The Wayang Party Club of Singapore

Now showing the wayang kulit of Singapore life, society, politics & more…

Embattled TOC unleashing its ferocious “internet brigade” on critics

Posted by wayangparty on February 24, 2008

It has been a week since we posted a thread here calling for Mr Remy Choo Zheng Xi and Mr Andrew Loh Hong Puey of The Online Citizen (TOC) to account for their words and actions to apologize and resign from TOC. Many bloggers have made the same call as us with the latest from Chemical Generation which sums up the current impasse aptly:

“In the aftermath of The Online Citizen controversy recently, some of its editors have not been completely truthful at first about the remote dealings with a PAP MP, and their eventual explanations of events are short of a full apology and closure to readers. A political and public relations leap ahead in the game is squandered away as a result of the editors’ hesitation to be magnanimous.”

We noticed that TOC has continued its “usual activities” without much fuss with articles by Mr Leong Sze Hian and Mr Gerald Giam who have escaped from the limelight so far while the lead actor, Mr Remy Choo, was conspicuous by his absence after the saga broke. He was also unwilling or unable to answer the 8 additional questions which we pose to him about his relationship with a cabinet minister and other PAP MPs. Are there more skeletons in his closet yet to be revealed ?

The spin doctors at TOC went into overdrive by publishing words of “support” and “encouragement” from their cronies to create a false impression that the recent debacle did not dent their credibility a bit and they have even emerged “stronger” from it than before. Many readers have emailed us to complain that they were unable to register their protests and displeasure on TOC itself as their critical comments were invariably blocked and deleted. 

We were amused and perplexed that the majority of views gathered from blogs and forums here do not quite commensurate with the echo of “support” reflected on TOC itself. One naive TOC fanatic is even shameless enough to accuse us of being the “sole originator” of these criticisms posted in cyberspace in order to discredit them !

As expected, TOC has been running a vicious smear campaign to counter-accuse us as the real PAP moles to deflect unwanted attention from their Chief Editor’s “honorable service” to a PAP MP for “500 taels of gold” in a blatant attempt to silence their critics.

For those long-time forumers of Sammyboy Forum, these callous tactics brought to mind those employed by the infamous moniker PMonkey10 aka Andrew Loh to demolish his opponents back in 2004 – 2006 before he was banned for posting indecent pictures on the forum.

The sneakiness, dishonesty and intolerance of TOC editors coupled with the fanatical streak prevalent in a small hardcore group of supporters and syncophants resembles internet brigades of state-sponsored warfare teams to monitor, moderate and eliminate dissent in cyberspace by “using cyberstalking, cyber-bullying and other psychological warfare methods against political bloggers or internet users.”

One early participant of TOC involved during itsplanning stages informed us that Mr Andrew Loh has the intention to rope in YPAP members into TOC’s Editorial team right from the beginning to boost its “credentials” and “visibility”. Coincidentally, TOC was taken off at about the same time the PAP announced its internet counter-surgency to The Straits Times in February 2007. Nowhere in other local socio-political blogs do we find prominent YPAP members like Mr Eprahim Loy and yet to be disclosed YPAP members like its senior writer Mr Koh Jie Kai, currently a third year law student at Oxford University controlling and running their daily affairs .

Of course there is nothing wrong with YPAP members or non-YPAP members in “honorable service” of a PAP MP expressing their opinions on a self-proclaimed “non-partisan” blog. And there is really nothing much we can fault them for not disclosing their background completely and truthfully to us if we overcome our initial mistrust and skepticism by compeling ourselves to believe that the views promulgated are entirely personal with no institutional influence and therefore negating any conflict of interest that may arise.

However we find it utterly unacceptable, irresponsible and unreasonable for Mr Remy Choo to refute and dismiss the allegations against him initially only to retract and confess the truth later after being forced into a corner by the presentation of hard solid evidence. TOC and its ardent supporters have so far shunned from discussing this “honest mistake” knowing that there is absolutely no grounds for defence and have instead attempted fruitlessly to obsfucate the matter several times by arguing that Choo’s part-time job as a freelance PAP writer has no bearing on his role as TOC’s Chief Editor.

Is Mr Remy Choo taking “leave” from TOC till this controversy dies down and return later as if nothing has happened ? Does Mr Andrew Loh really believe that TOC has emerged unscathed from this saga with its credibility intact ? With such self-deluded editors on board TOC, can we still believe the half-truths and lies inherent in its articles which only serve to moderate public frustration and anger towards PAP’s policies in a subtle manner ?

To The Online CONS: you can fool some people all the time, you can fool everybody some of the time, but you can never fool everybody all the time.

We will be scrutinizing TOC’s articles very closely as well as keeping track of their occasional Freudian slips like the most recent one by Mr Remy Choo betraying their hidden motives and agendas on this blog. We urge all readers to email us at wayangparty@hotmail.com of any discrepancies or inaccuracies you may find in articles written by TOC’s editors especially Mr Remy Choo and Mr Andrew Loh.

6 Responses to “Embattled TOC unleashing its ferocious “internet brigade” on critics”

  1. Little Bird said

    I applaud your work for exposing the PAP moles in blogosphere. Do not be cowed by the hooligan tactics of TOC.

    Keep it up!

  2. Husseinobama said

    Everybody knows TOC is a sham. I never bother to read any articles here, go round in circles for so long without taking a stand on anything. Typical PAP style.

  3. onlooker said

    Well to be fair, In the beginning the TOC is a good read.But asking for resignations is hardly fair afterall they are local who cared (even if they support the power that be) to make a blog.
    Unlike some (like me who don’t write blogs and leave comments).
    Give them times If they manage to gain my interest again like you did maybe, just maybe there is hope for everyone.
    But the thing is I like Clicking interestingads so where are yourads?
    The search bar don’t pay as well as theads.
    Remember “Ideas are indestructible. People can die but ideas won’t.” from V for vendetta or something.

  4. Hua Xiong said

    I seriously don’t care if they step down or not since I never bother to visit this PAP propaganda blog.

  5. wayang poop said

    A comment i posted in TOC was not published. So i put it here. It is a comment pertaining to WP member Eric Tan’s article on the budget “gift”.

    Eric Tan wrote: “My parents taught me to be gracious when you receive a gift, and not to scrutinise it. This year Singaporeans received a ‘gift’ in the form of the Budget. There are many good things about the Budget for both individuals and corporations.”

    My comment: Your 1st para already suffers from a faulty premise. The budget is not a GIFT, it is a govt’s obligation and DUTY to the citizens to improve their lives and lessen hardship. As a member of the Worker’s Party the author should be shot for having such premise. Might as well join the PAP.

  6. [...] The Phantom Menace. PAP mole in the mist? – Nomed Letters: The Power of Money: From Opposition to Budget 2008 [Recommended] – The Wayang Party Club of Singapore: Embattled TOC unleashing its ferocious “internet brigade” on critics [...]

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>