Posts: 2,980
Threads: 392
Likes Received: 949 in 719 posts
Likes Given: 1
(20-10-2024, 07:49 PM)talky Wrote: question is why she used lao hong biscuits better metaphor is lao hong red hot chilly potatoes chips
Lao hong means no substance, ie the women is a liar and can be discarded
8
Posts: 13,709
Threads: 0
Likes Received: 3,129 in 2,841 posts
Likes Given: 11,203
(18-10-2024, 08:45 PM)klat Wrote: It means cannot hold onto a lie for long so must discard
I also baked biscuits I know lah!
When biscuits are baked in the oven, they must be crispy and crunchy lah! Biscuits already lao hong soggy liao not nice lah!
Posts: 50,192
Threads: 36,716
Likes Received: 6,205 in 5,844 posts
Likes Given: 65,365
Live: Pritam Singh’s trial: Ex-WP cadre Yudhishthra Nathan takes the stand | Day 5
https://www.straitstimes.com/live-singap...ingh-trial
Tomorrow Monday
Posts: 50,192
Threads: 36,716
Likes Received: 6,205 in 5,844 posts
Likes Given: 65,365
The number 6 days .. liao
Posts: 50,192
Threads: 36,716
Likes Received: 6,205 in 5,844 posts
Likes Given: 65,365
‘There are more deleted messages than messages in which we can see the contents’: Defence
Pointing to Mr Yudhishthra Nathan’s evidence to the Committee of Privileges (COP), Mr Andre Jumabhoy notes that Mr Nathan had told the committee that he did not recall speaking to Ms Raeesah Khan on Oct 4, 2021. That was the day when Ms Khan doubled down on her lie in Parliament.
Mr Nathan replies: “You missed out the part where I said it’s possible I might have (done so) but I’ve forgotten it.”
Mr Jumabhoy then continues: “You said, ‘I spoke with her, from my recollections, either (on) Oct 12 or just before’.”
Mr Nathan agrees.
Mr Jumabhoy refers to message logs between Mr Nathan and Ms Khan, and points to numerous messages that Mr Nathan had deleted.
“As far as this chat is concerned, there are more deleted messages than messages in which we can see the contents. Do you agree?” he asks.
Mr Nathan responds: “Generally, yes.”
Mr Jumabhoy says it is “pretty clear” that on Oct 4, Mr Nathan had very much been in discussions with Ms Khan. Mr Nathan agrees.
Mr Jumabhoy then questions him on why, despite this being “quite a seminal event in relation to what’s going on”, Mr Nathan did not remember this when he gave evidence to the COP.
He replies that “many things had happened” by the time he found himself before the COP.
Mr Jumabhoy suggests that Mr Nathan had not told the COP what he did because admitting to the committee that him and Ms Loh had those messages in their group chat did not look good, and was not something he was prepared to do.
“I disagree with that,” Mr Nathan says.
(This post was last modified: 21-10-2024, 12:03 PM by
Bigiron.)
Posts: 8,332
Threads: 1,056
Likes Received: 1,988 in 1,632 posts
Likes Given: 0
(20-10-2024, 07:59 PM)klat Wrote: Lao hong means no substance, ie the women is a liar and can be discarded
right
means can forget eating this soft biscuits means ignore treat as transparent
Posts: 4,229
Threads: 38
Likes Received: 1,500 in 1,228 posts
Likes Given: 1,151
GE is coming soon and PaP needs to fix the opposition first because they cannot win fairly even with a new PM. Doesn’t this sound illogical and by far, another use of excess power to set 16 Days Trial to dampen this nation?
Posts: 13,709
Threads: 0
Likes Received: 3,129 in 2,841 posts
Likes Given: 11,203
(21-10-2024, 11:45 AM)Bigiron Wrote: ‘There are more deleted messages than messages in which we can see the contents’: Defence
Pointing to Mr Yudhishthra Nathan’s evidence to the Committee of Privileges (COP), Mr Andre Jumabhoy notes that Mr Nathan had told the committee that he did not recall speaking to Ms Raeesah Khan on Oct 4, 2021. That was the day when Ms Khan doubled down on her lie in Parliament.
Mr Nathan replies: “You missed out the part where I said it’s possible I might have (done so) but I’ve forgotten it.”
Mr Jumabhoy then continues: “You said, ‘I spoke with her, from my recollections, either (on) Oct 12 or just before’.”
Mr Nathan agrees.
Mr Jumabhoy refers to message logs between Mr Nathan and Ms Khan, and points to numerous messages that Mr Nathan had deleted.
“As far as this chat is concerned, there are more deleted messages than messages in which we can see the contents. Do you agree?” he asks.
Mr Nathan responds: “Generally, yes.”
Mr Jumabhoy says it is “pretty clear” that on Oct 4, Mr Nathan had very much been in discussions with Ms Khan. Mr Nathan agrees.
Mr Jumabhoy then questions him on why, despite this being “quite a seminal event in relation to what’s going on”, Mr Nathan did not remember this when he gave evidence to the COP.
He replies that “many things had happened” by the time he found himself before the COP.
Mr Jumabhoy suggests that Mr Nathan had not told the COP what he did because admitting to the committee that him and Ms Loh had those messages in their group chat did not look good, and was not something he was prepared to do.
“I disagree with that,” Mr Nathan says.
Wah! So many deleted messages ah!
All lao hong liao lah!
![](https://i.imgur.com/CLvY2jA.png")
![[+]](https://sgtalk.net/images/bootbb/collapse_collapsed.png)
![[Image: IMG-20241018-220722-124.jpg]](https://i.ibb.co/FxzvkMm/IMG-20241018-220722-124.jpg)
