Singapore to execute Aussie drug smuggler

[kheegster]

Not to mention that upon entry into Singapore, there are very large and very visible signs saying 'Mandatory Death Sentence for Drug Traffickers'

[PainRack]

My position is based on the person's mental state and the outcome of the act.

And? The rationale is this. You know that if commit a certain act and get caught, you're expected to pay the cosquences. Yyou did it anyway and you got caught.... so, why should you get an escape clause?

I'm curious. If an American woman in Saudi Arabia was about to be stoned to death for flashing a man in the street, would you simply sit back and say, "Hey, she knew the rules" and then decry the American government if they tried to get her out of there?

Let's try an alternate example, one that's has multiple examples of precedence. Porn.

We all know that porn is readily available and acceptable in the West. However, in certain countries, its not. Are you going to say they can't confiscate your porn, even though you willingly brought it in, despite knowing the cosquences?

To avoid a specific punishment. If Singapore just wanted to lock the guy up for a few years, I doubt anyone would be making a fuss. And the extradition would almost certainly stipulate that the offender serve an appropriate sentence in an American prison.

If that was the case, then what about soverignty?

As for homosexuality being illegal in S'pore as stated in the Canadian DFAIT references given by aerius, it is not as black and white as it appears.

I may be wrong, but homosexuality per se is not illegal in Singapore.
The Singapore government has also stated that there are gays in the Singapore civil service and I personally know gays in the Singapore civil service.

Homosexuality as a status isn't illegal. However, acts of affection in public can be prosecuted under the indecency act(or was it outrage of modesty?) and technically, unnatural sex means that the sexual act itself is an chargable offence.


However, the courts don't do it. Fuck, if homosexuality was actually prosecuted, pray tell what the fuck Venom, Bugis Village and Changi still exists? And why 9 years ago, it was still possible to get a sex-change op done here.

And before anyone asks about unnatural sex, its mostly used to prosecute rape and other acts of forced sex, because the laws we inherit state that rape can only occur via vaginal intercourse, as opposed to oral sex. That was why the rapist who forced women to commit oral sex on him 8 years back was charged with unnatural sex, whereas the child rapist who brutally targeted children and violated their vagina with foreign objects was charged with rape. Although IIRC, the guy who posed as a medium with his wife back in 1988(???) was charged with unnatural sex, despite the fact that the sex was vaginal. But I think that was due to his "fertilerty" treatments, which involved the use of an idol to be held at the vagina. Beside, the reason why he was hauled before the courts was due to the fact that he brutally murdered several boys and girls anyway, so, fuck him.

Personally, I would categorise the situation as sort of an implicit don't ask, don't tell. For the most part, the officialdom will not ask you as a routine matter of course what orientation are you, and what you do in the privacy of your own home is your own business. In return, don't flaunt your orientation, don't ask for public gay events, etc. Is it fair or ideal? Fuck no. But things are changing, perhaps too slowly for those involved, but they are changing. 15-20 years ago, I don't think the issue of gays were even publicly discussed in the S'pore newspapers.

Its more of a "don't ask, do tell".There is discrimination against gays, let's be fair and admit that. All gays in public service, aka, the civil service and military, police, civil defence must decleare their sexual orientation. In the past, and presumably, now, gays were discriminated against in the promotion arena. It was generally accepted that due to the security risk, gays would not be promoted to high ranks in the civil service. For the purpose of the military, gays weren't and I think still aren't allowed to serve as combat officers, due to the personal nature of that duty.
Similarly, its an unofficial rule that homosexuals aren't allowed to serve as teachers.

As for gay events..... well, the bar has been set higher. As long as such events don't focus on the homosexuality portion, they been snuck past, although MITA isn't making sense. It let past some charged plays and the like, but refused to allow a gay AIDs event.

So, essentially, gays are discriminated against in the public sector, but in the private sector, nobody gives a shit and nobody will even bother you. Want to admit you're gay? Go ahead, but don't flaunt it.(David Gan IIRC has admitted he is homosexual)

[Trytostaydead]

What it says in my US passport

"6. Foreign Laws: Remember, while in a foreign country, you are subject to its laws. Penalties for violating local law, even unknowingly, can be more severe than in the U.S. for similar offenses."

A good compromise would be to let him be extradited to Australia with the promise he be in jail for a very very very long time, and should he be paroled before then, the next Aussie to get caught, don't even bother acknowleding the Aussie ambassador and hang 'em.

[The Kernel]

Let's try an alternate example, one that's has multiple examples of precedence. Porn.

We all know that porn is readily available and acceptable in the West. However, in certain countries, its not. Are you going to say they can't confiscate your porn, even though you willingly brought it in, despite knowing the cosquences?

Durandal's example fits, yours does not (and I notice that you didn't answer his question either) because your example involves the seizure of property, not the penalty of death. If you can't see the difference between the two then you are a loon.

If that was the case, then what about soverignty?

Sovereignty will only get you so far. It is well established that there are certain things that the international community will simply not allow a country to do. For example if you massacre your own citizens regularly you forfeit your sovereignty as far as the international community is concerned. Or are you not aware of the various peacekeeping missions of the UN?

Homosexuality as a status isn't illegal. However, acts of affection in public can be prosecuted under the indecency act(or was it outrage of modesty?) and technically, unnatural sex means that the sexual act itself is an chargable offence.

However, the courts don't do it. Fuck, if homosexuality was actually prosecuted, pray tell what the fuck Venom, Bugis Village and Changi still exists? And why 9 years ago, it was still possible to get a sex-change op done here.

Irrelevent, they can still charge people for it, thus we can still say that Singapore's laws are ass backwards. Certain American states still have anti-sodomy laws on the books (even though they are unconsititutional according to the SCOTUS and thus unenforceable) and the fact that these states are all in the South is no coincidence.

And before anyone asks about unnatural sex, its mostly used to prosecute rape and other acts of forced sex, because the laws we inherit state that rape can only occur via vaginal intercourse, as opposed to oral sex. That was why the rapist who forced women to commit oral sex on him 8 years back was charged with unnatural sex, whereas the child rapist who brutally targeted children and violated their vagina with foreign objects was charged with rape. Although IIRC, the guy who posed as a medium with his wife back in 1988(???) was charged with unnatural sex, despite the fact that the sex was vaginal. But I think that was due to his "fertilerty" treatments, which involved the use of an idol to be held at the vagina. Beside, the reason why he was hauled before the courts was due to the fact that he brutally murdered several boys and girls anyway, so, fuck him.

All that means is that Singapore has ass backwards laws regarding rape as well as sodomy.

Its more of a "don't ask, do tell".There is discrimination against gays, let's be fair and admit that. All gays in public service, aka, the civil service and military, police, civil defence must decleare their sexual orientation. In the past, and presumably, now, gays were discriminated against in the promotion arena. It was generally accepted that due to the security risk, gays would not be promoted to high ranks in the civil service. For the purpose of the military, gays weren't and I think still aren't allowed to serve as combat officers, due to the personal nature of that duty.
Similarly, its an unofficial rule that homosexuals aren't allowed to serve as teachers.

So gays are discriminated against and not allowed to serve as teachers, soldiers, politicians or anything at all relating to civil service. This is not a "don't ask, don't tell" policy by your own admission since gays are required to report their sexual orientation.

As for gay events..... well, the bar has been set higher. As long as such events don't focus on the homosexuality portion, they been snuck past, although MITA isn't making sense. It let past some charged plays and the like, but refused to allow a gay AIDs event.

So in other words just about every parade, event and theatre in my hometown of San Francisco would be outlawed. And you don't consider this an attempt by the Singapore government to decide for its citizens what is and what is not healthy to their society? How is this NOT 1984?

So, essentially, gays are discriminated against in the public sector, but in the private sector, nobody gives a shit and nobody will even bother you. Want to admit you're gay? Go ahead, but don't flaunt it.(David Gan IIRC has admitted he is homosexual)

From your own descriptions, it sounds like gays are second class citizens in Singapore and that there are significant barriers preventing them from being open about their sexuality. That's enough to indicate the intentions of the government towards things they consider "unnatural".

[The Kernel]

Whoops, sorry I didn't realize this thread was so old. Damn you Trytostaydead!

[weemadando]

And in other news, the stupid dick should be dangling by now and hopefully by this time Monday it will have worked its way out of the news cycle and we can have one less brainless fucker in the world.

[Jason von Evil]

And in other news, the stupid dick should be dangling by now and hopefully by this time Monday it will have worked its way out of the news cycle and we can have one less brainless fucker in the world.

According to Yahoo, he be hung.

Linkski

[weemadando]

*cheers*

Thank fuck that its over and done with.

[Julhelm]

Pwned.

[The Yosemite Bear]

dammit if his twin brother whose drug addiction got him started in this stupidity visited him, just before it happened, he should have tried to pull a "Tale of Two Cities."

[Chris OFarrell]

*cheers*

Thank fuck that its over and done with.

Whats the difference between Van Nguyens mother and Ricky Ponting?
She will be returning home with the ashes

[thejester]

*cheers*

Thank fuck that its over and done with.

Whats the difference between Van Nguyens mother and Ricky Ponting?
She will be returning home with the ashes

So tasteless, yet so amusing at the same time.

[mr friendly guy]

*cheers*

Thank fuck that its over and done with.

Whats the difference between Van Nguyens mother and Ricky Ponting?
She will be returning home with the ashes

So tasteless, yet so amusing at the same time.

Even I found that tasteless and I consider myself to have a warp sense of humour. No doubt some Non-aussies will not get the reference.

My view is that he got his just desserts. I do however have sympathy for his mother who has to have her son die in the prime of his life.

In any event I couldn't believe the fucking support he is getting. Some church rang the bell 25 times, each time symbolising his years of life. Perhaps someone should ring a bell 26 000 times, each time symbolising the doses of heroin he was caught smuggling.

Or the lawyers in perth who wanted to meet and hold a minute silence for his execution (of course it couldn't be allowed to interfere with their sleep to they planned it 3 hours after he was supposed to be executed).

The claims that he has "reformed". Seriously, what evidence do they use to back that claim. He has been jail for the last 3 years, how is going to commit any crime.

The fact that shows dignity in composing himself in the face of death. Well so do suicide bombers, but I don't hear any Aussie politicians praising them.

Now lets hope Australians get the message not to smuggle illegal drugs into South East Asia.

[Chris OFarrell]

The joke WAS tasteless, but made me snicker enough that I decided to post it. It's just one of those kinds of jokes that IS horrible, but still, despite my best efforts, made me chuckle, as horrible as it is.


Now just to put my two cents in...

I have NO sympathy for Nguyen, even if I do have quite a bit for his family who didn't make this decision and now have to live with the legacy of their Son's actions and memory, of a person they no doubt loved.

Nguyen *himself* is a fucking idiot of the first degree for doing what he did, no fucking exception. I don't care if he thought his motives were good, he was running illegal substances that cause nothing but misery through a country whose legal response to this act is well known.

HE IS NOT AN INNOCENT, he FREELY admits to running *DRUGS* for the love of God. This isn't a harmless crime! It's not like he was hanged by the RIAA for downloading torrents or anything! I *HAVE* seen people addicted to drugs as well as people trying to quit the damn things, this is not a ‘well who cares’ crime here…supply is just as much a part of the equation as demand.

This doesn't mean I don't think Singapore’s 'justice' system isn’t pathetic, overbearing and primitive and doesn’t deserve the word ‘justice’ in the title. I also don't believe in capital punishment at all. But he gambled...and his lost.
That’s it.


On another topic, anyone else interested in the differing responses between this and say the situation in Cuba? Here the Government has some balls and stands up for a person who freely admits guilt to try and save his life, pleading for clemency. Yet they absolutely refuse to lift so much as a finger to help Hicks, when other allied nations like the UK simply demanded the US hand over the UK nationals they were holding, on similar levels of evidence of charges, who were subsequently set free when under the UK legal system?

But no. This is all purely political. The Government knows they can't save Nguyen, but they can look good as they 'try' it without really harming any relations. As they know after a few weeks pass, Australia will generally forget about this.
But in the case of Hicks of course, the Government fighting against the US would risk damaging the toadying up relationship Howard has with Bush. And when I say relationship of course, I mean Bush dictates our policy.

[PainRack]

Durandal's example fits, yours does not (and I notice that you didn't answer his question either) because your example involves the seizure of property, not the penalty of death. If you can't see the difference between the two then you are a loon.

Except that soverignty of the law applies. Simply put, nobody is going to disagree that the US should had put in effort to save its own citizen. However, if the person has been put through due process and given a fair trial, there is absolutely no reason to argue that he was a "victim".

Sovereignty will only get you so far. It is well established that there are certain things that the international community will simply not allow a country to do. For example if you massacre your own citizens regularly you forfeit your sovereignty as far as the international community is concerned. Or are you not aware of the various peacekeeping missions of the UN?

Only when criminal acts are being comitted.
Again, fair trial, due process.

Irrelevent, they can still charge people for it, thus we can still say that Singapore's laws are ass backwards. Certain American states still have anti-sodomy laws on the books (even though they are unconsititutional according to the SCOTUS and thus unenforceable) and the fact that these states are all in the South is no coincidence.

Fair charge.

So gays are discriminated against and not allowed to serve as teachers, soldiers, politicians or anything at all relating to civil service. This is not a "don't ask, don't tell" policy by your own admission since gays are required to report their sexual orientation.

Gays are allowed to serve as soldiers and politicians. As well as other posts in the civil service. The discrimination lies in that they aren't allowed to serve in the teaching profession and as officers in the military.

So in other words just about every parade, event and theatre in my hometown of San Francisco would be outlawed. And you don't consider this an attempt by the Singapore government to decide for its citizens what is and what is not healthy to their society? How is this NOT 1984?

Okay. This is a weird attempt by you to protray my illumination of the situation here into me attempting to defend the government practices.

I'm not. I'm fully illustrating what the government does in regards to homosexuality in Singapore. It is not as bad as outright illegality in practice, neither is official discrimination total. However, the government practice of "not promoting homosexuality" results in utterly absurd criteria of what is acceptable publications.

The most valid example of this will be how attempts to promote AIDS awareness amongsts homosexuals are axed, but homosexuality charged plays/movies are allowed to be promoted.

From your own descriptions, it sounds like gays are second class citizens in Singapore and that there are significant barriers preventing them from being open about their sexuality. That's enough to indicate the intentions of the government towards things they consider "unnatural".

Depends. They aren't second class citizens in that they are fully entitled and have to pay the full burden of being a citizen of Singapore, just as any other member. There are a few unofficial barriers to gays in public service, aka, teaching and officers. One can decleare their sexuality status, as David Gan did, although many do not. The problem with the government stand on homosexuality has and always will rest in one key statue.
The non promotion of homosexuality.
While this allows the existence of gay clubs and other such parties, they are relatively "underground" and not allowed to use the open media to flaunt their existence. More importantly from a societal point of view, it leads to an absurd selection criteria, in which homosexuality charged plays/movies are allowed to be promoted and played, while beneficial initatives such as an attempt ro raise AIDS awareness amongst homosexuals are axed.

[Danny Bhoy]

So gays are discriminated against and not allowed to serve as teachers, soldiers, politicians or anything at all relating to civil service. This is not a "don't ask, don't tell" policy by your own admission since gays are required to report their sexual orientation.

Gays are allowed to serve as soldiers and politicians. As well as other posts in the civil service. The discrimination lies in that they aren't allowed to serve in the teaching profession and as officers in the military.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't get the impression that one was required to declare one's own sexual orientation in the SAF. I got the impression that it was up to oneself to declare if one felt that way (in short don't ask don't tell) and get out of combat side. I don't personally know any gays who have not declared, but those I do know have told me that there have been gays who went through NS without declaring their orientation, including having been posted to combat units. Don't know if any were actually commissioned or even passed SAFINCOS/SISPEC.

[PainRack]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't get the impression that one was required to declare one's own sexual orientation in the SAF. I got the impression that it was up to oneself to declare if one felt that way (in short don't ask don't tell) and get out of combat side. I don't personally know any gays who have not declared, but those I do know have told me that there have been gays who went through NS without declaring their orientation, including having been posted to combat units. Don't know if any were actually commissioned or even passed SAFINCOS/SISPEC.

Technically, all homosexuals are required to decleare their 302 status during the medical check-up at CMPB. Technically, not declearing would be a penal offence, as he would had offered false information.

However, its not unusual for some people not to do so.

Furthermore, gays can and have been sent to combat units.

[Dendrobius]

I was reading the weekend paper, and the journalist covering this was "shocked" that over half of all those polled supported this "barbaric punishment".

Maybe it's because half of Australia recognizes that this is all bullshit generated by John Howard to cover his new Industrial Reform packages which basically puts worker's rights all the way back to the 19th century?

I wonder.