10/20/2007

DPM's responses to Timothy Cooper

These are some questions posed by Cooper of US based human rights group Worldrights and Jayakumar's reply. I am split between putting it in the Myth column, Signs of Progress, or Decline, Notable Quotes or in the Gems of Parliament column in Redbeanforum. And I will just quote them from what was reported in the ST. I will leave it to readers to form their own opinions/comments which I believe will range wildly from the unbelieveable to the amusing and to the very pragmatic necessary evil and the rule of law. 'Cooper asked how it was that there were no libel cases where people had successfully defended themselves against government officials. He charged that the legal playing field was not level. Jayakumar said the question must be whether libel suits were brought with "arguments and substance". Singapore leaders sued for a reason: to uphold their integrity and character. Cooper asked why permits are routinely denied to political opponents who want to stage gatherings, but are granted to the PAP. Jayakumar said for densely populated Singapore, the govt has kept strict laws for public gatherings and processions. It requires and grants permits on considerations of law and order, with particular care paid to gatherings base on race, language and religion, and public gatherings by political parties and figures. The rules apply to all parties, including the ruling PAP, which has to also apply for permits, he said.'

1 comment:

Matilah_Singapura said...

I wouldn't worry too much about this cry-baby, girly-man Western Liberal Arsehole.

If you go to their website:

http://www.world-rights.org/

You'll see what a bunch of fucking left-wing wankers they are. These jealous people are out to DESTROY the world, not "help" in anyway.

They have a section called "earth rights". What the fuck is an "earth right" and who invented it? Oh silly me, it's another figment of the warped mind of a Western Liberal...closely related to that other heap of unscientific bullshit: Global whining...oops... I mean warming.

And these cry babies, really do behave like spoilt children. HOW?

By making YOU feel GUILTY—for just about everything—your success, your ability to be a Sovereign Consumer, the fact that you drive a car, the fact that you leave your lights on, the fact that you buy goods made in China...anything to make you feel GUILTY for all the "problems" on earth.

All cry baby western liberals, and the overseas Singaporean students unfortunate to have them as lecturers, are essentially anti life. Western Liberals speak of "human rights", but never of "individual rights" or "property rights"; of "democracy" but never "meritocracy"; of "economic equality" so that they'll tax the most productive people in the country at the highest rate, and redistribute the confiscated wealth so that everyone can then be EQUALLY POOR.

Such is the mind set of the stereotypical mentally-diseased, so-called "intellectual" Western Liberal.

In fact, they are very much against the idea of INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, and hold the view that the individual is subservient to "society"—and we all know that there is no such thing in reality as a "society".

To me this conversation is like Communist vs Fascist—Tim is the commie and Jaya.., you guessed it. (Achtung! Heil Harry!)

To me, they are both a bunch of statist-socialist scum, and can both get fucked as far as I'm concerned.

BTW, the people get the govt they deserve. No amount of wailing from some cocksucker from a busy-body human rights group, or that other shithole communist organisation: The United Nations, can change that fact—namely, that as much as they dislike the idea of a totalitarian PAP, the people have voted them in time and again to GOVERN the prissy little red wart of a cuntry.

redbean, wherever you put your post, you may if you so desire, include my hostile response.

SOCIALISM? GO TO HELL!


EPILOGUE

The biggest threat to Singapore is going to begin as a bunch of ideas, encapsulated into some sort of "philosophy".

Western Liberalism, to me, is THE MOST dangerous threat to the future of Singapore—along with its associated political ideas of "social democracy" or "liberal democracy".

Unfortunately if you like freedom, like I do, then one must be embrace the notion that people are free to choose or even invent any idea—even the really bad ones.

Freedom and liberty also require Constant Vigilance—to ensure that people with ideas—either good or bad ones—do not manage to get the Power Of The Big Group happening which will invariably trample all over the individual and his Right To CHOOSE what ideas he may hold dear—be they good or bad—as long as they don't physically affect anyone else.

This whole issue could be solved by asking ONE QUESTION directed the Singapore Government, and the best individuals to ask it are the citizens of Singapore themselves. It is an "either-or" question, because like "honesty and integrity", one is either honest, or not. There is no in-between or "degree of honesty". In other words, we ask the government for an ABSOLUTE answer, not a RELATIVE one. The question is:

"Is the Singapore Government upholding the Singapore Constitution * TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW *, or not?"

The government might or might not answer. Whatever the case, the individual Singapore citizen can make a judgement, and decide to ACT if necessary—or not.

The People Get The Government They Deserve—so if The People want a change of governing style, The People must first change, and that change begins at the individual level.