are you saying that CSJ = Gandhi = Mandela = Chia Thye Poh?

Me disagree with CSJ’s methods, and i’m grandstanding?

wow…i dont even know where to start to counter your argument. anyway, i have nothing more to add to this thread.

Thanks budamax, but i wont be pulled into a discussion based on your logic.

The question of GIC and Temasek’s bad investment in US banks, think no one wanted it this way. every major fund houses incurred losses last year.

personally, i think CSJ should focus on current topics that Singapore need to address. Like topics on how to maintain Singapore’s competitive edge, how to help companies tide this this diffuclt period , how to increase Singapore birth rate etc.

Topic posted for debate should benefit Singapore’s future rather than for the sake of debate.
The questions posted was designed to embarrass George Yeo and PAP, personally i find it unethical to do so

let the people evaluate the views of the two opposing generals and may the best man win.

I agree with you. He’s trying to expose the PAP, and working very hard at it.

But so has TOC, Tan Kin Lian, Leong Sze Hian, Lucky Tan and many other bloggers in recent times.

The late great JBJ was at it since the 80s when he first got into parliament. Francis Seow and Tang Liang Hong were persecuted and banished for doing so. Said Zahari was locked up for 17 years for even thinking about opposing the Man.

He represents a political party. i think he should be doing what political parties do, not raise issues like what our bloggers are already doing. Engaging GY on FB can be done by any of us. If you choose not to, then fine.

But to laud him for being brave for doing so, i’ll refrain from that. He’s just doing what he’s been doing ever since the hunger strike. Thats why i think he’s grandstanding.

Looking at how they can come down hard on Francis Seow and Tang Liang Hong and James Gomez, and let CSJ continue with whatever he’s doing, is a sign to me of how much of a threat the PAP sees CSJ.

anyway, its just my humble opinion. Its happened, lets move on ;-)

“I just think he takes on this grandstand persona only in singapore, for the singapore audience.”

Well, I think you think wrong. Its not whatever persona you want to call it. CSJ must have known by now that the Spore audience won’t go ga ga with this sort of thing after his experiences so why would he do that just for the Spore audeince?

I think CSJ is using any opportunity to expose the PAP, because NOBODY in Spore would do it. NOBODY would dare openly question a Minister with her/his identity known, for reasons you and I know.

I’m here to “learn” and “grow”; including view’s like Aygee that I sometimes disagree. In my opinion, we vote for oppositions or PAP for a reason or reason(s). I am learning to look from his “views”; and hopefully, he can evaluate the merits and flaws of my “view(s)” in the exchange.

I am sure the next generation will. Have we not heard of entrepeneurs who struggled and made it. The same concept applies. But his struggle is of a higher calling.

Are you telling me us asking why the MPs are getting such high pays are all sour grapes? Grow up.

Go check out the payouts for them in previous years and now. You would know what I mean. Are you from the PuPpies?

Any platform that has publicity and readership is a good platform for open debate just like any physical place that frequent by the mass is a good place for spreading message. However the PAP is smart to control all physical space and even come out ridiculous laws to ensure that etc condemn single person’s protest . Hence, any platform that utilize physical space becomes harder for opp party to spread their message and ask question, and even then it becomes less effective for opp party as now the PAPpy is using the police force and camera to create FUD. Therefore using any online popular social media platform such as blog, FB, twitter, etc is the lowest cost yet effective and ‘safest’ way to communicate and engagement for opp party. There is no right or wrong way as long as there is result. If you use a standardized and formal platform, one will never get the answer from the gov because you will always get a same standard and beat around the bush answer.

“we need more platforms for open debate”
Yes, we need more and I presume you means gov opening platform for open debate, but the question is to ask yourself that isn’t that our gov is so pragmatic and self-serving, and only willing to do so if they benefit them and their regime ? It has only show time to time from the answer by the gahmen that everyone get sick hearing their partisan answer (take the recent answer from LIM that indicate no transparency if it does not benefit the gov, TH, GIC, yes, nevermind the citizen.). You need to proof and argue how open more platform will benefit the government. Yes, the government and leegime not the citizen.

So until “more platforms for open debate”, let’s do with whatever platform, physical or online for engagement no matter how incomfortable, ineffective and informal as it may seems to some.

You see, the problem with us is that we still think that parliament is the “ONLY” official way for open debate even though we choose to deny it. We get use to parliament debate in TV ( one-sided with prince and family makng the final verdict) and utube.

Another question how useful will you find debate in platform likeMeetThePeople session, Meet the gahmen’s session , whereby the answer given are model answer already consolidated by Lucky Tan, haha. I am not kidding you when I tell you that as gahmen play it safe all the time (even P65blog now play it safe by using small unknow Pappies to avoid putting tight spot to MP, and removing trace of previous MP’s personal opinion and thought. Everyone non-gullible can see that).

A good thing about having engagement online is that all tachi of the gahmen will be recorded into internet through blog and user account for all to see, and it is free and convenient to access those “evidence”. The gahmen can no longer says that they have discuss issues and solutions in some private “gahmen’s session”.

So let not define the boundary and constraint of what a effective platform is because we doubt we know it ourselves. Yes, certain platform may seem effective and right but then is it practical and accessible by alternative party ?

“to your point, i taking a guess here but its because many PAP politicians dont really want to be politicians in the first place. (which explains the high salary, to induce them to join politics. As for those in Cabinet and their high salaries, well, enough’s been said about it).”

What kind of “politicans” can these people turn out to be if your guess is true? In comparison, do you think they will be better than CSJ/SDP – just seeking your views as a fellow forumer.

And for pragmatic, reasonable view, I do not foresee Chee Soon Juan to be, will be a member of the Government of Singapore.

On balance, I think he does do good for Singaporeans by asking and challenging the Regime for accountability and transparency that most Singaporeans are demanding and expecting from the Authority. At least his calls are much more publicise than that of a lay citizen.

patriot

to your point, i taking a guess here but its because many PAP politicians dont really want to be politicians in the first place. (which explains the high salary, to induce them to join politics. As for those in Cabinet and their high salaries, well, enough’s been said about it).

Also many from the “elitist” model put into place by the govt. that breeds the high-and-mighty attitude that they have. Many are also well-educated, so they have yet another “i’m better than you” attitude.

PAP also has that paternalistic attitude about it, so if one talks back, they get the “How dare you?!” response.

LKY himself has realised that his candidates cannot engage and debate, and his excuse for having NMPs.

Anyway, this high-and-mighty attitude, elitist/technocrat, and their poor ability to engage and communicate, is the result of LKY’s hard approach anyway (i.e. the Machiavellian approach to governing).

You made some bold assertions and criticism/condemnation about CSJ and yet when you are challenged about your criticisms/condemnation, you weasel out.

I repeat what was posted in #126

{Leaving out KJ as he is new, what EXACTLY have Sylvia Lim, Chiam, Low “help change anything or even make a dent in getting any points across”?

And what exactly do you and people of your thinking would like to suggest not only CSJ but other people who don’t fall into the category the power that be deemed fit to be FIXED, should do to gain the support of the lesser mortals……..the tactics, strategy, platform etc.

In any case, this thread is about Minister George Yeo offering to engage netizens on the Internet as a private citizen and CSJ has joined in.

So what’s the beef of those who criticise the person who has accepted to engage the Minister in the latter’s personal capacity as a pte citizen?

I agree with Steve Wu that it is difficult for GY to defend the indefensible.

Incidentally, all should reflect on why our elite Ministers and other office holders from the gahmen want to engage voters on the Internet and yet refuse to be serious in clearing doubts.

As to GY’s reply on the Temasek question, what do foreign goverrment know about Temasek’s actual performance to want to emulate it? Foreigners might be interested to copy Temasek’s SET-UP as Temasek has been able to gain from overcharging by the GLCs, like utilities, telecom, gambling ops etc……as to Temasek’s performance, even Presdient Ong was in the dark.

It is obvious that you are anti-CSJ to the core, in the same vein as the msm and gahmen would want to demonise him.}

…………………………….

As for your #129,

You obviously belong to that approved wayang player the powers that be don’t feel threatened to be FIXED. Not only that it just shows out that your kind of group is just a SHAM……………nothing more than free-loading dimwits. Nothing personal…just my opinion.