agc dun haf soul discretion ler ... it lies wif their big brudder ...
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Liew Mun Leong Billion Dollars Temasek Reputation Has Been Rubbished
- Thread starter GUDANGARAM
- Start date
Agree with Uncle GD .. I think with the strong connections to their Pappy Masters, AGC probably going to give the Liews just a slap on the wrist... So can Parti sue the Liews Kao Kao for slander, defamation? At least hit jackpot half a million more than good enough for her.
Lim Tean
What An Astounding Statement From Temasek!
Instead of seriously looking at the issue of whether Liew Mun Leong should be asked to leave his position at Temasek in light of Justice Chan Seng Onn’s judgment in the Parti Liyani case, it appears that his friends in high places are circling the wagons to protect him.
That is the impression I got from the statements made by Dilhan Pillay Sandrasegara ( Chief Executive ) of Temasek International at the press conference today. Mr Sandrasegara extolled the contributions made by Mr Liew and told us that we should listen to his side of the story behind making any judgments.
As a former practising lawyer, Mr Sandrasegara should know that the judicial process on Parti Liyani’s case ends with Justice Chan’s judgment in acquitting her from her conviction by the District Court. There is no further avenue of appeal. The judge made very clear findings of facts involving members of the Liew family, and all residents of Singapore are legally obliged to respect the decisions of our courts, much like Parti Liyani had to respect the decision of the District Court in convicting her, until her conviction was overturned on appeal by Justice Chan.
Mr Sandrasegara’s appeal to listen to Mr Liew’s side of the story is disrespectful of the Court’s decision. Whatever Mr Liew says cannot change,and has no bearing on, the Court’s decision.
If an Opposition figure had a similar judgment relating to him/ her, you can be sure that the MSM, who are the establishment lapdog, would go to town with the story. That person would be described as the worst of the human species. Someone whom society cannot know no more. There is such a thing called karma.
Instead of defending Mr Liew, whom I am sure is well capable of defending himself and his family, I suggest Temasek and Mr Sandrasegara should instead reflect on the 4 year ordeal that Parti Liyani had to go through as a result of the inexcusable actions of an elite family. That ordeal is not something that even full monetary compensation can erase.
What An Astounding Statement From Temasek!
Instead of seriously looking at the issue of whether Liew Mun Leong should be asked to leave his position at Temasek in light of Justice Chan Seng Onn’s judgment in the Parti Liyani case, it appears that his friends in high places are circling the wagons to protect him.
That is the impression I got from the statements made by Dilhan Pillay Sandrasegara ( Chief Executive ) of Temasek International at the press conference today. Mr Sandrasegara extolled the contributions made by Mr Liew and told us that we should listen to his side of the story behind making any judgments.
As a former practising lawyer, Mr Sandrasegara should know that the judicial process on Parti Liyani’s case ends with Justice Chan’s judgment in acquitting her from her conviction by the District Court. There is no further avenue of appeal. The judge made very clear findings of facts involving members of the Liew family, and all residents of Singapore are legally obliged to respect the decisions of our courts, much like Parti Liyani had to respect the decision of the District Court in convicting her, until her conviction was overturned on appeal by Justice Chan.
Mr Sandrasegara’s appeal to listen to Mr Liew’s side of the story is disrespectful of the Court’s decision. Whatever Mr Liew says cannot change,and has no bearing on, the Court’s decision.
If an Opposition figure had a similar judgment relating to him/ her, you can be sure that the MSM, who are the establishment lapdog, would go to town with the story. That person would be described as the worst of the human species. Someone whom society cannot know no more. There is such a thing called karma.
Instead of defending Mr Liew, whom I am sure is well capable of defending himself and his family, I suggest Temasek and Mr Sandrasegara should instead reflect on the 4 year ordeal that Parti Liyani had to go through as a result of the inexcusable actions of an elite family. That ordeal is not something that even full monetary compensation can erase.
Charismatic megachurches are recession-proof cash cows. In fact, the hardcore Christians might even love Kong Hee even more after his prison stint, as they are suckers for the 'repentant prodigal son' story of repentance and redemption.
Perhaps...
But I think the internet has made things uncertain...
This case could be messy because it demonstrates a glaring systemic flaw in PAP's beloved good governance...
From Liew family police report until the case reached the High Court there were various points of intervention by various government/administrative/judicial bodies from SPF to AGC to the DC judge but all failed to act and do the right thing.
This is the very disturbing aspect of this miscarriage of justice that the government must be held to account and explain.
What so called contributions? Wasn't this greedy rapacious scumbag paid millions to do his job?
And what is there to judge? Hasn't high court judge Chan SO already made a judgment with a 100 page decision excoriating the Liew family and all the lapses by SPF, AGC and DJ Olivia Low?
Bravo Vincent Especkerman, my thoughts exactly!
I wonder whether this Temasek chap was speaking his own mind or was this under instructions from Ho Ching? Probably the latter.
Tay Kheng Soon
Democracy in a small country has to be different to democracy in a big country this is why LKY replied to me why he shut down our Jury System because jury members in a small city-state will be under pressure and influence from the accused's friends and allies and therefore justice will not be served.
Why does this logic not also apply to the compact national elite that run the country? They are a powerful compact group with a centre and a periphery.
Will the necessary separation of powers be exercised but within its own collegiate culture? Of course no willful compliance or bad faith compromise of principle take place but it will take extraordinary moral courage and integrity of members to break from group sentiment and collegiate duty to do so. Is this asking too much?
Should democracy thus rely only on the integrity of a few brave souls to maintain justice? Wont special institutional arrangements be necessary to ensure just recourse?
Ombudsman comes to mind of course but an appointed ombudsman is only human, after all he one drawn from the very meritocratic class upon which he is to exercise discretion. In an intimately structured situation this is almost inhuman. Some other solution has to be found..
Democracy in a small country has to be different to democracy in a big country this is why LKY replied to me why he shut down our Jury System because jury members in a small city-state will be under pressure and influence from the accused's friends and allies and therefore justice will not be served.
Why does this logic not also apply to the compact national elite that run the country? They are a powerful compact group with a centre and a periphery.
Will the necessary separation of powers be exercised but within its own collegiate culture? Of course no willful compliance or bad faith compromise of principle take place but it will take extraordinary moral courage and integrity of members to break from group sentiment and collegiate duty to do so. Is this asking too much?
Should democracy thus rely only on the integrity of a few brave souls to maintain justice? Wont special institutional arrangements be necessary to ensure just recourse?
Ombudsman comes to mind of course but an appointed ombudsman is only human, after all he one drawn from the very meritocratic class upon which he is to exercise discretion. In an intimately structured situation this is almost inhuman. Some other solution has to be found..
That is why we once had the Privy Council(House of English Law Lords) as the final avenue of appeal of our court cases.
But that was abolished because of the JBJ case when they effectively ruled against the government.
Hey ho ching.
We want you dog on the sacrificial altar.
We want you dog on the sacrificial altar.
Sure, we should get the man to speak, to give his side of the story.
But the question is: would he? will he? dare he?
My question to him would be to refer enlighten the world from which of
his many, many books and interviews did he preach the philosophy of
his behaviour towards an employee. An employee with a $600 monthly salary
after working for ten years vs his DAILY BONUS payment of $58,00 not
so long ago.
But the question is: would he? will he? dare he?
My question to him would be to refer enlighten the world from which of
his many, many books and interviews did he preach the philosophy of
his behaviour towards an employee. An employee with a $600 monthly salary
after working for ten years vs his DAILY BONUS payment of $58,00 not
so long ago.
The power man like LML is still being employed in CAG as Chairman, not being suspended or immediate terminated.
Normal ordinary civil servant like teacher or police, immediately suspended while being investigated.
This LML is more or less proven guilty and yet can keep the job, really powerful.
The remaining charges were withdrawn, without any explanation.
Because they did not want more lies to be exposed, with all the
surrounding public disdain in place? Or are we pre-judging?
Because they did not want more lies to be exposed, with all the
surrounding public disdain in place? Or are we pre-judging?
Anil will give you Anal which is what you like anyway.
I don't like to fuck guys in the ass. I'm not a faggot like you.
This is practically a David vs Goliath story.
Poor uneducated maid vs multimillionaire head of company. Feels good to see justice being done.
Poor uneducated maid vs multimillionaire head of company. Feels good to see justice being done.
Similar threads
