Tuesday, 26 June 2012

Watz Buzzing - 26 Jun 2012

The hot Esther Goh Tok Mui: A lady in red, really RED?

So the photo of the 4th mystery woman, Ms Cecilia Sue Siew Nang has been revealed, and it's quite a (pleasant) surprise to finally know the photo of the other mystery woman: Ms Esther Goh Tok Mui.

Yes, she's the very same Ms Esther Goh Tok Mui who was as a director of business development at NCS had allegedly gone (down? hur hur) the extra mile in her customer service to one shameful Singapore Civil Defence Force's (SCDF) former commissioner Peter Benedict Lim Sin Pang.

Possibly thanks to her having had sex with the lustful Lim Sin Pang seven times between April 20 and Nov 13 last year, NCS was awarded a new five-year contract by the Ministry of Defence to manage and maintain the National Service (NS) Portal, Data Centre and NSCall Centre.

The hot lady-in-red Ms Esther Goh Tok Mui

read more

Cecilia Sue says she had done no wrong (What does her Husband say about it?)

Well, well...just one day since I ranted about how mysterious the 4 mystery women could be in that post on "Cecillia Sue Siew Nang" (or is it 'Cecilia Sue Siew Nang'?). And I must say I'm quite surprise that the photos of her have suddently surfaced. They're official, I'd guess--as they're published by Asiaone.

I don't know whether it's just a coincidence. But comparing the two Asiaone articles below, of which one is published today and another's earlier this year, one may not be wrong to conclude that they're referring to the same woman: Ms Cecilia Sue.

So...is she?

read more 

“Singapore is (R)evolving”

The Editor
The New York Times
Dear Sir,
I refer to Chan Heng Chee’s letter dated 21st June entitled “Singapore is Evolving”. Ms. Chan is the Ambassador and her taxpayer-funded time should not be used to produce spin on behalf of the ruling party.

It is ironic that she talks about “a vibrant democracy.” But then the PAP are past masters of Orwellian newspeak. Is it a vibrant democracy when by law all media outlets must be government controlled; when state resources are used to buy votes and the threat of withdrawal of state resources is used to intimidate voters; when Opposition parties are harassed by oppressive restrictions and Opposition leaders are bankrupted through the use of defamation suits; and when the Elections Department is just an arm of the Prime Minister’s Office without even a charade of independence?

Ms. Chan says other countries have anti-terrorist legislation. However Singapore must be alone among robust or vibrant democracies to have detained individuals for over twenty years merely because they refused to give up their fundamental human right to engage in peaceful politics.

Yours sincerely,

Kenneth Jeyaretnam
Secretary General
The Reform Party
18A Smith Street
Singapore 058932
+65 65349641/+65 91461976 

read more 

Mr Low Thia Khiang’s speech at Post Hougang By-election Dialogue organised by NUSS

Workers’ Party Secretary General, MP for Aljunied GRC, Mr Low Thia Khiang was invited as a speaker at the Post Hougang By-election Dialogue organised by The National University of Singapore Society (NUSS) held on 21 Jun 2012. The following is the transcript of the speech he delivered.

"Hougang SMC is a unique constituency in Singapore and is known beyond Singapore. It is unique because it represents the political conscience of Singapore!

By following their political conscience, the Hougang voters humbled both the PAP and the WP! To the PAP, their message is loud and clear – they want justice and fairness and will not bow down to bullying tactics.

The Hougang voters have also sent a message to WP that we have to do our best to live up to our promises, to serve the people and not be afraid to admit our shortcomings and mistakes, even if it embarrasses us."

read more

Chinese less keen on S'pore jobs

Lower pay, longer hours, high agent fees make it less appealing for some

Mr Zhang Mingpu, 23, swears that his first time working in Singapore was also his last.

His job as a mobile phone shop assistant required him to work 10 hours a day, six days a week, he said. But his 6,000 yuan (S$1,200) pay left him with hardly any money after deducting rent and agent fees of some 25,000 yuan.

So, when his two-year contract ended earlier this year, he headed home to central Zhengzhou city, where he now works in an employment agency drawing 7,000 yuan a month.

'I can earn similar pay here without having to work as hard. I can also be close to my family and friends,' he says.

For years, China has sent millions of workers overseas in search of higher pay to labour-starved countries such as Singapore.

But of late, they seem to be having second thoughts about working overseas, a trend that could have long-term effects on Singapore's labour situation.

read more

Singapore’s $300m gift to Yale?

Via the Straits Times, NUS and Yale has denied the $300m deal. Unfortunately the article is truncated, so we’ll have to wait till it becomes available elsewhere.

Yesterday, Jim Sleeper of the Huffington Post authored a long post criticising Yale’s partnership with NUS here. The article is very lengthy, and much of it rehashes topics such as human rights and freedom of speech. However, what caught my attention were the following paragraphs:

As Amsterdam was being denied entry into Singapore last month, I was seated at a dinner in Germany next to a very high official of a European university who’d been to Singapore a few times himself. “There’s $300 million for Yale in its deal with NUS,” he confided to me.

“What? How do you know that?” I asked. “Yale claims it’s not getting a dime from Singapore, although Singapore is paying all the costs of constructing and staffing the college itself.”

“Oh, it’s not a direct payment,” my interlocutor explained. “It’s what you call insider trading: Yale will be cut in on prime investments that Singapore controls and restricts through its sovereign wealth fund. These will be only investments, not payments, so there’s some risk. But you’ll [see] Yale’s endowment will swell by several hundred million in consequence of its getting in on these ventures.”

read more

Sometimes, it’s better to give in even if you’re right

Between a durian tree and a spat over noise, I cannot decide which is more hilarious or ridiculous.

Hard feelings to match the concrete walls of HDB flats?

On Tuesday, The New Paper reported about residents in a Bukit Batok block petitioning to have their neighbour evicted.

They complained that Madam X, who is in her late 50s, makes loud banging sounds in the wee hours of the morning.

A day later, there was a report that residents in a Moulmein Road HDB block were trading barbs over a durian tree.

The spat came to light after one neighbour called the police to complain that her neighbour had scolded her with vulgar language because she picked durians from a tree which he claimed to own.

A friend, who works as a Community Mediation Centre (CMC) mediator, says “It’s amazing sometimes to hear the kind of complaints.”

read more

Lethal Weapon

I showed a bird. My primary school classmate Kok Pong showed a middle finger!

“What on earth is that?” I asked, astounded. I thought lom jiam pas has only got three choices. You either show a bird, water or stone.
“This is my screwdriver.” answered Kok Pong. “It beats bird, water or stone.”

Like that also can ah? Of course, that was only a dream and primary school was a long time ago. The rules of lom jiam pas have not changed. Bird drinks water, water covers stone and stone kills bird. No screwdriver.

But recent news has shown the power of a screwdriver. The pen is mightier than the sword. Singapore has just invented a new proverb – the screwdriver is more powerful than the SAR21.


I know they don’t allow you to bring screwdrivers onboard a plane, but imagine someone forcing a soldier armed with a SAR21 to surrender his weapon, armed with a screwdriver.

Compare that with this Gurkha soldier who singlehandedly fought off more than a dozen Taliban fighters with his machine gun – no, not his machine gun which had run out of ammunition, but with his machine gun tripod!

read more

NSF to be awarded for keeping calm

From Kementah.blogspot.com

A NSF who was robbed of his assault rifle at Pasir Labia camp is to be awarded a medal of bravery for diffusing a potentially violent conflict that could have resulted in some blisters and abrasion.
To prevent bloodshed, NSF Kang Tai, 22, gave in without a fight when faced with a robber armed with a screwdriver who demanded his SAR 21 rifle.

This turned out to be a ploy as the robber did not managed to get away because he was subsequently apprehended by others who knew that the rifle he had taken was not loaded.

The NSF’s actions have since been praised by the military, with credit given to the soldier’s tough training and smarts.

“Men who have been trained for war would rather live in peace,” said Supreme General of the Army, Jin Seow Onn, who applauded his man for his quick thinking.

read more

Why is Najib whipping Singapore this time?

“Singapore and Malaysia has always had a love and hate relationship – but what I cannot understand is why is it an abusive relationship, where Singapore always seem to be the one taking it up the ass? Some people say it is rooted in history and goes all the way back to the good olde days of Tunku Abdul Rahman. I do not buy this simplistic abang and adik fairytale bed time story. I think that is a crock of shit!

To me it has alot to do with how the relationship is managed. Or in this case mismanaged. Singapore regularly behaves like the mistress who will do anything and everything to please the man – she is the only country in the world that has bent heads over heels to placate the Malaysian party political hegemony by banning Bersih demonstrations in Singapore.

No other country that I know of has even seen fit to do the same. Now you would have thought that the Party political hegemony in Malaysia would be happy as cock – but no. Instead it is really like the sad case of a woman who does everything to please a man. Yet the man remains stoically ungrateful and continues to be abusive. Why is that so?

Maybe life really mirrors art after all? Could it be Tolstoy was right when he once wrote: Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. What this means is, this woman despite her best efforts will never be able to command the respect of this man.

Because she has failed to do that ONE thing that is most important and vital to create a relationship based on mutual trust and respect. Perhaps if this woman is less obedient and has her own mind. The man will respect her more. Perhaps if this woman even learns how to take a bite out of this man, she will be respected and treated better?

read more

Singapore Bersih denies hand in protest at high commission

Bersih Singapore 3.0 has denied it is responsible for a planned protest this afternoon in front of the Singapore High Commission here to protest the island republic’s alleged interference into Malaysia’s affairs.

“Bersih 3.0 Singapore has been made aware of a call to demonstrate on June 22 in front of the Singapore High Commission in Kuala Lumpur to protest against the alleged ‘planned interference by foreign interests’ in Malaysia in the upcoming 13th General Election,” said Ong Guan Sin, co-ordinator of the Singapore offshoot of the electoral reform movement, in a statement to The Malaysian Insider today.

“The allegation started from a blog, MyMassa, purporting to have proof of preparation by Singaporeans being trained as polling/counting agents for GE13.

“The blog used the specific training event organised by Bersih 3.0 Singapore as ‘proof’ of such preparation for intervention,” he added.

The protest instead is believed to be organised by a pro-Umno blogger who goes by the moniker “mymassa.

read more

Can an innocent individual be sent to the gallows in Singapore?

According to US journalist Peter Krouse, Singapore’s Foreign Minister and Minister of Law K. Shanmugam said that “while he hasn’t done a case-by-case study, he didn’t think so” when asked if Singapore had ever executed an innocent person for drug crimes.

His assistant later followed up with an email saying “I haven’t gone through the facts of each case, but I have complete faith in our judiciary”. [Source: Peter Krouse's Facebook]

For the benefit of those who may not be able to access the link, here is a screenshot.

Let us take a good look at the following cases:


1. Vignes Mourthi – executed in September 2003

Vignes Mourthi was arrested together with Moorthy Angappan outside An-Nur Mosque (Singapore) in September 2001. According to the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB), Mourthi tried to sell a packet of heroin to an undercover officer from the bureau. The undercover officer turned out to be Sgt Rajkumar.

According to Mourthi, he believed that the packages contained incense stones and insisted that he was doing Angappan, a family friend, a favour. He also stated that he had never seen heroin before and realised that the packages contained drugs only after he was arrested.

In fact, he stood by his claim til his death.

An innocent person can be hanged because of procedure?

read more

Woffles Wu case hits a nerve

It started off as a small matter, but it hit a nerve, and now the entire government is in damage control mode. However, a bone in me says the damage control efforts will focus on technicalities and miss the big picture, as often is the case, and so will prove less than effective.

It’s a common refrain in Singapore. The government sees the problem, but doesn’t know how to deal with it, or is ideologically unable to do anything about it.

Plastic surgeon Woffles Wu was fined $1,000 by a court on 12 June 2012
. . . for getting an elderly employee to take the rap for him for a speeding offence.

The 52-year-old had abetted Mr Kuan Kit Wah, then 76, to provide false information to the police in November 2006.
The car, belonging to Wu, was travelling at 91-kilometres per hour along Adam Road when the speed limit is 70 kilometres per hour.

The court heard that Wu also made Mr Kuan take the rap for him for another speeding offence in September 2005.
This charge was taken into consideration during the sentencing on June 12.

– Channel NewsAsia, 13 June 2012, Plastic surgeon Woffles Wu fined S$1,000, by Claire Huang
The two incidents occurred on 11 September 2005 and 10 November 2006 respectively. The Straits Times had a similar report:

read more

TOC author’s response to AGC’s statement on Woffles Wu (17 June 2012)

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) has issued a statement addressing some of the questions I raised in my earlier article this morning. I appreciate the fact the AGC response came on a Sunday morning and that time and effort was put into answering some of the concerns members of the public have been raising.

In my earlier article, I raised several cases where a charge under Section 182 of the Penal Code was used in situations similar to the one Dr Woffles Wu found himself in.

The AGC’s response is as follows:

“On the facts of this case, as there was no major accident or injury, it was considered appropriate to proceed under Section 81(3) of the Road Traffic Act rather than invoke the general provisions of the Penal Code, such as Section 182.”

This statement suggests that Section 182 cases would generally involve major accidents or injury and that the lack of major accident or injury informed AGC’s decision to proceed with a charge under Section 81(3) of the Road Traffic Act.

This is, however, incorrect.

read more

AGC explains the charges against Woffles Wu

Choo Zheng Xi, a Consultant Editor of TOC and a lawyer in private practice, wrote an article (‘Questions Remain in Woffles Wu Matter‘) on 17 Jun, hoping the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) can clarify why Woffles Wu was not charged under Section 182 of the Penal Code.

Earlier, the Minister of Law and Foreign Affairs Mr K Shanmugam has clarified that Wu was charged under Section 81 (3) of the Road Traffic Act instead of the more serious Section 204A of the Penal Code for perverting the course of justice because Section 204A was only enacted in 2008 while Wu’s offence had occurred in 2006.

However, Zheng Xi noted that Wu could have been charged under Section 182 of the Penal Code instead as this section was already in force at the time of Wu’s offence.

In his research, Zheng Xi noted that Section 182 has been successfully used in a number of cases involving the provision of false information to the police in traffic related violations. He gave the following examples:
  • Thirumalai Kumar v PP (1997) – sentenced to 2 week imprisonment.
  • Yap Khim Huat v PP (2001) – sentenced to 4 week imprisonment.
  • Tan Jack Saa v PP (2001) – sentenced to 2 month imprisonment.
  • Lim Seng Keong v PP and Koh Chee Khoon v PP (2001) – sentenced to 1 week imprisonment each.
  • Chia Pei Si v PP (2007) – sentenced to 2 week imprisonment.
  • Poh Chee Hwee v PP (2008) – sentenced to 2 week imprisonment.

read more

AGC's press release on Woffles Wu case

AGC's press release on Woffles Wu case

From the Attorney General's Chambers, 17 June 2012:

We refer to the media reports about the case against Woffles Wu.

2 Woffles Wu was charged for abetting his employee Kuan to give false information to the police about the commission of speeding offenses in 2005 and 2006. Kuan gave the false information. Woffles Wu, who did not give any information to the police, was charged with abetting Kuan to do so, which is an offence under s 81(3) of the Road Traffic Act. There was no evidence of payment or gratification given to Kuan. Kuan, who is 82 years old, was given a stern warning 

Law Minister, K Shanmugam, also posted about the case on his Facebook page. We re-post it in full as follows:

There has been a lot of comment on the case of Dr Woffles Wu. I asked AGC to let me have their position and the answers to the questions that hav been raised. Basically people have asked 4 questions:

(1) why was he not charged under s204 of the Penal Code, and instead was charged under the RTA. The Penal Code charge would carry a heavier sentence is what is used now

(2) Why was he charged for abetment

(3) why was Dr Wu imposed only with a fine under the RTA

(4) Why has it taken so long for the case to come to court when the offence took place in 2006.

I spoke with the media and gave answers to the 4 questions, based on what I was told by the AGC. 

read more