Originally posted by webben:Have you spent time in prison for your conviction? If not your words are empty, vacuous, rubbish.
if by stating my convictions it can bring change, by all means i will do so,
but if by stating my convictions, it does nothing to the political climate, why bother?
gopalan nair has stated his convictions, got himself screwed, apologised, left, and retracted his apology ---- what has that accomplished.....???
if he cannot even gain my respect, what has he accomplished????
... so what is conviction???
one web page defined it as: an unshakable belief in something without need for proof or evidence
so why bother to apologise?.... other than to get out of a sticky situation.
once that is done, the "conviction" part is already diluted....
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:Convicted Prisoner 101232008 Gopalan Nair, Queenstown Remand Prison, Singapore, a badge of honor
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On the 17th of September, 2008, after a trial of 8 days, Judge Kan Ting Chiu of the High Court Singapore found me guilty of insulting Judge Belinda Ang. I did no such thing, ...........
I had lost a lot of weight. That was one good thing that came out of it. Of course, it was a great adventure. Also a great honor to have been in Lee Kuan Yew’s prison for a cause that I am proud of.
Gopalan Nair
Was he treated differently from any other prisoners??? obviously not.
If it had been a "great honor to have been in Lee Kuan Yew’s prison for a cause that I am proud of.".... why bother to apologise...???
"FORMER Singaporean lawyer Gopalan Nair has made an unreserved apology to the court and a district judge for offending statements he made during a recent trial and on his blog.
Nair, now an American citizen, also unconditionally withdrew the allegations he made against District Judge James Leong and any statements imputing that the Singapore courts are beholden to the Government."
http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=1190
....he could have done the honorable thing... and stay in prison for the cause that he is proud of.
.... before anyone who wish to come back with accusations on whether i am pro-pap or not....
this has got nothing to do with pap...
this has everything to do with an opposition mouth piece who flip-flopped and ran.
... how is the opposition going to win those sitting-on-the-fence with such cowardly display of "convictions"?
"if he cannot even gain my respect, what has he accomplished????"
And your personal respect is so important? LOL. Typical PAP-mouthepiece. Discredit the speaker so you don't have to listen or argue against him.
Originally posted by webben:"if he cannot even gain my respect, what has he accomplished????"
And your personal respect is so important? LOL. Typical PAP-mouthepiece. Discredit the speaker so you don't have to listen or argue against him.
nope, my personal respect is not important.... but look at it this way... if you are a politician... be it PAP or opposition, don't you think your personal credibility is important to the electorate? isn't it about gaining a foothold into the people's mind so that they can support you.... well obviously you don't think so, i am just glad, for you, that are you not a politician.
where have i discredited gopalan nair? he has done the damage all by himself... no need for a nobody like me to do him in.
Mr Gopalan Nair:
If you are indeed a lawyer, then you should very well know that the law should never be confused with politics.
“It is [the lawyers] who have intimate knowledge of the law, the importance of the Constitution, and the need to uphold it.”
Very true, lawyers are indeed the ones most acquainted with the constitution, however, the judiciary has its own role to play and observe. In a democratic state, the most appropriate role of the judiciary inside such a system is to interpret the constitution and the laws, not to modify them. Attempting to interpret the laws beyond what they are meant for will defeat the very purpose of democracy, as it means bypassing the parliament to make law of its own and contravening the will of the people which the constitution seeks to represent.
I admit there are flaws in the politics of Singapore, but the legal fraternity should not intervene in politics. Have you ever heard of lawyers overturning the government??
The legal professions is a respectable profession, please accord it due respect just as I had for you by replying in a reasoned and amicable manner. I understand your displeasure with the political situation in Singapore, but please refrain from making such uninformed and sweeping statements about the legal profession when your target should have been the politicians.
Originally posted by 00king00:Mr Gopalan Nair:
If you are indeed a lawyer, then you should very well know that the law should never be confused with politics.
I'm afraid the line between law and politics has been erased in Singapore. It's worth your time to read section E.4 in the IBA report on Singapore. Better still, read the entire report.
Originally posted by webben:I'm afraid the line between law and politics has been erased in Singapore. It's worth your time to read section E.4 in the IBA report on Singapore. Better still, read the entire report.
That's my point, there SHOULD be a line between law and politics. The judiciary is not meant to be another political party. As lawyers, that was one of the very first concept hammered into us.
I understand your valid concern with section E.4, but you might have misinterpreted that section. Law societies (like SLS) are not political parties, they are meant to be legal think-tanks. They propose and suggest reforms, but do not themselves change the law. Eventually it is still up to the legislators to decide if the proposals should be taken up, hence it is still a political issue.
we are talking about Gopalan Nair - and whether he is a man of principle or not?
He is a man of principles to me.
He didn't kowtow to Lee Kuan Yew.
Can't say the same for many.
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:He is a man of principles to me.
He didn't kowtow to Lee Kuan Yew.
Can't say the same for many.
Man of principles do not call others, especially a woman judge a prostitute no matter how justified he feels.
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:He is a man of principles to me.
He didn't kowtow to Lee Kuan Yew.
Can't say the same for many.
he said sorry, and then retracted..... what do you call that?
... you have proven again that you only look at one side of a coin...
the one you hate, no matter what good he has done, will remain the one you hate.
the one you love, no matter what bad he has done, will remain the one you love.
.... happy new year to you.
Originally posted by Chin Eng:
he said sorry, and then retracted..... what do you call that?... you have proven again that you only look at one side of a coin...
the one you hate, no matter what good he has done, will remain the one you hate.
the one you love, no matter what bad he has done, will remain the one you love.
.... happy new year to you.
Will you still call a thief who has a gun pointed to your head a scum?
Same
analogy.. Won't you want to survive so that you can continue to be a
man of your principles? Actions under conditions of duress are hardly a
good measure of integrity
Man of principles do not call others, especially a woman judge a prostitute no matter how justified he feels.
You misunderstood Gopalan Nair's intent.
You did not read his postings.
... you have proven again that you only look at one side of a coin...
Show me examples.
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:You misunderstood Gopalan Nair's intent.
You did not read his postings.
Can you put a little more details in your posting? The one liners are really difficult for me to understand what you're referring to.
Man of principles do not call others, especially a woman judge a prostitute no matter how justified he feels.
..."The judge Belinda Ang was throughout prostituting herself during
the entire proceedings, by being nothing more than an employee of Mr.
Lee Kuan Yew and his son and carrying out their orders. There was
murder, the rule of law being the repeated victim."
The state controlled Singapore court with its complaint judge Kan Ting Chiu found that the words "prostituting herself during the entire proceedings", among other parts of the blog post, was an insult to her.
This
is completely untrue. According to Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate
Dictionary, other than the usual meaning of a prostitute being a street
walker, it also means
a) to devote to corrupt or unworthy
purposes, debase, e.g. to prostitute one's talents b) devoted to
corrupt purposes c) a person who (as a writer or painter) who
deliberately debases himself or his talents (as for money).
And
this was exactly what Judge Belinda Ang did during those 3 days of May
26 to May 28, 2008 in the High Court of Singapore. Reading the blog you
will see that my accusation is factually correct. She unashamedly,
throughout the proceedings permitted her position of a judge to be used
for Lee Kuan Yew and his son's advantage; not the not the interests of
the law.
And I repeat those words I said again here. She undoubtedly "prostituted herself in her position as a judge" to serve the interests of Lee Kuan Yew and his son, the Prime Minister of Singapore.
Therefore
there was no insult at all. My claim is factually correct. I am lawyer
and I choose my words with discretion. But whatever the truth was, did
not matter to Lee Kuan Yew's agent, Judge Kan Ting Chiu that day. He
finds that I insulted the judge when there was no insult at all. And
now, the state controlled Straits Times picks it up and repeats that
defamation again and again hoping that people will believe that I had
in fact insulted the judge....
.....
Originally posted by ulquiorra87:Will you still call a thief who has a gun pointed to your head a scum?
Same analogy.. Won't you want to survive so that you can continue to be a man of your principles? Actions under conditions of duress are hardly a good measure of integrity
bad example....
a gun in the head results in instant death if the trigger is pulled.
gopalan nair was serving a jail term... it is not a death sentence.
in singapore the offsprings of the oppositions are not targetted and can have a prosperous life, eg Philip Jeyaratnam.
.... to bend your principles so that you can continue to be a man of principles??? what the heck is that?
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:Show me examples.
all over the place lah, poh....
you had said that in your assessment... LKY is 60% bad and 40% good (or something like that), yet you want to curse him.....
gopalan nair is an unprincipled individual yet your support his tirades all the time.
gopalan nair is not only boh liao, he also boh chee.
... and btw, i think lky is an arrogant individual.... some of the things he said were good, while many were simply ludricous.
... and also btw, i have never visited any government website in order to support their cause.
you, like lionnoisy are the flip side of the same coin.
ahem!!! Court call to order...!!!Ponk!!! ponk!!! Ponkkk!!!!
the jury verdict is, Gopalan is a bo lan pa man
Uncle Poh Ah Pak is a lan pa and pa lan man
Uncle Chin Eng subject to further investigation and interview if he is pro PAP or neutral.
Court recess..!!!
Originally posted by angel7030:ahem!!! Court call to order...!!!Ponk!!! ponk!!! Ponkkk!!!!
the jury verdict is, Gopalan is a bo lan pa man
Uncle Poh Ah Pak is a lan pa and pa lan man
Uncle Chin Eng subject to further investigation and interview if he is pro PAP or neutral.
Court recess..!!!
wahaha so serious suddenly got comic relive...
Originally posted by Twincat:
wahaha so serious suddenly got comic relive...
relax lah, hv some fun mah...looking at these postings, it look at a court scene with defendants and prosectors. Need to instill some discipline.
Anyway, what the heck is this Gopalan messing with our country here, if he is here with a solution for the current recession, i dun mind, but seem like he is here to create problem and use more of our tax money to feed him, please ask him to go fly kite at LA long beach lah