http://yoursdp.org/ Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:10:54 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc13446 Dear Dr Chee and all readers of this forum, Name me one time in the history of humanity that an authoritarian regime has been changed due to a challenge in the law of court. Dr Chee, you have intelligent but you must make better use of it. Your methods are a waste of time and will achieve no change. Just reflect on your many years in the political scene. Who has been suffering the most and what has really changed? Thus I ask of you, since you have and are willing to sacrifice so much, to be more level headed, and think of how you can build a credible party, a viable government and practical alternative policies instead of wasting your time in the courts and prison. It is your family that suffer the most. guppy Sat, 21 Mar 2009 09:27:33 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12476 This is a brilliant post by Dr Chee. Totally encapsulates the entire philosophy behind the need for Non-violent action and why the rule of law in Singapore has been held hostage by the powers-that-be for their own self-serving interests. E-Jay ngejay Thu, 08 Jan 2009 03:00:03 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12472 Dr Chee says the legal personalities' accusing him and the SDP without addressing and naming them was ill-mannerly and puerile. Indeed, but bad manners and emotions aside, their mode of attack on Chee and colleagues betrays their lack of the commitment to justice, truth and rationality Singaporeans should expect from especially persons holding high and highly paid legal offices. All they did was to insinuate dogmatically that Chee and colleagues' criticisms and conduct visavis the courts were contemptuous and rightly punished to uphold the respectability of the judiciary. They totally ignored the reasons and evidences Chee and others, including the respected (even by LKY and the PAP, initially) IBA, had harnessed in support of their critique and protest against our courts. The passion for justice and truthfulness calls for being careful that justification is always made and presented when taking a stand. And persons holding public offices have the responsibility to educate the public, and so, even where they think that the grounds of opponents do not deserve attending to (a stance rational and fair persons should not dare to take), answers to them are still called for in a public speech, for the sake of public education. Tan Tai Wei Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:44:41 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12471 Great Post. All that is left to do now is to print it out and send it to the Straits Times. Lets see what excuse their Random Excuse Generator will come out with this time for not printing it out. Secret Politcial Blogger Wed, 07 Jan 2009 21:25:43 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12470 The 3 of them together in photos remind me of the 3 Stooges. What a bunch of hypocrites with no conscience and feelings for the people.Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely! maxchew Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:17:47 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12469 Brilliant! I would love to read the three's reply. black-scholes Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:28:04 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12468 "Dear sirs, Your speeches during the opening of the legal year were unmistakable references to my colleagues and I. Yet, like Mr Lee Kuan Yew, you did not deign to mention us by name. This is rather impolite, if not altogether puerile." Wonderful opening. I laughed out impressed. Seelan Palay Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:40:40 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12467 I'm disgusted to hear these people utter words like "Rule of Law". Please don't think because you have a law degree or hold high appointments, you can talk till hell freezes over but we see what your actions are. You all are selfish elites who colluded with the ruling party to suppress citizens,using your "Rule of law" in a selective manner, to suit your pay master. In another words, "Running Dogs" Just like your pay master in WW2. Dick Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:47:56 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12466 Signed, sealed and delivered... damn, that's an excellent piece of work, now watch for the smoke screen from the law lords..... abalchan Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:47:26 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12464 No point talking to these people,the only answer is for the voters to overthrow the govt.But unfortunately, singaporeans are sweet talk by these ppl,and believe their ideals. tewniaseng Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:52:46 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12462 Yo Dr. Chee, you are way much more intelligent than all the ministers and courts put together, however, you are speaking to animals, no better than you or me. These so called judges have a very low IQ, much lower than their counterparts in Australia, hence talking will not do. tan Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:45:08 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12461 This year is 2009, pap still think that all Singaporeans are fool? Most of the people know exactly what is going on and hate the lees to the bone. But all if not most are too afraid to get involve. Dr. Chee and associate, you need to provide a path of light, a path of hope. Then you will gain support slowly but surely. Anyway you guys are on the right track, please keep up the good work. Ted Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:22:01 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12459 Dr. Chee: Do you want a Kangaroo Court's answer to your query as to why CASE was allowed to protest and yet your Human Rights Group are being charged in court for the "same" act? The answer is so obvious and yet you could not find it. Shame on you! NO wounder you cannot win the sissy Loong. You are so careless. Are you ready for the answer from the the Kangaroo Court? Don't play play, if you press them hard enough they might come out with such "excruciating logic". Are you ready for the answer? Put on your safey belt! Ready? Well if you look at the photos of the CASE group and the SDP group you notice right away that CASE members were wearing "white" t-shirts and you guys wore the "red". That's it, the deciding factor is the colour of the T-shirts. AMEN. If this year you decide to ware the same colour as them, then the next "excruciating logic" to charge you guys could be even more "logical"...it could be the average size of your shoes are different! Sounds stupid? What else you expect from Kangaroos? But in order to catch the kangaroo you must be the kangaroo or at least think like the kangaroo. "Know your enemies and yourself; then a hundred battles will be a hundred victories". Shu Toa War LOGIC. More good years to the Kangaroos! Very soon it will be an offence to wear anything of "kangaroo" pictures or designs near any of the Singapore courts...including Liang COURT. exSINgaPOORean Wed, 07 Jan 2009 05:20:46 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12455 Absolutely GREAT and very direct letter based on FACTS. This is one of the 'move' I've been waiting for. If at any time or any case this letter needs petition from people of Singapore to prove what Dr Chee Soon Juan wrote is truthful and nothing but the truth, count me in. I will gladly agree. Keen for bigger step forward. AnnA AnnA Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:52:30 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12454 Dear Dr Chee, This is a true masterpiece of a letter. It was clear to me that the top dogs in the legal profession used this occasion to stage an ideological offensive against the SDP; not only is it puerile, it is unprofessional. It is also shameless politicking on the PAP's behalf by what is supposedly an apolitical entity. With reference to the CASE vs TBT question, I might mention an analogous situation. On Oct 23, 2007, when Lee Hsien Loong was wrapping up the Parliamentary debates to proceed with more severely discriminatory legislation against gays, he conceded that we might have to live with this 'legal untidiness' for the time being; it was seen as a concessionary move towards the gay community. Why then don't others see a mirror image of the same 'legal untidiness' - a metaphor for unlawfulness - in this case? The two are identical in the questions of legality raised. The Law Minister's statements are also misleading: aren't judges empowered by their office to make judicial rulings on discriminatory and unconstitutional laws? Why have courts if that is not the the case? (The difference between the CASE vs TBT case and the "more greatly discriminatory laws against gays" case is that CASE vs TBT is in the hands of the courts, and the judge is obliged to make a ruling based on the evidence submitted. And with IMPARTIAITY! The "gays" case was in Parliament and is subject to the vote.) And why the call to "get elected if you want laws changed" as if it were the only option that is legally available. This after he is fully cognisant of his party's own vile conduct against those who challenge unconstitutional laws: 1. rig the electoral system to ensure that there will be never be sufficient numbers in Parliament to effect a change in discriminatory legislation; 2. hound those who do get elected and want laws changed to the point that they no longer qualify to run for elections; 3. mandate acquiesence (as if it were law and to the point of being ineffectual) of those elected if you wish to remain harassment-free in Parliament; and, 4. prevent others from entering Parliament with preemptively bankrupting them. Never mind that most people don't believe him. Does the Law Minister believe his own words? Robox Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:29:13 +0100 http://yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1681#josc12453 A must "read" for all singaporeans... "In order that all men might be taught to speak truth, it is necessary that all likewise should learn to hear it." Dr. Samuel Johnson (1709-1784) - Source: The Rambler, 1750-52 jeffgoh Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:29:09 +0100