Historian Pingtjin Thum once again reiterated his assertion about Operation Coldstore that there was no evidence to show that those detained were involved in any communist conspiracy.

In short Facebook post on 1 December, Dr Thum pointed out that since the government is now using the Protection against Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), he wanted to make his position on the matter clear.

He wrote: “Now that Singapore’s PAP government is actively using POFMA to go after “fake news”, let me say this one last time so that there can be no uncertainty: There is no evidence that the detainees of Operation Coldstore were involved in any communist conspiracy to subvert the government of Singapore.”

In November, the government has already invoked POFMA twice in one week. The first was a correction order issued by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat for a Facebook post written by political activist Brad Bowyer.

The second, also a correction order, was issued by Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugan for a Facebook post by States Times Review. There was also another direction issued directly to Facebook to correct the post made by States Times Review as the editor of the site, Alex Tan, refused to comply with the first order.

Dr Thum, the government and Operation Coldstore

The conversation about Operation Coldstore came to light again this year when Dr Thum appeared before a select committee in March and was questioned extensively by Law and Home Affairs ministers about his interpretation of documents from the Special Branch, the precursor to the Internal Security Department.

The minister kept asserting that Dr Thum’s interpretation was flawed, arguing that the detainees were in fact planning to mount an armed struggle against the government in the 50s and early 60s.

Later, both Minister for Social and Family Development Desmond Lee and Senior Minister of State for Transport and Communication and Information Janil Puthucheary – who were members of the select committee – said that Dr Thum had agreed that some of his writings were misleading.

In an article published by Straits Times (10 April 2018) written by them, they also said Dr Thum admitted he had no read and sometimes not heard of writings by certain ex-leaders and cadres of the Communist Party of Malaya who were considering an armed struggle as a legitimate option.

However, Dr Thum challenged the committee’s conclusion in a submission in May, clarifying that the main point of his original submission was not addressed in the earlier six-hour discussion. He added that the committee focused on an article he cited on Operation Coldstore instead.

Dr Thum clarified that extracts from certain books presented in the hearings did not have primary sources cited and were not independently verifiable.

He added that “the best evidence” on communism in Singapore would be from the Singapore Special Branch documents, none of which were presenting during the hearing.

He also said, “at no point did I accept that any part of my article was inaccurate or misleading.”

What Dr Thum did concede was that a statement in his paper concerning a telegram from British Commissioner to Singapore Lord Selkirk during Operation Coldstore could have been worded better. The historian acknowledged that while Barisan Sosialis members called for continued peaceful constitutional action in order to achieve power in Singapore in late 1962, they did not explicitly rule out an armed struggle.

Later in his follow-up submission in May, Dr Thum said the argument that Barisan Sosialis unanimously agreed to continue following peaceful constitutional action is accurate based on notes and other documents he cited in his paper. A point he had reiterated during the hearing, said Dr Thum.

In his May submission, Dr Thum also highlighted an error in the transcript of the March hearing which showed that Mr Shanmugam kept referring to a telegram from Lord Selkirk dated 14 December 1962. In fact, Dr Thum noted that Mr Shanmugan had corrected himself and referred to a telegram, numbered 573, dated 11 December 1962 instead.

Dr Thum said, “It is important to clarify exactly which document is being referenced, because (the Dec 11, 1962 telegram) in fact shows that Lord Selkirk was more concerned with the political position of the British vis-à-vis merger and the creation of Malaysia, than with the security issue.

“In other words, his Telegram 573 supports my argument that Operation Coldstore was fundamentally motivated by political, not security, reasons.”

Mr Shanmugan had also said during the hearing that though there were no instructions for violent actions from leaders of the Communist Party of Malaya, that didn’t discount that there was no communist conspiracy at a lower of the organisation. For example, Dr Shanmugam pointed to the Hock Lee bus riots, saying that there may have been certain members of the party who instigated the incident without instructions from above.

To this, Dr Thum again referred to the Special Branch documents, noting how it states that the Hock Lee bus riots were caused by “PAP political manipulation”.
He said, “It emphasised that the PAP was using workers for political gain.”

It remains to be seen if the government will use POFMA on Dr Thum for making” flawed” and “misleading” statements about Operation Coldstore.

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

PSP’s Leong Mun Wai pens lessons that Singaporeans can learn from COVID-19 pandemic

Following the rapid rise of COVID-19 cases in Singapore, Progress Singapore Party’s…

民主党达曼胡理:民众已厌倦和抵制旧有政治模式

民主党成员达曼胡理直言,旧有的政治模式让新加坡人愈发反感和抵制。 达曼胡理昨日(21日)在脸书上发文形容,仍有顽固的双重标准拒绝离开,因为旧有政治拒绝从既得利益中改革。 他也表示,人民行动党必须推翻过去才能达到改变,与时并进,避免过时。他说,“终有一天传统铁票会离开,如果这种情况真的发生,它也只能怪自己。” 达曼胡理也表示,如今人民行动党若想依赖新公民的票数,以此取代传统票,将会是一把双刃剑,如同执政政府创造的集选区制度一样。 他续指,从其他国家的调查可发现,刚加入的新公民,大约二至三届选举,都会投向执政党派。但当他们明智地意识到,自己和本国公民都同样身陷困境时,他们就会选择改变,或离开。 总的来说,达曼胡理强调,最终决定权还是会落在土生土长的本国公民身上,因为无论如何,他们都会选择留在自己的国家。 “或许会需要一段时间,但它最终将会发生,因为平衡才是常态。这不是高端的学问,而是生命循环的本质。” 达曼胡理连同民主党成员方月光、林文兴、江伟贤等人于今年大选中角逐马西岭-油池集选区,对战人民行动党的黄循财、任梓铭、扎吉哈、苏慧民等人,最终人民行动党以63.18巴仙对36.82巴仙得票率,拿下该集选区。

For her son’s bright future

by Deborah Choo/   As I waited at the reception area of…

不搬来新加坡就炒鱿鱼? 餐饮业者称已咨询员工

3月16日马来西亚首相宣布本周三(18日)起实施行动管制措施,有雇主也在当天对员工表示, “你可以选择直到本月31日起住在安全宿舍,否则或面临被裁的命运” ,然而相关公司表示,自2月初就已经和员工接洽商议了。 宽意餐饮管理有限公司(Creative Eateries)于本月16日发出员工通告,要求马国员工在新加坡住宿“到年尾为止”,并停止每天跨境往返两国,更要求员工们出示新住处安排的证明。 一名读者则向本地英语媒体《Mothership》展示了有关的通知书。宽意餐饮的通知书中指出,如果员工因为边境管制而无法上班,该公司有权利立刻裁员并取消他们的工作准证,而任何相关的缺勤也将被视为无薪假期。 此外,有问题的员工应该在今日(20日)之前通知人力资源部门,否则当局会立刻寻找替代人员。 人力部早前已提醒雇主,如果在马国“锁国”期间,仍需要马国员工留在本地工作,即使时间仓促,也必须为他们提供合适的住宿;又或者让他们在马国远程工作,如不可行也要安排他们领无薪假。 人力部称大部分雇主都能为雇员找到住宿,有困难者则寻求该部安排,并协助接洽相关的酒店或寄宿单位。 “雇主也可衡量是否改为聘请本地员工,那么就依据合约解除在职者的服务。” 全部员工已到我国 在受询及有关问题时,宽意餐饮并没有否认发出过有关通知书,并表示这是在马国宣布锁国之前就已准备的应对方式,强调这“绝对不是”针对锁国所做出的决定。…