FYI,
Singapore Technologies do the important planning and paperwork for te bidding in Singapore not India.

Singapore Tech Banned From Indian Gun Bid
BY : Defense news

Singapore Technologies will not be allowed to participate in an Indian tender for 155mm ultra-light artillery guns because it was named in an alleged corruption scandal in June this year by India’s fraud investigating agency, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

Read more: http://idrw.org/?p=1732&cpage=1

You can repost your comment here minus the names and quote the exact date of the Straits Times article.

As you know, our site is being monitored daily. Surely you don’t wish us to get into trouble?

Unfortunately, this is Singapore and not Hong Kong or Taiwan. We just have to be extra careful.

Let me refresh you in the time frame in which those issues where published in the press (The Straits Times)

1. The purchase of several Nassim properties by LKY and his family from a project developed by Ong Beng Seng (late 90’s)

2. Ong Beng Seng’s own admission that he had previously applied for hosting Formula 1 GP but was previously denied (last year 2008). This was also admitted by LKY (same time period).

3. Tat Lee Bank’s first application of banking licence which was denied and subequent re-application the following year which was duly approved (early 80’s – court proceedings in defamation trial by LKY against JB Jeyeretnam)

They were public knowledge. Where’s the impartiality of your editorial staff ?

You have removed a substantial part of my comments. These were taken off published reports by a media insync with the government, the Straits Times and are common knowledge. So why is there the need to hide and censored them? Why are you protecting the “integrity” of PAP as such ? Aren’t you supposed to present alternative views ?

There are no disparaging comments there (those which you have conveniently deleted). No libel or slander. There came straight out from Straits Times report. Let the government sue the Straits Times then if they are not true.

Is PAP pulling the strings behind ? Maybe we should check your resources because LKY said that “he who pays the piper calls the tune” (this was also reported in the press many years back and I am not singing this tune with my own concoction).

Come one. If you claim to be a responsible alternative source of media. Prove it.

Let’s forget about ex-minister the late Teh Cheang Wan. He was gentleman enough to pay the ultimate price and not take the PAP down with him by makinf sure his case would not go to trial.

All these (and many more) are not figments of imagination or words of disparagement. They were reported and published by The Straits Times over the years. Has the writer of the above article forgotten about all these ?

How do you quantify and comparatively measure corruption involving the abuse of office and abuse in office of “certain unwanted actions”?

If you cannot quantify these, it is NOT in itself an incentive to deny it exist to claim integrity by falsehood or HYPOCRITICALLY PRETEND it does not exists?

The Corruption Perception Index measure of corruption is nonsense. Or is it NOT?

If the Emperor removes all his corrupt officials, he has no one to serve him. So why NOT instal puppets, corrupts them – better still with transparent inducement – and get things done the Emperor’s way.

It is NO DIFFERENT from larceny which is the police officers abuse their office and abuse in office coming to “assist” a reported home burglary TRANSPARENTLY right before the witness eyes of the victim, help themselves with petty cash belonging to the victim left in the top drawer forsaken by robbers deeemed too small worthy of taking. This happens in the real world. How do the victim, twice beaten, prove larceny of petty cash in home burglary – unless he or she keeps the serial number of all petty cash in the home???

BUT LARCENY IS STILL CORRUPTION IN COLLUSION OF ALL POLICE OFFICERS INVOLVED, isn’t it???

Chinese history teaches wonder.