Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Sat, 17 May 2008 19:10:17 +0800

drawer — Sat, 17 May 2008 19:10:17 +0800

Hmmm....i think i got my history wrong.Nevertheless,there is really such a boot-licking incompetent big fat general in World War 2.I have found his name through internet,his name is Hermann Goering.

I remember some years ago,i have read a book about another German general Von Manstein.And in this book,he described Goering as an incompetent boot-licking general,only know how to boot-lick Hitler all the times n know nothing.In the battle of Stalingrad in 1942,the Soviet armies surrounded German troops.Many German generals request Hitler to pull out his troops from the city while still can,but Goering advice Hitler to defend Stalingrad instead of retreating from it.

The incompetent boot-licking big fat general promise Hitler that his air force is able to sent 500 tons of military supplies to the encircled German troops,so that they will be able to withstand Soviets assault n waiting for rescue troops.

In the end,only around 100 tons or less military supplies were sent to the encircled German troops n in the end,the whole German armies was captured by the Soviet soldiers.

You guys type in Hermann Goering in Yahoo website,and you will read about his "accomplishment".This big fat incompetant boot-licking general remind me of our dear Goh Chok Tong^^

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Fri, 16 May 2008 21:20:32 +0800

Poh Ah Pak — Fri, 16 May 2008 21:20:32 +0800

For example,when the German defeated the allied of French n British troops,the allied retreated to a bay,waiting for their ships from Britain to rescue them.At this point,the German troops can easily attack the encircled allied armies n catch all the allied troops.

That would be the "Dunkirk" episode.

Here is an interpretation of that event by William Engdahl:

...Guderian's tank forces were pulling tight a fatal net around the core of French and British troops, driving them towards the port of Dunkirk on the sea, when one of the most extraordinary events of the war occurred.

General Guderian had advanced an astonishing 250 miles across enemy terrain in only 11 days. Then, with his Panzer forces at Gravelines, only ten miles from Dunkirk, orders came down on May 24, that his tanks were to halt.

Guderian's forces had been within hours of capturing more than 300,000 of the best-trained professional soldiers of the British Expeditionary Force, along with some 100,000 of France's best -trained and equipped men. Guderian at first read the order with disbelief. His commander, General von Kleist, stated that, on receiving the order, "I decided to ignore it, and to push on across the canal. But then came a more emphatic order that I was to withdraw behind the canal. My tanks were kept halted there for three days."

The order had come directly from Hitler. The three days pause was intended, though Hitler did not tell his generals at the time, to allow Britain's best fighting force escape by ship across the Channel to England. He intended it as a clear gesture of good will towards his British adversary.

That was the "miracle of Dunkirk," which Churchill's strictly censored wartime press propaganda in England portrayed as divine providence smiling down on the chosen British people. The British population would have been no doubt quite surprised, had they been allowed to learn the truth, that the one who had smiled on their army at Dunkirk had in fact been Hitler.

A week later, referring to this "miracle of Dunkirk," Churchill told the House of Commons and the entire nation over the BBC radio, "We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be; we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender..."

It wasn't exactly the response Hitler had in mind...

http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/History/

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Fri, 16 May 2008 20:28:29 +0800

drawer — Fri, 16 May 2008 20:28:29 +0800

Originally posted by dragon_stone:

well, the SM started it all

Nah,Goh Chok Tong dont have the power or quality to start anything,it is Lou Lee who started all the chaos.SM Goh is just a boot-licking eunuch who work under Lee family control.

But,sometimes,a boot-licker is more hated n despised by the public than a dictator himself.In world war 2,there is a fat general who boot-lick Hitler all the times,although i have forgotton his name.....Anyway,this arrogant !diot general keep giving wrong advice to Hitler n mess up some important military strategy planned by other capable German general.

For example,when the German defeated the allied of French n British troops,the allied retreated to a bay,waiting for their ships from Britain to rescue them.At this point,the German troops can easily attack the encircled allied armies n catch all the allied troops.But this big fat stupid boot-licking general told Hitler that his air force can takecare of the allied armies n force them to surrender.

In the end,it only give allied armies enough time to get on their ships n escape from German encirclement.This prove to be one of the fatal mistakes make by Hitler n his boot-licking general,cause it provide the allied enough manpower to counter-attack Germany on Normandy later on.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by dragon_stone @ Tue, 13 May 2008 21:32:29 +0800

dragon_stone — Tue, 13 May 2008 21:32:29 +0800

well, the SM started it all

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by qlqq9 @ Tue, 13 May 2008 21:16:01 +0800

qlqq9 — Tue, 13 May 2008 21:16:01 +0800

Originally posted by drawer:

LOL,so true.....But the most ironic thing is that the more SM Goh try to attract attention n show he is the "2nd most powerful man" in the parliament n that he is incharged,the more ppl will believe that he is just an eunuch working under Lee family control.Why?Becoz his speeches n action always sell him out.

drawer, you are right. so now we can see gct joins in the crowd in PAP to talk cock.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Tue, 13 May 2008 18:46:06 +0800

drawer — Tue, 13 May 2008 18:46:06 +0800

Originally posted by qlqq9:

what to do, it has happened? ha ha, just quoting what hopeless, good for nothing leehsien loong said. MM, SM and PM, SM not in the limelight as much as the father and son so must said something to attract attention. Instead of using his heart to talk and care for the peasants, he talks without brain and heart.

LOL,so true.....But the most ironic thing is that the more SM Goh try to attract attention n show he is the "2nd most powerful man" in the parliament n that he is incharged,the more ppl will believe that he is just an eunuch working under Lee family control.Why?Becoz his speeches n action always sell him out.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by qlqq9 @ Mon, 12 May 2008 21:36:31 +0800

qlqq9 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:36:31 +0800

Originally posted by drawer:

True.Although i also talk rubbish on the forum sometimes,but everytime i will realise it n try to avoid making the same mistake again.And i dont talk rubbish just to boot-lick someone.

But this Goh Chok Tong is different,everytime he talk rubbish,he doesnt seem to realise it.And he make such speech just to make his "master" Lee Kuan Yew n his son happy,so that he can continue get high pay,live bunglow and eat his cheap "peanuts".He has really no backbone or dignity for himself.Many Singaporeans n foreigners really despise him.

If i has a son like him,earn alot of money n get high ministerial post,but must sell his soul n boot-lick a dictator and do alot of harmful thing to his own countrymen.I would rather my son live a more simple life and be able to face his conscious.

what to do, it has happened? ha ha, just quoting what hopeless, good for nothing leehsien loong said. MM, SM and PM, SM not in the limelight as much as the father and son so must said something to attract attention. Instead of using his heart to talk and care for the peasants, he talks without brain and heart.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Mon, 12 May 2008 19:55:10 +0800

Poh Ah Pak — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:55:10 +0800

I have no opinion against Goh Chok Tong since he does not wield real power in Singapore.

I don't want Goh Chok Tong to die.

I want Lee Kuan Yew to die.

These people in power in Singapore, they are all handpicked by the ringleader.

It seems that often they did not like it, but let's go back: How did you first get into politics?

In the early 1970s, Lee Kuan Yew asked me for an interview to get me involved to stand for election. I stood in 1972 and I won and became a PAP backbencher. A year later, Lee asked me to take up ministerial office but I turned it down because my younger brother was dying of cancer. I had to assist him and to settle his affairs after he died at the age of 25. Then Lee Kuan Yew approached me again and this time I agreed to take up office. Lee is very persuasive.

He must have been impressed to make you a minister so quickly -- you were a young architect with no experience of politics.

Yes, I was not trained to become a minister or a politician, but you learn on the job.

Around this time you were discussing the succession to PM Lee?

Lee Kuan Yew had been discussing this since about 1983. At that time, the second echelon was Tony Tan, S. Dhanabalan, Goh Chok Tong and myself.

Were you a candidate for the top job?

I was considered as a member of the group. At that time, we did not know who would be the successor to Lee. We finally made the decision to pick Goh Chok Tong. He agreed on condition that I agreed to be his number two. So I was the second DPM; he was the first DPM. In 1988, Lee asked Goh to take over, but he was not ready. He said: two more years. So two years later, he took the job.

Lee did not agree with your decision to pick Goh.

No, he did not disagree. He said he would leave it to us. His own first choice was Tony Tan. Goh Chok Tong was his second choice. I was his third choice because he said my English was not good enough. He said Dhanabalan was not right because Singapore was not ready for an Indian prime minister. That upset the Indian community. There was quite a bit of adverse reaction to what he said. But he speaks his mind. He is the only one who can get away with it...

http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000310a4.htm

If you want to kill a snake, you must locate the head and then chop it off.

you must find the correct head.

Cannot chop off the wrong head.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Mon, 12 May 2008 19:41:42 +0800

drawer — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:41:42 +0800

This Goh Chok Tong is really good for nothing!!!!

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Mon, 12 May 2008 19:39:48 +0800

drawer — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:39:48 +0800

Originally posted by qlqq9:

Goh choke tong should learn to shut his mouth if it is unnecessary for him to speak. The more he speaks the more he reveals the ugly side of him.

True.Although i also talk rubbish on the forum sometimes,but everytime i will realise it n try to avoid making the same mistake again.And i dont talk rubbish just to boot-lick someone.

But this Goh Chok Tong is different,everytime he talk rubbish,he doesnt seem to realise it.And he make such speech just to make his "master" Lee Kuan Yew n his son happy,so that he can continue get high pay,live bunglow and eat his cheap "peanuts".He has really no backbone or dignity for himself.Many Singaporeans n foreigners really despise him.

If i has a son like him,earn alot of money n get high ministerial post,but must sell his soul n boot-lick a dictator and do alot of harmful thing to his own countrymen.I would rather my son live a more simple life and be able to face his conscious.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by cuddles @ Sun, 11 May 2008 20:59:02 +0800

cuddles — Sun, 11 May 2008 20:59:02 +0800

Originally posted by will4:

It is the same in the army in which every unit try to get the Best combat unit each year so that the CO n PSO can get good

appointment.

yeap.. and the men who put up the show for them are the ones who suffered..

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by will4 @ Sun, 11 May 2008 20:07:54 +0800

will4 — Sun, 11 May 2008 20:07:54 +0800

Originally posted by cuddles:

this one I agree with you people. when I read that article, somehow it just don't feels right. although the mention of human nature of wanting more and more is true, it's also the same as the govt are humans who are also going to ask for more and more.

I think uncle vs sg, your point is actually what many people hope for. that would be like back to the past where FT didn't flood in like now. GST also not that high..

It is the same in the army in which every unit try to get the Best combat unit each year so that the CO n PSO can get good

appointment.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by cuddles @ Sun, 11 May 2008 20:03:35 +0800

cuddles — Sun, 11 May 2008 20:03:35 +0800

this one I agree with you people. when I read that article, somehow it just don't feels right. although the mention of human nature of wanting more and more is true, it's also the same as the govt are humans who are also going to ask for more and more.

I think uncle vs sg, your point is actually what many people hope for. that would be like back to the past where FT didn't flood in like now. GST also not that high..

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by will4 @ Sun, 11 May 2008 19:54:45 +0800

will4 — Sun, 11 May 2008 19:54:45 +0800

Originally posted by robertteh:

We are being told of danger of welfarism so often by the government ministers.

We are also being told of openness and intention to listen to views and opinions of people.

Are such statements sincere or honest?

People can no doubt remember many times such promises were made but have these promises been kept or put into actions so far?

It seems clear from what we see so far that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. What we see are not changes made or promises fulfilled but the same old arrogant condescending attitude: "Take us on if you can".

What we see are hypocrites who do things to continue to deny problems or carry on their own selfish intent and agenda to serve their own interest.

PM might have relented on the ministerial salary increment when caught in the bind but as soon as public anger subsided he goes on giving yet another round of increments to himself and his ministers - even to ministers who have caused so many hiccups in various ministries as reported in the auditor general 2007 reports.

So see for yourself the fact about human nature - greed for monies and power will not change.

They will continue to say one thing and do another and pay lip-service to openness but in actual fact they don't really give a damn what people think of their policies or doings.

If they are that responsive as assumed by you they would have known of many good and truthful feedbacks from this and other forums or some newspapers without such pretension.

Look at SM's recent warning to people and cautious advice to PM Lee about the danger of creating a welfare state just because of laterst CPF top-up.

He conveniently forgets that in the first place if the government is to relent on its merciless hoarding monies by upping taxes and charges while holding back spending of taxes for essential services paid for by the people under taxes they would not be facing such plight as seen in thousands of ZAEMITEs as posted by you in other posts.

For the past 40 plus years through such hoarding and profiteering schemes of all sorts the government has been hoarding monies on the quiet at the rate of some S$2-4 billion per year from land sale and capital gains from property belonging to the people while lying to the people that government is facing deficit in its annual budget

It is not welfarism that is the danger today. The reverse of hoarding of tax monies and denying problems like the NKF and mas selamat complacency is the greater danger of them all.

Who in the first place created such a situation. It is the government who has been sucking of monies non-stop from its long suffering people that we are encountering such a ZAENITE crisis today.

So is SM Goh being honest with the people or himself by giving such pretentious caution to the people or PM or is he only trying to stay in the good book of the power that be himself of whom he was truly afraid.

If government is honest with the people do not keep over-taxing and profiteering so much from lands already owned and paid for by taxes by the people for public housing or medical care long long ago we would have done better instead of in a doldrum for years.

So it is abundantly clear that the so-called handing out after jacking the GST to 7% is not a hand-out and will for a fact not result in any welfarism.

They have already made up their mind not to listen or react to views and opinions which they cannot reply but would nevertheless bite the bullet and carry on doing things that benefit them.

So it is for show they put up such a forum which basically is a mechanism for ventilating the frustrations by the aggrieved citizens.

Nothing will change because of the selfish nature of men. Even after talking to the arabs government is getting complacent when the negligence of the ministry of home affair was found by the inquiry MM Lee just looks the other way and pretend never mentioning those words at all.

It is not that open as you have put it so I don't see results in the opening up to people yet.

Reach or Feedback Unit will be for show and for justification only. I bet if MM Lee and ministers can guess what are being written here and various forums are the truths but it looks like he is pretending not to know the emperor may be naked.

Nature of men is such that MM Lee and ministers after finding security in legalistic tweaking of laws and parliament have concluded there is no need for change and are deliberately refraining to study the truths or views and opinions on the NKF malpractices or the WKS fumbling in the Selamat case.

Hi Robert,

MM Lee seemed to be concern about the brain drain such as

150000 local studying or working in other countries plus 1000 locals

migrating to other countries each year. It seemed some of the foreign professional merely using this country as a stepping stone to other countries. How come the govt is still having a liberalized immigration policy? England already tightened its immigration policy after having allowed many of the Polish professional to work in Britain.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Uncle Ver SG @ Sun, 11 May 2008 18:49:27 +0800

Uncle Ver SG — Sun, 11 May 2008 18:49:27 +0800

No or little welfare ok.

But can have less FT and GST or not.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by qlqq9 @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:46:28 +0800

qlqq9 — Sun, 11 May 2008 12:46:28 +0800

Danger of welfarism? It is of course dangerous to have welfare as it may affect the earnings of the greedy PAP. Now with limited, very minimal welfare from PAP they can be assured they will continue to draw obscene undeserved super high world class salary.

Goh choke tong and cold blooded lee hsien loong don't give a damn to provide more deserved welfare to the people because they are not the common people who find it tough to make a living in Singapore. What they have now is power to control the people and lots of money - millions dollar paid ministers who don't need any welfare at all from anyone. They have the money and power so they choose to close a blind eye to people who deserve and need welfare from the govt.

Goh choke tong should learn to shut his mouth if it is unnecessary for him to speak. The more he speaks the more he reveals the ugly side of him.

PAP is not a responsible gahmen where providing welfare for the people is concerned.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Awareness @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:44:20 +0800

Awareness — Sun, 11 May 2008 12:44:20 +0800

Nice one... Hahaha

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by alwaysdisturbed @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:37:01 +0800

alwaysdisturbed — Sun, 11 May 2008 12:37:01 +0800

cui gong nei nei song.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:22:13 +0800

Poh Ah Pak — Sun, 11 May 2008 12:22:13 +0800

danger of welfarism ?

Then why they welfare themselves by million dollar salary?

Wong Kan Seng never resign after MSK debacle.

Welfare also.

Mainstream media always sings the praises of PAP regime, never criticise.

Welfare also.

Bullshit elections system, walkovers.

Welfare also.

Don't talk cock lah PAP.

Nobody will buy your cock and bull story.

Fuck off PAP.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by charlize @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:16:53 +0800

charlize — Sun, 11 May 2008 12:16:53 +0800

Welfare is reserved only for the people at the top.

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by robertteh @ Sat, 10 May 2008 22:12:22 +0800

robertteh — Sat, 10 May 2008 22:12:22 +0800

We are being told of danger of welfarism so often by the government ministers.

We are also being told of openness and intention to listen to views and opinions of people.

Are such statements sincere or honest?

People can no doubt remember many times such promises were made but have these promises been kept or put into actions so far?

It seems clear from what we see so far that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. What we see are not changes made or promises fulfilled but the same old arrogant condescending attitude: "Take us on if you can".

What we see are hypocrites who do things to continue to deny problems or carry on their own selfish intent and agenda to serve their own interest.

PM might have relented on the ministerial salary increment when caught in the bind but as soon as public anger subsided he goes on giving yet another round of increments to himself and his ministers - even to ministers who have caused so many hiccups in various ministries as reported in the auditor general 2007 reports.

So see for yourself the fact about human nature - greed for monies and power will not change.

They will continue to say one thing and do another and pay lip-service to openness but in actual fact they don't really give a damn what people think of their policies or doings.

If they are that responsive as assumed by you they would have known of many good and truthful feedbacks from this and other forums or some newspapers without such pretension.

Look at SM's recent warning to people and cautious advice to PM Lee about the danger of creating a welfare state just because of laterst CPF top-up.

He conveniently forgets that in the first place if the government is to relent on its merciless hoarding monies by upping taxes and charges while holding back spending of taxes for essential services paid for by the people under taxes they would not be facing such plight as seen in thousands of ZAEMITEs as posted by you in other posts.

For the past 40 plus years through such hoarding and profiteering schemes of all sorts the government has been hoarding monies on the quiet at the rate of some S$2-4 billion per year from land sale and capital gains from property belonging to the people while lying to the people that government is facing deficit in its annual budget

It is not welfarism that is the danger today. The reverse of hoarding of tax monies and denying problems like the NKF and mas selamat complacency is the greater danger of them all.

Who in the first place created such a situation. It is the government who has been sucking of monies non-stop from its long suffering people that we are encountering such a ZAENITE crisis today.

So is SM Goh being honest with the people or himself by giving such pretentious caution to the people or PM or is he only trying to stay in the good book of the power that be himself of whom he was truly afraid.

If government is honest with the people do not keep over-taxing and profiteering so much from lands already owned and paid for by taxes by the people for public housing or medical care long long ago we would have done better instead of in a doldrum for years.

So it is abundantly clear that the so-called handing out after jacking the GST to 7% is not a hand-out and will for a fact not result in any welfarism.

They have already made up their mind not to listen or react to views and opinions which they cannot reply but would nevertheless bite the bullet and carry on doing things that benefit them.

So it is for show they put up such a forum which basically is a mechanism for ventilating the frustrations by the aggrieved citizens.

Nothing will change because of the selfish nature of men. Even after talking to the arabs government is getting complacent when the negligence of the ministry of home affair was found by the inquiry MM Lee just looks the other way and pretend never mentioning those words at all.

It is not that open as you have put it so I don't see results in the opening up to people yet.

Reach or Feedback Unit will be for show and for justification only. I bet if MM Lee and ministers can guess what are being written here and various forums are the truths but it looks like he is pretending not to know the emperor may be naked.

Nature of men is such that MM Lee and ministers after finding security in legalistic tweaking of laws and parliament have concluded there is no need for change and are deliberately refraining to study the truths or views and opinions on the NKF malpractices or the WKS fumbling in the Selamat case.

Recent Posts in 'Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ?' | sgForums.com

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Sat, 17 May 2008 19:10:17 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Fri, 16 May 2008 21:20:32 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Fri, 16 May 2008 20:28:29 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by dragon_stone @ Tue, 13 May 2008 21:32:29 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by qlqq9 @ Tue, 13 May 2008 21:16:01 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Tue, 13 May 2008 18:46:06 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by qlqq9 @ Mon, 12 May 2008 21:36:31 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Mon, 12 May 2008 19:55:10 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Mon, 12 May 2008 19:41:42 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by drawer @ Mon, 12 May 2008 19:39:48 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by cuddles @ Sun, 11 May 2008 20:59:02 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by will4 @ Sun, 11 May 2008 20:07:54 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by cuddles @ Sun, 11 May 2008 20:03:35 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by will4 @ Sun, 11 May 2008 19:54:45 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Uncle Ver SG @ Sun, 11 May 2008 18:49:27 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by qlqq9 @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:46:28 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Awareness @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:44:20 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by alwaysdisturbed @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:37:01 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:22:13 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by charlize @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:16:53 +0800

Is SM being honest in his advice about danger of welfarism ? replied by robertteh @ Sat, 10 May 2008 22:12:22 +0800