If this is not another dishonest post from the Bear in
desecrating a Member from the Alternative Parties by back-stabbing
him without giving that person any course to defend
himself.
Over the last one year, if you have the gall to press home your
insulting views towards CSJ, why will you not hit the headlines by
doing it in his face at a Public Forum ?
If deriding CSJ as an ''attention whore'' - does it make
you any better as a cute and cuddly harmless Bear
?
Or should the truth be said that you are no more then
a dishonest lying political whore - acting as a fifth
columnist - lurking between the threads to insert your sly
remarks that suggest it is useless to be
anti-establishment, and at the same time making
sly disparages at the image of the Alternative
Parties.
Against your own advise, you will occassionally inject some
hypocritical dosage of anti-establishment remarks that you
hope will keep your image as a political neutral.
In robbertteh's thread - “Political control stratagem to
depoliticize the people”. you made a sly effort at
attempting to deflate robbertteh's piece to arouse the political
interest of participants in this SC - which under most
circumstances anyone will see it as innocuous act from an
inocuous commentator, until and unless one is concious to the
trend in your consistent mischief.
With your analogy of
choice described as ''between the MIW and the
opposition is like choosing the Iron Maiden and the Torture
Rack'' - have you considered your position as a
''Third Instrument of Discouragement'' to be selected from the
vast array of tools in the Ancient Chinese Torture Chamber
?
Do we need your 'Wet
Blankets' around to stifle the new ambers, when you are
only capable of wetting yourself in bed at the sight of the ambers
?
now... think about
this.
What is it with you with your continuous effort
- done with such consistent diligence - to perpetuate a
lie about CSJ, CST and the SDP - even when you have
been debunked on at least two previous occassions in
2007 ?
Did CSJ backstabbed CST and hijacked the SDP from CST ?
Was CST acting as a mentor to CSJ - and groomed CSJ -
or was CSJ recruited by SDP Chairman Ling How Doong in 1991 as
a result of being pushed by the general dissatisfaction
from the SDP Execo with CST's lack lustre performance -
in being reluctant and ineffective - in Parliament since he
won his first election in 1984 ?
In the 1992 GRC By-Election at Marine Parade - CSJ led the
SDP in increasing the popular vote to 27.8% - {the PAP GRC
took 72.9%} - when in the 1991 General Election the SDP had only
received 22.8%, and the PAP took 77.2%}.
This startling result from Goh Chok Tong's constituency was seen
as a potential threat if a University Lecturer can destabilise the
constituency of a PAP Stalwart - and if more lecturers or similar
professionals should follow CSJ in taking a political plunge.
This 1992 By-Election shock started the wheels in motion to
cut CSJ down to size, with his NUS Faculty Head - Dr Vassoo, {who
is a PAP elite and whom CSJ decline an invitation from Vassoo to
join the PAP} - digging up a one year old transport claim for taxi
fare reimbursement to CSJ's field trip as part of his NUS research
work.
Dr Vassoo had already approved the reimbursement one year
earlier, but after the 1992 By-election - took issue with the
amount that CSJ had claimed in his travel voucher, with the
disputed amount being less then $2.00 - between the
amount paid and the amount that Dr Vassoo claimed should have been
the correct fare.
One will have to question the brilliance in Dr Vassoo retracting
his approval one year later to dispute a fare difference of less
than $2.00 - which in all circumstances will have to be different
fares considering the taxi route taken, the
condition of the traffic at different times of the day, or
different days of the week.
Still the charges of dishonesty was pushed, and Dr Vassoo sued
CSJ for libel - from his statements that
suggest Vassoo was dishonest in making the charges at CSJ.
The second charge of dishonesty levelled at CSJ was also
from an reimbursement already paid some time prior
to the 1992 By-Election, when CSJ claimed for postage costs in
mailing his dissertation to an approved US
University that had also included research papers done by
his wife - which CSJ claimed is partially contributing to
his total work - and was approved by the receiving US
university as this was common practise at that tertiary level
of research work.
The dispute was over Dr Vassoo claim that he was not
advised of this matter by CSJ, and resulted in the charges of
dishonesty being raised for spending NUS funds to mail his wife
dissertation for assessment overseas.
As a neutral observer, one need only ask 'how did Dr Vassoo come
to know of the contents after the 1992 By-Election, when the
parcel had already left Singapore, and CSJ had already been
reimbursed for the postage costs ?
The rest is history as printed in the Wikipedia, and Chiam
See Tong has all the rights to make amendments if he has any
dispute with the recorded events.
With the picture straightened, one will need to ask
what your agenda as the Bear - in consistently
maulng CSJ dead body, as well as sabotaging the efforts
of everyone by pouring cold water on any efforts to widen
the political experience in this SC ?
Have you contributed anything of substance when you
have been observed to be devoid of any thoughts, except
to sneakily shoot your silent torpedoes and lay your contact
mines to disparage others who have more courage than you in
speaking their minds openly.
A whore has at least done a more honest service, what have you
done except to become a political carpet beggar.
Is grabbing attention going to give you any weapon to
fight? Or at least grabbing attention by deliberately going against
the law?
If going against the law is what you do to give me another
option, I would rather not have it at all. What constructive plans
has he laid? He fights, for the wrong reasons with the worst
ways.
If I'm a parent, the best gift would be a stable country with
nothing to fear and the worst complaint would be that the exams are
too tough, and the opposition is incumbent.