tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5539995.post111298110562709098..comments2023-11-05T17:53:13.405+08:00Comments on Singabloodypore: IMH detention at President's pleasureUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5539995.post-1113074036493048482005-04-10T03:13:00.000+08:002005-04-10T03:13:00.000+08:00"The scrutineers and the candidate said they check..."The scrutineers and the candidate said they checked the unopened boxes<BR/>and found that the opposition party seals were not in place.They<BR/>informed the Returning Officer who then said that the absence of the<BR/>opposition seal did not render them invalid as the responsibility for<BR/>having the seal in posiiton was that of the opposition party."<BR/><BR/>-------------<BR/><BR/>Woah.... I'm blown away by the RO's statement.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5539995.post-1113064177678785192005-04-10T00:29:00.000+08:002005-04-10T00:29:00.000+08:00Difficult to know. Start by spreading it. I am sur...Difficult to know. Start by spreading it. I am sure that the Singapore Democratic Party has brought it to the attention of NGO's. During the coming election ensure that it doesn't happen again. If it does, widely publicise it.dfgdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04890467678463833210noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5539995.post-1113058519461299682005-04-09T22:55:00.000+08:002005-04-09T22:55:00.000+08:00The question is what can we do with this informati...The question is what can we do with this information?Douglas Evanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14030067241392982918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5539995.post-1113045112212627112005-04-09T19:11:00.000+08:002005-04-09T19:11:00.000+08:00thanks anon.thanks anon.dfgdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04890467678463833210noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5539995.post-1113014857008527612005-04-09T10:47:00.000+08:002005-04-09T10:47:00.000+08:00The report stated that Robert was distributing pam...The report stated that Robert was distributing pamplets relating to the election system. It would most likely be this allegation of vote-rigging in 1997.<BR/><BR/>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.singapore/search?group=soc.culture.singapore&q=Robert+Ho+Cheng+San&qt_g=1&searchnow=Search+this+group<BR/><BR/><BR/>RH: MY TESTIMONY ON LKY ELECTION RIGGING CHENG SAN 1997<BR/>Only 1 message in topic - view as tree <BR/> Robert HO Jan 4, 10:22 am show options <BR/><BR/>Newsgroups: soc.culture.singapore <BR/>From: Robert HO <BR/>Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 02:22:10 +0800 <BR/>Local: Tues,Jan 4 2005 10:22 am <BR/>Subject: RH: MY TESTIMONY ON LKY ELECTION RIGGING CHENG SAN 1997 <BR/>Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse <BR/><BR/>TESTIMONY OF LEE KUAN YEW’s ELECTION FRAUD IN THE GENERAL ELECTION OF <BR/>1997 IN THE CHENG SAN GROUP REPRESENTATION CONSTITUENCY ELECTION, BY <BR/>Robert Ho, NRIC No. S0197974D. <BR/><BR/><BR/>1. My name is Robert Ho Chong. I am a Singapore citizen by birth. I am <BR/>54 years old as of writing this on 5 Jan 05 in the early hours of 0028. <BR/>I have been told, in email and in person, by a direct eyewitness, that <BR/>he, a male Singaporean slightly older than I, saw with his own eyes, <BR/>together with his lawyer friend, [who has his own law firm in <BR/>Singapore], the fraudulent rigging of the election in the Cheng San GRC, <BR/>in the counting centre of Anderson Junior College School, which the <BR/>People’s Action Party, whose head was Lee Kuan Yew, won by a very narrow <BR/>margin of ballots, this margin achieved by the simple expedient of <BR/>bringing in extra fake PAP ballots enough to win. <BR/><BR/><BR/>2. I have been publicising these facts since I was first informed of <BR/>them by my informant, first by email, then in personal testimony, since <BR/>9 May 03 when I was still residing in the United Kingdom, my first <BR/>public posting of such facts being 9 May 03,UK time 1044 hours <BR/>[Singapore time 1744 hours]. I first posted these facts in the <BR/>newsgroup, soc.culture.singapore, as one of my numerous postings [6,690 <BR/>to date] to inform readers of the newsgroup what I had received by <BR/>email. This, I did with Copy & Paste, so as to keep my informant’s email <BR/>as accurate as possible, leaving out only his name and anything that <BR/>might reveal his identity [the consequences of incurring the wrath of <BR/>Lee Kuan Yew is almost suicidal, so every Singaporean knows better than <BR/>to tell the truths about him, let alone lies or slander]. I have been <BR/>actively writing articles and comments in soc.culture.singapore for many <BR/>years and use the Google Groups version to archive all my original <BR/>better articles and ideas in this URL :-- <BR/><BR/><BR/>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.singapore/browse_frm/... <BR/><BR/><BR/>[This URL gives the page RH: ROBERT's ALMOST-COMPLETE ARCHIVE OF WORKS ]. <BR/><BR/><BR/>3. When my wife, son and I returned from our year and a half stay in the <BR/>UK around 5 Jul 04, I immediately emailed my informant for a face to <BR/>face meeting in which I could further probe his testimony as to what he <BR/>saw that night and early morning of the Ballot Counting Centre in <BR/>Anderson Junior College School. He agreed, with some trepidation and <BR/>reluctance, to meet me in the Cofee Garden of the Shangri La hotel, in <BR/>which we were staying pending the arrival of our belongings and personal <BR/>effects from the UK. My wife, KOH Gek Noi, NRIC S1174495H, a senior <BR/>manager in a large MultiNational Company, an accountant by training and <BR/>drawing a five-figure salary, and I met this our informant from about <BR/>1pm to nearly 5pm. During this time, my informant related to my wife and <BR/>I the events that he and his lawyer friend saw, that showed beyond doubt <BR/>that the Government of Lee Kuan Yew rigged the Cheng San GRC election by <BR/>bringing in fake ballot papers, mostly in favour of his PAP party <BR/>candidates, in 8-10 ballot boxes by 2 men dressed in army uniforms. <BR/><BR/><BR/>4. I hereby Copy & Paste the entire original posting I made on 9 May 03 :-- <BR/><BR/><BR/> RH: Was Cheng San election result rigged? 'Proof'? <BR/><BR/><BR/>Robert Ho May 9 2003, 2:56 am <BR/>Newsgroups: soc.culture.singapore <BR/>From: h...@pacific.net.sg (Robert Ho) <BR/>Date: 9 May 2003 02:56:54 -0700 <BR/>Local: Fri, May 9 2003 2:56 am <BR/><BR/><BR/>Subject: RH: Was Cheng San election result rigged? 'Proof'? <BR/><BR/><BR/>QUOTE: " You may be interested to know the following: <BR/><BR/><BR/>On the polling night of the Cheng San elections I was with a lawyer <BR/>friend - quite prominent- sitting at a coffee shop directly opposite <BR/>the etrance to the Anderson School where the counring was to take <BR/>place for Cheng San. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Our vantage point was about 20' higher than the road which fronted the <BR/>school gates. The school building was another 50 metres away from the <BR/>gates. The gates were closed with two uniformed police as security. <BR/>The lights in the open coumpound up to the building were off but the <BR/>building lights were well on. <BR/><BR/><BR/>The counting should have started at about 8pm but we took our <BR/>positions about 8.30pm. <BR/><BR/><BR/>We had one eye on the Anderson School counting centre and another eye <BR/>ahead of us on the coffeeshop TV monitor perched a little above our <BR/>heads. We could keep watch on the TV to see the results as they came <BR/>in and also on the school. <BR/>At about 10.30pm we noticed a small closed van approach the gates and <BR/>gates opened after some inquiry by the security police and the small <BR/>van drove straight to the building. This was unusual as the other few <BR/>vehicles that entered the building that we saw all turned to the left <BR/>upon entering to park. But this van was allowed to proceed to the <BR/>building entrance. <BR/><BR/><BR/>We were interested and watched closely the driver and his assistant, <BR/>both in army uniforms, went to the rear doors of the van and took our <BR/>some boxes and proceeded to carry them to the building. They did a few <BR/>trips each with a box. The boxes looked like ballot boxes. <BR/><BR/><BR/>We would be about 80 metres away and noted that the van had no <BR/>markings but was of one colour which in the darkness could have been <BR/>grey. After carrying the boxes in and immediatly after, the van drove <BR/>off with the same two persons. <BR/>Nothing untoward occurred further that night. <BR/><BR/><BR/>We waited at the spot until all other results were out and announced <BR/>but not Cheng San which completed at about 1.40am or so. <BR/><BR/><BR/>We were known to one of the Cheng San opposition party candidates and <BR/>we asked him what took so long as he was in there and also with the <BR/>two other scrutineers of the opposition party. This was after they <BR/>emerged from the counting centre. <BR/><BR/><BR/>They were surprised themselves and said that the counting took some <BR/>time because there was recount after recount. <BR/><BR/><BR/>But they said that what was stranger was that they were well into the <BR/>counting when the Rreturning officer on duty said there were another <BR/>few boxes - 8-10 more to be opened as they had just arrived. This <BR/>approximated to the time we saw the van driving up to the school <BR/>building. <BR/><BR/><BR/>The scrutineers and the candidate said they checked the unopened boxes <BR/>and found that the opposition party seals were not in place.They <BR/>informed the Returning Officer who then said that the absence of the <BR/>opposition seal did not render them invalid as the responsibility for <BR/>having the seal in posiiton was that of the opposition party. <BR/><BR/><BR/>The boxes contents (votes) were counted and they noted that the votes <BR/>composition was very much in favour of the PAP unlike the other boxes <BR/>where they votes more or less balanced out. <BR/><BR/><BR/>We drove the two lady scrutineers home and upon oiur inquiries we <BR/>learned from them in all their innocence that the extra ballot boxes <BR/>wre only opened and counted after the initial counting had taken <BR/>place. Also that the preponderance of PAP votes in those boxes were <BR/>not following the trend of the earlier countings. We know somebody had <BR/>been had. <BR/><BR/><BR/>The Returnoing Officer is duty bound to ensure that all ballot boxes <BR/>are in place before allowing counting to commence. " UNQUOTE <BR/><BR/><BR/>........ <BR/><BR/><BR/>RH: <BR/><BR/><BR/>Dear Dr Chee Soon Juan and Mr J B Jeyaretnam, <BR/><BR/><BR/>The above email was sent to me by a friend. It seems to be a strong <BR/>indication that the PAP falsified the Cheng San election, which, as <BR/>you know, was 'won' narrowly by the PAP team, defeating Mr Tang Liang <BR/>Hong and Mr J B Jeyaretnam and 3 others (Cheng San was a Group <BR/>Representation Constituency of 5 Members). <BR/><BR/><BR/>I believe the above email to me to be true but Mr Jeyaretnam can <BR/>always call on his old ties with the Workers Party to double check. <BR/>For example, my friend wrote that, "We waited at the spot until all <BR/>other results were out and announced but not Cheng San which completed <BR/>at about 1.40am or so." Now, this can be verified to check that if <BR/>indeed, Cheng San was the LAST constituency to have its results <BR/>declared. Mr Jeyaretnam could probably confirm this. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Also, "They were surprised themselves and said that the counting took <BR/>some time because there was recount after recount." Again, Mr <BR/>Jeyaretnam could probably confirm if there was recount after recount, <BR/>probably to determine how many fake ballot papers were needed for the <BR/>PAP to win. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Then, "But they said that what was stranger was that they were well <BR/>into the counting when the Rreturning officer on duty said there were <BR/>another few boxes - 8-10 more to be opened as they had just arrived" <BR/>Again, Mr Jeyaretnam or the WP election monitors/scrutineers could <BR/>probably confirm this. <BR/><BR/><BR/>For "The scrutineers and the candidate said they checked the unopened <BR/>boxes and found that the opposition party seals were not in place." <BR/>Again, this can probably be confirmed by Mr Jeyaretnam and the <BR/>monitors/scrutineers, as well as the unnamed WP candidate. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Then, "The boxes contents (votes) were counted and they noted that the <BR/>votes composition was very much in favour of the PAP unlike the other <BR/>boxes where they votes more or less balanced out." This, again, can be <BR/>verified by those present, including probably Mr Jeyaretnam, the other <BR/>4 candidates, and the monitors/scrutineers. <BR/><BR/><BR/>This is very serious: "...the extra ballot boxes wre only opened and <BR/>counted after the initial counting had taken place." This is a clear <BR/>breach of election procedure and election law. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Finally, "Also that the preponderance of PAP votes in those boxes were <BR/>not following the trend of the earlier countings.We know somebody had <BR/>been had." The second sentence is a fair conclusion. <BR/><BR/><BR/>What next? <BR/><BR/><BR/>Since the ballot papers are kept for only a few months/years? they are <BR/>probably burnt by now. The lesson the Opposition should learn is to <BR/>challenge in court the validity of any perceived shenanigans AS SOON <BR/>AS POSSIBLE. For example, if a court order were to be obtained for a <BR/>recount of the stored ballots, we could see WHETHER ANY SERIAL NUMBERS <BR/>ON THE PAPERS WERE DUPLICATED OR FAKED since every paper is serially <BR/>numbered. Also, IF THERE WERE MORE VOTES THAN RESIDENTS IN CHENG SAN, <BR/>THIS COULD BE DISCOVERED. However, this could be manipulated by <BR/>deleting some say, precinct result and replacing it with a false set <BR/>so there is no overall 'gain' discrepancy. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Finally, the real danger to any democracy is electronic voting. If <BR/>electronic voting is introduced, the results could be manipulated any <BR/>way, at will, by those with access to the machines or if computer <BR/>voting is used, any hacker with enough skill to hack into the system <BR/>and change the results at will. We have already seen how hackers seem <BR/>to enjoy targetting Opposition parties, with one party's political <BR/>mailing list deleted, wiping out months of hard work (other mailing <BR/>lists were left untouched) and at least one Opposition website defaced <BR/>with a porn message. <BR/><BR/><BR/>God, what a revelation! <BR/><BR/><BR/>Robert Ho <BR/>9 May 03 <BR/>UK 1044 S'pore 1744 <BR/>................................................................... <BR/><BR/><BR/>5. The reaction to my postings was muted because all the regulars and <BR/>indeed, all the adults in Singapore, know better than to even SEEM to be <BR/>anti-Lee Kuan Yew, which is almost economic suicide, and all the <BR/>regulars in the newsgroup, of which there are not many, numbering some <BR/>dozens or so, mostly let my postings alone without even a comment, <BR/>knowing that the secret police in this police state read every single <BR/>word posted and have traced posters to charge them in court. Indeed, I <BR/>myself have been arrested once and charged in court once for a posting I <BR/>made; then ordered to the Criminal Investigation Department for another <BR/>posting/s which such case is still unresolved. My computer has been <BR/>seized by the CID twice, and is still now with them. <BR/><BR/><BR/>6. However, the PAPist regulars in soc.culture.singapore, of which <BR/>there are many, whose job is to defuse any politically dangerous <BR/>postings, tried very hard, mostly by 'shouting' and repetition, to drown <BR/>out my testimony. Their favourite ploy was to question my sanity and <BR/>indeed, when I was working 2 jobs simultaneously around 1975, as a <BR/>teacher by day and a Straits Times sub-editor by night, I did have a <BR/>mental breakdown due to lack of, and irregular, sleep. This finally <BR/>culminated in a fullblown mental illness, successfully treated in 1979, <BR/>after which I returned to work, as an advertising copywriter, for 12 <BR/>years. After which, another series of personal events consumed my life. <BR/><BR/><BR/>7. A few days ago, on Sun 2 Jan 05, I went to a meeting of Dr Chee Soon <BR/>Juan and Mr Ghandi Ambalam and about a dozen others. It was their <BR/>meeting, quite a regular event and I had never joined them before. I <BR/>joined this time because I had heard that there would be a forum to <BR/>study the election system in Singapore and I wanted the meeting to know <BR/>what I had learnt from my informant, who was a former Police Inspector <BR/>or some such high ranking officer. I took the opportunity to testify to <BR/>the meeting what I had heard from my informant and this written <BR/>testimony is the written version largely of what I had told the meeting <BR/>verbally. I also distributed 2 copies of one of my numerous postings in <BR/>soc.culture.singapore :-- <BR/><BR/><BR/>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.singapore/browse_frm/... <BR/><BR/><BR/>[This URL gives the page RH: WORKERS PARTY Abdul Rahim Bin Osman CAN <BR/>TESTIFY CHENG SAN 1997 PAP FRAUD ELECTION ]. <BR/><BR/><BR/>8. If the ARDA Forum Study Group on Elections in Singapore wants to <BR/>speak with me, I can be contacted at :-- <BR/><BR/><BR/>[Contact details NOT to be published; only for use by ARDA Committee only]. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Robert HO <BR/>5 Jan 05 <BR/>Singapore 0220Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5539995.post-1112991095196142952005-04-09T04:11:00.000+08:002005-04-09T04:11:00.000+08:00Er..technically the State is not abusing its power...Er..technically the State is not abusing its powers since there are such powers in place..<BR/><BR/>I think the better question would be to ask how such discretionary powers at the State's disposal are allowed to come into being and tolerated/welcomed..redrownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16413340496211985458noreply@blogger.com