BBC: Singapore 'breaks protest deal'

[CYRN]

and i am still very irritated by the singapore media totally being ignorant of this incident. is like they totally reported nothing about this. all they talked about is all those going-ons in imf without the incident of singapore breaking the deal. ;( do they really want to keep us in the dark? with the imf still here, i think it will just speak badly about us, our imaginary freedom of speech, or something even worse, selective reporting.

You still depend on Sg media meh.... and even when they report on it the publisher is bound to have "responsibility to the country" so as to maintain Sg integrity.

Even before the internet age... there are kopitiam talks.

Now wif internet... there are not only forums but web search... you can get almost any news from any publisher. In the link below... straight from the horses mouth.

It's Sg's loss that her media dosen't report on this cuz others can say what they like. BTW must also take it wif a pinch of salt.

 

[satay16]

Firstly, if the CSO can protest all they like in the past, I dun tink thay took any or much govnt to court in the first place, it means they haven't any experience handling Sg govt.. so their past experience might not be valuable when suing Sg in ICJ...

Sg also got experience in ICJ too mah... most recently with our northen neighbour regarding some works around Tekong area thingy.

birdshit island also. haha:bsmilie: but i dun think singapore has ever put up againest big non-local influencial organizations before. i mean, most of the time, singapore just play with them, in a way, we a too small to go againest big timers. when companies go to court, it is sometimes true that it is not a battle of who's right or wrong, but rather, who can survive this financial drain. like microsoft, it is just too hard to fight againest them even is they are wrong.

 

[CYRN]

birdshit island also. haha:bsmilie: but i dun think singapore has ever put up againest big non-local influencial organizations before. i mean, most of the time, singapore just play with them, in a way, we a too small to go againest big timers. when companies go to court, it is sometimes true that it is not a battle of who's right or wrong, but rather, who can survive this financial drain. like microsoft, it is just too hard to fight againest them even is they are wrong.

not really leh...

Creative (sort of) won Apple in it's rcent paitent suit.

M$ lost of to some monopolising thingy too.

 

[dawgbyte77]

Firstly, if the CSO can protest all they like in the past, I dun tink thay took any or much govnt to court in the first place, it means they haven't any experience handling Sg govt.. so their past experience might not be valuable when suing Sg in ICJ...

Sg also got experience in ICJ too mah... most recently with our northen neighbour regarding some works around Tekong area thingy.

I think suing is not about winning ot losing. This will affect the tourism, any future convensions and such related consequences regardless who win.

 

[CYRN]

I think suing is not about winning ot losing. This will affect the tourism, any future convensions and such related consequences regardless who win.

I doub't it will affect most things negatively. From this incident, Sg have proven, if not anything else, we taken security seriously.

In post 9-11 world... it's a premium investors willing to pay for (especially Banks and $$$ institutions) and tourist attracting factor too.

Only down side would be... no more IMF/WB meetings for the foreseeable future (at least until something catastrophic happened to their annual meeting that hit them-the VIPs directly)... no more "spring cleaning" for Sg.

 

[Yappy]

One Question: Can our world class Police Force or Armed Forces take good care of the 28 activists when they get over active?

If the answer is a resounding "Yes", then we should import them. Don't let it be another classic case of 'Praise the bully, execute the victim'. I have read reports on how the rich nations siphon money from the poorest nations in Africa (some of these nations can't even repay the interest terms forever). These activists might be rowdy during the past IMF meetings, given the conducive environment for demonstration in those host nations. But Singapore offers an entirely different setting, how far can these 28 activists go when prevented from gathering in forces?

If the Chief IMF-World Bank seriously wants to engage these activists, I suggest that we let these people stay together in the same hotel, preferably next to each other. In this manner they can have constant and more direct engagement in private. ;p

U are rite. But why? Why can't they do it to Singapore?

Corruption is the answer! The leaders are corrupted! So clean up the leaders get somebody to do the job(easily said than done)

Can the protesters get rid of the corrupted government?

 

[Yappy]

Hi:

I understand fully the meaning and purpose of a demonstration. Have joined a few while overseas. To me, protest and demonstration is a measure of a nation democracy level, and the conducting manners reflects its civilization level. I always agree that alternative voices must be allowed with no restriction. The irony here is that the IMF wanted the activists and creates such big hoo-ha over it, but are they really sincere in hearing them out and act on them? Please don’t take my words seriously, I am just mocking at some of the bad decisions made, eg. Fencing of Suntec, are we locking out the terrorists or locking in the delegates? Can the 28 activists really stretch our police force to a breaking point?
:heart:

Protesters, protesters there were many ocassions so call peaceful demo turnt violent! Hoe to prevent them? Stopped them b4 they do anything. Why give them a chance. They can be heard everywhere! Why dem in Sg. Do it elsewhere! We do not welcome demo!

 

[Yappy]

how do you prevent a full-blown protest from happening? wait until riot and bloodshed (and risk lives/property/public warth) b4 moving in to stop or prevent the ringleaders from coming to start it in the first place?



I fully agree w the need for WB to hear out these ppl, but if the people are prone to using violence when making a point, I dun think they are being civil and I dun think any point gets across. BTW, I hope u read the news article tt some of those banned hv took part in violent protests in the past.



tell tt to his american lawyer ... they play by a different set of rules ... my point being we play by our own set of rules and foreigners coming in should observe OUR set of rules. Likewise, when we are overseas, we would observe their rules ...




I am comparing serial rapists to violent protesters, not normal protesters ... I hv nothing against peaceful protests, but for people who historically show that they cannot be peaceful, I prefer they not come at all ... Hence, my qn of would u allow ur loved ones to be alone with serial rapist? Of course not, why take tt chance? Same thing, for ppl known to be troublemakers, why let them come in at all?

and lets understand that the police and organisers are between a fire and in a hard place. At the end of the day, the 27 banned people are capable of stirring a crowd up to violent protests. And they have a responsibility to the delegates and Singaporeans for a peaceful environment. At the end of the day, would you hold the police responsible if violent protests break out? It is easy to be an arm-chair critic and not having to take the responsibility for your ideas/ideals/stance. For the organisers, they have a REAL responsibility on their hands.

I fully support yr view and comments. Why give them a chance. we are too small to allow this to happen. We cannot take chances. We cannot have double standard. If they want to protest, go else where. We just can't allow them and just cannot accommadate them.

We don't want Singaporean to be hurt, arm blown off, car burnt business distrupted and our children to know that public demo is allowed in Sg. We don't want our children to go to the street and get arrested because that are manipulated by only few individuals who are trying to increase their popularity and political asset.

 

[Yappy]

hi guys. from my sources, i've just heard that the
FOUNDER OF 400 FROWNS CAMPAIGN ARRESTED

problem now is i cant seem to find any confirmation of this though i know its true.

Serve them right if they are trouble makers! We don't welcome them. Go elsewhere....

 

[Yappy]

Welcome to Fortress Singapore, where you are protected 24 hours daily

Don't you like to have a safe place to stay. Don't you want our guests to be protected? Yes we built a fortress for a good course. We have 26,000 guests. Why....???? because it is safe in Sg. Would you travel to a place where you find bombing going on everyday?

 

[Yappy]

Firstly... chill guys. You might be proving Sg govt right in the enforcement they done for IMF. Even a simple topic like this can bring WWII upon us. :sweat:


Secondly.. My personal view ...

1. It's Sg govt way of "convinently" using legaslative powers to simply BAN BAN BAN, S'porean might be immune to it liao but that might not be "shiok" for a foreigner.

2. Since already put so much effort... why not allow those activist to come to Sg? Then confine them at pre-defined location away from the event area..say like M.south, govt can turn the place into a camp for all I care. IF they wan to protest... set up teleconference for them lah. Imagine Suntec 40" LCDs all showing activiest in action. Sure more power then standing at the roadside of the meeting venue.

3. So what about the 20++ people that can't get in? Are they that crucial to IWF that they became a show stopper? How many have Sg admitted?

*edit...never see the below link juz now...22 out of 27 admitted.

The game is simple. You have a visitor(foreigner) who visits you.

he walked into your hall and said " hey I don't like the sofa set in your hall. Move it to the kitchen "

Do you want a visitor to determine the rule you have for your home or do you want them to dictate their liking?

If you come to Singpore, follow the rule. You are not happy and you want me to change the rule for you because of your safety?

 

[Yappy]

In Sg, P@P rulz.

it is because we want you to be safe and sound!

 

[Yappy]

Imagine.

After a year of preparation, hard work, planning... you finally open your own curry chicken stall- SPICY CURRY HOUSE. hurray.

A customer finally comes to your Curry Chicken Stall. hurray.

Customer: "One bowl of chicken curry... I heard that your curry is damn spicy! Best in South East Asia! Thats why I choose to walk into your shop. Hurray"

But then you add one extra table spoon of chilli powder, hoping to give your customer an unforgettable impression. i.e add more kick to it lah. hurray.

After one sip of the curry....... hurray?

No hurray, but Customer shouting to the whole street: "I think SPICY CURRY HOUSE have inflicted enormous damage to its reputation by adding too much spice!"

You add the extras when you have VVIPs! Don't you? It is not spicy.. they are honey and better and best honey we can find!

You will find spicy find spicy food where your had gotten your hand blown off!

We will spicy when the need come. Should not we?

 

[Yappy]

someone probably thinks that the;

4 millions ,
big plastic banners,
potted flowers,
local hotel curry,
IMF drinks,
baba culture tours,
discounted botox treatment,
local social escort,
new coat of paint,
re-surfacing of roads,
security fence,
fireworks,
bmw,
welcome ads,
8 by 8,
renovated night safari,
fountain of wealth, etc.... etc.... etc....

would provides a totally different brand new sensation (from previous meeting) so nice and appreciative that they'll ease all the troubles....

No risk no gain. It is an investment.

 

[Yappy]

“Enormous damage has been done and a lot of that damage is done to Singapore and self-inflicted. This could have been an opportunity for them to showcase to the world their development process” - Wolfowitz

quoted from a website:

"World Bank says Singapore breached deal"
- Houston Chronicle.

"World Bank's Wolfowitz says Singapore backtracked on agreement"
- Bloomberg.

"World Bank says Singapore breached deal"
- Associated Press.

"Singapore has reneged on deal with activists: Wolfowitz"
- AFP.

"Singapore has reneged on deal with activists: Wolfowitz"
- The Nation.

"EU, World Bank urge Singapore to lift protest ban"
- Reuters.

"Charities threaten to boycott IMF over ban on Singapore Protests"
- Independent.

"Singapore Branded Authoritarian"
- BBC.

"Singapore Inflicted Enormous Damage to Reputation: Wolfowitz"
- AFP.

"Singapore IMF Activist Ban Slammed"
- CNN.


you see, it is no more confined into a "local event". we cannot just argue about singapore protecting their citizens. right now, it is going gobal. if you want to know the seriousness of this, just check the internet. like what i say, there isn't going to be any perfect ending anymore. what choices to take and what to sacrifice will be done by the government. just hope they will make a smart choice. bottom line, singapore signed a contract and breached it. if they understood that security would be an issue, and that protecting their citizens is placed in top pirority, they shouldn't even signed it in the first place. but what's done is done. pray that the consequences wun be high and costly.

and do you find it strange. none of this is reported in our news. is like if you're not on the internet often, one will still think that the imf is going smoothly and singapore is doing a good job. selective reporting, going to be on BBC soon.

It is a matter of intrepretations. We are flexible to need and we would do them to best our ability. Let them said what they like. They are there just to discredit Sg. Would you believe them?

 

[Yappy]

Good day comrade:thumbsup:
Tuning in to Class 95? Hearing only the good stuffs, ya..

Leading a good life here, just want to make it "better".

"we cannot deny that we are an economic giant, a powerful nation in our region within a short 50 years"
Yes, but by what standards, it is comparing to the third world? or are we still a gaint when compared to Korea; Hong Kong and Taiwan?


"Why ashamed?"
Ashamed, when our leaders boost we have a world class Police Force/ a 3G one, but shows no confident in handling the 27 activists.
Saw how Taiwan Police handles the two warring armies converging in Tai Pei. My hat off to them. That is world class.

Proactive and preventive are the key words. We are world class as we have a world class police force! We think far. We planned far ahead!!!!!

 

[Reliance]

SINGAPORE : Two of the civil society representatives who were denied entry into Singapore to attend the IMF World Bank meetings arrived here.

They were part of the 27 representatives who were told by the Singapore police that they may have difficulty entering the country.

Since then, 22 of them have been allowed to enter the country.

But some of them say they plan to take legal action against the Singapore government if it does not issue an apology.

LINK

 

[Yappy]

IF only those 66% of singaporeans are wiser and choose the right ppl to lead our country, lame things such as wats happening now will have lower chance of happening

felt so disgraceful as a singaporean now..becos of those lame restrictions

Look at thing positively. There is always two sides of the coin. If your other wise then you will be in trouble.

 

[CYRN]

U are rite. But why? Why can't they do it to Singapore?

Corruption is the answer! The leaders are corrupted! So clean up the leaders get somebody to do the job(easily said than done)

Can the protesters get rid of the corrupted government?

This remark totally uncalled for. :nono: :nono:

I doub't you can substaintiate what you juz said. :sticktong

 

[CYRN]

The game is simple. You have a visitor(foreigner) who visits you.

he walked into your hall and said " hey I don't like the sofa set in your hall. Move it to the kitchen "

Do you want a visitor to determine the rule you have for your home or do you want them to dictate their liking?

If you come to Singpore, follow the rule. You are not happy and you want me to change the rule for you because of your safety?

I tink you got it wrong analogy.

You invited your friends to your house for a party, and also agreed that he can invite HIS friends to your house.

But when the party is about to start, you tell your firend that HIS friends cannot come into your house, even as they are waiting at the door step of your house.

How will your friend feel?