“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.

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.

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”.

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!

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

(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.