Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

another-masked-hero t1_iugnyww wrote

I’m so confused by this whole document, is it common in Singapore to publish this? It looks at the beginning like it’s meant to be a demonstration but in fact there are logical fallacies and absence of proofs.

34

notsocoolnow t1_iugqd5b wrote

It happens quite a bit. The release is targeted at Singaporean readers, so there's a lot of political dogwhistles that would make no sense to a foreigner but trigger emotional responses in locals.

In the Singapore subreddit we post these and pick them apart all the time, and this isn't even the first press release for this specific event. To be fair, the recent high-profile drug execution has attracted unusually high attention to our draconian drug laws.

37

another-masked-hero t1_iugqyqe wrote

Thank you, well to give credit to your system it’s great that these documents get published. Though in this particular case it seems silly to respond to a random jet setter. But presenting the reasoning in such detail is a great approach in general and if it were not so full of fallacies I would really enjoy reading these.

5

megalon43 t1_iugpfsy wrote

Singapore used to be really clean and professional with stuff like this, but we have really gone full clown over the past decade.

Edit: adding on, Richard Branson is just a random posh fuck, not a U.K. official. I seriously don’t see the whole point of the whataboutisms attacking the U.K.

15

another-masked-hero t1_iugqq5t wrote

If done properly (i.e. correctly argumented) I think this would be awesome.

But it seems very flawed. This could be my ignorance but paragraphs 13-17 are logically flawed or suspicious (for example paragraph 12-13: accusation that there are biased in the system, then contradicting “proof” Is that the system itself cleared itself of wrongdoings). I then stopped reading because it seemed like a waste of time.

4