WP Low, Lim, Singh, AHTC & Their Suspiciously Strenuous Objections to the "Big Four" Accountants

[PTADER]

If the PAP had the evidence, they would have buried the WP trio long ago. Instead, the PAP took the civil suit route where bayi can dream and construct his version of the 'crime' committed. Except that there is NO crime.

How old are you?

 

[hofmann]

There is prima facie evidence that a crime/crimes has/have been committed.

If got evidence then how come CAD/CPIB not involved? Like the AMK TC case.

 

[Bonut]

I want to know LTK's business interest. What does he do for a living ? Sell what ?

 

[Hypocrite-The]

I want to know LTK's business interest. What does he do for a living ? Sell what ?

If his biz is not legit. Pap would have brought it up long ago

 

[PTADER]

If got evidence then how come CAD/CPIB not involved? Like the AMK TC case.

I have answered this and variations of this question in the "Five "Fundraising" Questions for WP's Low, Lim and Singh" thread as well as in some other threads.

I also believe there is a genuine gratitude on the part of the younger Lee towards Shameless Low, LKY's blue-eyed boy. Shameless and Dishonest Low played a crucial role in destroying his father's political nemesis, JB Jeyaratnam. LKY had declared after JBJ won the 1981 Anson by-election that he would make this "mangy dog" (LKY's insulting labelling of JBJ in Parliament) "crawl on his bended knees, and beg for mercy“. Shameless and Dishonest Low helped LKY achieved his objective of destroying JBJ.

For his efforts and success in doing so, this political prostitute and charlatan has been hugely rewarded for his treachery and for his Oscar winning performance as an "opposition". He lives the good life; in a landed property worth well over $4 million plus, goes on expensive holidays, eats good food, has access to "A" class health services, has a blind eye turned to his questionable dealings, etc whilsts others before him have been jailed, bankrupted, exiled, etc.

 

[whoami]

When JBJ was around, MIW scared shit. Those day i never stop voting for WP. Cos i can see JBJ fighting and argueing with old man in parliament. It was a Workers Party. Unlike now...wayang party.

 

[Bonut]

I have answered this and variations of this question in the "Five "Fundraising" Questions for WP's Low, Lim and Singh" thread as well as in some other threads.

View attachment 49444

I also believe there is a genuine gratitude on the part of the younger Lee towards Shameless Low, LKY's blue-eyed boy. Shameless and Dishonest Low played a crucial role in destroying his father's political nemesis, JB Jeyaratnam. LKY had declared after JBJ won the 1981 Anson by-election that he would make this "mangy dog" (LKY's insulting labelling of JBJ in Parliament) "crawl on his bended knees, and beg for mercy“. Shameless and Dishonest Low helped LKY achieved his objective of destroying JBJ.

For his efforts and success in doing so, this political prostitute and charlatan has been hugely rewarded for his treachery and for his Oscar winning performance as an "opposition". He lives the good life; in a landed property worth well over $4 million plus, goes on expensive holidays, eats good food, has access to "A" class health services, has a blind eye turned to his questionable dealings, etc whilsts others before him have been jailed, bankrupted, exiled, etc.

Can shed some light on those dealings you deemed questionable?

 

[Hypocrite-The]

Can shed some light on those dealings you deemed questionable?

Yes if soo questionable. How come pap never arrest Low earlier n throw him off the bridge?

 

[Bonut]

Yes if soo questionable. How come pap never arrest Low earlier n throw him off the bridge?

Ptader already addressed this point. But that is not the point of my question.

 

[hofmann]

I have answered this and variations of this question in the "Five "Fundraising" Questions for WP's Low, Lim and Singh" thread as well as in some other threads.

View attachment 49444

I also believe there is a genuine gratitude on the part of the younger Lee towards Shameless Low, LKY's blue-eyed boy. Shameless and Dishonest Low played a crucial role in destroying his father's political nemesis, JB Jeyaratnam. LKY had declared after JBJ won the 1981 Anson by-election that he would make this "mangy dog" (LKY's insulting labelling of JBJ in Parliament) "crawl on his bended knees, and beg for mercy“. Shameless and Dishonest Low helped LKY achieved his objective of destroying JBJ.

For his efforts and success in doing so, this political prostitute and charlatan has been hugely rewarded for his treachery and for his Oscar winning performance as an "opposition". He lives the good life; in a landed property worth well over $4 million plus, goes on expensive holidays, eats good food, has access to "A" class health services, has a blind eye turned to his questionable dealings, etc whilsts others before him have been jailed, bankrupted, exiled, etc.

Thanks for the reply. This sounds too much like a conspiracy (ie low probability) so it's not a point of view that I can subscribe too. It requires too many ifs and buts.

Applying Occams razor, the lack of CAD/CPIB involvement means there is insufficient evidence to stand in a criminal court of law. Hence the current shennigans with ownself sue ownself. The burden of proof is lower as a civil action.

 

[PTADER]

Thanks for the reply. This sounds too much like a conspiracy (ie low probability) so it's not a point of view that I can subscribe too. It requires too many ifs and buts.

The gratitude towards Shameless Low is a possibility. Keeping a compliant and inconsequential WP alive (lest a more aggressive opposition replaces it) for the electorate to ventilate is a very high probability, if not near certainty. After all, it was LKY who stated this "deliberately" in an interview with the 147th Prostitute Press in September 2003. This was what he dogwhistled to the electorate:

"I find Chiam See Tong, Low Thia Khiang and Steve Chia friendly and agreeable.​

​

There are several others, people who made malicious allegations that I was dishonest and corrupt, when they must have known there was no basis for them. I sued them. I did not regard them as serious political opponents.​

​

ST: You've mentioned only several people - Mr Chiam, Mr Low and Mr Chia.​

​

SM Lee: That's deliberate. No reason to give publicity to people whom I consider unprincipled and opportunistic.​

​

ST: Even though you didn't mention them, one obvious question is that if you don't consider them serious political opponents, the way you have battled them would suggest that you did treat them very seriously.​

​

SM Lee: I don't think so. If we had considered them serious political figures, we would not have kept them politically alive for so long. We could have made them bankrupt earlier. We showed people that this type of opposition is not productive."​

​

Whether you are kept "politically alive" or destroyed, in LKY's own words, is not up to you. It was up to him, his son and his party.

Politically, I too would do what the PAP is doing. I will keep the compliant WP who compliments me as a "competent government" and who sings me praises about me, alive. With my hands on their balls ever ready ready to squeeze them into prison for their shenanigans, they are inconsequential but politically useful to ward off the rise of the JBJs, CSJs, FSs and TLHs who would otherwise fill the political vacumn left in the opposition by the political death of the WP.

 

[PTADER]

Applying Occams razor, the lack of CAD/CPIB involvement means there is insufficient evidence to stand in a criminal court of law. Hence the current shennigans with ownself sue ownself. The burden of proof is lower as a civil action.

Occam's razor may not apply here as these are not based on speculations but actual findings by the auditors. Whilst it was not in their remit to look into potential criminal liability, the overwhelming evidence and shenanigans - the use of "dummy codes" and numerous other nonsense were dead giveaways - mean their credibility would be at stake and they could themselves be held liable if they were to ignore or remain quiet about that which was glaring and which could not be ignored. Hence, though not in their remit, they nevertheless went as far as to cite potential criminal offences under the Penal Code "including criminal breach of trust" and stated that "the circumstances may warrant further investigations by the relevant authorities as to such potential offences".

Anyone who has undergone an audit knows that these are killer statements and are particularly damning. No auditors make them lightly or frivolously. They specifically cited Sections 405, 409 and 166 of the Penal Code. This is what 405, 409 & 166 is about:

​

Criminal breach of trust​

​

405. Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully suffers any other person to do so, commits “criminal breach of trust”.​

​

Criminal breach of trust by public servant, or by banker, merchant, or agent​

​

409. Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, in his capacity of a public servant, or in the way of his business as a banker, a merchant, a factor, a broker, an attorney or an agent, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 20 years, and shall also be liable to fine.​

​

Public servant disobeying a direction of the law, with intent to cause injury to any person​

​

166. Whoever, being a public servant, knowingly disobeys any direction of the law as to the way in which he is to conduct himself as such public servant, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will, by such disobedience, cause injury to any person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.​

​

Note, "injury" under the Penal Code is not just "physical" injury, but "any harm whatever illegally caused to any person, in body, mind, reputation or property."

 

[hofmann]

Occam's razor may not apply here as these are not based on speculations but actual findings by the auditors. Whilst it was not in their remit to look into potential criminal liability, the overwhelming evidence and shenanigans - the use of "dummy codes" and numerous other nonsense were dead giveaways - mean their credibility would be at stake and they could themselves be held liable if they were to ignore or remain quiet about that which was glaring and which could not be ignored. Hence, though not in their remit, they nevertheless went as far as to cite potential criminal offences under the Penal Code "including criminal breach of trust" and stated that "the circumstances may warrant further investigations by the relevant authorities as to such potential offences".

Anyone who has undergone an audit knows that these are killer statements and are particularly damning. No auditors make them lightly or frivolously. They specifically cited Sections 405, 409 and 166 of the Penal Code. This is what 405, 409 & 166 is about:

​

Criminal breach of trust​

​

405. Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully suffers any other person to do so, commits “criminal breach of trust”.​

​

Criminal breach of trust by public servant, or by banker, merchant, or agent​

​

409. Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, in his capacity of a public servant, or in the way of his business as a banker, a merchant, a factor, a broker, an attorney or an agent, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 20 years, and shall also be liable to fine.​

​

Public servant disobeying a direction of the law, with intent to cause injury to any person​

​

166. Whoever, being a public servant, knowingly disobeys any direction of the law as to the way in which he is to conduct himself as such public servant, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will, by such disobedience, cause injury to any person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.​

​

Note, "injury" under the Penal Code is not just "physical" injury, but "any harm whatever illegally caused to any person, in body, mind, reputation or property."

Dishonesty requires an extremely high burden of proof to establish.

Negligence on the other hand requires much less to establish.

As a layman, I view their action of using dummy codes as being lazy and taking short cuts for convenience more than outright dishonesty.

Yes perhaps it did cross their minds it would not look good to be seen paying to ownself. It's was an ethical conflict of interest, not a criminal one.

There is no law against being unethical outside of certain professional fields. Not sure if it's the case with Town council management.

Of course the law could be changed to reflect this, but it will bite the incumbents more in the backside than the current case since laws don't tend to apply retrospectively.

$2 Aims comes to mind.

 

[PTADER]

Dishonesty requires an extremely high burden of proof to establish.

Negligence on the other hand requires much less to establish.

As a layman, I view their action of using dummy codes as being lazy and taking short cuts for convenience more than outright dishonesty.

Yes perhaps it did cross their minds it would not look good to be seen paying to ownself. It's was an ethical conflict of interest, not a criminal one.

There is no law against being unethical outside of certain professional fields. Not sure if it's the case with Town council management.

Of course the law could be changed to reflect this, but it will bite the incumbents more in the backside than the current case since laws don't tend to apply retrospectively.

$2 Aims comes to mind.

The use of dummy codes is just one example I have cited. I will cite a whole lot more in this thread...akan datang.

Taken individually, the use of dummy codes may well be like what you said. Taken within the context of the strenuous fight against auditors with the expertise and experience in forensic accounting, their many other shenanigans including their uncooperative conduct in withholding and delaying access to documents and information from the auditors, suggest that all these is not about the political embarrassment of being revealed to be hopelessly incompetent, but that there was criminality involved.

There's more than enough information uncovered by the auditors for CPIB to step in and investigate. It's only through such an investigation that crimes committed can be uncovered and charges laid.

 

[hofmann]

The use of dummy codes is just one example I have cited. I will cite a whole lot more in this thread...akan datang.

Taken individually, the use of dummy codes may well be like what you said. Taken within the context of the strenuous fight against auditors with the expertise and experience in forensic accounting, their many other shenanigans including their uncooperative conduct in withholding and delaying access to documents and information from the auditors, suggest that all these is not about the political embarrassment of being revealed to be hopelessly incompetent, but that there was criminality involved.

There's more than enough information uncovered by the auditors for CPIB to step in and investigate. It's only through such an investigation that crimes committed can be uncovered and charges laid.

Yes charge them in criminal court if indeed there have been such crimes uncovered.

But so far, the needle points towards lack of competence rather than criminality.

Your effort to share is much appreciated. Alternative view points are cruicial for the growth of our country.

 

[PTADER]

Yes charge them in criminal court if indeed there have been such crimes uncovered.

But so far, the needle points towards lack of competence rather than criminality.

Your effort to share is much appreciated. Alternative view points are cruicial for the growth of our country.

It's really a chicken and egg situation. Without CPIB or the "relevant authorities" stepping in and acting on the auditors' suggestion for an investigation into specifically identified (405, 409 & 166) potential crimes, no such crimes can then be uncovered and no charges can be laid.

Without an investigation or charges laid, this will allow the triumvirate to continue to proclaim that they acted "in good faith", portray this as a political persecution and claim that everyone else is at fault except they themselves. That they are happy to be seen as being hopelessly incompetent is telling. It's a certainly better option than doing time in jail.

 

[winnipegjets]

I have answered this and variations of this question in the "Five "Fundraising" Questions for WP's Low, Lim and Singh" thread as well as in some other threads.

View attachment 49444

I also believe there is a genuine gratitude on the part of the younger Lee towards Shameless Low, LKY's blue-eyed boy. Shameless and Dishonest Low played a crucial role in destroying his father's political nemesis, JB Jeyaratnam. LKY had declared after JBJ won the 1981 Anson by-election that he would make this "mangy dog" (LKY's insulting labelling of JBJ in Parliament) "crawl on his bended knees, and beg for mercy“. Shameless and Dishonest Low helped LKY achieved his objective of destroying JBJ.

For his efforts and success in doing so, this political prostitute and charlatan has been hugely rewarded for his treachery and for his Oscar winning performance as an "opposition". He lives the good life; in a landed property worth well over $4 million plus, goes on expensive holidays, eats good food, has access to "A" class health services, has a blind eye turned to his questionable dealings, etc whilsts others before him have been jailed, bankrupted, exiled, etc.

So, why was the PAP harassing the WP trio then if the PAP needs the WP as opposition?

 

[PTADER]

I want to know LTK's business interest. What does he do for a living ? Sell what ?

When the triumvirate of Shameless Low, Lying Lim and Turbanless Tigress embarked on their "in good faith" donation drive, they took pains to emphasise that they were doing so in their "personal capacity". The reality was this allowed them to circumvent and avoid complying with provisions in the Political Donations Act.

Their precious distinction of what is "personal" and what is "party related" went missing in action with Shameless Low's name card where he proudly displays his various political appointments on his personal business name card.

One of what Top Point (http://www.toppoint.com.sg/) does:

And the changes to perfectly functioning signages in AHTC to these red-yellows when they won:

Questions:

1. Which company was awarded the contract to change these signboards? Was it awarded to Top Point and/or relatives and/or friends and/or supporters of the triumvirate/WP?

2. If the contract was awarded to Top Point, was this done under a dummy code?

3. If the contract was not awarded to Top Point, were any works for the signboards subsequently sub-contracted to Top Point and/or relatives and/or friends and/or supporters of the triumvirate/WP?

 

[PTADER]

Another one of what Top Point (http://www.toppoint.com.sg/) does:

Some examples of WP's PVC banners.

Questions:

1. Which company was contracted to make such banners? Was it Top Point and/or relatives and/or friends and/or supporters of the triumvirate/WP?

2. If it was contracted to Top Point, was this done under a dummy code?

3. If it was not contracted to Top Point, were any works for such banners subsequently sub-contracted to Top Point and/or relatives and/or friends and/or supporters of the triumvirate/WP?

 

[Hypocrite-The]

Wow WP soo corrupt,,,I wonder about what the scale of what the PAP has done for its cronies,,,for example awarding SAF catering contracts to GLCs ..is that corruption too? Ho Ching controlling Temasek,,..and lack of accountability of Temasek,,,,,is that corruption too?