WIMH, I will do nothing personally that would damage or add insult to injury. We'll get this sorted as the facts come out. MS is a good guy.Wind In My Hair wrote:It's sad that MS got into trouble for trying to be helpful. I'm not surprised though, as NS policies are shrouded in secrecy and I was wondering how he got away with saying on a public forum that his advice was based on insider information.
Just my two cents - I wouldn't go on about printing and archiving the posts. The less the impact of the 'leak', the less he has to account for. For MS' sake just let it go.
It strikes me as a tempest in a teapot, and pretty silly on the part of those who would censure MS.Wind In My Hair wrote:SE, sorry I wasn't referring to you in particular. Just making a general suggestion as it's been mentioned by a few posters. This thread is being followed very closely for sure (hi there whoever!) and suspicions that the sensitive posts are being preserved despite MS deleting them would spark even more paranoia.
I suspect most government officials don't really know what the law is. The penal code is an awful document to read and try to comprehend. So they just do what their superiors tell them.Strong Eagle wrote:Certainly Singapore has its own laws and way of doing things, yet I've never seen a government official that attempted to keep the people in the dark about what the law is.
And yet, at first blush, it would appear that is exactly what is happening here. Someone or something wishes to suppress knowledge of the law and process.
This is what I like about you, WIMH... seeing the positive in a pile of negatives. I hope MS gets to do this.Wind In My Hair wrote:Hopefully after investigating they will find that MS's postings were all above board and invite him to compile an FAQ page for Mindef's website. This would make a lot of lives easier, including the bureaucrats processing the mountains of paperwork that would be less necessary if people knew more clearly where they stood in the first place.
What surprised me is the delay they took when implementing actions against you since you first post on forum. When they start doing eventually, they give you a crazy timeline. Wtf? I agree you don't have much of chance against them since you call Singapore home. What to do? lan lan suck thumb loh.Strong Eagle wrote:This is crazy. Who gave you three days to remove all your posts?Mad Scientist wrote:I was given three days to remove all of my posting.
MS
Utterly insane.
Maybe you cant disclose previous specific cases but is it even illegal to advise parents on some of the obscure policies Mindef has? Some time later we will be shot for telling parents they have to file intent on renunciation before age 13.Wind In My Hair wrote:I suspect most government officials don't really know what the law is. The penal code is an awful document to read and try to comprehend. So they just do what their superiors tell them.Strong Eagle wrote:Certainly Singapore has its own laws and way of doing things, yet I've never seen a government official that attempted to keep the people in the dark about what the law is.
And yet, at first blush, it would appear that is exactly what is happening here. Someone or something wishes to suppress knowledge of the law and process.
Transparency is not the strong suit of some ministries. While guidelines exist, very often they want the prerogative of making decisions for reasons they don't have to disclose. That is why merely providing facts of how past cases were processed can be an issue. Perhaps also they deal with too many people trying to circumvent NS and don't want someone out there to write The NS Dodger's Manual.
Hopefully after investigating they will find that MS's postings were all above board and invite him to compile an FAQ page for Mindef's website. This would make a lot of lives easier, including the bureaucrats processing the mountains of paperwork that would be less necessary if people knew more clearly where they stood in the first place.
I don't know if the obscurity is deliberate or due to bureaucratic overkill. Here's something to cheer MS if he is reading, and to amuse the rest of you. From "Goh Keng Swee: A Portrait" by Tan Siok Sun (page 145):Koalabear wrote:is it even illegal to advise parents on some of the obscure policies Mindef has?
It is illegal to discuss confidentiality of Military procedures full stop in the UK, so I can imagine their will be some sort of similar act in Singapore. one is under the official secrets act for around 25 years in UK, being an ex pro I know for sure information is kept out of the public domain.Koalabear wrote:Maybe you cant disclose previous specific cases but is it even illegal to advise parents on some of the obscure policies Mindef has? Some time later we will be shot for telling parents they have to file intent on renunciation before age 13.Wind In My Hair wrote:I suspect most government officials don't really know what the law is. The penal code is an awful document to read and try to comprehend. So they just do what their superiors tell them.Strong Eagle wrote:Certainly Singapore has its own laws and way of doing things, yet I've never seen a government official that attempted to keep the people in the dark about what the law is.
And yet, at first blush, it would appear that is exactly what is happening here. Someone or something wishes to suppress knowledge of the law and process.
Transparency is not the strong suit of some ministries. While guidelines exist, very often they want the prerogative of making decisions for reasons they don't have to disclose. That is why merely providing facts of how past cases were processed can be an issue. Perhaps also they deal with too many people trying to circumvent NS and don't want someone out there to write The NS Dodger's Manual.
Hopefully after investigating they will find that MS's postings were all above board and invite him to compile an FAQ page for Mindef's website. This would make a lot of lives easier, including the bureaucrats processing the mountains of paperwork that would be less necessary if people knew more clearly where they stood in the first place.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests