5 Nov 2004

Get your tongue outta his arse..

I apololgize to those of you who are upset by the word 'fuck' as opposed to 100,000 innocent Iraqi deaths. However... BROWN NOSER... well that's another MATTER.

The majority of the world is asking what the hell just happened to America. My opinion is that globalisation and terrorism have frightened the majority of voters in the US. The rest of the world, Singapore included, has lived under the shadow of external threats and gobalisation for some time. September 11th, was a terrifying event by all means. But there have been many such losses of loved ones. The loss of lives and the global significance is still beyond our mental grasp. But the world beyond American shores has lived within that sense of 'instant doom' for the last century.

Fear is the current 'slave ideology', fear of what the future may hold. With Adam Smith's invisible hand, politicians promised a bright promised land. That dream is dead. Today's politicans promise to protect us from evil demons that hide in the mist of the future. "Or just beyond the second link". But the world of demons and spirits is the world of feudalism.

Feudalism was a time dominated by family ties and authoritarian rulers. No wonder the Son of God is so quick to show his happiness.

Yes I know the Son of God has to deal with 'whomever' is the current American president, but the Son of God was pretty damn quick off the mark on this one. Was it necessary, who else has made such a proclamation? Does the Son of God feel a close affinity to another family accused of nepotism?

Yes, isn't Singapore great, lets see if we can find a few 'out of bounds' topics, especially for ang moh, and receive THE letter from the MDA asking me to register.

p.s. What is the latest news on the Singaporean troops serving in Iraq?

p.p.s. Are those who were arrested under the ISA, for the alleged planned attack on American troops still there? I know some where released, but what ever happened to 'innocent till proven guilty?' Yes I know the British introduced the ISA... so don't bother.

p.p.p.s. ....hhhmmm


The Devil You Know said...

Great pic! I really needed the laugh!

soci said...

please help me by asking difficult questions here.

Myrick said...

On the JI detainees, A couple were released back in September and 17 are still in custody. A total of 21 were initially arrested. It did go beyond attacking US troops though - an MRT station is hardly a military target.

Anonymous said...


The British introduced democratic elections and Appeals to the Privy Council too..

Defending the Fascist state

"If it is not totalitarian to arrest a man and detain him, when you cannot charge him with any offence against any written law - if that is not what we have always cried out against in Fascist states - then what is it?"
- Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates, Sept 21, 1955

"We have to lock up people, without trial, whether they are communists, whether they are language chauvinists, whether they are religious extremists. If you don't do that, the country would be in ruins."
- Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, 1986

"One-man-one-vote is a most difficult form of government. From time to time the results can be erratic. People are sometimes fickle. They get bored with stable, steady improvements in life and in a reckless moment they vote for a change for change's sake. This is the danger for Singapore, not in this election, because the results cannot be a disaster this time. But it can be in the future." - Lee Kuan Yew, pre-election speech 1984

JAN 27
Suspected terrorists deserve an open trial

Tan Tarn How


WHAT a difference this time round.

In 1987, when the Internal Security Department (ISD) swooped on 22 people for alleged involvement in a Marxist conspiracy, the arrests were met with a fair bit of scepticism among some Singaporeans.

Vigils were held in churches for the detainees, many of whom were Catholics.

Some people questioned the use, if not the very existence, of the Internal Security Act (ISA), and called for a trial in open court.

The ISA became enough of an issue for the People's Action Party government to ask Singaporeans to decide on it at the 1988 elections.

The arrests became a foreign affairs matter, with the West and the Western press charging that they were a contravention of human rights.

In Manila, protesters demonstrated outside the Singapore Embassy.

Contrast this with the aftermath of last month's arrest of the 15 suspected terrorists.

When the ISD declared that the members of the clandestine group Jemaah Islamiah had hatched plans to bomb American-linked targets here, there was a collective sigh of relief.

In contrast with the Marxists' detention, Singaporeans this time round seem nearly universally united behind the Government's action against the suspected terrorists.

The very fact that they did not act like terrorists or religious fanatics is no bar against most people arriving at the conclusion that they are guilty.

On the other hand, that they are your typical faceless heartlander only helps to leaven the already-accepted story by lending it a certain sinister rogue-next-door twist, rather than to raise doubts about their culpability.

For the moment, 13 of the 15 have been detained for two years under the ISA. The Government has said that it may choose to go for a public trial, though not yet, because investigations are continuing.

But there seems to be scant interest - whether from intellectual to the man-in-street - in such a trial.

One can only conclude from the disinterest that the men have already been tried and convicted - by public opinion.

Outside the country, even erstwhile Western critics of the ISA, most notably the United States, have changed tack. Some have given Singapore a pat on the back for moving against the detainees.

Only a very few people have publicly questioned the detentions. One is the Think Centre political activist organisation, which asked for an open trial.

The other is the even more fringe Muslim group Fateha (named after the first of the 114 chapters of the Koran, al-Fateha, or The Opening). It is now under heavy fire from the Government and Muslim leaders here for its view that the actions of the 15 men were prompted by Singapore's close alignment with the US and Israel.

One reason that minds were so quickly made up against the group is that the evidence against them appears stronger and their alleged intentions clearer.

They have evidently trained in the terrorists camps of Afghanistan. There is also that video of the Yishun MRT found so far away from home. Never mind that there are gaps. What, for example, the group had in mind at Yishun MRT remains unknown. And the plot to attack US naval vessels off the coast - does it not appear rather far-fetched?

Another reason is the Sept 11 effect.

Here and in most of the rest of the world, including some countries where Muslims are in the majority, it is not considered in good taste to question official action against anyone who is remotely linked to Osama bin Ladin's Al-Qaeda network.

Even in the US, the much-vaunted Home of the Free, liberal voices against the encroachment of civil liberties have found few sympathetic listeners.

But those who, in the thick of the Marxist controversy a decade and a half ago believe that the ISA and detention without trial should be scrapped, should also now call for the suspected terrorists to be tried openly.

Many of them probably believe that the detainees are the people the ISD has said they are, and that they really intended to carry out what the ISD has said they plotted to do. This would seem to make a public trial unnecessary.

This is a mistaken view.

Whether their guilt is as plain as daylight, they deserve an open trial as much as those who were held for their alleged roles in the alleged Marxist conspiracy.

Opponents of the ISA argue that it violates fundamental rights because it denies a person the right to defend himself in a fair and open trial. They also criticise the law for going against the principles of justice - because a person detained under it is not presumed innocent until proven guilty. They also reject the stand that the ISA is necessary in cases where no witnesses would be forthcoming or that it will undermine its intelligence operations, and insist that the fundamental rights and principles of justice are of greater importance.

If these arguments stand, they should stand in all cases, whether in seemingly open and shut ones like the present or the less clear-cut ones like the Marxist conspiracy.

The average Singaporean, who is not likely to lose sleep over the problems of the ISA, will not be tossing and turning over the justice meted out to the 13 people who have been detained.

Thus, pressing to bring them to court may not be popular. But it will certainly be right.


(E-mail: tarnhow@sph.com.sg)

Rajan said...

"I apololgize to those of you who are upset by the word 'fuck' as opposed to 100,000 innocent Iraqi deaths."

The John Hopkins-Lancet statistics is very flawed. http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2108887&

"Readers who are accustomed to perusing statistical documents know what the set of numbers in the parentheses means. For the other 99.9 percent of you, I'll spell it out in plain English—which, disturbingly, the study never does. It means that the authors are 95 percent confident that the war-caused deaths totaled some number between 8,000 and 194,000. (The number cited in plain language—98,000—is roughly at the halfway point in this absurdly vast range.)"

Emphasis mine. The Iraqi Body Count, while very very controversial, is far much more accurate than that study.

soci said...

by Stephen Soldz

for full article see the following link.


I know all about the problems of assuming statistics, official or not as 'fact'. However that was not the main focus of the blog. But I would like to add that its probably the best 'estimate' of the death toll because...

"In the absence of this confirmation, this study remains the best estimate of Iraq deaths. Its finding are truly horrifying. Recent reports indicate that the US is placing a far greater reliance on air power as a way of reducing Coalition casualties.[34] If this study's findings are at all accurate, the result of these policies will be even higher Iraqi civilian casualties. The continued US war in Iraq cannot be justified on any conceivable humanitarian grounds when many tens of thousands of Iraqis are being killed and many more injured. Surely, this study should be a wake up call for all those, regardless of their opinions about the original justifiability of the war, who sincerely are concerned about the fate of the Iraqi people. The looming attacks on Falluja and Ramadi suggest that, in the absence of world outrage restraining this Coalition action, the death and injury toll will soon be rising far higher."

So any thoughts on LHL alligning himself with one of the most unliked (internationally)American presidents?