CNA (Page 34)

I frequently rely on my reliable engine to suggest something new that is in line with my taste, just like the typical Singaporean who is time-hungry. As non-English speech TV shows and movies go, Mongolia’s works have always featured on my ever-growing record of must-sees. &nbsp,

So I was anxious as I waited for The Mongol Khan’s night performance at the Mongolian State Academic Theatre of Opera and Ballet in August. I am certainly the furthest point from a theater techie, with tastes that range from TV and movies to plays and musicals. Not only would the present be performed in Mongolian that day. &nbsp,

To be clear, The Mongol Khan is&nbsp, not&nbsp, about famous find Genghis Khan, whose wars have gained him a questionable standing in the West despite being revered in Mongolia. &nbsp, The play is instead set in the royal court of the ancient Hunnu ( Xiongnu ) Empire.

But it has all the ingredients of a binge-worthy present play: Adultery, swapped identities, adjustment, jealousy, deceit, punishment, and of course, a fight with the female personality.

A gentleman and a woman whose husband is in charge of the area have an affair. The clandestine lovers have a child, whom the woman’s husband rightfully suspects is n’t his. And so, rather than risk passing on his legacy to his wife’s illegitimate child, the husband chooses another woman’s child ( who also has zero genetic relation to him, thinking you ) as his successor.

The wife’s lover wo n’t stand for it, wanting his biological son to remain in the running, so he swaps the two babies. Chaos ensues.

And that’s just the non-spoiler overview.

Continue Reading

Following reports of food poison, the authorities have suspended Stamford Catering Services ‘ food company operations. &nbsp,

According to a media release released on Monday ( October 14), the Singapore Food Agency ( SFA ) and the Ministry of Health ( MOH) are looking into three gastroenteritis cases that affected 51 people who ordered food from the caterer on October 12. &nbsp,

None of those affected were hospitalised, it added. &nbsp,

SFA has suspended Stamford Catering Services ‘ foods business functions from October 14 until further notice in light of the event.

Stamford Catering Services must cooperate with steps during the suspension, including washing and sanitising its facilities, equipment and utensils.

Before they can continue function, food handlers who work there are required to re-attend and complete the Level 1 Food Safety Course, and also have to take a food-borne pathogen test.

The appointed meals hygiene officer working at the establishment had re-attend and pass the Level 3 Food Safety Course before being able to function as one,” SFA continued. &nbsp,

Following a 52-person food poisoning occurrence, the catering service’s foods health level was downgraded to” C” in 2019. The catering company is located at 24A Senoko South Road.

Therefore, in conjunction with joint checks by MOH and SFA, a great bacterial weight was discovered in meals and environmental samples taken. Another health errors, such as poor laundry of equipment, were even discovered. &nbsp,

Stamford Catering Services has been asked by CNA for feedback on the disqualification. &nbsp,

People officials may report unsatisfactory hygiene practices in foods organizations to SFA online. &nbsp,

Continue Reading

She broke down at one level when she revealed that Singh had secretly disclosed details of her physical assault to her own parents without their consent.

She described how, beginning in 2020, she became involved with WP and became acquainted with Singh through her voluntary work.

She claimed that Singh approached her in 2020 to ask her for a seat on the WP, and that she admired him as a “really knew all” and “would have all the responses.”

Her fake tale about the murder victim was added in a few days before in her crucial speech to parliament on August 3, 2021.

She sent Singh a review of her conversation, and he circled a part of the story, writing” justify” before returning it to her, but did not speak to her about it.

No understanding” the seriousness of what he wrote”, Ms Khan did not make any adjustments. She delivered the conversation on Aug 3, 2021, and it set off a series of satellites, debate and corrections.

Ms. Khan described how “terrified” she felt that her stay would be exposed, in part because she would have to reveal her own sexual assault story, which she had kept secret from her father and a counselor.

She continued to tell the truth, only to be contacted by Singh over a telephone call on August 7, 2021, when he questioned her point-blank about it.

Ms. Khan said her idea was that they were going to take it to the tomb after Singh coaxed her into the conference on August 8, 2021 with Ms. Lim and Mr. Faisal Manap.

This was done because Ms. Lim said the matter was unlikely to arise again, and Singh said” this would definitely be something that we would have to get to the grave.”

On Oct 3, 2021, a moment before another political relaxing, Singh visited Ms Khan’s home with his wife.

According to Ms. Khan, Singh said,” I do n’t think the issue will arise, but if it does, he’s not going to judge me for continuing the narrative.”

Ms. Khan thought that if she continued to lie, Singh would not be judgmental.

She claimed that she was willing to lie once more on October 4, 2021 because she was afraid of what might happen if she told the truth and because it appeared that Pritam may approve of me continuing to stay.

Law Minister K Shanmugam requested more information from Ms Khan regarding the story and asked her for more information regarding when it occurred, which officers place it was at, and which police officers were involved when parliament sat on October 4, 2021.

This was done to investigate the problem.

In text messages shown to the jury, Ms Khan texted Singh while in the legislature halls, asking:” What if I would, Pritam”.

She testified that she was “really terrified” and did not know what to do.

Singh did not reply quickly. When called on by then-speaker Tan Chuan-Jin to reply to Mr Shanmugam, Ms Khan maintained her rest and said she did not wish to discuss further information, citing security.

After the legislature session, Singh later asked Ms. Khan to keep Ms. Lim and him posted and said they would talk afterward.

Ms. Khan after contacted her about standing orders and what the COP’s rules might be because she meant Ms. Lim was outlining what might happen if the issue was raised.

Ms Khan afterwards sent emails to a group chat she had with then-WP functionaries Mr Loh and Mr Nathan, saying:” I’m trying not to worry, but I’m really scared”.

The party agreed to remove some messages from the talk because they worried someone might be reading them. Ms. Khan claimed that she believed she lied in the deleted emails.

The authorities had therefore sent Ms. Khan a draft statement to respond to Mr. Shanmugam, in which she wrote that she was disappointed that she had been pressured to violate” all forms of confidentiality and consent” and that she had instead focused on grilling her.

Yet, Ms Loh told her this “would be a terrible thing to say” and Ms Khan did not ultimately make this statement in congress.

Ms. Khan claimed that she asked if she should come fresh in a conference with Singh and Ms. Lim on October 4, 2021, toward the conclusion of that day’s legislative session.

” I&nbsp, did state, if I tell the truth? And Pritam’s answer was,’ It’s too late for that ‘”, she testified.

Ms. Khan was also questioned about why she did not explain to MP that Singh and another WP leaders had been aware of her lying when she admitted it to parliament on November 1, 2021.

” I wanted to protect them. I wanted to take full responsibility for what happened and I did n’t want to blame anyone else for the error I made,” she said.

Continue Reading

RAEESAH KHAN AND PARTY Officials CHANGE.

Additionally, the prosecution relies on the WhatsApp messages and emails Ms. Khan exchanged with Singh and various group leaders to support its case.

Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam made a speech during a parliament session on October 4, 2021, asking Ms. Khan for more information so that her allegation that the officers were handling a sexual assault case may be looked into.

According to the trial, while the secretary was speaking, Ms Khan sent Singh a message asking for assistance, creating:” What if I would, Pritam”. Both were present in the legislature room at the time.

Singh replied to the minister’s communication after she had replied, telling her she could not provide more information because of the security but that she had once more confirmed her anecdote.

After the congress session, Singh responded to Ms. Khan’s request to speak. They had a meeting with Ms. Lim, the WP chairperson, at around 11.15 p.m. that night.

The prosecution claims that Ms. Khan was given legal advice by Singh and Ms. Lim, but they never asked her why she had lied again or how to understand the lay.

” Mr Khan, however, told them that perhaps there was another manner – to tell the truth. The prosecution’s case is that ( Singh ) told her it was too late for that”, argued Mr Ang.

The officers sent Ms. Khan an email asking to speak with her about her tale on October 7, 2021. Ms Khan forwarded this message to Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal, and asked them for suggestions.

According to the trial, Ms Khan did not receive a reply from the party officials, and upward until Oct 11, 2021, none of them instructed Ms Khan to understand her stay with the officers or in congress.

At a gathering on Oct 12, 2021, Singh and Ms Lim explained to Ms Khan that the issue of the story would not go away, and she should understand the rest in parliament, according to the trial.

From then until Oct 31, 2021, she prepared some drawings of her clarificatory speech, in conversation with Singh, Ms Lim and her assistants Ms Loh and Mr Nathan.

Gathering Discipline PROCEEDINGS

The WP’s inside disciplinary procedures were included in the lawyer’s opening statement, which included details on Ms. Khan’s behavior.

On October 29, 2021, a meeting of the WP’s central executive committee ( CEC ) met to inform CEC members of the clarification Ms. Khan was going to provide.

Mr. Ang testified before the court that the CEC had not been informed that Ms. Lim and Mr. Faisal had been informed on August 8, 2021, nor that Singh and Ms. Khan had met on October 3, 2021 to explore what to do about the rest.

Mr. Low contacted Singh and suggested that the WP form a administrative board to look into the matter after Ms. Khan provided her explanation in congress on November 1, 2021, according to the attorney.

On November 2, 2021, Singh, Ms Lim, and Mr Faisal were all convened on a administrative board that met Ms. Khan and WP people.

At one such meeting, some WP people, including trial testimony Ms. Loh and Mr. Nathan, expressed concern that the board itself had to accept responsibility for” the way they had led Ms. Khan in the matter,” according to Mr. Ang.

Ms. Khan made her announcement to step down as an MP and WP part on November 30, 2021. In the end, the CEC voted to remove Ms. Khan from the group if she continued to attend the meeting.

The WP held a press event on December 2, 2021, which was the first time the COP was hearing oral testimony from witnesses like Ms. Khan and Loh.

” ( Singh ) would have known that Ms. Khan and/or Ms. Loh’s involvement in the matter would have been revealed when they testified before the COP,” said Mr. Ang.

Singh made the initial public admission at this press conference that the WP had been aware of Ms. Khan’s fabrication about a year after she first reported the sexual assault case to parliament.

The penalties Singh faces are a maximum jail term of three years, a fine of up to S$ 7, 000 ( US$ 5, 360 ), or both per charge.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers had recently said that the trial may get a good for each cost if Singh is convicted.

Anyone who is fined at least S$ 10,000 or jailed for at least a month is not eligible to run for office as an MP under the laws of the Constitution.

A sitting MP who is subject to these fines may lose their desk. The suspension is for five decades.

According to researchers, the Constitution’s browsing will determine Singh’s fate.

The maximum fine of S$ 14, 000 may preclude him as an MP and from running in the upcoming election if both fees are combined as an offense.

After admitting to her rest, Ms Khan resigned from the WP and as an MP, and was given a S$ 35, 000 good on the COP’s advice.

The test continues, with Ms Khan set to take the walk on Monday.

Continue Reading

Pritam Singh, the leader of the opposition and Workers ‘ Party leader, arrived at the State Courts on Monday morning ( October 14 ) for the first day of his trial for allegedly lying to parliament.

He was accused of lying to a parliamentary committee on two matters in relation to the circumstance of Raeesah Khan seven months ago.

Singh, 48, appears to be the first Member of Parliament to face these particular charges under the Parliament ( Privileges, Immunities and Powers ) Act, experts told CNA.

The most recent news from the State Courts can be found on our life website.

Continue Reading

Pritam Singh’s trial is scheduled to begin on Monday ( October 14), seven months after he was accused of lying to a parliamentary committee over the Raeesah Khan case.

Singh, 48, appears to be the first Member of Parliament to face these particular charges under the Parliament ( Privileges, Immunities and Powers ) Act, experts told CNA.

The most recent news from the State Courts can be found on our life website.

Continue Reading

Although it appears simple much, it is not for everyone to do instantly. So, firstly, get a thorough understanding of your own principles; determine what matters to you and what your non-negotiables are. &nbsp,

This includes places like as use of speech or certain words, instilling positive attitudes in the kids, maintaining a healthy diet and an active life, or reducing discrimination. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Once listed, examine them with your family until you both agree. Finally, speak to your in-laws – you may need a sit-down conference with them, as well as be armed with examples of the restrictions.

For example, if your in-laws tend to use bad language with your kids (” So ridiculous”! ), you may propose they say,” This find a better way”, instead.

You can also request them if they’re happy to let you know their limitations and if you’ve unintentionally ingested them.

Dan Ng, a registered advisor with Singapore Association for Counselling, said:” Preferably, it is good to set a limit early in the marriage. It might be challenging to define or evidently draw a line depending on the circumstance. It boils down to ethnic and price differences, and having a common understanding of each other’s beliefs”.

There are no appropriate responses. Restrictions vary for various people. For instance, some in-laws expect to see their kids ( and children ) every time, while others feel that once a month or weekend is good, to provide more time for different activities.

Do n’t forget to share your boundaries with empathy, considering that your in-laws may not have had experience with the “younger generation” telling them no.

2. COMMUNICATE QUICKLY, BUT WITH RESPECT

Continue Reading