Singapore Rebel : 2014

Thursday, October 23, 2014

"A life without idealism & convictions is a mere meaningless existence"

Add caption

by Teo Soh Lung

“Now some of you may have heard that when you are young you are idealistic, when you're old you are realistic. Now this is the kind of rubbish that is used by those who have either lost their ideals or have sold their ideals for self-interests. Age should not wither one's ideals or convictions.

If anything, it should only consolidate and make it more resolute. If age has anything to do with it, it is only by way of expression and application of these ideals and convictions having the benefit of a youthful experience. And a life without convictions, without idealism, is a mere meaningless existence, and I'm sure most of you will agree that as human beings, we are worthy of a life much more meaningful than just that.”

- Dr Lim Hock Siew at the launch of Fajar Generation on 14 Nov 2009.

Dr Lim Hock Siew was a friend of former prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew. A brilliant orator, talented artist and true socialist, he was about 9 years younger than Lee. He helped Lee found the PAP in 1954 and assisted in the drafting of the constitution for the party. In 1961, Lee did not renew his membership with the party. Together with others who had been either expelled from the party or left because of ideological differences, Dr Lim founded the Barisan Sosialis.

On 2 Feb 1963, just a few months before the general election, Dr Lim together with almost the entire central executive committee of the Barisan were arrested under the ISA. Codenamed Operation Coldstore, a total of not less than 133 people were arrested and imprisoned for an inordinate period of time, many exceeding 10 years. At the time of arrest, Dr Lim’s son was only five months old. An idealist and a principled man, Dr Lim remained in prison for 20 years. He refused to give Lee the satisfaction of any signed statement. Lee himself could have released Dr Lim at any time by imposing conditions for his release without having to obtain his signature. He did not do so and I can only conclude that it was fear that Dr Lim could revive opposition politics in Singapore that would endanger the survival of the PAP that caused Lee to exert such cruelty on his erstwhile friend who had contributed hugely to his party.

Incidentally, 20 years is more than a sentence for life imprisonment for a convicted criminal. A life sentence with its usual one third remission for good behaviour is 14 years.

Dr Lim Hock Siew (Banned in Singapore)Ex-ISA detainee issues challenge to Dr Tony Tan
Dr Lim Hock Siew : A Singaporean Patriot
Tributes to Dr Lim Hock Siew
Dr Lim Hock Siew Speaks from Singapore Prison (Date - 18.3.1972)

Posters : Lim Hock Siew

"Mr President, I urge you to seek the truth about Operation Coldstore and Battle for Merger"

By Tan Jee Say

Mr President, I urge you to seek the truth about Operation Coldstore and Battle for Merger during your State visit in the UK
The President (tony_tan@istana.gov.sg)
cc Prime Minister (lee_hsien_loong@pmo.gov.sg)

Dear President,

Early this year, I responded to your challenge issued during the 2011 Presidential Election TOC TV Forum that "one must be able to back up" "the very serious charge" that "the Internal Security Act had been used for political purposes".

In my response [link], I referred to recently declassified British Government documents relating to Operation Coldstore which revealed that Lord Selkirk, the UK Commissioner to Singapore at that time, reported to Duncan Sandys, secretary of state for the colonies, that 'there is no important new evidence of subversive activity on which arrests at this juncture can be justified. We could not substantiate a charge that they are planning to use violence. In the absence of specific evidence of subversion the arrests would be construed as an attempt by HMG to stifle legitimate opposition.' (Geoff Wade)

Independent check of archives in London

As I have produced before you the evidence that you asked for, Singaporeans expected you to follow up on it. More than 8 months have passed, but you have neither replied my letter nor shown any interest or follow-up action to verify the evidence. Perhaps the declassified papers were too far away from Singapore but now that you are in London on a State visit, physical distance is not an issue. The documents are kept at the British National Archives in Kew, London which is about 8 miles or a short drive of 15-20 minutes, from Buckingham Palace where you are currently staying. You can of course spend as much time as you want to go through the papers and satisfy yourself of their authenticity and accuracy. If this short journey or research work is too arduous for you to undertake, you can always request Her Majesty's Government to arrange for their intelligence officers to brief you. I am sure the HMG as gracious host, will be happy to oblige.

Your independent verification of the evidence is particularly important at this juncture in view of 2 recent events :

1. In disallowing the film "To Singapore, With Love" from public screening or distribution in Singapore, a documentary about political exiles who fled from Singapore, the Government has alleged that it contains "untruths and deceptions", designed to "whitewash their past actions" as " Communist Party of Malaya members and Communist United Front sympathisers" and

2. The Government has launched a reprint of Mr Lee Kuan Yew's radio broadcasts on The Battle For Merger of 1961 " 'to provide a reality check' to attempts by some historians to recast the role played by communists and their supporters on the issue" (Straits Times, 10 Oct 2014).

Truth about the Merger

Singaporean historian Dr Thum Pingtjin, a Rhodes Scholar and Commonwealth Scholar educated at both Oxford and Harvard, has written about events leading to the battle for Merger in ARI Working Paper No. 211 'The Fundamental Issue is Anti-colonialism, Not Merger': Singapore's "Progressive Left", Operation Coldstore, and the Creation of Malaysia.

Citing the declassified British Government documents, he made the following points :

1." ....Lee engineered a 'Hobson's choice' (in the Merger Referendum) : he ensured that all alternatives to the PAP option were repugnant, leaving the public with no real choice. The British called this 'a dishonest manoeuvre' and the Tunku 'a dirty game' ....",

2. "... Under Lee's direction, Singapore Special Branch produced a paper describing an extensive communist conspiracy in Singapore, directed from the underground by the CPM and led in the open by Barisan politicians as part of a Communist "United Front". The Security Liaison Officer (SLO), Maurice Williams, tore apart the paper, noting numerous major deficiencies. Firstly, ' ín spite of intensive investigations, no evidence has been obtained' of a conspiracy, and that the paper's conclusions were entirely 'surmise'. Secondly, sharing the goal of Singapore's independence with the Communists did not make someone a Communist sympathiser. Thirdly, it was ínconceivable that Secret Branch investigations would have failed to yield any evidence of such control and direction' of a conspiracy of such massive breadth and scale. "Finally, the label Communist "United Front" was so broadly applied that it referred to anyone unhappy with the government. Thus, he concluded, 'The developments since August 1961 outlined in the paper do NOT support this conclusion' stated in the Special Branch paper, and strongly advised against repression.

"Unable to proceed with arrests, the Federation and Singapore governments sought to provoke the Barisan into unconstitutional action on their own. A campaign of harassment against newspapers, publications, trade unions, and opposition politicians commenced.
"Meanwhile, Lee sought to go over Selkirk and appeal directly to his superiors in London. But when he met British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan in May 1962, Lee was forced to admit under close questioning that the Barisan leaders were merely 'stooges' and not leading Communists, and that the trade unions were no more communist than the Electrical Trades Union in Britain - i.e., not controlled by communists and functioning chiefly as a left-wing pressure group.111 .........."

Dr Thum's research paper, dated November 2013, can be accessed by clicking over this[link].

Seek truth

Mr President, the Government is now disputing the accounts of historians even though they quoted, from official British Government documents, the professional judgement of British Special Branch officers that those arrested were not communists or communist united front sympathisers but merely leftwing politicians and trade unionists opposed to the PAP. It is important that this fundamental matter be resolved as we prepare to celebrate the 50th anniversary of our independence.

Mr President Sir, I urge you to get to the bottom of this issue, to seek and establish the truth by checking it out at the British National Archives in Kew, London during your present State visit in the United Kingdom. You owe it to the people of Singapore to do so particularly when you asked for evidence to prove that the ISA had been used for political purposes.

Yours sincerely,
Tan Jee Say

------------------------------------------

VIDEOS

Face to Face 2: Tan Jee Say goes head to head with Tony Tan

Ex-ISA detainee issues challenge to Dr Tony Tan

Ex-political prisoner speaks out in Singapore (Banned in Singapore)

Thursday, October 16, 2014

Activists speak about their police interrogations

A police investigation is not something that most civil activists would look forward to. It is an annoyance and an intrusion. But given the State's liberal enforcement of our many illiberal laws, such a prospect can never be totally discounted.

In the wake of the police interrogation of Han Hui Hui, former lawyer and ISA detainee Teo Soh Lung had written a brief guide on what to do when one is summoned for police investigation.

Her views are further expanded here by other human rights advocates and filmmakers who had spent hours on the interrogatee's chair. Some were eventually prosecuted, others were not. Their experiences and advices offer snapshots on the extent of police powers in Singapore, and some methods by which activists can use to overcome their fear of isolation and prosecution.

Seelan Palay

Describe your role in civil society: Activist, Artist, Video/Filmmaker

Years active: From 2004 to present

How many police interrogations have you undergone? I believe 7-10

What were the nature of the investigations? Flyer distribution, assembly without permit, screening of political film

How did the police serve the notices? Hand delivered to my house

Total number of hours under interrogation? Each time is about an hour.

Have you ever been formally charged? Yes

How much fine did you pay? I did not pay the fine

How many days of prison time did you undergo? 12 days

Cite one aspect of your experience in which you feel the authorities were out-of-line?

Every single time they arrest and charge us for "illegal assembly and/or procession", especially the way they surrounded and forcefully arrested us during our Tak Boleh Tahan march from Parliament House.

What's your advice for activists undergoing police probe for their work?

I answered almost every question by citing that I was only excercising my constitutional rights to freedom of speech and assembly. I believe this is a good way to answer and remind people/authorities about those rights, and to avoid any incrimination through the questions that the police ask you.

Chong Kai Xiong

Describe your role in civil society: Not sure what to write here

Years active: from end 2006 to present

How many police interrogations have you undergone?

5 in total in connection to the following events:

- 10 Dec 2006 Human Rights Day Walk,
- 16 Sep 2007 IMF/WB anniversary walk,
- 15 March 2008 TBT rally/walk from Parliament House (arrested)
- 9 August 2008 TBT National Day
- 12 Jan 2009 MOM Protest (arrested)

What were the nature of the investigations? Arrested twice. Questioned for participation in assembly or procession without permit for four times and once for “criminal trespassing”.

How did the police serve the notices? By registered mail and by coming to my doorstep.

Total number of hours under interrogation? 1 to 1.5 hours each time.

Have you ever been formally charged? Yes, thrice.

How much fine did you pay? Approximately $3500

How many days of prison time did you undergo? None

Cite one aspect of your experience in which you feel the authorities were out-of-line?

Arrested outside MOM for “criminal trespassing” even though I was standing on public pavement, shared with loads of pedestrians; obstruction of procession and forcible removal of placards during arrest (TBT protest) without proper reason given.

What's your advice for activists undergoing police probe for their work?

- Meet with your peers and seek legal advice.
- Keep calm and firm and don't let anyone goad or guilt trip you. Know you have done nothing wrong and it is the police that has to justify their actions.
- Do not volunteer information for whatever reason. It will likely be used against you or your peers in court.
- Do not make self-incriminating statements, or statements implicating others.
- Refuse to answer where possible.
- Check through the printout of the recorded statement given by the investigation officer. Make sure your words have been accurately recorded.
- Ask for a copy of the statement; if the police refuses to hand you one, manually copy the questions and answers down.

Tian Jing

Years active: 2006-2010

How many police interrogations have you undergone? 3 interviews

What were the nature of the investigations? Illegal Assembly without permit, illegal procession, attempted procession

How did the police serve the notices? Letter by hand

Total number of hours under interrogation? 30 minutes to 1 hour

Have you ever been formally charged? Yes, 1 charge

How much fine did you pay? $1000

How many days of prison time did you undergo? None

What's your advice for activists undergoing police probe for their work?

There is no need to answer anything in the investigation, there's no obligation. Just say no comments.

Rachel Zeng

Describe your role in civil society: I work on human rights issues and in recent years, I have been focusing on the campaign against the death penalty. I have also worked on issues pertaining to G8, (conducted a protest outside the Japanese embassy in 2008), ISA, Burma, freedom of speech and assembly, the atrocities in Sri Lankan, LGBT rights (as an ally), among others.

Years active: From 2008 to now.

How many police interrogations have you undergone? 2

What were the nature of the investigations?

Disributing flyers outside Liat Towers (on the case of Yong Vui Kong) and selling Once a Jolly Hangman during Freedom Film Festival at the Substation.

How did the police serve the notices?

For the first case, they sent the notice to me thrice - personally, by registered post, and via normal post. In the second case, the Investigating Officer (IO) came personally to my flat and served it to me in person - at about 7.15am in the morning.

Total number of hours under interrogation? First case - about an hour; second case - close to 2 hours.

Have you ever been formally charged? No.

Cite one aspect of your experience in which you feel the authorities were out-of-line?

I was told by the IO in the first investigation, "I am the one doing the questioning" when I repeatedly asked him why he was asking me certain questions which I felt were irrelevant. This might not be out of line, as he did try to maintain his cool but I just wanted to put this down anyway.

What's your advice for activists undergoing police probe for their work?

Before investigation - read up on the particular act that you are investigated under, and identify which clauses you have violated, and which ones actually protect you. If you can, bring a copy of the act along for reference in case you need to challenge the IO. Always inform fellow activists that you will be investigated, and if possible, do not go alone. Also, if the stipulated date and time of the investigation is inconvenient for you, feel free to change it.

During the questioning - ask the IO if you will be able to get a copy of your signed statement, and if the answer is no, establish an agreement to take down notes of the questions and answers. If they aren't rude, be nice about it, but maintain the stand that you must have some sort of a record for your personal reference. During the questioning, keep your answers short and clear. If the questions are irrelevant, just say so. Just be frank, and don't need to lie, and be confident about your answers. Get out of it as soon as you can, and do bring a jacket if you are at Cantonment Police Complex.

Martyn See

Describe your role in civil society: Documentary filmmaker, blogger

Years active: From 2005

How many police interrogations have you undergone? 6 interrogations

What were the nature of the investigations?

Making of a political film 'Singapore Rebel' and organising a private indoor human rights forum featuring foreign MPs

How did the police serve the notices? Mostly by calls to my mobile phone, and once via registered mail.

Total number of hours under interrogation? About 11 hours over 6 sessions.

Have you ever been formally charged? No.

Cite one aspect of your experience in which you feel the authorities were out-of-line?

During the 'Singapore Rebel' investigations, my video camera was confiscated, but at no point did I surrender my mobile phone, so it came as a shock when friends informed me that they were called up by the police to attend questioning over my case.

What's your advice for activists undergoing police probe for their work?

Civil activists under investigation need to be mentally prepared. Other than M. Ravi, lawyers will not be forthcoming. Audio-visual recordings are prohibited in the interrogation room, although you can bring your mobile devices. When summoned, ascertain with the police the exact law under which you are being investigated. In the interrogation room, take your time to formulate replies but keep them short. Don't be afraid to answer "I don't know", "no comment" or "I don't remember". Bring a notepad. Officers tend to be professional and cordial in cases involving civil rights, but do avoid being lulled into providing unnecessary information.

Leslie Chew

Describe your role in civil society: Observer

Years active: from 2011 to 214

How many police interrogations have you undergone? 1

What were the nature of the investigations? Accused of sedition

How did the police serve the notices? No notice. Direct arrest and detained for around 44 hours before bail is allowed. Then forbidden to travel out of the country for 3 months while they take their own sweet time to decide that they have no ground to charge me for sedition.

Total number of hours under interrogation? Over 30 hours.

Have you ever been formally charged? Not for sedition.

Cite one aspect of your experience in which you feel the authorities were out-of-line?
Seizing all the computers and data storage devices in my parents' home including my elderly father's work computer "for investigation".

What's your advice for activists undergoing police probe for their work?

1. The police are not your friends.
2. Smile, keep clam and be friendly, but do not trust them one bit. No matter how friendly they pretend to be, they are not your friends.
3. Keep your answers short and sweet.
4. Do not volunteer any information. I repeat, they are not your friends.
5. Anything you say, even innocently, can and will be used against you. Once again, they are not your friends.
6. There is no coffee at Cantonment.
7. On the bright side, if arrested, it is a good opportunity to get any medical conditions you have treated for free.

Lynn Lee

Describe your role in civil society: Documentary filmmaker

Years active: From 2008.

How many police interrogations have you undergone? Two

What were the nature of the investigations? The Internal Affairs Officer (IAO) said they were investigating allegations of police brutality made by 2 SMRT bus drivers. I had interviewed the drivers and posted segments of the interviews online.

How did the police serve the notices? They came to my house. They also asked to confiscate my harddrive, computer, laptop and mobile phone.

Total number of hours under interrogation? 2 hours + 9 hours (parts of the second interview involved police taking apart my laptop and examining data in it; they also examined my mobile phone).

Have you ever been formally charged? No.

The AGC sent me a letter informing me that they had decided not to prosecute me, despite finding that I was in contempt of court. I had no idea when I was being questioned, that the IAO was investigating me for contempt. I had always thought they were investigating the SMRT drivers' allegations of police brutality.

Cite one aspect of your experience in which you feel the authorities were out-of-line?

The IAO said they were investigating the SMRT drivers' allegations of abuse. But they kept asking me lots of irrelevant questions about whether I championed any "causes". The police superintendent sent to confiscate my laptop and mobile phone was not from the IAO (which is supposed to work independently), but from Bedok branch. When I asked him to justify why it was necessary to take my things, he said I should just let them "seize first" and lodge a complaint later!

What's your advice for activists undergoing police probe for their work?

Take notes. Write down all questions and answers. Write down the name and rank of the people questioning you. Bring a sweater, wear comfortable shoes and bring your own water. If you wear contact lenses, bring eyedrops and your glasses. I realised when I was being interviewed, that my eyes felt really dry after six or seven hours. Give short, truthful answers. Don't ramble. Take your time. If you feel that a question is irrelevant, say so and decline to answer. If you can't remember, say you can't remember. Read and re-read your statement before signing it. Don't be afraid to ask for amendments if something is wrong. Be polite but assertive. And finally, make sure some one you trust outside is monitoring the situation.

Shafi'ie

Describe your role in civil society:

I did what needed to be done. I did not sign up with a volunteer corp of sorts so there was not any "assigned" roles but I was with sghumanrights, Free Burma Campaign Sg, SADPC and other occasional group actions.

How many police interrogations have you undergone? There are too many for me to recall at this moment.

What were the nature of the investigations?

To "assist investigation" on events like: giving out flyers in public to raise awareness on issues, being in candlelight vigils, wearing a tshirt with a certain design, peaceful protest following the announcement to increase public transport and costs of utilities that would take place simultaneous with the increased salaries of the ministries.

How did the police serve the notices? Once by hand, at night. Others by mail, occasionally coupled with phone calls.

Total number of hours under interrogation? I cannot recall the exact number at the moment.

Have you ever been formally charged? Yes.

How much fine did you pay? I was billed $1,600 in one case. In another, it was $5,000. In the latter, it was technically defined as pay costs to the AGC (Attorney-General's Chambers) and not as fine.

How many days of prison time did you undergo? 7 days.

Cite one aspect of your experience in which you feel the authorities were out-of-line?

To agree or disagree is entirely human. To express sentiments peacefully is naturally human too, and these were most often made out of genuine concern. Getting into legal trouble for doing so is not characteristic of a society that proclaims to be democratic.

What's your advice for activists undergoing police probe for their work?

1. Read the Constitution to understand your legal rights and the legal technicalities relevant to your situation. You would be surprised that most officers do not have knowledge about the Constitution.

2. Be firm but civil and courteous in interactions with the police. Be respectful (as you ought to fellow human beings) but firmly state your rights. Know what you stand for and remind the officer that you are not a criminal. However, if the officer is outright rude or threatening despite you being respectful, do not hesitate to lodge a complain.

3. Keep a record of what was said during the investigation. Bring a pen and paper to take down notes. You will be asked to counter-check and sign against your statement as typed in by the officer but the copy will not be given to you. Therefore, the notes you take down will be your own copy.

4. If you are being monitored and followed, try to verify and confirm that you are indeed being followed. If so, take pictures of the culprit as record. Inform others around you. Monitor and follow the culprit.

5. As in everything, always remember to pause and reflect. To fight systemic injustice is only half the battle, to grow as a better person is the other half. Always be motivated by love because it nourishes no matter what you have to go through. In this way, you win even when you lose. Never succumb to hate because it is blinding. The greatest tragedy is to embody the injustice you set out to stop.

Jaslyn Go

Describe your role in civil society: Civil activist, and now a member of SDP

Years active: From 2007

How many police interrogations have you undergone? 3 or 4 (can't remember)

What were the nature of the investigations? Illegal assembly, protest

How did the police serve the notices?

First notice was served at almost 10pm when two male officers banged on my door very loudly. I reprimanded them and later lodged a formal complaint with the Investigating Officer (IO). Subsequently, letters were discreetly thrown into my house even though my door was open and I was at home at that time. After I did not respond to these notices, they were delivered via registered mail.

Total number of hours under interrogation? Not more than 2 hours each time.

Have you ever been formally charged? Yes, twice.

How much fine did you pay?

First charge was $900 for each offence - total $1,800 (for illegal assembly and protest). Second charge was $600 (for illegal assembly).

How many days of prison time did you undergo? None

Cite one aspect of your experience in which you feel the authorities were out-of-line?

During the interview at the Bukit Merah Neighbourhood Police Post, I had wanted to write down the questions but the IO said that would take up too much time. So he suggested that he would allow me the time to write only after I had answer the questions. But after the interview was over, he refused to let me do so.

What's your advice for activists undergoing police probe for their work?

Know your rights and be assertive. We need not be rude, but if you feel the police have crossed the line, lodge a formal complaint.

Tuesday, October 14, 2014

National security bogeyman used to disallow film

"The contents of the film undermine national security because legitimate actions of the security agencies to protect the national security and stability of Singapore are presented in a distorted way as acts that victimised innocent individuals"
- MDA, Sept 10

"People who were communist or sympathisers or activists.. Why should we allow them, through a movie, to present an account of themselves.. Which will sully the honour and the reputation of the security people, and the brave men and women who fought the communist, all those many years."
- PM Lee Hsien Loong, Oct 3, 2014

"Many of the individuals featured in the film were former armed communist guerillas. Unlike a book, a film can more easily arouse emotional responses and reach a wider audience. To allow public screening.. would be like allowing jihadi terrorist groups today to produce and publicly screen films that glorify their jihadist cause."
- Yap Neng Jye, Press Secretary to Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs, Oct 14, 2014

Here's why the Government's official reason for the NAR rating of Tan Pin Pin's 'To Singapore With Love' is utter bollocks, or at best, a red herring.

In 2006, MDA passed a film (rated PG) made by 5 Singaporean researchers and filmmakers entitled 'I Love Malaya'. While the premise of the documentary centres on the debate in Malaysia regarding Chin Peng's application to return to his hometown, much of the film's 45 minutes captures the lives and interviews of communist exiles in the Betong Peace Villages of Southern Thailand, the same place where Tan Pin Pin interviewed her subjects.

Watch Al Jazeera's report of 'I Love Malaya' here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNwyCeJw7xY

You can order the DVD here
http://www.objectifsfilms.com/product.php?id_product=17

-----------------------------------------------

In the same year, Malaysian director Amir Muhammad's film 'The Last Communist', which also features extensive interviews of exiles in Betong, was rated PG by MDA and given a commercial run in Cathay cinemas.

http://staff.science.nus.edu.sg/~sivasothi/blog/index.php?entry=/movies/20060510-the_last_communist.txt

You can watch The Last Communist in its entirety here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTM0BwgDXn8

------------------------------------------------

In 2007, Amir's follow-up 'Village People Radio Show', which contained more interviews with communist exiles in Betong, was rated NC16 by MDA and screened in public.

http://limchangmoh.blogspot.sg/2007/04/apa-khabar-orang-kampung-to-release-in.html

You can order the DVD here
http://www.objectifsfilms.com/product.php?id_product=31

------------------------------------------------

In 'To Singapore With Love', the story of the elderly exiles in Betong Village makes up a small segment. There are no central characters, just a tapestry of vignettes that offer snapshots into the lives of octogenarian (ex)-communists. The Betong Village story is like refreshment to whet the appetites for the main course of the film.

And what is the main course?

They are the depiction of the lives of political dissidents Tan Wah Piow, Ho Juan Thai, the late Francis Khoo and Dr Ang Swee Chai, and a small cameo by Said Zahari, whose interview film 'Zahari's 17 Years' remains banned (not NAR, but gazetted and criminalised). All of whom were not featured in the aforementioned documentaries passed by MDA.

So what is it about the four main characters in TSWL that frightens the government so much?

To be sure, none of them were communists, or much less accused of being one, although Tan Wah Piow was named as the mastermind behind the bogus 'Marxist Conspiracy' arrests of 1987.

There is hardly any mention of Francis Khoo or Dr Ang Swee Chai's appearance in the film by the Government. In fact, after the death of Mr Khoo, Dr Ang was granted a one-off visa to visit Singapore. It was her first visit in decades. Moving freely, the world-renowned campaigner for Palestinian rights gave public talks. No threat to national security there, although it is unlikely the government will grant the ex-ISA detainee a permanent stay considering her outspokenness on human rights abuses.

Tan Wah Piow and Ho Juan Thai were both cited by Dr Yaacob Ibrahim as having left Singapore illegally. And the Minister added that "both Ho and Tan can return to Singapore, although they cannot expect to be granted immunity if they are found to have flouted the law." Do both fugitives undermine national security? Not by a long shot, and this is supported by the absence of statements pinning them down as such.

So how does the film undermine national security?

It lies in the reason behind the police's investigation of the SDP in 2011 after the party organised a public forum featuring political exiles Francis Seow and Tang Fong Har speaking via teleconferencing.

Police probe SDP forum involving exiled ISA detainees
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/police-probe-sdp-forum-involving-exiled-isa-detainees.html

It is also the same reason that moved the Government to criminalise my films 'Zahari's 17 Years' and "Dr Lim Hock Siew'.

And it is this.

From the Government's perspective, personal accounts by political dissidents and the humanising of their lives via the medium of a film or video presents an affront to the authority and the public image of the PAP Government, particularly of the Internal Security Department. It raises questions of past human rights abuses which undermine the legacy of Lee Kuan Yew and the PAP.

20 films that undermine the national security of Singapore
Allowing exiles film is “like allowing jihadi terrorist groups” to show film publicly
Let's talk about the past openly, warts and all
“To Singapore With Love” – the making of a new political folklore

The truth from a Singapore exile

Film on exiles, To Singapore, With Love, has four screenings at arts festival in London

Lee’s one sided broadcasts lacked legitimacy

Rebutting DPM Teo
What is the Government trying to hide?
Public records counter exiles’ claims: Sam Tan
The truth from a Singapore exile ll

Charges against Ho Juan Thai – errors in claims and contradictions?
The truth from a Singapore exile l

Appeal to reclassify rating of To Singapore, With Love rejected

Films Appeal Committee upholds rating for To Singapore, With Love

Saturday, October 04, 2014

We should not allow political exiles to air 'self-serving' accounts : PM Lee

Today

SINGAPORE — After his speech at the National University of Singapore Society (NUSS) Lecture today (Oct 3) Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong answered questions from the audience. Here are excerpts from his responses to questions about the Hong Kong protests and the film, To Singapore, with Love, directed by film-maker Tan Pin Pin.

Question on the conditions under which some of the more difficult, controversial points of history can be discussed more normally, so that there can be a common base from which to build a sense of “historical consciousness” and spring board for the future.

Mr Lee’s response:

I think there is no hindrance to discussing the past in a normal way. People express, recount their memories, they write their memoirs. Historians research the archives, they write their thesis, they propound revisionist views of history, others rebut them. Academic fratricide is normal. I mean that is the way, hopefully, knowledge progresses; at least in the sciences, sometimes social sciences. I think what we are dealing with in To Singapore with love is not that. What is that issue in To Singapore, with Love — you’ve got to see it within a historical context. And the historical context was the communist insurgency, in fact an armed insurrection, in which thousands of people were killed. And the movie essentially is about some of these people involved ...

(While some people who were communist or sympathisers or activists have turned around and accounted for their actions, those in the film) have chosen not to do so, it’s their prerogative. But if they have chosen not to do so, why should we allow them, through a movie, to present an account of themselves, not of documentary history, objectively presented. But is a self-serving personal account, conveniently inaccurate in places, glossing over inconvenient facts and others, which will sully the honour and the reputation of the security people, and the brave men and women who fought the communist, all those many years.

A movie is different from a book, you write a book I can write a counter book, you can read together with the counter book. The movie, you watch the movie you think it’s a documentary. It may be like Fahrenheit 911, very convincing, but it’s not a documentary. And I think that we have to understand this in order to understand how to deal with these issues.

---------------------------------

Understand the past, be confident in the future: PM Lee
Today

SINGAPORE — Even as society is immersed in the present, Singaporeans must understand their past and be confident of their future, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

What Singapore has achieved is a function of its history and in the South-east Asian context, he said. “We ourselves must know our history, to understand how Singapore works, why we do the things we do.”

SG50 is an important occasion to remember the Republic’s history, said Mr Lee, as he announced the setting up of a memorial to the victims of Konfrontasi opposite MacDonald House.

The Battle for Merger, Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s radio talks in 1961, will also be republished next week.

At the same time, SG50 should also be a time to look ahead — to set new goals for the next 50 years and to aim high.

Mr Lee highlighted how Singapore is being transformed “in many ambitious ways”, such as the implementation of “bold” social policies and investment in people.

He noted that young people may sometime be anxious about the future, and while some anxiety is constructive — “it keeps us on our toes” — he cautioned that it should not lead to paralysis or despondency.

“We need to be both paranoid and at the same time paradoxically confident. Then we can make Singapore a special nation for Singaporeans,” he said. The Government will do its part, he said, and urged everybody to play their part.

----------------------------------------------------------------

United Front were no communists: British intelligence
ALFIAN SA'AT: PM LEE, YOU ARE JUST AFRAID THAT YOUR 'TRUTH' WILL BE EXPOSED AS LIES
Exiles in 'To Singapore, with Love' shouldn't get chance to air 'self-serving' accounts: PM
To Johor Baru, for a movie by Chua Mui Hoong
PM LEE: SINGAPOREANS MUST UNDERSTAND HISTORY, BUT NOT THE VERSION POLITICAL EXILES TELL
To Singapore, With Love 'contains untruths about history': Dr Yaacob

Parliament: "To Singapore with Love" has 'distorted and untruthful' accounts of past history: Yaacob
Reviewing “To Singapore with Love” – Part 2: Only threat is to lost opportunities

Reviewing “To Singapore, With Love” – Part 1: A film about life and patriotism
COMMENT: Why PM Lee's remark on banned film 'To Singapore, With Love' is hard to understand

STRAITS TIMES WRITER: ‘TO SINGAPORE, WITH LOVE’ NOTHING MORE THAN HYPE

DR YAACOB: TO SINGAPORE, WITH LOVE IS ONE-SIDED, BUT LKY’S ACCOUNTS ARE BALANCED
After pulling screening of banned Singapore film, NGO says Putrajaya stifling civil freedom
Home Ministry denies forcing NGO to stop screening of banned Singapore film

Monday, September 22, 2014

Defiant Singaporeans view banned film in Malaysia

Singaporeans travel to view banned film in Malaysia

By Bhavan Jaipragas | AFP News – Sat, Sep 20, 2014

Hundreds of defiant Singaporeans protesting censorship gathered in Malaysia on Friday to see a documentary banned by regulators in their home country as a threat to national security.

The film, "To Singapore, with Love", examines the case of political exiles in the city-state and features interviews with nine former activists, student leaders, and self-confessed communists who fled Singapore from the 1960s until the 1980s and are currently settled in Malaysia, Britain and Thailand.

Organisers estimated 400 people watched the screening, saying most of the audience was made up of Singaporeans who had crossed the border to view the production in the southern Malaysian city of Johor Bharu.

The Media Development Authority (MDA), Singapore's media regulator, on September 10 banned the documentary, saying it provided a "distorted and untruthful" account of the exiles' situation.

It said the film's contents undermined national security because it showed "legitimate actions of the security agencies to protect the national security and stability of Singapore are presented in a distorted way as acts that victimised innocent individuals".

According to the Singapore government, a number of the exiles featured in the film were former members of the Communist Party of Malaya, which had sought to overthrow governments in Singapore and Malaysia in the 1950s and 1960s.

Singapore became independent from the Malaysian federation in 1965.

"I am disappointed by the reaction of the MDA, I wish it was otherwise of course...I spent a lot of time making it and really would have liked this film to have been seen (in Singapore)," director Tan Pin Pin told the audience in remarks after the screening.

- Indignance at Singapore's censorship -

Tan added that she was weighing her options, including launching an appeal and holding "private screenings".

The production has been screened at film festivals in Germany, Dubai, South Korea and the United States, and will be shown at the SEA ArtsFest in London in October.

Singaporeans at the Malaysia screening, part of a "Freedom Filmfest", said the relatively large turnout by their compatriots despite the hassle of having to travel to Malaysia, signified indignance in the city-state over the film's censorship.

"The interest is evident in the number of people here, over 400 who turned up in Johor Bharu on a weekday afternoon," said 24-year-old university student Lim Jialiang.

"After watching the film now, it is difficult for me to imagine why the film had to be banned," he added.

The 70-minute documentary drew loud applause from the audience at the end of the screening.

The exiles featured in the film -- all aged 60 or older -- gave vivid details of how they left Singapore and of their current lives, with most expressing a longing to return home permanently.

Singapore, ruled by the same party since 1959, has relaxed strict social controls including media censorship in recent years, but continues to impose stringent regulations on films that discuss local politics.

The government previously banned two films about prominent ex-political detainees produced by local filmmaker Martyn See in 2007 and 2010.

Further readings :

Yale-NUS shelves plan to screen To Singapore, With Love

Yale-NUS changes course on banned film

Tan to Yale-NUS: You may not screen banned film

Filmmaker Tan Pin Pin weighs options to appeal decision on banned documentary

Hundreds of S’poreans watch S’pore-banned film in M’sia

JB screening of political exiles film draws many S’poreans

Have you heard about the film Singapore has banned its people from watching? Well, you have now

MDA gives institutes of higher learning leeway to screen To Singapore with Love

Singaporeans arrive for Johor Baru screening of documentary To Singapore With Love

FILM BANNED: REAL THREAT OR JUST WOUNDED PRIDE

History's many shades of grey

S’poreans travel to JB for movie of the year

I Went to Malaysia to Watch A Film Made In Singapore About Singapore’s Political Exiles Because The Film Isn’t Allowed Be Publicly Screened in Singapore. I know right? Whoa.

To Johor Bahru with love: 350 S'poreans watch MDA-banned film across Causeway

To Singapore, with Love 星国恋

Counterproductive to ban public screening of “To Singapore, With Love”

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

20 films that undermine the national security of Singapore

In banning the documentary 'To Singapore, With Love', the government reasoned that the film "undermines national security because legitimate actions of the security agencies to protect the national security and stability of Singapore are presented in a distorted way as acts that victimised innocent individuals".

Here are 19 other films that fit the above description of undermining the national security of Singapore.

1. One Nation Under Lee
http://youtu.be/17qhGIwyGj0

2. Tan Wah Piow on the 'Marxist Conspiracy'
http://youtu.be/SOiZvmnEqQM

3. A conversation with Tan Wah Piow (Parts I and ll)
http://youtu.be/DtYXxlSKvcc
http://youtu.be/OOai0VbcjnE

4. Francis Seow : The Interview
http://youtu.be/pzOLJE2ysNw

5. Abolish ISA - Singapore
http://youtu.be/1GaPLhJI2KA

6. Dr Lim Hock Siew (banned in Singapore)
https://youtu.be/P-RU0ISDrKI

7. Zahari's 17 Years (banned in Singapore)
http://youtu.be/aaLaeDN4t2U

8. Exiled Singapore Politician - Wong Soon Fong:
http://youtu.be/17UR_xHJ9Ac

9. Ex-ISA detainee issues challenge to Dr Tony Tan
http://youtu.be/Zk-TH257ggI

10. The Price of Freedom in Singapore -

ISA fugitive Francis Khoo
http://youtu.be/bwwF8t8CuD0

11. Dr Lim Hock Siew speaking at

Said Zahari's book launch 1st July 2007

http://youtu.be/1XfvMfjdHGQ

12. Vincent Cheng's speech at the SDP rally on 2 May, 2011
http://youtu.be/QYmAtoS5t-Q

13. Teo Soh Lung at the 50th Anniversary of Operation Coldstore
http://youtu.be/BhUp6QC1UOo

14. Teo Soh Lung speaks out
http://youtu.be/TxinEMu6Ix0

15. Operation Coldstore Book launch

(Parts 1 & ll)
http://youtu.be/sjEp-vIH2As
http://youtu.be/O1GU9FMaSQs
Dr Thum Ping Tjin
http://youtu.be/GwviaaULeiY

16. Dr Poh Soo Kai at the 50th Anniversary of Operation Coldstore
http://youtu.be/y4GlGNgORZQ

17. Q & A Session with Dr. Poh Soo Kai
http://youtu.be/YVcZADHF6kI

18. Operation Coldstore Roundtable -

Dr Poh Soo Kai calls ISA detentions "crimes against humanity"

(Parts 1 to lV)
http://youtu.be/S_87pA23fhs
http://youtu.be/-wwpVXmu2FM
http://youtu.be/3BuubqylXW4
http://youtu.be/96W3BbIZls4

19. Lies of the "Marxist Conspiracy"

by Vincent Wijeysingha (Parts l & ll)
http://youtu.be/KuLEaOsMT6I
http://youtu.be/f7le7ZlLyhw

------------------------------------

Watch also :

CNA report : ISA should be abolished, say former detainees
http://youtu.be/lygweeAv4BY

Top 100 Political Videos (that are likely to be banned in Singapore)
http://singaporerebel.blogspot.sg/2008/08/top-100-political-videos-that-are.html?m=1

Friday, September 12, 2014

Singapore bans film on political exiles 'To Singapore With Love'

Singapore bans local documentary on political exiles

AFP – Wed, Sep 10, 2014 Singapore

Singapore on Wednesday banned a local documentary about nine dissidents living in exile, saying its contents undermined national security.

The film "To Singapore, with Love", directed by Singaporean director Tan Pin Pin, features interviews with the former activists and student leaders who fled Singapore from the 1960s until the 1980s and are currently settled in countries including Britain and Thailand.

The 70-minute documentary was released in December last year and has been screened at film festivals in Germany, Dubai, South Korea and the United States. Singapore's Media Development Authority (MDA) said in a statement it had "assessed that the contents of the film undermine national security because legitimate actions of the security agencies to protect the national security and stability of Singapore are presented in a distorted way as acts that victimised innocent individuals".

It said a number of the exiles were former members of the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) which had sought to overthrow governments in Singapore and Malaysia in the 1950s and 1960s. "The individuals in the film have given distorted and untruthful accounts of how they came to leave Singapore and remain outside Singapore," the media regulator added.

MDA said the individuals were not denied the right to return to Singapore or forced to leave the city-state, as was portrayed in the movie. "The government has made it clear that it would allow former CPM members to return to Singapore if they agree to be interviewed by the authorities on their past activities to resolve their cases," it said.

- 'Very disappointed' -

A description posted on the film's official website said the documentary explores how the exiles "lived their lives away and how they still view the Singapore of their dreams". "They are now in their 60s to 80s. Some were activists, student leaders, others were card carrying communists," it said.

Tan, the film's director, said she was "very disappointed that my film is banned".

"By doing this, MDA is taking away an opportunity for us Singaporeans to see it and have a conversation about it and our past," she said in a Facebook post. "We need to be trusted to be able find the answers about ourselves, for ourselves," she added.

But Singapore's information minister Yaacob Ibrahim said he supported the media regulator's decision. "Individuals who have chosen to leave and remain outside Singapore, and refused to account for their past actions, should not enjoy a public platform to purvey distorted and untruthful accounts to mislead the public, absolve themselves or deny their past actions," he said in a statement on Facebook.

Malaysia gained independence in 1957 and Singapore in 1965, both from Britain, after brief periods of self-rule. The Southeast Asian city-state famous for strict social controls has relaxed censorship rules in recent years, but maintains strict regulations on films that discuss local politics.

In 2010, the government ordered Singaporean filmmaker Martyn See to take down a YouTube video of a rare public talk by Lim Hock Siew, a doctor and activist held from 1963 to 1982 during then prime minister Lee Kuan Yew's rule.

In 2007, it banned a film by See on another political detainee, Said Zahari, a journalist. Zahari and Lim were among more than 100 people alleged to be communists by Lee's government and rounded up in the early 1960s.

Singapore’s banned film on exiles to be screened in Malaysia

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/singapores-banned-film-on-exiles-to-be-screened-in-malaysia

Freedom Film Festival
http://freedomfilmfest.komas.org/festival/schedule-2/

Singapore bans local documentary on political exiles
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/singapore-bans-local-documentary-political-102043140.htm

No screening for documentary due to MDA’s delay
http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2014/04/no-screening-for-documentary-due-to-mdas-delay/

----------------------------------------------------------------

Further readings :

Tan Pin Pin's film To Singapore, With Love not to be shown in public
‘To Singapore, With Love’ documentary screenings banned by MDA
Film About Exiles Is Banned in Singapore
‘To Singapore With Love’ banned in its home country
Statement by civil society on MDA’s decision to ban local film, “To Singapore, with love”
Singapore artists urge overturn of documentary ban
Ban on film contrary to what SG50 promised
Don’t tell us what is true, let us judge by opening official records
MDA, Let the People Judge
Film on exiles – MDA explains what “purely private” means

Friday, August 29, 2014

The nature of PAP's governance is "a continuation of colonial rule"

This is probably the most important speech you will NOT hear in the SG50 celebrations next year.

http://youtu.be/31b8WeqasQs

Historian PJ Thum exposes the 3 Myths of Vulnerability, Development and Meritocracy and calls the PAP Government an "imperial government and a continuation of colonial rule"

Excerpts.

"So if you're the first Prime Minister of Singapore. You have just been handed power by the British. Where does your legitimacy come from? You're not an indigenous people. You've won an election under very dubious circumstances where you put your political opponents into cold storage. So what do you do? You take a leaf out of the previous colonial government. You reject democracy, you suspend individual rights, you continue to cripple all sorts of safeguards against your exercise of State power etc. by arguing that Singapore is an exceptional case, by arguing for Singaporean exceptionalism. Why? You use the three myths of development, vulnerability and meritocracy."

THE MYTH OF DEVELOPMENT

"By 1950, Singapore was the richest country in Asia. The only country in Asia that was richer than Singapore was metropolitan Tokyo. It was famous then for everything that we are famous for today - tall buildings, wide boulevards, clean drinking water. We had more cars per capita than anywhere in Asia. We were famous for being a trading port, an offshore financial centre, a specialised commodities futures centre, world market for rubber and tin, an oil distribution centre. Lee Kuan Yew himself in 1960 as his electoral fortunes declined as he got more and more unpopular, kept going around saying, "Look, Singapore has the highest income in Asia." If you read the Straits Times in 1960 he kept saying this to point out how good we were doing."

THE MYTH OF MERITOCRACY

"The PAP's first generation, the Old Guards as we celebrate so much, was an example of how great leadership and talent can be found from people of all backgrounds regardless of education and upbringing. But after the party split several times in the 50s and early 60s, the leadership needed people they could trust to fill the ranks and so they turn to people who are like them - friends, colleagues, relatives - people with talent and who were smart but who thought very much like the leaders of the PAP. So power became concentrated in the hands of a narrow elite. And over time this has meant homogenity of thoughts, values and experiences. They think alike, they feel alike, they believe the same things. Multiple studies on Singapore's elite have shown that the strongest determinant of elite status in Singapore is the proximity to the PAP leadership. The elite is overwhelmingly male, overwhelmingly ethnic Chinese, overwhelmingly upper class; they attend a narrow range of schools, something like 90% of scholarship holders come from just 4 schools. Because a majority of them were male, most of them would have actively served in the military as scholar officers. Don't get me wrong. Within this elite, competition is very fierce and is meritocratic. But to get in there is an accident by birth and the rest of Singaporeans are excluded by definition from the very beginning. So you have a pre-selected elite who don't know that they are the pre-selected elite, who within the competition of this pre-selected elite, believed that they have gotten to where they are through hard work and therefore they owe nothing to the rest of society for their position.."

---------------------------------

"The PAP has abandoned attempts to restore democratic normality and instead have reasserted Singapore's exceptionalism.
Singapore's vulnerability was emphasised. Legislative authority was used to legitimise regulatory oppression. The media was suppressed and a monopoly was asserted over public discourse. Opposition has been depicted as subversive and detention without trial has been used to remove the leadership of the political opposition.

To maintain the three myths, the PAP, like the British, have used instruments of intellectual and legislative control. Over the decades the PAP has gone further than the British in implementing colonial policies in destroying Chinese education, shutting down Nantah, ending all Chinese schools..

To me the really sad thing is Singapore democracy really worked from 1955 to 1963 when Singaporeans went to the polls on an average of once a year. And out of this short period emerged policies that made Singapore world-famous today - HDB, CPF, industrialisation, a tri-lingual education system that produced a reasonably talented second generation of PAP leadership. But after the PAP's absolute control in 1968, what do we have? We have Stop At Two, the second industrial revolution where GDP dropped 10% in just one year, we have a CPF that's constantly being fiddled with.. And that is a product of a lack of democracy, a lack of debate, a lack of dissent and a lack of new ideas in the government.

The nature of our governance in Singapore today is an imperial government. It is a continuation of colonial rule."