Political filmmaker Martyn See reviews that historical 2006 televised debate between MM Lee Kuan Yew and the post 65′ers.
During the run-up to the 2006 General Elections, Mediacorp’s Channel News Asia aired a 50 minute-long programme entitled “Why My Vote Matters.” It featured a dialogue session between Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and a selected panel of post 65-ers.
Televised debates with PAP leaders are extremely rare. Older Singaporeans would have to cast their minds back to the mid-1980s when Select Commitee hearings such as the amendments to the Legal Professions Act were beamed into their living rooms. It had reportedly featured the then Law Society President Francis Seow jousting with then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, with cameo appearances by young lawyers Teo Soh Sung and Tang Fong Har. Two years after the programme was aired, Teo and Tang were detained under the ISA for an alleged “Marxist conspiracy” to subvert the Government. Seow was also arrested a year later.
Throughout the latter half of the 1980s to the mid 1990s, televised political debates did make recurring appearances, most notably with the live Parliamentary proceedings and other Select Commitee enquiries, including a rare face-off on the cost of living, which featured SDP’s Chee Soon Juan versus PAP’s George Yeo. And there was a particular memorable hearing on the Elected Presidency Bill, when a law lecturer named Walter Woon held his own against a panel of ministerial heavyweights including the then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong. By the mid-1990s, ‘Live in Parliament’ and other Select Commitee hearings were eased off the air, sporadically appearing only as heavily-edited spots during the nightly news broadcasts.
It is in this context that the airing of this 2006 debate makes for such a rare milestone event in Singapore’s television history.
On hindsight, there are questions one would ask of the station’s executive producers and the Prime Minister’s Office. Why did they see the need to conduct such a televised dialogue? Were they hoping to win the young voters over by allowing the octogenarian to remind them of PAP’s accomplishments? Were they hoping that the young 65ers’ would be so in awe of the MM that they would capitulate? And why entitle the show “Why My Vote Matters” when half the population of this country have not and will probably not be able to vote, given the number of uncontested seats since the 1980s? Add to that, it was Lee Hsien Loong’s first General Elections as the Prime Minister, so why didn’t he take the hot seat instead of his father?
Presumptions and motives aside, this televised debate makes for compelling viewing, and some startling revelations, chief of which was how the post 65-ers went straight for the jugular and tabled questions on the uneven playing field, particularly of the GRC system, and on occasions even interrupted the MM. Older Singaporeans conditioned to deference towards Lee would have been appalled at such disrespect shown to the ‘founding father’.
One young 65er who stood out was journalist Ken Kwek of the Straits Times’ political desk. Kwek had pinned Lee to the ropes on a survey he had done about political fear. But in a reversal of role, Lee shot back, probing Kwek to disclose the names of his sources.
Having watched this again on Google video, I found several illuminating moments. I leave marked timecodes of them but I’ll leave it to you to make your own conclusions.
(Ken Kwek has since left the Straits Times. He is currently a playwright and had written the screeplay to the local film The Blue Mansion.)
————-
1:47 : On why there are many PAP MP’s who have never contested.
2:06 : On why “there isn’t much of a fight.”
3:55 : On why the need for GRCs. It’s for racial minority representation.
4:33 : When pointed out by Ken Kwek that PAP’s minority candidates had indeed won in single seats prior to implementation of GRC system, Lee replied , “That was with the PAP in complete control. That generation voted for the PAP.” There was a pause. Lee seemed unsure of how to continue. But was interrupted by another question. This is probably the biggest Freudian slip by Lee that the GRC system was implemented for a different reason other than for minority represenatation.
4.55 : Voting are “basic, visceral, emotional biases.”
8:47 : Potong Pasir and Hougang “have to wait at the end of the queue.”
8:57 : Lee asks, “Does any government help the opposition to displace itself?”
10:05 : On eliminating the opposition.
11.10 : On fear of voting against the PAP.
12:04 : No level playing field anywhere.
12:42 : We can “guess” but we don’t know who voted against us.
13:07 : The grilling of Ken Kwek begins here. You name the voters who are afraid.
13:26 : I started as a cross-examiner. You name them.
13:45 : Kwek : Why should I name them?
13:55 : More cross-examination by Lee on Kwek.
15:10 : We have said categorically, “The vote is secret.”
16:11 : “I allowed my grandchildren to speak back to me but from time to time..I put them down.”
17:45 : I built up my base from one single seat in 1959.
18:56 : We want a fair media.
19:10 : Where is the opposition’s “substance?”
22:14: GRCs does the opposition good.
23:22 : I’ve never said that the opposition is unnecessary.
24:52 : Is the PAP insecure about losing?
25:22 : On why the government disallows political podcasts and blogging.
27:18 : Emotional attachment to nation via right to vote is an “unfounded thesis.”
27:15 : “The fact that we are not challenged is a strong mandate.”
32:44 : There is no political apathy.
33:35 : The definition of politics equals jobs, home, medicine, education, future.
34:40 : In the 50s and 60s, Singapore was “in a state of agitation everyday.”
36:50 : Once the PAP goes soft, it will be displaced.
36:39 : Our candidates have competence, integrity.
38:10 : There is a databank here (points to his head).
38:40 : Would you like me to retire from politics?
39:56 : Do you not think my son has a mind of his own?
41:00 : I’ll be sad if your generation wants me to retire.
44:04 : “If I’m arrogant, would I be talking to you?”
Hmmmm…isn’t he…even then, resting on his laurels???
One of them was right to say “I think you still can contribute out of politics.”
I would have asked “Why can’t you retire gracefully especially when you still have to retire when you finally kick the bucket one of these days ?”.
a floundering father he is! just as PAP is floundering amidst all the screw-ups since the last election…
:P
Glad to see our youngster still dare to voice out
Very soon we will see changes….
This is a brilliant blueprint for any opposition to contest n win the next elections. Nevermind the GRCs n the deposits n all. where are the ideas that will displace this govt. the electorate isn’t stupid. They hear n see wht the opposition can come up with. and frankly it’s always the same stuff(i hope i’m wrong for the next election) freedom of speech, GRCs, ministerial salaries. if the oppostion displaces the govt in the next election thru a contest of ideas and idealogy(alt sme argue this has been replaced by pragmatisim) all of its bugbears can be changed overnite. they can move to abolish the ISA, repeal the media laws etc etc. so it’s abt time the opposition pulls up its socks and earn their votes.
Hats off to the young interviewers and especially to Ken. It’s shocking some of the things that MM Lee. This man is a bully.
Sorry… missed out the word “said”. The thinking of MM Lee about the opposition, the media and about race is revealing here. This is not a great man. He is a power hungry dictator.
09.00 – MM LKY – “When they lost Kelantan and Trengganu..Mahathir stopped the oil funds going to the states…”
09.11 – MM LKY – “you mean to tell me that in America and Britain they will give development funds to all constituencies equally ?”
**Why did MM follow Mahathir’s method of mistreatment towards the States controlled by Alternative Political Party – instead of the US method of Federal Funding to States held by the Alternative Political Parties ?**
Trengganu MB crisi – Follow the Money Trail
http://anilnetto.com/accountability/trengganu-mb-crisis-more-than-meets-the-eye/
**Clearly, MM did not familiarise himself with the relationship between the US Federal Government and the State Government.**
http://www.fact-index.com/g/go/government_of_the_united_states.html
10.50 Mabel Lee – “fear to vote against the PAP.”
11.00 MM LKY – “Are you fearful to vote against the PAP ?”
**It is clear that everyone was too polite to state the obvious…and push MM into the corner**
11.10 MM LKY – “Why ? How will we know that you vote against the PAP ?”
12.11 Lee Ching Wern – “How will the PAP know who we voted for ?”
12.30 MM LKY – “we can guess from our campaigning and house to house visits – but we won’t know who comprises that 60 per cent…right”
12.40 Ken Kwek – you don’t need that to strike fear….
12.55 Ken Kwek said “WE talked to a hundred voters” –
** Why does MM LKY insist that Ken said that “I spoke to a hundred person and they are all afraid….”
THE TAPE SHOWED THAT KEN KWEK DID NOT SAY THAT HE ALONE SPOKE TO A HUNDRED…
Clearly MM LKY was aggressive to nail Ken Kwek – for basically being simplistic in arriving at a false conclusion based on the preferred extension of an unclear reply from the poll conducted.**
15.00 – MM LKY – “that is the point I am making, you’re in the media, you’re in the Straits Time…you’re purveying an unnecessary falsehood, we’ve said categorically – THE VOTE IS SECRET.
**This issue concerning the ‘fear to vote against the PAP’ is turning into pure childishness.
Singaporeans should know that THE VOTE IS SECRET – up to the point that the Pro Alien Party will not seek out to know how each Singaporean has voted.**
Dear Disgusted,
You are wrong about him.He is a great man.The only thing he is lacking is Grace and Wisdom.
26.35 – Alvina Teh – “I think that it is not just not only important in itself to have these blogs and things..but the implications they have for building a civil society – granted that we lack that – and the mindset in Singapore seems to be such that I will mind my own business, make my money, and leave the politics to the politicians, and in that sense – the implications are scary for nation building, when you talk about nation building ’cause you have people with the sentiments that they do not really care about the core of the nation as to who govern my country….so when people do not care about having a voice about who governs the country – how can then you build a sentiment that bond them emotionally to the nation, to build the nation, to give them a sense of emotional connection, engagement with the country?”
27.18 – MM LKY – “you’re putting a thesis which I find completely unfounded. You mean to tell me that what’s happening in Thailand or in the Philippines is bonding the people into a nation or dividing them ?”
**Did MM LKY miss the point ?
When citizens have no passion for POLITICS – which MM LKY had intially described as ALL ISSUES TO DO WITH LIFE – should he not be concerned ?**
27.40 – Hong Xin Yi – “Bearing in mind the unlevel playing field, bearing in mind the numerous walkovers, all the restrictions regarding podcasts and etc…how does when a PAP win – when it happens – signal a strong mandate for the party ?”
27.46 – MM LKY – “The very fact that we are not challenged is a pretty strong mandate….”
**The fact that the Alternative Political Parties do not enter Tanjong Pagar is not that they will not dare to challenge MM but that they know that they will be FIXXED.
Should the Alternative Political Parties accept MM’s challenge and take “a shot” at the next election to contest in Tanjong Pagar ?**
29.10 – Yam Yu Jian – “I believe that the lack of competition is due to a lack of a level playing field”
30.20 – MM LKY – “….there is no fair level playing field between political parties….I had the whole media against me…..why am I so strong against the media ?…because they try to put us down…they twisted everything I said… that I was a communist – when they knew I wasn’t….the Media is not setting the agenda for Singapore…if you want to set the agenda, you must put your stakes in and say come out…you are not setting the agenda surreptitiously…creating this issue, creating that issue….any misdeed, any misdoing by any officer, any government -bring it out…that’s how you keep the government clean….”
**Clearly, there is a disconnect between what LKY is saying with the reality.
Is he and the PAP not taking leaf out from the Communist-Marxist Political Methods in ONE-Party Supremacy ?
The media in the 1950s knew about LKY’s agenda then, and we are now seeing the complete revelation of a Communist Police State function under the guise of democracy, and operating a capitalist economic system – IDENTICAL to that of Communist China and the New Russia with largely the same Communist Politicians in NEW DISGUISE.**
32.34 – Mabel Lee – “Are you not worried though given that there is political apathy amongst the young…
32.38 – MM LKY – “How can you talk about political apathy…you are so agitated by all – but there is no apathy…”
32.44 – Mabel Lee – “but that is us, but that is us…for every one of us, there are ten more out there who don’t know…(MM mumbling ‘No, no, no, no’}…I have seen people who are in Polytechnics and Universities…they don’t know who their Prime Minister is…they don’t know who you are…{Alvine Teh interjecting: “and they don’t find it important to know}….and they really don’t care….I mean given the situation, aren’t you afraid that this would impact your party’s renewal chances in the long run…{MM mumbling “no, no, no,”}….say ten..twenty years down the road ?”
33.05 – MM LKY – “you assume that politics is about elections and election contests….I do not see politics that way….I think the best definition of politics is what I found in the American Dictionary, which said ‘the art or science of government or governance of a country…and how it runs its internal and external relations’. Now that is a very abstract concept. Translated in real life, it means how is my life affected by the government. Do I have a job, do I have a home, do I have medicine when I need it, do I have enough recreational facilities, is there a future for my children, will they be educated, will there be a chance to advance yourself. If you do not have any of these things…you are going to find agitation.
34.33 – MM LKY – “You have no recollection of this because you were not born…..but in the 1950s and the 1960s – Singapore was in a state of agitation every day…..the go slows, the strikes…why ?
No homes….half the children were not in schools….14% unemployment and under employment…pirate taxi drivers…no jobs..so I take a car, no license, no insurances, you take your chances, come in and I give you a ride…fifty cents and twenty cents and so on…hawkers, all over the place. Today, over forty years, we have transformed it, because assiduously we have attended to the POLITICS OF LIFE. Thats what it is about.
35.40 – MM LKY – “What is the future – IF – I can have another political party – you can have another political party – to look after you the way the PAP has, I say my job is done…finish. I can go home, sit back, and read the books I want to read.”
**LKY has shown his expertise in creating high drama to con those who were not living through the 1950s and the 1960s.
Was unemployment rate hitting 14% then, or is LKY again proving his political peers to be correct in their views that LKY is an expert in creating events and crisis to show his own worth ?
Some of the agitation then were reported to be caused by the government to allow arrests to be made.
Investigation to the Hock Lee bus riot found that it was the shady work by the Lim Yew Hock government, which allowed him to move ahead with his agenda.
Were there strikes and go slow every day during the 1960s ?
Clearly, this is another lie – as it would have displaced Singapore from even competing with Hong Kong in the 1950s and the 1960s.
If ‘POLITICS IS LIFE’ – MM LKY should be more concerned that younger Singaporeans have turned cynically apolitical – and the future for Singapore as a Nation is threatened when the spirit of nationalism is replaced by materialism.
He talk about suing Jaya, why he has NOT sue the IBA. Why just sue the messengers?
1. Aug 2005, Lee Kuan Yew said must sue
Asia Time
Aug 2005
The Making of Singapore
IME: Couldn’t you have been lighter on the opposition—not sue?
LEE: No. If you don’t sue, repetition of the lie [makes it credible]. It will be believed …
2. July 2008 IBA publish report on concern of independence of judicicary of Singapore.
July 08, 2008
08/07/2008
Report by IBAHRI express concern about limitations of freedoms of expression in Singapore
In a report released today, the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) expressed concern about limitations on the freedoms of expression, assembly, and the press, and of the independence of the judiciary in Singapore. The report, Prosperity versus individual rights? Human rights, democracy and the rule of law in Singapore, makes 18 recommendations (pages 67-68), which the IBAHRI urges the Singapore Government to implement as a matter of priority.
3. Sept 2008, Singapore govt through its Ag sue the Wall street and Dow Jones for reporting the IBA report.
Why they dont’ sue IBA?
Singapore to sue Wall Street Journal for contempt of court
Tajikistan News.Net
Friday 12th September, 2008 (IANS)
The Singapore government plans to sue the publishers and owner of the Asian edition of the Wall Street Journal (WSJA) for two articles questioning the impartiality and integrity of the Singapore judiciary.
Singapore attorney general’s office Thursday issued a statement saying it has sought permission from the court to institute contempt of court proceedings against the newspaper’s owner, Dow Jones Publishing Company (Asia) Inc., for articles published in the newspaper that ‘impugn the impartiality, integrity and independence of the Singapore judiciary’.
………The other editorial commented on a report by the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute alleging executive interference in the judiciary…….
4. Sept 2009. LI report to UN Human rights…reported in SDP website. Is the PAP foing to sue the SDP and LI for
reproting and also sue the UN for listening? Let’s wait a see.
Sept 10, 2009
Singapore Democrats
The Liberal International (LI) has submitted a written statement to the United Nations’ Human Rights Council. The statement cites human rights violations in several countries including Singapore and Burma.
Singapore
The International Bar Association (IBA) produced a report in July 2008 after it held one of its annual conferences in Singapore. In that report, the IBA stated that:
“The judiciary in Singapore has a good international reputation for the integrity of their judgments when adjudicating commercial cases that do not involve the interests of People’s Action Party (PAP) members or their associates. However, in cases involving PAP litigants or PAP interests, there are concerns about an actual or apparent lack of impartiality and/or independence, which casts doubt on the decisions made in such cases.”
Mr Ngiam Tong Dow in an interview:
Unequivocally yes, Singapore will survive SM Lee but provided he leaves the right legacy. What sort of legacy he wants to leave is for him to say, but I, a blooming upstart, dare to suggest to him that we should open up politically and allow talent to be spread throughout our society so that an alternative leadership can emerge.So far, the People’s Action Party’s tactic is to put all the scholars into the civil service because it believes the way to retain political power forever is to have a monopoly on talent. But in my view, that’s a very short term view. It is the law of nature that all things must atrophy. Unless SM allows serious political challenges to emerge from the alternative elite out there, the incumbent elite will just coast along. At the first sign of a grassroots revolt, they will probably collapse just like the incumbent Progressive Party to the left-wing PAP onslaught in the late 1950s. I think our leaders have to accept that Singapore is larger than the PAP
Right, like the PAP did not imprison its’ former activists as well as launch Operation Coldstone which terrified all those faith practitioners who help the poor and elderly. Didn’t all of these acts help stoke the rumours that “if you go against the government(by doing or saying something they take offense with), you will disappear at night”? Or the parent’s threats to the children “if you do anything stupid or do this again, the government/ISD will come after you?”
About Mabel Lee:
MM Lee can’t accept that the younger population doesn’t know who he is and doesn’t care to? He really should try to keep in touch with reality.
Many of my peers probably have no idea who the PAP consists of, only vote for them in return for more handouts/better upgrading/etc. and some would not mind changing their tune for a better life. Then again, most of them are considering quitting life in Singapore but a pity they won’t be able to. Many countries are already shutting their doors on most types of immigrants.
The question was that many perceive the PAP as arrogant.
44:04 : “If I’m arrogant, would I be talking to you?”
so is mm implying he himself is the PAP?
When someone rule the land for more then 4 decades with his family. He will never give up. His family too much to gain.
PUT SIMPLY:
The UNTOLD TRAGEDY for SINGAPORE(the Nation) and SINGAPOREANS(the People):
SINGAPORE is governed by a big bunch of FREAKING clueless/useless/hopeless CONTROL-FREAK Muddle-headed Million-dollar Ministers — who cannot even tackle the problem of FREAK FLOODS !!!
Half the time he was just contradicting himself :-
… the Media is not setting the agenda for Singapore …
… the very fact that we are not challenged is a pretty strong mandate …
… how can you talk about political apathy … you are so agitated by all – but there is no apathy …
Basically, he was just involved in a words twisting exercise, with some help from his normal arm twisting tactics.
That’s how I see it. And that’s what he is good at !
I’ve just finished watching it. This video shows clearly that he is a wily and seasoned politician who uses all the tricks of the trade, and more, to browbeat his opponents into submission. I have seen this guy at work for more than 50 years and I know that even his laughter, upon being asked a difficult question, is fake. It is an automatic nervous response that he has practiced to perfection to buy time for him to come up with an appropriate answer and at the same time to give the questioner the impression that he has asked a stupid/inappropriate question. Notice how many times he reminded his audience that he started life as a cross-examiner? It’s his trick to intimidate, that he will put you on the stand and you will be grilled mercilessly for saying certain things. And he did indeed do it to Ken Kwek right there in the video for all to see. He was not even apprehensive that he might appear to be a bully to the viewing audience. That’s what kind of person he really is.
My blood boils when I watch and listen to him. He really gets my goat!
Lee asks, “Does any government help the opposition to displace itself?”
He is right, but does any government create an unfair environment for the alternative parties.
The grilling of Ken Kwek begins here. You name the voters who are afraid.
Kwek : Why should I name them?
We have said categorically, “The vote is secret.”
Since he knows that the vote is secret, why ask?
The PM next door just said to the youngs that government knows all is outdated.
Sad to see that TOC is using the ageist terms “post 65-ers” and “pre 65-ers”. Singaporeans are Singaporeans, period.
Dear MM Lee,
GRC IS UNFAIR.
If you (PAP then opposition), in the 1959 elections were to be introduced GRC, would agree to what you said to yourself or disagree?
It is clear MM Lee that your concerns are partisan to PAP and not of the concerns of the people of SIngapore anymore.
SORRY NO VOTE for ruling party this coming GE.
“Does any government help the opposition to displace itself?”
It the people who should decide in a democracy. However by changing the rules of the games, the incumbent may possibly “hijack” the intention of the electorate (to help the opposition). The electorate is supposed to be the boss not the government.
//The grilling of Ken Kwek begins here. You name the voters who are afraid.//
maybe when it comes to statistics and survey, we need the one who makes / signs the report to name all the people going into the count.
It was billed as a debate but it turned
out to be Inquisition II. For his effort and youthful enthusiasm Ken Kwek was steamrolled into almost total silence. I don’t know the reason(s) he left journalism but this episode could have played a part in his decision. It must have left a very bitter aftertaste long after the event.
Great job, LKY!
Political fear and apathy in Singapore?
“I’m afraid I don’t care.”
preston loon, 30 August 2010
MM is a great man, how that is arrived depends on who’s perspective its viewed from. Genghis Khan too was a great man, but he is also remembered for his military campaigns that made the Mongol empire one of the furtherest reaching.
MM’s brillance is without a doubt, but to live up to the ideals of being called 1 of the great founding fathers, it could well be an aspiration he could never realise. if he is a great dad, LHL would have surpassed his standards, no need SM & MM to babysit loh…
Dalai Lama:
“To say that humility is an essential ingredient in our pursuit of spiritual transformation may seem to be at odds with what I have said about the need for confidence. But there is clearly a distinction to be made between valid confidence or self-esteem, and conceit – which we can describe as an inflated sense of importance, grounded in a false image of self.”
A great man who lacks grace and wisdom?
is it possible?
Looking at the PAP, I worry who will succeed PM Lee, most of MPs are drafted to do a job, and some did a very poor job indeed.
Recently the YOG showcased their capabilities and weaknesses. Dumping dollars for fame and ill treatment of the volunteers.
MM Lee, SM Goh and President Nathan should hasten their exit and PM Lee needs to create some difficulties for himself and the Party to grow stronger.
He should immediately remove the GRC and high barriers of entry and restrictions on opposition parties campaigning and promote growth of information by the opposition and citizens to ensure the best ideas are adopted. He is leading the PAP to atrophy by protectionist measures on building credible alternative candidates and hurting Singaporeans and the future of Singapore as well as PAP itself.
PAP does not have a monopoly of ideas and talents but by hanging on to their power they are putting undue suffering and hardship to the people and delaying the true spirit of Singaporeans and progress for all.
Thanks for posting this video to rekindle past memories. I remember back then when watching on TV, I can’t help but felt very uneasy with the verbal proceedings that ensue after Ken’s episode. While I admire LKY for his many achievements either as an individual or as leader of the team, I was disappointed with this style of engaging the young and the public at large. His many remarks suggest that he is not bothered by people’s perception but instead employs a highly scientific approach even in such public discourse. I shudder to think what he is going to do to the economically disadvantaged when they show up at his meet-the-people sessions. I’m afraid they might walk away feeling like criminals because they will be exposed naked on all the wrong things they did in their lives through his merciless interrogation, rendering their requests for public aids unjustified. Or does he do meet-the-people sessions at all?
It is common knowledge that intention does not equal perception. And human being human, we respond to perception and not intention. If the public feels that the government is unfair, they are merely sharing their perception. It is what I see and feel about events that occur, as simple as that. Perception in itself is not any less truer than the intention of the government. So why LKY appears to be oblivious to this simple logic is beyond me. What he seems to be alluding to, is that if you don’t perceive an event exactly as it was first intended, you are flawed and needs to be challenged and proven wrong. To me, this is a philosophy I cannot accept.
This version is censored. There was a moment when LKY said in desperation, “The PAP is not here to perpetuate our rule forever,” to the obviously skeptical group. The disbelieving and incredulous looks on the youngsters were priceless. Unfortunately my copy was lost when the hard disk crashed.
MM and SM should resign immediately and offer their seats to SDP and RP. The PM needs some people to help him think how to fix the economy and make him think faster.
Thank you again, Martyn, for bringing this to us.
Another eye-opener.
@ is it possible?.
Yes,it is possible.Look at it this way:Not all great men possess grace and wisdom.Inversely,not all ordinary people do not have grace and wisdom.Agree?
Lee Kuan Yew talks about racial bias in voting. Let me tell you what my bias is.
I’ll vote for the person, minority, woman or otherwise as long as the person is not part of the PAP!
it’s interestin that the media themselves are aware of their own self-censorship. could this be a reason that not many journalists stay in the job? of this group of journalists how many are left?
i wouldn’t be surprised if all of them have left. so the media perpetuates that it doesn’t necessarily believe in what they report on all the time and while there is no media w/o political slants(even in the UK n US) too much of itis centred on presenting a view that is lopsided n hence the fear of the New Media.
Thanks for the sharing, Martyn.
Dialogue? more like, congratulate me, if u please, you ungrateful generation..
preston loon 30 August 2010
Do you still call a man lacking in Grace and Wisdom great.
//preston loon 31 August 2010
@ is it possible?.
Yes,it is possible.Look at it this way:Not all great men possess grace and wisdom.Inversely,not all ordinary people do not have grace and wisdom.Agree?//
Certainly not. Taking mm’s case as an example and since he is the subject of this thread, for all the good that he has accomplished he could have been great, albeit within the geographical confines of this island. However, we need to offset his account with the bad/mediocre/evil that he has done as a result of the lack of grace and wisdom among other worthwhile attributes.
Now that he is well into his sunset years we can sum him up as “could and should have been great but for his
all too glaring weaknesses”. And, as you said so yourself, grace and wisdom are two of them.
This is an amazing video and at the same time it’s painful to watch. Mm is like the bull in the proverbial china shop; he charges in and mows down everything and everyone who disagrees with him.
So much for grace and wisdom. And finesse.
Strip a “great man” of grace, wisdom, humility, humanity, fairness, justice, and all the endearing attributes common to great men in history, and what do you have left?
An insecure bully who is afraid of his own shadow, that’s what!
Martyn,
Any idea which of these journos still in SPH, mediaCorp.
Ken kwek quit and so did the gal Cheng Wern. Anyone else you are aware of?
Lee die die had to stay in power, otherwise all their dirty laundry are for the public viewing.
leekingyou aint NO MAN!!!
`PERIOD`
Notice that he said low voters turnouts = people are satisfied with way of life and carry on. He told others not to assume but he assumed this. Contradiction.
The interview merely reflects the political savvy of a master politician rather than a POLITICAL LEADER.
What singaporeans need is a good political leader to lead us all in these tough times and into the the unknown future.
What we need is not mere scholastics,what we need are people with long-sighted vision,wisdom and a bit of compssion.
is that asking for too much?
@Kelly:
Aha, did not know that. Too bad I can’t find the uncensored version anywhere.
The whole panel was deliberately constructed by being very selective when picking the panel members:
- they picked young people: meaning they most likely were not too familiar with local and international politics. So, they will not be able to really counter MM’s Lee remarks except on certain key points like about the GRC system, online censorship and so on.
- I did not see any Indians and apart from that chick in that red shirt and that Malay boy, I doubt there were any other minorities presented.
- All the candidates looked to be quite educated and were probably leading a somewhat comfortable life(some might be from between middle and upper class even). Definitely no blue collar workers who are busy struggling with daily life and not any young people who belong to families staying in 1 to 2 room flats.
The way MM Lee took control of the situation many times:
- a lot of pauses in order to grab people’s attention, gain their focus and to extend his talking time
- how he interrupts people by saying “Let me finish first” in order to gain control of the entire situation and so that he can divert others’ attention to him. This might even allow him to avoid more critical questions.
- usage of very complicated key terms and foreign politics in order to challenge the panel – so they cannot really answer; to confuse them – populist? how many young Singaporeans understand what that really means?; talking about Philippines and other countries – how many of the panel actually understood a bit of what he even was talking about? And I mean in an analytical sense like understanding the entire situation within a country and not grasping some partial facts as portrayed or even represented by media or certain selective books, newspapers or even magazines – and so on. It is a common tactic during debates, to keep throwing in stands and arguments your opponent can’t comprehend, in order to show everyone else how ignorant he is. It also functions as a psychological tactic to try and shut the person up or make him defeat himself or herself by making them stumble when posing counter-arguments.
- keeps repeating himself and using the same themes and arguments as a delay tactic or to even deliberately throw the panel into frustration.
There are many other points which have already been pinpointed by others in this page.
When MM was “demolishing” kevin kuek he stated with characteristic cocksureness that he was right – eventhough he was old he still could remember that kevin had stated “I spoke with over 100 people”. He suggested looking at the recording. I did as he had suggested and it showed that kevin DID NOT say what MM accused him of.
The whole exchange between MM and Kevin Kuek epitomises the malaise now facing singapore. We have a regime that is not only cocksure and arrogant that it is right but the scary part is that it has the might and wherewithal to push through its flawed perceptions.