition.
[[note:please refer to all those opposition members who are either jailed or bankrupted or are fugitives -over the past 40 years]]
Your logic is so flawed that if we follow it, we will never have opposition member. Which makes me wonder are you really a PAP agent? By your logic, an opposition is a “true” opposition if he is jailed, bankrupted or fugitive, thus unable to serve the people. And those who can serve the people are not real opposition?
No wonder we have only two opposition.
Seriously, just follow my method. See anyone running as opposition candidate? Vote him/her in. We’ll sort out the mess later.
@deoxin on Mon, 7th Dec 2009 2:22 pm
[[do u really believe it when u say “all opposition and supporters must unite” ?]]
Not only do I believe it, I can tell you that if opposition and supporters continue to divide among themselves, they will all be doomed to occupy a token amount of seats in parliament and be forever impotent to do anything to counter the PAP’s hegemony.
[[i tot ..Chee Siblings n SDP Supporters, the-singapore-democratic-warriors-who-never-conduct-election-for-their-own-party’s-CEC, believe that other oppositions r fake / on PAP’s payroll (the exterme view) ..or that they r week, scared, PAP-complience, n has never achieved anything towards alternative choice in singapore. correct?]]
Looks like you have revealed your true colours as an PAP agent. Can you provide proof of what you said or do they all came out from your behind?
[[r u no longer a member of Chee Siblings, the-democratic-duo-who-didn’t-believe-in-party-election, civil-disobedience cult movement? ..have u switched side to the Grey-side of the like of CST n LTK?]]
More lies from you.
I have always supported any opposition candidate. Be it SDP, WP, RP, NSP or SPP, as long as they contest in my ward, they will get my vote.
What, you think you have the luxury of choosing your oppositions? You get whatever opposition you get in your constituency. Please wake up lah.
Or are you just a PAP voter who is scared of PAP losing seats or even losing power?
deoxin on Wed, 9th Dec 2009 10:20 am
@ deoxin on Wed, 9th Dec 2009 10:20 am
Well do that. You just cheapen your credit from low count to negative and bring more traffic to TR.
Who cares?
Nobody will take you serious for all your todler’s ignorance and tantrum. Stupid!
One disappointment though – you did throw a lot of self-acclaimed Hokkian expletives to show your limited range of vocabulary and intellect of no substance and ill-repute.
Yuck, you stinking corpse of dead rat. Yuck!!! Go Away and hide your shameless moronic coconut among the huge pile of animal waste in some zoo toilets!
I am NOT rattled, just laughing until my tits about falling off my chest!!!!!!!!!!!
@ PeterL on Wed, 9th Dec 2009 2:56 pm
Agree with you!!!.
This is a blogg for debate, not for trolling or rat cunning excursion of rubbish. Those who can’t handle their baby-burping emotions can make themselves scare – I hope.
Yes, I blog rigorously of my thoughts – NEVER WORRIED IF ANYONE DISAGREEING IS GOING THROUGH HIS/HER “SPECIAL DAY OF THE MONTH” OR IT IS HIS OR HER GRANDMA’S FUNERAL DATE.
You said you are not a graduate. Count your blessing of your life progress you have achieved.
ME??? DID NOT PASSED LEAVING KINDERGARDEN EXAMINATION!! Got whacked by my teacher often when I was a kid but now have grown up and learn a little in my life – at least able to blog sense in this thread which you agreed, thankfully.
Have a nice day, PeterL.
@PeterL
I agree with democracy rising that what you said made good sense.
if only more educated people speak up for the humble instead of
constantly barking nonsense to please tbeir masters,the prospects for a better Singapura and all its born and bred ’singas’ would be better.
instead,these bootlickers and apple-polishers prefer to encourage their MASTERS to throw the “steak” to the outsiders
like handing out our jobs and hard-earned “coffers”.
@btan on Wed, 9th Dec 2009 4:36 pm
i lie?!! obviously, u haven’t got enuf of SDP propaganda.
here r very few for ur perusal. in SDP activists very own words:
http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=215
http://singaporedissident.blogspot.com/2007/10/singapore-low-thia-khiang-is-let-down.html
http://singaporedissident.blogspot.com/2007/10/singapore-sylvia-lim-of-workers-party.html
http://singaporedissident.blogspot.com/2007/10/singapore-workers-party-and-singapore.html
http://seelanpalay.blogspot.com/2009/06/standing-up-for-people-on-bended-knees.html
u can dig more if u really care about who u’re voting for.
but i give u an easier one, the summary:
http://notmysdp.blogspot.com/
–
@Democracy rising on Wed, 9th Dec 2009 4:38 pm
u have completely misunderstand me. it’s my desire to bring more traffic to TR. i make u a deal, if i get more bonus than the civil service, i will produce a booklet containing the best n the harshest critics of gahmen from TR, i will especially highlight the comments made by u n ur SDP slaves.
i believe ..the more they know u n what u all said, the more likely ur candidate lose the election deposit.
btw, i plan to print SDP opinions of other oppositions in bigger font.
誰怕誰
deoxin on Wed, 9th Dec 2009 10:17 pm
” u have completely misunderstand me….if i get more bonus than the civil service….”
Aiyoh, so tragically sad!! Looking for a once a year only bonus for breakfast. Money buys your soul. Better go hunt for some DOM sugar-daddy lah! Maybe competition in Geylang and Chinatown too stressful for you??? Only know one Hokkian expletive CCB sums up your entire vocabulary and intellect. There is no second one of your calibre in cyberspace!
scum!! Yuck, carcinogen poison! dead rat carcass! Yuck,
STINKS.
How can anyone vote for such debased specimen like YOU???
Just good for trolling nonsense in cyberspace to make yourself feel a little important…Ooops…impotent?? Did I spell the word incorrectly??
AND YES, DEMOCRACY IS RISING. Dead smelly corpses like you living on borrowed times can’t stop me!
@deoxin on Wed, 9th Dec 2009 10:17 pm
[[i lie?!! obviously, u haven’t got enuf of SDP propaganda.
here r very few for ur perusal. in SDP activists very own words:]]
Again, you have failed to provide solid evidence on SDP’s official stance on other opposition.
This is a list of the CEC members of SDP.
Gandhi Ambalam Chairman
Francis Yong Vice-Chairman
Chee Soon Juan Secretary-General
John Tan Assistant Secretary-General
Gerald Sng Treasurer
Jeffrey George Assistant Treasurer
Chee Siok Chin
Lilian Chia
Johnny Ho
Mohd Isa
Jufrie Mahmood
Sylvester Lim
I do not see a single one of them in your links at all. So you just randomly pick a few activist on the net and label them “SDP”? Your PAP masters must have taught you well.
[[u can dig more if u really care about who u’re voting for.]]
What I care about is PAP not controlling 100% of parliament. And more importantly, something you have consistently failed to understand, you and I have no control which opposition will run in our constituency, if at all, if it is a GRC. What I know is that if I get to vote, it will be between a PAP member and an opposition. That’s all. You think you will get the opposition party of your choice? Fat hope. If you don’t get one, who are you going to vote for? PAP?
[[but i give u an easier one, the summary]]
How about I give you an easier one.
http://yoursdp.org/index.php/links/political-parties
Look at it. If SDP is against the other opposition, why would they place their links in their website? Hmm?
A few more.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8dvf8sYGhY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZL3lP6XoSQ
I really don’t understand why some Singaporeans behaved as if we are a Representative Parliamentary system country. In such a system, you choose your political party in election and the percentage they get means how many seats they get.
Here, you only have two choices (if it is not a walkover) : a PAP candidate and an opposition candidate. That’s all.
Picking over which opposition party to support, if you are an opposition supporter, is like trying to choose what is the soup of the day : you can’t.
Of course, you can help out the party you support but come voting time, you only vote PAP or you vote the opposition member into parliament. And for goodness sake, don’t make the same mistake Yaw Shin Leong made. (That said, I still give him points for running a commando team against LHL)