Hi Kelvin Lim:

Your list of news published in the Straits Times pertaining to the SDP is incomplete. You missed out all the Tak boleh tahan protests, as well as court proceedings.

I you were to visit SDP’s website, you should be able to pull out a complete list without too much effort.

On the subject of civil disobedience, Dr. Chee Soon Juan is less successful than Mr. Tan Kin Lian in attracting crowds to Hong Lim Speakers’ Corner. Do you know why?

For more than a month now, SDP website has never posted any news or articles on the investors losing money on Minbonds, DBS High Notes, Pinnacles and Jubilee Notes, nor has it posted news on Mr. Tan Kin Lian’s gatherings in Hong Lim Speakers’ Corner.

It does make one ponder why.

Regards,
Victor Sun
Singapore Kopitiam – Voices of Singaporeans

Mr Lim,

You try to find out more about SDP through the Straits Times.. that says it all. haha

You try to find out more about SDP through the Straits Times.. that says it all. haha – hopeless (#1)

Many Singaporeans have already been hoodwinked over by MSM that the civil service and the parliamentarians are undergoing a pay cut when in fact, it is only a mere reduction in bonuses. You must take note that bonus is never guaranteed in the first place, so it cannot be considered as a pay-cut. Now you expect the author Kelvin Lim to follow a MSM publication that is unable to provide unbiased reporting on political development in Singapore?

The problem with the SDP is that it has a good ideology, but lacks good methodology to implement it. Singapore is neither the Raj, nor is it Apartheid South Africa, so NVA lacks the necessary mass support to be successful. Plus, unlike India, Africa or Europe, Singapore is constrained by the ingrained Chinese culture of fear, which has been prevalent in Chinese culture for 4000+ years.

“Many Singaporeans have already been hoodwinked over by MSM that the civil service and the parliamentarians are undergoing a pay cut when in fact, it is only a mere reduction in bonuses. You must take note that bonus is never guaranteed in the first place, so it cannot be considered as a pay-cut.”

SmallVice585, can you confirm it is the BONUS that they are cutting not the SALARY ? So actually Pay-CUT is actually referring to BONUS-cut in this case ?

I don’t know enough of this info because I have refrained from touching ShittyTimes as I hate to taste the SHIT of it.

“For more than a month now, SDP website has never posted any news or articles on the investors losing money on Minbonds, DBS High Notes, Pinnacles and Jubilee Notes,”

It make me wonder what are you trying to imply ?
You are just giving the impression that SDP did not not post any info on the bond debacle based on the word NEVER.

So what if SDP are less successful in attracting crowd especially those crowd stand up for general human right not large crowds that get themselves get burn through the Scam Bomb.

If you talking about money-compensation, naturally investors who lost money will want to attend those gatherings unless they are very rich and bochap.

One gathering is about creating human right awareness and another is about SELF (Do you think the majority of investors will gather if they are not the one who get burnt [note, I'm talking of investors not kind-soul like TKL or GMS]).

So what is there to compare ?

SDP has been bent on character assaination just like McCain and Palin.

Dear Hopeless,

Unfortunately, I had actually based majority of the information on books by Dr Chee and SDP website.

I “hope” you read the whole article before commenting. ;)

Anyway, my intent of listing the headlines is to underline the negative portrayal of SDP in the Straits Times, not as a main reference source for information.

As much as some may loathe the local press, Straits Times still boasts of the highest daily readership for newspaper in Singapore. Thus, the influence on its readers (with such incriminating headlines) might adversely affect the reputation of SDP.

To #1) Victor Sun

> For more than a month now, SDP website has never posted any news or articles on the investors losing money on Minbonds, DBS High Notes, Pinnacles and Jubilee Notes, nor has it posted news on Mr. Tan Kin Lian’s gatherings in Hong Lim Speakers’ Corner.

Speaking of visiting their website to pull out info…

7 November, just 2 and a half weeks ago.
http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/1417-financial-crisis-politically-awakens-singapore-investors

Though even if it had been more than a month, so what? 10,000 investors are a lot, but they aren’t the be all and end all of everything, and there is hardly any need to keep posting “no change in situation”.

> On the subject of civil disobedience, Dr. Chee Soon Juan is less successful than Mr. Tan Kin Lian in attracting crowds to Hong Lim Speakers’ Corner. Do you know why?

Crowd’s self-interest perhaps? How many of those in the crowd are there who haven’t lost money? Not many I bet.

Dear Victor of Singapore Kopitiam,

The list of headlines published in the Straits Times (ST) was never meant to be exhaustive, covering for the past couple of months. This was done by searching through ST articles archived in LexisNexis database.

It is true that SDP’s website has reported extensively on the Tak Boleh Tahan campaign and court proceedings, but it has largely not been reported in ST. The rare occasions that Tak Boleh Tahan Campaign was reported was on 2nd May, under the headline, “SDP canvassing for support for 2 petitions”.

That mentioned, I might have missed out some ST articles (for the months of August to October) especially if they have not been archived in LexisNexis. But that should not change the basic point I’m trying to bring across, which is ST has not cast SDP in a flattering light.

Regards,
Kelvin

>> On the subject of civil disobedience, Dr. Chee Soon Juan is less successful than Mr. Tan Kin Lian in attracting crowds to Hong Lim Speakers’ Corner. Do you know why?<<

In the case of TKL, what civil disobedience are you talking about? Where is the civil disobedience? Where? Where?

Dear all,

There is some rational in this articles, about csj. Ask yourself this question, it take guts to do some like this as crazy as it may seem. If I read csj correctly, he model his movement in according to those of Gandhi. However, he failed to see the setting is completely different to that of the india path.

Unlike other race, we Chinese are more individualist. Thus, it will not work in getting a national effort to support him. If Chinese ourselves don’t even support him, less say for the other races in Singapore. However, please take note that not all his action really go down to the drain. If you look closely, he might be the element that make the rise of TKL possible.

Meaning if you go back in time and kill some of the associates of Hilter, he might not be able to start a war at all. While I see TKL as a train to launch people into political freedom, I see csj is the rail that make this possible. For his courage and what he had gone thru, I truthly believe he deserve some credit. If there is anything wrong doing by him, I think he has in the past provide “proof” to the Singaporean opposition is destructive! Then again, without csj, PAP really can’t find any other means to term opposition as destructive?! I don’t think so, history did tell otherwise too…

Dear Mr Lim,

Of course, ST is the best… please continue to read, cite and quote ST.

As for your article, I have read thoroughly word by word; looks like a replica of ST.

problem with current alternate parties is that they failed to see they are very much closely linked together, which explain the damage caused by CSJ and why the other parties do not want to be associated with him.

However, like I mentioned in my many postings. You like it or not, each alternate party has it’s own good points and short coming. At the end of the day, if each alternative party choose to go the path of it own instead making use of each other strength to challenge the PAP as a whole. I am afraid to say that LHL dream of having one party system will very soon be realized! I urge all alternate party to throw away their differences and work something out to achieve the same objective of representing the people.

# 1) victor

One cannot compare the path between CSJ and TKL like that. While CSJ objective is to create awareness of Singapore oppression, TKL is going towards public mandate.

Without awareness of Singaporean, mandate will only go to PAP and not any other alternate party. If not for this economy crisis, do you think people will actually go to the speaker corner and listen to Mr. Tan on car insurance policy (no offense Mr. Tan, stating the sad fact here about Singaporean)? To be fair, CSJ not only trying to make Singapore aware, on the other hand this awareness also go international. Put it is lay man term, it is like some child abuser beating up the children and caused the attention of the Neighbours that will likely stop the abuser!

And the way I see, it does tie the hand of the PAP in some way to ease ruling on the internet, speaker corn and podcast during election. Even it is a false front put up by PAP.

Dear Kelvin,

Good and well-researched article. Perhaps you can follow up with an interview with Chee Soon Juan, but give yourself some cover by approaching other Opposition or PAP figures for their perspectives as well (it doesn’t matter whether they accept – you can at least say that you tried).

Just to point out that Mandela, while initially committed to non-violent resistance, subsequently became the founder of the ANC’s armed wing. He didn’t fully renounce armed struggle until some time after his release from prison in the 1990s.

On serious note, if all of you really look forward to a more political freedom Singapore, I sincerely urge all people to see the truth correctly. If not, you never really get out of the loop that PAP had created to trap you inside! Don’t speculate, see the truth that PAP don’t want you to see.

hopeless (#13),

Come on. Give the author some credit. It is actually quite a decent case of fair reporting since he quoted both MSM and SDP’s Website.

SmallVice585, can you confirm it is the BONUS that they are cutting not the SALARY ? So actually Pay-CUT is actually referring to BONUS-cut in this case ? – Daniel (#5)

Check out the
official press release from the PSD of the Prime Minister’s office.

On Page 1, it is written that the total annual variable component and 13th month payment for civil servants in 2008 is 2 months plus $100 to $3001. This is 1 month less than the total paid out in 2007 which was 3 months plus $220. It is only a bonus-cut for 2008’s civil service salary

Mr/Ms smallvice585,

Credits? Sure. The author has got all the credits.

From theh very outset, once glance at his topic, one would be fully aware that the author is FULLY ACCREDITED.

Don’t compare Tan Kin Lian to Dr Chee, the former is a double head snake whose dream is to be president of S’pore. The latter is a human right activist who is prepared to go to jail to fight for justice. Tan Kin Lian does not even dare to protest outside Hong Lim. It is not a protest, it is a gathering of investors in an open field. Tan has no guts to oppose Pap

tewniaseng

Is there ONLY ONE WAY OF OPPOSITION?

If that is so, then it is no different from PAP maintaining there is only need for ONE PARTY in Singapore.

WP also has a different idealogy from SDP.

TKL’s championing of the rights of small investors burnt by the minibonds saga put him on a different side of the fence than the government, but I don’t think he set out to be in the opposition camp.

Mr AhKao,

I did not know much about Tan KL. I saw this in his blog:

“”you organised a collective protest against the bonus cut but did not lodge it at the AGM due to the assurance given by former NTUC boss Lim Boon Heng and the chairman Ng Kee Choe. The chairman also gave some assurance at the AGM. Are the assurances being kept and honoured?”"

If the post above was true, TKL’s action was defused by Minister Lim Boon Heng. What if Lim Boon Heng spoke with him again after all the 100,000 signatures were collected… Would TKL give an aboutturn again…

Aspiring politicians have no choice but play by the rules created by the incumbents. It is absolutely essential to get voted in first, whether as MP
or President, then take it from there.
I am sure who ever gets in cannot do worse than Nathan as President
or do worse than many of the PAP MPs.
Chee has done his part as an activist to raise awareness, it is now
up to the people to give their votes to the alternative party members
standing for elections. Anything less and I will be the first to acknowledge
we deserve to be shafted by the PAP.
Come to think of it, the majority who voted the PAP are misguided,
misunderstood the real agenda of the PAP and paying for it now.

15) RED-man on November 26th, 2008 9.27 am .

You hit the nail right on the head! Given the wonderful track record of our MIW and MSM to demonized any opposition parties that go against the PAP’s philosophy with no alternative media other than internet, what is to stop these arrogrant leaders from using the ISD act aka ”Marxist Conspirators” in the late 1980s on these dissidents? Let’s not be naive any more about the morality of our ‘If you don’t pay us enough we will leave” leaders to serve whole heartedly for our country.

The effort by Tan Kin Lian is fruitless. Money lost will not be compensated at all. You just wait and see. Don’t say misguided, the people in Town Council who are highly educated, who know english better than the uncles and unties, are they misguided ??

15) RED-man on November 26th, 2008 9.27 am
……. While CSJ objective is to create awareness of Singapore oppression, TKL is going towards public mandate.

CSJ’s attempts to create awareness is his way to win public mandate, no different from TKL’s going towards public mandate.

The difference is CSJ tries to create a public issue out of oppression, while TKL takes on the existing public issue of minibond.

Simply put, CSJ is ahead of his time. Maybe if he had put across his message in a more subtle way….TKL’s style is much more safe. but CSJ’s style may be workable overseas, where his style would be considered mild.

My friend say, on youtube, anyone can hear his court conversation with u-kno-who.
A nation under ….

# 26) sarek_home

(1) Assuming what you said is truth. Please tell me Sarek. To date, how much mandate did he get?

(2) Even if he did get mandate, with his current social status, how is he going to fight politically for his mandate?

That is why people is saying what he do is crazy, my dear friend.

Oppression is always around us (economy crisis or no crisis). While mini bonds come by chance. This explain CSJ consistency and exactly what he want to show.

# 20) tewniaseng

Hi there,

In life, there are time to be karang and there is time to step back and come in from another approach.

We all know that despite the courage of Japanese “Kamikaze” during world war 2, it did not bring them any closer in winning the war.

28) RED_man on November 26th, 2008 10.00 pm

That is why people is saying what he do is crazy, my dear friend.

I assume you are referring to CSJ with that post. I asked myself those questions and I think my answers are not too different from yours.

For those troublemakers in the Singapore Desperate party, see what happened in BKK. Nonviolence actions turned to violent causing so much hardship to innocent people. So stop brainwashing naive Singaporeans to join you.

“You try to find out more about SDP through the Straits Times.. that says it all. haha”

In the ST, the SDP is reported to be sued, charged, fined and jailed.

In the SDP website, the reports are all about them being sued, charged, fined and jailed.

Tell me what is the difference (other than a different side of the story that is equally biased but at opposite angle, and some pilfered articles).

#20) Tew N S,

You started by saying don’t compare the two, but you followed that by doing just the opposite.

As I see it , both of them are fighting for social justice and the rights of the people. They may have different approach, but that is to be expected – there is no the only one correct way. Same direction, different paths. That’s Ok.

Hi Kelvin Lim

You said

A clash of ideals

In a reply posted on the SDP website, the party accused Mr Tan of joining in with the voices of scaremongering. Rhetorically, they asked where Mr Tan could have assembled the DBS investors, if activists had not campaigned for freedom of assembly. Rather than disparaging civil disobedience, fighting for political and civil rights could “come in very handy in [the] future”.

The posting in my blog was written by somebody else in CNA forum. I reproduced the mesaage in my blog buy forgot to mention the author. It gave the wrong impression that the messag was written by me.

I wish to apologise to Chee Soon Juan and his sister for the damage that is caused to them by the statement, “what many stupid and selfish politicians in Singapore have done and seek self destruction.” This statement came from the original posting (by someone else).

I do not personally share this sentiment and wish to acknowledge their personal sacrifice in fighting for what they believe in.

Hi jy (#22)

Please read this statement on the “settlement” of the Collective Protest on the Bonus Cut.

http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/05/collective-protest-settlement.html

Different strokes for different folks.

The PAP is like a huge boulder. The SDP and the other opposition parties are trying to move it (hmm remove it?). The SDP believes in direct methods pushing it and people will see what they are trying to do join them …once you have enough people the boulder will move. The other opposition parties want to get the people first and some equipment before they start pushing.

Both are easily fixed by the PAP govt. There are many rules against activist activity and SDP chaps risk arrest which scares away the people they need to make their actions effective. For the other opposition parties, there are rules written and unwritten to keep them in check and passive.

Hi I have read all yr comments and want to add mine here.

I think TKL has given the alternate political voice a boost here by using an entirely different tactic. Of course, i am unsure whether when he started the HLP minibond protest, he would imagine himself standing for political office one day. It could have come along the way.

TKl has garnered public support by working on the ground first. By throwing caution to the wind, he has found sufficient ground support by fighting for their trust first at HLP. Most opposition parties if you realised by now lack the public support, which is critical for it’s survival. Most floundered between trying to stay afloat or not being drowned by lawsuits. I am unsure even many years down the road, can our opposition politics revive itself? I really doubt so given how hard PAP has clamped hard on them and how little support they have garner among Singaporeans.

In many countries, a two-party political system flourishes because there is equal ground support for both the parties. Perhaps their kind of democracy is really more open and modern than ours.

I fear that unless PAP opens up the political space for alternate parties to come in, our country may face a bleak future int terms of political openness which is not ideal for our progress at all. One TKL can only do so much. He has to attract enough people to start a new alternate front which has to operate differently from how our current opposition parties operate. It is hope that this will be his new national mandate if he decides to carry on any political ambition in the near future.

Hi Folks, Good Morning!

One thing must be clear to some, perhaps it would have been better if everyone sees it. The thousand or so investors that went to HLP in response to TKL declared appearance there to see him were and are hardly there for any political reason. They are there for a hope to recoup their monies in the minibonds and they were the few (abt 10%) that felt any help from anyone will do. The other 90% were either not awared of TKL going to HLP to help them, had their own ways to deal with their investments or had simply left their predicaments in the hands of all almighties. NOTE HERE THAT THERE WERE NO CROWD OF NON-INVESTORS, maybe some curious visitors.

TKL, been a Financial Sector Professional for decades, declared that he wanted to help because he felt that many investors were lured unethically into buying those financial products. So, let’s assumed that he took upon himself a duty because of A SENSE OF CHIVALRY to ‘right’ wrong and most importantly, TO HELP. From here, I extrapolate that he ‘felt’ that a political office will empower him to do more justice for the citizens. And he has declared his wanting to oversee the running(managing) of the State which sounded more for administration than politic. This said, many are unsure of his motive for political office and their doubts are not without reason(s).

For 30 years, on record, TKL was a PAP Member and there was no record or report of him ‘been chivalrous’ in those years. He was CEO of NTUC Income for decades and before the Minibond Fiasco, he as a customer of NTUC Income himself, was unhappy with his Former Employer, now his Insurer, for changes to the Structure of Agreement. This sudden adversarial stance of TKL was unexpected by many and I was astonished by Former President Ong Teng Chong and Devan Nair near the end parts of their political careers too, something like conscience comes lately? See the similarity. THE BIG BIG DIFFERENCE is Ong Teng Chong and Devan Nair were in Office but rendered impotent politically. Now, TKL wants political appointment to empower his authority, irony.

Having said the above, my conclusion is, be one in the (Singapore)Cabinet or out of it, history has proven there (was) is little any local Robinhood can do to change the political landscape. HOWEVER, ANY INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF ROBINHOODS SHOULD BE WELCOME.

GIVE TAN KIN LIAN OUR SUPPORTS!

My view of this man was influenced by his fallout with Mr Chiam See Tong.
Not a man I will entrust my future in.

Hey TOC, thank you for this article, but no thanks for misquoting Tan Kin Lian without checking with him.

I would love to read a good criticism of the Workers Party here too! About their ineffectiveness, silence and what many think is their co-option by the PAP as an “approved opposition”.

Oh and please throw in their distasteful name-calling antics such as calling another opposition party a “mad dog”.

Hi Patriot (#39)

Thank you for your positive statements.

During my 30 years with NTUC Income, I have to stay away from “negative politics” as it would be incompatible with my job. Also, there is a close relationship between the NTUC and PAP that restrict me from expressing my views.

I do have a record of doing “positive things”, e.g. to help people who are retrenched, to provide relief loans to policyholders, etc. Even so, I have been criticised in some quarters for extending beyond the “core business”.

I do not wish to be anti-anything. I only want to be pro-”what is good and right”. I hope that people will see me in this light.

TKL.
What you did was good and right.
I respect you for your integrity to do what you believe to be right.

The SDP is a “finished politically” Party. Why project them to be “heroes”? They will not be accepted by majority of Singaporeans no matter how much howlings, stampings of feet and raising of flags? This Party was full of promises and hope under founder CST. But was spoilt, corroded and rotten to the core under the present group of “idiot” politicians mastering and vying over their “ideals”. What the hack? These grp of “idiots” are still unawaken, unrealistic to this day. They do not understand that Singaporeans do not accept them and not even sympathized with them especially the way they behaved in public. They should count themselves “lucky” as they are able to be put on trials for all the unbecoming behaviours. In other countries, especially the ‘red’ one, they are already decapitulated, “hanjo pucho” and officially “make” to disappear from the scene.

Kevin.
Great piece of write up.

“After years of negative reporting by the local media, the public standing of SDP seems to be permanently marred in the eyes of some Singaporeans” – I cannot disagree more…. brainwashing, could aptly describe this.. Not that I am pro SDB but my earlier views of the SDP and CSJ, and as you indicate “in Singaporeans seems to be permanently marred ..”.

Being overseas, and access to news from other media has helped.. balanced this a bit. What is reported may not be what it is.. ST has shown in various cases of their reporting, even in recent times, to have poor jounalistic quality, accuracy and journalists whose reporting are much to to be desired.

The Straits Times has always been a pro-government propoganda machine. It has never been a media that provides unbaised news. Letters to the fourum are not printed, and if printed are usually pro-government letters, otherwise will usually be censored, edited which in cases distort the actual meaning of the letters. It is therefore not surprising that the ST is out to increase the obstacles for the SDP by printing unflattering materials, or information skewed towards what they want the readers to read – LKY has mnetioned before.. our media is to print what we (possibly LKY himself) want the public to read. With the times of the internet, this has slowloy changed. The current government do not want SDP or CSJ, or any opposition to succeed. What better way than to print proganda materials for the government and discrediting materials for anyone who is a potnetial challenge to the authority. Have you ever read any news from the ST that is unflattering to LKY? I cannot imagine if the ST has the balls to to this.

“Since Dr Chee was appointed as the Secretary-General of SDP in 1993, it remains debatable whether his confrontationist approach has yielded tangible results.”

Perhaps the TOC can do some balanced reporting for the opposition members since we are evidently not going to get this from the ST and mainstream media.

Since the ST is the mainstream media where thousands of households subscribe.. the impact is still there as most of these people who subscribe still believe in the news fro the ST. I have stopped subscribing to the ST a long long time ago, and each time reading any news from the ST with a major discount on the accuracy of the information. Most online editions of news are free. The ST charges subscription. A such, I seldom if ever read the ST unless someone happens to have a copy. Why pay to read propoganda. Perhaps they should pay the citizens for reading their propoganda.

“Former NTUC Income chief, Mr Tan Kin Lian is by far, the most successful organiser in attracting record breaking numbers to the Speakers’ Corner, and advocating justice for unwitting investors who have invested in complex structured products especially those linked to the collapsed Lehman Brothers.”

It appears that Singaporeans are more interested in affairs of the pocket.. and perhaps have not matured to be more concern about human rights and even each individual rights in Singapore, most rights of which have been taken away, and appear to be come normal for Singaporeans.

“Of late, the public outreach process has all but stopped as the SDP and some of its stalwart supporters had been besieged by a series of charges and lawsuits. With hefty compensation sums awarded to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in recent defamation lawsuits, the SDP faces possible bankruptcy and deregistration as a political party.”

What better way than to silence the opposition and their supporters – bankrupt them. There is no longer any need to detain them for decades. Bankrupting them will move them out of the way to be eligible for paliament or the elections.