Tag: People’s Power Party

People’s Power Party (PPP): We Should Deny PAP 2/3 Majority In The Next GE, After Their Blatant Political Ploy In Reserved PE

Date: 12 Sep 2017
For Immediate Release:

People’s Power Party (PPP) Statement on Singapore Presidential Elections 2017

The Elections Department announced on 11th of September 2017 that Madam Halimah Yacob is set to be the 8th President of the Republic Singapore, having been the only potential candidate to have been issued both the Malay Community Certificate and the Certificate of Eligibility.

This means that the other two presidential hopefuls, Mr Mohamed Salleh Marican and Mr Farid Khan were not successful in their application to stand although both gentlemen had also been issued the Malay Community Certificate each. Both had failed to satisfy the ridiculously stringent criteria imposed upon private sector applicants.

The People’s Power Party (PPP), first of all, would like to express gratitude to both gentlemen who had bravely stepped forward to provide an opportunity for Singapore citizens to choose their next Elected President reserved for the Malay community. Mr Salleh and Mr Farid had subjected themselves to be scrutinised by the public with regard to their “Malayness” since they are of Indian and Pakistani by descent respectively. Madam Halimah, though technically an Indian by descent, have had her “Malayness” certified four times over in general elections previously.

PPP views this latest development of PE2107 as opportunity denied to both private sector candidates since the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC) has discretionary powers. We also note the administrative manipulation of what could have been a participatory democracy.

First and foremost, the virtue of Reserved Presidential Elections had been eclipsed by the notion that the Malays are not capable of winning in an open contest. The Malays of Singapore are actually sick of such tokenism. To add salt to injury, the “Malayness” of Presidential hopefuls are being questioned by the general public and subjected to a special committee to certify that they are Malays.

Mr Salleh and Mr Farid should be lauded as successful self-made men who are truly non-partisan and independent. That cannot be said of Madam Halimah, who, despite of her claim to not be serving any political party after stepping down as Speaker of Parliament just about a month ago, would always be seen to be beholden to her supposedly erstwhile political masters. This indebtedness would forever be etched in the memory of Singapore for generations to come should she submit her nomination forms this Wednesday, 23rd of September 2017.

When victory is declared on a battle not fought, there is no glory nor dignity.

While we could grudgingly accept that this may be a Reserved Presidential Elections for the Malay but we definitely could not agree with the blatant political ploy to turn it into Reserved President for PAP’s Halimah!

While Dr Tony Tan was not the President of 64.8% of Singaporeans who voted against him in PE2011, at the very least he fought a battle and won by 0.35% margin against his closest contender, Dr Tan Cheng Bock.

PPP is disappointed without reservation that the office of the Elected Presidency is once again tweaked in forms and eventually, it denies robust electoral challenge that is the essence of our Democratic guarantee. In our view, Mr Salleh and Mr Farid who are prominent individuals of the Malay community with the exceptional capabilities to perform the role of the Elected President with full competency. The denial of their candidacy is really regrettable.

PPP shares the sentiments of Singapore Malays who feel insulted that they been taken for a ride. The community sees themselves, yet again, as a scapegoat for the political agenda of the Powers That Be. They are the ones paying the ultimate political price. They rightly feel used, betrayed, played out and stupefied now that they bear witness to political gains built upon Malay dignity.

Last but not least, PPP further reiterates that we should not allow electoral rules to be manipulated in such divisive way and the Constitution should not be changed so frequently by the ruling party just to suit their own political agenda. An Independent Commission appointed by the Elected President should look into every attempt of amendment made to the Constitution and the Elected President should also be vested with Veto power to such amendment with the advice of the Commission.

Most importantly, we hope that Singaporeans should realize that giving PAP 70% mandate with overwhelming power via the dominance of parliamentary seats will not work in the interests of our Nation. We should deny PAP Two Third Majority in the next General Elections so that they could not just bulldoze any amendment to our Constitution at their fancy. This will ensure a truly fair electoral process and this will enhance the independent role of the Elected Presidency above and beyond partisan politicking.

Syafarin Sarif
Chairman
People’s Power Party (PPP), Singapore For CEC

Source: People’s Power Party – PPP

September 12, 2017
Goh Meng Seng: Supporters Of Israeli Nationhood Must Not Blindly Support Its Oppressive Anti-Palestine, Apartheid Policy

I had sent my response to TRE with regards to an article written by Philip Ong but they actually didn’t publish it! Well, cannot expect anything else when the mind is bias.

People who “support Israel” really has an emotionally charged mind fill with religious rhetoric . No wonder Karl Marx said “Religion is the Opium of people”! It numbs the minds of people, giving them fantasies and weird logic. They can justify anything under the Sun, regardless whether it is logical to the human mind, just or unjust or otherwise.

It just electrifies them when something just touches on Israel, never mind what you say, you don’t support Israel, you are my enemy!

All sound and logical reasoning just fallen on deaf ears. Even when we are just asking for a reasonable stance from Israel, stop the atrocities in Palestine, stop the illegal settlements, establish the Two-States structure… not even wanting Israel to be wiped off or destroyed!

I am personally considered a “religious man” in any sense but never will I subject myself to totally illogical religious fanaticism. Anything I believe, must make HUMAN logical sense, though it is about Buddha, Gods and Goddess, it must still make HUMAN sense to me. And it must be just, fair and peaceful to all.

In all honesty, I feel strange for anyone to support a group of people who basically rob land and declare nationhood. Yes, they bought the land initially, but no, buying the land is not equal to buying sovereignty. Else, Singapore will be in great trouble because lots of foreigners on our land bought land and properties! Will we agree to them declaring Nationhood just because they paid for the land?

Israel, to me, is built upon less than honorable and legitimate way. But that could be excused because I empathize with their plight from WWII Holocaust and they will need a permanent land and country of their own. In all pragmatic terms, the situation is set. Israel is set to be here on Earth.

But instead of being grateful and empathetic to the Palestinians’ emotional backlash, they became aggressive, greedy and inhumane. As the Chinese saying goes, giving them an inch, they want the whole foot. That’s the Zionist style. It is totally unacceptable and immoral to me.

The emotional backlash by the Palestinians may or may not be invoked by religious differences because any human being, would be disgusted and felt repulsive if foreign migrants just came in and declare the land belongs to them and they will become the ruler of the land! That’s totally human nature and you do not need any religious spikes to ignite that knee jerk reactions.

The sad part is, many religiously zealous people, failed to see the human side of things but overly engrossed in their religious belief.

I guess most residents of this World, just want peace and sick of all silly atrocities and politics of hatred. There are 140 countries which supported the Two-States resolution and UN has passed the resolution in condemning Israel’s continual oppression and land grab in Palestine. This is not some “fake news” or anything, but pure facts of the day. Wake up, my friends. Wake up. Supporting Israel’s Nationhood should not be translated into the support of its continual oppression of the Palestinians, apartheid rule and illegal land grab!

Source: Goh Meng Seng

February 22, 2017
Goh Meng Seng: Politicians Beware – Politics Is Dirty

Thought of the Day – Dirty Politics

Politics are dirty, many people say. I always reply that it is only as dirty as the politicians.

There are numerous political assassinations in history along with persecution by means of false accusations made against political opponents in all era.

The most recent assassination of the half-brother of North Korean paramount leader is another prime example that such ruthless dirty politics still exists.

Some of the most common tricks in the “more civilized” way of “fixing” the political opponents involve planting incriminating “evidences” that could be used against them.

In the 20th century, we have also witnessed outright assassination of politicians and this include the supposedly most liberal place with full democracy installed, i.e. the assassination of JFK.

Ironically, USA’s CIA and British MI6 which come from supposedly “democratic” countries, were and still are involved in covert operations which include political assassinations as well.

Thus, dirty politics of political assassinations aren’t exclusive to communist regimes or dictatorship.

Although in Singapore, there is no record of bloody political assassinations, but framing political opponents and potential threats had happened and will happen still. Right from 1960s throughout 1980s, the use of detention without trial under ISA was rampant. The Power that be did not need to justify their brutal abuse of ISA in detaining their political opponents and such detention had lasted not only years but decades for some.

Apart from that, there were also records of falsifying of evidences by the ruling party to falsely accuse potential political threats. The most prominent one is none other than Tan Wah Piow’s case which he was falsely accused of rioting with false evidences planted by the shamed Phey Yew Kok.

Personally, I have told my dear wife, right from the very first day I stepped into Singapore’s opposition politics, I am prepared for the worse to happen to me. Whatever happens to me, I told her to stay away from Singapore and never come back.

For many of the politician wannabe out there, be warned of the dire consequences of dirty politics. If you cannot afford the heavy price of dirty politics, please keep away from it. It would be naive to believe that there is such thing called “benevolent politicians or dictatorship”.

One of my comrade announced to my group, “Congrats all. We are now officially on Mossad’s hit list..” after our People’s Power Party has issued our Press Statement in protest of Israel PM’s visit to Singapore. Well, this may be made in jest but there is always possibility of dirty politics everywhere, especially from those who don’t respect Human Rights. Especially so for the Zionists.

We shall constantly remind ourselves that we must be ready to face the ultimate persecution of dirty politics, death.

Goh Meng Seng

Source: Goh Meng Seng

February 20, 2017
Goh Meng Seng: Singaporeans Are Politically Illiterate Because Of PAP

Thought of the Day – Political illiteracy

I had a nice chat with an alumni of my Alma Mater today over lunch.

He told me that many of the Singaporeans he came into contact with are basically politically ignorant. He gave me an example that two of his close associates did not think that it is wrong that PA or Town Council under PAP’s control refusal to let opposition party use the facilities is wrong. The reasoning given was that these “belong” to PAP and it is purely politics that PAP should not allow opposition parties to use these facilities.

But when they were corrected that these facilities were built using taxpayers’ money and do not belong to PAP, they raised doubts about it!

Such political ignorance is really deep rooted all thanks to PAP’s deliberate effort in blurring the lines between itself and PA. Opposition controlled TC is expected to allow PAP to use whatever premises in their town via “grassroot organization” like PA or RC or CCC. But PA has all rights to allow PAP to use its facilities for whatever activities disguised as “grassroot events” while opposition parties were banned from using its facilities by using the excuse of “PA’s premises should not be politicized”!

And you may wonder how could well educated Singaporeans who are graduates or diploma holders, actually agree and even support such blatant abuse of tax payers’ money for partisan interests!

The conclusion my friend has made, most Singaporeans are not “Politically Educated” and PAP is very happy to maintain such Political illiteracy for Singaporeans. This I will have to agree. Do our schools teach our students on what is Democracy? Rule of Law? Separation of Powers? Judiciary Independence? Freedom of Speech and Expression? Well, only on some “abstract Highfalutin” National Pledge which PAP didn’t even believe in nor respect!

Source: Goh Meng Seng

January 6, 2017
Goh Meng Seng: Do Not Divert Attention From Real Issues In Benjamin Lim’s Case

I am utterly disappointed by the Minister for Home Affairs (who is also the Minister of Law, which I always feel is totally inappropriate as it may constitute a conflict of interests but this article is not about this) Mr. Shanmugam’s statement made in parliament with regards to the case of Benjamin Lim Jun Hui.

Instead of addressing the many valid pertinent concerns raised by the public, on and off-line, he has put up a barrage of fire attacks at The Online Citizen (TOC) and the President of Law Society, Mr. Thio Shen Yi with totally irrelevant petty details of bickering.

Whether there were 4 or 5 policemen went to the school, wearing police uniforms or plain clothes are really irrelevant to the pertinent questions asked by TOC, Mr Thio and the public at large.

It is even more ridiculous for the Minister to cast doubts on TOC’s intent by raising the fact that it has reported that the Police refused to comment on the matter when approached!

For whatever reasons the police refused to comment (such as those reasons presented by the Minister himself), it should just say so when TOC asked them! A good and competent Public Relations Officer from the Police would have made simple comment like “We cannot comment on this case as internal investigation is still ongoing.” or “We cannot comment on this case as there will be Coroner Inquiry, please wait for the result of Coroner Inquiry”…etc.

The total ignore or silence from the Police is smacked of either arrogance or complete incompetency in Public Relations communication.

The Police has its own Pubic Relations officers. If the Police refused to answer to TOC’s inquiries, then the Minister cannot blame the TOC for reporting so (the truth that the police refused to comment) and the public will have their own discretion to form their own opinion.

So my dear Minister, it is the FAILURE of Police Public Relations officers in responding to the matter in timely manner that created public perception, not TOC. TOC merely reported the NO RESPONSE from the police!

It is of course the prerogative of the Police in keeping silence but it must also understand that keeping quiet will have its consequences and implications.

By the way, the Main stream media also reported 5 officers went to the school! Please lah! Why not fire at the Main stream media as well?

As for the President of Law Society, the point made was the necessity of the police making the arrest at the school! So, don’t try to divert from this pertinent question by going into the irrelevant bickering. Do you think it is appropriate or necessary for the police to send 4 or 5 police officers to the school to make the arrest?

There are more important questions raised by the public and I expect the Minister to address them, instead of using diversion tactic to dodge from these questions and public anger:

1) Does the Minister think it is RIGHT (never mind if it is legal or not) for policemen to go to school to arrest students who are just suspects of crimes?

2) Does the Minster think it is RIGHT (never mind if it is legal or not) for the police to interrogate minors without the presence of guardian or legal representative? In fact, is it right for police to deny legal representation or aid to suspects, regardless of age, during interrogation?

These are the two important issues raised by the President of Law Society and they are valid questions to be addressed fully. These questions raised does NOT constitute sub judice but it is of GREAT PUBLIC INTERESTS.

I hope the Minister could address these real issues instead of wasting time trying to divert attention to inconsequential minor details and bickering.

Oh, by the way, the poor boy was just investigated but NO OFFICIAL JUDGMENT has been made about him just yet. I do not understand why the Minister would insinuate him as “guilty” in parliament just because, according to the police interrogation, he “confessed” to the crime. His confession could be contested in court if there was really a court case but unfortunately, he won’t have that trial now. So I would urge the Minister not to put judgment on the poor dead boy in parliament even though he is also the Minister of Law, but he is not the judge nor the case has been heard.

Goh Meng Seng

Source: People’s Power Party – PPP

March 3, 2016