A Wolf in Sheep's clothing

Thum Ping Tjin or PJ Thum, grabbed headlines when he made a submission to the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, where he made the most ridiculous claim:

There is clear source of “fake news” which has spread falsehoods, with major impact, and hitherto escaped sanction. That is the politicians of Singapore’s People’s Action Party. 

 The major examples of this are the numerous detentions under the Internal Security Act (ISA, and its predecessor, the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance) from 1963 to 1987. 

 Beginning with Operation Coldstore in 1963, politicians have told Singaporeans that people were being detained without trial on national security grounds due to involvement with radical communist conspiracies to subvert the state. 

 Declassified documents have proven this to be a lie. 

 Operation Coldstore was conducted for political purposes, and there was no evidence that the detainees of Operation Coldstore were involved in any conspiracy to subvert the government. (See Thum’s full submission here)

However his claim, as well as any credibility he had as a “historian” was soon shot to tiny little worthless pieces when it was revealed during the public hearing that Thum did not include, or chose to ignore any references and materials that would have contradicted his belief, including accounts from Chin Peng who was the chief of the Communist Party of Malaya.

Can PJ Thum be called an objective historian when he disregarded the leader of MCP claims that Operation Coldstore shattered the communist network in Singapore?

Posted by Shut down TRS on Monday, April 2, 2018

And what was his reason for this particular exclusion?  Thum rejected Chin Peng as 'unreliable' and as 'not true'. And yet, according to Thum, he has never explain any where in his work why Chin Peng's memoirs should be disregarded.

Would you believe this “historian” who selectively choses his material to write the “history” that he wants to Singaporeans to believe?

Shutdown TRS

During the public hearing, Home Affairs and Law Minister Shanmugam essentially tore apart Thum's submission and claims over 6 hours, where Thum persisted in avoiding giving a straight answer to the Minster's questions on the veracity of Thum's claims.

K. Shanmugam FB page

Thum's supporters will say that Thum won out. But how does another historian view Thum’s “work” (from 2014!)?

“There are two main problems with Thum’s argument. First, he argues – citing Selkirk’s contemporaneous concerns – that at the time of Coldstore there was no direct evidence that Lim Chin Siong and other detainees were engaged in actual Communist subversion. 

 But the records do show that even careful British officials conceded that Lim was a skilful CUF operative and other detainees possessed a recent history of subversive activities. 

 Tunku also agreed that the detentions on preventive grounds were necessary. This was prudent.  CPM elements within the utterly penetrated Barisan Socialis that was challenging the PAP for power never ruled out switching strategy to armed violence at any time.  Historian T.N. Harper hence considers Selkirk’s attempted distinction between ‘political’ and ‘security’ grounds for detention as ‘problematic’. 

 Second, Thum emphasizes how Tunku and Selkirk disliked Lee’s personality and byzantine political machinations. But CUF leaders – said to possess ‘animal cunning’ themselves – in fact regarded the tactically agile Lee as the only serious obstacle to their plans to establish Communist rule in Singapore. 

 British envoy in Kuala Lumpur Geofroy Tory sympathized with Lee’s position, warning that playing by ‘Queensbury rules’ with the unscrupulous Communists would be folly.  Ultimately, cautious British officials in Singapore conceded that in view of what historian S. J. Ball called the ‘ruthless, fast-moving and mendacious’ nature of local politics at the time, Lee Kuan Yew, warts and all, was ‘the only man who can run this city’.  

Kumar Ramakrishna, Revising the Revisionists: Operation Coldstore in History (Read the full article here)

Another blogger even provides a copy of the letters and documents from the British Archives that showed how serious the communist threat was in Singapore during that era.

Operation Coldstore: Declassified British documents revealed a real communist threat in Singapore

It is extremely troubling that a highly educated person like Thum would show such a poor regard for historical facts and objective assessment. Thum selectively choses 

Not to mention, those stupid moronic faces that he made during the Select Committee hearing just shows how much regard he has for Parliament. Why participate and make a mockery of the process if you don't believe in it?

Because of your irresponsible antics, you have deprived others of airtime when they had also prepared serious submissions to the Select Committee.

References

Singapore Parliament: Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods https://www.parliament.gov.sg/sconlinefalsehoods

Thum Ping Tjin’s Submission to the Select Committee

http://www.parliament.gov.sg/docs/default-source/sconlinefalsehoods/written-representation-83.pdf

Thum Ping Tjin at the Select Committee hearing on 28 March 2018

Video 1
Video 2
Video 3
Video 4

IPS Commons, Kumar Ramakrishna, Revising the Revisionists: Operation Coldstore in History (Feb 19, 2014)

https://www.ipscommons.sg/revising-the-revisionists-operation-coldstore-in-history/

Operation Coldstore: Declassified British documents revealed a real communist threat in Singapore

http://papinreview.blogspot.sg/2018/03/operation-coldstore-declassified.html