A
Alu862
Guest
Mr Nair,
You cleverly avoided my comments about Nixon and how he misused the power in 1970s in the thick of Watergate enquiry. I tell you, Americans felt thoroughly helpless. They were not sure what he will do next. Republican senators supported him. Although he was in his second term and when the cruch came, he had still 2 years to run. Newspapers were conjecturing about Nixon's dictatorship . This may sound crazy now but that was a plausible
conjecture then.
"The cardinal difference is, Americans can question authority"
I disagree.
1. Nixon's time
They did just that through campus protests, Newspapers, meetings and in the visual media. Nixon brushed them aside. When all was done,dusted and over, the Senate majority leader Peter Rodino heaved a sigh of relief and said the American democracy worked.
When asked whether he had any doubts about it, he replied in the affirmative and explained that he was sure Nixon would have gone at the end, but could not hazard a guess when.
2. Bush's election victory handed down by the Supreme Court(SC).
That was farcical. Gore had won by a margin. People spoke but Bush and SC did not listen. I was in Texas at that time and knew how people felt-they were all those who were not neocons, religious right or pro-lifers. They all voted for Gore. They were literally disenfranchised with the strokes of pens in the SC. Power did not lie with people then.
I also knew how the religious right worked and intimidated people in Ohio-Cincinnati, Hamilton Cou etc.. which handed victory to Bush 2nd time by a small margin.
Madela was a terrorist, There is no way of mincing the word. How is he great if he advocated violence? It is the civilised world which brought down the apartheid, not him like Gandhi. The word'great' belongs to people like 'Gandhi' and 'Martin Luther King' and not to (ex-armed) terrorist Mandela.
The British resorted to violence in India too all through early decades of 20th Century-shooting Tiruppur Kumaran dead for carrying the The Indian National flag ( then illegal) in a procession for example. Some armed natives history too for a period. But the greatness of Gandhi was to shun the violence. Mandela did not. The 26 years chastened him. If he had said he supported violence during the 26th year of incarceration, he would not have been released. He knew that ANC methods failed and the world hated apartheid. I wouldn't call him a great man.
I have visited Singapore and stayed there for days at a time. I would not say that it resembled Hitler's Germany. There are stricter laws . But even many Europeans particularly the British want stricter laws enforced in many cases I referred to.
Clearly, you were provoking the arm of law in Singapore by your
comments on judges which was illconceived. You wanted to be arrested, thrown in jail and claim success of an ill-conceived struggle. You were a foreigner while visiting a foreign country insulted the country. Pure and simple. While the Govt let you outside to sweat out, you were saying something like what I said about a woman judge in my earlier posting. If you had done this in Middle East, your head would have been detached by a sharp steel from your body. What if the the court ordered 25 cane strokes? You were treated as fairly as the circumstances permitted.
Singaporeans, the native ones may be leaving, I do not say in droves
(Brits are leaving too from Britain). Others will come in and build the country. That will be the dynamics of Singapore.
As I said before, my suggestion to you is to leave this 'baggage of hate' behind and 'move on' in life. You are no longer a citizen of that country. Let those citizens determine the future of their country without some one'yapping' at the side from outside.
"US Prisons house criminals. Not critics of the legal system"
Mr Nair,
Try heavily criticising the 'Patriot Act' and go around states doing this. The FBI will slap 'national security' on you and throw in jail.
You were not merely criticising the legal system but the political system and was aiming personal abuses against the leaders in the govt. All this as a foreigner.
What did you say to the immigration officer when you entered the country? Did you say you are coming to demonstrate and criticise or merely said visiting your native country? If it is former, I say the govt treated you fairly. Why did they not stop you at immigration? That is intriguing.
Mr Nair,
I see you quite craftily skirted away responding to my comments about Nixon, Bush and Patriot Act. The latter is as draconian as anything that Yew could design.
That combined with 'rendition' has given USA a bad name. But then what can you expect from a President who thinks deliriously God blessed him to invade another country! I do not see Obama doing much, a Carter mark 2 and the rightwingers will be back again, headed by Sarah Palin.
Taking you seriously? I would do it if you throw away your baggage and start writing something people could read instead of this rant. For a start, why not you blog about your days at the Inns of Court in London. The people you met etc..?
Now, anonymous 1.02: You deserve your govt which Nair is up against. If you care so much about your rights , come out of your hideous secrecy, stand up and be counted. I said what I said in my responses because your country is full of idiots like you, hiding and moaning. You are condemned to this infernal fate. Yew will eventually replace you with an immigrant from China and India who will shut up and do the work
Nair's weak reply: I am writing a blog. I am not having a debate with you.
What sort of lawyer is he if he hide from debating?
You cleverly avoided my comments about Nixon and how he misused the power in 1970s in the thick of Watergate enquiry. I tell you, Americans felt thoroughly helpless. They were not sure what he will do next. Republican senators supported him. Although he was in his second term and when the cruch came, he had still 2 years to run. Newspapers were conjecturing about Nixon's dictatorship . This may sound crazy now but that was a plausible
conjecture then.
"The cardinal difference is, Americans can question authority"
I disagree.
1. Nixon's time
They did just that through campus protests, Newspapers, meetings and in the visual media. Nixon brushed them aside. When all was done,dusted and over, the Senate majority leader Peter Rodino heaved a sigh of relief and said the American democracy worked.
When asked whether he had any doubts about it, he replied in the affirmative and explained that he was sure Nixon would have gone at the end, but could not hazard a guess when.
2. Bush's election victory handed down by the Supreme Court(SC).
That was farcical. Gore had won by a margin. People spoke but Bush and SC did not listen. I was in Texas at that time and knew how people felt-they were all those who were not neocons, religious right or pro-lifers. They all voted for Gore. They were literally disenfranchised with the strokes of pens in the SC. Power did not lie with people then.
I also knew how the religious right worked and intimidated people in Ohio-Cincinnati, Hamilton Cou etc.. which handed victory to Bush 2nd time by a small margin.
Madela was a terrorist, There is no way of mincing the word. How is he great if he advocated violence? It is the civilised world which brought down the apartheid, not him like Gandhi. The word'great' belongs to people like 'Gandhi' and 'Martin Luther King' and not to (ex-armed) terrorist Mandela.
The British resorted to violence in India too all through early decades of 20th Century-shooting Tiruppur Kumaran dead for carrying the The Indian National flag ( then illegal) in a procession for example. Some armed natives history too for a period. But the greatness of Gandhi was to shun the violence. Mandela did not. The 26 years chastened him. If he had said he supported violence during the 26th year of incarceration, he would not have been released. He knew that ANC methods failed and the world hated apartheid. I wouldn't call him a great man.
I have visited Singapore and stayed there for days at a time. I would not say that it resembled Hitler's Germany. There are stricter laws . But even many Europeans particularly the British want stricter laws enforced in many cases I referred to.
Clearly, you were provoking the arm of law in Singapore by your
comments on judges which was illconceived. You wanted to be arrested, thrown in jail and claim success of an ill-conceived struggle. You were a foreigner while visiting a foreign country insulted the country. Pure and simple. While the Govt let you outside to sweat out, you were saying something like what I said about a woman judge in my earlier posting. If you had done this in Middle East, your head would have been detached by a sharp steel from your body. What if the the court ordered 25 cane strokes? You were treated as fairly as the circumstances permitted.
Singaporeans, the native ones may be leaving, I do not say in droves
(Brits are leaving too from Britain). Others will come in and build the country. That will be the dynamics of Singapore.
As I said before, my suggestion to you is to leave this 'baggage of hate' behind and 'move on' in life. You are no longer a citizen of that country. Let those citizens determine the future of their country without some one'yapping' at the side from outside.
"US Prisons house criminals. Not critics of the legal system"
Mr Nair,
Try heavily criticising the 'Patriot Act' and go around states doing this. The FBI will slap 'national security' on you and throw in jail.
You were not merely criticising the legal system but the political system and was aiming personal abuses against the leaders in the govt. All this as a foreigner.
What did you say to the immigration officer when you entered the country? Did you say you are coming to demonstrate and criticise or merely said visiting your native country? If it is former, I say the govt treated you fairly. Why did they not stop you at immigration? That is intriguing.
Mr Nair,
I see you quite craftily skirted away responding to my comments about Nixon, Bush and Patriot Act. The latter is as draconian as anything that Yew could design.
That combined with 'rendition' has given USA a bad name. But then what can you expect from a President who thinks deliriously God blessed him to invade another country! I do not see Obama doing much, a Carter mark 2 and the rightwingers will be back again, headed by Sarah Palin.
Taking you seriously? I would do it if you throw away your baggage and start writing something people could read instead of this rant. For a start, why not you blog about your days at the Inns of Court in London. The people you met etc..?
Now, anonymous 1.02: You deserve your govt which Nair is up against. If you care so much about your rights , come out of your hideous secrecy, stand up and be counted. I said what I said in my responses because your country is full of idiots like you, hiding and moaning. You are condemned to this infernal fate. Yew will eventually replace you with an immigrant from China and India who will shut up and do the work
Nair's weak reply: I am writing a blog. I am not having a debate with you.
What sort of lawyer is he if he hide from debating?
