ME: do u know People's Association? the PA?
ME: PA is in charge of community centres. WKS and LHL are the chairman and general secretary of the PA
ME: Resident's Committee and CRC are also under the PA
ME: where does the budget for PA comes from? from the govt?
ME: do u know that if an opposition MP wants to hold an event at the community centre he will be rejected
ME: whereas PAP MPs and non-MPs even hold events at the community centres
ME: so u can see party politics at play here. State resources are channelled to a party and used for that party's purpose. Yet an elected MP cannot use this resource simply bcos the MP is an opposition one
ME: during GE for example u see the PAP rallies, organised by the respective RCs.
ME: this is using state resources to advance a party's interests... salah lor
Her: it's politics lor
Her: opposition shouldn't make this sort of thing an issue
ME: it is gutter politics
Her: nothing is fair esp if u r in politics
ME: we will never rise above it if we condone such vindictive behaviour in our politicians
Her: it's the same everywhere
ME: just because everyone smokes does it mean we shld too?
Her: well if it's a smoking room then yes
Her: and being in politics there's no level field
Her: obama has more cash so he can do more ads than clinton
Her: that's an adv
Her: pap is the ruling govt
Her: and pa is state owned so of course there's no fairness
ME: there is no level playing field in the sense that yes u may hv more resources, backers, supporters etc. But the min u enact laws, institutionalise unjust barriers, u r going down the slippery slope
ME: a slope that will come back to bite u one day
ME: compete fairly, why so scared
Her: becoz they r ruthless remember
ME: PAP is not a small party at all, why so scared of the opposition? if the opposition are as bad as the PAP made them out to be, ppl will know how to vote, example u will vote for PAP wat
Her: i hate to hear opposition make these sort of claims
Her: to me it's like crying out loud they r being bullied and weak
Her: i'd rather hear them talk about issue!
Her: it's just whining
ME: i think i m not wrong to say that ur big issue got to do with economics and $
ME: civil rights isnt so important to u right?
Her: civil rights is ??? being bullied unfairly treated? invasion of privacy?
ME: bcos if u r able to let these "small" issues go and continue to b perpetuated, there is no end where it will stop, as long as there is $
Her: not true
Her: if these r normal folks and they r victimised then of course it's wrong
ME: how do u reconcile the fact that such "small" injustices can continue while expecting the opposition to present to u reforms and policies
Her: these r people trying to compete and first of all they r not victimised, they have a disadv
Her: and if they keep complaining i think it's silly
ME: so to complain about being victimised is silly??
Her: why not
ME: like that no need CASE liao lol
ME: the logic makes no sense
ME: how can u justify your money, my money, Sgians' money be used on one political party to further their own agenda? if u dun mind, u can just donate to PAP itself. the govt's money is not PAP's money u see
Her: they r still given the chance to hold rally right?
ME: that is not the point. The point is the PA, a branch of the govt, shld not be engaged in partisan politics
Her: but govt is pap
Her: that's the reality
ME: PAP forms the cabinet, the govt does not belong to the PAP
ME: big diff hor
ME: and this is why govt resources are being abused by the PAP to do PAP's biddings
Her: yes it's wrong, but do the opposition want to make this an issue?
ME: wat u r saying is since PAP forms the govt now they can do watever they please
Her: so that's the case and if the thing is not a big issue, what does it matter?
ME: do u feel this is right? wat do think of a govt that uses state resources in this manner?
Her: it works against opposition but not the people
ME: to say that it doesnt matter and say that it is acceptable is 2 diff thing
Her: i told u politics got no level playing field
ME: so u are telling me u accept this unfairness?
ME: it is acceptable to u?
Her: there's no need to whine about
Her: yes acceptable to me
Her: if i were an opposition
ME: in other words u accept blatant discrimination, in the name of politics
ME: u accept double standards
Her: yes becoz it's poliitcs
Her: and it's dirty
ME: it should not be, it is dirty if u make it so
Her: if one day there's a stronger credible opposition who doesn't whine, l'll look up to him/her (when such an oppo appear, wat will she expect next? that they can fly? LOL.. of cos i didnt say that)
ME: it is like saying it is ok, where is the moral principle??
Her: u r so idealistic
ME: .................. (really speechless liao..)
A while later the topic went into oppression of opposition members in SG. She tried to justify the use of the ISA on opposition politicians in the past (in the 60s and 70s)...
Her: an oppression of an extreme oppostion who may give dangerous ideas can be amount to self defence by existing govt (wah.. use self-defense argument & paint oppo as extreme)
ME: well u hv to prove that the opposition is indeed extreme or dangerous
ME: r the opposition really dangerous? lets look at the ISA detainees
Her: yes taliban is an oppositon party too
Her: they r dangerous!
ME: do u know under the ISA, there is no open trial.
Her: can u deny the fact that groups like taliban are not dangerous? (omg! Sg oppo is taliban to her!)
ME: so all the political detainees were NEVER charged in court, no evidence were ever tabled against them to support allegations of them being dangerous elements
Her: so they can be given free speech on equal ground?
ME: so u see there is no prove that the opposition is dangerous. your argument again cannot stand
Her: u sound like u r the intellectual smart aleck
ME: i happen to be able to counter ur points thats all, i certainly dun wan to make ppl think i know a lot.. fact is i not smart, i cant even get into local uni lol
ME: "an oppression of an extreme oppostion who may give dangerous ideas can be amount to self defence by existing govt" - this is wat u wrote. I hv shown that this is groundless in Sg's context
Her: u think u know it all, what makes u think that the opposition is safe for sure? (siao liao.. attack-the-person tactic coming)
Her: i cannot be sure they r dangerous
Her: but how can u be sure they r safe?
ME: we deal with facts and logic. If u feel someone is dangerous, u got to show proof & evidence
Her: u deal with facts? i htink u deal with bias more
ME: this is the problem with the ISA. They cannot show facts n evidence, what it means that it can be used as a political weapon for dictators to preserve power and prevent competition
Her: look that's in the past
Her: like i said lky has to deal with this bad karma
Her: but it shouldn't give people like u a huge sympathy points over the opposition
ME: if u feel i m biased i cant help it, but the facts r facts, ppl will come to their own conclusions eventually
Her: but u can't deny the fact u have a huge sympathy points over the opposition
ME: how do u reach that conclusion? i merely presented facts that do not make the PAP look good
ME: in fact i tell u i pity LKY
ME: he could hv left a brilliant legacy, but as they say power corrupts
Her: from the way u support chee
ME: chee? i will speak up for anyone i feel has been unjustly victimised, not jus chee
Her: u actually support him?
ME: support in wat sense? if he comes and contest in my ward, i will vote for him over PAP any time
ME: if the WP or any opposition party comes to my ward, they will get my vote too
Her: see, why?
Her: just becoz they r victimised?
Her: so any tom dick harry on the opposite is worht ur vote?
Her: where's ur stand on being a singaporean then?
ME: because i do not condone the systematic unjust oppression of opposition politicians in my country
Her: to me u r slinging mud that's all
ME: mud slinging is wat the 148th media does best. Any wonder why they r ranked that way in press freedom? lol
Her: congrats u joined their ranks then
ME: to me it sounds like ppl who vote for oppo offends u .. how come?
ME: u can go vote for PAP, i wont be offended
ME: its your choice, i respect that
Her: people who vote any tom dick harry on the opposite offends me
Her: becoz they r not logical
Her: and never put the country's interest first
ME: do u think the country's interests is all about asset appreciation?
Her: it's definitely more than ur oppostion suppression
Her: its' about prospering and living in peace
ME: this is a very common phenomena i observed on the internet
ME: ppl who r sympathetic to the opposition are more forgiving, whereas ppl who are pro-pap are very unforgiving
Her: huh forgiving?
ME: they get angry even
ME: see? i can respect ur decision to vote for a party u want. But u seem unable to respect my decision to vote for the party i want.. that smacks of authoritarianism to me
Her: u know that's how people like bush can get into poliitics and be a leader
Her: becoz of pp like u!
ME: lol in the US i would be a democrat LOL the policies i support r liberal in nature
Her: doesn't matter what his stands on policies are
Her: just as long as he presents a different case...
Her: but here in sg
Her: ur support for a govt is one that's anti-pap (wah got wrong meh? must be pro-PAP one ah?? jialat sia..)
ME: this has been an interesting chat.. it will help in my analysis of how SGians view politics hehe
Wah piang! Do you think she is in love with me? Hahahaha!
She claimed that she is not pro-PAP or a PAP member leh, but from the anger and hate, i seriously hv my doubts sia... And this is not healthy at all for SG. Decades of political brainwashing and "national education" by the 148th media has resulted in hate mongering towards opposition politicians. It is dividing SGians instead of building an inclusive community regardless of one's political views and opinions. Sad siah ...