Trolls Online and Off Right Here in Singapore

And they are Legion

A funny ST article yesterday about Popular Science shutting down its comments feature as it was being trolled too much by dicks. Their reasoning was that these dicks were infecting public opinion, and as public policy is based on public opinion, then it was the end of science, research and its selective competitive funding. A bit of a stretch but the spirit of not letting the lunatic or dumb fringe take over a discourse is understandable. LOL So dicks and trolls are a global virus, not restricted to sunny little red dot Singapore. Also funny as academia and distinguished editors got fed up of reasoning out their dumb critics, so just shut them up. Chuckle.

What is a troll? Someone who purposely tries to make steam come out of your ears and you tense up with arms and legs straight like in cartoons by the things they say and what they do. They are out there in all forms in social media just to push buttons, yours and mine. Don't get angry or affected as that it what they want, just ignore, don't feed the trolls. Unless you want to do some self-righteous counter-trolling by being a troll yourself in a way, like me! The usual trolls suspects online are The Real Shit or TRS. They are only trying to get into your face in the Internet for giggles, and maybe donations.

Gilbert Goh and his anti-foreigner bashing circus which is kinda yawn are trying to hold another protest at Hong Lim Park, selling merchandise and ideas. Again? Now he is a troll by all accounts. Another troll is that crackpot Teo Soh Lung who has in recent times gone on a jihad and said free those Al Qaeda fanboys detained by Singapore and as they are illegaly imprisoned and innocent like her and her gang in 1987 or and those East is Red commies in 1963. Facepalm. Yeah right.

But hey trolls are not only on the anti-PAP front, the PAP also have their trolls! I'm not talking about their internet brigade you know. Almost all the ministers are trolls themselves e.g. Lui Tuck Yew, just saying or doing something to irk you! LOL

Demon-cratic's Buttocks Thumped, Again

Once more with feeling! Poor Leslie Chew is getting famous once more. Not sedition but contempt of court! SDP is bound to back their favourite cartoonist as they have done so in the past. Why is AGC out to thump Demon-cratic again? Two simple reasons. The earlier sedition charges were not punitive enough and the cartoons did not stop or at least tone down despite the obvious warning to Leslie to stay low.

Hence, if Demon-cratic was dumb enough to be stubborn, urged on by his fans, friends and SDP for all we know, AGC is going to take action for the Super White and fine and/or jail Leslie to scare the monkeys. Too bad for Leslie but it is all good for him as he wants to be a rebel. It gives his defiant cartoons more street cred and omph. But why pick Leslie and not the others?  Also why now? Hmmm part of the broader hard touching of some but not others in the Internet?

BTW Anti-death penalty UK citizen Alan Shadrake was sentenced 6 weeks jail and fined $20,000 for scandalising the judiciary.  I'm not a big fan of Demon-cratic's lame messages compared to other cartoonists, also because he used software rather than hand draw like the others, so popcorn out, watching the show and waiting to see what would happen to Leslie. Nothing good I bet! I think 3 weeks and $10,000 fine. Gulp.

Singapore Charges Cartoonist for Alleged Contempt of Court
By Chun Han Wong

Singapore prosecutors are pursuing charges against a local artist for alleged contempt of court over cartoons he drew that authorities say had scandalized the judiciary.

Leslie Chew, 37, has been under police investigation since April for potential wrongdoing in several cartoons he drew for his Internet comic strip. The Attorney-General’s Chambers this week launched formal legal proceedings against Mr. Chew over five of his cartoons, the agency said Thursday in a statement.

The proceedings are “aimed at protecting the administration of justice… and upholding the integrity of one of our key public institutions,” the agency said. Singapore’s High Court accepted the application in relation to four cartoons and set the next hearing Aug. 12.

If found guilty, Mr. Chew could be jailed, fined, or both. Singapore law doesn’t prescribe any maximum penalty for contempt of court.

Mr. Chew said that he would meet his lawyers before deciding his next move. The cartoonist publishes a comic strip on Facebook titled “Demon-cratic Singapore,” which he describes as a “totally fictional comic.” The strip has over 25,800 followers on Facebook.

According to the AGC, the four cartoons cited in the contempt proceedings were published in July 2011, January 2012 and June 2012. Those comic strips made references to  legal proceedings in Singapore courts that had occurred near the time of publication. Two of them mentioned the phrase: “The Kangaroo Court of Singapore.”

In April, police had questioned Mr. Chew over a Dec. 14 cartoon that referred to the recent retirement of a Supreme Court judge, according to Choo Zhengxi, one of Mr. Chew’s lawyers. The questioning followed a letter that the AGC sent Mr. Chew in December, which said that cartoon “scandalizes” Singapore courts through “scurrilous and false” allegations, Mr. Choo previously said. Police and prosecutors have declined to comment. The Dec. 14 cartoon isn’t part of the AGC’s contempt proceedings against Mr. Chew.

Singapore has in the past won several cases of contempt against opposition politicians and foreign publications. Rights activists say the government uses such suits to stifle criticism. Officials say the actions are necessary to defend themselves against false allegations.

Mr. Chew first came under investigation in April, when he was arrested and questioned for alleged sedition after a citizen filed a police complaint against the cartoonist for certain comic strips that the person said were racially insensitive. These cartoons are not the same ones as those currently alleged to be in contempt of court.

The cartoonist was subsequently released on bail while prosecutors considered whether to bring charges. The charges announced Thursday did not include sedition. Singapore law broadly defines sedition as acts agitating against the government and the administration of justice, fostering discontent among citizens, and promoting hostility between ethnic groups.

The Real Shit TRS Busted (Again)

 Is Mr Farhan actually Yang Kaiheng scared that he would be sued? Smirk

One of the funniest things this week! Retards' favourite news site The Real Singapore or TRS was busted this week by Alex Tan. Alex told ST, another Singaporean favourite, that he launched the #1 trash news site and then passed it to Yang Kaiheng and Ai Takagi. Then one mystery Mr Farhan from TRS said that the couple were never in TRS, contradicting Alex's claims. LOL Anyway, so who has a Pinocchio nose, or if both have such wood noses, whose is longer?

So Alex, former Reform Party candidate, sabo the people who took over his site,  if what he said can be believed. I think can as others have CSI it before. Alex, being Alex, did not stop there. He also admitted and self-sabo he is still involved in TRS by contributing to the site anonymously. Facepalm. So much for his anonymity to a degree.

The TRS couple, about to get bitten soon

More Lies, Rumours and FUD in the Internet

I'm not talking about Yaacob or Ravi Philemon lying or spreading rumours. Since both are from political parties, naturally the things they say about each other would be ahem, based on PAP or NSP agenda and creative use of FUD and facts to make each other look bad. Fuck lah, that's politics so fair game. Ravi would act innocent, Yaacob would act victim. One mat, one mama, both party wayang. Yawn.

However, Yaacob was right about some bullshit in the Internet that should not be tolerated. Bullshit rumours in the Internet spread by retards is common so no big bother there e.g during GE 2011, some cock people were saying that they received flyers addressed to them as voters in their letterbox by PAP to vote PAP. Dumbasses said that it was PAP intimidation tactics, but were ignorant that all parties contesting had access to the voter info in their constituencies. These retards were in fact spreading the fear that there was no voting secrecy, and scaring people to vote PAP instead! Facepalm. The fucking irony and damage they did.

Bullshit rumours spread by cocksters knowing it is bullshit is another lame game altogether. According to the government, one such lameness was the guy who doctored the image of a NEA PSI 393 reading and then spread it around that NEA covered up that record. Still, the leader of the crap pack is TRS e.g. cooked up an MP Irene Ng letter to TRS, lied that Tiong flags were hoisted at Marina Bay.

In the end, how can we tell the rumours are bullshit or not? I bet when Noah said the big rains were coming, people thought he was spreading bullshit rumours. On the other hand, some people might argue that the Noah story is bullshit altogether. So we want to believe what we like to believe. Some believe that the PAP is the only hope for Singapore still. Yeah right. Others would believe it is NSP, or WP or horror of horrors, SDP! We like rumours and lies as it makes news interesting and rumours of government cover-ups make fake news more real e.g. "Oh did you read about X? We don't get more details as there is a cover-up for the cock-up!" LOL that storyline never gets stale.

The thing about TRS and its fake news production line to draw visits and earn ad money, it cries wolf so often, even if one day it gets a real scoop, nobody would believe it any more.

Yaacob defends naming of blogger and website over haze rumours
By Goh Chin Lian
Singapolitics
Thursday, Jul 11, 2013

Minister of Communications and Information Yaacob Ibrahim said on Wednesday night that his naming of a blogger and a website for circulating online rumours during the recent haze was to be fair to the majority of the online community.

Otherwise, they may be inadvertently associated with spreading rumours, he added in a posting on Facebook.

In Parliament on Monday, the minister had cited many examples of Singaporeans pulling together and using the Internet to do good and clarify doubts.

But he also warned that some mischievous individuals had set out to spread rumours and cause unnecessary anxiety.

The five examples he cited included The Real Singapore putting up an article falsely attributed to Tampines GRC MP Irene Ng.

Another was blogger Ravi Philemon, who posted online that the public would not be able to access a fresh supply of masks that were arriving in Singapore.

Dr Yaacob recounted the sequence of events in his Facebook post.

On June 21, the Government announced that 1 million N95 masks would be distributed to 200,000 low-income households for free, and that the Singapore Armed Forces will help give out the masks.

The next day, on June 22, Mr Philemon posted an unnamed friend's claim that the supply would be strictly controlled by the Government, Dr Yaacob noted.

The minister said: "The upshot of Ravi's post is that the Government announcement the day before is not true. But what is his basis for suggesting so? The truth is, he had no basis for his assertion."

As to Mr Philemon saying later that he went to Johor Baru to buy N95 masks when they were sold out at pharmacies here, to give to others, Dr Yaacob said he was "happy to learn" that the blogger had distributed some masks to the community.

"But let's be clear," he added, "doing good offline does not mean one is excused from acting responsibly online."

Time Out Between WP and Hawkers, and PAP

The storm in a teacup that made WP look mean and niao. You bet the PAP, with the help of its papers and TV, would look for other little things to chip away at WP's credibility soon, regardless of what achievements underdog WP made or obstacles it faces.

Make no mistake, this AHPETC hawker misunderstanding is a small WP slip, nothing like its FMSS pie in the face. Now that was a serious WP blowback, which was so AIM-like in the poor corporate governance and town council money going from right pocket to left pocket. LOL

BTW what blogger black out today? Why should the PAP tell us what to read and what is objectionable, and bloggers to tell us what they think is objectionable and that they are the blogs to read more as they stood up to PAP? Riiight.

AHPETC, NEA and hawkers agree on cleaning schedule
By Elgin Toh
Singapolitics
Thursday, Jun 06, 2013

SINGAPORE - The Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) has agreed to bring forward the annual spring cleaning of two Bedok hawker centres from the end of the year to "within a month".

This latest compromise in the three-month-old spat over hawker centre cleaning was announced after a meeting on Thursday afternoon between the National Environment Agency (NEA), AHPETC and hawker representatives.

Hawkers coming out of the meeting told reporters they were happy with the outcome.

Mr Chan Kheng Heng, secretary of the hawkers' association at Block 511 said: "Everything is resolved and we are satisfied."

On Monday, AHPETC had announced a cleaning schedule which said the hawker centres - at Block 511 in Bedok North Street 3 and Block 630 in Bedok Reservoir Road - would be cleaned in October or November.

But the National Environment Agency rejected the proposal on hygiene grounds and called for cleaning for Block 511 to take place in June as originally scheduled.

Is Alex Au Sue-Proof?

 Alex dodges another one.

Lao gay Alex Au got another warning letter about his recent blog post on AIM which insinuated that some PAP members, including the PM himself, were corrupt. The warning was delivered by famous PAP attack legal pit bull, Davinder Singh. Alex Au, as usual to save his own skin which is the natural thing to do for any of us, apologised reluctantly and took down his blog post. Nevertheless, Chee Soon Juan or the late JBJ would not have backed down though and relished the chance of being political martyrs. Alex has more sense, just like Vincent Wijeysingha who apologised to Tan Chuan-Jin for some other defamatory comments.

This is not the first time lao Au got into trouble. Actually the 3rd time since last year - 1st was his blog post that had fleeting mention of Shanmugam's affair, the 2nd was his comments that the courts protected plastic-looking Woffles Wu. I would think this would be the last chance for Alex Au before the insecure powers that be castrate him as Alex seems bent on doing what he does best. 

Really, Alex Au whether you like his postings or not, his SDP politics or not, is an insightful blogger to agree or disagree with. But to cow him into silence and make him apologise, this style cannot work anymore and is going to boomerang hard on the PAP, especially when there is a SMC By-E coming close. Alex is not The Real Singapore or that type of blogger which deserve to be slapped back by the PAP for stupid rumour-mongering or just simply, stupidity.

Making Alex gulp and swallow his own words does not make him wrong in the first place in today's thinking. Maybe our parents' and grandparents' generation might think that sort of truism. The new truism is that we just think that Alex was bullied into shutting up instead and that maybe he was on the right track hence the need for him to be warned legally for crossing the line. Nonetheless, for the PAP, it is damned if they do or don't as if they sit on their fat butts and not threaten to sue, it also means to the PAP critic that their silence meant their guilt. Anyway, IMHO the threat to sue, is worse than the remaining silent and nonchalant in an age where we are easily intolerant of any high-handedness by the ruling party. Good job PAP on screwing youself again, and hope you lose in the By-E! Bye bye!

Blogger Au to remove post after PM Lee takes legal action
Website founder served letter of demand, will post apology for parts of blog post on PAP town council deals that defamed PM
04:45 AM Jan 05, 2013
by Ng Jing Yng

SINGAPORE - Exactly two weeks after he wrote a blog post on the sale of computer systems used by town councils, the founder of the popular Yawning Bread website, Mr Alex Au, has been served with a legal warning by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to take it down or face legal action.

Senior Counsel Davinder Singh of the law firm Drew & Napier, acting on behalf of PM Lee, sent the letter of demand to Mr Au yesterday. It is the third time in the past 11 months that Mr Au has been taken to task over his blog posts.

In the letter, Mr Singh said the article, headlined "PAP mis-AIMed, faces blowback", taken together with 21 other comments posted by readers, can be taken to suggest that Mr Lee is guilty of corruption in relation to the transaction between the PAP town councils and the company Action Information Management (AIM).

It added that the post could be intended to mean that the Prime Minister would "abuse his powers to cover up the matter or prevent any investigation into (Mr Lee's) corruption".

"These are false and baseless allegations," Mr Singh charged, and demanded that the article be taken down immediately. He further demanded that Mr Au publish an apology and an undertaking not to make further allegations of a similar nature on his website.

Mr Singh noted that PM Lee has suffered damage to his reputation and incurred costs as a result of the article. However, he said Mr Lee would not claim damages and costs if Mr Au apologised and removed the post, in keeping with his stand on a similar incident on Feb 19 last year involving the Temasek Review Emeritus (TRE) website. In that episode, TRE removed and apologised for an article which had, among other things, questioned Madam Ho Ching's position in Temasek Holdings, after being served with a similar letter of demand.

Contacted yesterday, Mr Au acknowledged the defamatory nature of the blog post and comments, and said he would remove them.

However, he added: "This should not distract from the issue of the sale of town council software to Action Information Management."

"From what has been disclosed so far, reasonable people would have many questions, and while news of me getting a lawyer's letter might be temporarily more 'newsy', it is more important for Singapore that these questions be answered, not avoided."

The article in question, written on Dec 21, relates to the ongoing exchange of words between the Coordinating Chairman of the PAP town councils, Mr Teo Ho Pin, and Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) Chairman Sylvia Lim over computer systems used to manage PAP town councils. It began when a Town Council Management Report released on Dec 14 flagged AHTC's less-than-stellar performance in management of Service & Conservancy Charge arrears, and that it did not complete its submission for the new Corporate Governance indicator.

Explaining the poor performance, Ms Lim said AIM had terminated its contract with AHTC to provide IT services in August 2011. As a result, she said, the town council had to develop its own system.

In subsequent exchanges, Ms Lim questioned why the rights to the software were sold to AIM, which is owned by the PAP, and if this was in the public interest. Mr Teo followed with a detailed explanation of the sale, and said the deal was done to benefit all 14 town councils.

Mr Au has been served with legal warnings in the past over his blog posts. In February last year, Law Minister K Shanmugam sent him a lawyer's letter demanding that he remove a post containing allegedly defamatory comments about the minister's personal conduct. Mr Au complied and removed the article.

Five months later, in July, he wrote a post alleging that plastic surgeon Woffles Wu had received special treatment over a speeding offence. The post was deemed to be in contempt of court, and Mr Au subsequently apologised.
Taking blogs and websites to task

The lawyer's letter served yesterday by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on blogger Alex Au is the fourth instance in less than a year where political leaders here have taken blogs or websites to task for putting up allegedly defamatory statements.

February, 2012: On Feb 14, Law Minister K Shanmugam's lawyers issued a letter to blogger Alex Au, asking him to remove a Feb 8 post containing allegedly defamatory personal allegations about the minister. Mr Au complied.

Five days later, Temasek Review Emeritus Editor Richard Wan was served a lawyer's by PM Lee. Mr Lee's lawyers wanted Mr Wan to retract a Feb 16 post containing allegedly defamatory remarks and to publish an apology on the website. The post had, among other things, questioned Madam Ho Ching's position in Temasek Holdings. The website removed the post and apologised.

November, 2012: The Real Singapore website was asked to apologise twice over a defamatory post concerning Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen. The website had reposted a letter published on Temasek Review Emeritus - which asked for the National Service disruption list that Dr Ng had said would be made public - and added a defamatory headline. Dr Ng's lawyers rejected the first apology which was "not sincere or unqualified".

PAP Almost Sue TOC!

Wow. Throwing law suits used to be only at SDP, now letters of demand are hurled at keyboard warriors too. It did not stop at the old gay Alex (did not deserve it) but went on to TRS (deserve it), now TRE (deserve it) and TOC (did not deserve it).  This is PAP's new media strategy.

What was it all about this time. About gay SDP Vincent Wijeysingha's SMRT strike Facebook note that SMRT drivers who are unhappy can quit and join SBS. Firstly, Vincent's note was a wall of text and I did not even know Vasoo was mentioned inside it. Some good points were made by Vincent like unions CMI and the Tiong drivers complained before and still no action. The rest was pure political grandstanding like the Tiongs had the right to an illegal strike, since Vincent is SDP and opposition what, so a bit of rhetoric is expected.

PAP lawyer hitman Davinder Singh then sent letters of demand left, right, centre. Making the issue even bigger, making people even more interested in what happened between Vasoo and Chee, making people think more that Vincent must be right for the PAP to want to silence him. PAP, you are so funny and you bring weekend entertainment to all of us. Thank you.

Did TOC pwn PAP, or PAP pwn TOC? You guess!

Go Sue TRS! Sue!

 From TRS' #1 Fan - Every Day Party!

The Real Singapore is in trouble again, again be happy! TRS has been posting shit for some time and it is about time it gets into shit itself. Again. Shit goes around! TRS is like the old Temasek Review, plagiarise and even post fake news, which is super weak. If they wanted to attract eyeballs and eventually ad money, just go for sex and sleaze. There is no need to fake and copy news, which is just the excuse the PAP wants to focus on in labeling any news sites out there as lacking credibility and sensationalist. BTW TRS is not the only one plagiarising - Temasek Times and Occupy Singapore do it too. Hey, is there one same person behind all these sites? LOL

Meanwhile, the former loaded surgeon turned loaded PAP minister was pissed with a recent TRS article on Mindef where TRS mixed plagiarism and fake news, a TRS first, or at least the first time TRS was found out. The defence minister has sent Davinder Singh, the PAP's elite lawyer-commando-sniper to take out TRS. TRS can't hide, can run and would only die tired.

TRS was recently kind enough to say Alex Tan and Yang Kaiheng are no longer in it. At least TRS has integrity to protect the innocent. Oh? Hmmmm or more like they are nervous that their charade is up and instead trying to pretend they not involved in it anymore? Everything sounds more and more like the old Temasek Review where the doctor insisted that he was no longer involved and had sold it off to someone else which he does not know. Sure. Whatever.

MF from TRS Exonerates Alex Tan! Steady or Do Thief Heart Fake?

Defence Minister to commence legal action against website
By Tessa Wong
The Straits Times
Sunday, Nov 25, 2012

SINGAPORE - Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen is taking legal action against sociopolitical website The Real Singapore (TRS), according to a posting by the website on its Facebook page.

On Friday morning, the website posted on its Facebook page a screenshot of an email sent by Dr Ng's lawyer, Mr Davinder Singh.

Mr Singh informed TRS that his client would be commencing legal proceedings and asked for the names and addresses of the administrators and editors of the TRS website and Facebook page.

TRS responded: "Sorry, your request does not comply with our privacy policy and is therefore rejected."

Earlier this week, TRS and another blog called SingaporeSurf were asked to take down a defamatory post about Dr Ng and publish an apology.

Both sites complied. However, in TRS' apology, additional comments were made. Readers were also allowed to post comments, some of whom left criticisms of Dr Ng and Mr Singh.

Mr Singh subsequently e-mailed TRS demanding them to take down the additional comments and post a second apology. TRS refused.

Ravi Mad to Think Loser No Need Pay Legal Costs for Winner in Court

Mdm Vellama duped big time for being dragged into the mess by Ravi. Now they must bear legal costs as Ravi and her lost the case that the by-election must be held within 6 months of a parliament seat being vacated. Always the case where loser foots the legal fee of the winners. WTF Vellama is now in a tight spot. If she cannot pay, then how? M Ravi pay up for her which is the right thing to do as he started the mess, he should clean it up.

Judgment reserved on costs in Hougang by-election case

SINGAPORE: A High Court judge has reserved judgment on whether a Hougang resident will have to bear legal costs following her bid to bring the Hougang by-election case to court.

Madam Vellama Marie Muthu had initiated the case in March this year, after former Hougang Member of Parliament Yaw Shin Leong vacated his post.

The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) then sought costs against Madam Vellama after her bid was dismissed by the court in August.

The AGC said that this was in accordance with the general legal principle that the winning party is entitled to legal costs.

The AGC added that on at least two occasions, after the writ of election was issued and the by-election for Hougang single-member constituency completed in May 2012, Madam Vellama was asked to discontinue her proceedings, but she rejected both invitations. This led to further costs being incurred.

Last week, Justice Philip Pillai directed both parties to submit their findings on whether there are exceptions to the general rule that the losing party pays the winning party in such cases.

He further instructed them to research if there were judicial precedents in Australia, New Zealand and United Kingdom.

At a closed-door hearing on Tuesday, Madam Vellama's lawyer Mr M Ravi referred to a previous judgment by Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong which asserted that public bodies must be protected from paying costs in carrying out functions that are of public interest.

Mr Ravi said that while Madam Vellama is a private citizen, she was carrying out a public duty in her court bid and that it gave closure to an issue of general public administration.

As such, the "wide public interest" of her bid should exempt her from the general rule of paying costs.

Mr Ravi, who is representing Madam Vellama pro-bono, also noted in his submissions that in that respect, it would be both "unjust and unreasonable" for costs to be ordered against her.

Justice Pillai will deliver his judgment at a later date.

Pritam Cannot Take Criticism from Bloggers! Says Singapolitics.

  The Sketch Times - Lovers' quarrel!.

WP Pritam Singh is a great orator during rallies. He can say anything clever or stupid, rhetoric or reason, and people would cheer. But lately that spell has broken. Broken so much that WP lost confidence in him and Pritam is no more vice-chair of the WP media team in the recent CEC shake-up in that solid party. The first doubt in Pritam's media power was when Pritam was caught bluffing as his parliament speech was copied almost word for word from a blogger-friend without attribution. Or maybe he was really that anonymous blogger Ground Notes, but cannot admit he was that anonymous blogger, so there was no plagiarism really! LOL.

 Stir stir stir! But has valid points tho.

The second and latest doubt was when Pritam was caught being petty with Andrew Loh, the Public House guy who had tea and scones with the PM at the Istana. Over a Molly Meek article which was the background to the spat between Pritam and Andrew, Pritam was pissed with Andrew because Andrew didn't want to give WP some room.

"He leave us alone lah instead of criticising here there and everywhere", said Petty Pritam

With that comment, Pritam has made a fool of himself and WP again. Please, WP is not special and it deserves to get knocked about like the PAP. Also, Pritam is not bulletproof to criticisms. With that whiney complaint, he sounded so like the PAP. WTF. Loser!

Anyway, backtrack a bit. Molly Meek had said that those bloggers who invited to tea with PAP were co-opted. PAP's strategy to win back the internet space it has lost is to talk to bloggers like Mr Brown and win them over for propaganda, seduce them to the White Side. Fuck. Wait. Isn't that the strategy of all opposition parties anyway. Fuck. Wait. Isn't that the strategy of restaurants and other retailers who invite food and other bloggers for makan and events anyway to co-opt them for product endorsement? Grow fucking up. That is the way things are done in the social media lobbying, political or commercial. All parties do that, just that PAP is so late, 2 general elections late to be exact, in the competition.

Friend friend again after teh

In the end, Pritam and Andrew decided to set time and place tea with each other to settle the misunderstanding. Sounded like some ah beng settlement talk LOL but it turned out well in the end, not like that sad Downtown East murder when rival gangs met to settle. As after all, everyone is doing their different part to offer moderate views on what we want Singapore to be. A national conversation, but without the PAP!

BTW, you know right. ST's Singapolitics was the one that reported the spat between Pritam and Andrew. Nation-building naughty ST via its Singapolitics is trying to add a bit of excitement into what is going on in the social media.

TOC Getting Weak! Diehard Fans to Blame!

If you have been following TOC, you might have realised that it is not the same TOC it was when it was under that Andrew guy. Something is different, it looks the same, but it is not. Then I read TOC: Nine “Main Stories”, only one original and there it was, my epiphany. The quality of TOC has plunged and the doubt was seeded some time ago. A recent one seed of TOC CMI was that infamous TOC photo during the Hougang by-election when Desmond Choo, cleverly used by TRE,  was depicted as refusing to shake Png Eng Huat's hand. Coincidence that TRE chanced upon that single photo from TOC album and fixed Desmond to show that political karma does exist? No. Also no coincidence that TOC and TRE have been dating each other like love birds, like their Online/Offline courtship. TRE's crappy journalism influence rubbing off on TOC LOL!

Worse is that TOC attracts zombies in its Facebook page. OK some Facebook comments are good and really constructive, but many others are really facepalm.  Well, excusable if the comments are made by teenage kids. Point to note. I make stupid comments now and then in my blog but at least I'm anonymous! I won't make stupid comments in Facebook using my real name for all my colleagues, friends and foes to see and spread. Unless these Facebook accounts are..OMG fakes! Take a look at these TOC Stomp-like Facebook mickey mouse club members who are lead weights drowning a TOC struggling to stay credible and afloat. No wonder TOC does not bother about its quality nowadays as its readers are usually diehard cheerleaders who can't tell apart TOC Then and TOC Now. TOC and its Facebook fans are encouraging each other downhill.




This fan whining on martial law when the thread was about a Today article on Shan's new framework on neighbourly conduct like - I can cook curry all I want but you can't complain. Different standards though about playing mahjong? Ahem. A guideline to encourage people to get along as neighbours when they don't is tantamount to martial law? Facepalm.

 
This fan ranting about our mostly useless politicians when the thread was about a CNA article on the Lemon Law starting in September. WTF Complaining about the government when the topic is on consumer rights and refund-return-repair responsibilities? Guffaw.

I read Public House. You should too. LOL

The By-E in Funny Pictures!

Nothing like funny pictures purposely taken out of context to set the By-E mood.PAP naturally bore the brunt of the jokes since many in the online world just dislike the PAP. Who doesn't? LOL

 Where are you Desmond? Where?

Who said the media is always friendly to the PAP? I suspect that someone from CNA saw this as an opportunity to take a dig at Desmond. Unless someone was really stupid enough to upload it right away without understanding the very loud joke that picture tells, which is hard to believe. So thumbs up to that unknown media guy!

Then the funnier one is this, the "Desmond Choo ignored Ah Huat's handshake" photo spread by Occupy Singapore and TR, from TOC, and then exposed by the famous GE 2006 mee-pok seller Mr Brown as a Fail smear campaign.

Who Pwned Whom?

TOC was so embarrassed by being involved in the fail smear that they issued a statement that the photo by Chan Zhijian, Jeremy did not capture the true picture on the ground. Hmmmm BTW is Chan Zhijian, Jeremy a WP or opposition party member?  LOL

Ooops sorry regret statement

It was a good smear campaign while it lasted and it is part of the political MMA going on - if the referees doesn't call it, a hit below the belt is not a hit below the belt.  LOL BTW also, conspiracy theory disclaimer, were TOC and TR working together on it i.e. TOC selected and quietly handed that photo of Desmond Choo looking aloof and not wanting to shake hands supposedly, to TR? TR and TOC did have an agreement that stuff that TOC got might be shared with TR for TR to push further? LOL that is working together against the common foe.

TOC TRE ad hoc alliance for the common good against common you-know-who enemies LOL

Every Day Party vs Temasek Times - What Next?

 Temasek Times, the latest by idiots for idiot site in the internet this year

There is need for online regulation or at least cold war containment, especially on online idiots. No, I'm not talking about the usual legions of bigots in the internet or their mortal enemies who are just as bad, the thin-skinned jumpy puritans in the internet who think they are complaining about the bigots. I'm talking about tabloid FUD sites like Temasek Times. Temasek Times uncannily reminds me of the pre-outed-I-am-Richard-Wan Temasek Review Emeritus when the cheeky satirical Every Day Party went  toe-to-toe with Temasek Times over Temasek Times' assholeness.

TRE and TT (Temasek Times, not Tony Tan) have the similar foreigner whacking and sex sells tabloid style, and when backed into a corner, whined for vigilantism and police reports. WTF Almost as if the same person from the old TRE is also in the TT, or the people behind TT is shamelessly copying TRE's tabloid formula.

The fun bunch at EDP, and they should stand for GE next time like the Pirate Party in Europe, have done in style and in their stride by giving themselves hero medals for putting up with TT's trash. Stay tuned to see if TT is going to stamp around madly and fall into its self-created chasm like Rumplestiltskin.

Kidnapping Your Reason Away, So Lock Them Away!

Kidnappers on the streets! Stealing children from under your very nose in heartland malls! Stay at home, be suspicious of foreigners talking to your children!

Turns out, the only thing kidnapped were people's ability to reason! Initially, there were rumours of failed kidnaps spread in the internet by the Chinese tabloids and of course, in the internet. The public then became kan cheong which is a natural reaction. Then the police turn to become kan cheong and they started investigations. Thankfully, no real kidnaps were found so far. What the police found were instead 5 retards spreading kidnap rumours!

To me, spreading of kidnap rumours of young children is as vicious and disturbing as spreading bomb hoaxes. Both cause the public to be kan cheong and panic. We become suspicious of anything, our lifestyle is undermined by anything, and we live in fear of everything. All because some stupid losers want to spread rumours. With Good Friday around the corner and its inspiration of state crime and punishment, I beg the police to crucify these rumour spreaders instigating public fear with their reckless actions.

However, seriously, who is to blame? Stupid assholes who spread rumours in the internet, or stupid people who soak in such rumours circulating in the internet. We ignored scam chain emails, or at least most of us do, but yet some of us want to believe in unverified kidnap rumours! Maybe most of us are vulnerable to these kidnap rumours as it is not unbelievable and it preys on our fears of lost children/siblings when parents look the other way in the crowded suburban mall or the MRT station.

Hence, all the more since these rumour spreaders knew which buttons to press in their little fear factor game out of stupid fun, let the police who did a good job so far of quashing the rumours, next go all the way out to punish them. Let it be a punitive deterrence. Off with their heads!

Spreading false kidnapping information: 5 assisting police in investigations

Five people have been called in by the police to assist in investigations regarding the posting of false information on children being abducted and kidnapped via online channels and text messages.

According to a Singapore Police Force (SPF) statement released on Monday, there has been no reported case in which a child was abducted or kidnapped.

The statement comes on the back of several recent online posts alleging that children have been taken away by strangers.

The police had also posted on its Facebook wall last Saturday that the posts circulating online were investigated and found to be untrue.

Seven police reports were investigated between 19 March and 31 March, and established that they were not related, said SPF.

In addition, there was no evidence to suggest criminal intent behind any of these encounters.

The SPF said that sharing tips on how to avoid becoming a victim of crime reflected “good community spirit and is strongly encouraged”.

“However, circulating false information is not only irresponsible, it is an offence. It will not only slow down and hinder police investigation into true reports and offences but worst still, generate unnecessary public alarm, causing fear and panic in the community,” said SPF.

Under Singapore law, the transmission of false messages is an office under Section 45 of the Telecommunications Act.

If the act is done with intent to create cause fear and alarm, or to incite offences against a class or community of persons, it may also be an offence under Section 505 of the Penal Code. Offenders may be punished with imprisonment for up to 3 years, fined or both.

TRE Trolls Are Not Safe - TRE Sells You Out!

 Poor Gary, lost his job, lost his hair, lost face and lost faith in TRE!

TR and its latest rebranding, TRE, supposed champion of Singaporean voices, yawn, does not protect you and your privacy. You are an idiot if you believe that TRE truly protects your anonymity when you comment in their website! TR previously swore that they would not reveal IP addresses of its fans who praise its shitty articles and shitted on the PAP and its cronies. Well, ask poor Gary Yue Mun Yew what he thinks about that promise of anonymity. Mr Yue got sacked from his job, and fined, lucky did not get thrown into jail too.

TRE is full of shit and what drives it is publicity and the visits to its website, to earn ad revenue. The more controversy it attracts by its sensationalist rumours and crazy comments, the more clicks to its website. TRE encouraged idiots like Gary Yue to go amok in the comments as it is generally good for business. However if the police wants the IP address of such idiots, TRE knows it has a good business model going and does not want to spoil it, and therefore gives up personal information when they have to. Why be forced to close down when all they have to do is sacrifice some gullible idiots?

Furthermore, if any other gullible TRE trolls have not realised by now, TRE has faked its stories of being DDOS or attacked constantly. Boring. All part of the grand sympathy plan. and we are attacked because we are the true voice of Singaporeans scam. KNS. TOC or Publichouse never DDOS ever despite them being more true voice of Singaporeans than TRE!

 

Man fined S$8,500 for inciting violence online
Updated 03:30 PM Mar 12, 2012

SINGAPORE - An unemployed man has been fined S$8,500 for inciting violence online.

In what's believed to be the first trial of its kind in Singapore, the court heard that 36-year-old Gary Yue Mun Yew posted a video clip depicting the assassination of former Egyptian President Muhammad Anwar al-Sadat on the Facebook page of socio-political website Temasek Review on August 9, 2010 at about 3.00 pm.

Along with the video, Yue wrote the comment: "We should re-enact a live version of this on our own grand-stand during our national's (sic) parade!".

The former engineer at Singapore Technologies was also found guilty of using a photograph deemed to incite violence on his Facebook profile in late July or early August 2010.

The picture depicted Vietnamese General Nguyen Ngoc Loan executing a Viet cong prisoner.

The head of former Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister, Wong Kan Seng, was superimposed on the image of the prisoner. The People's Action Party logo was also displayed on the prisoner's chest.

On each count, Yue could have faced up to five years' jail or a fine, or both.

In sentencing, District Judge Low Wee Ping made it clear that the charges were based on the acts of posting electronic documents that contained incitement of violence.

This, the judge stressed, was a big difference from the act of inciting violence itself.

Yue's lawyers had argued that he had no intent to incite violence through the posting and that the video clip was not effective in inciting violence.

But the judge said these are irrelevant.

Under Section 267 of the Penal Code, the charges Yue faced, were strictly liability offences.

The judge made it clear that the Youtube video and Yue's comment were "without doubt, an incitement to political assassination of persons on the grand-stand" on National Day.

And this was relevant in sentencing.

So he found Yue guilty on both charges and fined him S$6,000 for posting the video clip and another S$2,500 for posting the doctored photograph on his Facebook profile.

In his submissions, Deputy Public Prosecutor Sanjiv Vaswani had urged the court to impose a nine month jail term for Yue on the charge of posting the assassination video clip.

He said this was in line with the criminal intimidation sentencing benchmark.

But defence lawyers countered that the video did not have broad exposure, that it was only established three weeks after the incident that an individual had reported the posting to authorities.

As for criminal intimidation, the defence counsel pointed out that the essence of the offence is that harm is done, which was not the case here.

The defence counsel added that although the video posting was made on National Day, it had absolutely no chance of fruition.

He told the court that the act was "a grandiose statement, hyperbolic, surreal" and the exclamation marks at the end of the comment underlined those facts.

The defence counsel noted that this case is the first of its kind in Singapore, so it is easy for the court to make an example out of the accused.

But he urged the judge not to give a custodial sentence as Yue has already lost his job and has to take care of his elderly father who is unwell.

But DPP Sanjiv argued that it would be cheap to slap Yue with a fine, given the fact that self-radicalisation is a threat.

So, he said a custodial sentence is "imperative to set the sign that such acts will not be condoned".

The district judge said the sentence to be imposed has a wide spectrum and he found that Yue has more personal mitigating factors than aggravating ones, so a fine is liable.