Jump to content

Garmen tackling fake news trolls beware


Staff69
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Playtime said:

just had people come to do door survey...

 

one of the question: do you agree to increase GST to help the financially weak?

 

why not...

do you agree to increase GST to give FT scholarships which have fallen 50% to just 238million a year?

stupid survey designed to let ministers go parliament and tell lies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA

Uptron Uni also so expensive ? I thot 50 dollars for 3 days on line learning can get a MBA liao.

Almost the same as senior leadership program .. 2 weeks in Hawaii and come back, instant leader.

↡ Advertisement
  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Playtime said:

just had people come to do door survey...

 

one of the question: do you agree to increase GST to help the financially weak?

 

why not...

do you agree to increase GST to give FT scholarships which have fallen 50% to just 238million a year?

stupid survey designed to let ministers go parliament and tell lies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA

Did you question the guy: What is the purpose of the question?

Like what CCS said in parliament.

  • Haha! 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fcw75 said:

Did you question the guy: What is the purpose of the question?

Like what CCS said in parliament.

lucky not like topgun..

I can tell you.. but then I have to kill u ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fcw75 said:

Did you question the guy: What is the purpose of the question?

Like what CCS said in parliament.

Ranks right up there with :

"What do you think?"

[laugh]

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.straitstimes.com/forum/employment-data-already-provided-in-parliament

Mr Chee did not say that providing employment data for citizens and permanent residents would drive a wedge between different groups in society. In his Facebook post on Jan 8, Mr Chee said the data had already been provided in Parliament on Jan 6 and asked why Mr Pritam Singh failed to acknowledge this fact in his Jan 7 Facebook post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Weez911 said:

Yes good read. I really dislike pofma and the way it is used in sdp case is Super bad. If it is not an outright falsehood and subjected to interpretation, why should It be pofma in the first place.

the arguments the government used is chilling... it is up to sdp to prove their statement is true... it is shocking to me... seriously, my understanding of pofma was to prevent spread of false facts. Shunmugam has repeatedly shared scenarios on how the pofma law can be exercised. He also say the ruling should be fast as government cannot use this to silence the public. 
let’s see how Long the judge takes to rule. To me, if the judge needs to much time to decide if it is false, it should not even come under pofma at all.
 

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/pofma-challenge-sdp-mom-pmet-agc-judge-verdict-court-12273078

"In other words, a statement would be false under POFMA as long as one of the meanings it is capable of bearing is false or misleading," said SC Nair.

i don’t believe the above is true. I will vote for opposition, even if they send a monkey up if our judge rule against sdp. Basically, anything can be taken down if one interpretation out of 100 is false... duh.... I don’t even believe they are making this argument. 

this is so much more serious than what wp is arguing....

Edited by Wind30
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

ask yourselves.... do anyhowly say whitehorse ok... wait kenna for wrong "interpretation".

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/fake-news-law-does-cover-matters-of-interpretation-agc

 

The fake news law does cover matters of interpretation, said Deputy Attorney-General Hri Kumar Nair as he outlined the Government's argument against the challenge brought forth by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP).,,,,

 

He said the minister who initiates a Pofma direction will look at the article or statement in question and determine what he believes to be its meaning. A correction direction can then be issued based on the minister's interpretation.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

ource: Channel NewsAsia

Timestamp: 2003

 

'White horse' classification for NSmen existed prior to 2000

By Dominique Loh, Channel NewsAsia

 

SINGAPORE : Minister of State for Defence Cedric Foo said the Singapore Armed Forces had a 'white horse' classification for NSmen prior to year 2000.

 

He said the term was used to identify sons of influential persons to ensure such enlistees were not given preferential treatment. 

 

Mr Foo was replying to a question in Parliament on Tuesday by Non-Constituency MP Steve Chia.

 

Mr Chia asked if there was such a classification and, if so, who qualifies to be classified as a 'white horse' and what privileges are accorded to them.

 

It is a rite of passage for all 18-year-old Singaporean men.

 

They enlist and serve two or two-and-a-half years of National Service in a variety or vocations ranging from combat to clerical.

 

But for many years, some NSmen have wondered if the battlefield is really level.

 

There were whispers that the sons of influential Singaporeans, dubbed 'white horses', were supposedly getting special treatment during their National Service.

 

"I thought they got special treatment that was what I was lead to believe."

 

"I don't have any 'white horse' in my platoon, but from what I heard, these people do have special treatment and they will get less punishment, easy jobs but don't know if it's true."

 

"It should be taken out, everyone is equal regardless if you are a politician's son, someone powerful, rich. You are Singaporean, we all have to go through NS one point or another, why should you receive special treatment? "

 

Well, for what many Singaporeans say is the first time, the Defence Ministry has publicly admitted to having a 'white horse' classification.

 

But the purpose was the exact opposite.

 

Mr Foo said: "All NSmen are treated equally and are deployed in vocations and units based on SAF operational requirements, their medical classification, and their academic and military performance. No NSmen has been accorded special privileges.

 

"Prior to year 2000, the term 'white horse' was used to identify sons of influential persons to ensure such enlistees were not given preferential treatment. And their medical classification and vocation assignments are scrupulously fair."

 

But there were no follow-up questions from MPs. So then why scrap the scheme?

 

Mr Foo said: "Over the years, the public has widely accepted that the NS assignment system is fair and there is no preferential treatment to anyone. Since 2000, the SAF does not have a white horse classification for NSmen."

 

- CNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2020 at 8:07 PM, Playtime said:

Wedge??

 

 

st-march-2009.jpg

It's the same old silly theory of learning more languages will be at the expense of another. Just look over to malaysia where some of the chinese can talk dialect, mandarin, english and malay languages, no problem. Maybe not all at high level of proficiency but better than zero.

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Knowing to speak dialect has no bearing on the 2 languages that we are supposingly efficient in. 

 

Garment on this in wrong when it banned dialect in TV show. My personal opinion. 

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading all the government publications,  i am even more confused. So it is about what you should or shouldn't read rather than fake or not right?

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally  I think the judge is spot on.

Otherwise is just some minister saying ..:"in my opinion .. bla bla bla.. you wrong I right.."

Like that can ah???

 

https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/judge-wrong-in-placing-burden-of-proof-on-government-in-pofma-cases-agc

 

The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) argued on Thursday (Feb 6) that a High Court judge was wrong in ruling that the Government must prove the falsity of a statement when its corrections orders are challenged in court.

The onus, instead, should be on the party making the assertion to prove that the statements are true, it said in presenting its argument in The Online Citizen's (TOC) appeal under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Change some names... and this is very well Singapore too.

Whistle blowers in tt durai and chc case were thrown under the bus too.

And some folks think Pofma is harmless when it will only make it harder for whistle blowers... let alone free speech. 

 

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/coronavirus-chinese-public-mourns-rages-over-death-of-doctor-who-raised-early-alarm

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Playtime said:

Change some names... and this is very well Singapore too.

Whistle blowers in tt durai and chc case were thrown under the bus too.

And some folks think Pofma is harmless when it will only make it harder for whistle blowers... let alone free speech. 

 

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/coronavirus-chinese-public-mourns-rages-over-death-of-doctor-who-raised-early-alarm

https://www.inkstonenews.com/health/police-letter-tried-keep-chinese-doctor-li-wenliang-warning-coronavirus/article/3049555

↡ Advertisement
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...