Email received from the press secretary to RAdm(NS)Lui Tuck Yew, Acting Minister for Information,Communications and the Arts.
Appeal to review ban of Zahari's 17 Years
We refer to your email dated 22 Sep 09 in which you asked for a review of the film, Zahari's 17 Years, which is prohibited under Section 35(1) of the Films Act.
We have given your request due consideration. The prohibition stands as the film gives a distorted and misleading portrayal of Said Zahari's arrest and detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) and is an attempt to exculpate him from his past involvement in communist united front activities against the interests of Singapore. The film was assessed in its entirety, and every part of the film should be taken in the context of the entire film which presents a distorted portrayal of Said Zahari's arrest and detention under the ISA.
On why the anti-Islam film Fitna was not gazetted, the reason is that the film was never submitted to the Board of Film Censors (BFC) for classification. It is not practical and realistic for the BFC to review films that have not been submitted to it.
Regards,
JULIA HANG | Director, Corporate Communications / Press Secretary to Minister | Corporate Communications Division Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts Tel 6837 9920 Fax 6837 9816 www.mica.gov.sg
Creative People, Gracious Community, Connected Singapore
7 comments:
Perhaps you should invite Mr Yoong Siew Wah to comment on Azahari... haha......
If he did... wah
"The prohibition stands as the film gives a distorted and misleading portrayal of Said Zahari's arrest and detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) and is an attempt to exculpate him from his past involvement in communist united front activities against the interests of Singapore. "
So where is the concrete evidence of Zahari's involvement with commmunist ? Or is the evidence directly comes from the horse's mouth of LeeConYou again just like those from MIW propaganda book ?
Anything say by old fart is taken as gospel truth even though the fact and reality reflect otherwise.
"My letter was passed to Mr. Richard Lim, one of the three authors of the book. Mr. Lim replied on 1 October that the material for the disparaging statement was taken from a speech made by the then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew at the Select Committee Hearing of the Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill which was published in the Straits Times on 10 October 1986 of which a copy was attached."
Importing so many Communist Chinese into Singapore must surely be a Communist United Front Tactic. So who to detain?
The premature commentary by Martyn on Men In White (commenting without reading the book)is typical of the sort of integrity level that permeates the anti establishment segment of Singapore society. What passes for commentary is very often just outpouring of vile nonesense as is evident from this website. So I am not in the least surporised that MICA has described it as a distorted protrayal.
To taneug,
You are guilty of the very same charge that you are accusing Martyn.
Watch the film here and judge for yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaLaeDN4t2U
Anti establishment wasn't so bad. Idiotic George Bush was voted out, Obama was voted in.
Wow taneug, and what sort of integrity level do you think permeates the establishment segment of Singapore society?
You write with the same bias you claim Martyn to have.
Post a Comment