Temasek Review agrees

[Toapayohkid]

talk big, now balls small when threatened to get sued. molina han and amanda tan is joseph ong chor teck. somehow the message was passed to joseph and tr agreed to change the name later?

 

 

 

 

Temasek Review agrees

Edited October 18, 2010 by Toapayohkid

[SimonTan]

I guess no choice lah.

Who dare to go against the gov?

Doctor leh.....unless he dont want to stay in Singapore anymore. Or he is dam clean on his taxes and conduct.

 

[Joseph22]

Personally, using the name temasek review does give ppl the wrong impression that it's belong to temasek holding.

[Kiario]

i think the main thing is that if kanna sued, all the editorial team will be exposed as they appear in person to face lawsuit, something they are not willingly to.

[Joseph22]

i think the main thing is that if kanna sued, all the editorial team will be exposed as they appear in person to face lawsuit, something they are not willingly to.

 

 

who know. some of them might actually be some high ranking staff in Stats board gahmen sector.

[GoodCar]

This TR thingy was registered in Panama.

The editorial team is also "ghost' team without real name and reference.

 

This type of website very dangerous, can be use by foreign agent to dis-stabilise a society.

 

Just like the tactic use during sixties when the commie make use of innocent student for up rising.

Same tactic with modern packaging

 

IMHO

[Darryn]

Personally, using the name temasek review does give ppl the wrong impression that it's belong to temasek holding.

 

I never linked "Termasek Review" to Temasek holdings, or even knew that Temasek review was the investment agenicies annual report.

 

Always tot that "Temasek" was just another term for Singapore inc...in which case, parsing the name literally I tot Temasek Review was just "reviewing the actions of the SG govt"

 

In any case, reading the site, I found it to be quite slanted, and to my reading not credible...if I came across the articles, I would be fact checking like crazy cause it strikes me as biased, that however is beside the point.

 

@goodcar...so what would your solution be? That only registered MSM can have a news website? Or that only govt can have website?

 

 

[LoverofCar]

I think they did the right thing...don't chiong directly with those MIW.....''Keep the forest and you will not have lack of wood for fire starting''...haha

[Acemundo]

he should have used termasek review instead

[GoodCar]

@goodcar...so what would your solution be? That only registered MSM can have a news website? Or that only govt can have website?

 

I don't know leh, I no study berry high ...why ask me this type of "chim" question.

 

But I do know that the article in TR very interesting to read and provide some alternate view, but after awhile you know that they attack for the sake of attacking.

 

Than when I realised that this is not Singapore website but Panama wedsite.... I question the motive liao....

is it a opposition website or some foreign country trying to divide and weaken our social fabric.

 

We last time got Total defense, we must guard ourselves against element that divide our society.

 

May be I just thinking differently....my opinion only....

if I post this in TR, people will label me "dog" pappy etc do you think this is healthy politic?

 

 

[Pocus]

I once read a anti-singapore website in the late 90s that is an anti-singapore in any possible way you can imagine.

No it's not just anti-gov, it's main aim is total annihilation of Singapore.

 

It has a section that include tonnes of BS articles b------dising Singapore in general and our way of life. I remembered they have an article "Singapore will go to war with Malaysia in 2005, be prepared or you'll regret".....well it's 2005 and nothing happened. There's even an article saying The japanese invaded singapore is the right thing and alot of article criticising the majority and the other minority race/religion of singapore.

 

It includes a "recruitment" page to recruit wat seem to be like terrorists. (eg. must have quiet personality, no families or kin prefered, etc) and that was before Sept 11 incident.

 

The page was shortlived and disappear due to the hosting expire I think.

 

I think the website goes by the name of "harimau", no prices for guess the origin of the website.

Edited October 18, 2010 by Pocus

[GoodCar]

he should have used termasek review instead

 

 

Or TeRmaseK see one more time......

[GoodCar]

I think the website goes by the name of "harimau", no prices for guess the origin of the website.

 

 

 

Har.......Tiger ???

[Wind30]

my wife says she know that doctor. Was her classmate in RJC....

[Bystander50]

I don't think they are able to sue TR or force them to change name, if not a writ of summon for trademark infringement would have been served long time ago.

 

Till npw, no one knows the true identities of the people behind it. The domain is not registered in sg, the courts here don't have a say. Even if u bring the case overseas, it'll be treated as between a company and individual. If the trademark is not registered in the foreign country in which the domain is registered, the case will be thrown out for sure.

 

Think of this, why is SIA (S'pore Airlines) domain called singaporeair instead of sia?

 

Since Temasek Holdings is so rich, the easiest way is to make an offer to purchase the TR domain name. Wonder why those people didn't think of this.

 

 

[GoodCar]

Since Temasek Holdings is so rich, the easiest way is to make an offer to purchase the TR domain name. Wonder why those people didn't think of this.

 

 

Than what....one blackmail after another?

[Bystander50]

Than what....one blackmail after another?

 

What's the next blackmail u think TR will come up with since u mentioned "one blackmail after another"? First of all, TR did not even demand that they want money for returning the domain name. Both TR and TH are operating on different platforms. One is an investment arm, the other a political blog. There's no conflicts of business interests between them. If someone surfing both sites can't differentiate the difference between the 2, then I have nothing to say. To me, it looks more of a commercial transaction if an offer was made.

 

How many people have actually heard of Temasek Review is a review within Temasek Holdings before they came out to demand a name change?

 

 

[Joseph22]

I dont blame you. not many ppl know about "temasek review"

 

first time i read the site, i thought it belong to Temasek holding. then i read contend. i find very funny. then check.. aiyo... its actually a Anti-gahmen site. some news are impartial but most are biased.

 

some biaseness i agree. but most are nosense trying to push all blame to gahment.

 

I never linked "Termasek Review" to Temasek holdings, or even knew that Temasek review was the investment agenicies annual report.

 

Always tot that "Temasek" was just another term for Singapore inc...in which case, parsing the name literally I tot Temasek Review was just "reviewing the actions of the SG govt"

 

In any case, reading the site, I found it to be quite slanted, and to my reading not credible...if I came across the articles, I would be fact checking like crazy cause it strikes me as biased, that however is beside the point.

 

@goodcar...so what would your solution be? That only registered MSM can have a news website? Or that only govt can have website?