WTF is wrong with the opposition in Singapore?
-
Originally posted by Chris88110:
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 stupidityEven retarded idiots like you are entitled to their opinions... *yawn*
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Even retarded idiots like you are entitled to their opinions... *yawn*
Yeah i know, but even retarted idiots like me don't go around cursing everyone who disagrees. -
Originally posted by Chris88110:
Yeah i know, but even retarted idiots like me don't go around cursing everyone who disagrees.Right you are really a retarded idiot to conclude that when someone curse a dishonorable despot for persecuting dissidents and opposition to grab on to power and take massive amounts of public money and putting massive amounts of it into his, the pockets of his relatives and cronies.... is "cursing everyone who disagrees", (call them names if they are stupid and idiots, maybe) but "cursing everyone who disagrees"? An idiotic conclusion.
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Right you are really a retarded idiot to conclude that when someone curse a dishonorable despot for persecuting dissidents and opposition to grab on to power and take massive amounts of public money and putting massive amounts of it into his, the pockets of his relatives and cronies.... is "cursing everyone who disagrees", (call them names if they are stupid and idiots, maybe) but "cursing everyone who disagrees"? An idiotic conclusion.
Might be idiotic, but i'm not the only one who thinks so. If your curses worked so well LKY would be long dead, and don't talk so much, do something about it. Why not you go be like your hero CSJ or something and go curse them in public instead of just sitting behind your com typing nonsense? -
Originally posted by skythewood:
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.....
When you attempt to be brilliant you can be quite a spark, unfortunately sparks do not seem to last too long in time to allow any link to any matters of substance.It seems that you did not even bother to find out the purpose of this entire proceedings before shooting off whatever comes into your mind.
Was this entire proceedings conducted to assess the quantum of damages that both LKY and LHL were entitled ?
In the process of determining their characters, CSJ was entitled to bring up the details as described in his affidavit to show that all the under-handed political sheninagans - practised by LKY and continued by LHL - would have proven that their characters are flawed, and that both do not deserve any consideration for the damages that they have claimed.
Were the details stated in CSJ's affidavit resemble anything as reasons for his thinking that LKY and LHL are corrupt, or were these a list of factuals events that confirm that their poliitcal actions do not mirror the honorable image that they claim for themselves ?
The scope of the judgment requires the assessment of the public standing of both LKY and LHL based on their political actions that would have been revolting to the common sense of most Singaporeans.
It is obvious that there is "more then meets the eye" - when the entire trial that was shortened from the assigned five days to two days, and the hours reduced to only four hours per day - even as pre-trial agreements have been made based on the affidavits that must have already been exchanged before the trial date.
Was the sudden changes to prevent the full process of justice to take its course, and save both LKY and LHL from political embarrassment for their inability to respond to the tough cross-examination by CSJ ?
The facts of what had transpired are obvious, and it is doubtful that you can honestly appreciate the events based on your passionate defense of your preferred untenable position that you have adopted.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
When you attempt to be brilliant you can be quite a spark, unfortunately sparks do not seem to last too long in time to allow any link to any matters of substance.It seems that you did not even bother to find out the purpose of this entire proceedings before shooting off whatever comes into your mind.
Was this entire proceedings conducted to assess the quantum of damages that both LKY and LHL were entitled ?
In the process of determining their characters, CSJ was entitled to bring up the details as described in his affidavit to show that all the under-handed political sheninagans - practised by LKY and continued by LHL - would have proven that their characters are flawed, and that both do not deserve any consideration for the damages that they have claimed.
Were the details stated in CSJ's affidavit resemble anything as reasons for his thinking that LKY and LHL are corrupt, or were these a list of factuals events that confirm that their poliitcal actions do not mirror the honorable image that they claim for themselves ?
The scope of the judgment requires the assessment of the public standing of both LKY and LHL based on their political actions that would have been revolting to the common sense of most Singaporeans.
It is obvious that there is "more then meets the eye" - when the entire trial that was shortened from the assigned five days to two days, and the hours reduced to only four hours per day - even as pre-trial agreements have been made based on the affidavits that must have already been exchanged before the trial date.
Was the sudden changes to prevent the full process of justice to take its course, and save both LKY and LHL from political embarrassment for their inability to respond to the tough cross-examination by CSJ ?
The facts of what had transpired are obvious, and it is doubtful that you can honestly appreciate the events based on your passionate defense of your preferred untenable position that you have adopted.
keep the stuff simple, cut the talk about spark.
look at the transcipt, and ask yourself, if you were the judge, will you allow this kind of question to stand? here's a couple.
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?and so on. if i am the defense lawyer, i will just say hearsay all the way. If you think LKY has falsely imprisoned people, prove it. if you think LKY has abused the law, prove it.
If this type of questions without basis is all that the judge is going to hear, than he should cut short the hearing.
your hard headed appraoch to discredit the court has blind your eyes to the actions of CSJ, and the duties of the court, and what the judge needs to do to maintain order.
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
keep the stuff simple, cut the talk about spark.
look at the transcipt, and ask yourself, if you were the judge, will you allow this kind of question to stand? here's a couple.
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?and so on. if i am the defense lawyer, i will just say hearsay all the way. If you think LKY has falsely imprisoned people, prove it. if you think LKY has abused the law, prove it.
If this type of questions without basis is all that the judge is going to hear, than he should cut short the hearing.
your hard headed appraoch to discredit the court has blind your eyes to the actions of CSJ, and the duties of the court, and what the judge needs to do to maintain order.
He was trying act like a prosecuting lawyer, but dunno how to talk like one. LKY read law... he knows he don't have to answer this kinda questions.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
He was trying act like a prosecuting lawyer, but dunno how to talk like one. LKY read law... he knows he don't have to answer this kinda questions.
actually, LKY has a lawyer representing him anyway. -
Originally posted by skythewood:
keep the stuff simple, cut the talk about spark.
look at the transcipt, and ask yourself, if you were the judge, will you allow this kind of question to stand? here's a couple.
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?and so on. if i am the defense lawyer, i will just say hearsay all the way. If you think LKY has falsely imprisoned people, prove it. if you think LKY has abused the law, prove it.
If this type of questions without basis is all that the judge is going to hear, than he should cut short the hearing.
your hard headed appraoch to discredit the court has blind your eyes to the actions of CSJ, and the duties of the court, and what the judge needs to do to maintain order.
Did the sparkling truth bothered you ?
It looks like you cannot handle truth as you see it and need the continuous regurgitation of adulterated information to be intravenously dosed into you.
Do you think that LKY will allow CSJ to prove it ?
Why did LKY not confront CSJ and offer him the opportunity to prove what he has stated in his Affidavit ?
For all the bluster that he is capable of - he needs to be coddled in his own judiciary - that is appointed by his advise - to protect his political interests.
Was it all hearsay ?
Was it not true that LKY had no evidence in proving his accusation that Chia Thye Poh was supposed to be a Communist, and locked him up for 32 years - with the ISD agents bringing CTP on tours round the city to view the progress that Singapore has experienced with him locked up refusing to sign the papers admitting to LKY's false accusation ?
Was it not ironical that LKY had brought Lim Chin Siong to Chief Minister David Marshall's office and introduced Lim as “the future Prime Minister of Singapore” ?
Newly released official documents from the Colonial Office in London has shown that LKY attempted to have the Colonial Government to arrest Lim Chin Siong under false charges, that will allow LKY to successfully stand for election - even as LKY had introduced Lim Chin Siong to David Marshall as the best candidate to be the Future PM of Singapore ?
Was the judge attempting to maintain order or was the judge attempting to prevent the truth from being spoken ?
It happened in 1975 - were you even born then, or did you not read about it ?
This was not the first time that the judiciary was used as a henchman for the political agenda of the ruling party.
It happened during 1975 - when the University of Singapore Students Union Leader – Tan Wah Piow was caught in a conspiracy by Phey Yew Kok - a PAP Council Member also the Sec-General of the Pioneer Industries Employees' Union - to frame Tan on false charges of rioting inside the Union premises. The High Court Judge Sinnathuray was every unhelpful and brazenly prevented Tan from presenting his case every step of the way.
It was sheer brazen abuse of powers vested in the High Court judge and it was simply revulting by any standards of human decency.
Are these views so hard headed that it has blinded my sight towards CSJ's actions ?
Or are the abuses of the Singapore Judiciary not already well documented by others who are more legitimately qualified to comment on the current situation that continued since the late 1950s ?
One of the most prolific commentator is the previous Solicitor-General of Singapore - Francis Seow, who was coddled by LKY and did all of LKY's biddings until their relationship fell out.
LKY spent thousands of dollars to track Francis Seow's expenses across the USA, but refused to spend a single cent to bring Phey Yew Kok to justice on corruption charges when building the Big Splash located at the East Coast and now demolished.
Some of Francis Seow's works include:-
‘Singapore’s Two Faced Judiciary’
Politics of Judicial Institutions in Singapore
J.B. Jeyaratnam had experienced first hand the miscarriage of justice in 1984, when he was "fixed" by Government on poorly considered charges of the improper book keeping of the Workers' Party acounts.
In his most celebrated case of appeal in Jeyaratnam vs the Singapore Law Society -that went all the way to the Privy Council in UK - in which LKY promised him a full pardon if the Privy Council decided in his favor.
It was not surprising to JBJ that he won his appeal, while LKY renegaded on his words of getting a Presidential Pardon for JBJ. Instead, LKY even went two steps further by dismantling the Privy Council as a court of final appeal to assess the quality of the decisions made by the Singapore Judiciary, and saw the removal of a High Court judge for deciding in JBJ's case in the first instance.
News report of IBA critique on Singapore’s Judiciary summarises the views of the International Bar Association, which was printed in a clearly researched report that was titled:-
‘International Bar Association – Prosperity vs Individual Rights ?’
-
Originally posted by Chris88110:
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 stupidityi can't tell if the rest of the stuff we call him is real but he's not stupid, i can vouch for him
from all the posts he posted he's definitely not stupid. the rest of the stuff maybe but definitely not stupid. -
Originally posted by Chris88110:
Might be idiotic, but i'm not the only one who thinks so. If your curses worked so well LKY would be long dead, and don't talk so much, do something about it. Why not you go be like your hero CSJ or something and go curse them in public instead of just sitting behind your com typing nonsense?he's already explained in the other thread, its pointless for him to sacrifice himself in the currently situation.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Did the sparkling truth bothered you ?
It looks like you cannot handle truth as you see it and need the continuous regurgitation of adulterated information to be intravenously dosed into you.
Do you think that LKY will allow CSJ to prove it ?
Why did LKY not confront CSJ and offer him the opportunity to prove what he has stated in his Affidavit ?
For all the bluster that he is capable of - he needs to be coddled in his own judiciary - that is appointed by his advise - to protect his political interests.
Was it all hearsay ?
Was it not true that LKY had no evidence in proving his accusation that Chia Thye Poh was supposed to be a Communist, and locked him up for 32 years - with the ISD agents bringing CTP on tours round the city to view the progress that Singapore has experienced with him locked up refusing to sign the papers admitting to LKY's false accusation ?
Was it not ironical that LKY had brought Lim Chin Siong to Chief Minister David Marshall's office and introduced Lim as “the future Prime Minister of Singapore� ?
Newly released official documents from the Colonial Office in London has shown that LKY attempted to have the Colonial Government to arrest Lim Chin Siong under false charges, that will allow LKY to successfully stand for election - even as LKY had introduced Lim Chin Siong to David Marshall as the best candidate to be the Future PM of Singapore ?
Was the judge attempting to maintain order or was the judge attempting to prevent the truth from being spoken ?
It happened in 1975 - were you even born then, or did you not read about it ?
This was not the first time that the judiciary was used as a henchman for the political agenda of the ruling party.
It happened during 1975 - when the University of Singapore Students Union Leader – Tan Wah Piow was caught in a conspiracy by Phey Yew Kok - a PAP Council Member also the Sec-General of the Pioneer Industries Employees' Union - to frame Tan on false charges of rioting inside the Union premises. The High Court Judge Sinnathuray was every unhelpful and brazenly prevented Tan from presenting his case every step of the way.
It was sheer brazen abuse of powers vested in the High Court judge and it was simply revulting by any standards of human decency.
Are these views so hard headed that it has blinded my sight towards CSJ's actions ?
Or are the abuses of the Singapore Judiciary not already well documented by others who are more legitimately qualified to comment on the current situation that continued since the late 1950s ?
One of the most prolific commentator is the previous Solicitor-General of Singapore - Francis Seow, who was coddled by LKY and did all of LKY's biddings until their relationship fell out.
LKY spent thousands of dollars to track Francis Seow's expenses across the USA, but refused to spend a single cent to bring Phey Yew Kok to justice on corruption charges when building the Big Splash located at the East Coast and now demolished.
Some of Francis Seow's works include:-
‘Singapore’s Two Faced Judiciary’
Politics of Judicial Institutions in Singapore
J.B. Jeyaratnam had experienced first hand the miscarriage of justice in 1984, when he was "fixed" by Government on poorly considered charges of the improper book keeping of the Workers' Party acounts.
In his most celebrated case of appeal in Jeyaratnam vs the Singapore Law Society -that went all the way to the Privy Council in UK - in which LKY promised him a full pardon if the Privy Council decided in his favor.
It was not surprising to JBJ that he won his appeal, while LKY renegaded on his words of getting a Presidential Pardon for JBJ. Instead, LKY even went two steps further by dismantling the Privy Council as a court of final appeal to assess the quality of the decisions made by the Singapore Judiciary, and saw the removal of a High Court judge for deciding in JBJ's case in the first instance.
News report of IBA critique on Singapore’s Judiciary summarises the views of the International Bar Association, which was printed in a clearly researched report that was titled:-
‘International Bar Association – Prosperity vs Individual Rights ?’
blah blah, same points, no improvements. definition of hearsay is the same as ever, and it will always be the same. nice articles on the cons of singapore judiciary system, now go find a book critisizing jury system. -
Originally posted by skythewood:
blah blah, same points, no improvements. definition of hearsay is the same as ever, and it will always be the same. nice articles on the cons of singapore judiciary system, now go find a book critisizing jury system.'blah blah' ? That is the immature talk of one younger than a kid learning to walk.
Can one so young be savvy enough to discern any improvements in anything ?
When facts are available, can hearsay exist - can you discern the nuances ?
Only a dull mind will be bored with the idea of improving the status quo, and will prefer to look for negatives in anything that is new, instead of developing the positive for a new future.
Given your preference for the status quo, can your dull mind absorb any improvements in anything, when your views and attitudes are as unrealistic as your attempts to be politically savvy ?
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
'blah blah' ? That is the immature talk of one younger than a kid learning to walk.
Can one so young be savvy enough to discern any improvements in anything ?
When facts are available, can hearsay exist - can you discern the nuances ?
Only a dull mind will be bored with the idea of improving the status quo, and will prefer to look for negatives in anything that is new, instead of developing the positive for a new future.
Given your preference for the status quo, can your dull mind absorb any improvements in anything, when your views and attitudes are as unrealistic as your attempts to be politically savvy ?
still blabbering about hearsay, still no improvements.
have fun posting more hearsay.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Do you think that LKY will allow CSJ to prove it ?
Why did LKY not confront CSJ and offer him the opportunity to prove what he has stated in his Affidavit ?
as powerful as LKY is thought to be in singapore he still cannot openly attack anyone. either unable to or unwilling to. i'm leaning more towards the latter.
its human nature to perceive reality differently.
he has his own ideas of how things should work and he's in a position to do so. if this is all a game, CSJ has shown himself to have a chronic inability to play within the rules.
EDIT: its silly to talk about fairness when you're not the one setting the rules. he should have first tried to explain clearly how he is going to link what he is going to say in court is related to his defence then reword his questions in a non threatening manner .
instead he abbandoned everything and attacked in front of the referee forgetting he's playing football, not rugby.