Slashdot Mirror
Singapore Blogger Spared Jail
afaik_ianal writes "A Singaporean blogger, who pled guilty to sedition charges last month for posting anti-Muslim remarks in his blog, has avoided a custodial sentence, and has been placed on 2 years probation instead. According to the article, the 17 year old student is the third person to be convicted under Singapore's sedition laws in October. Singapore, which is unconcerned by wide criticism of its record of press freedom, appears to have been stepping up efforts against bloggers in recent months."
...Singapore treats bloggers like they do "Real Journalists".
*sigh*
So who first told the police about the existence of the Internet, and why?
So it is illegal for Christians to flame Muslims and it is illegal for Muslims to flame Christian or Jews.
The problem is that one group of religious nutjobs takes flaming the others quite literally.
Also, I don't see why any of them should be spared criticism. I'm an atheist, and I'm always on the receiving end of some well-meaning advices to get me into religion, but for some reason we religion-less folks aren't allowed to criticize those who believe in fairy tales that involve some god or another...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
It is a good thing that something similar to this never will happen in Europe!
Dvorak on Doomtech
I am actually considering moving to Singapore, and read about this while I was researching what it is like. Singapore actually is kind of to me, an interesting experiment in censorship. On the one hand, as a liberty-loving American, I'm wary of a place where speaking your mind can get you thrown in jail. On the other hand, singapore has one of the lowest crime rates in the world, is one of the cleanest countries in the world, has a very uncorrupt government, and somehow manages to keep a lot of different ethnicities (Chinese, Malay, Indian, many more) together mostly peacefully--in the most densely populated country on the planet, no less. This makes me wonder how much of it is due to the strict laws regarding racism, censorship, and morality (a lot of movies are censored or banned, pornography and oral sex is illegal, etc).
Basically, I see the censorship/nanny state-sim, and I see the apparent economic and social success of the country, and I have to wonder how much they are related. And I wonder if I would give up some of my rights to live in a country that seems to be doing just fine without them.
WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.
Large organized religions, especially Islam and Christianity, have been a curse to mankind, the cause of hundreds of millions of deaths and the worst cruelties, and continued poverty and ignorance. As an example of how brainwashed we are on the subject, point out how evil the nazis were and normal people agree; point out the Roman Catholic Church has murdered and persecuted more Jews than Hitler, and all of a sudden you get labelled as "intolerant". uh-huh....
Being from Singapore myself I can say that Singapore never has been free - it makes a superficial attempt at looking like a democracy, but thats just to appease outsiders. Things like other political parties aren't legal... and people have been known to disappear if they hold the wrong views...
Actually Singapore is a market economy. It's one of the reasons they've been able to turn their economy around since they had a recession in 2001. The government is very business-friendly.
WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.
In Iran (where I live) this is no news, it just happens everyday! the only difference is that jail is the simplest thing that could happen to a blogger!
you're right, and I only used RCC as example. Got modded "troll" in less than five minutes too, proving my point. Note that I don't treat any person badly or even differently because of their religion, and I myself come from a background of a religion that has done evil things too. Most all of my friends and relatives are of various organized religions that are doing and historically have done very bad things. But I'm saying its important to have the right to point out the bad things organized religions have done and are doing; while not harming any person or inciting hate for any person.
Athiests dont have religious beliefs. Thus people are able to critize our beliefs and we not theirs. i get this shit all the time, whenever some idiot says something ridiculous and then hides behind religion. Religion gets exempted all the time for their beliefis but athiests are never given the same benefit. Take for example Contenscious Objector status, you aren't allowed to object on a rational framework that killing is immoral, only a deeply held religious belief. Other great examples are bicycle helmet exemptions for sikhs. Or multiple wife exceptions for Muslim immigrants (in Canada). Religious exemptions just go to show how trivial and unimportant our laws are, basically saying if you believe in a fairy tale then you dont have to follow the law.
What did he actually say? I can't find information anywere. If it's something that I don't want hear, then I guess that's ok.
Speaking as one who asked for and received honourable discharge as a conscientious objector while serving in the United States Navy, and became very familiar with the regulations, you are simply wrong. Since a 1968 Supreme Court case, the military has not required that the objector present any religious beliefs, just a deeply held moral belief that killing is wrong. Nowadays due to stop-loss policies it's hard for anyone to leave the military as a CO, but several years ago when I left there were always successful COs who were atheists or agnostics. Look at MILPERSMAN (NAVPERS 15560 D).
The Sydney Morning Herald is a little light on details. Gan Huai Shi's community service will be performed among the Malay-Muslims, the community he once expressed his racist sentiments. The Straits Times wrote: "His 180 hours of community work should also take place at Malay welfare organisations such as the Jamiyah Home for the Aged, Pertapis Children's Home and Muhammadiyah Health and Day Care Centre for the Aged."
There is also a story behind his anti-Malay/Muslim remarks.
"Mr Pereira told the court the youth's animosity towards Malays stemmed from the traumatic death of his baby brother 10 years ago.
Gan, then seven, was with his mother trying to get a cab to rush his one-month-old brother to hospital. They failed to persuade a Malay couple to give up a taxi which had stopped for them. It took another 20 minutes before they flagged down another taxi. The baby was pronounced dead on arrival."
Where does one of these governments based on "freedom" exist?
The word Freedom implies total freedom. 100%. That's anarchy. A "government based on freedom" is a blatant contradiction in terms.
Governments can exist to promote some degree of some freedoms(s), and I assume that is what you meant. But stop with the trite soundbites of glorification, okay? The world is not black and white, and neither are governments. They're all just differing shades of grey.
Why do I get the feeling this is one of the countries that the United Nations will put in charge if ICANN is taken over by the UN.
I want those rose tainted glasses matey, I would live in a less anguished world.
If you were a politician in opossition you would be living in hell.
If during a political campaign you claim a politician in power is not doing his job properly and why you could do it better, the politician in question will sue you for libel, take you to court, and Singapore is still waiting for the first goverment official that loses one of these cases.
Once you lose the case (beacuse lose you will) the punishment is draconian and basically you are ordered to pay outlandish damages to make sure your larn your lesson. Several prominent Singaporean opposition figures have been bankrupted this way.
Singapore executes people with the happy detachement only to be found in China (google around, you can always find one or two recent cases that leave you cringing with disgust for their "judicial system").
Singapore was also the first country in the world to introduce nationwide filtering of the Internet (but all is of course in the benefit of the citizens of the happy city-state, what do they want foreigners spreading lies about this forward looking country!).
No, I am not Singaporean, neither have Singaporean friends, but I lived and visited there, it reminded me of "Brave New World" a bit.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
If someone speaks out against the government and runs for parliament, the party that has run the place for the last 50 years sues for slander/libel and takes everything he owns. The person is also banned for running for office for a few years. Opposing the ruling party is like a peasant challenging a king, even if you are rich.
The judges are not exactly bribed, but they know how they are "expected" to rule in these cases, and the ruling party is all-powerful.