It seems like one of the TBT 18 is a soldier of the Singapore Armed Forces. This soldier is none other than Recruit Muhammad Shafi'ie. His comments in the SDP site reaffirmed SDP's ignorance to the law.
This innocent or ignorant soldier should think about whether the TBT 18 did create any disorder. Of course, we do have to acknowledge that the small number of participants make it insignificant. However, the 18 people violated the law. And when the police approached them, they were reluctant to call their act off and continued to confront the police. This attracted public attention, people stopped to look, and that caused obstruction and disturbance, in other words, DISORDER.
"Asked why he was not pleading guilty and what he thought of the trial, the NSman said: "I don't think what we did on 15 March can be called a crime. We hurt no one and neither did we create any disorder. What we did was to express our concerns as citizens on issues that affect us deeply."I thought about Recruit Muhammad Shafi'ie's view on crime and could not make a sense out of it. He seems to imply that it is alright for Corporal Dave Teo to carry the rifle around Orchard Road, since he did not hurt anyone and he did not create any disorder.
This innocent or ignorant soldier should think about whether the TBT 18 did create any disorder. Of course, we do have to acknowledge that the small number of participants make it insignificant. However, the 18 people violated the law. And when the police approached them, they were reluctant to call their act off and continued to confront the police. This attracted public attention, people stopped to look, and that caused obstruction and disturbance, in other words, DISORDER.
Go to court can 'siam' all the 'siong' NS training what. That's how clever SDP is.
ReplyDeleteEverytime there is an assembly of people, no matter how peaceful the intention, the police have to commit resources to monitor the situation, and keep personnel on reserve in case things get rough - you want to nip disorder in the bud. For example, a group of people meet at Hong Lim to protest the Lehman saga, at the same time and place, a group of bank relation managers gather to protest about the way they have been mistreated and blamed by the public. Do both groups have the right to protest? Of course. But is there a real potential for violence? Of course too.
ReplyDeleteSo the police have to commit a force to standby, to keep tabs on things. And this drains their resources and their ability to response to other emergencies.
So yes, we have a right to peaceful protest, but there is a need to balance that with practical constrains and the need to consider the burden on the police. We can't have protest anywhere, anytime.