Safety VS Freedom...
-
In my opinion.. I rather choose the safety for my families than a little extra freedom... I never wanted my wife or daughter walking down the street alone in fear... Singapore is a protected country... although the freedom of speech may be limited... but if mismanaged by the wrong person... We will be like east timor... What's the use of that much of democracy?
Singapore under the Lees doesn't really look so restricted as most protray... I think they are good manger of the country and in fact I have confident in LHL as the prime minister office than any Opposition that I know. -
I used to think like that, until I discover alot of hidden facts about singapore government and their bullying tactics, then I don't support them anymore. I don't know how much you hate bullies, but I hate them to the core.
Check out http://www.yeocheowtong.com/ -
Freedom of speech must be exercised with responsibility. If Singaporeans behave like certain forumners who resort to defamatory remarks and vulgar personal insults, not to mention irresponsible remarks targeting race and religion, then certainly there must not be unfettered freedom of expression.
-
singapore is not that bad i agree. but then i doubt that safety must be interchanged with freedom.
will giving us more freedom of speech actually lead to less safety or chaos? i doubt it. its just some one's theory or scare tactic, i';m guessing with no actually prove or solid basis for judgement -
In 1956, Celon was the most promising of developing nations. They had good infrastructure and a well-educated workforce. But they also had 80% majority Buddhist Sinhalese and 20% Hindu Tamils. The minority was more educated and dominated the civil service.
In a one man-one vote system, the Sinhalese took over control of the government and the media became sectarian and propagated hate messages. The country unravelled into chaos. Singapore has about 70% Chinese, 20% Malays and 10% Indians. We can end up in a similar situation as Ceylon did. Certain statements by forumners and Singaporeans in electronic blogs are outright racist and dangerous.
By all means, have freedom of speech but that right must be exercised with responsibiliy. How much slack to give depends on how mature our society is when dealing with that freedom. Unfortunately, I don't see enough of it. -
There are many ways to bringing up the child.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:In 1956, Celon was the most promising of developing nations. They had good infrastructure and a well-educated workforce. But they also had 80% majority Buddhist Sinhalese and 20% Hindu Tamils. The minority was more educated and dominated the civil service.
In a one man-one vote system, the Sinhalese took over control of the government and the media became sectarian and propagated hate messages. The country unravelled into chaos. Singapore has about 70% Chinese, 20% Malays and 10% Indians. We can end up in a similar situation as Ceylon did. Certain statements by forumners and Singaporeans in electronic blogs are outright racist and dangerous.
By all means, have freedom of speech but that right must be exercised with responsibiliy. How much slack to give depends on how mature our society is when dealing with that freedom. Unfortunately, I don't see enough of it.
Just because a child is a problem child, does one lock it up for good OR impose rules that inhibits the creativity of the other children in the Family ?
Just because of one bad apple, do we spray insecticide in the entire orchard ?
Let us not overkill, over re-act, or even exaggerate a small issue to justify some actions that will allow other abuse to take effect on an even sinister and wider level.
Such reasons have been used too often to justify the present controls over Singaporean Rights to access the same afforded to FIRST WORLD SOCIETIES.
Are we NOT SUPPOSED to be part of the FIRST WORLD COMMUNITY ?
If we are, why does the Singapore Government not be a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights sponsored by the UNITED NATIONS - since it was first tabled in 1965 ?
Yet Singapore became a UN Member in 1966, and seeks protection under its international umbrella, but has continuously refused to be a signatory to such a simple statute towards HUMANITY that is to be part of the Humane World to which Singaporeans are supposed to be.
The Peoples' Republic of China became a signatory in 1998.
Is this an IRONY, or is there a deeper INSECURE PLOT from the POWER OF ONE ? -
The arguments against more liberalization of media are usually slippery-slope kind.Originally posted by banzie:In my opinion.. I rather choose the safety for my families than a little extra freedom... I never wanted my wife or daughter walking down the street alone in fear... Singapore is a protected country... although the freedom of speech may be limited... but if mismanaged by the wrong person... We will be like east timor... What's the use of that much of democracy?
Singapore under the Lees doesn't really look so restricted as most protray... I think they are good manger of the country and in fact I have confident in LHL as the prime minister office than any Opposition that I know.
If we allow democracy, Singapore will lose our security and become crime-infested.
If we allow more freedom of speech, Singapore will be like East Timor.
If we allow a one-man one vote system holding fair elections, Singapore will be like Sri Lanka plunging into chaos. Thus its better to have a wise leader that hold unfair elections.
But all these arguments potray the worst case scenario and appeals to people who fear to change the status quo. With such thinking, we will have the most conservative form of government. If every aspect of Singaporean life is so controlled , how will Singapore succeed in the nuturing creative Artists, Entrepreneurs and Scientist?
By importing foreign talent? That is the only strategy they have it seems. -
Ben Franklin once said: "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security, deserve neither"
and he's right.. -
What an amateurish page.Originally posted by DailyFreeGames.com:I used to think like that, until I discover alot of hidden facts about singapore government and their bullying tactics, then I don't support them anymore. I don't know how much you hate bullies, but I hate them to the core.
Check out http://www.yeocheowtong.com/
Online sources' credibility leave much to be questioned. -
Lol, I really don't think your site is a very good source of information. Not tt I like the govt much myself...Originally posted by DailyFreeGames.com:I used to think like that, until I discover alot of hidden facts about singapore government and their bullying tactics, then I don't support them anymore. I don't know how much you hate bullies, but I hate them to the core.
Check out http://www.yeocheowtong.com/ -
OM,Originally posted by oxford mushroom:In 1956, Celon was the most promising of developing nations. They had good infrastructure and a well-educated workforce. But they also had 80% majority Buddhist Sinhalese and 20% Hindu Tamils. The minority was more educated and dominated the civil service.
In a one man-one vote system, the Sinhalese took over control of the government and the media became sectarian and propagated hate messages. The country unravelled into chaos. Singapore has about 70% Chinese, 20% Malays and 10% Indians. We can end up in a similar situation as Ceylon did. Certain statements by forumners and Singaporeans in electronic blogs are outright racist and dangerous.
By all means, have freedom of speech but that right must be exercised with responsibiliy. How much slack to give depends on how mature our society is when dealing with that freedom. Unfortunately, I don't see enough of it.
So you support a tiered voting system? U know, like more cash, more votes? Ceylon's problem was not its democratic system, or its freedom of speech. It was a long-standing historical problem originating from colonial times. Not every democracy in this world is like Sri Lanka (that's the correct name for Ceylon, btw). Haven't u considered USA or UK or Switzerland?
And anw, u tag to the wrong line. I don't believe people want freedom to be racist, well not most anw. We want free dom fo political speech, and end to the ridiculous defamation act and to controls over politically-incorrect material in the press.
Lol,
the (young aspiring) pikamaster -
Are you saying 100% safe to walk alone at in singapore during the late night? Did you read newspaper boh.?Originally posted by banzie:In my opinion.. I rather choose the safety for my families than a little extra freedom... I never wanted my wife or daughter walking down the street alone in fear... Singapore is a protected country... although the freedom of speech may be limited... but if mismanaged by the wrong person... We will be like east timor... What's the use of that much of democracy?
Singapore under the Lees doesn't really look so restricted as most protray... I think they are good manger of the country and in fact I have confident in LHL as the prime minister office than any Opposition that I know.
I have been staying in East Timor for two years. I understand the situation there. Politics are equally dirty, people are hungry for power and $$$$$. Is was the politics that created the choatic in East Timor. Or otherwise, the people there also nice and friendly. -
I don't understand your description of a 'tiered voting system' and the link to cash. I am saying that the one man-one vote democratic system is not sacrosant and it does not resolve practical issues on the ground. Contrary to what you said, Ceylon was far more stable during colonial times. One needs strong government to put down social unrest that can unravel a nation. Look at Yugoslavkia after Tito died. In a way, I think Ceylon's experience has influenced the way Singapore is governed and lends support to the GRC system.Originally posted by pikamaster:OM,
So you support a tiered voting system? U know, like more cash, more votes? Ceylon's problem was not its democratic system, or its freedom of speech. It was a long-standing historical problem originating from colonial times. Not every democracy in this world is like Sri Lanka (that's the correct name for Ceylon, btw). Haven't u considered USA or UK or Switzerland?
And anw, u tag to the wrong line. I don't believe people want freedom to be racist, well not most anw. We want free dom fo political speech, and end to the ridiculous defamation act and to controls over politically-incorrect material in the press.
Lol,
the (young aspiring) pikamaster
UK is a terrible example to cite. They haven't had the experience of dealing with significant minority populations as they exist in Ceylon or Singapore, and now face increasing racial unrest in cities in the north where the minority population has become more vocal. The tragic events on July 7 last year are a sign of their failure in this respect. The terrorists who bombed the London underground weren't foreign Muslim radicals...they were homegrown.
Singapore has its share of racists and we cannot allow the country to descend into chaos because some irresponsible elements (and I have seen plenty in this and other forums) post racist and defamatory remarks. Strict laws are necessary to curb such action and if we have to limit freedom of speech to some extent, that is a price I am more than willing to pay.
Our current laws do not prosecute you for making remarks opposing government policies and certainly people in this forum are not afraid to make such remarks. But if you would make unjust personal attacks and defame someone, surely the law must protect the victims.
The Opposition parties can do better to engage minority races than they have done so far. The loss of a certain constituency in the recent election was in part due to the Malay support for the ruling party. The WP must reflect and consider why this is so.. -
since when did the now defunct YUGOSLAVIA change its name to yugoSLAVKIA?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:at Yugoslavkia after Tito died.
-
I agree with you about online sources lacking credibility, even some of those of sg.gov.Originally posted by missqi:What an amateurish page.
Online sources' credibility leave much to be questioned.
Since I do not hide behind my website, and since I don't want to put myself on the wrong side of things, what I put on my websites is true and documented.
Don't want to believe that LKY is sending his grandson to the Singapore American School, when other Singaporeans are kept from doing that by MOE?
Can't imagine that the Straits Times threatened to sue me, unless I apologized (which I didn't), and they never sued me.
Or what about Helen Yeo's threats which she never carried out. She didn't even answer my lawsuit against her launched in the United States Federal Court, District of Arizona.
Be my guest, back people like Yeo Cheow Tong, believe the lies you are being told.
Meanwhile, the FTs (many of whom don't have to do NS) are flooding into Singapore and taking away your jobs. As an FT, I ran your IRAS data center, as an FT, I structured and ran Citibank's data centers. Don't you think someone from Singapore would have been just as good? I do.
So why does Singapore hire FTs like me? TO KEEP SINGAPOREANS OUT OF CERTAIN KEY POSITIONS OF POWER. As a foreigner, I was no threat. Someday I would have to leave Singapore.
Maybe I will return - understand that Singapore is looking for high-level FTs to run the Casino.
www.yeocheowtong.com