Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by AndrewPKYap @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 10:55:58 +0800

AndrewPKYap — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 10:55:58 +0800

Originally posted by maurizio13:

Lee had his case thrown out of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice when he tried to sue Devan Nair for defamation due to articles printed in Globe and Mail. He must have suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of an impartial justice system.

Lee v. Globe and Mail, 2001 CanLII 28035 (ON S.C.)

Ontario Supreme Court

Lee v. Globe and Mail,

Date: 2001-01-30

Lee

and

The Globe and Mail et al.

Superior Court of Justice, Swinton J. January 30, 2001

Howard W. Winkler and Odette S. Soriano, for plaintiff/moving party.

Patricia D.S. Jackson and Peter R. Balasubramaniam, for defendants/responding parties The Globe and Mail, Thomson Canada Limited, William Thorsell, Margaret Wente and Marcus Gee.

Sean Dewart, for defendant Nair.

[1] SWINTON J.:—The plaintiff, Lee Kuan Yew, has brought a motion to strike paras. 6(p), 6(q) and 7 of the Statement of Defence of The Globe and Mail, Thomson Canada Limited, William Thorsell, Margaret Wente and Marcus Gee (the “Thomson defendants”) in this libel action.

[2] The action was brought as a result of an article which appeared in The Globe and Mail on March 29, 1999, reporting an interview with the defendant Devan Nair, who was the President of the Republic of Singapore from October 1981 to March 1985. The plaintiff Lee Kuan Yew was the Prime Minister of the Republic of Singapore from August 1965 to November 1990, and he is now the Senior Minister for the Republic of Singapore. According to the article, Mr. Nair, now a resident of Canada, decided to break his silence and to speak out on the continuing suppression of legitimate dissent in Singapore, drawing on his personal experience.

[3] In the course of the interview, Mr. Nair made certain statements which are alleged to be defamatory. Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Statement of Claim are important to the determination of this motion:

8. On or about the 29th day of March, 1999 the Defendants falsely and maliciously published the following words on page A12 of The Globe in an article entitled Singapore Sage, which are defamatory of the Plaintiff personally and in the way of his profession as a politician:

Singapore Sage

(1) Then, in 1985 came a shocking break. Mr. Lee told Singapore’s parliament that Mr. Nair had resigned because he was an alcoholic, a charge Mr. Nair now calls a baseless slur.

(2) But before he could speak out, Mr. Nair found himself at the centre of a rumour‑mongering campaign that labelled him a drinker and a womanizer. He says he was neither, and he suspects that Mr. Lee had government doctors slip him hallucinatory drugs to make him appear befuddled. “Lee Kuan Yew decided: This man is going to be a threat, so I’d better begin a total demolishment of his character. He’s very good at that.”

9. The Plaintiff pleads that the words in their natural and ordinary meaning meant and were understood to mean the following:

(1) The plaintiff, as the Prime Minister of Singapore, invented false allegations that Mr. Nair was an alcoholic for the purpose of destroying Mr. Nair’s good character;

(2) The Plaintiff, as the Prime Minister of Singapore, invented false allegations concerning alcohol for the purpose of destroying Mr. Nair’s good character;

(3) The Plaintiff, as the Prime Minister of Singapore, invented false allegations that Mr. Nair was a womanizer for the purpose of destroying Mr. Nair’s good character;

(4) The Plaintiff, as the Prime Minister of Singapore, maliciously directed government doctors to slip Mr. Nair hallucinatory drugs in order to make him appear to be befuddled as part of a scheme to destroy his good character.

[4] Mr. Nair has yet to file a Statement of Defence. However, in their Statement of Defence, the Thomson defendants have pleaded the defences of justification, fair comment and qualified privilege.

...............................................................

Conclusion

[23] For these reasons, the motion is dismissed. If the parties wish to make submissions with respect to costs, they may do so in writing or make an appointment with my secretary.

Motion dismissed.

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2001/2001canlii28035/2001canlii28035.html

The despot sells his propaganda and his dogs repeat them but only silliporeans believe anything they say.

They are not subjected to his "social engineering" in Canada. To them he is no better than TT Durai for taking such massive amounts of public money for his own pocket.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by eagle @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:49:59 +0800

eagle — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:49:59 +0800

Originally posted by maurizio13:

All these damages awarded were meted out by Singapore judges in Singapore courts, which was already tainted with accusations of judicial bias.

If our leaders want to show the world how impartial our courts are, they should take these issues to another impartial world court.

Strange logic this be, if you accuse someone (Mr. A) that he is a liar, Mr. A brings a legal suit against you to which he is also the judge.

How impartial can such a system be?

The plantiff is both the judge, jury and executioner.

If the case were to be put on trial here, I would suggest Wall Street Journal negotiate for an out of court settlement and a letter of apology.

well.... DIY is always cheaper

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by maurizio13 @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:33:12 +0800

maurizio13 — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:33:12 +0800

Lee had his case thrown out of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice when he tried to sue Devan Nair for defamation due to articles printed in Globe and Mail. He must have suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of an impartial justice system.

Lee v. Globe and Mail, 2001 CanLII 28035 (ON S.C.)

Ontario Supreme Court

Lee v. Globe and Mail,

Date: 2001-01-30

Lee

and

The Globe and Mail et al.

Superior Court of Justice, Swinton J. January 30, 2001

Howard W. Winkler and Odette S. Soriano, for plaintiff/moving party.

Patricia D.S. Jackson and Peter R. Balasubramaniam, for defendants/responding parties The Globe and Mail, Thomson Canada Limited, William Thorsell, Margaret Wente and Marcus Gee.

Sean Dewart, for defendant Nair.

[1] SWINTON J.:—The plaintiff, Lee Kuan Yew, has brought a motion to strike paras. 6(p), 6(q) and 7 of the Statement of Defence of The Globe and Mail, Thomson Canada Limited, William Thorsell, Margaret Wente and Marcus Gee (the “Thomson defendants”) in this libel action.

[2] The action was brought as a result of an article which appeared in The Globe and Mail on March 29, 1999, reporting an interview with the defendant Devan Nair, who was the President of the Republic of Singapore from October 1981 to March 1985. The plaintiff Lee Kuan Yew was the Prime Minister of the Republic of Singapore from August 1965 to November 1990, and he is now the Senior Minister for the Republic of Singapore. According to the article, Mr. Nair, now a resident of Canada, decided to break his silence and to speak out on the continuing suppression of legitimate dissent in Singapore, drawing on his personal experience.

[3] In the course of the interview, Mr. Nair made certain statements which are alleged to be defamatory. Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Statement of Claim are important to the determination of this motion:

8. On or about the 29th day of March, 1999 the Defendants falsely and maliciously published the following words on page A12 of The Globe in an article entitled Singapore Sage, which are defamatory of the Plaintiff personally and in the way of his profession as a politician:

Singapore Sage

(1) Then, in 1985 came a shocking break. Mr. Lee told Singapore’s parliament that Mr. Nair had resigned because he was an alcoholic, a charge Mr. Nair now calls a baseless slur.

(2) But before he could speak out, Mr. Nair found himself at the centre of a rumour‑mongering campaign that labelled him a drinker and a womanizer. He says he was neither, and he suspects that Mr. Lee had government doctors slip him hallucinatory drugs to make him appear befuddled. “Lee Kuan Yew decided: This man is going to be a threat, so I’d better begin a total demolishment of his character. He’s very good at that.”

9. The Plaintiff pleads that the words in their natural and ordinary meaning meant and were understood to mean the following:

(1) The plaintiff, as the Prime Minister of Singapore, invented false allegations that Mr. Nair was an alcoholic for the purpose of destroying Mr. Nair’s good character;

(2) The Plaintiff, as the Prime Minister of Singapore, invented false allegations concerning alcohol for the purpose of destroying Mr. Nair’s good character;

(3) The Plaintiff, as the Prime Minister of Singapore, invented false allegations that Mr. Nair was a womanizer for the purpose of destroying Mr. Nair’s good character;

(4) The Plaintiff, as the Prime Minister of Singapore, maliciously directed government doctors to slip Mr. Nair hallucinatory drugs in order to make him appear to be befuddled as part of a scheme to destroy his good character.

[4] Mr. Nair has yet to file a Statement of Defence. However, in their Statement of Defence, the Thomson defendants have pleaded the defences of justification, fair comment and qualified privilege.

...............................................................

Conclusion

[23] For these reasons, the motion is dismissed. If the parties wish to make submissions with respect to costs, they may do so in writing or make an appointment with my secretary.

Motion dismissed.

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2001/2001canlii28035/2001canlii28035.html

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by AndrewPKYap @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:22:12 +0800

AndrewPKYap — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:22:12 +0800

Originally posted by maurizio13:

Even the Court of Appeal of Ontario believes that there was evidence to judicial bias relating to political cases.

[3] The respondent’s position was accurately summarized in the application judge’s reasons as follows:

While Oakwell acknowledges that Enernorth has tendered some evidence relating to possible government interference in trials, all of that evidence applies only to political cases. The case at bar is a commercial case. There is no evidence that Singapore courts are biased when deciding a commercial case between private parties.

http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2006/june/C43898.htm

"all of that evidence applies only to political cases"

says it all doesn't it?

Despot run country, despicable.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by maurizio13 @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:13:04 +0800

maurizio13 — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:13:04 +0800

Even the Court of Appeal of Ontario believes that there was evidence to judicial bias relating to political cases.

[3] The respondent’s position was accurately summarized in the application judge’s reasons as follows:

While Oakwell acknowledges that Enernorth has tendered some evidence relating to possible government interference in trials, all of that evidence applies only to political cases. The case at bar is a commercial case. There is no evidence that Singapore courts are biased when deciding a commercial case between private parties.

http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2006/june/C43898.htm

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by maurizio13 @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 08:50:22 +0800

maurizio13 — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 08:50:22 +0800

If old man Lee really wanted to show how independent our judicial system is, he should let another democratic country's judicial system decide. If someone makes accusation against you, how credible is it if you refute the claim yourself? Putting the case through a judicial process which is ultimately determined by you bears no credence to faith of independence in the judicial system.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by AndrewPKYap @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 07:40:43 +0800

AndrewPKYap — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 07:40:43 +0800

Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:

Lee Kuan Yew wants to encourage youth to think about Singapore's future.

But when people talk politics, criticise him, he want to fucking sue.

People scared already, don't talk politics.

Become apathetic and ignorant, then fucking immigrant.

So what the fuck does Lee Kuan Yew want?

Does he want to sue or encourage people to care about Singapore political affairs?

What does the old fucker want?

I am in the dark.

He doesn't want to be another TT Durai that is for sure even though compared to him, TT took only peanut amounts of public money... so he is hard at work selling his propaganda and suing people that criticises him.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:34:26 +0800

Poh Ah Pak — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:34:26 +0800

Lee Kuan Yew wants to encourage youth to think about Singapore's future.

But when people talk politics, criticise him, he want to fucking sue.

People scared already, don't talk politics.

Become apathetic and ignorant, then fucking immigrant.

So what the fuck does Lee Kuan Yew want?

Does he want to sue or encourage people to care about Singapore political affairs?

What does the old fucker want?

I am in the dark.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:25:36 +0800

Poh Ah Pak — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:25:36 +0800

Democracy in Singapore
June 26, 2008; Page A14

Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore can rightly be proud of many achievements, but full democracy is not one of them. The city-state he founded in 1965 and led as Prime Minister until 1990 is economically prosperous and its citizens enjoy a range of freedoms. Political dissent is not among them.

Which makes a recent David vs. Goliath exchange between one of the country's few opposition politicians and Mr. Lee worth noting. The dialogue took place in a courtroom and is therefore privileged – which means we can report on it without risking a lawsuit, which Mr. Lee often files against critics. Audio files are available on the Singapore Democratic Party's Web site, and a partial transcript is available at Singapore Rebel, an independent blog.

The setting was a hearing to assess damages against Chee Soon Juan, head of the Singapore Democratic Party, and his sister and colleague, Chee Siok Chin. In 2006, the Chees lost a defamation suit brought by Mr. Lee and his son, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, over an article they published in their party newsletter that was interpreted by the court to imply corruption on the part of the government. In last month's hearing, the elder Mr. Lee, who holds the title of Minister Mentor, was cross-examined by Mr. Chee, who was representing himself.

Mr. Chee is no orator, and on one level the dissident was no match for the eloquent Mr. Lee. But when the subject turned to the moral underpinnings of democracy – freedoms of speech, assembly and association – the debate went game, set and match to Mr. Chee.

Mr. Chee set out his philosophy while questioning Mr. Lee: "What I'm interested in is justice, the rule of law, because ultimately it is not about you, Mr. Lee. It is not about me. It's about the people of Singapore, it is about this country and everything we stand for. You and I will pass on, but I can tell you, the practice of the rule of law, the entire concept of justice, democracy – that is going to last for all eternity."

Mr. Lee didn't respond directly to those assertions, choosing instead to cite the International Bar Association's decision to "honor" Singapore by holding its annual conference there last year and noted a letter from the association's president saying "how impressed they were by the standards they found to obtain in the judiciary."

Elsewhere in the hearing, Mr. Lee defended his string of defamation suits against opposition politicians and the press: "They know me by now," Mr. Lee said, referring to the people of Singapore, "that if anybody impugns the integrity of the government, of which I was the prime minister, I must sue."

He went on: "There are various parts of this government which do not comply with Western practices, including the law of libel. But it is a system that has worked." Mr. Lee has never lost a libel suit. He and his son are currently suing the Far Eastern Economic Review, a sister publication of this newspaper, and its editor, Hugo Restall.

Our reading is that the Minister Mentor sounded more than a tad defensive – no less so than in his characterization of Mr. Chee, who has been bankrupted as a result of lawsuits by Mr. Lee and other politicians. He called Mr. Chee, a "liar, a cheat and altogether an unscrupulous man." Not to mention "a near-psychopath." Mr. Chee, for his part, referred to Mr. Lee as a "pitiable figure."

It's hard to know what Singaporeans make of all this. Mr. Lee is widely revered as the father of their country, and Mr. Chee is often scorned for his aggressive tactics. But at least, thanks to the Internet, they are able to read the exchange and make up their own minds.

So, too, in the case of Gopalan Nair, which is making its way through the courts now. Mr. Nair is a former Workers' Party candidate. He is now a U.S. citizen and online advocate for media freedom in Singapore. He traveled to the city-state to attend Mr. Chee's hearing last month and recorded his thoughts on his blog, where he expressed his contempt for the court proceedings and challenged Mr. Lee to sue him.

On May 31, he was arrested and interrogated. On June 2, he was charged with insulting Judge Belinda Ang, who presided over the Chee hearing, by email. He was released on June 5, six days after his initial arrest, and charged on June 12 with insulting another judge in a separate, 2006 email. Last week, the court changed the first charge and specified that the offending remarks about Judge Ang were made on a blog, not by email.

Mr. Nair's case is scheduled to go to court in mid-July. Meanwhile, Mr. Chee was just released from jail, where he served 11 days for "scandalizing" the court during his questioning of Mr. Lee. His sister served 10 days. The court has yet to set the amount of monetary damages in the defamation case. When it does, we'll know the price of political dissent these days in Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121443744095705301.html

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by soleachip @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:18:11 +0800

soleachip — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:18:11 +0800

Originally posted by likedatosocan:

What the happen to IBA huh?

How the come IBA not sued huh ?

Or maybe I wrongs?

72 pages a lot words to find sue-able or nots ?

I no no ler.

The IBA's human-rights institute issued a report last week on "human rights, democracy and the rule of law" in the city-state. Like numerous past observers, the IBA finds that Singapore limits political speech and assembly and exercises strict controls on the media.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by soleachip @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:09:45 +0800

soleachip — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:09:45 +0800

This could be one of articles at work : Democracy in Singapore

Excerpt:

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by reyes @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 00:57:24 +0800

reyes — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 00:57:24 +0800

is there any govt in the world that go around sueing journalist and publisher for defamation?

why our govt dont openly engage this WST or FEER in opeb debate and set the record straight.

somehow i always associate this strategy use by former NKF CEO to sue others in other to conceal the truth.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Lin Yu @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:46:33 +0800

Lin Yu — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:46:33 +0800

like those people horse betting says "SURE WIN!!!"

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by pearlie27 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:43:34 +0800

pearlie27 — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:43:34 +0800

Originally posted by likedatosocan:

What the happen to IBA huh?

How the come IBA not sued huh ?

Or maybe I wrongs?

72 pages a lot words to find sue-able or nots ?

I no no ler.

Being IBA of course it should know how to word its report properly!

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by likedatosocan @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 22:17:25 +0800

likedatosocan — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 22:17:25 +0800

What the happen to IBA huh?

How the come IBA not sued huh ?

Or maybe I wrongs?

72 pages a lot words to find sue-able or nots ?

I no no ler.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by ulquiorra87 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:16:52 +0800

ulquiorra87 — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:16:52 +0800

Governments and Judiciaries have no need for reputation in the first place. I'm pretty sure Bush is probably the most widely critisized person in the world but you dont see him suing his own citizens for defamation. Valid or invalid i find it stupid to see a governing body sue citizens it is supposed to serve.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:05:01 +0800

Poh Ah Pak — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:05:01 +0800

I have not read the WSJ articles regarding Singapore judiciary.

But if there is valid grounds that there is slander being carried out, there should be a proper response to it.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by SPLIT SECOND @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 20:37:04 +0800

SPLIT SECOND — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 20:37:04 +0800

Originally posted by Meat Pao:

It is very important that Singapore persue this course of action, and persue it robustly.

This is of a fundamental interest for Singapore as a nation.

This lawsuit will send a consistent and powerful signal.

Despite internal debates and tinkering about the future path of political liberalization, democratization, and the like, this issue should be fully and firmly in the hands of Singaporeans, and on a time and pace of their own choosing.

I fully support Singapore AG, in his interview, when he mentioned this exact point himself, that Singapore has room for further changes and reforms, but one of which the shape, form, pace, and timing, should be determined by consensus of Singaporeans, instead of ceding it to foreigners who wish to impose their views.

It is very important to close ranks and support this move.

Fundamental core interest of Singapore.

Meat Pao

fully support this, but let wait for the outcome of this case. I dont think getting and ang mo is easy. But things make get worst as Gopalan nair will take this chance to associate himself with WST.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Meat Pao @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 18:44:18 +0800

Meat Pao — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 18:44:18 +0800

It is very important that Singapore persue this course of action, and persue it robustly.

This is of a fundamental interest for Singapore as a nation.

This lawsuit will send a consistent and powerful signal.

Despite internal debates and tinkering about the future path of political liberalization, democratization, and the like, this issue should be fully and firmly in the hands of Singaporeans, and on a time and pace of their own choosing.

I fully support Singapore AG, in his interview, when he mentioned this exact point himself, that Singapore has room for further changes and reforms, but one of which the shape, form, pace, and timing, should be determined by consensus of Singaporeans, instead of ceding it to foreigners who wish to impose their views.

It is very important to close ranks and support this move.

Fundamental core interest of Singapore.

Meat Pao

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by AndrewPKYap @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 17:52:30 +0800

AndrewPKYap — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 17:52:30 +0800

AFP: SKorea on alert for NKorea shift after Kim's stroke

SKorea on alert for NKorea shift after Kim's stroke

and the old dying despot here was treated at the hospital but out now (too bad)....

Stare "up" for what? Doesn't he know evil people should look "down?

Le's hope these depots go into coma and suffer... for persecuting dissidents, martyrs and victims of conscience

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by SPLIT SECOND @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 15:38:48 +0800

SPLIT SECOND — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 15:38:48 +0800

Originally posted by angel7030:

Yalor, actually singapore govt beri stupid one, the more you sue the journal, the more famous the journal become, my daddy and his frens alway ask my brother who do business in HK to buy the banned far east economic review for them...peoples like to read banned papers and journals, in fact their sales had improved tremedously after singapore banned them. So they dun mind paid a bit so as to get free advertisment and marketing fees, and become most wanted journal around the region.

itz like someone who wen to jail and wrote a book, it became a huge success.

The people they are going to sue, will turn this around and make themselves popular by going to CNN, Fox news and BBC shouting " protect freel Journalism ethics and rights" . They will then start to publish their own articles regarding the defamation case week by week, most people interested in some kick arse politic will buy them andd their sales will go up. and they will draw paralleles to their own country and such.

what a stupid move

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by angel7030 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 11:01:53 +0800

angel7030 — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 11:01:53 +0800

Originally posted by SPLIT SECOND:

careful with ang mo, they have national pride and many companies will withdraw from doing business in singapore. And singapore doesnt have a big presence in their rmedia in positive light thoug US and Singapore does cooperate on lots of things. Its not like Australia sending troops into Irag to aid missions.

Yalor, actually singapore govt beri stupid one, the more you sue the journal, the more famous the journal become, my daddy and his frens alway ask my brother who do business in HK to buy the banned far east economic review for them...peoples like to read banned papers and journals, in fact their sales had improved tremedously after singapore banned them. So they dun mind paid a bit so as to get free advertisment and marketing fees, and become most wanted journal around the region.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by SPLIT SECOND @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:59:12 +0800

SPLIT SECOND — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:59:12 +0800

Originally posted by angel7030:

Yalor, they just withdrawn their business here, we collapse liao. And further more our govt also not so big like their size.

careful with ang mo, they have national pride and many companies will withdraw from doing business in singapore. And singapore doesnt have a big presence in their rmedia in positive light thoug US and Singapore does cooperate on lots of things. Its not like Australia sending troops into Irag to aid missions.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by angel7030 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:50:05 +0800

angel7030 — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:50:05 +0800

Originally posted by zenden9:

They think they can get those ang moh so easily? Those foreign court wouldn't let them win one la...

Yalor, they just withdrawn their business here, we collapse liao. And further more our govt also not so big like their size.

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by angel7030 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:48:00 +0800

angel7030 — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:48:00 +0800

Originally posted by SPLIT SECOND:

at east we dont get the benefits directly. but it will have an offset effect. Extra $$$ will show our economy in good light.

there will be no extra, with so much loss, they are struggling to breakeven, where got extra, unless they are willing to come out of their own pocket money, then that will be a different story. Can i sue the govt for increasing ERP, powersupply bills and transport fares?? They just increased without consulting us?? Is this democracy or Demoncrazy rules??

Now that the oil price is down, howcome transport and powersupply bills is not down?? Can i sue them for overcharging us??

Recent Posts in 'Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia' | sgForums.com

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by AndrewPKYap @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 10:55:58 +0800

Lee v. Globe and Mail, 2001 CanLII 28035 (ON S.C.)

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by eagle @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:49:59 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by maurizio13 @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:33:12 +0800

Lee v. Globe and Mail, 2001 CanLII 28035 (ON S.C.)

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by AndrewPKYap @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:22:12 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by maurizio13 @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:13:04 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by maurizio13 @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 08:50:22 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by AndrewPKYap @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 07:40:43 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:34:26 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:25:36 +0800

Democracy in Singapore June 26, 2008; Page A14

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by soleachip @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:18:11 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by soleachip @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:09:45 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by reyes @ Sun, 14 Sep 2008 00:57:24 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Lin Yu @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:46:33 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by pearlie27 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:43:34 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by likedatosocan @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 22:17:25 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by ulquiorra87 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:16:52 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:05:01 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by SPLIT SECOND @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 20:37:04 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by Meat Pao @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 18:44:18 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by AndrewPKYap @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 17:52:30 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by SPLIT SECOND @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 15:38:48 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by angel7030 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 11:01:53 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by SPLIT SECOND @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:59:12 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by angel7030 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:50:05 +0800

Singapore attorney general to sue Wall Street Journal Asia replied by angel7030 @ Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:48:00 +0800

Democracy in Singapore
June 26, 2008; Page A14