- Joined
- Jan 26, 2014
- Messages
- 228
- Points
- 28
You are right Tommy Koh does look like a transsexual.
-
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.
Tommy Koh says gay ban should be repeal. ISD targeting him?
- Thread starter steffychun
- Start date
You are right Tommy Koh does look like a transsexual.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 38,209
- Points
- 113
Why all these elites sons turn gay? Hsien Yang, Tommy who's next? GCT?
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,731
- Points
- 113
kee chiu maybe
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 38,209
- Points
- 113
He has daughter. Lesbian?
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 15,733
- Points
- 83
Sweat kiat n Lawrence looks like an item, Casio is just the promiscuous slut between the sheets
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2013
- Messages
- 11,371
- Points
- 113
Oh yeah i love it when the coolies continue to obey the white mans laws.
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2017
- Messages
- 17,227
- Points
- 113
The elder of his two sons in pic below. Born and raised in New York. Wore earrings in his teens. Runs two magazines, one on watches (Revolution) and another, The Rake, that focuses on men's lifestyle, fashion, pursuits, etc. As an impressionable teen, hung around in Studio 54, a famous disco in New York which was modelled after NY's gay night clubs and whose owner, Steve Rubell, wanted it to be "very, very, very bisexual".
Studio 54 could have had a huge impact on his life. Or just maybe, it was the other way around. He could have been drawn to Studio 54 because of his "born like that" predispositions. Just to be safe, his wife, Jocelyn Shu, should make sure that there's no leftover shit on his dick the next time she takes it into her mouth.
So the first question for the father: is his son a closet gay or a bisexual? A disclosure by him would help explain this man's "sympathy" and open support for a man wanting to suck another man's cock, or for a man to want to insert his dick into an organ that nature or god designed specially for shitting.
BTW, the son went to Vassar, a college (term for university in the US), at 16. Studied econs in his first year, stats in his second and then switched to Darthmouth College in his third year. His father used his connections to get him a job that the son wanted to try out, a cattle ranch in Montana.
So the second question for the father: did he used his connections with Singapore government figures that resulted in his son being given the favourable treatment of, unlike the sons of working class Singaporeans, being allowed to complete his University education (in the US) before completing National Service?
Studio 54 could have had a huge impact on his life. Or just maybe, it was the other way around. He could have been drawn to Studio 54 because of his "born like that" predispositions. Just to be safe, his wife, Jocelyn Shu, should make sure that there's no leftover shit on his dick the next time she takes it into her mouth.
So the first question for the father: is his son a closet gay or a bisexual? A disclosure by him would help explain this man's "sympathy" and open support for a man wanting to suck another man's cock, or for a man to want to insert his dick into an organ that nature or god designed specially for shitting.
BTW, the son went to Vassar, a college (term for university in the US), at 16. Studied econs in his first year, stats in his second and then switched to Darthmouth College in his third year. His father used his connections to get him a job that the son wanted to try out, a cattle ranch in Montana.
So the second question for the father: did he used his connections with Singapore government figures that resulted in his son being given the favourable treatment of, unlike the sons of working class Singaporeans, being allowed to complete his University education (in the US) before completing National Service?
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 38,209
- Points
- 113
Thum PJ also studied in the US at 16.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 15,733
- Points
- 83
anyone who followed tommy koh would know he is no advocate of human right anymore than amos yee is a champion of parental caning. so out of the blue, of all looud ex diplomats, why would he, of all kalefe, conveniently chipped in his 2 cts and ask bummers to sue the government. all wayang. has the mosque and church choosen to abandon the dishonrable son that they need more than 13 hawker centers and bullshit mederka card to booster their fortune?
I have a long memory unlike 70% of my fellow Sinkies. I remember when the Arts Community cried out literally for his moral support in the Josef Ng's performance art fiasco where he snipped off some of his pubic hair. The PAP went down on him like a ton of bricks! Tommy Koh purred meekly in concurrence! Advocate of human rights is not something I associate with Tommy Koh! He is just another highly paid and high profile PAP appointee. It is pukingly disgusting to even think he is a liberal despite so many years abroad as ambassador-at-larger and before that UN Perm Rep. To come out of the blue and basically says he supports a legal challenge to Section 377A is abnormal and uncharacteristic behaviour. More than meets the eyes!
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2014
- Messages
- 251
- Points
- 43
I have a long memory unlike 70% of my fellow Sinkies. I remember when the Arts Community cried out literally for his moral support in the Josef Ng's performance art fiasco where he snipped off some of his pubic hair. The PAP went down on him like a ton of bricks! Tommy Koh purred meekly in concurrence! Advocate of human rights is not something I associate with Tommy Koh! He is just another highly paid and high profile PAP appointee. It is pukingly disgusting to even think he is a liberal despite so many years abroad as ambassador-at-larger and before that UN Perm Rep. To come out of the blue and basically says he supports a legal challenge to Section 377A is abnormal and uncharacteristic behaviour. More than meets the eyes!
Definitely more than meet the eyes as Tommy Koh is a known porlumpar.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 38,209
- Points
- 113
Tommy is not. Tommy never joined the government or was a perm sec.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,731
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 38,209
- Points
- 113
He earned the money but never sued.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2018
- Messages
- 29,394
- Points
- 113
Decision on Section 377A ‘a matter for Parliament’: Shanmugam
image: 
Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam speaks to reporters at an event on Saturday (Sep 8).
09 Sep 2018 10:41AM (Updated: 09 Sep 2018 10:50AM)
Share this content
SINGAPORE: Any decision on Section 377A of Singapore’s Penal Code is “a matter for Parliament”, said Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam on Saturday (Sep 8) at a Ministry of Home Affairs event.
Mr Shanmugam was speaking to reporters for the second time on the subject, since a landmark ruling by India’s Supreme Court on Thursday repealing a British colonial-era ban on gay sex.
“In the Singapore context, the Section 377A was challenged as being unconstitutional some years ago, 2014. The Supreme Court decided that it was constitutional, it was not invalid. So whether you decide to keep it, whether you decide to repeal it, amend it, it’s a matter for parliament.”
Mr Shanumgam added that depending on legislation, “public opinion is often relevant” when it comes to public policy making.
Under section 377A, a man found to have committed an act of "gross indecency" with another man could be jailed for up to two years.
On Friday, Mr Shanmugam said that while there is a growing minority who want 377A to be repealed, Singaporeans remain "deeply split" on the matter.
Advertisement
“Singapore ... on this issue, it is a deeply split society. The majority oppose to any change to section 377A - they are opposed to removing it.
“A minority - I have to say, a growing minority - want it to be repealed. The Government is in the middle,” he added.
His comments came after diplomat Tommy Koh, who is Ambassador-at-Large at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, had responded to the Indian ruling by encouraging Singapore's gay community to “try again” to challenge 377A. Previous legal challenges in 2014 had failed.
Professor Koh made the comments in response to a Facebook post by a senior Singapore-based academic on India's landmark ruling on Thursday. The law does not apply to homosexual acts between women.
Source: CNA/mn
Tagged Topics
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...377a-matter-for-parliament-shanmugam-10698992
image: 
Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam speaks to reporters at an event on Saturday (Sep 8).
09 Sep 2018 10:41AM (Updated: 09 Sep 2018 10:50AM)
Share this content
SINGAPORE: Any decision on Section 377A of Singapore’s Penal Code is “a matter for Parliament”, said Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam on Saturday (Sep 8) at a Ministry of Home Affairs event.
Mr Shanmugam was speaking to reporters for the second time on the subject, since a landmark ruling by India’s Supreme Court on Thursday repealing a British colonial-era ban on gay sex.
“In the Singapore context, the Section 377A was challenged as being unconstitutional some years ago, 2014. The Supreme Court decided that it was constitutional, it was not invalid. So whether you decide to keep it, whether you decide to repeal it, amend it, it’s a matter for parliament.”
Mr Shanumgam added that depending on legislation, “public opinion is often relevant” when it comes to public policy making.
Under section 377A, a man found to have committed an act of "gross indecency" with another man could be jailed for up to two years.
On Friday, Mr Shanmugam said that while there is a growing minority who want 377A to be repealed, Singaporeans remain "deeply split" on the matter.
Advertisement
“Singapore ... on this issue, it is a deeply split society. The majority oppose to any change to section 377A - they are opposed to removing it.
“A minority - I have to say, a growing minority - want it to be repealed. The Government is in the middle,” he added.
His comments came after diplomat Tommy Koh, who is Ambassador-at-Large at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, had responded to the Indian ruling by encouraging Singapore's gay community to “try again” to challenge 377A. Previous legal challenges in 2014 had failed.
Professor Koh made the comments in response to a Facebook post by a senior Singapore-based academic on India's landmark ruling on Thursday. The law does not apply to homosexual acts between women.
Source: CNA/mn
Tagged Topics
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...377a-matter-for-parliament-shanmugam-10698992
Similar threads
