2 edits
Originally posted by FMFThe streets would be safer if vandals got caned and if we had the death penalty for drug possession, but I'm not sure it's worth it.
Are the less safe streets of the U.S. due to enhanced attention to its citizens' human rights? If so how exactly?
Edit: Let me rephrase. I'm pretty sure it's not worth it.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWow. Do you really believe you have "assumed nothing"? Seriously?
I have assumed nothing FMF [...] I find it immensely entertaining that you think that a little group of law abiding tax paying citizens could possibly jeopardise 'investor friendly environment', and thus justify repression and quite serious human rights abuses...
Originally posted by FMFplease answer the question eff emm eff, what danger to economic investment do we represent, if none, then clearly repression and human rights abuses cannot be justified, in our case at least, can they.
Wow. Do you really believe you have "assumed nothing"? Seriously?
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou're seriously ascribing the "Asian Values" type political justification for 'order, conformity, stability' to me? I cannot explain it to you without you assuming I subscribe to it, is that how it works? Wow.
please answer the question eff emm eff, what danger to economic investment do we represent, if none, then clearly repression and human rights abuses cannot be justified, in our case at least, can they.
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFno, i am asking for your opinion within the context of the debate, which is something quite different. I have not said that you ascribe to it, have I?
You're seriously ascribing the "Asian Values" type political justification for 'order, conformity, stability' to me? I cannot explain it to you without you assuming I subscribe to it? Wow.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOriginally posted by robbie carrobie
I have not said that you ascribe to it, have I?
I find it immensely entertaining that you think that a little group of law abiding tax paying citizens could possibly jeopardise 'investor friendly environment', and thus justify repression and quite serious human rights abuses...
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFyes why indeed, now if we are quite finished then, it has been established that we represent no danger to foreign investment and economic stability, on the contrary we are law abiding and tax paying citizens that should instil investor confidence rather than diminish it and the government of Singapore , despite its shiny economic vision of health and stability cannot be described as a 'good government', in the broadest sense of the term, for it engages in serious human rights abuses.
I think you're just trolling. Why would you do that?
Originally posted by FMFso if you dont think that, why did you post this,
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
[b]I find it immensely entertaining that you think that a little group of law abiding tax paying citizens could possibly jeopardise 'investor friendly environment', and thus justify repression and quite serious human rights abuses...[/b]
They are just part of the mish mash consisting of 'the opposition, the different, the uncooperative' whose repression is part and parcel of creating 'stability' and an 'investor friendly environment'
your own words and thoughts were they not?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou seriously think I support "outrageous restrictions" (my words) and the "repression" (my word) of the "opposition, the different, the uncooperative" (my words)? What's with this line of attack, robbie?
yes why indeed, now if we are quite finished then...
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHave you never come across the concept of "Asian Values" before, in so far as they are used to justify repression? If someone explains it to you, you assume they support them?
They are just part of the mish mash consisting of 'the opposition, the different, the uncooperative' whose repression is part and parcel of creating 'stability' and an 'investor friendly environment'
your own words and thoughts were they not?
Originally posted by FMFthis is what i seriously waned to avoid, its not a line of attack on your person FMF, i am merely responding to the text, ill tell you what, i will get lost and you can discuss the economic implications in peace, deal?
You seriously think I support "outrageous restrictions" (my words) and the "repression" (my word) of the "opposition, the different, the uncooperative" (my words)? What's with this line of attack, robbie?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYes stick it in your ear robbie. If the best you can do is ascribe the Singaporean take on "Asian Values" to the person who explains it to you, then get lost by all means.
this is what i seriously waned to avoid, its not a line of attack on your person FMF, i am merely responding to the text, ill tell you what, i will get lost and you can discuss the economic implications in peace, deal?
Originally posted by FMFlook i was responding to the article you posted, cited in the economist, it terms the government of Singapore a 'good government', naturally, i have issues with that, that is the tact i have taken, it is nothing to do with you personally, unless of course you are a staunch advocate of that system, which as yet, has yet to be determined.
This is the tack you're going to take on this topic? Seriously?