Rilek1Corner

Tag: Amos Yee

  • Amos Yee: Still Donate To Amos Yee

    Amos Yee: Still Donate To Amos Yee

    The crowdfund for my court case is over, as of now I’ve managed to raise approximately 20 thousand dollars, and it’s a pretty awkward turn of events…

    Because initially, I really thought that when I had broken the terms of the bail, I had to reimburse either my parents or Vincent (The molester), 20 thousand dollars. But the judge never fully revoked the bail, I mean right now I am still released on a bail of $10000 until my sentence (Oh and I would like to clarify, it is not my father who is currently my surety, but my mother, I don’t how you can fucking have a bailor you might be filing a restraining order on), so we never had to forfeit the $20000 that I would have taken from the crowdfund.

    In addition to that 20 thousand dollars needed to pay for the bail, I also estimated an additional 10 thousand dollars needed to pay for all the court expenses, and therefore claimed I wanted to raise a total of 30k.

    That estimate was really off, ultimately I didn’t really need that much money, in fact I don’t even think we’ve finished using up the $1500 deposit sent to my lawyers. Yeah, apparently if you play your cards right, a full-fledged trial can be that cheap.

    I would have told you guys to stop donating because you didn’t have to anymore, but I was in prison so…

    Now, I don’t want 20 thousand dollars just lying dormant in a bank account and neither do I think my fellow donatees do, so…. My fellow donatees, can I perhaps pocket the money? 😀

    Now I do like to acknowledge that my crowdfunding is much, much less successful that Roy’s, because over the course of like a month, I raised 20 thousand dollars, but Roy was able to raise 36 thousand in the very first day, so I am highly jealous. But that’s great for Roy, because he actually had to pay his lawyers a really fucking hefty sum, while I didn’t.

    So now I’m conflicted, and deciding whether or not I should pocket the money specifically meant for my court fees, to myself (I’m leaning towards yes). This is a problem you will face if you promise that you will only spend that money on a specific thing.

    This is a problem, I wouldn’t be facing, in the next fund.

    If you are a fervent fan and you like my videos, my blog or my Facebook posts, then do donate to:

    My Paypal account : [email protected]

    My Bank Account: OCBC SAVINGS : 656-9-110387 (Swift Code: OCBCSGSG)

    Or if instead of giving money wholesale, you prefer monthly pledges, then I direct you to my patreon page: http://www.patreon.com/amosyee

    This avenue to show support for my work will continue indefinitely. And this support of course, really helps in basic living expenses, which I acknowledge being underage and primarily living off my parents, I have not been inflicted with the issue of paying the bills, but I probably have to, and want to, deal with that soon.
    In terms of my artistic endeavours, it will definitely help in attaining various equipment (Wacom Tablets, green screens, Legato Game Capture HD) And with those items, I can perhaps finally materialize the plethora of ideas I’ve been accumulating over the years, which could be extremely fun.

    And also, since many people have been imploring me to go overseas, and escape the tumultuous, stifling atmosphere of authoritative dictators that plagues the very fabric of our nation’s social regime (My-my). You can potentially help in funding my plane ticket too.

    And if I as a poor, innocent 17-year-old youth, unable to deal with the turmoil of Changi Prison, could have potentially come out as an emotionally distraught, raving lunatic. Therefore, you could also help in funding my psychiatric assistance too.

    Now you might argue that at this point, I am engaging in what is known in internet culture as ‘e-begging’ and in some respects, you would be right. I desire acknowledgement for my work, in the form of money, so that I have the means to buy some stuff that I like. Is that a bad thing? Haha no, why would it be?

    So do show your support and donate, and for the umpteenth time (I really can’t think of any truly creative ways on how to say ‘thank you’)I can’t express my absolute gratitude for you doing so.

    I would end off by making some sort of reference to jelly, but bananas are pretty cool too. See you around!

     

    Donating Info:
    OCBC SAVINGS : 656-9-110387 (Swift Code: OCBCSGSG)

    Paypal: [email protected]

    Patreon page: http://www.patreon.com/amosyee

     

    Source: https://amosyee.wordpress.com

  • Cherian George: Running To The Police Not A Mark Of Committed Citizenry

    Cherian George: Running To The Police Not A Mark Of Committed Citizenry

    On 15 May, Dr Lee Woon Kwang wrote to the Straits Times’ Forum page to lament if the “population at large [is] mature enough to handle” what academic Terence Chong called for – “open discussion in a frank and adult manner.”

    Dr Lee was responding to an earlier article in the same paper on “a deepening conflict between freedom of speech and Singapore’s OB markers of race and religion”, and how the Government has over-reacted to instances where these so-called markers were breached.

    The article cited the examples of cartoonist Leslie Chew and blogger Amos Yee.

    In both instances (and others as well) the two were arrested and investigated after complaints were filed with the police by members of the public.

    This default reaction of petitioning the police reveals “Singaporeans are over-dependent on the authorities for maintaining social peace”, said Cherian George, associate professor at the Hong Kong Baptist University.

    “Institute of Southeast Asian Studies sociologist Terence Chong said the over-reaction – and the willingness of the authorities to act on it – would ultimately result in a certain cultural bankruptcy,” the Straits Times said.

    “If censors take their cue from the most conservative or sensitive members of the public, then “art in Singapore is done for”, Mr Chong said.

    The two academics’ remarks prompted Dr Lee to write to the Forum page, where he said that “freedom of speech, as inspired by the West, has not brought much benefit to its people.”

    “Just look at the mess it created there with the free expression of anti-Islam sentiments,” he added.

    He cautioned that “[it] does not take much to destroy inter-racial and inter-religious trust and harmony, but it will take a lot of hard work and time to build these up again.”

    Dr Lee also referred to Dr George and said it was “easy for people outside Singapore to make such comments, as they do not have to live with any adverse consequences.”

    “Indeed, had Singapore listened to their advice in the past, it would not be what it is today,” Dr Lee said.

    On 18 May, Dr George wrote to the Forum page to respond to those remarks.

    He said that Dr Lee’s view “betrays the kind of attitude that would endanger the very harmony that he claims to prize.”

    “First, it is precisely because we treasure peaceful, respectful coexistence that Singaporeans should not automatically delegate disputes to the Government to mediate,” the associate professor said.

    “The instinct to lodge police reports instead of first trying to work through our differences horizontally is hardly a mark of a committed citizenry.”

    Dr George said such behaviour “does nothing to develop the social capital that is ultimately the best source of national resilience.”

    As for Dr Lee’s description of Dr George as part of the “people outside Singapore”, Dr George had this to say:

    “I remain a citizen with a home and family back in Singapore, and my current inability to work as an academic there is hardly due to a lack of emotional investment in the affairs of my country; quite the opposite. Thinking of the thousands of Singaporeans working overseas,

    “I hope Dr Lee’s remark is the kind of divisiveness that would be rejected by our public.”

    Dr George said it would be “fatal hubris” if Singaporeans thought that there was nothing they could learn from outsiders.

    “The challenge of balancing freedom of expression with other societal interests is eternal and universal; and the specific dilemma of dealing with racial and religious provocation is something most societies continue to grapple with.”

    The original letter by Dr Lee Woon Kwang is available on The Straits Times’ forum page. Dr Cherian George’s response is appended below.

    Tackling freedom of speech issues a universal challenge

    DR LEE Woon Kwang’s letter (“S’pore not ready yet”, last Friday) took issue with my comment that Singaporeans are over-dependent on the authorities for maintaining social peace.

    His response betrays the kind of attitude that would endanger the very harmony that he claims to prize.

    First, it is precisely because we treasure peaceful, respectful coexistence that Singaporeans should not automatically delegate disputes to the Government to mediate.

    The instinct to lodge police reports instead of first trying to work through our differences horizontally is hardly a mark of a committed citizenry.

    Furthermore, it does nothing to develop the social capital that is ultimately the best source of national resilience.

    This is not even a controversial view. Government ministers and grassroots organisations such as OnePeople.sg have repeatedly emphasised the need for Singaporeans to step up and take a stand, and not over-rely on the state.

    Second, Dr Lee dismisses views such as mine as the “easy” comments of “people outside Singapore” who “do not have to live with any adverse consequences”. For the record, although my quote reappeared in The Straits Times last week, the columnist got it from an article I wrote in 2011, before I moved to Hong Kong.

    But that is beside the point. I remain a citizen with a home and family back in Singapore, and my current inability to work as an academic there is hardly due to a lack of emotional investment in the affairs of my country; quite the opposite. Thinking of the thousands of Singaporeans working overseas, I hope Dr Lee’s remark is the kind of divisiveness that would be rejected by our public.

    Third, even when faced with non-Singaporeans’ comments, we would be indulging in fatal hubris if we duped ourselves into thinking that we had nothing to learn from outsiders.

    The challenge of balancing freedom of expression with other societal interests is eternal and universal; and the specific dilemma of dealing with racial and religious provocation is something most societies continue to grapple with.

    Nobody has found the answers, and everybody – yes, even Singaporeans – can learn from developments elsewhere.

    Cherian George (Dr)

    Hong Kong

     

    Source: www.theonlinecitizen.com

  • Amos Yee: Singapore Government Sucks But Opposition Also Manipulative

    Amos Yee: Singapore Government Sucks But Opposition Also Manipulative

    My mother, upon reading what Vincent had done to me, was absolutely horrified and disturbed, contacted Terry Xu of TheOnlineCitizen, to confirm that the moments I had mentioned concerning her in lieu of the Vincent story, was true, and to perhaps express it to the general public.

    However, as of now, Terry has yet to reply to my mother, even though he had been prompt in replying to her before, and voluntarily offering to write an article, explaining and showing the true nature of my mother’s police report.

    And Roy Ngerng who initially condemned me for my actions towards making molest allegations to Vincent. Now chooses to remain absolutely silent about the affair, after I had revealed the emotional abuse Vincent had inflicted on me.

    I asked him if he could assist in helping me confirm that the altercation he witnessed between Vincent and I, when we went to Public Enemy was true. But he refused to do so, still claiming that it’s to protect Vincent from any further harm.

    So Roy Ngerng thinks that hiding the truth, is advantageous for Vincent. Ahh… I see now why they are very good friends.

    But I think really, the true reason why Terry and Roy have refrained from talking about all of this, is simply because people just don’t like to admit that they have changed their opinions once further evidence have surfaced, because that might indicate that when they made their initial hasty judgement, they were wrong.

    And this is the reason, why PAP is able to rule the country for so long.

    The government in Singapore really fucking sucks, but then again, the opposition are manipulative too.

     

    Source: Amos Yee

  • Will The People Egging Amos Yee Do The Same If It Was Their Child?

    Will The People Egging Amos Yee Do The Same If It Was Their Child?

    The response to my previous article on Amos Yee, was not altogether unexpected. Many would agree, but there will be those who are so virulently anti-PAP, that any article that calls into question the actions of persons who are in some political or anti-establishment matter, will be met with derision.

    Some people are making Amos Yee into a political figure. Have they taken leave of their senses? He’s 16 for crying out loud. Which 16 year old should be a political figure?

    Anyone who ‘langgars’ (Malay for crashes into) the Govt, is a hero and must be supported at all costs. If you disagree, don’t support or worse condemn and question the actions of this person, you too must be condemned. But these people miss 1 key point, if you say the PAP is so bad that it disallows dissent and freedom of expression (and this is not altogether untrue), then by opposing anyone who disagrees with your point of view, you’re actually no better than the PAP. 1 must support all opposition parties or every single action by those who rail against the PAP. You cannot be different, you cannot support some policies or even like some PAP men, you must oppose all.

    Whatever happened to freedom to disagree? Why must I support Roy Ngerng, just because I also am not a PAP fan? Why can I not question Amos Yee’s actions since his arrest or offer a caution as in the article? Why must I only subscribe to your point of view – all out support? Some think by attacking the PAP at every turn, in the same vein as sites like FAP and others attack the Worker’s Party (WP), SDP and certain prominent opposition figures and political activists, they are combatting the PAP and cementing the ground in favour of the opposition.

    Some hardcore opposition supporters don’t realise the damage that people like Roy Ngerng and Leong Sze Hian are doing in regards to swing voters, whose votes are crucial.

    I beg to disagree, I think there’s a considerable middle ground, those who hardly comment on politics online, don’t follow either pro or anti-establishment or alternative sites or don’t really give a toss. Sure many of those in this segment of society, have also felt the effects of bad PAP policies in particular those concerning public housing, immigration, health care and transport costs, but their only action or input in politics will be that singular action – casting a vote. And there’s no guarantee whether they will vote opposition.

    Observing the conduct of some people who are very vocal, both online and in real life (attending protests, forums or speaking out), I am very worried that they are not doing the opposition cause as a whole any good. By being so extreme in their views, and the easy way they simply condemn and dismiss everyone who disagrees, they are putting off many swing or neutral voters. Worse they could be scaring them into not taking the plunge at the ballot box.

    I am not concerned by attacks or condemnation of what I write – I am not campaigning for anything and it won’t bother me if my blog is well read or not. In fact I’m quite amused by some of them. Take some the latest – that old chestnut – this blog is helmed by a PAP IB (Internet Brigade) or PAP supporter. (Which PAP IB/supporter calls for Lee Hsien Loong to resign? Calls the actions of PAP supporters reprehensible, condemns LKY for stifling dissent).  My post is too long winded (I agree). Roy and Alex Tan are heroes for speaking out (but do their content have substance, or is it generated to increasing viewership of their websites?). All these doesn’t bother me, it makes a good laugh between me and my friends. What concerns me is that these people think Amos has done nothing wrong and must have full unequivocal support.

    The Fault Lies with the Law.  

    They slam the Govt for prosecuting Amos. In actuality, 1 must first question the Police and then the AGC for acting so swiftly. No Govt Minister or MP called the Commissioner of Police or the DAG and specifically directed them to proceed all out to ‘whack’ Amos. This is always the misconception – if there is any evidence of this, it must be raised. Has any former police officer or DPP ever come forward to say, they were pressurised to act in a certain way by a politician? There cannot be political interference in the legal process. I have met many police officers and legal officers, they do not ‘receive a phone call’ and then given instructions. They do what they do, based on police reports filed (for the police) and the case filed submitted (for DPPs).

    Of course it’s open to speculation that these officers know which side ‘to butter their bread.’ But the real culprit is how the Law is fashioned. These officers are duty bound to follow the Law as it stands. I have met the case officers who handled some of the cases involving the SDP leadership and even knew personally 1 of the officers who had to detain Dr Chee Soon Juan. He like many of those mentioned are actually opposition supporters. They vote opposition, but when it comes to their duty, they are obliged to follow the Law.

    Ok let’s just agree with this TRS snapshot and blame the PAP, the question next is: Do you think the charges will be dropped just like that?

    Now this you can blame the PAP, for introducing/enacting such Laws. But the point is, having voted them in and given them a free hand to pass draconian laws, whose fault is it? You disagree with the Law, you should do 2 things, canvass widespread support and write in to the PAP or your respective MP saying why you disagree with the Law and want it changed. Not some anonymous online petition, actually writing in under your hand and name. The other is obvious – vote for someone else. But until either happens – you cannot simply disregard the Law as it stands merely because you disagree with it or think it’s unjust.

    Some people think online petitions like this have an effect. The answer is no, it’s just a gimmick that serves no real purpose. I read in Australia, MPs get sometimes 2,000 letters a week from their constituents telling them not to support something or change a law. This frightens politicians, voters in their constituencies writing in telling them won’t vote for them if they continue down a certain path.

    Ask yourself this, you say Amos is unfairly targeted, but will you go and do the same? Will go and produce a video in the same fashion? Will you and demonstrate outside the Court? You won’t right? Why? Because you know you will be on the wrong side of the Law.

    Amos Yee is not Blameless Either. 

    I read somewhere someone disagreeing with my take that Amos would not be prosecuted if this was in a ‘real Western democracy,’ saying my reference to ‘hate speech’ was wrong. Amos obviously did not produce hate speech, it’s merely ‘offensive.’ But my referencing that is to show, that there is no such thing as total freedom of speech even in the West. And given Amos’ conduct, even if he was in the West, it’ll be only a matter of time before he ups the ante and descends into that as well. Or if he’s smart enough to avoid that, the offensive nature of his content will eventually lead him down to a path of no return. He would go on insulting Christianity more and more, before next attacking Islam.
    Eventually he would piss the wrong people off and be subjected to violence, much worse than a mere slap.

    The Whole Point of that Article. 

    I can summarise that article under 3 key points:

    1) He’s being badly advised or no one is advising him correctly
    2) He’s not grasping the severity of his case.
    3) He’s in real danger of going to the Reformative Training Centre (RTC).

    You can dismiss me or my whole article, but you cannot make the case go away like that. You can blame the Police and Prosecution for acting so hastily. You can accuse them of double standards and mention other cases like Jason Neo’s, the RC member who threatened him with violence, the NTUC woman mocking a Malay wedding etc. And you have valid points there. But no matter how unfair it is, the lack of freedom of speech and the heavy handed manner, it will not make the charges disappear. At the end of the day the charges must be faced and combatted, if not, a clear and present danger exists.

    Amos Remains Defiant and Stubborn.

    Amos continues to remain defiant. In a bail hearing (Wednesday) before his trial commenced yesterday, there was a major climb down by the prosecution. Here’s some excerpts from a Today article:

    ‘Prosecutors offered to lower his bail amount by one-third to S$10,000 and not require him to report daily to Bedok Police Divisional Headquarters, provided the 16-year-old continues to go for psychiatric counselling. The ban on making postings on social media before his trial concludes, however, must still stand, while those that he had posted in breach of bail conditions have to be taken down.
    Amos, however, refused to budge on all three fronts.

    Decked in purple prison garb, Amos, who appeared in good spirits, frowned and shook his head when Deputy Public Prosecutor Hay Hung Chun called him a troubled person needing psychiatric help.
    When Mr Hay mentioned Amos’ blogged about his bail conditions in “not-too-polite terms”, Amos grinned.
    High Court judge Tay Yong Kwang questioned why it was so difficult to temporarily refrain from public online posts, and said the teenager would just have to learn to curb himself. With Amos’ refusal to go for psychiatric counselling, Justice Tay said he saw no reason to vary the bail conditions.’
    Sources close to his legal team have revealed that they have encouraged him to go psychiatric help/assessment and accept the lower terms. But he continues to be stubborn and maintain his own warp sense of right and wrong.
    Take his argument for not taking down the posts – it’ll still be available online! Simply put if I found an article that’s defamatory or inflammatory and posted it on my blog, I should ignore calls to remove it because it’s still available online. This cannot be correct. If the posts and video remains online, it will not be his fault anymore, so long as he himself doesn’t upload or post it.
    Lawyer Alfred Dodwell is doing his best and the latest argument on the legality of the obscenity charge is a valid one. But at the end of the day, he can only act on the instructions of his client, even if it’s a 16 year old kid. I’ve been told he’s been giving the correct advise to Amos who refuses to listen to the 1 person he should.
    And he’s taking it like some kind of game, grinning and smiling in court, when serious matters are being raised against him. Does he honestly believe that the Court will not take his demeanour and defiant attitude into account when determining what sentence to impose if it finds him guilty?
    Even the issue of going for psychiatric assessment is not a bad idea. If he’s found to be suffering from some kind of illness like an attention disorder or as I was informed, Asperger’s (his mother thinks so), it’ll help a lot in any sentencing. A court might be inclined to refer him for continual psychiatric help and as such agree to probation.
    Adults Behaving Badly.
    On Day 1 of his trial, it was revealed he decided to post the video even though he knew it will cause offence to Christians. And it was revealed he had consultations with some SDP members, who also directed him to watch Roy Ngerng’s videos and speeches. Roy also contacted Amos and wrote a really stupid article called ‘My friend Amos Yee.’

    Take a step back, read some of the rubbish Roy has posted. Do you think he’s been doing right by Amos? Shouldn’t he of all people advise Amos of the dangerous path he’s taking and not end up like him? Shouldn’t he of all people be vehemently encouraging Amos to comply and live to fight another day?

    I find these actions very troubling and reprehensive. What were these people thinking? Here’s a naïve 16 year old kid with no knowledge of politics and you encourage him? And Looney Fringe Roy instead of being a responsible adult and telling Amos, ‘No, this is my battle, I don’t need you to support me, please consider your future, you’re are in serious trouble. I too was arrested and charged in court, it’s a very serious matter, you should just cooperate, try and mitigate and hope to get off with a warning or probation.’
    What does Roy do? He writes in support of Amos, praising him for his honesty! He doesn’t chide or advise Amos to be respectful to his parents. (I read somewhere he called his mother a ‘bitch once’ and openly defied his father, provoking him into assaulting him). This is the same Roy that some people think is a hero! A hero who associates with kids and openly encourages them to continue down a dangerous path instead of warning them of the seriousness of the matter and consequences.
    What Advise/Action would People Egging him on do if it was their kid?
    As mentioned earlier, the extreme elements are all praising Amos, encouraging him and egging him on, just because he’s in a battle with the PAP.  What effect do you think this will have on him, together with the actions of Roy and others? Instead of realising he’s made a mistake, he will think he’s doing the right thing and should stick to his guns, which so far he has.
    But let’s for argument’s sake, agree with them – Amos is doing the right thing and should be praised, encouraged and egged on. The question to ask is whether they would do the same if it was their kid? Will they now tell or teach their sons and daughters to do what Amos has done? I think the answer is obvious.
    And how would they react if their own kid behaved like Amos? Refusing to listen (his mother told him not to upload the video, he wanted to wear pyjamas in court and purposely provoked his father until he snapped). The prosecution has made an offer to reduce bail and even his lawyers recommend going for psychiatric treatment. What will all these people do if their kids did the same, being openly stubborn, defiant and insisting on getting their own way?

    This is the image of Amos Yee people should take into account – just a kid. Not someone with worldly experience to battle the system.

    You want Amos to be your hero, but not your own kids. As I wrote in the earlier article, Amos is becoming a rebel for someone else’s cause. But just imagine if everyone he met, every adult including Roy, all tell him, ‘Never mind boy, you’ve already raised the issue of freedom of speech. You should be careful about insulting religion and there’s no point at this stage getting involved in politics. This is very serious, you can go to RTC, you better back down and just go through the motions the system requires. When you’re older, you can come back and be more involved in politics.’
    If everyone he interacts with tell him the danger and wrongdoings he committed (insulting religion, being disrespectful to his parents and even quitting school), you think he won’t be sceptical? He won’t hesitate and take stock?
    All those who egg him on should be ashamed of themselves. They are not discharging their duties as a responsible adult.
    RTC is very much on the cards, if not now then later. 
    I came across a comment saying I’m over-reacting, this is usually a fine case. Yes that’s possible, but only if you’re an adult. The guiding principle as far as the Courts are concerned with youthful offenders is rehabilitation. Of course the Court can if he’s found guilty, impose just a fine on all 3 charges.
    However the question 1 must ask, what is the prosecution going to ask for? You think after he thumbed his nose at every request they demanded he comply, they will be willing to recommend just a fine? After being told not to upload/take down or post further, he blatantly ignores. What if they agree to a fine and he goes and does this again? A fine looks very unlikely, most probably the judge will call for either a probation or RTC report.
    Ordinarily for a 1st time offender not involved in violent crime, probation is the norm. But before the officer recommends probation, there has to be certain things to suggest it’ll work. These includes:
    a) Supervision at home
    b) An ability to follow parent’s advice and instructions
    c) Avoid mixing with person’s of doubtful character.
    d) Interacts with similar minded disciplined kids his age, and not adults with no relation to him.
    e) Is either studying or finds a proper job.
    f) Will comply with terms of probation
    g) Will not be a spoilt brat who must always have his way.
    In the above (a), (b), (e) and (f) are the key factors. Has there been any indication up to now that Amos is prepared or capable of abiding by any of these? There has been none, and in that case, the RTC report will show:
    1) Will be under supervision 24/7
    2) Will have to undergo psychiatric treatment, if so directed
    3) Will be subject to discipline 24/7
    4) Can attend classes within RTC including doing his A levels.

    So Amos likes bananas. He thinks it’s funny to be photographed eating one outside court. A judge might assist him in his crave for bananas. I’m told bananas are often served in the RTC.

    Which of the 2 looks more likely based on all that has transpired? Even if he gets probation, but then goes and breaks the terms, he will go to RTC.
    Amos hasn’t done something that in normal circumstances will result in reformative training, but the conduct he has shown, the contempt, the disregard to instructions laid out by the Court and his refusal to listen to his parents, even his lawyers who are trying their best. All these are factors the judge may very well take into consideration and decide the only recourse is to send him to the RTC.
    Conclusion. 
    So to everyone who thinks he’s a hero, and deserves to be encouraged – you are doing more damage than good. He’s too young, naïve and immature to be your hero. He needs to be guided and given advice. You can condemn me, condemn my article – by all means, but are you doing the right thing for him? You will be terrified if your own 16 year old kid or brother did something like this. You’d never accept the kind of defiance, rudeness and total disregard for your authority. Why should it be any different with Amos Yee?
    Source:http://anyhowhantam.blogspot.sg
  • Amos Yee – A Response To Francis Micah Law

    Amos Yee – A Response To Francis Micah Law

    So Vincent’s son, Francis Micah Law, wrote a Facebook post, trying to validate the emotional abuse that his father had caused me:

    Most of the post is blatant pandering to his father, constant repetition of how what Vincent was doing was borne from kind-hearted intentions, most of which I have refuted extensively in my previous blog post, coupled with little ramblings of how he tried to attain his inner chee, attempting to give the impression that he’s a deep thinker, without actually being one.

    I’ll respond to some selected sections of the post.

    Amos claimed that nobody but himself knew what was going on? Well, now there’s me.

    No, you never knew what was going on. We had one conversation at your home, and the one-sided reasons your father gave to you on why he so kind-heartedly bailed me, and you claim that you knew exactly what he did to me?

    You knew that he intimidated me? You knew that he threatened to discharge himself 9 times? You knew I was completely miserable when I had to meet him every day?

    Wow… I see we have a psychic in the family.

    In many ways, my dad treated Amos almost like a son

    Wow, so like me, you experienced emotional abuse every day? Damn… you gotta speak up man.

    My dad did it because he saw a brilliant boy who needed a second chance. He didn’t care for the publicity, he wasn’t “jealous” that Amos was getting all the attention. All he wanted was to help Amos out of his predicament

    It’s so arrogant, that whenever you disagree with someone’s views, or their approach in doing things, you imply that they have some sort of problem that needs to be fixed, and they are in a ‘predicament’.

    So your father went in bailing me with such condescension, wanting to be the dominant one that gave advice. I can see why your father is now acting particularly insecure, now that he’s the one that is submissive.

    Part of my father’s conditions as a bailor was to keep in contact with Amos every 24 hours

    And yet Vincent told me initially, that he only intended to meet me once a week. Hmmm.. so suspicious.

    which, I must add, Amos wasn’t very compliant to.

    Yeah, no fucking shit I was not compliant, you do not need to ‘add’ anything. I’m sure that if you are absolutely miserable and experiencing emotional turmoil every day, you wouldn’t be considered ‘compliant’, now wouldn’t you?

    ‘There was once Amos came over to my place, he stared long and hard at a luggage tag in the shape of those green aliens from Toy Story 2. Convinced that Amos really liked it, my dad would look through every shop he passed by that might sell the luggage tag’

    I have not seen a luggage tag at Vincent’s house, I have absolutely no recollection of a luggage tag at his house, I am absolutely confused and shocked that there is a story about me seeing a luggage tag at his house. This is an absolute lie.

    I still remember his first words to me after we introduced ourselves to each other.

    “Hey Francis, your father is a great man. He bailed me out of jail!” With a wide grin on his face.

    Ahh.. you were seeing the manipulation at work.

    After-which we all sat down and had a chat about his plans for the future as well as our personal thoughts on education and film. I would say we all had a pretty good time. In that space, we all respected each other’s opinions which I was something I really appreciated.

    Ok this has absolutely nothing to do with Vincent, but it’s getting kind of distracting so I have to mention, please proofread your post. Like a few times before posting. Because it’s very clear that you didn’t.

    ‘wanted to fulfil is role as a bailor’, ‘which I was something I really appreciated’?

    I know there’s like a 40-minute time limit whenever you have to write an English composition, and you never have time to proofread your writing. But this is an internet post, you have all the time in the world.

    I see comments on your post and one of them was ‘brilliantly written’, what the fuck are they talking about? Can the prose be any blander? Does this phrase sound grammatically correct to you?

    ‘look through every shop he passed by’

    I mean I know I’m guilty of making spelling and grammar mistakes all the time, but regardless, I’m interested in how one can ‘look through’ a shop. Is the entire shop made of glass?

    You can tell why we are behind in the arts scene when people considers this ‘brilliant writing’.

    And no I didn’t, I completely disrespected your opinions, they were absolutely horrible.

    You were taking this thing called ‘Mass Commmunication’ in polytechnic where there was some kind of film course included.

    And I argued that especially with the availability of the internet, film schools are an absolutely inefficient and awful way to study filmmaking. If you did it by yourself, you are not constrained by a syllabus and can learn the techniques of filmmaking, from the movies that not your film professor, but you like, and make your independent film whenever you want. And people from Rodriguez, to Linklater to Paul Thomas Anderson, have already proven that.

    But then you were like ‘No! No! There are so many things that you can only learn in school, that you can’t learn anywhere else.’

    And yet you were never able to identify one.

    And concerning the fact that several film students have complained about how they were absolutely bored when they had to study the films their film professors put in the curriculum (Citizen Kane, Casablanca. God damn.. I wanna see some pulp fiction dude)

    You replied with one of the stupidest things that I’ve ever heard in my life:

    ‘Most of the time, you can’t learn things that you like, that’s part of learning’

    Ladies and gentleman, that’s basically the mindset that school teachers hold when they try to validate their horrid job, not feeling any remorse that they are spending 8 hours a day teaching material to kids that don’t give a solitary fuck.

    And when people come up to me and ask, ’Amos! How do you know so much stuff?’

    Well, not wasting my time on shit that I’m not interested in, and learning things because I want to instead of scoring well for an exam, kind of helps.

    And that is why, despite several people’s claims that I will have a much brighter future if I went back to study, and their enticements of students visas overseas, I will not accept it, because I am not going back to school.

    Just before he left (and stared at the luggage tag),

    What fucking luggage tag?

    he turned around and said, “You know Vincent, I wasn’t so sure about this before, but this was quite nice. We should do this again sometime.”

    Wow I was really good wasn’t I?

    let me quote two passages in the Bible that explains my reaction to his allegations.

    Matthew 5:44 “But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”

    Mark 12:31 “The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

    But your dad instead decided to uphold these other 2 passages:

    Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him. -Luke 12:5

    Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written … him only shalt thou serve. – Matthew 4:10

    As a Christian myself, I believe that responding in love instead of hatred would not only be a more peaceful solution, but a more constructive one as well.

    So if Vincent rapes me, I should respond with love?

    I could take legal action against him,

    Go ahead

    get him and the media to apologise

    No you can’t.

    or I could just forgive him and find an alternative solution to protecting my father’s reputation.

    Your father emotionally abused a child, I don’t know how much ‘protecting’ you can offer.

    my father’s choice in bailing Amos out was not a mistake.

    Tell that to Jolovan.

    I firmly believe that he was right to offer Amos a second chance and I fully support my father in this matter.

    You fully support your father emotionally abusing a 17-year-old boy. Wow… like father like son eh?

    If anyone has any questions regarding what I said above, please do not hesitate to contact me.

    Oh hi I have a question, what the fuck is wrong with you?!

    So it seems that in a stunning display of nepotism, Francis has so boldly came out of the shadows, validating his father’s actions and advocating child pedophilia as a method of showing ‘care and concern’, I am so fucking fearful for Francis’ future kids.

    And I would also like to point out the fact that Francis did not even mention the evidence that really proved that his father was a dick.

    He didn’t mention the frequent threats his father made to discharge himself, he didn’t mention still pushing himself in my line of vision at court, even when I and many people had made it clear that I never wanted to see him again. He didn’t mention his father advocating freedom of speech and the release of me and then afterwards threatening to sue me for defamation.

    You know because I want to portray my dad as the victim of the situation, so don’t mention all that stuff and hopefully nobody will noticed. Well I noticed. Ah hah, I got you there Francis, you might be able to fool everyone, but you can’t fool me.

    So I’m sure Francis has read my blog post concerning his father’s molestation. So that means that in Francis’ view, threats, intimidations and emotional abuse are now considered ‘counselling techniques’ and an expression of ‘love’ and ‘care’.

    And unfortunately Francis isn’t the only who thinks that way, because looking at the comments on the ‘My Abusive Father’ blog post, my father hitting my head on the ground, almost killing me, that is validated as the actions of a parent, done simply because he ‘cares’ for me. They coin that method as the ‘chinese way’.

    So we live in a society, where emotional and physical abuse, is a form of showing one’s care and concern. Wow…. For me and everyone out there, I am terrified.. I am really fucking terrified….

     

    Source: https://amosyee.wordpress.com