Thank you Clive Kessler. Your article “A Rage Against Islam” has helped me to formulate a much clearer opinion. The events of the past few years have made me search out books and articles on Islam. Currently I am reading Babur’s autobiography and trying to wade through the Koran. This background has helped me to appreciate your writing. Thanks again. Ron Stovell
Abdul, you casually state that as it is a known fact. In fact, it is just your opinion, it is your faith. That’s it. There is no scientific evidence of a god. Any God.
A well written article. Comparisons with Christianity in the past are worthless unless we also detail how Christian sects have come to accept life within a secular state. Also comparisons with tribal wars in the former Yugoslavia are also worthless. The divisions had as much to do with ethnicity as thy did with religion.
The issue of Islamic terrorism must be resolved by Muslims if they want to be accepted in secular parliamentary democracies.
In Thailand’s unstable, to put it kindly, legal environment, judicial application as the article well illustrates is an abstract and ideological process. But since Yingluck is already out of power it begs the question, why exactly is this impeachment taking place. A. Surachay put forth an interesting theory concerning this. The dark hands that influence, support, and compete with the junta for real power in the country fully understand the difficulty of their dilemma, that is, how does a tiny fraction of Thailand’s population, these elites, continue to maintain the upper hand over the majority. A. thinks that one possibility is that the decision that eventually is delivered will not negatively reflect upon the former PM’s honesty and will leave open the possibility of her returning to office. This will not further alienate the Red Shirts and stoke their anger and even willingness to take to the streets against the current system of influence peddling. He believes that insiders are opening paths by which she can regain her position through elections down the line. By allowing Pak Peau Thai to come back and regain its “power”, attention will be deflected from the undemocratic and fascist role that the royal networks play and the very real risks that attend with the coming succession. For example, civil unrest or a civil war between competing factions within these networks. This could be achieved by the effective absorption of the Thaksin network within the Royal Network sentencing the Thai people to another generation of LM, academic repression, and the neo-feudal system that has become institutionalized within every important power center in the country. This Machiavillean strategy has been used before in the country and would be a brilliant solution for the modern Sakdina who understand that they are fighting the main evolutionary current of modern political economy which is democracy. It so hard to predict what will happen but this idea was a novel one to me so I thought it should be shared here. Any thoughts?
Abdul Haq, you’d better say ‘We muslim believe that the Quran is literally revelation from God …’. But remember that nobody else believe so. For the rest of us the Quran is just one of the many religious books written by men in the history. It deserves the same respect and the same critical review.
Sandeep, your own comment is telling. In your pursuit of no censorship, you rather distort the historical truth of these individuals featured in the film.
Tan Pin Pin can simply upload the film online for all the view. But she doesn’t. Seeking controversy?
These film makers claim with their right hand to heart that they are independent, but take govt grants with their left.
Mr. Cohen, just to be clear, I did not call you elitist. I know nothing about you. I was referring to the limited access that the general public have to the film under the current restrictions.
Your film versus my actually being there at the time. It is not fixation; it is your lack of direct experience and my having a rifle stuck in my face. That you would call someone who lived through such an experience, “elitist”, reflects more on your naivete, than anything else. It is characteristic of those who live in a separate dimension of reality. That you would place your film over my real-world
experience is both elitist and rather silly. Of course, people may make up their own minds. Most value actual experience over artistic artifice.
Both the previous respondents suggest that I am trying to rehabilitate Chin Peng. I think that reflects their fixation, rather than what’s actually in the piece. My larger point is self-evident – people shouldn’t have to debate a film in a blog or in a newspaper. They should be able to actually view it and make up their own minds. And there should not be elitist restrictions on who gets to see it.
Oh please spare me. Fine. I will pull rank. My Great Uncle was the First Chief Minister of Singapore. That does not make me right; it does make me far more than just an “ad-hominem attacker”. You miss everything entirely. Yes, I do have a unique insight on Operation Coldstore and the Emergency; I had a relative (and myself) who actually lived through it. Had you ? Any other “valuable” rhetorical comments ?
Let’s get to the point. CPM Chinese agents were Maoist hacks; they served Mao and themselves. Given Malaya and Malaysia’s long litany of ethnic and religious divisions, what inane person is prepared to state that any ethnic Chinese member of the CMP longed for the liberation of the oppressed Muslim Malay masses. The notion that Chin Peng was some Malay hero in disguise and that he gave a tikus’ ass about kampung Malays is so pathetic to be insane. Chin Peng cared as much for the average Malay villager as Ibrahim Ali, Perkasa and that Chinese-Malay wanabee mutant, Abdullah Tee, care about Chinese-Malaysians and Indian-Malaysians, today.
You think Ho Chi Minh cared about ethnic Chinese in Saigon (HCMC) ? Sukarno cared
about Chinese-Indonesians ? Pol Pot cared about Chinese-Cambodians or Muslim Cham ? For those deluded romanticists out there, all of whom were too young to KNOW the Emergency in their faces and see dead soldiers, spare us any further grotesque theories.
having read Loh’s piece, prima facie it appears that Coldstore was no doubt a political exercise to forward the Malaysian plan.
somehow I feel the dependence on UK documents to comprehensively prove this political purge is a tad premature.
bear in mind that this article does not deal with the elephant in the room which is whether Lim Chin Siong was a Communist agent planted for subversive activities.
if you are familiar with Communist tactics, apart from the use of armed struggle, they were also engaged in clandestine activities to subvert legal organisations so as to turn the masses against the government of the day.
hence, when Prof Loh cited this portion: “British officials in Singapore believed that although Lim Chin Siong was a communist, he was independent of the Soviet Union and China, that the Barisan Sosialis was pursuing a constitutional line and there were no grounds for the arrests”
i found it hard to believe and felt that the said British officials were pretty naive and inept if i may. if Lim Chin Siong was indeed a communist leader tasked to subvert open and legal organisations for the benefit of the communist party of malaya, he would certainly thread the constitutional line instead of openly associating himself with the CPM. as doing so would warranty his immediate arrest which would be stupid to say the least.
so the question to ponder is not whether Lim Chin Siong pursued a constitutional line but who did Lim Chin Siong pursue this constitutional line for? was it for a free democratic malaya or was it at the behest of the communist party of malaya?
having read a little on this topic, i can’t help but lean towards the belief that Lim Chin Siong was a communist agent strategically planted as part of the CPM’s overall tactic to overcome Malaya both militarily and politically.
i refer to dennis bloodworth’s booth ‘The Tiger and the Trojan Horse’ (page 227). It says “within days of the Malayan leader’s speech (Tunku AR’s speech on formation of Malaysia), Lim Chin Siong conferred with Fang Chuang Pi, one of the communists’ top three leaders overseeing Singapore”.
also, in the book ‘Men In White’ (page 323), “on 16 July (1961), a day after PAP lost Anson (to Workers’ Party), Fang Chuang Pi again conferred secretly with Lim Chin Siong.”
with these publicly available accounts of Lim Chin Siong engaged in “secret” meetings with top CPM leaders especially after key political milestones in s’pore political history, it would appears that he was seeking counsel with the communist top brass.
hence to say that Lim was independent of China or the Soviets is quite unbelievable as the CPM with whom he had secret meetings with was funded by the CCP in China.
so if we were to consider the other evidence apart from british documents, it does cast doubt on the veracity of the views expressed by british officials and it does not help when the british themselves flip flop positions quickly for one reason or another.
I think that one of the key take-aways here (based on LKS’s presentation of the key articles) is not about who the good or the bad guys were, but rather whether decisions were taken at the periphery or the centre. In this case, it looks like the archives suggest (if read by historians rather than diplomats or political scientists) a reading that LKY in Singapore was the driving force, supported or backed up by Sandys, the Colonial Secretary.
Neither of the above two comments address the substance of the bibliography. Peter picks up on a single word which is irrelevant to the overall argument. It does not matter where Dr Loh works, surely–rather, it matters whether his argument is right.
Teo’s comment again misses the point. Several scholars of different nationalities — British, Australian, and Singaporean — and rather different approaches have examined CO files and come to similar conclusions. We could label all these people as “revisionist historians.” But I’ve yet to hear from a scholar who has done the work and come to an opposite conclusion. Both Teo’s and Peter’s comments don’t engage with the substance of the critique, but simply resort to ad hominem attacks.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
A rage against history
Thank you Clive Kessler. Your article “A Rage Against Islam” has helped me to formulate a much clearer opinion. The events of the past few years have made me search out books and articles on Islam. Currently I am reading Babur’s autobiography and trying to wade through the Koran. This background has helped me to appreciate your writing. Thanks again. Ron Stovell
A rage against history
Abdul, you casually state that as it is a known fact. In fact, it is just your opinion, it is your faith. That’s it. There is no scientific evidence of a god. Any God.
A rage against history
A well written article. Comparisons with Christianity in the past are worthless unless we also detail how Christian sects have come to accept life within a secular state. Also comparisons with tribal wars in the former Yugoslavia are also worthless. The divisions had as much to do with ethnicity as thy did with religion.
The issue of Islamic terrorism must be resolved by Muslims if they want to be accepted in secular parliamentary democracies.
Impeaching Yingluck Shinawatra
Sorry, these ideas were from Ajarn Chupong.
Impeaching Yingluck Shinawatra
In Thailand’s unstable, to put it kindly, legal environment, judicial application as the article well illustrates is an abstract and ideological process. But since Yingluck is already out of power it begs the question, why exactly is this impeachment taking place. A. Surachay put forth an interesting theory concerning this. The dark hands that influence, support, and compete with the junta for real power in the country fully understand the difficulty of their dilemma, that is, how does a tiny fraction of Thailand’s population, these elites, continue to maintain the upper hand over the majority. A. thinks that one possibility is that the decision that eventually is delivered will not negatively reflect upon the former PM’s honesty and will leave open the possibility of her returning to office. This will not further alienate the Red Shirts and stoke their anger and even willingness to take to the streets against the current system of influence peddling. He believes that insiders are opening paths by which she can regain her position through elections down the line. By allowing Pak Peau Thai to come back and regain its “power”, attention will be deflected from the undemocratic and fascist role that the royal networks play and the very real risks that attend with the coming succession. For example, civil unrest or a civil war between competing factions within these networks. This could be achieved by the effective absorption of the Thaksin network within the Royal Network sentencing the Thai people to another generation of LM, academic repression, and the neo-feudal system that has become institutionalized within every important power center in the country. This Machiavillean strategy has been used before in the country and would be a brilliant solution for the modern Sakdina who understand that they are fighting the main evolutionary current of modern political economy which is democracy. It so hard to predict what will happen but this idea was a novel one to me so I thought it should be shared here. Any thoughts?
An annotated bibliography of Operation Coldstore
Peter: Yes, I did. Both relatives and friends. You still don’t address the substance of the arguments.
Singapore’s “Battle for Merger” revisited – Part II
[…] For example, Dr Poh writes in “Battle for Merger Revisited, Part 2“: […]
A rage against history
Abdul Haq, you’d better say ‘We muslim believe that the Quran is literally revelation from God …’. But remember that nobody else believe so. For the rest of us the Quran is just one of the many religious books written by men in the history. It deserves the same respect and the same critical review.
Review: To Singapore, with Love
Sandeep, your own comment is telling. In your pursuit of no censorship, you rather distort the historical truth of these individuals featured in the film.
Tan Pin Pin can simply upload the film online for all the view. But she doesn’t. Seeking controversy?
These film makers claim with their right hand to heart that they are independent, but take govt grants with their left.
Singapore’s ‘Battle for Merger’ revisited
[…] 3 December 2014 Posted in: Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore http://www.newmandala.org/2014/12/03/singapores-battle-for-merger-revisited/ […]
Review: To Singapore, with Love
Mr. Cohen, just to be clear, I did not call you elitist. I know nothing about you. I was referring to the limited access that the general public have to the film under the current restrictions.
Review: To Singapore, with Love
Your film versus my actually being there at the time. It is not fixation; it is your lack of direct experience and my having a rifle stuck in my face. That you would call someone who lived through such an experience, “elitist”, reflects more on your naivete, than anything else. It is characteristic of those who live in a separate dimension of reality. That you would place your film over my real-world
experience is both elitist and rather silly. Of course, people may make up their own minds. Most value actual experience over artistic artifice.
Review: To Singapore, with Love
Both the previous respondents suggest that I am trying to rehabilitate Chin Peng. I think that reflects their fixation, rather than what’s actually in the piece. My larger point is self-evident – people shouldn’t have to debate a film in a blog or in a newspaper. They should be able to actually view it and make up their own minds. And there should not be elitist restrictions on who gets to see it.
An annotated bibliography of Operation Coldstore
Oh please spare me. Fine. I will pull rank. My Great Uncle was the First Chief Minister of Singapore. That does not make me right; it does make me far more than just an “ad-hominem attacker”. You miss everything entirely. Yes, I do have a unique insight on Operation Coldstore and the Emergency; I had a relative (and myself) who actually lived through it. Had you ? Any other “valuable” rhetorical comments ?
An annotated bibliography of Operation Coldstore
Let’s get to the point. CPM Chinese agents were Maoist hacks; they served Mao and themselves. Given Malaya and Malaysia’s long litany of ethnic and religious divisions, what inane person is prepared to state that any ethnic Chinese member of the CMP longed for the liberation of the oppressed Muslim Malay masses. The notion that Chin Peng was some Malay hero in disguise and that he gave a tikus’ ass about kampung Malays is so pathetic to be insane. Chin Peng cared as much for the average Malay villager as Ibrahim Ali, Perkasa and that Chinese-Malay wanabee mutant, Abdullah Tee, care about Chinese-Malaysians and Indian-Malaysians, today.
You think Ho Chi Minh cared about ethnic Chinese in Saigon (HCMC) ? Sukarno cared
about Chinese-Indonesians ? Pol Pot cared about Chinese-Cambodians or Muslim Cham ? For those deluded romanticists out there, all of whom were too young to KNOW the Emergency in their faces and see dead soldiers, spare us any further grotesque theories.
An annotated bibliography of Operation Coldstore
having read Loh’s piece, prima facie it appears that Coldstore was no doubt a political exercise to forward the Malaysian plan.
somehow I feel the dependence on UK documents to comprehensively prove this political purge is a tad premature.
bear in mind that this article does not deal with the elephant in the room which is whether Lim Chin Siong was a Communist agent planted for subversive activities.
if you are familiar with Communist tactics, apart from the use of armed struggle, they were also engaged in clandestine activities to subvert legal organisations so as to turn the masses against the government of the day.
hence, when Prof Loh cited this portion: “British officials in Singapore believed that although Lim Chin Siong was a communist, he was independent of the Soviet Union and China, that the Barisan Sosialis was pursuing a constitutional line and there were no grounds for the arrests”
i found it hard to believe and felt that the said British officials were pretty naive and inept if i may. if Lim Chin Siong was indeed a communist leader tasked to subvert open and legal organisations for the benefit of the communist party of malaya, he would certainly thread the constitutional line instead of openly associating himself with the CPM. as doing so would warranty his immediate arrest which would be stupid to say the least.
so the question to ponder is not whether Lim Chin Siong pursued a constitutional line but who did Lim Chin Siong pursue this constitutional line for? was it for a free democratic malaya or was it at the behest of the communist party of malaya?
having read a little on this topic, i can’t help but lean towards the belief that Lim Chin Siong was a communist agent strategically planted as part of the CPM’s overall tactic to overcome Malaya both militarily and politically.
i refer to dennis bloodworth’s booth ‘The Tiger and the Trojan Horse’ (page 227). It says “within days of the Malayan leader’s speech (Tunku AR’s speech on formation of Malaysia), Lim Chin Siong conferred with Fang Chuang Pi, one of the communists’ top three leaders overseeing Singapore”.
also, in the book ‘Men In White’ (page 323), “on 16 July (1961), a day after PAP lost Anson (to Workers’ Party), Fang Chuang Pi again conferred secretly with Lim Chin Siong.”
with these publicly available accounts of Lim Chin Siong engaged in “secret” meetings with top CPM leaders especially after key political milestones in s’pore political history, it would appears that he was seeking counsel with the communist top brass.
hence to say that Lim was independent of China or the Soviets is quite unbelievable as the CPM with whom he had secret meetings with was funded by the CCP in China.
so if we were to consider the other evidence apart from british documents, it does cast doubt on the veracity of the views expressed by british officials and it does not help when the british themselves flip flop positions quickly for one reason or another.
An annotated bibliography of Operation Coldstore
I think that one of the key take-aways here (based on LKS’s presentation of the key articles) is not about who the good or the bad guys were, but rather whether decisions were taken at the periphery or the centre. In this case, it looks like the archives suggest (if read by historians rather than diplomats or political scientists) a reading that LKY in Singapore was the driving force, supported or backed up by Sandys, the Colonial Secretary.
An annotated bibliography of Operation Coldstore
Neither of the above two comments address the substance of the bibliography. Peter picks up on a single word which is irrelevant to the overall argument. It does not matter where Dr Loh works, surely–rather, it matters whether his argument is right.
Teo’s comment again misses the point. Several scholars of different nationalities — British, Australian, and Singaporean — and rather different approaches have examined CO files and come to similar conclusions. We could label all these people as “revisionist historians.” But I’ve yet to hear from a scholar who has done the work and come to an opposite conclusion. Both Teo’s and Peter’s comments don’t engage with the substance of the critique, but simply resort to ad hominem attacks.
What’s left unspoken
Commonest product in Asia, the whole of Asia is Vanity.
An annotated bibliography of Operation Coldstore
Summary of this WOT:
Loh Kah Seng who himself buys into the revisionist’s version of history is praising fellow revisionist Thum and Wade for doing a “good” job.
Talk about patting yourselves on the back, this is of epic proportions LOL
My mother used to tell me self-praise is no praise but self disgrace. Does it apply here? Decide for yourself.