sedition on political comment over the net?
-
What you people think? Will there come a time where the govt extends the Sedition Act to cover local political comment over the internet?
If that day comes, it will not just be a step backward but a leap backward. -
we will all just have to stop talking.
-
They don't need the Sedition Act, they already have the ISA, defamtion and libel .
What you people think? Will there come a time where the govt extends the Sedition Act to cover local political comment over the internet?
If that day comes, it will not just be a step backward but a leap backward. -
The ISA is detention without trial, ie no open court proceeding. It is meant to be quiet and low publicity. More for politic of conscious. Defamation and libel are meant for one private party to sue another private party.Originally posted by plo30360:They don't need the Sedition Act, they already have the ISA, defamtion and libel .
Sedition Act is different. It is a law passed by the govt and it has open court proceeding. It is meant to spelling out clearly the OB marker and meant to be loudly fenceful and punitive if otherwise.
I mean should political comment over the net be allowed to be fenced? -
I was merely using thoes(ISA etc) as an example of how political comment is curbed.Originally posted by pat33:The ISA is detention without trial, ie no open court proceeding. It is meant to be quiet and low publicity. More for politic of conscious. Defamation and libel are meant for one private party to sue another private party.
Sedition Act is different. It is a law passed by the govt and it has open court proceeding. It is meant to spelling out clearly the OB marker and meant to be loudly fenceful and punitive if otherwise.
I mean should political comment over the net be allowed to be fenced?
IMHO, even if the Sedition Act(another form of legal action, to silence dissenters) has an open court proceeding, it is still a tool like (ISA etc) which will most likely have a result the powers that be want. -
It is true that Sedition Act would become a most effective piece of legislation to control expressions of political views that might be disliked by the party in power.Originally posted by pat33:The ISA is detention without trial, ie no open court proceeding. It is meant to be quiet and low publicity. More for politic of conscious. Defamation and libel are meant for one private party to sue another private party.
Sedition Act is different. It is a law passed by the govt and it has open court proceeding. It is meant to spelling out clearly the OB marker and meant to be loudly fenceful and punitive if otherwise.
I mean should political comment over the net be allowed to be fenced?
The fact that sedition is too difficult to define, undefined or left as widely encompassing all forms of expressions likely to give rise to incitements is reason enough that it might easily be turned into an instrument to be used for such purpose like the GRC.
Over the past 40 years of nation building, we are already noted as a society that goes for controls of citizens and not so much for stability but ease of governance, not so much for accountability or majority interests like lowering costs of living or promoting entrepreneurship but to perpertuate holding on to power by the party that be.
Citizens have to watch amendments to the Sedition Act to see through ulterior motive that serves only the one-party system. MPs and oppositions MPs or President do not seem to offer any check or balance to build a better society for our children or children's children. -
Having successfully implemented the party whip, it needs another whip for non-party member
So it is good to be a member 
-
Thing is, do the majority actually know or care?We must inform and educate and I hope such a day does not come..It will be a blow to Singapore as a whole.Citizens must learn to differentiate between the party and the State.What is good for the party may not be in the long term interests of the State.Originally posted by robertteh:It is true that Sedition Act would become a most effective piece of legislation to control expressions of political views that might be disliked by the party in power.
The fact that sedition is too difficult to define, undefined or left as widely encompassing all forms of expressions likely to give rise to incitements is reason enough that it might easily be turned into an instrument to be used for such purpose like the GRC.
Over the past 40 years of nation building, we are already noted as a society that goes for controls of citizens and not so much for stability but ease of governance, not so much for accountability or majority interests like lowering costs of living or promoting entrepreneurship but to perpertuate holding on to power by the party that be.
Citizens have to watch amendments to the Sedition Act to see through ulterior motive that serves only the one-party system. MPs and oppositions MPs or President do not seem to offer any check or balance to build a better society for our children or children's children.
I don't want to think of what will happen should such oppression be placed on our citizens.
-
I fail to grasp your logicOriginally posted by SnowFlag:Having successfully implemented the party whip, it needs another whip for non-party member So it is good to be a member -
There is no logic when it was meant to be a humorous statement.Originally posted by pikamaster:I fail to grasp your logic
Apparently, it is not -
If this is the case, might as well close down this forum!
Or just remove Speakers Corner!
Don't talk, just keep it to yourselves.
Then one day, small groups of people will start meeting secretly to talk about Political Issues - isn't this worst?!?!?! -
I will tell you the truth about this Sedition Act and why the govt wants it.
The govt is not stupid. They know very well that Muslims will never be able to defend Islam given all the terrorism in the name of jihad today. You ask any apologetic imams enough questions and they will surely get stuck. So they want to shut Singaporeans up on this issue, period. No more quarrels.
Yes, you can get analysis & criticisms of Islam all over the net and it would seem silly to ban it among Singapore bloggers. But the govt wants to ban it from blogs & forums by Singaporeans so that as far as possible, you won't have a local movement on it. Its a very kiasu nip it in the bud thing but thats how our govt always work. They will rather be over kiasu on the safe side in whatever that we can do.
Those guys who were arrested and charged are nobodies, but they are scarificial lambs to kick start the message. You kill a few to warn a million. -
Just ban the internet = no problem lor
-
no need to ban internet, just jail Singaporeans under sedition act will do.
-
its crazy to jail them. a warning should have sufficed. afterall they are first time offenders.
-
Singaporeans are like little kids and our govt a no nonsence parent. If you only give warning, everybody will think they have one warning entitlement and try their luck. If everybody try their luck, there will be cahos. At least that is what teh govt thinks.
Be a good little boy and go back to your room and study OK?