[Obamao]

https://www.change.org/p/many-questions-...i-hui-saga


Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

Ms Cheng might have been extremely satisfied with Mr Tan's performance over the last 3 years but I don't think the majority of Singaporeans were with yours at yesterday's press conference.

As law-abiding, tax-paying Singaporeans, may we request that you very kindly answer the following questions:

1. You said you found out about Tan and Cheng's "inappropriate relationship" (IR) "some time after GE2020" - roughly 3 years ago. You said as well that you don't know when the IR began.

Were you not naturally curious when the IR began?

Did you not at all ask them when the whole thing started? And how it started?

These are questions a leader would have asked. Not just that, but they would have been among the first questions asked. Are you not a leader?

The length - not to mention the intensity - of the IR would surely have figured in a natural leader's decision as to what to do with the amorous couple - whether to demand their resignation forthright (as you chose not to), whether to counsel them (as you did in February 2023), and whether to keep quiet publicly about the whole affair (pun unintended) for 3 long years until things burst into the open yesterday.

If you thought something was wrong or "inappropriate" (the term that is used), wouldn't you want to know how long it's been going on? Unless you didn't really think it was wrong or "inappropriate" so you didn't care when it started, or you did think it was wrong or "inappropriate" but you thought you could sweep it under the carpet. Either way, not knowing when it started doesn't reflect well on you, does it?

2. You said it was "simply inappropriate" for Tan as Speaker to have a (sexual) relationship with Cheng as MP. Why and how was it inappropriate? Please elaborate.

Further, are you implying that if Tan wasn't Speaker but an ordinary MP that then it would have been OK for him to be involved with Cheng? In other words, it's OK for 2 ordinary PAP MPs to be having an affair, but not if 1 is Parliamentary Speaker?

3. If it was so wrong for Tan as Speaker and Cheng as MP to be having an affair, why did you allow it to go on for 3 years?

4. Michael Palmer was literally sacked in a day while Tan was allowed 3 years to "mend his ways" because the "circumstances were different". How were the circumstances different?

5. Palmer wasn't given a second chance and time to mend his ways because PAP has such high standards of propriety. Are PAP standards now not only slipping but shattering? Is the boast of high PAP standards empty patter?

6. Is your exhortation to "all Singaporeans and the press" to give the lovebirds "time and space to heal from this episode" just a cunning attempt at getting everyone to shut up and not talk about this (to put it mildly) prolonged indiscretion any more lest it stay long in the public's mind and cost PAP seats at the next GE?

7. Has Tan and Cheng's departure been strategically timed by you to co-incide with the revelation of Leon Perera stroking Nicole Seah's hand in a public restaurant?

8. If the answer to the previous question is yes (as it appears suspiciously to be), was their departure timed to transfer the heat and shift the spotlight from you (PAP) to them (WP), with the bonus of distracting from Iswarangate, so you can claim PAP have acted decisively (when in fact you have dallied for 3 years) to clean house while WP take time to "investigate" Leon showing outward affection for Nicole?

9. Did your actions result in Mrs Tan being kept in the dark about her husband's affair? If the answer is yes, how does it comport with your desperate plea to give the Tan family time and space to heal?

10. You appeared to be reading from notes when you answered the second journo's question. Was the second journo's question scripted? Did you read from notes a prepared answer to the second journo's question?

11. You said you accepted Tan's offer of resignation in February - a good 5 months ago - and that you told him to hang on for the time being so his constituents could be well looked after in the interim. How long did you expect this process to take? Why was it necessary for this process to take more than 5 months to complete? Why so long? Why didn't it apply in Michael Palmer's case? Anticipating that you would say the circumstances of Palmer's case were different, how different were they?

12. The fourth journo pointedly asked, "Was there any abuse of power or conflict of interest [between the 2 parties: Speaker and MP]?" You answered by saying a Speaker-MP relationship was inappropriate and unacceptable. That's not answering the question. Could you answer the question please?

Dear Prime Minister, the above questions are very fair and top of every Singaporean's mind. You always tell the opposition to "come clean" on this matter and that. Now we would love to see you practise what you constantly preach. We patiently await your answers. Do take your time, but not 3 years please, that's a bit too long.Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

[Obamao]

[Bigiron]

petition got use . next GE just vote wisely

[Oyk]

https://www.change.org/p/many-questions-...i-hui-saga


Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

Ms Cheng might have been extremely satisfied with Mr Tan's performance over the last 3 years but I don't think the majority of Singaporeans were with yours at yesterday's press conference.

***snipped***

Stopped reading at "I don't think".

Nobody cares batshit what you think or don't think.  

[kc172021]

Agree.let a thief to catch a thief is not right

[p1acebo]

[Oyk]

Hi Cheekopekman 

[Manthink]

Like I said previously, something is NOT RIGHT..

Now it is like Everything SMELL like a bunch of STINKING CRAP.

[Klesk]

Ha.
He raise GST to help the horny MPs in Parliament.

At the same time increase inflation

[klat]

The case should be null and void.

[Stoki]

3. If it was so wrong for Tan as Speaker and Cheng as MP to be having an affair, why did you allow it to go on for 3 years?

[Obamao]

https://www.change.org/p/many-questions-...i-hui-saga


Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

Ms Cheng might have been extremely satisfied with Mr Tan's performance over the last 3 years but I don't think the majority of Singaporeans were with yours at yesterday's press conference.

As law-abiding, tax-paying Singaporeans, may we request that you very kindly answer the following questions:

1. You said you found out about Tan and Cheng's "inappropriate relationship" (IR) "some time after GE2020" - roughly 3 years ago. You said as well that you don't know when the IR began.

Were you not naturally curious when the IR began?

Did you not at all ask them when the whole thing started? And how it started?

These are questions a leader would have asked. Not just that, but they would have been among the first questions asked. Are you not a leader?

The length - not to mention the intensity - of the IR would surely have figured in a natural leader's decision as to what to do with the amorous couple - whether to demand their resignation forthright (as you chose not to), whether to counsel them (as you did in February 2023), and whether to keep quiet publicly about the whole affair (pun unintended) for 3 long years until things burst into the open yesterday.

If you thought something was wrong or "inappropriate" (the term that is used), wouldn't you want to know how long it's been going on? Unless you didn't really think it was wrong or "inappropriate" so you didn't care when it started, or you did think it was wrong or "inappropriate" but you thought you could sweep it under the carpet. Either way, not knowing when it started doesn't reflect well on you, does it?

2. You said it was "simply inappropriate" for Tan as Speaker to have a (sexual) relationship with Cheng as MP. Why and how was it inappropriate? Please elaborate.

Further, are you implying that if Tan wasn't Speaker but an ordinary MP that then it would have been OK for him to be involved with Cheng? In other words, it's OK for 2 ordinary PAP MPs to be having an affair, but not if 1 is Parliamentary Speaker?

3. If it was so wrong for Tan as Speaker and Cheng as MP to be having an affair, why did you allow it to go on for 3 years?

4. Michael Palmer was literally sacked in a day while Tan was allowed 3 years to "mend his ways" because the "circumstances were different". How were the circumstances different?

5. Palmer wasn't given a second chance and time to mend his ways because PAP has such high standards of propriety. Are PAP standards now not only slipping but shattering? Is the boast of high PAP standards empty patter?

6. Is your exhortation to "all Singaporeans and the press" to give the lovebirds "time and space to heal from this episode" just a cunning attempt at getting everyone to shut up and not talk about this (to put it mildly) prolonged indiscretion any more lest it stay long in the public's mind and cost PAP seats at the next GE?

7. Has Tan and Cheng's departure been strategically timed by you to co-incide with the revelation of Leon Perera stroking Nicole Seah's hand in a public restaurant?

8. If the answer to the previous question is yes (as it appears suspiciously to be), was their departure timed to transfer the heat and shift the spotlight from you (PAP) to them (WP), with the bonus of distracting from Iswarangate, so you can claim PAP have acted decisively (when in fact you have dallied for 3 years) to clean house while WP take time to "investigate" Leon showing outward affection for Nicole?

9. Did your actions result in Mrs Tan being kept in the dark about her husband's affair? If the answer is yes, how does it comport with your desperate plea to give the Tan family time and space to heal?

10. You appeared to be reading from notes when you answered the second journo's question. Was the second journo's question scripted? Did you read from notes a prepared answer to the second journo's question?

11. You said you accepted Tan's offer of resignation in February - a good 5 months ago - and that you told him to hang on for the time being so his constituents could be well looked after in the interim. How long did you expect this process to take? Why was it necessary for this process to take more than 5 months to complete? Why so long? Why didn't it apply in Michael Palmer's case? Anticipating that you would say the circumstances of Palmer's case were different, how different were they?

12. The fourth journo pointedly asked, "Was there any abuse of power or conflict of interest [between the 2 parties: Speaker and MP]?" You answered by saying a Speaker-MP relationship was inappropriate and unacceptable. That's not answering the question. Could you answer the question please?

Dear Prime Minister, the above questions are very fair and top of every Singaporean's mind. You always tell the opposition to "come clean" on this matter and that. Now we would love to see you practise what you constantly preach. We patiently await your answers. Do take your time, but not 3 years please, that's a bit too long.Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

Must answer or pls resign immediately too.

[Alice Alicia]

Don't think he will answer any question.
ROD mood.

[Scythian]

https://www.change.org/p/many-questions-...i-hui-saga


Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

Ms Cheng might have been extremely satisfied with Mr Tan's performance over the last 3 years but I don't think the majority of Singaporeans were with yours at yesterday's press conference.

As law-abiding, tax-paying Singaporeans, may we request that you very kindly answer the following questions:

1. You said you found out about Tan and Cheng's "inappropriate relationship" (IR) "some time after GE2020" - roughly 3 years ago. You said as well that you don't know when the IR began.

Were you not naturally curious when the IR began?

Did you not at all ask them when the whole thing started? And how it started?

These are questions a leader would have asked. Not just that, but they would have been among the first questions asked. Are you not a leader?

The length - not to mention the intensity - of the IR would surely have figured in a natural leader's decision as to what to do with the amorous couple - whether to demand their resignation forthright (as you chose not to), whether to counsel them (as you did in February 2023), and whether to keep quiet publicly about the whole affair (pun unintended) for 3 long years until things burst into the open yesterday.

If you thought something was wrong or "inappropriate" (the term that is used), wouldn't you want to know how long it's been going on? Unless you didn't really think it was wrong or "inappropriate" so you didn't care when it started, or you did think it was wrong or "inappropriate" but you thought you could sweep it under the carpet. Either way, not knowing when it started doesn't reflect well on you, does it?

2. You said it was "simply inappropriate" for Tan as Speaker to have a (sexual) relationship with Cheng as MP. Why and how was it inappropriate? Please elaborate.

Further, are you implying that if Tan wasn't Speaker but an ordinary MP that then it would have been OK for him to be involved with Cheng? In other words, it's OK for 2 ordinary PAP MPs to be having an affair, but not if 1 is Parliamentary Speaker?

3. If it was so wrong for Tan as Speaker and Cheng as MP to be having an affair, why did you allow it to go on for 3 years?

4. Michael Palmer was literally sacked in a day while Tan was allowed 3 years to "mend his ways" because the "circumstances were different". How were the circumstances different?

5. Palmer wasn't given a second chance and time to mend his ways because PAP has such high standards of propriety. Are PAP standards now not only slipping but shattering? Is the boast of high PAP standards empty patter?

6. Is your exhortation to "all Singaporeans and the press" to give the lovebirds "time and space to heal from this episode" just a cunning attempt at getting everyone to shut up and not talk about this (to put it mildly) prolonged indiscretion any more lest it stay long in the public's mind and cost PAP seats at the next GE?

7. Has Tan and Cheng's departure been strategically timed by you to co-incide with the revelation of Leon Perera stroking Nicole Seah's hand in a public restaurant?

8. If the answer to the previous question is yes (as it appears suspiciously to be), was their departure timed to transfer the heat and shift the spotlight from you (PAP) to them (WP), with the bonus of distracting from Iswarangate, so you can claim PAP have acted decisively (when in fact you have dallied for 3 years) to clean house while WP take time to "investigate" Leon showing outward affection for Nicole?

9. Did your actions result in Mrs Tan being kept in the dark about her husband's affair? If the answer is yes, how does it comport with your desperate plea to give the Tan family time and space to heal?

10. You appeared to be reading from notes when you answered the second journo's question. Was the second journo's question scripted? Did you read from notes a prepared answer to the second journo's question?

11. You said you accepted Tan's offer of resignation in February - a good 5 months ago - and that you told him to hang on for the time being so his constituents could be well looked after in the interim. How long did you expect this process to take? Why was it necessary for this process to take more than 5 months to complete? Why so long? Why didn't it apply in Michael Palmer's case? Anticipating that you would say the circumstances of Palmer's case were different, how different were they?

12. The fourth journo pointedly asked, "Was there any abuse of power or conflict of interest [between the 2 parties: Speaker and MP]?" You answered by saying a Speaker-MP relationship was inappropriate and unacceptable. That's not answering the question. Could you answer the question please?

Dear Prime Minister, the above questions are very fair and top of every Singaporean's mind. You always tell the opposition to "come clean" on this matter and that. Now we would love to see you practise what you constantly preach. We patiently await your answers. Do take your time, but not 3 years please, that's a bit too long.Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

[A2Z]

maybe one reason is TCJ from uniformed army with top secrets while Palmer has nothing to arm twist against the party. So all those recruited from army navy air force sure will get away from immediate sacking instead will be demoted to some useless posts.

[Gstalk]

He will just sweep it cleanly under the carpet.

No dust no sound

[Obamao]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...succession

[Sline]

https://www.change.org/p/many-questions-...i-hui-saga


Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

Ms Cheng might have been extremely satisfied with Mr Tan's performance over the last 3 years but I don't think the majority of Singaporeans were with yours at yesterday's press conference.

As law-abiding, tax-paying Singaporeans, may we request that you very kindly answer the following questions:

1. You said you found out about Tan and Cheng's "inappropriate relationship" (IR) "some time after GE2020" - roughly 3 years ago. You said as well that you don't know when the IR began.

Were you not naturally curious when the IR began?

Did you not at all ask them when the whole thing started? And how it started?

These are questions a leader would have asked. Not just that, but they would have been among the first questions asked. Are you not a leader?

The length - not to mention the intensity - of the IR would surely have figured in a natural leader's decision as to what to do with the amorous couple - whether to demand their resignation forthright (as you chose not to), whether to counsel them (as you did in February 2023), and whether to keep quiet publicly about the whole affair (pun unintended) for 3 long years until things burst into the open yesterday.

If you thought something was wrong or "inappropriate" (the term that is used), wouldn't you want to know how long it's been going on? Unless you didn't really think it was wrong or "inappropriate" so you didn't care when it started, or you did think it was wrong or "inappropriate" but you thought you could sweep it under the carpet. Either way, not knowing when it started doesn't reflect well on you, does it?

2. You said it was "simply inappropriate" for Tan as Speaker to have a (sexual) relationship with Cheng as MP. Why and how was it inappropriate? Please elaborate.

Further, are you implying that if Tan wasn't Speaker but an ordinary MP that then it would have been OK for him to be involved with Cheng? In other words, it's OK for 2 ordinary PAP MPs to be having an affair, but not if 1 is Parliamentary Speaker?

3. If it was so wrong for Tan as Speaker and Cheng as MP to be having an affair, why did you allow it to go on for 3 years?

4. Michael Palmer was literally sacked in a day while Tan was allowed 3 years to "mend his ways" because the "circumstances were different". How were the circumstances different?

5. Palmer wasn't given a second chance and time to mend his ways because PAP has such high standards of propriety. Are PAP standards now not only slipping but shattering? Is the boast of high PAP standards empty patter?

6. Is your exhortation to "all Singaporeans and the press" to give the lovebirds "time and space to heal from this episode" just a cunning attempt at getting everyone to shut up and not talk about this (to put it mildly) prolonged indiscretion any more lest it stay long in the public's mind and cost PAP seats at the next GE?

7. Has Tan and Cheng's departure been strategically timed by you to co-incide with the revelation of Leon Perera stroking Nicole Seah's hand in a public restaurant?

8. If the answer to the previous question is yes (as it appears suspiciously to be), was their departure timed to transfer the heat and shift the spotlight from you (PAP) to them (WP), with the bonus of distracting from Iswarangate, so you can claim PAP have acted decisively (when in fact you have dallied for 3 years) to clean house while WP take time to "investigate" Leon showing outward affection for Nicole?

9. Did your actions result in Mrs Tan being kept in the dark about her husband's affair? If the answer is yes, how does it comport with your desperate plea to give the Tan family time and space to heal?

10. You appeared to be reading from notes when you answered the second journo's question. Was the second journo's question scripted? Did you read from notes a prepared answer to the second journo's question?

11. You said you accepted Tan's offer of resignation in February - a good 5 months ago - and that you told him to hang on for the time being so his constituents could be well looked after in the interim. How long did you expect this process to take? Why was it necessary for this process to take more than 5 months to complete? Why so long? Why didn't it apply in Michael Palmer's case? Anticipating that you would say the circumstances of Palmer's case were different, how different were they?

12. The fourth journo pointedly asked, "Was there any abuse of power or conflict of interest [between the 2 parties: Speaker and MP]?" You answered by saying a Speaker-MP relationship was inappropriate and unacceptable. That's not answering the question. Could you answer the question please?

Dear Prime Minister, the above questions are very fair and top of every Singaporean's mind. You always tell the opposition to "come clean" on this matter and that. Now we would love to see you practise what you constantly preach. We patiently await your answers. Do take your time, but not 3 years please, that's a bit too long.Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

Did you have query or unanswered questions for LHL regarding Ridout case as well ?

[Scythian]

Cash Over Valuation

[Obamao]

Did you have query or unanswered questions for LHL regarding Ridout case as well ?

https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2023/07...roperties/

[Scythian]

.
Midway comes under heavy bombardment 

[Scythian]

https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2023/07...roperties/

They said, they have nothing to hide

[cheekopekman]

https://www.change.org/p/many-questions-...i-hui-saga


Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

Ms Cheng might have been extremely satisfied with Mr Tan's performance over the last 3 years but I don't think the majority of Singaporeans were with yours at yesterday's press conference.

As law-abiding, tax-paying Singaporeans, may we request that you very kindly answer the following questions:

1. You said you found out about Tan and Cheng's "inappropriate relationship" (IR) "some time after GE2020" - roughly 3 years ago. You said as well that you don't know when the IR began.

Were you not naturally curious when the IR began?

Did you not at all ask them when the whole thing started? And how it started?

These are questions a leader would have asked. Not just that, but they would have been among the first questions asked. Are you not a leader?

The length - not to mention the intensity - of the IR would surely have figured in a natural leader's decision as to what to do with the amorous couple - whether to demand their resignation forthright (as you chose not to), whether to counsel them (as you did in February 2023), and whether to keep quiet publicly about the whole affair (pun unintended) for 3 long years until things burst into the open yesterday.

If you thought something was wrong or "inappropriate" (the term that is used), wouldn't you want to know how long it's been going on? Unless you didn't really think it was wrong or "inappropriate" so you didn't care when it started, or you did think it was wrong or "inappropriate" but you thought you could sweep it under the carpet. Either way, not knowing when it started doesn't reflect well on you, does it?

2. You said it was "simply inappropriate" for Tan as Speaker to have a (sexual) relationship with Cheng as MP. Why and how was it inappropriate? Please elaborate.

Further, are you implying that if Tan wasn't Speaker but an ordinary MP that then it would have been OK for him to be involved with Cheng? In other words, it's OK for 2 ordinary PAP MPs to be having an affair, but not if 1 is Parliamentary Speaker?

3. If it was so wrong for Tan as Speaker and Cheng as MP to be having an affair, why did you allow it to go on for 3 years?

4. Michael Palmer was literally sacked in a day while Tan was allowed 3 years to "mend his ways" because the "circumstances were different". How were the circumstances different?

5. Palmer wasn't given a second chance and time to mend his ways because PAP has such high standards of propriety. Are PAP standards now not only slipping but shattering? Is the boast of high PAP standards empty patter?

6. Is your exhortation to "all Singaporeans and the press" to give the lovebirds "time and space to heal from this episode" just a cunning attempt at getting everyone to shut up and not talk about this (to put it mildly) prolonged indiscretion any more lest it stay long in the public's mind and cost PAP seats at the next GE?

7. Has Tan and Cheng's departure been strategically timed by you to co-incide with the revelation of Leon Perera stroking Nicole Seah's hand in a public restaurant?

8. If the answer to the previous question is yes (as it appears suspiciously to be), was their departure timed to transfer the heat and shift the spotlight from you (PAP) to them (WP), with the bonus of distracting from Iswarangate, so you can claim PAP have acted decisively (when in fact you have dallied for 3 years) to clean house while WP take time to "investigate" Leon showing outward affection for Nicole?

9. Did your actions result in Mrs Tan being kept in the dark about her husband's affair? If the answer is yes, how does it comport with your desperate plea to give the Tan family time and space to heal?

10. You appeared to be reading from notes when you answered the second journo's question. Was the second journo's question scripted? Did you read from notes a prepared answer to the second journo's question?

11. You said you accepted Tan's offer of resignation in February - a good 5 months ago - and that you told him to hang on for the time being so his constituents could be well looked after in the interim. How long did you expect this process to take? Why was it necessary for this process to take more than 5 months to complete? Why so long? Why didn't it apply in Michael Palmer's case? Anticipating that you would say the circumstances of Palmer's case were different, how different were they?

12. The fourth journo pointedly asked, "Was there any abuse of power or conflict of interest [between the 2 parties: Speaker and MP]?" You answered by saying a Speaker-MP relationship was inappropriate and unacceptable. That's not answering the question. Could you answer the question please?

Dear Prime Minister, the above questions are very fair and top of every Singaporean's mind. You always tell the opposition to "come clean" on this matter and that. Now we would love to see you practise what you constantly preach. We patiently await your answers. Do take your time, but not 3 years please, that's a bit too long.Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,

So many questions how to answer them all leh?   1 by 1 lah!

[cheekopekman]

How come my nickname was used leh?   I didn't even know leh!

[Bigiron]

The affair go before yr2020.
Might started in 2016. When Mr tan on the path to be full minister but in 2017 he was 明升暗降 to speaker

[FangFang]

Wonder any special topic during NDP speech..

[Bigiron]

1. how it started ?
   
2. when it started
   

[Scythian]

.
How will LKY react to all these?

[Bigiron]