Sammyboy RSS Feed
07-02-2015, 08:50 PM
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
THAIPUSAM INCIDENT - MP SHOULD GET FACTS FIRST BEFORE COMMENTING
Post date:
7 Feb 2015 - 9:38am
http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/download_20.jpg?itok=IARR-fuF (http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/field/image/download_20.jpg)
http://publicopinion.sg/logo.png (http://publicopinion.sg/)
The incident at Tuesday's Thaipusam festival/procession is now the talk of the town. Briefly, a fracas broke out between some devotees and police officers over the use of musical instruments at the procession in Serangoon Road.
The use of such instruments and the playing of music is banned in Singapore for religious events which include foot processions.
Law Minister K Shanmugam gave a lengthy and much appreciated explanation, although we may still disagree with him on the ban. (See his explanation here: "Hindus given special privileges: Shanmugam (http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/02/hindus-given-special-privileges-shanmugam/)".
Whether the ban is justified or not should be debated civilly, and indeed this was what Mr Shanmugam said.
" there a case for allowing musical instruments to be played during the Thaipusam foot procession, in support of the kavadi carriers?" he asked.
"This is a matter that can be debated. There were incidents in the past which led to the tightening up. Whether the rules should be relaxed, and whether and under what conditions music should be allowed during the Thaipusam processions, is something HEB has to discuss with the agencies. HEB has relaxed the rules last year within the temple premises."
I think that is reasonable. All parties involved should come together and discuss this.
What we do not need is for Members of Parliament to jump to conclusions and add fuel to the fire which is already burning.
And in this regard, one has to question the Facebook posting of the MP for Sengkang West, Lam Pin Min.
On 4 February, Wednesday, Dr Lam posted the following on his Facebook page:
http://publicopinion.sg/?qa=blob&qa_blobid=6955217022848095620
Now, how did Dr Lam conclude that it was "alcohol intoxication" which caused the apprent scuffle?
Dr Lam's post was linked to a blog post which in turn cited news or police statements that the three people arrested "were believed to have been drinking earlier as they smelt strongly of alcohol."
But it is important to understand what the police had said and the words it used.
The police said the three "were believed to have been drinking" and that "investigations are ongoing."
In other words, there is no conclusive proof of guilt, that the three - or any of them, in fact - had been drinking.
And even if they were, there is also no proof that they were "intoxicated".
Here is the full statement from the police:
http://publicopinion.sg/?qa=blob&qa_blobid=12479176686355071187
Following the news reports, at least one of the three men arrested has stepped forward to deny that he had been drinking or had been intoxicated.
Here is his Facebook post refuting the charge:
http://publicopinion.sg/?qa=blob&qa_blobid=17922320388630131939
You can read his whole post here: "News reports wrong about Thaipusam incident, says devotee (http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/02/news-reports-wrong-about-thaipusam-incident-says-devotee/)".
It is important that we do not jump to conclusion about things like this when investigations are still ongoing.
Dr Lam is also a Minister of State (Health) whose words carry extra weight. Thus he should refrain from making such statements before police investigations are completed and the truth ascertained by a court of law.
He should learn from Mr Shanmugam and present facts, and not conjecture ot hearsay or unsubstantiated allegations.
Else, it leads to unhappiness, as it already has, going by the response on Dr Lam's Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/LamPinMin/posts/985471434816166).
Remember: one is innocent until proved guilty.
[I]*Article first appeared on http://publicopinion.sg/212/thaipusam-incident-should-get-facts-first-be... (http://publicopinion.sg/212/thaipusam-incident-should-get-facts-first-before-commenting)
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.singsupplies.com/showthread.php?200010-FAP-Lam-Pin-Min-Did-Not-Check-Facts-on-Thaipusam-Incident-Before-Trying-to-Score-Pts&goto=newpost).
THAIPUSAM INCIDENT - MP SHOULD GET FACTS FIRST BEFORE COMMENTING
Post date:
7 Feb 2015 - 9:38am
http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/download_20.jpg?itok=IARR-fuF (http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/field/image/download_20.jpg)
http://publicopinion.sg/logo.png (http://publicopinion.sg/)
The incident at Tuesday's Thaipusam festival/procession is now the talk of the town. Briefly, a fracas broke out between some devotees and police officers over the use of musical instruments at the procession in Serangoon Road.
The use of such instruments and the playing of music is banned in Singapore for religious events which include foot processions.
Law Minister K Shanmugam gave a lengthy and much appreciated explanation, although we may still disagree with him on the ban. (See his explanation here: "Hindus given special privileges: Shanmugam (http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/02/hindus-given-special-privileges-shanmugam/)".
Whether the ban is justified or not should be debated civilly, and indeed this was what Mr Shanmugam said.
" there a case for allowing musical instruments to be played during the Thaipusam foot procession, in support of the kavadi carriers?" he asked.
"This is a matter that can be debated. There were incidents in the past which led to the tightening up. Whether the rules should be relaxed, and whether and under what conditions music should be allowed during the Thaipusam processions, is something HEB has to discuss with the agencies. HEB has relaxed the rules last year within the temple premises."
I think that is reasonable. All parties involved should come together and discuss this.
What we do not need is for Members of Parliament to jump to conclusions and add fuel to the fire which is already burning.
And in this regard, one has to question the Facebook posting of the MP for Sengkang West, Lam Pin Min.
On 4 February, Wednesday, Dr Lam posted the following on his Facebook page:
http://publicopinion.sg/?qa=blob&qa_blobid=6955217022848095620
Now, how did Dr Lam conclude that it was "alcohol intoxication" which caused the apprent scuffle?
Dr Lam's post was linked to a blog post which in turn cited news or police statements that the three people arrested "were believed to have been drinking earlier as they smelt strongly of alcohol."
But it is important to understand what the police had said and the words it used.
The police said the three "were believed to have been drinking" and that "investigations are ongoing."
In other words, there is no conclusive proof of guilt, that the three - or any of them, in fact - had been drinking.
And even if they were, there is also no proof that they were "intoxicated".
Here is the full statement from the police:
http://publicopinion.sg/?qa=blob&qa_blobid=12479176686355071187
Following the news reports, at least one of the three men arrested has stepped forward to deny that he had been drinking or had been intoxicated.
Here is his Facebook post refuting the charge:
http://publicopinion.sg/?qa=blob&qa_blobid=17922320388630131939
You can read his whole post here: "News reports wrong about Thaipusam incident, says devotee (http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/02/news-reports-wrong-about-thaipusam-incident-says-devotee/)".
It is important that we do not jump to conclusion about things like this when investigations are still ongoing.
Dr Lam is also a Minister of State (Health) whose words carry extra weight. Thus he should refrain from making such statements before police investigations are completed and the truth ascertained by a court of law.
He should learn from Mr Shanmugam and present facts, and not conjecture ot hearsay or unsubstantiated allegations.
Else, it leads to unhappiness, as it already has, going by the response on Dr Lam's Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/LamPinMin/posts/985471434816166).
Remember: one is innocent until proved guilty.
[I]*Article first appeared on http://publicopinion.sg/212/thaipusam-incident-should-get-facts-first-be... (http://publicopinion.sg/212/thaipusam-incident-should-get-facts-first-before-commenting)
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.singsupplies.com/showthread.php?200010-FAP-Lam-Pin-Min-Did-Not-Check-Facts-on-Thaipusam-Incident-Before-Trying-to-Score-Pts&goto=newpost).