4/01/2018

Singaporeans need the protection of stringent laws against fake news

Yes, you read me correctly, Singapore must pass more stringent and even draconian laws to protect the daft and hapless Singaporeans from fake news. Fake news is not only dangerous but becomes much more dangerous in the Singapore context because daft Singaporeans cannot tell the difference between fake news and real news.


How could that be? Didn’t Singapore have the best education system and with some of the top universities in the world taught by the best ang mohs and third world best professors? Didn’t this world best education system and the world best professors that money could buy teach the Singaporeans to think, to be discerning, to know simple things like fakes and truths? The education system in Singapore is so expensive not for no reasons. It is quality education measured by how much is being paid to get educated in this world best education system. How could it produce duds? Is there a contradiction?
 

Can anyone see the contradiction or something wrong with this world best education system that produced daft and unthinking Singaporeans that need to be protected from fake news? I see no difference because Singaporeans are by nature daft and no amount of good and expensive education can help them to be just a bit smarter to protect themselves from fake news. Papa is right and doing the right thing.
 

Didn’t they build a first world city from the third world? Yah hor, how could that happened to a daft people? How could they build a world class city if they are or were daft? The only reason I can think of is that Singaporeans were not daft then but the new Singaporeans are. How come?
 

The proof is everywhere. There are more than 2m foreigners here, many from the third world with fake or funny degrees that are employed to replace them. If this is not enough proof that they are daft, I can go on. Singapore is a banking and financial centre but got no banking and financial talents. The top bankers are almost entirely recruited from the third world where they got backward financial and banking industry. Funny isn’t it? Let me make it funnier. Singapore is supposed to be a modern cosmopolitan city, a smart city, but got no IT talent. Almost all its IT talents came from the third world countries, and more are being recruited, more are coming by the plane loads. You know why? Exactly, to replace the daft and no talent Singaporeans of course. Want me to go on?
 

Singapore is a tropical country, but all the talents managing the tropical gardens in Singapore are foreigners from temperate land. This has been happening since the independence of Singapore. They could not find a Singaporean with enough local and tropical knowledge to run these gardens. How come locals, oops, I should not use this bastard word, how come Singaporeans brought up in a tropical island cannot manage tropical gardens but foreigners that never lived in the tropical region know better? Daft question.
 

We don’t even have talents to study and implement solar energy system here despite being under the sun all year round but need foreigners from cold temperate countries to teach us how to do it.
 

OK, ok, let me not go too far to say we have no talent. We have talents doing research about the Artic and Antarctic regions. For what I don’t know. We are no good and know nothing about our tropical region but got experts studying about the cold north and south poles. See, we got talents.
 

Oops, I digress from the fake news and stringent laws to protect daft and unthinking Singaporeans. How many of you would now agree with me that daft Singaporeans need more stringent and draconian laws to protect them?
 

My reasoning very cheem and very correct right? To introduce such draconian and stringent laws is an acknowledgement that our education system, the schools, polytechnics, the universities, have failed to educate the people to think. If they have done their job to educate the daft, then there will be no need to protect them from simple things like knowing what is true or fake news. I rest my case.

37 comments:

Anonymous said...

Uncle RB, please do not run down Singaporeans too much. Give us some credit for our achievements, such as being the most liveable city in Asia, Changi Airport being one of the best in the world. Our education system, especially our Mathematics system has been copied by first world countries. I could go on....... So please give us some credit. Not all bad.

Anonymous said...

This must be uncle RB's April Fool joke.

Anonymous said...

Uncle RB, tis the Eastor Sunday, is resurrection of Jesus Christ. May God bless the dafts Singaputians to be able to differentiate fake and truth news. May this Little Red Dot be bless with more capable & wise people to rule this tiny island. May all the problems or troubles in this tiny island be eradicated or reduced so that its people r all blessed & not be dafts forever.Amen.

Anonymous said...

Singaporeans need the protection of stringent laws against fake news. What about alternative news?

Is alternative news also classified as fake news? What about having laws to protect Singaporeans against fake degrees as well?

You can see that the MSM will not report some news that paints unfavourable or are not palatable to the powers that be, but you can find it on alternative news sites, like 'My Singapore News' for example.

The agenda behind all this is to stifle criticisms. As simple as that! Because the truth hurts and is hurting.






Anonymous said...

When reading this site, the word daft to label sinkies will inevitably be seen. At time one would think, who is daft?

The fact is simple. Sinkies rulers have concluded sinkies are too intelligent. The ib they used are not effective. The rulers now use laws, rule the island by laws, to concur the intelligent sinkies new breeds. The majority old breeds reading wanpau, keep thinking only they can read are not daft, only they pro garment are not daft, has gone to chuachukang liao. In future, laws will rule this sinkieland.

Why sinkies new breeds are not daft. One old sinkie in 2014 asked her mp to return her cpf. Hey this old daft was 76 in 2014. She was so daft to keep her cpf inside account. So young bright sinkies will ask? Why cannot draw the money out? She was not belonged to the new laws to restrict drawings mah? Tio. Young intelligent sinkies was right. But fact was wrong: old daft lady got her cpf locked.

Then online ib started to flash her landed simi d at thomson, saying that house was bigger than readers hdb flat, this lady was out to make trouble to put bad spot light on garment elites. Sounded very logical? The bright sinkies can see the gaps. 1st, landed or not has nothing to do with old daft cannot take out cpf. She was never belonged to the new rules on cpf restriction in drawings. She was born in 1936, based on calculator.

So sinkies young breeds should know, old people like this lady trusted the old politicians, keeping imagining they live in old times, ruled by old farts teams. They never learned new tricks on them. The new breeds know very well. The new rulers create new rules like on cpf, new prices on hdb, new immigrants in millions to sabo their job opportunities, and fixed NS salary to $500pm as duties to be citizens, these rulers are smart lah. But the new voters at young age will out smart them some days. These old rulers will get sick, and grips on rules and laws will be exploited by their able assistants. One grc got into corruption cases. It tells readers the rules can be many, but are actually good helps to the corrupted minds to make use of the "silence or u are treated with ang chia" rule. It will collapse the entire system when no one bother to complain any more.

That s how historians wrap up their stories. No modern state can last for 100 years. The average age is 60 year. Sinkieland still has 10 years to play around with more rules.

U think young sinkies are daft? They are prepared to accept new citizenship to do away with serving ns but getting no good jobs to start families. No one is daft when his pocket is emptied, and cpf is locked up. Only old thinking they can grab more before they go will think the young sinkies are daft. Be it a colony of India, young sinkies will he happy not to do ns to waste time, as doing for 10 years will not get returns of a good job. It ends up worse, foreigners get the job because no need to do ns. The money to buy planes and weapons are wastage, that is the real problem created by old hacks. No war why need weapons and defense? Give up lah, after all, the entire population has more foreigners than citizens, hey 10 millions is target, now only 5.9. U think it can last for 10 years?

Anonymous said...

How come locals, oops, I should not use this bastard word, how come Singaporeans brought up in a tropical island cannot manage tropical gardens but foreigners that never lived in the tropical region know better? Daft question.
RB

Hahahahaha.

How come?

For the same answers as to how come the Sinkie opposition is not even ready to be govt after more than 50 years of independence. In a word, daft lor. Hahahahaha.

Anonymous said...

10:03am
Why no opposition? Pakatan Harapan is not over yet, according to shit time. Whether umno, harapan or pee and pee, its will help if no ns, and get good jobs, and can move to penang where one minster s home town is.

What opposition you want? U tell me lah.

Anonymous said...

1) I wonder how the different religions protect themselves from false prophets and false teachings?
- Can we learn from them to protect Singaporeans against fake news?

2) I wonder how real Science protects itself from fake scientists and fake science?
ANSWER
- the universities and Science use the process called "peer review"

Anonymous said...

@ April 01, 2018 11:10 am

So who is doing the "peer review" on Shanmugam if it is true that he is doing most of the talking?

Is it the job of the Opposition Parties to do the "peer review" on Shanmugam?

Is it the job of Singaporeans to vote Opposition to do "peer review" on the PAP Ministers in parliament?

Is it the job of the PAP to do "peer review" on themselves?
- "ownself check ownself" ??

Anonymous said...

Hello 11:15 am

70% Singaporeans voted for PAP to give a strong mandate for PAP to do what they like, correct or not?

In view of this, I think all your questions are superfluous.

Anonymous said...

In view of this, I think all your questions are superfluous.
April 01, 2018 11:21 am

No it's not.
That is why every 5 years, Singaporeans are given the opportunity to reconsider the wisdom of their decision and choices.

Unlike God who is infallible in His choices and action.
Singaporeans are fallible and can make bad choices.

Anonymous said...

11:15am
In science there seems to have review bcos a proposed idea is always being tested by other scientists NOT from the same university.

Pap will do "peer review" if the subject under study is proposed by WP, such as WP s "blue papers", when Pap found a big protest at Hong Lim Park, which news went round the world.

To do peer review on its very own proposal will be rubber stamped. May be called it "Peep review".

It is better for opposition like WP to watch them play their own suicidal games plan. WP itself is so weak and has no plan to expand to get stronger. No news will be good news on opposition. Still want to have "peer review" by the committee which one singh is on board. They just rubber stamp what the main star wants it. If it turns out good for opposition at election time, why not?

Anonymous said...

@ 11:15am

Democracy is a form of "peer review" because we are all supposed to be equals under the "one person, one vote" system.

Unfortunately, Singaporean slaves do not understand this.

jjgg said...

RB.. hate to always have to correct u.. Singaporeans don't need fake news law cos stupidity has it's own logic..if you don't believe then go look at singpools 4d q today.. it's only the ivory tower prisoners cushioned by their million $ featherbeds that need the law. Why ah.. complete control of the print media and free to air transmissions also not enough? MIW don't know whatever spin they put on their excesses cannot be exposed? Look at all the autobiography of their own hirelings.. which one has a good thing to say about the wheel which they are a part of.. look at all.. lhy.. etc.. they also spread fake news?.. I think the lot of them need hot x buns to cleanse their souls ..,,,)))

Anonymous said...

11:44am
The moment u think singaporeans slaves, u are not believing one man one vote system. One old fart went to the extend to think graduates should have more than one votes, he ended with graduates mothers had priority system. Then the son thought immigrants share equal benefits in schooling system.

Both are non democratic in respecting voters rights. They are to deliver goods to voters based on one man one vote. They instead, was thinking how to keep themselves on seat by giving the benefited with more power, and leave out the not benefited with less power.

U are the same as those elitist thinking, that the majority are daft or slaves. U are equally not to be respect, if u are in power.

When u read those in opposition sites, you can see many are real elitist, keep condemning voters. They themselves are incapable to be elected. They too cannot deliver the promises. One opposition goes from one party to another keep talking bad about others is one elitist kind of failure.

When they realize life is no living in their ideals, they are probably near death edge.

Anonymous said...

April 01, 2018 12:17 pm
"The moment u think singaporeans slaves, u are not believing one man one vote system."

I concede that you have a valid point.
----------------

"I freed a hundred slaves. I could have freed a thousand more, if only they knew they were slaves." - Harriet Tubman

Anonymous said...

One man one vote system can also be the same as no vote one system of China, Russia, N Korea etc. Democracy today is just a convoluted version of communism and vice versa.

When they cannot impose dictatorial rule on the pretext of fake democracy, they devise and impose draconian laws instead. There is no law against fake democracy or legalised corruption, right?

Anonymous said...

12:31pm
U may not feel differing opinion from yours is a form of respecting you. U feel others not sharing your opinion are not bright.

If u feel this, u lack democratic value.

Not knowing your age, but often there are comments quoted someone s saying, old fart, or this old usa president. By quoting, u dont rely on your opinion. U said u r not responsible for your comments, it was that dead old man s words, he is to be responsible.

No, in democracy, it is sharing responsibility. U have to use your persuading power to convict others.
U share responsibility of the consequence with all voters.

Tubman s words: message is: I have power to let them ALL go. Yet those hundreds freed did not feel they were free. So i didnt want to free the thousands now.

U sell this message as gold standard?

Anonymous said...

Whenever state media Straits Times report on North Korea news, it always say "the rubber-stamp North Korean Parliament."

Laugh die people ! 笑死人 !

Can ownself describe ownself the same !

Anonymous said...

12:56pm
Agreed. Spent the whole budge session to talk about "say sorry" then rubber stamped the budget.

This is a sign there is no need to discuss with differing opinions.
Any differing opinion will end up say sorry.

It is not only 笑死人, it no different if there was live mp sitting on chairs: the answer is rubber stamp "oh yes".
In democracy, u voted for such parliament, u are to face the consequence.

U dont laugh. it is a sign this nation will not exist in 50 years time.

Anonymous said...

When Papa say more, do more, pass more laws they reveal more n more clearly who they are inside. Be patient more will know them by their fruits n self enrichment.

Anonymous said...

U sell this message as gold standard?
April 01, 2018 12:50 pm

Harriet Tubman was a runaway slave you ignorant idiot.
She was not the American President.
------------------

"I have freed 30 Singaporean slaves. I could have freed 70 more, if only I could convince them that they are slaves."

Anonymous said...

Singaporeans generally are law-abiding citizens. If the Law Minister, knowing this fact, keep taking advantage of this trait by introducing more and more new laws to further whatever government or party agenda, it may come a time "when enough is enough" and the balloon of abiding will just burst open. When that happens, history must be recalled to pin responsibility unpon the creator and mover of these laws.

Anonymous said...

More seriously, there should be laws to protect Singaporeans' Livelihoods, Jobs, Long-Term Housing, Indiscriminate Taxation, Unlimited Changes to Prevent Citizens From Withdrawing their CPF Savings, Fake Politicians, Fake Leaders, Fake Degrees, Fake Qualifications, Fake Testimonials, Fake Select Committees, Fake Members of Parliament, Unjust Laws, etc.

Anonymous said...

1:54 pm
U showed your level of intelligence on this comment.
The statement was not said by this black woman.

It gain no value to allege someone is ignorant idiot. To know such statements by copying from html is as good as someone google it and search.

Your level of intelligence is at primary school if u do not interpret what the statements meant to u.

Must be older than pioneer generation, learning by heart can be given scores in your present life. Learn googling lah.

Anonymous said...

Award-Winning Incredulous Statement of the Decade:

"It does us no justice to be pro-Government," - The Straits Times' editor Warren Fernandez, 23 March 2018

Anonymous said...

"If they have done their job to educate the daft, then there will be no need to protect them from simple things like knowing what is true or fake news"-Redbean

Could it be that this little red dot the Daftland Daftians r suffering from a kind of a Pinocchio Syndrome? Which is why the garmen r setting up a Selac Comiitee to pre-empt the problem when it arises?

Anonymous said...

So were the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods’ hearings a good chapter in Singapore’s political development or a sham?

Youths participating in a democratic process:

I am particularly interested in the views of Rachel Er Shingtian from the NUS. She said she was passionate about constitutional law. But she had two concerns – that this society must be strictly secular to rise above religious and other pulls and that the laws must be objective to navigate us through the “post-truth era” where truth seems to be emotional (based on one’s feelings) rather than based on facts.

She said: “I hope we will start believing there is an objective solution to this issue (presumably in dealing with deliberate online falsehoods), that we should eschew the point that things can be relative and that there’s no absolute truth and that no one can ascertain the truth anymore.”

Perhaps she was just voicing out her anxiety, that in a new age where there are so many contending shades of truth, she would be more comfortable with one absolute truth.

Other Singaporeans are struggling with simply trying to find a forum to tell their truths or side of the online falsehood story.

Kudos to academic Cherian George for his words of caution against knee jerk and other sledgehammer solutions to stamp out something which may not really be that easy to wipe out.

He stressed, as reported in the mainstream media, that legal solutions provide a “false sense of security” and can backfire, especially if states “make the mistake” of trying to prohibit insult.

Prof George also suggested that the disproportionate attention paid to social media may be counterproductive: “Taking away their Internet tools would not suppress the spread of their viewpoints. They would simply find other means, including by going underground.”

“Face-to-face communication within places of worship and study groups probably play a much bigger role than online messages in fostering religious tolerance,” he said. “In many countries, long-established talk radio and cable television news programmes do more to create intolerant ‘echo chambers’ and ‘filter bubbles’ than social media.”

As he seemed to have had no history of open confrontationist debate with the establishment, the Select Committee seemed to have given him due respect. There were a couple of “we will look into your papers” and “we will certainly pass your views to another committee”.

LKY School of Public Policy’s Dr Gillian Koh had a less smooth treatment from K. Shanmugam. The Law Minister kept haranguing her to accept his contention that deliberate falsehoods have no place in a democracy and should be blocked outright from circulating. Dr Koh said it was better to use the falsehood as a way to educate people of such dangers. Engagement is important, otherwise, people will not know what a falsehood is.

Then there was Dr Thum Ping Tjin: “There is a clear source of ‘fake news’ which has spread falsehoods, with major impact, and hitherto escaped sanction. That is the politicians of Singapore’s People’s Action Party.” The historian claimed that detentions made under the Internal Security Act between 1963 and 1987, including for Operation Coldstore, were examples of this. He also said that declassified documents have shown that the detentions were made for political purposes rather than security ones. Mr Shanmugam disagreed and went to great lengths and detail to debunk Dr Thum’s research findings.

Dr Thum maintained his position as a historian who interprets historical evidence with nuances, instead of subjecting it to yes or no answers to Mr Shanmugam’s questions.

This brings us back to NUS law student’s plea. Absolute truth? Maybe not. The law is usually on the side of the big battalions.

Deliberate falsehoods? Tread with extreme care on this one. Better to present the facts and engage the community.

Anonymous said...

There is always 2 sides to every imperfect human story. Who is to say his side truth n the other side false? Man n woman always partial truth, partial lie, partial knowledge. This is esp so for politicians n businessmen whose self interests are so entrenched n strong. Shamemugun sheer arrogance if he wants to be determiner of truth n fake. Crossing into God's territory. Seow! Umm Chye See!

Anonymous said...

Is fake news a kind of
Chewing gum or what?

Anonymous said...

RB, yes. if you believe;
Singapoor was founded by a lion.
One old man will rise up from death if things cock-up.
That one son is the talent.
Ic Indian woman is Malay.
Pigs have wings.
A black snake don't hiss & crawl.
Fake or truth?

Cranium said...

The Time of Tyranny Has Cometh

The time of tyranny has cometh
When deliberate falsehood is banmed,
Hard truths hard to swallow becometh
Falsehood of men condemned.

The time of tyranny has cometh
When relative truth is Absolute,
All shades of grey becometh
Falsehoods in Courts of dispute.

The time of tyranny has cometh
When Dark Forces rule the Earth,
Truths and lies becometh
Tools of the Satanic at birth.

The time of tyranny has cometh
When laws of men is God,
Cunning law-man God becometh
Greater than the God his Lord.

The time of tyranny has cometh
When arrogant Minister is God,
Citizens' livelihood becometh
Fear, taxes, fines, jail and rod.

Cranium
1 April 2018

Anonymous said...

Changi Airport, a public establishment, was sold to Temasek Holdings on 1 July, 2009, without consultations with Singaporeans. Since then all the annual profits of Changi Airport Group went to beef up the profits of Temasek Holdings.

Changi Airport Group (CAG)’s chairman Liew Mun Leong today (April 1) said that even though Terminal 5 costs “tens of billions”, Singaporeans must pay:

“The project costs tens of billions of dollars. It’s an astronomical amount and it’s really a strain on the budget. So the Government has to work out how to finance these tens of billions of dollars. Fortunately we have built up a strong balance sheet but that’s not enough and if we have to get grant to get it done, it will also be a big strain on the reserves, on the overall budget. To me, the public who is using it is gaining a lot and we must start to learn how to pay for it.”

He is also insistent on not revealing the actual budget of Terminal 5, and said that the government does not have to be accountable to anyone:

“The Singapore Government has so far decided that we should not discuss the total budget. I think the budget is something that the Government wants to manage progressively. In a very big budget situation, the Government will have the prerogative to keep that confidentiality.”

The staunch PAP man also emphasised the need for propaganda and brainwashing:

“I always think that education is a very committed task. Unless your people are educated and you are better-trained, you will not get a good workforce. I started a training institute in CapitaLand called CLIMB which stands for CapitaLand Institute of Management and Business. The ‘B’ also stands for brainwashing. My version of brainwashing is that you will have certain views that we might disagree with and we try to change it.”

At 72-year-old, the multi-millionaire said he does not believe in retirement and he does not want to retire because he would “turn senile” if he stops working.

(Perhaps the lucrative salary and bonuses are more important to him than to spend his golden years travelling, spending more quality time with loved ones, writing a book to benefit others, or doing voluntary free service to help the needy, or giving someone else a chance to sit in his post?)

Virgo49 said...

Just another PAP Parrot and Parasite just like the Rest of their Cronies taking photos and laughing with them living on the FAT of the Land.

Now, they Bankrupted with No Ideas of how to Govern.

Asking for ideas how to help the Poor.

If you pay me a Manager Pay and i ask my subordinates how to run the Department, then i should be a junior clerk.

They will said, Oh, we are very accomdating to your feedback.

WAYANG.

Anonymous said...

Got one yr he was paid $24mln...for a GLC boss unheard of in SP history....HuliJinx is like a god to him lah. Self interests know no bound n can compromised good morals la.

Anonymous said...

@ April 02, 2018 9:52 am

"Got one yr he was paid $24mln...for a GLC boss unheard of in SP history....HuliJinx is like a god to him lah. Self interests know no bound n can compromised good morals la."


If this guy was paid $24 million that year, how much more HuliJinx paid herself that same year?

Anonymous said...

Your guess is as good as mine. However much is still not much. It is just a matter of how many peanuts in their scale of things. No questions can be asked.