ENCRYPTION, OPACITY AND VAGUENESS
Sarawak Report's optimum operational habitat
On January 27, 2015, Sarawak Report wrote an article, which prejudiced the decisions of a Judge of a legitimate Common Law Court - THE HIGH COURT OF SINGAPORE - with its frivolous, contradictory and illegal 'Judgment' in the said article.
This blog will present all the strong evidence available that proves Sarawak Report actually published "FABRICATED" materials - as determined by the presiding Justice Edmund Leow - in order to support its premature conclusions, premised on fabricated information.
The said fabricated information was provided to the Court by Dato Ting Check Sii, a disgruntled former “best friend” who had been proven many a times previously by the Law Courts to have been providing false testimonies, as evidenced by the sheer amount of cases he had brought forth and lost.
In this last round of litigation that took place on this highly-respected Island Republic - TANAKA V. TUFAIL, in ‘SUIT NO 783 OF 2012’ - the Singapore case was covered by Sarawak Report with surprising speed. In fact, Sarawak Report published its post moments after said evidence were presented before the presiding Judge, Justice Edmund Leow.
As mentioned before, the offending article that featured said fabricated materials was published on January 27, 2015 when Sarawak Report pronounced its own unfair - not to mention, illegal - 'Judgment' whereas the official High Court Judgment in Singapore was only meted out on June 29, 2015.
July 29, 2015 marked exactly one month from THE HIGH COURT OF SINGAPORE Judgment.
To have a better understanding of the seeming disconnect, we note Clare Brown also had dealings with another not-so-notorious, but very convicted forger - Canadian Cullen Johnson, who employed a similar modus operandi by forging banking and other documents of a secure nature.
After an unsubstantiated and alleged hack on Sarawak Report, a damning admission by Clare Rewcastle Brown - that she had been Skyping and emailing with Mr Johnson - slipped through the cracks as her audience-at-large failed to appraise that seemingly Freudian slip - we shall explore this in coming posts...stay tuned, there’s much to tell - a slip that exposed the "Clare-Cullen Connection", which enabled them to reap untold rewards from their ‘pursuits’ in a life of fraud, to damn, shame and then harvest payment from their victims.
Few noted the significance of the contradictory statements concerning the nature of their dealings, which took place right before the arrest of Mr Johnson and his wife-accomplice, Elaine White.
The correlation between Sarawak Report articles and real-life scenarios, such as in the TANAKA V. TUFAIL, in 'SUIT NO 783 OF 2012' and the recent Justo confession, raises questions regarding a possible conspiracy.
By the one hand, Sarawak Report rushed to Justo’s 'defence' immediately following his arrest. Contrastingly, less than a month later, Clare Rewcastle Brown slammed Justo as a ‘bunkum’ full of untruths.
More recently, a former staff of Radio Free Sarawak was also heavily censured by Sarawak Report over his 'exposé' of his former employer.
Through the years, with such a persistently treacherous trend of Clare making contradictory statements about people - using her signature mouthpiece, Sarawak Report - her connections and opinions prove to all and sundry, how these three and also Sarawak Report’s ‘Judgements’ lack credibility and consistency.
So, what secrets lurk behind Sarawak Report? Join us on this journey to seek the truth about these notorious ‘snoops’.
Listen to Secrets of Sarawak Report - The Beginning of the End on SoundCloud.
Sarawak Report's optimum operational habitat
On January 27, 2015, Sarawak Report wrote an article, which prejudiced the decisions of a Judge of a legitimate Common Law Court - THE HIGH COURT OF SINGAPORE - with its frivolous, contradictory and illegal 'Judgment' in the said article.
This blog will present all the strong evidence available that proves Sarawak Report actually published "FABRICATED" materials - as determined by the presiding Justice Edmund Leow - in order to support its premature conclusions, premised on fabricated information.
The said fabricated information was provided to the Court by Dato Ting Check Sii, a disgruntled former “best friend” who had been proven many a times previously by the Law Courts to have been providing false testimonies, as evidenced by the sheer amount of cases he had brought forth and lost.
In this last round of litigation that took place on this highly-respected Island Republic - TANAKA V. TUFAIL, in ‘SUIT NO 783 OF 2012’ - the Singapore case was covered by Sarawak Report with surprising speed. In fact, Sarawak Report published its post moments after said evidence were presented before the presiding Judge, Justice Edmund Leow.
As mentioned before, the offending article that featured said fabricated materials was published on January 27, 2015 when Sarawak Report pronounced its own unfair - not to mention, illegal - 'Judgment' whereas the official High Court Judgment in Singapore was only meted out on June 29, 2015.
July 29, 2015 marked exactly one month from THE HIGH COURT OF SINGAPORE Judgment.
To have a better understanding of the seeming disconnect, we note Clare Brown also had dealings with another not-so-notorious, but very convicted forger - Canadian Cullen Johnson, who employed a similar modus operandi by forging banking and other documents of a secure nature.
After an unsubstantiated and alleged hack on Sarawak Report, a damning admission by Clare Rewcastle Brown - that she had been Skyping and emailing with Mr Johnson - slipped through the cracks as her audience-at-large failed to appraise that seemingly Freudian slip - we shall explore this in coming posts...stay tuned, there’s much to tell - a slip that exposed the "Clare-Cullen Connection", which enabled them to reap untold rewards from their ‘pursuits’ in a life of fraud, to damn, shame and then harvest payment from their victims.
Few noted the significance of the contradictory statements concerning the nature of their dealings, which took place right before the arrest of Mr Johnson and his wife-accomplice, Elaine White.
The correlation between Sarawak Report articles and real-life scenarios, such as in the TANAKA V. TUFAIL, in 'SUIT NO 783 OF 2012' and the recent Justo confession, raises questions regarding a possible conspiracy.
By the one hand, Sarawak Report rushed to Justo’s 'defence' immediately following his arrest. Contrastingly, less than a month later, Clare Rewcastle Brown slammed Justo as a ‘bunkum’ full of untruths.
More recently, a former staff of Radio Free Sarawak was also heavily censured by Sarawak Report over his 'exposé' of his former employer.
Through the years, with such a persistently treacherous trend of Clare making contradictory statements about people - using her signature mouthpiece, Sarawak Report - her connections and opinions prove to all and sundry, how these three and also Sarawak Report’s ‘Judgements’ lack credibility and consistency.
So, what secrets lurk behind Sarawak Report? Join us on this journey to seek the truth about these notorious ‘snoops’.
– - –
– - –
Listen to Secrets of Sarawak Report - The Beginning of the End on SoundCloud.
– – –
– - –
The NINE QUESTIONS Blog will return with more facts.
– - –
– - –
The NINE QUESTIONS Blog will return with more facts.
– - –
