atans1

Posts Tagged ‘Lee Wei Ling’

How PM honours “Pa”

In Uncategorized on 24/10/2017 at 2:16 pm

The hermitess of Oxley, or the husband of lawyer got liddat mah?

PM rereads LKY’s speeches and “can hear his voice in” his head.

 [W]e think of him often, we read his old speeches and we say, “well, that’s still relevant to us today.” The way he puts it still has a ring to it. At the same time, we have to build on that and move forward, because if we just remained with what he had imagined and what he had done and nothing more, I think he’d have been very disappointed.

CT: If he were alive today, what advice do you think he would have given you?

PM Lee: I think he would have said, “Press on, move on. Don’t be looking at the rear view mirror. Remember what has happened, understand how you got here, but look forward and press forward.”

CT: You can hear his voice in your head?

PM Lee: (laughs) Yes, we can imagine that.

http://www.asiaone.com/singapore/cnbc-transcript-lee-hsien-loong-prime-minister-singapore

To be fair to the hermitess, she keeps the ashes of her parents in the Oxley Road House.  I had tot that the ashes were scatterd in the sea, or from an aeroplane over S’pore. I didn’t expect the ashes to be in urns in the Oxley shrine Road House. Wonder if she practices shamanisitic rituals to channel “Pa”?

That’ll be one up on tai kor who only reads pa’s speeches and hears his voice in his head.

 

Advertisements

“Whoever scandalises our judges will be hunted down …”

In Public Administration on 14/08/2017 at 4:51 am

A top grossing Chinese film Wolf Warrior 2 http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-40811952 has the tagline “whoever offends China will be hunted down wherever they are”.

Seeing the way the AGC is pursuing a case against a über White Horse, without fear or favour, I tot “Whoever scandalises our judges will be hunted down wherever and whoever they are”

———————————

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) filed an application in the High Court on Friday (Aug 4), to start committal proceedings against Mr Li Shengwu for contempt of court.

This was after Mr Li failed to take down a Facebook post which he put up on Jul 15, criticising the Singapore court system.

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/agc-takes-action-against-li-shengwu-for-contempt-of-court-over-9094174

——————————–

And his auntie still thinks White Horses must have privileges:

It is more than 24 hours since my nephew posted that AGC was incorrect In claiming he did not reply in time and he had proof. AGC and the media was very quick to comment and report earlier on, but are strangely reluctant to correct their mistake.

She omits to tell us that even if he had replied in time, he did not do what AGC asked him to do to purge his contempt.

It demanded that he should delete the post and apologise by July 28th.

Mr Li asked to be allowed to consider the request until August 4th; on that day he tweaked his message, but neither removed it nor said sorry. The attorney-general’s office duly filed an application in the High Court to start proceedings against him.

What would pa and ma think of her misrepresentation of the facts?

Sad.

Btw, Teo Soh Lung, our very own Xena is silent on this and M Ravi’s case. Taking “I love S’pore (PAP version)” pills to celebrate National Day? She’s not KPKBing most probably because she’s mortified as the lady M Ravi is charged for hurting, is a good friend as is M Ravi. “Own friend hurt own friend”.

Anti-PAP Amazon fights alongside White Mare

In Public Administration on 06/08/2017 at 4:34 am

AG’s plans to whack Li Shengwu

for comments he made suggesting the city-state’s courts were not independent, said on Saturday (Aug 5) he would not be returning to Singapore.

The office of Singapore’s attorney-general said on Friday it had filed an application to start contempt of court proceedings against Li, a US-based academic, over a Facebook post he made on Jul 15.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/li-shengwu-says-will-not-return-home-to-face-charges-9095394

reminded me of a really unholy alliance.

One of the usual suspects, a S’porean version Xena, the warrior princess, recently wrote

I am sad for Singapore and Singaporeans. A single word about the judiciary in a private facebook entry which drew just 20 likes has attracted the attention of the Attorney-General’s Chamber.

How did my country descend to this depth?

Given that she’s always so unhappy about the S’porean way of life, what else could make Teo Soh Lung unhappy?

Li Shengwu, grandson of Lee Kuan Yew has now attracted the attention of the attorney general’s chambers. I believe the chamber was already watching him when he took side with his father, Lee Hsien Yang over his and his aunt’s dispute with the prime minister.

The attorney general will tell the world that there is no conflict of interest when his chamber decides to look into the private facebook entries of Li Shengwu, but I will not believe that. What business has he to look into a person’s private facebook? Isn’t there more important work than to spy on personal facebooks?”

Am I being overly cynical in thinking that if the AGC did not say the AGC was investigating this White Horse (progency of the First Familee), she’d be KPKBing, “Why no investigate? White Horse isit?”

As it is now, she’s on the same side as über White Mare Lee Wei Ling with her whine

I am surprised that AGC takes such negative reaction to a private post. Is there a government servant whose duty is to follow the Facebook activity of all people related to Hsien Yang and I, including our private musings. Also, what Shengwu posted is a common topic amongst Singaporeans who are well informed. Is this not an example of ” big Brother government”. Perhaps it is a case of “if the hat fits, take it.”

Churchill said a fanatic is “one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject”. Fits Ms Teo: life is always seen in the lens of resentment against the PAP administration. An administration that has the support of 60- 70% of voters. True it locked her up without trial but that was a long time ago. Time to move on?

I mean being on the same side as Lee Wei Ling is so, so pathetic. And so is the cause. I mean White Horses (especially über ones) should be held accoutable for their actions, juz like nobodies like Roy or Amos.

I’m glad that the AGC is upholding the laws that Harry made illleral and in sending the message that über White Horses from the line of Lee not exempted.

Oxleygate: “the curious incident”/ What S’poreans are not focusing on

In Political governance, Public Administration on 14/07/2017 at 10:36 am

“The dog did nothing in the night-time.”

“That was the curious incident.”

The real “scandal” is that DPM Teo and Lawrence Wong did not protect their reputations the PAP way, when the younger Lees defamed them by accusing them of doing their brother’s bidding, not PM not threatening to take legal action against his siblings, but doing a wayang in parly.

ESM Goh said in parly:

[I]t is clear that their goal is to bring Lee Hsien Loong down as PM, regardless of the huge collateral damage suffered by the Government and Singaporeans. It is now no more a cynical parlour game. If the Lee siblings choose to squander the good name and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew, and tear their relationship apart, it is tragic but a family affair. But if in the process of their self destruction, they destroy Singapore too, that is a public affair.

Now isn’t the attempt to destroy S’pore by making allegations against other ministers, not just their brother the PM, a good enough reason for said ministers to have demanded an apology and sued the younger Lees for defamation, if no grovelling apology was made? And what about their personal reputations? Why liddat?

After ESM’s Goh’s speech, Lee Hsien Yang posted

“We are not making a criticism of the Government of Singapore, as we made clear from the beginning. What we have said is that we are disturbed by the character, conduct, motives and leadership of our brother, Lee Hsien Loong.”
Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/we-are-not-making-a-criticism-of-the-government-lee-hsien-yang-9006620

————————————————

Talk Cock Sing Song King Lee Hsien Yang talking cock again above. Other examples

Reading Lee Hsien Yang’s repeated “clarifications” on FB to his earlier FB “clarifications” (example on whether his wife’s law firm was used in the final will: he said “No” emphatically, but then went to explain what they did*), I can understand why the committee wants a statutory declaration and I can understand why he hasn’t given one.

Talking cock about the will

Didn’t do his job as executor

—————————————

Huh? I tot the younger Lees were making allegations that the ministerial committee set up to consider the fate of LKY’s house was doing their brother’s bidding, not making independent judgements and findings? That not attacking govt meh?

DPM Teo rightly responded:

“With regard to Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s allegations against the Ministerial Committee, public agencies and public officers, the Government has already responded comprehensively to all of them in Parliament,”
Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/38-oxley-road-govt-still-has-to-carry-out-responsibilities-for-9009684

This shows that, while the PM may have felt that he could not sue his siblings, DPM Teo or Lawrence Wong should have had no such qualms about suing PM’s siblings for the good of S’pore and their good name. They should have asked the younger Lees to withdraw their allegations against them, and apologise. Failing which, they’d sue the Lees.

While I’ve argued that that the cabinet full of Oxbridge men royally screwed up

Yesterday’s wayang and the preceding Lee family row could have been avoided if PM (from Cambridge) had not have gone to the cabinet about his doubts about the circumstances around the execution of the will and the cabinet committee headed by another Cambridge man had not decided to act on PM’s doubts.

DPM Teo, Lawrence Wong, and, possibly, other ministers should have been prepared to take legal action to protect the reputation of the cabinet and themselves. They didn’t and that me is the real scandal. It now seems that this White Horse and White Mare have privileges not extended to people like Roy Ngerng. Who else does do these privileges extend to?

Even now, the Princess of Oxley Road is attacking Shanmugam, raking over the ashes of her allegation of his conflicts of interest. Shouldn’t he be telling her to “apologise or else”, instead of sitting down and keeping quiet? She that special isit?

Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”

Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”

Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”

Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”

Silver Blaze by  Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

 

 

Survey shows S’poreans don’t believe PM’s siblings

In Political governance, Public Administration on 03/07/2017 at 10:55 am

But want house demolished.

Really sitting on the fence. But when White Horses fight, that’s the best place from which to view the spectacle.

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/lladro-horses-group-horses-fighting-515424428

No automatic alt text available.

Harry’s Hard Choice for “filial” daughter that she’s avoiding

In Political governance, Public Administration on 03/07/2017 at 6:17 am

But first, double confirm, Lee family feud is all about younger siblings’ unhappiness with tai kor.

Don’t believe me? Just read the last para of one of Lee Hsien Yang’s latest FB posts:

We are simply very sad that it is in fact Hsien Loong using powers and instruments … for his personal agenda, whilst pretending to be an honourable son.

Forget all the BS about the abuse of power, the absence of “checks and balances to prevent the abuse of government”: his siblings are upset that he’s a hypocrite and want to expose him as such.

Now I sympathise with their anger: PM should not have gone to the cabinet about his doubts about the circumstances around the execution of the will and PM did attack his brother and wife’s integrity.

Whatever, the govt has no problem with Lee Wei Ling living in the house (as per LKY’s and wife’s wishes) because it pushes the problem of what to do with the house into the future (30 yrs at least; when S’poreans may want it preserved as a shrine to the genius of the PAP, unlike now.

It’s the PM’s siblings who want a decision now.

A decision by the govt today (say tear that house down), cannot bind the govt of the day when she moves out to say turn house into shrine for Harry. So are the siblings really calling for a constitutional change to enshrine Pa’s wishes in the house? If so they should say so.

If Lee Wei Ling wants her cake (stay in the house), she cannot eat it (get it torn down when she leaves) short of a change in the constitution. She should also remember that in S’pore, changing the constitution is as easy as changing one’s underwear.

If she wants to force a decision on the house now, when a majority of S’poreans want Harry’s wish to be honoured, she has to leave it now. 

And trust S’poreans to get the PAP administration to acede to Pa’s wish to demolish the house after she leaves. As things stand, the PAP administration is aceding to his wish that she lives in the house.

Anything less than moving her ass out (or saying she’ll move said ass out) will double confirm she’s a spoiled brat. Pa in his wisdom left her with a Hard Choice, a choice that she refuses to acknowledge.

Btw, LKY must be  laughing at his eldest son and daughter. He willed the house to him but gave her the right to live in it, when I’m sure he knew they were not on the best of terms. Pay back time for both of them? Remember when she rowed with Pa, she lived with PM and Ho Ching and their family. This shows that she’s an ingrate like TRE cybernuts. No wonder she’s their new heroine.

Image may contain: text

Oxleygate: Hell’s bells, another PAPPy and I share the same views

In Uncategorized on 30/06/2017 at 2:34 pm

Janadas Devan (see below) respond to LWL on LHY’s share: https://goo.gl/mCuyg9

I agree with his

My personal view remains that Mr Lee’s wish to demolish 38 Oxley Rd should be granted the moment you are no longer living in it, which may be 20, 30 or more years in the future.

I am as baffled as most Singaporeans why Hsien Yang and you wish to consume all of us in your personal family matters.

My take is that she’s a spoiled brat, wanting her cake and eating it. Only a white mare will think like that.

On the house book project he mentions, I wrote about the book project here after PM posted on FB in June 2015

“Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang would like to honour the wish of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew that the house at 38 Oxley Road be demolished after Dr Lee Wei Ling ceases to live in it.” …

Wonder if the ex-ST guy I mentioned in post has had to give a statutory declaration?

Janadas Devan wrote

Dear Wei Ling:Your latest post blares, tabloid-style, misleading information. Having edited you for many years, I know this is not your style.

The email you quote was written when I was Associate Editor of Straits Times, not Chief of Government Communications. And as you know well, I had met Mr Lee Kuan Yew with a few other journalists to discuss a book that he had proposed on 38 Oxley Rd.

When he met us in July 2011, he made plain that he wanted the house to be demolished. But as the months and years passed, the nature of the project changed as it became less definitive whether the house would be demolished – and if so, when.

For example, we were told that you will be staying in the house for as long as you live. Then I learnt plans to build a model of the interior of 38 Oxley Rd was dropped – because, I gathered, Mr Lee was considering plans to gut the interior of the house altogether to remove traces of the private space.

There was no doubt then or now that Mr Lee’s preference was to demolish the house. But as the shifting instructions we heard from the family in 2011-12 – including from you – indicated, the fate of the house had by no means been decided at that point.

I ceased to be involved in the Oxley Rd book project in July 2012, when I left ST. My personal view remains that Mr Lee’s wish to demolish 38 Oxley Rd should be granted the moment you are no longer living in it, which may be 20, 30 or more years in the future.

In the meantime, I am as baffled as most Singaporeans why Hsien Yang and you wish to consume all of us in your personal family matters.

Please: Think of Singapore, and forget the rest.

 

Double confirm: All Harry’s fault and PM’s siblings are spoiled brats

In Political governance, Public Administration on 29/06/2017 at 1:49 pm

Dr Thum Ping Tjin, a S’porean anti-PAP historian based at Oxford University’s Centre for Global History, talked about the row between PM and his administration on one side and his siblings on the other,  in an interview with Reuters, last week.

Dr Thum said that LKY learnt from the British how to rule (I once heard LKY tell a BBC reporter in the late 80s when questioned about how he reconciled his speeches about repression etc when he was in opposition to what he did later: he laughed and said he learnt from the British administrators who tot him the difference between ruling and talking).

What LKY used in Operations Coldstore and Spectrum is a climate of fear that is in turn used to justify authoritarian measures. His genius (my word) is passing “anti-democratic legislation through the form of democracy but not the substance of it.”:

The power LKY acquired and wielded through this system was led to the “steady erosion of our democratic freedoms and liberty, (and) more importantly the erosion of the independence of state institutions.”

This, Dr Thum argues, was what his son inherited: a system where, like dad, he makes a “decision” which passes through the democratic consultation and legislative process where it is legitimised. Despite the facade of democratic deliberation, such decisions are really foregone.

And this is what got his siblings upset:

“That’s what Lee Wei Ling and Lee Hsien Yang are really upset about. For many years they, of course, benefited from this system, but now the system is being used against them. A decision that Lee Hsien Loong made about the house in Oxley Road has probably been taken in advance. What has happened is that he then convened the committee to legitimise this decision to give it a veneer of parliamentary democracy in order to wash his hands clean, to keep his hands clean, to say it was done in the proper way. But its a foregone conclusion.”

He goes on

“The problem with a system where too much power is concentrated in the hands of one man, is that the interests of that one man from his own perspective becomes indistinguishable from the state’s. As long as that one man was Lee Kuan Yew, there was a very clear harmony between the man and the state but now the Lee family is 3 people and they have very different interests, very different perspectives, and so they are fighting each other.”

And

“Lee Hsien Loong, of course, is now fighting back using the machinery of the state against them which shows just how much his personal and the national interests have blurred together. Again, this is part of Lee Kuan Yew’s legacy. 
“His siblings are fighting against him with the only real weapon they have, which is to try and deprive him of the authority of Lee Kuan Yew.
“So what we have today is a very brittle system which is still reliant on the personal authority of a dead man.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-mpreKaFg4

And he headed SAF and SingTel?/ Where PM’s siblings have the high moral ground

In S'pore Inc on 28/06/2017 at 4:59 am

Mdm Ho Ching was “never authorised” to remove the personal belongings of Mr Lee Kuan Yew from his home, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said on Saturday (Jun 24).

(More details from CNA below)

So why wait till now to tell S’poreans that he and his sister didn’t do their job as executors? If they really didn’t give their consent, shouldn’t they have taken steps to retrieve the property then? And as citizens, and good children of Harry, expose their sister-in-law’s thefts and their brother’s lies?

And he should remember that by keeping quiet at the time, the executors are likely to be deemed to have consented.

Where else have they failed in their duties? Given they held high executive posts in S’pore Inc., we have a right to know.

Seriously, I think he should stop being petty, because he and his sister are trying to frame the row as about the abuse of power, the absence of “checks and balances to prevent the abuse of government”, and how the constructive, nation-building media ignores or disses those that don’t fit into the “right” narratives. And how these are new developments and that they are the first to notice**.

They should have focused on where they have the moral high ground, not give spurious, cock reasons.

To my mind, they  are right to be morally upset with their brother for not challenging the will but telling his subordinates that he had problems with the circumstances surrounding the will.

Why PM could not go to court.

— But he should have just sat down and shut up not tell his subordinates his concerns.

Especially since LKY recognised that the govt could override his wishes.

And PM’s statutory declaration was nothing less than an attack on the integrity of Lee Hsien Yang and his wife. As a son of LKY, Lee Hsien Yang would have learnt the importance of defending his integrity. He could do no less as a son of Harry than to attack his brother’s integrity in return.

——————————

*The youngest son of founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew was responding to a note on Facebook by Mdm Ho, the wife of his brother and Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, on the circumstances under which the elder Mr Lee’s belongings were loaned to the National Heritage Board (NHB) for a memorial exhibition.

Mdm Ho had explained that she was tidying up the house after Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s death when she came across “small interesting items which (she) thought were significant in papa’s life”. She also said that she kept both Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his sister Dr Lee Wei Ling informed on what she had done, including the loan of the items to NHB.

PM Lee also said on Friday that the loan to NHB was “openly done, and for a good cause – an exhibition remembering my father soon after he died”.

But in a Facebook post on Saturday, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said that he and Dr Lee – the executors of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s estate – had not authorised Mdm Ho to lend the items to NHB.

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/ho-ching-was-never-authorised-to-remove-lee-kuan-yew-s-8975018

**They seem to have forgotten JBJ, Chiam, the Coldstore and Spectrum detainess, etc.

 

Oxleygate: Yikes PAPpy has gd points

In Political governance, Public Administration on 27/06/2017 at 7:28 am

A PAP junior minister sums up my problems with the PM’s siblings position on the house to a T.

Indranee Rajah in a long “4 Financial Things You Should Know About the Oxley Dispute” on Facebook had this to say

4. Why is the government being asked to demolish the house now?

That is a good question.

The government has the same question.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew wanted Dr Lee Wei Ling to stay in the house as long as she wanted. The government has publicly stated that it will respect those wishes and does not intend to do anything until Dr Lee leaves. Letting the house stand for now does not go against those wishes. Mr Lee Hsien Yang has said Dr Lee does not want to move out and she has every intention of living a long life. That being the case, the matter may well not need to be decided for another 20 – 30 years. It can be decided by a future government.

So there is nothing for the government to decide now.

The real question therefore is why Mr Lee Hsien Yang is asking for an immediate commitment on demolition now?

What is the urgency?

Until and unless Dr Lee moves out, there is nothing for the government to decide. It is also a principle that the current government will not be able to bind a future government.

The options open to any government, current or future are also not binary. There are a range of things it can consider.

For example, DPM Teo Chee Hean has said he personally would not support options at the extreme ends of the range: At one end, preserving the house as it is for visitors to enter and see as that would be totally against the wishes of Mr and Mrs Lee Kuan Yew. And at the other end, demolishing the house and putting it on the market for new private residences.

One can understand DPM Teo’s feelings. A luxury condo with that address would confer bragging rights on a select few to say: “I’m living where Lee Kuan Yew lived”. The history and heritage of the site would be forever lost to ordinary Singaporeans, including future generations. That is probably not the way Singaporeans will want to remember 38 Oxley Road.

Mr Lee Hsien Yang has said that “[he has] not thought about what lies beyond demolition”. It would appear he has not ruled out redevelopment.

But,

The options open to any government, current or future are also not binary. There are a range of things it can consider.

doesn’t mean that the cabinet committee was right to go into circumstances of the making of LKY’s will:

Seriously I don’t think it was wise of the Lee Hsien Loong or the cabinet committee (and by extension the cabinet) to try to go into the execution of LKY’s will, and that it was a serious and bad mistake to try to do so.

The piece also has a good summary of the law on conservation, preservation, demolition and compulsory acquisition.

Related article: Lee Wei Ling wants to eat her cake

ST trying to fix Dr Lee isit?

In Media on 21/06/2017 at 11:00 am

We know that Dr Lee is rowing with her brother the PM. We also know from her row with ST last year that she’s dyslexic. So I was laughing when I read it today’s ST:

Kids with dyslexia more prone to social, emotional problems: Study

Children with dyslexia are more likely to encounter a range of social and emotional difficulties – such as feelings of anxiety, depression and low self-esteem – than their peers.

And having strong social support networks may help to buffer them against such negative outcomes.

These were the main findings of a study by the University College London (UCL), based on responses of 99 Primary 3 pupils with dyslexia across 13 primary schools here.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/kids-with-dyslexia-more-prone-to-social-emotional-problems-study

 

Singlish touch to Niemoller’s poem/ Hot stock

In Uncategorized on 20/06/2017 at 4:59 am

On FB, an anti-PAP cyberwarrior (and adoring fan of the PM’s siblings) added this very S’porean perspective to Niemoller’s poem:

First Papa come for the supposed Marxist conspirators.

Then Kor come for ordinary citizens and me.

Well this is the first time in nearly a week, when I’ve not seen new postings or new reports initiated by the siblings. Hopefully, they’ll hold their fire until PM’s parly statement.

What a waste of parly time. Just send demand for apologies and if there are none, initiate legal proceedings. White Horse cannot treat other White Horses like he treats Roy Ngerng and other peasants isait?

Whatever, maybe I can now find time to talk about a stock about several reputable M’sian tycoons have bought into and in which I’m in, up to  my eyeballs, at the same price as them.

Oxleygate is good clean and free entertainment, but malking money is better.

———————————

Niemoller’s poem

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.’

 

 

Great riposte to Dr Lee quoting Niemoller

In Uncategorized on 19/06/2017 at 5:55 pm

Yes I’m trying real hard not to blog on the comic duo. But they keep on providing great comic material. Take the quote from Niemoller (see below) by Dr Lee. This got the following response on FB

Subramaniam Thirumeni
14 hrs · Singapore ·
Dear LWL & LHY,
In response to your attempt to quote Niemoller, here’s a list of people that either of you could have spoken up for. This is a list of persons detained by your father. I have disregarded the pre-1975 detainees. LWL would have been 20 in 1975 and LHY would have been 18. Both old enough to start asking questions. So, this is a list of detainees from that year onwards. Apart from these detainees you could have also spoken up for opposition figures who were hounded and bankrupted. Those persons are not listed here.

(Update: 11.53am, 19 June 2017 – As some of you have rightly pointed out in the comments, the siblings’ public split with their brother presents a small window of opportunity to set things right in the system. I acknowledge that. I wrote this initially as a response to LWL’s post because of the sheer irony. But, I appreciate the point, raised by some of you, that there is some possibility of brokering systemic change. Though the underlying quarrel between them is personal, the implications of the allegations have a national significance. Better late than never. If the siblings are ready to advance positive political progress, then we can welcome them.)

Chua Sen Lee 蔡胜利 Delivery Clerk 1975
Goh Beng Giap 吴明业 Shoemaker 1975
Ong Eng Hoch 王永福 + Grocer 1975
Pek Eng Kian 白荣坚 Construction Worker 1975
Pek Eng Koon 白荣根 Construction Worker 1975
Tey King Waa 郑金华 + Clerk 1975
Yeo Meng Teck 杨明德 + Trade Unionist 1975
Azmi Mahmud Asst. Editor Berita Harian 1976
Chai Chong 蔡聪 + Chairman, Chinese Language Sociaty 1976
Chua Ah Ba 蔡亚芭 + Ngee An Technical College 1976
Chua Ah Sing 蔡亚兴 + Sub Constractor 1976
Foo Chin Yen 胡振延 + President of S’pore Polytechnic Union Council 1976
Foo Weng Fatt 傅文发 + Chairman of S’pore Polytechnic Union Council 1976
Goh Lay Kuan (f) 吴丽娟 Principal of Practice Theatre School 1976
Hussein Jahidin Editor Berita Harian 1976
Kam Kiew 甘 吉 + Electrical and sanitary sub contractor 1976
Kong Sow Fai 孔绍发 + Peon 1976
Kuo Pao Kun 郭宝昆 Secretary to Chinese Chamber of Commerce & Founder of Practice 1976
Leow Wai Cheng( f ) (Rearrest ) 廖惠贞 Nurse 1976
Shamsuddin Tung Tao Chang (Rearrest) Businessman 1976
Lim Tiow Hui 林朝辉 + Asst. Financial Secretary 1976
Ng Ho 黄 和 + S’pore Polytechnic Student 1976
Ng Hoon Hwee 黄焕贵 + Social Secretary, S’pore Polytechnic Council 1976
Ng Yan Huay 黄炎辉 + Sales manager, Nantah graduate 1976
Ong Geok Huia 王玉辉 + Seamstress 1976
Pan Nan Hung 潘南汉 + Naval Engineer 1976
Poh Soo Kai (Rearrest) 傅树介 Doctor 1976
Teng Swee Tong 邓水东 + President of S’pore Polytechnic Students’ Union 1976
Wong Chee San 王志山 + S’pore Polytechnic Student 1976
Wong Sang Hwee 王尚贵 + S’pore Poly Graduate / S’pore Poly CLS, NSman 1976
Wong WoonToi 黄文涛 + Businessman 1976
Yeo Chai Cheng 杨财清 + Technical Officer 1976
Oh Teng Aik 胡定爱 Construction Superviser 1976
Tan Kwee Liang (f) 陈桂莲 Tuition Teacher 1976
A. Mahadeva (Rearrest) Property Manager 1977
Ang Swee Chai (f) 洪瑞才 + Doctor 1977
Arun Senkuttuvan Journalist of Far Eastern Economic Review 1977
Arun Senkuttuvan (Rearrest) Journalist of Far Eastern Economic Review 1977
Chan Ket Teck 陈可德 Accountant Coopers Brothers 1977
Chua Chap Jee Lecturer at Ngee Ann Technical College 1977
Chua Chian Kiat 蔡清吉 + SAF Reservist 1977
Foo Ah Lim 傅亚林 + 1977
G Raman (Gopalan Krishnan Raman) Lawyer 1977
Ho Kwon Ping 何光平 Ex Journalist of Far Eastern Economic Review 1977
Jeffrey Sng Working With Quakers International 1977
Koh Kay Yew 许赓猷 Singapore Airlines Manager 1977
Lee Yoke Seng 李玉成 + Malaysia Construction Worker 1977
Leong Mun Kwai 梁孟开 + Secretary General People’s Front 1977
Michael Fernandez (Rearrest) M.费南德 Insurance Executive 1977
Ngoh Teck Nam (Rearrest) Translator, Sin Chew Jit Poh 1977
Ong Bock Chuan 王木川 + Lawyer Company secretary of Goodwood Park 1977
Ong Kian Wee 王坚卫 + Electrician and Part Time Constable 1977
P. Govindasamy P.歌文达三美 Bookshop Owner 1977
Ramalingam Joethy Lawyer 1977
Tan Jing Quee ( Rearrest ) 陈仁贵 Lawyer 1977
Tan Bee Choo (f) 1977
Jacqui Foo (f) Economist 1977
Grace Poh (f) Matron 1977
Peter Kwok Economist 1977
Hoong Bee Teck Engineer 1977
Mok Kwong Yue Biologist, Computer engineer 1977
Tan Kok Wah 陈国华 + Construction Worker 1977
Yong Sek Yu Construction Worker 1977
Yeng Pway Ngon 英培安 Writer 1978
Peck Soo Tee 白书治 + 1979
Toh Siang Kee 杜祥齐 + 1979
Ronnie Ng Soon Hiang 黄顺贤 Polytechnic Student Union’s General-Secretary 1987
Abdul Gani Abdul Rahman Driver 1987
Chew Kheng Chuan 周庆全 Businessman 1987
Chia Boon Tai 谢文泰 Businessman 1987
Chng Suan Tze (f) 庄瑄芝 Lecturer 1987
Chung Lai Mei (f) 钟丽薇 Production Operator 1987
Fan Wan Peng (f) 范运冰 President of Singapore Polytechnic Students’ Union 1987
Jenny Chin Lai Ching (f) 陈丽清 Journalist 1987
Kenneth Tsang Chi Seng 曾志成 Advertising Executive 1987
Kevin Desmond de Souza 凯尔文 德苏沙 Law Graduate, S’pore Poly Catholic Students’ Society Helper 1987
Low Yit Leng (f) 刘月玲 Project Manager 1987
Mah Lee Lin ( f ) 马丽玲 Polytechnic Graduate, S’pore Polytechnic Students’ Union Helper 1987
Maznan Awi Fire and Security Officer 1987
Mohamed Jumaat Ramad Vocational and Industry Training Board Student 1987
Mohamed Noor Kasmadi Police Constable 1987
Ng Bee Leng ( f ) 黄美玲 Social Worker, Geylang Catholic Centre 1987
Nur Effendi Sahid 诺埃芬德 Singapore Polytechnic Graduate and National Serviceman 1987
Tan Tee Seng 陈智成 Sales Executive 1987
Tang Fong Har ( f ) 陈凤霞 Lawyer 1987
Tang Lay Lee ( f ) 董丽莉 Law Graduate, Young Christian Workers’ Movement Staffer 1987
Tay Hong Seng 郑方生 Subtitling Editor 1987
Teo Soh Lung (f) 张素兰 Lawyer 1987
Teresa Lim Li Kok (f) 林丽国 Publisher 1987
Vincent Cheng Kim Chuan 钟金全 Church worker 1987
William Yap Hon Ngian 叶汉源 Subtitling Editor 1987
Wong Souk Yee (f) 黄淑仪 Senior Research Executive 1987
Francis Seow Tiang Siew 萧天寿 Lawyer 1988
Patrick Seong Kwok Kei 常国基 Lawyer 1988


Niemoller’s poem

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Reason why Hsien Yang so angry?

In Uncategorized on 19/06/2017 at 2:30 pm

Many moons ago the Princess of Oxley said that her brothers were competitive.

So if Hsien Yang tot that Big Brudder screwed him over house, wouldn’t he be angry with tai kor especially as serious money is involved.

Two FB posters put it this way:

You sure know who is a sucker. The money LHY paid to LHL – LHL donated everything to charity. LHL also make LHY give 50% of what he paid LHL to charity. In other words, what goes to charity is 1.5 times the amount of what LHY paid to LHL. So LHL has nothing to gain either way (whether the house is acquired by the state or demolished). On the other hand, if the house is not demolished, LHY would be holding on to a white elephant for which he paid good money to charity. So it is all about $$$

(Note he paid brother $24m (for house) + another $12m to charity.)

And

If you paid market value for a space and later discover that the seller formed a committee to restrict the use of the space that you paid market value for, then I am sure you would feel cheated. So, I must say that not all is about the honour of doing what is right, but some of it is about money.

The issue, legal and moral, is whether big brudder made any misrepresentations to younger brudder that the govt would not block demolition and redevelopment.

If tai kor didn’t, or Sue Fern can’t prove in court or arbitration that he made misrepresentations, Hsien Yang sfould sit down and shut up . He should go cry and bang his balls in private. S’pore is not his playpen. Neither is it Lee Wei Ling’s doll house.

PM did the honourable thing by not challenging will

In Uncategorized on 18/06/2017 at 5:38 am

His brudder has said that if he had doubts, PM should have challenged probate. He added that the hearing could be conducted in private so it would still be a private matter.

Yah right: the public would still know that the Lees were rowing.

And as I pointed out here:  If a will is invalidated, the deceased’s assets will not be distributed according to the will, and such assets may instead be distributed according to the Intestate Succession Act.

This means that the challenge had been successful, there would have been no reversion to the previous will (Version 6). Instead of Harry’s (and indirectly his wife’s) wishes on how the assets of the estate should be distributed, the assets of the estate would be mechanically according to the Intestate Succession Act. Like that why bother with a will in the first place?

This would really be the act of a dishonourable son.

 

TRE commenter gets it right about the younger Lees

In Uncategorized on 17/06/2017 at 2:40 pm
Dr Lee and her younger brudder are whiners
In reaction to Gilbert Goh’s piece
LIONS:

Just one ? pops into my mind .
WHY “persecuted” LEE SIBLINGS said NOTHING when JBJ,DR CHEE N even Humble Roy n Little-woman HHH got PERSECUTED?

Tell ya,no matter what,BLOOD IS THICKER THAN WATER N LEE AH LONG’s threats on LWL N LHY will not turn into the truly NASTY PERSECUTIONS faced by other citizens.

Well,thats my conviction.

Sad to see capable sgs only KPKB when their own skin gets slightly scratched.
The Lees are filthy rich,even LHY N LWL.
Imagine JBJ N DR CHEE N ROY ALL BROKEN UP?

What is their PAIN like?
And yet,70 pct of sgs remains BOCHUP!

Gilbert Goh wrote

Ten questions that many Singaporeans will want answers to during the current spat among the Lee siblings

1. Who actually drafted the final will before the demise of LKY? Was LHY’s wife heavily involved when she is with Stanford Law as alluded by the PM or was it done by another team of lawyers as suggested by LHY. As this is a important material legal issue with regard to the demolition of the house, the lawyers involved in drafting the will must now say their piece. If not, it is just you say versus I say.

2. Why did the PM convened a secret ministerial committee which Singaporeans knew nothing of till now – is he trying to stop the demolition of the property as specified in the will? Is he attempting to subvert the will and take matters into his own hands as alluded by LHY by using state organs? Who are the ministers involved in this secret committee? What is their agenda?

3. Why did the PM not challenge the will when he suspects anything amiss and wait till a long while by appointing a secret ministerial committee to try and stop the demolition? Did Ho Ching really went to seize all relevant documents from the house as suggested by LWL in order to stop the demolition? If she did what LWL suggested then Ho Ching is really in contempt of power by being the PM’s wife and is clearly misusing her position. We all want to know if she has over-stepped her role as the PM’s wife.

4. Many Singaporeans will want to know how much is the property worth as by now it is no longer a private matter anymore. Some have speculated that the property with all its prime plot ratio must be worth at least 100 million. Its a public matter now as LHY and LWL have pointed out that the PM may have try to profit from the property by selling his share at market value to his brother.

5. Many will also want to know why LHY has to leave the country in order to escape from big brother. Is he really scared that he may be prevented from leaving the country and he has also mentioned that some of his friends were adversely affected by some of the government’s adverse tactics. He may want to be more specified here so people will know that its not just a sweeping statement. Was he being monitored by the ISD or followed around as alluded by some activists and opposition party candidates before?

6. How much exactly is LKY’s estate worth? Half a billion? A billion? The patriach has been the country’s PM for about 30 years and also his wife has been helming Lee & Lee for a long while. As a public statesman, its good that all his assets be made known to the public. For that matter, we all hope that in future all ministers must be made accountable for their assets so that we are assured of a clean and transparent government. There is no fear if all ministers own properties properly as they have earn their keeps from their million-dollar salary.

7. How can the three royal siblings sit down and manage the current mayhew amicably though it seems a impossible preposition now with so much bad blood spilled out. To resolve the situation, can the President come out of his ivory shell and try to manage the matter? Now its the time for Tony Tan to try and earn his millions by being useful for the country for once.

8. Many Singaporeans will also want to know the PM’s decision on the matter promptly as it has became a public issue now. Will he continue to challenge the legitimacy of the will or agree for the property to be demolished thus honouring the will of his father? We need an answer from the PM soon as any more delay will only prolong the agony for all involved.

9. At the centre of the fiasco is also the suggestion that there may be a third generation successor to the Lee empire and though the eldest son has refuted the idea directly on his latesr FB post, can the PM once and for all set the record straight by stating the fact outrightly so nobody will ever speculate on this again? Hopefully, in future, we may never see another PM’s son stepping into those controversial shoes again which smells gravely of nepotism. The Lee Dynasty has to stop after the retirement of LSL period.

10. If there is a slim chance of retaining the Oxley property as a heritage site, will LHY and LWL agree to it for national interest sake? The siblings have accused the PM of not demolishing the property so that he can benefit from the legacy of LKY but realistically he don’t need to do that as he is stepping down soon. Will there be that slim chance of a heritage site though we all know the ultimate wish of LKY? That I think is what will benefit Singapore more…

Gilbert Goh

LKY, PM not above the law: Dr Lee, LHY and cybernut friends

In Uncategorized on 17/06/2017 at 8:25 am

That’s what these cocks don’t understand.

Here’s an extract from the “Observer” (new to me and sounds like TMG, pro-PAP but pretending to be neutral) that summarises the law well:

The family home on 38 Oxley Road is subjected to the Planning Act and the Preservation of Monuments Act, with the latter due to the fact that the building undeniably holds significant historical importance. The decision-making agencies are ultimately the National Heritage Board (NHB) and the Urban Redevelopment Board (URA). In this regard, even if LHL had wanted for the building to be demolished as he has asserted previously, the final decision lies in NHB and the URA. Under the Planning Act, building owners are required to seek the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s (URA) approval prior to carrying out works to demolish, redevelop or undertake additions and alterations to their properties. Under the Preservation of Monuments Act, the National Heritage Board (NHB), under the purveyance of the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY), can make a preservation order to place any monument under the protection of the Board. https://observer.news/…/lee-family-not-get-decide-lkys…/

To this, I’d add that LKY was aware that he was not above the law: hence his wish that the house be demolished once Dr Lee get her ass out of the house. He knew that the govt could preserve his house despite his wishes.

I’m not saying that the PM behaved in a proper, respectful manner towards his siblings. The evidence on that is still coming out. And so far neither side has come out looking well. Score draw so far.

But it’s clear to me that PM’s siblings and their cybernut allies think that Harry, at the very least, is the 9th Immortal. And that his will must be done.

That is wrong. And disrespectful of Harry. 

 

 

 

Hsien Yang talking cock about “will being final and binding”

In Uncategorized on 16/06/2017 at 11:34 am

If the Lee row goes on, I wouldn’t be surprised if the state decides to ask the courts to rule on the validity of the will. Despite probate having been granted, it’s still possible for the will to be ruled invalid. See below.

I find two things, that don’t look good for the PM’s siblings and their cybernut fans, intriguing.

PM’s siblings have not yet given their statutory declaration, something the cabinet committee has asked for. If by the end of June (Extension of time granted, at their requeset, to give the declarations), they don’t, one is entitled to ask, as Pa would certainly have asked, “Scared is it? Got something to hide is it?”. There are criminal sanctions for giving false declarations. So scared to give declarations isit?

Interesting that a “new” law firm with a connection to one of beneficiaries drew up the “final” will*. Nothing illegal or wrong, but the optics don’t look good. Neither does it smell right. Especially as all previous versions had been drafted by another firm.


*Update at 1.02: Lee Hsien Yang denies that his wife’s firm drew up the “final” will. I suppose he’ll say that they used the language of a previous version.

——————————————————-

In movies and novels, this is a signal to the audience or readers that something’s not right: a famous detective will called in in to establish if there was anything wrong.

Plenty more entertainment to come. And better still, it’s free.

Challenging a will

Under certain circumstances, a will may be treated as invalid by a court. In such cases, a claimant can challenge the validity of the will. If a will is invalidated, the deceased’s assets will not be distributed according to the will, and such assets may instead be distributed according to the Intestate Succession Act.

 

Furthermore, if the deceased was under undue influence, the will is also invalid. Undue influence can refer to the unconscientious use of one’s power over another for selfish purposes. For example, coercion, threats, harassments or persistent persuasion may amount to undue influence by one party in causing the testator to err in the making of his will.

On a related note, the lawyer who draws up a defective will which does not reflect the true wishes of the testator, may be liable for negligence to the potential beneficiary. For instance, if the testator instructed his lawyer to make a provision in his will to bequeath $10,000 to his son, and the lawyer negligently failed to do so, the son may be able to sue the lawyer for negligence.

https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/how-do-i-contest-a-will/

White Horses get taste of what Marxist conspirators kanna isit?

In Uncategorized on 15/06/2017 at 5:39 am

Now that daddy’s gone. And don’t like it isit?

This was my reaction when I read the statement of Harry’s younger children, the executors of his will.

Having read what they further had to add, I’ve not changed my mind.

——————————————

I am looking to move on and wake up from what feels almost like an Orwellian nightmare.

Lee Hsien Yang in a media interview)

—————————————————————————–

If u don’t know what I’m referring to, Dr Lee and Lee Hsien Yang alleged in a joint statement, posted on their Facebook accounts that they feared the “organs of state” might be used against them and the wife of Mr Lee’s, Ms Lim Suet Fern.

“We feel extremely sad that we are pushed to this position,” they added without giving details about the alleged persecution they said they felt. Mr Lee Hsien Yang said he felt “compelled to leave Singapore”.

“It is with a very heavy heart that I will leave Singapore for the foreseeable future….I have no desire to leave. Hsien Loong is the only reason for my departure.”

He later elaborated in a media interview

On the fears of the use of organs of state you mentioned, could you tell us more about that fear?

LHY: The cabinet has just put out a note and talked about some of the things. What is the cabinet committee doing on 38 Oxley Road notwithstanding our settlement with Loong? Why is there even a Cabinet committee when PM Lee (Hsien Loong) had announced in Parliament that so long as (younger sister) Wei Ling is living there, nothing needs to be done? Why when the Government says the government of the day will decide when Lee Wei Ling is no longer (living there) … is the Government of today convening this Cabinet committee?

The Committee said it had asked you and Dr Lee (Wei Ling) some further questions.

LHY: Yes, we had given answers to them last year. They continue to repeat the same questions. Probate has been obtained on the last will. It is final and legally binding. If Lee Hsien Loong had any doubt about the validity of the Last Will, he should have challenged it in court. Frankly it is completely improper to use a cabinet committee to pursue an issue like this when the proper channel was at the court and probate.

Wow. Juz kanna asked a few questions and they KPKB about oppression. They really led privileged lives.

I mean people like Tan Tee Seng, Teo Soh Lung and the other Operation Spectrum detainees got worse: Ms Teo, for one, alleged physical intimidation.

Updated at 10.15 am:

Related post: Juz move yr ass Dr Lee: Dr Lee trying to have her cake and eat it.

Will Harry’s daughter throw a tantrum this year?

In Uncategorized on 16/03/2017 at 10:48 am

Last year around this time, the princess of Oxley Risethrew a tantrum over ST’s refusal to publish a piece written by a ST reporter channeling her tots*. The piece was on her tots on how Harry was being commemorated on the first anniversary of his death.

Well with the second anniversary of his death fast approaching, I’m sure she’d find an excuse to throw another tantrum to show her grief for her dad (and mum). Better I tot if the estate of her parents, or the state paid for a few professional wailers from Taiwan or HK. I’ve been told there are no more professional wailers here, so we need some FTs where the “T” stands for “Talent”.

Well some stamps were issued recently. The Defence Minister said:

 “I’m sure the stamps will be well received – they feature founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew, as well as the late former Minister for Defence Dr Goh Keng Swee, both key figures in the introduction of National Service.”

Whatever, this is the first time LKY has appeared on a stamp. It’s also a first for Dr Goh.

But I’m sure the princess will be throwing a tantrum. She should get some professional wailers from Taiwan or HK to express her very genuine grief. I mean her parents (especially Harry) deserve to be better remembered than through her tantrums.


*We learnt she would say a few words and a ST staffer did the rest. 

Harry’s daughter should move her ass out / Dishonouring Pa & Ma

In Uncategorized on 19/09/2016 at 5:00 am

Below* is Dr Lee Wei Ling’s latest FB post KPKBing about Harry’s house not being allowed to be demolished. WTF, I mean her parents’ wish was that the house be demolished after she moves out. Hey she’s still living there. So how to demolish?

——————————–

What Harry wanted:

“It is my wish and the wish of my late Wife Kwa Geok Choo, that our house at 38 Oxley Road, Singapore 238629, be demolished immediately after my death or, if my Daughter, Wei Ling, would prefer to continue living in the original house, immediately after she moves out of the House.”

More on Harry’s house.

—————————————————

Seriously, she should declare that she intends to move out and together with her younger  brother (they are the executors of Harry’s will) publicly announce that they are starting the demolition process.

If the govt tries to stop the process, then she has legitimate and reasonable grounds to KPKB. And S’poreans will agree with her. Polls have shown that S’poreans want LKY’s wish to be respected.

So long as she stays in the house, the govt can say it is acceding to LKY’s wish for her to remain: “Waz wrong with that? She being a spoiled brat isit? Why liddat?”

She wants to stay in the house and yet demolish it? Mana ada logic? Anyway taz not what her parents wanted.

If she has problems articulating her views about what she really wants, I’m sure “The Idiots — S’pore (Or TISG as it prefers to call itself) can help her, even if the boys there don’t do grammar.

She should reflect on this FB post:

LWL should put an end to this. Surely you don’t protect your father’s legacy by telling the world he couldn’t even raise 3 children properly without them squabbling with one another in public.

(To be more accurate, she’s the one KPKBing in public. Her brothers maintain dignified silence. But then, rumour had it that she was the “spoiled” brat, “indulged” by her parents. Her brothers were not indulged.)

She is dishonouring both her parents by her behaviour. I’m sure they’ll be hanging their heads in shame that she’s a cybernut hero, alongside M Ravi (certified loonie), Amos Yee, Roy Ngerng and New Citizen Han Hui Hui.

The only excuses  one can make for her behaviour are her grief and loneliness. She should a dog or two or more from SPCA, say my dogs. The Oxley Road house can home a lot of dogs they say.

=================

*Papa would be 93 today if he were still alive. He lived a full life, committing most of his time and energy to advancing Singapore and Singaporeans’ welfare. He did so with no ulterior motives, abjuring any personality cult in spite of well-meaning intentions of his fellow Singaporeans. He is a rare politician and statesman who dedicated himself to his nation because it was the right thing to do. He did not want to be hero worshipped, and throughout the last years of his life, he tried to get a promise from the Singapore government that his marital house would be demolished, so that it would not become a relic for veneration, and also because he knew how strongly Mama wanted her private life to remain private. Because the Cabinet refused to do so, he added a last paragraph to his will, “It is my wish and the wish of my late Wife Kwa Geok Choo, that our house at 38 Oxley Road, Singapore 238629, be demolished immediately after my death or, if my Daughter, Wei Ling, would prefer to continue living in the original house, immediately after she moves out of the House.” In this age where prestige and power attract unscrupulous people to enter politics, Papa’s wish should be honoured as an example of an outstanding Singaporean who did not want to be hero-worshipped. To preserve the house sends a wrong message to Singapore’s politicians and aspiring politicians. It is also impossible to say we honour him and dishonour his only request of Singaporeans.

Is Harry’s daughter the real hagiographer?

In Uncategorized on 25/04/2016 at 4:21 pm

Isn’t the grieving Dr Lee the real worshipper of one Harry Lee?

The first piece of evidence:. She compared her father to Churchill and Mao.

I had not intended to write about my father’s death on 23/3/2016. What led to my comments in Facebook on 1/4/2016 was the article on the front page report of The Straits Times on Mar 21st. It carried a photo of an outline of Papa’s face made with 4,877 erasers. I know Papa would be very upset by this sort of hero worship. I felt a sense of urgency to stop all acts of hagiography as I knew how unhappy they would cause Papa. To put things in context I wanted to recount how other countries honoured their leaders after death. China’s Chairman Mao and Britain’s Winston Churchill were the best examples to compare the founding prime minister of Singapore to. \

Churchill amd Mao were lead actors on the world stage. Churchill was the prime minister of the United Kingdom when it had an empire on which the sun literally never went down, He also led the British empire when the British empire, the USSR and the USA were fighting Germany and Japan. And for a while, the British (under his leadership) were the only people in Western Europe that were not subject to German hegemony.

As for Mao, he was the leader of the communists who established The People’s Republic of China on October 1, 1949. Who can forget, Mao’s famous phrase “The Chinese people have stood up” (Chinese: 中国人民从此站起来了)?

And when he later came up with scatter-brain ideas (Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution) he was powerful enough to ensure that his ideas were carried out. Millions died and millions more suffered, and the economy tanked.

LKY was at best a marginal figure (America’s boy from the third world) on the world stage. He played a very important part in S’pore’s development but S’pore is not China or the British empire.

Has PM or the PAP ever compared LKY to Mao or Churchill? No, only Dr Lee has. And yet she is the one accusing them of hagiography?

Her grief must be warping her famed objectivity?

Next piece of evidence: by “Pa” was not anti free speech “For the cynics who complain that Pa restricted freedom of speech, you are wrong. If your statement is accurate, fine. If it is slander, l will have to defend my reputation in court.”, isn’t she guilty of building a monument to him? A false one with feet of clay?

My Facebook avatar asked in a thread discussing what Dr Lee had written, “She should ask herself why ST “censorsed” her? Fear of the administration where her dad formed and was a leading figure for many a year? She says “For the cynics who complain that Pa restricted freedom of speech, you are wrong.” sounds like something from Evelyn Waugh’s black comedy writings.”

He got two “Likes” from two ex-SPH editors who are pretty decent fellows: not wannabe Sith Lords who now present themselves as Jedi knights.

One of them was taken to task by LKY personally over a piece of reporting that he allowed to be published. LKY did not dispute the facts, he juz said that the piece shouldn’t have been published.

Now that’s Dr Lee’s idea of someone who didn’t restrict free speech?

Let’s wiah her all the best, hope she can overcome her grief and regain her unsentimental objectivity that made S’poreans think of her ‘Pa” when she made public statements as private citizen Lee.

 

 

 

 

Cybernut Land got new hero/ Harry’s a complex man

In Uncategorized on 20/04/2016 at 2:49 pm

TRE’s cybernuts have a new hero: Harry’s daughter. She must be appalled and he must be fuming given that they are all rabid haters of all things Harry and the PAP.

There have been loud shouts of support for her defamatory comments about her brother, the PM.

When TRE republished this piece of mine, among the rants against me and in favour of Harry’s filial daughter, there was this good comment

There is no need to glorify, mummify or deify the image of LKY. It is already imprinted in the minds of thousands of grateful Singaporeans. This what his daughter Dr Lee Wei Ling wishes for. The piece(lightly edited)  is reproduced at * because it  also shows that the writer understands the complex nature of one Harry Lee.

And in response to this asking why Dr Lee did not object to “LKY: Follow thar Rainbow”, Hawking Eye showed what he and the nutters in TRELand have in common, “die-die” Dr Lee is always right.

The vivid memory of the joyful years with her father and the contentment of having been his anchor support during his final frail years must have caused her reflective pain of unbearable proportion. She must be slowly recovering from that and for her to see her father’s first death anniversary being made, by the powers-be, a national occasion of repeat mourning with state sponsored or orchestrated multiple and extended events, is nothing short of seeking political gain out of the death of a venerated political figure i.e her father. LKY himself was dead against personality cult. Why must the PAP Government attempt to glorify, mummify or deify LKY against his wish and that of his daughter?

The book had already been published. If only Dr Lee Wei Ling had a premonition of what her PM brother and his minions were up to, she would have probably objected to it.

Taz right, move aside New Citizen Han Hui Hui, the cyber-rats have a new heroine.

She’ll stand tall beside Roy, M Ravi and Amos Yee, the nutty three.

The funny thing is that they want her brother to sue her. I’ll explain why one of these days. But with fans like these, she doesn’t need enemies. I mean to be a hero to the ratty, nutty rabble one has to suffer. Ask Roy, M Ravi and Amos if being a hero of the mob brings any benefits other than being a celebrity?

—————————————

*Hawking Eye:

In defence of Dr Lee Wei Ling

LKY’s political life has diabolical dimensions.

His first avatar was that of a demon – a destroyer. He destroyed the lives of key comrades in arm and their families both before and after he became the most powerful man in Singapore – the PM.

His earlier victims were his arch rivals like the leftists – Lim Chin Siong, Fong Swee Suan, Sydney Woodhull, James Puthuchery, Said Zahari, Poh Soo Kai, Lim Hock Siew and many others.

He was successful in eliminating them because he had the support, at that time, of the Tunku (then Malaya’s PM) and the British, both of whom also wanted the leftists rounded up as they opposed the formation of Malaysia, a British idea planted into the head of the Tunku. Operational Coldstore (2 Feb 1963) was the security sweep that put all of them away for good, some of them for more than 10-20 years. The British wanted to withdraw their troops and bases from this region and they wanted a pro British regime to take care of their commercial and security interests here. They found Anglophile Tunku, the perfect man to ensure this and they floated the idea of Malaysia comprising (the then) Malaya, North Borneo (Sabah), Sarawak and Singapore with Tunku as the PM. The Leftists resisted this – initially the concept itself and later over the terms of merger. They parted company with the PAP and formed their own political party – the Barisan Socialis. Operation Coldstore followed thereafter. Singapore’s separation vindicated the Leftists but they were still kept under detention for many more years to come. Once entrenched in power, LKY was unstoppable. He went after whoever opposed him and many were knocked out flat by him with his knuckle dusters. They included Tan Lark Sye (then President of the Hokkien Huay Kuan and founder of the former Nanyang University (Nantah), Chinese Newspaper editors, JBJ, Francis Seow, Tang Liang Hong, Devan Nair and Dr Chee Soon Juan amongst many others

His second avatar was that of a creator, an exceptional one at that. g a save, secure and thriving livelihood for its people, which he did?

How should history judge LKY?

With the passing of a generation of individuals and their families who suffered at the hands of LKY, what will remain dominant in the psyche of Singaporeans in some 50 years time, is high respect and gratitude for him for making Singapore the special one it is. And at that time, all his ruthless handling of his political adversaries in the long gone past, will not matter or figure in the minds of Singaporeans except, perhaps for those who read history.

There is no need to glorify, mummify or deify the image of LKY. It is already imprinted in the minds of thousands of grateful Singaporeans. This what his daughter Dr Lee Wei Ling wishes for. Some in power may collectively want the home to be preserved, perhaps, for political gains. The Government should respect the wishes of both the late LKY and his wife to demolish their house at 38 Oxley Road and do so accordingly. Not doing so can turn ugly, given the legal options available for Dr Lee to resist such a move.

 

 

HARD TRUTH that PM & sis must obey

In Political governance on 17/04/2016 at 1:12 pm

PM’s sister last Sunday posted on Facebook that her brother had “no qualms abusing his power to [have] a commemoration just one year after LKY died.”, going on, “If the power that be wants to establish a dynasty, LKY’s daughter will not allow LKY’s name to be sullied by a dishonorable son.”

He answered on Facebook hours later (after his sister’s remarks had been taken down) that,“The accusations are completely untrue.”

There the matter rests, at least publicly. But things are happening behind the scene it’s alleged.

Whatever, inaction and silence is not an option for the PM beyond the short-term. As the WSJ put it: The Prime Minister now faces an awkward decision of whether to take legal recourse against his sister, a former head of the National Neuroscience Institute, since clemency could be construed as favoritism. He and his father always maintained that libel lawsuits are necessary to protect the reputations of the country’s leaders.

A true blue local blogger put it in terms that any member of the PAP’s IB and TRELand’s cybernuts can understand: Yes. Dr Lee had taken down the offending post. But she hadn’t publicly recanted what she had said and apologised for making a baseless allegation. If we were to accept the logic that Roy Ngerng had to do alove [sic] those things so that public and international confidence in the integrity and character of our PM would not be affected, then PM MUST take legal action against his sister to clear his name. Otherwise, the public and international confidence in our PM would be shaken to its core!

Of course, some would say, don’t be silly. PM’s character and integrity both locally and internationally won’t suffer because of what Dr Lee said. That is effectively also saying that there wasn’t a compelling reason to take legal action against Roy Ngerng. A simple refutation of what he said would have sufficed.

So if PM doesn’t take legal action against his sister, there are two possible implications. First, public confidence, both locally and internationally, in the integrity and character of PM would suffer. Secondly, there is double standard – if you belong to the FamiLEE, you get free pass in some ways. If you aren’t, then out comes the hatchet… I mean… If it was Dr Chee and not Dr Lee who made that statement about abuse of power etc, I’m sure he would be staring at a letter from PM’s lawyers by now…

So. What will PM do? Will he vigorously defend his integrity and character?

Should PM Lee sue his sister?

Rumour has it that something is being worked out behind the scenes so that PM can in future sue to protect his reputation without questions being asked about, “Err why no sue sister? Membership got its privileges isit? Why liddatt?”

Whatever, Harry’s Law must be obeyed. His daughter herself said“Pa” was not anti free speech “For the cynics who complain that Pa restricted freedom of speech, you are wrong. If your statement is accurate, fine. If it is slander, l will have to defend my reputation in court.

A Hard Truth that has no exceptions or mitigating circumstances: sue to protect one’s reputation and integrity. Inaction means confirming the allegation.

Expect, if all goes according to plan, an apology from Dr Lee to her brother and a big donation to charity in lieu of damages. And if this doesn’t happen soon, expect a formal letter of demand from PM’s lawyers to his sister for an apology and damages.

Harry would expect no less. And so should me if remaining true to his principles are to have any meaning.

Related post

 

 

 

 

Why doesn’t Harry’s daughter object to this?

In Political governance on 13/04/2016 at 1:48 pm

Dr Lee thinks Pa’s wish not to be venerated is being ignored and that there’s an active campaign by the PAP administration  to venerate him.

As yesterday’s post showed, I take her concerns with a large pinch of salt, finding her rantings funny, in a black comedy way. I think she is genuine in her feelings, but the evidence she cited doesn’t support her.

I tot the u/m touching if kitschy

Two young children pose for a photograph against a mural made out of nearly 5,000 Singapore country erasers forming the likeness of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, during a tribute event in Singapore, 20 March 2016.

Ms Lee singled out the creation of a portrait of her father made up of nearly 5,000 erasers as a commemorative event which she felt uneasy about

Now if she had objected to the workbook titled “LKY: Follow That Rainbow, Go Ride It” (the book on LKY’s values etc that SPH published) that is being distributed to kids up to age 18 (publication run 200,000 copies), I’d agree with her on the issue of veneration. But somehow I don’t see her ever objecting to that book or others of its kind: “Pa” would surely have no problem about a book on him being used to perpetuate the PAP’s hegemonic rule  here.

Veneration, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

====================================

My favourite caroon on the subject

=====================================================

Or maybe she’s thinking like Humpty Dumpty?

“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’ ” Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’ ”
“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. “They’ve a temper, some of them—particularly verbs, they’re the proudest—adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs—however, I can manage the whole lot! Impenetrability! That’s what I say!”

Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking-Glass

The book is not “veneration”, it’s to remind us of his values. Err, I’m sure the same was said of Sun Yat Sen’s mausoleum by those who wanted to revere him.

 

Are Dr Lee’s concerns about “Pa” being venerated justified?

In Political governance on 12/04/2016 at 2:04 pm

Or juz the imagination of a grieving child, used to getting her way?

Let’s look a someone who was venerated: Sun Yat Sen.

Taiwanese media has also reported on the spat between Singapore prime minister Lee Hsien Loong and his sister Dr lLe Wei Ling. Taiwan is a very relevant example. When the father of republican China Sun Yat Sen died in the 1920s, many Chinese mourned him, just as many Singaporeans mourned Lee Kuan Yew when he died one year ago. Sun’s successor, venerated Sun in a way that Lee Wei Ling objected to, by building a huge mausoleum for Sun and asking all chinese soldiers, students and officials to bow to Sun’s photo. Chiang’s idolisation of Sun did not prevent him from forfeiting the mandate of heaven and losing mainland China because of his incompetent and corrupt rule.

(This is a Facebook post by one Toh Han Shi,  an ex-ST journalist now working for the People’s Daily HK edition South China Morning Post (now owned by Jack Ma). I edited it because he doesn’t believe in using capital letters.)

Err somehow I don’t see the PM and the PAP trying to venerate Harry Lee like that.

—————————————

At least 100 events were organised for the one-year anniversary, ranging from solemn ceremonies and a candlelight vigil to tree-planting and kayaking events.

Wax statues of Lee – widely known as LKY – and his wife were put on public display with flowers laid at their feet, a schoolbook teaching Lee’s values was launched, while some ardent fans online even claimed to have seen his face in the clouds.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-36012257

Two young children pose for a photograph against a mural made out of nearly 5,000 Singapore country erasers forming the likeness of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, during a tribute event in Singapore, 20 March 2016.

Ms Lee singled out the creation of a portrait of her father made up of nearly 5,000 erasers as a commemorative event which she felt uneasy about

———————————————

Where’s the huge mausoleum? Where’s the mass forced bowing to LKY’s portrait. Yes I know the Indian alleged one such incident. But come on, the Indi is worse than Jason Chua’s FATPAP, ASS, TRS, STOMP! and TNP combined. And even if true, why no more reports meh?

And really, we wouldn’t stand for Sun style veneration. For starter’s we wouldn’t want to spend money on a huge mausoleum given the cost of land, labour and building materials here

Let me be very clear. I’m not saying that there’s no attempt to venerate LKY. There could be. Funnily Dr Lee doesn’t object to something that can reasonably be seen as deification veneration of LKY. More on this tom.

 

 

Harry’s daughter: From Hero to Zero

In Uncategorized on 11/04/2016 at 2:26 pm

She now has as much credibility as Roy Ngerng and Amos Yee as far as I am concerned.

First the row with SPH where SPH has a legitimate reason (but whether the real reason or not will the subject of another post) not to publish her piece as she wanted it published.

Then on Facebook accusing her brother of abusing his power, wanting to set up a dynasty and of being dishonourable that it seems she has now taken down.

——————————–

She had written

— “HL has no qualms about abusing his power to hv a commemoration just one year after LKY died”

— “if the power that be wants to establish a dynasty, LKY’s daughter will not allow LKY’s name to be sullied by a dishonourable son.”

————————–

Wonder what “Pa” would think of her? Ah well, she’s made her bed and must lie in it.

Given that she has taken down her accusations against her brother, that’s no longer something to comment on.  So I’ll focus on her row with ST. As I said above, I’ll blog separately on what I think about ST’s actions: it’ll be juz as cynical and nasty. A good description of ST and Dr Lee is Oscar Wilde’s definition of fox-hunting:“The unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable!”.

Dr Lee responded to ST’s story http://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/why-dr-lees-column-was-not-published that she wanted to include material that was plagiarised: the demand was non-negotiable, and last-minute. ST could not accede to her request without itself getting into trouble for breaches of copyright.

My then SPH editor, Ivan Fernandez’s first response to my draft which included commemoration for Mao and Churchill, “Not using this, Wei Ling. Sticking with the original edited version. Will use your suggestion for the visual (if space permits): shot of the video you mentioned. Bits about Mao and Churchill are going off on a tangent. Distracting and do not contribute enough to the point that you’ve already made. Best to objectively maintain the tightness of argument and not appear to be airing a pet peeve.” There were 5 subsequent emails with regards to this draft, never did Ivan bring up the issue of plagiarism. Given that my article was posted on Facebook on 1st April, and this is 9th April, I wonder whether the powers that be had instructed SPH to criticize me and accuse me of plagiarism. I am a doctor, and writing articles like these do not advance my curriculum vitae which depends on publication on medical issues. So I leave my readers to judge me fairly, whether I intentionally plagiarized or as a filial daughter I wanted to stop any attempts at hagiography at the first anniversary of my father’s death.

My observations about Dr Lee based on this row with SPH and that other White Horse, s/o Devan Nair

— Her Facebook ramblings show that she needs a good editor (polite word in my book in her case going by her Facebook ramblings for rewriter” or “ghost writer” to put her tots into intelligible English. I once upon a time rewrote Terry Xu’s pieces for TOC, all the time telling the editor that Terry should stick to taking photos). The above FB post clearly shows she found a good editor. Good for her and her anti-PAP fans, both rational and nutty.

— It’s reasonable to conclude her ST pieces are really the work of ST’s editors, and are not her work. A White Horses’s stream of consciousness is turned into reasoned arguments and readable English. And to think that many yrs ago, I agreed with a Today editor who said her writings followed her dad’s logical, systematical way of looking at things. Seems to be no such thing. Her editors’ were thinking like LKY, not her.

— The care and attention that ST lavished on her (40 emails between her and her editor on the LKY piece that is the subject of the row) shows that she is a special person*.

— As someone who has to “publish or perish” to advance her career, she should be aware that wholesale cutting and pasting is plagiarising**, when there is no attribution. But to be fair, she doesn’t deny that she plagarised; she claimed mitigating circumstances: love of and filial duty to”Pa”.

It would be best for her reputation and that of the other S’porean natural aristocrats that she sit down and shut up. And I’m sure “Pa” would wish it lest it makes the rest of  S’pore’s natural aristocracy look bad. Her sense of entitlement is astounding.

But we would be deprived of a great soap opera. So here’s hoping she’ll keep on KPKBing.

I’ll end with three great comments that a PAPpy (worships her “Pa” and Nathan) super troll made about her.

ST has put forth great clarity on the issue and Dr. Lee comes up smelling as fresh as day old prawns. Left in the sun. Sad that she had a good cause but went about it with ultimatums which were correctly defied.

— Dr. Lee’s alleged conduct did not do her or the memory her legendary father any favours although her article itself would have. A tragedy it went the way it did.

— Be that as it, the ensuing fracas is regrettable and Dr. Lee came off third best. She is entitled to her own wishes and views about how her father wished to be remembered. Just as much and no less than PM was. And ST is not obligated to present her personal wishes and thoughts. Just as those who admire the late Mr. Lee Kuan Yew are free to conduct their own remembrance of the man on his 1st anniversary. Or subsequent ones.

He’s absolutely right.

Reminder, I’ll post my nasty, cynical tots on ST’s behaviour next. But not tomottow.

————————

*Membership has its privileges

Many of us in the trade would’ve gasped to learn the number of email exchanges between Dr Lee and Mr Fernandez over the column in dispute: Over 40, all in one week in March.

That’s a full-time job in itself! No columnist I know of (including myself) would’ve had this kind of access to an editor’s time. The rule of thumb: If the copy from a freelance columnist is not delivered clean, with minimal edits, then it’s spiked (journalist’s jargon for killing a story). Rewriting it wholesale – and patiently taking the writer through the edits – is just not a done thing.

But we’re not talking about any columnist, are we?

**Do not copy and paste

Finally, according to ST, Dr Lee committed a cardinal sin in journalism and academia: plagiarism. Two passages, from The Guardian and an obscure website, were cited by ST as evidence.

Open-and-shut case: If one of my undergrads had done something similar, he would’ve received zero for the assignment and a warning from the school.

Instead, Dr Lee, in a Facebook update on April 9, defended her action, stating she doesn’t need the ST column to advance her curriculum vitae (err, beside the point).

She added: “So I leave my readers to judge me fairly, whether I intentionally plagiarised or as a filial daughter I wanted to stop any attempts at hagiography at the first anniversary of my father’s death.”

Why stopping hagiography requires an act of plagiarism (intentional or otherwise) is beyond me at this stage in my cerebral development.

Felix Cheong

http://themiddleground.sg/2016/04/10/lwl-saga-top-5-lessons/  Do read it. Great for laughs. Btw I tot Felix Cheong was once upon a time a ST journalist. apparently, i’m wrong after reading an Infopedia piece on him.

 

White Horse fights White Horse

In Political governance on 05/04/2016 at 10:21 am

Who is really ignoring LKY’s wishes?

But first, the spat between Lee Wei Ling and Devandas Nair (example https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154269480746844&set=a.10150263346906844.370932.581221843&type=3&theater) is starting to sound like

Tweedledum and TweedledeeAgreed to have a battle;
For Tweedledum said Tweedledee
Had spoiled his nice new rattle.

And how did that end?

Just then flew down a monstrous crow,
As black as a tar-barrel;
Which frightened both the heroes so,
They quite forgot their quarrel.

Juz remember: White Horse fights White Horse. Two very privileged kids (who should know better) are rowing pub;ocly about who is upholding LKY’s wishes and who is dissing his wishes.

One White Horse (actually a mare) thinks she is the keeper of LKY’s flame (Funny that she never fulfilled his wish for her: that she marry and have a family.). The other White Horse (Gelding really?) is a paid-up member of the administration that Harry built and which turned on his dad.

—————————————————————————–

Gelding: a male horse that has had its testicles removed

———————————————————————

I’m still thinking about the rights and wrongs of both sides. But here are the two major themes that I’m meditating on:

— By claiming “Pa” was not anti free speech “For the cynics who complain that Pa restricted freedom of speech, you are wrong. If your statement is accurate, fine. If it is slander, l will have to defend my reputation in court.”, isn’t she guilty of building a monument to him? A false one with feet of clay?

— And isn’t the PM and the PAP really doing what “Pa” wanted: trying to ensure PAP hegemony forever and a day by propagating stuff like Follow the Rainbow? I mean he wrote self-serving books too didn’t he? DSC_0011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’ll end with her failure to understand the regime that Harry built:

My Facebook avatar asked, “She should ask herself why ST “censorsed” her? Fear of the administration where her dad formed and was a leading figure for many a year? She says “For the cynics who complain that Pa restricted freedom of speech, you are wrong.” sounds like something from Evelyn Waugh’s black comedy writings.”

He got two “Likes” from two ex-SPH editors who are pretty decent fellows.

Re: Harry’s daughter KPKPing about being censored

In Media, Political governance on 04/04/2016 at 3:56 pm

When I read the following in an FT article about the relationship between journalists and the , rulers, I  couldn’t help thinking about Lee Wei Ling’s KPKBing that she was censored by ST.

When President Xi Jinping paid a New Year’s visit to China Central Television in February, the welcoming banner on the wall ignited a controversy that has roiled Chinese politics for weeks.

“Our family name is the Party,” the banner read, in a display of fealty that many Chinese felt was excessive. Mr Xi took things a step further, saying that China’s media “must love the party, protect the party and closely align themselves with the party leadership in thought, politics and action”.

Guess this is how the PAP expects SPH and MediaCorp publications and channels to behave.

After all, this is what Ms Lee posted on Facebook: It was a love-hate relationship between me and my three consequetive editors. there may already been a space for my article, then the editor does not like what i wrote, and i refuse to have the relevant points deleted and the entire article is then dropped. when what each of the three editors objected to was so consistent, i decided they must have been commanded to edit certain issues out, and they are to timid to disobey, and too embarassed by their timidness to tell me the truth.

And this is the headline from the SCMP Cheong Yip Seng tells how Lee Kuan Yew, who saw the press as subordinate to the nation’s needs, made sure that only he and his government could set the agenda for Singapore

It then went on to quote an extreact from his book OB Markers http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1747889/under-lee-kuan-yew-press-was-only-free-it-needed-be-serve

(In case anyone has juz woken up from a 50-year sleep, Cheong Yip Seng is a former editor-in-chief of Singapore Press Holdings’ English and Malay Newspapers Division. He is an editorial adviser for SCMP Publishers.

Then there is this from the FT.

Looks like the urge to report the Truth (whatever that means) than propoganda never took root among journalists in our constructive, nation-building media. And Yes of course blame it on Harry.