AN: “Many Singaporeans are directly impacted by the policies implemented in Singapore. We definitely have the right to discuss about the state of affairs in Singapore…”
One might add that the Thais also have this right, since it was the decision of the Lee family (father, son, and daughter-in-law) in favor of buying Shin Corporation from Thaksin Shinawatra (a fellow ASEAN head of government–very ethical, indeed!) via Temasek that finally led to the military coup, the abrogation of the constitution, and martial law.
Already before the sale, Singapore was seen my many Thais as a regional neo-colonial power, using its economic prowess. No need to say what the view of Singapore was after the sale, and after the coup…
1) why should we listen to a foreigner who is trying to tell how to best run my country when he does not have interests in it?
If you have read Chinese history on the romance of the three kindoms, you would have realise Zhuge Liang does not really belong Shu Kingdom but he manage to make it a prosper country that is on par with the other 2 kindoms. He does not have any interest in it either.
Why rule off someone’s suggestion just because he is not a Singaporean?? We should be mature enough to listen to others then decide what is our course of actions. To reject other’s opinion just because they are not born within a country only narrow what one can hear, see and achieve.
2) if you are a singaporean, then you have every right to criticise the Govt, but at the end of the day, be constructive, offer alternative for the betterment of this nation.
In the earlier post, you are saying that the Singapore who criticise govt are ‘loud-mouthing the country overseas for the purpose of entertaining western media’. Now, you say we have every right to criticise the govt. Don’t you find that contradictory?? Are you saying we have the right to criticise the govt but if we do so, we are doing our country a disservice?? Please, make up your mind!! You either encourage or discourage it. The way you phrase it, it seems like we are at fault anyway.
And, just because you do not find some of the opinions constructive does not mean others would think so too. Therefore, please do not try to stop people from posting their opinions, no matter if you agreed with them or otherwise??
Lastly, if you have even been in Singapore, you would have realise that Singapore commoners’ suggestions are seldom, if ever, heeded. Read up on NKF saga. You would have a better idea. Therefore, please do not tell us to offer alternatives that will not be followed. For example, so many Singaporeans suggest, instead of pegging ministers’ pay to top earners, let it be peg to 80 times the median pay instead. If so, Govt would not need to increase the GST to increase their money. That would be a good way to cut cost without erording the nation competitivenesss or causing grief to the people. You think Govt will follow to this constructive advice that is definitely be for the betterment of this nation?? Of course, just because I find it a constructive advice does not mean you or the govt would agreed with me.
3) please let the majority of fellow singaporean to live our own life the way we see fit for our future.
Please speak for yourself. Just because you do not want to listen to other’s opinion does not mean rest or majority of the Singaporeans are not interested as well. Isn’t it weird that just because you do not want to listen to others’ opinion, you want to stop them from speaking out? What about the rest of us who might be interested? If you are not interesting in others’ views and experience, you can stop reading about them. Do not tell people to stop voicing their opinions as if you represent all Singaporeans.
“What precisely was the court verdict in Dome’s case, or was the case not brought to court at all?”
5555. Court? No court for him. The victim’s families didn’t press charges after they received compensation, i.e blood money, and more surprisingly the police didn’t press the issue. Why this surprises me is that I was under the understanding that the case in concern was a “compoundable offence” (is that the term in Thai?) and could be pressed with the victim’s complaint.
“The politically most obscene libel case was brought by Thaksin against media activist Supinya Klanarong.”
Actually, what was obscene was that it was a corporation which filed the libel suit and not an individual. I am not sure of the need for corporations to protect their reputation.
The irony of the Sondhi case is that he campaigned to get rid of Thaksin and it is doubtful whether the coup could have been staged without him. The coup got rid of the Constitution and the freedom of expression. I don’t see how the previous court ruling in the Supinya case is still binding given there is no longer provision in the interim constitution for freedom of expression. If Thaksin was still in power there might have been a different decision. Karma?
Even before this sentencing, any “serious analysis” of the coup, that is one that would include the role of Prem and the monarchy, would have been out of the question.
Following the recent sentencing of the Swiss man, I do not believe that any foreign academic could feel safe presenting a serious analysis of the coup, the military of the monarchy at this conference.
I find it really weird that just because we Singaporeans discuss about Singapore in the western media, such as here, you decide that we are ‘loud-mouthing the country overseas only for the purpose of entertaining western media’. Don’t you think you are jumping to conclusion a little too much??
Going by your logic, aren’t you loud mouthing the Singaporeans (your own country men) for the purpose of entertaining the western media?
Just because most of the Singaporeans who can vote (which is less than half of the Singaporeans in Singapore and not including Singaporeans staying in overseas) have chosen to vote for PAP does not mean the rest cannot voice their opinions. It is like saying since majority of the people here do not believe LKY deserved his honorary degree but you think so, you should not be posting in this forum. Indeed, you should be glad that you have this ‘freedom’ to post here. What an irony!!
It seems, to you, we cannot be constructive just because we have different opinions. If that is the case, why do we bother having the parliaments, meetings, forums, discussion etc?? What do you bother to post here??
It is hypocrite for you to advocate democracy since you obviously do not tolerate adverse opinions or believe in the freedom of speech.
Many Singaporeans are directly impacted by the policies implemented in Singapore. We definitely have the right to discuss about the state of affairs in Singapore, when we like, where we choose to. Therefore, keep your arrogant attitude to yourself and stop telling us what to do. FULL STOP!!
“What precisely was the court verdict in Dome’s case, or was the case not brought to court at all?’
Dome? Another pending lawsuit?
Don’t the courts have some independence in their decision? Is the Prime Minister even consulted or given the power to coordinate verdicts? The way two of them were announced at the same time is strange.
Jack: I am a European. My posts contained a number of incentives to problematize certain issues. If this is too much for your sensitive Singaporean soul, I am sorry for you. If you have to hide behind demands for “constructive” suggestions, and the insistence of non-interference by “outsiders”, I am even more sorry.
Obviously, I know that Asian’s have different values. And this does not only apply to collectivities such as Malaysians and Singaporeans. Even within these “entities”, you can find different values. For example, I know Singaporean citizens who value an open discussion, and I know Jack, who wants to abort it by reference to non-interference, and constructive suggestions.
Ngarn – two years might just be short enough to defuse the political pressure that otherwise would be brought upon the Swiss (and other Western) government(s) to protest “loudly” against the Thai decision.
Ten years on the otherhand would definitely cause even the most right-leaning Swiss talkback radio jockeys to call on their government to do something to bring their drunken idiotic fellow citizen home.
Jon: Sorry, it would take me too much time to come up with all the details. Suffice to say that, by December 2005, so many libel suits had accrued that the King felt the need to say that hurling suits against each other was no solution. As a gesture of deference, Thaksin withdrew all his suits against Sondhi. Yet Sondhi, the PAD, and other public figures at the protests continued with their approach.
The general problem was about the content, the intensity, the style, and the language used in these events. It even prompted the Thai Chapter of Amnesty International to warn the PAD against their verbal violence (such as saying that Thaksin’s daughters deserved being VD-infected prostitutes).
The politically most obscene libel case was brought by Thaksin against media activist Supinya Klanarong. Moreover, that case also served as an illustration were a libal suit is brought against a person that merely used her constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression.
All these arguments by westerners?
How do you know everyone here is a westerner?
Jack, have you considered that it is your own imposition and projection of values here is what infact causes problems, seen in extreme examples with IRAQ and the WEST…?
>> I did not assume all here are westerners, do not play with words. You presume it not me. I merely stated the fact that most arguments about democracy are often based on western democracy. Democracy in Singapore is deemed suitable for a little tiny island nation, with no resources and surrounded by “friendly” neighbours. I did not impose my values by giving examples of IRAQ, I meant to tell you that so called western democracy does not work on every country in this world. each has their own constraints. Again you presume my arguments as such.
Without the West – what do you think Singapore would be? It’s a mutual dependancy. Furthermore, one could argue that Singapore isn’t really apart of the ‘east’ anymore at all. Not as a result of its economic position, but more to do with the adoption of the cosmocrat attitude…
>> This is the fact that LKY himself acknowledged, without security and stability Singapore would not have reached where we are now. But then we never asked for the same system to be implemented here. We are fine the way we are.
In fact we have been fine for many decades with our own system based on our own values.
To add on the comments posted by Suriyon Raiwa ..I am a singaporean and I must admit that LKY is quite over rated..Non of the history books we read at school mention anything about dutch economist Dr Albert Winsemius helping out singapore in development back in the 60’s -70’s.. So you guys can see, LKY is trying to create a fake impression that he created singapore single handed.
Srinthanochai, I am sure you know that even among asians we have different moral values and cultures. Your comparison using NUS arguments does not make sense. What does the goal of being no1 in education ha to do with values? Even between Malaysians and Singaporeans, there are differences in values. Again let me ask you, are you a singaporean? if you aren’t then, why should we listen to a foreigner who is trying to tell how to best run my country when he does not have interests in it? if you are a singaporean, then you have every right to criticise the Govt, but at the end of the day, be constructive, offer alternative for the betterment of this nation. Stand up for election, do something useful in Singapore. Otherwise, please let the majority of fellow singaporean to live our own life the way we see fit for our future.
“Sonthi is definitely not at all ‘meta’. In his incredibly demagogical manner, he hurled innumerable wild accusations against people during his anti-Thaksin campaign. In most European countries, he could never have dared doing so without facing serious consequences.”
Was it the content of the accusation or the style, intensity, and language used that was the issue?
The news release specifically mentioned: “accused Poomtham of being a former communist and of not respecting the Monarchy.”
If lese majeste is the most culpable form of defamation, then the crime would be defaming someone by accusing them of engaging in the worst form of defamation, i.e. defamation by claiming defamation, pretty meta.
Of course, it’s worse in Burma. When Anna Allot wrote “Inked Out, Ripped Out” …. http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/docs/inked-over-ripped%20-out.htm
….she claimed that people were using indirection to avoid censorship and criticise the government and got those people promptly arrested. IMHO When things started getting meta like this, it’s not a good sign for the future. P.S. His Sonthi’s criticism of Pridiyathorn was reported as a main factor behind his resignation, maybe he’s getting his come-uppance.
The obvious point: if the VC can not be trusted to follow the rules then why should staff or for that matter students at ANU feel themselves bound by university regulations?
And a question: if the awarding of the degree was against university rules, then can the degree be revoked on these grounds? Or at least, can the decision to award the degree to Lee be reconsidered by the Honorary Degrees Committee under the existing Honorary Degree Rules? (which, one would think, would have the same outcome).
Wow! The going rate of weregild in Thailand is only 390,000 baht? Even if you take into account some inflation over the past seven years…that’s still a bargain!
I am so bewildered whenever I read news about fellow singaporeans loud-mouthing the country overseas only for the purpose of entertaining western media. The bottom line is this, in Singapore, it is Singaporeans who should determine how they want their country to be run. We have a system for an election, although some may argue that it may not be a fair one. But think about it, we are given a chance, yet, times and times again, the majority spoke and handed over to the same party. Why? partly because we have trusts in them, partly because we have no choice. If you think you can run the country better then, come back and offer your service, be constructive for the sake of the nation, but please don’t go round yelling without offering much alternatives. If you truly can offer better alternatives then stand for election. Please do not tell me that the PAP will go after you, because if you have nothing to hide, then you should have nothing to fear! Look at the Workers Party, they did pretty well, in fact I support Sylvia Lim and had hoped that she would be elected, but the people has spoken. Do you trully believe, opposition party like Chee Soon Juan is preferred by fellow Singaporeans? He is a joke and westerners, especially the media likes to use him as an example to put down Singapore for their own agenda. Think about it, at the end of the day, who lives in Singapore, who cares more about this tiny nation? it is us, Singaporeans not the westerners!! Like LKY said, you have your own country to run, we have our own country, everyone would prosper given the system most suitable for each. But please do not try to impose your values on us. Let us, Singaporeans decide. For those minority Singaporeans, who are playing to the western media, instead of being constructive, you have your freedom, otherwise, do you think you would be writing like this? Think about it! If you think Singapore is not suitable for you, then you are always welcome to seek for a better place to live. Nobody is stopping you. But if you do love this nation, then, please remember in true democracy as you have so often quoted, means, you should let the majority rule. FULL STOP!
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thailand’s climate of repression
Bangkok Pundit: I am not sure about your legal argument re Supinya. A decision is a decision, no? As for the interim constitution, see section 3.
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
AN: “Many Singaporeans are directly impacted by the policies implemented in Singapore. We definitely have the right to discuss about the state of affairs in Singapore…”
One might add that the Thais also have this right, since it was the decision of the Lee family (father, son, and daughter-in-law) in favor of buying Shin Corporation from Thaksin Shinawatra (a fellow ASEAN head of government–very ethical, indeed!) via Temasek that finally led to the military coup, the abrogation of the constitution, and martial law.
Already before the sale, Singapore was seen my many Thais as a regional neo-colonial power, using its economic prowess. No need to say what the view of Singapore was after the sale, and after the coup…
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
Jack,
I disagreed with the few points below:
1) why should we listen to a foreigner who is trying to tell how to best run my country when he does not have interests in it?
If you have read Chinese history on the romance of the three kindoms, you would have realise Zhuge Liang does not really belong Shu Kingdom but he manage to make it a prosper country that is on par with the other 2 kindoms. He does not have any interest in it either.
Why rule off someone’s suggestion just because he is not a Singaporean?? We should be mature enough to listen to others then decide what is our course of actions. To reject other’s opinion just because they are not born within a country only narrow what one can hear, see and achieve.
2) if you are a singaporean, then you have every right to criticise the Govt, but at the end of the day, be constructive, offer alternative for the betterment of this nation.
In the earlier post, you are saying that the Singapore who criticise govt are ‘loud-mouthing the country overseas for the purpose of entertaining western media’. Now, you say we have every right to criticise the govt. Don’t you find that contradictory?? Are you saying we have the right to criticise the govt but if we do so, we are doing our country a disservice?? Please, make up your mind!! You either encourage or discourage it. The way you phrase it, it seems like we are at fault anyway.
And, just because you do not find some of the opinions constructive does not mean others would think so too. Therefore, please do not try to stop people from posting their opinions, no matter if you agreed with them or otherwise??
Lastly, if you have even been in Singapore, you would have realise that Singapore commoners’ suggestions are seldom, if ever, heeded. Read up on NKF saga. You would have a better idea. Therefore, please do not tell us to offer alternatives that will not be followed. For example, so many Singaporeans suggest, instead of pegging ministers’ pay to top earners, let it be peg to 80 times the median pay instead. If so, Govt would not need to increase the GST to increase their money. That would be a good way to cut cost without erording the nation competitivenesss or causing grief to the people. You think Govt will follow to this constructive advice that is definitely be for the betterment of this nation?? Of course, just because I find it a constructive advice does not mean you or the govt would agreed with me.
3) please let the majority of fellow singaporean to live our own life the way we see fit for our future.
Please speak for yourself. Just because you do not want to listen to other’s opinion does not mean rest or majority of the Singaporeans are not interested as well. Isn’t it weird that just because you do not want to listen to others’ opinion, you want to stop them from speaking out? What about the rest of us who might be interested? If you are not interesting in others’ views and experience, you can stop reading about them. Do not tell people to stop voicing their opinions as if you represent all Singaporeans.
Thailand’s climate of repression
“What precisely was the court verdict in Dome’s case, or was the case not brought to court at all?”
5555. Court? No court for him. The victim’s families didn’t press charges after they received compensation, i.e blood money, and more surprisingly the police didn’t press the issue. Why this surprises me is that I was under the understanding that the case in concern was a “compoundable offence” (is that the term in Thai?) and could be pressed with the victim’s complaint.
“The politically most obscene libel case was brought by Thaksin against media activist Supinya Klanarong.”
Actually, what was obscene was that it was a corporation which filed the libel suit and not an individual. I am not sure of the need for corporations to protect their reputation.
The irony of the Sondhi case is that he campaigned to get rid of Thaksin and it is doubtful whether the coup could have been staged without him. The coup got rid of the Constitution and the freedom of expression. I don’t see how the previous court ruling in the Supinya case is still binding given there is no longer provision in the interim constitution for freedom of expression. If Thaksin was still in power there might have been a different decision. Karma?
A Thai Studies boycott?
Even before this sentencing, any “serious analysis” of the coup, that is one that would include the role of Prem and the monarchy, would have been out of the question.
Thailand’s climate of repression
“Dome” is the “well-known Thai singer” mentioned by bangkokpundit in no 7.
A Thai Studies boycott?
Following the recent sentencing of the Swiss man, I do not believe that any foreign academic could feel safe presenting a serious analysis of the coup, the military of the monarchy at this conference.
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
Jack,
I find it really weird that just because we Singaporeans discuss about Singapore in the western media, such as here, you decide that we are ‘loud-mouthing the country overseas only for the purpose of entertaining western media’. Don’t you think you are jumping to conclusion a little too much??
Going by your logic, aren’t you loud mouthing the Singaporeans (your own country men) for the purpose of entertaining the western media?
Just because most of the Singaporeans who can vote (which is less than half of the Singaporeans in Singapore and not including Singaporeans staying in overseas) have chosen to vote for PAP does not mean the rest cannot voice their opinions. It is like saying since majority of the people here do not believe LKY deserved his honorary degree but you think so, you should not be posting in this forum. Indeed, you should be glad that you have this ‘freedom’ to post here. What an irony!!
It seems, to you, we cannot be constructive just because we have different opinions. If that is the case, why do we bother having the parliaments, meetings, forums, discussion etc?? What do you bother to post here??
It is hypocrite for you to advocate democracy since you obviously do not tolerate adverse opinions or believe in the freedom of speech.
Many Singaporeans are directly impacted by the policies implemented in Singapore. We definitely have the right to discuss about the state of affairs in Singapore, when we like, where we choose to. Therefore, keep your arrogant attitude to yourself and stop telling us what to do. FULL STOP!!
Thailand’s climate of repression
“What precisely was the court verdict in Dome’s case, or was the case not brought to court at all?’
Dome? Another pending lawsuit?
Don’t the courts have some independence in their decision? Is the Prime Minister even consulted or given the power to coordinate verdicts? The way two of them were announced at the same time is strange.
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
Jack: I am a European. My posts contained a number of incentives to problematize certain issues. If this is too much for your sensitive Singaporean soul, I am sorry for you. If you have to hide behind demands for “constructive” suggestions, and the insistence of non-interference by “outsiders”, I am even more sorry.
Obviously, I know that Asian’s have different values. And this does not only apply to collectivities such as Malaysians and Singaporeans. Even within these “entities”, you can find different values. For example, I know Singaporean citizens who value an open discussion, and I know Jack, who wants to abort it by reference to non-interference, and constructive suggestions.
Hopefully, this response satisfies you.
Thailand’s climate of repression
Ngarn – two years might just be short enough to defuse the political pressure that otherwise would be brought upon the Swiss (and other Western) government(s) to protest “loudly” against the Thai decision.
Ten years on the otherhand would definitely cause even the most right-leaning Swiss talkback radio jockeys to call on their government to do something to bring their drunken idiotic fellow citizen home.
Thailand’s climate of repression
Jon: Sorry, it would take me too much time to come up with all the details. Suffice to say that, by December 2005, so many libel suits had accrued that the King felt the need to say that hurling suits against each other was no solution. As a gesture of deference, Thaksin withdrew all his suits against Sondhi. Yet Sondhi, the PAD, and other public figures at the protests continued with their approach.
The general problem was about the content, the intensity, the style, and the language used in these events. It even prompted the Thai Chapter of Amnesty International to warn the PAD against their verbal violence (such as saying that Thaksin’s daughters deserved being VD-infected prostitutes).
The politically most obscene libel case was brought by Thaksin against media activist Supinya Klanarong. Moreover, that case also served as an illustration were a libal suit is brought against a person that merely used her constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression.
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
Vordhosbn,
All these arguments by westerners?
How do you know everyone here is a westerner?
Jack, have you considered that it is your own imposition and projection of values here is what infact causes problems, seen in extreme examples with IRAQ and the WEST…?
>> I did not assume all here are westerners, do not play with words. You presume it not me. I merely stated the fact that most arguments about democracy are often based on western democracy. Democracy in Singapore is deemed suitable for a little tiny island nation, with no resources and surrounded by “friendly” neighbours. I did not impose my values by giving examples of IRAQ, I meant to tell you that so called western democracy does not work on every country in this world. each has their own constraints. Again you presume my arguments as such.
Without the West – what do you think Singapore would be? It’s a mutual dependancy. Furthermore, one could argue that Singapore isn’t really apart of the ‘east’ anymore at all. Not as a result of its economic position, but more to do with the adoption of the cosmocrat attitude…
>> This is the fact that LKY himself acknowledged, without security and stability Singapore would not have reached where we are now. But then we never asked for the same system to be implemented here. We are fine the way we are.
In fact we have been fine for many decades with our own system based on our own values.
Thailand’s climate of repression
What precisely was the court verdict in Dome’s case, or was the case not brought to court at all?
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
To add on the comments posted by Suriyon Raiwa ..I am a singaporean and I must admit that LKY is quite over rated..Non of the history books we read at school mention anything about dutch economist Dr Albert Winsemius helping out singapore in development back in the 60’s -70’s.. So you guys can see, LKY is trying to create a fake impression that he created singapore single handed.
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
Srinthanochai, I am sure you know that even among asians we have different moral values and cultures. Your comparison using NUS arguments does not make sense. What does the goal of being no1 in education ha to do with values? Even between Malaysians and Singaporeans, there are differences in values. Again let me ask you, are you a singaporean? if you aren’t then, why should we listen to a foreigner who is trying to tell how to best run my country when he does not have interests in it? if you are a singaporean, then you have every right to criticise the Govt, but at the end of the day, be constructive, offer alternative for the betterment of this nation. Stand up for election, do something useful in Singapore. Otherwise, please let the majority of fellow singaporean to live our own life the way we see fit for our future.
Thailand’s climate of repression
“Sonthi is definitely not at all ‘meta’. In his incredibly demagogical manner, he hurled innumerable wild accusations against people during his anti-Thaksin campaign. In most European countries, he could never have dared doing so without facing serious consequences.”
Was it the content of the accusation or the style, intensity, and language used that was the issue?
The news release specifically mentioned: “accused Poomtham of being a former communist and of not respecting the Monarchy.”
If lese majeste is the most culpable form of defamation, then the crime would be defaming someone by accusing them of engaging in the worst form of defamation, i.e. defamation by claiming defamation, pretty meta.
Of course, it’s worse in Burma. When Anna Allot wrote “Inked Out, Ripped Out” ….
http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/docs/inked-over-ripped%20-out.htm
….she claimed that people were using indirection to avoid censorship and criticise the government and got those people promptly arrested. IMHO When things started getting meta like this, it’s not a good sign for the future. P.S. His Sonthi’s criticism of Pridiyathorn was reported as a main factor behind his resignation, maybe he’s getting his come-uppance.
Lee’s degree broke ANU rules
The obvious point: if the VC can not be trusted to follow the rules then why should staff or for that matter students at ANU feel themselves bound by university regulations?
And a question: if the awarding of the degree was against university rules, then can the degree be revoked on these grounds? Or at least, can the decision to award the degree to Lee be reconsidered by the Honorary Degrees Committee under the existing Honorary Degree Rules? (which, one would think, would have the same outcome).
Thailand’s climate of repression
Re: bangkokpundit
Wow! The going rate of weregild in Thailand is only 390,000 baht? Even if you take into account some inflation over the past seven years…that’s still a bargain!
If you excuse me, I have to go start my car!
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
I am so bewildered whenever I read news about fellow singaporeans loud-mouthing the country overseas only for the purpose of entertaining western media. The bottom line is this, in Singapore, it is Singaporeans who should determine how they want their country to be run. We have a system for an election, although some may argue that it may not be a fair one. But think about it, we are given a chance, yet, times and times again, the majority spoke and handed over to the same party. Why? partly because we have trusts in them, partly because we have no choice. If you think you can run the country better then, come back and offer your service, be constructive for the sake of the nation, but please don’t go round yelling without offering much alternatives. If you truly can offer better alternatives then stand for election. Please do not tell me that the PAP will go after you, because if you have nothing to hide, then you should have nothing to fear! Look at the Workers Party, they did pretty well, in fact I support Sylvia Lim and had hoped that she would be elected, but the people has spoken. Do you trully believe, opposition party like Chee Soon Juan is preferred by fellow Singaporeans? He is a joke and westerners, especially the media likes to use him as an example to put down Singapore for their own agenda. Think about it, at the end of the day, who lives in Singapore, who cares more about this tiny nation? it is us, Singaporeans not the westerners!! Like LKY said, you have your own country to run, we have our own country, everyone would prosper given the system most suitable for each. But please do not try to impose your values on us. Let us, Singaporeans decide. For those minority Singaporeans, who are playing to the western media, instead of being constructive, you have your freedom, otherwise, do you think you would be writing like this? Think about it! If you think Singapore is not suitable for you, then you are always welcome to seek for a better place to live. Nobody is stopping you. But if you do love this nation, then, please remember in true democracy as you have so often quoted, means, you should let the majority rule. FULL STOP!