In my previous post, I mentioned that I received an email from a gentleman by the name Michael Frost who generously offered to share his photos with me and Peter. I must sincerely apologize to him for getting his name mixed up. Michael Frost was the name in the ‘Sender” of the email. But his actual name is Arthur Poskitt. I reproduce below excerpts of his emails to me first and then to Peter as well.



####################################



Singapore Jan 1948 – Jun 1949



Hallo I would like to introduce myself.



Arthur Leonard Poskitt (80) I served in Singapore as a Signalman and ran a drawing office at a village called Yio Chu Kang for about eighteen months with the Royal Corps of Signals.



My main duties were supervising line parties to repair underground communication cables and service test huts as the location of all underground cable routes were destroyed at the onset [...]

Dr. Michael Geist said:

Throughout the debate over ACTA [ed: a secret, unprecedented copyright treaty that the public isn't able to see or participate in] transparency, many countries have taken public positions that they support release of the actual text, but that other countries do not. Since full transparency requires consensus of all the ACTA partners, the text simply can't be released until everyone is in agreement. Of course, those same countries hasten to add that they can't name who opposes ACTA transparency, since that too is secret. No longer. In an important new leak from the Netherlands, a Dutch memorandum reporting back on the Mexico ACTA negotiation round names names, pointing specifically to which countries support releasing the text and which do not. At the top of the no-transparency list: the U.S., South Korea, Singapore, and Denmark.

Recommended by Anonym[...]