PAP cause Mr Brown to lose his job (income) as columnist?
-
I don't think he will give you a YES or NO answer.Originally posted by Applecombi:since you claim you are neutral, then answer this question:
did cost of living increase after the most recent general election?
just a simple YES or NO will do.
My guess is, he will say increase a little, but increases is to help investments and the poor.
-
I wonder if he even knows how to say either.Originally posted by Applecombi:since you claim you are neutral, then answer this question:
did cost of living increase after the most recent general election?
just a simple YES or NO will do.
-
Yes, cost of living has always been increasing. Thirty years ago noodle with fishcake in school canteen cost only 30 cents. Syrup drink 10 cents only.Originally posted by Applecombi:since you claim you are neutral, then answer this question:
did cost of living increase after the most recent general election?
just a simple YES or NO will do.
What else? -
so where is the evidence that brown was fired for what he wrote? still no one dare to answer?
-
So if cost of living did INCREASE over the years, then the article written by mr brown is TRUE.Originally posted by Mat Toro:Yes, cost of living has always been increasing. Thirty years ago noodle with fishcake in school canteen cost only 30 cents. Syrup drink 10 cents only.
What else?
So why must PM come out to say that he's misleading the public, and not providing a factual picture in a mainstream newspaper? -
cost is always increasing, not only after election. Isn't brown misleading the public then?
What exactly did brown wrote and what exactly was PMs charge about him? Can you show me articles? Lets examine them together. -
LOL, in that case are you implying the Singaporean is screwed?Originally posted by Mat Toro:cost is always increasing, not only after election. Isn't brown misleading the public then?
Since you are too lazy to find the articles, let me post them for youAnalyzing Mr Brown's original article
Mr Brown wrote an article in Today newspaper, entitled 'Singaporeans are fed, up with progress!' on 3rd July 2006, which triggered a response from the Ministry of Information, Communication & the Arts (MICA) of Singapore.
The response from MICA has been thoroughly deconstructed by many pseudonymous bloggers as well as anonymous/pseudonymous blog-readers. Many argued that the most troubling conclusions from this episode are the following: (a) that citizens cannot criticize Singapore in any way (including the humorous way), (b) that if citizens do want to criticize, then they must offer solutions, and (c) if citizens criticize publicly, then they must be prepared for nothing less than the swiftest and harshest response. Make no mistake: this is Singapore, and we are definitely a 'swift-response' city and the 'hub of harsh replies'!
Thanks to MICA's response which triggered an uproar in cyberspace, I became curious and popped over to Mr Brown's blog just to see what the fuss was all about. I read MICA's response first, and by the end of it I was almost convinced that Mr Brown is an anti-Singapore person who is highly dangerous and who can never see the positive aspects of government policies. Then I read Mr Brown's original article, just to see what are some of the terrible things he wrote, and I reached the following conclusions....
(1) MICA should not be angry with Mr Brown, because Mr Brown did say that the Progress Package which should have been used to 'cope with the rising costs' ends up being used by some Singaporeans for the purchase of unimportant consumer goods. Hence, 'too bad for them then', says Mr Brown.
(2) Mr Brown did not criticize Singapore's IT programmes; he was simply arguing that 'outsourcing' of projects to private companies comes with an inevitable price. He did say that he 'understands the cost of building these roads is high, and the government is relooking the financing of these big road projects'.
(3) Mr Brown's real criticism is probably his suggestion that despite the glittering and impressive symbols of progress, these symbols themselves come with a price, thus neutralizing the progressive effects of the policies put in place by the well-intentioned government. He did not say that the government has bad intentions. Neither did he say that the policies were ineffective. He was simply saying that you need money to pay for all these shiny, cool, and efficient technological artefacts - which is true!
(4) Regarding means-testing, Mr Brown wrote, 'we do know many families who cannot [afford it]....but don't worry. Most of you don't have this problem. Your normal kids can go to regular school for very low fees, and I am sure they will not introduce means testing for your cases.' Mr Brown is pointing out - in a non-partisan manner - the fact that many families cannot afford it, which is a truism in any society! (Which society doesn't have poor families?) He did not say that the government will neglect the needs of these poor families or will fail to exercise flexible discretion in borderline cases. He is simply saying that while price increases are not necessarily nice, as long as he can still afford it, he can't complain because the poorer families are worse off than him.
(5) Next, Mr Brown, through his article, merely expressed a sincere hope that children with special needs can get 'a little more therapy to help them walk and talk', and 'if the country does really well,...a little more subsidy'. What's wrong with a citizen writing this to express a hope? Can't citizens have hopes?
(6) And finally, the pseudonym 'Mr Brown' is used by Mr Lee Kin Mun; even Heavenly Sword who usually stays in the mountain practising his kungfu knows this...
The response from MICA, nonetheless, did not surprise me. (You mean you're surprised?) I can see where it's coming from, and I respectfully acknowledge what it's saying. But the purpose of this short post has been to argue that MICA's interpretation of Mr Brown's original article is wrong, hence triggering an overly harsh reply to an actually-innocent Singaporean. -
-
Mainstream media has role in ensuring quality of debate: Dr Balakrishnan
Singapore's mainstream media has a crucial role in ensuring the quality and standard of discourse and national debate, says Second Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan.
Our media is scored 140 out of 167 for press freedom index. After they axe Mr. Brown we can be assured that they will get a higher improved score next time perhaps 150 out of 167. It has to ensure high standard of discourse and national debate not we cannot allow ordinary lay person like Mr. Brown without a masters degree speaking emotionally to join this discourse - it has to be driven by logic.
And he says as long as everybody understood their respective roles and respected each other, Singaporeans can have a useful dialogue going forward.
Mr. Brown has no respect and does not understand his role which is to explain the price hikes in a humorous manner. That is a problem. PAP leaders have always respected everyone's views. Just take the Worker's Party Manifesto, the PAP respectfully called it a timebomb and poison. As long as it is done in a respectful manner, everyone can express their view without fear of bankruptcy or harsh actions.
Dr Balakrishnan made these remarks when asked to comment on reactions by the foreign media to a recent decision by MediaCorp's TODAY newspaper to stop publishing a column by "Mr Brown" who was one of its regular columnists.
A recent article by the columnist about the cost of living in Singapore had drawn a sharp rebuttal from a government spokesperson.
Dr Balakrishnan said: "I am not at all concerned at all about what the foreign media thinks. We are not here to fulfil their agenda. Let me put it to you this way. We are all entitled to express our opinions.
"But we also have to be accountable for our opinions and to be prepared from time to time to stand by them or be called to answer them and from time to time to be rebutted. So I see this as part and parcel of the consistent position which the government and people of Singapore have taken."
Yes the PAP has been very consistent so that Singaporeans don't become confused with alternatives. All the price increases are accountable. Higher oil prices can be used to account for all the increases. Some of you are asking if the price increase serve to preserve the profit margins of companies some of them linked to the govt.....now that is not consistent so it is not allowed to be debated. Anyway that is why Mr. Brown is not just rebutted he was suspended because he failed to be consistent as part of the complete parcel.
He added that what is important for Singaporeans, particularly on serious issues, is to have an honest constructive debate with no extraneous agendas involved.
Yes, Mr. Brown is dishonest when he expressed frustration with price increases and lack of help for his autistic daughter. Seriously speaking, his feelings and opinions are just dishonest and unconstructive.
Dr Balakrishnan said: "If you feel there is a problem with cost of living, say so, let's collectively explore solutions. But don't in the name of humour distort or aggravate on an emotional level. That sort of discourse does not generate solutions. It generates more heat than light.
See how despicable Mr. Brown has become HE HAS DISTORTED OUR EMOTIONS. Before he wrote that article all of us were very happy with the price increases thinking it is good for us, after reading his article all of us are now angry. See how much harm Mr. Brown has caused!! He has played with our emotions to make us unhappy.
"So we should put this in its proper context. If someone says something which we disagree with, we will say so. If someone says something which is unhelpful we have a right to say it is unhelpful. We have a right to remind everyone that at the end of the day, this is not a fight.
There is no fight. Mr Brown is silenced. Thank goodness.
"We are in search of solutions and by working together and by engaging in an honest constructive dialogue we can do so and we want our newspapers to be a part of that process and also to be aware that, the mainstream media in particular. You are not an internet chat room." - CNA/ch
We are all part of this inclusive process and part of a collective solution UNTIL we use humor to bring about unhappiness and distort the consistent position of the govt. It is a happy process and no unhappiness shall be allowed to poison this process. The goal of the process is to make Singaporeans happy, totally convinced and satisfied that the price increases are inevitable. Mr Brown is clearly not part of this process and thus have to be eliminated. -
The Original Article:
S'poreans are fed, up with progress!
THINGS are certainly looking up for Singapore again. Up, up, and away.
Household incomes are up, I read. Sure, the bottom third of our country is actually seeing their incomes (or as one newspaper called it, "wages") shrink, but the rest of us purportedly are making more money.
Okay, if you say so.
As sure as Superman Returns, our cost of living is also on the up. Except we are not able to leap over high costs in a single bound.
Cost of watching World Cup is up. Price of electricity is up. Comfort's taxi fares are going up. Oh, sorry, it was called "being revised". Even the prata man at my coffeeshop just raised the price of his prata by 10 cents. He was also revising his prata prices.
So Singaporeans need to try to "up" their incomes, I am sure, in the light of our rising costs. Have you upped yours?
We are very thankful for the timing of all this good news, of course. Just after the elections, for instance. By that I mean that getting the important event out of the way means we can now concentrate on trying to pay our bills.
It would have been too taxing on the brain if those price increases were announced during the election period, thereby affecting our ability to choose wisely.
The other reason I am glad with the timing of the cost of living increases and wages going down, is that we can now deploy our Progress Package to pay for some of these bills.
Wait, what? You spent it all on that fancy pair of shoes on the day you saw your money in your account? Too bad for you then.
As I break into my Progress Package reserves to see if it is enough to pay the bills, I feel an overwhelming sense of progress. I feel like I am really staying together with my fellow Singaporeans and moving forward.
There is even talk of future roads like underground expressways being outsourced to private sector companies to build, so that they, in turn, levy a toll on those of us who use these roads.
I understand the cost of building these roads is high, and the Government is relooking the financing of these big road projects.
Silly me, I thought my road tax and COE was enough to pay for public roads.
Maybe we can start financing all kinds of expensive projects this way in future. We could build upgraded lifts for older HDB blocks, and charge tolls on a per use basis.
You walk into your new lift on the first floor, and the scanner reads the contactless cashcard chip embedded in your forehead. This chip would be part of the recently-announced Intelligent Nation 2015 plan, you know, that initiative to make us a smart nation?
So you, the smart contactless-cashcard-chip-enhanced Singaporean would go into your lift, and when you get off at your floor, the lift would deduct the toll from your chip, and you would hear a beep.
The higher you live, the more expensive the lift toll.
Now you know why I started climbing stairs for exercise, as I mentioned in my last column. I plan to prepare for that day when I have to pay to use my lift. God help you if some kid presses all the lift buttons in the lift, as kids are wont to do. You will be beeping all the way to your flat.
The same chip could be used to pay for supermarket items. You just carry your bags of rice and groceries past the cashierless cashier counter, and the total will be deducted from your contactless cashcard automatically.
You will not even know you just got poorer. And if your contactless cashcard runs out of funds (making it a contactless CASHLESS cashcard), you just cannot use paid services.
The door of the lift won't close, the bus won't stop for you, taxis will automatically display "On Call" when their chip scanners detect you're broke.
Sure, paying bills that only seem to go up is painful, but by Jove, we are going to make sure it is at least convenient.
No more opening your wallet and fiddling with dirty notes and coins. Just stand there and hear your income beeped away. No fuss, no muss! I cannot wait to be a Smart e-Singaporean.
I also found out recently that my first-born daughter's special school fees were going up. This is because of this thing called "Means Testing", where they test your means, then if you are not poor enough, you lose some or all of the subsidy you've been getting for your special child's therapy.
I think I am looking at about a $100 increase, which is a more than a 100 per cent increase, but who's counting, right? We can afford it, but we do know many families who cannot, even those that are making more money than we are, on paper.
But don't worry. Most of you don't have this problem. Your normal kids can go to regular school for very low fees, and I am sure they will not introduce means testing for your cases.
We need your gifted and talented kids to help our country do well economically, so that our kids with special needs can get a little more therapy to help them to walk and talk. And hey, maybe if the country does really well, the special-needs kids will get a little more subsidy.
Like I said, progress.
High-definition televisions, a high-speed broadband wireless network, underground expressways, and contactless cashcard system — all our signs of progress.
I am happy for progress, of course but I would be just as happy to make ends meet and to see my autistic first-born grow up able to talk and fend for herself in this society when I am gone.
That is something my wife and I will pay all we can pay to see in our lifetimes.
mr brown is the accidental author of a popular website that has been documenting the dysfunctional side of Singapore life since 1997. He enjoys having yet another cashcard, in addition to his un-contactless one and the ez-link one to add to his wallet. -
i don't see anything wrong with the article. I also do not see why it led to brown being fired.
-
Strictly speaking, Mr Brown was not a columnist but a blogger. The humour columns were extracted directly from his blog.
Now Today onlyh left Neil Humphreys. But he seldom writes for them these days. -
You didn't read the response of Dr Balakrishnan to it? You contradict his view directly by saying you seeing nothing wrong with it.Originally posted by Mat Toro:i don't see anything wrong with the article. I also do not see why it led to brown being fired. -
Also don't forget about the response from the MICA:
Letter from K BHAVANI
Press Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts
Your mr brown column, "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" (June 30) poured sarcasm on many issues, including the recent General Household Survey, price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares, our IT plans, the Progress Package and means testing for special school fees.
The results of the General Household Survey were only available after the General Election. But similar data from the Household Expenditure Survey had been published last year before the election.
There was no reason to suppress the information. It confirmed what we had told Singaporeans all along, that globalisation would stretch out incomes.
mr brown must also know that price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares are the inevitable result of higher oil prices.
These were precisely the reasons for the Progress Package — to help lower income Singaporeans cope with higher costs of living.
Our IT plans are critical to Singapore's competitive position and will improve the job chances of individual Singaporeans. It is wrong of mr brown to make light of them.
As for means testing for special school fees, we understand mr brown's disappointment as the father of an autistic child. However, with means testing, we can devote more resources to families who need more help.
mr brown's views on all these issues distort the truth. They are polemics dressed up as analysis, blaming the Government for all that he is unhappy with. He offers no alternatives or solutions. His piece is calculated to encourage cynicism and despondency, which can only make things worse, not better, for those he professes to sympathise with.
mr brown is entitled to his views. But opinions which are widely circulated in a regular column in a serious newspaper should meet higher standards. Instead of a diatribe mr brown should offer constructive criticism and alternatives. And he should come out from behind his pseudonym to defend his views openly.
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics. -
And some responses from others:
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the GovernmentÂ’s standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.
-Courtesy of K. Bhavani, from the Ministry of Communication and the Arts, on the mrbrown debacle.
*****************************************************************************************
Thank GOD for MICA for outlining the rules of the roles all of us are supposed to play. Phew, I was beginning to think that yÂ’know, my views and opinions as a normal human being were permissible, because of *gasp* inalienable rights to express myself and contribute to the great debate of life. Now, thanks to clear guidelines outlined by the thoughtful thought police, I know my place.
MICA’s statement is confusing, or maybe, too blatantly clear that it shocks the reason out of me. If someone is “no longer a constructive critic” because he is using the mass media to undermine the Government’s (Singapore and our famous capital “G” for government because, apparently, ours has a life of its own) standing with the electorate, than is a constructive critic supposed to be someone who serves the Government?
Funny, cos i had the impressions critics were supposed to criticise, and to ask difficult questions and not to SERVE anyone in particular, and most particularly not the gahmen.
We forget that journalists in the National Mouthpiece are famously non-partisan, we forget that they write columns like that talk about how the “opposition is no longer relevant in Singapore”. We forget that journalists, columnists and editors from the National Mouthpiece write the Powers-That-Be’s memoirs, their commemorative books, and their biographies. How come noone checks THEM for “non-partisanship?
K. Bhavani also writes:
“Mr brown’s views on all these issues distort the truth. They are polemics dressed up as analysis, blaming the Government for all that he is unhappy with. He offers no alternatives or solutions. His piece is calculated to encourage cynicism and despondency, which can only make things worse, not better, for those he professes to sympathise with.”
What is the truth, really? Where do I apply for a licence to disseminate the truth? Who decides what it is and when it gets to be heard?
And when did asking your government to be accountable become such a sin? I wonder, if MICA trawls taxi cabs and finds cabbies complaining about the gahmen, will they censor cabbies too? I had no idea that political discourse was confined to the realm of the appointed, to the realm of the approved, the realm of “spokesperson” handpicked by the right people with the right views?
But my grouses aside, I think MICA has seriously screwed itself on this one. ItÂ’s practically asking for the entire Singapore blogosphere to slime it, and itÂ’s not scaring the bejeezus out of anyone. If anything, the ministry looks more draconian and less credible to anyone with any grey matter with functional synapses.
Rebuking the blogosphereÂ’s most respected and most beloved contributer harshly and without considering the value of his comment has set the ministry back by many many years in winning the hearts of many Singaporeans who already think of it as a toothless arm of the gahmen. -
I don't agree with balakrishnan on this issue but i also do not see how brown was fired over it. He could well be fired over other things.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:You didn't read the response of Dr Balakrishnan to it? You contradict his view directly by saying you seeing nothing wrong with it. -
We have no interest whatsoever regarding your opinions on the matter.Originally posted by Mat Toro:I don't agree with balakrishnan on this issue but i also do not see how brown was fired over it. He could well be fired over other things.
Thank you. -
We will never know for the simple reason that if indeed he was fired for this article, the real reason for his firing will be kept quiet.Originally posted by Mat Toro:I don't agree with balakrishnan on this issue but i also do not see how brown was fired over it. He could well be fired over other things.
But I work in the media industry and understand how it works- if you recieve offical disapproval (like from the MICA in Mr. Brown's case), you are already a poision ball and and kiss bye bye to any promotion or even expect to get dropped. Getting public censure from the government is a big no-no. It is one of those unwritten rules.
Given Mr. Brown's article got such a harsh response from the MICA, which accused him of distorting the truth, being a partisan player in politics and leading Singaporeans into depressed and cynical, I am not surprised if Mr. Brown suddenly looked extremely unattractive to his employers.
In the end it is up to the individual to believe, but Mr. Brown losing his job over the offical response to this article is not out of the character of how our local media industry works, and indeed there is sufficent reason to believe so given the uncanny timing of his suddenly-terminated contract.
But if you need to know, Mr. Brown is certainly on the govt. watchlist. A flash mob that assembled in support of Mr. Brown was intercepted by the police. -
And more importantly, there were no satements from Today contradicting the idea that was in everybody's mind that Mr. Brown was suspended for his article, which they would have gladly released had that been the case.
In fact, our media even carried articles on the issue which explictly refer to Mr. Brown's article and the the suspension of his work as a consequence of it, as well as why it was justified- simply put they said that such partisan views had no place in our mainstream media:mr brown opens door to media debate
By Li Xueying
How now, mr brown?
Two weeks after his satirical column appeared in the Today newspaper on June 30, earning the wrath of the Government and a suspension of the said column, full-time writer and blogger mr brown appears to have recovered from the affair.
....
Blogger bulletin Tomorrow.sg ran an online poll. In it, 76 per cent of the 293 Netizens who responded thought the Government "over-sensitive" in its response. Twenty per cent were indifferent, and 4 per cent felt mr brown's column was irresponsible.
In it, Mr Lee had criticised the rising cost of living and noted that increases in taxi fares and electricity tariffs had come after the General Election and at a time when a government survey showed a widening income gap.
The Government also said it would not have taken heed if the column had appeared in his blog, but it expected different standards in a mainstream paper.Thursday, July 06, 2006
Regarding TODAY
Some of you have been asking, so here goes.
I have been informed that TODAY has suspended my column.
It has been a trying few days for me, my family, my mum and my friends. Thank you all for your emails, letters, calls, SMSes, blogs and comments, I don't know what to say.
Thanks. -
And don't forget a piece that appeared in our flagship Straits Times, talking about Mr. Brown's article and the consquence of his column getting suspended because of it.
If you think that there's nothing wrong with Mr. Brown, then your views apparently contradict that of our government.Straits Times
Friday, July 7, 2006
The Today newspaper has suspended a regular column by a well-known blogger known as mr brown, after the Government criticised his latest piece about the high cost of living here.
The suspension of the weekly column takes effect today, said the freesheet's editor-in-chief Mano Sabnani.
"It is the decision of the editors of Today. That is all I have to say," he said in an e-mail reply to The Straits Times yesterday, four days after the paper published the Government's rebuttal on the column.
The columnist's real name is Mr Lee Kin Mun, a 36-year-old full-time writer.
In his column last Friday, titled "Singaporeans are fed, up with progress," he commented that increases in taxi fare and electricity tariffs had come after the polls and at a time when a government survey showed a widening income gap.
The Government issued a strong response, which Today published on Monday.
Ms K. Bhavani, press secretary to the Minister of Information, Communications and the Arts (Mica), said Mr Brown's views "distort the truth" and offered no solutions.
"His piece is calculated to encourage cynicism and despondency, which can only make things worse, not better, for those he professes to sympathise with," she said.
Ms Bhavani added that opinions widely circulated in a regular column in a serious newspaper should meet higher standards.
Her parting words: "It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government.
"If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics."
Mr Lee announced the column's suspension on his own blog, called mrbrown, yesterday morning. The father of three said it has been a "trying few days" for him and his family.
When contacted, he declined to say more.
But news of the suspension stirred the local blogging community and Mr Lee received more than 400 responses on his site by last night, most of which were critical of Today's decision.
Mr Lee became particularly well-known for producing satirical podcasts during the May 6 General Election. Most notable was his parody of the James Gomez episode with a bak chor mee (minced pork noodle) seller berating a customer.
Political observers such as Mr Tan Tarn How, senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, did not support Today's decision to suspend the column.
"If you believe that pluralism is good, this is an unfortunate case of mass media censorship, or self-censorship," he said.
He believed it was "probably intended" by the Government. Otherwise, it would not have attacked the columnist.
Media academic Cherian George said the Government statement is drawing a clear line between alternative niche media and mainstream media.
This is because newspapers have been trying to up their hip quotient by co-opting aspects of online culture, including celebrity bloggers.
"Just because it is tolerated online does not mean it is acceptable to give the same individual the same status in a more public platform," he said.
MP Penny Low, who is expected to be the new chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Mica, said that anyone can express his views online or offline, but freedom comes with responsibility.
"Obviously, anyone -- Government, media or any individual -- can offer their counter views or supporting views. And, it is for the concerned party to decide on what they want to do with the view or situation."
Date Posted: 7/7/2006 -
The above article ends the debate effectively. -
Her parting words: "It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government.
I find this particularly ironic. The Straits Times not championing issues that paint the PAP in a favorable light?
"If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics."
WHAT A JOKE. -
There was never any debate to begin with, just that somebody decided to dispute facts that both sides of the issue agree on for some reason known only to himself.Originally posted by bigmouthjoe:
The above article ends the debate effectively.
It's as if somebody went into an argument about who was right or wrong in World War 2 claiming that World War 2 never happened at all.
The question of if Mr. Brown lost his job because of the article was never in question, even the Straits Times confirmed that it was a consequence of what he wrote, the main debate was over if his sacking was justified to begin with. -
Old news. Move forward people.
-
So erm, what's all this talk from Mat Toro about there being no proof that Mr. Brown lost his job as the result of his article? And that it was all unrelated when the whole debate held by the Singaporean netizens akready knew that was the case.
As I said, it's so bizzare it's funny. Like a dude barging into a debate about WW2 to claim that WW2 never happened.
The irony is that it does not even take 5 minutes to find the articles on the web.