There are certain logical fallacies in speeches of certain contestants of the upcoming GE. For example, The Straits Times wrote that Wong Kan Seng stated "during all his neighbourhood visit, nobody had asked him about Mas Selamat". However, this has no link to the question whether he is responsible for Mas Selamat's escape and why voters should support him even after the Mas Selamat incident.
The opposition candidate for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, Chiam See Tong, also had logical fallacy in his speech when he rebutted the claim that he only made one comment throughout the parliament meetings discussing about Mas Selamat's escape from the Whitley Road Detention Centre. Chiam See Tong said that he asked "whether heads would roll over the issue of Mas Selamat. The PAP did not give me a good answer. The reason I didn't ask more question was that we were waiting for the elections, and we believe in accountability". Firstly, Chiam See Tong only stated the the PAP MPs did not give him a good answer. However, he did not state what were their answers. Hence, without even hearing what the PAP MPs said, we cannot assume that their answers were not good. Moreover, his statement that "the reason I didn't ask more questions was that we were waiting for the elections, and we believe in accountability" is also flawed. There is no link in the sentence "the reason I didn't ask more question was that we were waiting for the elections". It would not make a difference whether Wong Kan Seng is accountable for Mas Selemat's escape whether the questions were asked then or when the elections come.
No comments:
Post a Comment