Not My SDP - Debunking SDP myth and legends

Will Tan Jee Say form new party?

2011-09-05T23:06:00.000+08:00

The Straits Times

EVEN as the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) restructures its leadership, questions are being raised as to whether its famous former member Tan Jee Say, who quit the SDP to run for president, will rejoin it or form a new party.

Mr Tan himself says he is keeping all options open: 'I'm open to all possibilities. As I've said before, I will listen to my supporters and see what they say.'

During his presidential campaign, Mr Tan was helped by opposition figures such as SDP's Dr Ang Yong Guan and Ms Michelle Lee, and the National Solidarity Party's (NSP) Ms Nicole Seah and Mrs Jeannette Chong-Aruldoss.

When Dr Ang was asked whether he would follow Mr Tan if the latter set up a new party, he was non-committal.

'All of those supporting him have to reflect and think how best to contribute to his party and what role they can play,' he said.

Mrs Chong-Aruldoss and Ms Seah said they would not. The former is NSP vice-president and the latter a member of its executive committee. Ms Lee could not be reached for comment.

Political analyst Derek da Cunha said he would not be surprised if Mr Tan and other opposition figures set up a new party as a vehicle to contest a GRC at the next general election, due by 2016.

'Five or six quality individuals who can get along well with each other forming a 'Dream Team' and going up against the PAP in a GRC would make sense,' he said.

They would, however, need to secure at least 100 volunteers to handle the logistics for such a task, he added.

SDP's new committee under scrutiny

2011-09-05T23:03:00.001+08:00

Tessa Wong - The Straits Times

WHAT does the Singapore Democratic Party's (SDP) election of a new central executive committee (CEC) say about its future direction?

Political observers are divided on this question.

The new CEC, formed two weeks ago, comprises a mix of old and new faces. Mr Jufrie Mahmood, a veteran opposition member, is now its chairman, while Mr Vincent Cheng, a former detainee and newcomer to opposition politics, is vice-chairman.

Civil society activist Vincent Wijeysingha, another newcomer to opposition politics, has been promoted to treasurer.

Mr John Law, another newcomer, fills in Dr Wijeysingha's previous post as assistant treasurer.

Among the old faces: Dr Chee Soon Juan and Mr John Tan remain as secretary-general and assistant secretary-general respectively, and Ms Chee Siok Chin and Mr Mohamed Isa as CEC members.

Former vice-chairman Francis Yong is now a CEC member.

Excluded from the CEC line-up are Dr Ang Yong Guan and Ms Michelle Lee, who were among a number of highly qualified former establishment moderates who recently joined the party to contest the May General Election.

Dr Ang is a psychiatrist and retired army colonel, and Ms Lee a former Monetary Authority of Singapore officer.

The two of them, together with Dr Wijeysingha and Mr Tan Jee Say, formed the SDP's A-team in the General Election and stood in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC. Mr Tan quit the party in July to run for president.

The prominence of these candidates played a part in attracting more young professionals with moderate liberal views to the SDP, both during and after the election.

Dr Ang and Ms Lee were among those in this moderate group, and some speculated that they might take up leadership positions in the SDP.

But the two told The Straits Times that they did not wish to run for the CEC, preferring to be involved in newly set-up subcommittees.

Ms Lee said she also needed more time to concentrate on her family and work. She currently teaches at a private school.

'(The party leaders) discussed with us, and said there was a two-track system. They said they wanted to see how things go. And it's vice versa. We also want to find out where we can best contribute,' said Dr Ang.

SDP secretary-general Chee Soon Juan said that the SDP has seen a 'dramatic expansion' of its ranks, and hence now needs a larger structure to ensure 'a high quality of management across all the party's work streams'.

'As such, capable members are being deployed across a much wider leadership team outside of the CEC,' he said.

He said new members are now holding key positions in subcommittees.

Dr Ang heads a health care advisory panel, and Ms Lee facilitates a fund-raising group. Academic James Gomez coordinates a policy studies subcommittee and Mr Alec Tok, who owns a theatre company, is involved with a training and development subcommittee.

Dr Gomez joined the SDP last year, while Mr Tok joined right before the General Election.

Political observer Alex Au noted that the party appears to be opting for 'stability rather than an abrupt shift' by voting in familiar faces known to be 'steadfast to a certain political standard'.

'There has not been any wholesale change, and I'm not surprised. We have to consider the membership base, where the moderates are probably not that significant in number,' he said.

The SDP declined to reveal membership figures.

Assistant law professor Eugene Tan of the Singapore Management University, however, views the new CEC line-up as a sign that moderate voices are being 'sidelined' in the party.

As this was the first committee elected after the May General Election, it would have been 'a powerful signal' if more moderates occupied CEC positions. But the new line-up 'suggests that the moderate ascendancy during the May General Election was but a false dawn', he said.

In the run-up to the election, the SDP started playing down its erstwhile activist image and projected a more accessible, moderate tone. It also moved away from human rights advocacy and put more emphasis on bread-and-butter issues.

The new CEC line-up shows that a human rights agenda is still central to the party's philosophy, noted political analyst Derek da Cunha.

Mr Au, however, pointed out that, unlike some other SDP members, Dr Wijeysingha and Mr Jufrie, while holding strong views on human rights issues, are not known to advocate public demonstrations.

Dr Wong Wee Nam, a medical doctor who follows opposition politics closely, believes the SDP is willing to continue the change that started before the General Election, and is aiming for 'gradual renewal'.

He said: 'This is not an issue of moderates versus hardcore supporters... I think the SDP is taking a long-term view, because if people are bogged down by day-to-day running of the party, they may not be able to spend time on more important things like socio-economic and health-care programmes, which they have to develop.'

Alex Tan Zhixiang says SDP is "more like selfserving pigs like the PAP"

2011-09-05T22:51:00.003+08:00

Presidential explosion

2011-09-05T22:47:00.000+08:00

The Real Truth about Tan Jee Say

2011-09-05T22:44:00.000+08:00

I quote a letter comment posted by a Singaporean on various online forums.

"TheRealTruth:
August 14, 2011 at 10:23 pm (Quote)

Dear Fellow Singaporeans

In the interest of transparency and in the spirit of being the voice of conscience,
this to correct the false impression that is conveyed in the Sunday Times article about tjs.

Tjs has no moral righteousness, compass or anchor and blows where the winds of opportunity takes him. He quit as PPS when it became apparent that he would not become perm sec. Tjs is driven by greed and selfishness.

After quitting the government, he joined Morgan Grenfell, then Peregrine Bank, Standard Chartered Bank and finally AIB Govett.

When Morgan Grenfell came knocking, tjs jumped at the chance. He promised to bring in much monies from the Malaysian conglomerates which he came into contact with during his tenure at MTI. His results at Morgan Grenfell speak for themselves, tjs did not deliver the monies and his peers soon found that he was a light weight load of hot air.

Tjs had a contributory role in Bank Peregrine’s demise. He did not dispense proper advice that the investment into an Indonesian concern was not viable. Tjs, the person at the site did not do proper due diligence.

At AIB Govett, it was reported that his strength was in policy making. This firm collapsed whilst others survived, obviously tjs’s policies were wrong. This forebodes poorly on the potential for tjs to be EP as at every employment stop he has demonstrated poor judgement. Translate this into safeguarding our nation’s reserves and it will result in disastrous consequences.

Tjs’s next stops at Standard Chartered Bank and Hi Green is also empty of significant contributions. He was forced out of Standard Chartered by his Indian boss.

His claim to be ‘not a lavish man’ is not true. In tjs ‘high flying’ years, tjs openly boasted that his income tax contributions were higher than an average man’s annual income. Tjs aspired to the lifestyle of his successful PAP friends and his banking colleagues. Tjs had his fair share of thoughts about redeveloping his Frankel Avenue house into a mansion.

It is obvious that tjs squandered his wealth on ill conceived and dubious ventures in his empty years. If tjs had prudently invested his wealth, he would be fairly well off. This can be verified by any banker.

2006 till present, tjs was unemployable as by that time the banking industry had seen tjs for what he was, no substance and only hot air.

Let the people exam tjs’s empty years for themselves. And these were indeed empty as he was trying to chase his ‘China make money’ dream backed up by casual connections made when he accompanied government officials in China state visits.

There was the attempt at marketing Chinese breast enhancement drug treatments in Singapore.

His attempt to provide training of bank personnel also failed as tjs could not deliver what he promised.

There is also an erroneous reporting that Tjs’s wife was an investment banker. This is inaccurate. Pls verify which investment bank she was employed under. In fact, Mrs tjs abused her position when she was with their 4th child. NTUC Income would not grant her paid maternity leave so she took unpaid leave but traded on her information from the NTUC Income equity positions she managed to make money for herself. In what ever manner one looks at this, this is a conflict of interest.

Tjs’s selective use of reality makes him dangerous to Singapore.

Reporting tjs an independent candidate is also very wrong. He was brought up through the PAP system and for a time worked within the system when he was PPS to DPM GOH. In truth, tjs is a rogue PAP minion setting out his own agenda to revenge the wrong that he perceives the PAP has done to him under the disguise of public interest.

Tjs cannot claim to be a people’s man and have the Singaporeans’ interest at heart. For those who know tjs, tjs thinks highly of himself, is full of himself, highly opinionated, talks down to people. Tjs can no way be representative of Singapore’s President.

I feel that tjs does not have our nation’s interest at heart; tjs has an axe to grind with the PAP because he is disgruntled that his dreams of higher government office was not realized.

This is very dangerous and a threat to our country’s stability and because of this I feel strongly that when reporting on tjs the truth must be correctly reported.

Best regards,
The Real Truth"

Tan Jee Say escorted by SDP member

2011-07-21T09:33:00.005+08:00

It turns out that Tan Jee Say is not shy in showing off his SDP support.

Tan Jee Say had been frequently sighted with SDP members after he declared his interest to run for President.

In his newly launched website, Tan Jee Say was even seen watching a soccer match with a member of the Young Democrats.

How Tan Jee Say wants to unite Singaporeans, without any past baggage from any political party, would be a huge question he has to answer. Or perhaps he has no answer to it.

So what does the above photo tells about Tan Jee Say?

That he wants to be different from Singaporeans or he is not supporting the Singapore team in the match against Taiwan.

Puzzled by Tan Jee Say's presidential promises

2011-07-20T09:58:00.002+08:00

Here's a forum letter to The Straits Times. It shows how Tan Jee Say is acting as a proxy of the SDP in running for the Presidential race.

I AM curious about the reasons behind Mr Tan Jee Say's motivation to serve Singaporeans ('Another Tan enters the fray'; last Saturday).

The investment adviser has resigned from the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP). Yet he continues to promote his five-year $60 billion National Regeneration Plan, which he lobbied for as an SDP candidate at the hustings for the recent general election, in his presidential bid. Has he confused the role of Singapore's head of state with that of an opposition MP?

If he is elected president, Mr Tan is reported to have stated that he plans to turn the grounds of the Istana into a central park. As far as I know, no country in the world, including the United States, has done this for the official residence of its titular head.

Security is a key consideration. There is also the dignity of the office. Imagine a foreign dignitary being met by sweaty joggers on his way to an official meeting with our president and prime minister.

Singaporeans may want a president who is not merely a rubber stamp for government policies, but it is just as important that we do not elect someone who rolls out populist schemes to appeal to the masses.

Toh Cheng Seong

'Burn minister' man quits SDP

2011-03-03T09:23:00.000+08:00

A SINGAPORE Democratic Party (SDP) member who was investigated for inciting violence against a minister has quit the party, citing internal disagreements.

Mr Abdul Malik Mohammed Ghazali, 27, was arrested in August last year for his comment on a Facebook group page set up to complain about the Youth Olympic Games' organising committee.

In the comment, he said it was time to 'burn Vivian Balakrishnan and the PAP'.

A day after his arrest, he met SDP leaders and later joined the party. The project executive helped out in organising rallies and walkabouts.

Last Friday, the police said in response to media queries that they will not be taking any further action against him.

Contacted yesterday, Mr Malik said he quit the SDP because of internal disagreements on 'matters of principle'.

He said some members were unhappy that he spoke to the media without prior approval about the case against him and were thinking of drawing up new guidelines. He felt these would be too restrictive: 'These protocols go against party ideals of democracy. It's very heavy-handed.'

Mr Malik, who e-mailed his resignation to SDP chief Chee Soon Juan on Tuesday night, also disclosed yesterday that he has applied to join the Singapore Malay National Organisation, a component party of the Singapore Democratic Alliance.

Kenneth Jeyaratnam disagrees with SDP's route

2011-02-04T01:20:00.005+08:00

Finally, an Opposition Leader has casted doubts on the publicity tactics taken by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP).

Reform Party Secretary-General Kenneth Jeyaretnam has this to say about the SDP:

"SDP has chosen another route whereby they campaign for equality and Freedoms directly. ( I hope I haven't misrepresented them -this is my understanding)...

Whatever CSJ is or isn't, and after all he's my political rival. But we can't stand by and be a country which allows a political leader to be imprisoned for an act that would be perfectly legal and even deemed necessary to the democratic process in most other countries. (Not that I am disparaging the decisions of our legal system here.)"

Kenneth Jeyaretnam is the son of the late Opposition Leader Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam (or affectionately called "JBJ").

Chee Soon Juan is now soliciting for funds to help save him from a jail-term for an offence he committed. He has so far raised S$6,000.00 from Singaporeans' hard-earned money. SDP is even holding a "Kampung Night" dinner to raise funds for him.

Chee's party members also sell his books in public to raise funds for him.

Show your disapproval to this party machinery and the selfishness of Chee Soon Juan. Vote "no" to SDP!

YD Member draws inspiration from autocratic Sukarno

2011-02-02T22:37:00.006+08:00

One wonders if the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) even screens its young members or orientates them properly.

Muhd Shamin, a member of the Young Democrat (YD) - the youth wing of the SDP - recently wrote an article on the SDP's party website, invoking the wisdom of former Indonesian President Sukarno:

"“100 orang hanya bermimpi, tetapi berikanlah aku 10 pemuda maka akan kuguncang dunia!” (100 people only dream of, but give me 10 young people, and I will shake the world!)"

Didn't he know that President Sukarno used guided democracy to impose autocratic rule on Indonesians?

I wonder if Muhd Shamin is trying to imply that a democratic system doesn't require winning support of the masses, but just the support of a few.

SDP has always been a small fledgling party and in GE2006, it was regarded as the least significant political party in Singapore. This comes as no surprise since SDP espouses liberal ideas that are influenced from their ties with foreign organisations.

In SDP's Secretary-General Chee Soon Juan's own words "I occasionally receive foreign funding".

A Muslim that drinks?

Breaking the law with camera phone?

Vote wisely.

Say no to nonsensical politics. Say no to SDP.

Chee Soon Juan lied to escape from questions from media

2010-04-02T21:07:00.006+08:00

On the 28th of March 2010, Chee Soon Juan commented to the Shin Min Daily, rebutting the accusations by Mdm Loh Woon Lee Lina (otherwise known as Mrs Linda Chiam, wife of Mr Chiam See Tong) that Mr Chiam See Tong was ousted from the Singapore Democratic Party by Chee.

The article was then translated to English by The Straits Times on 29 March 2010.

Appearing cornered by Mrs Chiam, Chee Soon Juan "told the Chinese-language daily he did not want to take the issue further".

However, on 2 April 2010, the Straits Times published a forum letter written by Chee Soon Juan. He started the letter with "Mrs Chiam See Tong's comments in Monday's report... is regrettable". And then he continued to explain that "no one forced Chiam out".

What happened between the 3-4 days? Nobody knows.

Going back on his words, Chee Soon Juan went ahead to defend himself and stressed that Mr Chiam was wrong in that Mr Chiam "spoke at a Singapore Press Club and attacked his own party".

The forum letter was not posted on the SDP's website. This is the first time SDP is not posting its letter written to the press on its website.

Apparently, Chee Soon Juan had lied to the press, saying that he did not want to pursue the issue further, so as to escape from the questions that are posed to him by reporters.

This is yet another stark instance where the integrity of Chee Soon Juan is exposed.

Thinking back, do you believe him when he did the hunger strike? You shouldn't, because he drank glucose during the "hunger strike".

Vote wisely.

SDP Economic Forum 28 Mar 10-- Downright Disappointing

2010-03-31T22:43:00.001+08:00

By Lee Wai Leong

SDP held its Economic Forum last Sunday at the former Allson Hotel.

I went with high hopes but left disappointed.

Their so-called proposals are flimsy and clearly not well-thought out, and they spent half the time taking digs at the PAP instead of elaborating on their proposals. Although the forum was meant to showcase SDP's alternative economics proposals, it degenerated to the usual criticisms of minister's salaries, calls for accountability for Temasek and GIC losses, lack of transparency in GIC and Temasek, barbs against the Lee family, etc.-- accompanied by the expected smirking and cheers from their regular attendees.

Sad.

Notwithstanding the above, what they presented would be demolished by any Economics 101 student. Shows they just don't have the requisite economics expertise within the party.

Sad.

Examples of the proposals:

Reduce URA/JTC rentals and lower the selling prices of HDB flats.

Minimum Wage

Scale back GLC's and MNC's

Provide more support to SME's

Allow workers to form independent trade unions

And the best one:

Pay 18 months of benefits on a sliding scale to ALL retrenched workers, although it was not clear who would foot the bill-- taxpayers or companies.

Why these proposals are not well-thought out
Simple logic tells us one cannot change one part of a system without upsetting the rest of it. So if the govt reduces URA/JTC rentals and HDB prices, what could possibly happen?

For rentals, either the tenants pocket the savings (ie they charge the sub-tenants the current rates and pocket the difference) or they pass it through. If the former, it won't really benefit the economy at large. If the latter, the rental market could collapse as businesses flock to cheap URA/JTC properties and desert commercial space. The rental index will crash overnight. Private landlords could then be driven into negative equity and foreclosures if they can't come up with cash flow.

Ditto lowering HDB prices. Either it creates a mad rush for new HDB flats (and for the chance to make a killing) or it depresses the prices of resale flats and likely drive resale flat owners into negative equity and foreclosures by banks.

The collapse in HDB prices will then spread to private property as buyers avoid condos and go for HDB.

Private property owners will then be sitting on negative equity and they will not be able to sell out. Market activity will be paralysed. Foreclosures may well follow and property prices will crash, hurting everyone.

Anyone who has done central banking would certainly understand the importance of price stability. One simply cannot administer price shocks to a system in equilibrium without causing massive repercussions. That's why every central bank in the world has as its mission to ensure price stability and economic growth with minimal inflation.

Did SDP ever think of that?

Like it or not, we are all stuck. Stuck with our mortgage, stuck with our valuations, stuck with our repayments.

If a market crash happens and people lose their homes thru foreclosures and others sink into negative equity due to lowered valuations, they have no choice but to accept it. But if the govt causes a spectacular property devaluation by selling new HDB flats at bargain basement prices, that govt is not going to last too long in power.

Much as we want, we can't wind back the clock and sell flats at 1980's prices any more.

Ditto reducing reliance on MNC's, scaling back GLC's, dismantling Temasek and nurturing SME's by taking away tax incentives from MNC's and using it to help SME's.

These are very laudable goals but they have massive repercussions and will cause much unemployment, significant adjustments and extensive structural changes before the goal can be achieved.

I estimate it'll take more than two terms of govt to even achieve half of these goals-- and that's assuming the disgruntled property owners and workers who are displaced as part of these sweeping changes do not vote the govt out before the grand plan can be carried out.

Did SDP think of that?

Minimum wage seems very popular among "opposition" parties these days, although I don't see how it can solve our problems (which is either (i) that Singaporean's wages, in real terms, are slipping or (ii) productivity in Singapore is decreasing).

For (i), the minimum wage applies only to the bottom rung of workers, so it really doesn't help the executives or managers. It won't arrest our continued slide in real wages, when compared to other countries.

For (ii), it's true that minimum wage may force bosses to find ways to increase efficiency and productivity. However, SDP presented stats to show Singaporeans work the longest hours among 12 countries surveyed by ILO. So the logical conclusion is that minimum wage will likely cause bosses to get staff to work longer hours or increase their job scope.

In other words, we could be back to square 1.

Did SDP think of that?

I don't think SDP or other parties really understand the rationale behind minimum wage. They were implemented by advanced countries not to tackle productivity problems, but because of workers' rights.

They came about because unions wanted to make sure their workers got a good deal.

Thus minimum wage is always implemented with limits on the no of working hours per week.

Without proposing such limits here, implementing minimum wage is useless.

But most importantly, don't be misled-- MW is to improve workers' welfare, it's not a productivity tool first and foremost.

Last-- some observations on the SDP leadership.

After 20 years, Dr Chee is still charismatic as ever, still as eloquent, still as much fire in the belly.

The same cannot be said of his team.

Mohd Jufrie looks so tired, as does Gandhari.

John Tan looks so mild-mannered.

Sylvester Lim looks so out of his depth. No wonder, the guy is not even 30.

But what is truly amazing about this party is their fighting spirit. Despite the crippling lawsuits, they have not given up.

That's the most important takeaway from this afternoon.

Source: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=104454799593506&id=685766564

Mrs Chiam: Chee Soon Juan ousted Chiam See Tong from SDP

2010-03-29T11:30:00.003+08:00

This article appeared first on Lianhe Zaobao on Sunday (28 March 2010) and then got translated into English on Straits Times on Monday (29 March 2010). The article titled "Chiam's SDP exit: Wife speaks up" is the first time Mrs Chiam is speaking on the issue and is revealing on the integrity of Chee Soon Juan. The integrity that of a liar and an opportunist.

A LONG-STANDING spat between Potong Pasir MP Chiam See Tong and former protege Chee Soon Juan has resurfaced, with Mr Chiam's wife and Dr Chee engaged in a fresh exchange of views.

The row centres on Dr Chee's role in Mr Chiam's dismissal as secretary-general of the opposition Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) in 1993 and his eventual exit from the party in 1996.

In an interview with the Chinese-language daily Lianhe Zaobao published yesterday, Mrs Lina Chiam dismissed comments that Dr Chee made in an earlier interview with the same newspaper that he had tried to persuade Mr Chiam to stay on.

She instead accused Dr Chee, who succeeded Mr Chiam as SDP chief, of ousting her husband from the party he founded in 1980.

Mrs Chiam - who told the newspaper she was speaking with her husband's knowledge and authority - said that despite the SDP central executive committee's initial attempts in 1993 to make Mr Chiam stay, it held a disciplinary hearing in August that year, where it decided to expel him.

She said: "If he (Dr Chee) really wanted to keep Mr Chiam, he could have politely declined the position of secretary-general. Or when the central executive was taking a vote on whether to take disciplinary action against Chiam, he could have opposed the dismissal."

She noted that Dr Chee wrote to the Speaker of Parliament to tell him of Mr Chiam's ouster, and asked for any further necessary action to be taken.

The Constitution says that an MP who loses membership of the party he represented in a general election automatically loses his seat in Parliament.

Mr Chiam was elected as Potong Pasir MP in 1984 on the SDP ticket. He contested his expulsion from the SDP in court and left the party only in 1996 for the Singapore's People Party.

Mrs Chiam said: "The People's Action Party tried all means to defeat my husband, but failed after several general elections. But the SDP achieved it effortlessly with one stroke of the pen and did the PAP a great service."

Mr Chiam asked her to clarify the matter with Lianhe Zaobao after it interviewed Dr Chee, she said, adding that she wanted to set the record straight: "For the sake of my husband and to let the younger generation understand 'Uncle Chiam', I have to step forward to clarify matters. He did not turn his back on the SDP. When we were forced to leave, our hearts were filled with anguish."

Dr Chee told Lianhe Zaobao in his interview that he tried to persuade Mr Chiam - who had differences with the central executive in May 1993 - not to resign. He said he went to Mr Chiam's office several times to withdraw his resignation, "and told him he was still regarded as our leader".

Yesterday, Dr Chee reiterated that neither he, nor anyone else, forced Mr Chiam out. He told Shin Min Daily News that the SDP spent one month persuading Mr Chiam to change his mind: "But Chiam insisted that he would return to the SDP as its secretary-general only if the SDP central executive committee gave him the maximum power to appoint or remove any central executive or party member."

He also told the Chinese-language daily he did not want to take the issue further.

SDP exploiting underage teens

2010-03-28T12:26:00.005+08:00

If Chee Soon Juan were to be believed, the Young Democrats is indeed seeing some new faces, faces that are perhaps too young.

The legal age to be a member of any political parties in Singapore is 21. These chaps (see photo below) are aged 15-16, and still studying secondary school. Uniformed students should not be involved with politics. But yet, as shown in the photo, they participated in the Singapore Democratic Party 30th Anniversary dinner. These chaps are Kenneth Lin, Sebastian Puay and Darren Choy.

The most prominent underage YD sympathiser is Kenneth Lin (16 years old). Studying in St Andrew's Secondary School, this secondary 4 student has been SDP's latest new toy (after Alex Tan) in the social media front. Recently, he created a Facebook group to get Singaporeans to sign a petition demanding Lee Kuan Yew to apologise. A brief glance on the list of petitioners showed that a huge majority of them are fake.

A new face is Sebastian Puay Tong Kehl. Born in 1993, he is still currently studying in Maris Stella High School.

Last but not least, Darren Choy, also a student of the Maris Stella High School.

Singapore Democratic Party's dirty tactics of using teens as proxies should not be condoned.

Fighting, by Urging Others to Fight Back....

2010-03-27T00:34:00.000+08:00

Bryan Ti

Rather chivalrously, SDP states that it will fight for the Bt Panjang residents.

It then reminds us that the residents have some form of economic power that they must exercise to fight back.

Besides all the talk and sending out letters, one wonders whether SDP's way of fighting for the residents is simply to urge them to fight back (while it sniggers from the side-lines).

Otherwise, SDP could also be planning to carry out yet another round of petition signing, which incidentally got nowhere the last time round. Of course, I am sure it will also NOT fail to seize the opportunity to sell more of its newsletters as a form of side-income.

Incidentally, perhaps this fight it now threatens (and is hopefully legal) will also be considered part of the series of activities to joyfully celebrate its 30th Anniversary. This is in addition to the gala dinner and coming public forum it is organising.

(By the way, I am also wonder whether the letter sent to Mr Teo Ho Pin really had a photo of a rather jovial looking John Tan on it. If so, I am sure Mr Teo would be fuming at the deliberate snigger on John's face that he seems rather adept at making.)

I saw Chee Soon Juan

2010-03-26T06:53:00.001+08:00

By www.pressrun.net

I saw the Singapore Democratic Party leader Chee Soon Juan selling his party newspaper at a hawker centre.

I was having coffee when two men and a woman appeared, all in red polo shirts, carrying armloads of newspapers. The slender, youthful-looking bespectacled man in the centre was Dr Chee. He did not give out his name. I could recognize him from the photos I had seen in newspapers and on the internet.

He did not make any speeches or criticize the government, merely saying he knew people had problems with wages being cut and held up a copy of his newspaper, asking if anyone would like to buy.

He was studiously ignored by the people, who went on eating and drinking, though several fell silent while others lowered their voices.

An elderly couple passing by stopped and the old man bought a newspaper from him. "Thank you," he said.

The woman with him approached me with a copy of the newspaper. "No, thanks," I said and got up, having finished my coffee.

A little later, as I was passing by the hawker centre, he was gone.

The people went on eating and drinking under burning lights amid the surrounding darkness.

I enjoyed walking in the dark past the silvery haloes of light of street lamps.

The night air was soothing in its tranquillity.

I love Singapore, the peace and quiet it offers if that is what we want.

I know. Like the trees spreading their branches but solidly rooted to the earth, I can't be budged from my comfort zone.

Source: http://www.pressrun.net/weblog/2009/11/i-saw-chee-soon-juan.html

Chee Soon Juan: "I occasionally receive foreign funding"

2010-03-24T23:17:00.002+08:00

The following is extracted from Lianhe Zaobao. Its reporter conducted an interview with Singapore Democratic Party Secretary-General Chee Soon Juan. In the interview, Chee mentioned that he occasionally receives foreign funding.

徐顺全：现在是民主党30年来巅峰时刻

Chee Soon Juan: This is the peak of Singapore Democratic Party's peak in 30 years

游润恬 (2010-02-28) Reported by: Ms Yew Lun Tian

　针对大戏党网站（淡马锡评论）是由民主党幕后操纵，目的是打击其他反对党并提升民主党地位的传言，徐顺全矢口否认。他说：“我们不做诋毁其他反对党的事。”

Referring to the claim that Temasek Review is being operated by the Singapore Democratic Party, with the aim of discrediting the other opposition parties to strengthen SDP, Chee Soon Juan denied it. Chee: "We do not criticise the affairs of other opposition parties."

　　民主党成立30年，巅峰时刻是什么时候？最低潮的时刻又是什么时候？

Singapore Democratic Party is 30 years old. When's the peak? When's the trough?

　　徐顺全博士（48岁）的答复似乎会让人们大感意外。他说现在是它的巅峰时刻。

Dr Chee Soon Juan's (48 years old) answer was surprising. He said the SDP is at its peak now.

　　“我相信民主党还没有达到真正的顶峰，不过到目前为止，现阶段必然是最光辉的。”

"I believe Singapore Democratic Party has not reached its actual peak, but as of now, we are at our highest point."

　　他表示民主党过去五年吸引了许多新人，党员的整体素质也比从前高了。这些新人不但可提供新的政治视角，还懂得善用新媒体进行宣传，使民主党可以做很多以前做不成的事。

Chee says that SDP has attracted many new members over the past 5 years. The quality of the members is higher than before. The newcomers not only provide new political perspectives, they are also savvy with new media, empowering the party in ways it has never done before.

　　五年前没有资源办25周年晚宴

No resources to organise anniversary dinners 5 years ago

　　比方说早在五年前，他就想举行民主党25周年晚宴，却因缺乏资源，只好打消念头。今天，民主党不但能在乌节路的凯煌酒店办30周年晚宴，还能出版第一本纪念特刊，80页全彩色印刷。

For instance, 5 years ago, Chee Soon Juan wanted to organise a 25th anniversary dinner. However, due to scarce resources, he called off the idea. Today, SDP not only organised its dinner at a hotel in Orchard Road, it also published its first 80-page full colour commemorative magazine.

　　他认为最重要的是全体中央执行委员的团结。

Chee believes that of upmost importance is the unity among the Central Executive Committee Members.

　　“对他们来说，集体奋斗的目标，凌驾于个人理想之上。”

"For them, fighting in unity precedes personal ambitions."

　　民主党在1991年大选时，一举把当时的秘书长詹时中（波东巴西区）、主席林孝谆（前武吉甘柏区）和蒋才正（义顺中区）三名候选人送入国会。自从詹时中在1996年离开后，民主党在国会里再也没有代表。照理说，上世纪90年代在詹时中领导下的民主党，应该已达到巅峰，徐顺全却认为那是最低潮的时刻。

In the 1991 General Election, then Singapore Democratic Party's Secretary-General Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir SMC), Chairman Ling How Doong (Bukit Gombak SMC) and Cheo Chai Chen (Nee Soon Central SMC) won their seats in Parliament. Since Chiam's departure from the party in 1996, there had been no representatives from SDP in the parliament. As such, SDP under Chiam See Tong should be considered as the peak period of the party. However, Chee Soon Juan thinks that was the lowest point instead.

　　“我加入民主党不到几个星期，就已感觉到党内领导人之间强烈的紧张关系。当时的民主党不是一个党，它从来就不是一支有共同理念的团队，只不过是一群同床异梦的人凑在一起。出现状况时，大家各有主张，要往不同的方向走，结果是树倒猢狲散。”

"A few weeks after I joined the SDP, I could already feel the strong tension in the ties between the party leaders. The SDP back then wasn't a party. It was never led by a team with a common ideology. It was just a group of individuals with different beliefs. When incidents occur, everyone has their own views and wants to pursue their own paths, resulting in disunity."

　　詹时中在1992年一手把当时在新加坡国立大学担任心理学讲师的徐顺全带进民主党，参加马林百列集选区补选。当时的总理吴作栋为了把现任副总理张志贤引进国会，而让马林百列集选区的议员集体辞职，以举行这次补选。

Chiam See Tong single-handedly brought then NUS Psychology Lecturer Chee Soon Juan into the party in 1992 and fielded him in the Marine Parade GRC by-election. Then PM Goh Chok Tong wanted to Teo Chee Hean to be in Parliament and arranged for Marine Parade GRC MPs to resign so that a by-election could be held.

　　徐顺全竞选失败，隔年因呈报德士车资不实等遭国大开除。詹时中原本支持他，后来却动议中委会谴责他。党内其他中委不赞成詹时中的做法，民主党于是陷入分裂。詹时中跟着辞去秘书长职务。

Chee Soon Juan lost in the election. The following year, he got fired by NUS after he was found to be overstating his taxi claims. Chiam See Tong initially supported him, but subsequently passed a motion to the CEC to punish him. Other CEC members didn't agree with Chiam's actions, leading to a stalemate within the party. Chiam then resigned as Secretary-General.

　　徐顺全追述道：“当年他提出辞职的那场会议，是在我家召开的。过后的一个月，我三番四次上他的办公室请他收回辞职信，并表示他仍然是我们心目中的领导。”

Chee Soon Juan continued: "The meeting when Chiam tendered his resignation, was held at my place. The following month, I repeatedly went to Chiam's office to request him to keep his resignation letter, and expressed my loyalty to him."

　　尽管徐顺全如今这么解释，但不争的事实是民主党中委当时却做出了比接受詹时中辞去秘书长职位更为严重的决定——投票将他逐出党。詹时中一旦失去党籍，也将丧失国会议席，反对党在国会里也将少一把声音。我国宪法不允许议员在任内跨党。詹时中尽力保留党籍，直到1997年大选才离开民主党，转以新加坡人民党秘书长的身份竞选。

Despite Chee Soon Juan's explanation, the fact is that SDP CEC went on to vote to expel Chiam See Tong from the party. If Chiam were expelled, he would lose his parliamentary seat and the opposition would lose a voice in parliament. Singapore's Constitution prohibits MPs from switching party membership. Chiam See Tong fought hard to retain his party membership. In 1997, Chiam left the party and set up the Singapore People Party where he became the Secretary-General and retained his Potong Pasir seat.

　　詹时中事后对外表示他是被徐顺全逼走的。

Chiam See Tong procliamed that he was ousted by Chee Soon Juan.

　　徐顺全辩称詹时中的“一言堂”作风，才是其他中委背弃他的原因。

Chee Soon Juan claims that Chiam got ousted because of his dictatorship style.

　　“即使在林孝谆等党领导人眼里，詹时中的领导地位也是毫无争议的。不过，我们希望他能以更加民主的方式做事。”

"Even in the eyes of Ling How Doong and other members, Chiam See Tong's leadership was undeniable. However, we hoped he could be more democratic in the way he carried out the tasks."

　　他说：“直到今天，我仍对詹时中不怀芥蒂，还出席了他担任议员25周年的晚宴。如果在外头碰面，我也会跟他打招呼。”

Chee: "Until today, I don't bear any grudges against Chiam See Tong. I even attended his 25th Anniversary Dinner. Even when I meet him in the streets, I would greet him."

　　詹时中在1992年把徐顺全引进民主党时，他一时被视为反对党的希望及一颗闪亮的政治新星。如今，被他取代的詹时中仍保住国会议席，自己却始终无缘进入国会。

Chiam introduced Chee Soon Juan into the party in 1992. Chee was seen as the hope of the Opposition and a rising star in the political realm. Until today, Chiam is still in parliament, but Chee had never made it in.

　　问他如今是否后悔从政，他说：“绝不。我这么说不是为了逞英雄。我的确喜欢教书和做研究，那是我的初恋，但是为新加坡争取民主是一个更大、更迫切的使命。我一点也不后悔。”

When asked if he has ever regretted joining politics, Chee said: "Never. I'm not saying this because I want to be a hero. I really love teaching and research work. Those were my first love. However, fighting for democracy in Singapore is an even greater and urgent mission. I have no regrets."

　　他在2006年破产，一家现在住在大巴窑的三房式组屋。妻子黄志美（48岁）留在家里照顾三个分别是10岁、7岁和5岁的孩子。

Bankrupted in 2006, he stays in a 3-room flat in Toa Payoh. His wife Huang Chih Mei (48 years old) stays at home to look after 3 children aged 10, 7 and 5 years old.

　　夫妇没有工作怎么养家？

So how does the couple derive an income without a job?

　　夫妇俩都没有工作，那怎么养家？询及收入来源时，他表示多数从卖书赚来，偶尔也接受亲戚朋友的接济。

The couple is not employed. When asked about income, Chee expressed that he derives the majority of his income via the sale of his books. Occasionally, he also receives financial help from relatives.

　　“我们过着简单的生活。有多余的资源，我都会投入民主抗争。”

"We lead a simple life. I contribute my excess resources to the party cause."

　　坊间流传他是拿了外国机构的资金，所以才能继续在新加坡无后顾之忧地进行公民抗争式的斗争。左问右问，他回答说：“我是学者，偶尔也领一些外国的研究基金。我的著作有时获奖，有时也参加海外的研究计划。”

There are rumours that Chee Soon Juan is financially supported by foreign agencies, and that's why he could continue protesting without any worries. After asking him several times, Chee said: "I'm a scholar, I occasionally receive foreign funding for my research. My works have bagged awards, and I participate in foreign research programmes."

　　哪方面的研究，是有关民主的研究吗？他含糊地说：“嗯，或者是人类行为之类的。”

What kind of research? Is it related to democracy? Chee dodgingly replied: "Hmmm, it's about human behaviour."

　　“打不打算脱离穷籍这个问题不应该问我”

"The question of whether I want to leave poverty shouldn't be answered by me"

　　跟已故反对党巨人惹耶勒南一样，徐顺全也是因被政府领导人起诉诽谤而拖欠巨额名誉损失赔偿金，最终在2006年2月被高庭宣判破产，失去参加同年5月大选的资格。不同的是惹耶勒南生前无时无刻不在努力筹钱偿还债务，终于在生前脱离穷籍，还成立了新的政党，开始为参加大选部署。而徐顺全却不打算这么做。

Similar to the late Opposition leader Jeyaratnam, Chee Soon Juan was also sued for slander by government leaders, failed to pay the damage and finally was declared a bankrupt in February 2006, losing the chance to contest in the 2006 General Election. The difference is that Jeyaratnam strives hard to recover from his bankruptcy and finally succeeded before his death. Jeyaratam even set up a new political party and prepared for the GE. However, Chee Soon Juan had no plans to recover from his bankruptcy.

　　他说：“打不打算还清债务以脱离穷籍，这个问题你不应该问我，而应该去问李光耀。如果他不怕我，大可行使债权人的权利把我所欠的债务一笔勾销。只要他不挡住我参选的去路，对我亮绿灯，我马上就去提出脱离穷籍的申请。”

Chee: "Whether to recover from poverty is not a decision I make. You should ask Lee Kuan Yew. If he's not afraid of me, he could call off the debt. If he doesn't stop me from contesting in the GE, gives me the green light, I will immediately apply to be delisted as a bankrupt."

　　民主党在2006年大选时的得票率是反对党中平均得票率最低的，徐顺全把这都怪到主流媒体头上。

In 2006, SDP performed the worst compared to other political parties. Chee Soon Juan blamed this on the mainstream media.

　　他认为主流媒体刻意丑化他，以致至民主党在大选时的表现不如其他反对党。

He feels that the mainstream media portrayed a very negative image of him, causing SDP to perform badly at the poll.

　　“因为民主党提出有别于政府的可行经济方案，我们也提倡要对现有的机制进行大刀阔斧的改革，因此被行动党政府视为威胁，要把我们铲除。主流媒体也把攻击的矛头对准我们。”

"Because SDP proposes alternative economic plans, we also encourage major changes to the current political system, therefore the government sees us as a threat and wants to get rid of us. The mainstream media also points their guns at us."

　　下次大选将以网络作为主要竞选渠道

New media as the main site for political battle in the next GE

　　为突破主流媒体的局限，他声称民主党在下次大选时将以互联网作为主要的竞选渠道。

To break free from the constraints of mainstream media, he claims that SDP would use new media as the main platform for the party in the coming GE.

　　尽管如此，他还是认为民主党要在大选中获胜，必须靠主流媒体。

Despite this, he believes the party needs the mainstream media if it wants to win in the GE.

　　“我非常有信心，主流媒体如果肯公平地报道我们的想法和信息，民主党肯定可以把候选人送入国会。”

"I'm very confident that if the mainstream media reports fairly about our beliefs and messages, the SDP would definitely enter parliament."

　　民主党的作风比较强硬，工人党的作风比较中庸。几年前一个对政党政治提出尖锐批评的“大戏党”（Wayang Party）网站出现，不客气地指工人党根本是在作戏，不是真正在搞反对党政治。

SDP is radical. Workers' Party's style is moderate. A few years ago, the Wayang Party website was set up to condemn WP, stating that it is a wayang.

　　大戏党后来改名为淡马锡评论（Temasek Review），对其他反对党的批评也有所收敛，不过网主的身份依然神秘。针对大戏党网站是由民主党幕后操纵，目的是打击其他反对党并提升民主党地位的传言，徐顺全矢口否认。

The Wayang Party then changed its name to Temasek Review, and also lambasted other opposition parties. TR's owner is anonymous. Referring to accusations that Wayang Party is operated by SDP so as to alleviate SDP's standing among the opposition parties, Chee denied them.

　　他说：“我们不做诋毁其他反对党的事。”

Chee: "We don't belittle other opposition."

　　那他跟其他反对党领袖的关系有多好？他表示虽不至于称兄道弟，但彼此都不时保持联系，也依然遵守不在大选时进行三角战的游戏规则。

So how is his relationship with other political party leaders? He said that they are not as close as brothers, but they stay in contact and avoid 3-cornered fights in GEs.

　　党庆与众不同

An extraordinary anniversary celebration

　　时装秀、自助晚餐、没有上台敬酒的节目，新加坡民主党昨晚的30周年党庆，和其他政党大不一样。

Fashion shows, Buffet dinner, no toasting on stage. SDP's 30th anniversary dinner differs much from other opposition parties'.

　　民主党的老中青党员昨晚充当模特儿，上台摆姿势，展示党制服多年来的演变。图中红色有领汗衫是目前最新的制服。

SDP's senior and young members became fashion show models, parading on stage with the various party uniforms. The red shirt and kaki pants is the latest uniform.

　　许多重要反对党人物都缺席

Many key opposition leaders were absent

　　约170人参加民主党在凯煌酒店举办的党庆晚宴，但许多重要反对党人物都缺席，包括创立民主党后另起炉灶的新加坡人民党秘书长詹时中、工人党秘书长刘程强、党主席林瑞莲、革新党秘书长肯尼思和国民团结党主席张培源。

About 170 people attended the SDP's dinner. However, many key opposition leaders were absent, including SDP's founder Chiam See Tong, WP's Low Thia Khiang, Sylvia Lim, Reform Party's Kenneth Jeyaratnam and National Solidarity Party's Sebastian Teo.

　　往年反对党设党庆晚宴时，都会邀请其他反对党领袖一起上台敬酒。昨晚的民主党党庆，并没有出现这样的场面。

In the anniversary dinners organised by other opposition parties, the various opposition leaders were usually invited on stage to toast. It didn't occur at SDP's.

　　徐顺全大女儿单独上台清唱国歌

Chee's eldest daughter sings the National anthem

　　民主党的党庆还有一个节目是其他反对党的党庆没有的。昨晚开场时，徐顺全的大女儿徐安琳（10岁）单独上台清唱国歌，接着还念信约。新加坡早在数十年前就停止在活动开始前唱国歌的做法，一些与会者昨晚起初还愣了一下，不过很快地也跟着一起唱国歌。

Chee's eldest daughter Chee An Lin (10 years old) sang the national anthem and recited the pledge. Singapore has long stopped the practice of singing the national anthem before the commencement of activities. The singing stunned many of the participants.

　　徐顺全经常让孩子曝光，比如让他们陪他出庭，或到监狱外等候他出狱。他这么做，是不是为了博取同情？他日前受访时说：“没有我的家人的支持，我很难继续下去。看着孩子，会让我想起，我要留给她们一个怎样的社会，这给了我坚持下去的力量。”

Chee Soon Juan frequently exposes his children into the limelight. For instance, they accompany him to court and wait for him outside the prison as he gets released. Is he doing this to win over compassion from the public? Chee: "Without family support, I find it hard to carry on. Looking at the kids, will remind me that I have to strive to give them a better Singapore."

《联合早报》

Lianhe Zaobao
（编辑：梁嘉芪）

SDP Website Censors BryanT’s Letter on Lack of Progress in Opposition Cooperation

2010-03-20T20:17:00.001+08:00

In a recent comment sent to the SDP website on an article titled “Let's get serious about alternative: Democrats to hold public discussion”, BryanT proposed that various Opposition parties exploit the coming public forum organised by SDP to collectively develop an economic plan.

As part of the comment, BryanT also provided a link to his FB note which explained out why he is making this suggestion.

Essentially, the note provided the background that since a public forum organised last year, no progress had been made on Opposition cooperation. At most, the parties have been cordial with each other in attending each other’s events, and that is only provided these are NOT SDP’s events.

BryanT proposed that the coming public forum organised by SDP could be exploited to create some momentum for greater Opposition cooperation. The benefit would be two-fold: a more robust set of alternative economic programmes, and as a consequence, greater credibility in the eyes of the electorate for the Opposition.

The SDP website moderator BLATANTLY deleted the link to the FB note. SDP probably finds objectionable the report of lack of progress in developing Opposition cooperation. It was the party that organised the public forum last year to foster cooperation in the first place.

In fact, SDP is probably the main obstacle to greater Opposition cooperation. It pursues a strategy (of deconstructive politics through illegal civil disobedience acts) that is diametric to those carried by the main Opposition parties.

That is the main reason why Opposition cooperation (not to say any semblance of unity) has failed to take off.

It should also be noted that SDP recently raised a ruckus over ST and ZB censoring its letter concerning an interview with its Sec-Gen. SDP’s censorship of BryanT’s comment reeks of HYPOCRISY. This is a political party that does not practise what it purportedly preaches.

The parallel between the censorship of its Sec-Gen's letter and BryanT's comment is ironic, but enligtening. (It should be noted that BryanT has NEVER censored any comments on his FB, so there is no further parallel, or irony)

Such acts by SDP taint the collective reputation of the Singapore Opposition. There is no assurance that should one day an Opposition party take over the government, it will not CHANGE its mind and behave in a exact manner it has fought against whilst in Opposiiton. The electorate should not be fooled into believing that it will be better off with parties like this.

The SDP moderator has previously allowed other commenters to post links on its website, even when some of the links are irrelevant to the topic at hand. The background information concerning the lack of progress in Opposition cooperation is RELEVANT to BryanT’s proposal for it to seize the opportunity in developing collective economic programme.

The question now is this: just who is undermining the Singapore Opposition's interest?

The original comment that was sent to SDP Website with the deleted portions in bold is reproduced here:

--------------------

I would like to propose for the various Opposition parties to exploit the public forum organised by SDP to collectively develop an economic plan.

Although SDP’s proposals to date are the most comprehensive and wide-ranging (I will reserve my comments about “realism” and “workability”), the other parties have also along the way articulated their set of proposals, albeit with varying degrees of success.

Since SDP is organising the forum, it is appropriate that it takes the lead to bring the various parties together for deliberations on the programme.

My suggestion is detailed here:

http://www.facebook.com/notes/bryan-ti/singapore-opposition-given-us-a-collective-roar-or-a-few-disparate-squeaks/387660943976

Chee Soon Juan

2010-03-18T00:23:00.006+08:00

Derek da Cunha's book "The Price of Victory: The 1997 Singapore General Election and Beyond" lets us understand more about Chee Soon Juan, the Secretary-General of Singapore Democratic Party.

The following are some excerpts from the book.

On 24 July 1994, Deputy Prime Minister Brigadier-General (NS) Lee Hsien Loong described Chee's Dare to Change as "no more than a rehash of some fashionable Western liberal ideas, welfare programmes." He also said: "The foreign media and human rights groups have been talking about it, they tried to press us to do it. They are ideas which have already failed in Western societies, and Chee Soon Juan them together, calls it a book." (Quoted in "Don't be as gullible as the SDP", Straits Times a few days later. In his words: "Points made in Dare to Change backed up the points I made in the book with research findings, observations and analyses and historical data". (Straits Times, 28 July 1994, p.30) On the basis of the statement, the government could have responded by pointing out the factual inaccuracies in Dr Chee's book. The fact that it chose not to do so might suggest that it decided to wait for a more opportune moment.

Page 9:

"and MacPherson, which would be carved out of Marine Parade GRC so as to allow a contest between the PAP's Matthias Yao and the SDP's Chee Soon Juan - contest which the latter had requested."

Page 37:

Chia Shi Teck (NMP): "Had the SDP and Mr Chiam [See Tong] continued to progress and attract talented, credible and honest people, I would not be here. There would be no need for this independent idea. But having seen the recent direction of the party, I think it is not good for the country..." --> "Shi Teck's slate as alternative to opposition," Straits Times, 7 November 1996

Page 36:

"... false submission he made to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Health Care Subsidy, which among other things, included what Chee later tried to explain away as a "typo"; his misuse of research funds of the National University of Singapore (NUS) to send his wife's thesis to the United States when he was a neuro-psychology lecturer at the university; and his inflated taxi fare claims to the NUS (where the amount was said to have been jacked up a few dollars each time he took a cab).

The people of MacPherson has passed a "solid" verdict on Chee's integrity. Chee, Wong Hong Toy, S. Kunalen and Kwan Yue Keng fined by Parliament's Committee of Priveleges over their conduct during testimony to the Select Committee on Health Care Subisidy.

Page 42:

"The despair among the SDP chief's supporters and members of his family had clearly to do with the size of his defeat, and the fact that the PAP had turned the contest in MacPherson into a referendum on Chee's character. Being defeated almost 2:1 in a bitterly-fought contest meant that the Chee camp could not take even a slither of comfort or consolation from the result. It was a conclusive defeat."

Page 49:

"But it is the speeches of the politicians, rather than just the rally atmosphere, that either animate a crowd or turn it off. For emotionally-charged speeches in the 1997 general election, few could match those delivered by SDP chief Dr Chee Soon Juan . (The emotional element aside, he was clearly also one of the better rally speakers, holding his audience in thrall.) In his last rally at MacPherson, on 31 December, Dr Chee tried to focus the minds of his audience on the fact that after 2 January, his life would not be the same again. As he began to wind up his speech, Dr Chee asked his audience whether they would vote for him. "Yes", came the answer from a section of the crowd. "I still can't hear you", Chee retorted. "Yes," came the louder answer. "I still can't hear you," he said. Louder still was the affirmative reply. As I was about to leave this scene of crowd-speaker interaction, I happened to hear a young man who was nearby make a perceptive observationto his lady companion. "Less than half say yes". This was at once prophetic and a salutary example of the silent majority, no less."

Page 60:

If one looks back, historially, over the previous three elections, with minor exceptions, leaders of major Opposition parties (and, here, I am excluding Mr Harbans Singh's United People's Front) usually took at least 40% of the vote in two-candidate single-seat contests. This should be the basis for comparison. If the leader of a major Opposition political party secures less than 40% of the vote, that does not constitute a good result.

Dr Chee, Secretary-General of the SDP, a party which between 1991 and 1996 had been the principal standard bearer of the Opposition cause in Singapore, secured 34.9% of the vote. And his vote appears a shade worse when one looks at the percentage of spoilt and blank votes in each of the constituencies in relation to total votes cast.

When an Opposition candidate has a real chance of getting elected or when the competition is keener, the percentage of spoilt and blank votes shrinks in proportion to the total votes cast. Thus, in Hougang and Potong Pasir, where the Opposition was elected, the percentage of spoilt and blank votes were the smallest amongst the 15 contested constituencies. MacPherson, where Dr Chee contested, ranks fourth highest in terms of the percentage of spoilt and blank votes.

Page 63: It was a clear rejection of the SDP which, under Dr Chee, was perceived to champion Western-style liberal democracy.

PAge 78: What precipated the event was Chee's dismissal from the NUS in March 1993, with the university accusing him of using S$226 of university research funds to despatch his wife's doctoral thesis to Pennsylvania State University the previous September. In protest at his expulsion, Chee went on a hunger strike. It was this that caused a schism within the SDP. Mr Chiam had disagreed with the way Chee was protesting his dismissal. Indeed, many other people criticised Dr Chee's hungry strike, seeing in it an exercise in self-publicity. --> Forum letters: "If Dr Chee believes he is innocent, what is stopping him from seeking legal redress?"

But what probably topped it all, in almost a chronicle of self-inflicted wounds, was Dr Chee and his SDP colleagues' appearance before, and submissions to, the Cost Review Committee and the Parliamentary Select Committee on Health Care Subsidy less than a year later. After many hours of questioning by those committees, it was concluded that the SDP team's research was flawed and that it had made glaring errors. The most significant of the errors was one suggesting that in 1990, the government's share of total health spending was 5%, instead of 25.4%, with Chee later telling Parliament's Committee of Privileges that this had been a "typo", or typographical error.

And when faced with such outcomes, Dr Chee would provide variations of a standard statement, such as the one issued in November 1995: "In the face of the PAP onslaught, the SDP assures Singaporeans that it will stand its ground. We have set our objective, which is to speak up for Singaporeans who might not otherwise get a chance to air their views, and we will be disciplined to fous on what we have to do." This might have seemed like a gutsy statement, but it would have rung hollow to those who had just witnessed the exchange. Also, whatever sympathy members of the public might have had for Dr Chee in a perceived unequal fight, might have been dissipated following the release of his statement.

Clearly, Dr Chee might have done better if he had been more selective in the battles he chose to wage with the government. Instead, he locked horns on a variety of issues. This, of course, leads one to ask why he did so? There were probably several reasons. I will offer two. One, was that he might have been bent on changing Singapore's political culture, from one which was circumscribed with out-of-bound markers, to one where limits were less apparent, trying to be the example to others to speak up. Two, he might well have felt that publicity, even bad publicity, would be good for the SDP and would translate into votes for the party at the polls.

As to the first of these reasons, Dr Chee obviously misread the ground. Most Singaporeans would seem generally satisfied with the status quo and how politics are conducted. If they want changes, these are of style, or a fine-tuning of the context within which political debate and activity takes place, not significant modifications to the system. On the second reason, he may have over-stated the significance of a high profile as against an image of sincerity.

On the day he stepped into the political spotlight, at an SDP press conference to announce the party's candidates for the by-election in Marine Parade GRC, Dr Chee was asked why he decided to align himself with the Opposition. He answered: "Mr Goh Chok Tong has called on younger Singaporeans who are capable, competent and of ministerial quality to serve Singapore in politics. I have decided to heed his call". People might well have read this as too self-regarding an answer and it was probably Dr Chee's first mistake.

Not My SDP calls for Chee Soon Juan to vacate his position as Secretary-General for his doubtful integrity.

Where's the Research (.....like human behaviour)?

2010-03-18T00:19:00.001+08:00

Bryan Ti

Hitherto, CSJ had repeatedly lamented that the MSM had imposed a media blackout on the SDP.

Although he would rather not admit it, the editorial ban was mainly on SDP; other opposition parties were given some airtime (or rather, page space) to cover their electoral plans, recruitment of new members, in-house seminars and even their counter-arguments to government policies.

The recent interview with CSJ broke new grounds for SDP. CSJ was probably elated when he was offered a rare opportunity to express himself via the MSM (ie. ZB, and then reprinted by ST). In the interview, he sounded as if he deserved the new attention.

As events subsequently unfolded, we can see that he didn't.

He is now back to his old (recalcitrant) ways. He seems rather irritated that his letter has not been published in its entirety, and is presently accusing it of “censoring the SDP's views” (yet again).

His original bugbear (and defensiveness) arose out of questions being raised over his sources of income. Instead of using his follow up letter to shed some light on this, he has gone on a not-unexpected tirade about himself “fighting for democracy and the political rights of Singaporeans.”

The leopard does not change its spots.

If some politicians purport to fight for the rights of Singaporeans, then Singaporeans have the right to subject such politicians to scrutiny – to ask for a reasonable degree of openness and accountable.

Why is it so difficult for CSJ to publicly cite his “research (….like human behaviour)” work that provides him income so that the burden of doubt is lifted?

Instead of clearing the air, his latest attempt at diversion to his favourite (but tiresome) causes reinforces the perception of evasiveness.

SDP has no one but itself to blame for being ostracised by the MSM in future, and for being ignored by the people as per current.

Chee Soon Juan says Productivity linked to political system

2010-02-27T01:09:00.004+08:00

The Straits Times (24-2-2010):

"Singapore Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan, in turn, disagrees completely with the way the Government is trying to boost productivity.

He blames the lagging productivity on an overdependence on multinationals, government-linked companies crowding out the SMEs and the absence of a open political system."

No other political party leaders agreed with Chee's point.

SDP movements in Tampines is just CSJ standing at Tampines MRT shouting slogans

2010-02-01T11:27:00.002+08:00

A news report recently mentioned that several opposition parties are eyeing Tampines GRC, including the Singapore Democratic Party. The SDP is believe to target the area due to its limited resources and the fact that Tampines GRC is a "small and compact space".

NotMySDP conducted an email survey on a group of 15 people residing in Tampines GRC and found out from them about the groundwork that SDP is doing. These are some of the feedback and comments from the Tampines residents:

"SDP movements in Tampines is just CSJ standing at Tampines MRT shouting slogans"
"Chee Soon Juan hardly moves around elsewhere (other than Tampines MRT station)"
"Chee Soon Juan is always at the MRT station beside Tampines Mall selling his newsletter with his whole group of people."
"Chee Soon Juan stays there for like 2hrs and most people ignore him other than a few who mistake his newsletters for being free so its quite amusing"

We feel that SDP should not jump into the bandwagon to dilute the votes.

SDP Activist Ng E Jay hits at Reform Party

2010-01-30T23:14:00.002+08:00

Singapore Democratic Party activist Ng E Jay poured cold water on the Reform Party, in a letter to the Straits Times forum, saying it's "no big deal" for a former government scholarship holder, Mr Tony Tan, to join the Reform Party.

In Ng E Jay's letter, he said that the recent news report on a former government scholarship holder joining the Reform Party as a "non-event".

He also betrayed the opposition by agreeing with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's assessment that "we should not judge political candidates based on their paper credentials, but on what they can do for society."

Perhaps referring to Mr Tony Tan from Reform Party, Ng E Jay continued to state that "It is time we look past superficial measures of success like academic credentials, and pay more attention to an individual's track record at work and in community service, which are more accurate indicators of his calibre."

Read the entire forum letter written by Ng E Jay below:

Jan 30, 2010
Ex-scholarship holder in opposition? No big deal

I REFER to the report on a former government scholarship holder joining an opposition party ('Ex-Admin Service officer joins Reform', Jan 20).

While some have hailed this as a significant plus for the opposition, I view it as a non-event.

First, many talented graduates have joined the ranks of the opposition in recent years, but many of them have opted to keep out of the spotlight, preferring to build a credible profile first. For example, Workers' Party secretary-general and Member of Parliament for Hougang, Mr Low Thia Khiang, mentioned recently that his party has been recruiting new members, many of whom are probably academically well qualified.

Second, I agree with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's assessment that we should not judge political candidates based on their paper credentials, but on what they can do for society. Using Mr Lee's yardstick, I judge many opposition candidates favourably as they provide an alternative voice for the people, regardless of their qualifications. In fact, good grades are irrelevant to being a good politician, as the work of serving the community requires the heart more than the head.

It is time we look past superficial measures of success like academic credentials, and pay more attention to an individual's track record at work and in community service, which are more accurate indicators of his calibre.

Ng E-Jay

YD Jarrod Luo snubbed by WP Sylvia Lim

2010-01-28T22:57:00.004+08:00

The National University of Singapore Students' Political Association (NUSPA) and Socialist Democratic Club recently organised a policy forum - "Policy Face-off - Immigration Policies: How many is enough?"

The Facebook event wall stated: "All Staff / Students need to flash their Staff ID / Matriculation Card to gain entry into the venue." (See facebook event)

Interestingly, Jarrod Luo from the Young Democrats, youth wing of Singapore Democratic Party, managed to enter the theatrette.

Jarrod Luo was quick to pose a question to Ms. Sylvia Lim, Chairman of Workers' Party, regarding her views on Minimum Wage, in a brazen attempt to challenge her. Some of the participants were puzzled because the forum was dealing with "Immigration Policy", and the question appeared out of topic.

Charismatic as she is, Ms. Sylvia Lim snubbed Jarrod Luo, by disagreeing with Jarrod Luo's view that Minimum Wage policy should be enforced in Singapore. Ms. Sylvia Lim even went to the extent of agreeing with the PAP Government's take on Minimum Wage. After this "smack-in-the-face" response, Jarrod Luo hurriedly retreated to his seat. It's interesting to see how shallow Jarrod Luo appeared to be. Perhaps just reiterating the party's stand on Minimum Wage, Jarrod Luo didn't seem to be able to convince the audience on Minimum Wage policy.

Jarrod Luo could have read more about Workers' Party before jumping on to Ms. Sylvia Lim.

In the Workers' Party Manifesto 2006, under the heading of "Labour Policy and CPF", it was stated that "* The minimum wage in Collective Agreements should be strictly enforced. Union leaders should educate employees on their minimum wage and to make a report if they have been "short-changed"."

Minimum Wage Policy and "minimum wage in Collective Agreements" are both different issues.

By not understanding counterparts in the opposition, Jarrod Luo humiliated himself in the theatrette, with close to 300 staring at him.

For those who want to know more about Jarrod Luo, you may wish to read "Forumers point out Jarrod Luo's involvement in Sunshine Empire" & "Who's Jarrod Luo?"

John Tan's remarks deeply offensive to Muslims

2010-01-28T02:22:00.003+08:00

This article is in follow up to my novel article "SDP's John Tan plays the religion card"

The Singapore Democratic Party's Christmas greeting video has disturbed several online Muslims netizens, local and abroad.

In the video, John Tan, SDP's Assistant Secretary General (#2 man in SDP), repeatedly used the words "Jesus" and "Bible" in a span of 7 minutes. The Christian Messiah complex of the video has obviously offended Singaporeans of other religious groups.

John Tan mentioned that being "jolly" means different things to "different" people, and added that "being jolly is to continue to fulfill the mission Christ came to impart to us".

What does he mean by "different" people? Singaporeans might choose to believe in different religions, but how does that made us "different" people?

And do we Muslims get less "jolly" because we are not fulfilling "Christ" mission?

Our society is multiracial and multireligious. John Tan's insensitive remarks could have triggered an "Allah" saga, as observed in Malaysia, if not for the poor outreach of the party and lack of awareness of SDP online.

John Tan also claims that Muslims follow the Christian's path of non-violence. Citing the example of Abdul Ghaffar Khan, who was suspected of attempting to assasinate the founder of Pakistan and who was viewed by Pakistanis as a traitor, John Tan gave a distorted image of reality.

In an attempt to win over Christians to the Singapore Democratic Party, John Tan asked netizens to "join" him in his crusade.

By drawing religious lines, John Tan has lost my vote indefinitely, and many Muslims' votes for his irresponsible sensationalised remarks and illogical comments.

SDP eyeing Tampines GRC

2010-01-28T00:25:00.003+08:00

Singapore Democratic Party is eyeing Tampines GRC in the upcoming General Elections, reported The Straits Times.

"The Straits Times understands that the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) has approached the NSP, saying it may be keen to contest in Tampines GRC."

Other than the National Solidarity Party (NSP), the Reform Party and the Workers' Party are also interested in fielding candidates for Tampines GRC.

In the General Election 2006, the GRC was contested by both PAP and Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA), which the NSP was part of it then.

NotMySDP understands that the Tampines GRC turf has been worked by NSP and the WP over the years. NSP has fielded candidates in the Tampines GRC, while WP has always been active in the Northeast region. SDP has never contested in the area before.

As to why SDP is jumping on Tampines GRC, the best explanation is:

Asked about the opposition challenge, Tampines GRC MP Ong Kian Min said: ‘They are interested because this is a small and compact space. With their limited resources, it helps when they don’t need to spread out to cover the area.’

What else to expect from opportunistic SDP? Besides selling the party newspapers, visiting prisons, and attending international forums, the SDP has not did their ground work in Tampines.

No support for Chee Soon Juan by Singaporeans

2010-01-23T23:11:00.003+08:00

Singapore Democratic Party proudly pasted a press release by the Council for a Community of Democracies, condemning the jailing of Chee Soon Juan, the Secretary General of SDP.

I must salute the Singapore Democratic Party over the way it profiles itself online, as a very glamorous organisation, with so many alliances with international bodies, yet appears to be victimised in Singapore.

So what really is this "Council for a Community Democracies"?

The Council for a Community Democracies (CCD) are staffed with 25 civil society leaders, who are all from the United States of America. With no representation from Asia, I wonder how the council can be effective in pushing for democracy outside the USA.

The CCD seeks "to establish a global network of democratic countries with the principal aim of fortifying democratic governance everywhere". However, since its inception in 2000, the CCD still has no Asian and European representation in its council. It is far from a "global network", it's just a "USA network".

A quick glance through its activities shows that the CCD is more talk than action. There were no signs of positive results from its activities. The CCD often merely acts as a body to condemn the actions of other countries/governments/organisations.

Hey... But Chee Soon Juan won the Defender of Democracy Award!

The award is given by Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA). According to its website, "The Defender of Democracy Award is presented to individuals who, through their own commitment and active engagement, have made significant progress in strengthening democracy and democratic practices. "

Chee has intimate ties with many foreign organisations and foreigners. A very good example is Robert Amsterdam, who frequently condemns the Singapore government in favour of Chee. With his ties, it's not difficult to imagine how he won this award.

Just ask yourself - Has Chee made SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS? Through his OWN commitment and ACTIVE engagement?

SDP's Proxy Alex Tan Zhixiang defects

2010-01-19T10:13:00.002+08:00

The latest proxy of Singapore Democratic Party has declared on his blog that he had defected to Singapore People's Party (SPP).

With the support of anonymous netizens, Alex Tan Zhixiang launched numerous attacks against Young PAP members. SDP's Young Democrats also pitched in to discuss with him via facebook regarding political issues.

SPP is now led by the former Secretary-General of the SDP, Mr Chiam See Tong. Chiam was the one who groomed SDP's Chee Soon Juan. When Chee Soon Juan performed a high-publicity hunger strike over the misappropriation of funds, which led to him being sacked by his employer NUS, Chiam opposed to it. However, Chee Soon Juan soon became the publicity boy for the party and caused a split within the party, finally resulting in the ouster of Chiam.

Chiam sued SDP, and the court ruled in favour of Chiam that it was illegal for the party to expel him. That meant Chiam could retain his seat in parliament. By the next General Election, Chiam founded a new political party, the Singapore People's Party.

Alex Tan Zhixiang also referred to Chiam See Tong, as the Respectable Chiam. It is no wonder why he had picked SPP over SDP.

And our team wishes him all the best.

SDP's John Tan plays the Religion Card

2010-01-18T13:15:00.004+08:00

Hello everyone. I'm Nur Aishah and one of the founding members of the NotMySDP team. I'm compelled to stand forward, writing in my own name, to defend something that is so important to me, and which had been insulted by Singapore Democratic Party's Assistant Secretary General, John Tan, in his Christmas video message.

In a video with a duration span of less than 8 minutes, John Tan mentioned the word "Jesus" more than 13 times.

According to SDP's website, John Tan was a bible scholar and a missionary intern. He was previously a lecturer at James Cook University but was expelled after he was charged in court for his group's "Tak Boleh Tahan" protest. He is now a "social psychologist", as stated on the party's main site.

If John Tan had made the Christmas message a personal one, I wouldn't mind. BUT, he was speaking for the party - Singapore Democratic Party - and so whatever he said must be held accountable to Singaporeans, of all races and religions.

Beginning with Jesus' story from the bible, John Tan went ahead to invoke Christianity beliefs that justified SDP's ideology.

John Tan also went ahead to say how Jesus enlightened other religious prophets to follow his steps.

I wonder why has no one charged him for saying such irresponsible and anti-religious harmony.

To John Tan & SDP members who subscribed to such anti-religious harmony sentiments, you are the FOXes!

SDP's latest Proxy Alex Tan Zhixiang

2009-12-16T19:34:00.008+08:00

A beacon of hope seems to appear for the Singapore Democratic Party as the "online hero" Alex Tan Zhixiang aligns himself with the Young Democrats. NOTMYSDP has in various posts shown how weak the Young Democrats is and the myths surrounding them. With reinforcement of a new media darling Alex Tan Zhixiang, Young Democrats can now capitalise on this attention-seeking individual to bring it to newer heights.

Alex celebrates his feature in The Sunday Times, with the support of Young Democrats' Honorary Secretary Jarrod Luo.

Several other prominent YD members/supporters are also leveraging on Alex Tan Zhixiang's fame by commenting and writing on his facebook wall.
Alex Tan Zhixiang also openly supports the Young Democrats' supporters/members:

This appears to be a well-coordinated move by the SDP to rope in a proxy to fight this online battle. The SDP has been known to capitalise on proxies (supporters who aren't given the membership to make them appear neutral), including Seelan Palay and Chia Ti Lik. SDP is playing a smart strategy not to give membership to Alex Tan Zhixiang as he openly denounces National Service and had a criminal record (According to Sunday Times, he was charged when he was serving National Service). As a member, he would be a liability to the party, so SDP is using him as a proxy.

Alex Tan Zhixiang added Corns Tan as his facebook friend. Utilising the access to Corns Tan's account, Alex Tan Zhixiang acted as an outpost for the SDP. He also issued a challenge which he mistakenly thought that NOTMYSDP was a PAP initiative.

So Who is Alex Tan Zhixiang?

Alex Tan Zhixiang claims to be working as an engineer with ISPL. However, it is found that he actually owns a tuition business "Tuition Now" with a friend Jason Soh - see facebook link (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=107063045105).

A browse-through his profile and photos shows that he is very much a loner.

Alex Tan Zhixiang's Friendster
Alex Tan Zhixiang's Facebook

It is not known how Alex Tan Zhixiang joined the SDP but our sentiments are that he had subscribed to SDP's views soon after he was charged and served sentence in detention barrack during National Service.

NOTMYSDP will continue to check on the SDP and expose all its myths and untruths that it creates so as to allow Singaporeans to understand this party.

Seelan Palay & Co. Communism Supporters?

2009-12-02T01:21:00.003+08:00

Seelan Palay is a guitarist with the band called Ila Mitra. Scratching your head over what Ila Mitra means?

Ila Mitra (Bangla: ইলা মিত্র) (1925-2002) was a legendary peasants movement organizer of the Indian subcontinent, especially in Bengal (now Bangladesh). She was born to an upper middleclass Bengali family in Kolkata on 18 October 1925. She became a communist during her youth. In 1945, she married Ramendra Mitra, who was an active member of the Communist Party despite his lineage from a zamindar (landowner) family of Chapai Nawabganj.

Seelan Palay and his Ila Mitra band members are pro-SDP and had participated in various SDP events, such as the IMF-World Bank distribution of flyers:

So why would someone pick the name of Ila Mitra? Not unless they are respect and look up to Ila Mitra.

That makes Seelan Palay and friends supporters of Communism. Perhaps that's why Seelan Palay has not been given the SDP membership.

Image Source: http://blogs.myspace.com/ilamitra

SDP wants BAN on news reports during GE

2009-12-02T00:39:00.003+08:00

Singapore Democratic Party's Chairman, Gandhi Ambalan wants a complete ban on news reports during GE. This was in response to the proposed cooling-off period mooted by the PAP.

A complete ban would mean that Singapore be shut off from external world. Thousands of news network would be disallowed to mention Singapore in their reports. Sounds silly? Wait till you hear more!

Gandhi Ambalan writes, "Direct communication through rallies and groundwork have been opposition's mode of reaching out to voters."

Gandhi should speak for himself or for the SDP instead of speaking on behalf of the opposition. Workers' Party and Singapore Democratic Alliance members does groundwork before GE. When Gandhi Ambalan writes that, it gives a feeling that the SDP had not been doing their ground work. Would a longer campaigning period help? One wonders.

One reader of the SDP website had this comment to make about the SDP:

"SDP repeatedly prides itself on its ability to bypass the ruling party's control of the MSM through its mastery of the alternative media.

Complaining is just a (further) indication that it has run out of imaginative ideas to reach the electorate. More importantly, it should worry about what messages it wants to convey rather than raise hue and cry over the restrictions over the means."

Ignorant Seelan Palay and SDP's LOVE for foreigners

2009-11-14T00:31:00.006+08:00

Seelan Palay, the activist that is tactically made a non-SDP member, sheds some light to the extent on how much the SDP loves foreigners (while condemning government policies on foreign workers and talents).

A Burmese shares with us how Burmese supports SDP and other oppositions in Singapore.

Seelan Palay didn't know that Dr Chee Soon Juan misappropriated funds when he was NUS lecturer.

And Jarrod Luo acknowledged the inactivity of Young Democrats.

SDP - a Party for Foreigners

2009-11-13T03:49:00.002+08:00

Dr Chee Soon Juan slammed SPH for publishing the government's response to Robert Amsterdam's article.

Dr Chee Soon Juan was also interviewed by a foreign radio station.

Dr Chee Soon Juan never misses an opportunity to capitalise on foreign platforms to voice out his flawed ideologies.

And he's not the only one in the SDP to be pro-foreigner. Just think of Seelan Palay, who did a hunger strike for the Hindus, not in Singapore, but in Malaysia, following the detention of the HINDRAF activists. SDP also held vigils for Burmese and I would have thought they pray to Mother Aung San Su Kyi.

What kind of political leader would ask foreign businesses not to come into the country? Dr Chee Soon Juan! As irritating as a fly pestering you on a hot sunny day, Dr Chee Soon Juan appealed to foreign governments and businesses not to deal with Singapore, claiming that they should not support the not-so-democratic Singapore.

AND YET... Dr Chee Soon Juan and Singapore Democratic Party are scolding the PAP for not helping the people enough during the economic recession (think Tak Boleh Tahan campaign, that saw SDP members Tak Boleh Tahan and giving up on continuing the campaign). Now how does SDP reconcile the fact that Singapore needs foreign businesses here to help build the economy so that locals get job? Nah, they're more interested in foreigners.

Of course, Mrs Chee is an exotic Taiwanese. Jarrod Luo, Honorary Secretary of Young Democrats, got his degree from Australia and frequent Macau and Hong Kong for his online gambling business. Chee Siok Chin so wants to go overseas to attend class.

SDP could prosper if it wasn't a political party. Perhaps it should consider opening a travel agency or offer espionage services.

Who is Chee Siok Chin?

2009-11-09T12:23:00.005+08:00

Chee Siok Chin is the sister of Dr Chee Soon Juan. Chee Siok Chin is currently a CEC member of the Singapore Democratic Party.

In GE 2006, Chee Siok Chin's occupation was a democracy advocate. She is married without children.

Prior to that, Chee Siok Chin was a Physical Education (PE, in short) teacher at the former Queenstown Secondary Technical School.

Here's some comments on Chee Siok Chin from her students:

My favourite comment goes to:

"A teacher who had always demanded discipline from her students could actually do that. Did we rebel against her in the past when felt unjust? We didn't."

Singapore Democratic Party Lack of Transparency

2009-11-09T11:27:00.004+08:00

Singapore Democratic Party have links with foreign groups.

Should foreign activists fund S'pore civil groups
Ho Lian-Yi
The New Paper, 27 July 2009

..... So what was the agenda of the Swedish activist, Mr Johan Skarendal?

He is a member of the Swedish International Liberal Centre (Silc), whose avowed goal, as stated on its website, is 'to strengthen organisations and support individuals who develop and promote democracy and human rights'.

Mr Skarendal, 29, is in charge of Silc activities in Singapore and the group is affiliated to the Liberal Party, one of the four political parties in the Swedish government since 2006.

The group has extensive reach globally and funds activities which promote its goals....

The rules for foreign funding of local political parties here are clear. The Political Donation Act bans political parties and organisations from receiving foreign donations.

But could foreign groups influence politics through non-political donations using civil societies as a front?

After all, NGOs have shown they can spark a change here....

Singapore Management University law lecturer Eugene Tan said no CSO (Civil Society Organisation) would be breaking the law by virtue of receiving foreign funding as long as they are not recognised as a political organisation.

But he said they have an 'ethical duty' to say who funds them so people who give donations can make an informed opinion about the group's motives...

Gay rights activist Alex Au, who is also a member of Maruah, however, didn't think there was any issue with foreign funding...

But he agreed that funding sources should be as open as possible.

'Any organisation that takes a public profile should act in a way that is in the interest of accountability, to a reasonable extent,' he said.

Who did Swedish activist meet here?

In about a one-week period in April, Swedish activist Johan Skarendal met an array of Singapore liberals.

They include filmmakers Martyn See and Seelan Palay, Myanmar activist Myo Myint Maung, and Mr Andrew Loh and Mr Choo Zheng Xi of socio-political blog The Online Citizen.

Others included activist Alex Au from gay movement People Like Us and lawyer Peter Low...

Mr See said he met Mr Skarendal over drinks in town in a casual setting and the topic was mainly his experience with the Films Act...

Overseas Burmese Patriots spokesman Myo Mying Maung said he was introduced to Mr Skarendal by Mr Palay, and there were five Myanmar activists at the meeting, himself included.

Gay rights activist Mr Au said they spoke about social change and politics here.

'He asked us a number of questions, and we answered,' he said...

But The New Paper understands Mr Skarendal did not meet any minister or 'members of the establishment'...

Fact-finding

Activist Mr Palay, who was present at several of the meetings, would only say that Mr Skarendal came on a fact-finding mission...

All those interviewed denied being offered funds by Skarendal, who is not new to Singapore. A self-described good friend of opposition politician Chee Soon Juan, Mr Skarendal has been involved with the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief's work in human rights and the promotion of liberal democracies.

Just how close is the relationship and has Mr Skarendal funded Mr Chee's non-political agenda? The Swede would not say. Ignoring the question, he merely replied earlier that he considered Mr Chee a good friend and someone who had written a testimonial for his studies in Taiwan. Their relationship goes back to 2003. After Mr Chee visited Sweden in February that year, the SDP's youth wing organised a conference here in July...

Mr Chee also spoke at the conference, which was sponsored by Swedish-based institutions including SILC.

It was co-organised with the Sweden-Singapore Initiative for Democracy (SSID).

On SDP's website, the party says it is affiliated or working in close cooperation with several organisations including SSID, which is also funded by SILC.

Singapore Democratic Party Exposed 2 - Bad State of the Young Democrats

2009-11-04T09:50:00.002+08:00

In this episode, we examine the state of the Young Democrats, youth wing of the Singapore Democratic Party.

Young Democrats (YD) Monthly Meeting For October 2009 on Saturday(31/10/09)‏

From: Jarrod Luo (duckispro@hotmail.com)

Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 6:47:42 PM

To:

Cc:

Dear all,

Please note that the meeting scheduled as per email subject has been called off, due to poor attendance. The Council shall arrange another day within the next week to meet, in order to close for the month of October and plan for the coming month of November.

The Council would like to take this opportunity to highlight to one and all that the overall participation level of YD members in Party events and activities have been disappointingly poor, for apart from the same few individuals who have been trying their best to make time for the cause, the rest of the members really need to do better in this aspect.

The Council would also like to highlight on another disturbing trend they observed. Despite the numerous communications channels available to connect the members with the Party, it still seems that the latest plans and intentions of the Party are still being kept in the dark from some members. This should not be the case, as all members should already be on the email lists(e.g. this). And even if in the unlikely case that a member is not in the loop, the onus is on the member to put in the extra effort to connect with the Party and request the relevant updates.

Make no mistake, but all members should be clear on one thing: they are not being expected to put in any extra effort for anyone, nor anything. Not for the Party, not for Dr Chee, not even for our beloved country (emphasis added), Singapore. This extra effort has to be given because for better or worse, we are all in this together and ultimately it all boils to the reason why we are in politics and why, out of all parties, we have chosen this Party.

Hence, the Council would like to conclude by urging all YD members to reflect upon the events of the past months, and re-dedicate themselves anew to the Party and the cause it represents.

Best Regards,

Jarrod Luo

Honorary Secretary

Young Democrats

From: Muhummed Shamin Mohammed Sidek (shamin_maldini@hotmail.com)

You may not know this sender.Mark as safe|Mark as junk

Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 7:25:23 AM

Hi,

I agree that we need to work together as a team. I remembered the poll TOC had on it's website regarding the youth wings that people identify themselves with, Young Democrat had the 2nd highest vote. I guess people voted us because they looked at the parent party. If people knew the realities of the group and how active it was, people might not have voted us overwhelmingly.

We should find the root of the problem and not be pointing fingers at one another. We can look a few questions to discuss and think of a solution to it.

1) Is it a leadership issue?

2) Is it that members just can't be bothered?

3) Members feel alienated from the party as whole?

4) Members are afraid to be publicly identified with the party itself?

I am sure that all of us have our problems that becomes a stumbling block which prevents us from committing. Being youth, we also have other pursuits and problems such as trying to get a job, financial difficulties and other personal issues. Some of us would aspire to be members of parliaments while other would just want to help out.

As of now, I believe all of us joined the party because, firstly, we saw the PAP and the system that they have established as our enemy and secondly, we agreed with the parties goals. So we should all be working together towards the party goals.

I hope that we are able to overcome this commitment issue and move on from here.

Muhammad Shamin
Member
Young Democrats

Singapore Democratic Party Exposed 1

2009-11-03T22:41:00.003+08:00

To date, Honorary Secretary of Young Democrats, Jarrod Luo hasn't responded to our email.

To allow Singaporeans to understand the Singapore Democratic Party, we will now launch the SINGAPORE DEMOCRATIC PARTY EXPOSED SERIES.

The information are shared by ex-SDP members who have been alienated by the party, as well as those who have left the party after knowing what the party stands for.

We have always maintained our posture and objective of exposing the myth of the SDP. And now we present you the reality.

REALITY: Young Democrats has only 5 members

President: Priveen Suraj
Vice-President: Jufri Salim
Honorary Secretary: Jarrod Luo
Program Director: Khalis
Member: Shamin

Of the 5, only Jarrod Luo is a University Graduate. The only work he has done since is MLM (which he calls a business).

REALITY: Seelan Palay is not a SDP member

Seelan is not a YD or SDP member. But he helps out alot with their activities. He runs some campaigns(anti-death penalty, myanmar protest etc) in his own capacity but his work is often interwined with SDP's. It is not that he does not want to be a SDP member but John Tan (Asst Secretary General, SDP) thought he could help the party better by being a non-partisan member instead of a full-fledged SDP member. This is to make it appear like as if non-political sections of Singapore support SDP.

REALITY: No Internal Elections held to contest Party Leadership since Chiam's departure

There has also been no internal elections to contest the party leadership since Mr Chiam See Tong left the party. John Tan only joined the party in 2007, yet he was quickly made the Assistant Secretary General by Dr Chee Soon Juan. Again, no elections, no contests. Other members were not even consulted on the issue.

REALITY: Dr Chee Soon Juan is no Democrat

Dr Chee Soon Juan designates positions as he likes. There is no mechanism within the party to remove him from his position.

Dr Chee Soon Juan also has full control over income earned through the newsletter. Some of the funds are believed to be used for his own personal use [sentiments from ex-SDP members].

REALITY: The True Purpose for selling newspapers

SDP tries to recruit new members through their newspaper selling walks but this method has never been very successful. When they are out and about selling their newspapers, they also sell Dr Chee's books at the same time. Dr Chee's book sales are unaccounted for in the party records as it is his personal business. This is one way how Chee uses his party members for his own personal gain.

Most of SDP's present recruits have come through the various seminars and public forums that SDP conducts. It is during this forums that they try to get members of the public interested in their party.

Wait a Minute!
How do we know if you are telling the truth?

We have reliable sources. We offer the Singapore Democratic Party the right of reply to whichever points it feels are not accurate.
Members of SDP can email to perplexperspective@hotmail.com OR
post your comments at the blog itself

NotMySDP writes to Jarrod Luo for explanation

2009-11-03T02:08:00.003+08:00

NOTMYSDP wrote to Jarrod Luo demanding an explanation on his involvement in vice activities.

We await Jarrod Luo's response, failing which we will send in a public letter to Dr Chee Soon Juan.

The Singapore Democratic Party needs to be more transparent. We have not heard of how the SDP uses its funds collected through its website.

Hi Jarrod Luo (jarrod@yoursdp.org),

Several forumers have pointed out your involvement with Sunshine Empire, the owners of which are now undergoing trial for the Ponzi scheme.

I have also found evidence of your involvement with an online gambling site.

For the benefit of the residents of Bishan-Toa Payoh and Bukit Panjang, please disclose your involvement in the above-mentioned vice activities. Singapore Democratic Party has always asked the PAP government to be transparent. We as citizens will want to know the facts.

Thank you.

Regards,
Corns Tan,
on behalf of NOTMYSDP

What Chee would write to Obama

2009-11-03T01:11:00.001+08:00

Chee Soon Juan wrote an open letter to Obama to congratulate him when he was inaugurated as President of the USA in January. Of course, it turned out to be more a complaints letter.

Dr Chee would probably be recycling this idea when President Obama drops by next month. Not My SDP would like to postulate what the new letter to Obama will look like with the following parody.

-----

President Obama,

I heard that you will be popping by next month for APEC 2009. That is why I am writing yet another open letter to you.

When you were inaugurated as President earlier this year, I also composed a letter to you. I couched the letter in the form of a congratulatory note, but it was more to air my political grievances to you and everyone who bothers to read my endless ramblings.

But you did not even deem it necessary to reply me. Of course, I was very devastated then. My disappointment only ceased after much soul searching. I finally consoled myself that you must have been too busy improving your basketball skills or pulling strings for the Nobel Peace Prize to write me a reply.

I have decided to forgive you, but I hope you will be more sensitive to a fellow freedom crusader's feeling in future. It really made me look bad in front of my supporters to be ignore. Please remember - no one ignores Chee Soon Juan.

Nevertheless, I am not known around Singapore as Mr Politically Persistent for no reason; hence this second attempt at an open letter. Initially, I was hoping to repeat most of the points I had made in my previous one, since you missed them anyway.

But I've been rather busy lately. I also am to lazy to regurgitate the same points I had made previously, even just for the sake of the President of USA. So I hope you don't mind reading them over here at this URL (http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/1782-democrats-message-to-president-obama).

Since politically nothing much has changed here in Singapore, my letter would have been about the same old stuff - lack of civil, human and whatever rights here; Singapore PM is earning bigger bucks than you; many poor Singaporeans, not unlike the homeless ones over there in USA, and so on.

The only additional point I would have made is that our government here is trying to deprive the citizens of their wet-markets that the old folks are very sentimental about. . My party is pretending to fight for these and trying to impress the voters in a constituency we hope to contest soon. Don't underestimate people's passion for stinky and humid markets.

In Jan, I even made a video then, to enhance the emotional impact of my messages. The video is more intended for the lazy Singaporeans who prefer something more multi-media. You see, it's hard to compel them to read my long essays, and that is also why my party website has seen a big drop in readership. What to do, have to pander to the electorate's idiosyncrasies, right?

To cut to the chase, I have run out of ideas what else to do here. I like the catch-phrase you used very much - "Yes we can", I thought my party can too, but apparently we just can't think of any new ideas to get into parliament. Maybe you can lend me your campaign manager, that David Plouffe guy. He's quite good; at least better than the rag-tag team I have who simply echoes whatever I say.

Anyway, when I heard you were coming by, I could not decide whether to rejoice or feel downtrodden.

I rejoiced because I might have the opportunity to meet you personally when you are in Singapore. Imagine you and I rubbing shoulders together. It would give me much political mileage amongst my potential voters whom I regret to say, are very indifferent. And ignorant, if I may add.

Perhaps there would be some photo-op too. Then I can embellish my party website with pictures of you and I standing shoulder-to-shoulder not only physically, but against the tyranny of the autocratic governments around the world. I was told you are quite a tall guy, so I hope you won't mind if I stood on a small stool for the pose in front of the cameras. Our statures would then be more or less equal. A politician craves for some limelight, no?

Unfortunately, it's unlikely I'd even get within 10 miles of your entourage. Those pesky policemen will be tailing me and ensuring that I don't even get near to SUNTEC where the meetings will be held. So my colleagues and I are planning to deliberately break some laws by having some demonstrations.

I can't give any details of our plans here, since they are meant to be secret. I hope the noise we make won't interfere with the conference. Anyway, I heard nothing usually comes out of APEC meetings. So no loss. At least we would provide the international journalists something interesting to write about, and my international profile will be raised. It's good for me, because I'd be invited to seminars and talks overseas, and more importantly, get paid money which I quite desperately need.

At the same time, I have reasons to be sad by your attendance of APEC 2009. Perhaps simply out of courtesy, you probably be singing praises of your host, whom you should know by now are my political arch-enemies. It's a moral betrayal I'll have to bear for the duration of the conference. I'll just hope you won't carry it overboard, otherwise I'll stop writing to you in future.

Your Fellow Crusader for Freedom,

Chee Soon Juan (Dr)

SDP Internet Brigade strikes at NOTMYSDP

2009-11-03T01:03:00.003+08:00

Thanks SDP for the attempt to publicise this blog.

There's something called copyright though.

http://butmypap.blogspot.com/

Forumers point out Jarrod Luo's involvement in Sunshine Empire

2009-10-28T00:06:00.004+08:00

Forumers have pointed out Jarrod Luo's (Honorary Secretary of Young Democrats - Youth wing of Singapore Democratic Party) involvement in the Ponzi Scheme Sunshine Empire.

Click on link below to find out more:

http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/showthread.php?p=41238169

Forumers have found photos of Jarrod Luo with Sam Mok, who is the Managing Director of Sunshine Empire.

In one photo, Jarrod Luo is pictured side by side Sam Mok, and wearing a tag, with a Forwin88.com image in the background. Forwin88.com is believed to be a splinter of Sunshine Empire.

About Sunshine Empire

Sunshine Empire is a defunct company, with all assets frozen by the Singapore Government. The Founder and CEO are currently on trial for running fraudulent trades and investment schemes.

It was set up in 2006 as a Multi Level Marketing (MLM) company, based Singapore.

The company is listed by the Singapore Government's Monetary Authority in its Investor's Alert List, for possibly running investment schemes without authority.

Following months of investigation by the Commercial Affairs Department of the Singapore Police, Sunshine Empire's Directors will appear on trial at Singapore's Subordinate Courts in March 2009 for falsifying accounts, making false capital declarations and running a fraudulent trade.

The company had gathered up to S$189 million in funds through investment schemes, alleged to have never materialised and in fact a Ponzi scheme. Initial trial revealed that over S$115m were paid out as 'investment returns', while another S$40m were transferred to associates as 'interest free loans' and the remaining believed to have been expended or paid out to directors as fees.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_Empire

It is not known if Jarrod Luo had been an active multilevel marketer at Sunshine Empire. Jarrod Luo is estimated to have joined the SDP after Sunshine Empire is investigated by the authorities. Could his SDP membership be a result of his discontent with how the authorities clamped down on Sunshine Empire?

We believe that Jarrod Luo had a name change or rather adopted an English name after Sunshine Empire got into trouble.

Repeated attempts of contacting Jarrod Luo have not been successful. At least Sheng Siong responded with a rejection. Jarrod Luo didn't even reply.

Naked SDP has no clothes to wear

2009-10-21T10:28:00.004+08:00

In a latest blooper by the most irrelevant political party in Singapore*, the SDP mistook someone else for MM Lee!

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew was speaking to students at the University Cultural Centre of National University of Singapore on 19 October 2009, Monday. However, in its article, the SDP mentioned criticised the MM Lee that spoke on "Sunday night".

SDP mentioned that MM Lee disregards the Gini coefficient. But that's not true! MM Lee Kuan Yew was answering to a student's question "Short of a Minimum Wage policy, what are the other ways we can help low-income Singaporeans other than CPF Life, ComCare, SPUR, Workfare, etc". As such, the SDP is skewing the facts and painting a wrong image.

As Singaporeans, we feel disturbed that SDP, as a political organisation, adopts such a negative writing style when penning about Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's very own founding father. Without MM Lee's leadership, the SDP might not even exist.

But the SDP's views do not matter. Channel NewsAsia reported that "The minister mentor will deliver a speech and receive the inaugural Lifetime Achievement Award from the US-ASEAN Business Council during its 25th Anniversary Gala Dinner in Washington on October 27."

At the end of the day, the one that has no clothes to wear is the SDP

* based on a research by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS)

Indiscriminate recruitment for Young Democrats

2009-10-18T12:22:00.002+08:00

As the SDP rejoice the growing [based on assumption] numbers of its Young Democrats, its elites should begin to worry. Quantity does not mean quality, and especially in the Young Democrats, the quality seems to drop with every increase in its quantity.

Just look at the Honorary Secretary of the Young Democrats, Jarrod Luo. As a young graduate, he is now involved in an online gambling business called Forwin88.com, a business linked to Grand Elitia. Upon our research on Grand Elitia, we found it linked to a fraudulent company. We have sent a private message to Jarrod Luo to ask him if he was involved there too. Online gambling is illegal in many countries including Singapore. Read more about Jarrod Luo in our article: "Who's Jarrod Luo?"

In contrast to the claim by the SDP that "the Young Democrats have also been doing their homework in raising discussions that interest young people in Singapore", a quick glance at the Young Democrats facebook page will very quickly turn you off. Other than members of the Young Democrats, no one else are contributing to the page.

An encounter with the Young Democrats in their facebook group has also been disappointing. Read the following articles to find out more:

Young Democrats not open to alternative views: http://notmysdp.blogspot.com/2009/10/young-democrats-not-open-to-alternative.html
Young Democrats lift ban on Corns upon reading NOTMYSDP: http://notmysdp.blogspot.com/2009/10/young-democrats-lift-ban-on-corns-upon.html
Anonymous reader returns with loopholes: http://notmysdp.blogspot.com/2009/10/anonymous-reader-returns-with-loopholes.html

Has the SDP broken the Law?

According to the SDP article, "a 15-year-old student joined us for a walkabout and sales of The New Democrat". The law states that political parties must not recruit students (less tertiary ones) and that students should not be engaged in political activities.

Is the SDP desperate for young members that it indiscriminately recruits teens into Young Democrats? Do the teens even understand what is politics in the first place.

The answer lies here in our article, "Sell The New Democrat for Commission", http://notmysdp.blogspot.com/2009/10/sell-new-democrat-for-commission.html . Are these underage students selling the SDP newspapers to earn a living?

SDP first to start youth wing but now has the weakest youth wing

SDP proudly proclaims to be the first political party to start a youth wing. It was started by Mr Chiam See Tong, which was ousted by Dr Chee Soon Juan. The current leadership has changed 360 degrees after Chiam's departure. However, Dr Chee and other SDP leaders still shamelessly claim Chiam's work as their own pride.

In fact, the Young Democrats cannot be compared to the youth wings of Workers' Party and the PAP. Even the youth wing of Reform Party is recruiting more youths than the SDP.

All in all, SDP has yet again been boastful about tiny achievements and show us that humility has no place in its value system.

SDP wants to fight PAP on all fronts except...

2009-10-14T10:31:00.002+08:00

Capitalising on the AGC appeal on the acquittal of the TBT gang and the sale of HDB wet markets to Sheng Siong, Dr Chee Soon Juan is quick to exploit the situation and gain some political points for the SDP.

In his latest article, he outright declared that his party wants to fight the ruling party - PAP - on all fronts. The title appeared demeaning BUT after reading it, we found that his title was misleading. The title should instead be:

SDP wants to fight PAP on all fronts except winning the people's hearts

These are the actual fronts that the SDP want to fight:

Contesting Elections
"campaign for the rights of our freedoms of speech and assembly to be restored"

Point 1 -- Elections. Acceptable.

Point 2 -- Campaigning for rights

Read this: "The nonviolent action campaign conducted by my colleagues and I is not borne out of impulsive passion or angry desperation. They are a result of a careful review of what strategy works and what doesn't."

The SDP simply has no way to turn back. After numerous suits against Dr Chee and jail terms, Dr Chee has many reasons to fight for "rights". He fights for such "rights" so that he can clear his tainted name. The day he achieves the "rights" to strike and protest and demonstrate, he would be placed on the altar for his disobedient activities.

What about winning people's hearts?

SDP says interacting with people is "backbreaking work". The only interaction that SDP had till now was Tak Boleh Tahan (no updates for a long time), selling newspapers and walking the wet markets ONLY WHEN HDB wants to sell them. And yet, that's "backbreaking".

Walking the ground to the PAP, WP, and SDA means regular house visits to gather feedback from residents, not only during opportunities like sale of wet markets.

Fighting alone

To fight the hegemon PAP, SDP is going alone. Dr Chee did not mention, in any sense, that SDP would be working with other parties. It's been well-known that SDP has never respected WP as the leader of the Opposition.

As the least relevant party perceived by Singaporeans, it'd be definitely an uphill task for SDP.

民主党没做好功课就乱下指责

2009-10-12T20:34:00.001+08:00

张俰宾：民主党没做好功课就乱下指责。

武吉班让区议员张俰宾博士昨天受访时，证实收到民主党的公开信，也知道民主党成员到他的选区分传单，但没见过传单内容。

张俰宾说：“民主党不知道这个湿巴刹是我在1996年代表居民向建屋局申请兴建的，因为居民都倾向于在区内设立湿巴刹。民主党说我没为居民追究（收购）事件，其实我最近经常和居民、巴刹的摊贩和基层领袖们会面，他们都希望保留湿巴刹，我最后也向当局传达了居民的意愿。他们（指民主党）想说什么都行，因为他们没做好功课，不了解个中情况。”

《联合晚报》 12/10/2009
http://news.omy.sg/News/Local%2BNews/Story/OMYStory200910121455-97303.html

No One Bothers

2009-10-10T17:36:00.003+08:00

A picture says a thousand words about the attitude of Singaporeans toward Singaporeans. Now we know why they have to offer commission for the sale of party newspapers.

Sell The New Democrat for COMMISSION

2009-10-07T00:29:00.002+08:00

Looking for a new job?

Help SDP sell its party newspaper for commission.

SDP's sad or happy day?

2009-10-06T23:23:00.002+08:00

The following is a comment made by BryanT on the article about SDP members' acquittal.

SDP members and supporters won't know whether to laugh or cry over this acquittal.

Obviously, SDP should be euphoric that the acquittal vindicates what they have done in Sep 07. They could also rejoice that the judge has been amicable enough to interpret the law in their favour.

But I would like to remind SDP that it was let off on what seems like a technicality - the lack of a clear legal definition of "progression". Hence the judge has had to rely on a “natural and ordinary” meaning of the word.

SDP should note that this oversight (ie. lack of definition) can be easily corrected by parliament in future, although personally I think we should let it be, besides the fact it would make the government seem retributive to make the amendment at this stage.

On the other hand, SDP has reasons to be sad because the acquittal DEBUNKS their long-held and oft-repeated insinuation that the judiciary is at the beck-and-call of the ruling party. Here was a case whereby the judge has given SDP the benefit of doubt with regards to the law.

Based on its mindset, whenever judgments were proffered that were not favourable to the SDP, it would make accusations of judges being biased and beholden to the government. This mindset is embodied recent accusations made by its supporters of the type as follows:

- Shame on those lap dogs - the judges, ministers, technocrats, etc who are so educated yet have to suck up to one old
peesai miserable man.

- the ruling party has used the whole civil system like the police, army, media and justice to perpetrate the manipulation and suppression on the people

- Everyone knows kangaroos run our courts!

Now that a judge has shown clear and balanced legal mind to acquit these SDP members, the party and its supporter can no longer lay claims to persistent legal suppression. SDP can no longer deliberately breach laws and then attribute their incarceration to miscarriage of justice.

A principled judiciary is not helpful to SDP's cause since it has essentially lost one of its raison d'être to overhaul the Singapore system.

I know a sparrow does not summer make, but overall it's a sad autumn day for SDP.

Opportunistic SDP exploiting closure of wet markets

2009-10-05T23:08:00.003+08:00

SDP showed off its opportunistic side when it objected to the closure of wet markets.

SDP stated its objective: "The SDP will take the case to Singaporeans especially the residents at the Bukit Panjang constituency where we contested in the last general elections." & "We will ask the residents to oppose the sale of the wet market at Fajar Road".

Isn't it ironic that when SDP economic policies are to encourage local companies to blossom with the elimination of GLCs, SDP is fighting against the expansion of local company Sheng Shiong?

Would it be wise for the SDP to capitalise on this issue and turn it into a political equation? It's your take.

SDP needs to reconsider its electoral weaknesses

2009-10-05T22:13:00.003+08:00

In the last few days, SDP Assistant Secretary General, John Tan (the TBT person who treated the court like a circus) attended a forum in Seoul, Korea and "urged the international community to send monitors to Singapore during its next election".

In writing that the SDP are continuing the sale of its party newspapers, SDP highlighted several obstacles that lay in front of it, namely, "fear" of Singaporeans to vote against the PAP, and the "manipulation of the electoral process".

We believe that SDP is suffering from myopia and it needs to reconsider its electoral weaknesses in order for them to be ready for the next General Elections. There is really no point in dwelling at pointless accusations and external factors that the SDP cannot control.

These are our groups' observations and analysis on the SDP's electoral weaknesses.

Lack of grassroots appeal

While PAP, WP and SDA members conduct regular walkabouts at their constituencies and their "target constituencies", the SDP just sells newspapers. What SDP needs to do is to do more than just generating income from the sale of its newspapers. SDP should embark on house-to-house surveying and attempt to help locals directly.
Seen to be anti-everything-under-the-sun

SDP is well-known to be against every government policies and everything espoused by the ruling party. We can applaud SDP's effectiveness of transmitting such grievances and complaints. However, this has become a double-edged sword. On the other end, Singaporeans become disillusioned with SDP because SDP becomes a party with no useful outputs other than complaints.
Cannot shed its criminal image

With the numerous libel suits against SDP leaders, Singaporeans would be wary of voting the leaders who brushed with the law. In a society where locals are still not as forgetting and forgiving, SDP leaders might be shooting their feet if they continue to disregard the law.
Unable to differentiate itself from other parties

With the rising popularity of the Reform Party (since the death of JBJ and the coming of JBJ's son), the lines that differentiate SDP from the other parties become blurred. We know SDP claims it fights for democracy and human rights. Reform Party believes in that too. So does SDA and WP. So why vote for SDP?

Anonymous reader returns with loopholes

2009-10-02T02:07:00.003+08:00

This comment is real interesting.

we tend not to reply comments to this blog, so this might be one major exception since this exposes the SDP.

Take sometime to read it... cuz' Corns is no facebook idiot...

Are you ready?

Loopholes

1) "Click members and u can see all sorts of things" --> only Admins would see the ban list, therefore Anonymous must be admin.

2) Anonymous mentioned earlier (read below) on that he/she checked the Corns'd a secure facebook account and cannot be located from the member list by normal members --> Anonymous must be admin.

Thank you, Anonymous 4 all the entertaining performance!!!

Who's Jarrod Luo?

2009-10-02T01:38:00.006+08:00

Jarrod Luo is the Honorary Secretary of Young Democrats.

Excerpts from his facebook:

"... I'm currently working at a friend's company, training to be an assistant manager, as well as running some business on the sidelines..."

Businessman! Young Entrepreneur. Then I saw these photos:

Club Forwin website (http://www.forwin88.com/) shows that it's an online gambling site.

This is further confirmed by this forum --> http://www.onlinegamblingforum.org/showthread.php?t=6120

Online gambling is illegal in Singapore & in some other countries such as the United Kingdom. Is this why SDP hasnt been championing against the opening of the IR casinoes, unlike WP and SDA?

This adds questions to the way SDP picks its "talents". Do they screen their candidates?

As a key office holder, Jarrod Luo stands a chance to be put up by the party for elections. Is this your party, your voice?

Young Democrats lift ban on Corns upon reading NOTMYSDP

2009-10-02T00:58:00.005+08:00

cheers! Young SDP lifted ban after reading our blog! hurray yay :)

Allow me to now expose the "behind-the-scenes" actions by the SDP youths.

At 11:22pm, Young SDP Honorary Sec. Jarrod Luo started responding to a question Corns posed earlier on to Muhd Khalis Rifhan.

At 12:04am, an Anonymous reader posted a comment saying that he/she "just checked the ban list and its clean with no names on it". --> Must be an administrator of the facebook page.

At 12.11am, the Anonymous struck again, asking why we censored Jarrod's reply. Note: Jarrod replied at 11:22pm.

At 12:21am, Jarrod Luo told Corns that her links have been cleared (???) by the admin. He said they 'look forward to engaging with more opinionated individuals like you (Corns)'.

How hypocritical

Let's relook at who's the Admins for the facebook page.

Priveen Suraj (President of Young Democrats)
Jufri Salim (Vice-President of Young Democrats)
Jarrod Luo (Honorary Secretary of Young Democrats)
Muhd Khalis Rifhan

At the point of time of incident, Jarrod Luo's online. Could Jarrod Luo be the Anonymous poster? And after reading our complaints that Corns got banned, Jarrod then quickly went to lift the ban on Corns?

This mystery will only reflect the SDP's integrity. Did the youths learn from their SDP leaders?

Young Democrats not open to alternative ideas

2009-10-01T16:10:00.006+08:00

I laugh when I read this from the Young Democrats page : Come into our Facebook page and be a part of a lively discussion about the need for political change in Singapore!

A few days ago, Corns (our teammate) joined the Young Democrats Facebook group and started to post her views. My initial post was removed by the Young Democrats, leaving behind a response from Muhd Khalis Rifhan to her initial post.

Next, the Honorary Secretary of Young Democrats, Jarrod Luo, responded in kind asking Corns to use the discussion board.

Since Jarrod wanted dirt to be swept under carpet, Corns decided to leave just her final question that Muhd Khalis Rifhan had not answered to her earlier on, before going under the carpet.

Well, Muhd Khalis Rifhan still did not answer to Corns' question, sadly.

At the discussion board, Corns posted this popular sentiment about the SDP -->

Seelan Palay was the last person to comment on my posting. Then when Corns logged in today, she found herself banned from the group!

Who could have banned Corns Tan?

The answer lies in 1 of the Admins.

Priveen Suraj (President of Young Democrats)
Jufri Salim (Vice-President of Young Democrats)
Jarrod Luo (Honorary Secretary of Young Democrats)
Muhd Khalis Rifhan (the Gentleman that did not answer my question)

1 of the reasons stated by the SDP as to why join Young Democrats is "The Young Democrats is a vehicle to express your opinions without constraints." link

MY FOOT!

Recall the days when SDP's website allowed anonymous comments? SDP was attacked and assaulted and that led SDP to restrict comments only to those who register. With yet another such episode in censoring alternative views, SDP has exposed its timidity and fearfulness of what they really stand for -- personal gains rather than for country.

Jufrie Mahmood playing racial card

2009-09-29T15:38:00.002+08:00

I was surprised to see a Hari Raya message this year coming from the SDP. The presenter is none other than SDP CEC member Jufrie Mahmood. He's the most ideal candidate since he is the most senior Muslim SDP member.

When I read his article today, I got a shock. (By the way, SDP claims that the article is an "amalgamation of several discussions with ordinary Singaporeans").

In the article, he wrote: "A Government leader tried to make us believe that I as a Malay enjoy special privileges under the constitution. In fact we Malays have not received any special treatment."

He provides no elaboration on what he envisages. And instead, he leaves us guessing and making our self-judgement. But the meaning is there. He's playing the racial card. Why would he want to mention about special Malay privileges? Is he saying that if SDP were to be the Government of the day, then Singapore Malays would be a special class from the rest? Is SDP attempting to split Singaporeans racially?

He also wrote: "The fact that Changi is number one really has nothing to do with me."

How Singaporean could that be? Does SDP want Singapore to fail?

As naive as could be, he added "But are we not supposed to be living in the First World and enjoying the Swiss standard of living?"

Should Singaporeans be fed with gold spoon from the moment they are born? Does SDP want meritocracy to be scraped and usher in a welfare state or worst still, a communist state?

Singaporeans are fortunate to be living in a peaceful society where the possibility of being starved is real low. Have you ever read about Singaporeans starving to death? NO. Instead we read about Jufrie Mahmood and friends' complaints on why the wealth of the deserved is not channelled to the lower strata.

SDP sells party newspapers instead of doing grassroots work

2009-09-28T10:18:00.005+08:00

In yet another publicity stint, the SDP has started selling its party newspapers to people. Just when the Government is setting out to integrate new citizens here, the SDP is fighting back by attempting to split Singaporean society. The latest issue of SDP's newspapers is on the foreigners and locals paradigm.

Just less than a year ago, the SDP launched the Tak Boleh Tahan campaign, setting up booths to increase the grievances of locals in view of the economic recession. The campaign, which initiated with a great start, has now gone into silence. The fight for the commoners has now ceased.

Instead, SDP now "visited Tampines, Bedok and Geylang Serai during the Hari Raya period as well as the Central Business District during lunch time to sell the newspaper." The importance of raising funds for the party is now more important than fighting for the people.

It is now evident that SDP is eyeing the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, since it has been doing its rounds there (whenever it does). One wonders how SDP is going to win, when it is out of touch of the constituents and is not doing anything practical and concrete for the residents of Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC.

The SDP reported an interview with an Auntie that has difficulties in finding a job and who is maintaining "high expenses". The interview was laden with complaints. But Guess WHAT? The SDP just took away her money by selling her its party newspapers.

SDP took 3 years to start publishing newsletter

2009-09-23T10:03:00.003+08:00

SDP proudly announced that it will start selling its newsletter to "help the party raise funds" after SDP stopped selling 3 years back.

It sure took SDP a very very very long time to prepare for its party papers. 3 years!

Could you imagine if SDP forms the government one day?

When that day comes, the headline will go "10 years wait for rental flats".

SDP is Party above Country

2009-09-19T00:43:00.003+08:00

This is a proud moment for SDP, having one of the lowest membership as a political party in Singapore, to be photographed as a party.

Considering the fact that 12 of these people are the CEC members, there are a total of 39-12=27 SDP ordinary members. And thinking that some of these people are spouses of members.... well, there's a real long way to go for SDP.

But the main point is...

SDP is the political party that sees itself as a higher entity compared to our country Singapore. In the photo, members hold the party flag up high, higher than the National flag.

SDP's website frequently publishes foreign news about Singapore that puts Singapore in a negative limelight. SDP capitalises on these news sources to discredit Singapore and Singaporeans.

From the photo, we can now be sure that SDP is not pro-Singapore. They just want to be your party, your voice, but not your countryman.

Photo Credit: Copied from SDP website

SDP supports screening of video of Singapore Traitor

2009-09-15T23:35:00.003+08:00

SDP reported that Seelan Palay has submitted a video about Francis Seow.

It makes one wonder if SDP is really pro-Singapore. As we all know, Francis Seow was accused of having received funds from the United States and advice for the purpose of promoting democracy in Singapore.

Unlike our revered Opposition figure Joseph Benjamin Jeyaratnam who took on the PAP lawsuits one by one, Francis Seow fled Singapore and lived in exile ever since. Not so surprisingly, he is now a US citizen.

On one hand SDP wants to rid Singapore of foreign labour and talents, but on the other hand it admires the Singaporean who had betrayed his country and gave up Singapore's citizenship.

It doesn't take much to show how SDP is actually anti-Singapore.

SDP following others' lead

2009-05-28T15:32:00.002+08:00

Just as Members of the Parliament brought up the point in Parliament that the Government should focus more on local SMEs and businesses, SDP is quick to say that it is the one that originated the idea in Dr Chee's books.

This is another myth put on by the SDP. In actual fact, various ELECTED Opposition MPs have spoken in Parliament in regards to this matter, way before the Dr Chee wrote his books, or even before he stepped into Parliament.

By falsely saying that SDP is the one pioneering the shift of focus to local SMEs and businesses, SDP is actually showing its myopic and selfish face.

Another 2 Activists Tak Boleh Tahan and Surrender

2009-05-27T00:12:00.004+08:00

TBT Traitor 4: Chia Ti Lik

I read the papers in disbelief. One of the staunchest of the SDP members, Chia Ti Lik surrendered in court and pleaded guilty to "illegal assembly and procession" in front of Parliament House last year.

The reason cited for pleading guilty was "work commitment", a similar reason also cited by Traitor 2: Jeffrey George. This shows that they rather defend their rice bowls than their ideology.

TBT Traitor 5: Suraya binte Akbar

For Traitor 1 - 3, please click here to view

Not My SDP FaceBook Group

2009-05-26T03:25:00.001+08:00

Welcome all patriotic Singaporeans to join the Not My SDP FaceBook Group at

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=101731420743

SDP says Anonymity in Cyber Space is Good

2009-05-21T02:38:00.004+08:00

Italics are phrases/sentences copied from SDP's article...

"Challenge the accuser to produce the evidence to back up his or her claims, and even offer to reproduce them on your blog."

This just means NotMySdp is not accusing SDP in our blog and that all our articles give accurate information such that SDP is not countering our claims.

"By going to the police, however, we send the signal that we want the identity of the perpetrator revealed so that action can be taken. Get the police involved and we destroy the promise that the Internet offers."

Yes. It is such irresponsible actions taken that result in sexual predators stalking young girls online and getting away with it. The police should get involved and weed out all these bad crooks.

"there will always be attacks against our persons and reputations. Get used to it."

Talk about integrity. Can you allow others to smear our integrity. I say no. I don't know about our readers, but there is a limit to the accusations that others can do to you. Get too personal and that's it. Safeguarding your integrity is important. Only people who have no self-respect and no integrity would allow people to keep accusing oneself.

"But good leaders should not seek to take action, even though we can, against those who speak ill of us. However venomous and hurtful the words may be, we should rise above the attacks and seek dialogue and debate with our opponents."

SDP is being too idealistic. How do you seek dialogue and debate with your opponents when they are basically launching personal attacks on you. Just look at how SDP supporters create YouTube videos that directly attack Singapore leaders. Do not do unto others what you don't want them to do unto you!

"[SDP] use this website [yoursdp.org] to expose these lies with reasoned confrontation and in so doing show up the silliness and emptiness of such people."

I guess SDP worded the article wrongly. Let me rephrase on its behalf: SDP uses yoursdp.org to show up the silliness and emptiness of its people. With bias reporting and no practical solutions to every issues qualify SDP to be rated as a irrelevant party.

Why Siew Kum Hong is not a SDP Mole

2009-05-20T00:58:00.002+08:00

Top 5 reasons why Mr Siew Kum Hong is not a SDP Mole?

Siew Kum Hong is a Nominated MP. SDP is a critic of the NMP system
Siew Kum Hong is representing the people by providing an alternative view in Parliament. SDP is representing itself outside Parliament.
Siew Kum Hong is a lawyer, conforms to legal norms. SDP has many lawyer members but actively breach the law.
Siew Kum Hong is seeking a second term as a NMP to be in parliament. SDP participates in elections because it has no choice.
Siew Kum Hong offers practical ideas while SDP is bias and offers ideas that benefit itself.

Truth No.1: SDP not interested in elections

2009-05-19T23:51:00.003+08:00

SDP finds it real difficult to participate in elections. In its articles, SDP states the many obstacles and challenges in participating in elections in Singapore. However, these challenges prevail even in the Western liberal states.

"Redrawn constituencies are not announced until the last minute."

This happens in many countries in the world. Singapore is a small island state and cannot afford to have political parties that are just keen to serve a small section of the population. Having the constituencies announced late will ensure that politicians derive popular support from the masses. A fixed boundary will give SDP an advantage since it can just concentrate on a group of constituents and neglect the rest.

"The GRC system makes it much harder for campaigning."

Till today, SDP still has no better alternatives to the GRC system in maintaining racial representation in parliament.

"Ballot papers are numbered."

When asked in Parliament by DPM Wong Kan Seng, WP chief Low Thia Kiang said he believed that voting is secret in Singapore. WP has an elected MP and a NCMP. SDP is merely using excuses to justify its poor electoral vote count. Ballot numbers help in ensuring that each piece of voting slip is genuine and that the ballot papers cannot be duplicated easily. Many non-profit organisation adopts the serialised ballot papers during their AGM voting processes.

"The campaign period lasts for only nine days."

SDP is vocal and is strong in rhetoric. A draggy campaign period will benefit itself because it can launch vocal attacks at other parties and hopefully gain sympathy votes. WP and SDA are able to win their seats even for a 9-day campaigning period because they have done their ground work regularly in their constituencies. Likewise for the PAP. SDP needs a long campaign period because it does not commit itself to grassroots work. Take for instance, the Tak Boleh Tahan campaign that it launched for the needy in Singapore. Money went into the pockets of SDP and the campaign now can no longer tahan anymore.

'threatening voters through HDB upgrading. The prime minister in a rare moment of honesty admitted that he needs to "fix" the opposition and "buy" votes.'

Other opposition parties can win seats despite such disincentives to vote them in. Stop finding excuses, SDP! Giving incentives for constituents is part and parcel of political campaigning and it takes place in every single country in the world!

"All this does not even include the fact that the entire media is in the hands of the PAP making it near impossible for voters to read and hear the alternative views."

Voters are able to use the internet to choose what they want to read. Another excuse given by the SDP because SDP readership is now lower and that's because Singaporeans have lost faith in SDP.

"So what should the opposition do? We have a choice: (a) boycott the elections or (b) take part in it. Option (a) is not feasible unless all the opposition parties agree to the boycott and then strategically work to force a reform of the electoral system.

Given the present state of affairs, we are left with only option (b). But even as we participate in the elections, we will not stop there. We will use the opportunity during elections to educate Singaporeans and raise awareness of the need for reform."

Boycotting the elections happen to be a choice for SDP. Boycotting elections is not a democratic action and surprisingly, the party that calls its members Democrats believe that boycotting elections is a choice! SDP is reluctantly participating in elections presently. That explains why it is not serious in fighting for what citizens really need -- healthy economy, high living standards.

This brings us to the conclusion that SDP is not interested in elections. It is participating in elections because it has no choice to do so!

Tak Boleh Tahan cannot tahan anymore

2009-05-19T04:41:00.002+08:00

The Tak Boleh Tahan campaign organised by the SDP began with a good start. By a good start, I refer to the creative naming of the campaign.

Under the banner of "Tak Boleh Tahan", SDP began setting up Pasar Pagi (Morning market) to sell their collaterals and their plainly designed and cheaply printed tshirts, not forgetting also the books that few bookstalls find it saleable.

The last TBT campaign took place on 18 January 2009. (You kidding me?) Talk about a campaign to help needy Singaporeans. Not a single cent out of the sales generated went to the public. It's been more than 4 months and nothing has been heard.

The very fact is that the Tak Boleh Tahan campaign has already Tak Boleh Tahan in itself. Why? Because Singaporeans have lost interest in this campaign that selfishly seeks to absorb public donations for the party interest.

Other than the casual chat and providing a listening ear to complaints, there is no other form of engagement with the people on the ground.

Do SDP a favour the next time you see them hawking on the streets. Try not to treat them like beggars.

SDP hopes other Countries don't look to Singapore

2009-05-19T03:48:00.003+08:00

The fact that a U.S. journalist praised Singapore's strategy on containing terrorism within the island state had riled the nerves of the anti-nation SDP. After failing to provide constructive ideas on how to handle Mas Selamat's escape and first to doubt the Singapore Police Force effort in providing intelligence to the Malaysians, SDP has become an anti-nation political party in Singapore.

The Internal Security Act (ISA) has enabled Singapore to survive through the threat of Communism and ensured the peace that we enjoy with the swift detaining of suspected terrorists. Without the ISA, could we have prevented the bombing of Yishun MRT or Changi Airport? Does the SDP have any suggestion at all?

SDP: "The fact that not a single shred of evidence has been presented against these detainees doesn't seem to bother Mr Dobson who incredibly lives in a country that prides itself on the rule of law."

Hey, the country that prides itself on the rule of law has already act without the law in Guantanamo Bay.

SDP: "The writer cites the president of the state-sanctioned Islamic Religious Council of Singapore, Mr Alami Musa, as saying that 'Singapore is the one place in the world I know where relations between the government and the Muslim community are better after 9/11.' How Mr Alami arrives at his conclusion is unquestioned and Mr Dobson passes the remark off as fact."

Is SDP trying to stir up some tension in multiracial and multireligious Singapore? This paragraph is totally challenging the fabric of the nation. SDP is insinuating that there is tension among the Muslim community. If the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore cannot represent the voice of the Muslims in Singapore, who else? How SDP arrives at its sentiment is fascinating.

What other strategies are there other than torture (U.S.) and
rehabilitating terrorists (Singapore)?

This is something SDP never says, or better worded, doesn't know. As always, they make mythical and biased criticisms but never leave behind a useful idea. This marks the uniqueness of SDP as compared to PAP, WP, SDA, etc.

SDP twisting facts of "Singapore's involvement in capturing Mas Selamat"

2009-05-18T01:09:00.002+08:00

I refer to SDP's article "Wong gets worse". I hope this is the lowest that SDP can stoop because the facts were horribly twisted.

In the article, SDP claimed that:

He was reported in the Straits Times as saying that it was the "strong co-operation" between the police intelligence agencies on both sides of the Causeway that led to the apprehension of Mr Mas Selamat in Johor last week.

But the Malaysian side refuted such a claim, saying that "the operation to trace and capture Mas Selamat was carried out fully by the Malaysian police."

Usually, SDP copies news articles and posts it on their articles to allow readers to go through them. This time round, SDP did not do it. And there's a reason behind it. SDP is attempting to generate readership and controversy by making a false allegation.

Let's take a look at what The Straits Times and Bernama really reported:

Straits Times: "He (Wong) added that the arrest is the result of the strong co-operation between security agencies on both sides."

Bernama: "Although we did exchange intelligence, the operation to trace and capture Mas Selamat was carried out fully by the Malaysian police."

Both newspapers concurred that there was indeed cooperation and nothing else. So is SDP trying to cook up a story by dropping the phrase in Bernama that says "although we did exchange intelligence"?

What has SDP done throughout the whole Mas Selamat saga? Nothing!

And now that SDP chose once and again to side with foreigners, this time round Malaysians, it is yet another display of betrayal to the Singapore people.

SDP, why don't you be renamed as MDP and start blogging in Malaysia. You will most probably be able to win a seat there instead!

PAP MP in Ivory Tower? SDP Members in Outer Space!

2009-03-31T22:28:00.003+08:00

A SDP activist, Seelan Palay, had recently wrote an article on how a PAP MP visited his residence and gave him gifts that he didn't think he needed. He then proceeded to state how useless these gifts are, which in fact they are useful.

These gifts include a postcard with details on MPS; caps, recycling bags and shirts.

The Postcard with details on MPS is important as some residents might not know where to seek help from. During Meet-the-People-Sessions, residents can seek help from their MPs directly. This is the best way to help someone who is in need.

Next, the collaterals with Woodlands symbol on them. These collaterals are obviously already produced way back for other events. The excess would be redundant if stored inside RC centres. A good way of course would be to distribute them to the residents during door-to-door visits. The collaterals help to create an identity among the residents and hopefully bond them together in a multiracial and cohesive society.

Now, it's easy to point fingers at others. Now let's POINT IT BACK TO THE SDP!

SDP shows it cares... by setting up a stall at the neighbourhood stall areas, SELLING SDP collaterals and labels it the "Tak Boleh Tahan!" campaign. At times of recession, it asks money from people instead of helping the unemployed get jobs or helping beggars have a wholesome meal. SDP wants your money!

Look throughout the publicity materials of the SDP. It has never (I mean really never) helped a single Singaporean in ways that could improve his or her life economically and pragmatically. There has been no successful testimonials of Singaporeans benefitting from financial aid or even counselling help.

SDP, Singaporeans no longer "Tahan" your ideologically-charged-up-but-practically-doing-nothing form of political ideology. Continue to stay relevant as an entertainment party!

Dr Chee just an Actor in a Play

2009-03-31T22:12:00.002+08:00

According to SDP, "An American playwright, Garrett Hughes, recently penned a short 'scene' that took place when Dr Chee Soon Juan was imprisoned in 2006."

Finally, someone had discovered the acting talent in Dr Chee.

Take for instance the Hunger Strike incident. Dr Chee claimed he would protest via a hunger strike against his sacking from the National University of Singapore as a lecturer. Later, reporters found him secretly drinking glucose water.

Just look at how Dr Chee ingeniously arranges for cameraman to follow him when he does his usual yelling about Democracy with small groups of supporters. He enjoys the camera moment, doesn't he.

Let's hope that Dr Chee can one day clinch the Oscars Award. Then at least, he could really physcially do something for Singapore.

SDP calling out for Irrational Netizens

2009-03-13T11:36:00.002+08:00

With some successes of politicians from other countries, SDP has now called for netizens to support it in the hope that it wins in the next General Elections.

SDP quoted two success stories, that of Barack Obama and Roh Moo-Hyun.

Yes, they both leveraged on the Internet to win elections, but the fundamental reasons they win over their opponents are not just the Internet. They have the substance and a proper track record.

Irrational Netizens might fall for this trick by the SDP but the majority would hopefully not.

SDP's "conspiratorial and destructive politics"

2009-02-27T04:19:00.002+08:00

TODAY newspaper had requested an interview with Dr Chee over Opposition MP Chiam See Tong's comment about SDP being a party engaging in "conspiratorial and destructive politics". To this, Dr Chee had sent a reply, trying to dodge away from the question and instead paranoidly claimed that this was a gimmick to dampen the unity of the Opposition.

While Mr Chiam is able to rope in 4 political parties (now 3 since NSP withdrew) to form the Singapore Democratic Alliance, Dr Chee is unable to form an alliance with other political party. Even the newest Reform Party did not want to partner with SDP. Who would want to partner with the party with a leader who betrayed his predecessor?

Mr Chiam is right about SDP being conspiratorial and destructive. Where in Singapore would you find a political party that actively posts articles demeaning Singapore and painting a bad image on the beautiful island-state. Besides, SDP members routinely flout the rules of the state.

TBT Protesters believe in the Judicial System

2009-02-27T04:12:00.003+08:00

In the recent SDP article, Why TBT protesters look forward to going back to court, it was reported that SDP views that "legal battles are one way through which Singaporeans can fight for their rights".

As such, SDP has contradicted itself since in the past, it has always lamented against the use of legal suits by members of the ruling party. However, it now agrees that legal proceedings are the way out.

We would like to thank SDP for their belief in Singapore's judiciary and hope that it could act in line with the laws that have kept Singapore safe and secure since independence.

Opposition bashing in SDP's "opposition unity" forum

2009-02-11T13:11:00.001+08:00

Opposition bashing in forum on "opposition unity". Sounds like a misnomer? That's what exactly happened in a SDP forum. An opposition forum to call for opposition unity. But this is what the speakers had to say:

"Potong Pasir has got no upgrading because the people want opposition and they want the opposition which they voted into parliament to be a catalyst for the growth of opposition in Singapore, but are they getting it?" - SDP supporter Jufrie Mahmood, questioning the leadership of Chiam See Tong (who BTW does not belong to his party)

"As a party leader they even dare not make the move to go into a GRC and win a GRC. The people of Potong Pasir and Hougang have been betrayed because the opposition has not grown after so many years." - Jufrie Mahmood thinks Chiam and Low Thia Kiang has "no guts" and slams them for being traitors to the opposition's cause (as an opposition member himself he thinks he is not partly responsible for the opposition's state)

"Worse still, some opposition MPs remain silent when asked pertinent questions in parliament." - SDP supporter Ng E Jay criticizing opposition MPs (remember this was the guy who pleaded guilty when faced with a pertinent challenge)

"All opposition parties need only be clear of the fact that they exist to challenge the ruling party, not to give them a passing grade." - Ex-WP candidate Chia Ti Lik, bashing his ex-party's ex-SG (again). Low gave PAP a "passing grade" some time back.

If you notice, all 3 who criticize the opposition are with the SDP. Jufrie, Ng and Chia are heavily involved in SDP and are part of the TBT18 (or TBT16 minus Ng and another SDP guy who pleaded guilty. So much for "unity")

These are the following people who talk about opposition unity. Look at the facts and ask yourselves if they are fit to.

1. Jufrie Mahmood stood for elections under JBJ's WP in 1984, then switched to the "gutless traitor" Chiam's SDP in '88. For abandoning JBJ for Chiam years ago, he now sheds crocodile tears as a JBJ "supporter" in Hong Lim park and becomes a critic of Chiam.

He rejoined WP again in '91 and back to SDP again in '97. Does an opposition unity "advocate" need to keep switching parties?

2. Ng E Jay has called for opposition unity for the most times this writer can remember, but did nothing to further the cause. If anything, he prides himself as critic of the main opposition WP (because they have MPs in parliament and he thinks he can do better)

3. Chia Ti Lik resigned from WP out of spite and badmouthed his party to the press. As a SDP supporter now, he wants SDP to work with WP.

4. Sin Kek Tong (a former SDP member) led a pro-Chiam group which ruptured from SDP after Chee ousted Chiam. He is now chummy with his ex-party and ex-nemesis again. After seeing how Chiam got "bitten" by his protege, he criticizes Chiam for not working towards unity.

5. No. 1 "Wayang" Award goes to none other than their leader Chee Soon Juan, who said the opposition should "prosper thy neighbour, not beggar thy neighbour". Yet he keeps all the "beggar thy neighbours" at his side and appoints them to speak at the forum.

The best sayings must come from Alex Au of Yawning Bread:

"It was already quite directionless as the panelists presented their carefully prepared seven minutes each, but at question time, the wheels fell off the whole project."

"They were refreshingly honest, but how such frankness squares with opposition unity, which they all said they hoped for, escapes me."

- http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2009/yax-981.htm

Maybe the opposition MPs knew what they were going to expect and chose not to associate themselves with the SDP clowns, because they know their places in parliament have often invoked the jealousy of the SDP chaps.

No Chinese New Year Greetings from SDP

2009-01-26T22:38:00.002+08:00

SDP has long been recognised as the ideological political party with no grassroots base. I believe the most evident of this is the absence of New Year greetings to the Chinese in Singapore.

In a country where the Chinese is a majority, it is only basic courtesy to wish the Chinese a happy Lunar Year.

Sadly, SDP is out of touch with reality.

Guitarists to lead Brainwashing songs

2008-12-22T14:05:00.003+08:00

The SDP is seeking guitarists to perform for free for their event. They would be playing three songs (see lyrics below) - Imagine, You Raise Me Up, Auld Lang Syne - to brainwash party activists and the public.

I have skimmed through the lyrics and highlighted parts of it to illustrate my points.

John Lennon - Imagine

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace ----> contradicts Protests in front of Parliament House by TBT18

You may say that I'm a dreamer ---> Yeah! Dreaming without concrete grassroots action
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions ---> Then why get so worked up over economic recession?
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

Josh Groban - You Raise Me Up ==> Read "You" as "SDP"

(This is the brainwashing part of the night, where SDP becomes a supreme body that raised people up)

When I am down and, oh my soul, so weary;
When troubles come and my heart burdened be;
Then, I am still and wait here in the silence,
Until you come and sit awhile with me.

You raise me up, so I can stand on mountains;
You raise me up, to walk on stormy seas;
I am strong, when I am on your shoulders;
You raise me up: To more than I can be.

You raise me up, so I can stand on mountains;
You raise me up, to walk on stormy seas;
I am strong, when I am on your shoulders;
You raise me up: To more than I can be.

There is no life - no life without its hunger;
Each restless heart beats so imperfectly;
But when you come and I am filled with wonder,
Sometimes, I think I glimpse eternity.

You raise me up, so I can stand on mountains;
You raise me up, to walk on stormy seas;
I am strong, when I am on your shoulders;
You raise me up: To more than I can be.

You raise me up, so I can stand on mountains;
You raise me up, to walk on stormy seas;
I am strong, when I am on your shoulders;
You raise me up: To more than I can be.

Auld Lang Syne

And for auld lang syne, my jo,
For auld lang syne,
We'll tak a cup o' kindness yet,
For auld lang syne,
1.
Should auld acquaintance be forgot,
And never brought to mind? --> "Yes they should," answers the SDP. Read how 3 of them betrayed the rest.
Should auld acquaintance be forgot,
And days o' auld lang syne.
2.
And surely ye'll be your pint-stowp!
And surely I'll be mine!
And we'll tak a cup o' kindness yet,
For auld lang syne.
3.
We twa hae run about the braes
And pu'd the gowans fine;
But we've wander'd mony a weary foot
Sin auld lang syne.
4.
We twa hae paidl'd i' the burn,
Frae mornin' sun till dine;
But seas between us braid hae roar'd
Sin auld lang syne.
5.
And there's a hand, my trusty fiere!
And gie's a hand o' thine!
And we'll tak a right guid willy waught,
For auld lang syne.

Say no to SDP propaganda.

SDP and Housing Policy

2008-12-19T02:53:00.003+08:00

In a market economy, products and services are generated according to demand and supply. Likewise, houses should be built to tailor for demand - demand from citizens. However, SDP is attempting to create a hoo-ha over the recent government's decision to increase the number of smaller flats.

SDP's argument:

"Singaporeans are getting poorer."
"as we progress forward in time with the PAP, we progress backward in our fortunes."
"if all this is took place during the "boom years" between 2003 and 2007, just imagine what's in store when we enter the economic maelstrom next year."

Logical Thinking:

The rise in demand for smaller flats is due to many factors such as more elderly living by themselves and the trend towards nuclear families rather than big families living together.
While there are poverty cases in Singapore, Singapore still boasts a low poverty level compared to other developed countries. Can SDP give an example of a country with zero poverty level? Can SDP cite a country with decreasing poverty level as the country gets more developed?
Even as we "boom" in our economy, we are still facing various societal issues which are inherent in a globalised island. SDP just adds the gloom to Singapore's future. Can SDP show that all the progress made before the impending economic crisis is virtual?

In conclusion, SDP ended its article on housing with an advertisement of Dr Chee's book. How sincere...

Economic Crisis : SDP Celebrates

2008-12-17T11:34:00.002+08:00

While the Singapore Government is acting to ensure that help is available to affected groups amidst the economic turbulence and Singaporeans are readying themselves for the storm, only one group of people is happy over the matter. They are the members of the SDP.

In its latest post, SDP featured many international news articles that painted a gloom picture over Singapore's economy. SDP seems to gloat over every mishap that happens to Singapore.

At a time when even the liberal Western states are trying hard to boost investors' confidence in their country's economy, SDP acts in the opposite manner, trying as hard as possible to paint a bad picture on its own country's economy.

When the economy is doing good, SDP espouses "Tak Boleh Tahan", a campaign to provide more for the poor. However when the country's economy is affected by global conditions, SDP silenced its "Tak Boleh Tahan" campaign (perhaps the poor isn't that important to the SDP anymore) and threatens to bring Singapore down with its all-out attack on Singapore's economy.

Seems like SDP will never enjoy singing "One People, One Nation, One Singapore".

SDP Website Viewership Drops

2008-12-16T03:13:00.002+08:00

According to Alexa.com, SDP website viewership is dropping. Over a 3 months period, visits by internet users dropped by up to 9%. Page views per user dropped another 20% and only a slight majority of the internet users are Singaporeans.

SDP has slapped itself by allowing only registered users to post comments on its website. By doing so, it practises censorship and goes back on its words on freedom of speech. Also, a quick browse through the website shows only SDP-biased comments on articles.

Singaporeans are not foolish. They are smart enough to distinguish SDP propaganda from accurate facts. The drop in viewership proves that SDP cannot withstand the test of time.

Using the JBJ Card to draw crowd

2008-12-16T02:48:00.002+08:00

While organisations tend to celebrate the dawn of the new year with their achievements of the past year and the vision of the new year, SDP decided to do it differently.

SDP is on the brink of dissolution and there is not much achievements it can celebrate, so it turned to .... the JBJ card.

After years of using the Chia Thye Poh card, SDP now leverages on JBJ to draw crowd to its new year's eve gathering. JBJ has no affiliation to SDP and has never partnered WP/RP with SDP. Yet, SDP is exploiting JBJ's prestige in garnering more supporters to SDP.

Participants to the event would be given the chance to give their tributes to this great opposition leader, JBJ. But ultimately, the SDP achieves the glory and fame.

Show your respect to JBJ. Stop the exploitation!

Dr Chee asking Singaporeans to learn from... Foreigners

2008-11-06T21:35:00.002+08:00

Dr Chee Soon Juan wrote an article asking Singaporeans to learn from Foreigners. In its most dramatical twist of events, Dr Chee has chosen to be represented by a Canadian lawyer. And now, Dr Chee is asking you and me to learn from Americans who just voted in their first Black President.

Let me now show you how myopic Dr Chee is getting.

“And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn,” the new leader says, “I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices. I need your help. And I will be your president, too.” In Singapore, our government refuses to build lifts that stop on every floor for the elderly because one of its candidate is not voted in.

Can Dr Chee stand out and admit that he did not accept any performance package from the Government? GST rebates? Growth Package? When the PAP government was established in the 1960s, it ensured that every Singaporean would be given opportunities in this island. Meritocracy and multiracialism enabled Singaporeans to achieve their dreams. Ironically, the US had just begun to give voting rights to the Blacks then.

Mr Obama points out that the “true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope.” In Singapore, our leader measures his success by the number of billions he accumulates in the reserves.

I thought a doctorate graduate would know how to differentiate between talk and action. The sole superpower - the United States has always been using its weapons in the international arena. US action in Southeast Asia has resulted in massive deaths (Vietnam War, Pol Pot, etc). Let's not forget that the US had conducted espionage activities in Singapore.

In Singapore, our leaders have much success to boast about. For instance, we have the highest number of home ownership, we are clean and green, etc. All this occured even before Dr Chee entered politics.

In America, people come together to argue, to celebrate, and to change. In Singapore, the police arrest you and the judges imprison you.

Has Dr Chee heard of Guantanamo Bay?

While Americans take pride in their vote and protect that right jealously, we in Singapore look nervously over our shoulders and wonder whether our votes can be traced.

The fact is Singapore's election has been globally recognised as fair. As the only political party that did not even garner 25% of the votes in the 2006 elections, we can understand how Dr Chee feels.

Change. It's not just a word, it is the key to survival. Americans know it, the world knows it. But Singaporeans are still too frightened to embrace it and fight for it.

I wonder how Dr Chee defines change. Singapore has changed to become such a vibrant international hotspot.

Yet one thing that hasn't changed is Dr Chee's ignorance.

Another Enlightening SDP Video

2008-11-04T12:33:00.002+08:00

Contributed by Reader

On day five of the TBT 16 trial, the SDP made another "enlightening" video to share with all of us. We thank the SDP for their "enlightenment".

Sylvester Lim, the first to be interviewed in the video, seems to have been bought into singing the same "freedom of speech" tune like the rest. He said "the government sees fit to charge me as a Singaporean to exercise my right to speak up". Tell us which of your charges involved speaking up, Mr Lim.

We can agree that the cost of living is high and the government can do more. But in a typical fashion of the SDP, he exaggerated the situation by saying that "Singaporeans can't make ends meet".

When you say "Singaporeans", people will take it that you mean most Singaporeans. True, some Singaporeans cannot make ends meet and that happens in every country, but what about the rest? If most people were really in a bad shape, the SDP is a failure to have only 18 people protesting.

Another exaggeration was this: he said the TBT 16 "can't afford to eat outside" due to the court trials, and their supporters had to provide lunch for them. We may remember the lavish Hawaiian celebration they had which will easily cost the SDP enough to provide meals for the entire trial.

Next up was Jufri Salim. He said "in other countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, Hongkong, we've seen some similar protests happen but in Singapore, it is otherwise..... we have been charged right now"

What does it mean by "otherwise"? Does it mean there are no protests in Singapore? Or the countries he mentioned could have protests without people getting charged?

He cannot have forgotten how the Hindraf in Malaysia was disbanded and their members arrested under ISA, or how Indonesian protestors clash with the police and arrests are seen nearly every day. In HK case, police arrested protestors in Disneyland last year. Guess what? Only 2 of them were involved.

SDP Activist John Tan gets suspended by James Cook University

2008-11-04T03:31:00.003+08:00

John Tan, a lecturer at James Cook University (Singapore), has been suspended due to the ongoing charges of contempt of court against him. John Tan pointed to the picture of a kangaroo on his T-shirt and saying, "This is a kangaroo court" to Mr Lee Kuan Yew when the Minister Mentor walked past him outside the courtroom. John Tan is also Assistant Secretary General of SDP.

SDP is quick to jump in defence of John Tan in its website. However, the bulk of the defence is irrelevant and misleading. SDP cited these reasons as why the suspension is "completely out of order":

Mr Tan has not yet been convicted of the charge. The trial begins only tomorrow, 4 Nov 08. He was suspended on 21 Oct.
The action appears to have been triggered by an email complaint that cited Mr Tan's association with Dr Chee Soon Juan and which was copied to Dr Ng Eng Hen.
The suspension stayed despite an appeal by Mr Tan citing testimony from 28 of his students that he had gone about his work in a professional manner.

1) Usually, employers sack employees who are charged in court by the state. Even during job interviews, employers do have concern whether the person they are going to employ has ever been charged in court or broken any law. In this case, it is justifiable for JCU to suspend (note that it's different from sacking) John Tan.

Contempt of court is a serious matter and it is duly right that lecturer John Tan face suspension. Even a secondary school boy who gets into a fight or comes late to school can be suspended.

2) Who sent the email is not important in this case. The school's decision to suspend John Tan is due to the information received. And that information is that John Tan is charged for contempt of court. The fact that the email is copied to Dr Ng Eng Hen isn't important too.

SDP is trying hard to imply that the PAP government has a hand in this matter.

3) 28 students seem to be a very small minority for the whole campus. JCU has a reputation to uphold and keeping a lecturer who is charged in court for breaking the law seems to not give a good image.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SDP's article also mentioned that:

"even if Mr Tan is convicted, does the university not have the obligation to protect the free speech of its employees?"

SDP is asking the obvious. Employees should know that they are part of the organisation that they work in and their criminal actions would tarnish the organisation's image and reputation that has taken so long to build.

It is disgraceful that John Tan and the SDP chose to politicise this issue as an academic and as a party. By making use of education and the school, John Tan should be given the boot.

Soldier reaffirms SDP's ignorance to law

2008-11-01T23:37:00.002+08:00

It seems like one of the TBT 18 is a soldier of the Singapore Armed Forces. This soldier is none other than Recruit Muhammad Shafi'ie. His comments in the SDP site reaffirmed SDP's ignorance to the law.

"Asked why he was not pleading guilty and what he thought of the trial, the NSman said: "I don't think what we did on 15 March can be called a crime. We hurt no one and neither did we create any disorder. What we did was to express our concerns as citizens on issues that affect us deeply."

I thought about Recruit Muhammad Shafi'ie's view on crime and could not make a sense out of it. He seems to imply that it is alright for Corporal Dave Teo to carry the rifle around Orchard Road, since he did not hurt anyone and he did not create any disorder.

This innocent or ignorant soldier should think about whether the TBT 18 did create any disorder. Of course, we do have to acknowledge that the small number of participants make it insignificant. However, the 18 people violated the law. And when the police approached them, they were reluctant to call their act off and continued to confront the police. This attracted public attention, people stopped to look, and that caused obstruction and disturbance, in other words, DISORDER.

SDP's Enlightening Video

2008-11-01T12:55:00.000+08:00

Contributed by Reader

In this video below, the TBT 18 16 (2 down) protestors try to "enlighten" us with their good reasons for protesting and breaking "unjust" laws.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmcI9LPW4_A

One of them, Seelan Palay, said, "my position has always been that, as a human being, I feel that I am free as a social animal, to gather wherever I want, to speak wherever I want, as long as I do not harm someone else."

I guess all laws that do not harm other people should be abolished, such as jaywalking, chewing gum, buying contraband cigarettes, smuggling pirated VCDs. All these do not harm other people.

Another, John Tan, said he protested because "we don't have real democracy here in Singapore" and "no basic human rights". He gave examples like "right to speak", "right to respond to the government", "right to criticize".

It seems the TBT 16 still do not understand what has gone wrong and why they are charged. No wonder they did what they did. Maybe the only 2 who knew pleaded guilty.

The protestors were not charged for gathering. They were charged because they gathered at places where they are not allowed to gather. Not every place are you allowed to gather. For eg. a group of men are not allowed to gather in the ladies toilet.

What had it to do with freedom of speech when they were not charged for speaking at a public place, nor did they say a word during the protest.

People gather everywhere everyday. Why do the police not arrest all of them?

Because the SDP's was not a normal gathering as they claimed. One of their protestors tried to argue along this line, but do they really think it was normal for people to wear the same t-shirts and carry placards? If so, why did they publicize it? Do people who normally gather at bus stops publicize their presence at bus stops? Obviously it was not just a gathering. It was meant to be a law breaking activity.

No right to speak? No right to respond to the government? No right to criticize? Now we know they're living in a different planet from the rest of us, and the hundreds of letter writers to the press daily.

SDP Cock-up -- everytime

2008-10-29T08:55:00.002+08:00

On the third day of the TBT trial, SDP entertained Singaporeans yet again when its lawyer couldn't find Parliament Lane on the Singapore map!

(Red circle added for emphasis)

Using the same map that SDP referred to on its website, it took me only a few seconds to locate Parliament Lane. Yes, it might be called Old Parliament Lane, but it's still a Parliament Lane and the oversight on the part of the defence really gives us a chance to munch some popcorns.

Dr Chee gets Legal Help from Foreign Talent

2008-10-28T15:14:00.002+08:00

When it comes to day-by-day politics, SDP condemns the ruling party from engaging foreign labour and talents into Singapore, arguing that they compete with locals for jobs.

In a dramatic twist of events, Dr Chee is now accepting legal help from a foreign talent! The foreign talent happens to be Mr Robert Amsterdam, a Canadian lawyer.

As TBT trial proceeds, we are now looking at how SDP members went back on their words, one by one...

Highly Educated SDP Activists doesn't know Reasoning

2008-10-26T00:27:00.002+08:00

It is surprising that a party led by a PhD graduate and with many highly educated individuals do not know simple reasoning. Below, those in quotes are words of the SDP:

"How does one ought to 'reasonably' know that having more than one person assemble outside Parliament is an offence?"

Even the average Joe in Orchard road can tell you that SDP activists did not simply assemble outside Parliament. They protested, donning cheaply printed T-shirts, and holding placards. Why is it that every time SDP claims it is campaigning and then later deny it when they go into the courtroom? Can anyone trust this party at all?

"Under cross-examination by one of the defendants, Mr Carl Lang, during the hearing yesterday, police witness Sergeant Nor Hidah said that she was "not sure" whether the area around Parliament House was a gazetted place within which a gathering of more than one person needs police permission. And get this -- she has been a police officer for eights years.

This begs the question, doesn't it? If an experienced police officer doesn't know the above requirement (and we'll wager our last dollar that Sgt Nor Hidah is not the only police officer who doesn't know) how does one expect the average guy to, reasonably or otherwise?"

Since SDP activists, including Dr Chee Soon Juan, feel that they are average, so be it. That explains why SDP is the party rated the worst in terms of credibility.

Stay tune to more entertainment brought to you by SDP in the courtroom for the days to come.

3 Activists Tak Boleh Tahan and Gives Up

2008-10-25T11:29:00.004+08:00

Just less than 3 days into the TBT trial of the 18 SDP activists, 3 of them have already fallen from the group. No matter how the photos and videos of the SDP try to picture these activists as a united group standing for a good cause, all these had started to peel off in the eyes of the public. Singaporeans are now witnessing how these activists themselves are beginning to Tak Boleh Tahan and give up the fight.

The Myth of SDP's genuinity to the cause espoused by their TBT campaign

TBT Traitor 1: Ng E-jay

When the trial started in the morning, Ng E-jay can't wait to just plead guilty. See SDP activists belittle Civil Disobedience and Tak Boleh Tahan Campaign.

TBT Traitor 2: Jeffrey George

In order to be able to attend work on time, Jeffrey George thought of an ingenious idea. He decided to plead guilty since SDP donations could subsidise his penalties.

TBT Traitor 3: Yap Keng Ho

When cross-examining the police photographer, Yap Keng Ho repeatedly ask questions about the camera being used. He asked about the flash used to establish authenticity, thereby dropping hints that he didn't stand for TBT campaign and thus disassociating himself from the group. He's smart in not pleading guilty since he knows SDP donations are too little and can't help him much. The other 15 noticed that and lost patience with him. Chia Ti Lik even allied with the Prosecutor to get Yap Keng Ho to shut up! See the news report extract below:

Jeremy Au Yong, Political Correspondent
The Straits Times
25 October 2008
"THERE were disagreements in court on Friday as the first prosecution witness took the stand in the ongoing trial of 17 people charged with taking part in an illegal assembly outside Parliament House on Mar 15.
However, this came from among defendants themselves, as they could not see eye-to-eye on a number of matters.
Chief among these was the line of questioning of police photographer Nor Hidah Ali Jinnah, the witness.
At one point, lawyer Chia Ti Lik, a defendant, interrupted fellow defendant Yap Keng Ho's cross-examination to say: 'Your Honour, I do not see the relevance of this line of questioning. And I wonder why the DPP (Deputy Public Prosecutor) has not objected.'
Yap had been questioning the police photographer on the type of flash she used to take pictures of the scene. He said it was to establish the authenticity of the photos.
Staff Sergeant Nor Hidah had been tasked to take pictures of the area where the assembly and procession had allegedly taken place, to establish the setting.
Half an hour of questions from Yap delving into technical details of her camera equipment made his co-defendants lose patience..."

Stay tuned as we count down the days to the disbanding of SDP!

SDP Activists belittle Civil Disobedience and Tak Boleh Tahan Campaign

2008-10-24T00:48:00.004+08:00

In its latest article "AGC cannot decide whether to use video or not", SDP reporting seems to become a laughable joke. Let's take a look at some excerpts in quotes:

"The morning started off with Mr Ng E-jay pleading guilty to the charge of taking part in an assembly outside Parliament House. The second charge of participating in a procession was taken into consideration. Mr Ng was subsequently fined $600."

Compare this to the article "Come and support the activists during the trial" which read, "We are proud of being able to come together to defend and push for the rights of our fellow citizens, for without these rights we are at the mercy of the PAP. We know that we are guided by the truth and righteousness."

If SDP knows it's righteous, why did its activist pleaded guilty in the morning?

"In the end, Mr George pleaded guilty as this was the only way for him to get back to his work. He was fined $1,200."

What's more, one of the SDP activists pleaded guilty just to go back to work! Seems like career is more important than political stand.

The Best Job Insurance: SDP calls out for supporters to donate to its legal defence fund, which will be used to keep Mr George's job.

With the guilty pleas, SDP has lost its legitimacy among its supporters. This is because SDP has gone back on its civil disobedience action. Remember how Dr Chee claimed to be on hunger strike but secretly drank glucose water?

Oscar Award for the most illogical statement of the YEAR:

"I understand what was read out to me," Mr Jufrie replied, "what I don't understand is why are we being charged. You see groups of tourists and other people everyday in front of Parliament. Why are they all not charged?"

This either shows the naivity of Mr Jufrie to law, or that he's trying to say the SDP did not campaign at all in front of Parliament. So wasn't there a demonstration?

In conclusion, SDP doesn't really care about the poor in Singapore as much as they say they are. It protested outside Parliament House but said they were just like tourists walking pass Parliament without intention of demanding more to be done to alleviate poverty in Singapore. All else said, after the bankruptcy of SDP, it could consider joining the Entertainment industry.

SDP Activist Gives up & Pleads Guilty

2008-10-24T00:43:00.003+08:00

Jeremy Au Yong
The Straits Times

Headline: 19 on illegal assembly trial

IT WAS a lively start to the first day of court proceedings for 19 people accused of demonstrating in front of Parliament House in March.

The 19, who include Singapore Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan and his sister Chee Siok Chin, have been charged with taking part in an illegal assembly and a subsequent procession.

The group piled into Court 5 of the Subordinate Courts at 9.30am on Thursday, and extra chairs had to be put in place to accomodate all of them.

The public gallery was filled with about 20 people, including supporters of the SDP and those on trial.

Amid the noise and commotion as the defendants were taking their seats before proceedings started, one of them, blogger Yap Keng Ho, 45, remarked to the rest: 'This is the largest pasar malam in the history of Singapore'.

During the course of proceedings before District Judge Chia Wee Kiat, several of those who were charged rose to ask questions or make applications.

There were requests for copies video clips taken by the police of the March 15 event; one accused sought an adjournment as he wanted to get back to his job; and one asked for the Court to observe a minute's silence for the late opposition polition JB Jeyaretnam, who was to have represented several of the activists.

But the first order of formal business on Thursday morning for District Judge Chia was to deal with the decision by one of the accused, blogger Ng E-Jay, 31, who said that he was pleading guilty.

He told The Straits Times that he had decided to do so just on Wednesday.

Proceedings were then adjourned so that his case could be dealt with before the trial of the remaining 18 accused could continue.

Ng was fined $600, or six days in jail in default, after he admitted to the charge.

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_293924.html

Right to criticise 'doesn't cover lies'

2008-10-18T16:18:00.001+08:00

Straits Times
18 October 2008

Govt responds to call by US advocacy group to desist from 'using defamation suits to stifle political opposition'

THE Government yesterday gave its position on criticisms levelled against government leaders by opposition politicians, in response to a statement by a New York-based advocacy group, Human Rights Watch (HRW).

The group had called on Singapore's leaders to 'end the practice of using defamation suits to stifle political opposition'. In comments posted on its website yesterday, it highlighted a High Court ruling this week.

HRW noted that the court had awarded Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew six-figure sums against the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), its secretary-general Chee Soon Juan and his sister Chee Siok Chin for defamation.

In reply, the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts' spokesman noted that in Singapore, opposition politicians have the right to criticise the Government and government leaders.

But, Ms K. Bhavani added, 'that does not entitle them to tell lies or defame'.

'If they do, the leaders must either sue to clear their names and be prepared to be cross-examined in open court, or allow the lies to stand unchallenged and the public to believe that the defamations are true.

'This is the way to establish the truth, and to keep Singapore's public discourse honest and responsible.''

In reference to the court ruling, Ms Bhavani noted that the Chees and their political party, the SDP, had accused PM Lee and MM Lee of dishonesty, nepotism and corruption, among other things.

They had done it just before a General Election in 2006, she noted in a statement to the media. 'When the two ministers sued, the other members of the SDP central executive committee apologised, but Chee and his sister refused to do so.

'The Chees had every opportunity to justify and prove their allegations in court, but totally failed to do so. Therefore, they have to pay damages commensurate with the seriousness of the defamation and in accordance with the judgment of the court.'

The defamation was committed in articles published in SDP's newsletter, The New Democrat. Nine of its leaders settled earlier with the Lees, apologising and paying them $170,000 each.

That leaves the SDP and the Chee siblings owing the Lees $610,000 in all. The siblings are bankrupt. If the SDP is unable to pay, the 28-year-old party faces the prospect of being wound up.

The possibility was highlighted as well in HRW's statement. It reported its deputy Asia director Elaine Pearsonas saying: 'Using defamation laws to silence peaceful political speech makes a mockery of Singapore's claim to be a model democracy. Opposition criticism of the Government is an essential ingredient of a democratic political system.'

The group urged the Government to 'lift legal restrictions on freedom of expression to bring the country in line with international law'.

In concluding remarks, the HRW said 'the assault on free speech by Singapore's leaders extends to critical foreign publications circulating in Singapore'.

It mentioned several cases, involving among others, the Far Eastern Economic Review and The Wall Street Journal Asia.

Ms Pearson said: 'The history of defamation in Singapore shows a pattern of making people pay dearly for exercising the basic right of peaceful expression.

'Singapore has nothing to fear from a vocal opposition and its people have everything to gain.'

It's True Protests do not lead to anarchy, but ...

2008-10-15T00:26:00.002+08:00

I refer to the SDP's article "Protests do not lead to anarchy". As per normal, SDP had tried to subtly mislead readers. We shall examine each of the untruths and then argue against them. The sentences in quotes are extracts from the SDP's article.

"Why must closed minds conjure images of pandemonium and anarchy when we talk about protests? Why can't protests be civil, disciplined, and peaceful as demonstrated by peoples all over the democratic world? Why must people who call for protests and challenge unjust laws be always demonised?"

By inference, SDP feels that Singapore is already a true democracy. Protests have never been always been civil, disciplined and peaceful ALL OVER the democratic world.

"Laws against protests in Singapore were not handed down through some heavenly edict. They were introduced by white men to subjugate brown, yellow, and black ones during their colonial rule."

Did Democracy come from the East?

"Have protests suddenly become morally acceptable? The truth is that freedom of assembly has never been morally undesirable. It is dictators that, for obvious reasons, outlaw them and give the convenient excuse that protests are bad for society."

I don't remember any PAP leaders comparing the act of protest to morality.

SDP to pay S$610,000

2008-10-14T01:04:00.004+08:00

There's a price to pay for disrespecting the judicial court and irresponsible accusations. Even before SDP gets itself into lawsuits, the precedent cases of defamation suits were abundant. The Opposition knows it, and we have seen how Workers' Party and Singapore Democratic Alliance could win elections without slandering others.

SDP leaders have to be responsible for slander. The only chance they had in court to bring in their valid arguments was wasted away by the drama they created within the court. At the end of the day, after SDP leaders had fun in the courtroom, they started to blame it on others (PAP) instead of reflecting on themselves.

PM Lee, MM Lee awarded 6-figure sums in libel case against SDP & party leaders
Margaret Perry, Channel NewsAsia

The High Court has awarded six-figure sums to both Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew in their libel case against the Singapore Democratic Party and its leaders.

Justice Belinda Ang said she came to the conclusion that a fair and reasonable figure for damages was S$500,000 for Mr Lee Hsien Loong and S$450,000 to Mr Lee Kuan Yew for defamatory remarks which appeared in an SDP publication during the 2006 General Election.

After taking into account the S$170,000 which each plaintiff had earlier received in settlement from six other defendants, she awarded damages of S$330,000 to be paid to Prime Minister Lee and S$280,000 to Minister Mentor Lee.

Justice Ang said the amount was commensurate with and proportionate to the gravity of the libel and the "egregious behaviour" of the defendants Chee Soon Juan and Chee Siok Chin.

Justice Ang said defendants Chee Soon Juan and Chee Siok Chin had played to the gallery.

She ordered them to pay aggravated damages, saying they had attempted to establish the truth of the libel under the pretext of cross-examining the plaintiffs.

She added the plaintiffs had been "subjected to insulting behaviour and more than unpleasant cross-examination, which increased their sense of having been ridiculed and humiliated".

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/382524/1/.html

SDP Treats the Court as a Circus

2008-10-13T13:40:00.002+08:00

Referring to the SDP article "Lighter moments in court", we can now be convinced that the championing of rules of law by the SDP is insincere.

In previous trials in court where Dr Chee and Ms Chee were debating with the MM and PM Lee, the Chees had already shouted in court and failed to respect the judiciary in doing so. However, some Singaporeans then felt that they had done a good job in bringing out some of the common grievances of the population.

This time round, it finally confirmed the lack of respect of the Courts by SDP.

"The DPP interjected saying that the defendants were jumping to conclusion that they would be found guilty. The defendants chuckled to themselves, one of whom was Mr John Tan, SDP's assistant secretary-general.

Mr Tan then remarked: That's really funny."

How are Singaporeans going to believe that SDP wants to champion on the platform of rule of law when it has no basic respect for the institution of law?

Our Students Grow

2008-10-07T01:26:00.003+08:00

I refer to the SDP article "Let our students grow". In it SDP portrayed a skewed image of education opportunities in local University. I would like to use National University of Singapore (NUS) as an example to debate some of the points mentioned by SDP.

"A check with the NUS Students' Union website showed little discussion of national affairs. The section on “Events” is blank and “Current Issues” highlights the unhappiness of the fee hike – in 2006! “NUSSU News” carries a news flash that dates back to February this year."

Discussion of national affairs should never be seen to be restricted to whatever appears on websites. There are various student organisations and initiatives found on the NUS Student Organisations page.

"What about party politics? Why are our universities so consistent in their aversion to opposition parties visiting their campuses?"

It's faulty to state that universities are averse to opposition parties visiting their campuses because the NUS Democratic Socialist Club has on many counts, invited opposition leaders to address students.

"Although DSC is a non-partisan student political organization, the club's leadership saw the
political necessity to push forward the agenda of raising undergraduates' awareness to strive
for a politics of balance in Singapore. Hence our administration was remembered for an

unprecedented back-to-back Kent Ridge Forums , featuring only oppositional personalities.

Speakers in the 2 forums included Chaim See Tong, Low Thia Khiang, JBJ & Chee Soon
Juan." (Yaw Shin Leong, 2007)

To conclude, SDP should not tout itself to the students and appear desperate in its attempt to find a platform to outreach to the public. Looking at the opposition websites, it turns out that SDP seemed to be the only one that did not bother to wish our Muslim brothers Hari Raya Aidilfitri. Lacking grassroots support has always been the detriment of opposition parties.

SDP advocates Civil Disobedience at Home

2008-09-30T13:12:00.002+08:00

SDP reported that "Even Al Gore advocates civil disobedience".

This is what Al Gore said:

"If you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration."

By interpreting the "civil disobedience" used by Al Gore in a political slant would be to miss out the whole picture of what he actually means. By just extracting the words and not the essence of his speech, SDP again attempts to justify itself.

Well, if we were to do the same to SDP, then we can safely say that SDP advocates Civil Disobedience at Home (and anywhere else)!

Source:
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/09/25/gore.carbon/index.html

Light Bulb Jokes

2008-09-28T23:59:00.003+08:00

What does it take to replace a fused light bulb?

PAP:

Engage foreign talents to check out the best method to replace the bulb. They will be paid according to what other experts are being paid. For manpower, foreign workers would be employed to cut down the operating cost.

To make it cost-effective, people using the bulb would pay a fee. The fee calculation is intrinsically very complexed. If you use it for a long period of time without turning it off, you pay more. But if you periodically switch on and off, you have rebates for using it but everytime you switch on, you pay an additional fee.

In the end, there is surplus and it's redistributed back to those who use the bulb.

WP:

Insist on using local talents to do the job. Their remunerations are benchmarked upon the multiplication of a factor by the lowest paid worker. The workers contracted are all locals.

To make it affordable for workers, there will be minimum fees imposed. Unions will be consulted if operating costs rise and if workers strike, then lights would not be turned on and cost is saved in the end.

SDA:

Who does the job doesn't really matter BUT it all depends on budget. With such a tight budget, it's hard to accomplish things. Representative will express anger on the tight budget allocation.

In the end, the bulb is still left unfixed. However, the supporters still rally with pride because they know they are unfairly treated.

Reform Party:

Newly established, this does not mean they lack the experience given the veteran level of the leader. The bulbs will not be replaced because the whole system is faulty!

The entire building will be demolished and rebuilt from scratch. That is how a bulb should be fixed.

SDP:

Gather a group of supporters and get them to wear Tak Boleh Tahan Shirts to protest against the spoilt bulb. At the same time, books, apparels, accessories will be retailed to gather enough money to sustain the group and if there are excess, then fix the bulb.

When enough money is gathered, fixing the bulb will be via Democratic means. That is, everyone gets to vote on the bulb wattage, the company to engage, the time for them to fix, and the list goes on. During the voting period, all are welcome to express their concern and anger since they have freedom of speech and the right to assemble.

When the votes support an unrealistic way to replace the bulb, the bulb will not be replaced! All the supporters will quietly sit down and perform a hunger strike (with glucose water sponsored). This is called "Civilised Naughtiness". The process will be recorded and downloadable via youtube so that no one misses out on the fun.

From:	Jarrod Luo (duckispro@hotmail.com)
Sent:	Saturday, October 31, 2009 6:47:42 PM
To:
Cc:

From:	Muhummed Shamin Mohammed Sidek (shamin_maldini@hotmail.com)
	You may not know this sender.Mark as safe\|Mark as junk
Sent:	Sunday, November 01, 2009 7:25:23 AM