5/10/2015

Amos Yee – What are the issues?




On the first day of the hearing that took just 20 minutes, the defence lawyers stated that the graphics in Amos Yee’s facebook were nothing offensive or obscene and many magazines or media had similar graphics or pictures in them. The case was adjourned with the court asking the counsels to define what is offensive and not offensive.

The second point in contention was Amos offending the Christians and with intent. And that it is no good as it would, in my interpretation, harmful to our social fabric and make the Christians angry. The defence pleaded it was not Amos intention to hurt the Christians. So the issue now is a matter of Amos intent with what he said and how it offended the Christians.

The defence counsel also quoted that many Christians said they were not offended. Would this be enough? Would it be enough if hypothetically the Pope or some Christian leaders were to stand up to say they are not offended, which means there was no victim?

While the two sides were saying their peace, it would be good if the defence lawyers could make a plea to the judge to remove the chains and shackles on the poor boy. He is only a kid and he has not hurt anyone. Can the court be kind enough to take pity on the boy without influencing the court’s decision the case?

Perhaps the President or Chairman of the Kindness Movement may want to say some kind words for poor Amos.

Poor child.

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

"While the two sides were saying their peace, it would be good if the defence lawyers could make a plea to the judge to remove the chains and shackles on the poor boy."

The chains and shackles reveal very clearly the type of people we have in our country.

Anonymous said...

"He is only a kid and he has not hurt anyone."

The kid who shouted "The emperor has no clothes."
Did he hurt anyone?
Did he embarrass anyone?

Anonymous said...

I wonder how many Singaporean Christians are willing to sign a petition to say that they have been offended?
If what the prosecution say is true, then the prosecution should have no problem producing such a petition to support their case right?

Anonymous said...

I don't think Christians are so narrow minded and unforgiving.

Virgo49 said...

Hi Anon @10.14

Yes, they are merciful with more than twenty reports were made at Amos Yee.

How come not a single report against the preachers of their God who said more harmful remarks about other religions???

So they are not so narrow minded and unforgiving???

Anonymous said...

So what is the prosecution trying to say here?
"In the name of Christianity, we prosecute you Amos Yee?"

Is this a fair statement?
I really don't understand.

Anonymous said...

You should ask if the chain and shackle is part of the procedure? In which case,law is law.

Anonymous said...


Can only say.....................

可怜 可怜 非常可怜 !

Will there be a 包青天 ?!

Anyway hope that......明天会更好!

Cheers.

ℳatilah_Ƨingapura said...

Once there are laws in place which make it ILLEGAL to hurt peoples' feelings. or try to apply the idea of "offensive" speech or content, then it is a matter of anything goes in the supposedly "objective" judicial process, and supposedly "objective" Rule Of Law.

Of course Amos's content was offensive. Of course there'll be many people who'd have their "feelings hurt".

So what? How come there are many many people who just LAUGHED when they watched the Amos Yee video, and chuckled at the cartoon of LKY banging Thatcher doggy style.

You cannot just say "offensive" and "hurt feelings" exclusively when you know darn well there are people who feel quite the opposite---anywhere from indifferent, to mildly amused, to rolling on the floor convulsing with laughter, and cheering Amos Yee.

What's more, being "offended" or having one's "feelings hurt" ⇉ IS A CHOICE ⇇ , because ☛☛ Y O U ☚☚ have to actually CLICK on a particular point in your browser to view the cuntent and have the "experience" of being offended or entertained, or whatever.

Motherfucker, if you don't want to be "offended" and have your feelings left intact:

1. Don't fucking click the link
2. Destroy your computer/ device, because the entire internet has the potential to OFFEND someone, everytime.
3. Go off quietly somewhere and die already. Because you refuse to accept that the cuntent you hate will be ENJOYED by many "normal" people.


Happy Mother's Day, motherfuckers!

Anonymous said...

Uncle Red Bean,

The kid had no intent to hurt the Christians, and many Christians had came forth to sign a petition to say that they are not offended. One Christian even came out to bail Amos out.

But the Emperor who has no clothes got hurt very badly, and many of his fierce dogs are running wild, like suffering from rabbies, barking with vengence and going for the kid's jagular vein.

One even went all out to teach him by giving him a big tight slap across his face before the kid could enter the Court to face the judge.

I can feel that the whole State machinery is busily at work in full gear, including the one-sided Mass Media. Can't you feel that?

The handcuffs and shakles are there for all to see how Emperors in ancient China and the Japanese Invaders of Singapore treated those who offended them. That is called public embarrassment and subtle mental torture. Killing the chicken to teach the monkeys, is it not so?

No matter how cruel or vicious such actions could be perceived by the Public and the World at Large, do you think the Emperor could be bothered?

Isn't it time for the sheeples and weaklings, the kiasu and kiasi, to wake up and stand up? Yet very few can be bothered to do something about it .....

Hasn't the Japanese Invasion and Occupation of Singapore taught us anything?

Should such cruelty be allowed to go on and on?

Sad ... very sad ..... very very sad .... extremely sad .....


Anonymous said...


包公! 包公! 包公!

你是在哪儿?

Anonymous said...

'Hasn't the Japanese Invasion and Occupation of Singapore taught us anything?'

Yes, we learnt to love the Japanese for raping, killing, beheading, looting and robbing us, to control us as their colony.

We love to be butchered and would quickly forgive the butchers.

jjgg said...

Actually all the complainants should be cross examined as to exactly what they are offended by..surely there cannot be a template for their police reports. Would it not be very funny if the net result shows that the only people offended are the AGC?

patriot said...

Amos is a victim of his own talent.

A natural talent is always a threat to fake talents, especially those annointed to high offices.

The ONLY MISTAKE that Amos had made was his lack of manners. He had probably picked up the Crude at the Places where he was 'educated' in; his schools, the Company where he acted as an artiste, the House(s) of Worship that he was brought to. AND THIS IS WHERE I SUSPECT THINGS WENT AWRY. I think Amos was, is not convinced about the Faith that he was probably 'brought into' as a child. I can empathize with it as I too was disturbed by my Late Mother who forced me to embrace her superstition. Later, I was also approached by lots of believer friends and professional preachers and evangelists. They put me off and as an atheist, I pose them difficult qiestions to ward and frustrate any preacher. Even close friends with superstitious suggestions are asked to cut off point blank. Like to say here that not all are gullible to myth and superstition.

Some said Amos DID NOTHING WRONG. I beg to differ as his crudeness and rudeness were uncalled for. As a talent, he should know discipline and civility. However, his wrong in manners IS NOT CRIMINAL.
I am especially disturb that he was handcuffed and shackled despite his proven compliants to report to a far away from home police station, which in itself is an harassment in my view.

Amos is a minor at his age and did not commit any crime except mistakes of indiscipline arising from lack of civility and manners. With usual form of disciplinary actions such as getting him to apologise for his rudeness and put on oath not to commit anymore indiscipline should be the Right Way to educate and reform him.
Why the Harsh and OUT OF PROPORTION Treatments to harass a boy who happened to act in a bad manner?

patriot

patriot said...

Like to say here that many who commented at Amos Wordpress
Blogsite, supposedly to admonish and educate him were NO BETTER than Amos himself. I believe that most of these Commenters are ADULTS WHO THINK HIGHLY OF THEMSELVES and were at Amosyee Nlogsite to give the Young Blogger a piece of his/her mind. Unfortunately, many were NO BETTER than Amos, on the Contrary, as educated adults with the Audacity to admonish and 'teach'
wayward others, they were a BIG SHAME.
Many were NOT JUST CRUDE AND RUDE, they sounded no better than those working at whorehouses.
Well, me am not sirprised having read many times how some preachers took advantages of their young believers.

As a senior citizen, I am appalled.

patriot

straycatsgp said...

How anybody can condone the heavy handed approach by the government on this 16 year old kid is beyond me.
The treatment he has received is way beyond the treatment even normal "real" criminals" get.

I watched his video again, this time I disregarded his vulgarities and explicits, and the kid makes sense!!

Many people may not like his opinions, but aren't we all entitled to our opinions?

What is also a pinnacle of hypocrisy is that NONE of the 25-30 police report authors do not want to testify...

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Another pinnacle is that none of the people's representatives is willing to open their golden mouths in case diamonds fall out. That must be the reason to keep their mouths shut.

Anonymous said...

I m looking hi and low for something called conscience. Is there a Singapore conscience? Or has it been stolen by the dark side?

Anonymous said...

Poor Amos, he is in deep trouble. He is just unlucky to be born in Singapore and hence a Singaporean. If he was born in the west, his ill mannered rant would probably be laughed off as a childish rant. However in Singapore, where strict laws control citizen behaviour what he has done will never be tolerated by some small minded people. To shackle and handcuffed a 16 year old boy will never be practised in any civilise country except in Singapore.

patriot said...

良心被狗吃了。

The Late Lee Kuan Yew did exhort Singaporeans to imbue conscience. He probably sensed that there was a lack of it. As to why Sin was short or lacking of conscience with him guiding the People since he took over from the British five decades ago, is quite bothering. Anyway, it seems to get worse immediately after his demise.

With lack of conscience in the Society, things are going deeper into the Dark Side and the Question really is how long can Sin hold on to peace and prosperity.

Logically and empirically, regimes and states slumped and got into fast decay once the Society becomes liked jungle, where the Wildest and Ferocious Species run over all others.

Can conscience return to those in
Authority?

patriot

ℳatilah_$ingapura said...

@ patriot:

>> Can conscience return to those in
Authority?


The "authority" (a special minority) won't be there unless the majority put them, and kept them there.

The government reflects the people. A representative govt. represents all aspects of the people who vote them in.

Here's the crux:

In Singapore culture "face" is a very very big thing. The idea of "face" is tied up to social rank---if you "lose face", your "value" diminishes, and you perceive yourself or others perceive you as DROPPING in social rank.

"Face" is nothing but EGO, which is an ILLUSION "created" in the brain by biological processes churning out a "story" (narrative) of YOU. Aspects of yourself and your life are integrated into an "idea" of who you are, and how you fit into the environment, as well as a feeling of SEPARATENESS from the rest of the "objects" in the universe.

In order to keep on going when we're faced with challenges, the EGO version of ourselves is HIGHLY INFLATED and sensitive to "attacks" especially to aspects of our being held dear in the ego. Aspects like: our ethnicity, our family's reputation and history, our spiritual beliefs or lack thereof, our "value", our physical attributes...etc...etc.

Therefore if a person calls themselves "Christian", any attack on the #1 Christian aka Jesus can potentially "attack" the ego/ face of those believers.

Similarly, Lee Kuan Yew is revered by many elevating him to "messiah" status. So if you "attack" Lee Kuan Yew, that has the potential to "attack" the ego/ face of those people who've incorporated their esteem for "LKY: the 'saviour' of Singapore, my beloved cuntry" into their very being.

The laws used to charge Amos are all based largely on this cultural principle of "loss of face" being interpreted as a terrible loss of social capital.

Whilst most Singaporeans have no issue with people "losing face" because they get caught cheating, stealing or doing physical harm to others, they have a BIG PROBLEM in losing face because some joker fucked them using words...they BUAY TAHAN!

How can a so-called modern society have laws which are based on face-saving? If you have such laws, how the fuck are you going to CRITICISE AUTHORITY when they do bad things?

Anonymous said...

"I m looking hi and low for something called conscience. Is there a Singapore conscience? Or has it been stolen by the dark side?"
May 10, 2015 2:58 p.m.

You got hear of this thing called "making a deal with the devil"?
Singaporeans say "I want to be a millionaire."
Devil say "I can make your wish come true. Vote for me, and I will make you an HDB flat millionaire."

And that is how the Singapore conscience died.
We made a deal with the devil.
And like all deals with the devil.
This deal is not going to end well.

SOURCE:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deal_with_the_Devil

Anonymous said...

Uncle Redbean, thank you very much for your continuing concerns over this issue, and especially for the end of your article highlighting the shackles put on the 16-yr-old boy.

I have a constitutional question that I'll pose in a series of small questions.

Is it reasonable to try Amos in an adult court instead of juvenile court?

Is it standard procedure to put shackles on defendant in an adult court? Are there no exceptions for handcuffs? Are there no exceptions for leg chains?

Is it standard practice to shackle a defendant in a regular juvenile court?

Is it not a wrong procedure to shackle a juvenile just because the state bends the usual rules and put him in an adult court?

Can some human rights organisation sue the State for ill-treatment of juveniles?

The mainstream media is silent as usual on this disgraceful police behavior. It's up to alternative media to raise the conscience of the Nation.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Hi anon 8:34, those are valid questions. JB Jeyaratnam has been quoted to have requested the court to remove the handcuffs of his client and the court obliged.

I am writing a piece called Power Logic. It may answer some of our questions.