2010/09/19

Total of 7917 Contestants in the 2010 Mayor, Councilor and Borough Elections


The registration for the 2010 elections of city mayors, councilors and boroughs ended yesterday with total of 7917 contestants (五都登記截止 7917人參選).

Table.1 Number of Contestants in 2010 Elections
PositionsSeatsContestants
TotalDPPKMTTSUPFPNPOthersNon-p
Mayors5145500004
Councilors314649161208151797232
Boroughs37587254462184300054944
Total407779177917
* DPP=Democratic Party; KMT=Chinese Nationalist Party(Koumingtang); TSU=Taiwan Solidity Union; PFP=People First Party; NP=New Party; Others= other parties; Non-p= non-partisan

Table.2 Schedule of 2010 Elections
2010.10.22Review Qualifications / Notify qualifiers
審定候選人名單,並通知抽籤
2010.10.29Qualifiers draw the ballot order
候選人抽籤決定號次
2010.11.11Announce the candidates, the allowed dates of campaign and the allowed time slot each day;
公告候選人名單與競選活動期間的起、止日期及每天競選活動起、止時間
2010.11.12Host official campaign debates
辦理選舉公辦政見發表會
2010.11.26
2010.11.27Cast the ballots
五都直轄市長、市議員及里長三合一選舉投票

2010/09/18

預測國民黨越輸越多,政大未來事件交易所乾脆關站止血 ?


號稱(事實上也是)國內預測選舉最準的「政大未來事件交易所」,在連續幾個禮拜預測國民黨越輸越多之後,突然在昨天無預警關站。整個網站完全封網,連以前進行過的交易資料、現在進行一半的交易資料等,完全坑殺。

這是一個很形跡可疑的動作。台灣現在正面臨非常重要的五都大選,五個直轄市第一次同時改選,選民涵蓋台灣大半人口,其重要性不亞於總統大選,說是台灣歷史上重大事件之一也不為過。在這個對台灣非常關鍵的時刻,每個單位都盡可能提供越多越詳盡的民調以作為選舉分析的參考。身為一個不斷宣傳自己是預測最準的未來事件交易所,為什麼會選在這個時候突然「自殘」呢?

該所目前主頁『未來事件交易所 暫停營運公告』上提出的「藉口」是:

學術研究的資源畢竟相當有限,為了讓交易所永續發展與擴大運用,「未來事件交易所」即將公司化。未來將由政治大學預測市場研究中心與「未來事件交易股份有限公司」共同合作開發新平台,擴大各類合約議題與交易功能。屆時歡迎各位會員再度參與,發揮眾人的智慧、增進人類福祉。

什麼叫做「學術研究的的資源畢竟相當有限」?而且,要公司化不能再等兩個半月嗎?有必要在這麼重要的時刻,放棄自己扮演的如此重要的、向來引以為豪的角色而且將整個網站連新舊資料全面關掉嗎?

由這些似是而非的藉口看起來,背後恐怕有不可告人的原因。我們若把該所最近對選舉的預測結果拿出來看看,馬上就可以看到可疑的政治操作之處。

其中勝負差距大的台中、台南與高雄就先不談。底下我把未來事件交易所過去將近兩個月對所謂「戰況膠著」的台北市與新北市的預測列出來:

未來事件交易所對 2010 選舉的預測
日期台北市新北市
蘇貞昌郝龍斌蔡英文朱立倫
2010.8.349.449.148.449.7
2010.8.1149.1515051.1
2010.8.1749.84949.649.9
2010.8.24524849.750.7
2010.8.3152.447.452.348.5
2010.9.753.84652.948.3
資料來源:政治大學預測市場研究中心

畫個圖就更清楚:
北市新生高與花博弊案在 8月17日被揭發。之後國民黨的郝龍斌一路下滑,跟民進黨的蘇貞昌越拉越大,在 9月8日已經拉大到將近 8 個百分點。新北市國民黨朱立倫也輸民進黨蔡英文越輸越多。照趨勢看,國民黨在北二都都越輸越多。這時交易所突然關站,新舊資料一併毀去,讀者再也看不到國民黨越輸越多的趨勢。
資料來源:政治大學預測市場研究中心
從圖中看出,郝龍斌自從新生高與花博弊案在 8月17日 被揭發之後,當選機率如脫軌的雲霄飛車般一路下滑,到 9月8日 短短20天已經輸了八個百分點,而且看起來還在狂跌的趨勢中。

不但如此,連朱立倫的當選率也跟著下滑,已經從弊案揭發前的贏一個百分點變成輸將近五個百分點,雖然有緩檔的趨勢,但差距似乎還在拉大中。

照這個趨勢這樣下去,國民黨的選情,在這個全台灣最準的預測中心所做出的預測中,將會「死得很難看」。

可是,就在這個時候,這個以「最準」為標榜的預測中心好像突然說:這樣不算,我不跟你們玩了。而且,以前玩的都不算!

然後當然要掰一些美美的藉口來把可疑的自殘講得冠冕堂皇。

更可疑的是,在這個關站的同一個時段,國民黨開始放出「郝龍斌民調已經回升且小贏」的風聲,而且中國時報馬上跟著做出相對應的民調報導與之呼應。這些民調與所知趨勢不符,但是民眾已經沒有政大交易所的趨勢可以作為比較。

政大交易所的突然關站,使得民眾在最需要民調的關鍵時刻失去「台灣最準」的預測,放出空間讓國民黨可以隨便操弄民調,看起來好像兩者一唱一搭配合得天衣無縫。這樣搞,把一個原本中立客觀的學術研究網站搞成掩護貪腐無能政黨的遮羞布,以後還有客觀的本錢嗎?

2010/09/17

自立晚報淪為國民黨的打手?


今天看到一則新聞:唱衰新北市捷運 蔡英文硬拗,原本以為是什麼在台中國報在替國民黨打選戰,仔細一看竟然是自立晚報。我想,好吧!看看到底講些什麼,結果一看,裡面全篇都是國民黨在罵蔡英文的片面說詞,為文的記者蕭博樹既沒有採訪蔡英文的說法,也沒有做任何的事實查證。

這種片面報導已經是非常不專業了,但如果在標題上註明:

『唱衰新北市捷運 國民黨:蔡英文硬拗』

那至少讀者立刻知道那只是在報導國民黨的觀點。但該文在標題上卻沒註明,反而直接採用國民黨的立場,讓整篇新聞報導變成國民黨攻擊蔡英文的文宣。

到底是蕭博樹記者不專業呢?還是自立晚報已經淪為國民黨的打手?


2010/09/10

公視對馬政府打壓新聞自由的陳述


底下是在新聞局告公視的官司中,公視董事長鄭同僚對審判長提出的補充陳述。轉貼自鄭同僚的臉書 (9/8/2010),紅色是我標的。

新聞局於六月底向台北地方法院提出公視董事會1至6月會議無效的法律訴訟,繼續干預公視運作。今天,台北地方法院開庭,我出庭為公視作法的正當性做補充說明。以下是法庭上公開發言重點,也將會以此書面資料補送給審判長。

敬愛的審判長:

我是公視董事長鄭同僚,今天站這裡,以沈痛的心情,向您陳述我的心聲。

我國公共電視法第11條明白規定:「公共電視屬於國民全體,其經營獨立自主,不受干涉」。尊重公共電視獨立自主,本來就是全世界民主國家的基本共識。我國公視法如此明白的宣示,讓我們能昂然站在民主國家的行列。

很不幸的,徒法不足以自行。今天,我們得在此,控訴一股破壞這種民主社會基本共識的強大力量,而這股力量竟然是最應該維護媒體自由與國家形象的「行政院新聞局」。

新聞局去年8月因為在增聘8名公視董事過程中其作法「未臻完全合法」、「鑿痕斑斑,紊亂體制」,被監察院提出糾正。請注意,到目前為止,他們還沒有依據監察 院的糾正完成改善。不但如此,他們為了掩飾自己被監察院糾正未改的過失,竟然對我們不願意妥協的公視董事提出兩次假處分,同時還提出今天這個訴求公視董事 會會議無效的訴訟。

從今年1月到7月,陳勝福等5名董事集體不參與公視董事會開會,惡意缺席超過16次,造成開會人數不 足,使得董事會不斷流會。但是,公視法規定每個月需要開會一次,而且,公視許多重要議案也必須決議,以維持正常營運,若任由陳勝福等5人長期缺席無法開 會,勢必造成公視嚴重經營問題。我和另外六位董事基於職責所在,迫不得已,採取監事會的建議,依據內政部會議規範中「不足額」的條文開會。

在過去16次開會前,董事會辦公室都經過掛號信、手機簡訊、電子郵件以及電話,四種方式一一通知所有董事開會,陳勝福等5人,卻仍堅拒不出席。這顯然已經違反公民託付的義務,而不是單純一次、兩次的議事杯葛或不同意見表達。

公 視曾經針對陳勝福等董事集體長期缺席,造成董事會不斷流會的情況行文給新聞局,請教他們,若公視董事會不用內政部議事規範不足額相關規定開會,新聞局有何良方?但,新聞局不但不予理會,或規勸陳勝福等來開會,反而對負責任不斷開會的7位董事提出假處分,讓杯葛開會超過半年的陳勝福有機會被「推舉」為「代理 董事長」。

公視董事會當前所有重大爭議,主要來自新聞局被監察院糾正而不改。今天,新聞局竟然還進一步浪費公帑,花錢僱請律師,對公視在1月到7月間的董事會決議提起無效的訴訟,新聞局至此,已然荒腔走板,由媒體自由保護者的角色,變成媒體自由的加害者。

我們今天所以還願意站在這裡堅持理念,我們的義務律師群所以還積極為我們出庭辯護,是因為,我們想為台灣的媒體自由立下典範。我們要用所有可能合法的手段,阻擋新聞局種種粗暴的作為,讓政治干預的黑手,無法伸進公共電視。我們不相信,台灣沒有公理。

去年底,公視曾經邀請一位英國BBC高階主管來訪,我請教他,英國公共電視如何面對可能的政治干預。他說:「先婉拒,再婉拒,最後要公開力抗到底。」我們曾經試過所有婉轉溝通的可能,現在,已經是毫無退路,公開力抗的階段。

我 是大學老師,也是兩個孩子的爸爸,相信審判長您也有可愛的親戚後代,如果今天我們容許新聞局用如此粗暴的方式,干預媒體自由得逞,我們將如何教育下一代堅 持民主理念?如何和下一代談論正義是非?審判長,您的判決很重要,請為我們的下一代立下絕不讓政治力干預媒體自由的典範。

鄭同僚 2010年9月8日

轉貼自鄭同僚的臉書 (9/8/2010):
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=145843812121779&id=100001151663628

新聞局和陳勝福,究竟把公視當成什麼地方了?公民社會還要吞忍多久? (9/9/2010)

今年8月4日,新聞局不但不理會監察院的糾正趕快改正,還濫用公帑僱請律師,對公視董事長及其他六名董事第二次提出假處分,使7人無法行使職權。

公視董事陳勝福趁機於8/12在律師站身邊、警察守大門,再以新聞局的「洽悉」公文為依據情況下,宣布已被若干董事「推舉」為公視「代理董事長」。

儘管公視監事會要求陳勝福說明受推舉代理過程,陳勝福竟不予理會,至今也還沒有公開他到底是如何被「推舉」的會議記錄。新聞局和陳勝福,究竟把公視當成什麼地方了?

還有更過份的,8月28日,陳勝福召開了一次「公視董事會」,但這次會議,沒有依據公視董事會會議規則通知監事列席開會,也沒有依據會議規則列出會議討論事項,開會之後,目前也還沒公開會議記錄,如同開了一場黑箱作業式的秘密會議。

會後,竟說依據該次會議,發函改派華視法人董事。 公視監事會曾經透過正式會議決議,要求瞭解8/28該次會議內容,但,得到的回復,竟然說要監事會先拿出法律依據!!

陳勝福先不通知監事會參與開會,繼之缺席監事會邀約說明,後又拒絕公視監事會索取會議資料,蠻橫到完全不顧正當程序與監事會依法監督職權,真令人嘆為觀止。

今年1月到7月之間,公視董事會一開完會,新聞局常常馬上發佈新聞稿,說公視董事會會議無效云云,現在換成他們「洽悉」的陳勝福當「代理董事長」,卻裝聾作啞了。陳勝福和新聞局,究竟把公視當成什麼地方了?

還有。今天,9月9日,陳勝福召開「華視董事會」,華視是公司法人,陳勝福竟然違反公司法規定,又不通知監察人開會。而且,根據會議討論事項,他們將通過新總經理的任命。

華視從民國95年公共化以來,曾經選任了兩位新總經理,一位是李遠(小野),一位是陳正然。兩位在就任前,都經歷過公開的遴選過程,而且過程全程錄音錄影,留有紀錄可查。其目的,就是要讓公共化華視的總經理選任過程公開透明,讓公民社會可以監督。

今天,陳勝福不但不願意交代自己被推舉的會議過程,竟然還打破華視以往選任新總經理的慣例,省去公開遴選過程,直接選任總經理。陳勝福和新聞局,究竟把公廣集團當成什麼地方了? 這樣不理會程序正當性的陳勝福和新聞局,公民社會還要吞忍多久?

轉貼自鄭同僚的臉書 (9/9/2010):
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=146103285429165&id=100001151663628

● (8/14/2010) Opera director appointed as provisional PTS chairman

The controversy surrounding operations of the PTS Board of Directors arose two years ago when the Government Information Office (GIO) — under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government that took office in May that year — unilaterally changed six PTS board members that represented the GIO.

Last year, the KMT-dominated legislature revised the Public Television Act (公共電視法) to increase the number of seats on the PTS board from 13 to 21, increasing the government’s representation on the board.


2010/09/08

Ma Ying-jeou's Anti-Corruption Freezes When It Comes to Taipei Flora Scandal


The scandal of sky-high overpayment by Taipei City government in the preparation of upcoming Taipei International Flora Expo (TIFE) keeps revealing more and more audacious behaviors of the city officials. City councilors from both the KMT and the DPP parties have been trying hard to request the official decision-making documents but got stonewalled again and again. The officials gave an excuse that they need to "compile" those documents first.

Lets see if we can cover it up

We didn't learn the meaning of "compile" until the documents were finally handed over. The DPP's Taipei City Councilor, Jian Yu-yen (簡余晏), examined one of the them [1]:

The compiled official document of calling for public bidding on the Xinsheng Overpass (新生高第七次招標公文) presented by Taipei City government shows signs of forgery

It shows that some of the words were scratched out and manually replaced with new ones.

But that's not all. In a TV program on Sept 4th [2], the KMT Legislator Lo Shu-lei (羅淑蕾) displayed the real document she obtained from the Taipei City government. It shows something not seen on the forged version -- the signatures of personnel who signed off the project. That is, the Taipei City government whited out those signatures before they gave it to Councilor Jian, a blatant act to conceal responsible officials.

Comparison of the documents Taipei City sent to the DPP councilor Jian Yu-yen (簡余晏)(left) and that the KMT Legislator Lo Shu-lei (羅淑蕾) obtained (right). The Taipei City wiped off signatures of responsible personnel (marked with red) before the doc was sent to Jian.

From the comparison of two versions above, the Taipei City removed the signatures of former section chief Chen Chih-sheng (前科長陳智盛陳智盛), Specialized Commissioner Chi Lan-sheng (專門委員池蘭生), former chief engineer of the department Chang Li-yen (前總工程司章立言) and former commissioner of the New Construction Department Huang Hsi-hsung (前新工處長黃錫薰):



Oh No !!! Scapegoat, any one ?

Those names eventually came out under tremendous pressures. Under heavy critics, the Taipei City mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), who is also KMT's candidate for Taipei mayor in the year-end election, organized an anti-corruption task force from within the city government to investigate the potential corruption inside the city government -- that is, a "self-investigation" on the alleged corrupt party by the alleged corrupt party.

In a response to critics that Hau's administration is controlled by a 4-person-gang later, which is the presumed reason for the incompetence in his government, Hau insisted [3] that he is the one who made the final decisions:

郝龍斌昨天說,市府決策都是集體智慧、分層負責、尊重專業,過程中有非常多人協助提供意見,但“最後做決策是我自己”

Hau Lung-bin said yesterday that the decision making process of city government is always about collective wisdom, echelon responsibility and respect of expertise. Many share their opinions, but the final decisions are always made by myself.

If that so, then it's obvious who is responsible. Therefore the so-called internal investigation looks like a scapegoat-pinning show to shirk his responsibilities.

Please, don't wake me up!

Meanwhile, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who always made strong anti-corruption claims to show off his determination on cracking down corruptions, keeps a blind eye;

The Control Yuan President Wang Chien-shien (王建煊), whose main responsibility is to supervise all levels of governments, keeps a blind eye;

The Taipei District Prosecutors' Office (台北地檢署), which won't hesitate to go full speed in response to any corruption rumor on the opposite party, keeps a blind eye;

Update: Finally, prosecutors raid Taipei City’s construction office. It is 3 weeks after continuous exposure of scandal evidence to the public by DPP's councilors. Why did The Taipei District Prosecutors' Office took so long to take action? Did they give the Taipei City enough time to forge compile/destroy crucial evidence that could implicate higher level officials ? How many documents have already been forged -- like the one shown in this article -- or destroyed already?

Despise that the TIFE scandal has already wasted tax money much more than the amount the former President Chen Shui-bian was accused corruption of, KMT Secretary-General King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) pledged [4] that the KMT will support Hau fully no matter what.

Thus, the entire system of Ma Ying-jeou and KMT's anti-corruption functioning went into hibernation, leaving the suspected officials -- who don't have the legal right -- to investigate themselves.

Case closed?

With a stunning efficiency (hey, the year-end election is coming!), mayor Hau announced [5] the result of this self investigation -- Chang, Chen and Huang are sent to the prosecutors' office, along with the Join Engineering Consultants (JEC, 昭凌工程顧問), the constructor in charge of all those alleged overpricing projects related to TIFE. No mention of responsibility of Specialized Commissioner Chi Lan-sheng, one of the signatures the Taipei City tried to hide.

The JEC, to which as huge as $13,000,000,000 New Taiwan dollars (~ $400 million US dollars) of tax payers' money went, was previously a KMT-owned property, and now still has the KMT as the largest stock holder. The company was ruled previously as illegal to carry out governmental contracts due to the company's notorious history of bribery and sex seduction, but the Taipei City government ignored the ruling and allowed them to take the contracts anyway. Further more, official documents show that Taipei City government already knew about the overpricing TWO YEARS ago [6], but allowed the overpaying to keep going. No matter how you see it, the entire flora scandal in Taipei looks more like a KMT-government-directed money laundering.

Further Readings:

2010.8.27: DPP city councilors file lawsuit against Hau
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2010/08/27/2003481406

2010.8.28: Hau apologizes over expo, overpass
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2010/08/28/2003481521

2010.9.5: Overpass task force short on answers
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2010/09/05/2003482147

2010.9.5: Taipei prosecutors begin investigation into city government overpricing scandal
http://englishnews.ftv.com.tw/read.aspx?sno=DC3DFF7E5A346859F79C0F7FE5CD0076
(Note: this page provides both text in both English and Chinese. While in the English version it says prosecutors start the investigation, it is not mentioned in its Chinese version. So far none of all news in Chinese I know ever mentioned that Taipei District Office started investigating)

Cited:

[1] The Join Engineering Consultants Finally Spoke out! Crucial: Who Gave the Order? Who Signed the Docs? Why the Amount Matched ? (昭淩終於說話了!關鍵問題是:誰是「鈞長」指令?市政會議、工程會報裡誰指示了?公文內簽誰曾看過?金額為何這麼剛好?)
http://www.yuyen.tw/2010/09/blog-post_04.html

[2] Forged Flora Expo Docs With Liquid Paper ? Big Difference In the Official Docs Given to Pro-blue and Pro-green Representatives (花博公文塗立可白?! 綠藍民代調閱差很大!!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HhqUxlEEC4

[3] Getting Rid of Flora Storm, Pan-Blue Pledged Full Support on Hau (擺脫花風暴 泛藍全力挺郝龍斌)
http://www.chinareviewagency.com/doc/1014/3/5/0/101435069.html?coluid=7&kindid=0&docid=101435069

[4] Battle Of Five Cities / Full Support to Hau to the End - King Pu-tsung (五都爭霸/力挺郝龍斌到底!金溥聰:對抗分裂的民進黨)
http://www.nownews.com/2010/09/01/91-2642184.htm

[5] Taipei City Hands Over 3 Officials to Justice For The Xinsheng Overpass Scandal (新生高弊案 北市3官員送辦)
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2010/new/sep/5/today-t1.htm

[6] Xinsheng Overpass / Taipei City Government Already Knew About the Overpricing Two Years Ago (新生高工程/報價有問題 北市府2年前就知情)
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2010/new/aug/29/today-t1.htm

2010/09/03

中國孕婦大量湧進香港產子


最近一期經濟學人雜誌報導中國孕婦大量湧進香港產子的奇怪現象。去年(2009)一年,中國內地到香港的遊客所生下的小孩,佔了香港當年新生兒的 36%。報導說這個比例還在快速增加中。

該文提到幾個原因:香港不受中國內地的單子政策限制;香港提供了比較好的產婦醫療保健制度;中國聲名狼藉的賄賂文化,使付不起高額賄賂的人民無法獲得好的照料。

此外,香港對新生兒的福利也是很重要的因素:一個新生兒在 12 歲之前,免付一切教育費,而且醫療幾乎完全免費。

當然在香港不止新生兒有比中國好的福利。於是,除了孕婦外,其他居住在中國內地享受比較便宜消費水準的人,也想要到香港分一杯羹。

為了解決這個問題,香港當局規定社會福利的申請者必須證明在香港居住起碼一年。但該規定被法院否決,原因是違反人民自由遷徙的自由。

底下是我對這個消息的看法:

中國近代史上,對邊陲地區包括西藏、新疆等地,每每利用人口的大量遷入來吸收當地資源。反正中國多的是人。現在連香港也要為了中國人的大量湧入而面臨本地資源被外地人截收享用的苦境,等於是辛苦工作讓外地人享福。

那台灣呢?台灣的社會福利跟香港的福利一樣好過中國太多,可以想像中國人會想盡辦法湧進台灣享受福利。而馬英九對中國的瘋狂開放,台灣人的稅金,變成中國人的福利,這是不是正把台灣人辛苦工作的成果拿去「供養」中國人呢?

參考: 無國界的媽媽 ─ 香港的嬰兒潮
Hong Kong's baby-boom - Mamas without borders


2010/09/01

Serious Data Leak Puts National Security in Jeopardy


The Liberty Times reported a serious security leak of the government (外交部員工電郵密碼 Google全都露), in which the private data (names, email addresses and passwords) of more than 2000 personnel of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) was exposed, including those of former and current ministers of MOFA, Francisco Ou (歐鴻鍊) and Timothy Yang (楊進添), respectively.

The leak was discovered accidentally by a netter when he/she was searching some info with Google and found a document containing all the data mentioned above. The document, with a substring "MOFA" in its filename, is stored on the FTP server of a company, 新寶網通公司, which is responsible for the internet service and security of MOFA.

The report is followed by a blame game: MOFA claimed that it's 新寶網通's fault. 新寶網通 claimed that it must be (that means, they don't know) some hacker(s) hacked into their server and opened it up to the public, otherwise it wouldn't have been accessible through Google (業者說明外交部信箱帳密外洩:備份伺服器被駭).

A side-note here: the document could also be public accessible if the company forgot to set the settings of access privilege of that file. Blaming it to unidentified hackers might make a internet-security company look less guilty. Incompetent, maybe.

This is not the first time the government data was leaked. In May, 2008, tax-payers' private data submitted to Ministry of Finance (財政部) for tax return was exposed (政府不設防 報稅資料也曾外洩). MOF blamed that to tax-payers, saying that some commonly used P2P softwares that users had on their computers caused that leak.

That leak was certainly less damaging than the current one that opened up a channel to national secrets.

Both MOFA and 新寶網通 claimed that the leaked emails and passwords were 5~6-year old and were no longer valid, so there's no security problem.

However, the data exposed contains that of both ministers served under Ma Ying-jeou's goverment (that is, within the past 3 years), but not that of former ministers served under Chen Shui-bian's government (廠商︰被搜到是六年前舊資料).

It's obvious that both MOFA and 新寶網通 are lying.

More crucially, evidence provided by journalists showed that people were still able to use some of the leaked data to login to MOFA's system until Aug. 26th, which was 5 days ago.

In response, 新寶網通 says that they don't know why.

Yea, who would have known ? The imagined hackers shouldn't have targeted them in the first place.

How long that data has been leaking? How many users hackers have already made use of that data to sneak into the MOFA internal system? When and how many secret documents fall into outsiders' hands? And to what extent the national security has been jeopardized ?

Since MOFA doesn't want to face the fact that the login data was still valid 5 days ago, should we assume they already determined that there's no need to consider possible security breaks and the case will be closed soon ? After all, we will all feel safe as long as we pretend this never happened.