• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: Tronica

Boycott Singapore - Van's unfair sentance

Status
Not open for further replies.
whilst the wanking continues a man is waiting to be murdered. spare a thought for him, seeing that is the purpose of this thread.
 
KB you have actually not told us how it Chaos and Evolution relates to this case..however it is a good post you did...COTB is nothing but a tosser and out off respect for Van Nguyen i will not continue rebutting..over and out
 
awwww.. did the big, bad KB say mean things to you?
Click to expand...

Hey KB, no you didnt say bad words that hurt me earlier. I went off to work with a huge smile on my face knowing that i need people like you to define the rest of humanity and myself. So thanks ;)

So please, KB, stop blowing hot air.

Who am i kidding, i know you wont

So keep going!! Tell us and educate us more!

Chaos relates to van?

Well ill tell you all something. If you want to break it down into everything vs everything then everything is related to everything. So then in effect, everything cancels everything out and we have everything. :)


Criticism of Singapore's trade with Burma, a major global supplier of heroin, is mounting as the execution of Australian convicted Australian drug smuggler Nguyen Tuong Van draws nigh.

Human rights campaigner and former Federal Court judge Marcus Einfeld this morning accused the island nation of hypocrisy because of its substantial trade with Burma.

Burma, led by a military junta, was one of the world's worst regimes and one of the largest heroin traders, Justice Einfeld said. Attacks on the economic links also came from the Singapore Opposition and academics.

Singapore should not remain one of Burma's major trading partners while it was proceeding with plans to execute Nguyen for drug smuggling, Justice Einfeld said.

"It is quite hypocritical of the Singaporeans, on the one hand, to sustain this regime which won't let (Burmese democracy leader) Aung San Suu Kyi out of house arrest after years and years," he told Channel Nine.

"It's one thing to keep that regime going, as Singapore helps to do, but (not to) then pick up a young man for a serious offence and then want to execute him."

Opposition speaks out

Singapore's opposition Democratic Party leader Chee Soon Juan said Singapore needed to focus on the Burmese drug lords rather than drug "mules" if it was serious about keeping Singapore clean of drugs.

"This Government keeps going on about having to take a tough stance on drugs and what a scourge illicit drugs are in our society. Fine, but go and get it at its source," Dr Chee said.

"What's the point of getting the mules? You know these drug lords are just going to find new people to get the drugs."

Justice Einfeld said the international community could bring pressure on Singapore, particularly countries represented at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Malta.

Dr Chee said Singapore's continuing policy of investing more than $US1 billion ($A1.35 billion) in government funds in Burma despite the regime's complicity in the opium trade was hypocritical.

"The Singapore Government has access to the Burmese military, it needs to ask them hard questions: what are you doing on the drug lords?" said Dr Chee, who opposes the death penalty.

Heavy investment

Bertil Linter, who has written extensively on Burma's drug trade, said Singapore was the first country to invest heavily in Burma when the regime reopened its borders to foreign investment in the 1990s.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
originally written by KB
its called "the big picture" - butterfly flapping its wings in tokyo and all that.

He dies, Darwin wins. Science has spoken!
Click to expand...

Science has spoken? What if you happen to believe mainstream science to be autocratic, facsist and extreamly short sighted?
 
^^then you need to shoot yourself and pray that you rise again in a feudal world, because all of the 'progress' we've made in the last 400 years have been due to science.
I use the term progress lightly, because you, amongst others, obviously don't think the direction we're heading in is the correct one. I'm sure you'd be happy with a world with trees everywhere, grass huts and mushroom and dope farms, but alas, thats not going to happen any time soon.
 
Yes, when in doubt, stereotype.

I never said science didnt perform a role. The work of the Philosopher Thomas Khun is where i get alot of my ideas relating to science from. No, he isnt a bearded flower child.

He did alot of talks regarding paradigm shift in various scientific disciplines. I may have been misleading when i said science is autocratic. I was meant to say, Science, as it stands now is all those things. The science of the last couple of hundered years has served its purpose. Now that we have nearly destroyed the world, we need a new paradigm in science to emerge to fix many of the problems we have. A science that will take us further to understanding our make up, why we are here and eventually finally come up with a complex explanation for the human mind.

No, i dont want to live in a grass hut with dope fields. What the fuck? Trust me, if you met me, you would think otherwise :)
 
stereotype?
do you, or do you not think that the direction in which we head is not where we should be going?
 
^ but won't that still be science?

and even a modern day science at that?

and how does the need for something new make something old redundant?

edit: sorry moe, meant for EE :)
 
Mary Poppins said:
^ but won't that still be science?

and even a modern day science at that?

and how does the need for something new make something old redundant?

edit: sorry moe, meant for EE :)
Click to expand...


A paradigm shift would mean the breakdown of the basic principals of today's science. It happened before when people moved from platonian platform to neutonian platform. The same things needs to happen again. It wont make the old science redundant. Its a natural progression. Like a pyramid, each new brick serves its purpose in relation to the whole structure. ;)

PS. Its would still be science in that we are investigating life, but the rules will be totally different.

PPS. Science of today has turned into a money grabbing machine. Most scientists are nertured through the universities based on how much of a purpose they can serve to the awaiting community. Science has become spiritless. If all the scientists of the world came together with concerted passionate effort, i reckon we could erradicate alot of the problems we are faced with. But when you have little groups of scientists, one working for pfizer, one with novartis, one with bayer and one with roche; when they should all be working together for common cause, rather then treating it as a money grabbing excercise to cure some major disease, progression will be alot slower.

Real science kuhn argued was totally independant and original..

Einstin never even went to uni. His peers thought he was crazy. But ooh boy they were wrong

A whole series of people were deemed insane when they said the world was round.

What we need is some groundbreaking creativity and originality in science. Something that will change things. There are people out there with vision, but they usually succumb to the huge grants payed out to them for doing some repetitive problem solving. Oh and fierce condemnation from their colleuges
 
Last edited:
I get really pissed when science is blamed for the world's problems. People are to blame for the world's problems, their application of science.

Science is nothing more than the pursuit of understanding.
 
endlesseulogy said:
Science has spoken? What if you happen to believe mainstream science to be autocratic, facsist and extreamly short sighted?
Click to expand...

I don't think you could have chosen three words more unfitting to be associated with the word 'science'.

Science looks to define knowledge by using metholodogies to prove theories and concepts. Considering the end goal of science is to learn, calling it short sighted is about as far from the truth as you could get.

At least science attempts to back up its concepts with factual data, which is more than I can say for spirituality.
 
And btw, crossing out a large percentage of scientists as money-grubbing whores to the corporate world ignores the enormous amount who do devote their life to the pursuit of knowledge. The fact that you ignore these people in your definition of modern science demonstrates your lack of understanding.
 
^^ I wasnt taking about science in general. I was talking about our application of science, here and now.

Who ever said i was trying to define modern science?

I was just ranting. Dont make it sound so official.

I dont think its right to assume somebodies position on anything without asking them.?

Just because i dont mention something dosnt mean you cant ask me :)
 
hmmm, I did didnt i? I admit it :D

Thats what happens when arguments go round and round and round and round.

The last person standing that dosnt contradict himself/herself usually wins.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top