Although the newspaper was flooded with groundbreaking news like who didn't turn up at the F1 party at Amberlounge, the 700 billion dollar rescue package didn't go through, the duxton was oversubscribed 3x over, Cadbury featuring ads to say its products are safe despite the AVA issuing directives to recall Cadbury products, nothing was more shocking than the news of JBJ's passing which I heard on the radio.
Granted, he is old and doesn't have as many resources as other old men his age that can afford to prolong their lives, but after reading all about him and meeting him in person so many years ago, I did feel affected to the extent that I immediately sms'd a few people that I think would care to know about his passing.
It is true that many shunned him whilst he promoted the hammer and his books in public. I am quite sure that as many were probably intrigued and would not actually mind hearing what he had to say as he was undoubtedly more coherent then some other fellow opposition member(s). There is a distinction between a lawyer and a doctor ya. I recall a day years ago when I was at city hall and I actually went up to him to get two copies of his latest book from him. It's really sad that here is a man trying to do what he thought was best for his country through the "official channels" and yet having them laugh and scoff at him. He loved Singapore, but Singapore mocked him. Sounds familiar?
The media has been generally kinder to him than they have been to other opposition members primarily because he makes more sense than them, as does CST. But even so, the article on straitstimes.com has been changed over the course of the day from a rude editorial in the morning to something a little better by the evening. Now that's a tad unfair isn't it? That suggests changes done (probably over flaming in the ST forums) over the course of the day. Somebody's gonna get it from the online community. I think if one googles hard enough, he/she may still be able to find the morning article. Hmmm.
I find that we take it for granted that there would be coherent opposition members around to act as a check and balance in Parliament. This cannot be more wrong. Although I do not advocate blindly throwing weight behind any opposition group, nor that the government should recognize more opposition groups, I do hope that the people and the government can actually recognize good opposition leaders/members and give them credit where credit is due. This goes for the media as well.
It is hard to write something personal to a man one barely knows personally. But I do want to say that it is a damn shame that he was taken so prematurely (82 is still young compared to some oldies that are like 90s and clinging on to their life for the sake of pissing off their relatives). Perhaps JBJ will become stronger in death, as do some of the world's greatest artists. It is a shame that we do not realize how much he has achieved until we have lost him. I did notice however that upon his passing, more people are realizing how important he actually was to Singapore. Here's to the thought that even though he may never see it, his dreams for Singapore will materialize one day.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=760
PM Lee, if you are unwilling to write a sincere condolence message, why bother to write?
Posted by admin on October 1, 2008
Written by Ng E-Jay
01 October 2008
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong yesterday wrote a condolence letter on the demise of JBJ, addressed to JBJ’s sons Kenneth and Philip Jeyaretnam.
However, I find PM Lee’s condolence letter insincere and unbefitting of his stature as head of Government and the ruling party.
PM Lee wrote that JBJ “used to engage in heated debates” in Parliament probably because “he and the PAP never saw eye to eye on any major political issue and he sought by all means to demolish the PAP and our system of government“.
PM Lee said that this “helped neither to build up a constructive opposition nor our Parliamentary tradition“.
I am deeply saddened that PM Lee has used the sorrowful passing of a great Opposition stalwart to make a personal attack on the late JBJ in an obvious attempt to press home a biased political message on behalf of the PAP.
The people will be the judge as to whether JBJ really sought to demolish the PAP and Singapore’s system of Government, or whether JBJ sought to provide a constructive and credible alternative to the PAP and reform our political system for the better.
At an election rally in 1988, JBJ challenged the PAP’s claim of being an open and transparent government, and asked whether any investigation had been conducted as to how the late Minister for National Development, Teh Cheang Wan, had obtained the tablets with which he had committed suicide, in the midst of being investigated for corruption.
For this, JBJ was sued by the then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and ordered to pay damages of SGD 260,000, together with interest on the amount and costs.
JBJ was sued twice for libel over an article he wrote in The Hammer, the Workers’ Party newspaper, in 1995, resulting in total damages of SGD 465,000 and SGD 250,000 in court costs.
Eleven defamation suits were also filed against JBJ over remarks he made at an election rally in 1997 concerning Mr Tang Liang Hong.
I wonder how PM Lee Hsien Loong can claim that JBJ had failed to work towards a constructive Opposition when in fact JBJ was financially crippled by numerous defamation suits brought against him by PAP leaders in an obvious attempt at keeping him out of Parliament and destroying his political career.
PM Lee also mentioned in his condolence letter than their differences were “not personal“.
Has PM Lee forgotten that after JBJ won the Anson seat in 1981, President Devan Nair recounted Lee Kuan Yew as telling him: “Jeyaretnam can’t win the infighting. I’ll tell you why. WE are in charge. Every government ministry and department is under our control. And in the infighting, he will go down for the count every time … … I will make him crawl on his bended knees, and beg for mercy.”
Does this sound personal or impersonal?
PM Lee also mentioned that Goh Chok Tong had previously helped JBJ’s son, Kenneth Jeyaretnam, find employment in Singapore by writing a letter explaining that the Government did not hold anything against him.
I am saddened that PM Lee has used his condolence message to glorify his own colleague, Goh Chok Tong. Worse still, Goh Chok Tong’s actions of writing a letter urging employers to evaluate Kenneth Jeyaretnam on his own merits only goes to illustrate the pervasive climate of fear generated by the dictatorial PAP.
PM Lee should not have used this sad event to drive home such a lop-sided political message. If PM Lee is unwilling to write a sincere condolence message for JBJ and keep party politics out of the equation, perhaps he should not have bothered to write.
What about old men that hold on and refuse to relinquish power or die, even though lots of people hate them, and they no longer make any sense?
Post a Comment