Monday, 3 February 2014

Total Defence Day: What We Did NOT Learn from the Japanese Occupation of Singapore in 1942

On 15th February 1942, Singapore was surrendered to the Japanese by the British, ranked as the British' greatest military defeat. The anniversary of that dark day is commemorated on Total Defence Day, 15th February every year.

The Imperial Japanese Army went ahead with an ethnic cleansing policy against presumed hostile elements in the Chinese population. The plan was drawn up beforehand and was started immediately after the Fall of Singapore.

Post-war, crimes against humanity like these and others led to the formation of National Service as a means of forming a strong defensive force ready to stand up to threats with the overall goal of ensuring if diplomacy fails, the country will be able to stand up to external threats. A seemingly logical way of doing things in a dangerous world where wars of resources are still being fought.

Among the sites where the ethnic cleansing took place in 1942 was at the Punggol Beach at the northeast corner of Singapore. In the Punggol Beach massacre, over a thousand Chinese males were rounded up from homes and villages along Upper Serangoon Road in the central northeast of Singapore.

One of the groups of people targeted by the operation were people armed with weapons that would 'disrupt social order'. As we saw what happened, the Imperial Japanese Army did not bring in order, but chaos through fear, luring certain neighbours to co-opt and tattle on each other, creating an atmosphere of suspicion and fear, and those who were brought in were tortured in horrible ways to make an example of and cower the rest of the population into fear.

The most the locals had in the form of weapons was if they were in the Volunteer Corps and even then they were given simple arms that were used to hunt wildlife. General Yamashita himself couldn't believe his luck that his 30,000 men (going up against 80,000 British soldiers) were able to capture Singapore in less than 2 weeks, stating in his diary that had the British discovered their numerical weaknesses, they would have been forced into the disastrous street fighting of the kind that had destroyed the German 6th Army in Stalingrad (today's Volgograd).

This itself is a clue to the point I am trying to make here. Had the nearly half a million to a million civilians being armed with the modern weapons of the time against 30,000 Japanese troops, 1200 them military police, the outcome would have been very different. There would have been mass casualties on both sides, but the civilian population, especially the Chinese who were being targeted, would have died with a rifle in their hands, not with their hands tied behind their back and at the mercy of their captors. The Japanese will have experienced unsustainable mass casualties fighting in the streets that they were less familiar with than the locals. Control over Singapore would have been non-existent. It would have been the Japanese that were being massacred, not the civilians.

This is indeed telling when the Japanese High Command said about invading the continental United States of America, a country that had a Bill of Rights that acknowledged the inherent Right ("We see these Truths to be Self-evident") for the People to Keep and Bear Arms as the 2nd Amendment.

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a MAN with a RIFLE behind every blade of grass.' - Admiral Yamamoto, architect of the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Which brings us back to modern times. Instituting National Service may on the surface means that the country is defended against external attack. But what has been ignored is the looming threat of government itself. Opposition party or the incumbent, it does not matter. As long as we have a group of masters believing it has the moral right to rule over the people, and the people are told they have the moral obligation to submit to the rule, we are under SLAVERY.

Never has it occurred to us that a government can descend into tyranny once the civilian population has been cowed by fear and threats of violence (violation of one's rights)?

Kenneth Jeyaratnam is the Secretary-General of The Reform Party in Singapore. His case against the government's decision to feed a US$4 billion line of credit to the IMF supposedly to prop up failing economies in Europe was thrown out in October 2013 by the courts. All this while the locals are struggling with stagnant incomes, competition with cheap foreign labour, and are now facing rising costs of living in all areas including public transport.

You can see his full article here :

Based on  Mr Jeyaratnam's findings, and the apparent lack of transparency and fairness in the courts, its clear government accountability is completely dead. Singapore is officially under an oligarchical dictatorship, as if we didn't know that already.

'The judiciary has now come to the rescue of the executive by ruling that we have no locus standi to challenge illegal government actions.' - Kenneth Jeyaratnam

If a bunch of crooks who have enriched themselves off the backs of the hard work of Singaporeans through the forced extortion of taxes (read: protection money) can get away with doing what they want, there is nothing else to stop them. This is especially worrying with the government having the monopoly of force and violence through the ISD, police and armed services and the people of Singapore do not have some means of self defence.

In this modern technological era, the Rifle and Shotgun would be equivalent to the Sword of Roman times, and the Stone and Spear of Prehistoric Men.

In the not so distant future, there remains the possibility that we will be faced with a situation similar to those who were unfortunate to be living in the Japanese occupation of Singapore, except this time those to come and grab your wife and kids will be those working for the local dictatorial government.

Reading history will show how giant massacres and mass deaths occurred after a country's people were disarmed, Russia's collectivization (20 million dead), China's Cultural Revolution (60 million to 80 million dead), Cambodia's Killing Fields (3 million dead), Nazi Germany's holocaust after disarming the Jews and others (11 million dead), etc.

There was a reason why the United States instituted the 2nd Amendment, and high powered rifles were not invented for just hunting game. Historical fact necessitates the need for the individual to have measures of self-defence that match up to the level of technology of the government's ability of use of force.

This one and a half long interview sums all this up perfectly, especially at the 28:00 minute :

You tell someone not to have the right to use modern arms of this time to defend oneself, you effectively have control over that person, you are putting them in a class below a ruling class, and if you do violence to them, they have no means to fight back. Disarmament has nothing to do with the weapon, its all about CONTROL and SLAVERY.