• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Another sad day for freedom of speech in Singapore

metalslug

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Messages
3,619
Points
48
http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/4352-another-sad-day-for-freedom-of-speech-in-singapore

Another sad day for freedom of speech in Singapore
Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Singapore Democrats

alan-shadrake.jpg


Mr Alan Shadrake's conviction and punishment for criticising the Judiciary marks another sad day for freedom of speech in Singapore. Sentenced to 6 weeks' imprisonment and fined $20,000, the 76-year-old British author was penalised for writing Once A Jolly Hangman in which he questioned the administration of the death penalty in Singapore.

But why, some ask, did Mr Shadrake, a Briton, do what he did? After all, he is not a Singaporean. Why did he speak up so strongly on a Singaporean matter when most Singaporeans themselves did not?

The short answer is that Mr Shadrake believes that justice transcends nationality. He saw the controversy surrounding the mandatory hanging of small time drug peddlers and to him a life is a life no matter which country that life came from. He stood up for what he believed in and for his right to freely and honestly express it.

Freedom of expression is the very core of his profession and, one suspects, his person.

Sadly, it is something that is alien to the Singaporean society. Freedom of expression has long been drilled into our heads as concept that, if practiced, harms our country. Of course the proponents of this view are themselves the rulers of this land. It doesn't take much to understand that if the PAP can banish free speech from this island, it controls the political narrative of this country thereby perpetuating its political dominance.

Many Singaporeans continue to buy in to this propaganda that political freedoms should be curtailed for the good of national unity and progress. Others, while not decrying these human rights per se, nevertheless believe they are irrelevant to the political situation in Singapore. The argument goes something like this: Human rights cannot increase my salary or free speech cannot get me a job.

Perhaps not. But it surely gives you that voice that you so desperately need to prevent the PAP from bringing in plane loads of foreign nationals who compete unfairly for your jobs. You can yell as much as you want but there's not a darn thing that you can do to stop the PAP. Not without free speech.

This is because with the right to freedom of assembly and speech opposition politicians cannot go out to speak publicly to the people and win their confidence. The laws and policies passed to prevent the opposition from public speaking while allowing the PAP to do so ensures that the public hears only one point of view.

It is because there is no freedom of speech that we are faced with the problems confronting us today. The plight of Singaporean workers having to contend with the flood of foreigners is but one manifestation of the denial of freedom of speech. Other problems such as our inability to withdraw our CPF savings or HDB prices going through the roof are all a result of the opposition having no avenue to reach out to the people.

The PAP have us by the throat. The danger now is whether we are too deep in this trap to extricate ourselves. Have we made a Faustian pact by sacrificing our political rights for economic progress?

The one party that continues to fight for freedom of expression continues to be targeted by the PAP. No surprise there. The Singapore Democrats recognised the problem a long time ago: The denial of free speech is the reason why the people are so helpless against the PAP's onslaught.

As a result, we made up our minds to work to claim back for Singaporeans their fundamental rights and in the process empower the people.

On the Internet the PAP continues, less successfully, to rubbish the importance of freedom of speech.

The Internet community must take the fight to the PAP. Let us not shy away from the struggle for freedoms of assembly and speech. Instead of servicing the falsehood that human rights are not important to bread-and-butter issues, we must educate Singaporeans that it is precisely the lack of our fundamental political freedoms that our economic woes continue to be ignored by the PAP Government.

It is only when we are able to freely express our views that we can liberate ourselves from the clutches of the PAP and live like rightful owners of this country again.
 
If SDP were to be in government and take this approach to freedom of speech, all manner of chow angmoh, smelly ahneh, ah tiong, pinoy, will take some many pot shots at Singapore, SDP will have to engage some Ah neh call center to outsource SG as a comprains centre.

Chee himself would be busy entertaining comprains from the rest of the world than to lead the nation effectively.

I say trial by Jury lah, more fair that way, but when I see this chow ang moh's face that look like a pedophile butt-fcuker, I oso want to send him to jail.
 
Freedom of speech is good, freedom of anyhow speech is not..
 
The impt question is: Did Alan shadrake write a book with careful attention to the facts, or did he write a book with some salt and pepper and seasoning thrown into the mixture in order to bolster his case?

I think you have to read the book, and do your own investigation, before you can come to the conclusion. Don't take anyone's word for it - neither Alan's words nor our judiciary's words.




If SDP were to be in government and take this approach to freedom of speech, all manner of chow angmoh, smelly ahneh, ah tiong, pinoy, will take some many pot shots at Singapore, SDP will have to engage some Ah neh call center to outsource SG as a comprains centre.

Chee himself would be busy entertaining comprains from the rest of the world than to lead the nation effectively.

I say trial by Jury lah, more fair that way, but when I see this chow ang moh's face that look like a pedophile butt-fcuker, I oso want to send him to jail.
 
phpxZWEkh.jpg

This angmoh, just like those 369 street gang, need to be taught a harsh harsh
lesson to wake up his idea.
To me, he is no different from those 369 gang ah bengs.
A hooligan and a menace and threat to our peaceful society.:D
 
Freedom of speech is good, freedom of anyhow speech is not..

Freedom of speech comes with responsiblity of speech.

Whatever you say, you are free to say it, but you are responsible to what you have said and be made responsible if what is said turn out not to be what it is.

This is not a sad day for freedom of speech, more like a sad day to those who are irresponsible and they know, they will be taken to task and cant get away with it.
 
The impt question is: Did Alan shadrake write a book with careful attention to the facts, or did he write a book with some salt and pepper and seasoning thrown into the mixture in order to bolster his case?

I think you have to read the book, and do your own investigation, before you can come to the conclusion. Don't take anyone's word for it - neither Alan's words nor our judiciary's words.

I do agree with what you are saying here.

We need to read both the book as well as the judgement point out about the inaccuracy of the facts to determint if he deserve the judgement and punishment.

However, I do not see this as a denying of freedom of speech, just aking sure that speech comes with responsiblity as well.
 
Alan Shadrake should behave himself. 75 years old and still so kuailan
 
From what I read above, it showed that Sinkies will still be under Lee PAP for many years to come, even if Lee is to put his 3rd and 4th generations decendant to rule Sinkies, Sinkies still doesn't know what's going on!
 
From what I read above, it showed that Sinkies will still be under Lee PAP for many years to come, even if Lee is to put his 3rd and 4th generations decendant to rule Sinkies, Sinkies still doesn't know what's going on!

We should attribute that feat to the successful education system we have!
Sadly though, that is the only success. But to the MIW, this is THE success that is most critical to allow them to rule and rule and rule.
 
By bring Alan to court and charging him with defamation - is the gahmen saying, whatever he wrote in the book is false?

Despite what he wrote in the book regarding hanging small-time drug mule and the obvious plight and background story of the traffickers - the fact remain that they indeed attempted to smuggle drugs into Singapore - which our law says - its death penalty. Simple, you not happy, don't come into Singapore.

I for one is for the death penalty for murder and drug traffickers. In his book, the weight of the cases are on drug traffickers and their 'sorry' background or some extreme circumstances that lead them to smuggle drugs - there are a few cases about murder too.

Of course, in writing the book, he might have added salt and pepper or added contents in his own flavor to 'spice' up the facts. Some cases that he wrote - indicate that our judical system tend to favor foreigners or when the government exert their influence, we 'bend' our rules. Is that true? If it is not true, i ask the government to come out and state so.
 
actually its bizzare - is the book banned in Singapore? I don't recall MDA says its banned right?

if it is not banned, why is it not available here?
 
By bring Alan to court and charging him with defamation - is the gahmen saying, whatever he wrote in the book is false?

I don't think he was charged for Defamation. He was charged for contempt of court coz he stated that the courts are controlled by the ruling party
 
Last edited:
From what I read above, it showed that Sinkies will still be under Lee PAP for many years to come, even if Lee is to put his 3rd and 4th generations decendant to rule Sinkies, Sinkies still doesn't know what's going on!

Some will even think its another bonus[same, same those freebies B4 elections], many would be unhappy and wait for the next guy to protest and the remainder will think its the act of God that this happens.
 
Some will even think its another bonus[same, same those freebies B4 elections], many would be unhappy and wait for the next guy to protest and the remainder will think its the act of God that this happens.
Why do u think MM LKY dare proclaiming to the world

I won every SINGLE elections.

BUT HE DID NOT TELL THE WORLD
THAT MY ERECTIONS ARE VERY FREE BUT NOT 100% FAIR!

MM LKY IS EXTREMLY SKILLED!
 
Everyone in this thread, with the exception of yours sincerely, need to have their memory tested. U cannot miss something u never had. Singapore has not known Freedom of Speech since the PAP took over, that's 40 odd years now. How can it be a sad day for freedom of speech when there never was this freedom in the first place? People wake up your ideas.
 
Why do u think MM LKY dare proclaiming to the world

I won every SINGLE elections.

BUT HE DID NOT TELL THE WORLD
THAT MY ERECTIONS ARE VERY FREE BUT NOT 100% FAIR!

MM LKY IS EXTREMLY SKILLED!

The funny parts are:-[1] pap govt is so uncorrupted, the Leetizens are corrupted; [2] the govt bribes its Leetizens with public fund, B4 elections. No wonder people say lawyer lky is smart and he is dealing with simpletons.
 
The funny parts are:-[1] pap govt is so uncorrupted, the Leetizens are corrupted; [2] the govt bribes its Leetizens with public fund, B4 elections. No wonder people say lawyer lky is smart and he is dealing with simpletons.
"No wonder people say lawyer lky is smart and he is dealing with simpletons."

Speaking fr personal experience,I agree.

I always like to repeat the world LEEGALISED,not easy to explain though.

THat is why I agree whole heartly that LKY is indeed SMART!
 
Back
Top