Sweeping Powers for Poodles To Silence CSJ & Co.!

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>The Public Order Act: What it is all about
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>Parliament yesterday passed the Public Order Act (POA). Its key philosophy: There must be adequate space for the individual's rights for political expression, but without compromising society's need for order and stability. These are the main provisions in the new law </TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>

</TD><TD width=10>

</TD><TD vAlign=bottom>

ST FILE PHOTOS
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->Rationalised permits regime

<TABLE width=200 align=left valign="top"><TBODY><TR><TD class=padr8><!-- Vodcast --><!-- Background Story --><STYLE type=text/css> #related .quote {background-color:#E7F7FF; padding:8px;margin:0px 0px 5px 0px;} #related .quote .headline {font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:10px;font-weight:bold; border-bottom:3px double #007BFF; color:#036; text-transform:uppercase; padding-bottom:5px;} #related .quote .text {font-size:11px;color:#036;padding:5px 0px;} </STYLE>ALLOW STREET PROCESSIONS

... more​

The POA moves away from proscribing based on the number of persons involved in an activity. It focuses instead on whether the activity may have a disruptive effect on the public.



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Activities that will require permits under POA are those that:
1. Demonstrate support for or opposition to the views or actions of any person, group of persons or any government;
2. Publicise a cause or campaign; or
3. Mark or commemorate any event.
Activities that are exempted:
Commercial, recreational and sporting activities organised by statutory boards and charities with Institution of Public Character status. This means about half the activities that now require permits.
The POA rationalises existing provisions in the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act and the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act.
It moves away from proscribing based on the number of persons involved in an activity. It focuses instead on whether the activity may have a disruptive effect on the public.
There will be designated 'unrestricted areas' where no permits are required, for example, Speakers' Corner.
Penalties for first-time offenders have been relaxed. However, there are stiffer penalties for repeat offenders. Organisers who are repeat offenders can be fined up to $10,000 or jailed up to six months, or both.
Special events

The POA empowers the Minister to declare certain events of national importance as 'special events'. The upcoming Apec summit in November is expected to be one such.
All assemblies and processions within a special event or special event area will require a permit.
Move-on powers to deal with disruptive behaviour

Under current law, the police can do only one of two things:
1. For non-seizable offences, observe and warn a person, and follow up with a post-event investigation. The police cannot stop the offence from taking place.
2. For seizable offences, arrest the person.
The POA finds a middle ground. It empowers a police officer to issue a move-on order to a person whose behaviour was or has been:
1. interfering with trade or business at the place;
2. disorderly, indecent, offensive or threatening;
3. disrupting the peaceable and orderly conduct of an event.
It can also be issued to someone whose behaviour shows he is about to commit an offence, has just committed or is committing an offence.
This part of the POA draws inspiration from various Australian laws.

=> Why not import the laws guaranteeing freedom as well?
However, unlike in the state of Queensland, move-on powers can only be applied to a person's actual behaviour, not his mere presence. Also unlike in Australia, it will not be used to apply to noise or loitering problems which can be addressed using existing laws and community solutions that involve town councils, grassroots bodies and mediation councils.

=> In other words, the poodles will not bother where it matters most!

The move-on order will be in written form, stating the area and time of validity, subject to a maximum of 24 hours. It can be issued only by a police officer whose rank is sergeant or higher.
A person who thinks an order against him is wrong can appeal to the Commanding Officer or the Commissioner of Police. But he must comply with the order first.
If a person complies, there will be no police record against him as the order will not be treated as a police warning.
Filming of security operations

The POA empowers law enforcement officers to stop a person from filming or taking photos of a security operation, or where the safety of an officer is endangered. They can seize the photos or films.
Reason: Such acts can compromise the effectiveness of security operations, jeopardise rescue operations, and blow the covers of covert officers.
Officers who can stop such filming: Police officers above the rank of sergeant; Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau officers; narcotics officers; intelligence officers; immigration officers.
These officers can search a person without a warrant if the latter is suspected of having such a film, and even take him into custody.
They can also enter premises to conduct such a search. Equipment used to make such a film may be seized.
These powers are not meant to be used against filming of routine police activities. If a police officer is misconducting himself, the public can film it. The film can be used for investigation and disciplinary action against the officer if needed.
The powers are not targeted against the filming of acts of civil disobedience. These powers are tightly scoped to where a security operation can be prejudiced or the life of an officer is endangered.
The powers cannot be used to prevent filming of police abuse.
A person who films a relevant activity commits an offence only when he is ordered to stop filming and refuses, or if he is ordered to surrender a film and refuses. There is no question of someone filming an activity, without knowing that he is not supposed to do so, and being prosecuted for it.
Property owners

The onus will be on owners or occupiers of a property to prevent an unlawful activity from taking place on the property, if the police inform them that such an activity is going to take place there. Otherwise they will be guilty of an offence.
Sound principles, evolving framework, Review Page A23

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>MPs call for checks and balances
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>Move-on order and restrictions on filming are most contentious </TR><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Jeremy Au Yong
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>

</TD><TD width=10>

</TD><TD vAlign=bottom>

Mr Low Thia Khiang (above), Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Siew Kum Hong raised objections to two provisions in the new Public Order Act, saying they curbed civil liberties excessively.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD>

View more photos
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THREE Members of the House yesterday opposed the new public order rules, arguing that these gave overarching powers to the police without sufficient checks and balances.
The trio were Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang), Non-Constituency MP Sylvia Lim and Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong.
At the heart of their objections were the two most contentious provisions in the new Public Order Act: the move-on order and restrictions on filming of certain security operations.
The first enables the police to order a person to leave a designated area if they determine that he is about to break the law.
The second allows the police to stop people from filming, distributing or exhibiting films of security operations.
Both provisions, the trio said, went too far in curtailing civil liberties, while leaving the door open to abuse.
Both Ms Lim and Mr Siew cited the case of Mr Ian Tomlinson to illustrate the potential pitfalls of filming restrictions.
Mr Tomlinson, a 47-year-old newspaper vendor, died from a heart attack two weeks ago, after getting caught up in a protest while on the way home.
The incident took place in London on the eve of the G-20 summit.
Ms Lim pointed out that British police initially said he had not clashed with them. This claim was disproved by a passer-by's video clip showing a policeman shoving him in the back.
This triggered an investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
Ms Lim asked: 'If the above case were to happen here, how does this Government expect truth and justice to prevail without the presence of footage recorded by public-spirited citizens?'

What truth do u want? I am the truth! *chey*​

She also said the wording of the law was too broad when it was meant only to target security operations and not activities such as crowd control and other routine police action.
Similarly, Mr Siew and Ms Lim argued that the move-on powers were unnecessary and did not come with sufficient checks.
Mr Siew contended that there was not enough recourse for those who felt they were wrongly targeted. He felt the possibility of complaining to a commanding officer was not enough.
'That would trigger an internal investigation at most, which is not transparent and may not be perceived as being fair and independent,' he said.
In response, Second Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam noted that he and Mr Siew appeared to be coming from different starting points.
For example, on the issue of the police potentially abusing their powers in stopping a person from filming, he said: 'Mr Siew's perception is that all police officers will behave illegally. They'll be smart and they'll direct deletion because they don't want a record of what they have just done.
'I come from the opposite perspective. I think we come from the perspective that our officers are fundamentally honest...'

=> Thambi puts words in others' mouth again to siam question!

Where abuses may occur, he said the Act requires the officer to give reasons to justify why he directed the deletion.
As for Ms Lim's concern that the wording of the law could be read to cover the filming of routine police acts, the minister said he would relook the definition.
But he stressed the main idea was to give the police the powers to act to prevent situations that could compromise their work, and without people being able to argue about it.

=> Sounds like North Korea!

Separately, opposition MP Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir) had a more personal concern about the new law.
He noted how at the end of his election rallies, supporters often carried him and 'off they go' - a move he feared could amount to holding a procession without a permit.
Mr Shanmugam assured him that such an incident would not run afoul of the law.
'The fact that Mr Chiam has not been charged so far shows he's probably not breached the law and he should not have to worry,' he said.

=> In other words, the Familee can choose who to apply the law on? U call this justice?
[email protected]

 

[Watchman]

Error: Host Not Accessible

The web host www.sammyboy.com is not accessible.

Possible sources of this error:
The host name is invalid
There was a DNS error
The web site may be unavailable
You may not be connected to the internet

Please edit the URL, or search for it using Google.

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Shanmugam: Don't focus on the numbers

=> Sure, focus on his Thambi lan cheow since he likes to talk cock!

</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Zakir Hussain
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>

</TD><TD width=10>

</TD><TD vAlign=bottom>

MP Sin asked if the Government had gone for the 'overkill'.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD>

View more photos
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->MR SIN Boon Ann (Tampines GRC) asked if the Government had gone for the 'overkill' when it crafted the Public Order Bill such that even a one-man assembly would need a permit.
Nominated MP Thio Li-ann wondered if an assembly of one, or a procession of two, was 'too wide and extreme a definition, too restrictive of civil liberties'. In Hong Kong, the law defines a procession needing a permit as one with more than 30 persons.
<TABLE width=200 align=left valign="top"><TBODY><TR><TD class=padr8><!-- Vodcast --><!-- Background Story --><STYLE type=text/css> #related .quote {background-color:#E7F7FF; padding:8px;margin:0px 0px 5px 0px;} #related .quote .headline {font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:10px;font-weight:bold; border-bottom:3px double #007BFF; color:#036; text-transform:uppercase; padding-bottom:5px;} #related .quote .text {font-size:11px;color:#036;padding:5px 0px;} </STYLE>Other issues raised and Mr Shanmugam's replies
Mr Sin Boon Ann (Tampines GRC) and Nominated MP Thio Li-ann asked if the decision to deny a permit could be challenged with a judicial review.


Law Minister K. Shanmugam: 'Permit applications must be assessed in context, based on the facts of each case in accordance with the provisions of the Bill. Applicants who are aggrieved can appeal to the minister. The Act does not preclude judicial review.'

... more​

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Ms Irene Ng (Tampines GRC) felt that to label as 'assembly' a one-man show was to 'commit violence against the English language'.
These MPs were addressing a provision under the Public Order Act which defines an assembly requiring a permit to include a demonstration by one person in support of or promoting a cause.
In response, Second Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam said the new law was not about how many people make for a protest, but about averting the impact of a potentially disruptive gathering.
The law does not seek to ban cause-based activities, but asks only that a permit is sought, he said.
He also noted that this 'one man' aspect of the law was not new. He pointed to the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act which applies to public entertainment such as talks, regardless of the number of people involved.
Under the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act, an assembly of five or more is illegal.
Five was used 'as a proxy for a possible disruptive effect', but it was more logical to simply focus on the activity rather than pick an arbitrary number, Mr Shanmugam said.
He cited two examples to make his point. One was during the Hindu Rights Action Force incident in Malaysia, when a local activist protested alone outside the Malaysian High Commission for five days, attracting large groups - including Malaysians who came over.
'In such situations, it's better that the police have the power to tell the person to stop protesting and move on if they believe that his actions could be disruptive to public order or public interest,' he said.
The other was during the Asean Summit in Singapore in 2007, when groups of four people gathered to evade the permit requirements.
'Having a threshold creates an artificial numerical criterion which can lead to a cat-and-mouse game with the police. This distracts the police from their responsibility to secure the safety and security of the event,' he added.
'We debate in this House with the often implicit assumption that people behave reasonably. But the unfortunate truth is that there is always a small minority which gets up to endless farcical antics outside there,' he said.
'If one is too low a number, what number should be chosen? Five? Four? Three?' he added. 'It's better for us simply to focus on the effect of the activities.'

 

[tonychat]

Sinkie, let me tell you. When the govt raise such a rule. It is more than ever to rebel against it and go to the streets to middle finger the PAP for such self-serving rule.

You cannot depend on your opposition to do that.

But as i always say, you bunch of sinkies are balless cowards. So enjoy getting screwed day in and day out. That is what it becomes of being a cowards.

Good luck for having such a life.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

This about sums it up doesn't it?:p

Under the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act, an assembly of five or more is illegal.
Five was used 'as a proxy for a possible disruptive effect', but it was more logical to simply focus on the activity rather than pick an arbitrary number, Mr Shanmugam said.
He cited two examples to make his point. One was during the Hindu Rights Action Force incident in Malaysia, when a local activist protested alone outside the Malaysian High Commission for five days, attracting large groups - including Malaysians who came over.
'In such situations, it's better that the police have the power to tell the person to stop protesting and move on if they believe that his actions could be disruptive to public order or public interest,' he said.
The other was during the Asean Summit in Singapore in 2007, when groups of four people gathered to evade the permit requirements.
'Having a threshold creates an artificial numerical criterion which can lead to a cat-and-mouse game with the police. This distracts the police from their responsibility to secure the safety and security of the event,' he added.
'We debate in this House with the often implicit assumption that people behave reasonably. But the unfortunate truth is that there is always a small minority which gets up to endless farcical antics outside there,' he said.
'If one is too low a number, what number should be chosen? Five? Four? Three?' he added. 'It's better for us simply to focus on the effect of the activities.'

 

[pia]

Sinkie, let me tell you. When the govt raise such a rule. It is more than ever to rebel against it and go to the streets to middle finger the PAP for such self-serving rule.

You cannot depend on your opposition to do that.

But as i always say, you bunch of sinkies are balless cowards. So enjoy getting screwed day in and day out. That is what it becomes of being a cowards.

Good luck for having such a life.

By running off to another country makes me a hero?

 

[annexa]

Good. It's about time. Chee is embarassing the country enough.

 

[annexa]

By running off to another country makes me a hero?

Bro, you know you are my hero. You open my eyes to the beauties I never thought existed!

 

[funglung]

Sinkie, let me tell you. When the govt raise such a rule. It is more than ever to rebel against it and go to the streets to middle finger the PAP for such self-serving rule.

You cannot depend on your opposition to do that.

But as i always say, you bunch of sinkies are balless cowards. So enjoy getting screwed day in and day out. That is what it becomes of being a cowards.

Good luck for having such a life.

LEE KUAN YEW IS NOT ATTACKING CSJ AND OPPOSITION

THAT SHIT HEAD LEE KUAN YEW AND HIS COCKROACHES IN WHITE ARE ATTACKING YOU SINGAPOREANS

TO KEEP HIS POWER SO THAT HE CAN CONTINUE TO FUCK AND SCREW YOU

SO THAT HIS COCKROACHES IN WHITE CAN CONTINUE TO ENRICH THEMSELVES HELPING LKY TO HOLD YOU DOWN SO LKY CAN SCREW YOU SIOK SIOK

YOUR FUTURES ARE GONE WITH THE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS THAT LKY ROBBED FROM YOU AND THROWN AWAY IN HIS FUCKING STUPIDITY THINKING HE IS AN ECONOMIC GIANT WHEN HE IS A FUCKING DWARF





HOW ELSE DID BASTARD LEE KUAN YEW GOT FROM YOU ALL THAT 400-500++ BILLIONS INTO HIS TEMASICK AND GIC?

EVEN MORE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS INTO HIS RESERVES




Sinkies got no balls
You all dare not stand with those that tried to speak for you.
SO HOW MANY TRIED TO SPEAK FOR YOU NOW?

You all dare not give money to them so that they can work for you.
SO HOW MANY CAN WORK FOR YOU NOW?

You all dare not support them publicly so that they can speak for you.
SO HOW MANY PUBLICLY SPEAK FOR YOU NOW?

You all turn your backs on those that spoke out bravely against LKY
LKY hit out at those who tried to speak for you with his kangaroo courts
You turn your backs and not support them with money and courage.


SO HOW MANY TRIED TO SPEAK FOR YOU NOW?
SO HOW MANY CAN WORK FOR YOU NOW?
SO HOW MANY PUBLICLY SPEAK FOR YOU NOW?


You let them be beaten and bankrupted because you all have no balls
NOW YOU GETTING YOUR BALLS CUT OFF FROM YOU AND YOU AND YOUR FAMILY RAPED AND FUCKED BY LEE KUAN YEW AND HIS COCKROACHES IN WHITE


Why complain now?

Your 400-500++ billions sucked and bled into LKY Temasick and GIC

And even more billions are currently sucked and bled so that LKY can use those money to bastardised and pay his kangaroo courts and running dogs to bleed even more billions from you in future

You got what you all deserved
for your lack of balls

 

[shelltox]

Hurray hurray hurray, finally we get those irritating people of the streets so that the police and concentrate on catching Mas selamat.

 

[halsey02]

Sinkie, let me tell you. When the govt raise such a rule. It is more than ever to rebel against it and go to the streets to middle finger the PAP for such self-serving rule.

You cannot depend on your opposition to do that.

But as i always say, you bunch of sinkies are balless cowards. So enjoy getting screwed day in and day out. That is what it becomes of being a cowards.

Good luck for having such a life.

Amen............!:o

 

[pia]

Bro, you know you are my hero. You open my eyes to the beauties I never thought existed!

Thnks for the support :o Looks like u're still my No. 1 fan in that thread

My post was actually a dig at the resident sinkie basher. He displays all the traits of a sinkie, but after removing himself physically, he turns on his own kind with vengeance. Either a deliberate or subconsious shutting of door to what he himself really is. 五十步笑百步

I may be in Indo, but I still identify myself as a Singaporean. I love my country and my people. It's the leeches who took advantage of a people's yearning for a better life foregoing personal liberties for "national development" which irk me.

 

[tonychat]

The problem is you are not ashamed of those behavior of a sinkie and try to show your patriotism.

If those sinkies are patriotic, they should stand up together and go against the govt that screw them. But no, You do not understand the behavior of a sinkie.

Try to observe and talk to a few sinkies in their land and see what is their reaction. Most will give you a reply that fit a coward.

I do not wish to mix around with people like that as i know that a country filled with such coward, the whole country will fall. Do not tell me about patriotism when your own people refuse to stand up what that is belong to them, their country.

I mixed with the Thais and i know what real patriotism is when they stand up against a leader ( thaksin) that try to take advantage of their land based on his self serving motive.

I do not wish to mixed with a coward who dare not stand up against their own useless govt, it will disgrace me and lower the quality of me being a human being.

I am not you, i am happy in my new land and will do my best to help the new land that i am in where my own land and the people in it betray themselves.

I am here to show you bunch of sinkies how worthless and useless you are where your own govt screw your own ass and instead of standing up and going against them, you bend down even further for them to screw.

I believe many people and even the future humans who are going to be born will not want to go through such life and only a sinkie will allow himself such humiliation.

I may be in Indo, but I still identify myself as a Singaporean. I love my country and my people. It's the leeches who took advantage of a people's yearning for a better life foregoing personal liberties for "national development" which irk me.

PLease make this clear.

It is those Coward, Useless and Worthless sinkies that allow the leeches to leech them, they got no balls to prevent them for leeching. It is not the govt fault to take advantage of them when the sinkies are too stupid and coward to stop them from their evil.

PLEASE MAKE THAT CLEAR!!!!!

 

[SIFU]

By running off to another country makes me a hero?

to that CB kia tonychat, becoming a vegetarian is also a hero..

as long as u do same as him = hero = unsinkiefied

diff from him = sinkie

 

[pia]

It is not the govt fault to take advantage of them when the sinkies are too stupid and coward to stop them from their evil.

PLEASE MAKE THAT CLEAR!!!!!

So you justify raping a retard girl saying it's not your fault, but becos she's too stupid to stop you?

I'm not proud of sinkie behaviour, and by the same definition, your behaviour.

I'm doing my part for Thailand and Indo as well, not just S'pore. But that doesn't mean I think all their people are perfect, or all of S'poreans imperfect.

You will do fine by recognising there are imperfections in the world, and not label something as totally imperfect.

 

[funglung]

The problem is you are not ashamed of those behavior of a sinkie and try to show your patriotism.

If those sinkies are patriotic, they should stand up together and go against the govt that screw them. But no, You do not understand the behavior of a sinkie.

Try to observe and talk to a few sinkies in their land and see what is their reaction. Most will give you a reply that fit a coward.

I do not wish to mix around with people like that as i know that a country filled with such coward, the whole country will fall. Do not tell me about patriotism when your own people refuse to stand up what that is belong to them, their country.

I mixed with the Thais and i know what real patriotism is when they stand up against a leader ( thaksin) that try to take advantage of their land based on his self serving motive.

I do not wish to mixed with a coward who dare not stand up against their own useless govt, it will disgrace me and lower the quality of me being a human being.

I am not you, i am happy in my new land and will do my best to help the new land that i am in where my own land and the people in it betray themselves.

I am here to show you bunch of sinkies how worthless and useless you are where your own govt screw your own ass and instead of standing up and going against them, you bend down even further for them to screw.

I believe many people and even the future humans who are going to be born will not want to go through such life and only a sinkie will allow himself such humiliation.



PLease make this clear.

It is those Coward, Useless and Worthless sinkies that allow the leeches to leech them, they got no balls to prevent them for leeching. It is not the govt fault to take advantage of them when the sinkies are too stupid and coward to stop them from their evil.

PLEASE MAKE THAT CLEAR!!!!!

Well said





HOW ELSE DID BASTARD LEE KUAN YEW GOT FROM YOU ALL THAT 400-500++ BILLIONS INTO HIS TEMASICK AND GIC?

EVEN MORE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS INTO HIS RESERVES




Sinkies got no balls
You all dare not stand with those that tried to speak for you.
SO HOW MANY TRIED TO SPEAK FOR YOU NOW?

You all dare not give money to them so that they can work for you.
SO HOW MANY CAN WORK FOR YOU NOW?

You all dare not support them publicly so that they can speak for you.
SO HOW MANY PUBLICLY SPEAK FOR YOU NOW?

You all turn your backs on those that spoke out bravely against LKY
LKY hit out at those who tried to speak for you with his kangaroo courts
You turn your backs and not support them with money and courage.


SO HOW MANY TRIED TO SPEAK FOR YOU NOW?
SO HOW MANY CAN WORK FOR YOU NOW?
SO HOW MANY PUBLICLY SPEAK FOR YOU NOW?


You let them be beaten and bankrupted because you all have no balls
NOW YOU GETTING YOUR BALLS CUT OFF FROM YOU AND YOU AND YOUR FAMILY RAPED AND FUCKED BY LEE KUAN YEW AND HIS COCKROACHES IN WHITE


Why complain now?

Your 400-500++ billions sucked and bled into LKY Temasick and GIC

And even more billions are currently sucked and bled so that LKY can use those money to bastardised and pay his kangaroo courts and running dogs to bleed even more billions from you in future

You got what you all deserved
for your lack of balls

 

[Zombie]

By running off to another country makes me a hero?

Seeing trouble, the person
first to run - Aero - hot air (but keep almost everything)
last to run - Zero - dead broke
in the middle - Hero - got some hot air and usually running broke.

 

[tonychat]

So you justify raping a retard girl saying it's not your fault, but becos she's too stupid to stop you?

I'm not proud of sinkie behaviour, and by the same definition, your behaviour.

I'm doing my part for Thailand and Indo as well, not just S'pore. But that doesn't mean I think all their people are perfect, or all of S'poreans imperfect.

You will do fine by recognising there are imperfections in the world, and not label something as totally imperfect.

PLease argue in the correct context. SInkies are not retard. Even a retard will remove himself when he is being bullied.

But sinkie still allow themselves to be screwed. That is not normal. And that is not just one person, it is a whole god damn population.

Whether u like my behavior or not it is non of my concern. That is my stand and my point and i will continue to do that as long as i can.

Sinkies are totally a disgrace of the world. They are too selfish to stand up for themselves. If you want to know more why sinkies behave like that, then go and understand how a sinkie thinks, being educated and being brought up.

As what funglung said, 400 billions , they can take as they want , use as they want. How did they come about. from your patriotic sinkies.

I dun give in to any shit by just showing some blind patriotism without using much brain.

Sinkies are too screwed up to be even considered as an imperfection. It is considered a curse to me.

By the way, how i will do fine is up to me to decide and not for you to tell me how i should do to be fine. Make that clear as well...

 

[SIFU]

just like how i like to fuck u upside down, CB kia tonychat :oIo::oIo::oIo: