Singapore hypocrisy: hang the drug couriers while investing with the drug barons
July 31st, 2010 | 
Author: The net effect of the Singapore government’s barbaric hanging of drug courier Van Nguyen will be to increase profits for the government’s trading partner, Burmese drug lord Lo Hsing Han.
While the high-profile execution will no doubt reduce the supply of heroin somewhat, the inelastic demand by addicts will just increase the margin to the wholesaler, Lo.
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his authoritarian government display extreme hypocrisy in executing dozens of drug couriers while at the same time going into business ventures with drug trafficker Lo.
The former US Assistant of State for the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, declared in 1997, “Since 1988 over half of the $US1 billion investments from Singapore have been tied to the family of narco-trafficker Lo Hsing Han”.
The Singapore government, in cooperation with Morgan Guaranty Trust Company, is directly connected to key business ventures of drug kingpin Lo through an investment group called the Myanmar Fund. The fund, which provides investors “with long term capital appreciation from direct or indirect investments in Myanmar (Burma),” is registered as a tax-free fund in Jersey, Channel Islands, according to documents provided to the Irish Stock Exchange.
Singapore’s largest government-controlled financial institution – the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) – is listed in the documents along with Morgan Guaranty Trust Bank (a J.P. Morgan subsidiary separate from the Trust Company) as a core shareholder in the Myanmar Fund. A September 1996 GIC business profile from the Registry of Companies and Businesses in Singapore shows that high-level Singaporean politicians were officers and directors of the GIC, including senior minister Lee Kuan Yew; his son, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong; and finance minister Dr Richard Hu. As a core shareholder, the GIC helps determine how the fund’s money is invested in Burma.
Singapore’s economic linkage with Burma is one of the most vital factors for the survival of Burma’s military regime,” says Professor Mya Maung, a Burmese economist based in Boston. This link, he continues, is also central to “the expansion of the heroin trade.” Singapore has achieved the distinction of being the Burmese junta’s number one business partner -both largest trading partner and largest foreign investor. More than half these investments, totalling upwards of US$1.3 billion, are in partnership with Burma’s infamous heroin kingpin Lo Hsing Han, who now controls a substantial portion of the world’s opium trade. The close political, economic, and military relationship between the two countries facilitates the weaving of millions of narco-dollars into the legitimate world economy.
The Burmese military dictatorship- known by the acronym SLORC for State Law and Order Restoration Council until it changed its name to the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) in 1997-depends on the resources of Burma’s drug barons for its financial survival. Since it seized power in 1988, opium production has doubled, equalling all legal exports and making the country the world’s biggest heroin supplier. With 50 percent of the economy unaccounted for, drug traffickers, businessmen and government officials are able to integrate spectacular profits throughout Burma’s permanent economy.
Both the Burmese generals and drug lords have been able to take advantage of Singapore’s liberal banking laws and money laundering opportunities. In 1991, for example, the SLORC laundered US$400 million through a Singapore bank which it used as a down payment for Chinese arms. With no laws to prevent money laundering, Singapore is widely reported to be a financial haven for Burma’s elite, including its two most notorious traffickers, Lo Hsing Han and Khun Sa (also known by his Chinese name Chang Qifu).
Lo Hsing Han is chairman of Burma’s biggest conglomerate, Asia World, founded in 1992. His son, Steven Law, is managing director and also runs three companies in Singapore which are “overseas branches” of Asia World. Although Singapore is proud of its mandatory death penalty for small-time narcotics smugglers and heroin addicts, both father and son travel freely in and out of the friendly (to them) island-nation.
In 1996, when Law married his Singaporean business partner in a lavish, well-publicized Rangoon wedding, guests from Singapore were flown in on two chartered planes. According to a high-level US government official familiar with the situation, Law’s wife Cecilia Ng operates an underground banking system, and “is a contact for people in Burma to get their drug money into Singapore, because she has a connection to the government.” According to the official, Ng spends half her time in Rangoon, half in Singapore; when in Rangoon, she is headquartered at Asia Lite, a subsidiary of Asia World.
The husband-wife team are also the sole officers and shareholders of Asia World subsidiary, Kokang Singapore Pte Ltd. Founded in Singapore in 1993 with $4.6 million, the company “engages in general trading activities in goods/products of all kinds/descriptions.
The Burmese junta’s control of its impoverished population through crude methods such as torture, forced labour, and mass killings leaves it open to international condemnation. In contrast, Singapore takes a more sophisticated approach to repression, both at home and abroad. While the island-nations citizens have material benefits and the appearance of rule of law, they live in fear of an Orwellian government that closely monitors every aspect of their lives. The ruling party often sues those who dare to oppose it on trumped up defamation charges, forcing many into bankruptcy or exile.
by Elizabeth Krantz
Editor’s Note: This article was original penned by the author during the case of drug courier Van Nguyen but in view of recent happenings surrounding related subject, we are reproducing it again for the benefit of readers.
Posted in 24 Responses to “Singapore hypocrisy: hang the drug couriers while investing with the drug barons”
Loading ...
Alex Tan Allan Ooi AWARE Chee Soon Juan Chiam See Tong Claire Lee David Widjaja DBS Dr Allan Ooi Dr Silviu Ionescu Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Foyce Le Xuan highnote5 Hong Lim Park Jack Lin Xinli Jack Neo Jack Neo affair Jack Neo scandal Josie Lau Josie Lau Meng Lee Lee Kuan Yew Lehman brothers Lighthouse Evangelism MAS minibonds Miss Singapore World NTU stabbing PAP Pastor Rony Tan Ris Low Romanian diplomat in hit-and-run Rony Tan S-League silviu ionescu Singapore Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games Tan Kin Lian Thio Su Mien Tiger Woods affair Tong Kok Wai Top 8 Vivian Balakrishnan Wendy Chong Y O G Youth Olympic Games
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
While some should agree to hanging of anyone trying to bring drugs in, what I can’t stand is the cooperation of our gov and state own arms manufacturer doing business with the main source, the real culprit.
The right thing to do is to block or confiscate the Burmese leader’s asset park in SG, start a low grade war over sponsoring underground resistance forces.
But knowing our profit above all gov, they lack guts and humanity to pull something like this off.
If Elizabeth Krantz comes to Singapore, she will be detained for criminal defamation too like Alan Shandrake, LOL!
KR
What is the name of the Orchid that was named after the Burmese narco-general in Botanical Gardens, again?
Slaughter teenage mules, feast with the drug Lords.
How do the pappies sleep at night?
This is wayang govt.
说一套,做一套!
左手救一人,右手杀十人!
虚伪之至!
我们还要这样的政府来干嘛?
Thank you for posting this. Everyone in Singapore should read this and decide who really deserves to be hanged.
Our gahment only interested in getting rid of ikan billis. The big fishers are for farming and to milk for money and profit.
Political charlatans in pursuit of political power with avarice as an objective.
Should it be a surprise that these words will enter into the Singapore political vocabulary and used on a hapless J.B.Jeyeratnam by one who has all the Ace Cards in his sleeve, and deal from a deck of card that is clearly marked in his own favor ?
1.8.10
My stand is known on TOC ie continue to hang drugs courier and amend the law if present laws are not adequate, seize all the assets of drugs kings like my former brother who has tens of millions of investments in Singapor-he is the richest man in Penang and all the authorities there are on his payrolls,no mercies must be show to such persons. I also made my stand should my only child,son turns such a person, I shall expose him, see he is charged and on trial and if found guilty, will personally witness his hanging (I put our Modern Singapore and her national interests above all things including my family-no one is above the Rule of Law)
Regards
Andrew Chuah
Ordinary Singaporean
what, the gov supplies drugs to all singaporeans !!!
no wonder our drug rehabilitation centers are filled to the brim…
no wonder they have to built bigger changi prison….drug couriers and suppliers within itself, where are the responsible people to catch them, are they been spoonfed to keep quiet…
what a state of hell, we’re in !!
GIC should be hanged.
if possible, should provide a biosummary of the author elizabeth krantz so that this report can have credibility.
Years ago, I was already somewhat aware that Khun Sa might have had a connection with Singapore. If it’s really true, this news does not come as a surprise.
I wish the writer would quote her sources, though.
The production and supply of opium is just start of the heroin chain – a bottleneck in supply at the distribution end does not mean increased margins will be distributed across the whole supply chain.
Drug traffickers are part of the supply chain – they make their money on the miseries, inflict pain and death on others. The traffickers know what they are in for when they take the ride, and to cry for mercy when caught makes mockery of the system. SGP must continue to take a strong stance on drug trafficking to protect its citizenry.
Could TR list the credentials of Ms. Elizabeth Krantz? to lend creditability to this article and to see where she is coming from with it. The article made reference to reports in 1997, are there more recent reports of similar nature to substantiate her story.
On the GST rebates given to Singaporeans recently, the Ministry of Finance replied to my letter published in ST and BT on 8 June 2010 under “Income and wealth checked for GST” and “GST credits given based on both income and place of residence” respectively.
In its reply, MOF said, “Similarly, those with high incomes (annual assessable income of more than $100,000) receive lower payouts, regardless of whether they live in HDB flats or private properties.”
The $200 GST rebate amount is for those who are earning less than $100,000, not those earning more than $100,000. I have no issue with those who earn more than $100,000 getting $100 GST rebate. It is not relevant to my concerns.
Regrettably, the reply did not say that those staying in HDB apartments receive double the GST rebate given to those who stay in private houses or apartments.
Those in the age group of 21-54 years with YA2009 income band of $29,001 to $100,000 will receive $200 if they are staying in HDB apartments whereas those who are staying in private properties will get only $100, or half of it.
It begs questioning why those staying in HDB apartments are paid double the amount at $200 when both are on par based on annual assessable income basis of below $100,000.
We must be mindful that not all staying in private properties are rich and well to do.
For example, there are those who inherit the property from their parents, and they are now in hard times, in dire straits, either old and infirm, or sick and jobless.
Some staying in private houses or apartments are mere occupants like for example, the retirees, who depend on the family for their daily needs.
Some are young, or unmarried but jobless, and they are staying with their parents in the private apartments or houses.
Paying these people $100 and paying the super-rich staying in HDB 5-room flats $200 do not make sense when their assessable income are on par at below $100,000, or for some no income at all. I repeat my question: Is this fair?
Are all Singaporeans staying in 5-room HDB flats that poor for the Govt to give to all and sundry across the board at double the GST rebates paid to those who stay in private apartments or houses?
It is clear that the method of ‘HDB vs private property criteria’ used by the Govt is not enough and clearly not equitable. It is too simplistic as we know some super-rich Singaporeans staying in 5-room HDB apartments drive top-end European luxury cars, own private businesses, own and rent out private condo apartment, or own and operate shops and factories.
Please do not get me wrong. I have to make it clear that I have no intention to ask the Govt to increase the rebate from $100 to $200 for those staying in private properties.
Rather, I am asking that the super rich staying in HDB 5-room flats be paid only $100 and not $200 to bring it down to be on par with the $100 paid to those who stay in private houses or apartments.
The saving of $100 per person by not paying everyone staying in 5-room HDB flats, to include those in 4-room as well, at $200 each could add up to a lot of money. The amount so saved could be used more meaningfully by the Govt to pay more S&CC rebates to the really poor, those staying in 1 or 2-room HDB flats. Is this wrong?
Easily some 100,000 persons staying in HDB flats are ‘rich’ and should be paid $100 and not $200. The saving at $100 person on 100,000 people will mean a total saving of $10m, which is not a small amount. This S$10m could be used by the government to give it to the really poor either in more GST rebates or for paying their S&CC charges.
I repeat what I wrote to the Govt proposing the criterion to be used in giving out rebates to the citizens staying in HDB flats. My suggestions are:
Quote:
The following residents staying in HDB apartments should be treated as if they were staying in private houses or private condominium if there were proof of registration (by present-day high-powered computerised systems of linking and checking) that they or anyone staying with them in the same HDB apartment:
A] owns a car of less than 10-year old with an on-the-road value exceeding $100,000; or
B] owns any land, private house, condominium apartment or a commercial or residential property; or
C] – deleted.
D] – deleted.
Unquote.
The Govt’s method of handing out GST to HDB dwellers does not take these suggestions (A) to (B) into consideration. These people could not be super poor but could be very super-rich Singaporeans and they are staying in HDB 4 or 5-room apartments.
This is the anomaly that I hope the Govt will reconsider and address.
The Finance Minister, Mr Shanmugaratnam said that “the government has to question existing policies, re-mould entire social contracts and prepare the ground for a new era of growth” and in order to achieve this, governments need to be an “activist” state like Singapore.
I hope the government will not take too long in reviewing their methods of giving handouts to Singaporeans and not treat many Singaporeans as super poor when it is not really the case.
When corrections are due, I hope the government has the political will to stand up and address it head on.
== For my letters, please check out at http://www.blog.com, search under tan kok tim. ====
To Andrew Chuah and all other Aye Sayers for Death Penalty for drug traffickers. All of missed the point that people are up against MANDATORY Death Penalty. Even though young people may being conned and deliver unknowingly and its not easy to prove, even if one life is saved in a year, justice is then properly carried. Expedience is many are up against and you know it too. If your brother or child was truly used, would you Andrew Chuah and your supporter go to find out the truth? OR simply rely on official version that they are guilty as hell in an expedient law environment as in Singapore? Wouldn’t then without finding with no efforts spared to get at the absolute before your love one’s life is snuffed out. And only to find out that you did not to spare no efforts for the Absolute Truth?
Me thinks that YOU RAE blinded and deeply hurt bY your brother’s wrong’s and you’re therefore on A VENDETTA of just about anyone authorities say that they have traffic 15 gms of a certain drug deserve TH MANDATORY DEATH PENALTY. As you share, the magnitude of your sibling’s drug crime is so huge. Are you not confused and bogged by both hurt and hatred? Till you have only one agenda! And that is REVENGE JUSTICE to mitigate and pacify your outrage of a family member has let you and your family down. Please goes see a counselor. A psychologist and also psychiatrist it necessary. May God have mercy and guide you to healing Andrew Chuah. I’ve been reading your adamant views. And am not convince that you’ve grasped both sides of the pros and cons as yet due to the reasons I’ve flagged out for your own good as I sincerely feel sorry for you.
tan kok tim: August 1, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Have you or anyone else realized that in order to pay GST Credits the way it is setup, they have only 1 of 2 ways to do it!
IRAS income tax account data an/or link to I.C. number => CPF and/or FM OR to CPF only. Or to FM for matching then => CPF! Means that FM can pick up anyone’s last income anytime by computer? How was minister’s pay based on 6 professions done then?
There is link via IC number to the register of vehicles, and to the Land Office for properties registration.
I am not able to explain how my post on GST got landed here in this thread on drug barons. I am puzzled.
Andrew Chuah:
August 1, 2010 at 10:18 am
I had read the book by Alan Shadrake. I am not against the capital punishment by hanging. However I am pertubed by the unevern application of the law. By the way, I had personally seen how drugs (heroin) had destroyed lives.
http://www.singapore-window.org/804caq9.htm
http://www.burmalibrary.org/reg.burma/archives/199811/msg00209.html
http://www.singapore-window.org/1020naus.htm
Why not sue the author? Given the premise on which the others had been sued, not suing is concurring with revelations in this article.
So SUE SUE AND SUE so that they become RICH RICH AND RICH if they are not already so.
Wah this is even more damning than what Alan Shahrake has exposed !
Singapore directly or indirectly involved with the drug barons.
No wonder they say no clemency for Kong because it will put a stop to all investigations beyond Kong.
People need to know that not everthing claimed by this article is true. For example, Lo’s family has been cleaned with drug for several decades now. Since then, there is not a trace of evident linking drug trafficking to the family. People like to speculate a lot.