Criteria used in the selection of SAF Officers
-
Wowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww, seems furious, hit the nail on its head already liao.
Anyway from my nickname democratic worker, it clearly shown that I am Pro Democratic Activist, so what, I don't give a damn even if Pro goverment supporter say that I am an anti-goverment or anti-P_P. I got the GUTS to admit what I think.
The truth:
I really think you are the type who got GUTS to admit what you think, am I right? Those kia-si people who not no GUTS, go back to mummy there and cry. Stay in forums page for what?
[This message has been edited by democratic worker (edited 17 March 2000).] -
Well I do not know who Democratic worker is referring to, cos I don't see myself crying whatsoever.
To my knowledge, I am able to admit my views and support them with my reasoning.
I have also so far offered my reasoning to all questions posed in this forum, and not so called "go back crying etc".
The Truth???
Yes, I admit that you were of enough guts to voice out your disapproval.
Though I do hope that you are able to substantiate your claims.
I understand that you are just expressing your views. But for a discussion for progress, it takes more than just opening and closing your mouth, like democratic worker who just shoots.
Meanwhile, prove that you are able to stand on your own by answering my questions.
Prove that you are my worthy opponent.
------------------
Chromeheart Minds: The Endless Search for Intellectual Freedom -
So far in this topic..........
I have not seen any constructive postings by any individual......Perhaps I would say that The Truth is close to that, but the rest are....er.....disappointing....To the extend of personal attacks???
Well Democratic worker, You are a worker aren't you?? Which sums up to a 'follower' isn't it?? There is such a thing as 'tic for tac' and I presumed someone of your intellectual mind understands that easy statement.
We are all talking about the main 'ol topic here, and I presume all here are seemingly of adulthood. Thus I view democratic worker's postings as having no significance in this topic.
(Yes, demo, it's called tic for tac)
Yes Demo, you can continue to shoot your mouth off for all I care for amusement.
But what you have posted as of today has, indeed gave a notion of you having nothing better else to contribute for the benefit of this discussion than to give cynical remarks about 'kia-si' individuals whom u think are 'kia-si' because they have chosen the Better government.
Er....Denocratic worker, do you get my drift or do I have to simplify it???
anyway, the truth, you have my respect for having the courage to remain in the discussion. Hope to hear more from you, and also regarding my questions. heehehe
Cheers
------------------
Chromeheart Minds: The Endless Search for Intellectual Freedom -
So much of quarrel here.
[This message has been edited by millennium (edited 17 March 2000).] -
Well well, someone seems to have endless of rubbish to say. Ignore me all you like, I already said I don't give a damn. I am not the kia si type. I can say all I like.
Back to topic, hmmmmm, somebody just said stop putting words in his mouth, now it seems that somebody is putting words into my mouth now. It seems to me someone here is super kia si now, petty minded, can't even accept other opinion. Not even the originator "opposition party". You have all the hell load of rubbish to say. Don't mind telling you, I don't even to bother to read the long nonsence you wrote. Only look for my name to see any kia si petty minded people got anything rubbish to add.
Last to add, I may not be sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo well educated, but a least I know what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is bad. You can support P_P all you like, I don't give a damn. You can state all the points you like, but don't forget that Singapore voters got eyes to see. -
Looks more like a warzone 2 me. Time 4 me 2 hide under the table wif my pillow(that's my vocation during lunch hour).
ZZzzz.... -
Well, Since you did not take the time to read my reasoning, then I see no reason is talking sense with you.
Well, The Singapore voters have got eyes to see, sure of course.
Well the results of the votes over the years have spoke for itself.
I emphasize being responsible for whatever one writes.
You say that I am putting words into your mouth.
Well I'm not 'putting words' into your mouth. I am merely taking the 'words' DIRECTLY from what you wrote. You know what you have written, and I believe everyone in this topic have read what you have written. No point trying to shift the blame onto me.
You said those words yourself.
As for the statement about opinions, well I have something to say.
I respect and accept OPINIONS WITH REASONING.
Your opinions are just like "Bam Bam, I don't like this, that's it, and that's the way it is"
And Mind you, you have contradicted yourself by stating in YOUR WORDS/ Posting that you did not bother to read my lengthy postings and reasonings.
Well then, I must admire you for your guts to chide me for not listening to other's opinions.
As much some blabberdash you may choose to post, or to the extent of personal and sarcastic remarks about me, you deserve 0 respect from me.
I view this as a discussion about the TOPIC.
I don't understand how you could change the course of the subject to you not having enough education.
Well, I am not interested anyway.
I'm more interested in "opinions with good reasoning to make the discussion more worthwhile" than "bam bam bam plus zero reasoning."
You may proceed with your rubbish.
Regards.
------------------
Chromeheart Minds: The Endless Search for Intellectual Freedom
[This message has been edited by chromeheart (edited 18 March 2000).] -
Well one thing about your youthful joyride,
One Gains Respect Through The Way He Speaks And Acts.
And One Convinces Through His Sincerity And His Theorical Reasoning.
Which Is why I'm urging the Truth to convince me that he has His Point for his opinion, so that the discussion does not go to waste.
------------------
Chromeheart Minds: The Endless Search for Intellectual Freedom -
Thank you for all the comments given. It seems that most of the comments are not relevant to the topic posted. I'm not discussing whether we should be pro- government or anti-government, I am discussing about whether there is a criteria or not in the selection of SAF Officers.
-
Yah loh, wrong topic already liao.
[This message has been edited by millennium (edited 18 March 2000).] -
Yah loh, wrong topic liao.
[This message has been edited by millennium (edited 18 March 2000).] -
Seems to have endless of rubbish to say. Of course not taking sense, that's because got senseless stick to mud people here. Putting words into my mouth yet got no guts to admit and still trying to say "taking words DIRECTLY from me". Well I will not blame you, as I understand from your posting you are actually a kia si petty minded person. Typical kia si petty fellow. Whether my statement is Bam Bam or not, who cares whether you like it or not, stupid fool. Of course I got the guts to chide an ignorant small kid posting. Who care whether you respect me or not, stop thinking soooooooooo highly of yourself, thick skin fool.
As for the results from voters clearly shown that the number of votes dropped for the P_P since the 80s. Only stupid ignorant fool had not notice that. Admit what you support if got the guts, not guts f__k off from this forum page. I personally look down on gutless petty minded people. -
Shall we shift our focus back 2 the topic. So wat r the criteria? Let's not talk abt. those BG or Colonel, wat r the basic criteria 4 a NSF officer? Any officer out there who would like 2 share??
-
Well Demo,
This is what u said,
"as I understand from your posting you are actually a kia si petty minded person. Typical kia si petty fellow. Whether my statement is Bam Bam or not, who cares whether you like it or not, stupid fool. Of course I got the guts to chide an ignorant small kid posting. Who care whether you respect me or not, stop thinking soooooooooo highly of yourself, thick skin fool.
As for the results from voters clearly shown that the number of votes dropped for the P_P since the 80s. Only stupid ignorant fool had not notice that. Admit what you support if got the guts, not guts f__k off from this forum page. I personally look down on gutless petty minded people."
Sincerely, anyone who can post the above statement into a discussion forum is, well...nonsense.
And you got the cheek to say the MY postings are "ignorant" and "small-kid"??
I had came into this discussion forum looking for something more intellectual and with more substance.
I admit that I support ONLY MY VIEWS, and not any political party.
Instead all I received was personal attacks and nothing close to the topic.
Well, for someone who replies to me without even having the basic courtesy to read what I have written in the first place is somehow what I would not expect from a discussion.
Sad to say, you are but still a Singaporean.
Thanks but no thanks for your replies. I would definitely not show your postings to a foreigner because that would surely mean a disgrace.
Up till now you still do not understand what is the true meaning of Constructive Discussion???
I'm sure I have related my views well enough and the truth knows what I'm talking about when I posed him the 10 questions and emphasized on 'constructive discussion'.
I do not mind the fact that no one has provided me with an answer yet. I'm more concerned about the personal attacks which contradicts the purpose of discussion.
Lastly, if the topic was anything like the 'criteria used in the selection of SAF officers', I urge all to contribute wisely and not just give sore-eyed remarks like "BG Lee can't even shoot for nuts etc."
With that I rest my point.
Cheers
------------------
Chromeheart Minds: The Endless Search for Intellectual Freedom -
Looks like there is another load of rubbish again. Of course I got the cheek to say an stupid posting as a "ignorant" and "small-kid" posting. Stop thinking so highly of yourself, you thick skin Bam Bam. There is no need for me to show any courtesy to read nonsense posted by some thick skin kia si people. All these reply I would definitely not shown to a foreigner, thats of course, you are only disgracing all Singaporean by telling others Singaporeans you are kia si petty minded people. From what I saw from your posting, you really proof to me that you are real kia si, kia su and petty minded. Opposition party posted 1 topic, you posted 2 to argue with him. The truth posted another reply, you posted another 2 to shoot him back. I posted a comment, you slam me back with another 2 stupid nonsence reply. I really started to think that are you able to lose, or I should say you can't afford to lose. I am attacking on you personally, yes, I dare to admit, do u dare? I bet you wouldn't dare. To me you are just the typical kia si, kia su and petty minded people which I dispise most in the world. Admit your position whom you support if you are a man enough and stop disgracing yourself here.
-
Any opinions from anyone regarding to the topic??
------------------
Chromeheart Minds: The Endless Search for Intellectual Freedom -
chromeheart,
After reading through this topic and the interesting exchanges between you and 'the truth', I have one question for you...
Are sons of Mr Lee Kuan Yew (or sons of ministers, rich tycoons, generals, etc) treated the same as the general male population during NS? Do they endure the same punishments? Will their PCs dare to confine/punish them without fear of reprisal from their influential parents?
you said:You haven't offered any Constructive postings so as to the following questions:
The questions you want answered are irrelevant to the topic: Criteria used in the selection of SAF Officers. What 'oppositionparty' & 'the truth' (and all the other folks) are trying to say and lament about is that having a strategically placed parent has given these kids an unfair edge over other people in the army.
1) Why Not BG Lee??
2) Why is he not deserving??
3) Why are other individuals Deserving??
4) And if they are Deserving, why are they not in the hot seat??
5) Can You make yourself clear with the "L & E" issue??
6) How many Army Capts whom you have said are "better" and of more calibre than the Bg, have actually voiced out their own potential and abilities to be able to run the Government Cabinet??
7) Are you going to declare future discussions a Standstill by calling the other party a "Pro-PAP activist?" (Yes, That Was what you wrote about me. Any Literate can See that)
And how much truth does the CNN offers compared to the Straits Times?? (And mind you, I was not referring to only Straits times when I had asked you to read the Papers)
9) The Parliament endorses all the Political Issues. Can you tell me whether if BG Lee alone could change the course of Nature just because like why you said, he had the "L & E" in his name??
10) Can you identify the worthy ones to upstage BG Lee or any high-profile Ministers since you think there are so much talents out there??
So the question you have to answer is:
IS THERE ANY BIAS IN THE ARMY TOWARDS CHILDREN OF THE LEE FAMILY? -
Funny this time, didn't slam me back with another 2 stupid nonsense topics. Maybe really hit the nail on its head liao.
Boooooooooooooo:
Democratic worker mind: No intelligent f**k off from this forum. -
Well time for me to come back to this topic also. I believe there is definitely a bias towards big shot sons. Definitely no officier would dare tekan a ministers or MPs sons. So there is definitely a link between SAF and ministers and MPs
[This message has been edited by democratic worker (edited 20 March 2000).] -
most or all of the replies to chromehearts reasoning and debates can be found here. Democratic Party, The answers are in the links below.
Happy reading to all. http://www.gn.apc.org/sfd/ -
Please refer to my earlier posting:
"....This is a very cynical remark built on a personal view. I agree with your view that some 'Singaporeans matter more", though to me they are all the same....."
By this statement I believe that I have answered Mr John's qeustion. However, I wish to state that my point of view is that for the discussion of the topic, we should go more deeply into the 'criteria' used in the selection, as in the 'personal attributes' in the first place.
I don't feel that it is appropriate to list out the Lee family as a target.
By listing the Lee Family as the talking point, we are actually provoking the psychological rhythm of bashing out at their identity rather than look seriously into the 'personal attributes' department.
More or less, I felt that few people actually read into my postings, and thus they miss out some important statements that I have made, for example, the statement as featured in the first paragraph.
All the above factors, or more, have triggered off some flash-off comments, to the extent of personal attacks like calling me a "pro-PAP"??
Well as I have stated earlier, that's simply not the case as I have stressed on my own views.
I am a by-stander, and I say things from what I see.
I hope that explains the whole thing.
To the truth, yes,
thank you for your reply, and this is what I need to read about.
I am seriously looking into the 'personal attributes' of this discussion rather than the identity of individuals.
Demo, I hope that explains the point.
And once again, I am not a Pro-PAP man, I must stress!!!
Cheers
------------------
Chromeheart Minds: The Endless Search for Intellectual Freedom -
From my point of view regarding "what criteria used in selection of SAF officiers". Who ever had a link with this topic CAN be mention. As I always said, I am not the kia si type, I don't give a damn. I really DO believe BG LEE got his BG because he is a LEE. (I would not use words like L and E, I would definitely spell out the whole word. Any body wants me to spell out his whole name?)
To the truth:
Will look into your reply seriously as you are really talking sense and I am sure you are the type who is willing to accept other opinion and not stick to mud type. Remember that you will always have my support.
Booooooooooooooooooo
Democratic mind: Kia si go sleep inside coffin, it is more safer there. -
To John Wong,
you have stated my irrelevancy in posing the 10 questions.
However, please take note that these questions are relevant in concrete evidence that the claims about the Lee Family receiving 'special treatment' are of any truth.
Anyway, I wasn't the one who introduced the Lee Family to the topic, so it's best I am not your target.
Anyway, glad the truth has made the effort of convincing me with his posting.
I'm reading through the website.
Cheers
------------------
Chromeheart Minds: The Endless Search for Intellectual Freedom -
Ok, lets carry on with LEE's family discussions, surely got link one lah. Don't keep asking for evidents to show got whether they got special treatment or not. Show others evidents that they got no special treatment first.
-
Sure. No Prob.
Cheers
------------------
Chromeheart Minds: The Endless Search for Intellectual Freedom