Some TOC editors are convinced that LKY is the badass who took all the credit of building Singapore. TOC editors don’t read Lee’s memoirs, books or interviews because they are convinced that Lee twisted history for political gains.
2
Before the public get carried away by Roy Ngerng’s act of apologising to PM Lee three times in court yesterday, we should recap some key moments. In May last year, Roy Ngerng retracted defamatory contents he posted and issued an apology to PM Lee. But the public has forgotten that Roy Ngerng also informed the media to tell them other ways to access the removed contents in a attempt to raise awareness of his self-induced plight. That act showed Roy Ngerng was insincere in his public apology. Hence, the public should not be taken in by Roy Ngerng publicity stunt of apologising to PM Lee three times in court yesterday.
To deal with the lawsuit, Roy Ngerng sought funds last year from netizens who thought they are looking at a handsome young man who could rescue their CPF. More than $100,000 have been raised but the monies were used for his overseas trips to Scandivanian countries and United Kingdom.
To Singaporeans’ disappointment, Roy Ngerng visited Reporter without Borders, gave talks in international forums, and even met up with NS defaulter Tan Wah Piow to seek legal opinion.
Prior to meeting Tan, Roy Ngerng was actively learning from Leong Sze Hian, a statistician whose educational qualifications were doubted. What was the outcome of learning from Leong? Roy produced more confusing graphs even my qualified accountant friend can’t make any sense of.
But looking at the sinkhole Roy Ngerng is in now, I wonder what form of advice Roy Ngerng has received from Tan Wah Piow? Remember it was Tan who first advocated “Virtual Movement for Democracy in Cyberspace” by seeking more “guerrilla-type bloggers and cyber-warriors” to challenge the status quo which would erode the support towards PAP [1]. Then we saw Roy Ngerng writing for TRS, and getting himself into more limelight by hiring and firing of his legal counsels, but yet applied through the courts to admit a Queen’s Counsel to defend his case? All his actions got the attention of news-starved competitive international media that are more than eager to tell the world that Singapore adores Kim Jong Un and wear down Singapore’s image.
Roy Ngerng is trying to milk the limelight for as long as possible to set himself as an example to tell Singaporeans that this country is undemocratic, and this country is a shit hole; and only by voting out the oppressive PAP can this country be saved.
What do you think? Are Singaporeans that naive? Maybe yes, you know. since nobody asked about the $100,000 worth of donations. LOL
[1] The real reason behind the Internet Crackdown by Tan Wah Piow,
Auntie Lina Chiam, Uncle Chiam See Tong, despite your age and experience in politics, both of you are poor judges of character.
Years ago, Uncle Chiam inducted Chee Soon Juan into SDP which you’ve founded. Singaporeans know what happened after.
Auntie Chiam once said Alex Tan was “like his godson” after he joined SPP. What happened to Alex Tan? He played a major role in TRS and ran off to Australia but still keen to stir shit in Singapore. Did you, as a godmother to Alex Tan, stopped him? No. You didn’t. Why are you endorsing your godson?
In 2015, co-founder of TOC, Remy Choo Zheng Xi was seen involved in SPP’s walkabouts.
Uncle Chiam, good luck to your position of Secretary-General because Remy is eyeing that position. Are you oblivious to it? You have no power to stop it. Your SPP is the shortcut for his political stardom.
Your party is the weakest link in opposition politics. Due to your age, your naive wife, and your poor judgement of character in those you have endorsed so far will ensure the destruction of your party.
Since the demise of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, opposition supporters and Alternative SiteS such as TOC published articles to doubt Mr Lee’s dedication to Singapore, and used 21st century western values to question his actions. Why is there a need for TOC to be so pro-west? Why didn’t TOC credit the unique Singapore values that made Singapore so successful today?
Presentism — “Evaluating past events and people by present-day values; the application of current ideals and moral standards to interpret historical figures and their actions.”
“..what really drives some Alternate historians and their supporters is what is called presentism – an orientation to the past coloured by current ideological and political biases and concerns.
Blind, uncritical imitation of the Western model however – as some Alternate historians and activists appear to crave – would be unwise. Evolutionary change, with one eye fixed firmly on Singapore’s unique geopolitical, demographic and sociocultural realities, remains the way forward in the post-Lee Kuan Yew era.”
I always believe Reform Party chief Kenneth Jeyaretnam has his roots here in Singapore and he is based here. But I was wrong.
Looks like Kenneth Jeyaretnam has a base in the United Kingdom as well. He hosted Roy Ngerng in his London home and managed to get international press to interview Roy.
I know the world is globalised and you can preach your political/anti-PAP views across the globe but to have a strong stake in another place other than your home is making me wonder whether KJ has permanent residentship in UK.
Wilfred Leung from Democratic Progressive Party apparently is not based in Singapore most of the time too. No one is faulting him for earning his keep in foreign land but as a key member (Chairman and assistant Secretary-general) of his political party, how is he supposed to understand real Singaporeans’ concerns on the ground? By reading TRS?
But Singaporeans will be pleased to know that they will appear in Singapore again once General Election campaigning starts; they will hang around for a month or so, then fly off again. Just like how people always say PAP MPs only appear during GE period.
But it makes you wonder why not a single opposition politician voiced out against The Real Singapore.
![[Photo from TNP.sg] Ai Takagi, an Australian and Yang Kai Heng, a Singaporean were speculated to be the owners of TRS.](https://scontent-sin1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/11019585_546227812183534_4000810606504839269_n.jpg?oh=831819a6cba81f37fdce0eddccb142c9&oe=56447189 "[Photo from TNP.sg] Ai Takagi, an Australian and Yang Kai Heng, a Singaporean were speculated to be the owners of TRS.")
[Photo from TNP.sg] Ai Takagi, an Australian and Yang Kai Heng, a Singaporean were speculated to be the owners of TRS.
TRS is now in trouble with the law but it is business as usual for them. But the facts that foreigners are running TRS under the tagline “voices of average Singaporeans” while earning lucrative monies from digital advertisment by leeching on grouses of Singaporeans & fabricating stories did not go down well with majority of Singaporeans.
The public can only speculate what might happen to TRS if its owners, Yang Kai Heng, a Singaporean, and Ai Takagi, an Australian got charged and convicted.
Regardless of the outcome, The Online Citizen (TOC) stands to benefit the most.
Andrew Loh is a former member of Workers’ Party (WP).
TOC is the 2nd largest social-political site in Singapore. It was founded in 2006 by Andrew Loh and Remy Choo Zheng Xi. Despite its long history, it did not gain popularity among Singaporeans because they did not focus on bread and butter issues but prefer to raise awareness on the application of western liberal ideas in Singapore. Their topics are boring, stale, WOT and did not resonate with many.
I believe TOC has a group of full-time writers, namely, Andrew Loh, Howard Lee and Terry Xu. I have no idea how they survive on TOC alone. Its founding member Remy Choo, a lawyer, definitely has his hands full and more interested in building up his own reputation. (Google for “Remy Choo Zheng Xi” and note the number of times he has been quoted in the media! Remy seems to be media darling these days.)
Remy Choo receives direct phone calls from Law Minister K Shanmugam.
TOC is known to dislike TRS. In November 2013, TRS published an expose by one “Vettel” who cried foul of Twelve Cupcake’s exploitation of its foreign workers. The expose turned out to be anything but true. But, TOC gleefully latched onto the story to highlight the atrocities of TRS and its past behaviours. [http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/11/twelve-cupcakes-refutes-accusations/ ] .
The downfall of TRS will push TOC to be the number 1 socio-political site in Singapore. This potentially translates to more ad-revenue for TOC to reward its full-time staff. TOC founding editors Remy Choo and Andrew Loh can finally pop a bottle of campagne to celebrate this victory (against TRS).
On 16 Feb, Mr Tan, a Singaporean taxi driver shared a touching encounter of a PRC guest worker who spent time and effort to return a wallet to a Bangladeshi worker. This is the original Facebook link: [ https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10203599641744227&id=1611217186&pnref=story ]
The heartwarming tale tugged the heartstrings of many Singaporeans who were probably accustomed to hearing horrible online tales of guest workers who flouted Singaporeans laws and disrupted the social stability of this country.
On 22 Feb, the Chinese evening papers ran an interview they had with Mr Tan who revealed he was extremely moved by the honest gestures of the PRC guest worker so he spent 3 hours the same night to dedicate a post to that guest worker. The post was published on 6:21 AM. That means he started writing at 3 am.
Mr Tan’s Facebook post went viral. Obviously, Mr Tan had no intention to profit from that post.
However, TRS republished the Mr Tan’s Facebook post on their website on 20 Feb as the story has the potential of bringing in eyeballs which translates to lucrative advertisement income for the owners of TRS — an Australian, Ai Takagi, a Malaysian Melanie Tan, and a Singaporean, Yang Kai Heng.
TRS has 6 advertisement spots – 1 x 728 by 90 Leaderboard, 2 x 120 by 600 Skyscraper, 2 x 300 by 300 Square and 1 out-link dashboard at the bottom [The screenshot is appended at the end of this post].
TRS has been in operation since 2012. Notwithstanding that they got into trouble with defamation laws, they continued operations by stealing other people’s work as their own, (lousy) paraphrasing of Straits Times/Today/CNA reports as their own, fabricating contents to boost page views and embellished articles to attract more hits to their website. The latest criminal probe into their act did not deter them because the advertisement income from Google Adsense is too lucrative. They have too much to lose if they ceased operations.
Mr Tan lost a farking night of sleep to jot down his experience so more Singaporeans will know there are kind-hearted guest workers around. Not only his gesture helps to bridge the differences between Singaporeans and transient workers, his post can help to make the internet a more pleasant place.
But TRS stole Mr Tan’s work and republished it. The whole process takes less than 5 minutes. But this 5 minutes of work are able to reap monetary rewards and it will continue to bring them income as long as the site is in operation.
Tell me, fellow Singaporeans, is this fair to Mr Tan?
TRS has 6 advertisement spot
Remember what happened between Jeremy Chen and SDP? Do you remember SDP exclusively uses TRS as a platform to share their anti-Singapore views and attacked ex-member Jeremy Chen?
Now we know why. Can SDP care to explain? Can SDP explain why they are using a site that is run by Australians to push their agenda?
Resharing my old post –
Singapore Democratic Party Assistant Secretary General Christopher Ang has responded to its former member Jeremy Chen who left the party over some disagreements. Jeremy Chen is not the first SDP member who left on acrimonious terms – before him, there’s Jarrod Luo, the former SDP youth wing chief.
Christopher Ang explained that the party was unhappy with the “offensive” Facebook postings by Jeremy. Those postings have violated the code of conduct which the party expects from its members. In the lengthy response, Mr Ang has painstakingly posted the screenshots of the “offensive” postings which Jeremy have made.
The SDP tried hard to swing the negative opinions that it has with the general public – On the ground, they have begun their walkabouts with cute mascots and portrayed themselves to residents that they are a viable alternative. On social media, they prepared slick interview videos and marketed themselves impressively online to project their message to young web savvy Singaporeans.
SDP may have successfully delivered their message to the masses. In Jeremy Chen’s case, the party has to contain the damage from the fallout, since they are aware that social media can work against them which could hamper their political outreach on the ground.
But I question the medium which the SDP has used to slam Jeremy Chen – Christopher Ang’s rebuttal piece was not posted on SDP’s website, neither did it appear on its Facebook page. Miraculously, the piece appeared on The Real Singapore, a site with extremely low credibility and known for its anti-Singapore stance. The piece has also appeared on TRE, another anti-Singapore site.
This is an indicator of SDP’s dubious nature. They are not keen to ensure that their message appear on the right, proper channel such as their official website but they are desperate to get its message out to the masses through anti-Singapore channels. Not only should Singaporeans should question their use of such channels and its affiliations with such channels, Singaporeans must also press SDP on their views on TRS: Is SDP for or against TRS?
I am not surprised if SDP submits other hate pieces to TRS anonymously to suit its own political agenda.
[Photo – HK TAN]
Singapore Democratic Party Assistant Secretary General Christopher Ang has responded to its former member Jeremy Chen who left the party over some disagreements. Jeremy Chen is not the first SDP member who left on acrimonious terms – before him, there’s Jarrod Luo, the former SDP youth wing chief.
Christopher Ang explained that the party was unhappy with the “offensive” Facebook postings by Jeremy. Those postings have violated the code of conduct which the party expects from its members. In the lengthy response, Mr Ang has painstakingly posted the screenshots of the “offensive” postings which Jeremy have made.
The SDP tried hard to swing the negative opinions that it has with the general public – On the ground, they have begun their walkabouts with cute mascots and portrayed themselves to residents that they are a viable alternative. On social media, they prepared slick interview videos and marketed themselves impressively online to project their message to young web savvy Singaporeans.
SDP may have successfully delivered their message to the masses. In Jeremy Chen’s case, the party has to contain the damage from the fallout, since they are aware that social media can work against them which could hamper their political outreach on the ground.
But I question the medium which the SDP has used to slam Jeremy Chen – Christopher Ang’s rebuttal piece was not posted on SDP’s website, neither did it appear on its Facebook page. Miraculously, the piece appeared on The Real Singapore, a site with extremely low credibility and known for its anti-Singapore stance. The piece has also appeared on TRE, another anti-Singapore site.
This is an indicator of SDP’s dubious nature. They are not keen to ensure that their message appear on the right, proper channel such as their official website but they are desperate to get its message out to the masses through anti-Singapore channels. Not only should Singaporeans should question their use of such channels and its affiliations with such channels, Singaporeans must also press SDP on their views on TRS: Is SDP for or against TRS?
I am not surprised if SDP submits other hate pieces to TRS anonymously to suit its own political agenda.
First, given Prof Cherian George’s stellar academic credentials, you wonder why he was not grabbed by HKU’s journalism school, a top uni in Asia, but preferred to ply his trade in the lower ranked HK Baptist U? In fact, he was often invited by HKU to speak at seminars previously.
And if there was any political games being played, why is the system so cruel to a relative of a key member of the cabinet?
So what good would it do for NTU and Singapore if Prof is not given tenure in Singapore and now able to rant freely in HK? Keep your friends close and enemies closer…
TODAY Article by Neo Chai Chin: http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/former-ntu-prof-hits-out-comments-university-president-denial-tenure
Allan's Daydream. 