Singapore student forced to shut down blog
-
xia xue is a display of local bimbo with style.
Still she Suck big time. -
yeah, i hope she sux mine.Originally posted by M©+square:xia xue is a display of local bimbo with style.
Still she Suck big time.
-
They won't ..because she only talks on inane topics.Originally posted by 798:errr.... by the way, i hope they dun shut down xia xue's blog...
-
Originally posted by LazerLordz:
Well, what do you know?
They won't ..because she only talks on inane topics.
All right. It's a joke by another Singaporean blogger Lim Zhiyang. Click here for his blog.
-
Defamation is not against the law. It is a civil case which means lawsuit taken up by private individual/s or corporate against another private individual/s or corporate.Originally posted by dragg:if you say something about someone without proof it is defamation. defamation is against the law!!!
If it is against the law, the police or public prosecutor will be involved, ie they will charge/prosecute you in courts.
Saying something without proof isn't defamation. lwflee and Tuatau have given fairly good definition of it.
Defamation is not easy to prove for the plaintiff has to prove beyond doubt that his reputation has been harmed. However, there're some allegations which are straight cases of defamation, one of which is to call someone an illegitimate when he isn't one. -
Men like philip yeo get their way when they want to. It's sad when you have to threaten leagal action to pound someone into submission when a simple dialogue to air your views would have been far more productive.
This whole matter stinks of bullyboy tactics.
Afterall, he started all this furore when he was quotated in the TNP for saying male scholars are immature despite going through NS. He even labelled them as bond-breakers and that female scholars are way better.
I'm sure that sparked off a flood tide of angry comments.
To each his own. Bad experience doesn't earn him the right to generalise. He reminds me of a straight talking general called patton.
I also recall Patton was only tolerated because he produced results. -
Innuendos were heavily relied upon in the defamation suits against Tang Liang Hong for his speeches during election campaigns. Innuendos were indirect defamation even if fully proven not to mention that speeches during election could be justified in a fair trial.Originally posted by lotus999:Defamation is not against the law. It is a civil case which means lawsuit taken up by private individual/s or corporate against another private individual/s or corporate.
If it is against the law, the police or public prosecutor will be involved, ie they will charge/prosecute you in courts.
Saying something without proof isn't defamation. lwflee and Tuatau have given fairly good definition of it.
Defamation is not easy to prove for the plaintiff has to prove beyond doubt that his reputation has been harmed. However, there're some allegations which are straight cases of defamation, one of which is to call someone an illegitimate when he isn't one.
I don't see that the courts after Tang Liang Hong case has allowed defamation in private suits to be fought on the grounds of innuendos.
-
No,I like her blogOriginally posted by 798:errr.... by the way, i hope they dun shut down xia xue's blog... -
Some bond breakers did well for themselves. Anyways who said to get out of the comfort zone....none other than our darling gahment....then again who said singaporeans don't take risk .....none other than u know who....Originally posted by BillyBong:Men like philip yeo get their way when they want to. It's sad when you have to threaten leagal action to pound someone into submission when a simple dialogue to air your views would have been far more productive.
This whole matter stinks of bullyboy tactics.
Afterall, he started all this furore when he was quotated in the TNP for saying male scholars are immature despite going through NS. He even labelled them as bond-breakers and that female scholars are way better.
I'm sure that sparked off a flood tide of angry comments.
To each his own. Bad experience doesn't earn him the right to generalise. He reminds me of a straight talking general called patton.
I also recall Patton was only tolerated because he produced results.
So bondbreaking is a risk that is taken to get to somewhere better. If Singapore is not the right place for the individual then maybe he/she should look elsewhere rather than to decompose in their own cesspool of misery. -
Who ask him to write so much. Want to died. Died fast fast lah ! Complain no use one. Got to have proof. Or else.......... Hahahaha!!!!!!!!!
If he got guts. Think he is right. Continue to talk on the internet and go to the courts lah ! No guts of course say "SORRY" loh ! -
At least what he wrote was articulate and worthy of debate.Originally posted by skyline63:Who ask him to write so much. Want to died. Died fast fast lah ! Complain no use one. Got to have proof. Or else.......... Hahahaha!!!!!!!!!
If he got guts. Think he is right. Continue to talk on the internet and go to the courts lah ! No guts of course say "SORRY" loh !
I would love for philip yeo to publish his lawyer's letter and give everyone a clear understanding of both positions and what exactly A*star considered defamatory. -
I think Philip Yeo should apologise for his remarks about male scholars turning into bond-breakers. They are so discriminatory.Originally posted by BillyBong:Men like philip yeo get their way when they want to. It's sad when you have to threaten leagal action to pound someone into submission when a simple dialogue to air your views would have been far more productive.
This whole matter stinks of bullyboy tactics.
Afterall, he started all this furore when he was quotated in the TNP for saying male scholars are immature despite going through NS. He even labelled them as bond-breakers and that female scholars are way better.
I'm sure that sparked off a flood tide of angry comments.
To each his own. Bad experience doesn't earn him the right to generalise. He reminds me of a straight talking general called patton.
I also recall Patton was only tolerated because he produced results.
I believe there are females in the same cohort. Everyone is capable of breaking the PSC bond if they are offered a better shot at life overseas. Girls, with nothing to tie them down to military defence, are free to marry a white man and give birth to half-blood babies who carry their father's ethnicity and receive 1st-class treatment all over. Instead, the number of female bond-breakers is strangely small in number.
-
Though I don't always follow law cases, I strongly believe that there isn't any defamation suit that was disallowed by the courts just because it was based on innuendoes.Originally posted by robertteh:Innuendos were heavily relied upon in the defamation suits against Tang Liang Hong for his speeches during election campaigns. Innuendos were indirect defamation even if fully proven not to mention that speeches during election could be justified in a fair trial.
I don't see that the courts after Tang Liang Hong case has allowed defamation in private suits to be fought on the grounds of innuendos.
Anyway, defamation itself is quite difficult to prove what more innuendoes!
Also, I was merely telling dragg that defamation is not a crime (aka "against the law") and not saying anything about the impartiality of the courts. -
Did I get you right that you said PY started this episode by labelling male scholars as immatured? That is incorrect as the sweeping remark was made after the threatened lawsuit.Originally posted by BillyBong:Afterall, he started all this furore when he was quotated in the TNP for saying male scholars are immature despite going through NS. He even labelled them as bond-breakers and that female scholars are way better.
Anyway, it is inded annoying of him to make such sweeping statement. -
Yes agree and what I don't understand is that how come they can be so generous with the foreign scholars but so mean with our locals. They never uttered a word on those foreign students who make use of Singapore as a stepping stone to the US.Originally posted by fymk:Some bond breakers did well for themselves. Anyways who said to get out of the comfort zone....none other than our darling gahment....then again who said singaporeans don't take risk .....none other than u know who....
So bondbreaking is a risk that is taken to get to somewhere better. If Singapore is not the right place for the individual then maybe he/she should look elsewhere rather than to decompose in their own cesspool of misery. -
Can't you tell it's so obvious that we are treated with less respect than foreigners?Even though many of us have served NS and have upholded the responsibilities of a citizen.
-
Updated from Reuters.
----------------------------
Singaporean shuts blog after libel threat
1 dy 9 hr 56 min ago
By Geert De Clercq
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - A Singapore student said on Monday he has shut down his blog and apologized unreservedly after a government agency threatened to sue for defamation. Chen Jiahao, a 23-year-old graduate student in the United States, told Reuters he closed down his personal Web site after A*STAR, a Singapore government agency focusing on science and research, threatened legal action for what the agency said were untrue and serious accusations.
International freedom of speech and media advocates criticized the agency's methods.
Chen said he had removed all material from his site and posted an apology on April 26 after receiving e-mails from the agency's chief. He added that the agency told him last week his apology was insincere and that they wanted a new apology.
On Sunday he posted the new apology on his "Caustic Soda" blog, saying "I unreservedly apologize to A*STAR, its Chairman Mr. Philip Yeo, and its executive officers for the distress and embarrassment caused to them."
"They sent me an e-mail with these words," Chen told Reuters on Monday by telephone from the United States, where he studies chemical physics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
An A*STAR spokeswoman said she could not immediately comment on the new apology. The agency told Singapore media on Friday it wanted the student to apologize unreservedly by May 8.
Paris-based Reporters without Borders said the case highlighted the lack of free expression in Singapore, which is among the 20 lowest-scoring countries in the organization's worldwide press freedom index.
"Chen criticized some of A*Star's policies but there was nothing defamatory in what he wrote," Julien Pain, head of Reporters without Borders' Internet freedom desk, told Reuters.
A*STAR said in a statement last week that it recognized the value of a diversity of views and welcomed that in all media. "But the particular public blog had statements which went way beyond fair comment." It did not elaborate.
Bloggers are generally not journalists, but some of the thousands of private online blogs -- short for Web logs -- on the Internet have gained political relevance. The campaign for the May 5 election in Britain saw an explosion of blogs, much like in last year's U.S. presidential election.
The U.S.-based Committee to Protect Journalists said last week it was alarmed that the threat of defamation lawsuits was being used to inhibit criticism of the government in cyberspace, much as it has in Singapore's traditional media.
"We are troubled that the government has raised the spectre of costly legal action to chill commentary on the Internet," Executive Director Ann Cooper was quoted on a CPJ Web site as saying.
Singapore-based politicians as well as international media organizations have paid large amounts of damages in libel cases brought by senior government figures.
Singapore leaders have defended their use of defamation lawsuits, saying that such actions are necessary to safeguard their reputation. -
Phillip yeo said those things about Singapore males? Well then, I think Phillip Yeo is a f ucking c unt. I think he needs to get f ucked up the arse because i think he is a tight arse.
Let it be known that Lwflee challenges him to a duel because Lwflee is a Singaporean Male who feels that his honour has been tarnished!
I demand satisfaction Phillip Yeo Sir!
(Please don't sue) -
Originally posted by lwflee:
Maybe one day he would propose Singapore females do National Service instead.
Phillip yeo said those things about Singapore males?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpt from the Electric New Paper
http://www.tnp.sg/news/story/0,4136,87882-1115567940,00.html:
Philip Yeo on A*Star scholars:
Forget wimps, I prefer women
IN Mr Philip Yeo's book, Singapore boys are whiny and immature.
He said this because all government scholars who broke their scholarship bonds since 1990 have been Singapore males.
Not only that, the occasional postings on the Internet criticising his scholarship programmes were also from Singapore male scholars.
He said: 'I have no bond-breakers among the girls, no bond-breakers among foreign students.
'Maybe I should give more scholarships to non-Singaporeans who are bright, eager and hungry, and then help them get Singapore passports. The rest, I give to the A-level girls at 19 years old.
'I don't want whining Singapore boys. They are not mature even though they have national service and are over 22 years old when they take up undergraduate studies. They give me so much trouble and waste our precious time,' he said.
But behind these strong words is a man who clearly has a soft spot for his scholars.
Despite his busy schedule, including travels abroad 'to chase investment money', he spends a lot of time e-mailing his scholars.
He banters and jokes with them, and hosts lunches and dinners whenever he is in the vicinity of their overseas universities.
He says he has a '4D' list.
But '4D' in this case refers to the group of top A*star scholars who obtain the prefect straight-A scores of 4 in their US university's grade-point average (GPA).
As of last month, 117 of its BSc scholars have obtained their final examinations grades. About 82 per cent, or 96 scholars, have attained a GPA of 3.8 and above. Thirty-six of the 96 even made it to the A*star Chairman's Honours List for achieving the perfect score.
'Of my top scholars, 23 are girls and 13 boys. Four of the girls and four of the boys are non-Singaporeans. As can be seen, the Singapore girls outperform the Singapore boys.'
Mr Yeo also made posters of his '4D list', which he advertised in the newspapers, on the Internet and in various parts of the Biopolis.
He defended criticism from former government scholars that his minimum requirement of 3.8 GPA for overseas scholars is unduly strict. That score requires them to get combined grades of at least an equal mix of A (4.0) and A minus (3.67).
He said: 'The scholarship money is from my research institutes. This is not your Ah Kong's money. So you jolly well make sure you study hard and excel.
'My scholars can do it. Why are you complaining and b itching about 3.8? If you don't like, don't take it!'
When he is not travelling, he spends part of his time reading his scholars' files. 'I know all their backgrounds. I have spoken to scholars who scored below 3.8. Did I turn them away?
'You think I am so cruel? Sometimes people get lower scores because something has gone wrong with a few papers. I understand that.
'But I am not going to lower the standard. How low do you want to go? You think this is limbo rock?' -
No, he would propose abolishing NS since that makes Singapore males whiny and immatured.Originally posted by Tuatau:Maybe one day he would propose Singapore females do National Service instead. -
Originally posted by lotus999:No, he would propose abolishing NS since that makes Singapore males whiny and immatured. The day it happens, all of us will win big at the casino.
-
i can understand why the student concerned is angwee. after reading Mr Yeo's side of the story posted by Tuatau, i can understand some of his rationales too.
i just want to add a few points.
the best male scholars have already been taken by the SAF, Police and perhaps even Temasek, GIC, SIA, Shell, OCBC ... in any case, it's silly to compare the best with the best ... they are all talents no doubt be it 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 or 4.0.
although the concerned male scholars had reservations at the age of 22, they probably made the decision of their lives at the same age as their female counterparts, just after the 'A' levels that is. at such a young age, it's hard for anyone who has always been cacooned in the school environment to know the real world out there and where he should fit in. furthermore, no matter how informed a decision is, there will always be uncertainties that can only be realised upon experience.
furthermore, i wonder how many of the males scholars are overseas scholars and how many of the female scholars are local scholars. doesn't matter whether you're male or female, if you're local, then probably there's not much else better around. but if you're in the US, be it guy or gal, then you have a lot more choices. -
I think some of you should read the 5th reply in this thread (posted by dragg). Then only you will get a better catch of this debate.
-
Originally posted by iveco:
If we could rely on witness statements, many bloggers who have read Chen's blog didn't think Chen was making any false defamatory statements. From the letter written by Chen to CNA journalist Valerie Tan regarding his alleged defamatory statements, he didn't sound like he made any malicious comment to defame A*STAR either. It sounded more like the blog just contained his opinions about the grade requirement system. However, since the blog has been taken down, it is impossible to verify if the contents were indeed defamatory.
I think some of you should read the 5th reply in this thread (posted by dragg). Then only you will get a better catch of this debate.
Anyway, just came across this open letter by Chen Jiahao's friend to Philip Yeo on one of the Singapore blogs. According to the blog site, the open letter was copied to the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), Straits Times, and TODAY as well. For the sake of interested readers, I'm reproducing it without the author's permission, but it is an open letter, anyway, so I hope he wouldn't mind. Apologies to Ng Yong Kuan if he is reading this.
-----cover-----
Dear Mr. Yeo,
Please find attached an open letter to yourself.
In this letter, I express my disappointment at A*Star's handling of the Acidflask saga.
Please regard it as comment and feedback.
This open letter is carbon-copied to the PMO, Straits Times forum, Today and a small number of online journals I consider to be less reactive about the issue.
Yours sincerely,
NG Yong Kuan
-----actual letter-----
To: Mr. Philip Yeo, Chairman A*Star
Date: 5/16/2005 9:30 AM (EDT -0400)
Dear Sir,
In recent weeks, A*Star has threatened legal action against Mr. Chen Jiahao over remarks on his blog that are allegedly defamatory to yourself and A*Star. A result has been obtained: Mr. Chen has apologised and retracted the remarks; but it is the ugliness and ease with which A*Star threatened to sue that is causing much furore on the Internet.
As A*Star and yourself have not specified the allegedly defamatory remarks in question (upon the legal advice you received), I cannot comment on this aspect of the drama.
However, I can comment on the manner in which A*Star handled the matter. I personally believe that A*Star and yourself have acted with integrity in performing necessary and important work for the benefit of Singapore. When A*Star discovered the allegedly defamatory material in Mr. Chen blog, it could have tried to convince Mr. Chen that his remarks were untrue and hence correct his blog, or refuted the remarks in a public forum. Either course of action could have scored A*Star a public relations coup by assuring the world of its integrity, performance and human touch.
Instead, A*Star and yourself as Chairman of A*Star, threatened legal action in order to obtain a retraction and to remove the remarks from the Internet and any other media. This action to limit discourse to A*Star's terms is unsavoury and unbecoming of the public institution A*Star aspires to be.
Mr. Yeo, this heavy-handed approach may have quickly settled the matter to your satisfaction, but it appears to have bought much bad press and ill-feeling in the local internet community. A*Star has placed itself in a bad light, appearing to be quick to pull out the legal stick to silence criticism. Such an image cannot help A*Star attract research talent who challenge assumptions and question critically. In the bigger picture, you have also reinforced the mentality that is is better to play it safe and hide in the crowd, to be the grey man who takes no action so that he draws no attention to himself. Such a mentality will be a millstone around all our necks as we compete internationally in whatever field we choose.
Mr. Yeo, you have been quick and firm in upholding the reputation of A*Star, but the conduct of it may hurt Singapore for years. Substance is important, but so is style.
Yours sincerely,
NG Yong Kuan, Singaporean
-----end-----
Source: "From A Singapore Angle" blog -
Ng Yong Kuan sure has a point. Philip Yeo could have done better and put his PR machine to good use. Unfortunately, he chose to act in a heavy-handed manner typical of a despot. After all the unpleasantries, I will never trust A*Star anymore. Sadly, I doubt the PM office will take this letter seriously.
