[...] The Online Citizen has also posted a story and will be uploading a video of the protest [...]

Does it matter if majority of the students support the free media movement? If activists, heroes and matyrs were to weigh their cause against popularity, then we would have nobody to champion social and political justices. Often, but sadly, the general public only start to appreciate these champions after a very long time or after their deaths. What’s the point of showing support for a dead fighter when he is already resting in his grave? Seize the moment. Support the fighters that are still alive. Cement a student movement into a national movement. Only through this way, we are assured that Singapore has a future, and not an impending doom under the PAP flag.

Do the students need an NTU TV broadcast?
Isn’t it better to broadcast to the world unhindered by the university’s censorship via a Youtube channel?

Actually… If you have articles that are too sensitive for your university media… why don’t you promote or sent in the article to theonlinecitizen and let them see whether they can published it (subject to their editorial principles).

I believe you reached a wider audience here and I’m sure most students would come online for discussion ..rather than reading newsletter that dont have any participative element in it.

Maybe theonlinecitizen can collaborate with these writers and expand the topics available in onlinecitizen …

There are no shortage of avenues where the NTU articles can be published, as commented by #2 and #3. They could have done that easily (they had already done it in one of the facebook group), however, I felt NTU student decided to protest for the principle of their fundamental believes that there should not be suppression in freedom of responsible media publications. (Note: there are already discrepancies in the turn out numbers in Today’s News who had reported this event).

The NTU student body had made it very clear in their declaration that the article was not just works of the students, it has been edited by qualified professors making sure that their article remains on neutral ground.

As I have commented in the other post, Developing “Great Thinkers” with creative mindset needed unconditioned space to transpire and express ideas that will be beneficial for the growth not only to the nation but also her nation’s youth growing up process. The essence of “freedom of speech” has no or should not have pre-conditions, more so at Institutional level. It is indeed a learning experience that today’s young minds should be exposed to.

In today’s globalization aspect where information is free flowing INTERNATIONALLY, the students and the young maturing process include credibility analysis of the true value of messages conveyed or received whether publicly or privately, that institutional teaching cannot completely ignore or cover up. Suppression is the greatest advocate of rebellious behavior. It does no good to NTU as well as this nation.

I would certainly hope that NTU Authorities and other Universities Authorities to have trust and confidence in your students that you nurtured. In fact, you should embrace them for speaking up and having strongly identifying their fundamental believes. This kind of principle virtue should be advocated. We are no longer living in an encased society. Who knows someday, one or many of them may become leaders of Singapore and we certainly hope that our future leaders possess strong fundamental and know what they are doing to serve to the people. Even though if they may not be leaders of tomorrow, at least one thing for sure, these group of students believes in upholding their fundamental principle values.

Will this protest of theirs make any change? In reality, may be not immediate, but it is a big worthy small steps forward (at least in the NTU student’s mind) that they wanted their opinion made known.

Kudos to you all kids and the participants.

No doubt the student may not want it or intend for it to be political but certainly political an issue it is now.

Good luck to the students. I hope they have thought through the consequences of their actions and have no doubt the JBJ spirit will be there to sustain them.

Lim,

They’re just doing what’s right.

ST’s coverage of this event is pretty decent. Surprise surprise?

…6) mr or miss or mrs lim,,

this students is just stand for the their right…
as sing is a freedom COUNTRY>…..< freak.

do u mean tat against pap policy,is against the whole NATION..??
or will go to jail??
come on,singapore is belong to singaporeans,,,they have ANY right to stand on their belief..

singapore have u this corward,,really………….

tat why pp always said sing pp is fear to die..
i think tat sing no need u this pp,becos can”t be trust..when in battle period,u alreadly ran asap lo…

HAI..singaporeans!!

@young generation@

once again, even stuff like this which is non-political is being screened off n banned
i dun no know the logic behind it…
i guess its the same old story…wat PCF is doing…isnt political….
wat WP organising…..even drink coffee session oso have a “higher” chance of occurring accidents…
wat kind of unfair n rubbish logic is this?
and please I am not anti-PAP….i just want some fairness in this tense society..
why cant it happen?

haiz..

Its interesting to note that many a times national change(eg independence movements etc) are lead by University Students. i think the gov is really afraid of this. Thats why student unions here usually just organise club parties.

LEakin (#10):

You might find it heartwarming that there was a group of Singapore Polytechnic (SP) students who attempted to revive independent student union from SP’s administration in 2007. No doubt the way senior management at SP responded in an underhanded manner (just like how PAP MPs sue Opposition politicians bankrupt), but these youngsters have not given up. It is clear the young generation wants to take charge of its destiny.

There are sometimes many ways of doing the right thing and getting the message across.

Its out of habit that I will look at all the options and do a cost-benefit analysis before embarking on a course of action.

No doubt the students think that a protest at Hong Lim park was the “right” thing to do. But every action elicits an opposite reaction. To do things without thinking of consequences would be folly indeed and 18-20+ year olds with their life ahead of them have a lot more to lose than older f*rts like myself.

Like I said, I hope they have thought through the consequences of their actions and have no doubt the JBJ spirit will be there to sustain them because likely nothing and no one else will.

“Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead” – Farragut (paraphrased)

“13) lim on October 7th, 2008 9.45 am

But every action elicits an opposite reaction. ”

Not too long ago, I wanted to use this phrase to reply to one of the posts. Well, you beat me to it on this one.

I love this Newton’s law very much. Put it in another way, could the protest (a reaction) be a result of some earlier action.

Life is always like that, good begets good, while evil begets evil. In some unfortunate situations, you get punished for some stupid actions of others.

Yup, and the first event that sparked this off was CSJ’s uninvited visit to NTU. No doubt Chee is probably enjoying this one esp since he’s not in the line of fire and there’s a lot of political opportunity to be taken advantaged of here.

The people in the line of fire here are the students. And they getting punished for an unfortunate incident not sparked by them is really not what I hope to see here.

I sincerely hope the NTU can take a step back and a step up to remember who exactly it was that sparked off this incident.

It is the PAP that sparked off this incident, and they will never get uninvited visits, will they?

To 13) lim,

You put up a huge post on JBJ’s speeches in another blog and stated that you admire him.
Can you tell us readers whether you think JBJ suffered any gross injustice at the hands of this govt ? Kindly elaborate if you can.
Please be objective because you have a substantial record of many pro government positions in various blogs.

Now it seems you think it fit to advise the NTU students to proceed with caution in their protests. You insinuated in another blog that the university authorities will not take too kindly to the students’ actions and their exams could be affected.
In other words you believe NTU authorities are capable of foulplay, right ?
Let’s ask ourselves why is that so ?
I will be honest with the readers and say I am pretty sure it has to do with this damned govt.
What about you lim ? please be objective even though you have many pro govt posts. It is ok with me.

Lim, you openly stated you admire JBJ.
It has to be JBJ’s courage and conviction speaking for the people, right ?
Don’t you agree the students are showing courage and conviction ?
And what about you lim ? Courage and conviction just words to you ?

So all this while you were actually aware that this govt is guilty of much foulplay, but you chose to post pro govt comments. In other words, you were never objective. And it is clear for all to see that courage and conviction are just words to you.

“15) lim on October 7th, 2008 11.56 am

Yup, and the first event that sparked this off was CSJ’s uninvited visit to NTU.”

Wow man. I really take my hat (imagined one lah) to you.

Perhaps CSJ should not have been borned in the first place = leading to perhaps mother nature made a mistake.

If this goes ad infinitum, we would not even be around so that no such thing could have happened in the first place (no human existence). So everyone & everything is right except CSJ.

“And they getting punished for an unfortunate incident not sparked by them is really not what I hope to see here.

I sincerely hope the NTU can take a step back and a step up to remember who exactly it was that sparked off this incident.”

Your magnanimity is clearly needed in this trying time – much so on the part of NTU. Really hope that they also come in this site to learn a bit from you so they will aim right when it comes to finding the right target.

Do you sincerely believe the parents of those students are going to take all this sh**.

Hi guys

You can insult all you want. Its a typical trend isn’t it? You can label me non-objective, false magnamity, whatever….

Its not me that matter. Go ahead.

Do you guys really care about the students? Are they only potential casualties of war to you guys?

If you wanna think Chee didn’t start this by an unsolicited visit, go ahead. That’s your choice, not mine.

What I said about JBJ, I don’t have to defend them. If you can’t live with it, too bad.

If you think the parents of those 4 students can make a difference, go ahead, I sincerely hope you’re right.

Best Regards and have a nice day.

to lim , 6) 13) 15) and 19)

I put to you many straight forward questions that you have evaded.
Don’t use this excuse of claiming netizens here insult you to squirm out from replying.

Here you go again with your insinuations on Chee.
I still remember you have yet to reply to a proposal on having a proper debate with Chee. I believe the offer is still open for you.

No point admiring JBJ and at the same time running Chee down, because both these two men have shown us what courage and conviciton means, right ?

Time to stop taking cheap shots at Chee and show the readers, especially NTU students that you have courage and conviction to debate with Chee at Hong Lim Park. What say you lim ? Go for it man !

“19) lim on October 7th, 2008 2.21 pm

If you think the parents of those 4 students can make a difference, go ahead, I sincerely hope you’re right.”

I sure hope I am right. Because if I am wrong. The next thing you may see will be parents themselves protesting this time, with friends, relatives and whatnot “kow-peh-kow-bo”.

Anyway, we have strong authorities who are so used to ignoring “kow-peh-kow-bo” bravely – so maybe they can try their luck one more time.

They will always be one more time and another time. Which side do you think can win this poker game better with each passing round ? What do you think ?

Jokes aside. Friend, authorities should listen to the people and not the other way round as long as the matters are not criminal in nature. The authorities need our blessing to be in their positions and we do not need their blessings to be ourselves unless again it is criminal in nature. Unless again, you think they have every right to use big stick on us if we disagree.

Hi berak, if you want to regard Chee making an unsolicited visit to NTU which sparked this incident as an insinuation, that’s your choice.

For me, that’s a fact.

As much as you’d like to think Chee = JBJ, I’ve so far refrained from making that comparison. But last I heard, JBJ and the WP didn’t get sued by Chiam for defamation and lose that suit. JBJ didn’t lead a party to engineer the removal of an elected MP also. Those I’m sure are insinuations to you but facts to me.

But that’s not the issue here despite your attempts to distract from the issue. I know your party’s style. When faced with no facts, they try to distract.

You can call it cheap shots, but its a fact to me. Feel free to continue suggesting Chee didn’t actually visit NTU unsolicited which spark this incident. I’m sure there’ll be several SDP supporters who will agree with you.

The issue is about NTU students hosting an event that arose from an unsolicited visit by Chee. An event that I am concerned can affect their future. I’m not sure if this is important to you. Judging by the pathetic attempts to distract from this, I’m not so sure it is….

There is nothing wrong for being Pro-Government or Pro-Opposition…it is your personal Choice depending on your judgement !! Just like some like ” Mee Pok” or “Mee siam my hum” as long as all views are allow to be freely articulated(display their items) and not censored (Right to reply).

“Speak the truth and the truth shall set you free” You can publicise for …. all you want about this stall or that stall and bluff yourselves……good or bad. The proof is in the eating.(Digestion of Truth)

“Jokes aside. Friend, authorities should listen to the people and not the other way round as long as the matters are not criminal in nature. The authorities need our blessing to be in their positions and we do not need their blessings to be ourselves unless again it is criminal in nature. Unless again, you think they have every right to use big stick on us if we disagree.” – To Lim

Yes, I agree. The FW dorm issue at Serangoon Gardens is an example that will make a difference but that’s for another thread.

Its not a question of whether I think they have a right to use a big stick on us (what I think doesn’t matter) but a question of can they use a big stick on the students and if possible, what can be done to avoid/mitigate this.

I knew products from Singapore universities will only end up as wimps suitable only for civil service, grassroots, NTUC , GLCs, Temasek, PAP etc that why I chose to to overseas universities for a more complete education.

21st century already and Singapore universities still need to handhold their students on what to see, what to hear, what to read, what to say etc. hahah

First World Education ?? .Big Joke.

Who is right or wrong, universities can help decide for their students?

Nanny Universities produce Nanny Students who is led by a Nanny PM with a Nanny Cabinet.

All the more employers should look down on students from Singapore universities., cannot think out of the box and still stuck in their own world of the 60s to 90s hahah

As one of the organizers of the above-mentioned event of the article, I just want to remind all of you that the event was never political (in respect to parties) to begin with.

We are also clearly aware of the consequences, and we did weigh them out before doing what we did. So thank you for your kind concern Lim. Any rational and logical person will see that this issue has nothing to do with any political party, but about how we felt the university should have acted instead when faced with the issue.

I want to correct Lim on this statement, “The issue is about NTU students hosting an event that arose from an unsolicited visit by Chee.”

Clearly, either you do not fully understand what we were speaking out for, or choose to politicize the issue at hand. A more accurate statement would be, “The issue is about NTU students hosting an event that arose from the spiking of a news story.”

It could have been a story on panties theft in NTU halls that got spiked, and we would still have campaigned. It was the actions, the high-handedness, and almost unilateral way the school spiked the article and managed the entire issue that frustrated us.

Coupled with the fact that the way the university acted contradicted whatever we were taught by our professors, we felt that we had a duty to perform by contemplating the decision of the university.

Hi Thaddeus

Thanks for your response.

If Dr Chee did not visit, would there be a news story to spike?

That is a question I can fully understand. You may not think it is a political event, I respect that and in some ways understand that. Whether the university shares your view, I hope they do.

The definition of political is not in debate.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/political

The university clearly believes that publishing the article that got “spiked” would have been supporting a political agenda. If it was a story on panties theft in NTU halls that got spiked, and you campaigned, it would not have been an issue nor do I think the NTU would have spiked the story. If they did, I may even have attended your protest, and more interesting it would be imho.

But that was not the case. It was a story of Chee’s unsolicited visit to the NTU. And that was the story that was the focal point.

That you and your fellow classmates disagree with this is obvious. I’m not in a position to second guess what the university will think but what they think will determine their actions, like it did yours. But do allow me at least to have my own opinions on the affair.

Please be clear, what I think or say on this forum will not make your actions political. It is only your actions and the connotations that go with it, that counts.

I do not begrudge you your views, nor am I in a position to criticise them (nor have I done so, at least not intentionally). Ultimately, all I can say is “I hope you know what you’re doing”.

With Kind Regards

I can safely speak for ourselves that our event was not political. Dr Chee’s unsolicited visit is on the other hand another ball game that I do not want to discuss here or now. But do not take what I just said as a recanting of my previous post, because our event was never based on the the unsolicited visit, but based on the censorship that occurred.

And that is what we are emphasizing. We can’t stop people from politicizing an event, like you evidently are, but we definitely took great efforts to prevent as much politicizing it on our part. Do look carefully at our clearly stated goals, and intention.

Moreover, we opened the first 2 speeches of that day with the clear disclaimer about what we wanted the event to be, and what the issue we wanted to voice out was and about.

I did not say the event was non-political. There’s a reason why I contextualized it in reference to the idea of “party”. I would be truly naive if I claimed our event to be non-political.

You are right, we cannot second guess what the university views. But we’re fairly confident in what we have done and we have our appropriate follow-up with the university as well.

Indeed, I agree with you that our actions and connotations that go with it will count for whether our actions are political. And I hope by posting in the manner I have, our stance is made a lot clearer. So I would appreciate it if you can refrain from emphasizing on politics, and discuss more about the principles of the issue that we sought to bring up.

Your concern is appreciated but undue, and yes, you hope correctly. We do know what we are doing. If we didn’t, then we would probably have a defamation suit flying our way by now, *laughs*.

Well, like I said, I respect your views and appreciate your optimism. All the best and have a nice day!

28) Thad on October 7th, 2008 6.43 pm

So I would appreciate it if you can refrain from emphasizing on politics, and discuss more about the principles of the issue that we sought to bring up.”

Lim, now that Thad has defined the parameter for discussion. Are you willing to be bound by these rules of engagement. Not so easy right.

Now, imagine the rules of engagement that CSJ is facing – onerous rules that have not been set by him.

To lim, 22)

Don’t use a cheap shot at me also, putting words in my mouth.
Show me where in my post that I suggested Chee never visited NTU ?
And don’t accuse me of being a SDP member.
Basically I am just pro politicians who demonstrate courage and conviction.
Besides JBJ and CSJ , Lily Neo from the PAP is a good example.

Anyway it is heartening to see Thad from NTU making it very clear to you that the students know what they are doing and for you not to politicize what they have been doing.
Lim , please take note, this is a good example of courage, conviction and composure.

http://talkback.stomp.com.sg/forums/showthread.php?p=1622494#post1622494

Does the exisitng rule that the public can’t raise questions or seek clarification after the speech when all attention is on speaker. I’m not referring the public to take the floor and give a speech.

Why the speakers choose or classify “small-talk exchange” as “open dialogue”, It the speakers are well-prepared, and committed why should they afraid of? in fornt of public scrutiny?

If the speakers can answer firmly, don’t you all think that it will help them to convince themselves they are right in bring up the issue?

Thad,
well done. Keep up the good work.

Hi Lim

your statement “If Dr Chee did not visit, would there be a news story to spike?”

So goodness why will NTU want to spike Dr Chee then… something to hide? If Lee Kuan Yew pays a surprise visit to NTU… will NTU find it newsworthy to report it… if uninvited perverts ventured into NTU hostels and steal panties… will NTU find it newsworthy to report so that students will be aware of such thefts

And how does Dr Chee’s uninvited visit have an undue influence on NTU chronicle… Dr Chee is not sitting in the editoral team and it might just as well be that the article written by students may be a negative publicity for Dr Chee as from NTU students account… not many students were interested in his visit.

From your readings… you have a dislike for SDP… fine with that… but what is your problem of SDP getting into the “news”

well put it this way SDP are vocal and it is just a fact that mass media want to focus their attention on the “louder” people because journalists just find them newsworthy and mind you newsworthy does not mean SDP will get good publicity all the time… in fact in number of occasions SDP complained that mass media are not too kind with them… but will SDP behave like NTU to censored information… you should go to SDP website and find out all kind of negative comments posted by people.

Since no political agenda can be use to make use of naive and clueless Singapore university undergrads, NTU should stop all PAP ministers, MPs etc rom visiting NTU to give seminars, talks etc.

Inevitably under the guise of government, these ministers and MPs can also spread their own poltical agenda, the PAP political agenda.

NTU should stand by its words and ensure no polticians ever step into NTU for interaction with students anymore, like Ho Peng Kee said before, it should apply to all poltical parties and polticians, not just SDP and Chee Soon Juan.

People with brains will laugh at such lame reason from a “top university”. The stupid media still try to divert the attention of students being make use of as pawns when the focus should be on NTU instead.

Then are our little kids in PCF pawns too in a political agenda as it suppose to be charitable organisation??

Are grassroots workers pawns too when they suppose to serve residents instead of PAP ??

If these NTU students at Hong Lim Park are pawns, there is easily many more examples of PAP making pawns out of ordinary Singaporeans at those PA, PCF, RC, CCC, CDC, handouts etc.

When can Singaporeans start using their brains ???

——————————————————————————————————-
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/news/story/0,4136,179196,00.html?

In an e-mail reply to The New Paper’s questions, an NTU spokesman said: ‘It is inappropriate for our student media platforms to be inadvertently exploited by unsolicited visitors to publicise their visits and advance their agenda.

‘As the publisher of the Nanyang Chronicle and Spectrum TV, the university is ultimately responsible for their content. Generally, in consideration of the educational objectives, the university would not interfere in editorial matters.

‘In this case, there is the potential of an unsolicited visit being given publicity in furtherance of a political objective.

‘The risk that the university is seen as being used for the political agenda of the uninvited visitor had to be mitigated by exercising the university’s ownership rights.’

http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/news/story/0,4136,179196,00.html?

The intentions of CSJ’s visit to NTU and it’s merits aside, I think it is reasonable to consider that event to be news worth reporting to the students of NTU. And as with all news, it can be reported as fact following which an editorial may also be written to cast a light on the event from the perspective of the editorial team, whether good, bad or balanced.

Taking the story off for no good reason (lack of space, lack of facts, etc …) does not seem like a reasonable journalistic practice to me (forgive me if I’m wrong, because I am not a journalist by training. I’m just basing my views on what I *think* are reasonable).

In this case, there is the potential of an unsolicited visit being given publicity in furtherance of a political objective. – NTU Spokeman

What’s wrong with furthering political objectives? The whole point is to engage students in a multitude of political opinions. It is common among world class universities such as Harvard and Cambridge to have student chapters of political parties on campus. If PAP doesn’t want to engage young Singaporeans at university, it should not limit other political parties. Clearly, PAP doesn’t want opposition parties to be active in places where PAP representation is clearly passive. PAP propaganda is already omnipresent through mass media such as Straits Times and local radio.

Nothing will work until Tyranosaur go meet his pacemaker. trust me. i know you already surely do. safe the effort for now.

To Lim (#30) said:
“So I would appreciate it if you can refrain from emphasizing on politics…”

Mr Donaldson Tan (#37) said:
“What’s wrong with furthering political objectives?”
—————————————————-
My response:
I know. Its only me that has to refrain from emphasizing on politics. No one else apparently. Nothing new.

Nevertheless, I will be continuing my policy of making responses and providing my opinions when I would like to do so.
—————————————————-
Berak said:
“Don’t use a cheap shot at me also, putting words in my mouth.
Show me where in my post that I suggested Chee never visited NTU ?”

My response:
My apologies, it was a response meant for #18. Still, I still don’t see why I am incorrect to state that the issue arose out of an unsolicited visit by Chee.

No visit = no media report = no protest. I stand by the accuracy of that statement even if no one else dares or refuses to acknowledge this.

Berak said:
“And don’t accuse me of being a SDP member.”

My response:
66.6% of Singaporeans chose the PAP in the last election. I would say to the 66.6% that’s its your party (which these people voted) but definitely 66.6% isn’t in the party. It is clear to me that at the very least, you’re an SDP supporter or are you denying that. That’s your party from my perspective, isn’t it.

In any case, I don’t see it as “accusing” anyone of being a SDP member. I don’t see anything wrong in being a member of ANY political party.

I do however note a lot of constant gripe about PAP actions (once in a while myself included). If I think it is ok to gripe about actions which I disagree with, I will do the same about actions of ANY political party when I personally believe it to be incorrect. It would be inconsistent of me not to do so and I get the impression that this is manifestly wrong judging by the responses.

If anyone doesn’t like it, too bad.
—————————————————-
Choon Hiong said:
“So goodness why will NTU want to spike Dr Chee then”

My response:
Actually there’s 2 separate incidents. One is an incident of trespass, the other is a media article on the incident that was “spiked”.

The rationale for the former is that it is illegal. The latter rationale by the NTU is illustrated in #35.

Just another example of how some people will not see it as 2 separate incidents.
—————————————————-
NTUNUSSMU said:
“Since no political agenda can be use to make use of naive and clueless Singapore university undergrads, NTU should stop all PAP ministers, MPs etc rom visiting NTU to give seminars, talks etc.”

It would strange for a person studying political science not to be provided some opportunity in politics first hand. Still, I would highlight that the difference in this case being an unsolicited visit vis a vis an invitation. I don’t think NTU offers that though…

Out of curiousity, I would ask these questions, has any of the universities in Singapore ever invited Dr Chee (or for that matter, other opposition politicians) to speak? If they did, did they spike the media on that incident? If not, why the inconsistency here?

lim (#39):

66.6% of Singaporeans chose the PAP in the last election. I would say to the 66.6% that’s its your party (which these people voted) but definitely 66.6% isn’t in the party. –

Does the 66.6% include walk-over when nobody actually votes? If it did, this number is hardly representative of Singaporeans’ opinion.

No visit = no media report = no protest. I stand by the accuracy of that statement even if no one else dares or refuses to acknowledge this.

That simply means Dr Chee’s visit somehow highlighted the lack of independent media in Singapore, which raised notable concerns among NTU media students.

The rationale for the former is that it is illegal. The latter rationale by the NTU is illustrated in #35.

The above statement completely misses the point that denying Singaporeans access to alternative political opinions is detrimental to Singapore’s long-term future.

Still, I would highlight that the difference in this case being an unsolicited visit vis a vis an invitation. I don’t think NTU offers that thoug.

Can someone from NTU clarify if NTU staff pressure student officers to not invite SDP? I understand recently the Vice President (Internal Affairs) of NTU Student Union wrote to SDP that he does not intend to invite SDP to NTU’s campus.

“Out of curiousity, I would ask these questions, has any of the universities in Singapore ever invited Dr Chee (or for that matter, other opposition politicians) to speak? If they did, did they spike the media on that incident? If not, why the inconsistency here?”

Which local university dared even if it wants to. In fact, which organisation (not opposition) dares – not a lot I guess.

Even Kenneth Jeyeratnam needed a letter from GCT “which could be shown to prospective employers to say that the Government did not hold anything against him”. http://www.todayonline.com/articles/278944.asp

Lim, imagine the society we are living in. Good decent people like Kenneth need to have a letter (blessing) from GCT.

“66.6% of Singaporeans chose the PAP in the last election.”

Well, this is a fact and the only credible trumpet (priceless treasure) left.

@ 39) lim,

your quote : ” It is clear to me that at the very least, you ‘re an SDP supporter or are you denying that. That’s your party from my perspective, isn’t it. ”
How wrong you are lim.

Read my post again Lim.
I stated very clearly that I am pro politicians who demonstrate courage and conviction. Don’t be presumptuous. I admire the person for their actions and JBJ,CSJ and Lily Neo comes to mind. So by your logic you should conclude that Reform party, SDP and PAP are my parties. Afterall I am pro JBJ, pro CSJ and pro Lily Neo.
For the record my being pro Lily Neo in no way changes my negative perception of the PAP. Hope you get it this time.

Hi Berak

You are either a supporter of the Chee and the SDP or you are not.

I say you are, you say I’m wrong. Ok. So you don’t support the SDP.

And then you state that you are “pro politicians who demonstrate courage and conviction.” Doesn’t that mean that SDP are not comprised of men with courage and conviction (that’s not my view, just to be clear…). Perhaps there is a contradiction there. lol.

———————————————-
To the rest…

It takes courage and conviction to state the truth esp in the face of repeated falsehoods. It doesn’t take courage and conviction to spread falsehoods.

After all the talk about courage and conviction, I find the refusal to acknowledge that NUS has invited Chee to speak before, disappointing. Also the refusal to acknowledge that “No Chee visit = no media report = no protest” as a fact.

You know what I liked about JBJ. When it was right, he acknowledged it. Even when it was the opponent who was in the right. And when thing was wrong, he identified it and stood by what he believed even when it cost him politically. That is indeed a man of character.

Sigh. Men like JBJ are few and far between. Have a nice day.

@ lim,

You still don’t get it. Let me put it this way for you.
I admire Lily Neo but that does not imply the rest of the PAP MPs have courage and conviction. In fact I believe the SDP members have far more courage and conviction than the PAP MPs except for Lily.

You mentioned that it takes courage and conviction to speak the truth especially in the face of repeated falsehoods.
It is easy to claim anything on line.
I am sure you recall the offer made to you to debate with CSJ not too long ago.
I believe the offer still stands.
Here is a great opportunity for you to show courage and conviction and also dispel all falsehoods in public. Hong Lim Park is a good venue and NTU students can learn a thing or two from you. What say you lim ? Time to walk the talk lah !

Wow, Mr Berak, I admit I’m confused, you’re a supporter of SDP and yet not a supporter of SDP. So am I wrong or right?

Also, I’m happy for you that you’re able to represent Chee even when you’re not in the SDP. I’m flattered and surprised by your offer considering all the previous post about me being non-objective etc, etc….

I’m not a big shot claiming to represent democracy in Singapore. I’m not seeking to represent Singaporeans either. My views represent one person and I don’t value it more than any other Singaporean.

Can there be a discussion? No one certainly don’t need my approval for that.

Dr Chee and the SDP can post what they want on any specific topic they desire in the TOC (subject to TOC editorial of course), and all of us, not just me, can post our views about the post, if so desired. No one needs my approval to do that as the last few hundred articles have shown.

Last I read, the TOC is a blog site which endeavours to reflect the views and opinions of ordinary Singaporeans. It is a platform which welcomes contributions from the man on the street, the average citizen who is concerned about issues facing our country.

You can be rest assured that ordinary Singaporean, man on the street, average citizen, concerned citizen all applies to me. If I do have views which i think are worth contributing, rest assured I will (or at least that’s what I tot I have been doing). If I don’t, it is only due to my constraints, not anyone else’s.

In fact, the TOC blog format is a very wonderful one as it allows me within my own time to write my views in a more researched and considered manner. My thanks to the TOC for this.

The rationale for the former is that it is illegal. The latter rationale by the NTU is illustrated in #35.

Hi the rationale is way off man… If Dr Chee trepass, it is the security or the police to escort him or arrest him just as if an uninvited pervert comes to NTU to do naughty things in the hostel, it is again the security or police to arrest the person

this both incident will warrant if NTU reporters want to report it, deem newsworthy to report them….

thus your logic and NTU is quite flawed…. that so long as any person is “uninvited”, it should not be covered by the journalist.

if that is the case, the role of newspaper will not function as alot of events for instance theft should not be reported because such events are “uninvited”.

Thad,

Good that you are participating in this thread. I for one am glad you are doing this. Remember, if people around you try to discourage you by invoking all the “fear” factors, its because your actions reminds all of them how cowardly they are. And most people hate being reminded of that.

Just have one comment though, although I think you may have already heard of this. Since you are from the journalist school, and that school happens to be called the “Wee Kim Wee school of journalism”, it may be enlightening to think about how and why Wee Kim Wee was protrayed by the media to be the most loved president ever.

How was Wee Kim Wee like when he was a journalist? I figure he is one person that “accepts the system”. He merely reports the news and probably feels so grateful to the system that he never will rock the boat. The system rewarded him well with our media taking every effort to publicize how much he is loved by the people when he was President.

Contrast it to Ong Teng Cheong, the next president and you can easily understand why, by calling your school the Wee Kim Wee school, what the system wants from budding journalists. They prefer you to accept the system and they make sure you will be well rewarded if you do.

So to end it off, I am glad that the all of you are playing the “Morpheus, Trinity and Neo” role in freeing Singaporean minds from the Matrix. Always remember that, many Singaporeans will reject your message because to them, ignorance is bliss. Do not be discouraged if they do, just free those minds that want to be freed.

“Hi the rationale is way off man… If Dr Chee trepass, it is the security or the police to escort him or arrest him just as if an uninvited pervert comes to NTU to do naughty things in the hostel, it is again the security or police to arrest the person” – Choon Hiong

You appear to be confused. Which of the rationale is way off?

The fact that Chee’s trepass is illegal which is the former or that the NTU rationale for not publishing the article is in #35?
————————————————
“this both incident will warrant if NTU reporters want to report it, deem newsworthy to report them….” – Choon Hiong

And as events proved, NTU disagrees with you.
————————————————
“thus your logic and NTU is quite flawed…. that so long as any person is “uninvited”, it should not be covered by the journalist.” – Choon Hiong

No. That’s not my logic cos the decision to decide whether to publish doesn’t lie with me but the NTU. Feel free to highlight my offending words which state that it should not be covered, all of my posts are still there.

What I did state is that if Chee didn’t visit, there wouldn’t be a news article = no protest. Still don’t see how that is wrong.
————————————————
“if that is the case, the role of newspaper will not function as alot of events for instance theft should not be reported because such events are “uninvited”.- Choon Hiong

The issue here is a question of whether the students have the right to decide or NTU. The students believe it is theirs. NTU believes it is theirs. Who will decide, ultimately, see my analogy on football managers vs owners in the other thread on editorial independence.

Best Regards

“48) lim on October 9th, 2008 11.57 am
The issue here is a question of whether the students have the right to decide or NTU. ”

Yah la. I learned a very beautiful phrase from “some foreign talent” many many years ago. It goes something like this “Crying bady gets the milk”.

Replace the word “crying” with whatever right word you may prefer like “demanding”, “shouting”, “requesting”, “taking back”, etc. If you want something, you better work for it and sometimes you just need to pay the price.

If you do not work for “your right”, other people will just decide for you. Nature abhors a vacuum. Just about every piece of land (even rock in the sea) on earth is being claimed and nations are fighting to claim it. Period.

Hi Lim…

What I did state is that if Chee didn’t visit, there wouldn’t be a news article = no protest. Still don’t see how that is wrong.

well may I add that if chee visit = newsworthy = But NTU spiked it = protest.

So the fault lies with NTU, if NTU has just let the students decide to publish it… no protest will warrant.

Yes you can say NTU management is the owner but you must know that NTU has various stakeholders too not just the management… since students paid school fees, it is also their every right to complain to school if the school did not deliver what the students will like.

That goes for companies who hired employees and that does not mean the company can just anyhow fired the employee, the employee can seek redress too if they are unfairly treated or dismissed.

again I wonder how Dr Chee is being the start of all this… it is like a thief got arrested by the Police, but the Police somehow became high handed and beat him up during interrogation and the thief died as a result…

you can say no thief = no arrest = no death. But hey if there is a board of enquiry done up because the public were offended by police brutality, the police will be punish for their inappropriate action.

the issue is unfairness or highhandedness….. NTU management brought such bad publicity to themselves by spiking the story. At the end of the day yes perhaps NTU can still continue with this mentality they own the newspaper and they can decide to publish or spike the story… but just dun expect people or society at large to quietly accept the verdict

I do agree that every action has an opposite reaction… seeing now how many newspaper articles have covered the student protest… NTU has paid a high price for their decision.

[...] group of students protested at Speakers Corner recently on the censorship of campus media. Click here and here for more. Also, click here for a proposal on Internet Freedom for [...]

[...] of opposition politician Dr Chee Soon Juan’s visit to the university. (See reports by TOC here and [...]

[...] The Online Citizen – NTU students protest at Speakers’ Corner [...]

[...] TOC: NTU censors news coverage of Chee Soon Juan’s visit SDP: NTU students come alive TOC: NTU students protest at Speaker’s Corner SDP: SDP turns attention to NIE Related [...]