• 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.

Big Balls Theorem not valid in Chng vs Home Minister in Peasantpore?? Sure or not?

mscitw

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
2,973
Points
83
The Big Balls theorem seems to work all the time because its proof is rather straightforward despite a gender bias.

If 2 parties contest, the one with bigger balls win.

Examples:
Yeo vs Waterfront View sale committee as reported by The Shit Times - February 6, 2007, Couple lose fight on collective sale

Yeo crowed he can oppose the sales committee en bloc because he will suffered 100k shortfall in CPF accounts.
The Land Strata Baboons:'Lumpar ok, $100k CPF shortfall not considered financial loss!'
In this case, Yeo lost because he got smaller balls than the sales committee and property developers who can run circles around him.

Seems to work on countries. WWII-Germany vs Soviet Union. Bigger balls because USSR+USA more then ten times the size of Nazi Germany.

Chng vs Home Minister aka Gestapo Minion. In this case, it will appear the the Old Autocrat and his Gestapo Minion will win because it has bigger balls. But read on.

QC Robertson (yes Ang Moh) noted BG Tan (ex Mindef swine), Home Permanent Lackey claim the regime is satisfied that the alleged Marxist baboons are still danger to Peasantpore by renouncing their forced statutory declarations of guilt and has the power to re-detain them under the Infernal Security Act.
Kangaroo Court forced by Ang Moh Queen Counsel to concede that the regime cock up by assuming if regime is happy, the rubber stamp President will also be happy to agree and play along. The 3 Stooges of Injustice order the release of the 4 peasants who have the small balls to challenge the regime using a technicality. Brave ladies huh.

Old Autocrat:"Release? Wait long long!". Cambridge trained Baba lawyers usually do not shout 'lum par or lan jiao'

What will a despot do in this case when it control the Legislative and Executive branch? Or to reword the question, what will an emperor do in this case? Simply issue a decree, change the laws and presto, done.

End result:
The four goondu activists or perceived commies were immediately re-arrested after the Old Autocrat passed a new decree stating his minion's whims and fancies pertaining to prevention detention under Infernal Security Act are not subject to any review by Kangaroo Courts or challenged by Ang Moh lawyers.

Singlish:I say, you do, you lan lan do even if you know it is wrong.

The Big Balls Theorem seemed to break down but it does not. The theorem did not state you must win all battles to win the war. You can win many battles but still lose the war.

Example:
The Imperial Nippon Armies in the China Theatre of War will tell you their sad stories. They won 80% of the 22 major clashes of the 2nd Sino-Nippon War but still must lan lan surrender to the inept Chinese Nationalist Ragtag Armies (NRA). Those Nippon vermins understood Hirohito's phase, 'to endure the unendurable'.

The 4 goondu naive activists aka murderous commie agitators may have won a court case but it cannot prevail against an autocrat who change the laws and win the war.

Imagine in sports, Cocka vs Nathan. Cocka wins but Nathan speaks to the umpire who changes the rules and declares Nathan the winner.

Well, anything is possible in an Asiatic Society...especially in Peasantpore. The law can say one thing today but when you wake up the next day, it can say another thing.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top