4 SAF commandos charged over death of NSman
-
By exactly the same measure, it would be equally unfair to assume that Padiaraj, who just took over as OC not too long before the incident, to realize the violation of the TSR. If Pandiaraj is to be held to be negligent, so is Teo.Originally posted by Icemoon:Hence it is unfair to assume the Rear Admiral, who was not from the army, who most probably not even been through the Navy Hell Week, who just took over the post not too long ago, to realize the violation of the TSR.
Teo's being from the Navy and not the Army does not stand up as an excuse. At that level, staff officers operate in an inter-service environment.
Alternatively, let's say you're right and his deprivation of an Army background is a crippling factor. In that case, he's got no business being Minister of Defence, much less any business with this case.
Teo's a show pony, and this whole sorry affair is a three-ring circus. -
You neglect the point, quoting the news report by Selina Lum and David Boey:
According to the charges:
Pandiaraj, supervising officer of the Combat Survival Training Course and the Officer Commanding of the Commando Training Wing of the School of Commando, ordered the drill.
He told the instructors to hold the trainees' heads under water four times, for up to 20 seconds each time.Alternatively, let's say you're right and his deprivation of an Army background is a crippling factor. In that case, he's got no business being Minister of Defence, much less any business with this case.
Huh, what are you trying to say? -
r u saying that to be a minister of defence one has to have an army background?Originally posted by Gedanken:By exactly the same measure, it would be equally unfair to assume that Padiaraj, who just took over as OC not too long before the incident, to realize the violation of the TSR. If Pandiaraj is to be held to be negligent, so is Teo.
Teo's being from the Navy and not the Army does not stand up as an excuse. At that level, staff officers operate in an inter-service environment.
Alternatively, let's say you're right and his deprivation of an Army background is a crippling factor. In that case, he's got no business being Minister of Defence, much less any business with this case.
Teo's a show pony, and this whole sorry affair is a three-ring circus. -
That seems to be what Icemoon is implying by raising the point that Teo is from the Navy, and not the Army.Originally posted by wuming78:r u saying that to be a minister of defence one has to have an army background? -
oh ok...Originally posted by Gedanken:That seems to be what Icemoon is implying by raising the point that Teo is from the Navy, and not the Army.
anyway forgive me but the sense i get from reading the posts come across to me that there seem to be some kind of vendetta with the MOD. perhaps i could have misinterpreted.
i personally dont think there is a need for him to take responsibility and step down - not cos of his background, not cos hes new.
the perpetrators will have to go down - that is straightforward. anyone higher up who would have to take some kind of responsibility would be the ones who allowed the culture to perpetuate within the formation. outside of that, i dont think there is a need or that it is fair, since there is nothing wrong with the system in itself and as a whole but the culture within a specific formation.
but if after all this hoo-haa, another similar incident occur, then the situation is different - various persons have made various promises to review the system and all. hence it would have to mean negligence or incompetence somewhere. the impact would be more widespread. -
[quote]Originally posted by Icemoon:
You neglect the point, quoting the news report by Selina Lum and David Boey:
According to the charges:
Pandiaraj, supervising officer of the Combat Survival Training Course and the Officer Commanding of the Commando Training Wing of the School of Commando, ordered the drill.
He told the instructors to hold the trainees' heads under water four times, for up to 20 seconds each time.
It doesn't say anything about his instructions to "dig the noses" of the trainees or otherwise ensure that they could not hold their breath. In and of itself, the specific instruction to hold the trainee's head under water was not necessarily fatal - after all, how many combat-fit individuals can't hold their breath for 20 seconds?
So the dunking wasn't part of the original lesson plan. SOMEBODY approved it at some point, and having in the post for a short period of time, it is likely that someone besides Pandiaraj approved it. Where's that individual in this affair?
I wouldn't go putting too much faith in the news reports right now - they're not telling the whole truth. Where's the safety officer in this trial? He was not even present at the scene of the incident! Why isn't he being charged for not stopping things by virtue of his neglect? If he, of all people, is not on trial here, it raises serious questions about how this matter is being handled.
The safety officer isn't on trial, but two other men, who are at best only equally involved in the case, are. Something tells me that they've been railroaded. -
No, I'm not saying that he should be charged or that he should step down. I'm saying that if you're going to charge Pandiaraj and Bala, you may as well take it all the way and charge Teo Chee Hean too. After all, if you're going to go beyond charging those who physically carried out the act, you're heading into a very gray area - where is the line to be drawn?Originally posted by wuming78:anyway forgive me but the sense i get from reading the posts come across to me that there seem to be some kind of vendetta with the MOD. perhaps i could have misinterpreted.
What's being done here is that not only are those directly responsible being charged, but we've got a couple of other men being dragged down as well, and it's being done very selectively. The hypocrisy that this selectiveness reflects is what I am objecting to. -
i wont be surprised, since in all lessons the supervising and the conducting has to make sure things lessons are conducted properly according to the lesson plans.Originally posted by Gedanken:No, I'm not saying that he should be charged or that he should step down. I'm saying that if you're going to charge Pandiaraj and Bala, you may as well take it all the way and charge Teo Chee Hean too. After all, if you're going to go beyond charging those who physically carried out the act, you're heading into a very gray area - where is the line to be drawn?
What's being done here is that not only are those directly responsible being charged, but we've got a couple of other men being dragged down as well, and it's being done very selectively. The hypocrisy that this selectiveness reflects is what I am objecting to.
not sure wat the role of the course commander was for that lesson.
without knowledge of the full picture its hard for us to comment and criticise. of course we can then criticise the so called transparency. but how much do we need to know? -
Well, Teo Chee Hean's the one trumpeting this new age of transparency to the media. Well and good - if he is sincere, why does the public not know the following:Originally posted by wuming78:without knowledge of the full picture its hard for us to comment and criticise. of course we can then criticise the so called transparency. but how much do we need to know?
- why was the safety officer, given his central role in this case, not included in this case?
- why are these particular two men, who did not physically participate in the dunkings, being charged when others, who could well be involved to that same degree, are not?
- what does Mindef hope to gain from allowing four men, instead of two, to be prosecuted?
Is it because the inclusion in the charges of Pandiaraj and Bala is based on such flimsy excuses as to be an embarrassment to Mindef? Are they trying just to get the public off their backs through a the-more-charged-the-merrier approach, but not going so far as to harm anyone of any consequence to them?
Teo's got no business talking about transparency. Given how they're trying to pull a three-card trick on the public, all this talk about transparency is a mouthful. -
Originally posted by wuming78:
Just what do you mean by that? What is wrong with our culture?
the perpetrators will have to go down - that is straightforward. anyone higher up who would have to take some kind of responsibility would be the ones who allowed the culture to perpetuate within the formation. outside of that, i dont think there is a need or that it is fair,since there is nothing wrong with the system in itself and as a whole but the culture within a specific formation. -
Definately....take it all the way to the top. If you wanna have it transparent, then make it transparent, not transluscent....Originally posted by vleelee:I agree with you on Teo's cowardly way in handling this matter. Seems that LTA, MOE and MINDEF will always be in the -ve limelight of the media. These 3 particluar bodies are controlled by politicians, not by leadership in the respective fields.
The more I read the article, the more fuming mad I become. But can someone enlighten me on the part of 'keep digging his nose so that he cannot hold his breath under water'? I can't quite visualise this.
The digging of the nose part? Simple...when you hold your breath underwater, there's always air bubbles in your nostrils...when someone sticks their fingers inside, it becomes uncomfortable (I mean, who actually picks their nose underwater? ) and when that happens, you tend to release air in your lungs to get rid of this discomfort...But you end up choking on water because you run outta breath and also water is forced up your nostril. A very very uncomfortable situation.... 
Those who have gone through the old, unregulated CST would know what I'm talking about...all we wanted to do, as Joshua1975 pointed out, was to simple finish the course and pray that we never have to go through that again.... -
like what Colonel Noel Cheah had said: "I should go down with the men... this should be the way..."Originally posted by Gedanken:The report fails to note that Pandiaraj had only taken over as course commander just before the incident. By the logic that, being in that situation, he had abetted the actions that led to Sgt Hu's drowning, the following should also be brought up on charges:
- Chief Commando Officer
- Chief of Army
- Chief of Defence forces
- Minister of Defence
Somehow, though, in RADM Teo's hypocritical publicity exercise, I doubt this will happen.
but as the Minister of Defence, doesn't Mr Teo he himself has to put in some responsibilities towards this incident? with what he is currently doing, does he fit to be a leader?
for those who knows... the removal of CCO.... he's just a political scapegoat.
fair and open system??? I think he should know more than this.
'This is a fair and open system, a transparent system, and I think it will give Singaporeans the assurance that we will deal with issues openly, transparently, and the law will take its course,' he said.
the WHOLE truth will never make known to the public.... -
Well, lion, my list follows the chain of command. Unfortunately, while Col Cheah was man enough to stand by his men, the rest of the pencilnecks are going to run for cover like the scholar-soldier wannabes that they are.
-
i went though CST...those who went through ranger course, CST and JCC sure know staff bala(now warrant) n his cadres...without them i guess my platoon mate n me will not be as tough as now...r we lowering our level of training to the NCC level?? yeah it sad that a guy died during training but hey it the ARMY..what u expect?? accident sure happen. all i can say now is "let go 7-11 n get "SOFTEE" for the future NSF"
-
Hey Ged, how're things going with ya? You've been MIA here for a while eh?
Have to agree with what you've said here, unfortunately its a fact of life with most militaries. Just look at the RSS Courageous and the recent Abu Ghraib cases, the small fry get hanged while the big fish, who were culpable by the mere fact that they were negligent in supervising their subordinates, get away.
Its the hypocrisy about "transparency" and "getting to the truth" that riles me. -
im not saying there is something wrong wif the culture. im refering to specifically the culture tt led to the misdeeds of the instructors which led to the casualties.Originally posted by Soldier I:Just what do you mean by that? What is wrong with our culture? -
Yeah, been kinda busy, Viper. The Straits Times article just got me going, so I thought it was time to post.
Anyway, this whole case is such a sham. What penalty can a civil court pass that is worse than anything that can be passed in a military tribunal? The only reason I can see for this civil court case is publicity - it's just another empty gesture by the powers-that-be. -
what i mean is, those instructors WERE drunk! how come no mention of being drunk while on official duty?Originally posted by wuming78:the others were named in the trial.
-
It is just another POLITICIAN PROPAGANDA. 'He' is doing his work
Look like the SAF will not have any more seleted few ELITISM in the furture.
If situation arise, look like we will be the few there ya 
3G gadget fail, we will be the only one operational in the field 
If we are caught, look like we will be the only one out alive 
To those still in service, take care ya. Sad to say soldier today are label 'Fragile' in some ways. Not like the past where you 'break' them and together you both 'build' a SOLDIER in them.
In 1995 when they post me to 7BTS, the 1st thing I ask is re-posting. Hack, I am not going to get charged for training someone to become a so call soldier. Now look like CTW is another BMTC. I am sure for those who went for the course know what they will be getting at CTW. -
wat we expect?Originally posted by bsor:i went though CST...those who went through ranger course, CST and JCC sure know staff bala(now warrant) n his cadres...without them i guess my platoon mate n me will not be as tough as now...r we lowering our level of training to the NCC level?? yeah it sad that a guy died during training but hey it the ARMY..what u expect?? accident sure happen. all i can say now is "let go 7-11 n get "SOFTEE" for the future NSF"
we expect no death...we expect tat the boys we train go back to their parents alive after they ORD...we expect the course we conduct benefit them not kill them...
u can die many time if u want..i rather live n make myself useful in wartime or peacetime..
u sounded as if no fault shld go into anybody?
tough training is tough training..so dun compare tough training with sadistic training.. -
IIRC , I believe Teo Chee Hean say that this incident was investigated by a independent panel and not from Mindef.
The independent panel decides who to be charged if they believe there is any wrongdoing by any conducting officers in this incident & by right not be influenced by anyone especially from Mindef.
I assume this remains to be true therefore some of you guys here criticise Mindef's decision is bit off the mark. -
err.. well. i have no knowledge of that - that was entirely not public domain since the beginning of the incident. and i don't want to rely on "insider knowledge" in making arguments here since its hard to verify.Originally posted by HENG@:what i mean is, those instructors WERE drunk! how come no mention of being drunk while on official duty?
but IF they were indeed drunk, then they deserve much harsher punishment, including dishonourable discharge, jail terms and all. being drunk on duty, esp military duty, is dead serious. -
honestly. its not insider knowledge. ask ANYONE who attended the last few batches of CST course. they'll all verify that those guys were drunk while doing the torture part.Originally posted by wuming78:err.. well. i have no knowledge of that - that was entirely not public domain since the beginning of the incident. and i don't want to rely on "insider knowledge" in making arguments here since its hard to verify.
but IF they were indeed drunk, then they deserve much harsher punishment, including dishonourable discharge, jail terms and all. being drunk on duty, esp military duty, is dead serious.
and yes, harsher punisment is needed. Death and grevious hurt due to negligence, derliction of duty, failing to abide by the oath they've taken to the Republic and failing to abide by the 7 commandments. This IS treason. -
Oh, so one government department steps aside completely so that another department can go messing about with its inside workings. Gary, can you spot anything wrong with that picture?Originally posted by gary1910:IIRC , I believe Teo Chee Hean say that this incident was investigated by a independent panel and not from Mindef.
The independent panel decides who to be charged if they believe there is any wrongdoing by any conducting officers in this incident & by right not be influenced by anyone especially from Mindef.
I assume this remains to be true therefore some of you guys here criticise Mindef's decision is bit off the mark. -
All of which are under the jurisdiction of military tribunals. This still doesn't explain why the case is being heard in civil court.Originally posted by HENG@:Death and grevious hurt due to negligence, derliction of duty, failing to abide by the oath they've taken to the Republic and failing to abide by the 7 commandments. This IS treason.
Heng, I understand that you have a personal stake in this matter, but take a good look and see how Teo and gang are patronising you so that you'll go away happy, as long as you go away.