Potential rioting at next year's IMF meeting in SG?
-
Easy for you to say.Originally posted by Salman:Violent demonstration is rioting. We don't allow such nonsence in Singapore.
Tell that to the Korean farmers.Don't get caught in the crossfire though.
The part about allowing foreign NGOs to demonstrate while treating our own like dirt, is at the very apex of hypocrisy and it must be made known.So foreigners may interpret our Constitution in a more liberal way than a Singaporean who has served his 2.5 yrs of NS for his nation?
What does that tell you?It tells me that there is something seriously rotten going on.. -
I think demonstrations are ok, violence like what the koreans did in hk is not ok. Law enfoirecement must be swift and harsh to discourage violent demonstrations.
-
I doubt so, Singapore gahmen wants to portrait a goody good shoes to the western world. They might put up a strong police present, put I do not think they will arrest potential rioters, before they protest.
The 1960's policemen are no longer around, Singapore simply has no expirence whatsoever in dealing with such intense demostrations, Esp infront of cameras. The today's police force members on the ground are simply too young. And as I say, their mass deployable equipments are too inferior. Not up to even Indonesian standards.
The last demostration our Police encountered are from the Fulungong Group at Far East 10 years ago, not exactly violent, but slightly violent in resisting arrest. I heard it wasn't that professional. -
I hope our men in blue can be forceful in their presence without being painted as a Prateorian Guard for all that is repressive here.Originally posted by MobyDog:I doubt so, Singapore gahmen wants to portrait a goody good shoes to the western world. They might put up a strong police present, put I do not think they will arrest potential rioters, before they protest.
The 1960's policemen are no longer around, Singapore simply has no expirence whatsoever in dealing with such intense demostrations, Esp infront of cameras. The today's police force members on the ground are simply too young. And as I say, their mass deployable equipments are too inferior. Not up to even Indonesian standards.
The last demostration our Police encountered are from the Fulungong Group at Far East 10 years ago, not exactly violent, but slightly violent in resisting arrest. I heard it wasn't that professional.
there is a difference between maintaining public order and striking a balance with letting the people have their say.
I'm thinking that they will have a huge cordon, any protests may be held outside it, and maybe within a confined area.Any breach of the cordon will be met with forceful rebuttal and publicly announced penalties. -
I think that our men in blue will be able to handle this without a doubt.
We cannot doubt the capability of our police force simply because they havent experience any riots for the past 40 plus years.
Our armed forces also haven face any war since our independence.. so is it safe to assume that they will not be able to handle any threat? -
So if there are 2 groups of people protesting, one Singaporean based and one foreign based, which group will police arrest first?
-
It is time for the SG to vent thier frustration at the government! But please do it in a smart way. Get all the crazy barbaric South Koreaners be the buffer while u guys be at the back hurling molotovs , chairs , sticks n rubbish bins. Since they outside ppl paid good air ticket to be in the front line show..let them be. As Citizens of SG.. be kind enough to stay at the back seat... cheering them on n once in a while , hurl objects at police.
-
I recommend a baton charge on those who hurls moltovs followed by jail and caning. hats will teach these punks a lesson they will never ever forget.
-
Pitot,
Military threats are different from handling civil unrest. Many polictical issues have to be considered.
A south Korea commander have been charged for riot violence leading to afew protestor's death today. Looking at news videos of that damn violent demostration, the protestors got what they deserve.. in my opinion.
The present personal police riot equipments standard cannot withstand this kind of situation. The best way, hope and segregation, as LazerLordz has suggested. Or the Sinagpore Police buy better and more equipments, than simply showcase some from the Special Command Units only. Even they are not issued with padded armour, neck nor shin protection.
Yes, water cannons, tear gas and pepper spray are available, but the Koreans have always shown that they were able to get close and personal at every demostration.
The above have to be addressed by our Police Service.. for the safety of our Policemen. -
Originally posted by MobyDog:
I feel that protestors make their point known when they are focused and non-violent.Turning on the police and public property merely hardens the officials' hearts towards them.
Pitot,
Military threats are different from handling civil unrest. Many polictical issues have to be considered.
A south Korea commander have been charged for riot violence leading to afew protestor's death today. Looking at news videos of that damn violent demostration, the protestors got what they deserve.. in my opinion.
The present personal police riot equipments standard cannot withstand this kind of situation. The best way, hope and segregation, as [b]LazerLordz has suggested. Or the Sinagpore Police buy better and more equipments, than simply showcase some from the Special Command Units only. Even they are not issued with padded armour, neck nor shin protection.
Yes, water cannons, tear gas and pepper spray are available, but the Koreans have always shown that they were able to get close and personal at every demostration.
The above have to be addressed by our Police Service.. for the safety of our Policemen.
[/b]
Has 10 years of violent protests by Korean farmers brought about any concessions?I think a well-funded pressure group in the WTO lobby might bring about more change.Same goes for well-coordinated distribution of leaflets to meeting participants and holding talks.
Throwing molotov cocktails merely endanger everyone.But one thing must be clear, the authorities should not silence these people, because a silent group that is sidelined and muzzled, has every equal chance to turn militant when the dedicated and ultra-passionate members in its ranks resort to violence just to let the group's name or existence be heard.
Let them speak out in peace.And ensure that the peace, if breached, must be restored firmly but fairly.Singapore cannot afford a Santiago, nor a Tian'an'men. -
Originally posted by LazerLordz:
According to LKY, Tiananmen turned urgly because the authorities did not know how to handle demonstration, the police were not equipped. LKY even told Li Peng that they should just spray some itchy powder or something to disperse the crowd.
I feel that protestors make their point known when they are focused and non-violent.Turning on the police and public property merely hardens the officials' hearts towards them.
Has 10 years of violent protests by Korean farmers brought about any concessions?I think a well-funded pressure group in the WTO lobby might bring about more change.Same goes for well-coordinated distribution of leaflets to meeting participants and holding talks.
Throwing molotov cocktails merely endanger everyone.But one thing must be clear, the authorities should not silence these people, because a silent group that is sidelined and muzzled, has every equal chance to turn militant when the dedicated and ultra-passionate members in its ranks resort to violence just to let the group's name or existence be heard.
Let them speak out in peace.And ensure that the peace, if breached, must be restored firmly but fairly.[b]Singapore cannot afford a Santiago, nor a Tian'an'men.[/b]
It is all well and good if emotions are controlled and peace maintained in a demonstration. and if it turns violent, which is one extreme, can our police handle; i think our government want to avoid a situation which they cannot handle and therefore forbid demonstration, and that is the other extreme. In so decide, the ppl is denied a mean of free expression.
Today, there are demonstrations even in china, the most undemocratic country and HK, a territory controlled by China, has been duped the capital of demonstrations.
Sometimes I wonder, if a large number of citizens really gather and
demonstrate, will Tiananmen repeat itself in singapore?? -
And that would bring us to the other dilemma, if this large number of people demonstrate but do not torch buildings or hantam the police?Would you as a policeman, if ordered to shoot them, carry out the order?Originally posted by sgdiehard:According to LKY, Tiananmen turned urgly because the authorities did not know how to handle demonstration, the police were not equipped. LKY even told Li Peng that they should just spray some itchy powder or something to disperse the crowd.
It is all well and good if emotions are controlled and peace maintained in a demonstration. and if it turns violent, which is one extreme, can our police handle; i think our government want to avoid a situation which they cannot handle and therefore forbid demonstration, and that is the other extreme. In so decide, the ppl is denied a mean of free expression.
Today, there are demonstrations even in china, the most undemocratic country and HK, a territory controlled by China, has been duped the capital of demonstrations.
Sometimes I wonder, if a large number of citizens really gather and
demonstrate, will Tiananmen repeat itself in singapore??
Or would the govt order a police presence to stand guard, and only move in they decide to turn violent.The problem is that we don't have a strong heritage of picketing..and this might be used as an excuse to clamp down on a spontaneous show of mass unhappiness, for if it happens, there must be a serious reason for it..
Hmm.It's not easy to balance prevention of unrest and maintaining a semblance of democratic rule of law and not quasi-military suppression of a peaceful demonstration. -
Salman and sgdiehard,Originally posted by Salman:Violent demonstration is rioting. We don't allow such nonsence in Singapore.
Perhaps you should be a little more liberal. But anyway, what do you classify as a "violent demonstration"? And do you have a complementary definition for a "peaceful demonstration"? Or do you see all protests and demonstrations as violent?
And Salman, perhaps you shouldn't take the moral high ground on this issue, calling demonstrations "nonsense".
the (cautionary) pikamaster (who still opposes torture) -
why do I have to answer for what salman said??Originally posted by pikamaster:Salman and sgdiehard,
Perhaps you should be a little more liberal. But anyway, what do you classify as a "violent demonstration"? And do you have a complementary definition for a "peaceful demonstration"? Or do you see all protests and demonstrations as violent?
And Salman, perhaps you shouldn't take the moral high ground on this issue, calling demonstrations "nonsense".
the (cautionary) pikamaster (who still opposes torture)
-
demonstrations are always peaceful until the procession reaches the police cordon. so many things can be used to stop the procession, HK police used pretty lady constables handling flowers, that was a soft approach (don't usually work), the hard ones are tear gas, high power water jet, pepper or chilli spray, and finally it is the wall made up of police equipped with helmets, armed with shield, baton. why should there be a need for an order to shoot??Originally posted by LazerLordz:And that would bring us to the other dilemma, if this large number of people demonstrate but do not torch buildings or hantam the police?Would you as a policeman, if ordered to shoot them, carry out the order?
Or would the govt order a police presence to stand guard, and only move in they decide to turn violent.The problem is that we don't have a strong heritage of picketing..and this might be used as an excuse to clamp down on a spontaneous show of mass unhappiness, for if it happens, there must be a serious reason for it..
Hmm.It's not easy to balance prevention of unrest and maintaining a semblance of democratic rule of law and not quasi-military suppression of a peaceful demonstration.
what or who should be the target?? why should guns and live rounds even be there in situation like this??
i don think any country need to have a heritage of picketing to be prepared for handling demonstrations, which country have that kind of heritage? Demonstrations against WTO or IMF should be expected, demonstrations leading to riots like that in Australia, France and UK recently are always spontaneous. Reasons for the demonstration and who are involved in the demonstrations are not important.
The communist china shot their students demonstrating in Tiananmen, the democratic american also shot their student demonstrators in Kent State University, and the peaceful and religious Thai also shot their students in a political aftermath. Whatever the reasons for the demonstration, planned or spontaneous, soldiers should never be sent in, live rounds should never be issued and order should never be given to shoot.
It is difficult to keep the balance, but there will be no excuse whatsoever for the use of extreme force for suppression of demonstration. If our guys are not equipped or prepared, its not too late now. -
Totally agree.Let's hope sense and peace prevail.If our SPF learn well from their foreign counterparts, then we won't have to worry too much.Originally posted by sgdiehard:demonstrations are always peaceful until the procession reaches the police cordon. so many things can be used to stop the procession, HK police used pretty lady constables handling flowers, that was a soft approach (don't usually work), the hard ones are tear gas, high power water jet, pepper or chilli spray, and finally it is the wall made up of police equipped with helmets, armed with shield, baton. why should there be a need for an order to shoot??
what or who should be the target?? why should guns and live rounds even be there in situation like this??
i don think any country need to have a heritage of picketing to be prepared for handling demonstrations, which country have that kind of heritage? Demonstrations against WTO or IMF should be expected, demonstrations leading to riots like that in Australia, France and UK recently are always spontaneous. Reasons for the demonstration and who are involved in the demonstrations are not important.
The communist china shot their students demonstrating in Tiananmen, the democratic american also shot their student demonstrators in Kent State University, and the peaceful and religious Thai also shot their students in a political aftermath. Whatever the reasons for the demonstration, planned or spontaneous, soldiers should never be sent in, live rounds should never be issued and order should never be given to shoot.
It is difficult to keep the balance, but there will be no excuse whatsoever for the use of extreme force for suppression of demonstration. If our guys are not equipped or prepared, its not too late now.
Anyway, on a sidetrack, STK does have a new sonic weapon that can irritate crowds and force them to back off. -
Salman and sgdiehard,
I am very liberal. Thats why I am against violent demonstrations.
Perhaps you should be a little more liberal. But anyway, what do you classify as a "violent demonstration"? And do you have a complementary definition for a "peaceful demonstration"? Or do you see all protests and demonstrations as violent?
And Salman, perhaps you shouldn't take the moral high ground on this issue, calling demonstrations "nonsense".
the (cautionary) pikamaster (who still opposes torture)
Demonstrator who throw stuff and hit police are violent protestors, its that simple. Such activities are nonsensical because they negate the intended mesage of the protestors. Only a fool will want to listen to a bunch of trouble makers? -
LazerLordz,
And that would bring us to the other dilemma, if this large number of people demonstrate but do not torch buildings or hantam the police?Would you as a policeman, if ordered to shoot them, carry out the order?
I think no leader smart enough to run a country will gave such an order, in the situation you describe. However, should molotov corktail, knifes, machetes(parang), spears and bricks are used.. I would likely shoot to protect myself and friends. And if bottled bombs are used (such as in China) I will shoot without any order given. Inspite running risk of western media manupilating and delete this important fact, in typical western bias style reporting in asian affairs. And they have.. luckily.. in the this internet era.. such bias reporting are slightly curtailed..
sgdiehard,The communist china shot their students demonstrating in Tiananmen, the democratic american also shot their student demonstrators in Kent State University, and the peaceful and religious Thai also shot their students in a political aftermath. Whatever the reasons for the demonstration, planned or spontaneous, soldiers should never be sent in, live rounds should never be issued and order should never be given to shoot.
Now, there is a difference in the Tiananmen situation, compare to the rest of the incidents you wrote. The Tiananmen incident are not normal protest, their agenda was, in retrospect, to topple a Government. Many policemen were abducted, strung to buses and burnt alive, some are still missing. Fashioned sprears and knifes were used.... not the peaceful protest the Western media portray. The Chinese Government was correct to sent in the Military... any government in those situation would.. if you think objectively without prejudice... that is. -
Now, there is a difference in the Tiananmen situation, compare to the rest of the incidents you wrote. The Tiananmen incident are not normal protest, their agenda was, in retrospect, to topple a Government. Many policemen were abducted, strung to buses and burnt alive, some are still missing. Fashioned sprears and knifes were used.... not the peaceful protest the Western media portray. The Chinese Government was correct to sent in the Military... any government in those situation would.. if you think objectively without prejudice... that is
You are spewing communist propaganda.
It was a peaceful demonstration to begin with. The Chinese never expected the PLA to ever fire on its own people. The people did not carry any weapons and fought back only when their friends were brutalised by the soldiers.
Whatever the reason for the demonstration, it was wrong for the Chinese govt to fire into crowds and use tanks to crush these people. Teargas, rubber bullets and truncheons is the most you can use for crowd control, not live bullets and tanks.
It was estimated that hundreds of thousands of Chinese disapeared in a crack down after Tiananmen. You can get the details from the Epoch Times website. -
Tiananmen incident began as a peaceful demonstration, and that was a completely new situation in China. The students didn't know when to stop and were made used of by tugs for all kinds of other purposes. I am not surprised policemen were adbucted and killed. People like Wu Er Kai Xi and Chai Ling thought they could just take over the communists government with a demonstration, they were simply niave and stupid. And the government didn't know how to handle a situation like this and treated that as a civil war. All in all, it turned out to be a sad incident for PRC, not for Chinese as a whole though.Originally posted by MobyDog:Now, there is a difference in the Tiananmen situation, compare to the rest of the incidents you wrote. The Tiananmen incident are not normal protest, their agenda was, in retrospect, to topple a Government. Many policemen were abducted, strung to buses and burnt alive, some are still missing. Fashioned sprears and knifes were used.... not the peaceful protest the Western media portray. The Chinese Government was correct to sent in the Military... any government in those situation would.. if you think objectively without prejudice... that is.
Under no circumstance should army be sent in to suppress a demonstration. The situation was not amounting to a civil war yet and it wasn't likely to happen. Basically, the government should learn to handle situation like this, to do that, they should first see that such a demonstration could happen. -
The Chinese govt has not learnt from its mistakes of tiananmen. Brutal tactics are still used on dissenters of any form today, including Falungong members.
-
Erpz, you ahven't answered my qn at all. I asked you what is defined as a "violent demonstration"?Originally posted by Salman:I am very liberal. Thats why I am against violent demonstrations.
Demonstrator who throw stuff and hit police are violent protestors, its that simple. Such activities are nonsensical because they negate the intended mesage of the protestors. Only a fool will want to listen to a bunch of trouble makers? -
the (cautionary) pikamaster (who still opposes torture),Originally posted by sgdiehard:why do I have to answer for what salman said??
You haven't answer my question yet.
Happy New Year! -
Originally posted by Salman:
You are spewing communist propaganda.
And You ?It was a peaceful demonstration to begin with. The Chinese never expected the PLA to ever fire on its own people. The people did not carry any weapons and fought back only when their friends were brutalised by the soldiers.
The soldiers only came much later... after they travelling thru the city towards the square.. all hell broke ..It was violent !Whatever the reason for the demonstration, it was wrong for the Chinese govt to fire into crowds and use tanks to crush these people. Teargas, rubber bullets and truncheons is the most you can use for crowd control, not live bullets and tanks.
Government toppling a minor reason ? The US national Guard also shoot at Protestors at Kent states..what.. they are no even violent and are unarmed. If you have seen the Chinese man infront of the Tank video.. you would have notice that the tank came to a halt, slightly reversed then a pause. That lone man climbed up and shook the divers hand. He ran off later The Tank then proceeded forward. In my opinion, if that tank would have retreated.. the whole situation would have been worst. The Protestors would have been embolden. There were no people being rolled over by tanks. All hype up by media.It was estimated that hundreds of thousands of Chinese disapeared in a crack down after Tiananmen. You can get the details from the Epoch Times website.
Epoch Times website..? no wonder your views are as such. You know where Epoch Times originated ?
You may also check out this link http://www.alternativeinsight.com/Tiananmen.htmlThe Competing Facts
The most credible reporting of the events at Tiananmen Square is depicted in a video documentary entitled: The Gate of Heavenly Peace, © Long Bow Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved. This report contains video footage by a Spanish television crew and has been shown on Frontline and PBS stations. The complete report and video can be accessed at http://www.tsquare.tv/film/transcript01.html. A pertinent excerpt from the narration is shown below. The speakers are students and allied persons who protested at Tiananmen Square.
FENG CONGDE: At around 3:30, the four people on the hunger strike came to talk to the students. They said, "Blood is being spilled all over the city. More than enough blood has already been shed to awaken the people. We know you're not afraid of dying, but leaving now doesn't mean that you're cowards."
HOU DEJIAN: Chai Ling told us she had heard that leading government reformers hoped that the students could stay on the Square until daybreak. So Liu Xiaobo told her: "I don't care if it's true or not, but no leader has the right to gamble with thousands of students' lives at the Square."
FENG CONGDE: Finally our student headquarters told them, "You can go ahead and negotiate, but you can't represent us."
HOU DEJIAN: So we went ourselves. We got into a van and drove only a few seconds before we saw the soldiers, all lined up on Changan Avenue. As we got closer the soldiers pointed their guns at us. They didn't know what we were up to. A few minutes later, an officer appeared. He listened to what we had to say and went to report to his superiors. He came back and told us that they had agreed to our request. He said, "We hope you can convince the students to leave the Square." We rushed back to the monument to tell the students. Their opinions were divided.
NARRATION: There was little time to debate. The troops sequestered in the nearby Great Hall of the People now came out and moved toward the Monument. Soldiers with guns at the ready converged on the students from all directions.
LIANG XIAOYAN: The soldiers came right up in front of us. They were in full battle gear. The students all stood up. I was in the front row, with a gun pointing straight at my chest. It was only a few inches away. The soldiers looked really mean. Only later did the terror hit me. At the time I was simply stunned. I didn't feel a thing. I can't imagine what would have happened had they really opened fire.
FENG CONGDE: I was in charge of the vote to determine whether we should leave. I said, "On the count of three, those who want to go, shout 'Go!'; those who vote to stay shout 'Stay!'" I couldn't tell which side was louder.
HOU DEJIAN: I knew that those who wanted to leave would be ashamed to shout very loud, while those who wanted to stay would shout with all their might.
FENG CONGDE: Because of this situation, I felt that when the two sides sounded about the same, most likely more people voted to leave. So I announced the decision to leave.
NARRATION: At dawn on June 4th, after occupying the Square for more than three weeks, all the remaining students and their teachers and supporters left Tiananmen Square.
HOU DEJIAN was born in Taiwan in 1956, became a singer-songwriter, and achieved fame with his 1979 song "Children of the Dragon." During the protest movement, Hou took part in the four-man hunger strike of June 2nd. Chinese language newspapers (outside of China) published Hou Dejian's account of the final hours in Tiananmen Squarequare. In one interview, Hou Dejian related:
"Some people said that two hundred died in the Square and others claimed that two thousand died. There were also stories of tanks running over students who were trying to leave. I have to say that I did not see any of that. I don't know where those people did. I myself was in the Square until six thirty in the morning.
I kept thinking, are we going to use lies to attack an enemy who lies? Aren't facts powerful enough? To tell lies against our enemy's lies only satisfies our need to vent our anger, but it's a dangerous thing to do. Maybe your lies will be exposed, and you'll be powerless to fight your enemy."
The following excerpts are taken from
Black Hands of Beijing: Lives of Defiance in China's Democracy Movement, George Black and Robin Munro (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1993), pp. 234 - 246. The complete report can be accessed at: http://www.tsquare.tv/chronology/BlackHchrn01.html
"The phrase "Tiananmen Square massacre" is now fixed firmly in the political vocabulary of the late twentieth century. Yet it is inaccurate. There was no massacre in Tiananmen Square on the night of June 3. But on the western approach roads, along Chang'an Boulevard and Fuxingmen Avenue, there was a bloodbath that claimed hundreds of lives when the People's Liberation Army found its path blocked by a popular uprising that was being fueled by despair and rage. To insist on this distinction is not splitting hairs. What took place was the slaughter not of students but of ordinary workers and residents - precisely the target that the Chinese government had intended."
"Imagination filled the gaps. Into the vacuum rushed the most lurid tales of the supposed denouement in the square. Wu'er Kaixi, flamboyant to the last, reported that he had seen "about two hundred students" cut down by gunfire in the army's predawn assault, but it was revealed later that he had been spirited away to safety in a van several hours earlier. A widely recounted eyewitness report, purportedly from a student at Qinghua University, spoke of the students on the Monument being mowed down at point-blank range by a bank of machine guns at four in the morning. The survivors had then either been chased across the square by tanks and crushed, or clubbed to death by infantrymen. But it was all pure fabrication." -
There's no need to use live bullets. There are high-tech devices that will paralyse a man, cause them to slip and wriggle like fish on the ground, CS gas and pepper spray that will make the strongest guy weep and gas vortex devices that will knock out a charging mob. Test out the latest non-lethal weapon on them...it's a good occasion for beta testing...