To the (adolescent) pikamaster,
Do you rmb how old I am? (HINT: I'm not even in NS yet.)
.and I wish to WIP too, for the moment.
Well, not really interested in how old u r. If u r young, u have
much to learn, if u r old u have not seen much of life.
Yr posts do not convince me a little wee pit, so may be I do not
understand 100%.
Forbes does not agree with u, so his letter contains absolutely no
substance at all.
Ariels does not agree with u, so his letter is also lacking in
substance.
Laughably and shockingly,
..It's shocking not because
Singapore is not civilized, but because of the callous disregard
Ariel shows the other Southeast Asian nations of Malaysia,
Indonesia, Phillippines, Brunei, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos.
His statement implies that all these societies are far less
civilized than Australia.
How does Ariels arguably our most civilized neighbouring state
be implying that all these societies are far less civilized than
Australia. What did he say that with wider implication to what he
says was used as a justification for the mass torture at Guantanamo
Bay?
We are all worthless because we do not agree with you.
4) Foreign counsels are prohibited from beign involved in
local cases. Do they have to be involved in local cases to
be of any use?
7) Refer to the Case Study on Poon Yuen Yang. But read the
rest of the report too, when you have the time, so that you can
understand the abolitionist-human-rights stand better, and get the
facts fo the argument straight.
Between the report fr AI and the rebuttal from GCTs office, I
choose to believe in our ppl doing their job.
With America, the champion of human rights still implementing death
penalty, I cannot help but when there is a conflict in human
rights, the rights of the victims and the innocent citizens come
before the right of the criminal.
9) Please read up on the opium farming industry and have
you heard of something called "international
exports"?
What has ecstasy pills got to do with opium farming? Do you really
know what you are talking about?
11) wth. This is the most nonsensical thing I have seen
written on a discussion on the Death Penalty!!! :X If you want to
deal with a problem, you look at all perceptions so that you can
see which perceptions need to be changed to solve the problem. That
is elementary psycholgy and human relations for you. OMG, which
planet do you live on?
why do you need the perceptions of the drug lords? To be more
sympathetic to them? To change their perceptions or change your
perceptions in solving the problem? I am living on planet earth in
a country called Singapore. I dont need human relationship with
the drug lords in Myanmar. Are you in Burmese jungle?
12) Let's put it this way ... I'm not going to buy a drug
even if it was shoved in my face. And I'm pretty much a child, or a
teenager anyway, so where goes your argument?
You need to show IC to watch NC16, can smoke only in the toilet and
it is illegal for the hawker a peh to sell you a beer, or do you
have the money for anything?
13) I'm not a parent. And please don't keep misquoting
me.
At least learn to respect what yr parents are doing for you.
14) Because you are teaching him that finding someone else
to blame and dealing violently with that person is the best way to
solve a problem. (And IMHO, private arms possession is illegal in
Singapore. Breaking a law to stop the breaking of another law is
still breaking the law.)
Hmm
..y r too young to know how an adult can shoot a drug
trafficker. Dont waste time thinking about this.
1) Taking away the life of a man is much more serious than
taking away his youth - at least in the latter situation, the man
still has the chance of living out the remainder of his life as a
useful and law-abiding citizen.
There are countless evidences of criminals repeating the crimes
after jail. You can argue till cows come home between giving the
criminal the chance to live out the remainder of his life as useful
(?) and law-abiding citizen, and protecting the would-be victims of
the criminals committing the same crime after release.
3) America and Singapore are not the only countries in the
world. Of course, there are other countries which still retain the
death penalty in practice. But overall, there is an international
trend of abolishing the death penalty in law and abolishing it in
practice (2 different things).
I dont follow trend, especially when it comes to protecting the
life of innocent citizens.
I think you retentionists are confused about what respect
of the law is. It means to adhere to the law when it is fair and
just, not refraining from criticizing the law even when it is
unjust. After all, Respect for the Law also entails respect for the
principle of Law itself, and by criticizing unjust or unfair laws,
one is adhering to that principle.
I am no retentionist, and am not confused. Our laws and judicial
system are not perfect but certainly not unjust and unfair.
Oh haha your words sound so empty - what if another party
comes into power and overturns the law? Will you support it then?
And IMHO, most Singaporeans are apathetic, and hence do not bother
about retentionism or abolitionism, or are afraid to speak up
against the government, so don't try and commit a fallacy of Gross
Generalization here, ok?
Hmmm
what makes you think the majority of Singaporean are not fully
aware of the need and therefore endorse the death sentence?
Singaporean may be apathetic to many political issues but isnt it
an assumption that they are also apathetic and are afraid to speak
up on this issue? Talk about Fallacy of Gross Generalization?
And may I ask when did you ever speak up against the government
about abolitionism? Hypocrite!! Oops, I forgot, you are still
hiding under yr moms apron.
6) Please look deeper, and realize that you are trying to
promote Singapore's model, or at least are supporting the
government's promotion of the model, as the best in the world.
Please don't retreat into Ad Misericordiam
arguments.
I am only trying to protect my own way of life. I promote
Singapores model to whom? Arent you the one promoting an outside
model, approved by AI, into Singapore? Hmm
.this is called
retreating into Ad Misericordiams arguments.
What I notice about retentionists - and the government
worst of all - is that they adopt a very insular world-view, where
what they do or wish to do is right. They refuse to accept
criticism from other people, or even see what other people do. They
fail to understand that their society and culture is not as unique
(remember this?) as they think it is, and stubbornly refuse to
learn from others.
Did the government of Singapore send rebuttal to AI to clearly
state its position. Our society is indeed unique (which two
countries are similar?), and we, the ppl decide what we want to do,
and we choose not to follow your way. Stubbornly refuse to learn?
Thats arrogant accusation.
Simply to say, even if abolitionists provided evidence
directly relevant to personal situations, retentionists will reject
it with the most spurious arguments e.g. "let the
murderer/trafficker go free" (sound familiar?)
So try harder.
