Untold story of PAP

[lockeliberal]

Dear Por

I probably would have been shot for my errrr capitalist tendencies, or have a high post as the Minister of Information :_))

Do read a new book, Its " Conversations with Chin Peng" and on two issues it does raise some interesting questions.

Chin Peng states clearly that prior to the basement meeting, through middle road school Unions LKY knowingly approached the CPM for help :_)) in forming the base of the PAP.

And on the issue on whether Lim Ching Siong was a communist, I am inclined after reading Chin Peng's reply to believe yes. Btw the reply has been misquoted by the Anti LKY and LKY is the spawn of the red devil camp but the quote is telling.

In reply to a DIRECT question as to whether Lim Ching Siong was a communist. CP himself replied with a masterful politicians reply and said " Lim Chin Siong said he was not a communist. "

Please note contrary to what people thought he said, he never directly stated " No Lim Chin Siong was not a communist." or " Lim Chin Siong was a communist" I couldn't figure a reason for such an evasive answer until I remembered that like LKY and like most politicians they want to be remembered positively by history, and in that evasive answer I believe CP admitted that LCS was a communist :_))





Locke

 

[scroobal]

You right. People who knew old man and these 2 chaps would trust the latter two. Poh was released and had to be arrested again as he was attending to sick and injured wanted people. He could have said no and the communist would have understood having spent many years in changi.

from my interaction with people who personally knew chaps like drs. lim hock siew and poh su kai...i get the impression that they truly cared for the downtrodden and poor and cared little for material wealth...however at the sametime they also appeared way too far to the left...

 

[scroobal]

CC was malaysian boy who studied under scholarship in RI and Raffles College but he went back. He was never associated with Singapore Special as they were not linked to Malaysian Special Branch even during time of merger.

CC had met EU and Chin Peng previously and believed to have worked with the forunner of CIA.

He was asked by Tungku to advise old man in Singapore but did not work with the local SB. Only advised on Coldstore and the merger referendum. I am am sure old man is not going to tell him that half the wanted buggers were in his basement day and night.

i was under the impression that cc too was involved on advice viz the merger and operation coldstore...

 

[scroobal]

Special Branch raided a pineapple plantation near Kranji. They searched the celling of an attap roofed outhouse and recovered bedding and a tin. In the tin, they recovered small pieces of paper. In it was micro-writings in chinese to the Johore communist command. Handwriting analysis revealed that it matched Chin Siong.

The person who kept those things and acted as liaision was the Towkay's son who attended Chinese High. The father got a mighty shock. The family spoke to the boy and together with Special Branch arrangement were made to send the boy to England to study. He went on to HK and is now a successful businessman.

These and many other things are known to old man and the cabinet of that era. Ever wonder why they never said anything.

Dear Por

I probably would have been shot for my errrr capitalist tendencies, or have a high post as the Minister of Information :_))

Do read a new book, Its " Conversations with Chin Peng" and on two issues it does raise some interesting questions.

Chin Peng states clearly that prior to the basement meeting, through middle road school Unions LKY knowingly approached the CPM for help :_)) in forming the base of the PAP.

And on the issue on whether Lim Ching Siong was a communist, I am inclined after reading Chin Peng's reply to believe yes. Btw the reply has been misquoted by the Anti LKY and LKY is the spawn of the red devil camp but the quote is telling.

In reply to a DIRECT question as to whether Lim Ching Siong was a communist. CP himself replied with a masterful politicians reply and said " Lim Chin Siong said he was not a communist. "

Please note contrary to what people thought he said, he never directly stated " No Lim Chin Siong was not a communist." or " Lim Chin Siong was a communist" I couldn't figure a reason for such an evasive answer until I remembered that like LKY and like most politicians they want to be remembered positively by history, and in that evasive answer I believe CP admitted that LCS was a communist :_))





Locke

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Scroobal

Ohh wall of silence on both sides, evasive response from CP himself when all that matters is that history records as much of the truth as possible. I mean Eu Chong Yip came clean to ISD when he came back to Singapore .........what more is there left to hide ?

If I would hazard a guess based on your stories, detailing what was known of LCS would have also meant detailing what was known about other people and some of the names would have included some very prominent or sons of prominent people today.

Looking at Chin Pengs account of the MCP, I can't get the feeling that the MCP was a rural movement dominated by rural communists , whereas in Singapore those dabbling in the left and communism included the rich, sons of the rich and the well educated.


Locke

 

[scroobal]

Communism drew 2 types of people - the lower income and the upper income. The middle income had no time for ideology, they were salaried, staring family, aspirations were possible. The lower income knew the light of been dirt poor while the upper income had the luxury of time to delve into ideology. Both set of candidates had very good intentions.

Naturally prominent families were involved. Its was basically who's who of the landed and the gentrified. The upper income funded while the lower income did the leg work while both went deeper into ideology.

Of course old man made sure that communist were absolute evil and some of them helped paint the picture many fold. Only a Singaporean has different interpretation of communism than anyone else in the world. If I put out a new thread stating the Title as "Lim Chin Siong was a communist", I will incur the wrath of the uneducated and the Ignoramus and you can't blame them because this is same country that has no clue about its history and know clue who the Plen was.

ps. by the way, its no story - its appears in the oral archives.

Dear Scroobal

Ohh wall of silence on both sides, evasive response from CP himself when all that matters is that history records as much of the truth as possible. I mean Eu Chong Yip came clean to ISD when he came back to Singapore .........what more is there left to hide ?

If I would hazard a guess based on your stories, detailing what was known of LCS would have also meant detailing what was known about other people and some of the names would have included some very prominent or sons of prominent people today.

Looking at Chin Pengs account of the MCP, I can't get the feeling that the MCP was a rural movement dominated by rural communists , whereas in Singapore those dabbling in the left and communism included the rich, sons of the rich and the well educated.


Locke

 

[scroobal]

When Chin Peng particpated in the close door discussion with academia and luminaries involved in the Emergency at ANU, Canberra, there were people from Malaysia, Singapore UK, Australia etc. There was even a retired Special Branch officer.

Singapore had a well respected academic who for some reason was so overwhelmed by the occasion, kept praising Chin Peng sky high that he forgot to ask questions on Singapore or where it was asked, it was brushed aside and he never pursued. One of the British Historian pursued the angle better than this guy.

This Singaporean does not lecture anymore but spends his time sitting on committes and heads Institutes that he is lost in the trappings of office.

Looking at Chin Pengs account of the MCP, I can't get the feeling that the MCP was a rural movement dominated by rural communists , whereas in Singapore those dabbling in the left and communism included the rich, sons of the rich and the well educated.
Locke

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

i left out that i would also possibly land up with a dunce cap/hat or worse still the singapore gulag

Dear Por

I probably would have been shot for my errrr capitalist tendencies, or have a high post as the Minister of Information :_))

yup did manage to thumb through this book...and you pointed out some curious stuff...ever consider joinning the Bar?!...

btw i think Fang/Plen in his own book made some indirect/implicit reference that seems to suggest that lim chin siong may well have been a communist afterall...

Do read a new book, Its " Conversations with Chin Peng" and on two issues it does raise some interesting questions.

Chin Peng states clearly that prior to the basement meeting, through middle road school Unions LKY knowingly approached the CPM for help :_)) in forming the base of the PAP.

And on the issue on whether Lim Ching Siong was a communist, I am inclined after reading Chin Peng's reply to believe yes. Btw the reply has been misquoted by the Anti LKY and LKY is the spawn of the red devil camp but the quote is telling.

In reply to a DIRECT question as to whether Lim Ching Siong was a communist. CP himself replied with a masterful politicians reply and said " Lim Chin Siong said he was not a communist. "

Please note contrary to what people thought he said, he never directly stated " No Lim Chin Siong was not a communist." or " Lim Chin Siong was a communist" I couldn't figure a reason for such an evasive answer until I remembered that like LKY and like most politicians they want to be remembered positively by history, and in that evasive answer I believe CP admitted that LCS was a communist :_))





Locke

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

:p:p:p

. I am am sure old man is not going to tell him that half the wanted buggers were in his basement day and night.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

yes my thoughts exactly...this probably cuts both ways...for instance i gather it has now been revealed that the late french president mitterand collaborated with the germans during wwII when it was previously recorded that he was a great french resistance hero...likewise i note allegations albeit without substantiation thus far that harry was in collaboration with the japs during wwII...probably alot more water to flow under the bridge with regards this commie/colonial/malayan singgie story between 50s-60s...may well throw up more Lai Tecks...

If I would hazard a guess based on your stories, detailing what was known of LCS would have also meant detailing what was known about other people and some of the names would have included some very prominent or sons of prominent people today.

Looking at Chin Pengs account of the MCP, I can't get the feeling that the MCP was a rural movement dominated by rural communists , whereas in Singapore those dabbling in the left and communism included the rich, sons of the rich and the well educated.


Locke

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

i think this issue was made even more complicated by the anti-colonial sentiments and the fight for independence...these sentiments were shared by all malayan/singaporean colonial subjects whatever their political stripe...

Communism drew 2 types of people - the lower income and the upper income. The middle income had no time for ideology, they were salaried, staring family, aspirations were possible. The lower income knew the light of been dirt poor while the upper income had the luxury of time to delve into ideology. Both set of candidates had very good intentions. .

 

[Papsmearer]

Devan was never part of the inner circle and never had access to state matters. He was asked to look after the unions. He never stepped into government and unlikely to have anything solid.

During his time in Canada, he made so many allegations but these were more adjectives and labels with nothing substantive. Old man tried to sue him in Canada but it was thrown out.

For some reason he kept sensitive union matters to himself probably he was close to Ho See Beng, father of the present MP Ho Geok Choo. Till the very end, See Beng was close to him visiting Devan overseas often.

Are u shitting me? Devan Nair "unlikely to have anything solid"? Helloooooo. This guy was one of the original PAP, and on the PAP's central exec committee from the start. He knows the inner workings of the PAP for sure. He was in the CEC during the last years of the British and privy to all the PAP strategies vis a vis the colonial govt. and other political parties. He could have written a book on this era alone. Many things he knows were not revealed by him. I would have liked to know what was the PAP's election strategy in 1964. What did Con You REALLY think about the merger? WHat is the PAP's relationship to the DAP? Who devised the PAP strategy of subverting the trade unions and making them subservient to the PAP? How was this carried out? WHat is his version of the events of 1985? What was the disagreement with Con You about, and why was it so bad that Con You had to publicly disgrace him like that? What is his personal opinion of Kuan Yew's character?

 

[TeeKee]

Please note contrary to what people thought he said, he never directly stated " No Lim Chin Siong was not a communist." or " Lim Chin Siong was a communist" I couldn't figure a reason for such an evasive answer until I remembered that like LKY and like most politicians they want to be remembered positively by history, and in that evasive answer I believe CP admitted that LCS was a communist :_))





Locke

like dat u also believed? what happens if CP is a cunning old fox like Hakka Lee?

 

[FuckSamLeong]

Why the fucking endless rounds of coffee when the quality of the food and service are the real issues?

 

[scroobal]

Do concede that he was part of the equation at the founding but it did not last long.

Devan was sent to Malaysia to form DAP and he held the position of Sec Gen until handing over to Lim Kit Siang. What was he doing in Malaysia - growing rambutan. The PAP CEC meetings are held just before the cabinet meeting in the Istana.

When Devan became President, the post of NTUC Sec Gen became a cabinet post.

Are u shitting me? Devan Nair "unlikely to have anything solid"? Helloooooo. This guy was one of the original PAP, and on the PAP's central exec committee from the start. He knows the inner workings of the PAP for sure. He was in the CEC during the last years of the British and privy to all the PAP strategies vis a vis the colonial govt. and other political parties. He could have written a book on this era alone. Many things he knows were not revealed by him. I would have liked to know what was the PAP's election strategy in 1964. What did Con You REALLY think about the merger? WHat is the PAP's relationship to the DAP? Who devised the PAP strategy of subverting the trade unions and making them subservient to the PAP? How was this carried out? WHat is his version of the events of 1985? What was the disagreement with Con You about, and why was it so bad that Con You had to publicly disgrace him like that? What is his personal opinion of Kuan Yew's character?

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

perhaps this is jenadas' retirement golden nest egg

Are u shitting me? Devan Nair "unlikely to have anything solid"? Helloooooo. This guy was one of the original PAP, and on the PAP's central exec committee from the start. He knows the inner workings of the PAP for sure. He was in the CEC during the last years of the British and privy to all the PAP strategies vis a vis the colonial govt. and other political parties. He could have written a book on this era alone. Many things he knows were not revealed by him. I would have liked to know what was the PAP's election strategy in 1964. What did Con You REALLY think about the merger? WHat is the PAP's relationship to the DAP? Who devised the PAP strategy of subverting the trade unions and making them subservient to the PAP? How was this carried out? WHat is his version of the events of 1985? What was the disagreement with Con You about, and why was it so bad that Con You had to publicly disgrace him like that? What is his personal opinion of Kuan Yew's character?

 

[mscitw]

Peasant Cheong is indeed another swine or vermin depending who he call as parents.

In Asian society, history is often written by the victors and dissenters are usually dispatched to penal colonies as an example to the rest.

despite the westernization, this old kowtow culture has not fettered out.

Peasant Cheong merely idolized his older political masters and bemoaned the present generation of money hungry lackeys and minions.

His book break no new ground and has little literary merit, the pulp could be recycled as toilet paper and the ink better off staining the Peasantpore River pitch dark.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Por

To old to spend another three years in law school arguing with SYTs, I have burnt enough brain cells arguing with family, business partners, gfs ex ggs etc etc




Locke

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

now this tamby was being quite honest

THINGS WE NEVER KNEW



'They've covered a fair bit of ground. There are many things surfacing now that we did not know.

Historically, it's necessary. People may not agree but history is never objective. People who write it will always write it from a certain point of view.'

Mr P. Selvadurai, 76, PAP MP from 1967 to 1984 in the Bukit Panjang and Kuo Chuan (now in Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC) constituencies.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

The PAP story, blemishes and all
SPEECH by Dr Tony Tan, chairman of Singapore Press Holdings, at the book launch

What is Men In White all about? How different is it from previous books on Singapore's ruling political party?

Let me clarify what the book is not.

It is not a re-telling of Singapore's transformation from Third World ghetto to First World city, a story which Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew so vividly documented in his memoirs. It is also not about the PAP Government and the art of policy-making.

Men In White is the untold story of the rise, fall, capture, split and resurgence of one of the world's most successful and longest ruling political parties, a story narrated for the first time through the voices of the victors and the vanquished as well as eyewitnesses to its unfolding history.

It is untold because many of these voices had not been heard in earlier books on the PAP - the voices of former PAP stalwarts and grassroots activists and their adversaries.

The story is untold because the voices of the Mandarin- and dialect-speaking, Malay-speaking and Tamil-speaking cast of characters often overlooked are also aired for the first time.

The result is a story of the PAP, warts, blemishes and all.

It is a story which details the ups and downs and twists and turns of the PAP and the pivotal moments in its history. It is a story which combines political theatre with human drama.

It tells of friends who turned foes when they found themselves on different sides of the ideological divide and of ordinary people who rose to meet extraordinary challenges in extraordinary times.

This book marks the culmination of a seven-year journey for our project team led by former SPH editor-in-chief Cheong Yip Seng and later by Straits Times editor Han Fook Kwang.

It all started in May 2001 when then-Prime Minister and PAP secretary-general Goh Chok Tong broached the idea of a book to mark the 50th anniversary of PAP in 2004. Mr Goh and Mr Cheong agreed that it should not be a commemorative coffee-table book, and that it should be well-researched. More importantly, it should be non-partisan and not written for the PAP, but rather the authors' version of the PAP story.

When Mr Goh Chok Tong told then-Senior Minister Lee about the book, the latter said that it would make for compelling reading if it covered the views of all the players in the struggle - those for and against the PAP.

Mr Lee told the team: 'If you're going to tell my side of the story, then you might as well not write the book. This has to be your book.'

He stressed that the authors - Sonny Yap, Richard Lim and Leong Weng Kam - should get the facts right but stand by what they have written.

When the initial drafts were shown to him, he pointed out factual errors but did not question the narrative thread or request that any of the critical and contentious points surrounding him be taken out.

This approach meant keeping an open mind, unfettered by any preconceived notions. Just let the story unravel - through the voices of about 300 people interviewed and of some 200 oral history interviewees recorded in the National Archives as well as the voices resurrected from unpublished memoirs and declassified documents.

The challenge for the team lay in tracking down former political players lost in the fog of history. After locating them, the next great challenge was in cajoling and coaxing them to give their side of the story.

Many were initially sceptical if not cynical. Some were downright hostile, assuming that the book would be just a propaganda exercise.

Typical of their responses were: 'Why should I cooperate with you to do a book on the party whose government locked me up for so many years?

'Are you sure that whatever I tell you will be printed?'

Fortunately, most of the people contacted gave the writers the benefit of the doubt and agreed to be interviewed. Despite being on the losing side and spending years in detention, many former leftists betrayed little bitterness or rancour and extended full cooperation to the team.

Some of them are now with us in the chamber: Fong Swee Suan, Dominic Puthucheary, Lim Chin Joo, Chen Say Jame and Low Por Tuck.

Unfortunately, some had passed away since their interviews.

What proved to be a treasure trove of precious insights were the 200-odd oral history interviews released by the National Archives of Singapore.

They included the voices of Lee Kuan Yew and his wife Kwa Geok Choo, S. Rajaratnam, C.V. Devan Nair, E.W. Barker, Fong Sip Chee, Richard Corridon, Lord Selkirk, David Marshall, S. Woodhull, James Puthucheary, Ong Chang Sam, Soon Loh Boon and Chen Say Jame.

Apart from listening to hundreds of hours of oral history interview tapes, the researchers pored over reams of documents, scanned reels of microfilm, ploughed through volumes of Chinese and Malay newspapers and sought the help of libraries and government agencies for the required information.

The team was also fortunate in gaining access to confidential party documents such as PAP's Analysis of the 1984 General Election; declassified diplomatic records from British National Archives; Mr Lee Kuan Yew's correspondence in the 1950s before he became PM and unpublished papers and memoirs belonging to Francis Thomas, Maurice Baker, SR Nathan and others.

Singaporeans might ask: Why should we know the PAP story?

Since 1959, PAP has won 12 general elections making it one of the most successful and longest ruling elected parties in the world. The 55-year-old party has ruled Singapore for 50 years. So whether you are for or against PAP, knowing the history of the party would mean knowing the political development of Singapore.

As former leftist leader Fong Swee Suan said, modern Singapore and PAP are inseparable. Their stories are intertwined.

They say that history favours the victors but in Men In White the voices of the vanquished are also aired.

Many of the leftists and communists who found themselves on the wrong side of history were idealistic young men and women, fired up by the Chinese revolution and the rise of socialism, to fight against the colonialists and champion the plight of the working class and the poor. Their support for PAP in the early years contributed to the victory of the party in the 1959 elections.

In some way, belated as it may be, the book has accorded recognition to their roles and contributions in the political development of Singapore. Thanks to their inputs and insights, Men In White is a rounded and balanced account of the Singapore Story.

In relating the fortunes of Singapore's ruling political party, the book also highlights the values, convictions, ideals, instincts, beliefs and world views of the generation of politicians who laid the foundation for today's Singapore. Whether as protagonists or antagonists, they were fighting for the future of Singapore.

The reader will be struck by the idealism, integrity and self-sacrifice of the first generation of PAP and non-PAP leaders: Lee Kuan Yew charging little or no fees as lawyer for political activists and trade unionists; Goh Keng Swee bringing soap flakes on his overseas trips to do his own washing to save taxpayers' money; ministers and legislative assemblymen refusing to accept bribes; Francis Thomas requesting the Ministry of Education to drop his expatriate allowance after he became a Singapore citizen; and leftists leading an austere life which compelled PAP leaders to do likewise to win the hearts and minds of the people.

Indeed Men In White can be read as a tribute to the generation born before the war who suffered under British colonialism and Japanese occupation, endured unimaginable poverty and privations, underwent social and political upheaval, and yet were able to overcome the tears and the trauma to lay the foundation for a new nation.

If not for the thrift, frugality, hard work and tremendous sacrifices of the leaders and the people, the present generation would not enjoy the privilege of being the beneficiaries of Singapore's peace and prosperity today.

We believe that the book will be new grist for the mill, a source of reference for future writers, researchers and scholars to pursue new lines of enquiry and expand on the themes and issues raised in the book.

This huge project will not be in vain if the book helps to equip a new generation of readers to rethink the Singapore Story, overturn some longstanding assumptions, question some conventional wisdom and debunk some myths and taboos.

For the project team, it has been an epic journey into a long forgotten and fractious past.

Many of you present here have helped our team to bring the past to life again. We thank you for sharing your recollections of those turbulent days.

Whether you were on the side of the PAP or against the PAP or were bystanders and witnesses to unfolding history, you are honoured guests today.

Directly or indirectly, in one way or another, you have all helped to contribute to the political development and common good of Singapore and your voices deserve to be heard.