PAP moves to counter criticism of party, govt in cyberspace
-
You hit the nail on it's head.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:I find it hard to believe that OM might be one of them...
Or else I would be rather surprised that they are using agents of dubious quality for this.
Then again, I'm basing this on the assumption that they are bothering to properly rebutt any anti-establishment points, as opposed to going the OM road of a rather pitiful and laughable display of pseudointellectualism.
Right on! -
PAP ROCKS ALL U BETTER REMEMBER THAT!!!
-
OM is OM, he's got nothing to do with PAP even though he seems to go along with the PAP views (most, but not all).
-
Haha...next you will be asking how much they are paying meOriginally posted by dragg:OM,
are you one of them?
the above article appeared in today's straits times.
Sorry to disappoint you but no, I am not linked at all to the ruling party. The reason I defend most government policies is because I agree with them, unlike the many here who are against everything the government does.
The PAP will never change the mind of the brainless die-hards who are against them regardless of what they do. But putting the record straight and pointing out the other side of the argument is useful for the many who would otherwise hear a biased opinion.
There are hypocrites aplenty in this forum. Libertarians who claim to espouse freedom of expression are also the ones who criticize the government for not muzzling Thaksin. I strongly disagree with the government's handling of the Thaksin affair, because national interests should come before civil liberties. Yet these leftists haven't any guts to oppose me for denigrating civil liberties and freedom of expression. They talk about how we should be sensitive to the Thais (as I do), but suddenly civil liberties do not matter any longer. Because they are so consumed with hatred and bias against the ruling party, they have suddenly shifted to the right, just for this affair What credibility is there?
To tell you the truth: on the whole, I was more critical of the government than supportive of its policies when I first came to this forum. Reading the biased vitriol of the anti-government postings here have swung me to the other side. These people have spooked me into serious concern as to what might happen if the ruling party loses at the polls to these jokers. The future prosperity of the nation cannot be compromised.
So what if I support most government policies? Surely having a different opinion from the loads of anti-government propaganda I read here is essential in any balanced political discourse? But no, supporters of the Opposition have shown that they are only capable of personal attacks and vulgarities. If they continue along this path, it is not surprising that the ruling party will continue to win at the polls. -
I've always been one to appreciate your contributions to this forum, Mushroom. Not very agreeable at most times, but definitely engaging and in some way constructive.
I disagree with you terming the forumities here 'hypocrites' on the basis that some of their ideas contradict their believe system. I think that instead of exalting yourself upon a moral high ground, you should, like the counter-cyber-insurgency movement consider why people are so pissed off with everything around them. There is a reason I'm certain and I think many of them just do not except the excuse that this is how life is suppose to be. I'm certain that this government could do more to address several isues that people have brought up here, not that all are credible and need for redress. So do me a favor Oxford Mushroom, next time you respond to a fellow forumite, try to put urself in his shoes, not everyone is perched upon high like you and your contemporaries.
If we all could just see beyond status, but that was not how this world was constructed, I guess we can only try to make it better. -
"One activist who is involved said that when posting comments on online forums and the feedback boxes of blogs, he does not identify himself as a PAP member.
He tracks popular blogs and forums to 'see if there is anything we can clarify' on hot-button topics such as the impending hike in the Goods and Services Tax."
OM was so supportive of the GST increase, when no sane Singaporean was supportive of it.
Even if OM is one, do you think he would reveal.
Hehehe
He'd rather not known to be associated with PAP, so that others will think that he provides an unbias opinion about policies.
Hey OM! You still have not rebutted my post on medical cost and doctors from India to reduce cost. Ran out of websites to cut and paste; or you just busy cleaning wc? -
People with virtue must speak out; People who speak are not all virtuous-confucius
They raised thier own gain and now they are raising the burden of the people. You call this care for people, or care for yourselves?
What we need in government are virtuous people not cunning people. -
if they want people to listen to their explanation why dont they make themselves known?
-
Our leaders have over-emphasised on the academic talents so much for past forty years that they have discriminated against many practical talents in all aspects of nation building.
well said. i am one of those practical talents victims who use to work in defence ministries. bu t because i am not a scholar. i was not given a chance to perform. and many of my idea are rebuff or simply ignore.
anyway, i am glad i left the ministries in disappointment and now doing quite well privately.
i bet if do strict audit in many ministries, singaporean will realise, there are more bad managers than good one in all stats board, ministries. but the bad one get promoted faster than the good one. not all but most of the times.
SCHOLars my feet!!! -
A government without virtue will eventually lose the authority, credibility and respect of the people. Without such respect, the government will not be supported even though its leaders succeed in passing many laws, win votes due to ignorance of people or through tinkering with election system like the GRC, or win many defamation cases in their courts.Originally posted by (human):People with virtue must speak out; People who speak are not all virtuous-confucius
They raised thier own gain and now they are raising the burden of the people. You call this care for people, or care for yourselves?
What we need in government are virtuous people not cunning people.
The lack of virtue can be seen in the following policies and actions:-
(1) Recommend and vote for their own salary jumps and bonuses using artful argument and fallacious salary comparison tables (as seen in NKF)
(2) Interfering with feedbacks of citizens by prohibiting the media from publishing certain letters and removing newspaper ceos for certain articles published about sensitive incidents
(3) Running a government based on taxing and recovering all costs from citizens thereby allowing taxes to be accumulated to glorify their own achievements.
(4) Passing laws and using power of government not for the benefit of the people but only their own purposes e.g. disallowing elected ex-president Ong Teng Cheong to uncover the hidden surpluses and assets in various statutory boards and GLCs, to bring about greater accountability and transparency in investments by GIC and Temasek overseas etc, hoarding surpluses, and continuing to raise taxes including dubious double-charge on lands already owned by citizens in sale of public housing, increase taxes and approving all kinds of fee increases, and pointing to reserves and surpluses and say that these are their success and pay themselves the highest salaries and bonuses, recover all possible costs through corporatisation thereby driving up the costs of living and causing job losses by the thousands.
We invite minister Lui Tuck Yew to correct our views on the above-stated lack of virtue so that we will change our opinions about the government if we are wrong. -
Actually Minister Lui Tuck Yew might be trying to respond to my several private emails to PM, MM and himself to invite forumers to take part in internal debates on major government policies with the people.
But for some reasons, after PM Lee and Minister Vivian Balakrishnan have invited people with non-conformist views on mainstream or conventional policies, my self-invitation was not accepted. So it is not true that government intends to engage the people in robust debates on policies.
If minister Lui wants to do so sincerely, we should all welcome him to reply to our posts here personally and not use pseudonyms to hide identity.
another very well said post!! i wonder why ppl like yourself are not invited in many TV feedback shows. and all the guest they invited seem like ppl who are pro govt or PAP pet poodle(like Mr yong of NKF). these guest are not engaging the minister hard question enough. we singaporean has enough of the SOP answer from the minister and PM. robert teh, if you wish to start any petition to be invited in the next talk show, i will def. be the one who will sign it either online or personally!!. -
Originally posted by reyes:
I am still keeping my self-invitation (to take part in internal debates of pap on major government policies) open for acceptance. The last time I heard about this self-invitation is that I need to be accepted by the mp (Minister Lui) through a period of pupilage as a pap member. My reply is: as my intention is to offer my service to take part in such debates, so their normal procedures relating to pap members should be waived. There is no change of mind on their part so I am still not admitted to such debate forums. From here we all could conclude that PM Lee is not serious in robust debates with non-conformist activists.
[b]Actually Minister Lui Tuck Yew might be trying to respond to my several private emails to PM, MM and himself to invite forumers to take part in internal debates on major government policies with the people.
But for some reasons, after PM Lee and Minister Vivian Balakrishnan have invited people with non-conformist views on mainstream or conventional policies, my self-invitation was not accepted. So it is not true that government intends to engage the people in robust debates on policies.
If minister Lui wants to do so sincerely, we should all welcome him to reply to our posts here personally and not use pseudonyms to hide identity.
another very well said post!! i wonder why ppl like yourself are not invited in many TV feedback shows. and all the guest they invited seem like ppl who are pro govt or PAP pet poodle(like Mr yong of NKF). these guest are not engaging the minister hard question enough. we singaporean has enough of the SOP answer from the minister and PM. robert teh, if you wish to start any petition to be invited in the next talk show, i will def. be the one who will sign it either online or personally!!.
[/b] -
OM ,who with a right frame of mind will accept GST increase.
to help the poor? who will believe that SH&*. the amount would make all poor ppl in singapore get additional $100K++ every year.
the more i read about the NKF saga, i tends to find it similar it to our singapore govt system. on the outside it seem like perfectly run system but on the inside, i begins to seem something fishy inside the can.
frankly whether you are from the PAP "SPY agent" in the forums dont bother me. it motivates use more to post more so that you can work for us and made feedback to RDM LUI TECK YEW.
reservist 1st sergeant REYES from #^%^*&^(*. -
I think maybe some of these people get so bored regurgitatiing pro government policies over the net (which ultimately have no effect on the netizens) that they resort to creating clones to post funny perverted threads in Bar.
Maybe.
Just maybe.
-
They are scared, especially when they're doing a piss poor job of what they're suppose to be doing.Originally posted by dragg:if they want people to listen to their explanation why dont they make themselves known? -
(Re-posted from youngpap site for information}
Hi Friedquest,
Your suggestion to increase penalty on public officers who engage in wrong doings, as found in the NKF case, can be incorporated in the latest amendments to the penal codes.
It appears that under the proposed amendments, anyone who punches a MP even if he may be extremely provoked by some wrong policies like double-charging by HDB on lands in the sale of public housing or some other injustices could now be jailed up to 20 years.
I would recommend that any MPs, Chairmen, Directors sitting on various audit committee have the potential to commit great crimes affecting thousands as compared with this citizen who lost his cool and punches his MP.
I would recommend that when any of our MPs or public officers sit on various boards like GIC or Temasek when found engaged in deals and contracts which benefitted themselves even through proxies like wives should be liable to be jailed double to 40 years. In China such public officers might be executed by a firing squat. -
To balance of what? Balance for them to become richer? farkOriginally posted by oxford mushroom:Haha...next you will be asking how much they are paying me
Sorry to disappoint you but no, I am not linked at all to the ruling party. The reason I defend most government policies is because I agree with them, unlike the many here who are against everything the government does.
The PAP will never change the mind of the brainless die-hards who are against them regardless of what they do. But putting the record straight and pointing out the other side of the argument is useful for the many who would otherwise hear a biased opinion.
There are hypocrites aplenty in this forum. Libertarians who claim to espouse freedom of expression are also the ones who criticize the government for not muzzling Thaksin. I strongly disagree with the government's handling of the Thaksin affair, because national interests should come before civil liberties. Yet these leftists haven't any guts to oppose me for denigrating civil liberties and freedom of expression. They talk about how we should be sensitive to the Thais (as I do), but suddenly civil liberties do not matter any longer. Because they are so consumed with hatred and bias against the ruling party, they have suddenly shifted to the right, just for this affair What credibility is there?
To tell you the truth: on the whole, I was more critical of the government than supportive of its policies when I first came to this forum. Reading the biased vitriol of the anti-government postings here have swung me to the other side. These people have spooked me into serious concern as to what might happen if the ruling party loses at the polls to these jokers. The future prosperity of the nation cannot be compromised.
So what if I support most government policies? Surely having a different opinion from the loads of anti-government propaganda I read here is essential in any balanced political discourse? But no, supporters of the Opposition have shown that they are only capable of personal attacks and vulgarities. If they continue along this path, it is not surprising that the ruling party will continue to win at the polls. -
I agree that with people like OM, it gives you view of the other side of the story. Often one becomes blind when one is one the "opposition mode" on whatever the government says.
However, much cannot be commented on what they havr been saying or doing much less the crappiest story about helping the poor with the recent moves -
Seems like quite an one-sided affair aimed at one forumer.
-
Grrrr, if you're not with us, you're against us!!!Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Seems like quite an one-sided affair aimed at one forumer. 
-
Got such thing?Originally posted by ditzy:Grrrr, if you're not with us, you're against us!!! -
You can't blame them because OM stands strongly, many times, too strongly, on one side of the fence.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Seems like quite an one-sided affair aimed at one forumer. -
yeah... DIE!!!Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Got such thing? -
"counter insurgency" - ring a bell?Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Got such thing? -
While true, there's no need for this issue to go to quite a personal level.Originally posted by LazerLordz:You can't blame them because OM stands strongly, many times, too strongly, on one side of the fence.
The PAP has already made it their business to track. At least, they have some sense not to rebut every post made to make it seems like they want to control the cyberspace.
That's what I'm seeing as a netizen, hopefully this will stay, as one-sided affairs are never good to start with, with us being the live specimens under the current government.
If we continue this way, that makes us no better than the PAP.