ISA, they claim is a tool by the ruling government to silence political dissent and to hang on to power.
lets see how substantial this fact is.
I would like to redirect you to my earlier posting HERE
According to Aliran Online, the number of detainees as of May 2009 stands at 17 individuals.
Out of this 17 individuals, the number of political detainees stands at a "staggering" .......errrr..... ZERO /naught / kosong.
Again, i summarise for you the current detainees under the ISA;
TOTAL : 17 individuals .
10 are suspected Jemaah Islamiyah (1 of them being En Mas Selamat Kastari, the escaped detainee from Singapore)
- Jemaah Islamiyah has been listed in the United Nations' list of terrorist organisations linked to AlQaeda and the Taliban under the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1267 (link)
5 are linked to official documents forgery and falsification
1 Foreign agent/spy
1 status unknown
So where are the political detainees?
-
Phi
YES2ISA
-
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Are you sure this is accurate list?
Dear Kmpp,
This list is from Aliran online, an organisation highly critical of the ISA. I would think that it is accurate, if not exaggerated..
I do not have all the facts, so correct me if i'm wrong.
The issue is not who else is under ISA detention, but how it has been used.
Wasn't a reporter and a Selangor politician taken under ISA recently, and under what crime?
It's like your parents keeping the rotan in the cupboard. No need to whip it out ALL the time on you. A few rounds every now and then should do the trick and put the fear of the rotan in you. It's a tool of finesse. Look at the ISA's long history. And you know what they say about history...? Maybe not.
- Siew Eng
Dear Siew Eng
Yes the rotan is in the cupboard, but if the child did nothing wrong there is nothing to fear no?
Yes, there is nothing to fear if the parent is fair. But what if the parent is an abusive one? BTW, I will stop using stupid analogies if you stop as well.
Yes, have no fear if you have done nothing wrong. But with such a broad interpretation of what "constitutes" national security, isn't there ample room for abuse?
What is your opinion?
Dear Gene,
Good question!
The broad interpretation of the law is due to the nature of the fact that national security consists of a broad spectrum where every segment of society and order is taken into consideration. Taken also into consideration is the unique plural society in which we live in.
This also helps eliminate bureaucracy and enables quick action..something very essential when national security is at stake.
thank you
How about the reporter who was taken in under the ISA, and a Selangor politician who was also taken under the ISA?
Wasn't the intention of the Act to curb communism?
I very much like this cordial tone that we have right now. And if you don't mind me asking, could you change my perception, that the ISA is is used occasionally for political persecution?
Hi Gene,
Initially the birth of the Act was to combat communism. With its effectiveness as one of the tools to defeat the threats of communism, it has since evolved as an act to combat new threats to national security.
As of today, the PM has said that there are certain loose ends that needs to be ammended and reviewed in the act. Im sure certain concerns will be addressed. This we can support but not the abolishment of the act.
About the political persecution, how do you explain the fact that some Bn politicians have also been detained over the years?
The arrest of BN politicians still do not justify or make it more acceptable. Could you specify which reps were detained? i do not know of the cases you mention.
I would like to be more specific now, and mention Teresa Kok. what is your opinion on that case? And a reporter who was also taken. What are the justifications there?
The issue that i have with the ISA is that there is too much power in the hands of a minister, and that there is insufficient legal recourse. Should someone be guilty of a crime, there should be adequate ways to prosecute them through the courts, and not detain a person without trial.
Dear Gene,
This is becoming a little hilarious.
You complain of "political persecution" yet you say that you didnt know that there were BN politicians detained under the law too.
This only means one thing-
You have blindly swallowed all the things that opposition politicians had fed you. After all you keep harping on that Kok woman..
Which BN politicians? well sinced you asked;
Maximus Ongkili (1990) , Ibrahim Ali (while he was in UMNO - 1987), Chan Kit Chee (MCA VP - 1987) , Fahmi Ibrahim (1987 - pemuda UMNO) , Zahid Hamidi (1998)
As for that Kok woman - you fan religious sentiments, you bare with the consequences. Simple as that. Do you wait for a riot with angry locals slashing her and her kind before we react? Of course not.. its a preventive tool remember.
DO i detect that a condescending tone?
I asked only because i did not know, and if you could kindly provide me with what you knew.
And if i'm not mistaken, even the mosque said that she did not bring up an issue. so how is that fanning religious sentiments? what about the reporter? she was reporting from an incident. how can you take someone in under the ISA for their own protection?
Dear Gene,
Sure, ask - but do not blindly throw statements masked as facts when they are clearly unsubstantiated.
The fact that they are both still alive speaks volumes on the success of the ISA in protecting them.
Post a Comment