Ah diddums….
CRAIG Thomson has pleaded to be left alone while a raft of inquiries into his conduct proceed, declaring “enough is enough”.
No it isn’t. You are still in the House, you lying, thieving, whoring grub. Everybody who has an interest in the truth will pursue it until it is resolved.
Get used to it.
Facebook
Twitter
“you lying, thieving, whoring grub”
Obviously you were there and witnessed it all, Kev – in the brothel, in the HSU meetings….seeing how you’re so sure about the “truth”. Don’t hold back – give us all the gory details.
“Everybody who has an interest in the truth”
An interest in the truth is precisely why I’ll refrain from abusing Thompson until (if/when) he has been charged and convicted.
This issue has sfa to do with the “truth” and everything to do with political expediency.
No I wasn’t there but a government body empowered and charged with investigating the incidences were and they have found well over a hundred incidences of theft and whoring relating to Thomson and in the House this week he obviously lied.
An interest in the truth is exactly why the ALP and fellow travelers are doing all they possibly can to drag out the case until after the elections. They don’t want the truth to come out but unfortunately it has so the only defence is “but it hasn’t been proven in a court of law”.
It’s not about the truth; it’s not even about the integrity of parliament or the thousands of HSU members funds being misappropriated – it is now about Gillard staying in power.
You stick with him – he needs friends.
“Obviously you were there and witnessed it all, Kev – in the brothel, in the HSU meetings….seeing how you’re so sure about the “truth”. Don’t hold back – give us all the gory details”.
Bad luck Kev, but 17… has nailed you. You weren’t at Auschwitz, Warsaw, the Burma Railroad or the WTC on 9/11. Therefore, you cannot comment on these matters.
So 17… how’s your demolition of my claim that Singapore will not have Muslims in their Air Force coming along? I notice you have not responded to my last advice dated 27 Apr on Kev’s entry headed: QLD Sets High Standards.
Could it be your youthful informant Ravin of the RSAF checked further, and discovered I was not talking “bullshit” as you so politely put it?
Any chance of an admission you were wrong?
“youthful informant Ravin”
He’d be chuffed to hear that. He’s in his late forties with three teenaged sons, one of whom attended my school.
I’d believe him before I’d believe you – he’s a serving officer. He laughed when I chatted to him about your allegations – said that it was (to use his words) a “fairytale”.
“it is now about Gillard staying in power”
Or to put it another way – it’s about Abbott grasping power.
Thanks for making my point….
Some of us (apparently not many) still have a regard for truth and justice. Unfortunately, these archetypical Australian values are being overwhelmed by the same kind of gutter journalism apparent overseas (Fleet St – News Limited).
I don’t see how reporting the details of the FWA report becomes ‘gutter press’ The media are obliged to report the news and if it makes Thomson look immoral and unethical it is because all evidence points to the fact that he is.
I’ll stick to Gillard staying in power. She is the one depending on two scruffs to hold her government together. Abbott is just doing what Opposition leaders are supposed to do and that is hold the government to certain standards.
I don’t know what you’d call paying a prostitute to make a statement. I’d call it “gutter journalism”.
“Abbott is just doing what Opposition leaders are supposed to do”
If Abbott had a shred of integrity, he’d explain why he was prepared to serve for years alongside Wilson Tuckey, a convicted crim (described accurately by Graham Edwards as a “bloody dingo”) without a murmur, but isn’t happy to sit in the same parliament with a person who has not been charged, let alone convicted, of any offence.
The man is a rolled gold hypocrite.
Iron Bar subdued a drunk going ballistic in a bar at Carnarvon when he was the publican. The judge ruled he was over the top and fined him. All over and done with quick smart.
No similarity. Thomson has been stealing from those he is supposed to look after and now is lying about it. He and the ALP have dragged this on for over 4 years now and whereas you might like to give him the benefit of the doubt most people are in no doubt.
Stick with him 17, he’s going to need all the friends he needs.
I don’t watch the ACA but if the prossie is believable it may will help to rid us of this troublesome government.
“Some of us (apparently not many) still have a regard for truth and justice.”
Now that is just funny coming from a serial bullshit artist.
Regardng Thomson, he is entitled to a presumption of innocence in court once charges are laid, until then the general public are entitled to judge him as they see fit and, given the huge amount of evidence against him and the flimsy “I was victimised by James Bond” nature of his defence, it is fair for the public to assume guilt, after all Mr Thomson can always sue if he doesn’t like what is said about him, though that turned out quite badly last time he tried it in regards this matter.
“the general public are entitled to judge him as they see fit”
OK – I’ll judge him as I see fit. I won’t be part of an orchestrated smear engineered by the spin meisters in the Liberal Party.
spinmeisters in the Liberal Party have just asked the relevant questions of those who did start the fracas. HSU execs and the subsequent AWA investigation report. Both bodies being very ALP.
Ah yes the Liberal Spin Meisters appointed by the ALP to FWA, and the Liberal Spin Meisters in the NSW and Victorian Police force, plus of course the renowned Liberal Spin Meister Laurie Oakes. Damn them all. Damn them to hell.
Everyone knows you are an ALP/Green stooge, but this is below contemptible.
I’d throw in an insult here, but it is redundant to insult anyone who would write something so stupid as “I won’t be part of an orchestrated smear engineered by the spin meisters in the Liberal Party.” about Craig Thomson.
“the Liberal Spin Meisters appointed by the ALP to FWA”
The FWA report does not constitute a brief of evidence.
“NSW and Victorian Police force”
Would you mind letting me know what action these bodies have taken against Thompson?
Otherwise I might be forced to conclude that you are a Liberal Party stooge….
“subdued a drunk”
Translation – striking an Aboriginal man with a length of steel cable whilst he was being pinned to the ground by Tuckey’s offsiders.
The conviction was for assault.
To quote a bit of relevant commentary –
“Genial WA Labor MP Graham Edwards, a disabled Vietnam veteran well respected on both sides of the chamber, says that Tuckey is the only MP in Parliament to whom he will not speak.
“Mate, I think he’s a disgrace,” Edwards says. “As far as I’m concerned, he’s just a bloody big coward. Anyone who makes a name for himself on the basis of having someone else hold a person down while you hit them is, in my books, a dingo”
See – http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/22/1061529333629.html
Tuckey resigned from Howard’s ministry in August 2003 after he had written to the Police Minister in South Australia, on ministerial letterhead, asking his son’s conviction on a traffic charge to be reviewed.
This is the piece of criminal garbage that Tony Abbott was content to tolerate when he was in Howard’s cabinet. I wonder what’s different?
Hypocrisy….
I wonder what’s different?
If you don’t know now you never will
1909573…..Tuckey showed poor judgement when he used the letterhead to appeal to the Police for his son. No doubt he was attempting to use his position to his son’s advantage. He was not found at the end of an investigation by a Government appointed body, to have stolen from the workers in his union, lived beyond his means at the expense of people funding his extravagance or with having engaged with prostitutes or brothel keepers, but he was obviously an embarrassment to those he was seated with in Parliament. As you say he RESIGNED. WAS HE CHARGED WITH ANY CRIMINAL OFFENCE DURING HIS SERVICE OR AS A CONSEQUENCE OF HIS SERVICE AS A POLITICIAN? You are the sort of person who denies that a player, who has been found guilty after an investigation by a duly appointed body, is actually guilty.
“WAS HE CHARGED WITH ANY CRIMINAL OFFENCE DURING HIS SERVICE OR AS A CONSEQUENCE OF HIS SERVICE AS A POLITICIAN?”
When you’ve done shouting (which is a sure sign that you’re losing the argument) answer the same question about Thompson who was not in parliament when the alleged offences occurred…..
No FWA doesn’t produce a brief of evidence, however it is a govt investigative arm that has evaluated his claims and found them wanting. NSW Police have found that he did not commit crimes in NSW, but handed the case to VicPol (join the dots idiot), VicPol investigation is ongoing. watch this space.
BTW, like to put $50 on him not being convicted of a crime relating to this matter? I’m happy to put my money where my mouth is and bet that he will be found guilty of crimes in regards his time at HSU and/or misleading Parliament regarding same.
ah hah,
17 a question if I may, where does Iron Bar Tuckey sit in the LNP nowadays, oh that\’s right he\’s been replaced by someone else, Mr Crook, Mr Tuckey was not very happy
Here: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/fat-lady-is-warming-up-for-wilson-tuckey/story-fn59niix-1225908302087
I watched them move him aside and wondered to myself, why?, well now I know so that 17 would be happy and you, you whinging bastard are still unhappy.
How you can defend Mr Thomson with innocent until the guilty schtick heaven knows.
Half a bloody million dollars is missing from the poorest workers (me dad was general duties at a Hospital) spent on the high life, as well as prostitutes and legal effing fees 100\’s of thousands more, trying to silence the free press with a vexatious lawsuit, again supplied by workers.
Wilson Bloody Tuckey is not in parliament nor is Jack the fucking Ripper but Craig Bloody Thomson is.
You and Craig are bluffing with a busted flush. Tuckey\’s only political crime was using a letterhead and that bit him so hard on the backside he was eating standing up for months.
The opposition’s job is to keep the bastards honest, of course they are all over him and Julia should have cut him loose long ago, it’s that simple.
“you whinging bastard are still unhappy”
Sure you don’t mean Tony Abbott? He’s been whinging since the election.
The Prime Minister dumped him from the ALP, hint Tony Abbott didn’t.
Facts are not your strong suit.
Stop using people who have faced prosecution as a defence for the indefensible.
The facts remain and your opinion remains biased and corrupt and based generally in mistruth and innuendo and name calling.
You rate with me as high as the scum bag who broke into my house last night.
You really do hate anyone from the Coalition, don’t you Numbers?
Wilson Tuckey was convicted of assault in 1967. At that time Tony Abbott was about 10 years old. Abbott was elected to Parliament in 1994 (27 years after Tuckey’s conviction) yet you expect him to refuse to serve beside someone for an offence committed before he even started high school?
You really do hate anyone from Labor, don’t you Graeme?
Craig Thompson is alleged to have committed these offences in 2005. At that time Abbott was in Howard’s cabinet serving with the convicted criminal Tuckey. Yet you believe that it’s OK for him to apply a different standard of behaviour to Thompson.
Please explain how the passage of time excuses blatant hypocrisy.
I think if you reread what I wrote, you won’t find the words Labor or Thomson mentioned. You’ve assumed that I am demanding Thomson stand down. Nowhere have I suggested this.
My opinion is simply that Tuckey was convicted and whatever sentence he received did not disqualify him from being elected to Parliament. His electorate deemed him worthy of representing them for 30 years.
If Thomson is found guilty and receives a penalty that does not disqualify him from Parliament and IF he gets elected again then he is perfectly entitled to represent that Electorate.
The ALP are the ones who have stood him down from the Party and disendorsed him from standing in Dobell, not Abbott.
Jesus H Christ Bobby, which part of “Tucky wasn’t disqualified from service in Parliament” don’t you understand? He hadn’t been convicted of an offence which could get him jailed for 12 months and he wasn’t a bankrupt. As far as the rules allowed he had a “clean slate” and sevice alongside him is hardly a reason to discredit any member let alone the leader of the opposition. Your disregard of the rules that allow the situation you rely on to “point the bone” at Tony does not mean they do not exist. If the situation, described so avidly by you, called for it Labor people (your mates) would have had Tuckey expelled, merely by indicating that he was disqualified (which he obviously wasn’t). I have been pondering how a person with your disregard/lack of comprehension of basic rules could have been conscripted, let alone compelled against your will to make the trip to the funny country for ten months. You really only use this site to incite anger amongst the readers, don’t you?
“He hadn’t been convicted of an offence which could get him jailed for 12 months and he wasn’t a bankrupt”
Nor has Thompson….
Double standard!
Just popped in to see who’s winning the argument here.
Not much arguing here, Cav – but plenty of abuse and name-calling.
“The Opposition have basically been trashing the rule of law in our country,” Swan shouted in Parliament. “People are innocent until they are proven guilty.”
But on Friday, Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare announced the presumption of innocence would be stripped from workers. “(We) will give law enforcement the power to revoke someone’s licence to work on the waterfront if we’ve got compelling criminal intelligence that they’re involved in organised crime,” he said.
“At the moment, you can only have your right to work on the waterfront removed if you’ve been convicted of a serious criminal offence.”
Why does the Government insist Thomson is innocent until a court finds him guilty, but waterside workers aren’t?
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/we-need-one-rule-for-all/story-e6frfifx-1226368649873
“presumption of innocence would be stripped from workers”
Sounds a bit like what happens to asylum-seekers with a negative ASIO finding. What happens to their presumption of innocence?
They have no right of appeal and are banged up for open-ended durations.
Desperately trying to move the goalposts aren’t you?
Weren’t you busy defending Mr Thomsons presumption of innocence when it became apparent that your beloved ALP doesn’t believe in presumption of innocence, not for workers, not for queue jumpers, not for the media, not for the wealthy, not for anyone?
You have chosen the wrong ideological side in your life and you are simply too stupid to acknowledge it and change.
This has nothing today with ideology and everything to do with hypocrisy. I’m simply highlighting the behaviour of the leader of the opposition who will take whatever position suits political expediency. He’s had more positions on the major issues (especially climate change) than the Karma Sutra, and demonstrates the capacity to change them when it’s convenient.
The leader of the opposition is not the one who directs what happens to queue jumpers you dickhead, that is an ALP/Green decision and has been for some time you dickhead. Not about ideology my arse, the ALP/Green alliance has been in charge for close on 5 years and you still blame Tony abbott for what happens to queue jumpers? you are a joke.
Hello 17….
When I said Singapore would not have Muslims as pilots and that Mahathir Mohammed had complained about the policy, I was told by you I was talking “bullshit” while your Singaporean friend said my claim was a “fairy tale”.
I also wrote I had been a flight sim instructor with the RSAF’s 120 Squadron and the policy of no Muslim pilots had been explained to me by pilots of that squadron. What I did not mention was that my employer also operated a C-130 simulator for the RSAF’s C-130 unit – 122 Squadron I think. There were no Muslim pilots in that Squadron either.
It was not news, of course, to the ex CO of 120 Squadron (a Singaporean)who was also a pilot sim instructor with the company. The exclusion was also well known to the ex RAAF wing commander, the ex RNZAF squadron leader and the ex RNZAF flight lieutenant who were the company’s other pilot sim instructors.
I have not raised the topic with them but, should I do so I am confident they would be astonished to learn what they had experienced was “bullshit” and that they were part of a “fairy tale”.
Here are some old and recent quotes which might interest you.
“Mahathir Mohamad accused Singapore of insincerity and of trying to show that Malaysia is bad and does not practice meritocracy. He further asserted that minority Malays in Singapore suffer from discrimination; for example, he says that they are not given high posts in the armed forces and are denied the chance to become air force pilots. (Reuters, 09/06/96).”
An article in the Far Eastern Economic Review Asia 1998 Yearbook (pg 222f) says: “To Lee this came down to a question of loyalty : “Are we sure that in a moment of crisis, when the heat is on, we are all together heart to heart? I hope so. But we ought to have a fallback position and quickly fill up all the missing hearts if some go missing”.
“The same article says, “In February 1987, Lee’s son commented further on the status of the Malays in an open forum on why Malays do not hold sensitive positions in the armed forces. Explaining that there are no Malay fighter pilots, for example, because their religion might conflict with their duty to Singapore, he provoked a backlash of criticism from the Muslim community in addition to Singapore’s Muslim neighbours”.
“As recently as September 18, Mr Lee, speaking at a Singapore 21 forum said, the reality is that while Singapore has made progress in integrating the different races, certain emotional bonds are instinctive and cannot be removed overnight. (Straits Times September 19, 1999).
Asked by a polytechnic student if Singapore could overcome this and become a nation, Mr Lee said: “Yes, I think so, over a long period of time and selectively. We must not make an error. If, for instance, you put in a Malay officer who’s very religious and who has family ties in Malaysia in charge of a machine gun unit, that’s a very tricky business.”
“Malays are subject to an official policy of systemic general discrimination and treated with distrust even before enlistment. Malay absence from SAFOS scholarships and near-absence from SAF Merit Scholarships deserves special mention. This absence of Malays is an extension of the discrimination against the admission of Malays into senior and sensitive positions in the SAF that is officially sanctioned by this policy.” The Online Citizen – A Community of Singaporeans 30 January 2012.
“The discrimination against Malays has been discussed in parliament and the media, and is justified by the assertion that the loyalty of Malays cannot be assumed, both because they are Muslim and because they have a racial and ethnic affinity with the Malays in Malaysia and Indonesia (Barr,2006)”.
“….He (Gandhi Ambalam) highlighted that during the time when Singapore was in the Federation, then prime minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew had championed “Malaysian Malaysia”, a policy that did not favour one ethnic group over another.
After Singapore was expelled, Mr Lee espoused a Singaporean Singapore. But this did not take place as his policies discriminated against the minority races.
…
Mr Jufrie Mahmood gave examples of such policies. In the armed forces there are sectors where Malays are not allowed to enter and there has only been one Malay general – and, for that matter, he is not Malay but an Indian Muslim.” (Singapore Democrats Party 27 April 2010).
In his 2011 book: “Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going”, Lee Kuan Yew wrote: “I would say today, we can integrate all religions and races except Islam.”
So 17… what do you think – more bullshit and fairy tales or, are you still the only one in step?
I’ve been working out west this week and haven’t been able to catch up with my Singaporean friends. But when I got back and did, this is what I was told –
There are three Malay Muslim pilots in the RSAF.
Major Zakir (KC pilot) currently on peace Carvin detachment. CPT Yusri (another KC Pilot) and Lt Khairul (a trainee pilot) – they’re not sure which aircraft he flies now.
For what it’s worth – There are also around 6 Malay Officers/NCOs in the RSN –
Four LTA-CPTs (two of them aboard Transportation vessels as Nav Officers), (two of them at Logistics departments). There are currently two full Colonels (Army) of Malay Muslim background.
One of them is Col Ishak (widely tipped to be the next Chief of Infantry). Another is a Col Faris (last heard was working at MINDEF).
The media is Singapore is about as reliable as it is here – always trying to whip up xenophobic hysteria. It improves circulation.
An interesting sidelight about the Singaporean helicopter training contingent in Toowoomba (Oakey) is that there are a high proportion of families with autistic children in the cohort – that’s how I got to know them.
The reason for this is that under the training agreement with our government, accompanying children are eligible for enrolment free of charge in local state schools. There are no schools for children with disabilities in Singapore – only charitable institutions where they are “minded” – not educated. As a result, families with these kids queue up for the Oakey posting.
“are you still the only one in step?”
I’m a civilian – I take a great delight in being deliberately out of step, especially when debating with ex-military – it drives them nuts….
Booby, Booby 1735099, Firstly one cannot be said to be shouting whilst expressing one’s self in writing. It can be said that one is adding emphasis to that expression by using upper case letters. I did so because you seem to veer off on another tangent without answering some of the questions and comments I have offered (as you have here, once again). One cannot be accused of losing an arguement unless one is actually involved in an arguement. Merely expressing an explanation during a written discourse is hardly arguing. The fact is that if I took, for instance, the law of gravity and proved it beyond any reasonable doubt, you would not agree and therefore an arguement by me would be pointless and a complete waste of two finger typing skells. I don’t mind pointing out your obvious errors in logic/judgement in my perception and that of others.
No double standards by me Bobby…..Tucky, a man selected by his electorate, was an embarrassment and subsequently resigned as a consequence of his awkward and not too subtle attempt to elicit a favor for his son (heinous crime). Thomson has been found guilty by an investigating body that took three years to put the documents, statements and whatever evidence together to make that finding. It is a “FINDING” (THAT IS EMPHASIS) Thomson has had numerous opportunities to answer/refute/disprove the matters and even in his statement before his peers, the media and the voters and has failed to answer the questions. Just like you Bobby he just points to every one else and cries “I am the only one in step in this whole parade”. There is obviously no embarrassment to the party relying desperately on holding onto Govt. Well guess What Bobby…..it will be one of the many things that bring this government down. FWA is a toothless tiger reliant on the Labor Party. I believe they dragged it out so that it was outside their permitted time to act. They have handballed the job the other investigative bodies that have the expertise to carry on with further action and with the possible offences involved time to prosecute is not an issue.
It will be interesting to see your “arguement” with HRT.
I am glad you are trying to add some interest to your comebacks…..like tossing the bit in about the Kama Sutra.
“Tucky (sic), a man selected by his electorate”
Thomson was also selected by his electorate.
“Thomson has been found guilty”- He hasn’t been charged, let alone found guilty.
“There is obviously no embarrassment to the party relying desperately on holding onto Govt.”
They don’t need his vote to maintain the confidence of the house.
My ICD* is working overtime on this one.
*Inbuilt crap detector
Careful of that detector Robert, it may turn on you and suck the guts right out of you. You do not have to be sued or prosecuted in a court to be found guilty Robert. There are all sorts of bodies of enquiry with investigative powers and findings of guilt frequently lead to monetary fines and suspensions. FWA has had an enquiry (extensive at that, and drawn out to the point that it would appear that they have exceeded the time allowed, the statutory limitation, for them to take appropriate action) and Thomson has had a finding as a result of that investigation. From what I have heard and read it would appear that he is as guilty as sin. So guilty in fact that the controlling body has handed the investigation over to Government bodies associated with the investigation of criminal matters.
Tucky’s electorate probably had an accurate picture of who they voted for whereas Thomson’s electorate had not idea how much of a grub they were getting…..wonder what they think now, Robert.
I am wondering how much confidence the House has in this Government…..if you wish to believe Juliar Robert that is a concern for you and the rest of your minority group.
“You do not have to be sued or prosecuted in a court to be found guilty Robert.”
In this country you do.
“From what I have heard and read”
Don’t believe everything you hear or read – remember Kilroy and Ern Malley?
And you can’t spell Tuckey…
You are a bit short on information Bobby. Some of the the most prominent bodies in Australia have investigative powers, their own laws/rules and, when an offender is found “guilty”, impose penalties much greater then Australian Courts for identical offences.
eg. NRL, AFL, Tennis Australia and the list goes on. Then of course there are “on the spot fines” (Penalty Notices) which are issued by numerous Governmental bodies….. investigation/detection and finding of guilt all in a matter of moments and then the imposition of a fine and in some cases points that may lead to further penalties. If you are aggrieved you may choose to argue your case in a Court but that is not the usual outcome. Guilt is not always the decision of a Judicial Court Roberto. Then there are those who employ people to do their bidding and have rules in place to ensure that the job is done correctly and according to certain guidelines. If an employee is “found guilty” of a transgression by the employer who then follows work place rules the employee may have his employment terminated. Thats a pretty stiff penalty for what may appear to be a superficial reason in some cases, but guilty nonetheless.
I am with you on the belief of what you read and hear, I have been villified wrongly in the press my self over the years. My rule is simple, if the information comes from a number of different sources and the person who is the subject of the complaint/information refuses to co-operate with investigators, has no rebuttal or chooses not to reply to the accusations, then in the same way that a jury comes to a conclusion, ie weigh it all up and throw it at a fan and if enough sh*t sticks to the blanket make a judgement. The FWA, that Government appointed body appointed to police the work place must work the same way, reckon Thomson”s guilty.
Juliar “Pontius Pilate” Gillard says ‘Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth the people; and behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him’. She has hands cleansed in a finger bowl.
Nice of you to pick up my light tap with the left digit on the “e”. The second time was intentional, I noted your reference in the previous post and thought you may wish to partake of the educators prerogative and use a red pen. You can’t “fail” me any more so at the end of the year I will proceed to the next level. I do like to keep people smiling.
Kilroy and Malley??? I told you I am uneducated and there are no bells ringing, apart from the tinnitus.
Hello 17…
You wrote:
“I’ve been working out west this week and haven’t been able to catch up with my Singaporean friends. But when I got back and did, this is what I was told –
There are three Malay Muslim pilots in the RSAF.
Major Zakir (KC pilot) currently on peace Carvin detachment.
CPT Yusri (another KC Pilot) and
Lt Khairul (a trainee pilot) – they’re not sure which aircraft he flies now.
………….
The media is Singapore is about as reliable as it is here – always trying to whip up xenophobic hysteria. It improves circulation.”
I hope your informants had their fingers crossed behind their backs when they passed on that “information” to you. It’s deceitful.
It is written in the present tense but its source is almost certainly a post dated 9 Jan 2007 from a Singapore media outlet called SGForums. As you suggested, that means it may be unreliable.
Nevertheless, here is a copy of the relevant piece from SGForums:
“There are three Malay Muslim pilots in the RSAF.
Major Zakir (KC pilot) currently on peace Carvin detachment
CPT Yusri (another KC Pilot)
Lta Khairul (a trainee pilot) dunno which aircraft he flies”
Your post is word for word the same as that in SGForums except for the comment about Lta Khairul.
I did some research on the three pilots.
I found a photo of Major Zakir and his wife on a Singapore Ministry of Defence webpage. His wife is wearing a snug fitting dress in public, which would indicate she is not a Muslim and therefore, it is most unlikely Zakir is either.
I also found a photo of Cpt Yusri. His wife is wearing Muslim dress but there is no indication of his religion.
Of Lta Khairul (allegedly in training albeit five years ago), I could find no trace.
So 17…?
“I said Singapore would not have Muslims as pilots…..”
So what I’ve been told by serving Singaporeans gels with what you’ve found by Googling. These officers are Malay, and their commissions are promoted in local forums and official Singapore Defence publications as examples of inclusive appointments. You’ve seen pics of them, one of which shows a wife wearing hidjab – http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/publications/cyberpioneer/news/2007/March/14mar07_news.html
But you’re still in denial.
I bet you also believe that white is black, the Pope’s a protestant, and there are fairies (probably wearing burkas) at the bottom of your garden.