Woman faces caning in Singapore for graffiti

Police in Singapore say a 25-year-old woman has been arrested for painting graffiti and placing stickers on public property. If convicted she could be beaten with a cane.

Graffiti and other forms of vandalism are very rare in Singapore. Almost all past cases have involved foreign men, including American teenager Michael Fay, who was caned in 1994.

Police did not identify the woman or her nationality in their statement Tuesday. They said if found guilty of vandalism, she faces mandatory caning and a fine or jail term.

The paintings and stickers were cryptic messages written mostly in the local English dialect.

The statement said police take "a serious view of such irresponsible actions" and they will be "dealt with severely."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/06/05/international/i010006D14.DTL

A controversial Singapore artist known popularly as “Sticker Lady” is inspiring copycats despite authorities’ efforts to rein in her activities.

Police arrested and then released a local artist over the past week. She is alleged to have pasted black stickers on traffic signal buttons across the city-state, including ones with captions such as “Press To Time Travel,”  and “Press For Nirvana,” and to have painted  “My Grandfather Road” on city streets, which some residents interpreted as a nod to the country’s founding statesman Lee Kuan Yew. Police said they are investigating and that she could face severe punishment if found guilty of vandalism.

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/WO-AK031_SINGAR_E_20120607183615.jpg
The phrase “My Grandfather Building”, suspected to be the work of a female artist recently arrested by Singapore authorities, is seen painted on the sidewall of a building in the outskirts of Singapore’s financial district.

http://kimedia.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/leekuanyew.jpg
Lee Kuan Yew

Yet the work of the Singapore based artist–who hasn’t been officially identified by authorities–now appears to be receiving more attention than ever, as she becomes something of a social-media phenomenon and supporters and copycats tweak her designs for their own campaigns.

Some activists are using similar designs to raise awareness of her work in the hopes of reducing any charges leveled against her (so far, she hasn’t been charged with a crime). Similar black circles, this time captioned with different phrases, have marked Twitter profiles and Facebook pages of many Singapore residents in recent days.

One blogger, Kirsten Han, designed a sticker featuring the Singlish phrase “Paste Sticker Police Catch,” directly referencing the artist’s arrest. Ms. Han, who put the stickers on her popular blog, encouraged other Twitter and Facebook users to circulate the images online to garner support for Sticker Lady. Residents have also noted the appearance of similar stickers, presumed to be the work of the artist’s supporters, at prominent locations around Singapore–including one that reads “Still Sticking Around,” with the hashtag #leaveskl0alone printed below it, off the city’s Orchard Road shopping district. ”Skl0″ is another common moniker for the Sticker Lady.

http://blogs.wsj.com/searealtime/2012/06/08/singapores-sticker-lady-grows-even-more-popular/

so? teach the punk a lesson she'll never forget.

Falah I'd be interested to here your take on this.

Free Tibet Singapore

Whip her with blue-bottle jellyfish until she froths at the mouth!!

I fully support Singapore's anti crap laws so if this woman is stupid enough to graffiti another person property she deserves what she gets.
Australia would have far less crime if we adopted Singapore's hard line stance.

adelcrow wrote on Jun 14^th, 2012 at 11:55pm:

I fully support Singapore's anti crap laws so if this woman is stupid enough to graffiti another person property she deserves what she gets. Australia would have far less crime if we adopted Singapore's hard line stance.

Would you like these people to have the crap beaten out of them too?

http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1047749762913_2003/03/18/operahousegraffiti,0.jpg

falah wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 8:54am:

Free Tibet Singapore

From what? Was this a joke?

freediver wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 8:58am:

falah wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 8:54am: Free Tibet Singapore From what?

From the Lee family that has ruled Singapore for nearly half a century.

falah wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 1:26am:

adelcrow wrote on Jun 14th, 2012 at 11:55pm: I fully support Singapore's anti crap laws so if this woman is stupid enough to graffiti another person property she deserves what she gets. Australia would have far less crime if we adopted Singapore's hard line stance. Would you like these people to have the crap beaten out of them too? http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1047749762913_2003/03/18/operahousegraffiti,0.jpg

Yup....

falah wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 1:26am:

adelcrow wrote on Jun 14th, 2012 at 11:55pm: I fully support Singapore's anti crap laws so if this woman is stupid enough to graffiti another person property she deserves what she gets. Australia would have far less crime if we adopted Singapore's hard line stance. Would you like these people to have the crap beaten out of them too? http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1047749762913_2003/03/18/operahousegraffiti,0.jpg

We would prefer to drop bombs on them

Not exactly a secret that singapore doesn't tolerate this poo.  Enjoy your flogging sweetheart!

These people were, are, and always will be nothing but barbarians.

I have no time whatsoever for them.

falah wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 10:26am:

freediver wrote on Jun 15th, 2012 at 8:58am: falah wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 8:54am: Free Tibet Singapore From what? From the Lee family that has ruled Singapore for nearly half a century.

When, insh'allah, calphate comes, we will free oppressed peoples in Singapore from this tyrant.

No longer will these peoples be whipped and killed. Unless Gud wills it.

Singapore has:

*detention without trial

*prohibition on public gathering

*prohibition on protest

*prohibition on speaking in public without permit

*prohibition on filming/recording activities of police

*executions without scrutiny

*canings for unauthorised immigrants

*canings for conscientious objectors of compulsory military duty.

*Deported Burmese workers who supported pro-democracy movements.

*bankrupts opposition leaders through defamation actions.

Freedom of expression in Singapore:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W3qzO888rw

Quote:

Woman faces caning in Singapore for graffiti

Good.


Good, good, good, good,........good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4KyEE0R9Rc

falah wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 3:03pm:

Singapore has: *canings for unauthorised immigrants

Excellent !!!!!!!!

When is Australia going to follow Sing's lead ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOa3m4hsl3M

Yadda wrote on Jun 15^th, 2012 at 3:13pm:

falah wrote on Jun 15th, 2012 at 3:03pm: Singapore has: *canings for unauthorised immigrants Excellent !!!!!!!! When is Australia going to follow Sing's lead ?

Ah, you are wanting the caliphate too, my friend.

It will only come when Gud wills it.

It is good you are a believer. Insh'allah, you will enter paradise.

Press freedom: The Singapore grip

The country presents itself as a modern liberal democracy yet has an autocratic political culture

Singapore is proud of its place near the top of many international rankings. Its school system is by some measures the world's best. The island state promotes itself as diverse, competitive and cultured – an exciting global hub. But there are two league tables which shame Singapore. The first, compiled by the campaigning group Reporters Without Borders, places the country 136th in the world for press freedom – below Iraq and Zimbabwe. The second is the rate at which Singapore executes convicted criminals: arguably higher, per capita, than any other country in the world.

Singapore presents itself as a modern liberal democracy: it has a parliament, elections, courts, a constitutional right to free speech and the consumerist gloss of capitalism. Its citizens are free to become rich and to travel. Many do both. The country has by any measure succeeded since independence. But its autocratic political culture – overseen by the country's founding father and now official minister mentor Lee Kuan Yew – is highly and needlessly restrictive. The media is largely state-owned. Defamation and contempt laws threaten dissent. The latest victim of these is Alan Shadrake, a British-born writer sentenced yesterday to six weeks in prison and a large fine after being found guilty of contempt of court. His book Once a Jolly Hangman questioned the independence of Singapore's legal system, and its use of the death penalty.

It is depressing that a country as successful as Singapore should feel the need for such restrictions on free speech. Singapore argues that, without them, the balance between the country's Chinese, Malay and Indian populations would be upset. But the reality is that other successful parts of Asia – Hong Kong and Taiwan, for instance – have thrived by extending free speech and the rule of law. Singapore is making itself a less significant place by refusing to give its people the sorts of freedoms that are routine elsewhere.

On a practical level, the decision to prosecute Mr Shadrake was also foolish. His book has had far greater attention because of it, and Singapore's reputation has been harmed. Mr Shadrake is quite right to attack a criminal justice system whose victims are often poor migrant workers. His book was legitimate and – despite the court's claim to the contrary – largely accurate. The suspicion is that the Singapore government resented the exposure of a squalid system of routine executions which sits uneasily with the image it likes to present to the world. Singapore wants to be judged as a first-world nation. It must find the confidence to allow its citizens the freedoms that go with that status. Repression is not the route to success. In the end, it will prove its enemy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/17/press-freedom-singapore-grip

Freedom of the Press 2011 - Singapore

Media freedom in Singapore continued to be constrained in 2010, with the vast majority of print and broadcast journalists practicing self-censorship for fear of harsh defamation charges. The November 16 sentencing of British author Alan Shadrake on contempt of court charges for a book criticizing the nation's use of capital punishment seemed to substantiate claims that Singapore's government routinely uses the judiciary as a means of going after its critics.

Freedoms of speech and expression are guaranteed by Article 14 of the constitution, but there are restrictions on these rights. The Newspapers and Printing Presses Act (NPPA), the Defamation Act, and the Internal Security Act (ISA) also constrain press freedom, allowing the authorities to restrict the circulation of news deemed to incite violence; arouse racial or religious tensions; interfere in domestic politics; or threaten public order, national interest, or national security. The Sedition Act, in effect since the colonial period, outlaws seditious speech, the distribution of seditious materials, and acts with "seditious tendency." The media also face harsh punishments for perceived personal attacks on government officials. As suggested by the case of Shadrake, the Singapore judiciary lacks independence and systematically returns verdicts in the government's favor, further undermining press freedom in the city-state. The 2010 publication of Shadrake's book Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock, which questioned the impartiality and independence of Singapore's courts in applying the death sentence, led to his arrest in July and a sentence of six weeks in prison with a 20,000 Singapore dollars (US$15,400) fine for "scandalizing the court" in November. Authorities indicated in news reports that they were still considering additional criminal defamation charges at year's end.

Singapore's Parliament has been dominated by the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) since 1959, and ruling party members are quick to use harsh civil and criminal defamation laws to silence and bankrupt political opponents and critical media outlets. Foreign media in Singapore are also subject to such pressures and restrictive laws. For example, the New York Times Company, threatened by a lawsuit for an article by Philip Bowring called "All in the Family" that was published in the February 15 edition of the International Herald Tribune, was forced to apologize both to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and to his father, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's founding prime minister. In addition to the apology, the company was required to pay US$114,000 in damages. Foreign media are required by the Ministry of Information, Communication, and the Arts to post bond and appoint a local legal representative if they wish to publish in Singapore.

Films, television programs, music, books, and magazines are sometimes censored; all films with a political purpose are banned unless sponsored by the government. In July, the government banned another film by Singaporean filmmaker and blogger Martyn See about prominent political prisoner Dr. Lim Hock Siew's arrests and detention under the ISA in 1963. Unlike previous bans, when See's films could still be viewed on the internet, the government's Media Development Authority ordered See to remove all digital copies of the film uploaded on YouTube and his own blog. Journalists, in general, can cover the news freely and without harassment. Cases of physical attacks against members of the press are extremely rare, and none were reported in 2010.

Nearly all print and broadcast media outlets, internet service providers, and cable television services are either owned or controlled by the state or by companies with close ties to the PAP. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) World Service is the only completely independent radio station available in the country. Satellite television is forbidden. A substantial variety of foreign newspapers and magazines are distributed uncensored, but the government is authorized to limit the circulation of print editions. Annual licensing requirements for all media outlets, including political and religious websites, have been used to inhibit criticism of the government.

The internet was accessed by 70 percent of the population in 2010. Internet use is widespread in Singapore, but the government attempts to restrict and control it by licensing internet service providers. Websites offering political or religious content are also required to register with the government's Media Development Authority (MDA), thus making a website's owners and editors criminally liable for any content that the government finds objectionable. Although the ruling party has been successful in curbing dissenting opinion among traditional print and broadcast media, the internet has proven more difficult to control, and new media continue to occupy a small but significant democratic space. While not commercially viable, bloggers and discussion groups nevertheless offer alternative views and a virtual channel for expressing dissent.

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,,,SGP,4562d8cf2,4e9bec2cc,0.html

Falah, do you think that democracy and freedom of speech are important for a society?

freediver wrote on Jun 16^th, 2012 at 10:45am:

Falah, do you think that democracy and freedom of speech are important for a society?

I support the right of people to protest against tyranny, corruption and injustice.

But you don't support free speech or democracy?

falah wrote on Jun 16^th, 2012 at 11:01am:

freediver wrote on Jun 16th, 2012 at 10:45am: Falah, do you think that democracy and freedom of speech are important for a society? I support the right of people to protest against tyranny, corruption and injustice.

And support a religion that murders people for screwing around and treats woman as a mans chattel. Just a mess of contradictions aintcha ;D

freediver wrote on Jun 16^th, 2012 at 11:23am:

But you don't support free speech or democracy?

This is a trick question from Freeliar. So I will first ask for some context to that question by asking this question:

Which country has absolute free speech or absolute democracy?

It is not a trick question Falah. It is about what you support in principle, not where the edges get messy or the difference between absolute freedom and achievable freedom.

freediver wrote on Jun 16^th, 2012 at 12:51pm:

It is not a trick question Falah. It is about what you support in principle, not where the edges get messy or the difference between absolute freedom and achievable freedom.

Would you be able to answer your own question?

Sure. You go first, then I'll answer it, and then we'll see who is being honest about their views.

freediver wrote on Jun 16^th, 2012 at 6:08pm:

You go first

Why? Don't want to put your money where your mouth is?

It is an attempt to get a straight answer from you. I think you would still make up excuses for not giving a straight answer, even if I answered first.

But please, prove me wrong.

You seem to be having trouble answering my question Freeliar. Do you support absolute freedom of speech. Do you support absolute democracy?

Is there any country which gives people absolute freedom of speech and/or absolute democracy.

Here you go Falah. This is the most recent time where you asked me the same questions. I have been over this with you and Abu many times - pretty much every time I attempt to get a straight answer from either of you on the subject.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1226714182/98#98

Notice the pattern - I ask you a question, you refuse to give a straight answer. You and Abu ask me a question. I give a straight answer. I ask you the same question again and again you refuse to give a straight answer. In fact I don't think you have given a straight answer on democracy the entire time you have been on this forum, except for your initial claim that Islam 'does not prohibit voting'. You cannot even say whether you support democracy of freedom of speech.

But please, prove me wrong.

Freeliar, the thread is not about what my personal views on democracy are. The thread is about oppression in Singapore, and the lack of right to protest in the police state.

I hope they don't cane her like this?
Caution - this video is barbaric & very disturbing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBE7p5gDNe4

falah wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 12:51pm:

Freeliar, the thread is not about what my personal views on democracy are. The thread is about oppression in Singapore, and the lack of right to protest in the police state.

OK Falah, give us your opinion on freedom of speech then (if you are allowed).

freediver wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 1:12pm:

OK Falah, give us your opinion on freedom of speech then (if you are allowed).

People should be allowed to protest against injustice and oppression.

falah wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 1:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 17th, 2012 at 1:12pm: OK Falah, give us your opinion on freedom of speech then (if you are allowed). People should be allowed to protest against injustice and oppression.

Should they be allowed to change their religion?

Should the be allowed to criticise religion?

Should they be allowed to protest against and criticise an oppressive religious government?

Or does the right to protest end once your form of government is imposed on everyone?

freediver wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 2:28pm:

falah wrote on Jun 17th, 2012 at 1:48pm: freediver wrote on Jun 17th, 2012 at 1:12pm: OK Falah, give us your opinion on freedom of speech then (if you are allowed). People should be allowed to protest against injustice and oppression. Should they be allowed to change their religion? Should the be allowed to criticise religion? Should they be allowed to protest against and criticise an oppressive religious government? Or does the right to protest end once your form of government is imposed on everyone?

People should have the right to open discussion which people like you completely destroy the chance of by ignoring reality and fact.

freediver wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 2:28pm:

Should they be allowed to change their religion?

Yes.



freediver wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 2:28pm:

Should the be allowed to criticise religion?

Respectful and honest debate should be allowed.



freediver wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 2:28pm:

Should they be allowed to protest against and criticise an oppressive religious government?

Yes




freediver wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 2:28pm:

...does the right to protest end once your form of government is imposed on everyone?

Freeliar, I am not seeking to impose a government on anyone, I am only trying to present people with the truth. You, on the other hand, seem to take every opportunity to lie and distort.

For anyone who is interested, here is Falah finally admitting what his views on democracy are (sort of...).

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1226714182/145#145


falah wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 3:54pm:

freediver wrote Today at 3:28pm: Should they be allowed to change their religion? Yes.

What is the Islamic punishment for apostasy?


falah wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 3:54pm:

freediver wrote Today at 3:28pm: Should the be allowed to criticise religion? Respectful and honest debate should be allowed.

So anyone who draws a muhammed cartoon should get their head chopped off? Who decides what is sufficiently respectful of the Muslim oppressors? Would it be the Muslim opressors by any chance? How would this be any different to Singapore for example, other than being a whole lot worse?



falah wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 3:54pm:

freediver wrote Today at 3:28pm: Should they be allowed to protest against and criticise an oppressive religious government? Yes

This wouldn't be punished as treason?


falah wrote on Jun 17^th, 2012 at 3:54pm:

freediver wrote Today at 3:28pm: ...does the right to protest end once your form of government is imposed on everyone? Freeliar, I am not seeking to impose a government on anyone, I am only trying to present people with the truth. You, on the other hand, seem to take every opportunity to lie and distort.

Isn't that what Islam is all about?