Blog

  • Sebastian Vettel: Tighter Security Needed After Track Invasion

    Sebastian Vettel: Tighter Security Needed After Track Invasion

    Sebastian Vettel called for tighter security at the Singapore Grand Prix after a “crazy” spectator ran across the track in front of him and took a photo on Sunday.

    The Ferrari driver and eventual winner said he did a double-take when the man appeared shortly after the race’s halfway stage, an incident which prompted the safety car.

    Police said a 27-year-old man was arrested and was helping with investigations, without giving further details.

    “I had to look again because I wasn’t sure whether I had a problem with my eyesight or I saw somebody crossing the track,” Vettel said.

    “I went on the radio and said some guy’s crossing the track. I saw him taking a picture — I hope it was a good one at least, it was in focus!

    “Yeah, (it was) pretty crazy. We approach that corner around 280-290 clicks (kilometres per hour; 174-180 miles per hour). I wouldn’t cross the track if I was him so yeah, it was crazy.

    “Maybe next year they need to block the grandstands a bit better. Fortunately nothing happened to us and nothing happened to him, as far as I know.”

    Fans are positioned close to the track in some parts of the street circuit, most of which is enclosed by walls and tall metal fencing.

    Central Singapore grinds to a standstill for the race which snakes past modern and historic landmarks along usually busy roads of the former British colony.

    “I think he did a pretty good job, he was a quick runner. He crossed me from the right to the left,” Vettel said.

    “Pretty odd, obviously that’s not what you expect when you come round looking into the next corner.”

    Video footage of the incident showed the man walking down the side of a stretch of track before hopping through a gap in the fence.

    The safety car came out for four laps after the incident before the race resumed.

     

    Source: https://sg.sports.yahoo.com

  • Man Arrested For F1 Track Invasion

    Man Arrested For F1 Track Invasion

    Police have arrested an unidentified man who was captured on live footage sauntering on the race track midway through the Formula One Singapore Grand Prix (GP) on Sunday (Sep 20).

    At about 1am, police confirmed a 27-year-old man was arrested for Rash Act and is now assisting with investigations.

    The individual, who was clad in a T-shirt and boardshorts, strolled along the side of the Esplanade Drive section of the Marina Bay Street Circuit, where cars reach top speeds of 290km/h.

    Then-race leader Sebastian Vettel, who eventually won, radioed his team shouting: “There is a man on the track, there is a man on the track.” Runner-up Daniel Ricciardo also told his team that the individual “was taking a video”.

    The safety car was immediately deployed onto the race track but after a brief amble, the man hopped back into the stands.

    “I had to look again as I wasn’t sure if I had a problem with my eyesight and that I actually saw somebody crossing the track,” Vettel told reporters.

    “The team said on the radio that someone was on the track, I think I saw him take a picture so I hope it was a good one at least… in focus.

    “It was pretty crazy though, we approach that corner at around 280-290 clicks (km per hour) so I wouldn’t be crossing the track if I was him but it was good to see the safety car come out straight away.

    “Maybe next season we need to block the grandstands a bit better and fortunately nothing happened to us and nothing happened to him. It was pretty odd, not what you expect to see when you come around to the next corner.”

    Australia’s Daniel Ricciardo, who finished runner-up to Vettel, was not impressed by the intrusion, saying the introduction of the safety car might have cost him a chance of winning the race .

    “Thanks to the guy on the track…appreciate it!” Vettel joked. “I was tempted to swerve – clip him!”

    Shortly after the incident, another spectator at the Singapore GP tweeted a photo of a separately open and unmanned gate to the track.

    Similar invasions, while uncommon, have happened in the past, raising concerns about security at Formula One races.

    An Irish former priest ran onto the track during the 2003 British Grand Prix while a disgruntled Mercedes Benz employee invaded the Hockenheim track during the 2001 German Grand Prix.

    Earlier this year, a spectator ran across the track in front of cars travelling at 260km/h during practice for the Chinese Grand Prix.

    Apprehended by security and handed over to police, he explained that he had wanted to drive one of the cars.

     

    Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

  • High Court: Thaipusam Instrument Ban Legitimate

    High Court: Thaipusam Instrument Ban Legitimate

    The High Court has dismissed a move by three Thaipusam participants to challenge the ban on the playing of musical instruments during the Hindu procession.

    Justice Tay Yong Kwang made clear that, while the playing of instruments in the course of the procession is a religious practice protected by the Constitution, such a provision is restricted by public order concerns as provided in the same laws.

    “In my judgment, the police has shown legitimate public order concerns and their measures were directed at preserving public order,” he said in judgment grounds released last week. “The risk of a disruption of public order was not unreal. The connection between the music restriction and the preservation of public order was neither illogical nor unreasonable.”

    Messrs R. Vijaya Kumar, Balasubramaniam and M. Sathiamoorthy, who participated in the Thaipusam procession in February, had applied to court to lift the ban on the use of instruments – such as the urumi, a type of drum – and authorise their use at next year’s event.

    The application implicated the Government’s 42-year-old policy forbidding the use of musical instruments during the foot procession, which in recent times had been modified as police authorised religious hymns to be sung throughout the procession and broadcast from public address systems at three locations, noted Justice Tay. Musical instruments were also played within the temple grounds at the start and end of the procession.

    The applicants, represented by lawyer Eugene Thuraisingam, argued that their constitutional right to religious freedom had been breached by the police decision to restrict musical instruments for Thaipusam processions as this was a religious practice. He said “public order” must stem from “some real threat of violence or disturbance to public safety”.

    Senior Counsel David Chong for the Attorney-General disputed the claims, arguing that the applicants had no case for the relief sought, among other things. He said the application was premature as the Hindu Endowments Board had collated feedback on potential modifications for future processions, which was expected to be discussed with the Government soon.

    He explained the restrictions were meant to address the risks for communal disturbance and stressed that the potential public order issues cannot be underestimated. He pointed to the crowd build-up and congestion, given that the procession lasted more than 24 hours on a 3km route and affected major roads.

    Religious “foot processions” are fundamentally different from non-religious ones as religion is a sensitive issue in Singapore’s multi-religious context, the Senior Counsel added. He noted that riots had arisen out of a religious foot procession in 1964.

    Justice Tay accepted that the playing of instruments is an essential part of the procession, based on a Hindu expert’s report and the applicants’ submissions, but found it is not a universal practice. The judge also accepted that the trio had the legal standing to mount the court judicial review application.

    But he found that the police had shown there were legitimate concerns based on their ground intelligence and were in a better position than the court to decide what was necessary for public order and safety. He found the police had taken a “calibrated approach”, balancing applicants’ rights against public order issues.

    He also noted that Thaipusam had a religious dimension which attracted “public order considerations of a different degree and kind”, compared to the non-religious theme of the Chingay Parade and the secular nature of the St Patrick’s Day event, which the applicants had brought up.

    “History and current events in Singapore and around the world give ample justification to the police to pay special attention to events involving a religious element,” said Justice Tay.

    The applicants are appealing to the apex court, while the Attorney-General is also cross-appealing on the decision that the applicants had the requisite standing to mount this application, and the judge’s finding that, to some Hindus, the playing of musical instruments during the procession is part of Hindu practice.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Maarof Salleh: Perjuangan Untuk Mendapat Kelulusan Hijab Satu Amalan Hak Asasi Manusia

    Maarof Salleh: Perjuangan Untuk Mendapat Kelulusan Hijab Satu Amalan Hak Asasi Manusia

    Ini ialah komen saya akan posting En Maidin Packer berhubung isu tudung. Komen saya itu panjang, lalu saya pisahkan sebagai posting tersendiri.

    “Isu asas di sini bukanlah mahu mendesak pemerintah mewajibkan pemakaian tudung utk muslimat. Isu sebenarnya ialah meminta pemerintah tidak mengenakan larangan pemakaian tudung bagi muslimat di beberapa sektor pekerjaan, terutama sektor pekerjaan beruniform dan di setengah-setengah ‘front-counter’ pejabat/badan pemerintah. Dan itupun hanya mahukan pemerintah ‘membenarkan’ mereka yg mahu memakai tudung, bukan menyebabkan semua pekerja muslimat mesti memakai tudung.

    Dalam isu inilah, tindakan pemerintah utk terus mengekalkan dasarnya sekarang salah.

    Dan alasan yg terus dipegang pemerintah utk mengekalkan dasar itu jelas tidak dapat dipertahankan jika perkembangan di tempat-tempat lain diteliti. Malah ganjil utk diterima sebagai munasabah.

    Bagaimanapun, cara sebhgn pejuang tudung di sini mengetengahkan tuntutan mereka juga banyak yg salah.

    Ini termasuk cara mendesak yg kasar. Sebhgnya mengambil pendekatan mencela org lain yg tidak sealiran dg pemikiran mereka.

    Pendekatan mereka lebih merupakan pendekatan sebagai penghukum, sedangkan muslim tidak semestinya berada dlm kedudukan sebagai penghukum pd semua masa.

    Satu lagi pendekatan yg dipakai ialah menuduh sesiapa saja yg dianggap bukan golongan pejuang tudung sebagai melawan Islam. Pendekatan ini tanpa disedari mengasingkan mereka yg sepatutnya tidak wajar sengaja diasingkan dlm perjuangan ini.

    Pendekatan begini juga salah.

    Jadi, perjuangan menuntut pemerintah tidak meneruskan sekatan bertudung yg ternyata salah dan sukar dipertahankan kemunasabahannya, mesti memakai kaedah dan pendekatan yg bijak.

    Selain beberapa hujah yg sudahpun dikemukakan sejauh ini, yg perlu dibangkitkan ialah hujah bahawa membenarkan muslimat memakai tudung, misalnya dalam industri kejururawatan, tidak akan mengurangkan atau menutup peluang pekerjaan mana-mana pihak dlm industri berkenaan.

    Juga, perjuangan ini tidak seharusnya memakai alasan itu hak beragama semata. Malah sebaliknya, ia lebih merupakan satu amalan asasi kemanusiaan yg wajar dihormati. Misalnya, jika wanita mendedah aurat dg berseparuh telanjang, yg lebih mengundang musibah, tidak menimbulkan sebarang kegusaran, mengapa dg pilihan utk menutup aurat?

    Diharap pandangan ini tidak disalah anggap. Sebagai muslim, sikap dan pendirian saya tetap istikamah kpd prinsip: perintah dan sokong yg baik (amar ma’ruf), banteras atau bantah yg buruk (nahi mungkar).

    Dan perjuangan berprinsip ini menjadi tanggungjawab semua.

    Semoga kita terus sedar!”

     

    Source: Maarof Salleh

  • Woman Marries Man Who Raped Her Best Friend

    Woman Marries Man Who Raped Her Best Friend

    A woman went on with her marriage, even after being told that her husband had raped her best friend.

    Royal Army Medical Corps officer Daniel Howard, 29, was jailed last week for seven years for the attack which happened in February last year, reported the Mirror.

    He was accused of raping his then fiancee’s best friend, who was sleeping in the spare bedroom of his Darlington house.

    The prosecutor told the jury the victim was fully clothed in bed  when Howard entered the room and forced himself upon her.

    During the attack, he warned the victim not to tell his fiancee and when it was over, asked: “Have you had a good time?”

    After his arrest, Howard denied going into the guest room and having sex with the woman.

    The soldier claimed that the alleged victim had his semen inside her because she had used one of his sex toys.

    His new wife, April, had refused to believe he had carried out the assault and went ahead with her wedding just three weeks before his trial.

    However, he was convicted after a four-day trial in which he was accused of inventing a “ludicrous, cold-blooded and insulting” defence.

    The judge told Howard:”What you did was calculated. You relied on the victim keeping what you had done a secret burden to herself.”

    “You sought to degrade and humiliate her by concocting a wholly false and unwarranted allegation.”

    The victim, 26, has been diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder.

    She has since changed jobs and lives with the fear of being left alone, having anxiety attacks and taking pills to sleep.

    “I was meant to be the bridesmaid at her wedding. We were meant to have children at similar times and raise them together,” she said in her statement.

    “He loves April and April loves him so why this happened I will never know.”

     

    Source: www.tnp.sg

deneme bonusu