TOTD: The Final POISONOUS Death Dagger stabbed into Alternative Media.

Thought of the Day - The Final POISONOUS Death Dagger stabbed into Alternative Media.

Most people like me, would look at the Fake News Law at superficial level on first sight. This is always the tactic used by PAP controlled Mainstream Media to mislead and misguide people into looking at the big punch while avoiding the poison darts and daggers hidden in that thick legislation.

While we are busy criticising why political appointees like Ministers were given such huge power to decide what's true and what's false, we miss the whole poisonous intent of this law.

Hidden within this legislation is the vicious intent to force the closure of all alternative media by taking aim at advertisers and sponsors of alternative media, instill FEAR into them while putting an "exemption clause" so that it could be used to exempt PAP's Mainstream media.

The reason why Facebook and other international internet media platform are so against this law is basically because not only the owners of these platforms would be criminally liable but advertisers on their platforms as well as sponsors will be criminalized by PAP government as "supporting fake news"!

The proposed law and with no single doubt, would be passed, says that if a website or internet platform has been found guilty of DELIBERATE spreading "fake news" or information (for 3 times within 6 months), those who donated or sponsored these sites, or advertise on these sites, will be charged in Singapore court as well!

Now you know why there is an "exemption" clause which gives PAP great power to exempt SPH, Mediacorp and media under its control from this law because, even these media outlet could not be sure that each and every news they broadcast could only be True but not Fake!

On the other hand, who would dare to advertise on alternative media like TOC or Independent SG if this law is passed? Who would dare to donate to these entities to face the risk of being prosecuted by PAP government if these media get into trouble with Fake News legislation?

This law is a total Farce. It is making use of the excuse of curbing "Fake News" to empower PAP Ministers with enormous Judiciary and Executive power to thumb down internet media which they don't like!

It goes against the spirit of Rule of Law whereby the Judiciary will be totally by-passed and smack of Rule by Law of a dictatorial power which will decide who will be exempted while who will be persecuted!

The potent poison actually lies within the details. If Singaporeans do not wake up to such blatant facts but chose to believe in PAP's sweet talk of its weak justification to empower themselves with such dictatorial powers, I fear Democracy will leave us eventually one day.

Goh Meng Seng

Trespasses of Judiciary

Trespasses of Judiciary

When PAP enacts a law to give its own Ministers the power to Judge, Decide and give out punishment to "fake news" publishers or propagators, it is a serious trespass of Judiciary power by the Executive!

This is a serious attempt to destroy the fundamentals of Democracy in Separation of Powers.

Judgement on "falsehood" is definitely not the same as a straight forward breach of rules like parking offences or speeding. It requires an objective and independent entity like the court to make judgements.

I would think that such law is totally unconstitutional as it basically made political appointees like Ministers empowered with judiciary powers! Ministers will have great potential conflicts of interests involved when they are making such judgement call.

To say that people could go to court and challenge the Ministerial decisions doesn't erase the fact that Ministers have been given powers that trespass and undermine the judiciary system.

Goh Meng Seng

TOTD: "Racial Chauvinists", Religion, Humanity & Balance

Thought of the Day - "Racial Chauvinists", Religion, Humanity & Balance

This is going to be a "political incorrect" and sensitive topic but it sets me thinking for quite a long while.

What will happen when a "perceived" Chinese Chauvinist meets a "labeled" Malay Chauvinist?

A good friend of mine, a Malay, told me that his friend "warned" him about me being "Chinese Chauvinist" and wanted him to "stay away" from me. My friend replied "I am also a Malay Chauvinist, so what?"

Simple Labels are thrown around in politics as a means of divide and rule. I get this "Chinese Chauvinist" label ever since my first electoral contest in Aljunied GRC under WP because I played the role as "Chinese Anchor" by making more speeches in Mandarin during elections rallies. My SAP school background has also been played up to justify this label of "Chinese Chauvinist". But as far as I am concerned, technically speaking, I am not truly a Chinese educated person. I always tell others I am "half Chinese-educated" because SAP schools aren't really "Chinese Education" at all.

Yesterday at the Water Protest, I met a veteran Malay political activist/politician who has been labeled as "Malay Chauvinist" by PAP during one of the hotly contested elections. Guess what happens? Did the "fight" between the two "Chauvinist" figures occur? Nope.

He said to me that he has been following my various postings and find that I have been very fair in writing towards the Malays/Muslims issues.

Deep down in my heart, I regard everyone as a Human Beings first (unless you want to be a dog of some kind...) before you are racially or religiously classified. We have the same color of blood running in our veins. As human beings, we should have the same understanding of Humanity.

I just told him that sometimes, for some "sensitive Malay/Mulsim" issues or perspectives, it is better for Chinese or non-Malay/Muslim to speak up for them, else PAP people would use the opportunity to put labels on those Malays/Muslims who dare to utter those words. We are humans and Singaporeans, we look after and speak up for each other. Don't ever allow PAP to use "divide and rule" on us anymore.

PAP has always emphasized on the FEAR of racial disharmony and what not. It has always proclaimed that we need "racial balance" and it has always been playing the racial card whenever it suits their agenda. The Elected Presidency and GRC system the most prominent examples. Of course, at the same time, it will disallow others from "playing racial politics".

The curious thing is this. While PAP played the racial card well and regularly, it has always shy away from the topic of "religious balance" in politics. Religious political perspective is more sensitive than racial politics to PAP. The last opposition politician who touched on this "most sensitive" topic of "religious balance" in PAP government, got hammered and chased out of Singapore. This is none other than Mr Tang Liang Hong. He had two labels thrown at him, not one. "Anti-Christian Chinese Chauvinist". That was the exact label.

Despite the fact that Mr Tang can speak Fluent Malay and learned Indian Dance, the "Chinese Chauvinist" label was put on him.Yet some Singaporeans actually buy PAP's story! Just because he is really "Chinese educated" and also speak fluent Mandarin. The "Anti-Christian" label was put on him just because he mentioned about the imbalance of religious mix within the Cabinet in one of the dialogue sessions.

He had just poked at the sensitivity of PAP government, which was and still is factually correct.

Religion is of course, a sensitive and emotional issue. Some people could lose their sensibility and even human logical mind when discussing religious topic. Especially in politics, it makes people irrational, ignoring all other issues but focusing solely on their own religious beliefs.

I have met several people of such mindset in my FB. When it comes to the issue of "Israel", it seems that some people just went bonkus. They were "known" to be "opposition supporters" but when I try to make sense of the happening in Israel as an issue of atrocities against humanity, they will somewhat justify that as "Palestine is the God's promised land to Jews". Well, for people like me who do not believe in Abrahamic faiths, this is really a non-issue. The real issue of the day is that sufferings to humanity are happening in Palestine due to Israel's unreasonable doings.

At the end of the day, they would end up with "I will not vote for you" just because I am "against Israel"!

I raise this point to illustrate how religious faiths could greatly affect one's rational thinking and we should NOT pretend that such things don't happen. I would say that beside racial balance, religious balance in politics is an important key issue for Singapore as well. This is especially so when the Abrahamic faiths followers are somewhat affected by the tensions created in the Middle East.

Every religions will have its extremist factions. They might be the minority but their twisted teaching may affect a lot more people unknowingly. Even Buddhism has its fair share of cults created over the decades and centuries.

In Singapore's context, we have to eradicate and prevent such extremism from evolving in ALL religions in Singapore. And the best way to effect such preventive measures is to have a good balance of representation of people with different religious beliefs in parliament as well as the Cabinet. The religious moderates should dominate the political sphere, in prevention of any extremism from any religious faith from hijacking the platform.

However, comparatively, Buddhists and Taoists are rather inactive in the political sphere. Somehow, among the Buddhist community, there is a subtle inherent discouragement of political engagement or involvement due to our religious belief. Most of the Buddhists would just take a detached attitude towards politics. Their religious faith is personal and do not see the need or importance of political involvement.

Even more so for the "elites" in the Buddhist community. They view politics as "dirty" and it would hinder their own practice of mindfulness, gaining merits so that they could be reincarnated or reborn into better realms or even attaining Nirvana.

This is why in Singapore, even though the Buddhist/Taoist community is the largest among the various religions, we are "under-represented" in the political sphere.

But I think otherwise. Buddhists could well be the balancing force in Singapore politics when the tension between the Abrahamic faiths could well spill over from Middle East.

The reason why I could put up a FAIR position on the issue of Islam, Malay and Israel is not because I am Chinese but rather, I am a Buddhist and not bounded by the Abrahamic-faith mindset. I see things as it is, in modern context and I am not bounded by whatever past historical religious happenings in the Middle East.

Having said that, I personally feel that Catholics are generally more moderate in nature. They have a better understanding that Islam, has similar roots to their faith. It is a curious point because the Crusades and Jihads have been fought bitterly between the Muslims and Catholics centuries ago. But they have evolved.

I had a Catholic friend who said that Catholic encourages fasting for one month prior to Easter or Good Friday. They will fast for a meal a day and the money saved from this meal, they will donate out to charity. Doesn't that sound familiar? The only difference is that Muslims and Catholics chose to fast on different months but both believe that fasting is essential in keeping mindfulness about the cleansing of their body and mind.

Sometimes many people ask me to give up opposition politics altogether. Well, I will give up eventually and hopefully soon. Like all good Buddhists, I would like to have my last years of my life spent in seclusion and private practice to attain enlightenment. It would be a great blessing if I could become a monk in this life. But for the time being, I will have to continue to play my role and duty to my country.

Hopefully when the time is up, I shall know by Divine intervention. :)


Goh Meng Seng

TOTD: The Police State - Singapore

I have met an activist not so long ago. He was basically subtly INTIMIDATED by the PAP establishment via physical mail to his residence. They also sent a physical mail to his parents as well.

From the information printed out in the mail and the mail itself, it seems that it came from the SAME SOURCE which THREATENED Roy. And apparently, this is done by someone with the establishment apparatus!

It basically means that most probably ISD is involved in this case.

My young friend is shaken and shocked. He had never believed all the stories I have told him about how ISD operates and only now, he is convinced that PAP has been using or rather, abusing its power as the government to utilize the state's apparatus for its own political agenda.

My young friend had decided to stop all internet writings, activities and close down his FB as well.

I told him pretty straight forward. These dogs are tailing him and decided to bark at him basically because they have psychologists who studied his mental profile. He is scared, afraid and timid, which he refused to admit.

Well, the crux of the matter is this, no matter how I and other more seasoned politicians and activists seem to put forward the proposition that PAP is basically a dictatorship and there is no such as "benevolent dictatorship" but only a FULL POLICE STATE in all essence, terrorizing and using all methodologies to intimidate opponents and dissidents, most people will not believe UNTIL the day that they suffered the same fate of being persecuted by this invisible Police State.

PAP pretends to build a "democracy" but in every essence, it is not a party which believes anything about democracy and its core values. Not only its ministers would openly denounce democracy as "inferior" but in effect, propagate that only one party rule under PAP will be good for Singapore. It also asserts draconian means of any dictatorship would put up.

My young friend is one of the "unfortunate" or "fortunate" one who will experience first hand how a Police State works. But he chose to be threatened, hide away and went on in life with that constant nagging of fear behind his mind. I do not blame him. Most Singaporeans are tamed and timid in every sense, politically speaking. There are really very few REALLY courageous who would stand up and do what that little white monkey does, to PAP.

But make no mistake about it. PAP is not some good and innocent ruling party. It is a party with a great tendency towards full dictatorship. If it is not stopped, then there will be disastrous impact on the democratic development for Singapore. That would be too late for anyone to defend democracy anymore.

Goh Meng Seng

Dodging the REAL Issues - The Case of Benjamin Lim

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 Public 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

2016 Chinese New Year Message

Normally at this time of the year, I would be happily preparing my Chinese New Year greetings for all my friends and supporters, but today, my heart is heavy and saddened.

Benjamin Lim committed suicide because of the inappropriate use of police force and this has made my party colleagues and I extremely depressed. I could not imagine how the Lim family could possibly feel anything good about this festive season with such overwhelming sorrows of their lost son. On behalf of my family and my party, I would like to offer our heartfelt condolences to the Lim family.

As a father of a teenage girl, it is my greatest joy to watch my girl grow up. However, if one day, my daughter was to be brutally abused and ill-treated by this ridiculous police state until she has mental breakdown, I would also be totally devastated. Thus, I empathize with the Lim family of the loss of their son. This system of overwhelming police power which was allowed to exercise the most primitive deformed kind of police procedure, based on the first premise of guilty before proven innocence, extended its power to use whatever force including mental humiliation to extract confession, is in fact our common karma.

Benjamin Lim’s death is not solely an insolated incident. His death is in fact an amplification of the absurdity of this system of excessive police power. Every year, there are numerous people who have suffered under this excessive police power. Thus, in the midst of sorrows, we should resolve to fight for our ideal system based on our belief in the balance of powers through the Separation of Five Powers.

On this eve of Chinese New Year, I am also shocked by the devastating impact of the earthquake in Tainan. I hope that our Taiwanese friends could overcome the pain and sufferings with their determination and willpower. I will pray for our Taiwanese friends, praying for the speedy rescue of the trapped and injured. most importantly I will pray for the minimum casualties for this unfortunate natural disaster.

Last but not least, on this Chinese New Year Eve, I sincerely wish every friends and supporters, good health and safe travel in the coming year. Thank you for all your support over the years and I hope we will have a better life in the coming one.

Goh Meng Seng

The Murderous Police State

The job of the police in investigation, is to FIND OUT THE TRUTH and not "EXTRACTION OF CONFESSION". There is a fine thin line of VAST difference between the two.

Today some members of the public told me this, they are very angry about this case. When there was a riot in Little India, the police acted like wimps, didn't know what to do or just simply running away from the rioters. But when they handle a child, a teenager, they turned into big bully... simply bully kichi until the child committed suicide! The contrast is just too huge for them to be forgiving.

However, the problem is nobody thinks that way when the whole state machinery, including the state police, prosecutor, mass media etc came down hard on another teenager Amos Yee. If more people had made enough noise and protests, the police might have been forced to review their SOP but we failed to do so as a Nation. So the rouge police state carries on their SOP with the defence of the PAP ministers and MPs to deny anybody early access to legal assistance while in police custody and interrogation!

And a young life was lost with only patronizing statements from the state.

We as a Nation, have blood in our hands, for allowing such primitive and inhumane system which deny basic human rights of legal representation to extend unlimited powers of police intimidation, coercion for confession via interrogation techniques exerted by the overwhelming police power.




When Amos Yee was ill treated by the State Police, put through the torture of interrogation and remained in IMH, many people didn't see the problem of such act by the police state. Even when people like me protested against such treatment, even though I do not agree to his rude behavior, were scorned at and criticised.

When it comes to Benjamin, the same police state tactic was used upon this poor child who was even younger than Amos Yee. The only difference is that this young boy could not take the pressure and committed suicide. Then there is this uproar.

The irony is, the same old technique has been used by the police over and over again, regardless whether you are a teenager or adult. Cruel techniques were used to extract unwilling confession from the ISD detainees but nobody squeaked. Few people squeaked when Amos Yee was treated badly by the same police state just because people are more intolerant of his rude behavior than the rouge police state.

Few Singaporeans see the need to speak up against the rouge police state because they are blinded by their own fear and prejudice. Singaporeans have little sense of social justice until something really bad goes wrong. Singaporeans also lack the empathy to understand that by not standing up to the tyrannic police state, they will become part of the justification of the murderous system. Yes, Singaporeans, by keeping quiet all along with all the injustice happening throughout the decades, are guilty of letting this bloody system grow and take the life of a teenager.

Pastor Martin has this to say about the COWARDICE of the Germans under the Nazi:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

And the same can be said about Singaporeans as well:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Student Activists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Student Activist.
Then they came for the Opposition, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not an Opposition.
Then they came for the Social Activists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Social Activist.
Then they came for the Young Rascal Amos Yee, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Young Rascal like Amos Yee.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

I do not think Benjamin will Rest In Peace when the whole society is guilty in part to the murderous police state.

Goh Meng Seng

Singapore is BIGGER than LKY & LHL

I refer to the forum letter entitled “Govt critics riding on Amos’ case for their own cause” published on 8 July 2015 (Today).

The author insinuated that my participation in the protest held in Hong Kong on 5 July 2015 was an attempt to “incite participants of other nationalities” to protest against a “local issue”. And the author opined that I am not “patriotic” because I did nothing to stop the protestors from burning the “effigies” of Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong.

My response is as follows:

1) I believe the author, Mr. David Tan, has never participated in any protest before. It is an extremely common practice for protesters (overseas) to burn effigies of their targeted politicians or individuals. In the said protest, I would say that the printed images of Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong are not even considered as “proper” effigies to begin with.

2) A staff from Singapore Consulate was present at the protest site and he didn’t step in to interfere with the burning of the “effigies”. Is he considered as “unpatriotic” by David Tan’s definition?

3) I do not consider the two individuals, Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong as “representation” of Singapore. i.e. they are NOT Singapore and Singapore does not equate to them. I believe Singapore is definitely BIGGER than them.

4) There are reasons why the protesters have demonstrated such disgust of the two persons, so much so that they proceeded to burn their images. You may or may not agree with them, but this is their way of expression in Hong Kong.

5) As I have repeatedly said, I do not respect dictators and definitely have even lower opinion of Lee Hsien Loong after his administration has chosen to use such inhumane and cruel means against a 16 year old boy.

6) I would have raised my objection to the organizers if they were planning to burn the Singapore flag. They didn’t burn the Singapore flag but only two individuals’ images whom I have very little respect to start with. And I do not think they are in any way, represent Singapore’s sovereignty.

7) Thus I do not see why I should interfere in their protest activity at all.

8) Besides, it is a really bad move if anyone from the Singapore Consulate has interfered in their burning of the images. It will only escalate the matter and create a bigger unnecessary bad press for Singapore.

9) In fact, Singapore Consulate’s refusal to receive the letter of protest from the protesters has aggravated the situation back then, resulted the protesters to take further actions of pasting protest signs on the lift lobby. This is totally unnecessary as the protest could have ended earlier and peacefully.

10) Human right is an universal issue. There isn’t a need for anyone like me to “incite” protest by foreigners against such human rights infringement. The reason why Singapore name is being dragged into the mud is basically due to the total mismanagement of PAP government under Lee Hsien Loong in handling Amos Yee case. Anyone with good conscience should feel angry about this and should question why PAP government has damaged Singapore name internationally.

11) When our country is being invaded, we will stand up and fight our enemies. When our government has brought shame to our Nation, we should speak up against it. Only then, it is true patriotism. We should not misplace our patriotism to support any government which has done wrong and brought international shame to our Nation.

12) Last but not least, I am quite puzzled why the author is expressing more concern of the burning of effigies which didn’t cause any harm to the dead nor the living (maybe only a slight dent to ego) but chose to ignore the unjust, cruel and inhumane harm which the PAP government has inflicted on a 16 year old boy.

13) I would opine that this is a total disproportionate and unbalance focus on the inconsequential issue while trying to sidetrack from the more important issue of political persecution of a 16 year old boy.

Goh Meng Seng

Voice of Conscience

Andrew Loh expressed frustration and disappointment that no MP, be it PAP or WP has made any comment on the torture, unfair treatment or cruel inhumane vindictive political persecution of AMOS.

I would like to share with him and all here why this is so. I was persuaded by many well meaning supporters and close associates not to comment or get involved in this Amos saga simply because they opined that I will lose support and votes from Singaporeans who may be either opposition supporters or middle ground voters.

Why so? Amos is seen as a rude and ungrateful spoilt brat by many Singaporeans and many of them hold the view that "he needs to be taught a good lesson " or "he deserves it".

It is indeed sad that our society and Nation at large has lost the sense of appropriateness, conscience, Rule of Law and human decency just because many of us are overwhelmed by disgust, annoyance, hatred or simply apathy.

Such common thinking resulted in a literal MOB RULE mindset in which these people would just want HARSH punishment towards spoilt brat Amos, disregarding whether what he has done warrant any criminal charges or imprisonment or worse, sending to IMH or 18 months of reformative centre detention... They might have wished Amos to be locked away with keys thrown away if they could!

The vindictive PAP Government feeds on such irrational sentiments of Mob Rule thinking and thus we ended up with a gungho aggressive AGC trying all administrative means to punish Amos in any ways they can, going into extremes in their vindictive political persecution of a 16 year old boy. They have totally Forgotten their role as legal officers is to uphold Rule of Law and not some political persecution of their masters.

And the sad thing is, most Singaporeans have stood by watching silently, condoning such vindictively cruel, inhumane and insanely disproportionate brutal assault on a 16 year old boy. Some have even cheered, clapped and urge the authority on such act!

Amos is not the one who is mentally sick. These people are the ones who are mentally sick.
The sad thing is that apart from a few politicians, most have lost their voice of conscience. They chose to keep quiet for fear of losing votes from the irrational Mob!

Personally I have received several private messages from supposedly opposition supporters who chastised me for taking part in the Protest against PAP Government's vindictive, inhumane and cruel political persecution and said Amos deserves it and I will lose support by fighting for him! Some have even openly attacked me as TRAITOR just because I participated in the protest held by foreigners, forgetting that it is human decency and pure conscience of Rule of Law which I am standing for.

These people view that a spoilt brat like Amos is more disgusting than a regime which will go all out to persecute a 16 year old with such extreme cruel and inhumane means!

A spoilt brat like Amos could do no big harm to anyone except annoying many people. What he deserves is just zero attention from all of us. But a Government which will break all backs to seek all possible administrative means, even trespassing the rule of law just to persecute Amos will do more harm to our nation!

It has destroyed Rule of Law, instilled fear which curtailed free speech and worse, destroyed trust in our legal system!

Instead of taking the stance to stop all these nonsense from such fanatical move by PAP Government to extract maximum punishment from a naive and ignorant spoilt brat, both PAP and opposition MPs have chosen to remain silent.

Instead of taking the lead to show leadership in putting sense and reasons into people's mind of proper balance and moderation, they decided to allow PAP Government to feed on and perpetuated Mob Rule!

Instead of standing up and be opinion makers and leaders, they have chosen to hide cowardly behind perceived safety of populist Mob mentality.

This is the sorry state of affairs in Singapore, so much so that foreign observers and activists have to wonder what has happened to our country whereby those who are supposed to fight for the well being and rights of the people, suppose to be leaders of the people, have become enslaved by that little ballot box!

I know I am going to be attacked by many people again for making this post but heck it. If I have to lose my voice of conscience in exchange for enough votes to win Elections, then I would rather not have such support and prepared not to win Elections. I would rather keep my soul and conscience intact than go into parliament with an empty heart.

Goh  Meng Seng

Rebuilding what LKY has Destroyed - Democracy

The PAP IBs and LKY fans regard me as "LKY hater" but I am definitely not because I am not the victim of his ruthlessness, unlike many others who have been unjustly imprisoned and tortured by him.

I consider his greatest FAILING in his political career to be his TOTAL DESTRUCTION of the tenets of Democracy: The Separation of Powers. This bad deed, has longer implications on Singapore's development than any other bad deeds he has done during his lifetime. For his deed of treating his opponents with unnecessary harsh and inhuman means, it could be easily be forgiven by these victims if he has repented and apologized. But not so for this deed of destruction of Democratic development.

The political system which he has carefully designed, could only survive with his dream of having "Philosopher King" with massive concentration of great powers without being corrupted. That is definitely IMPOSSIBLE. It may have worked during his time but it has opened up Singapore to instant failure should a corrupt leader get into power as there is a lack of checks and balances and accountability.

We will need to re-look at the current political system to remove all the bad practices and policies which destroy the basic principle of Democracy, Separation of Power. For a start, I would like to see the following happening:

1) CPIB should be made independent of PMO, oversee by a commission led by a retired judge.

2) The appointment of judges, especially Chief Justice, should be made independent of the executive. We should not repeat the stunt of appointing someone who was only "lawyer in name" without rich experience in legal practice or justice department to become Chief Justice or even High Court judge.

3) The Executive should be banned from meddling with editorial rights of newspapers and TV stations.

4) Elections Department should be made independent of PMO as well, led by a commission. Any changes to boundaries should be transparent and open for scrutiny. The ED or the commission in charge should justify any drastic changes.

5) The ISA should be reviewed and the law should ban the use of National resources for espionage on political parties without strong justification of National security threat. ISD should only work on cases or situation which warrant their attention in terms of National Security Threats. They should not work for political missions dictated by the ruling party.

6) Conflict of interests should be minimized and declaration of such interests is important in the process of policy making as well as appointment of key personnel. The anti-corruption law should look into this.

7) Declaration of assets for political appointment holders such as Prime Ministers, Ministers, Ministers of state etc should be made transparent.

8) The Government should "get out of business" in Singapore. This is to prevent the massive conflict of interests and impact on Rule of Law in Singapore. The Government cannot subject itself as the regulator as well as the one being regulated. This has been deliberated by Eric Tan in his latest article.

9) Addition by Ken Zeng, the Prime Minister should only have two consecutive terms. Entrenchment of power will lead to the possibility of corruption of power as well.

10) Ministerial pay should be lowered further to reflect the nature of Public Service. We do not want our Ministers to stay in power for too long as well. This is to prevent them from taking this as "just another job", too comfortable to move on. The Minister pay should be pegged to the lowest 20% percentile of income, calculated with the inclusion of those WITHOUT income. It may also include a certain percentage weighted peg on the median income level.

11) Addition by Ken Zeng: Reinstatement of Jury system for certain cases as practiced prior to 1969.

These are the few things in my mind now.Please feel free to suggest any other things you think which is important as in Separation of Power alone; not just any policy issue.

Goh Meng Seng

Two Warnings to Opposition Camp

Warning to Opposition Camp I

It has come to my attention that there is a group of "opposition supporters" (well, in fact, just a particular party supporters) which is ultra left and does not really believe in the Universal Values of Democracy, Rule of Law, Justice and separation of powers.

This group is actually "Ultra-Left" which has a slanted view of Great China which I suspect is basically Chinese Chauvinistic in nature. For Opposition supporters in Singapore to support tyranny rule of CCP in China, hitting out any Democratic Movement against the tyrannic rule of CCP in all possible opportunities, have exposed their ideological idea of Dictatorship.

From my observations so far, this group of "Opposition supporters" does not really believe in Democracy. If they ever have the chance to influence or even control any opposition party to come into power, most probably they will be MORE PAP THAN PAP in all aspects.

From my observations, they are basically holding the same Dictatorship ideology or tendency which PAP embraces... the Monopoly of Power is their strategic positioning. They will encourage multi-corner fights to prevent any other opposition parties other than the one they support, so to prevent other opposition parties to be successful in GE and make sure that the party they support will be the only viable party to become ruling party.

I hope all of those people who believe in Democracy as our core value and our basis in our struggle against PAP, to be extremely careful of this group of people. Else, we may just end up with a group of people who are More PAP than PAP to be ruling party in future.

Warning to Opposition Camp II

I have to concede, the big word "Opposition" is built around mostly on the concept of "Anti-PAP". We must also admit that among the "Opposition Camp", Opposition people, be it opposition party members or supporters, aren't really "perfect" in every sense.

Politically speaking, I find certain tendencies among Opposition people quite troubling. There a few points I wish to raise here:

1) Lack of Understanding or even doesn't believe in simple Universal Core Values of Democracy, Rule of Law, Social Justice, Basic Human Rights, Fairness, System of checks and balances, Accountability and Transparency etc. We have to apply these values in assessing BOTH the ruling party as well as our own opposition parties.

2) Extremist tendency in Racial aspects (Racial Chauvinism), Religious aspects (insensitive Religious based attacks or comments) and Party Affiliation aspects.

3) Some party supporters are very defensive of their own party's shortcomings while attacking almost every other opposition parties in all other ways. Ironically, they have the same monopolistic tendency just like PAP. This is unhealthy for Singapore democratic development.

4) The more worrying tendency is the rise of Religious and Racial assertions in the daily social-political discourses. We must understand that no party will be able to rule effectively or even win elections, if it does not show the ability and capability to take care of the interests of ALL races and religious groups in Singapore. PAP will discourage positive religious and racial discourses in the name of "possible sedition" but the truth is, one of the main reason why PAP is still able to stay in power is because it has used all mechanism and machinery available as the ruling party, to show that it is the "ONLY" political party which can take care and balance the interests of all racial and religious groups. Opposition people are not going to progress if they are still stuck with divisive extremist tendency in Racial and Religious aspects.

5) While we may position opposition as "Pro-Singapore", "Pro-Singaporeans", but there is really a fine line between Nationalistic vs Xenophobia. Based on the Universal Core Value of Democracy and Social Justice, we should also help those foreign workers who have been ill-treated or exploited by their employers or even the whole system to seek justice and redress. Instead, we are seeing people attacking foreigners all across the board regardless of the context and situation. A balance must be struck between Anti-Liberal Immigration Labour policy vs Anti-Foreigners. We are against the policy, not Foreigners who behave themselves in Singapore. Of course, for those Foreigners who misbehave themselves here but consistently just get a slight slap on their wrists, we detest that. That concerns the unfair judiciary system run by PAP government which antagonized and planted the seed of public hatred against such unfair treatment. Such issue has wider implication as in rising social tension between local Singaporeans vs foreigners. But as opposition supporters, we should not fall for the extremism while we raise the red flag against such systemic bias.

It is not going to be easy to strike a balance in this era due to the change in the political landscape both in Singapore and the world. Without a strong belief in Universal Core Values of Democracy, Social Justice, Rule of Law etc etc, many of us will fall into the traps of extremism which may be detrimental to the whole Opposition movement.

But we must try very hard, to constantly remind ourselves and people around us who are with us in this difficult journey of effecting Political Change.

Goh Meng Seng

4 June 1989 - Yahoo SG becoming accomplice of the Butchers?

WARNING: This Blog Article contains GRUESOME PHOTOS of the DEAD from Tiananmen Square. These may create great discomfort to viewers. 


I normally write my article in remembrance of the 4 June 1989 massacre in Chinese but this year, it will be a bit special because I have read a very disgusting article written by Gregory Clark posted on Yahoo SG which attempts to obfuscate the fact that a massacre has indeed happened during the 4 June 1989 incident at Tiananmen Square, Beijing.The article entitled "Tiananmen Square Massacre is a Myth, All We're 'Remembering' are British Lies" smacks of an attempt to whitewash away the blood of the butchers.

This is supposedly a conclusion after "research" but it only provides a few "eyewitness" accounts without photo evidence. It mentioned some "video" recording but wasn't presented in the report. This is against the background of hundreds, if not thousands of eye witnesses report of the massacre. But this is the basic common sense, if the army troopers have been shooting and killing all their way to get to Tiananmen Square, what makes him think that they would stop shooting at the Square?

There was a list of casualties leaked from the army's Chief of Staff office that gave detailed figures of casualties in various parts of China. The following is the summary:

 1989年6月1-10日 死亡总人数 Total Death: 31978人
   1。 其中学生(身份确认) Students identified 10974人 

    2。 普通人员(身份确认) Civilians identified 7992人 
    3。 不明人员(不予确认) unidentified 11865人 
    (2类3类人员含工人，农民，教授，医务人员，武警，公安人员，便衣警察，国家部委人员，离退休干部，僧尼，教会人士，外国人等 including workers, farmers, medical staff, police, monks, nuns, church personnel foreigners) 
    被袭军队死亡(身份确认) Military personnel attacked identified 113人 
    军队内部误杀(身份确认) Military cross fired 197人 
    因伤过重死亡人数(医院) Death from wounds in hospital 837人 
   
    死亡地区:(以下含军人) Place of death
    颐和园地区 12人 
    北京大学地区 17人 
    清华大学地区 23人 
    万寿路地区 39人 
    木樨地地区 11人 
    燕京饭店外 27人 
    民族饭店外 57人 
    西单地区 113人 
    西单至新华门地区 389人 
    人民大会堂北 271人(尸体堆群) 
    南长安街至南池子大街 933人(尸体堆群) 
    天安门广场人民大会堂一侧 Tiananmen Square Great Hall of People side piling of bodies 3569人(大的尸体堆群) 
    天安门广场历史博物馆一侧 Tiananmen Square History Museum side piling of bodies  5781人(大的尸体堆群) 
    人民英雄纪念碑底南侧 2544人(大的尸体堆群) 
    人民英雄纪念碑底北侧 4633人(大的尸体堆群) 
    天安门广场长安街侧 Tiananmen Square side of Changan Street 9531人(大的尸体堆群) 
    金水桥 289人(尸体堆群) 
    午门 812人(尸体堆群) 
    前门大街 53人 
    崇文门地区 29人 
    北京饭店外 21人 
    建国门外 19人 
    二环建国门至朝阳门 33人 
    红庙地区 17人 
    进入居民宅及办公区处决 1918人 
    医院 837人 
    合计 31978人
    注意:尸体堆群包括别处拉来集中的部分,军队隶属不同,尸体集中地不同,但是销毁火化基本集中处理.如何销毁可以在网络上查到,有人透露过.
    以上的资料来源包括总参两位人士,黄寺大街的总政三位人士及当年参与镇压的某高层校官的日记汇总,其中的天安门地区的人数完全根据总参人士的统计,该部分资料的流出与前几年军队内部要求平反六四有直接的关系,另外三位提供口头资料,即提供镇压时误杀军队人员资料的三位军官(也参与了当时的指挥镇压行动)确认都已经移民美国,并加入美国国籍.

These figures didn't include the numerous secret executions of dissidents happened in the aftermath for as long as 2 years. But never mind, we will just concentrate on the figures here. According to the figures revealed here, there were a total of 18881 dead bodies found piling up at the sides of Tiananmen Square!

Well, people may put doubts or dispute on these figures and rightfully so, then I would ask, why should we believe those few witnesses interviewed by the author?

Maybe seeing is believing. The following GRUESOME photo evidences taken JUST FROM one website here will speak louder than words.

The Tanks rolled into Tiananmen Square. Do you think they will stop the killing after ramming through other places?

The Army clearing Tiananmen Square in the aftermath. What do you think they are building in the background?

 

 This is how the Tanks ramming through humans

This is the remains of a man crushed through by a tank.

Yes, they shot the heads of protesters!

 Bodies were cleared and piled up at designated places.

Dead bodies piled up at hospital.

Citizens tried to identify the bodies in the aftermath.

The massacre continued in the aftermath at Changan Street. Notice the various dead bodies lying on the streets.

This is the MAP of the BUTCHERS, stating clearly where they military had opened fired and killing thousands of civilians, students, farmers etc. And please note, the bloodiest attack was right outside Tiananmen Square! This validated the figures provided by the leaked figures.

Now, back to the author's claim that the Spanish news team video clip has shown that there was "no massacre at Tiananmen Square". That is an attempt to "quote out of context" of the whole video. I shall produce the video which the author based on his writing here.

First of all, it is clear that the first assault had happened even before the Spanish news team has reached the National Hero Memorial Hall. You can see that Mr Liu XiaoBo was holding a rifle and denouncing the violence by the military and tried to break the rifle. You can also observe that students were injured quite badly.

The video has shown that the military actually "tricked" the students to retreat from the Tiananmen Square but only to attacked them by shooting at them using rifles AFTER they have dispersed into various directions. This explained why there were three main piles of bodies surrounding Tiananmen Square. It was due to the despicable trick used by the army to con the students to let down their guard and then slaughter them later! If this is NOT a MASSACRE then I don't know how to describe it!



The following video has proven the fact that the Military has already been fired at the civilians before the Spanish News Team reached Tiananmen Square



The following video is the evidence that the army fired upon civilians and students.




Another video that shows how the army fired indiscriminately upon civilians in the aftermath of clearing the students off Tiananmen Square.



It is ingenious to state "No Tiananmen Square Massacre" but the truth is, there are hundreds and thousands of bodies found in the aftermath!

Now back to Yahoo SG. What is Yahoo SG's motive by putting such article in the of 25th Anniversary of the bloodshed at Tiananmen Square? Is it trying to trivialize the massive killing by the butchers by stating there was NO killing in Tiananmen Square but ignoring the fact of the massive killings AROUND Tiananmen Square?

It is totally disgusting, disrespectful and insensitive for Yahoo SG to carry such article which is based on doubtful accounts on few individuals to aggravate hurt on the Mothers of Tiananmen Square who have lost their children during the 1989 massacre and continue to suffer injustice and oppression from CCP. Such article which void of any sense of justice and conscience should NOT have appeared on Yahoo SG at all unless Yahoo SG is set to the cruel accomplice of the butchers to cover up the brutal truth!

I really do not see why such article is worthy of being propagated by Yahoo SG unless it too wants to be part of the propaganda started by CCP to WHITEWASH the BLOOD stains on the butchers of 1989!

Spare a thought to the dead who have died of such brutal injustice. If you are not going to seek justice for them, at the very least, you should not help the oppressors and butchers to get away from the judgment of history.


I would urge Yahoo SG to remove the blatantly disrespectful and nauseating article which has practically insulted the many Chinese people who have sacrificed their lives for their democratic dream. It has also trivialized and poured cold water on the effort of many other people, especially in Hong Kong, to keep the memory and records of the brutal massacre alive in the search of Justice and vindication of the 1989 student movement.  I seriously hope that Yahoo SG will have that little of Conscience as a global citizen seeking for Justice, Rule of Law, Freedom and Liberty, to do the right thing by removing this offensive article.

Last but not least, a reminder here from Malcom X

“If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”

― Malcolm X

Goh Meng Seng

Get it right for integration of Foreigners!

There was a question put up by a human rights social activist on what we are trying to achieve by raising the red flag and complain to the authorities about Filipino and Mexican shops putting up their national flags on their signage. Well, that human rights social activist has admitted that it is indeed against our law, the National Emblems Act.

I find it weird for the activist to make that remark and I was trying to understand on what angle or grounds he is trying to see from. Is he trying to say just because this illegal act is done by foreigners, we should just close both eyes and let it be? Is he trying to say that because they are foreigners and may be ignorant of such law, that is why we should excuse them? Then the logic would extend to other general rules and laws. Foreigners will be excused from jay walking, littering, spitting, urinating or poohing in public etc etc because it was their unique culture back home and they didn't know how drastic the law we have in Singapore against all these!?

My dear activists, the sole purpose, is not about racism as you are so quick to label it, but rather to maintain the basic RULE of LAW on this little tiny island. If the foreigners aren't aware of our law here at first, after actions have been taken, they will sure know it from now on. Ignorance, is not a good excuse for committing an illegal act.

You either believe in Rule of Law or you don't and before you talk about human rights, you must also understand Rule of Law is the fundamental basis of maintaining human rights as well.

One of the main problems with "integration" between Foreigners and Singapore is the mismatch of "social practices". If we frown upon their "social practices" which are really unacceptable, would it be considered as "Xenophobic" or "Racist"? The recent big hoohaa between Hong Kongers vs Mainland Chinese have provided an exceptional case study.

On numerous occasions, Mainland Chinese have been caught poohing and peeing openly in public places. It is unhygienic and annoying to Hong Kongers to the extend that Hong Kongers start to take photos of such disgusting acts and put them up on the internet. The Mainlanders fought back, complaining that it is "common" or a "non issue" because public toilets are scarce in Hong Kong. In fact, that is what they do in China as well, hinting that it is an acceptable social norm or practices to them in China and Hong Kongers are just making a fuss over a trivial mater.

The situation exploded, of course. Now the question is, are Hong Kongers really "Xenophobic" in this instance? IMHO, not at all.

The tension arises because of difference in cultural social understanding of what is and what is not acceptable. But at the end of the day, it is Hong Kong where the act has been committed and Hong Kongers should have the last say. When you are in Rome, do as Romans do. You will have to follow the custom of the society or place where you stay or visit and respect the laws and social norms, definitely not the other way round! If you, as a foreigner, try to assert yourself, your way of life, your mentality and cultural-social practices in the host country, you will definitely become a person who will not be welcome there. What gives you the right to go into other people's land and try to do it your way? Mess it up the law and order of the society which you are just a guest there?

Thus, in my view, the only way to prevent further frictions and unnecessary unhappiness and deterrence to REAL Integration, we will have to exert and enforce our cultural-social norms and it is for foreigners to integrate into such social order instead of the other way round.

One of the important Enforcement of law and order fairly and clearly to foreigners and Singaporeans alike, will set the key tone to whole social norm which is acceptable to Singaporeans. We cannot become lax just because they are foreigners with the excuse that they do no know the law. If so, the social tension between the citizens and foreigners will aggravate because it would be seen as double standards which lack rule of law. Secondly, the persistence infringement of social norm or contravene of our law will eventually create a deeply imprinted generalized BAD perception of these foreigners and it will become a time bomb for future explosion.

Thus, back to the Human Rights Activist who questioned the purpose of me raising the red flag on Filipino and Mexican shops which put up their national flags which clearly contravene our law, in which he too admitted this fact. Contrary to what he thinks that this is some dubious act of racism, it is actually an attempt to nip the bud of the problem right at the heart of it. If these shops were allowed to carry on their ways, citizens will start to wonder why foreigners have special privileges to break the law or disrupt the social norm. Such development will definitely be most unhealthy to our nation and society. Rule of law is the simplest and effective way of maintaining social standards and stability.

If you do not want citizens to differentiate or discriminate foreigners, you have to get the fundamentals right: it is for the foreigners to respect our social norms, abide by our laws and stop doing things that is culturally annoying to Singaporeans. On top of that, respect our country and sovereignty. Everybody likes to have good and well behaved guests in their house.

If Human Rights Activists cannot get this right, I do not think they can get very far in their pursue of their human rights cause.

Goh Meng Seng

P.S. I have just seen this quote on a book:

"If and when foreigners contravene any Laws, they cannot expect or claim special privilege or exemptions on the basis of their nationality or states as foreigner... while some might regard graffiti as a stimulating an liberating activity that adds colour, spice and variety to a staid environment, many more in Singapore think otherwise." - Justice V.K. Rajah (2010)