For advertisement

Sample

8/17/2012

Hooliganism, asymmetrical warfare in Parliament



The small number of opposition MPs in Parliament makes their presentation of alternative views difficult to pass through against a well entrenched govt with an over whelming majority, and its well honed tactics of running down the opposition MPs. Some may disagree that the ruling party is bullying the opposition MPs, and that they are just doing what they should be doing as the power of the day when confronted with unpleasant and undesirable questionings. Robust debate so they claimed. Intimidation or no intimidation, insinuations or no insinuation, gangsterism or no gangsterism, everything is there for all to see in the bikini programme called In Parliament. In those brief few minutes, the viewers will still be able to form their own opinions on the happenings in Parliament. Some will clap and some will jeer.

Faced with such lopsided power trained against them, what can the few opposition MPs do to level the battle field? It is not easy to raise an issue without being accused of motive, agenda and bad intention, and may be cut into pieces by cold steely stares or words laced with threats. Opposition MPs may benefit from reading Sun Tzu or Clausewitz to borrow some of the strategies to walk the treacherous ground in Parliament.

Or they could learn from Taiwan or Hong Kong MPs and their tactics of hooliganism, throwing shoes, chairs and microphones at the opposing camps. Keep long hairs like Mr Long Hair of Hong Kong Parliament fame and employ the same rowdy tactics. It would be quite fun to see how the priestly MPs and ministers handle a boisterous gang that would not play by their terms and dictates. But that would be too much to ask from the likes of Chen Show Mao, Pritam Singh or Gerald Giam. Low Thia Khiang would have to buy a wig. Maybe a wig will do for all of them, to throw the priesthood into disarray.

It is ok for hooligans to behave like hooligans and use hooligan lingos. But it is not ok for the priests and monks to behave in the same manner. It will be too unbecoming to do so, to reveal their gangster side of Jekyll and Hyde. That should level the playing field.

Imagine when Shanmugam asked Sylvia Lim if she was insinuating and questioning the integrity of the AGC, and Sylvia retorted, ‘Cut the crap, just answer my question!’ Ling Dong How would be able to do better. Or counter a threat by throwing her stiletto shoes at him. That would be box office material and will go viral for sure. Asymmetrical warfare is possibly the only effective way to deal with priests and lords, and can even be applied to immortals.

How about voting a few long hairs or skin heads into Parliament to deal with the good lords of Parliament? Pun intended. The battle would then be more evenly matched.

PS. I must qualify, and doubly and triply qualify that this is not meant to be a serious article okay? Don’t be like someone saying shoot him and the police were sent to arrest the person when that person did not really mean it, like fxxx you. Relax okay?

50 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just keep voting Opposition.
Even if it's Ah Meng's grandson.

Compared with the Millionaire Ministers.
How much damage can a few more Opposition MPs do to Singapore?

failure to control flooding?
YOG budget over run of $300 million?
$1 billion to profitable bus companies to buy buses?
Mismatch of demand & supply in HDB flats?
and etc. ....

Anonymous said...

[ST's Interview with 'The One Who Got Away']

"I read the Straits Times' Long Interview with Ong Ye Kung in 1 June 2012 issue.. "


http://www.tremeritus.com/2012/08/17/sts-interview-with-the-one-who-got-away/

Anonymous said...

Red bean, I have to say fu..you as it is a damn good article but please don't call the police cause I said fu... U!

theonion said...

Redbean

Going through the video, well, all I can say, is that there should be a debate but likewise, there connotations which can be used by either end.

Further, you seem to expect a tea lunch setting when the basic idea is to get your points across in a debate.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Anon 10:15, thank you for being so kind and understanding.

Is our parliament living up to the quality of a first world parliament or is it a typical third world parliament, just a third world parliament with pretension to be a first world parliament?

Anonymous said...

I think it's more like third world pretending to be first world to me . What do u think?

The said...

/// How about voting a few long hairs or skin heads into Parliament to deal with the good lords of Parliament? ///

We already have - in the person of Tin Sarah Palin, the foot-stomping tin head who does know what to say.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Seriously, I think she speaks quite well. The doubt is that there seems to be a disconnect in what she spoke, as if it was from a script writer.

Anonymous said...

Who was the Chairman or CEO of GIC who lost 42 billion dollars in wild ventures in failed investments in toxic American business and financial products . It seemed he quietly slipped out of GIC to steal the presidency instead of staying back in GIC to recover the losses. It seems that is the standard of the Pappies now. It's time to boot them out in 2016.

Eagles Eye

Anonymous said...

.....as if it was from a script writer.
Hmm..papi script writer?
To be humiliated,is their asking for going to a batle with bows and arrow.
She need not throw her heels or dash across to bite him.All she need to say is,answer the question to address the public's concerns.(no politics injected)

Anonymous said...

We need to elected a few sharp streetfighter type oppo MP into Parliament!!!!!People who will tell Shanmugam in this manner "Cut the crap, answer my question", "I am not a lawyer, I share the layman perception that Woffles Wu got away lightly", "Six cases does not make a summer, list out all the cases to prove your fucking case, you idiot"

Anonymous said...

"We need to elected a few sharp streetfighter type oppo MP ..."

Chee Soon Juan is available.
But not enough Singaporeans want to vote for him.

Singaporeans deserve the shit we get from this government that we elected.

Anonymous said...

Dr Chee is considered unelectable by about 80% of Singapore voters but he changed his strategy as he now believes that voters are changing their minds fast.
Tin Sarah Palin was elected as she was under a gurantee ticket to win.

Anonymous said...

Some of you will be shaking their heads when RB joked about how slyvia lim should have responded to Shan.

Actually, it would be fair response for anyone who was deliberately provoked by false accusation.

But you can't be honest about it or about how you feel, because they have put in place a civil code to manage you, how can you progress then?

So since she didn't want to walk into their trap, and she has to always maintain a pretentious professional priestly front, she can only politely back down and sit down -
Which is end of debate.

To progress would have incurred more of priestly style hooliganism and it will be very difficult not to be unsettled by it.

Losing your cool in Sin is as good as losing. And maintaining your cool is just plain hypocrisy.

Anonymous said...

You know like arguing with religious folks? If you argue by their book, you will never win but only get frustrated.

Some will honestly tell you to your face...fuck you, you are wasting my time.

But if you say that, in Sin fine priestly rules, you lose.

Anonymous said...

" If you argue by their book, you will never win but only get frustrated. "

That's becos Singaporeans have been brainwashed into thinking that only the priestly rules are legitimate.

It cannot be helped.
Singaporeans deserved to be fucked by the Pro Alien Party.
Stupid people get the government they deserve.

The said...

/// Seriously, I think she speaks quite well. The doubt is that there seems to be a disconnect in what she spoke, as if it was from a script writer. ///

The hubby is the ghost writer.

Anonymous said...

KJ or Dr Chee are more fiesty than mild mannered Sylvia and LTK. We need more people who speak from the heart like KJ and Dr Chee SJ than people who memeorise the lines from the scripts.

Anonymous said...




Nah. Chee in his hay days won't last. I think by now, given a chance to be in the political arena, he will know to have a more measured approach - useless.

What you need is an untrained and unpolished chow ah Beng who doesn't talk like a hotel receptionist or a corporate lawyer.

Like a child who speaks plainly and in your face. Isn't that the reason why we seek children's opinion?

Anonymous said...

KJ cannot lah. He speak in a dull and monologue tone with a weird British accent!!!!

Anonymous said...

What about TJS ? Boleh ? He is quite a bulldog street figher type. Even LTK and CSM would be no match for him.

Anonymous said...

You want to talk frankly and sometimes painfully, you can't do it in parliament lah

Same, you go to church, you must stay on the gospel track set out by the gods, understand?

The said...

/// KJ or Dr Chee are more fiesty than mild mannered Sylvia and LTK. We need more people who speak from the heart like KJ and Dr Chee SJ than people who memeorise the lines from the scripts.
August 17, 2012 1:57 PM ///

Nah, Chee Soon Juan gets himself into a bind and sometimes do not get his facts right. His confrontational style, like JBJ, will ensure that he either self-destruct or they will destroy him.

LTK is good - he asks difficult questions with tact. Sylvia is classic - knows her stuff and not easily intimidated. You should see the video when she spoke up against the high ministerial pay. All the PAPs MPs were squirming in their seats and hung their heads down like naughty kids caught stealing from the cookie jar. Mild manner can be a plus, especially in this bully-infested chamber. Speak softly, but carry a big stick.

Anonymous said...

So what? you are still in a pressure cooker, nothing basically changed. The winners are always the same bloody type of losers

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Actually Pritam, Sylvia, LTK, GG and CSM could do much more if there are more support. Another 10 more oppo MPs to give them added strength and backup, and the confidence of numbers, the table can be turned.

What is happening now is that they are being over powered by sheer numbers and have to hold back and not fight a losing war.

Anonymous said...

After reading the article, I only see another WP supporter (the author) cannot accept or tahan lose. He bring out so many points and why don't he ask why the WP did not bring out the issue and discuss.
And lastly, I want to tell him that even the school debate competition bring out a lot of valid evidence and case study to support their agenda

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Parliament is not a school debate to win or lose, with no bigger purpose. Parliament is about the country and people.

There is a disquiet in this case and Sylvia raised it for the minister to explain and remove the disquiet from the people's mind. She is not there to debate and neither should the minister be thinking that he is a debator or defending his client.

It is about justice and transparency, about answering the people. The interest of the people, the good of the system is above scoring political points in a debate.

The minister has failed as the disquiet is still in the air. And he thinks he scored very well by winning a debate but he has lost the plot. And he doesn't even know!

The said...

/// Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...
Actually Pritam, Sylvia, LTK, GG and CSM could do much more if there are more support. ///

CSM is of the highest calibre, higher than those of the PAP. If only he behaves more like a CSM - Company Sergeant Major. Salute the PAP officers, take off their ranks on the epaulettes and then tekan them jialat jialat

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Haha, unfortunately parliament is not a parade square. Only God can tekan people jialat jialat in parliament.

theonion said...

Redbean

Look closely, the minister gave 6 other cases with same set of circumstances, yet no direct reply by her.

So what would you do if your previous capacity as HR director if somebody queries you and there were precedents and yet you still remained questioned.

So I may i assume you would willingly allow your decisions to be loaded with innuendo?

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Hi onion, the minister has cleverly deflected the issue and many people think he won the debate with the 6 cases.

What is the real issue? Did the minister address the disquiet of the people with the 6 cases? Or were the 6 cases to prove that he did more groundwork than Sylvia? He was more thorough than Sylvia.

Now compare this case with the Bromptongate. The disquiet about that case has been cooled after CPIB stepped in. The people are not whining about it but awaiting a closure pending the findings of CPIB.

In this case, is the disquiet growing louder or gone away? Is there a closure? I don't think so.

The minister won the debate. Is that the issue?

The said...

Onion - those 6 are not comparable. All of them were fined a few thousand dollars compared to Waffle's $1000. One of them is using weekend car on week day. Can't find the site - someone posted those 6 cases, and one look at it and you can tell that Wooffle got off the most lightly.

Anonymous said...

So how, like that?

Ask police bring back Woffles, jail him 5 days and cane him 6 times to punish him for being rich, so that the anger of the oppositions can be pacified.

Anonymous said...

Case closed. Talk so much for what? They had their opportunity to drill the minister, they blew it or chickened out.

Do they dare to revive the issue with the Minister?

I think it is going to be that way at the end of the day.

Sparks without real fire.

Anonymous said...

Or for show only.

Anonymous said...

Can ask LTK to ask Minister to reopen case to re-trail again to appease us ? Can or not ?

Anonymous said...

If you are not prepared to be sued or made to look like fools, don't probe too much

Which means to say, scrape the surface and hope we are all idiots

patriot said...

The Debate was nicely concluded in Parliament. However, it's continuation here is more interesting.

patriot

Anonymous said...

WW was never punished. A fine is like a tip for wiping his ass.

Now ask WP to say that in parliament. Best English! No ambiguity or masturbating the english language.

Anonymous said...

The tip ...with his shit on it...went into the gov coffer to pay our ministers

Some of our ministers are using shit money to feed their children..

Say that in parliament pls.

Anonymous said...

Now go fucking open up the case and fuck the ministers...this is what you have been called to do!

Anonymous said...

LOL

Anonymous said...

[So easy to mock, so difficult to build one's integrity and self-worth]

"Is our Parliament nothing more than a rubber stamp to pass laws and amendments proposed by PAP?
Is it an institution for the betterment of Singapore and Singaporeans or a place for PAP Ministers to politically browbeat their opponents?"

http://feedmetothefish.blogspot.sg/2012/08/so-easy-to-mock-so-difficult-to-build.html

Anonymous said...

The house is a sham, just like your church

theonion said...

Redbean

The disquiet to be removed would be more for fencesitters and those inclined to give benefit of doubt.
For those whose minds are made up and any facts or rationalisation is not enough such The will never be enough.

The problem is everybody who is already made up mind looks at the govt when it should be looking at the judge and the fact that the sentence leeway is there.

Would you like to be the first to hire a lawyer than to query the judge on the rationale.

Anonymous said...

Someone pls tell me how was WW punished? I don't see it.

Anonymous said...

I think RB will be a better judge than all the Harvard trained judges working for the establishment and RB is a photographer and RAR artist some more....

Anonymous said...

"It is easy to pull down and mock, less easy to build "

The latter cannot precedes the former. The heavens mock and laugh....

theonion said...

Redbean

You have not answered my query on your reactions.

The only thing will satisfy the naysayers would be a COI and the cases put to CPIB.

Anyway, this case, since there are precedents seems well argued.

The major problem which naysayers are not willing to consider is that once you up the punishment level this will apply across the board, it applies for those who request their friends or family members to '"pang mang"" or help.

This is one case which is definitely be careful what you wish for.

Further, let me put this way, in this case all traffic offences of naysayers or yeasayers will be fully investigated, does this sound fun?

The brompongate is not settled yet and people are just waiting.
Let me put this way, you should see some of the blogs just waiting to go hunting if the results are not in their favour.

Anonymous said...

What talking you? That's why we need chow ah bengs to save us