1. Throughout the whole thing, everyone has had a chance to weigh in on the matter - Teo Chee Hean had stuff to say, the MPs had a go at the matter in parliament, S’poreans were KPKB-ing about it in the blogosphere. Even his girlfriend has some stuff to say too. But it’s everyone except CPL Teo who has had a chance to speak… And in a sense no one knows his side of the story? I personally believe that a coin always has two sides, and the lop-sidedness of how this issue has been presented is the impetus for me to want to explore it - albeit to give the boy some air time now.

  2. I know he took a rifle out with some live rounds with the intent to kill. But truth be told - he is just a young boy, much like the rest of us were when we were first presented our rifles. Hence, I feel the correct remedial action, if any, should not be a punitive one, but rather, one that seeks to explore why CPL Teo did what he did, and how to prevent it from occurring in other recruits in the future. Cos we have heard all the stories about the suicides and the shooting of sergeants in the ranges; I wouldn’t be surprised if the next incident involved an escaped tank rolling towards the Istana. Hence I want to shed some light on the whys instead of just the consequences of his actions.

  3. I think Singaporeans possess an insufferable sense of Schadenfreude. The way in which many ppl slammed CPL Teo quite disgusted me, because they seemed to almost revel in it? It made me wonder if they were even over-compensating for thoughts they are guilty of - perhaps many men have entertained desires to escape with their own rifles, but never had the guts to do so. Vilifying CPL Teo may be the best way for them to purge their guilty secrets through a projection of their guilt on CPL Teo. I want to satirise these attitudes.

    On a tangential note, does this secretly make CPL Teo a hero? Could ppl secretly be envious that CPL Teo had the balls to do it, but are afraid to show it?

  4. At the end of the day, it’s quite common for people to become scapegoats in the SAF. I think CPL Teo really became the scapegoat for the most important failed measure of all - a failure to provide enough emotional and mental support for soldiers. Could it have been the environment in camp that contributed to CPL Teo’s duress amidst his personal anguish over the break-up? (Am I even using the word duress properly?) I don’t know, and I think none of us ever will, unless we get a chance to talk to him, of course. But it’s plain to see that CPL Teo and his direct superior have been/will be soundly punished, if only to cover as many top-ranking backsides as possible, which covers up their failures at the same time. I want to expose this.