http://www.yoursdp.org/ Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:31:04 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3050#josc16135 Thanks to Mr T, we now know that PAP banned outdoor political demonstrations not because of public order and safety concerns. It was the 'attention grabbing theatrics' all along. The [b]Public Order[/b] Act is a major misnomer. The press has hoodwinked us yet again. But why are outdoor musical and [b]theatrical[/b] performances not also banned? The original set of restrictions on public assemblies in the Miscellaneous Offences Act have been in place years before SDP took to the streets. How might we also explain this? If POA was meant to target only political 'theatrics' which is presumably undesirable, how could the act then encroach on political space that never existed or should ever exist? If the government is so concerned about 'theatrics' but wish to allow other forms of political expression outdoors that do not degenerate into such, it could lift its [i]blanket[/i] ban and consider the merits of each proposed activity on a case by case basis. Was that not how our permit system was designed to function? Lastly, 'tis strange for Mr T to be infuriated by the POA, even though according to him, its terms would not apply to him. EVER. (I of course would like to believe his level of hypocrisy would not extend so far as to practice what he publicly denounces.) waterfirex Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:38:49 +0100 http://www.yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3050#josc16134 BryanT: Politicians do things using people as excuses. Its within their job scope. You should be mature enough to know this. quantum Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:22:27 +0100 http://www.yoursdp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3050#josc16132 I have my reservations about the POA, and even more after the additional restrictions imposed in recent times. But let’s be clear about why this law was further tightened. It was NOT as what CSJ says, to “(target) more broadly at the growing desire of Singaporeans for more political space, which includes the right to express themselves freely and publicly”. It was BECAUSE CSJ and his outfit tried all means and ways to bypass the previous legal stipulations. It was tightened precisely because SDP was all out to see how the laws would stack up against its attention-grabbing theatrics. Singaporeans, especially the emerging generations, yearn for more political space. But only the SDP defines this space SOLELY as the right to parade themselves with banners and placards (and badly designed T-shirts) on the sidewalks. Their hope is that the foreign media would turn up so that they can prostrate themselves before them as victims of repression, or display their well-rehearsed tango skills with the men(and women)-in-blue. We have CSJ and his sidekicks to thank for the law in its tightening form. [b]I suggest SDP stops using the excuse that it is doing something for Singaporeans to justify its urge to break the law.[/b] BryanT Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:59:26 +0100