• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Chitchat Operation Spectrum - 29 arrests - 1987 - 30 years ago

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
25,132
Points
83
https://sudhirtv.com/2017/05/24/why-singapore-needs-to-discuss-1987s-marxist-conspiracy/
Why Singaporeans need to discuss 1987’s Marxist Conspiracy
May 24, 2017 3 Comments


Do people become subversive after reading Animal Farm?

George Orwell’s allegory on totalitarianism was one piece of evidence Singapore’s Internal Security Department (ISD) allegedly seized in 1987 during Operation Spectrum. Thirty years on, the arrest and detention without trial of twenty-two people accused by the government of plotting a Marxist conspiracy to overthrow the state is still an episode shrouded in fog. There are good reasons today for society to embrace a more honest conversation about it.

The facts bear mention. On May 21st and June 20th 1987, a total of nine men and thirteen women, aged eighteen to forty, were arrested and detained by the ISD using powers conferred by Singapore’s Internal Security Act (ISA). The accused were a mix of activists, Catholic Church members, social workers and theatre performers. Some had ties to the rejuvenated Workers’ Party.

A week after the first arrests, the government released a statement tying them to a supposed plot masterminded by Tan Wah Piow, a Singaporean student activist who had gone into exile in London a decade earlier. All of the detained eventually gave written and/or video confessions.

By the end of 1987, all except Vincent Cheng, a church worker, had been released. On April 18th 1988, nine of the ex-detainees issued a statement recanting their confessions, saying they had been made under duress.

All but one, who was overseas, were rearrested the next day. They eventually reaffirmed their original statements and were again released. Two lawyers representing the detainees were also arrested, detained and later released. Cheng, the last detainee, was released in 1990.

Almost immediately doubts emerged about Operation Spectrum’s veracity. In 1991, Walter Woon, later to be Attorney-General, said “As far as I am concerned, the government’s case is still not proven. I would not say those fellows were Red, not from the stuff they presented.” In 1992, Minister S. Dhanabalan resigned from the Cabinet because of his discomfort with Operation Spectrum.

In 2001, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, personal friends with some of the accused, said “although I had no access to state intelligence, from what I knew of them, most were social activists but were not out to subvert the system.” Mary Turnbull, noted historian on Singapore, has called “the alleged Marxist conspiracy” a myth.

Despite this broad-based suspicion about what happened, the government has yet to conduct an inquiry. In 2011 the Ministry of Home Affairs reasserted its position that the twenty-two “were not detained for their political beliefs, but because they had involved themselves in subversive activities which posed a threat to national security.”

Many believe there is nothing to be gained from an inquiry into something that occurred thirty years ago. That is myopic. A nation cannot be built on collective amnesia. By conducting one, Singapore can finally ascertain the truth, strengthening societal cohesion, as well as public faith in its national security apparatus.

To understand why, it is worth first considering the allegations made by the detainees about their time in jail. Long reticent because of their fear of reprisals, some have in recent years started speaking out. Many claim they did not know each other before the arrests. The picture they paint of detention without trial, if true, is grim.

For the first seventy-two hours detainees claim they were made to stand barefoot in thin clothes while being interrogated in a tundra-like room by ISD officers wrapped in winter wear. Sleep deprived, the detainees started hallucinating.

Several of the male detainees claim ISD officers beat them. Chew Kheng Chuan, an entrepreneur and former student activist, alleges that one slapped him repeatedly across the face until his buccal cavity started bleeding. Kenneth Tsang, an advertising executive and opposition activist, claims another punched him and threatened to abuse his wife who had also been arrested.

Detainees say the psychological and physical torture continued until each admitted to being a Marxist. In other words, they believe that torture was used for the sole purpose of extracting confessions for use in state propaganda, in a bid to cripple civil society.

These, along with the Animal Farm anecdote, are some of the allegations. If true, they constitute an abuse of state power.

Justice, the rule of law and transparency are bedrocks of Singapore society. In Operation Spectrum, the worry is that all three were suspended. Failure to address that sets a dangerous precedent for future governments.

Moreover, there is no longer any national security reason for withholding state intelligence about communist activities in the 1980s. The twenty-two were charged in 1987, just two years before the Berlin Wall fell and four before the Soviet Union imploded—the twilight of global communism. In 1989 the Communist Party of Malaya was dissolved after its leaders signed a peace agreement with Malaysia and Thailand.

Any communist threat has been altogether extinguished, only to be replaced by more pernicious ideologies. These include anarchic cyber-terrorism and religiously-inspired terrorism. Though Singapore has specific anti-terror laws, the government claims the ISA’s extra preventative powers are necessary to defang aspiring terrorists.

The ISA has, however, been tarnished by suspicions that it has been used to serve political ends, as in Operation Spectrum. Opponents want it abolished or replaced. The government may believe that since the ISA remains broadly popular, any opposition to it can be ignored.

Yet public opinion can shift. The electorate is increasingly concerned with procedural legitimacy rather than just performance legitimacy—in governance, the process is starting to matter as much as the outcome. Better for the government to embrace transparency rather than risk being later accused, falsely or not, of any cover-up. Failure to hold the ISA accountable will undermine its future use.

Inquiries are fraught with difficulties, particularly when prior generations are assessed with contemporary moral lenses. What counts as torture is ill-defined today, never mind the 1980s. The primary aim of the inquiry should be to determine whether or not the twenty-two were wronged by the state. It should not be a witch-hunt.

Why might an inquiry be a bad idea? Skeptics worry about sullying then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s legacy. These fears are overblown. Lee is respected globally for, among many other things, his decisiveness, foresight and toughness in developing Singapore.

Even if we discover that the twenty-two were not subversives, the episode will fit neatly into the narrative of a leader willing to take preemptive action for the sake of the greater good. That he made mistakes in the process is something he admitted: “I’m not saying that everything I did was right, but everything I did was for an honourable purpose. I had to do some nasty things, locking fellows up without trial.”

In a region where governments have butchered communists en masse, Lee’s treatment of the accused was relatively mild. This neither precludes his actions from scrutiny nor negates the suffering of detainees and their families. But it does explain why impetus for an inquiry has hitherto been muted.

Yet Singaporean society is mature enough to handle renegotiations of history, in our relentless pursuit of truth and justice. In a world deluged by falsehoods, there is a pressing need for clarity and objectivity in our national conversations.

There is no end point, of course, no definitive history. As with Gandhi, Pinochet, Reagan and Thatcher, Lee’s legacy will continue to be pored over by laypeople and historians alike. This is not simply an intellectual joy, but an expectation, of life in a pluralistic society.

“There is no hindrance to discussing the past in a normal way,” Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in 2014 in response to a question about Singapore’s communist history. Operation Spectrum deserves this normal discussion.
 
http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_1578_2009-10-31.htmlMarxist conspiracy

In May 1987, the Ministry of Home Affairs arrested 16 people under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for their involvement in a “Marxist conspiracy”. They were detained without trial for between one month and three years. Tan Wah Piow, a former University of Singapore Students’ Union president residing in the United Kingdom, was named the mastermind behind the plot.1

Description
The 16 people who were arrested were Vincent Cheng Kim Chuan, Teo Soh Lung, Kevin de Souza, Wong Souk Yee, Tang Lay Lee, Ng Bee Leng, Jenny Chin Lai Ching, Kenneth Tsang Chi Seng, Chung Lai Mei, Mah Lee Lin, Low Yit Leng, Tan Tee Seng, Teresa Lim Li Kok, Chia Boon Tai, Tay Hong Seng and William Yap Hon Ngian.2

The mostly English-educated group was a mix of church workers, social workers, graduates and professionals who were arrested and accused of being part of a “Marxist conspiracy” to topple the government. Their intention was to “subvert Singapore’s political and social order using communist united front tactics”.3

The government named Tan Wah Piow, a former University of Singapore Students’ Union president based in the United Kingdom as the mastermind behind the plot. Tan had left Singapore in 1976 after evading National Service.4

Vincent Cheng, a full-time church volunteer, was Tan’s key assistant. They shared a common goal of establishing a classless society. Cheng, who once studied to be a Catholic priest, concentrated on two main areas: church groups and students via the student union, especially those from the Singapore Polytechnic. The strategy was to use the church in their political struggle. During small Bible study sessions, Cheng and his members spread anti-establishment ideas.5

The government listed church organisations that it believed were used to further the Marxist cause. This included the Justice and Peace Commission, of which Cheng was the executive secretary, the Student Christian Movement of Singapore, the Young Christian Workers Movement and the Catholic Welfare Centre, which assisted foreign workers and maids working in Singapore.6

It was also said that the detainees had links with Filipino leftists and advocates of “liberation theology”' as well as Sri Lankan separatists.7 Liberation theology was reportedly a movement in Roman Catholic religious teaching advocating for the Church’s active involvement in combating social, political, and economic oppression.8

Over a few weeks after the initial arrest in May 1987, six more people were arrested which brought the total under arrest to 22 people.9

Following the arrest, Catholic priests Fathers Edgar D’Souza and Patrick Goh issued statements questioning the detentions. Church services were held for the detainees and their families and this contributed to the build-up of tension between the Church and the government.10

A meeting was arranged between Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and the head of the Catholic Church in Singapore, Archbishop Gregory Yong and several other Catholic Church representatives. Lee’s prime concern was that there should not be any conflict between the Church and the State because of the arrests.11

The group were shown documents relating to Cheng, which included letters, and meeting notes in Cheng’s handwriting. Archbishop Yong said that he accepted the Internal Security Department’s (ISD) evidence against Cheng and was convinced that the government had nothing against the Catholic Church when they arrested him. Lee stressed that the government upheld freedom of religion but will not tolerate the use of religion for subversive activities.12

In a move to avoid conflict, Fathers Joseph Ho, Patrick Goh, Edgar D’Souza and Guillaume Arotcarena resigned from all positions in church organisations. Archbishop Yong later suspended them from their preaching duties and warned the clergy not to mix politics and religion. He also announced that the Catholic Centre for Foreign Workers would be shut down.13

A few weeks after his arrest, Cheng was interviewed by local journalists in a televised programme. He spoke of how he had become interested in the idea of a classless society and class struggle after reading Maoist literature that Tan had given him.

He also revealed that he used the Catholic Church and various church bodies and publications because they provided a ready cover to further the cause. Cheng said that Tan wanted him to build a broad base of grassroots organisations that could be used to build political action against the government through means such as demonstrations, strikes and riots. The strategy was aimed at “confronting the Government, creating turmoil in the country, agitating the masses, so that in creating instability, the government of the day can be overthrown”. Cheng expressed regret using the church institutions and manipulating the young people who trusted him.14

Tan’s role in the Marxist plot was evident in the letters that he wrote to Chia Boon Tai. The letters were not sent to Chia directly but were instead addressed to Chia’s brother in Johor Baru. In the letters, Tan suggested using the church’s support and goodwill to further their cause.15

Cheng was served with a two-year detention order. 11 others, including Teo Soh Lung, were served with one-year detention orders. Six more persons were arrested while some of the detainees were released.

In a two-part television documentary titled Tracing The Conspiracy, the detainees spoke of the roles they played in an intricate network. Tang Lay Lee and Teo revealed how they targeted the Law Society as a pressure group to oppose the government. Wong Souk Yee spoke of how the drama group, Third Stage, used plays as a tool to portray Singapore’s social and political system in an unfavourable light. Tan also insisted that they infiltrate the Workers’ Party and on his insistence the group helped to print and distribute Workers’ Party pamphlets during the 1984 General Elections. After the elections, Kenneth Tsang Chi Seng and Tan Tee Seng slowly moved into positions of influence within the party. They later took control of the party’s publication, The Hammer, which they used as a channel to propagate anti-government sentiments and influence public opinion against the government.16

By December 1987, all the detainees had been released except for Cheng.

In April 1988, nine of the released detainees issued a joint statement accusing the government of ill treatment and torture while under detention. They also denied involvement in any conspiracy and alleged that they were pressured to make the confessions.17 Eight of the nine were re-arrested and detained for a second time. The ninth member, Tang, escaped re-arrest as she was in the United Kingdom.18

The government took these charges seriously and announced that a Commission of Inquiry would be set up. The detainees later made statutory declarations retracting their previous allegations. The Commission of Inquiry was called off. It was subsequently revealed that the statement was a political ploy to discredit the government and damage its integrity.19

Four of the detainees – Teo, Tsang, Wong Souk Yee and Kevin de Souza were issued with one-year detention orders. They filed for writ of habeas corpus proceedings. A habeas corpus is a legal action or writ, through which a person can seek release from the unlawful detention of himself, or of another person.20

Queens Counsel Anthony Lester pleaded Teo’s case but the application was dismissed by the High Court. She later filed an appeal.21

The Court of Appeal ordered the four detainees to be released but they were immediately re-arrested under new detention orders. The detainees filed fresh applications for writ of habeas corpus. However, three of the detainees later withdrew their applications and they were released. Teo’s application was dismissed by the High Court and she filed an appeal again.

Soon after the Court of Appeals decision, amendments were made to the Internal Security Act to tighten the law.

The detention orders for Teo and Cheng were extended for one year. Cheng filed a writ of habeas corpus and his case came before Justice Lai Kew Chai but was dismissed with costs.22 Teo’s appeal against the High Court decision is heard in the Court of Appeal. She was released in early June 1990.23

After being under detention for three years, Cheng was conditionally released in mid-June 1990. He had to abide by six restrictive conditions, one of which was not to engage or get involved in any activity that advocates a political cause.24

Impact on laws
In January 1989, the Internal Security Act was amended to remove the power of the judiciary in cases related to internal security. Appeals to the Privy Council were also abolished because the government inferred that only the local courts should be involved in matters that involved Singapore’s national security.25

The Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (MRHA) became law in1992. The law gave the Minister for Home Affairs the power to issue restraining orders against any religious leader whose sermons, speeches or actions threaten Singapore’s religious harmony.26

Sub-plots
The three-year Marxist episode developed several counter-plots. Lee sued and won a libel suit against the Far Eastern Economic Review for an article that the magazine published regarding the meeting between him and Archbishop Yong.

Queens Counsel Lester, who represented Teo, was banned from working in Singapore because the government said that he had become personally embroiled in the case and had started meddling in domestic politics.27

Timeline28
May 1987: 16 persons are arrested under the ISA. Government says detainees are involved in a Marxist conspiracy.
Jun 1987: Lee meets Archbishop Yong and Catholic leaders. Four of the original 16 detainees are released. Six more people are arrested.
Sep 1987: Teo and six others are freed.
Dec 1987: All detainees freed except for Cheng.
Apr 1988: Nine detainees issue statement denying involvement in Marxist plot and alleging ill-treatment while under detention. Eight are re-arrested. Teo files writ of habeas corpus.
Jun 1988: Four more detainees freed. Teo, Tsang, Wong and Kevin de Souza are issued with one-year detention orders. They begin habeas corpus proceedings.
Aug 1988: Teo’s habeas corpus dismissed. She files appeal to Court of Appeal.
Sep 1988: Appeal is heard.
Dec 1988: Court of Appeal orders four detainees released but are re-arrested immediately.
Feb 1989: Two more detainees freed.
Mar 1989: New writ of habeas corpus hearing on Teo’s re-detention. Three other detainees withdraw their writs and are released.
Apr 1989: Teo’s habeas corpus application is dismissed. She appeals.
Jun 1989: Detention orders for Teo and Cheng extended for one year. Cheng files writ of habeas corpus.
Feb 1990: Cheng’s application is dismissed.
Apr 1990: Teo’s appeal is dismissed.
Jun 1990: Teo and Cheng are released.



Author
Jagjit Kaur
 
https://sudhirtv.com/2017/05/24/why-singapore-needs-to-discuss-1987s-marxist-conspiracy/
Why Singaporeans need to discuss 1987’s Marxist Conspiracy
May 24, 2017 3 Comments


Do people become subversive after reading Animal Farm?

George Orwell’s allegory on totalitarianism was one piece of evidence Singapore’s Internal Security Department (ISD) allegedly seized in 1987 during Operation Spectrum. Thirty years on, the arrest and detention without trial of twenty-two people accused by the government of plotting a Marxist conspiracy to overthrow the state is still an episode shrouded in fog. There are good reasons today for society to embrace a more honest conversation about it.

The facts bear mention. On May 21st and June 20th 1987, a total of nine men and thirteen women, aged eighteen to forty, were arrested and detained by the ISD using powers conferred by Singapore’s Internal Security Act (ISA). The accused were a mix of activists, Catholic Church members, social workers and theatre performers. Some had ties to the rejuvenated Workers’ Party.

A week after the first arrests, the government released a statement tying them to a supposed plot masterminded by Tan Wah Piow, a Singaporean student activist who had gone into exile in London a decade earlier. All of the detained eventually gave written and/or video confessions.

By the end of 1987, all except Vincent Cheng, a church worker, had been released. On April 18th 1988, nine of the ex-detainees issued a statement recanting their confessions, saying they had been made under duress.

All but one, who was overseas, were rearrested the next day. They eventually reaffirmed their original statements and were again released. Two lawyers representing the detainees were also arrested, detained and later released. Cheng, the last detainee, was released in 1990.

Almost immediately doubts emerged about Operation Spectrum’s veracity. In 1991, Walter Woon, later to be Attorney-General, said “As far as I am concerned, the government’s case is still not proven. I would not say those fellows were Red, not from the stuff they presented.” In 1992, Minister S. Dhanabalan resigned from the Cabinet because of his discomfort with Operation Spectrum.

In 2001, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, personal friends with some of the accused, said “although I had no access to state intelligence, from what I knew of them, most were social activists but were not out to subvert the system.” Mary Turnbull, noted historian on Singapore, has called “the alleged Marxist conspiracy” a myth.

Despite this broad-based suspicion about what happened, the government has yet to conduct an inquiry. In 2011 the Ministry of Home Affairs reasserted its position that the twenty-two “were not detained for their political beliefs, but because they had involved themselves in subversive activities which posed a threat to national security.”

Many believe there is nothing to be gained from an inquiry into something that occurred thirty years ago. That is myopic. A nation cannot be built on collective amnesia. By conducting one, Singapore can finally ascertain the truth, strengthening societal cohesion, as well as public faith in its national security apparatus.

To understand why, it is worth first considering the allegations made by the detainees about their time in jail. Long reticent because of their fear of reprisals, some have in recent years started speaking out. Many claim they did not know each other before the arrests. The picture they paint of detention without trial, if true, is grim.

For the first seventy-two hours detainees claim they were made to stand barefoot in thin clothes while being interrogated in a tundra-like room by ISD officers wrapped in winter wear. Sleep deprived, the detainees started hallucinating.

Several of the male detainees claim ISD officers beat them. Chew Kheng Chuan, an entrepreneur and former student activist, alleges that one slapped him repeatedly across the face until his buccal cavity started bleeding. Kenneth Tsang, an advertising executive and opposition activist, claims another punched him and threatened to abuse his wife who had also been arrested.

Detainees say the psychological and physical torture continued until each admitted to being a Marxist. In other words, they believe that torture was used for the sole purpose of extracting confessions for use in state propaganda, in a bid to cripple civil society.

These, along with the Animal Farm anecdote, are some of the allegations. If true, they constitute an abuse of state power.

Justice, the rule of law and transparency are bedrocks of Singapore society. In Operation Spectrum, the worry is that all three were suspended. Failure to address that sets a dangerous precedent for future governments.

Moreover, there is no longer any national security reason for withholding state intelligence about communist activities in the 1980s. The twenty-two were charged in 1987, just two years before the Berlin Wall fell and four before the Soviet Union imploded—the twilight of global communism. In 1989 the Communist Party of Malaya was dissolved after its leaders signed a peace agreement with Malaysia and Thailand.

Any communist threat has been altogether extinguished, only to be replaced by more pernicious ideologies. These include anarchic cyber-terrorism and religiously-inspired terrorism. Though Singapore has specific anti-terror laws, the government claims the ISA’s extra preventative powers are necessary to defang aspiring terrorists.

The ISA has, however, been tarnished by suspicions that it has been used to serve political ends, as in Operation Spectrum. Opponents want it abolished or replaced. The government may believe that since the ISA remains broadly popular, any opposition to it can be ignored.

Yet public opinion can shift. The electorate is increasingly concerned with procedural legitimacy rather than just performance legitimacy—in governance, the process is starting to matter as much as the outcome. Better for the government to embrace transparency rather than risk being later accused, falsely or not, of any cover-up. Failure to hold the ISA accountable will undermine its future use.

Inquiries are fraught with difficulties, particularly when prior generations are assessed with contemporary moral lenses. What counts as torture is ill-defined today, never mind the 1980s. The primary aim of the inquiry should be to determine whether or not the twenty-two were wronged by the state. It should not be a witch-hunt.

Why might an inquiry be a bad idea? Skeptics worry about sullying then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s legacy. These fears are overblown. Lee is respected globally for, among many other things, his decisiveness, foresight and toughness in developing Singapore.

Even if we discover that the twenty-two were not subversives, the episode will fit neatly into the narrative of a leader willing to take preemptive action for the sake of the greater good. That he made mistakes in the process is something he admitted: “I’m not saying that everything I did was right, but everything I did was for an honourable purpose. I had to do some nasty things, locking fellows up without trial.”

In a region where governments have butchered communists en masse, Lee’s treatment of the accused was relatively mild. This neither precludes his actions from scrutiny nor negates the suffering of detainees and their families. But it does explain why impetus for an inquiry has hitherto been muted.

Yet Singaporean society is mature enough to handle renegotiations of history, in our relentless pursuit of truth and justice. In a world deluged by falsehoods, there is a pressing need for clarity and objectivity in our national conversations.

There is no end point, of course, no definitive history. As with Gandhi, Pinochet, Reagan and Thatcher, Lee’s legacy will continue to be pored over by laypeople and historians alike. This is not simply an intellectual joy, but an expectation, of life in a pluralistic society.

“There is no hindrance to discussing the past in a normal way,” Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in 2014 in response to a question about Singapore’s communist history. Operation Spectrum deserves this normal discussion.


Tan Wah-Piow
7 hrs ·
I beg to differ with this gentle, but well-intentioned approach of the author.

The author said:

"Even if we discover that the twenty-two were not subversives, the episode will fit neatly into the narrative of a leader willing to take preemptive action for the sake of the greater good. That he made mistakes in the process is something he admitted: “I’m not saying that everything I did was right, but everything I did was for an honourable purpose. I had to do some nasty things, locking fellows up without trial.”

Lee Kuan Yew's intended outcome was to destroy the entire "spectrum" of opposition, which went far beyond the 22 arrested. As he had so intended, and those currently in power were the intended beneficiaries, where lies the mistakes?

Lee Kuan Yew's mistake was his failure to recognise that the world had changed since the height of the Cold War. He was a yesterday's man clinging on to power by stealth, fear, knuckle dusters, and an enormously. well funded patronage scheme funded from the fruits of the people's labour.

I have to concede that Lee Kuan Yew excelled where other dictators, with less intellect, failed.

The author is absolutely right that we need to discuss. This is the first step.


The postscript to the original article you posted does reflect how little the vast majority actually give a damn about 1987:

Post-script

Over the past ten days researching this and speaking to people, it has struck me how little Singaporeans know about Operation Spectrum. Many in this country could probably describe Abu Ghraib in greater detail. Yet among those who are familiar with it, and this includes many people within the establishment, they tend to be fairly sympathetic towards the plight of the detainees.
I had wanted to time this article for May 21st, the 30th anniversary. For the past six days, I have been working with people within more mainstream channels towards getting something published. Today I was told “No”. So boh pian lah, publish here. I mention this so readers know that there are people “up there” who might want to engage in this kind of discussion; but ultimately the outcome is what one might expect. Certain issues will remain off limits for public discussion, never mind how inclusive, open, etc. the government claims it wants to be. No matter, will keep trying.

Here is another footnote:

Martyn See
26 May 2016 ·
Enforcers of the law can sometimes be the worst abusers.

During the 'Marxist conspiracy' detentions of 1987/88, many detainees spoke of being tortured, physically and mentally. The physical assaults were led by Sim Poh Heng and Tan Seck Kang (SK Tan).

At the time, Sim was the Deputy Director of Operations and Tan a Deputy Superintendent.

Ex-detainees reported repeated slappings carried out by both men. Sim also administered punches to the abdomen so vicious that Vincent Cheng passed out blood. Tan was not averse to hitting female detainees, as Tang Fong Har described how she was slapped "with the full force of his body" that she fell to the floor.

Overseeing the interrogations and forced confessions were ISD Director Tjong Yik Min and DSP Benny Lim.

All four men saw career promotions after Operation Spectrum.

Benny Lim was recently commended by PM Lee as a top public servant who is "respected and loved as a leader”. The PM omitted any mention of Operation Spectrum in his eulogy to Lim.

http://www.pmo.gov.sg/…/pm-lee-hsien-loong-2016-administrat…

http://www.singapore-window.org/tfhmemo.htm

https://youtu.be/QYmAtoS5t-Q
 
Last edited:
The operating principles and the doctrine of all effective Intelligence Services are the same when it comes to revealing what has come to be known. Moment it hits national security interest, it never goes to court or to the public. The primary intention is not to reveal their hand to their adversaries. Which network has been compromised and which have not, who has turned and who has not.

Operation Spectrum was to close off once and for all a long drawn saga with the Catholic Church that began in 1971 when Vincent Cheng went to join Jurong Industrial Mission as a social worker. He had joined one Chew Beng Lan who was there since 1969 in a similar post. Tan Wah Piow joined then joined them. Chew went on to become TWP's wife. The Government stepped in and closed JIM in 1972 for agitating the workers. Then the Nazareth Centre at Bt Ho Swee led by a Carmelite nun, followed by Francis Khoo and the use of the Ponggol Seminary. Bear in mind all these people had good intentions and were helping workers and society.

When ISD and old man found out the re-establishing of links between the Church and the old CPM network with the use of codes, dead letter drops, photographs showing our Singapore girls undergoing firearms training with Telo in Sri Lanka, a playwright who underwent training in the Philippines in liberation theology he went apeshit. He felt that it was unfinished business (the same thing he told the press when he went after SIA Pilot Union and Ryan Goh). He wanted the 4 priests. Nicholas Chia and his party were shown things that were not revealed in public.

Anyway it seems to work. The Church now is much stricter with its priest and lay workers and they are also are more cautious with external organisations who want to work wit them.

What I did find concerning is that few who were involved did not reveal to the remaining detainees their involvement. One who was deeply involved stepped away from the rest for nearly 2 decades and actually became a successful businesswoman. She is now back with the rest and I doubt they know her involvement. She was the one who handled the coded messages and followed instructions to the T. By the way the confessions on TV was orchestrated and they made sure that the important details were left out.

Operation Spectrum however led to unexpected bonus which the authorities had no prior clue - the role of Hank Hendrickson from the US, the Singapore Lawyers who were approached and those that agreed including Francis Show. Note the Govt never revealed who the lawyers that agreed. I am sure these were singing like canaries and still do "sterling" work for the authorities.

My advice to the detainees is look within themselves. Also do not associate culpability with the length of detention. They should also understand that this country had a long underground war with it adversaries and old man has never left his enemies walk away even when the threat has dissipated.

Also remember when they were released they had approached the Association of Ex Political Detainees to join them as members who however turned them down flat. So next time choose your "friends" carefully.

When Old Man revealed that Ryan Goh did not sign the very letter he crafted, the entire Pilot Union Committee was shocked. In life again know your friends and more importantly know your enemies and know when you are being used.
 
The govt will not say or reveal a thing, hold an inquiry or clarify anything until the last piece of the puzzle is completed and that is the arrest and detention of the most wanted person in all this - Paul Joseph Lim Huat Chye. This is the man that came to Singapore and met with the Catholics and directed which are the organisations that they have to work with .
3 groups were specifically targeted by the communists or whats left of them.

1) The Catholic Church and the penetration into Catholic Student groups in Uni and Poly, the Geylang Catholic Centre etc
2) The Workers Party
3) The 3rd Stage (drama group)
 
I don't think the ISD officers involved in the interrogations were really promoted.

Sim Poh Heng was kicked out of ISD on Old Man's orders. He was posted to head the less important CNB. (MHA probably did not know what to do with him). Tan Sek Kang met the same fate a while later, to be Sim's Deputy at the CNB.

Only Benny escaped because he was then relatively junior.....
 
Decisions to arrest and detention are made by political leaders, ISD only recommends, in this case a Minister or the PM, the PM has made that decision all these years. Its the direct opposite to the Police. Its the same with Intelligence Services in well run countries. ISD will go far as Lim Kopi (now you know why the phrase has caught on) FBI has both an enforcement and an Intelligence remit (CounterIntelligence ) and its the same with them. There must be a clear detailed report before the decision is made. Its was GCT that made the call.

During the Official Secret Act investigation, ISD Officers mistakenly went to the courts to apply for warrant of arrest to arrest Tharman and company and warrant to search SPH. The magistrate was also surprised. They were told that it was going to court and thought they must follow some procedures.

They were all recognised at a ceremony at the Istana. Both SK and Sim were going into pre-retirement phase. It was not a demotion.

I don't think the ISD officers involved in the interrogations were really promoted.

Sim Poh Heng was kicked out of ISD on Old Man's orders. He was posted to head the less important CNB. (MHA probably did not know what to do with him). Tan Sek Kang met the same fate a while later, to be Sim's Deputy at the CNB.

Only Benny escaped because he was then relatively junior.....
 
ISD carried out the wishes of her political masters, but when the shit hit the ceiling, Old man blamed ISD for mishandling the situation.

Nothing happened to Napoleon's dogs until one fine day when Old Man discovered that Sim was still in ISD contrary to his wishes. He blew his top. Within 24 hours, MHA had to move Poh Geok Ek from CNB to a new post in MHA so that Sim can be deposited at CNB.

Sim was never promoted after his transfer to CNB. He was then afflicted with Colon Cancer, but survived. Some people say it was retribution.......
 
Sim Poh Heng was awarded Public Administration Gold in 1989, 2 years after Operation Spectrum.

ISD carried out the wishes of her political masters, but when the shit hit the ceiling, Old man blamed ISD for mishandling the situation.

Nothing happened to Napoleon's dogs until one fine day when Old Man discovered that Sim was still in ISD contrary to his wishes. He blew his top. Within 24 hours, MHA had to move Poh Geok Ek from CNB to a new post in MHA so that Sim can be deposited at CNB.

Sim was never promoted after his transfer to CNB. He was then afflicted with Colon Cancer, but survived. Some people say it was retribution.......
 
Pap and lky is like America and George Bush who hv no natural enemies.

So they fake enemies.
 
It appears Fat fuck Kirsten han has been groomed by the old farts in function 8 to help cultivate, influence and rally a new generation of leftists to go up against current government policies like ISA, death penalty, public order act etc with the ultimate objective of creating chaos and bringing PAP down.

IMG_2458.JPG
 
I don't think the ISD officers involved in the interrogations were really promoted.

Sim Poh Heng was kicked out of ISD on Old Man's orders. He was posted to head the less important CNB. (MHA probably did not know what to do with him). Tan Sek Kang met the same fate a while later, to be Sim's Deputy at the CNB.

Only Benny escaped because he was then relatively junior.....

SPH had to go only because to make way for BL. TSK was posted out yrs later to accommodate the rise of a scholar taking over from BL.
 
They were all recognised at a ceremony at the Istana. Both SK and Sim were going into pre-retirement phase. It was not a demotion.

Spot on! And both were more than happy to enjoy their own kingdom at CNB, a position they never enjoyed in ISD coz SPH was effectively number 2 and TSK just below SPH.
 
Nope. That was DISD Tjong Yik Min, Pinky's NJC mate I was told.

I believe that LHL and Tjong were buddies from Catholic High School.

Was Tjong the Director of ISD before that scholar officer?

Was Benny a junior officer at ISD? below SPF's Superintendent rank?
 
Does the ISD director have to be a cop?

Who is it now?

Nope. No need. Usually PPS to PM gets to become DISD before their next promotion to PS post. I stand corrected - Benny may well be the first mata DISD.

No idea who is DISD now but very likely another ex-PPS to Pinky. That chap will be a PS next. Bet on it unless he screws up big time. It's predictable.
 
Nope. No need. Usually PPS to PM gets to become DISD before their next promotion to PS post. I stand corrected - Benny may well be the first mata DISD.

No idea who is DISD now but very likely another ex-PPS to Pinky. That chap will be a PS next. Bet on it unless he screws up big time. It's predictable.

Did Benny move from ISD back to SPF, then promoted to be Director ISD?
 
I believe that LHL and Tjong were buddies from Catholic High School.

Was Tjong the Director of ISD before that scholar officer?

Was Benny a junior officer at ISD? below SPF's Superintendent rank?

You are likely to be correct on CHS connection.

Yes, years before scholar arrived.

Not aware if he was JO there before but started career in SPF as one before Uni
 
Back
Top