• 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.

Chitchat Shanmugam : "Something only lawyers know..."

ChanRasjid

Alfrescian
Loyal
18:10
Gillian Koh: "... takes time to establish falsehood..."
Shanmugam: "...Well, because you're not a lawyer, you're at a disadvantage. There are ways of dealing with that. Leave that to us... we'll get the experts to work on it..."

Shanmugam says he (also other lawyers) knows about a way to easily distinguish truth from falsehood. Can someone reveal what is the secret way that Shanmugam is hinting at. I really am curious to know.

"Is Mr's Clinton selling arms to ISIS?" This is a Yes/No question. Shanmugam say "No"

There were articles circulating that the reason Muamar Gaddafi was taken down was because he moved away from accepting the USD for oil export and ask for gold. How can we determine it was clear "online deliberate falsehood" and should have been taken down.

China: "Historically, for thousands of years, Diaoyu islands had been part of China"
Japan: "Historically, for thousands of years - before our ancestors landed on Japan - Senkaku islands had been part of Japan. Heaven favors the Divine race of the Divine Land"

Ask Shanmugam to declare what is true and what false so that the problem get a "clearcut" solution. This could help to avoid a WWWIII.

"There are reports saying the SG government is increasing GST to 9% because Temasek Holdings is losing money bigtime."
Shanmugam: "This is deliberate online falsehood. I want only a Yes/No comment. Yes or No?"

I am sad that I am not as smart as lawyers.:( I have to accept my fate.
 

Truth_Hurts

Alfrescian
Loyal
That just means all the lawyer jokes online are true..and after hearing from Shan...there are no lawyers in heaven...
 

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Shanmu is a master of lies ...I remember all the lies he cooked up to tarnish the reputation of the WP. He can only do that in sinkapore because he knows his Ah Neh chief justice will protect him.
 

ChanRasjid

Alfrescian
Loyal
I think it is a forgone conclusion. Laws on deliberate online falsehood would be passed. Shanmugam will need experts to help him draft the law so that there would be simple foolproof manner to determine falsehood - in other words - lying. I suggest Shanmugam seek help from the Chinese government.

On fakes, none beats the Chinese. Not only have the Chinese mastered faking on earth, but also in Heaven! They produce fakes on earth like branded handbags, Rolex, Nikkie shoes, iPhone, and what not. They also produce fakes in the abstract non-material world - lying. They have the highest per-capita production of lying in the world. And among the Chinese, the government officials figure way above the average.

It is a thieve that is an expert in picking out a thieve. It is a liar that is best in picking out another liar. That's why Shanmugam should contact the Chinese government.:rolleyes:

Or is there a neccessity to seek outside help for experts in lying?:p
 

TKB

Alfrescian
Loyal
Ho Ching signed off as PMO officer. Evidence was in her signature. Was that falsehood? If not, why is she not arrested, or at least apologize? Why Shan never spoke on this? Other people would have been given 3 months jail at least, and sue until pants dropped.
 

sweetiepie

Alfrescian
Loyal
my uncle say KNN KNN he haven't dare to say this 山本 dare to say this that he is smarter KNN KNN .he say one day must invite 山本 for a duel liao see who is the smarter one KNN.
 

ToaPehGong

Alfrescian
Loyal
At least the rest of Singapore gets to say Yes or No. My multimillion dollar Ministers can only say Yes. Long live PAP
 

ChanRasjid

Alfrescian
Loyal
PAP ministers are like the truth-seekers of Nepal - the birthplace of the Buddha.

Once, someone on the path of Eastern mysticism went to Nepal to see how the people there respect and practice the truth. He discovered a crown jewel of Nepalese mysticism:
"We Nepalese love the truth so much that we never ever part with it":eek:

Singaporean culture with respect for legislated truth will never penetrate Nepal! Truth is the very lifeblood of nature. The Nepalese seem to have them within their genes - no need legislation.:p
 

myfoot123

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
This is not even engaging, the select committee's ears are shut to all comments, suggestion and opinion. Shamugam is all about himself, his self-centered party. In fact, a few members in the select committees have told lies in some ways during the election and during the parliamentary debate to swing votes.. Foreigners were even invited to particiate in political opinion in Straits Times and some ferried to PAP rally too not to mention as many were involved in RC and PA for political reasons. How can the govt not know? I cannot bring myself to watch the entire video anymore.
 

ChanRasjid

Alfrescian
Loyal
Matthew 19:24 King James Version (KJV)

"And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a _blank _ blank to enter into the kingdom of God."

This is homework: Fill in the blank.
Strictly no clues, A*Star level IQ required.
 

halsey02

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Anything that is apparently anti-government is fake news....simple as that.

Anything you do not agree with them least it be a simple matter of an alphabet, they say "F' you say "K"...Fu..K!...that is a lie & you are spreading false news..period.

People should be smarter these days to counter these purveyor of truth....like the example given...give concrete evidence that Temasek is loosing money & they need to raise 9% to cover....since they are so smart in boxing people...people out there, must be smarter to paint these whities into corner & let the truth speaks out for itself.

As long as we have a 70% voters who give them the mandate...the truth they sell is what they perceive it to be & they will go to great length to bend that.
 

sweetiepie

Alfrescian
Loyal
my uncle say KNN lah 山本康 say this becas he use mha hq lie detector and say what lawyer will know KNN.
 

ChanRasjid

Alfrescian
Loyal
I seldom read the speeches of our ministers. I watch these videos because of the threads here and comments. From these Select Committee proceedings, what I finally found out is that:
K. Shanmugam is not clever.
He believes he could turn things easily into boolean as in computer programming - either a "0" or "1" and nothing in between. But in real life, there exists the fuzzy dividing lines. He cornered Gillian Koh into admitting that lines could be drawn in terms of factual falsehood.

Gillian: "This (Twitter allowed a cartoon - about Muslims surrounding a women and words about "they killed her baby") is clear cut.
Shanmugam: "Twitter did not think it was clear cut and allowed this cartoon to circulate... in Singapore it would be considered clear cut... as a sensible person ...would you would agree it is clearcut?".
G:"Yes"

S: "Would you agree that a suggestion that Obama is a Muslim is a clear cut example?"
G: "Yes"

S:"Would you agree that the suggestions Mrs Clinton was selling arms to ISIS a clear cut example?"
G:"Yes"

S:" You have some questions as to where that line is drawn, but in your earlier evidence, you are quite good enough to agree it can be drawn in terms of clear factual falsehood."
G:"Yes"
D:"That's good enough. Thank you."

K.Shanmugam would never win a law case against an averagely smart lawyer..

Case 1: Twitter's catoon:
Q:"Is it clear cut?"
In France:"It is indeed clear cut. Muslims are devils. So why can't we warn the world about this evil religion"
The moral:"What is clear cut is dependent on what shoes you are wearing."

Case 2: Obama being Muslims:
Q:"Is it clear cut ?"
A: "Not sure".

Even in Singapore there is no direct legislation to determine a person's religion. It all comes down to words of people and witnesses. In Obama's case, the strongest "clear cut" example would be if Obama himself had said in the past he is not a Muslim. So to Shanmugam, the words of a person could have been taken as evidence of factual truth! It is logically wrong!

Bill Gates: "Microsoft did not make any profit in 2016 and therefore paid no tax"
Q:"Is it a factual truth Microsoft made no profit?"
Shanmugam: "Yes"

Temasek CEO :" We made tons of money every year"
Q:"Is it a factual truth?"
Shanmugam:"Yes"

The moral:"Words of witnesses may be accepted in courts to come to a final legal judgment; but nowhere in law (anywhere in the world) says that such words of witnesses ever represent factual truth or falsehood"

Case 3: Mrs Clinton was selling arms to ISIS
Q:"Is it a factual falsehood?"
A: "Who knows?".
Q:"Do politicians tell only the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?"
A: "No"

Shanmugam could pass the examinations for a law degree, but he is not clever. He sits on a pedestal above the lady and could easily intimidate Gillian Koh. The lady is too Eastern.

Quotable quotes:
A fat male thinks fatness is sexy.
A fat female thinks fatness is beauty.
A mathematician says the brain is all that matter.
A lawyer says there would be peace when all things
are covered by the law.

But God says: "The only thing important ever is that you obey me.
I'll here let out a great secret lest ye earthlings continue to argue.
It is a factual truth that my real name is Allah
 
Top