S
Is that why you are so often here? Attracted to the aquas?
Last edited:
-
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.
Haha! PM Lee sent lawyer letter to gay boy Alex Au.
Is that why you are so often here? Attracted to the aquas?
Bad move by our big boy.
On surface it looke like Alex is wrong and withdraw the post.
But at coffee shop people only talking how big boy always bully small boy.
A lot of Singaporean do not know about this Saga, now it attracted attention.....
Singaporean got brain to think.
无风不起浪。
Big boy try to
杀一警百。
This may be a catalyst of their fall.
On surface it looke like Alex is wrong and withdraw the post.
But at coffee shop people only talking how big boy always bully small boy.
A lot of Singaporean do not know about this Saga, now it attracted attention.....
Singaporean got brain to think.
无风不起浪。
Big boy try to
杀一警百。
This may be a catalyst of their fall.
Are you aqua? Why you so attracted to me?
If indeed Alex the fag has a case, he would have defended himself in an open trial for all to see wouldn't he? I'm sure there will be lots of funds to support him if there is a defence at all.
Why did Alex back down three times for if he got substance?
You think this will be the topi discussed by your local Ah Kow and Ah Ma or will they talk about mahjong?
shctaw is what you call astroturf.
There's no playing field accorded to the PAP's political opponents inside this country's courtrooms..
You tell me who are the Overlords of this country?
You tell me who those shameless Court Judges kowtow to everyday?
There is no shame for Alex to back down from a further confrontation with a big shameful bully like the PAP..
For Alex to slug it out in an open trial against the mighty LEEgime is akin to a football match between your beloved Spore Lions vs Brazil..
You jolly well know how your beloved Pappy Masters operate.. By bullying the weak with fear and intimidation..
Alex might be interested in ramming your arse after you called him many rude names..
Re: [Breaking News] PM Lee wants to sue Alex Au over blog posts about AIM!
auch is in his 60s. Does he have much to lose?
auch is in his 60s. Does he have much to lose?
See the number of posts over less than a year. You practically make your home here. how much do they pay you? A dollar per post?
Aiyah, let Kanina the PAP IB noise maker evolve to the level of making arguments mah. It may take half a millenium. BTW, Kanina, vulgar in design, is showing his vulgarity. It indicates all is not well with AIM.
Asking the PM to take action via CPIB was always playing with fire.
There are more valid ways to attack the PAPzis, THP and AIM in this saga. The aim should have been to show how the PAPzis have hurt the pockets of its citizens through this scheme that THP cooked up. The way in which IP from citizens was transferred to a private entity which would cost citizens more in the future is the main issue. Everything else is not necessarily wrong. From their own mouths they have shown themselves to be incompetent in managing the property of its citizens and this is where the barrage should be aimed at.
Firstly, any government should be interested in lowering costs for its citizens. To achieve economies of scale the ownership of the software should already have been centralised from the onset and not prior to its lifespan coming to an expiry. Then why should citizens, owners of the software living in opposition wards have to forfeit their ownership of the software while citizens living in PAP wards can continue with the ownership.
Were the shares of the citizens from the opposition wards sold off and how did they benefit?
THP's explanation on how AIM ended up owning the software is even more ridiculous. Not only did he look into the matter too close to the expiry of the original contract but he spent valuable money to hire a consultant to advise on basic matters. Not only was the advise provided simple, ie. achieve economies of scale and upgrade the laden operating system but the discharge based on the advice seems contrary at best.
Rather than centralise the ownership the ownership was sold off at what looks to be less than market value and allowed the new owner the right to terminate individual town councils at one month's notice. Such a termination policy was never in the original contract and that it was established in the new contract goes totally against a central, single ownership as prescribed by D & T and which according to THP was what he was trying to establish.
The end result of a savings of $8000 will go into a net loss as time passes by. It is foolish to even have brought it up. As time passes by, the town councils will have forked out much more than they were paid by AIM. The time where AIM begins to earn more than it paid to the town councils is only days away if one calculates the payable fees that THP himself has announced.
Therefore the issue of having central ownership was never established in the renewed contract with the new owners. We should also not forget that citizens living in opposition wards have lost their ownership rights without any recourse and without any benefit in kind. Given these two reasons, we can safely say that THP has managed the renewal of the contract poorly and this of course reflects badly on the PAPzis.
Please concentrate on these two issues as they are salient and clear cut. Stay away from barking up the wrong tree by asking for CPIB intervention. You should have sufficient ammunition to show that the PAPzis have put the interest of the citizens as a lower priority and their management standards are ridiculously poor as epitomised by THPs actions and his eventual explanation.
There are more valid ways to attack the PAPzis, THP and AIM in this saga. The aim should have been to show how the PAPzis have hurt the pockets of its citizens through this scheme that THP cooked up. The way in which IP from citizens was transferred to a private entity which would cost citizens more in the future is the main issue. Everything else is not necessarily wrong. From their own mouths they have shown themselves to be incompetent in managing the property of its citizens and this is where the barrage should be aimed at.
Firstly, any government should be interested in lowering costs for its citizens. To achieve economies of scale the ownership of the software should already have been centralised from the onset and not prior to its lifespan coming to an expiry. Then why should citizens, owners of the software living in opposition wards have to forfeit their ownership of the software while citizens living in PAP wards can continue with the ownership.
Were the shares of the citizens from the opposition wards sold off and how did they benefit?
THP's explanation on how AIM ended up owning the software is even more ridiculous. Not only did he look into the matter too close to the expiry of the original contract but he spent valuable money to hire a consultant to advise on basic matters. Not only was the advise provided simple, ie. achieve economies of scale and upgrade the laden operating system but the discharge based on the advice seems contrary at best.
Rather than centralise the ownership the ownership was sold off at what looks to be less than market value and allowed the new owner the right to terminate individual town councils at one month's notice. Such a termination policy was never in the original contract and that it was established in the new contract goes totally against a central, single ownership as prescribed by D & T and which according to THP was what he was trying to establish.
The end result of a savings of $8000 will go into a net loss as time passes by. It is foolish to even have brought it up. As time passes by, the town councils will have forked out much more than they were paid by AIM. The time where AIM begins to earn more than it paid to the town councils is only days away if one calculates the payable fees that THP himself has announced.
Therefore the issue of having central ownership was never established in the renewed contract with the new owners. We should also not forget that citizens living in opposition wards have lost their ownership rights without any recourse and without any benefit in kind. Given these two reasons, we can safely say that THP has managed the renewal of the contract poorly and this of course reflects badly on the PAPzis.
Please concentrate on these two issues as they are salient and clear cut. Stay away from barking up the wrong tree by asking for CPIB intervention. You should have sufficient ammunition to show that the PAPzis have put the interest of the citizens as a lower priority and their management standards are ridiculously poor as epitomised by THPs actions and his eventual explanation.
The PM has been silent on this issue. And when he "opens" his mouth, all we see is to sue. Holy shit, this is all he can do??? Being paid millions just to sue??? Utterly coward.
Last edited:
I didn't know aqua can get attracted to you
Maybe it's your your boobs they admire
I love to grab them from behind as you type into SBF sitting for hours
It gives me the hard-on with the usual cum into your wide open mouth
You are one real slut who blows like a champ
Honey I love you
Re: [Breaking News] PM Lee wants to sue Alex Au over blog posts about AIM!
As a matter of fact your logic on the way we screw is not as satisfying as the way you suck my cock. Your gentle stroke forth and back is so stimulating it can back up any claim in the world who the champ is and that's reality.
As a matter of fact your logic on the way we screw is not as satisfying as the way you suck my cock. Your gentle stroke forth and back is so stimulating it can back up any claim in the world who the champ is and that's reality.
You are right aqua can't stand when you challenged them naked but don't try this in SBF.
Re: [Breaking News] PM Lee wants to sue Alex Au over blog posts about AIM!
Any tiger show observer will be able to see how sexy and sensational when we get on board for the legal show. However because of the glaring lights I have made a complaint to the stage owner on the competence of the lighting engineer. Supporters never fail to applause when you start to twist and turn under my well defined and integrated body.The narratives provided during our act was not up to par as they cannot answer the one question about your mole. Cheers,Honey
Any tiger show observer will be able to see how sexy and sensational when we get on board for the legal show. However because of the glaring lights I have made a complaint to the stage owner on the competence of the lighting engineer. Supporters never fail to applause when you start to twist and turn under my well defined and integrated body.The narratives provided during our act was not up to par as they cannot answer the one question about your mole. Cheers,Honey
Re: [Breaking News] PM Lee wants to sue Alex Au over blog posts about AIM!
[h=2]Stop being so childish, Prime Minister Lee[/h]
January 5th, 2013 |
Author: Contributions
It is barely the first week of the new year and we already have a threat of legal action from the People’s Action Party (PAP) / Government. PM Lee Hsien Loong had sent a lawyer’s letter to well known and very much respected blogger, activist and writer, Alex Au, demanding Alex removed his blog posts about Action Information Management, the PAP-owned company embroiled in the controversy over a certain computer system.
It is unclear whether PM Lee had sent the letter in his personal capacity, or as the prime minister or secretary general of the PAP. Whatever it is, the demand was clear – remove the allegedly offending post, and publish an apology, or else.
It is the same old tiring, tiresome, and tired tactic of issuing threats instead of engaging the issue or the alleged allegations. Threatening to take legal action over blog postings is, to be honest, infantile. It is childish because it does not befit the office of the prime minister to take offence so easily, when he has in his power all the resources to engage the issue, clarify any perceived falsehoods, or lay out the facts of the issue at hand. In short, he could very well take some time, have a bit of patience, and debate or discuss the issues and in the process enlighten everyone – and maybe gain a bit more respect too from his detractors.
But no. A lawyer’s letter was obviously deemed the better option.
Nonetheless, lets not let this threat of legal action distract us from the very important matter of the AIM/PAP controversy – for there are still many questions, serious questions, left unanswered, even after some 3 weeks since the matter came into the public spotlight.
Dr Teo Ho Pin, the coordinating chairman of the 14 PAP town councils, have yet to explain, for example, why he and the chairmen of the town councils, did not see the conflict of interest of awarding and selling the rights of the computer system to a PAP-owned company. If they did, why did they still choose to go ahead in awarding the contract to AIM?
He has also not disclosed how much was used to develop the software in the first place. Or indeed, how much AIM paid for the software. Why was AIM’s bid for the contract submitted, apparently, one week after the closing date of the tender – and accepted?
Alex raised some very pertinent matters too – such as the danger that there is nothing to stop the PAP from selling out other services to PAP-owned companies. By the way, the PAP has declined to reveal how many companies it owns. This too is a problem because any opposition party which wins a constituency may find itself having to deal with PAP-owned companies, as the Workers’ Party did with AIM in Aljunied.
It is thus important, in the name of full accountability, that the PAP disclose the number of companies it has, and the nature of their business.
In the case of AIM, the PAP declined to disclose its past business dealings, or other details about the company.
So, in spite of the threat of legal action by the prime minister, these questions are being asked even more loudly now – and it would do the PAP a whole lot of good if it addressed each one openly.
And the best way to do so is in a “live” press conference in the presence of the mainstream media and the alternative media. Take the matter head-on, clear all doubts, lay out all facts.
That is, if the PAP has nothing to hide, which I am sure is the case.
And it really – I mean, really – is time to lay down the hatchet.
Engage Singaporeans. Engage the issue. Engage the questions – and not engage lawyers to issue threats.
Stop being so childish, prime minister.
.
Andrew Loh
—————
Read Ravi Philemon’s letter to PAP chairman, Khaw Boon Wan, here.
Andrew helms publichouse.sg as Editor-in-Chief. His writings have been reproduced in other publications, including the Australian Housing Journal in 2010. He was nominated by Yahoo! Singapore as one of Singapore’s most influential media persons in 2011.
[h=2]Stop being so childish, Prime Minister Lee[/h]
It is unclear whether PM Lee had sent the letter in his personal capacity, or as the prime minister or secretary general of the PAP. Whatever it is, the demand was clear – remove the allegedly offending post, and publish an apology, or else.
It is the same old tiring, tiresome, and tired tactic of issuing threats instead of engaging the issue or the alleged allegations. Threatening to take legal action over blog postings is, to be honest, infantile. It is childish because it does not befit the office of the prime minister to take offence so easily, when he has in his power all the resources to engage the issue, clarify any perceived falsehoods, or lay out the facts of the issue at hand. In short, he could very well take some time, have a bit of patience, and debate or discuss the issues and in the process enlighten everyone – and maybe gain a bit more respect too from his detractors.
But no. A lawyer’s letter was obviously deemed the better option.
Nonetheless, lets not let this threat of legal action distract us from the very important matter of the AIM/PAP controversy – for there are still many questions, serious questions, left unanswered, even after some 3 weeks since the matter came into the public spotlight.
Dr Teo Ho Pin, the coordinating chairman of the 14 PAP town councils, have yet to explain, for example, why he and the chairmen of the town councils, did not see the conflict of interest of awarding and selling the rights of the computer system to a PAP-owned company. If they did, why did they still choose to go ahead in awarding the contract to AIM?
He has also not disclosed how much was used to develop the software in the first place. Or indeed, how much AIM paid for the software. Why was AIM’s bid for the contract submitted, apparently, one week after the closing date of the tender – and accepted?
Alex raised some very pertinent matters too – such as the danger that there is nothing to stop the PAP from selling out other services to PAP-owned companies. By the way, the PAP has declined to reveal how many companies it owns. This too is a problem because any opposition party which wins a constituency may find itself having to deal with PAP-owned companies, as the Workers’ Party did with AIM in Aljunied.
It is thus important, in the name of full accountability, that the PAP disclose the number of companies it has, and the nature of their business.
In the case of AIM, the PAP declined to disclose its past business dealings, or other details about the company.
So, in spite of the threat of legal action by the prime minister, these questions are being asked even more loudly now – and it would do the PAP a whole lot of good if it addressed each one openly.
And the best way to do so is in a “live” press conference in the presence of the mainstream media and the alternative media. Take the matter head-on, clear all doubts, lay out all facts.
That is, if the PAP has nothing to hide, which I am sure is the case.
And it really – I mean, really – is time to lay down the hatchet.
Engage Singaporeans. Engage the issue. Engage the questions – and not engage lawyers to issue threats.
Stop being so childish, prime minister.
.
Andrew Loh
—————
Read Ravi Philemon’s letter to PAP chairman, Khaw Boon Wan, here.
Andrew helms publichouse.sg as Editor-in-Chief. His writings have been reproduced in other publications, including the Australian Housing Journal in 2010. He was nominated by Yahoo! Singapore as one of Singapore’s most influential media persons in 2011.
Similar threads
