Myths about Fortress Singapore 

• The guns could only face the ocean, they could not be fired towards Malaya.
  • Not so. The naval guns installed could manage full traverse and fire towards Malaya. Unfortunately there was little use in so doing. They were NAVAL guns with ammunition for firing at ships at sea over very long distances i.e. flat trajectory. That is totally different from firing at a bunch of infantry soldiers on pushbikes. As anti personnel weapons they were useless, regardless of which way they pointed.
    • The guns of Changi still covered the sea approaches to the now deserted naval base, but as the Japanese forced their way south towards Singapore in the weeks that followed there dawned the bitter realization that these guns could not fire effectively in the direction from which the attack would now surely come. Writing to Mr Churchill on 16th January, General Wavell was obliged to say that ‘although the fortress cannon of heaviest nature had all-round traverse, their flat trajectory made them unsuitable for counter battery work.’ He could certainly not guarantee to dominate enemy siege batteries with them. A further point which soon emerged was that most of the ammunition for these guns was of the armour piercing variety, quite unsuitable for the bombardment of ground forces. From Changi History

• The island could have been defended like Tobruk was if only the "cowardly" British had not surrendered
  • Untrue and unfair. Tobruk was a totally different proposition. It was filled with mainly service personnel, had its' own water supply, had a reasonable chance of food and ammo resupply by sea and had a large allied army building up on land behind it to relieve the beleaguered garrison, given time. Singapore had none of that. It had a huge civilian population to worry about, no chance of resupply, no water,  no friendly army to its rear and therefore no chance of surviving for any more than a few days with unnecessary &  massive loss of life.

Myths about treatment of POW's

• The prisoners were herded into a prison.
  • Not so. They were herded into a prison camp, made up of British Army barracks set in thousands of acres of rubber plantations, market gardens and the like. For quite a while there was not even any barbed wire. When barbed wire was introduced the Aussies went outside it on a regular, almost nightly, basis without any problems. Attempting to escape FROM THE ISLAND was punishable, slipping out for a bit of scrounging was 'blind eye' stuff.
    • It was not difficult to find one's way out of the camp, and some of the more intrepid prisoners would forage among the old British Army dumps and sell their finds at black market prices. There were plenty of local traders only too willing to indulge in illicit enterprises and the black market rapidly became a thriving concern. Changi contained a great many ‘saleable’ commodities, but on occasion the desire for food would override common sense, as for example when precious M & B tablets from the hospital were being traded for bully beef or when men went out to sell the clothes they wore in exchange for food. from Changi History
    • And then there were other 'creative' ways of finding things for the concert party. As men went out to work they would try and find things they thought the concert party might need. Over the years musical instruments, including a piano and drum kit, clothes and a sewing machine found their way to the concert party. Although it was forbidden to bring these things into the camp, if the POW's managed to smuggle them in they would be allowed to keep them. from the ABC website about Changi

• The prisoners were regularly beaten.
  • Reports of people who were there and other reliable sources indicate that source of many of the beatings was actually the Sikhs who had gone over to the Japanese and were used as guards. It is recorded that the Japanese stopped the abuses fairly quickly.
    • Then again there were the guards. Most were Sikhs who had succumbed to Japanese pressure and had gone over to the enemy. These Sikhs, who were regarded as traitors by the prisoners, took advantage of their position to make increasingly absurd demands on the prisoners and eventually even the Japanese realised that they were going too far. Consequently in November 1942 the Japanese tried to remove the causes of the trouble by ordering the Indians to recognize all forms of salutation, not to enter the prisoner-of-war area except when on duty, and not to strike the prisoners who failed to salute. Forbidden to use violence, the Sikhs now resorted to forcing the escorting officers to strike the prisoners, and they also took any opportunity to drill alleged offenders and to make them stand to attention for long periods.    from Changi History

• The prisoners were deliberately starved.
  • False. The prisoners were undernourished, badly. Not deliberately. However there are several things to be taken into account here;
    • they were placed on Japanese ration scales which consisted mainly of rice. OK for the Japanese, unfamiliar and unwelcome to Australians who were used to a meat ration that was twice what even the British Army got.
    • ration scales were reduced even for the Japanese as resupply from outside Malaya/Singapore became more difficult as the war progressed. It is probably true to say that the British, Australian and US navies had more to do with starving the prisoners than any deliberate decision by the Japanese 
    • it must be remembered that at the same time Japanese front line troops were dying of starvation in New Guinea (and turning cannibal if eye witness accounts are to be believed) because of the same reason, no resupply possible by sea.
      • Imagine an Australian guard at the Cowra POW Camp, guarding Japanese, being told "we intend to feed the prisoners better than our own troops". His understandable reaction would be "Not while I'm around, Mate". Are the Japanese prison guards any different?  Editor.
      • After the first fortnight, during which British army rations were issued, prisoners had to make do with the Japanese ration scales, which consisted mainly of rice, and it was only gradually that the cooks devised means of making it palatable. Apart from rice, a little tea, sugar and salt were issued, together with the occasional ration of meat or fish. The Japanese refused to allow Red Cross relief parcels to be distributed, so any supplementing of the meagre rations depended on the ingenuity of the prisoners themselves. The rubber plantations that lay between Selarang and the Gaol were gradually cut down and camp gardens appeared in their place. These gardens grew such fresh vegetables as sweet potatoes, Chinese cabbage and tapioca, and they remained a most valuable source of food right until the end of the war. from Changi History

• The prisoners were worked to death.
  • Untrue. For a long time boredom was a big worry for the allied officers looking to the interests of their men and trying to keep them occupied. Work parties were sent out but they were not 'slave labour'. When work started on the airport construction work became harder but that was as much a problem of poor nourishment as overwork. Changi was not like the Death Railway.

• The Japanese refused to allow Red Cross parcels to be distributed.
  • Here the question has to be asked "What Red Cross parcels"? I have heard a thousand times that the distribution was not allowed. I have never seen or heard any evidence that Red Cross parcels were available. (If you have such evidence please share it with me)

• The prisoners were forced to live in overcrowded conditions.
  • Yes they were, particularly by Australian standards; by Asian standards untrue. 
    • Even in the 1960's and 70's when I served with the Australian Army in Malaya there were huge differences. At Terendak we bunked 8 men to a room, the British Army in the same barracks, 16 to a room, the Malaysian Army, same barracks, 20 to a room. That was peacetime and the soldiers were not POWs. It has a lot to do with national expectations and standards. Editor.

• The prisoners were regularly executed.
  • Not so. Some executions did take place but it was not the norm and it was usually for attempting to escape which by Japanese and German rules can be punishable by death.

• The prisoners were treated like animals.
  • Even the POWs themselves do not make this claim about Changi. They were allowed a Concert Party that gave regular performances (and travelled to other areas to perform), a "University" and other time filling recreational activities.
  • Within the divisional areas, however, the Japanese were hardly ever to be seen, a phenomenon which Russell Braddon noted with gratitude when he arrived from Kuala Lumpur in November 1942. In contrast with the privations he had suffered in Kuala Lumpur and the suffering he and countless others were to endure later in Thailand, Changi camp in 1942 seemed to him to be the 'Phoney Captivity'. His views were typical of those expressed by many other men who had been taken prisoner in Malaya or the Dutch East Indies and were brought to Changi during that year; its acres of grass and trees and its well spaced, well appointed buildings seemed to savour of another world, as did the welcome they received from the older inhabitants, who greeted them most warmly and gave them all their essential needs. from Changi History

• The Japanese were seen as Asian 'liberators' by the local population, helping to throw off the yoke of colonialism. They actually helped the Japanese.
  • Totally false. The local population was mainly Chinese. China had been at war with Japan for several years. The Japanese were particularly brutal in that campaign and the local Chinese knew that. In fact, in the first few months over 50,000 Chinese locals were slaughtered by the Japanese and the remainder were forced to raise $50 MILLION to be give to the Japanese government.