On 17 November, Young PAP posted the Straits Times article on Alan Shadrake’s sentencing on its Facebook wall.
The posting sparked off a debate regarding the credibility of Alan Shadrake’s book, Once A Jolly Hangman.
Two of The Online Citizen’s editors – Andrew Loh and Joshua Chiang – weighed in as well. (see an excerpt of the exchange below):
A few hours later, all the posts by Joshua Chiang and Andrew Loh had disappeared, leaving Edward Tay seemingly replying to ghosts. They were also banned from posting further comments on the YPAP Facebook group.
A case of YPAP not wanting it’s members to develop critical thinking?
While we appreciate the fact that the administrators of the site have the authority and the right to do as they please, we nonetheless are puzzled why the posts by us were deleted when what we posted were not personal attacks and were not out of issue.
We’ll let our readers decide.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Free Alan Shadrake!
http://www.facebook.com/FreeAlanShadrake
Wow, is it me or are they trying hard to bring censorship to web 2.0? Much as i’d commend the valiant effort to regulate the Internet, is it not a little too ambitious to do so? You either ban it in entirety, or leave it as it is (nobody can stop the proliferation of ideas through the net anw). Attempting to censor part of the internet just makes no sense to me.
But I love it when you catch them at it.
It is good and heartening that 6,000 copies of the book already sold.
nothing new really.
YPAP posted a link regarding MARUAH and other civil societies’ submissions to UN for the human rights review and a poster said that there are no human rights violation in SG and he supported the government’s stance as long as Singapore is safe.
i then pointed out the human rights violations such as ISD, 377a, media censorship etc, and rebutted his statement and was promptly deleted within an hour or so.
all these facts impede the development of groupthink and might turn away potential converts and censorship is their answer to it.
YPAP only learning from old PAP on censorship.
We should just be adults about it and let the kiddies play in their own sandpit while we find the bricks to build something we can be proud of and won’t be washed away by the rain.
TOC, not only my posts are deleted by YPAP on a routine basis, but I am also routinely banned by them. Yet, I have never done anything that is not permissible in ethical use of online forums. I also know that there are countless others with the same experience.
Oh, but did I forget. All of us who have had our posts deleted or banned outright have one thing in common: we make irrefutable comments or observations, refute the PAP’s falshoods forcefully, or ask tough questions.
Thus if I were you, I would wear my deletions/bans as a badge of honour; only those who are a threat to the YPAP intellectually will be banned.
And fret not either: in the end it is the PAP that loses out because they have removed themselves from sparring with their critics intellectually, which could have helped them improve their critical thinking abilities and develop sharpness. It also seems to contradict what one of their very own said recently. (Of course, I know that when PAP members say things to make themslves look good, it is mere lip service. But that’s besides the point.)
http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC101116-0000128/We-cant-avoid-the-hard-questions
“[Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong] reiterated that only a thinking population who cares about the future of Singapore can sustain our growth and prosperity…A thinking population contemplates issues beneath the surface and beyond current timeframe, and needs avenues to express what they think, otherwise the process is incomplete and the benefits not fully garnered.”
If the senior minister’s assertions are correct, then we can only infer that the YPAP couldn’t possibly comprise individuals ‘who [care] about the future of Singapore [and] can sustain our growth and prosperity’.
why am i surprised YPAP adopting modus operandi of PAP. we can choose to ignore the YPAP, but that means the PAP has a place in the internet. continue the debate and make them look ugly.
what we must not have is an authoritarian power dominating both offline and online.
YPAP Critical thinking – think thoughts critical about others but don’t allow them to do the same to you.
It is pathetic that YPAP did not learn from a younger LKY, who was most eloquent during his youthful prime – when he made the following speech not once, but at least on three separate occassions: twice in the Singapore Legislature in 1955, and for a third time in the Malaysian Federal Parliament in 1964:-
“If we are to survive as a free democracy, then we must be prepared, in principle, to concede to our enemies – even those who do not subscribe to our views – as much(sic)constitutional rights as you concede yourself.” – Lee Kuan Yew Legislative Assembly Debates Sept 21, 1955
*
*
“But we either believe in democracy or we not. If we do, then, we must say categorically, without qualification, that no restraint from the any democratic processes, other than by the ordinary law of the land, should be allowed… If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication.
Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought, and no excuse, whether of security, should allow a government to be deterred from doing what it knows to right, and what it must know to be right… ” – Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates April 27, 1955
*
*
“Let us get down to fundamentals. Is this an open, or is this a closed society?
Is it a society where men can preach ideas – novel, unorthodox, heresies, to established churches and established governments – where there is a constant contest for men’s hearts and minds on the basis of what is right, of what is just, of what is in the national interests, or is it a closed society where the mass media – the newspapaers, the journals, publications, TV, radio – either bound by sound or by sight, or both sound and sight, men’s minds are fed with a constant drone of sycophantic support for a particular orthodox political philosophy?
That is the first question we asked ourselves.
I would like to see minds stimulated and debate provoked, and truth refined and crystallized out of the conflict of different evidence and views.
I, therefore, welcome every and any opportunity of a chance to agree, or to dissent, in order that out of thesis comes synthesis – thesis, anti-major premise, anti-premise, synthesis, so we progress…
I welcome every opportunity to meet members of the opposition, and so do members of my party, over the radio, over the television, university forums, public rallies. We never run away from the open encounter.
If your ideas, your views cannot stand the challenge of criticism then they are too fragile and not sturdy enough to last.
I am talking of the principle of the open society, the open debate, ideas, not intimidation, persuasion not coercion…
Sir, the basic fundamentals we asked ourselves…is whether the duties of the Minister of Information and Broadcasting are to produce closed minds or open minds, because these instruments – the mass media, the TV, the radio – can produce either the open minds receptive to ideas and ideals, a democratic system of life, or closed and limited.
But I know that the open debate is a painful process for closed minds…
But let me make this point: that 5 million adult minds in Malaysia cannot be closed – definitely not in the lifetime of the people in authority.
It is not possible because whatever the faults of the colonial system, and there are many…they generated the open mind, the inquiring mind.” – Lee Kuan Yew Dec 18, 1964 Malaysian Parliamentary Debates
*
*
*
*
*
Clearly, the YPAP prefer to indulge in “a constant drone of sycophantic support for a particular orthodox political philosophy” – which they are comfortably familiar, and will not venture out of their comfort zone, preferring to stick their entire heads into their sand box.
Is it any wonder that the PAP has run itself flat and without any imagination nor ideas as how to bring us forward, and have to search deep into their old bag of tried and tested tricks from the 1970s and the 1980s to steer us forward ?
If you can’t even defend your stand, how can you expect to lead (others)? What a shame
Every instance they use their power to ‘cleanse’ the web, one more person on the web realises the censorship taking place.
They censor such minor things at their own risk.
Joshua,
ypap deleted your postings because to me you won the argument hands down in your reply to that coward tay :
“That you have in fact not lost faith in the judiciary despite reading the book actually shows that the feared impact of the statements via the real risk test is much exaggerated. Thanks for helping highlight the fact that the State indeed over-reacted in this instance.”
@Prone To Being Banned,
what that lau goh actually meant is that as long as you think and agree with the pap then you are considered a thinking people, for example the ypap. Lau goh is just copying what the Bush jr had said after 911 albeit in different words “either you are with us or you are against us”
not displaying the whole picture. Didnt Viv Balakrishnan use the same excuse to kick Al Jezeera out? Double standards everywhere.
If this is how they behave in feedback website, there is alot of worst stuff the present govt can do and are already doing openly.
They are basically a bunch of very high handed, small minded, power crazy and lacking of empathy group. What can we expect from them ? Only the worst to come.
How can you call this rational and civilised debate when you censor replies, this is stupid… YPAP is totally rubbish seriously.
I am really surprised that anyone is shocked at the way young pappies are behaving. It’s their mantra, self first before anything else. Those making the comments are only working to promote themselves to their masters. In David Marshall’s words they are running dogs and poor prostitutes. You don’t have to trust me. Go explore our history, the unofficial or true history. Well it starts with the Japanese. Many Chinese lost their families to the Japanese and yet refused to bow and beg. But there were some who collaborated and worked for the Japanese to save their families and their own ass, in particular there was one Indian and one Chinese. Then when independence was looming we hear about a young man who fought for freedom of speech, independence of the press, judiciary and was against oppression. Later we can see how friends were used and abused for self gain. How anyone who dared to speak against were incarcerated in prison without trial. Yet today these same men proclaim themselves to be men of honor and integrity. And resort to prove this in court. The true honorable and great men do not have to do this. History will give them that honor. But then despots will try to rewrite history and for that we have school textbooks. Ask yourself, have you seen these people act with fairness and integrity. Look into our history, from threats to gerrymandering, you name it. They have done everything to win and you call this honorable. My dog is much more honest.
pap:censor the bad stuff,publish feel good half truths.
ypap: censor the bad stuff,publish feel good half truths & make pap look good.
why am i not surprised?
btw,ypap are jus as self serving as pap.when the top is crooked,the bottom will as well…and they have done well to learn from their masters…
After looking at the situation YPAP has created for themselves, I feel sad that the new generations of pro-pap have became so weak as to to do something so unncessary and stupid. It is a strong proof of their immaturity, fear and inadequacy to truly engage in thought provoking debates. Than again, that should also reflects the kind of leadership falling dangerously low. Singaporeans must decisively vote PAP out in the coming election or we fail ourselves the country we have painstakingly build (not by PAP alone) for a better future. My families are all ready to kick some butts!
“If you can’t even defend your stand, how can you expect to lead (others)? What a shame”
The YPAP has already defended their stand. They defend it by censoring information and argument that make them look like dummy and moron. But the fact is that they are really dumb and moron to begin with because they are PAP parrots with brain on their ass.
Yet today these same men proclaim themselves to be men of honor and integrity. And resort to prove this in court.
The true honorable and great men do not have to do this. History will give them that honor.
But then despots will try to rewrite history and for that we have school textbooks. Ask yourself, have you seen these people act with fairness and integrity. Look into our history, from threats to gerrymandering, you name it. They have done everything to win and you call this honorable. My dog is much more honest.
>> Well said. Truth is never complicated; it’s whether you choose to see it or you prefer to keep your eyes close.
Ever wondered why the Vote PAP Out FB has almost 7,000 members while YoungPAP has only 4,000+ ? Go figure.
As Singaporeans, we should trust our own judicial system and should not allow foreign media and opposition parties to poison our mind. They have political agenda and are all out to topple the lawful government Singaporeans have voted in.
Before we can trust our judicial system, it has to show us that it can be trusted. Sadly that has yet to occur.
What we have seen however is how it has been manipulated to bankrupt opposition leaders, given lenient judgments towards thenm elite class (eg. Polling station boundary controversy by CJ, sph editor killing someone by dangerous driving and only getting a fine for it, judge’s son snorting drugs and getting away with it, etc.)
People supporting YPAP are really stupid!! Idiots for the duration of its existence.
The day you join PAP or YPAP is the day you surrender your brain & soul.
To poster “Be a smart & objective Singaporean”:
Your paranoia with anyone toppling PAP now stretches abroad. Wow!
Let me just ask how would a foreign journalist gain politically if SG Govt is toppled?
Edward Tay either forgets or choose to forget that Alan is being punished for a book that no one is allowed to read (it being restrained).
Restraining the book is understandable from the judiciary’s point of view but to punish the author having restrained the book is definitely, totally, absolutely 100% unacceptable in this civilised society.
@Dead Poet,
Can’t agree with you more!
There is no Estate duty in Singapore, the rich will be richer and all their monies/estates can be passed to their next generation, we are going to see Kennedy family and Royal family (as in UK) in Singapore sooner than I expected!
The worst scenario is guys like ‘Be a smart & objective Singaporean’ are one of the 66.6% voters.
What else can we do? I wonder.
Mmm, I took a look at the YP fan page, which I don’t visit that often. There are a number of comments that are not flattering to YP or PAP. Doubt they are really against dissenting voices or criticisms against them. Could it be that Andrew and Joshua posted something offensive to whoever/ whatever or potentially wrong or something? If I recall correctly, if a a page bans someone, everything that the person had posted gets deleted automatically.
*shrug*
“Could it be that Andrew and Joshua posted something offensive to whoever/ whatever or potentially wrong or something?”
Isn’t the onus then on YPAP to produce the offending remark then ? On the other hand, if they did not post such things, then what reason do they have (other than stifiling debate) ??
you should always act a warning to your posts…
“Before you reply to my post, remember that my post may be censored, and that you will look stupid, replying to nobody”. THEN, you write your irrefutable arguments.
Must at least give them chance to save face mah. We are Asians after all. hehehe.
Strike 3 and you’re out YPAP. First world country with third world mentality. It’s appalling to think that these people are the ones who could potential be the head of of ministries like Law and Media. It’s a fearful thought, so let’s make sure they don’t even get to sniff the front door of our Parliament.
@sg in UK
Yes, you are right but there could be another reason for the abolishment of estate duty. No one will know much any politicians is worth if the law does not require them to declare their net worth. Well when a politician or family member dies, the whole country would have known how rich they are based on the estate duty paid and the people would have died of shock. So the abolishment of estate duty was to protect the people. See how noble they are.
Remember…Lim Swee Say said “we are deaf to all criticisms”!!!
TOC is not far behind
Re: Post by ‘Kechicken’, 19 Nov
>>”What’s wrong with shutting the doors and windows of your own house?”<<
It will be good if YPAP shuts the doors & windows completely. Whats wrong is they only partially shut them, airing the bits they want to form the picture they want the public to take in.
TOC's censorship, as far as I can see, is not for you to form an intended picture. I have read many stupid arguments against the writers in TOC, even the most vehement ones are not censored. Actually TOC does not have to, because the against arguments are so stupid no one would be taken in.
For that matter, whats wrong with saying anything you want within your own house? Why is Alan Shadrake being punished for saying what he wants? He is allowed to think isn't he? As I said, it is fair enough if the judiciary does not allow Alan to open his doors & windows (restrain the book), but it should not punish him for saying or thinking what he wants.
It is very clear that the purpose of their FB page is not a platform to engage others, but for self-glorification and propaganda. I have not bothered to even subscribe to their page exactly because of this. Better spend my time and efforts elsewhere.