Singaporean Arrogance

[schlong hauler]

When John Howard raised the idea of a merger between QF and SQ I was appalled. How could our Prime Minister suggest that we and SQ be merged when our national views, identity and culture are so different. We have a robust democracy, freedom of speech and an independent Judiciary. Singapore has none of these. The Singaporean government, whom owns SQ, runs the island state with an iron fist. No free press, speech or judiciary. Expat pilots from SQ talk of a biased rascist bullying management. An airline that on face value gives the appearance of success, but like the nation it represents is imbued with an arrogance which is out of all proportion with its size and international relevance. Why on Earth would or should we give them any more access to our economy belies belief.
I am outraged by the impending hanging of Van Nguyen. If Singapore desires more access to the Australian economy/routes then it needs to be very aware of the ground swell of abhorrence that most Australians including the P.M. fell to this most tragic and totally undeserving sentence. Singapore you are on notice.

[Keg]

Singapore you are on notice.

Whilst I agree with all of your points, I don't think Singapore, it's dictat......er, I mean Prime Minister, and airline really give a stuff about that last statement. That's why they are the way they are! :suspect:

[Jenna Talia]

I am outraged by the impending hanging of Van Nguyen.

Well, I'm not. The more heroin traffickers that are caught and end up with their necks stretched the better.

:yuk:

[Continental-520]

I do believe that if the guy was a "dinkum ozzie" rather than of Asian appearance there would be a MUCH larger outcry over this.

Regardless of race or nationality, it is deserved.


520.

[Uncommon Sense]

I hope if you ever seek clemency for yourselves or a family member, the respondents display more humanity than you have just submitted.

Would you have the courage of your convictions to say that directly to the faces of the family involved as this guy is dropped from the gallows?

I thought not.

[Icebreaker]

slong hauler,

you live here in Singapore do you? Thought not. I'm an Aussie and I do. You've got no idea.

As for the latest drug smuggler - he knew the laws, he knows the penalties and must be subject to the law of the country, excessive as we think it is.

It won't be too long when "Australian" will be synomous with "Druggie" with the likes of Van N, Corby, Bali 9, Leslie. We will be laughing stock if this keeps up. (Well more than we are with the likes of "Crikey Irwin".

[7gcbc]

Quote:

" but like the nation it represents is imbued with an arrogance which is out of all proportion with its size and international relevance."

which nation are you talking about ? Singers or Oz ?

seems to fit both from where I sit. I can't imagine you are privy to the hilarity that Australian foreign policy (pronounced US foreign Policy) is viewed with in the EU ? and perhaps if I were to be brutal, in indo, timor, malay and surrounds ?

Our government is **obviously** building bridges there.....?

dunno, glass houses stones, throw , rearrange....at your will.

Whilst I do not agree with the death penalty as a matter of principle, the fact that he is an Australian citizen does not matter a damn to the Singaporese, why should it ? We have hardly shown it to be an unassailable right, lets face it, the Aus government abandoned Hicks in Gtmo like the pathethic mminion she is, why on earth should the Singaporians listen to us when this Van N probably killed more indirectly than Hicks ?

[Brindabella]

Singers or Oz indeed 7gcbc..... I could'nt agree more!

Brinda...

[Dave Martin]

7gcbc,

Hear, hear!

[Spodman]

Our brain-dead Foreign Minister gave the green light to hang/shoot/strangle/poison Aussies abroad with his response to the sentencing of the Bali bombers. He said something like, "We don't agree with the death penalty, but will be making no objection in this case."

I believe this meant that either it was OK to off people if they had done something naughty enough (leaving everybody free to decide who had been really naughty) or it was OK to off people who look like Asians.

Either way its neck-stretching time for Van.

Now back to the topic. As SQA & QFA (who would together be known as SFA) fly all over the place wingtip to wingtip like an international two-airline policy wouldn't their merger be deemed anti-competitive?

[Home Brew]

Capitol punishment belongs in the Dark Ages!!

I challenge any of you to visit the hanging rooms in any of our old jails, view the trap door, hanging noose and yell; “Van Nguyen should hang!” Then remember the last guy we hanged in the 50’s turned out to be innocent.

Its time that countries like Singapore, Indonesian, Malaysia, goddam America and others joined the civilised world and outlawed capitol punishment!!

If rattling the trade sanction sword is needed, and then do it. I am sick and tired of countries, like Singapore, running and crying with their “loss of face” when another country criticizes them. If you want to be part of the big world, learn to accept it.

Back to the topic – no to any SQ/GF merger, and no SQ, you cannot ply the pacific route until your country grows up!!

[psycho joe]

Then remember the last guy we hanged in the 50’s turned out to be innocent.

The last person to be hanged in Australia was Ronald Joseph Ryan in 1967 and he was guilty of killing a prison guard.

The problem is that our legal system today is far too lenient.

where were you bleeding hearts that plee for clemency when the likes of Amrosi was sentenced to death. You might well say that his crime is not the same, but these drug mules are aiding in murder no differently to someone with a gun or car/backpack full of explosives.

[maxgrad]

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't Van N caught red handed and didn't he also confess saying something about doing it for his family?
Like the Bali 9, If you are stupid enough, pressured enough or greedy enough to try and traffic drugs in a country with death sentences as a penalty written in their law. Well.....accept the penalty. (If one of my sons were to do this I would grieve and be there for him but if he was caught red handed I would also steel myself to say goodbye)

On topic...Unfortunately having never been to Singas or on their motaplanes I cannot answer but let those closer to the coal face answer.

[B A Lert]

Only when SIA operate without the unfair benefits bestowed upon them by Singapore Inc. that are not available to Qantas should SIA be allowed to play in Qantas's sandpit.

As for capital punishment, the fate of Van Nguyen highlights the concerns of most humane people. Despite appearances to the contrary, Singapore is a very undemocratic country where, for example, freedom of speech is discouraged – often by threat of defamation suits brought by those at the top of the ruling PAP. It also rules by fear, and seeks compliance with its laws by maintaining archaic and cruel policies of capital punishment and physical torture that we in the west find difficult to imagine and accept.

Nguyen Tuong Van did commit a serious crime for which he must be punished. This is not at issue. What is at issue here is that capital punishment is

1. contrary to the position of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights,

2. not a deterrent to the commission of crime,

3. a violation of the most basic of all human rights - the right to life.

I know that the do-gooders and the red-necks in our midst will imply that one bad act begets another but is that how we as a civilised and humane society should react? Lawful homicide, such as that proposed to be committed by the Singaporeans on 2nd December, is abhorrent, inhumane and downright senseless. It should not, under any circumstance, be tolerated or accepted by any civilised human being.

[Orville]

Which is more tragic to let 1000's of children become addicted to drugs and ultimately some die a slow and agonising death, or let one greedy SOB die a death ( much quicker) knowing full well what he was doing was illegal and had the penalty of death.

I don't run red lights because I know the penalty is a fine, how smart do you have to be.

[Truth Seekers Int'nl]

........i think a couple of people round here need a reality check. check out some of the halfway houses that look after kids whose lives have been ruined by drug adict parents, go visit the salvation army shelters that try and help the poor unfortunate kids that are hooked on heroin.....look at the number of youth suicides that have been attributed to drugs........walk around the streets of any major city in oz after 1am in the morning and see the youths banged out of their heads on drugs.....

uncommon sense

Would you have the courage of your convictions to say that directly to the faces of the family involved as this guy is dropped from the gallows?
..............not only that mate, i would walk onto the gallows deck and pull the trap lever !:mad:

[Metro man]

The amount of drugs in question was enough for 26 000 hits. Had that amount got through how many crimes would have taken place to pay for a fix ? I'm talking about people getting mugged, burglaries, armed robberies, girls turning to prostitution.

Singapore has taken a hard line on crime generally and drugs in particular. Use of a gun during a robbery will also result in the death penalty. Commit three crimes and get locked up in preventative detention so you can't commit any more.

And guess what, it works ! Unlike our soft revolving door court system which only keeps criminals off the streets for a short time in an airconditioned prison with colour tv, good food, excellent medical facilities and job training. Their system ensures very little crime. I would quite happily walk down any street in Singapore at any time of the day or night and feel perfectly safe. How many other cities can you say that about ?

We are in no position to lecture Singapore on how to deal with drug smugglers, as their way works and ours doesn't we should listen to them instead.

Van Nguyen had a wonderful opportunity of a life in Australia and chose to repay it by bringing in death and misery. At the age of twenty five he can't claim to be young and stupid like the Bali nine. He knew what he was doing. His brothers debts were the result of drugs which the Vietnamese community seem to have above average involvement in (ever been to Cabramatta ?)

People die because of drugs, it's just in Singapore it's the traffickers instead of innocent school kids. Singapore executes people yes, but the result is far fewer deaths than if they allowed drugs to run free like we do.

[ratpoison]

No free press, speech or judiciary. Expat pilots from SQ talk of a biased rascist bullying management. An airline that on face value gives the appearance of success, but like the nation it represents is imbued with an arrogance which is out of all proportion with its size and international relevance. Why on Earth would or should we give them any more access to our economy belies belief

Sorry, we talking about SQ or Emirates ??????? :yuk: :confused:

[Continental-520]

Would you have the courage of your convictions to say that directly to the faces of the family involved as this guy is dropped from the gallows? I thought not

I would and do posess that courage, actually. They may well Kung Fu my backside after saying so, and so be it. At the end of the day, the guy has broken a rule, and has to face the repercussions, which, in this case means his life.

Just as I would accept that if it happened to a member of my own family. I would have no choice but to do so. I don't wish death on anyone, but there are consequences for certain actions that one has to weigh up sometimes.

What now? You're telling me he didn't know that he could face death if caught?


520.

[The Voice]

I am not a fan of capital punishment. I think Australia has it right - not all convicted persons are actually guilty of committing an offence - history has proven that.

Anyone who says that they are not aware of the penalties handed out in other countries for drug related offending are either plain stupid or ignorant.

If that is the penalty in that country, and you commit that type of crime that attracts that penalty, then you must be prepared to face the consequences.

There is a diffrence between being a user and being caught with the gear or being a trafficker and/or dealer and being caught with the gear. Van was caught being the latter.

Personally I think hanging is barbaric. If capital punishment is to carried out, then it should be by another humane method.

Even animals are euthanased with more compassion.

On the other hand, as a white female, I felt absolutely safe walking around the streets of Singapore in the early hours of the morning - there is a similar penalty for any perpetrators of serious assaults against females there.

Pity I can't say the same for my own homeland.

[priapism]

Icebreaker,

There are plenty of Singapore nationals in Australian Jails at the moment for drug importations ..just ask any one of our fine customs officers next time you see one.
It ain't all a one way street .

That said , as a paramedic who deals with the ultimate outcome of the condemned Aussie's attemted drug importation , I have no sympathy for him.


His brother is a convicted thug who severed the hamstring with a of a teenager ( with a machete) in a racially motivated attack on a young lad of Pacific Island origin. This has been revealed by a radio journalist who interviewed the victim of the attack.
It was also revealed that the brother was not just a former heroin user , he was also a dealer .

This fine pair of Australian citizens deserve everything they get.

[Taildragger67]

We need to put emotion to one side for a moment here and look at this issue coldly and logically; compassion, sympathy, deservedness, etc. actually have nothing at all to do with it.

There is no doubt Nguyen broke Singaporean law and must therefore submit to it. However as he pleaded guilty, that is not really the issue. The issue is the safety of the death penalty itself and there have been enough incorrect executions around the world for someone to say ‘let’s just hold the horses here for a moment’.

The one major issue standing against the death penalty is its finality. That is, if a conviction is proven to be unsafe at a future date, it’s a touch hard to reverse the sentence. The problem is that the world over, there has been a worrying number of capital sentences carried out where, years later, the conviction has been proven to have been ‘unsafe’. That is, the prosecution evidence, when held up to scrutiny, has been shown wanting. We have all, at some time, held firm beliefs which have been shown to be less than sustainable, but we have believed them nonetheless. Prosecutors, in good faith, may hold the same belief in all their cases. But just as advances like DNA technology have made it easier to prosecute in many instances, so have such advances shown that some convictions were flawed.

The pay-back to the executed in such instances? Re-burial in ‘hallowed ground’. Great, that makes it so much better.

Some cases will have incontrovertible evidence of guilt and the accused (as in this case) may indeed plead guilty. However, the ‘thin end of the wedge’ argument applies: for something as final as capital punishment, unless there is a blanket ‘no’, then over time populist politics will dictate that the number of offences which have a capital sanction will increase. Before long, the net has widened and the risk of unsafe convictions increases. Don’t believe me? Then read your history books; it’s happened before and indeed happens in some jurisdictions still.

This is not ‘bleeding heart’; this is just pure logic.

Moreover, in the instant case, Singapore law does allow for clemency if the accused ‘fesses up smartly and co-operates. Nguyen has done this. If he is executed, what signal does this send to someone else contemplating being a mule for desperate reasons? If one is already in that position, chances are they’ve already thought about the possibility of being nabbed. So rather than put them off, this is actually more likely to make them take an in-for-a-penny, in-for-a-pound line and increase the amount they’re carrying. So if they get through, the problem is greater. Exercise clemency, and you send the message that whilst we reserve the right to stretch your neck, we realise that you are a pawn and if you help us nab the big fish, we may not exercise that right. Also, reduce what you carry and that’ll help you (so if the overlord wants to move a whole kilo, he’s going to have to use more mules, increasing his risk of detection). So in deciding to execute Nguyen, the Singapore authorities (whilst making a statement) are actually making it harder for themselves to achieve their goal of preventing drug trafficking. That is, the next mule, rather than offer any help, will just think “Sod it, you’re going to kill me anyway, so why should I waste my last days helping you?” Again, it’s just pure logic.

For those espousing a religious ‘eye-for-an-eye’ argument, it has been suggested that giving a convicted lifer a number of years to sit in his cell, contemplating what he plans to say to his Maker with increasing trepidation (before the inevitable meeting we will all have), is possibly a greater punishment than hurrying that meeting up. Think about John 15:13 and replace ‘friend’ with ‘brother’.

[greybeard]

The death penalty is a finality, used in Singapore according to THEIR laws.
We have, it is told above, some Singaporians in our penal system for similar offences to our current Darwin Award winner.
How would we react if the Singapore Government told us/our Government to EXECUTE them as it is their way.???
You play in other sand pits, you are under the local rules.
As for being a deterant, this one wont do it again that's for sure.

Members of my family work in the Juvinile system of the Justice Dept, max security stuff, you can see the results of the use of the drugs so any way to slow or reduce the availability of this disaster to life is fine by me.

To all the bleeding hearts, think of your family member under the influence of this stuff, dribbling, pissing, pooing all over your house, stealing from you, your family, friends and the public at large to satisfy the curse.

We are what we chose to be, drug carriers know the risks and let the Bar$tard swing, and if you want to enhance the gene pool, his sodding brother can do the descent thing and join him.

[Capt Claret]

greybeard,

Just a quick question. What's the aim of hanging the man? Is it to punnish him, or is it to deter others from following in his footsteps?

[Dave Martin]

Capt Claret,

That's not the point here.

As a leftie, liberal tree-hugger, I abhor the death penalty, it's arbitrary nature, and in some cases the laws under which it is imposed.

But Australia doesn't raise much of an issue with the death penalty being employed in countries like Indonesia or Singapore, unless of course it is an Australian being executed. Then the vitriol!

Much like the recent Indonesian case, the banging on about human rights (while being one of the few countries not to condemn Guantanamo Bay) is hypocritical.

The original post seemed to exemplify that. Australia would do well to deal with its own dirty laundry.

[greybeard]

We will have stopped him from doing any more damage, maybe slowed down a few others.

As the majority of crime is committed by people who have committed before, one less is a start.

We should get a few of the minor offenders to watch, might slow them down as well.

In case you have missed my point, I DONT LIKE DRUGGIES, THEIR PUSHERS OR DEALERS, I have seen the damage.

I am not all that fussed about people who screw up other peoples lives, we can do that ourselves.

[Capt L]

Am I the only one who feels saddened beyond belief by the pleasure that some people seem to be getting from the impending death of another human being? Is this what we have become? Yes he did the wrong thing, I don't think anyone is arguing this, yes so much heroin on the streets would destroy more lives than I can imagine, but I believe that capital punishment is stooping to the criminals level.

To those of you saying that if it was a family member of yours you would accept what is happening, shame on you. Life is not about 'An Eye for an Eye'. I thought as adult human beings we were above that.

I know I can't change your views, but as I've already said it just makes me feel incredibly sad.

[7gcbc]

I think it is important to remember that these SE Asian countries have a significant problem with drugs, that is it is not going to go away of its own accord.

As we all probably know drugs are a major "low risk" cashflow for organised crime, lets face it, the criminals are not doing the time, its dupes like Van N and so forth, so its really a case of throw-aways, a volume based strategy.

I don't know the circumstances of Van N, and frankly I don't care too much for the theatrics surrounding his family and so forth, at the end of the day he made a decision to do it, he alone is responsible, there were no hostage parents, there were no hostage children, if he wanted money so bad he should have done like the rest of us and worked for it.

No Sympathy here, and no pressure from me on the Singers, they have laws, harsh and unpalatable they may be, but you takes your bets and you live by your choices. As a mate of mine in a very topical world wide organisation is fond of saying " mate if you are going to fcuk up, do it in the EU".

I do however think that capital punishment is wrong, as taildragger pointed out, there is an irreversable finality to it.

To have the australian govermnent make representations on Van N's behalf, and not on the behalf of Hicks , is just plain wrong, there is a significant message there, which we won't go into now as it's bedtime for this bonzo

[Icebreaker]

Priapism,

yes i have no doubt - thing is, those guys you mention aren't plastered all over the news daily - in fact not even a mention over here.

:suspect:

[The Flying Lip]

Another thought, that has me troubled here....

Firstly, you cannot help but know that Singapore has a hard line on those who import drugs. Not a secret. If you do import the vile stuff, you really do deserve all you get, I am afraid. Singapore has no wish to see her citizens drugged up, with all the attendant misery that causes, and a far better society it is for that, IMHO.

BUT....

I was under the naive impression that the law in Singapore was "the importation of controlled substances". This guy was in transit, and had no intention of importing drugs into Singapore. He was trying to import them into Australia. He did not try and enter Singapore. He was caught when he set off a security alarm at a boarding gate, and was hand frisked.

Under those terms, shouldn't the Singaporeans hand him over to the Australians, since it surely would be Australian law he was going to flout, not Singaporean law?

Just a thought...

[Dave Martin]

Greybeard

In case you have missed my point, I DONT LIKE DRUGGIES, THEIR PUSHERS OR DEALERS, I have seen the damage.

We've been here before, but:

1. It is highly dubious to even claim the death penalty is stopping people committing the crime

2. Something like 30% of the population have taken "illicit substances" at some time in their life - do you really dislike 3 out of 10 people, purely on this basis? Your own profile states you like Beers - is that not also a drug? One responsible for as much carnage as heroin?

3. The pushers methods become even more dissagreeable the greater the penalty (and hence rewards) for supplying drugs.

4. There is an umlimited supply of poor sods like this bloke to be executed. The people higher up the food chain are probably free to continue their supply.

[boofhead]

Dave has it right; it is all about the rewards.
So long as the war on drugs continues, there will be money in it for the criminals. And where does this money come from? Why from us of course. We allow the governments to run massive enforcement arms with military and police resources, for which we pay. When huge profits can be made from such small amounts of powder, pills, or weeds, how does the criminal resist the chance we give him? We put huge investments in the legal, medical, and social support areas in a vain attempt to fight a war that cannot be won. It never has, and never will.
History shows us the futility of making drugs illegal by the attempt in the US in the 20s to do the same for alcohol. After eight years it was seen to be ineffective and was causing the criminals to become outrageously wealthy and many of those criminals of the time were able to move into legitimate businesses because of the profits of their crimes, and now run the US economy. Meanwhile it did nothing to stop people who wanted to drink from doing so.
The same is true now with drugs. All it can do is cause the price to rise and so the profit for the drug kingpins and the death and misery for the users, their families, and a general loss of wealth for all of us. Nobody should support such an illogical, proven to fail policy.
Sure drugs are bad, and they were around me when I was growing up, but apart from alcohol I did not use them simply because I knew they were bad for me. Because alcohol is regulated, even though I used it, I was not tempted to abuse it. Social pressures tend to make all of us aware of the dangers of drinking and smoking and at the same time offer counseling, medical and religious help to avoid or recover from abuse.
Youngsters today abuse all manner of drugs, including alcohol and tobacco but they abuse the hard drugs worse because they are relatively cheap, available, and are more attractive simply because they are illegal; something forbidden has an allure that the young mind cannot resist.
Ask a drug pusher what he thinks of legalising drugs (with the right controls) and he would be horrified at the idea.

[psycho joe]

boofhead,

You sound pissed off that one of your mules got caught.

Hey whilst your at it, let's legalize home invasion. I know that legalizing armed robbery would quell my thirst for it!

[whiteknuckleairlines]

Boofhead, I would have to disagree with you..... I think it was Sweden which tried lgalisation about a decade ago and have now very strict drug laws because things got out of control.

I think you have to compare apples with apples here. Comparing prohibition in the US in the 30's to the possibility of legalising hard drugs would certainly not be the same.

The problem is that hard drugs such as methamphetamine, heroin and the like make the user so dangerous to society when they come down and need a fix that we could not allow it. Making it cheaper would not solve the problem and would certainly make things worse. Try NZ and Australia and look at some of the homicides over the past three years and the prevalence of violence linked to drug-abuse is huge.

You also need to separate what drugs you are talking about. The 30% figure would encompass cannabis and the "soft" drugs and only a very small proportion of society get involved in the harder drugs.

As for the drug which is responsible for the majority of drug-affected crime, well that would be alcohol.

I think it is simplistic to say that legalising and "controlling" drugs would solve the problems because how the hell could you do that? With a methamphetamine addict he may go on a binge for seven days without sleeping and psychosis sets in. The next thing is he thinks that ants are crawling up his arms and he tears his skin off. The next thing is he believes that his wife/mother/friend is the devil and kills her. Not dramatised but fact. I was in the Police for 10 years and how can you not try and stop that?

[Dave Martin]

Whiteknuckles,

Good points, but it isn't clear cut.

Heroin was legal in the UK (Sherlock Holmes certainly enjoyed the odd syringe) until the 60s I think it was.

It has been commented on, that only once it was made illegal that it became 1) a problem (popular amongst down-and-outs), 2) laced with all kinds of things from cement to other pharmaceauticals, and 3) did the gang-land fraternity get involved.

There are usually a lot of onfounding facts that make direct cause and effect links in anything to do with drugs open to question. But clearly it is the gangs and thieves who are profiting, the users who are facing increased harm, and the police who have an increased workload - not to mention those on the receiving end of drug based crime (usually a users effort to fund their addiction, rather than psychosis).

Sweden does take a very strong line on drugs, and by and large it works for them very well. This might have a lot to do with the relative high living standard there though and general "obedient" society.

Certainly legalising "P" in New Zealand is not going to stop the axe murders and knifings, but elsewhere a more pragmatic approach can work. At the other end of the spectrum, Singapore is by and large one of the safest cities in the world....but there is a price.

[king oath]

schlong hauler appears to be using this aviation forum to preach his views on capital punishment, cunningly using aviation as a smoke screen.

There are two opposing views, but in the end this dude is going to swing on the 2 December. Get used to it.

Get over it and lets get back to aviation subjects.

[Metro man]

It's not just the death penalty which results in Singapore being largely crime free. Police there have considerable powers under the internal security act to detain people threatening good order. Hence you do not have firebrand Islamic clerics calling for jihad against westerners, they would be locked up and expelled. Note that in the west they would be claiming social security at the same time.

The courts deal effectively with criminals, being more concerned with "did he actually do it " rather than allowing the guilty to get off on a minor technicality (did the search warrant actually include the garage as it is seperate to the house rather than built in ?)

Sure free speach is limited, and rights aren't what you'd expect in the west, but the place is safe, clean and prosperous. You don't have Singaporean refugees escaping as people are free to travel as they please, and can afford to do it. Housing, health and education are of a high standard and there is virtually no unemployment.

Singapore has about got things right.

P.S. Can we please borrow Lee Kwan Yew ?

[Dave Martin]

Unfortunately Metroman, Singapore is indeed unique in a number of ways.

Like exporting democracy, exporting Lee Kwan Yew to Canberra will do bugger all for crime, housing and education. The rest of the ingrediants are missing.

[schlong hauler]

The original thread was to high light the difference and the ulterior motives of the Singaporean Government. The only thing that they understand is money. The fact that I mentioned Van Nguyen's plight was to emphasise a greater motive and the lack of any compromise and or humility by the Singaporean Government. Why would QF want to have any association with SQ (read Government) when all they would do is slowly screw us down and out. QF was instrumental in the original setup of Malayan Airways which was split to become Malaysian and Singapore Airlines. A fact which is easily forgotten. I suppose its to do with the size of the islands which we live on. The small one has a very big chip on its shoulder. NSW alone has an economy seven times that of Singapore and yet they want to call the shots. This is all about aviation and its iconic link to what we are as nations. The two airlines are both flag carriers and therefore reflect the policies of their respective governments. What is happening at Changi high lights our differences as Nations. By allowing SQ to operate over the Pacific will be seen as condoning Van Nguyen's hanging which is being widely condemned by the Australian Government and society. Read and listen to what is happening. This is becoming a huge political issue.

[HI'er]

By allowing SQ to operate over the Pacific will be seen as condoning Van Nguyen's hanging schlong haulerThat's drawing quite a long bow - I doubt whether there would be very many people who would make that association.
Using that comparison of your's, does it mean that Australians also condone the inhumane torture and beheadings of Australians, by the Japanese, by allowing Japan Airlines to fly into Australia?

[Adamastor]

NSW alone has an economy seven times that of Singapore.....

A caution on your empty rhetoric, schlong hauler.

Assuming you accept that GDP is a fair indicator of "size of economy", Singapore's GDP/capita for 2003 was US$23,006, or roughly A$35,400.* NSW's GSP/capita for 2002-3 was A$38,374.* Pretty damn close really - an eye opener for me, but not quite as impressive as you wanted it to be.

* Sourced from NZ Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and NSW Dept of State and Regional Development/CBA Historical Exchange Rate data respectively.

[Truth Seekers Int'nl]

.........schlong hauler seems to be taking this Van Nguyen thing hard.....as far as his statement

This is becoming a huge political issue.

if he is referring to the possible QF / SQ "marriage" then it could well be that.................but if it's about Van Ngyen's demise, forget it. that is just another low life drug dealer getting his neck stretched.

[Buster Hyman]

So, when he swings, that will have fixed the problem? Right?

26,000 hits off the street, that's great! There won't be any more coming now that we got our courier. Right?

The death penalty is the ultimate deterrent right? How come there are so many still willing to risk it?

When all the couriers have gone, the dealers and "drug barons" will have to shut up shop, right? "Boy, they showed us!"

IMHO, he can rot in the hell hole that is Changi Prison, but surely as a society, we ought to encourage rehabilitation & stand up for the sanctity of life as opposed to the real culprits, the dealers, who prey on Human misery for profit?

[Tom Sawyer]

OK, lets turn this around a bit.
If it were a Singaporean in Australia found guilty, the law being known and followed it's due course and the maximum penalty imposed, and then the Singaporean government started to interfere, I guess most Australians would be indignant with rage. How would you feel at the momment if the Lebanese government (and whatever other nationality) started to interfere in the lawful process that is currently underway for the groups arrested in Sydney and Melbourne in the past few weeks. Their alledged actions could have committed serious harm to Australians, just as his actions could have committed serious harm to Singaporeans.
The guy broke the law of the country, he probably knew the consequences if he was caught and he must be responsible for his actions, most things in life have consequences but some idiots think they are above them. Purely a matter for Singapore and it's collective conscience, and they seem quite happy with death penalties. So be it.

[tinpis]

Capital punishment is not a deterrent.

Come to think of it , neither is anything else.

:ugh:

[E.P.]

short schlong

You are a complete idiot.

I remember when Ansett and SQ attempted to tie up, little Johnny et el raced across the pond to finish AN once and for all!! :hmm:

[Sunfish]

If any of you care to look at Malaysian, Singaporean and Indonesian websites, you will understand that there is an incredibly deep vein of racism in Southeast Asian people. It extends in all directions Chinese/Indonesian/ Malaysian/ and most of all Western.

There is still a huge sense of inferiority and envy of the West in Southeast Asia. Thats why some Asians get sent to Australia - to be taught, not so much by Australians, but by whites. Ask a certain Australian University that tried to recruit Asian students to be taught by Asian lecturers on its Asian Campus - no sale.

I will gladly eat my hat if I am wrong in saying this, but Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore will not ever pass up an opportunity for self agrandissement by hanging a westerner, even a miserable Vietnamese like Nguyen, because he is Australian.

After the execution Singaporean chests will pump out a little more as they say with pride "We showed them. We are not second class citizens of the British empire any more.".

Keating labelled Mahathir "recalcitrant" because he welched on a very expensive deal that would have saved Barlow and Chambers from hanging. Mahathir just couldn't resist the opportunity for a little "Nation Building".

At least half of the "Bali Nine" idiots are as good as dead, one in the eye for Australia over East Timor.

[schlong hauler]

Author: PAUL KELLY, EDITOR-AT-LARGE
Publication: The Australian (016,Wed 23 Nov 2005)
Edition: 1 - All-round Country
Section: Features
Keywords: Qantas (1),Singapore (1),Airlines (1)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Singapore has misjudged the likely fallout from the execution of Nguyen Tuong Van



SINGAPORE has the most intimate ties with Australia of any Asian nation, yet the issue of Nguyen Tuong Van exposes the rift over principles and culture that bedevils Australia's ties with Asia.

There is little public awareness of Singapore-Australia closeness at the elite levels of politics, business and security. Singapore is our true partner in Southeast Asia. We share a common mindset about the region, China and the US. There is no other Asian leadership with which Australia feels as comfortable. Yet the impending hanging of Nguyen will expose the limitations of this relationship and the misjudgments made by Singapore.

All the signs are that Singapore will proceed to execution. The Howard Government, in private, believes the issue is settled. Singapore has executed several hundred people during the past decade and has withstood fierce retaliation from countries whose nationals have been executed. The policy of capital punishment is accepted within Singapore.

The city state executes its own citizens and the problem in offering clemency to Nguyen lies in giving a foreigner a concession denied to Singapore's people.

In truth, Singapore is trapped by its authoritarian mindset. The disciplined rigidity so identified with its success is now an obstacle to its progress. Singapore seems frozen amid a region in evolution, as shown by the democratic transition of Indonesia during the past decade.

Close Australia-Singapore ties are an orthodoxy yet such ties are not underpinned by sufficient popular consent. And Singapore is about to inflict grave damage on its reputation in this country.

The hanging of Nguyen will shock many Australians; it will be seen as a punishment out of proportion with the crime. It will highlight Singapore's authoritarian nature, its denial of civil liberties and the flaws in its awesome record of success. The execution will be a bad news event for Singapore to a far greater extent than its Government has grasped.

It is past time for Singapore to re-think its position. Indeed, senior figures within Singapore's Government are deeply unhappy about the situation and the policy.

While the Howard Government made representations for a long time on Nguyen's behalf it seems to have misjudged the intensity of the Australian public reaction. The dilemma created for Australia is revealed in the contrasting reactions of Alexander Downer and Kevin Rudd.

When Singapore rejected the appeal for clemency the initial Australian reaction was one of resigned acceptance.

``I am happy to do anything realistic to try to save his life but on the other hand I am very pessimistic,'' Downer said on October 24.

It is no surprise if Singapore interpreted such remarks as meaning that Australia was not prepared to compromise the bilateral relationship for Nguyen.

Presumably, this is exactly what Singapore did conclude. This goes to the nub of the matter: that any Australian government has multiple responsibilities.

The core conundrum is that a public campaign will only succeed if the bilateral relationship is called into question yet the more vocal and public the pressure the more difficult it is for Singapore to retreat in humiliation.

The Howard Government, therefore, is trapped in a dual stance: it believes Singapore cannot be turned yet it has a responsibility to make what efforts it can on Nguyen's behalf.

Howard has put Singapore on notice that it ``should not imagine that this incident is going unnoticed in Australia''. But Howard has drawn a line on where that responsibility ends. He will not countenance any substantive threats or retaliation on the trade, political or security relationship.

Singapore is our closest ally in the region; its armed forces train widely in this country; it works closely with Australia against Islamic terrorism; it served in the UN force in East Timor; it is our largest trade and investment partner in Southeast Asia; it is the first nation in the region that entered a free trade deal with Australia; and a proposed Qantas-Singapore Airlines merger is not very far from the negotiating table.

Howard and Downer can dismantle the Australia-Singapore relationship brick-by-brick as a gesture of concern and outrage. But is this a rational or responsible reaction? They believe such retaliation would only be a gesture and make no difference whatsoever to Nguyen's fate.

Such rationality and realism will be sorely tested during the next 10 days. It is likely that opinion in Australia will reach an emotional intensity at this execution.

This situation is a variation on an old refrain: the limits to Australia's influence when its nationals are entrapped in Asian laws that offend our values and human decency.

By contrast, Rudd has warned Singapore not just that Australian opinion is upset but that Australia-Singapore relations will be damaged.

``The Singaporean Government has treated Australia with contempt on this question,'' Rudd told the ABC's Insiders. ``We've had representations from the Pope, from the Prime Minister, the Governor-General, the Opposition, a resolution of the Australian Parliament and representations from a huge cross-section of the Australian people. The Singaporean Government's response to that has been to tell us all to go jump in the lake.''

Rudd's tactic is that progress is only possible once Singapore knows that damage is being done. Rudd, in turn, knows that for this warning to be credible it must be genuine. His logic is clear: Rudd is telling Singapore that its execution policy is inconsistent with the maintenance of public support in this nation for the Australia-Singapore relationship.

This is a far-reaching position. Singapore should reflect upon this point, which is easier to make from Opposition. It constitutes an assault on the Howard-Downer tactic as defeatist and reflects a different foundational judgment of the situation.

Singapore, of course, has mishandled the diplomacy of this issue with Australia. Howard's anger was palpable last week in South Korea after finding that Mrs Nguyen had been informed about her son's execution date yet Howard himself was not told of this during his meeting with Singapore's Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong, a meeting during which Howard made lengthy representations and asked for the death penalty to be reconsidered.

Downer says Australia won't hold out false hopes, yet he will be driven into further initiatives with Singapore in good faith to Nguyen and in response to public demands.

Meanwhile there are two other Australians on death row in Vietnam (two were previously given clemency), one in China, the Bali nine facing trial in Indonesia, a total of 228 Australians facing trial in 60 nations and 175 convicted and serving sentences.

[Woomera]

This thread is supposed to be about the proposed Singapore Airlines/Qantas merger.

Now it has degenerated into a debate about whether somebody should be put to death.

Yes, it is an emotional topic, however, this is an AVIATION forum.

If you wish to carry on about the benefits or otherwise of capital punishment, please take it elsewhere.

Thread closed