From Siew Kum Hong’s blog:

Excerpts:

The point here is that this was a factual recording of a speech, nothing more nothing less. No deceptive editing, no emotive music, no crafty juxtaposition of images. So the usual arguments trotted out by the Government about the “special emotive power” of film do not apply.

If there was anything in this film that deserved to be banned, it would have to be the words used by Dr Lim. If his speech was somehow illegal or unlawful, then the authorities should go after him for having made that speech and used those words. Go to the source and address the root problem, so to speak. Instead, the Government has chosen to suppress the film, without prosecuting Dr Lim for the speech. If the speech itself was lawful, then how can the possession or distribution of the film be unlawful? Why should the film be banned? How can the recording of words be somehow more illegal than the words themselves? And if Dr Lim had acted unlawfully, so much so that the Government saw fit to take action and ban the film, then why are they not prosecuting him?

Read the full write-up on Siew Kum Hong’s blogsite.

Visit Martyn See’s website here for more updates on the ban: http://singaporerebel.blogspot.com .

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Singapore – no grand story to tell the world

“But to become a great centre for the arts and culture, like…

Civil Society, QUANGOs and ASEAN

Government intervention at the ASEAN People’s Forum is two-fold. Donaldson Tan

Not forgetting 21 May 1987 and its relevance today

By Teo Soh Lung Today at dawn, 27 years ago, plain clothes…

Monks lead protest in Burma

Latest: Burmese riot police attack monks – BBC Below are 2 BBC…