Barisan socialis come back to challenge PAP

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Well you are entitled to your POV of course. However the likes of the Plen and even Lim Chin Siong seem to concede that it was LKY who masterminded the overall 'defeat' by playing all the main actors British, Tungku, United Front, Leftist Socialists for maximum political advantage.

Oh I am sure there shall always be groups of people helping push the cause of social justice. Human natutre does not change. However I hope they also learn from history.

The British "favored son", stooge LKY did not defeat Lim Chin Siong the true leader of Singapore. It was Harry Lee's British handlers, together with the Malay aristocracy, who crippled the struggle against colonial oppression and exploitation.

By the way, the movement started by Lim and his group is still alive and not "defeated" at all. The struggle continues.

 

[one2unite]

Facts of the matter are these:

Going by strict legal principles, I believe LKY and son did not necessarily need to participate in the cross examination. This was not a trial on liability only with regards damages.

From the cross examination it would appear that LKY took part in the proceedings to 'play around' with CSJ. On balance I think this plan to some extent backfired on LKY.

But in relation to CSJ's questions on Lim Chin Siong, I don't think it was strange for LKY to avoid the same. Those questions were 100% irrelevant to the case at hand. Note LKY only gave testimony on issues which he thought would either win him points in his argument that his model governance was right for Singapore or to give CSJ "sufficient rope to hang himself".

The senile old Lee was not there to "play around" with CSJ. He thought his presence in court would boost his son's tattered image and intimidate the others. No one was intimidated, except judge Belinda who'd at one stage said: "Sir, Mr Lee, go on..."

The questions on Lim Chin Siong were very much relevant because the Lees asked for excessive damages on the ground that they are regarded very highly as statesmen of exceptional quality. Chee Soon Juan's cross-examination was to expose the myth that what LKY had achieved so far is not due to his honest and upright methods but due to the total control of the state apparatus, including the 154th mainstream media.

The three-day trial was to assess the quantum of damages and thus the questions relating to Lim Chin Siong were one hundred percent relevant. But Lau Lee chose to maintaining stony silence and that was most telling.

 

[one2unite]

Well you are entitled to your POV of course. However the likes of the Plen and even Lim Chin Siong seem to concede that it was LKY who masterminded the overall 'defeat' by playing all the main actors British, Tungku, United Front, Leftist Socialists for maximum political advantage.

Oh I am sure there shall always be groups of people helping push the cause of social justice. Human natutre does not change. However I hope they also learn from history.

Fong Chong Pik or Fang Chuang Pi @ Plen has said the communists were also fighting to free Malaya, including Singapore, from the colonialist yoke. They were also nationalist in that respect. But the departing British had a different agenda. They were bent on handing over power to their chosen, favored "nationalists" who would continue to protect their economic interests after they had relinquished their direct colonial political control.

Lim Chin Siong and his group were very clear about where Lee Kuan Yew was coming from. They did not doubt for a moment that he was working closely with the British and the then chief minister Lim Yew Hock to achieve his treacherous schemes.

The mastermind in this whole "exercise" were the British colonialists who came to the rescue of Harry Lee at every crucial moment.

Yes, history is always a great teacher.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Agree to disagree. CSJ had his own political agenda and soapbox and likewise LKY had his own political agenda and soapbox. No legal relevance to the case at hand, in particular events that had transpired in the 60s with all parties having long since moved on.

Btw it is noteworthy that Lim Chin Siong himself had graciously conceded in an interview that LKY had done a good job economic wise although he lamented at the moneytheism culture that has become the be all and end all in Singapore (somewhat similar to Tan Wah Piow's interview afew years ago).

The questions on Lim Chin Siong were very much relevant because the Lees asked for excessive damages on the ground that they are regarded very highly as statesmen of exceptional quality. Chee Soon Juan's cross-examination was to expose the myth that what LKY had achieved so far is not due to his honest and upright methods but due to the total control of the state apparatus, including the 154th mainstream media.

The three-day trial was to assess the quantum of damages and thus the questions relating to Lim Chin Siong were one hundred percent relevant. But Lau Lee chose to maintaining stony silence and that was most telling.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

If Chin Siong and his gang were so clear why did they stick around with LKY to help him win the GE in 59'? All were playing games with each other and that is the fact. LKY used ALL of them to his benefit instead of the otherway around.

Lim Chin Siong and his group were very clear about where Lee Kuan Yew was coming from. They did not doubt for a moment that he was working closely with the British and the then chief minister Lim Yew Hock to achieve his treacherous schemes.

The mastermind in this whole "exercise" were the British colonialists who came to the rescue of Harry Lee at every crucial moment.

.

 

[scroobal]

Scroobal,

Excellent dialogue Bro

Those were indeed extraordinary dramatic historical times that threw up very interesting characters many of whom appeared to be motivated by pure noble ideals and principles. I guess even the communists and leftist socialists who were eventually 'defeated' by LKY and gang can still take heart in the fact that they had contributed to freeing Singapore from its colonial master. Perhaps this is the very least credit that history should accord to this 'defeated' group.

Cheers

Very well put. strong leaders and men of substance.

I did forget one other important individual - Dr Lim Hock Siew. He was in the thick of the action from the very start. He is writing his memoirs and if Arthur Lim does not keep dragging him around for reunions the book might be out.

 

[one2unite]

Agree to disagree. CSJ had his own political agenda and soapbox and likewise LKY had his own political agenda and soapbox. No legal relevance to the case at hand, in particular events that had transpired in the 60s with all parties having long since moved on.

Btw it is noteworthy that Lim Chin Siong himself had graciously conceded in an interview that LKY had done a good job economic wise although he lamented at the moneytheism culture that has become the be all and end all in Singapore (somewhat similar to Tan Wah Piow's interview afew years ago).

The questions on Lim Chin Siong were very relevant because the Lees said they needed to protect their "reputation" that had been built over the years since 1959.

Why did "loudmouth" LKY remain silent despite repeated egging by CSJ when the questions turned to Lim?

On economy, that was not what Lim Chin Siong said to his old comrades after he came back from England to stay at Serangoon Gardens. His views about Lee Kuan Yew as a ruthless, inhuman specimen were clearly etched in Said Zahari's book "The Long Nightmare".

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

I suggest you go read from the horses mouth i.e. Lim Chin Siong himself, in his interview with historian Mel Chew in her book on Singapore Leadership, where Chin Siong himself gives LKY due credit on the economic front. It is all there on the record for posterity. I think Tan Wah Piow's interview was with someone from NUS, in fact i read the same in the old Sammyboy site afew years ago.

The problem with you and your ilk is that all you can see is black and white and what you want to see instead of the overall reality which includes good bad and shades in between.

On economy, that was not what Lim Chin Siong said to his old comrades after he came back from England to stay at Serangoon Gardens. His views about Lee Kuan Yew as a ruthless, inhuman specimen were clearly etched in Said Zahari's book "The Long Nightmare".

 

[one2unite]

I suggest you go read from the horses mouth i.e. Lim Chin Siong himself, in his interview with historian Mel Chew in her book on Singapore Leadership, where Chin Siong himself gives LKY due credit on the economic front. It is all there on the record for posterity. I think Tan Wah Piow's interview was with someone from NUS, in fact i read the same in the old Sammyboy site afew years ago.

The problem with you and your ilk is that all you can see is black and white and what you want to see instead of the overall reality which includes good bad and shades in between.

I would also suggest that you go and read what Lim Chin Siong said about Lee Kuan Yew in Said Zahari's book.

By the way, Lee Kuan Yew's economic miracle is just a myth. Singapore is a place for foreigners, money launderers, a place to exploit workers, including those from Third World countries who are allowed to flood the place by a regime out to protect its out-of-the-world multi-million-dollar "salary".

The problem is that the "overall" reality is hidden from the public eye by a corrupt regime that is forced to control everything, including the mainstream media, in order to avoid being exposed.

 

[one2unite]

If Chin Siong and his gang were so clear why did they stick around with LKY to help him win the GE in 59'? All were playing games with each other and that is the fact. LKY used ALL of them to his benefit instead of the otherway around.

They were clear about LKY being a British stooge. They were suspicious of him before the elections in 1959. The British did everything for LKY to remain afloat. All that LKY had to do was to rely on his British masters, even when it came to wresting back the leadership of the PAP well before the 59 elections.

Even when Singapore was part of Malaysia, the British "rescued" their "favored son" from being arrested under the ISA!

The British helped LKY, the only Englishman east of Suez, all the way for his obedient service to the British Crown.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear One

Honestly did u expect the Empire to in its retreat from Suez to leave rulers in place who were not friendly to the West ? We were all subjects of the crown and who could we expect the British to replace themselves with ? Wait how about the CCP, or Mother Stalin Russia ? In the context of the time, being an ally of the british was the correct political game to play. Btw in order to be the favored ally of the British, LKY had to beat of both David Marshall and Lim Yew Hock.




Locke

 

[cleareyes]

Your attempt to present half-baked "facts" as truth is most telling.

How can Dr Lee boycott parliament in 1965 when he was not a member of the House? Furthermore, the Barisan MPs so-called boycott happened only in 1966, nearly thirteen months after Singapore's separation from Malaysia.

Throughout this period, repeated calls by BS MPs for the convening of Singapore's parliament fell on Lee Kuan Yew's deaf ears. The BS MPs even staged sit-ins in parliament precinct with makeshift tents. Subsequently, they were forced out of British lackey Lee Kuan Yew's rubber stamp parliament.

I shall leave this as it is.

http://www.singapore-elections.com/ge1963/

STATE ASSEMBLY GENERAL ELECTION 1963

This GE was the only one held with Singapore's status being a state of Malaysia, intentionally held after merger with the Peninsular, remembered in history as PAP's most hard-fought GE ever. Holding just 39 seats after two by-election defeats and two defections to UPP, PAP expelled 13 of their Assembly Members in an open political battle between two factions and was left hanging onto a slim one-seat majority of 26 to 25. The group formed a new party, BS, which PAP alleged was communist-backed. A month prior to the GE, PAP's Mdm Ho Puay Choo joined BS, bringing PAP 25 to 26 against opposition, but UPP and ex-PAP AM S. V. Lingam switched back and PAP was back with its one-seat majority. Five days later, PAP Minister Ahmad bin Ibrahim passed away leaving a 25 to 25 stand-off in the house. Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew avoided holding a BE, choosing instead to call for this GE to court a fresh mandate or if failing to do so, the Malaysian Federal authorities will be left to handle of a pro-communist government. Fielding a full slate, PAP faced strong challenges from BS and its PR partner, Ong Eng Guan's UPP and SA, a formalised umbrella of SPA and the UMNO-MCA-MIC alliance, backed by the ruling Alliance Party Malaysia coalition, but without leader and former Chief Minister Lim Yew Hock in the running. All three also had close to a full slate but nevertheless, PAP managed to eke out an election victory. In the biggest election "slaughter" ever, all except in three constituencies saw a total of 92 candidates losing their deposits.

Nomination day: 12 September 1963 [Thu]
Polling day: 21 September 1963 [Sat]
Assembly commencement: 22 October 1963 [Tue]

Total voters: 617,650
Total voter turnout: 587,433 (95.1%)

 

[Kid278]

This part of history has not been disputed by any of the players from both sides, political observers and the man in the street including BS and Dr Lee. It was a strategic error of judgement and its happens to the best of us. There are no contradictions.

We do a great disservice to the opposition cause if we don't make an attempt to read up on our history, learn from the mistakes but very liberally give false facts, excuses and pretend that the world is not round.

True, no one has disputed that part of history, the move was a strategic error. Does it really happens to the best of us? Well, the question remains, at the least politically. Events that led to that grave mistake were mystified, details were different coming from different people, I see that as contradictions.
<O:p
As to great disservice to the oppostion cause, I concurred. More readings needs to be done. Pictures the current monarchy painted for the poeple to believe has always been unscrupulous, facts has always been twisted when comes to history on how folks in that difficult and turbulent era struggled and went thru.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

I gather some of Dr Lim's old 'friends' irritated Art by declining to attend the reunions although one prominent reunion member was apparently Tommy Koh.

I did forget one other important individual - Dr Lim Hock Siew. He was in the thick of the action from the very start. He is writing his memoirs and if Arthur Lim does not keep dragging him around for reunions the book might be out.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

I have read all of Zaid's books and what you allude to is a general character reference of LKY, which perhaps has some merit although it does not capture the economic issue.

As for "myths", you appear to be creating your own 'myth' and history to some extent. Oh and if this regime was really truly "corrupt" as you suggest, it would have been toppled along time ago or at the very least CSJ would have gained serious traction with the public by now as history has shown that "corruption" is one of the primary factors in causing the collapse of a ruling power. No government can hide real true "corruption" forever which was most recently seen in the March M'sian political tsunami.

I would also suggest that you go and read what Lim Chin Siong said about Lee Kuan Yew in Said Zahari's book.

By the way, Lee Kuan Yew's economic miracle is just a myth. Singapore is a place for foreigners, money launderers, a place to exploit workers, including those from Third World countries who are allowed to flood the place by a regime out to protect its out-of-the-world multi-million-dollar "salary".

The problem is that the "overall" reality is hidden from the public eye by a corrupt regime that is forced to control everything, including the mainstream media, in order to avoid being exposed.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

There you go creating your own 'myths' and history again. What "obedient service"? Aiyah if Chin Siong and gang came into power than others would sprout "obedient service" to China.

Foreign relations is part of statecraft plain and simple. More so for small states which are obviously more vulnerable. In any event Singapore pulled itself up by its very own bootstrings without very little assistance from the British (who were in any event in decline as global power). Singapore was independent for better or for worse.

The British helped LKY, the only Englishman east of Suez, all the way for his obedient service to the British Crown.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Pure logical rational pragmatic foreign relations statecraft at play. It is as simple as that.

Dear One

Honestly did u expect the Empire to in its retreat from Suez to leave rulers in place who were not friendly to the West ? We were all subjects of the crown and who could we expect the British to replace themselves with ? Wait how about the CCP, or Mother Stalin Russia ? In the context of the time, being an ally of the british was the correct political game to play. Btw in order to be the favored ally of the British, LKY had to beat of both David Marshall and Lim Yew Hock.




Locke

 

[myjohnson]

Corruption comes in many forms, don't they? I remember telling myself back in the nineties, if the Suharto children were to give away half of their ill gotten gains to help the poor, their family name would have stood side by side with the gods and the bonus of having the accompanying assurance that no one will come after them without inviting a backlash from the general population. But for them, greed knows no bounds. Can we say that of a family closer to home? Probably had taken the lesson learned from Suharto's fate.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

I had a feeling the definition of "corruption" would arise from my previous post.

Well my take on the political front is "corruption" as seen in Indonesia as described by your goodself, Philippines, Thailand, Burma, Cambodia and even Malaysia. Endemic malaise of raw visceral "corruption" from the elite classes. This sort of "corruption" inevitably rankles the public masses and eventually makes them act on it with anger.

Does this sort of "corruption" exist in Singapore? Just going by the public masses attitude towards LKY and the PAP government I should think the answer is in the negative.

Corruption comes in many forms, don't they? I remember telling myself back in the nineties, if the Suharto children were to give away half of their ill gotten gains to help the poor, their family name would have stood side by side with the gods and the bonus of having the accompanying assurance that no one will come after them without inviting a backlash from the general population. But for them, greed knows no bounds. Can we say that of a family closer to home? Probably had taken the lesson learned from Suharto's fate.

 

[scroobal]

They were clear about LKY being a British stooge. They were suspicious of him before the elections in 1959. The British did everything for LKY to remain afloat. All that LKY had to do was to rely on his British masters, even when it came to wresting back the leadership of the PAP well before the 59 elections.

Even when Singapore was part of Malaysia, the British "rescued" their "favored son" from being arrested under the ISA!

The British helped LKY, the only Englishman east of Suez, all the way for his obedient service to the British Crown.

You got your history terribly wrong. Their favourite son was Lim Yew Hock. The British dispised Marshall, Old Man, Keng Swee, Chin Siong, Byrne and whole host of players from a variety of groups agitating for freedom from colonial rule. What started as pay difference in the civil service, turned out to be a full cry for freedom.

Tungku was the other favourite son until he became leader of UMNO and knew where his loyalities lie.

Have noticed that you not only have your history wrong but the political equations that matter as well.

For instance, the issue with CSJ is his appeal to Singaporeans. It matters little if old man loves or hates him. CSJ battle is with Singaporeans to recognise and accept him. Votes count in this game.

It makes no sense engaging the tyrannical bastard or his overpaid cronies. It makes no sense enaging the foreign press, when this fucking old man has the hide of an elephant and knows that every token foreign criticism has little or no impact on foreign investment. I can only recall that one 3rd rate british uni decided not to set up shop here.

We have more foreign presence than any fucking country and that includes foreign workers.

If putting kangaroos on t-shirt is a political tactic, then we really have to ask, where the fuck is all this going except to ask what next - Ben & Jerry going to stop selling ice cream in singapore.

There must a purpose. Lim Chin Siong, Chia Thye Poh and company went to prison because they move the people in this country and by the way, they actually got votes and got into parliament and it was a deadly game then.

John Tan claim to fame before the t-shirt affair was questioning jayakumar during some walkabout. By the way, Jayakumar is an idiot so what good does that do one's image, I have no clue.