WTF is wrong with the opposition in Singapore?
-
Originally posted by ArtBoon:
Agree. However, I am more confused now because I don't know what is wrong with that thread (since I read several other threads, including the several exchanges above, which are no different....)
in every country, there are laws.
on every forum, there is a guidelines.
don't follow law or guideline, stuff happens.
http://sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/75823
read the guideline
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Did I claim myself to be highly principled, or was I not comparing to Chia Thye Poh's principles with those similarly accused by LKY to be Communists ?
"manipulating others, backstabbing, namecalling" - are you referring to LKY ?
Are you volunteering your opinion of yourself without any prodding ?
you know who i'm refering to so if you don't want to knowledge my views i can't help it, one can only bring the camel to the water.
if it makes you happy you can continue to pretend what i said is what you want to be. but end of the day you know who or what i mean.
i just happened to have a honest opinion of myself, is there any particular reason i must wait for prodding to express my opinion? oh? are you saying you didn't "prod" at all?
so i'm being sensitive when you quoted me and start going about commenting on how only the low principled would reject your views?
so the following statements not meant to refer to me when you quoting me lah
"How could anyone expect you to see any point in going back to jail repeatedly every few months ?
How could anyone with low principles see the principled stand of those who are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for a higher cause ?"
am i the only one thinking this way?
or suddenly you want to be like andrew? say one thing mean another?
Is it not obvious that somethings are never meant to be as you have described ?
Was there any relevance in your reply to his statement in the purpose of the "seat holder" "to help the despots wayang-wayang" ?
Your reply was at a tangent that in all practicality never meant to be a reply.
ok, so my direct reply that quoted his reply is suddenly "never meant to be a reply" because you failed to see how pointless i see his view on "to help the despots wayang-wayang" since i used a pointless comment in comparison instead of just directly telling him its pointless?
As I have said - the seat holder has been allowed to keep his seat by the good grace of the despots.
Do you seriously think that a "high principle and high ambitioned" person will be allowed by the despots to see the light of day ?
Read my statement instead of making another reply at a tangent that make your reply irrelevant.
i think you should read my statement instead, regardless of what you and your friend here think i rejected that view liao.the main thing/point/relevance of my reply was my view, not yours.you rejecting my view doesn't make my view irrelevant it only means you don't accept my view.
seriously don't quote this part if you still want to argue, you yourself of all people knows what it means to reject another's views no matter what's being said. we'll just end up saying the same things over and over again. and chances are i'll just copy and paste.
I got quite used to his colors and style, and have rarely immersed into his thread until I find some replies that offend my senses.
I had expected better stuff from the honesty of an old bread that knows it stinks.
of course, you two happen to share identical views, you don't even need to point that out.
and finally a cheap insult, not bad this time you managed to push it back to the third post. why? since you still post this way it can't be you've gain some manners, are you mellowing with age? haha sorry but even though you expected better of me i expected much worse from you. you usually ignore everything else and start aiming for user nicks and old posts. 5 years ago you say stinky bread now still no change.
As much as you have been tracking my posts, I have been studying yours too.
The reason for taking replies apart is to give justice to the efforts made in making the specific contents of the replies, without doing so, can you possibly cover the various issues that are commonly lumped together ?
Not so clever in attempting to make relevance out of two hypocritical statements.
eh, i didn't track your posts, its normal for readers to be naturally attracted the rudest and most aggressive posts. its more common for the nasty ones to be remembered then the nice ones.
and considering i'm not as prominent as you in those areas, am i supposed to be honored you've actually taken an interest to the point of studying mine?
if you feel insulted with that you can always go back quote me again then twist the words around to say thats not what you mean like how you usually do in the past.
my point was made very clearly, but you like to take it apart to make it lose its meaning. refer to my first reply at the top. you want accept, if not reject. don't quote, change the meaning and say something irrelevant and out of context.
You should be surprised if you have not learnt from observation that I usually return the compliments to those who believe in their own smart abilities.
Are the principles of a smart ass any higher ?
actually my observations only told me you're rude.<--- honest opinion not trying to rile you, really.
when i first came into SC (5years ago) i thought you made sense, then i saw how your arguements were taken apart and you started to target those you couldn't win in debate by commenting on nicks and grammar.
then i realise you guys really do exist.
Why make life hard for yourself ?
Life is hard enough, it becomes harder if you try to be stupid.
Yes, we certainly do look at things differently - as the person who is not hungry will look at a coconut as a hard shell.
Should it get pass you that creativity appears when stupidity ceases ?
yeah lah, same story everytime right? repent and see the light . as long as i accept your views i'm one of the good guys lah, enlightened lah. once people not on your side, they're silliporeans, peasants ignorant lah and so on.
memory quite vague lah but rougly 5 years ago i think i replied to you saying what i replied to your friend here.
you behaved just like PAP but only difference is you're not on their side. the same people who use "high principled" people as examples like to have low principled ways.
on one hand like to complain about low principles, then say ends justify the means then used against you not happy again.
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
How would I know how big an ass-hole Lee Kuan Yew is without Dr Chee Soon Juan making the sacrifices?
How can I curse Lee Kuan Yew with the worst curses to the third generation if I do not have concrete evidence that he is deserving of the worst curses to the third generation, for among other things, the persecution of Dr Chee Soon Juan?
uncle, if you have concrete evidence you won't be here cursing liao.
and no need to give your hero so much credit, without him i'm sure you'll still make your way here and post in big red letters about cursing.
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
haha, since this is not a debate but just a game of insult, let's bring it on.
Shouldn't you have a license for being that ugly?Calling you an idiot would be an insult to all the stupid people.
Folk clap when they see you...but they clap their hands over their eyes.
You should learn from your parents mistakes - try using some birth control.
Next time you shave, try standing an inch or two closer to the blade.
Listen, are you always this stupid or are you just making a special effort today?
Anybody who told you to be yourself simply couldn't have given you worse advice...
Well, they do say opposites attact...so I sincerely hope you meet somebody who is attractive, honest, intelligent, and cultured.
Why don't you slip into something more comfortable...like a coma.
I heard that you were a Ladykiller. They take one look at you and die of shock.
I know what sign you were born under...'RED LIGHT DISTRICT'his are more original and personal
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Cross Examination of Lee Kuan Yew
The general rule is first to deal with the allegations in the pleadings, namely Plaintiffs Statement of Claim and Dr. Chee’s defense. Dr. Chee has to show that Lee is without any respect in the community, that people consider him no better than a rascal and someone who will shamelessly use crooked means to amass wealth.
In the first instance, Dr. Chee’s attack on Lee’s character should be based on the pleadings. For instance if he says he was the Prime Minister of Singapore, to show that he got the position by dishonest means.
In this case, since Lee’s position is that the people would believe that just as the NKF, Lee is corrupt, prove that Lee in fact had control over NKF and since he did nothing to stop the corruption there, he was clearly complicit in it. Moreover his government is no different from NKF since there is no accountability and the newspapers are state controlled and a mouthpiece for propaganda.
Other than specifically trying to disprove Lee’s claim of respectability, defamation law permits a defendant to raise even extraneous evidence of lack of reputation.
Therefore Lee’s rigging elections to remain ion power, his misuse of the law to eliminate opposition politicians, his purchasing Jade condominium at a discounted price, his paying himself $3.7 million, his refusal to permit transparency for Tumasek and GIC are all matters that you can validly go into.
In other words, once a person sues another for defamation, his entire life including everything private and public is fair game to be attacked. Lee’s lawyer cannot raise objections as to relevancy since his entire life can be exposed.
As I do not have the benefit of the Statement of Claim and Dr. Chee’s defense, I am writing with the benefit of only Lee’s Affidavit in Chief.
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
In page 4, Para 8 of your Affidavit you claim that you were the first prime minister of Singapore in 1959, a post you held until 1990. Are you relying on that fact as a basis for claiming a reputation?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Is it not true that throughout those years, you retained power by unjust means, such as falsely imprisoning your opponents such as Lim Chin Siong for many years on false charges?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Is it not true that the average ordinary citizen of Singapore looks upon you as a dictator having retained power by unjust means in effect by abusing the law by bankrupting and imprisoning your opponents?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
In Pages 6 and 7 of your Affidavit, you refer to the NKF saga with the criminal implication of Mr. TT Durai. Let me ask you, is not TT Durai a member of the Peoples Action Party? Are you denying that it is common knowledge among Singaporeans that he is a member of your party, just as every other appointment in public or private office is?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Are you willing to admit that the public assume even today that you are aware of the goings on in NKF because you are involved in all aspects of the running of the country including the charity?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Do you not admit that it is commonly perceived that you either knew or you condoned the corrupt activities of the NKF since you have your tentacles all over the island? Therefore do you not admit that people may justifiably think, just like the NKF, the Singapore government too may be corrupt, thereby tarnishing your reputation?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Please refer to pages 8 and 9 of your Affidavit, Para 20 with reference to the words of the SDP paper the New Democrat “It is about the idea that the political elite must be paid top dollar no matter how obscene those amounts are and regardless of who suffers as a result of it”.
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Do you not admit that those words were true?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Do you not admit that TT Durai was paid X hundred thousand dollars and X thousand dollars of perks etc?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
How much do your earn? I understand it is $3.7 million? Do you take any more money in addition to this? How much? Do you not admit that your income is obscene? Your son’s income is obscene? All your relatives take obscene salaries?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Do you not admit that you do not have the consent of Singaporeans to pay yourself this much?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Is not what I said in that paragraph “ It is about a system engineered over the decades by the PAP that ensures that it and it only has access to public information and by fiat decides what is allowed and what is not” true?
Is it not true that people have no access to any independent opinion other than the Internet; that you own and censor all newspapers in Singapore? Are you therefore not seen as a dictator rather than a democratic leader of country?
Do you not admit that people fear you and are unable to question whether or not you commit fraud embezzle and criminal breach of trust?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Is not the words “Singaporeans must note that the NKF is not an aberration of the PAP system, It is instead a product of it” entirely true, since just as how the government is run without any transparency, so was the NKF run, entirely in secret with no transparency.
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Is not my comparison of the NKF and your running of the GIC, CPF and all institutions as secretive as how the NKF was run; in secret.
Do you not admit that the public do not know how the CPF is run, how much money there is in it, how much money is in GIC as in every public organization.
Since the lack of transparency is so striking, is it not reasonable to assume that just as TT Durai, you too have been stealing public moneys in addition to the $3.7 million that you pay yourself?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
In the same paragraph, are not my statements that there is no transparency as regards GIC headed by you, HDB and CPF all entirely true, as no one really knows what is going on with the books of these organizations?
Since they are public institutions, are not the people entitled to know?
By keeping these things secret, are not the majority of Singaporeans entitled to assume that you are stealing the monies in them?
Therefore are not reasonably minded people entitled to assume that you are in fact a thief?
And so are your entire family members whom you have placed in positions of authority?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
As regards defamation suits, are you not world famous for using defamation actions to bankrupt your opponents?
Are you not doing the same now in these proceedings?
Do you not admit that there is not a single defamation case that you have won which has any merit?
Do you admit that it is generally perceived in Singapore as well as the whole world that the Singapore judiciary is beholden to you and do your bidding by eliminating your opponents in return for huge mind boggling salaries?
Do you not admit that by your actions the integrity of the Singapore judiciary has been comprised and this is common knowledge?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Do you deny that the similarities between NKF and your government are in fact striking?
Power concentrated in one man, yourself?
You make sure that no one can challenge your authority by defamation actions?
By banning protests? Introducing GRCs?
In these circumstances, is it not reasonable for Singaporeans to think that just like TT Durai, you too could possibly be a thief, stealing the money of Singaporeans because if they question you, you will sue them?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
In page 10 of your Affidavit, do you not admit that with the control of the press, you can trumpet your so called successes and hide your failures; so that there is no way that anyone can ever know whether corruption and criminality goes on behind the closed doors?
In these circumstances, are not the people entitled to assume that corruption is going on, because if you are not corrupted, why then do you fear transparency and a free press?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
With regards to page 11, reference the CPF protest; is not the protest entirely within the rights of Singapore citizens which permit freedom of speech and assembly under the Constitution?
And in any case are not the questions raised by the protestors entirely true, since National reserves are not transparent, HDB and GIC do not provide any figures of the monies in them, are not the words “be transparent now” entirely legitimate since there is no transparency, and NKF CPF reference is true, since just like NKF, CPF refuses to publish any figures?
And principally because you refuse to publish figures, are not people entitled to assume that you and your family are stealing, just as TT Durai did?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
In page 17, with respect to the judgment of VK Rajah in relation to the protestors court action, is it not true that the judge was entirely wrong in his judgment, since Singaporeans have a legitimate right to peaceful protest under the Constitution and by your questioning this right, should not Singaporeans assume that you are doing nothing more than silencing dissent?
Do you not agree that the average Singaporean believes that every judge including the Judge in this court Belinda Ang as well as every other judge in Singapore including VK Rajah was acting at your behest and obliged to do your bidding by deciding cases in your favor regardless of its merits?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Am I not entitled to raise the NKF issue as part of the elections of 2006 since the NKF is an organization under the control of your government?
In fact, do you not agree that in any other respectable democracy, the government would have resigned and admitted responsibility of the wrong doing in the NKF?
But instead of doing that, you are instead suing anyone who criticizes that organization or your government?
By these numerous court actions that you launch, is not a reasonable person entitled to assume that you may be a thief and trying to hide your wrongdoing by these court cases?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
In page 21 and 22, when Ministers Khaw and Lim in fact praise the NKF after the discovery of the wrongdoing instead of condemning it, surely the public is entitled to assume that there is something fishy going on and that perhaps you as well as Khaw and Lim are all corrupt?
Are not the public entitled to assume that?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
From pages 25 to 41, you have devoted it entirely to the progress of these proceedings and the continuances that were obtained for trial preparation.
What is the point of so much reference to it?
Do you not realize that no legitimate court would give exemplary damages against anyone just because they needed time for trial preparation and the conduct of the proceedings?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
In Para 100 page 41, you state that I have a deep seated hatred of you because, inter alia, you had called me a liar and a cheat.
Will you admit that it is not surprising that you feel that way because you perceive me as a threat?
Will you admit that it is only you and your government that has such an opinion of me?
In fact will you not agree that all true democracies in the world have an opinion of me which is just the opposite?
Here refer to the various commendations and awards and accolades of appreciation and respect showered on Dr. Chee by the rest of the world as an honest decent man, highly determined to bring justice for Singaporeans.
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Is it not true that in relation to the NKF, just as Singaporeans had no way of knowing whether there were financial misappropriations going on, with Lee Kuan Yew and the Singapore government similarly, the public have no way of knowing whether you are siphoning off the peoples money?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Is it not true that you commenced action against me and the SDP just before the 2006 elections during the campaign?
Is it not reasonable for the ordinary man to assume that you did it in order to intimidate voters away from the SDP and to distract us from concentrating on elections?
Is this not what the ordinary man on the street will think?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Do you not agree that the injunction that you obtained stopping us from referring to the NKF during the election rallies of 2006 was an attempt to silence us from exposing the truth about the NKF and had we done so, it would have badly hurt your chances at the elections?
Would not people think of you as a coward using unfair means to win elections?
Dr. Chee to Lee Kuan Yew:
Are you aware that Singaporeans have the benefit of the Internet?
Are you aware that overwhelmingly both within and without Singapore you are seen as a bully willing to tolerate not even the slightest criticism by harassment intimidation false criminal charges and defamation actions?
Therefore do you not accept the fact that even if you are corrupt no one will know because no one can find out?
Do you not consider the salary you take of $3.7 million a year and several more millions both admitted and not admitted are seen as nothing less than corruption, plain and simple?
Here show the voluminous Internet articles and letters all calling this man a thief and a crook.
Here Dr. Chee should throw the whole kitchen sink at Lee Kuan Yew by producing every shred of document both in Singapore and the world which refers to him as a tyrant and a bully and a cheat. Lee’s reputation is in issue and therefore anything that you can find as to his bad character should be thrown at him. If the Judge were to object, then state your protest.
Dr. Chee to Judge:
Your Honor knows that this hearing is to decide the quantum of damages to be awarded to the Plaintiff.
Your Honor also knows that this entire exercise is one in futility since I have already been bankrupted and I am unable to pay.
Even if Your Honor were to award a trillion dollars against me, it will make no difference.
If indeed these proceedings are commenced by the Plaintiffs to recover monetary damages, I doubt very much if they will get a penny.
Indeed I am sure that the purpose of these proceedings is not for money but to try to silence me from further criticism.
I would like to tell this court as Your Honor is yourself aware that both you and the entire population of Singapore and indeed the whole world knows that this Plaintiff remains in power by silencing the opposition by abusing the law.
Your Honor knows that this is one reason why the educated and capable in Singapore continue to leave the country in droves and Singapore is losing its best people.
One thing both you and the Plaintiff can be certain is this.
I refuse to be silenced in my work of exposing this totalitarian regime and will continue to strive to bring democracy to this country.
Your Honor can decide whatever Your Honor wants to do.you have to be blind to think thats ok, he totally ignored the importance of linking his actions to his defence. then without concrete proof tried to link other events to LKY. you think the judge can allow him to continue to attack LKY like this?
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
I think if he comes in to read all this, And if the claims of him being a despot are true, the likes of AndrewPKYap, would have been hauled off by ISD already.
But since he's still here, that means either one part of the joint conditional premise is not true.
That is, 1. He doesn't read sgforums, and 2. He's not a despot.
3.so far the ones getting sued somewhat at least have substantial influence(enough to have people taking them seriously). andrew doesn't.
-
Originally posted by ArtBoon:
Err.. why is the topic "The despots are waking up? Get ready for very painful times. " locked after 3 posts?
there's no point to it anyway, he starts a similar one every few days or at least have one of his bumped up.
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
you?
a band of lobotomised retarded comatose chimps could not do worse than you
On the other hand, they might do a tard bit better than him. -
*yawn* good morning....
-
Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:
uncle, if you have concrete evidence you won't be here cursing liao.
and no need to give your hero so much credit, without him i'm sure you'll still make your way here and post in big red letters about cursing.
You have faith in the justice system here with political cases? Delusional big time.
There is no evidence that Singapore courts are biased when deciding a commercial case between private parties.' Citing a precedent on the enforcement of ...
app.mfa.gov.sg/pr/read_content.asp?View,4529, - 5k - Cached - Similar pages"Notice that it makes clear "when deciding a commercial case between private parties".=========================== -
So much of what I wrote in sgforums before something happens, happened (until it scares even me) and so when I say that curses meant for despots can rub off onto their dogs... up to you people whether you want to believe or not.
-
yap ah.... ko mai koon ah
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
You have faith in the justice system here with political cases? Delusional big time.
There is no evidence that Singapore courts are biased when deciding a commercial case between private parties.' Citing a precedent on the enforcement of ...
app.mfa.gov.sg/pr/read_content.asp?View,4529, - 5k - Cached - Similar pages"Notice that it makes clear "when deciding a commercial case between private parties".===========================i have no faith in any justice system that involves people least of all the one here but i'm not going to get sued if i have no faith in it right? only if i go around and try to covert others to my thinking.
your dr Chee wouldn't get into any trouble if he say he don't trust the court but if try to spread that idea around then its no longer personal.
-
Originally posted by BeRt^.^:
yap ah.... ko mai koon ah
I am now a farmer as well... I think high tech farming might work in urban Singapore... we farmers wake up very early....
-
Hmm...
Below are rules that I extracted. I have also reproduced text by forumer. Since this thread is still open, I have the following observations.
I am still hoping for Mr Moderator to enlighten me...
1. Anybody who wish to express their opinions on any issue except religious speeches, and speeches that would cause feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different racial or religious groups, could simply type in their views.
My observation: this type of language (below) does not cause feeling of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility
However any topics related to those stated above will be closed in 24 hours and repeated offenders will be put into consideration for banning.
Reason why this is done so:
Singapore is a small, compact, multi-racial and multi-religious country. Past events show how easily it is for troublemakers to make use of gatherings to incite racial and religious riots, resulting in loss of lives and property. Indeed events in the last two years around the world, demonstrate the disruptive forces that can be unleashed due to racial and religious strife. Regulation of public talks is therefore necessary and continues to be needed.
2. All Statements here Must be backed with facts and not baseless allegations.or the forumer is writing statement backed with facts
3. Any topics that eventually ends up as a flame war will be closed after 3 warnings. A 24 hour grace period will be given after the last warning to allow users to give reasons on why the thread should remain open.the topic is not a flame war, or 3 warnings have been given...
Written by someone earlier:-
Shouldn't you have a license for being that ugly?
Calling you an idiot would be an insult to all the stupid people.
Folk clap when they see you...but they clap their hands over their eyes.
You should learn from your parents mistakes - try using some birth control.
Next time you shave, try standing an inch or two closer to the blade.
Listen, are you always this stupid or are you just making a special effort today?
Anybody who told you to be yourself simply couldn't have given you worse advice...
Well, they do say opposites attact...so I sincerely hope you meet somebody who is attractive, honest, intelligent, and cultured.
Why don't you slip into something more comfortable...like a coma.
I heard that you were a Ladykiller. They take one look at you and die of shock.
I know what sign you were born under...'RED LIGHT DISTRICT' -
I am trying not to focus on the person.
I am trying to understand how things work around here...
Originally posted by ArtBoon:Err.. why is the topic "The despots are waking up? Get ready for very painful times. " locked after 3 posts?
there's no point to it anyway, he starts a similar one every few days or at least have one of his bumped up.
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
It is quite obvious that CSJ is asking stuff not related to the case, and therefore, the judge opt to cut short instead of waste his time.
If you think otherwise, you are either blindly supporting CSJ or blindly anti-PAP
Firstly, have you informed yourself what the proceedings was all about when CSJ presented the offered statements in his affidavit ?
If you do not know or understand what was the background for his affidavit, you should at least try to determine the background before making your unsolicited comments.
If you cannot see the obvious, can anyone who is blind lead the blind ?
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Firstly, have you informed yourself what the proceedings was all about when CSJ presented the offered statements in his affidavit ?
If you do not know or understand what was the background for his affidavit, you should at least try to determine the background before making your unsolicited comments.
If you cannot see the obvious, can anyone who is blind lead the blind ?
if you want to link stuff, you can link all the way to the beginning of time.
to establish the background between LKY and CSJ, the judge opt to stop at that LKY and CSJ do not like each other, and that CSJ thinks that LKY is corrupt/inept /not nice.
as to establish why CSJ think LKY is corrupt,/inept/not nice is obviously not within the scope of the judgement.
Look Look Look.....
-
Originally posted by ArtBoon:
Hmm...
Below are rules that I extracted. I have also reproduced text by forumer. Since this thread is still open, I have the following observations.
I am still hoping for Mr Moderator to enlighten me...
1. Anybody who wish to express their opinions on any issue except religious speeches, and speeches that would cause feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different racial or religious groups, could simply type in their views.
My observation: this type of language (below) does not cause feeling of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility
However any topics related to those stated above will be closed in 24 hours and repeated offenders will be put into consideration for banning.
Reason why this is done so:
Singapore is a small, compact, multi-racial and multi-religious country. Past events show how easily it is for troublemakers to make use of gatherings to incite racial and religious riots, resulting in loss of lives and property. Indeed events in the last two years around the world, demonstrate the disruptive forces that can be unleashed due to racial and religious strife. Regulation of public talks is therefore necessary and continues to be needed.
2. All Statements here Must be backed with facts and not baseless allegations.or the forumer is writing statement backed with facts
3. Any topics that eventually ends up as a flame war will be closed after 3 warnings. A 24 hour grace period will be given after the last warning to allow users to give reasons on why the thread should remain open.the topic is not a flame war, or 3 warnings have been given...
Written by someone earlier:-
Shouldn't you have a license for being that ugly?
Calling you an idiot would be an insult to all the stupid people.
Folk clap when they see you...but they clap their hands over their eyes.
You should learn from your parents mistakes - try using some birth control.
Next time you shave, try standing an inch or two closer to the blade.
Listen, are you always this stupid or are you just making a special effort today?
Anybody who told you to be yourself simply couldn't have given you worse advice...
Well, they do say opposites attact...so I sincerely hope you meet somebody who is attractive, honest, intelligent, and cultured.
Why don't you slip into something more comfortable...like a coma.
I heard that you were a Ladykiller. They take one look at you and die of shock.
I know what sign you were born under...'RED LIGHT DISTRICT'hey hey, want to quote me just quote bah. but quote me fully, you miss out the very first sentence.
"haha, since this is not a debate but just a game of insult, let's bring it on."
so you think my post is problematic, or feel offended by it, but is ok with the guy with egged me on? ok.
-
no bro, i did not say that. i am just trying to figure out how things work in this forum. every forum works differently. i try to be a good forumer. cheers
-
Originally posted by ArtBoon:
no bro, i did not say that. i am just trying to figure out how things work in this forum. every forum works differently. i try to be a good forumer. cheers
Why do you take it so seriously. Everything you write and read in the fourms, you must take it with a sense of humour.
The topic, I guess was locked because it qualifies as a "continue in present thread/s" topic, meaning, there are already thread/s discussing it.
I don't know and I don't care. If the mod feels that it should be locked, then, because it is no big deal, why bother with the reason/s behind it?
-
Andrew
Thanks. You are the only guy who bothers to tell me.
That gives me some hope that not everybody is apathetic!
I could be quite xiao some time, it is just that you don't see it here.
Cheers
-
Originally posted by ArtBoon:
Andrew
Thanks. You are the only guy who bothers to tell me.
That gives me some hope that not everybody is apathetic!
I could be quite xiao some time, it is just that you don't see it here.
Cheers
sorry for not bothering to tell you.
-
No apology needed bro. Cheers
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Why do you take it so seriously. Everything you write and read in the fourms, you must take it with a sense of humour.
The topic, I guess was locked because it qualifies as a "continue in present thread/s" topic, meaning, there are already thread/s discussing it.
I don't know and I don't care. If the mod feels that it should be locked, then, because it is no big deal, why bother with the reason/s behind it?
So i guess i should laugh at your insults and stupidity then. Somehow i think your thread was locked cuz it came under the catergory of utter stupidity