According to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA)'s press release issued on Monday (12 June), it has  detained the first female Singaporean for radicalism under the Internal Security Act (ISA) which allows the state to detain an individual without trial and without a time limit.

It is said that Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, a 22-year-old contract infantcare assistant with the PCF (PAP Community Foundation) Sparkletots preschool programme, was detained in this year's June.

According to MHA, Izzah's radicalisation started in 2013 through online propaganda related to the Islamic State terrorist group.

“She began to believe that ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) represented the true spirit of Islam. Her radicalisation deepened over time,” a press release read. “This was exacerbated by a wide network of foreign online contacts which she developed. They included ISIS militants and supporters, some of whom have either been killed in Syria or arrested for terrorism-related activities.” wrote MHA in its press release.

It is said that Izzah actively posted and shared pro-ISIS material online since 2013. MHA further claims that several of her social media platforms were removed by administrators because of such content, but she created new ones.

MHA also said Izzah was also intent on joining ISIS and was actively planning to make her way to Syria, with her young child, to do so. “She supported ISIS’s use of violence to establish and defend its self-declared ‘caliphate’, and aspired to live in it,” said the ministry. “To this end, she said that since 2015, she was looking for ‘a Salafi or an ISIS supporter’ to marry and settle down with him and her child in Syria.”

“She said she would support her husband if he fought for ISIS in Syria as she believed she would reap ‘heavenly rewards’ if he died in battle. With her ‘elevated status’ as a ‘martyr’s widow’, she felt she could (then) easily marry another ISIS fighter in Syria.”

Izzah allegedly said that she was prepared to undergo military training and engage in armed combat to defend ISIS if called upon by the terrorist group to do so.

MHA claims that Izzah's parents (both freelance Quranic teachers) and sister came to know of her radical postings in 2015 and her intention to join ISIS in Syria. and tried on their own to dissuade her, but were unsuccessful.

The Ministry adds that Izzah continued down the path of radicalism and “boasted” to a contact in April this year that the Singapore authorities had not detected her.

MHA states that it is imperative for family members and Friends to report suspected radicalised Individuals to  authorities.

"In Izzah's case, her family members did not bring her to the attention of the authorities when she was younger and could have potentially been turned back from the path of radicalisation. Furthermore, after Izzah was placed under investigation, important evidence was destroyed by a family member relating to her plans to join ISIS, in order to try to minimise her acts." said MHA.

While this is the first female Singaporean arrested for radicalism under ISA, but there have been an increasing number of individuals whom MHA have alleged to be radicalised Muslims and arrested without trial. While some have been released under probation, many still remain detained.

SINGAPORE - Two Singaporean auxiliary police officers have been arrested for terrorism-related offences under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

The duo were fellow AETOS officers at Woodlands Checkpoint when they were nabbed last month, said the Ministry of Home Affairs on Tuesday (June 20).

Muhammad Khairul Mohamed, 24, has since been detained for planning to travel to Syria to fight against the Syrian government, while Mohamad Rizal Wahid, 36, is placed on a Restriction Order for supporting his plan, the ministry added in its statement.

 

 

News of their arrests come one week after the ministry said last Monday that a 22-year-old has become the first Singaporean woman to be detained for radicalism under the ISA.

 

 

Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, an infant care assistant, was planning to travel to Syria with her child to become a "martyr's widow", fighting for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Auxiliary police officers are private contractors hired to do police duties such as carrying out security checks at buildings and crowd control.

 

 

The uniformed officers have powers similar to that of police officers while on duty. These include carrying out a search and making an arrest.

Some are armed with revolvers.

 

The ministry, however, said Khairul's duties did not require him to be armed.

He was working as an outrider at the checkpoint, performing traffic enforcement duties when he was arrested.

The ministry said he became radicalised in 2012 after he went online to gather information about the conflict in Syria.

"He developed the view that the conflict in Syria was a sectarian struggle between Sunni Islam and Shia Islam, and being a Sunni Muslim, he wanted to fight against the Shi'ites in Syria by joining the Free Syrian Army (FSA)," the ministry said.

It noted that the FSA is formed by Syrian Armed Forces defectors who are fighting the Syrian government.

"Khairul perceived the Syrian conflict to be a "holy war" in which he was prepared to die in battle as a "martyr" and receive divine rewards," the MHA added.

In 2014, he tried to contact a foreign militant and FSA supporters on Facebook.

"At the point of his arrest, Khairul was still interested to join FSA or any other militant groups operating in Syria and engage in armed violence there," the ministry said. "His readiness and proclivity to resort to violence in pursuit of a religious cause makes him a security threat to Singapore."

His colleague Rizal was working as an armed officer conducting general security duties at the checkpoint when he was arrested.

He knew about his colleague's plan to travel to Syria to fight, the ministry said, but he "not only failed to bring the matter to the attention of the authorities or the AETOS management, he even suggested to Khairul various ways to get to Syria and die there as a 'martyr'".

While he did not share the same desire to take part in armed violence, "as an auxiliary police officer, he should have been aware of the prevailing terrorism threat and his failure to dissuade Khairul and report him to his superior officer was a serious lapse of judgement", the ministry said.

He was placed on a restriction order that curtails his movements and activities.

Their arrests reflect Singapore's strict position on radicalism.

"The Government takes a serious view of anyone who supports, promotes, undertakes or makes preparations to undertake armed violence, regardless of how they rationalise such violence ideologically, or where the violence takes place.

"This is particularly so if the person involved is a public servant, and especially if he or she is a uniformed officer," the ministry said.

It also stressed again the need for families and friends to report those whom they suspect to have been radicalised. "In the case of Khairul, several relatives and friends knew of his intention to fight in Syria, but none of them came forward," the ministry said.

Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam told reporters after a closed-door media briefing on Tuesday that Khairul was vetted by the authorities when he joined AETOS in 2015.

But the vetting process would not have picked up the intentions, said Mr Shanmugam.

"There were no obvious signs and it would have been difficult to have picked it up," he added.

Mr Shanmugam urged employers not to single out Malay employees for closer scrutiny.

"It would be very wrong to suggest that employers start vetting Muslim candidates in a different way. That will have the very opposite effect of what (they) want."

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/islamophobia-as-bad-and-unacceptable-as-terrorism-says-pm-lee

please take a look at our PM lee hsien loong speech

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/islamophobia-as-bad-and-unacceptable-as-terrorism-says-pm-lee

 

 

 

 

terrorist arrested in singapore 

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/8-bangladeshi-men-detained-under-singapores-isa-for-planning-terror-attacks-back-home

 

 

Edited July 8, 20178 yr by ahling023
add on

It is said that Syaikhah Izzah Zahrah Al Ansari, a 22-year-old contract infantcare assistant with the PCF (PAP Community Foundation) Sparkletots preschool programme

 

Part of me wonders if her plan was to try and brainwash the children at an early age to support ISIS agenda. Sad to see someone who works with children would be so vulnerable to stupidity.  Anyone with a functioning brain can see ISIS is pure terrorism, and doesn't stand for anything decent.

People who feel neglected or persecuted by a government will usually try to find ways to oppose it. If somebody's a Muslim in an area with lots of attacks on Muslims, I can see how a small minority of their population might be radicalised.
 

I'm not sure that all countries are doing enough to stop these problems at their source. If Muslim populations were happy, I reckon that far fewer of them would turn to extremes like this. Many countries now seem to be locked into a cycle where a terrorist attack causes persecution of the general Muslim population which feeds terrorist propaganda videos online which inspire more terrorist attacks. Currently most countries are preparing for the attacks themselves, and trying to stop them before they've happened, but they don't seem as capable of dealing with online extremist material. Some areas also seem to be struggling to deal with hate crimes against Muslims, which feed into extremism.

 

I'm glad that these people were stopped before they caused harm to themselves or somebody else, but there will be more like them unless the government takes a more holistic approach to dealing with counter-terrorism operations and stopping radicalisation.

 

Also, detention without trial or time limit? How the heck do they justify that one?

 

 

Edited July 9, 20178 yr by sek510i
Formatting

4 hours ago, sek510i said:

People who feel neglected or persecuted by a government will usually try to find ways to oppose it. If somebody's a Muslim in an area with lots of attacks on Muslims, I can see how a small minority of their population might be radicalised.
 

I'm not sure that all countries are doing enough to stop these problems at their source. If Muslim populations were happy, I reckon that far fewer of them would turn to extremes like this. Many countries now seem to be locked into a cycle where a terrorist attack causes persecution of the general Muslim population which feeds terrorist propaganda videos online which inspire more terrorist attacks. Currently most countries are preparing for the attacks themselves, and trying to stop them before they've happened, but they don't seem as capable of dealing with online extremist material. Some areas also seem to be struggling to deal with hate crimes against Muslims, which feed into extremism.

 

I'm glad that these people were stopped before they caused harm to themselves or somebody else, but there will be more like them unless the government takes a more holistic approach to dealing with counter-terrorism operations and stopping radicalisation.

 

 

 

 

I have no issues with folks who feel their government is failing and want something to change.  That said, there is a right and wrong way.  Spilling blood to further your agenda does nothing except take lives and show you're a monster, which ultimately takes away from your original intent and instead helps everyone else to get behind their government.  Who do you think everyday people will support - the ones who bomb, kill and behead innocents, or the ones who simply enact laws and control the country? 

 

Detention without trial or time limit? How the heck do they justify that one?

 

Terrorism, maybe with a side of national security.  When it comes to terrorism cases, all rules are thrown out the window, even though the terrorist still has rights.   It's why the CIA still has black sites.  The government knows about them and what happens there, but they are weighing the lives of thousands or millions over one person.  I'm not sure if other countries have similar interrogation/torture tactics for terrorism suspects, but I imagine they do.

On 7/9/2017 at 6:43 AM, Kallus Rourke said:

 

I have no issues with folks who feel their government is failing and want something to change.  That said, there is a right and wrong way.  Spilling blood to further your agenda does nothing except take lives and show you're a monster, which ultimately takes away from your original intent and instead helps everyone else to get behind their government.  Who do you think everyday people will support - the ones who bomb, kill and behead innocents, or the ones who simply enact laws and control the country? 

 

 

 

 

Terrorism, maybe with a side of national security.  When it comes to terrorism cases, all rules are thrown out the window, even though the terrorist still has rights.   It's why the CIA still has black sites.  The government knows about them and what happens there, but they are weighing the lives of thousands or millions over one person.  I'm not sure if other countries have similar interrogation/torture tactics for terrorism suspects, but I imagine they do.

 

I'm obviously not suggesting that they're right, just that waiting for them to reach that stage doesn't seem like as good an idea as trying to prevent them getting there in the first place :/

 

My issue with this comes when there's no trial or judicial oversight. Without that, it's hard to tell if they really are terrorists. Security services still make mistakes, and I don't support any system that allows a single organisation to do something like that without at least having another organisation to check their work.

 

Why not use the UK system? Detention without trial, but with a time limit before the case needs to be heard. Information doesn't have to be publicly released, but a judge does need to see the police and security service's evidence before they can hold somebody beyond a certain point.

5 minutes ago, sek510i said:

 

I'm obviously not suggesting that they're right, just that waiting for them to reach that stage doesn't seem like as good an idea as trying to prevent them getting there in the first place :/

 

My issue with this comes when there's no trial or judicial oversight. Without that, it's hard to tell if they really are terrorists. Security services still make mistakes, and I don't support any system that allows a single organisation to do something like that without at least having another organisation to check their work.

 

Why not use the UK system? Detention without trial, but with a time limit before the case needs to be heard. Information doesn't have to be publicly released, but a judge does need to see the police and security service's evidence before they can hold somebody beyond a certain point.

 

I agree.  There have been plenty of folks illegally detained in these black sites and interrogated as enemies of the state, even though they actually aren't terrorists.  Terrorism changes the playing field entirely.  It's not right, but it does.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singapore-under-highest-terror-threat-in-recent-years-8-key-points-from-mhas-terror-report

 

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/03/asia/singapore-terror-arrests/index.html

 

 

http://www.smh.com.au/world/australian-resident-zulfikar-bin-mohamad-shariff-detained-for-terrorismrelated-activities-in-singapore-20160730-gqh8vd.html

all those suspected terrorist news