Singapore Democrats

Hey, YD can recruit Abdul Malik into SDP.

Then the next time the Police asked him whether "he had joined any political party and what were his political affiliations", he can give a totally different answer altogether.

BTW, does questioning someone over a fact constitute any questioning of his rights "to set up the Facebook group and to be associated in any way to any political group"?

Report:

27-May-10: Ex-detainee Vincent Cheng barred from speaking in history seminar.

08-Jul-10: Media Development Authority asked Kinokuniya Bookstore to remove copies of "Once A Jolly Hangman" written by Mr Alan Shadrake from its shelves.

12-Jul-10: Govt bans Martyn See's video recording of a speech by former political prisoner Dr Lim Hock Siew.

17-Jul-10: A newspaper photographer handcuffed and detained because he was taking photographs of the flood.

18-Jul-10: Alan Shadrake, British author of "Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock" was arrested.

26-Aug-10: YOG critic Abdul Malik arrested.

So, when it comes to our world-class leaders, it is a crime for us to use "violent" figures of speech like "burn", or to make reference to past "violent acts" against them. But it is perfectly alright for them to say that "... I have a hatchet, and a very sharp one. You take me on, I take my hatchet, we meet in the cul-de-sac”, to call us "daft" and to bemoan that spurs are not stuck to our hides.

We need to reclaim our freedom and dignity and bring justice to our land. We need to vote for change.

What Abdul Malik did is another step forward in the fight for freedom and justice for our country.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90883/7103221.html

The same word "burn" was misconstrued.

It is unfortunate that Abdul Malik had used the word "burn", but we need to be very aware of governments encroaching on civil liberties since 9/11.

See this news article.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/terrorist-threat-exploited-to-curb-civil-liberties-1623795.html

“If I have to shoot 200,000 students to save China from another 100 years of disorder, so be it.” - Lee Kuan Yew evoking the ghost of Deng Xiaoping whilst endorsing the Tiananmen Square massacre, Straits Times, Aug 17, 2004

And he didn't mean it as a figure of speech.

Exactly what does Lee Kuan Yew mean with his repeated by his repeated use of "demolish" to refer to what he feels must be done to the opposition?

(Hint: He has never meant "demolish their arguments".)

What was that veiled threat to send the army in should the opposition seize power legitimately at elections if not the perpetration of violence?

I don't kmow if arresting him is the best way to impress him, but that saying of his is really badly advised. It's the context that differentiates it from LKY's metaphor referred to.

"Burning" the heterodox has, of course, connotations of religious fanaticism. Christian "orthodoxy" burnt heretics, "infidels" are condemned to "hell" by extremeist interpreting of Islam, etc. And in the context of suicide bombings and burnings today, here we have one, Muslim by name, saying "burn that minister"!

What? When? Why ? How? Where are the answers?
Nobody gets burnt yet, but many did in fact suffered food poisoning.
Now you know, it is just an evasion tactic to the real issue: a poorly managed event, and also an abuse of state instrument : the police force.

When the statement is read in its entirety, I am unable to understand how the word "burn" could be interpreted to mean that of literally causing griveous bodily harm to another person. All I feel is that he is merely asking Singaporean to "rally together and vote them (VB and the PAP) out" thereby making them suffer the losses..similar to a person getting "burnt" due to losses in stock market speculations.

the police may have arrested him on the basis of the fear of another minister that maybe burned. they would as seen as they would take a higher precaution on the issue as to means of internal and political security. it is reasonable and also viewed as a political defamination. i do not think the sdp would like that too.

I suppose had he said "we should rally together to ensure he gets burnt at the next voting", it would really be like saying someone was burnt at stocks.

No one sets out to burn anyone at stocks trading. It's the market that does the "burning".

No, he didn't mean to be literal, but we should learn to guard our language and be wary of its nuances especially in sensitive situations, just in case we inwittingly set people on fire.

But Chen is right about his intention. So if he is to be charged, the charge should be such as that he used language likely to incite violence, rather than he really was inciting violence.

I cant agree with him being charged for such a mild comment like that. In any case, the elites have proven to the masses that they are once again "untouchables", totally disconnected from the people and doing things the way they like without a regard for the people.

I used to be pro establishment on its policies, but increasingly i have found it difficult to comprehend these acts of police intimidation on citizens speaking up in cyberspace.

PM Lee spoke of internet regulation back n 2006, i think it's being enforced right now People are being watched. In anywhere else, this kind of comments online wouldnt even be construed as inciting violence.

Well unless you have really bad english and want to take the meaning of "burn the minister" literally. Yes, then persecute the guy and make an utter fool out of yourself.

i would first then ask you. what would you do when a person has threatened such an act upon you? would you be like other politicians which increases security just for these death threats. a more direct and confrontational approach would be needed as to disallow such political 'childishness' to grow and continue.