The Straits Times Forum published a letter by a certain Mr Syu Ying Kwok today, 8 July. The letter was titled, “Five years? MM Lee’s estimate was optimistic.

In his letter, Syu gave his thoughts on MM Lee Kuan Yew’s earlier remarks about how it would take only five years for Singapore to be “unscrambled” should the opposition come into power.

There is nothing unusual about Syu’s letter – until this part where he made reference to Mr Tan Lead Shake’s “tragic event in his family”:

Recently, opposition politician Tan Lead Shake made headlines after a tragic event in his family. But what chills the bones is the fact that in the past three elections, an average of more than 20 per cent of the electorate voted for him or anyone else who stood for election with little consideration of his credentials or abilities.

We fail to see how the two are linked or can be linked – a personal tragedy in the family and the electorate voting for him. It is a cheap shot at a person whose family tragedy is used here to question the number or percentage of voters who voted for him in the elections. The words used in the letter speak for themselves – “chills the bones”, it says.

It is totally appalling and vile that such a letter could be published in a national newspaper which prides itself on integrity and respectability. Did the editors of the Straits Times Forum not go through the letter? By what criteria did they pass it for publication – with the above parts intact?

Where is the responsibility and common decency? How is it that a letter such as Syu’s, making tenuous connections between what is undoubtedly a very sorrowful time for the Tan family, and particularly Tan Lead Shake, and Tan’s participation in three general elections?

What is the purpose?

While we condemn Syu for the stupidity of his letter, our anger is directed at the editors of the Forum Page.

We call on the editors of the Straits Times, especially the editors of the Straits Times Forum, to issue an apology to Tan Lead Shake, and also to all its readers and subscribers.

As for Syu himself, we would like to ask him: Please show us or tell us the link between the two issues of Tan’s personal family tragedy and his participation in elections.

We would also like to urge all our readers, fellow bloggers and Singaporeans to write in to the ST Forum’s editors and express your disgust for allowing such a letter to be published.

You can send your letters to: [email protected]

You can post your letters sent to the Straits Times in the comments section for this article.

————————–

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

如政府传假消息怎么办? 唐振辉称一样被新法对付

如果政府或领导传播假消息,该怎么办? 对此律政部兼卫生部高级政务部长唐振辉打包票指出,政府并不会凌驾于法律体系之外,完全不受到监督。他们也受到同样的监管,适用同样的标准。 他认为,政府若作出错误判断或决定,法院便得裁决,若这类事件一再发生,人民对政府的信任也会被削弱。 唐振辉在昨日出席由新加坡管理大学主办的对话会,针对与会者提问,法案是否有制衡机制,确保政府本身不制造假消息。 约150名师生,出席这场讨论假消息草案的对话会。会上唐振辉也解释,法案没有设定人数标准,消息传到多少人手中才构成违法。这意味着,不会因为接到假消息的受众少,就不会被法律对付。 他声称,新法必须具备这种伸缩性,因为一些假消息即便没有广泛散播,但它可能涉及危害国家利益。例如,若意图在短信或私人群组散播假消息以制造恐慌,也得面对法律责任。 民间忧遭诉讼缠身,产生寒蝉效应 另一方面,反假消息法也被指透过法律刑责,来制造寒蝉效应,造成民众因担忧招惹官司而被高昂诉讼费缠身,而不敢再批评政府政策。 对此,唐振辉指出,法庭是比较合适和独立于政府的监督机构,来裁定部长的判断。 对于官司费的担忧,唐振辉认为,目前国内已有充足的经济和法律援助供有需要者申请,对部长的更正指示作出上诉。 “作为消息发布者,在法院也只需要直截了当,提出证明自己所说所写皆属实,这应该不难,如果我写了什么,理应有所根据。” 尚穆根:政府不是假消息真伪最后仲裁者…

MINDEF’s new argument against Ben Davis: He will go AWOL if we defer his NS

MINDEF yesterday (18 Jul) now said that it rejected teenage footballer Ben…

Foreign workers organised sit-down protest at CBD, demanding unpaid salaries of nearly S$300,000

On Wednesday (March 6), over 30 foreign workers participated in a sit-down…