人民之友工委会向全国选民提出 各州选举和全国大选的投票建议

人民之友恭祝各界在新的一年里,坚持抗拒种族霸权统治,阻止政客把国家伊斯兰化!

 yehwa1.jpg

黄业华@赵明福民主促进会2025-05-25呼吁 民主行动党5名内阁部长(即陆兆福 、哥宾星、倪可敏、沈志强和杨巧双)集体辞去部长职位,向人民谢罪。国内各大媒体竞相作出详尽报道,引起了各族人民的广泛关注,尤其是引起了民主行动党基层党员以及华印社会底层民众的巨大共鸣。

赵明福民主促进会与明福家属不满首相安华多次拒见(他们),而决定在即将来临的元宵节(即阳历2月24日)上午11时正,到行动党的半山芭总部,向陆兆福拜年和探问关于明福命案调查的进展。人民之友工委会2024年2月5日(星期一)发表《5点声明》,表达我们对赵明福冤死不能昭雪事件的严正立场和明确态度。

人民之友工委会根据本身以往对全国大选和州议会选举的论述,结合团结政府成立后的政治形势,决定对新古毛州议席补选,于2024年5月8日发表声明,供新古毛选民5月11日投票以至全国各族人民今后行动的参考。

Hindraf.png

人民之友工委会针对第15届全国大选投票提出 5项建议 和 两个选择

[人民之友20周年(2001-2021)纪念,发表对国内政治局势的看法] 坚持抗拒种族霸权统治! 阻止巫统恶霸卷土重来!

Stop%2BRestoration%2Bof%2BMahathirism.png

人民之友工委会即将在2020年9月9日发表文章,对“喜来登”政变发生后的我国政治局势,提出具体意见,供全国致力于真正民主改革的各民族、各阶层人士参考,并愿意与同道们交流、共勉!

Stop%2BRestoration%2Bof%2BMahathirism.png

Sahabat Rakyat akan mengemukakan pendapat khusus mengenai situasi politik di negara kita selepas "Rampasan kuasa Sheraton" pada 9 September 2020 untuk tatapan rakan semua bangsa dan semua strata yang komited terhadap reformasi demokratik tulen negara kita. Kami bersedia bertukar pendapat dan saling belajar dengan semua rakan-rakan sehaluan.

Stop%2BRestoration%2Bof%2BMahathirism.png

Bersatu padu, mempertahankan reformasi demokrasi tulen, buangkan khayalan, menghalang pemulihan Mahathirism.

 photo the-new-phase-of-democratic-reform-reject-state-islamization.jpg

马来西亚民主改革的新阶段马来西亚民主改革的新阶段 / The New Phase of Democratic Reform in Malaysia / Fasa Baru Reformasi Demokratik di Malaysia

Wednesday, 3 August 2022

“I went through the hoops of detention without trial for 13 years long” - An article by Chng Min Oh written for the Souvenir Issue of Old Friends’ Camp

“I went through the hoops of detention without trial for 13 years long”
An article by Chng Min Oh written for the Souvenir Issue of Old Friends' Camp

Source: 庄明湖@sahabatrakyatmy.blogspot.com
 
Written by Chng Min Oh @ Zhuang Ming Hu
Translated by Ang Pei Shan

This article is translated from original version in Chinese language. In the case of any discrepancy between the English rendition and the original Chinese version, the Chinese version shall prevail.


Function 8, a Human Rights organisation based in Singapore interviewed Chng Min Oh @ Zhuang Ming Hu in 2016. The recorded video interview was then uploaded to YouTube.

Chng Min Oh is the author of the book (originally written in Chinese) entitled “Probing Into The Sufferings Of Singapore`s Left-Wing Labour Movement In The 1960s”. Its English rendition was published by Sahabat Rakyat Committee in 2020.

This article was written by Chng Min Oh @ Zhuang Ming Hu 2 years back (March 2020) in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of his detention under ISA (Internal Security Act). The writer originally handed it over to an old friend of his to be included in a Souvenir Issue of a camp event of Old Friends organised in that year (2020). The 85-year-old writer: Chng Min Oh was formerly a veteran trade unionist in Singapore. He is now a registered TCM physician in Singapore. 

Sahabat Rakyat Editorial however had unexpectedly received the full article and the following letter from the writer around 2 weeks back (in mid-July) ——

To the Editorial of Sahabat Rakyat

Hello comrades!

3 August 2022 marks the 52nd anniversary of my long-term detention without trial in the 1960s. I wish to take the opportunity of the anniversary to express my indictment against the Singapore authorities on the persecution of me and my family (my personal experience is only the tip of the iceberg of political detainees persecuted by the Singapore authorities). Therefore, I hope that your blog could consider publishing the following article " I went through the hoops of detention without trial for 13 years" in early August (hereinafter referred to as "Went through the hoops").

I penned “Went through the hoops” for the following reasons:
  1. In early 2020, after watching the video interview by Function 8, a human rights organisation pertaining to my long-term imprisonment, a good friend of mine suggested me to convert the content of the interview into a transcript and distribute to the old friends who do not know how to surf the Internet. I agreed.
  2. At the same time, old friend Chng Wee Thian @ Chng Ler Thian told me that some former political detainees from the political detention camp of Kemunting, Taiping, Malaysia decided to organise a “Political detainees camp 2020” gathering in July, and publish the “Souvenir Issue of The Former Political Detainees Camp 2020”. Wong Kwai Man, the old friend in charge of the publication of the “Souvenir Issue” asked Chng Wee Thian to suggest me to convert the content of the above-mentioned video interview into a transcript for publication in the "Souvenir Issue". I concurred.
In early March 2020, upon the completion of the article, I distributed a few copies to the old friends whom I am in close contact with. Chng Wee Thian also passed it to Wang Kwai Man, the person in charge of "Souvenir Issue". As the Covid pandemic worsened, the abovementioned gathering and the publication of the " Souvenir Issue " were postponed. Until mid-June of this year (2022), I am glad to know that both the gathering and " Souvenir Issue" will resume in mid-October.

After finished writing "Went through the Hoops" in March 2020, my plan back then was to first publish it in the " Souvenir Issue", and followed by the web.

However, in view of the unpredictability of the pandemic, it is hard to tell whether the abovementioned gathering and the publication of "Souvenir Issue" will be further delayed by then (October this year). As such, I now choose to publish on the web first. Such arrangement gained the kind understanding and acknowledgement by the person in charge of the "Souvenir Issue".

Thanks in advance! Wishing you good health!

Chng Min Oh  10 July 2022

Upon discussion, Sahabat Rakyat Editorial decided to publish the article 2 days in advance, on 1 Aug (Monday) in consideration of Chng Min Oh’s request and aspiration to publish the article on the web (i.e. Sahabat Rakyat blog), which was also acknowledged by the abovementioned person in charge of the "Souvenir Issue" of the Old Friends’ camp.

The Editorial members unanimously agreed that the publication of this article, 2 years after the publication of the English rendition of Probing Into The Sufferings Of Singapore's Left-Wing Labour Movement In The 1960s by Chng Min Oh, would be of the followings but not limited to such significance:

●(1) Chng’s fighting spirit against imperialist, colonialisation and hegemony (not giving in, not surrendering, not accepting “enlistment”) is praiseworthy and should be held in high esteem -- such "noble" temperament serves as a role model to current and even future generations participating in the democratic reform movement of Malaysia and Singapore;

●(2) Chng’s opposition to the path of the radical adventurism and separatism (especially vigilance against the enemy's attacking the people's fortresses of struggle from within) of Lee Siew Choh and others has been consistent and unremitting - such tenacity is inspiring to the democratic reform movement of our country and Singapore at present and in the future. 

According to Ang Pei Shan, translator of the English rendition, part of the translations of Chng's article quoted the English subtitles of the abovementioned video interview produced by Function 8 whom we would like to express our appreciation to. Below is the full text from Chng Min Oh (pictures are provided by Chng and the corresponding captions are added by the editor of Sahabat Rakyat) ——

I went through the hoops of detention without trial for 13 years long

Chng Min Oh @ Zhuang Ming Hu (Singapore)

In 2016, lawyer Teo Soh Lung, person in charge of "Function 8 Ltd", a civil human rights organisation in Singapore, and her two teammates came to my TCM clinic to conduct a video interview about my experience of long-term imprisonment. The video recording of the interview was then uploaded to the Internet. A good friend of mine came to me after seeing this video on the Internet and said that our friends are all elderly, and most of them do not know how to surf the Internet. He suggested that I convert them into transcript, print and distribute them. I agreed. When I started writing, I realised most of the interviews were self-narration and in oral expression, some paragraphs were repetitive, and some paragraphs were not exhaustive. Therefore, in order to meet the requirements of a transcript and the complete logic of words and sentences, this article is based on the transcript of the above video interviews, with some deletions, additions and modifications.

I was arrested on 3 August 1970

My name is Chng Min Oh, I was detained on 3 August 1970. That night while I was having dinner at home, two Internal Security Department (ISD) officers took me away. They said nothing except "You are under arrest". In late 1960s to early 1970s, I was active in the Singapore Gold and Silversmiths’ Union, a left-wing trade union. I was its chairman at the time of detention. 

At that time, brute force was not used on me so I did not resist. Reason being is that I had a hunch that I might be arrested soon as a comrade of mine from the same trade union Tan Sin / Chen Xin @ Tan Seng Hin was detained two months back. I was already mentally prepared that I may be detained too. I was not afraid, if the authority wants to arrest me, so be it. As I did not resist, they did not handcuff me. Two ISD officers, one on my right, the other on my left led me to a car park nearby my house. I was brought to Internal Security Department and then detained at the Central Police Station.
 

Picture above was taken in 1967 when the members of the Singapore Gold and Silversmiths’ Union camped at Loyang Holiday Villa. Tan Cheng Nui @ Chen Jing Lian was the girl in floral dress(6th from the left in the second row)and Chng Min Oh was the 1st from the right in black shirt. People in the front row were holding the union flag and the portrait of Lim Chin Siong, an eminent leader in the left-wing labour movement who was destroyed by the reactionary ruling clique led by Lee Kuan Yew.

Since 1967, the Singapore Gold and Silversmiths’ Union had openly debated with the “unarmed struggle commander” self-proclaimed by Lee Siew Choh who usurped Lim Chin Siong’s leadership in the Barisan Sosialis Singapura (BSS) at the time. Relevant debate materials can be found in the last few editions of the Souvenir published by the union. (Now available in xingmarenmin.com website).

In 1968, the union drew the conclusion that the “BSS Leadership” appointed by Lee Siew Choh is the “separatist commander” of the left-wing movement, and launched an uncompromising struggle against them.
 

The National Union of Building Construction Workers Executive Committee took the above group photo in 1962. Second from the left in the back row is Chng Min Oh, the then deputy treasurer. The main leaders of the union at the time were: Chairman: Lee Keng Wah @ Lee Chin Hua(3rd from the right, front row), Deputy Chairman: Dong Hua Rong (3rd from the left, front row); Secretary of General Affairs: Yang Xiaohei (namely Yeo Meng Teck) (2nd from the right, front row); Deputy Secretary of General Affairs: Goh Chong Kwee (4th from the right, front row) and Zhang Qing Hua (4th from the left, front row); Treasurer: Phua Yong Siao (not in the picture). Yang Xiaohei and Goh Chong Kwee fled to Riau Island, Indonesia in 1963 as they were hunted by the Singapore and Malaya governments in "Operation Cold Store".
 

Picture above is the first order of detention without trial under the Internal Security Act (ISA) issued to Chng Min Oh by the Singapore Home Ministry on 2 September 1970. An extended detention order was issued every two years thereafter until he was released on 7 August 1983.

I was detained at the Central Police Station for about a month. No officer came to see me. I saw only those policemen who delivered my meals. After a month, they began to see me to issue a detention order for two years. That evening I was taken from the Central Police Station to the Moon Crescent Detention Centre (MCC). I was very happy to finally reach the prison! But it was short-lived. After a night of solitary confinement, the next morning I was brought back to Central Police Station for another round of solitary confinement. My solitary confinement cell was a mere 10 square feet. I was let out only for shower and toilet. I was not given pillow nor blanket. I was also not allowed to exercise (outside the cell).

After I was detained for 45 days, they started to interrogate me but not to get my confession. At the beginning, the ISD officers were not rude, they gently expressed that they wanted to help me to get out, they wanted me to "solve some problems" with them. They did not say how to “solve those problems”. I replied, "Since you detained me, so just release me and your problems will be solved." They said, "It is not that simple. You must give suggestions on how to resolve those problems." 

So I said, "There's nothing to discuss. If you want to lock me up, so be it." Then they got really mad and started reprimanding me. They said, "We want to help you to resolve the problem, but you refuse!" I replied "There isn’t any problem if you don’t detain me. Isn’t it ridiculous when you detained me in the first place, then say ‘help me to get out’, and need me to ‘resolve problems’!”

Then they started to taunt me "You are afraid of going out", "Your wife is having a difficult time, so you are afraid to bear the responsibility", "Your children and your wife need your care, you don't want to go out, you are afraid of the hard life outside, you don't dare to go out, you have no conscience and don't care about the life and death of your wife and children" and so on, a lot of insults to my dignity. I replied, "It's you who imprison me. I didn't come here voluntarily." "If you release me and I don't want to leave, then you'll have the right to say so!"

Deprivation of my citizenship upon confession

After around 10 sessions of such insulting interrogation, they started to get statement from me. They then deprived me of my citizenship. I was taken back to the interrogation room after that. They said, "Your citizenship is now deprived, you better apply to return to China (because I was born in China). We can help transport your family to China.” I said, "No way, I am Malayan, I will not go back to China."

"If you don't go to China, we will force you to."

I said, "You can try. When the ship arrives (in China), I will not embark." 

After this round of interrogation, they didn't force me anymore. They didn't take me to the interrogation room, and didn't ask me any more questions, the interrogation was over.

In fact, the interrogation process on me was quite simple. Why didn't they force a confession out of me like the others? I think that firstly, I have no links to underground (Malayan Communist Party) activities. My activities were above-board (legal organisation).

Secondly, they knew that I was not a threat to them (the government). Yet they still arrested me hoping that the difficult financial circumstances my family was in would make me succumb under detention and accept their conditions for release. But I am not such kind of person. Some people were detained, maybe because of their underground activities, or because they were preparing to launch a struggle. If they were caught, they may face forced confession, forcing you to answer what you have done and what are you planning to do.

I was arrested on 3 August 1970. The left-wing movement then was already very weak and had developed into a serious schism. In the second half of 1960s, I was already one of the activists in the left-wing trade unions. As I opposed to the radical line of struggle of Lee Siew Choh led Barisan Sosialis Singapore, I was then suppressed, and accused by Lee Siew Choh and his followers for being a People’s Action Party (PAP) agent, proxy and so on. I no longer had influence in Singapore. Since I was of no significance in any anti-government struggle, why was I arrested? The main reason is, even though you have no influence you are still part of the movement. You would still be detained and offered “enlistment”. And once you give up your belief and succumb, your political life is finished. I guess that was the main reason for my detention, i.e. to destroy me politically so that I can't live with dignity.


I was determined that I would rather be detained than accept "enlistment"

Although they did not specify how to resolve those problems, but I knew what they meant about “resolving problems”. For instance, among the political detainees released from prison, some had issued confessions on television, some had signed public statement of “confession” or “repentance”, making remarks that went against their conscience. I knew that I was just detained, and I would probably be asked to accept a similar way of surrendering to solve the problem. I guessed at the time that they would ask me to go on TV to express my repentance or sign a public repentance statement, and it couldn't have come out of low-level compromises (and not possible to be freed with a low-level way of compromise) (such as joining the Ex-Political Detainees' Association, signing Restriction orders of political activities and living (signing of political activities and life restriction terms)). 

So I was eventually put in Moon Crescent Detention Centre. Whenever the two-year period was up, I was then issued with a new detention order for another two years. Every time not long after the new detention order was issued, they would bring me from the prison to solitary confinement. In the beginning, it was in the detention centre of the Central Police Station and then to Whitley Road Holding Centre. This was how I was mentally abused in solitary confinement every two years. This was very inhumane. Because in solitary confinement, I was not allowed to read books and newspapers. I was not given blanket nor pillow. From time to time, I was brought to the interrogation room for so-called "brainwashing", which was a torture of mental bombardment, insulting my self-esteem, trying to force me to compromise and surrender, and accepting their "enlistment", but I refused every single one.

It went on until around late August 1978 (after I was detained for 8 years) when I was again transferred from Moon Crescent Detention Centre to Whitley Road Holding Centre. I thought it was solitary confinement again, which is more suffering compared to imprisonment, because the Whitley Road Holding Centre solitary confinement is worse (compared to Central Police Detention Centre). As I was being escorted, I thought, if this is still the same this time, I'm going to resist, I can't let them do it. Because the purpose of taking me there to solitary confinement was to force me to give up my beliefs and unable to live an open-hearted and above-board life. I was determined that I would rather continue to be detained than accepting "enlistment".


Went on a hunger strike to protest "solitary confinement"

I was locked up in this tiny cell, about 10x6 feet. It was too warm and we were not allowed out to go out for exercise. I requested to read the books I brought but was denied. The next day I started to sing loudly. The agent then asked, “Why are you singing”. I said, "Singing is my exercise. Since you refused to let me out to exercise, I sing in order to exercise my body. If not, I will fall sick."

So they warned me, "If you dare to sing again, we will punish you!" So I gave them an ultimatum that in 3 days they are to bring my books to me and to let me exercise. But they ignored me. On the third day, I went on a hunger strike. I shouted, "I am Chng Min Oh. I am on hunger strike, I protest this ill-treatment! I demand to be taken back to the prison."

Then, another political detainee, Ho Koon Kiang detained not far from my cell, also staged a hunger strike. He made a similar demand to be sent to prison. Both of us started our hunger strike on 3 September 1978. About a week later, they brought us to Changi Prison Hospital.

During that week of hunger strike in Whitley Road Holding Centre I was beaten up twice. The first beating, I was taken to the interrogation room where more than 10 angry men surrounded me. One of them hit my chest and kicked my private part. 

"You are here to make trouble", they said.

I said, "I am no trouble-maker. I just want to be in the prison." After the beating, I was taken back to the cell.

After two days, another officer a Deputy Director (his surname was reportedly Foo) entered my cell and barked, "Why are you not eating?"

I replied, "I want to go back to the prison! I object to my solitary confinement here!"

"That depends on whether you are going to eat or not!", he said.

I said, "Take me back to the prison and then I'll eat! I am not eating to protest your ill-treatment!"

So he used both hands to smash my ears for around 20 times, causing my hearing loss for a few days. I still have the sequelae of poor hearing. I wasn’t allowed to go out to urinate, they took a potty for me to urinate in instead.  At that time, I was sitting on the bed, and after beating, they poured the urine all over my head. My head, whole body and bed were covered with urine. I was not allowed to shower so stank for a few days until I was brought to Changi Hospital, only then I could take the shower. 
After a week of hunger strike, Ho Koon Kiang and I were sent to the Changi Prison Hospital on the same day but separately, not together. The hospital had two floors. I was detained downstairs together with other patients and him upstairs, on his own.  

At that time, the main purpose of our hunger strike was, firstly, "Stop the ill treatment and take us back to prison". Secondly, to expose the authorities for using of the usual means of solitary confinement to force political detainees to compromise and surrender. In the hospital, we insisted on "Continue the hunger strike until we are moved back to the prison." As a result, we were brought back to the Moon Crescent Detention Centre after going on hunger strike for 84 days. 

In the first 14 days of our hunger strike, we refused to eat but we drank water. From the 15th day, we refused to eat and drink. Doctor from the Changi Prison Hospital persuaded us to eat, we responded, “Return to the prison (detention centre), only then we will eat.”

After about 20 days, they started to force-feed us milk. On the first day of force-feeding milk, the chief of the prison and 7 to 8 prison officers came. One grabbed my hands, another my legs and used handcuffs to secure my hands to the bed. Another officer pressed hard on my head and shoulder till I could not move. They had to prise open my mouth using metal spoon which I kept tightly shut, it wasn’t successful. Then they tried inserting a tube through my nose straight to my stomach but still failing as I kept struggling by shaking my head. At last they still managed to force-feed me milk.

We heard that there were political detainees who died when they struggled during tube insertion to their nose, causing the tubes to accidentally puncture their lungs. Hence I thought, we must protest when we were force-fed. We must struggle, but we could not escape being force-fed. I would die if the tube accidentally puncture my lung. There wasn’t a need to die under such circumstances, hence only they managed to force feed me. They did this twice everyday. The next day, the nurse who force fed me said, “Mr Zhuang, do not struggle and cooperate, please. We are going to insert the tube. If you keep on struggling, the tube may puncture the lung and you may die. It's not worth it, please cooperate with us."

I think what he said made sense. So I negotiated with him, I didn't voluntarily let you do this, so before you force-feed me, I want to shout a slogan. He agreed. So every time before I was inserted a tube, I would shout in Chinese and English, "We protest against the torture of political detainees! We demand to be taken back to the prison! We protest …"

Since then, every time when the nurse came to force feed milk, he would half-jokingly say, "Say your prayer." After I finished shouting the slogan, the nurse would then insert a tube through my nose from mouth to the stomach to force-feed me milk, and removed the tube after it was done. They did this twice everyday.

My feeling about “Solitary Confinement”

Someone asked me, how do you feel about solitary confinement? My answer is: If I didn't have a strong resentment with my solitary confinement, do you think I would risk my life and go on an 84-day hunger strike? Without strong resentment, it is impossible. Moreover, the hunger strike in prison is different from the hunger strike in the ISD, especially the hunger strike at the Whitley Road Holding Centre, where people were dragged and beaten to death at any time.

I was detained at the Whitley Road Holding Centre three times. I went on hunger strike the second time. The third time I went there, I was no longer in solitary confinement but a big cell with a cell mate instead. I was then brought to the house of the Chief Police Officer until released.

I did not accept any conditions for my release. It was only 5 to 6 years after I was detained that the authorities told me, "You have to accept six conditions for your release." I refused. This went on for some time. Finally they offered a bargain. "It's fine if you don't accept the conditions, but you must join the Ex-Political Detainees' Association as the only condition." Again, I refused. 

Finally they said, "Since you refuse this and that, our President has the power to force you accept four conditions and release you. If you don't abide, we will charge you in the court." I said, "I refuse to accept any condition." They said, "We will issue you a letter of the conditions. But you must sign. Your signature only meant that you acknowledge the receipt, not accepting the conditions." I told them “I don't want to sign. I can't read English. If I sign, you can turn around and say that I’ve ‘accepted the conditions’, so I won’t sign." 

My stance on the 4 Restriction Orders for my release

They had four restriction orders for my release. They put it very nicely. You can take part in politics, such as Workers' Party type of politics, but not Communist Party politics. I said I have never been involved in Communist Party. Participating in political activities is my democratic right. I will insist this whether your permit me or not. I will not abide by the restriction orders. If you want, you can take me in court. Among the four restrictions was prohibiting contact with other former political detainees. In fact, I met with former political detainees on the next day right after my release. No action was taken against me.

I still remember that on the day of my release, they gave me a Restriction Orders document, and forced me to sign as acknowledgement of receipt. In fact, I have long known that signing the above-mentioned release conditions or not is not a matter of principle and did not go against my political position. But at that critical juncture when I was just about to be released from the prison and heading home, and I was forced to acknowledge the receipt, it seemed to me that they regarded this as my position on whether or not I would compromise. Therefore, I was determined to resist to the end. I said, I have already said that I won’t sign. If you want to release me, I will leave, I will go home, otherwise, take me back to the prison! In the end, I insisted on not signing, and they released me anyway.

It is worth mentioning that the authorities did not inform my wife of my release. Instead they informed my younger brother. Why so? I guess that the authorities might want to force me to sign at a critical moment. If my wife was there, she would dissuade me if I wanted to sign. According to common sense, my younger brother, who was a senior civil servant, would not go against the will of the ISD to persecute me, who knows he might even persuade me to sign. Fortunately, my brother just sat quietly, not saying a single word.

A year after my release, one day in September 1984, ISD officers came by to my house and issued me a notice to inform me that my Restriction Orders have been lifted. Before they issued me this, they sent a female officer to my house and asked me to go Phoenix Park (ISD HQ). I told her I would not go. 

Then someone from the ISD phoned me and said, "Chng Min Oh, we have a good news for you."

"What is the good news?", I asked.

He said, "We are considering to cancel your Restriction Orders."

I said, "I have never accepted it in the first place. So cancellation makes no difference."

He said, "Come to Phoenix Park. We will notify you officially."

I said, "I have never accepted it in the first place. This notice makes no difference." Twice they had asked me to go to Phoenix Park, I did not go. So finally, a male special agent came to my house to issue me a notice. Again, I refused to sign. I said, "I did not sign the first notice of the Restriction Orders, so why should I sign this notice of cancellation of the Restriction Orders?"

My wife's death was the result of the persecution by the PAP Government

Even though I was imprisoned, living condition was harsher on my wife, Tan Cheng Nui @ Chen Jing Lian. She suffered much more. For example, I need not worry about food, clothing and lodging. Three meals were delivered to me. When I was detained, we had two daughters. One was 4 years old, the other 5 years old. My wife was 3-months pregnant. She had a weak heart and was not able to work.

How weak she was? We lived in the second floor of the HDB Flat. Just to walk up to the second floor of our house, she would pant. She had to stop 4 times before she could complete the climb. How could she cope with working? Hence, I was the sole breadwinner. I can imagine how tough her life was after I was detained.

Not long after I was detained, in mid-January 1971, there was a meeting of Commonwealth Heads of Government held in Singapore. This led to a public demonstration. Some of the family members of political detainees went to the meeting place petitioning for the release of political detainees. Although my wife was weak and pregnant, she also brought our 4-year-old daughter to participate. They participated several times. She and our younger daughter had been arrested in the police station and once even in Changi Women's Prison. So her life would not be calmer than mine. She was originally a sewing worker. After giving birth, she quit the job as a sewing worker with little income, and went to a construction site to work as a steel worker with better paid, so that she could raise the family.

Reinforcing steel bars is a heavy work. Imagine how hard it must be for her with a weak heart to do heavy rebar work. That's how she endured. When I was detained at the Whitley Road Holding Centre 8 or 9 years after my arrest, she visited me, got off the car at the side of the road and could not walk up the slope to the holding centre. She then had to ask the Taxi driver to take me to the door of the centre. At that time, she was already very weak from overwork.
 

This photo of Chng Min Oh and Tan Cheng Nui @ Chen Jing Lian was taken on 26 March 1984, about half a year after Chng was released from ISA detention. Tan Cheng Nui's face looks bloated and swollen. She suffered from various health problems due to continued overwork. Tan Cheng Nui’s health was deteriorating and getting worse. Unable to bear the prolonged torture of illness, she ended her own life on 11 January 1989. She was only 52 years old. In the 13 years when her husband was detained under the ISA by the PAP government, apart from giving undivided support to her husband's struggle for justice, Tan also had to work hard to support herself and raise her 3 children who were still studying. The unbearable torment finally collapsed her. Her fighting spirit is impressive and highly commendable!

Later, she became a hawker, she sold kway chap.  There was a lot of tedious work. She wanted to hire workers but could not afford the money. My wife had no choice but to ask our 2 daughters who were studying in secondary school to help out at the stall. So our two children, everyday before they went to school, helped to clean pig's intestine at the stall. After that, they rushed to school. Sometimes there were not enough hands in the afternoon, the children had to rush from school to help and then rushed back to school. This had an impact on my children's lives and studies.

After I was released, my wife told me, “If you are released any later, I would have collapsed.” I presumed she was right. Before that her health was not that bad. When I was released, she was already suffering from diabetes and high blood pressure. About 3 years after my release, she was diagnosed with brain cancer and prolapse of the uterus (hysteroptosis). She suffered from multiple illnesses. In the 4th year of my release, she underwent surgery for brain tumour.

She could no longer work because her uterus prolapse was at the third stage. Her uterus slipped out and could not retract. She had to use bandage to tie it up. She could no longer do any heavy work. She was like, in her own words like a walking corpse. Almost 6 years after my release, she could eat but could not pass motion. She could not sleep every night. Sleeping pills were useless, it was a great torture for her. In the end, to end her pain, she committed suicide by jumping into the sea. She was only 51. To say that my wife's death was the result of the PAP Government's persecution would not be an exaggeration!

Conclusion: The broad masses should oppose the Internal Security Act!

It is not only detainees like us who were victimised by ISA. Weren’t my wife and my daughters also victims? The ISA - it is not just up to the former detainees like us to oppose it as those participating in the struggle for the democratic rights of the people who have not been detained may also face it one day. You have to oppose it. It is a national problem.


The author (first from the left) attended the 50th Anniversary of Operation Cold Store event at Hong Lim Park, Singapore in 2013. He was invited to deliver a speech at the event.  Via the narration of the sufferings of himself and his family, Chng denounced the reactionary nature and brutality of the PAP ruling clique to suppress their political rivals and dissidents with ISA. More than 700 ex-political detainees, their relatives and friends attended the event. Picture above shows part of the event. (Source: screenshot taken from YouTube video)



Photo above was taken during when Chng Min Oh’s family celebrated his 79th birthday in February 2016. From the left: His eldest daughter, Chng Chor Hwa, his second wife, Ong Yau Kin, Chng’s second daughter, Chng Tang Buay, and his youngest son, Chng Hiang Aik.

The amazing life that Chng had, is inseparable from the undivided support and endless sacrifice by both Tan Cheng Nui and Ong Yau Kin, in addition to his strong faith and determination!

Ong Yau Kin was a worker. In the 1960s, she took part in the cultural learning activities of the BSS at Serangoon Branch San He Cun (三合村)Office. In late 1970s, she was arrested and imprisoned for more than three months by the PAP government on suspicion of involvement in underground activities. She married Chng Min Oh on 12 June 1989 while Chng was peddling Kway chap on his own after the departure of Tan Cheng Nui.


After Chng Min Oh was released, Chng voluntarily guided the local community on “Yi Quan health piling” (“意拳养生桩”)  at Lau Clan General Association and The Singapore Buddhist Lodge Cultural Activities Centre in his spare time to make sure his life was not divorced from the broad masses.

The group photo above was taken while Chng Min Oh (4th from the left, front row) and Ong Yau Kin (3rd from the left, front row) celebrated Chinese New Year with “Yi Quan health piling” learners in 1998 at Lau Clan General Association. The photo below was taken with “Yi Quan health piling” learners in 2007 at The Singapore Buddhist Lodge Cultural Activities Centre during the mid-autumn festival celebration (4th from the right, front row is Chng Min Oh, while 5th from the right is Ong Yau Kin).

Ong Yau Kin actively makes an effort and contribution not only by supporting Chng to continue in political struggle for democracy and human rights, but also joins hand with Chng in teaching the public health exercises.


 

Written in March 2020


Tuesday, 2 August 2022

《当今大马》报道: 交警屈身亲吻纳吉手背, 成网上热议和漫画题材

《当今大马》报道:
    交警屈身亲吻纳吉手背,
成网上热议和漫画题材



本文是《当今大马》华文版 2022年8月2日的报道 。原标题:交警屈身亲吻纳吉手掀议,亦成画作讽刺对象。全文如下(文内小标题为《人民之友》编者所加)——

一名交通警察最近在见到前首相纳吉时,屈身亲吻纳吉手的画面,在网上引起议论,更成为画作的讽刺对象。 
事缘,纳吉的特别官员慕克里斯(Mukhlis Maghribi)日前在Instagram上载一支影片,显示纳吉抵达国会时,一名交警上前屈身亲吻他的手,以表敬意。 

虽然这支影片已经移除,但相关截图已在社交媒体疯传。

"马来西亚最佳写照"

其中,前媒体人 @nizambakeri在推特上载截图说道,“马来西亚最佳写照。”


两张漫画讽刺到位

政治漫画家祖纳则依据截图,发布双格漫画(见下图),显示一名警察正在追捕貌似纳吉的盗贼,但在追到对方之后却是低头亲吻对方的手。


社运艺术家法米惹扎的画作 (见下图) 则显示,一名交警在亲吻纳吉的手,并附上“金钱为王,奉承是我们的文化”的口号。


在媒体询问下,武吉阿曼警察总部的一名发言人透露,当局正在向相关部门寻取回应。 

纳吉目前深陷一马公司贪腐丑闻,而吉隆坡高庭已裁定他的4,200万令吉SCR案七项罪名全数成立。 

纳吉较后在上诉庭翻案失败,法官当时更斥责他乃国耻。案件目前正在联邦法院上诉当中。 

除了SRC案,纳吉涉及26亿令吉的一马公司案目前也在吉隆坡高庭审理中。▉


《观察者网》8月2日报道:佩洛西"确定访台" 美国务卿竟"甩锅" 【附网易视频】

《观察者网》8月2日报道:  
佩洛西"确定访台"
美国务卿竟"甩锅"


上图:美国国务卿布林肯

点击箭头聆听内容:
布林肯如此放话:“佩洛西访问台湾一事,完全是佩洛西的个人决定”、“如果(佩洛西)议长确实决定访问,而中国(大陆)试图制造某种危机或以其他方式升级紧张局势,那么(责任)将完全在于北京。”。

本文是《观察者网》2022年8月2日刊出的报道。原标题:外媒声称佩洛西确定访台,美国务卿布林肯竟“甩锅”。全文和原图如下(上图和文内小标题以及文末的视频为《人民之友》编者所加)——

[文/观察者网 刘骞]

8月1日晚,多家美媒、台媒集体曝光声称美政府“3号人物”众议院议长佩洛西“确定访台”,并透露部分在台行程细节。不过,佩洛西的官方行程中仍未包括台湾地区。

据路透社报道,美国国务卿布林肯1日辩护,如若佩洛西“访问台湾”,完全是她的个人决定。他一边呼吁中方不要“致使局势升级”,一边扬言若中方“试图制造某种危机或造成紧张局势”,那么“责任全在中方”。

中国对佩洛西窜访台湾的警告

对此,中国驻联合国大使张军同日对美方发出警告,佩洛西窜访台湾是危险的、挑衅性的,将严重破坏中美关系。中国外交部发言人赵立坚1日再次正告美方,中方正严阵以待,中国人民解放军绝不会坐视不管,中方必将采取坚决应对和有力反制措施,捍卫自身主权和领土完整。

▲美国众议院议长佩洛西星期一在新加坡与美国商界举行的招待会上离开会场。

美国国务卿布林肯竟如此"放话"

路透社称,美国国务卿布林肯8月1日参加了联合国举行的核不扩散条约审议会议。谈及佩洛西窜访台湾一事,他称,这完全是佩洛西的个人决定,同时向中方发出所谓警告。

“如果(佩洛西)议长确实决定访问,而中国(大陆)试图制造某种危机或以其他方式升级紧张局势,那么(责任)将完全在于北京。”布林肯如此放话。

他还声称:“我们正在寻求让他们(中方)——如果她决定访问的话——采取负责任的行动,不要推动任何的事态升级。”

与此同时,美白宫国安会战略沟通协调员柯比1日对记者表示,“我们不会被吓倒”。他认为中方的行动可能包括在台湾地区附近发射导弹、大规模的空中或海上军事活动,或进一步地强调对台湾地区的主权。他当天甚至还挑衅称,“佩洛西有权访问台湾”。

中方也对美方言论作出强力回应

对于美方的各种甩锅、叫嚣言论,中方也给出强有力回应。

中国驻联合国大使张军当天在联合国简报会上称,关于美国众议长佩洛西访问台湾,中方近期已多次向美方表明严重关切和坚决反对。这样的访问显然是危险的、挑衅性的,将向“台独”分裂势力发出严重错误信号,严重违反一个中国原则,严重侵犯中国主权和领土完整,严重破坏台海和平稳定,严重破坏中美关系。中方严阵以待,如果美方一意孤行,中方必将采取坚定有力措施,捍卫国家主权和领土完整,由此造成的一切严重后果应由美方负责。

8月1日我外交部发言人赵立坚再次正告美方,中方正严阵以待,中国人民解放军绝不会坐视不管,中方必将采取坚决应对和有力反制措施,捍卫自身主权和领土完整。美方应该做的是恪守一个中国原则和中美三个联合公报规定,兑现拜登总统不支持台独的承诺,不得安排佩洛西访台。

当被问及中国军方会做出什么样的反应,是不是前所未有的反应时,赵立坚表示,作为美国政府的第3号人物佩洛西的身份决定了她访问台湾必然高度敏感,不管他什么时候以什么方式赴台,这都将严重违反一个中国原则和中美三个联合公报规定,严重破坏中美关系,必将造成恶劣的政治影响。

他再次强调,如果佩洛西众议长访问台湾,必将采取坚决应对和有力的反制措施捍卫自身的主权和领土完整,“至于是什么措施,如果她敢去,那就让我们拭目以待吧”。

"东部战区"发文:严阵以待 听令而战

8月1日晚间,“东部战区”“东部战区”微信公众号发布题为《重磅发布:严阵以待 听令而战》的文章,写道:“严阵以待,听令而战。埋葬一切来犯之敌。向着联战胜战前进。”▉


▲观赏视频

《星洲网》8月1日社论: 佩洛西的 亚洲行程 , "項莊舞劍,意在沛公"

《星洲网》8月1日社论 
 佩洛西的 亚洲行程 ,
"項莊舞劍,意在沛公"

 
 
点击箭头聆听内容:
❝明眼人大概都了解佩洛西的亚洲行程是“项庄舞剑,意在沛公”,借放出访问台湾的消息来刺激大陆,才是真正的目的。❞ 

本文是《星洲日报》/《星洲网》8月1日社论。全文如下(上图和文内小标题为《人民之友》编者所加)—— 

美国众议院议长佩洛西访问新、马、韩、日、“台”,前4国行程已定,专机周一抵达新加坡空军基地。依新加坡外交部的说法,佩洛西代表团一行人将会晤总统哈莉玛与总理李显龙,两天的行程将会讨论区域和平与安全、经济和贸易课题、冠病防控、全球气候危机、人权和民主治理。 

这位贵客预计将在周三抵马,行程虽未正式公布,但会面的预料会有首相依斯迈沙比利,讨论的重点应该会延续新加坡的议题,相信访问韩、日也是谈论同样的课题。

佩洛西的亚洲行程的真正目的

但明眼人大概都了解佩洛西的亚洲行程是“项庄舞剑,意在沛公”,借放出访问台湾的消息来刺激大陆,才是真正的目的。 

按理说,美国的国际事务应该是国务卿布林肯的工作,佩洛西身为众议院议长,应以国内法案的修、立与表决通过为主要任务,而这次越俎代疱的目的,无非是想创造话题获取一些政治资源,以便在11月8日美国期中选举中赢得胜选。 

美国期中选举将改选众议院全部435个席位,目前佩洛西所处的民主党只以220席:210席稍为领先共和党;拜登1年多的任期表现很具争议,各项民调显示拜登领导的民主党支持率一路下滑,佩洛西想要连任议长,这次民主党在众议院期中选举的席次,一席都不能少。 

佩洛西访台的目的就是希望引起“不大不小”的两岸争端,来搏取中间游离选票,“反中”就是赢得大选的关键之一。从特朗普到拜登,两人察觉只要和中国搞对立,就会提高支持度。为什么?因为多年来中国已经被美国政府和媒体塑造成会严重威胁美国全球领导地位的“霸权国家”;中国企业的发展剥夺美国人的就业机会……。

中国怎么对待佩洛西的访台?

所以中国外交部发言人赵立坚表示,佩洛西访台只是再次说明美国政客为一己之私,唯恐中美关系不够紧张、唯恐台海关系太过和平、唯恐天下不乱。连中国国防部也发表强硬声明,如果美方一意孤行,中国军队绝不会坐视不管,言下之意是不惜“动武”了! 

果不其然,中国军方早在佩洛西专机起飞前,就在南海、东海、黄海展开实弹演习,其中福建平潭的演习地点距离台湾本岛只有126公里,短程导弹飞行时间只需1分30秒,军事阻吓意图明显。 

除此之外,中国空军在周日也声称有多型战机绕台湾飞行,并强调中国捍卫国家主权完整的意志坚定。在中国政府的眼里“台湾是中国不可分割的一部分”,简而言之,“台湾是中国的一个特区或一个省”,所以凡未经中国政府同意而访问台湾,就是分裂中国领土的行为,必要时会动用武力。 

佩洛西访台,台湾政府一开始相当高调,因为这是提升台湾国际透明度的机会,但随着中国的态度强硬,台湾政府对佩洛西访台一事转为沉默,他们希望佩洛西访台行程不致于破局。

如果佩洛西在台湾硬着陆呢?

至于佩洛西会否因为中国的文攻武吓而放弃访台?不到最后一刻,我们没法臆测。如果放弃访台,佩洛西的亚洲行程就失去替民主党阵营宣传的机会。 

如果佩洛西本着“虽千万人吾往矣”的精神在台湾硬著陆,我们相信中国军方不至于会向佩洛西专机开火,但装载飞弹的战机陪飞是不可避免的。 

●第一种情况就是中、美、台三方战机在公共领空陪飞,战机一多就会有擦撞的风险,万一擦枪走火就兹事体大了。 

●第二种情况,就是中国战机进入台湾领空,美、台军机必须拦截,冲突就此发生。发生此一情况的几率不大,但中国最近一再重申没有所谓的“海峡中线”,意味着台湾的领空就是中国的领空,如果这一论点付诸行动,第二种情况是可能发生的。▉

Monday, 1 August 2022

佩洛西亚洲之行只字不提台湾 岛内某些人急了, 说"还有机会"

佩洛西亚洲之行只字不提台湾
岛内某些人急了, 说"还有机会"

 

点击箭头聆听内容:
本文是《大公报》2022年8月1日的报道。原标题:佩洛西只字不提台湾,有些人急了...... 

全文如下(上图和文内小标题为《人民之友》编者所加)——

尽管公开行程中未提及台湾地区,但外界仍密切关注美众议长佩洛西此次亚洲之行的动向。 

在航班实时追踪平台FlightRadar24上,数万网友实时关注,据信是佩洛西搭乘的C-40C专机 (呼号SPAR19),先从夏威夷飞往关岛,短暂停留后一路向西飞行近6小时,最终于北京时间8月1日凌晨4时20分左右降落在新加坡巴耶利峇空军基地。 

新加坡外交部此前证实,佩洛西此行的第一站是新加坡,她率领的美国国会代表团将在8月1日至2日访问新加坡,与总统哈莉玛和总理李显龙会面。 

长安街知事(《人民之友》注:本文作者的称号)注意到,在中方警告不断升级、地区紧张情绪推高的背景下,佩洛西此访有意保持低调。

佩洛西办公室对外公布行程没提台湾

首先,其行程以“安全因素”为由迟迟未公布。佩洛西启程前一天,她本人和其下属仍拒绝证实行程安排,仅有知情人士透露,行程中的台湾地区被列为“待定”。 

直到7月31日,佩洛西的专机离开夏威夷后,其办公室才正式对外公布行程,包括新加坡、马来西亚、韩国和日本,至于台湾地区则压根没提。 

其次,佩洛西在社交媒体上“谨言慎行”。北京时间31日凌晨,沉寂了18个小时的佩洛西连续发布4条推特,内容均为美国医疗问题。而在行程正式公布后,佩洛西仅转发了其办公室官网发布的新闻稿。 

目前,佩洛西最新一条推特内容是关于所谓“芯片和科学法案”,仍未谈及亚洲行的动态。

一些岛内媒体与政客炒作"还有机会"

佩洛西只字不提台湾,一些岛内媒体和人士着急了,开始炒作“还有机会”。 

台“中央社”称,佩洛西公开行程中未列入台湾,更多是出于安全顾虑,未必是没有访台计划。文章还提到,如果佩洛西在最后一刻踩刹车,取消访台计划,势必会落人口实,影响她在美国政坛的声望。 

还有台媒援引消息人士称,台当局相关部门对佩洛西来访已是“准备中”。 

前民进党“立委”郭正亮推测,佩洛西第一站是在新加坡,她因此“可能从东南亚由南往北”窜访台湾,避开台湾海峡。如果佩洛西从东南亚前往台湾,她有可能从台湾东部,飞抵台北松山机场,这样就能避开比较敏感的台海西岸和东海。

若她过境, 台官员去"拜见",真丢脸!

台北市议员游淑慧直言,假设佩洛西届时过境台湾,台当局官员像哈巴狗般跑去松山机场,将“把台湾的脸丢光”。 

“我看不懂她为什么要来,拜登不希望她来,军方也不赞成,特朗普也觉得她会搞砸。”游淑慧说,“佩洛西可能就在松山机场过境个几小时,然后台湾这些官员就像哈巴狗,噗噗噗跑到松山机场去‘拜见’佩洛西,如果出现这种状况,我觉得真的是丢脸丢到家了!”

触碰中国台湾问题的底线,必遭痛击

无论窜访还是过境,公开挑衅还是暗地搞小动作,一旦触碰到中国在台湾问题上的红线和底线,必将遭到迎头痛击。 

中华人民共和国国防部新闻发言人吴谦明确警告,对于“台独”分裂行径和外部势力干涉,解放军绝不姑息,坚决反制。行动是最有力的语言。 

他还告诫有关方面,要学会适应,学会反思,更重要的,是学会悬崖勒马。▉

佩洛西到新加坡了, 行程声明没提台湾

 佩洛西到新加坡了,
行程声明没提台湾



点击箭头聆听内容:
本文取自新浪财经网(原来出处为环球网),原标题:“到新加坡了”。全文如下(上图和文内小标题为《人民之友》编者所加)——

根据飞行航班信息平台FlightRadar24数据,据信是美国众议院议长佩洛西搭乘的C-40C专机(呼号SPAR19)于北京时间8月1日凌晨4时20左右抵达新加坡巴耶利峇空军基地。

▲FlightRadar24显示的佩洛西专机C-40C降落新加坡巴耶利峇空军基地截图

据公开资料显示,巴耶利峇空军基地在1955年8月20日开始运作。从1981年转换成军事用途。一般情况下,此空军基地负责接待来访的外国空军。

8月1日凌晨抵巴耶利峇空军基地

据FlightRadar24此前数据显示,佩洛西专机于北京时间7月31日中午从夏威夷起飞后,在北京时间31日20时左右降落在在关岛基地。经过短暂停留后,该机又于北京时间31日22时30分左右重新起飞,并一路向西飞行近6个小时后,最终在8月1日凌晨4时20左右抵达新加坡巴耶利峇空军基地。

▲当地时间2022年7月29日,美国华盛顿特区国会大厦,佩洛西在新闻发布会上发表讲话 (图源:视觉中国)

此前,在亚洲行路上的美国国会众议院议长佩洛西在推特上发文,提到所谓民主党人通过“芯片和科学法案”,但没有提及台湾。

行程声明全文未提及中国台湾地区

美国众议院议长办公室官网于7月31日公布佩洛西亚洲之行行程,称佩洛西率领一个国会代表团访问印度-太平洋地区,包括访问新加坡、马来西亚、韩国和日本,声明全文未提及中国台湾地区。▉

庄明湖为老友主办生活营专辑撰文 《我经历了13年无审讯扣留磨炼》

庄明湖为老友主办生活营专辑撰文
《我经历了13年无审讯扣留磨炼》


 

2016年新加坡人权组织“8号功能”(Function 8)对庄明湖作录影访谈。过后制作视频上传YouTube。

庄明湖就是人民之友工委会于2020年出版的《廿世纪六十年代新加坡左派工运遭遇问题探索》英文版(Probing Into The Sufferings Of Singapore`s Left-Wing Labour Movement In The 1960s)一书的原文(华文)作者。

本文是现年85岁的新加坡前工会领袖,现为一名仍在执业的新加坡注册中医师,在两年前(即2020年3月)就已完成的为纪念他在内安法令下被逮捕50周年而作的文稿。作者原本是交给了其老友计划发表在当年(2020年)筹办的一个老友生活营活动专辑上。

不料在约两周前(即今年7月中旬),《人民之友》编辑部收到了作者的这篇文稿和以下来信——

致《人民之友》编辑部

各位同道:大家好!

2022年8月3日,是我在60年代遭受无经审讯被长期监禁的52周年纪念日。我期望纪念日来临时,表达控诉新加坡当权者曾对我和我家人进行迫害的罪行(我自身的经历只是新加坡当权者迫害政治扣留者的冰山一角)。为此,我请求贵网页在即将来临的8月初张贴敝文:《我经历了13年无审讯扣留的磨炼》(下文简称《磨炼》)。

我写《磨炼》的缘由是:
  1. 2020年初,我的好友看了Function 8 民间人权组织专访我被长期监禁经历的视频后,向我提议:将专访视频的内容转换成文稿印发给不懂上网的老友。我答允。
  2. 与此同时,庄伟天老友告知我,由大马前太平甘文丁政治扣留营的部分前政治被扣者合力推动,决定在7月间主办“2020太平政扣者生活营 ”聚会 ,并出版《2020年前政治被扣者生活营专辑》;负责《专辑》出版工作的黄贵文老友托他向我建议,将上述专访视频的内容转换成文稿供其《专辑》刊载。我同意。

2020年3月初,我完稿后,即复印几份发给常交往的老友。稿件也由庄伟天转交《专辑》负责人黄贵文。此时正遇疫情恶化,上述的聚会与《专辑》的出版,不得不展延。直到今年(2022年)6月中,喜闻有关聚会与《专辑》将在10月中复办。

在2020年3月写好《磨炼》后,我当时计划是,先由上述《专辑》发表,后才转载于网页上。

考虑到当前疫情反复无常,到时(今年10月间),上述的聚会活动和《专辑》出版会否再度受阻,真难意料。为了避免再度拖延,我现在选择先在网页上发表。这样的安排已得到《专辑》负责人的理解和认可。

先谢谢! 祝安康!

庄明湖  2022-7-10

编辑部经讨论后,基于此文在网络(指人民之友部落格)上发表是作者庄明湖的意愿和请求,也获得上述老友生活营专辑负责人的理解和认可,决定提前两天在8月1日(周一)刊出。

编委们一致认为,在出版了庄明湖所著《廿世纪六十年代新加坡左派工运遭遇问题探索》英文版(Probing Into The Sufferings Of Singapore`s Left-Wing Labour Movement In The 1960s)一书两年之后,再刊出此文,可以体现至少但不限于以下两点意义:

●(1)庄明湖反帝反殖反霸权的硬骨头气质(不屈服、不投降、不接受招安)是值得表扬推崇的——这种堪称“高尚”的气质对今天以至未来的参与马来西亚和新加坡的民主改革运动的人士都有模范的作用;

●(2)庄明湖反对李绍祖等人的激进冒险和分裂主义路线(尤其是警惕敌人从内部来攻破人民的斗争堡垒)是贯彻始终、坚持不懈的——这种艰苦顽强精神对今后我国和新加坡的民主改革运动将有激励的作用。

以下是庄氏发来的全文内容(其中图片资料由庄明湖提供,而图片说明为《人民之友》编者所加)——


我经历了13年无审讯扣留磨炼

庄明湖(新加坡)

2016年间,新加坡的一个称为“8号功能”(Function 8 Ltd)的民间人权组织的负责人张素兰律师和她的两位同伴,到我的医务室,就我遭受长期监禁的经历感受作录影访谈,过后制作视频上传网络。我的一名好友在网络上看到了这个视频之后找我说,我们的朋友都是老年人,大多数不懂上网,为了让这些老友有机会了解我这次访谈的内容,向我建议将它笔录成文稿,印发送他们。我答允。我动笔时,发觉访谈多属自述、口语表达,不少段落内容有重复现象,有的段落又言不详尽。因此,为了符合文稿要求和词句完整逻辑,本文是以上述录影访谈的笔录内容作基础,作些删增修改而成。

我在1970年8月3日被捕

我是莊明湖,在1970年8月3日被捕。当晚我在家里吃饭时,两个政治部人员来抓我走。他们没有说什么,只说你被逮捕了。上世纪60年代末70年代初,我是在新加坡的一间左派工会,新加坡金银业职工联合会(The Singapore Gold & Silver Smiths’ Union)活动,我是担任主席的时候被抓的。他们没有对我粗暴,我也没有反抗。为什么?因为我事先已有预感我不久后可能被捕。因为跟我在同一个工会的同伴陈辛(又名陈成兴)[英文名:Tan Sin / Chen Xin @ Tan Seng Hin]在我被捕的两个月前被捕了,我就想到接下来我就会被捕,我毫无畏惧,你要抓就抓。所以他们看到我没有反抗,也就没有上手铐。两个特务左右一个拉着我的手,带到我家附近的停车场就載去政治部,后来转移到中央警署关押。
 

1967年,新加坡金银业职工联合会在洛阳(Loyang)度假别墅村举办活动成员露营留影。图中第2排左6穿花衣者是陈静莲,右1穿黑衣者是庄明湖;前排人所持的是该会的会旗和那个年代享有很高威望却被反动的李光耀统治集团阴谋摧毁的左派工运领袖林清祥的画像。

该会从1967年开始,就公开跟在当时篡夺了林清祥在社阵的领导地位的李绍祖自命的“非武装斗争司令部”展开激烈的论战(有关的论战资料,可见于星马人民历史资料室收集的该会最后几年出版的纪念特辑里头)。

到了1968年,该会就毫不踌躇把由李绍祖一手委任组成的所谓“社阵领导”,定性为左派运动的“分裂主义集团司令部”,而向他们展开毫不妥协的斗争。
 

上图为1962年度新加坡建筑工友联合会执行委员会合影。后排左2是庄明湖,时任副财政。该会当时重要负责人是:主席:李清华(前排右3),副:董华荣(前排左3);总务:杨小黑(前排右2),副(2人):吴仲桂(前排右4)、张清华(前排左4);财政:潘扬齐(不在图中)——其中杨小黑和吴仲桂2人在1963年新马政府的“冷藏行动”(即“2•2事件”下被追捕而潜逃到印尼廖内岛。
 

上图是新加坡内政部1970年9月2日发给庄明湖的
第一张内安法令下的无审讯扣留令。以后每两年期满就再发一张延长的扣留令,直到1983年8月7日被释放为止。

我在中央警署被关一个月,没有人见我,只有那里的警察拿饭给我吃。关足一个月开始见我,只是发扣留令给我,扣留我两年。当天傍晚从中央警署带我到明月湾(MCC)监牢去,去到那边我很高兴,来监牢了。那里知道,单独一人住了一晚,,隔天早上又带我回到中央警署,还是单独监禁。我被单独监禁的房间大约是10尺x10尺,除了我要冲凉或大小便才让我出来去厕所,没有枕头被。没有给我(走出室外)运动。

关了我45天,开始带我去审问室,不是问口供。初始,政治部的人员态度没有粗暴,表明温和地说要帮助我出来,要我跟他们“解决问题”,他们没讲要怎样“解决问题”,我说你们抓我进来,放我出去,不就是解决问题了吗?他们说不是这么简单,你要怎样解决,你提出。我讲没有什么好谈的。你们要关就关啦。于是,他们就变脸了,气煞了,骂我了。他们说我们要帮助你出去,你不要。我讲,不要抓我就没有问题,你们抓了我进来,再说“帮助我出去”,要我“解决问题”,真是笑话!。结果他们就骂我,说我怕出去,“你的老婆生活很苦,你怕负担啦。”、“你的孩子,你的太太需要你照顾,你不要出去,你是害怕外面的生活苦,不敢出去,你没有良心,不顾妻儿的死活”等等,一大堆侮辱我尊严的话。我说,是你们抓我进来,又不是我自己进来?现在放我走,若我不走,你们才可以这样讲。

问口供后,吊销我的公民权

经历约有10次这样的侮辱之后,他们开始问口供。问口供后,就吊销我的公民权。吊销我的公民权后,又再度带我去审问室,对我说,你的公民权已被吊销,你最好自己申请回去中国,(因我是在中国出生的),你的家人我们可以帮忙送过去。我说我不要,我已经是马来亚人,我是不会去中国的。他们说,你不回,我们会强硬押你回。我说你们可以试试看,到时你们押去,(到中国)我是不会上岸的!。这次之后,再没逼迫我了,没有再带我去审问室,也没再问话,因问话已完了。

其实问话是很简单的。为什么我没有如别人那样遭受逼供?我的想法是,第一,我与(马共)地下组织没有关系,我是搞公开(合法组织)的;第二,我对他(政府)没有威胁,抓我是因为当时我家里经济出现困难,他们(政府)认为抓我扣留我,逼迫我就范,我就会妥协,接受他们提出的方式出来。但我并不是这样的人。有些人被扣留,可能因为进行地下活动,或准备发动斗争,他们被抓就可能面对逼供,逼问你做了些什么,准备做些什么。

我是在1970年8月3日被捕,当时左派党团已分裂,力量也很弱。更重要的一点是,在60年代下半期我是左派工会活跃者之一,但因我反对李绍祖为首(新加坡社阵)派系的激进斗争路线,被他们打压,骂我是行动党的代理人,是特务,等等。所以,在新加坡我已经没有影响力了。在新加坡进行反政府斗争活动我已经没有作用,但为什么要抓我?主要是,即使你没有影响力,但只要你还参加政治活动就要抓你,向你“招安”,你放弃信仰投降出来,你的政治生命就完了。大概我想他们抓我的主要目的就是在政治上毁灭我,让我不能抬头做人。

我决心宁愿被关,不接受"招安"

虽然他们没有明确向我提出怎样解决问题,但我自己明白,他们的所谓“解决问题”,例如,出狱的被扣者,曾有的人上电视表示悔过,有的签署公开声明或悔过书,发表违背良心的表态言论。我知道,我刚被扣留,大概也是要我接受类似的方式投降解决问题。当时我猜想,他们会要求我上电视表示悔过或签署公开投降声明的,不可能是低级的妥协方式(如参加前政治扣留者协会、签署政治活动和生活限制条件)出来的。后来我被带去关在明月湾(MCC)监牢,每两年期满就发再关两年的新扣留令给我。每次发新的扣留令不久,就从监牢带我去施行单独监禁,起初是在中央警署扣留室,后来是在惠特里路扣留中心(Whitley Road Holding Centre)。每两年一次都是这样用单独监禁手段对我进行精神虐待。这样很不人道的。因为单独监禁时,不允许我看书报。没有给我被和枕头。不时带去审问室进行所谓“洗脑,其实是精神轰炸的虐待,侮辱我的自尊,妄图逼迫我妥协投降,接受他们的“招安”,我都一 一拒绝。

到了1978年大概是8月底(被关了8年多之后),我又一次从明月湾监牢被带去惠特里路扣留中心时,我想又是面对更难受的单独监禁,因为在惠特里路扣留中心单独监禁更糟糕(与中央警署扣留所相比)。我在被押送途中就想,这次如果还是这样,我就要反抗,不能让他们这样做了。因为带我去那里单独监禁,目的是要逼我放弃原有信仰无法坦荡做人,但我决心宁愿继续被关不接受“招安”。

反对"单独关禁",进行绝食斗争

当时我被带到那里关在一间约10尺X6尺的小房间,很闷热,不准许我出房外运动,也不准许我阅读带来的书。隔天我就大声唱歌,特务开房门问,为什么你唱歌?我说:“我唱歌是运动。你们不给我去运动,我就用唱歌来运动,不然我会病倒。”我这样回应后,特务警告我说:“你再唱歌的活我就不客气!”我于是向他们要求:“我带来的书拿给我,给我出外运动。”他们不理。到了第三天,我就大声叫喊:“我是莊明湖,我绝食,抗议虐待,要求回去监牢。”接着,关在離我房间不远的何君强,也喊绝食,提出和我同样的要求,要回去监牢。我们两人从9月3日开始绝食,绝食一周后,我们两人被带去樟宜(Changi)刑事犯监牢的医院。

我在惠特里路扣留中心绝食的一周内,被殴打过两次。第一次,带我去审问室,10多个特务凶凶的围着我,其中一个打我胸部,踢我下部。他们骂我:“为什么你要捣蛋!”我回应说:“我没有捣蛋,我抗议虐待,要求回监牢。”打骂之后带我回房间。隔两天,那里的副总管(据说姓符)一进我房间凶煞煞说:“为什么不吃饭?”我说:“我反对单独监禁,要求回监牢。”他说:“看你要不要吃?”我讲:“回去监牢我就吃,为什么我不吃!不吃,是抗议你们虐待我!”他就双拳打我双耳朵约20次,造成我双耳几天听不清声音,至今还有听觉差的后遗症。他们不让去外面小便,拿尿壶给我盛小便。当时我坐在床上,打后就把一壶尿从我头上淋,我的头及全身和床上都是尿。因不让冲凉,我满身臭了几天,直到被带去樟宜监牢的医院,才有机会冲凉。

绝食一周后,我和何君强被分别带去樟宜监牢的医院,不是一起去,关在不同的地方。医院有两层楼,何君强是被关在楼上,单独一人的房间,与病人隔離。我是关在楼下,跟病人在一起。那时候,我们绝食主要目的,首先是“要求停止虐待,带我们回去监牢”,其次是揭露当局运用单独监禁惯用手段逼迫政治扣留者妥协投降。在医院里,我们坚持“没回监牢,不停止绝食,绝食直到回监牢。”结果,我们经过84天绝食才被带回明月湾监牢。

在绝食的前14天,我们绝食但有喝水,到了第15天起,我们绝食绝饮。绝食绝饮后,樟宜监牢医院的医生劝我们进食,我们回答:“回去监牢,我们才会进食。”绝食进入约20多天,当局对我们強灌牛奶。首次強灌牛奶当天,监牢的狱长和七八个人员如临大敌,围着我的病床,分别抓我两只手两只脚用手拷拷在床上,不让我动,另外的人就强力按、扭、压我的头颈部,控制着我的头颈无法动,用钢汤匙欲撬开我的口,我口紧闭,不成功。接着改用胶管穿插我的鼻孔至胃部不成功,因我不断摆头挣扎,最后才穿插成功灌下牛奶。因曾听闻有政治扣留者被强逼鼻孔穿插胶管时挣扎而错插入肺部致死,所以当时我想,为表达抗议极力反抗不要给他们插入是必要的,但是你无法反抗掉的,若不幸被错插到我的气管或肺部会死亡,没有必要在这样的情况下死,所以最后我才被他们成功灌了牛奶。一天穿插胶管灌牛奶两次。第二天由护士来灌牛奶时对我说:“Mr. Zhuang 你最好合作不要挣扎,你这样挣扎,等一下我们把胶管插错到肺部你会死,这样不值得,你跟我们合作。”

我觉得他讲得有道理,所以我跟他讲条件,我不是自愿让你这样做,如果你要穿插胶管之前都须先让我喊口号表示反抗,他答应。所以我每次被插前,我就先喊,我用华语用英语喊:“政治扣留者绝食反对虐待,要求回监牢,我们坚决反对……”。之后,护士来灌牛奶时,他就半开玩笑说:“哎,你祈祷”。每次喊反抗口号后,护士就把胶管从我的鼻孔穿插到胃部灌牛奶,灌完后抽出胶管。每天两次。

我对“单独关禁”切身感受

有人问我,你对单独监禁的感受怎样?我的回答是:我对单独监禁感受若没有很强烈的不满,你说我会担负生命的危险进行84天的绝食吗?没有强烈不满,是不可能的。况且,在监牢的绝食与在政治部的绝食是不一样的,特别是Whitley路扣留中心的绝食,随时面对被拉去打到半死的。

我被关在惠特里路扣留中心共有三次,第二次我就绝食了。第三次去就不再給我单独监禁,是关大房,还找一人来陪我。不久就带我去住警长的家,直到释放。

我出来是没有接受任何条件的。我被关大约5、6年后,当局才明确向我提出释放条件,要我接受6项条件出来。我拒绝。隔了相当长时期后,他们就降低条件,说“你不接受6项条件,可以,但是你参加前政治扣留者协会(Singapore Ex-Political Detainees Association)的唯一条件出去。”我也拒绝。最后,他们说:“你这个不要,那个也不要。现在,我们总统有权力不需要你接受,即可强加4项条件给你,推你出去,而你必须遵守,你不遵守,将在法庭控告你。”我说,我什么也不要接受。但他们告诉我,我们发强加条件的信给你,你必须签名表示收到,而不是说明你接受。我说:“我不要,我不懂英文,我在文件是签名,你们现在说是‘表示收到’,过后你们可以说是我‘接受条件’,我不签。”

我对"释放我4个条件"的立场

释放我有4项限制条件,他们讲得很好听,你可以参加政治活动,比如可以参加像工人党那样的政治活动,但不可以参加共产党的政治活动。我说,我从来没有参加过共产党,参加政治活动是我应有的民主权利,是我的参政权利,不管你们允许不允许,这点我会坚持。我出去不会遵守限制条件,你们要么,在法庭控告我。4项限制条件中,有一条不许我和前政治扣留者来往,其实,我出来第二天就与前政治扣留者来往了。他们也没有对付我。
记得释放我当天,他们发强制释放限制文件给我,还要逼我在文件上签名表示收到,并说,现在你签个名,马上走。其实,我早已理解,对上述释放条件签收或不签收,不是原则性问题,不违反我的政治立场。但处于当时一脚踏在监牢一脚踏在回家路的紧要关头,还要逼我签收,在我看来,分明是把我签不签名当作我会不会妥协看待。因此,我决心反抗到底。我说,我已讲过我不签,要放,我就走,我回家,不放就带我回监牢!最终,我坚持不签名,他们还是释放我。

我要特别一提的是,当局释放我时,故意不叫我太太来接我,却找我的那位担任高级公务员的弟弟来接我。为何这样?我推想,当局为了要实现在紧要关头逼迫我签名。若我太太有在现场,万一我要签名她必会劝阻。按照常理,我的弟弟身为高级公务员不可能违逆政治部对我逼迫的意志,绝对不会劝阻我签名,或许还会劝我签呢。还好我的弟弟始终静静坐着没有出声。

在释放我约一年后,即1984年9月间,政治部人员就来我家发通知给我,知会我的释放限制取消了。发通知给我之前,政治部派一女特务到我家叫我去凤凰山政治部总部,我不去。过后政治部又打电话给我,说:“莊明湖,我们要告诉你好消息。”我问“什么好消息?”他答:“我们考虑要取消你的限制令了,”我回应:“我本来就没有接受,取消不取消对我都是一样的”他说:“你来凤凰山,我们通知你。”我讲:“我从来没有接受,通知不通知都一样,何必去凤凰山。”先后两次叫我去凤凰山,我不去。结果,一男特务到我家发通知书给我,要我签名以示收到。我不签。我说,释放限制条件通知书我没有签名,取消通知书我也是不会签的。

太太的死也是政府对她的迫害

我被捕关在监牢,其实生活最惨的是我太太陈静莲,她受害应比我更大。比如,我在监牢不愁吃不愁穿,三餐有得吃,我太太则不一样。我被捕时,有两个分别是4岁和5岁的女儿,我太太怀孕三个月,她心脏没有力,无法做工。她心脏没有力到什么样?我们住政府贫民组屋二楼,没电梯,她从楼下走到二楼会喘,须停息四次才能走完,要怎样做工?所以家里经济由我当担。可以想象,我被捕后,她的生活一定是很辛苦的。我被捕不久后,1971年1月中旬,英联邦国家首脑会议在新加坡举行时,新加坡政治扣留者家属游行到会场请愿“释放政治扣留者!”,我太太虽身体衰弱又怀孕,也牵着4岁女儿去参与。她游行请愿好几次,她和小女儿曾一起被捕关在警署,一度还关在樟宜女监牢。所以她的生活不会比我平静。她本来是车衣工人,孩子出生后,她为了糊口养家,不再做收入很少的车衣工作,而到建筑工地去当收入较多的扎铁工人,才能勉强过活。扎铁是粗重工作,试想心脏弱的她,去做粗重扎铁工,可想何等辛苦。她就是这样挨过的。我被捕八、九年后监禁在Whitley路扣留中心时,她探访我,在马路旁下车没气力走斜坡到扣留中心,不得不要求德示司机載到扣留中心门口。那时她因操劳过度,身体已非常虚弱了。
 

上图为庄明湖获得释放半年多后,在1984年3月26日与陈静莲的合影。照片中的陈静莲脸部臃肿,显示脸部水肿病态。她原本体弱,加上长期操劳过度,导致多种疾病缠身,健康日益恶化。她不堪病魔长期折磨,而在1989年1月11日跳海自尽,才52岁。她在丈夫遭遇人民行动党政府利用内安法令逮捕扣留的13年多的日子里,除了默默支持其丈夫的正义斗争,还需艰苦挣钱来养活自己和3个还在念书的孩子,因不堪折磨而不幸倒下了,她的“艰苦奋斗”精神是令人赞赏和敬仰的!

后来她就去当小贩,是卖粿汁,琐碎的工作多,请不起助手,因赚钱不多,请了助手就没什么钱,此时两个女儿已10多岁,读中学,不得不叫她们到摊位帮忙。所以两个女儿每天上学前,早早起身到摊位帮洗猪大肠后,匆匆忙忙赶去学校,有时缺助手,中午从学校赶来摊位帮忙后再赶回学校上课。所以,对我孩子的学习和生活也有很大的影响。

我出狱时,我太太对我说:“你若再迟一些时日出来,我一定早已倒下去了。”我判断,真的会是这样的。以前她的身体还没有这么差,我出来时,她早已患上糖尿病、高血压。我出来后约3年,她又被发现患有脑癌和子宫下垂,简直百病丛生!到了第4年,她动了脑癌手术,子宫下垂已第三期了,子宫下垂到外面不会缩回,每天必须用月经带吊绑着,不能拿重,不能多站,已无法做工。她告诉我,她像行尸走肉的人。到了第6年,她会吃,但不能大便,每晚不能睡,吃安眠药也没有用,她被病魔长期折磨得很痛苦,结果去跳海自杀而死,才52岁。如果我说,我太太的死,是行动党政权对我和我的家庭的迫害而造成的,是不过分的!

结语:全民应反对内安法令!

内安法令这项恶法,对被逮捕被扣留的我们来说,不只是被扣留的我们受害,以我的例子,我的太太,我的子女,是不是也受害?所以,反对内安法令,不仅是曾被扣留的我们要反,所有未曾被扣留的参与争取人民民主权益的人士,有一天可能也会被逮捕被扣留,所以也应该要反对。这是全民的问题。


作者(前排左1)出席2013年在新加坡芳林公园举行的“2•2事件”50周年纪念大会,并受邀在大会上发表讲话。他通过讲述自己和家庭的遭遇,痛斥人民行动党统治集团利用内安法令来对付政治对手和异议人士的反动性和残酷性,他强烈发出“必须废除内安法令”的呼声!当日大会约有700多名前政治扣留者和他们的亲友参加。上图为会场一角,
这是取自YouTube视频的截图。


上图为庄明湖家人在2016年2月为他庆祝79岁生日后留影。左起:其长女庄楚华 (Chng Chor Hwa),第二任夫人王瑶琴(Ong Yau Kin),庄明湖,次女庄冬梅( Chng Tang Buay)与幼儿庄向毅@翔逸( Chng Hiang Aik)。

庄明湖能够有个精彩人生,除了本身具有坚定的信仰和坚强的意志之外,跟已故夫人陈静莲和现任夫人王瑶琴的坚定不移的支持和不求代价的付出是分不开的!

王瑶琴,工人出身。上世纪60年代在新加坡社会主义阵线(简称“社阵”)实龙岗支部三合村办事处参与文化学习活动。70年代杪被行动党政府怀疑涉及地下活动而被逮捕监禁了3个多月后释放。她是在1989年6月12日陈静莲逝世后庄明湖单独卖粿汁为生的时期结为夫妻的。


庄明湖获得释放之后,为了不让自己生活脱离社会大众,他在业余时间就到新加坡刘氏总会会所和新加坡居士林文化活动中心,义务指导民众习练“意拳养生桩”。

上图为庄明湖(前排左4)与王瑶琴(前排左3)在1998年跟刘氏总会意拳养生桩活动站欢庆农历新年的部分学友合影。下图为他俩在2007年跟新加坡居士林文化中心意拳养生桩活动站欢庆中秋节部分学友合影(前排右4为庄明湖,右5为王瑶琴)。

王瑶琴不仅支持庄明湖继续参与争取民主人权的政治斗争,也伴同庄明湖指导民众养生保健活动,积极做出她自己的努力和贡献。

 

稿于2020年3月


通告 Notification




工委会议决:将徐袖珉除名

人民之友工委会2020年9月27日常月会议针对徐袖珉(英文名: See Siew Min)半年多以来胡闹的问题,议决如下:

鉴于徐袖珉长期以来顽固推行她的“颜色革命”理念和“舔美仇华”思想,蓄意扰乱人民之友一贯以来的“反对霸权主义,反对种族主义”政治立场,阴谋分化甚至瓦解人民之友推动真正民主改革的思想阵地,人民之友工委会经过长时间的考察和验证,在2020年9月27日会议议决;为了明确人民之友创立以来的政治立场以及贯彻人民之友现阶段以及今后的政治主张,必须将徐袖珉从工委会名单上除名,并在人民之友部落格发出通告,以绝后患。

2020年9月27日发布



[ 漫画新解 ]
新冠病毒疫情下的马来西亚
舔美精神患者的状态

年轻一辈人民之友有感而作


注:这“漫画新解”是反映一名自诩“智慧高人一等”而且“精于民主理论”的老姐又再突发奇想地运用她所学会的一丁点“颜色革命”理论和伎俩来征服人民之友队伍里的学弟学妹们的心理状态——她在10多年前曾在队伍里因时时表现自己是超群精英,事事都要别人服从她的意愿而人人“惊而远之”,她因此而被挤出队伍近10年之久。

她在三年前被一名年长工委推介,重新加入人民之友队伍。可是,就在今年年初她又再故态复萌,尤其是在3月以来,不断利用部落格的贴文,任意扭曲而胡说八道。起初,还以“不同意见者”的姿态出现,以博取一些不明就里的队友对她的同情和支持,后来,她发现了她的欺骗伎俩无法得逞之后,索性撤下了假面具,对人民之友一贯的“反对霸权主义、反对种族主义”的政治立场,发出歇斯底里的叫嚣,而暴露她设想人民之友“改旗易帜”的真面目!

尤其是在新冠病毒疫情(COVID-19)课题上,她公然猖狂跟人民之友的政治立场对着干,指责人民之友服务于中国文宣或大中华,是 “中国海外统治部”、“中华小红卫兵”等等等等。她甚至通过强硬粗暴手段擅自把我们的WhatsApp群组名称“Sahabat Rakyat Malaysia”改为“吐槽美国样衰俱乐部”这样的无耻行动也做得出来。她的这种种露骨的表现足以说明了她是一名赤裸裸的“反中仇华”份子。

其实,在我们年轻队友看来,这名嘲讽我们“浪费了20年青春”[人民之友成立至今近20年(2001-9-9迄今)]并想要“拯救我们年轻工委”的这位“徐大姐”,她的思想依然停留在20年前的上个世纪。她初始或许是不自觉接受了“西方民主”和“颜色革命”思想的培养,而如今却是自觉地为维护美国的全球霸权统治而与反对美国霸权支配全球的中国人民和全世界各国(包括马来西亚)人民为敌。她是那么狂妄自大,却是多么幼稚可笑啊!

她所说的“你们浪费了20年青春”正好送回给她和她的跟班,让他们把她的这句话吞到自己的肚子里去!


[ 漫画新解 ]
新冠病毒疫情下的马来西亚
"公知"及其跟班的精神面貌

注:这“漫画新解”是与<人民之友>4月24日转贴的美国政客叫嚣“围剿中国”煽动颠覆各国民间和组织 >(原标题为<当心!爱国队伍里混进了这些奸细……>)这篇文章有关联的。这篇文章作者沈逸所说的“已被欧美政治认同洗脑的‘精神欧美人’”正是马来西亚“公知”及其跟班的精神面貌的另一种写照!




[ 漫画新解 ]
新冠病毒疫情下的马来西亚
"舔美"狗狗的角色

编辑 / 来源:人民之友 / 网络图库

注:这“漫画新解”是与《察网》4月22日刊林爱玥专栏文章<公知与鲁迅之间 隔着整整一个中国 >这篇文章有关联的,这是由于这篇文章所述说的中国公知,很明显是跟这组漫画所描绘的马来西亚的“舔美”狗狗,有着孪生兄弟姐妹的亲密关系。

欲知其中详情,敬请点击、阅读上述文章内容,再理解、品味以下漫画的含义。这篇文章和漫画贴出后,引起激烈反响,有人竟然对号入座,暴跳如雷且发出恐吓,众多读者纷纷叫好且鼓励加油。编辑部特此接受一名网友建议:在显著的布告栏内贴出,方便网友搜索、浏览,以扩大宣传教育效果。谢谢关注!谢谢鼓励!












Malaysia Time (GMT+8)

面书分享 FB SHARE