Connect with us

Current Affairs

PSP’s Brad Bowyer clarifies his stance after fellow party member criticises him for “dangerous opinions” on COVID-19 measures

Published

4 years ago

on

Progress Singapore Party (PSP) member Brad Bowyer took to Facebook on Monday (21 December) to provide an explanation over his earlier remarks on COVID-19 measures, which drew criticism from a fellow party member, Kala Manickam.

It all started in a Facebook post last week on Thursday (19 December) where Mr Bowyer questioned the need to wear masks and for social distancing measures to continue, which resulted in Ms Manickam rebuking him for his “irresponsible” comments.

Mr Bowyer, who contested in the recent general election as part of the PSP’s team in Nee Soon GRC, also voiced his distrust in the COVID-19 vaccines.

Following his post – which is no longer available as Facebook removed it – Ms Manickam criticised Mr Bowyer in the comment section of his Thursday’s post.

The PSP member, who also contested at Nee Soon GRC along with Mr Bowyer, pointed out that she was disappointed that Mr Bowyer is trivialising the COVID-19 crisis.

She noted, “Being a COVID-19 survivor, I am extremely disturbed by the misinformation and fear you are spreading.”

Ms Manickam had told The Straits Times that she was tested positive for the coronavirus on 27 August, just a day after her mother was also tested positive for COVID-19.

Ms Manickam was the approved caregiver for her mother during her 14-day quarantine after she returned to Singapore from India on 14 August.

Ms Manickam also pointed out that although there were gaps in communication from the Government when the pandemic first started in Singapore, she believed that it has “generally done well in the past few months since the election”.

She added that making it mandatory to wear masks, social distancing and calibrated reopening of the economy are measures that are important to protect the community.

“In the midst of a public health pandemic, we should not spread conspiracy theories on vaccines, like what you are doing here,” she said.

She continued, “We have to follow the lead of the Government and health professionals to keep our people safe. Surely the economy cannot be more important than human beings”.

Mr Bowyer questioned in his post why is Singapore not able to enter Phase 3 of its reopening earlier than 28 December, since there have been “virtually no new cases in the community for months”.

He went on to question the Government for “pushing experimental vaccines with known side effects”, pointing out that the threat for the coronavirus is “virtually zero” and the disease does not require “serious treatment”.

Mr Bowyer said that the Government should instead promote “healthy lifestyle, exercising in the sun, nutrition and other natural immune-system-boosting activities” to safeguard people from COVID-19 and other future viruses.

As a reply, Ms Manickam said: “I am alarmed at your recent posts on the topic because I stood with you as a candidate in Nee Soon GRC… I believe the Party has to distance itself from your dangerous opinions.”

Mr Bowyer responds

Following Ms Manickam’s criticism over Mr Bowyer’s previous post, the latter took to Facebook today to justify the points he had made earlier.

Mr Bowyer said that his earlier Facebook post was removed by the company without notifying him or offering him any reason, hence the public is not able to read it and understand his points.

“Firstly, the actual post in question, which I had made alongside the recent BBC article “Covid-19: Singapore migrant workers infections were three times higher” is no longer available for viewing because sometime last night Facebook took it upon itself to remove it giving me no notification or reason so sadly it is not available for you to personally see and read,” he wrote.

In response to Mr Bowyer’s claim that Facebook removed his post without notifying him, a spokesperson from Facebook told TOC: “We do not allow people to share misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines that have been debunked by public health experts. This includes false claims about the safety, efficacy, ingredients or side effects of vaccines.”

The post was removed because it included several claims about alleged side effects that have been debunked by global public health experts

In today’s post, Mr Bowyer also opined that the questions he raised in his earlier post were “fair” and it had been “grossly mischaracterized and taken out of the context”.

However, people would not be able to see it now as it was deleted, he noted.

“Secondly I feel the questions I had posed were fair and were asking for hard evidence and justifications for the current and continued policy landscape and the timing given the changing public information available revealed both at Monday’s PM statement and the following press conference and from overseas sources as the global pool of knowledge about Covid grows.

“I feel this has been grossly mischaracterized and taken out of the context but sadly you can no longer see for yourself due to the deletion,” he explained.

Mr Bowyer went on to clarify that the views he makes online are his own and that he is “extremely glad” to be part of PSP as it allows its members to have their own voice on social media.

This is because Mr Bowyer believes that it is “important to have a proper discourse about such issues in the public domain even if they are sometimes difficult conversations to have”.

The PSP member also apologised to Ms Manickam for feeling the way she did, and wished her well given that she was tested positive for COVID-19 a few months ago.

“I will continue to post on topics I feel we need to discuss and as I always do will do so within the guidelines set by the party and adjust if necessary or asked to from time to time as I am still learning all the subtle nuances of being a political figure in Singapore,” he concluded.

Commenting on Facebook’s clarification of the post’s removal, Mr Bowyer told TOC that his post on Thursday raised questions about the safety of the vaccines based on the “publicly acknowledged risk of anaphylactic shock” as well as concerns on birth defects.

He said Pfizer prohibit pregnant women from taking the vaccine. They also cautioned individuals against having unprotected sex for 28 days after the last dose of the vaccine.

Additionally, the UK’s own medical guidelines also “recommends two months abstinence” as they are unaware of the effects of the vaccines.

Separately, Mr Bowyer also noted that he questioned if the benefit of the vaccine is worth the risks since the Government had announced that even with the vaccination, the public still has to continue wearing masks and practice safe-distancing rules.

“And I questioned: is the benefit worth the risks especially as we are now told regardless of vaccine it won’t change masking etc contrary to what we have been told for the last 8 months or so,” Mr Bowyer said.

Last Tuesday (15 December), a healthcare worker at the Bartlett Regional Hospital in Juneau, Alaska, has reportedly developed a severe allergic reaction after getting the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine despite not having a history of allergic reactions.

The middle-aged woman had to be hospitalised overnight for observation due to the symptoms, as reported by NBC.

Dr Lindy Jones, the emergency physician who treated the woman, said the next day that the woman had no history of allergies, but she had an anaphylactic reaction about 10 minutes after receiving the vaccine. Her reactions include feeling flushed and shortness of breath.

The woman’s reaction is believed to be similar to the two cases of anaphylaxis reported in Britain last week.

Just a day after the woman’s allergy reaction case, her male colleague reportedly suffered an allergic reaction 10 minutes after getting the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine at Bartlett Regional Hospital.

Over in Singapore, the HSA has recently granted an authorisation for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to be used in the city-state, with the first shipment due to arrive in Singapore by the end of December.

“HSA’s review of the available clinical data found that the benefits of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine outweigh the known risks. The vaccine demonstrated a high vaccine efficacy of 95%,” it said in a statement last week.

Citing the vaccination regime submitted by Pfizer-BioNTech, HSA said two doses are required to be administered 21 days apart, in people aged 16 years and above.

“Pregnant women, immunocompromised persons and those under the age of 16 should also not receive the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine as the safety and efficacy data on this group of persons is not available yet,” it stated.

Additionally, people with a history of anaphylaxis or the rapid onset of severe allergic reactions should not receive the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine as a precautionary measure.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
45 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
45 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Farewell to Dr Lee Wei Ling: Rain marks solemn tribute, echoing her father’s funeral

Dr Lee Wei Ling’s funeral was conducted on 12 October 2024, in Singapore, with family members leading the procession in the rain. In a heartfelt eulogy, her brother, Lee Hsien Yang, remembered her dedication to medicine and family. Dr Lee had requested a simple ceremony, with her ashes to be scattered at sea.

Published

2 days ago

on

12 October 2024

By

Li Huanwu and Li Shaowu sending off their aunt, Dr Lee Wei Ling in the rain (Photo: Lianhe Zaobao/唐家鴻)

Dr Lee Wei Ling was farewelled on 12 October 2024, in a solemn funeral ceremony attended by close family members and friends.

The weather was marked by light rain, drawing comparisons to the conditions during her father, Lee Kuan Yew’s funeral in 2015.

Her nephews, Li Huanwu and Li Shaowu, led the procession, carrying Dr Lee’s portrait and walking side by side under the rain, symbolically reflecting the loss felt by her family.

In his emotional eulogy through a recorded video, her brother, Lee Hsien Yang, spoke of Dr Lee’s profound contributions to medicine and her unshakable devotion to family.

He described her as a remarkable individual whose life had left an indelible mark on those who knew her, as well as on Singapore’s medical community.

Expressing deep sorrow at her passing, Lee Hsien Yang reflected on their close bond and the immense loss he felt, having been unable to attend her final farewell.

He recalled his private goodbye to her in June 2022, a poignant moment that stayed with him during her last months.

Lee Hsien Yang also reiterated Dr Lee’s wish for a simple funeral, a reflection of her humility.

In accordance with her wishes, her body was cremated, and her ashes will be scattered at sea, symbolising her desire for a modest and unobtrusive departure from the world.

LHY acknowledged the efforts of his sons, Li Huanwu and Li Shaowu, for their role in managing their aunt’s care during his absence, thanking them for their dedication to her comfort in her final days.

During his eulogy for his sister, Lee Hsien Yang also conveyed a message from Dr Lee regarding the family’s long-standing issue surrounding their home at 38 Oxley Road.

Quoting from Dr Lee’s message, LHY said: “My father, Lee Kuan Yew, and my mother, Kwa Geok Choo’s, unwavering and deeply felt wish was for their house at 38 Oxley Road, Singapore 238629, to be demolished upon the last parent’s death.”

Dr Lee had been a vocal advocate for ensuring that this wish was honoured since Lee Kuan Yew’s death in 2015.

Dr Lee and LHY had strongly supported their father’s wishes, while their elder brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, took a different stance. This disagreement led to a public and highly publicised rift within the family.

In her final message, Dr Lee reiterated: “Lee Kuan Yew had directed each of his three children to ensure that their parents’ wish for demolition be fulfilled. He had also appealed directly to the people of Singapore. Please honour my father by honouring his wish for his home to be demolished.”

Dr Lee had maintained a private life, focusing on her medical career as a respected neurologist. She was known for her candid views, often unflinching in her advocacy for transparency and integrity.

Her professional accomplishments, combined with her strong commitment to her parents’ legacy, made her a significant figure in both Singapore’s medical community and public discourse.

Diagnosed in 2020 with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), a rare neurodegenerative disorder, Dr Lee faced immense physical and emotional challenges in her final years.

The illness progressively affected her movement, speech, and ability to swallow.

Despite her health struggles, Dr Lee remained actively involved in public discussions, particularly on matters concerning her father’s legacy, until her condition worsened to the point where communication became difficult.

By March 2023, her brother LHY revealed that her condition had deteriorated significantly, and he feared he might not be able to see her again due to his own circumstances.

Even in her final months, Dr Lee maintained a close relationship with her immediate family, who cared for her during her illness.

Dr Lee’s funeral and cremation mark the end of a significant era for the Lee family and Singapore.

Her legacy as a dedicated neurologist and a firm advocate for her parents’ values will continue to resonate, even as the debates over the future of the Oxley Road property remain unresolved.

The rain that fell during her funeral, so reminiscent of her father’s final farewell, added a symbolic layer to this momentous chapter in Singapore’s history.

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

TJC issued 3rd POFMA order under Minister K Shanmugam for alleged falsehoods

The Transformative Justice Collective (TJC) was issued its third POFMA correction order on 5 October 2024 under the direction of Minister K Shanmugam for alleged falsehoods about death penalty processes. TJC has rejected the government’s claims, describing POFMA as a tool to suppress dissent.

Published

1 week ago

on

6 October 2024

By

The Transformative Justice Collective (TJC), an advocacy group opposed to the death penalty, was issued its third Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) correction direction on 5 October 2024.

The correction was ordered by Minister for Home Affairs and Law, K Shanmugam, following TJC’s publication of what the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) alleges to be false information regarding Singapore’s death row procedures and the prosecution of drug trafficking cases.

These statements were made on TJC’s website and across its social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter).

In addition to TJC, civil activist Kokila Annamalai was also issued a correction direction by the minister over posts she made on Facebook and X between 4 and 5 October 2024.

According to MHA, these posts echoed similar views on the death penalty and the legal procedures for drug-related offences, and contained statements that the ministry claims are false concerning the treatment of death row prisoners and the state’s legal responsibilities in drug trafficking cases.

MHA stated that the posts suggested the government schedules and stays executions arbitrarily, without due regard to legal processes, and that the state does not bear the burden of proving drug trafficking charges.

However, these alleged falsehoods are contested by MHA, which maintains that the government strictly follows legal procedures, scheduling executions only after all legal avenues have been exhausted, and that the state always carries the burden of proof in such cases.

In its official release, MHA emphasised, “The prosecution always bears the legal burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and this applies to all criminal offences, including drug trafficking.”

It also pointed to an article on the government fact-checking site Factually to provide further clarification on the issues raised.

As a result of these allegations, both TJC and Annamalai are now required to post correction notices. TJC must display these corrections on its website and social media platforms, while Annamalai is required to carry similar notices on her Facebook and X posts.

TikTok has also been issued a targeted correction direction, requiring the platform to communicate the correction to all Singapore-based users who viewed the related TJC post.

In a statement following the issuance of the correction direction, TJC strongly rejected the government’s claims. The group criticised the POFMA law, calling it a “political weapon used to crush dissent,” and argued that the order was more about the exercise of state power than the pursuit of truth. “We have put up the Correction Directions not because we accept any of what the government asserts, but because of the grossly unjust terms of the POFMA law,” TJC stated.

TJC further argued that the government’s control over Singapore’s media landscape enables it to push pro-death penalty views without opposition. The group also stated that it would not engage in prolonged legal battles over the POFMA correction orders, opting to focus on its abolitionist work instead.

This marks the third time TJC has been subject to a POFMA correction direction in recent months.

The group was previously issued two orders in August 2024 for making similar statements concerning death row prisoners.

In its latest statement, MHA noted that despite being corrected previously, TJC had repeated what the ministry views as falsehoods.

MHA also criticised TJC for presenting the perspective of a convicted drug trafficker without acknowledging the harm caused to victims of drug abuse.

Annamalai, a prominent civil rights activist, is also known for her involvement in various social justice campaigns. She was charged in June 2024 for her participation in a pro-Palestinian procession near the Istana. Her posts, now subject to correction, contained information similar to those presented by TJC regarding death penalty procedures and drug-related cases.

POFMA, which was introduced in 2019, allows the government to issue correction directions when it deems falsehoods are being spread online.

Critics of the law argue that it can be used to suppress dissent, while the government asserts that it is a necessary tool for combating misinformation. The law has been frequently invoked against opposition politicians and activists.

As of October 2024, Minister K Shanmugam has issued 17 POFMA directions, more than any other minister. Shanmugam, who was instrumental in introducing POFMA, is followed by National Development Minister Desmond Lee, who has issued 10 POFMA directions.

Major media outlets, including The Straits Times, Channel News Asia, and Mothership, have covered the POFMA directions. However, as of the time of writing, none have included TJC’s response rejecting the government’s allegations.

Continue Reading

Trending