Category: Politik

  • Kenneth Jeyaretnam: How Not To Get Charged With Sedition

    Kenneth Jeyaretnam: How Not To Get Charged With Sedition

    The  editors of the The Real Singapore, Ai Takagi and Yang Kaiheng, have been charged with sedition for stirring up ill will between Singaporeans and foreigners. Takagi has already pleaded guilty to four counts whilst her husband is claiming trial.

    Many  of us Singaporeans are still unsure what sedition actually is even when we know it’s a law left over on the statute books from the British colonial oppression. The common law understanding of sedition is of a political crime or speech threatening to overthrow the State by unlawful means. Singapore’s Sedition Act departs from common law understanding in several distinct ways one of which includes “the promotion of  feelings of ill will or hostility between races or classes…”   Whilst the alleged editors of TRS mostly upset the feelings of PRC Chinese and Filipinos, this expansion of the Sedition Act is more often used to protect the sensibilities of Malays who are largely Muslim. This stems from Article 152 of the Constitution which protects our Malay Singaporeans as the indigenous people of Singapore and Islam as their religion.

    It is important to remember that the Right to Free Speech  which is  guaranteed to us by Article 14  of the Constitution does not exist as a stand alone right in Singapore. Free Speech is not in fact free but is restricted by eight grounds one of which is Sedition. For bloggers  and netizens in our beloved Republic not knowing the definitions can be rather risky. When you cross the  blurry line you can end up facing criminal and/or civil charges. Sedition carries a maximum fine of S$5,000 and up to 3 years in jail.

    Luckily I  can now shed some light on the mystery of Sedition Singapore style. Hopefully  this will keep you all safe whilst you post rabid thoughts on Facebook, Twitter  or WordPress at one 0′ clock in the morning.  Here is my foolproof guide to staying out of jail. You are welcome!

    KJ’s guide to staying out of prison for offences including but not limited to Sedition

    1. Post a disclaimer.  It can be a lie or insincere such as “Everything I say is untrue and I’m just making fun of races and ethnic minorities or Singaporeans with darker skin so I’m not an actual racist ok ah?”   Choose your own words. Try to reference satire. That’s a fail safe  ‘get out of jail even for racists’ card.

    2. Tell the truth.  (Best used to prevent charges of defamation) This is a method that seems to work for me as I’ve never been sued no matter how unpalatable the questions I ask. I’m not a racist or Foreigner-hater either  which helps, although I continue to question our open door immigration policies or suggest fairer deals for Singaporean citizens.

    3. Join a Political Party and not necessarily the PAP. Obviously being a high up in the PAP or grassroots or a founding father of the Nation brings its own ‘get out of jail card’. Yet, most Singaporeans think they are safe staying under the radar by blogging as individuals or not actually joining a Party. This was the big mistake of the so-called Marxist conspirators in 1987. By failing to join the Workers Party they lost the protection of legitimate political expression and left themselves open to claims that they were in fact secret Communists. (Note this does not keep you safe in Malaysia)

    4.

    “TRS made $500k from ads in 17 months”. 

    Be careful not to make any money. I can reveal that the best  way not to cross the sedition line is to avoid making any money or attracting a large number of views. So do not monetise your blog. Whatever you do, do not advertise on your blog or ask for donations because it’s clear from the reports that what is really eating the Government is the amount of money the alleged editors of TRS  made. The State Times headline today on page 8 is that,  TRS made $500k from ads in 17 months“.  The report also adds “But, in fact, it was a big cash cow that raked in almost half a million dollars in advertising revenue for its owners in just 17 months.”   

    One wonders whether their actual crime was in running a profitable business? While I find TRS’s stoking of xenophobia distasteful, it is unfortunately one of the things that comes with a free media. In the US and the UK several newspapers make a living by stirring up xenophobia, such as the Daily Mail. They may not uphold the highest standards of journalistic ethics but as long as they do not cross the line into advocating violence they have a right to report. UK readers have a right to complain to an independent Press Complaints Commission which can order that the newspaper publish a retraction or make redress. But no one disputes their right to make money from journalism or their right to appeal to the prejudices of their readers in an effort to make money.

    In Singapore’s case of course double standards apply. What really exercises the PAP Government is seeing that an independent media not be allowed to develop in Singapore. The best way to stop that happening  is to cut off a publication’s source of funding, particularly advertising. TRS’s huge numbers of views (134 million page views in its last year) make the State online media look bad by comparison despite the monopoly that they enjoy. Ultimately if TRS was not shut down and made and example of they would threaten the financial viability of the Government media. I suspect TRS’s popularity in terms of views was stealing readers directly from STOMP.

    The campaign to shut down TRS has direct analogies to the way LKY waged war against the foreign media in the 1980s. He said that if they carried reports critical of him or his Government that he would ensure that they earned no advertising revenue in Singapore. Newspapers like the Wall Street Journal, the Far Eastern Economic Review and the Economist were sold in Singapore without adverts when they fell foul of LKY.  Western Governments spinelessly failed to defend their newspapers against what amounted to an illegal  trade restriction  in breach of World Trade Organisation rules. In time the newspapers kowtowed and self censored eventually not carrying anything too critical of the PAP or the Lee dynasty. LKY was absolutely right of course. The perfect way to control overseas media or any critical voice is to hit them in their pockets.

    The PAP in essence run Singapore like  a Communist state although this is heavily disguised and often misunderstood.  Most of the economy  including the Media is controlled by the Government. Even private businesses are often dependent on contracts to supply Government-owned companies or on subsidies paid for by the taxpayer. Almost all land is ultimately owned by the Government making the Government  the Landlord of most businesses.  If you tow the line or better still support the PAP enthusiastically then you will be allowed to make money. If you fail to play the game you will soon find yourself in trouble for breaching vague and ill-defined regulations or sued into bankruptcy using oppressive defamation laws.

    Those laws that may be breached are  vaguely defined in the first place and interpreted by judges  who in turn are appointed by the people suing, the very definition of conflict of interest.  The PAP has extracted money by milking the  citizen cash cow, hobbling her, failing to provide adequate health care and then housing the Cash Cow in a very basic yet severely overcrowded barn. By these means the PAP has built up our supposedly huge reserves which are a very useful tool indeed when it comes to buying friends and influencing people abroad.

    cash-cow

    The DPP has accused the TRS duo of fabricating stories yet the State media do this all the time.  Stomp, owned by the State Times, frequently runs similar stories to TRS yet they are allowed to get away with appalling standards of journalism. The Finance Minister and the Government fabricate figures in the Budget where vast sums of money are unaccounted for. Money is allocated to funds which then disappear with no accountability.

    Takagi and Yang  who presumably ran a business for profit are accused of “pocketing” money yet the Government, not supposed to be a for profit business, does that. If this case was really about stopping the stirring up of ill will between different races then LKY would have been convicted long ago for his comments about Malays, Indians, Muslims, Africans and whites. What it is really  happening here is that no one who criticises the Government or the Lee family can be allowed to make a living in Singapore. There is a direct line running from  the suing of  foreign newspapers in the 1970’s to the bankruptcy of my late father JBJ , the persecution of Doctor Simon Shorvon and the recent action against Roy Ngerng and  Amos Yee and all others who dare to offer an alternative to the PAP/Lee family hegemony.

     

    Source: https://sonofadud.com

  • Starving Animals Up For Sale At Gaza Zoo

    Starving Animals Up For Sale At Gaza Zoo

    GAZA — A Gaza zoo owner is putting the last of his starving animals up for sale.

    Mr Mohammad Oweida once hosted family and school outings at his zoo in Khan Younis in the southern part of the Palestinian territory. But war and economic hardship intervened to turn the venture into what is now a sad collection of 15 emaciated animals that he can no longer afford to feed.

    “I have to sell them in order to save them,” said Mr Oweida, 24, sitting near the cage of a tiger who had not eaten for four days.

    In all, he said, some 200 animals, many of them smuggled across the tightly controlled Egyptian border in tunnels, have starved to death in the zoo since a seven-week war between Israel and Palestinian militants in 2014 prevented him getting enough food for them.

    Mr Oweida stuffed 15 of the animals he lost, including a lion, a tiger and a chimpanzee, and put them on display for children to pet. But the visitors now stay away.

    He said he was negotiating to sell the hungry tiger for around US$23,000 (S$31,743) to a Gaza resident who used to raise lion cubs. Other animals on offer included an ostrich, a turtle and a pelican.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • Inderjit Singh: Singapore’s National Identity Issues Need To Be Addressed

    Inderjit Singh: Singapore’s National Identity Issues Need To Be Addressed

    Former Member of Parliament Inderjit Singh does not mince his words when talking about several issues the government needs to look into in order to show that it is in touch with the people on the ground.

    In an interview with Inconvenient Questions (IQ), he shared his thoughts on what on what makes a Parliament that has better checks and balances, and how the government can avoid falling into the elitism trap.

    He also said that his wish for Singapore society was a stronger national identity. In relation to that, Singh, who has previously pointed out the issues around integration in the Indian community, noted that integration remains an important issue that needs to be addressed in Singapore.

    “Today, we have a situation where integration is not happening as well as we want to. People don’t identify together as Singaporean as much as we want to,” he told IQ.

    He stressed that it is crucial that Singapore focuses on developing a national identity. “In times of difficulty, this commonness is what will help us pull through a difficult period.”

    Watch the full interview below:

     

    Source: https://sg.news.yahoo.com

  • Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Constitutional Commission Must Create System Enabling Election Of Independent And Effective President

    Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Constitutional Commission Must Create System Enabling Election Of Independent And Effective President

    Reviewing the last Presidential Election 2011.

    In the last Presidential election I lost narrowly to the current President Tony Tan by a mere 0.34%.
    .
    Last month the government appointed a Constitutional Commission to study and make recommendation on specific aspects of the Elected Presidency relating to the qualifying process for presidential candidates.

    I strongly encourage Singaporeans to make submissions to the Commission to ensure that we have a Elected Presidency system that will enable us to elect a Truly Independent and Effective President. The Elected Presidency is created to provide some check on the use of our reserves and appointments of certain top civil servants.

    Make your views known now on why the need to change..It is important for the future of Singapore.
    .
    There are three aspects the commission has been tasked to review.
    1. whether the eligibility criteria for such candidates should be updated , and if so how?
    2. It will also study the framework governing the exercise of the President’s custodial powers, including whether the views of the council of Presidential Advisors can be given more weight and if so how.
    3. Ensuring that Minorities have the chance to be periodically elected to the Office of the President.

    The 9 members are as follows: Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, Justice Tay Yong Kwang, Mr Eddie Teo, Chairman PSC, Abdullah Tarmugi, Member,Presidential Council on minority rights ,Prof Chan Heng Chee , Mr Chua Tian Poh of Ho Bee Land, Mr Philip Ng of Far East organisation, Mr Peter Seah of DBS, and Mr Wong Ngit Liong of Venture Corporation.

    The Commission is now inviting written submissions by Singaporeans. The deadline is 21 March 2016 and the submissions may be sent to the Constitutional Commission Secretariat via the following 2 methods: Email: [email protected] Post: 1 Supreme Court Lane, Singapore 178879.

     

    Source: Dr Tan Cheng Bock

  • Ng Eng Hen: SAF Commanders Must Continue To Train Professionally

    Ng Eng Hen: SAF Commanders Must Continue To Train Professionally

    I wrote this note to MINDEF and SAF staff:

    When emotions are running high, we must respect the decisions made by our Courts, who have come to an objective and impartial assessment given all the facts. The Coroner’s inquiry has ruled on the cause of the death of PTE Lee Rui Feng Dominique Sarron. The High Court judgement in awarding MINDEF costs is based on sound legal grounds and precedents. But we need not add to the pain and anguish of the family of the late PTE Lee. We should waive the costs to the family.

    We should also emphasise to our SAF commanders that they should continue to train their men professionally, with due regard for safety regulations. I know that our commanders care for their men and that no one wishes for their trainees to be injured or worse still, face death. We must learn from every accident, fix lapses and improve. This is the way we honour all those who have given their all to build a strong and honourable SAF.

     

    Source: Ng Eng Hen

deneme bonusu