Death in Singapore

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/afbddb44-7640-11e2-8eb6-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2KzVJrFJo

by Lightning • 13 years ago

459 232 13 years ago

ft.com

batgaijin3• 13 years ago

Wow... that is beyond weird. From what I've read I always thought Singapore was quite the corrupt-free police state.

hboon• 13 years ago

It isn't a police state. And in recent years, it has been shown that it isn't corruption-free either.

batgaijin3• 13 years ago

http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2007/100537.htm

You get caned if you overstay your 90 days.

homosaur17• 13 years ago

Really, then what exactly would you call it? You are essentially subject to all manner of ridiculous punishment for what would be considered minor or non-offenses in most free countries. Most of their elections are uncontested. You can dress it up because their streets are clean and safe, but it's still facism.

flexie2• 13 years ago

Oh, but Singapore is a police state (a state where the government exercises rigid and oppressive laws).

It is also a dictatorship. It may not be the worst of its kind in that it actually has (the thin conception of the) rule of law, but it's not a free country and it lacks decent human rights.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law_doctrine_in_Singapo...

DigitalTurk• 13 years ago

Well, you don't have free press (the ST is a joke) and you're not allowed to criticize politicians by name. I don't know if it's a police state, but it definitely isn't a free country either.

throwawaysnipe• 13 years ago

Some replies to parent dispute the 'police state' moniker. Decide for yourself:

(Source: http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2013/country-chapters/singap... . Points below are all direct quotes)

* Singapore's Internal Security Act (ISA) and Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act permit the authorities to arrest and detain suspects for virtually unlimited periods of time without charge or judicial review.

* The Misuse of Drugs Act permits the authorities to confine suspected drug users in "rehabilitation" centers for up to three years without trial.

* Outdoor gatherings of five or more persons still require police permits. The city-state's Speakers Corner -- where people may demonstrate, perform, and hold exhibitions -- remains the only outdoor space where uncensored speech is allowed in the country.

* The Singaporean government and senior government officials have frequently brought charges of "scandalizing the court," criminal and civil defamation, and sedition to silence and even bankrupt its critics.

* Singapore's 208,000 foreign domestic workers are still excluded from the Employment Act and key labor protections, such as limits on daily work hours.

* Human rights defenders in Singapore risk being fined, imprisoned, bankrupted, and banned from traveling outside the country without government approval.

wilfra4• 13 years ago

While these aren't good, they don't refute the commonly held belief that Singapore is essentially free from corruption.

Human rights is another issue and on this they do very badly. They are among the worst places in the World to get arrested for basically anything and they have harsh laws that restrict all sorts of personal freedoms. But that's not corruption.

aerique• 13 years ago

I do not think it possible to have a corrupt-free police state.

PeterisP3• 13 years ago

Not trying to invoke Godwin's law, but AFAIK both Stalin and Hitler had police states with rather little corruption; certainly far less corruption than nowadays Russia or mid-Africa.

PaulAJ• 13 years ago

I'd say its difficult but not impossible, especially over the long term. Singapore seems to have managed the trick, but it is the exception rather than the rule.

epsylon• 13 years ago

This isn't corruption if they're following orders from above.

_quasimodo• 13 years ago

I think they are just corrupt on a much higher level. Sure, you might not have everyday bribery, but if a big company chooses to fuck you they will not have a problem with closing both eyes for a minute.

pingou• 13 years ago

Maybe it's because I'm on a mobile device or I'm from France but I'm told I can't read the article unless I register on ft.com.

Does anybody have a link that might work better ?

homosaur17• 13 years ago

http://pastebin.com/s2th4i04

I know this is poor, please check this out on the real site when you can.

yareally• 13 years ago

The pastebin given is probably good enough, but you can also run it through google cache (add cache: in front of the url and search for it on google). If it does not work still, add strip=1 to the end of the cache url so it does not load anything from the site. Here's a link to it with that + run through viewtext.org:

http://viewtext.org/article?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwebcache.google...

creamyhorror• 13 years ago

This story is all over my FB wall. Rest assured there are many concerned Singaporeans listening, and it'll be harder to ignore this case now that the FT has brought it to the world's attention. I'd like to hear the IME and police's side of the story, though - hopefully a higher body will conduct a proper investigation to settle the facts and determine motives.

We rarely get serious cases of cover-ups being exposed, so if this is the real deal, it'll be a very interesting one, especially if it concerns foreign governments.

varunkho2• 13 years ago

wondering why didn't the person possibly looking/cleaning the evidence from the harddrive take it with him in the first place? Isn't Suspense theory indicating something deeper?

> Hours later, in the middle of the night, someone went into Shane’s hard drive and accessed five folders, all labelled IME. ... Since the time of Shane’s death is uncertain, Massoud could not say who looked at the IME files. > But Massoud found activity, again, on several more IME files on the night of June 27, three days after Shane’s body was found. He said someone looked at IME folders – including one labelled “Supervisor” and one labelled “Goal Setting”

Edit: Usually the actual suspect would want to remove the evidence itself – in this case, the harddrive is carefully tampered with. Still the contained information is enough to put the blaim on a party – or the actual accuser is more profound than it is semed?

steve-howard• 13 years ago

It's possible that his laptop, with the external hard drive, was accessed remotely, and that the "speaker" was simply removed by the police when they took the laptop. If it was on a corporate network (as it would be if he used it to back up data) then they might well have been exposed to some form of corporate spyware. Of course, we can't know with the computer under wraps.

Jplenbrook• 13 years ago

I see why you never "get" them. It looks like they are pretty good at covering up.

AlexeiSadeski3• 13 years ago

Families of the suicidal always blame everyone else.

HeyImAlex• 13 years ago

Did you actually read the entire story? While I'm wary of anything I read on the internet, if FT is being completely truthful you can't help but think that things are a bit odd. From the beginning I felt like it was probably just grieving parents gripping at straws, but the strangeness just kept piling up...

AlexeiSadeski3• 13 years ago

Things are odd, yes, but I imagine that suicide cases are quite frequently odd...

chris_wot• 13 years ago

No, they do not.

Edit: you insensitive jerk.

AlexeiSadeski3• 13 years ago

These sorts of cases - in which families accuse the police of complicity or incompetence during suicide investigations - are not exactly unknown.

I recall reading accounts of a similarly "suspicious suicide" several years ago. It also included sympathetic interviews with a grieving family in denial. Read for yourself how that turned out:

Initial suspicion report, 2007: http://www.sfweekly.com/2007-07-18/news/who-killed-hugues-de...

Example of another suspicion report: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18559_162-6599236.html?pageNum=1

Whelp, "independent" (kinda) investigation says probably a suicide (2009): http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/san_fran...

Some continue to push the murder theory (there are many more recent news articles too): http://huguesdelaplaza.blogspot.com/

The fact is, no one really knows. Once you hear the other side of the story, things get more convoluted. It seems that the police have a decent reason to classify it as a suicide, but it also seems that the case may have been a murder. So it's weird.

These sorts of cases seem to pop up from time to time. Most likely some are murders, and most likely some are suicides. I'm not confident in my own ability to determine which is which by simply reading a highly biased account in a newspaper.

doktrin2• 13 years ago

Meyi

nshepperd• 13 years ago

> The Todds agree that Shane’s hard drive may be a critical piece of evidence in how he died and could shed fresh light on the vulnerabilities of technology safeguards. But they question how the Singapore police have so far investigated Shane’s death, so they won’t hand over the drive. They are offering, instead, to send a copy of the contents of the drive.

Good. This is pretty much the only sane way to handle digital evidence, anyway.

maeon32• 13 years ago

It's possible the hitmen could have cloned the drive, bought a replica, mirrored the contents and deleted any incriminating evidence, the parents are probably not advanced enough to know the difference between a file and a browser.

I'd look for evidence that the hard drive shows evidence of usage by the victim here.

aeze• 13 years ago

Until you realize they're sending a logical copy with no hash of the original.

njloof• 13 years ago

Shane had no place taking home a copy of his work computer. Didn't deserve what happened, but that was just foolish... unless he was an informant.

jlgreco8• 13 years ago

If he was fearing for his life, he could have been intending to use it as insurance.

contingencies7• 13 years ago

Fellow hackers: stay away from anything connected to the defence industry. Security might be fun, it might pay well, but the ethics are terrible, things get used for bad purposes, and you can easily lose your freedom or worse.

homosaur17• 13 years ago

Amen, my friend.

Money: not fuckin' worth it.

eshvk• 13 years ago

Counter perspective: I used to work in robotics and really the majority of the jobs are in defense or defense related. There are a handful (less now that willow garage is closing down) of robotics companies that do civilian work. Sometimes it is not just about the money.

JumpCrisscross3• 13 years ago

Shane Todd worked for the IME, a globally regarded research organisation based in a country that scored higher in the 2012 Corruption Perceptions Index than the U.S. (87, #5 versus 73, #19) [1]. If he worked for the defence industry then so would an Oracle engineer deployed at Northrup Grumman or a SpaceX engineer in competing with Lockheed Martin.

[1] http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2012/results/

homosaur17• 13 years ago

What does corruption have anything to do with this? I would think it's largely irrelevant.

And also, you're right, those people do work in the defense industry.

Confusion2• 13 years ago

Lower corruption just means nobody risks their neck for relatively small amounts. For higher prices most are still for sale. If they offered the officers involved the equivalent of $50K each to cover it up, then it doesn't matter whether it's Germany, the US or Singapore: there is a reasonable chance they would succeed. And if a government (and Huawei, like any other Chinese company, is basically Chinese oligarchy/government property) is involved, money is not a problem.

rdl3• 13 years ago

I'm quite comfortable in defense. There are good reasons to avoid doing direct operations contracting for the USG (bureaucracy, inefficiency, etc.), but if you can just sell products, it's fine.

The USG doesn't tend to assassinate its contractors.

contingencies7• 13 years ago

Some might see that as a bit of a head-in-sand perspective; ie. one that conveniently avoids considering the onward effects of one's actions. You could equate it to the situation vegetarians often encounter, ie. people that say eating meat is OK because the animal is dead already, or because it was farmed to be food, or some such. In such cases, the animals are farmed and killed (often under horrible conditions) because some people pay to fund that industry by buying the meat and others work within it as butchers, cattlemen, industrial vets, transport operators, cleaners, accountants, etc. to facilitate the scale and depth of suffering imposed upon the animals. Similarly, working in an industry based around killing, torturing, pressuring, wounding, imprisoning, spying, and other negative activities targeted at human beings also directly contributes to those activities.

One perspective on this type of activity is that of early Buddhism, which 2500 odd years ago summarized that one should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison. — AN 5.177 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma...

rdl3• 13 years ago

This is terrifying. Either it's a tragic suicide (which hurts even more given that there have been so many high-profile tech suicides recently), or it's an escalation of low-grade economic/technology/cybersecurity war between the US and China.

homosaur17• 13 years ago

Not recently on the suicides, mate, always. The only recent thing is the rockstar status of these folks where it hits the news.

VexXtreme2• 13 years ago

Sounds like a classic case of corporate murder.

In the cozy world of web startups, we engineers have an incredible amount of freedom and control over our lives and what we do... but megacorps and companies connected to the defense/war industry are known for treating their engineers as fungible resources that can easily be disposed of once they get the job done. Sounds like something out of a hi-tech Tom Clancy spy novel? Think again, things like this happen for real, there's your proof.

Like someone else said here, stay away from that industry altogether. For the people in control of that industry, engineers aren't super ninja rockstars like they would be at a Silicon Valley startup, they are just means to an end.

homosaur17• 13 years ago

Western educated engineers are a dime a dozen in Asia for companies with large bank. White folks probably have a very confused view on this when they head out to Asia for work.

frrp• 13 years ago

Interesting. Could you, please, elaborate on this? I would like to learn more about this issue so any good sources of information would be highly appreciated.

miked2• 13 years ago

>> Sounds like a classic case of corporate murder.

No, it sounds like a case of Chinese government murder, something they have plenty of experience with. They must have known that there was a good chance that he would talk to the US government. The more interesting aspect is that the IME, a agency of the Singaporean government, would appear to be in on at least the suppression of the story.

crdoconnor• 13 years ago

To a policeman the explanation is always fairly simple. Murder's not common in Singapore, especially not 'corporate' murder but suicide is.

disbelief2• 13 years ago

Just wondering who had more at stake here: the Chinese Gov't or the US Gov't? If he was the one guy with the skills and knowledge (at IME) capable of operating this device, and his work was a potential national security threat to the US, then wouldn't they have more motive to kill him than China?

I don't think it would have come as much of a surprise to the US that China is interested in cutting-edge semiconductor tech, nor would be the details of what IME was up to. I don't see much of an upside for China killing him, shedding tons of light on his work, and Huwei's dealings with IME, plus losing their top specialist. They tend to just blanket deny things when caught red-handed anyway.

brown9-25• 13 years ago

If IME has a lucrative partnership with Huawei, then there might be incentive to keep it alive.

zero_intp• 13 years ago

William Gibson writes this plot repeatedly

cuz• 13 years ago

I am a part of Shane's family, and I can tell you all from my perspective there is no way Shane committed suicide. He was an incredibly talented and above all optimistic young man. That is not to say that individuals with these qualities do not meet this type of end, but that suicide did not fit at all with the reality of Shane's life.

When Shane's death was ruled a suicide by the Singapore police I was deeply shocked but felt that I had no option but to accept it. However, as more details emerged it soon became clear that his death was not his own doing.

It is still incredibly upsetting that Shane's parents Rick and Mary may never have the answers and closure that they (we all) need. Please spread the word as best you can about this story. Please be careful with yourselves, wherever your careers may bring you.

Matti• 13 years ago

Not the first death of that kind in Singapore:

"Family suspects interference in David Widjaja case"

http://sgforums.com/forums/3317/topics/363855

"However, it appeared the court process was intentionally directed to a conclusion of suicide despite evidence showing a strong possibility of murder, according to David's family and the verification team.

"We have strong evidence that he was murdered but that fact was not brought up in the court," David's father, Hartono Wijaya, told a press conference Tuesday at the National Commission on Human Rights."

[...]

"He added there was a suspicion David's death was related to his research: "Multiview Acquisition from Multi-camera Configuration for Person Adaptive 3D Display".

"His friends said his three-dimensional study could be used for various purposes, either for entertainment or even for military needs."

"And we must not forget that after David's death, there were two unusual deaths at NTU - his professor's assistant *committed suicide' four days later and another researcher was hit by a car 25 days later.""

EDITED: Having read more about the specific case, it seems to me that the official story sounds plausible enough. It's not at all clear whether there was foul play involved.

contingencies7• 13 years ago

Absolutely chilling. What are the odds of being hit by a car in Singapore? One would think that, given so few people have them and that there are so few roads large enough to speed down, with the culture being so conservative, drugs near-absent and surveillance omnipresent, that it would be rare indeed; further, it would be trivial to catch the perpetrator. Were they caught in this case? Not, I suppose. It feels as if western state-assisted assassinations of civilians are becoming a more frequently documented reality, and not just for CIA rendition, UAV or economic sanction victims, either.

lukeholder• 13 years ago

I dont know much about these cases, but having lived in singapore you are just as likely to be hit by a fast moving car as anywhere. I saw people running across the ~4 lane orchard rd all the time while shopping.

gph2• 13 years ago

Let's see what the statistics have to say, first for Singapore:

"Total pedestrian fatalities dropped from 49 in 2011 to 44 in 2012" [1] Singapores' population is ~5 million[wikipedia], so the odds of being killed by a car for the total population is ~0.00088%

For a comparison let's look at NYC, which has roughly double the population within City Limits (~8 million for NYC):

"From 2002 to 2006, 843 pedestrians were killed"[2] That's ~211 deaths per year. Making the percentage odds ~0.0026375%

So you're about 1/3 as likely to be hit and killed by a car in Singapore than NYC. That's fairly significant, but there are a couple things to point out. NYC does have a significantly higher population density and I would assume it has a higher amount of vehicle traffic.

I think overall while it's clearly less likely to be killed as a pedestrian in Singapore, I wouldn't exactly call it "rare". And while I'm no professional on Singapore, I don't know why you characterize Singapore as somewhere that doesn't have large roads or many vehicles (There are 965,192 vehicles in Singapore[1]). Also I don't think CCTV is nearly as ubiquitous as you think, from the few news articles I've read they probably only have a few thousand with more only starting to roll-out recently[3][4]. It's certainly not up to London standards, and I doubt even there ever single pedestrian death is caught by CCTV.

[1]http://driving-in-singapore.spf.gov.sg/services/driving_in_s...

[2]http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nyc_ped_safety_stu...

[3]http://www.safetrolley.com/latest-news/singapore-police-inst...

[4]http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne+News/Singapore/Story/A1S...

ginger_beer3• 13 years ago

Sorry but this is rather ignorant. Enough people have cars and the roads are definitely wide enough, just like anywhere else, for traffic accidents to occur regularly. Surveillance might be omnipresent, but it's not a CCTV state like the UK.

jzwinck• 13 years ago

Singapore has many wide roads for a city, substantial traffic, reasonable speed limits, and many intersections with at least one crossing having no crosswalk or pedestrian signals.

In the short time I have lived in Singapore, there were two kids killed by a truck, and I've seen two or three roadside signs appealing for witnesses to accidents with serious or fatal injuries.

So it's pretty much like other places. People can get hurt, and big brother is not all-seeing just yet.

miked2• 13 years ago

>> It feels as if western state-assisted assassinations of civilians are becoming a more frequently documented reality

And when were they documented the first time? It's much more plausible to believe that you are paid by the Chinese government to spread that rumor than to believe what you've written.

brador• 13 years ago

Is hitting someone by car really a plausible method? Do they just drive round the block over and over until they see the guy?

maeon32• 13 years ago

It's pretty easy to track a person without being detected, it's probably a little harder than deer hunting, but it's not impossible.

RivieraKid• 13 years ago

Definitely plausible. They know that he crosses the road at certain times. So they park a car nearby. As he's approaching the road, the car driver is notified and tries to hit him.

Or - they can simply kill him in other way and report that he was hit by car.

mistercow2• 13 years ago

Why would you need to drive around the block over and over? Cars can be parked.

ck2• 13 years ago

Huawei has been deemed a security risk by powerful US lawmakers

Shane had deep misgivings about the project he was working on and feared he was compromising US national security

The fact he didn't walk away in the first moment he felt this way, most likely means one of the US agencies killed him. We are apparently already allowed to kill citizens without trial when they are not on US soil.

Well written article though and the presentation was helpful.

disbelief2• 13 years ago

This is the first conclusion I came to as well. Some entity in the US would have the strongest motive. Possibly number two could be IME, if there's something they're trying to hide. Claims that it was perpetrated by China and/or the Singapore gov't hold less water for me.

walshemj• 13 years ago

Sounds like your not taking your meds - a us citizen who has joined terry taliban and in a war zone is not the same as having doubts about working for Huawei.

The obvious thing to do in such circumstances is to offer your services to the CIA as an inside source.

brown9-25• 13 years ago

What is to be gained from killing an IME employee on the last day of his employment with IME?

sophacles• 13 years ago

I really don't think this follows. Even if we take everything presented in the article at face value, there are a lot of questions unasked (let alone answered) in the article:

1. How did he come to the conclusion/concern he might be violating US national security?

Speculations:

* He could have come to the conclusion on his own, he was apparently a smart guy.

* He could have been asked about his work by embassy officials.

* He could have heard/overheard a conversation that lead him down that path.

* other reasons I don't have any knowledge of.

2. Once he became concerned, what actions did he take?

Speculations: * He kept it to himself and his family.

* Being described as an all-american boy, he could have gone to the US embassy with his concerns. The general perception of US citizens is if you report things like this, even if you're unintentionally involved, you are not targeted.

* He could have started asking uncomfortable questions at work.

3. Why did he copy a bunch of (presumably NDA) "trade secret" research onto his own hard drive?

Speculation:

* He just wanted a copy of his work. (I know I've done this with certain bits of code)

* He wanted to give a gift to his new employer

* He wanted something to bargain with in case the USG investigated him.

* He was just going to hand it to the embassy.

* He didn't do it with any intent, it was just part of a normal backup routine and he didn't even think of it.

4. Why would that hard drive not have been destroyed or taken, particularly if it was accessed after death? (especially since the place was unlocked)

Speculation:

* Deep spy game stuff -- the accessed files were altered to be "wrong"

* There isn't foul play

* There is more dangerous information that they were really worried about, not the stuff he had

* No one realized the information was not on the company network, and some IT guy was just spot-checking against official work to make sure stuff wasn't lost.

5. If there are national security implications, what things are we not being told because of classified?

No speculation on my part here. I have no way of pretending to have a reasonable understanding of this world.

6. What don't we know about Shane Todd? (Not in a blame the victim way, but there is lots of a person's life that can't be described in an article of this size. Is there something about him his family didn't know? Is there something they are embarrassed to talk about?)

Speculation dependent questions:

1. If he went to the USG as a good citizen, what did they do?

* They could have advised him to not abruptly up and leave for personal security reasons.

* They could have asked him to get them copies of the research.

* They could have blown him off, or told him, "thanks, but don't worry about it".

2. Who are all the people who would be interested in targeting him?

* His employers (as speculated/suggested in the article).

* The US government, as you speculate.

* Governments who pay/partner with his employers

* Singapore government, wanting to keep various ties quiet

3. If they are after the research, why kill him rather than just steal his computers?

chaostheory5• 13 years ago

> The fact he didn't walk away in the first moment he felt this way, most likely means one of the US agencies killed him.

I'm not sure this makes any sense. Your theory is more believable if:

1) He had no foreseeable plans for leaving.

2) Singapore was more friendly with the US, rather than being in bed with China.

3) Based on #2, Singapore is a surveillance society. I would imagine they would be pissed if the US did this on their soil, and they would probably have some video footage proof akin to what Dubai had.

4) If he didn't have a hard drive full of a Chinese company's trade secrets, that he intended to bring to the US. Why would the US do this before this data made it back to our shores?

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

lystergic• 13 years ago

Quote1 [But the stress made him come back to God, she said. “Mom, can we pray?” Shane asked in April. “If I survive this, Father, I want to live my life to serve you.”]

I find it odd that the Todd family did not invoke the attention of US gov earlier. They argue that Shane Todd had been anxious and feared for his life for some time before his death. Had that been the case, and Shane Todd was unable to leave Singapore due to his situation, surely the US gov should've been informed of the situation and help transfer Shane back to the US. The US gov would also have had an interest in doing so since Shane Todd had reported to his mother that he was possibly compromising the security of his home land due to his research in Singapore.

Quote2 [“He said he felt he was being asked to compromise American security.”]

Quote1 indicates Shane means to dedicate his life to 'God'(phrased Father) if he survives. I assume that any parent hearing their child stating this would immediately take action as to save the life of their child and thus contact some instance of US gov.

jessaustin7• 13 years ago

Someone who worried he was harming national security and then continued at his position for any time could face repercussions from the USA government for that. Obviously in hindsight it would have been better to get Shane out of the whole situation by any means necessary. In general, however, you shouldn't get FBI files started on your loved ones. After all, what would seem more likely: that one will be hassled by the FBI after one's mother calls the FBI, or that one's widely-respected first-world-government-affiliated employer will orchestrate one's murder upon resignation?

confluence2• 13 years ago

This kind of shit still happens? Holy crap. I'm probably going to be involved in the defense industry over the next decade - and this was a serious eye opener. Robotics is fun - getting killed for it isn't. I'm staying the hell away from foreign countries and contacts from now on.

crusso• 13 years ago

Not that we have great statistics on it, but it would seem that the odds of getting killed just because you're in the defense industry are negligible.

You should be more concerned about traveling on the highway, traveling by plane, the food you put in your body, the amount of exercise you get, and how often you risk being hit by lightning.

That said, if you find yourself in Asia being asked by agents of foreign governments to violate US security concerns... smile and nod your head then hastily get your ass to the US Embassy for debriefing and extraction.

arbus3• 13 years ago

I'm a Singaporean and have served for some time in the military( Compulsory National Service as well as a short stint as a regular) and I think that the comments below seem to misunderstand the level of control that the government has over speech, people and companies in Singapore.

We have many restrictive laws here but they are very selectively enforced. As long as you stay away from "hot" topics such as direct criticism of the ruling party and sensitive issues such as immigration, you are ok. But if you make too many waves, there are many ways in which such selective enforcement can come back to bite you.

On an individual level, you will get much more attention on things like your tax returns. Your Provident Fund usage can be limited in many ways(It is a opaque system and they don't need to give you any justifications)

If you own a company, it will also be subject to a much higher tax scrutiny. They can choke your company by limiting the number of foreign talent that you can hire( again an opaque process). They can reject your applications without any reasons and simply say better luck next year.

Even with all these pressures, Singapore is a great place to do business and just enjoy a generally high quality of life as long as you don't do anything foolhardy or get really unlucky with the cards that you get dealt.

On a side note, if the person in question above was involved in some tricky business, then I would not put it past this government to take drastic measures

confluence2• 13 years ago

You are exhibiting some insane cognitive dissonance there. Your post is internally inconsistent. Singapore is Disneyland with a death penalty.

markdown• 13 years ago

It's hard to understand, isn't it?

However, I feel the same about where I live... Fiji. We're run by a dictator at present, but you wouldn't know it unless you got involved in anti-government "activities".

jessaustin7• 13 years ago

I'm pretty sure that the nation in which Disneyland is located still has a death penalty.

I really appreciate arbus's comment. You're right that it doesn't hang together in a completely rational way, but it is a rare accurate illustration of how Singaporeans really feel. For an empathetic person, it isn't hard to imagine feeling this way, if you grew up there.

People in other countries also have idiosyncratic ways of tolerating the limitations of their systems. Singapore is perhaps an extreme case.

(I lived in Singapore for a couple of years, a long time ago.)

chaostheory5• 13 years ago

Well in his defense, he's posting from Singapore. Who knows if he has VPN or not.

arbus3• 13 years ago

Sure its a Disneyland with a death penalty if you want to call it that but you seem to be implying that either I'm in acceptance with the way things are run or if I'm not, I have no business living here.

I think that uprooting from your home, leaving your family, friends and culture behind takes more than just disagreement with the wayyour government is run. This is of course assuming that you or your loved ones are not in immediate danger of any kind.

contingencies7• 13 years ago

Singaporeans: "We have high quality of life!" "We have relative freedom of speech!" "We are modern!"

Rest of world: Singaporeans pay top dollar for tiny apartments, have no nature, no drugs (and thus little art), no real political freedom, are forced to military service (read: military brain washing on top of the social/education system serving) and self-censor routinely whilst claiming their government is really OK! On top of this, they are all kind of insecure because the way work is omnipresent, everyone competes all the time on appearances, the extreme financial burden of having a kid there (even though few do, because they are educated enough to know it's a death sentence of decades of mortgage, even with the government kickbacks) and the increasing immigration of younger, better Mandarin-speaking, less demanding workers from China, India, Indonesia and Malaysia.

Xofel• 13 years ago

Pains me to agree, but spot on.

bitcartel• 13 years ago

Singapore, a tiny piece of land with no resources, has been transformed over 50 years from a colonial backwater into a first world country. People once in poverty now live much more comfortable lives. Of course things could be better but the issues you raise are no different from the issues people face in other countries and major cities.

mhartl3• 13 years ago

have no nature

Have you been to Singapore? It wasn't nicknamed "The Garden City" for its skyscrapers.

arbus3• 13 years ago

Maybe I'm out of my scope in your points about nature or political freedom as I haven't really experienced life in other countries enough to comment but I would like to explain the military part a bit more.

True it is compulsory but I think that a great majority of the people who experience it are better off for it. Our country has the highest rate of millionaires(1 in 6) and the kids that come from these households are much better off for the work ethic, value of money and socialization that we instill in them. The training that they go through may not be as rigorous as those who go through full spectrum military training in other countries but it teaches them mental discipline and the ability to give and take orders(20% of each years' intake go on to become commanders) which I'm sure you would agree too many kids learn far too late in their lives. It also has the side effect of providing baseline physical fitness, allowing for a much healthier population in the long run.

doktrin2• 13 years ago

Thank you for sharing your perspective. I hope you can understand why many reading it will find this depiction quite non-utopic.

siliconviking2• 13 years ago

“The United States has offered FBI assistance to the Government of Singapore on the Shane Todd case" (but Singaporean authorities have not accepted the assistance) - what is the jurisdiction for the FBI to pursue this investigation without Singaporean consent? Doing that sounds like an appropriate measure at this stage (a little surprised that it hasn't already happened).

DrJokepu• 13 years ago

They have obviously no jurisdiction but they might have access experience, money, human resources, technology and information Singaporian authorities might not necessarily have access to. This kind of cooperation is fairly common in cases involving multiple countries, but obviously they can only conduct an investigation in Singapore with the consent of the Singaporean government. They are free to conduct an investigation within the United States, however.

siliconviking2• 13 years ago

But what exactly would stop the FBI from sending agents to Singapore and conducting their own investigation, with or without consent? Need it be covert, it could certainly be covert.

I'm currently operating under the assumption (which seemed likely to me) that the Singaporean government / police had a motive for not wanting to involve the FBI. Hence the more reason for the FBI to be there.

ValentineC6• 13 years ago

I'm more curious as to why the Singaporean government has yet to accept the assistance. While Singapore may wish to protect its sovereignty when it comes to law enforcement (i.e. police), I feel more unsafe knowing that the police investigation was lacking (and possibly closed, considering they've considered it a suicide) compared to what the FT has reported. Not a good thing for a country widely perceived as having little crime.

api2• 13 years ago

I'm amazed at how many elite-school tech types idolize Singapore for some strange reason. I've heard a number of gushing recommendations for the place from the MIT/Harvard set.

I personally see it as some kind of horrible sci-fi "Stepford Wives" "smile or die" dystopia... like a yuppie latte-sipping upscale version of North Korea. It makes me thankful for ghettoes and dirt and bums, given the alternative.

rdtsc• 13 years ago

I find that libertarian types love it. Its dystopia is closer to their own dystopia.

dr_doom• 13 years ago

I know it's anecdotal like your own post but I saw an Anthony Bourdain Singapore episode and he said it was one of the worst possible places for libertarians like himself. I know I hate it.

gph2• 13 years ago

Are you sure you meant libertarians? I don't see how anything about Singapore would fit in with libertarian ideology...

yen223• 13 years ago

They banned chewing gum for the longest time. Singapore definitely isn't socially libertarian.

chaostheory5• 13 years ago

I think you're either confusing Singapore or libertarians with something else. Singapore is a surveillance and censorship happy city state that China aspires to become.

NPRTX• 13 years ago

Lol. At least it's an easy place to start and do business. What would happen if you tried that in North Korea?

pyre2• 13 years ago

Obviously the ability to start and do business is the only thing that's important! What? I'm only allowed to eat government-supplied food cubes? Who cares! </sarcasm>

jvm• 13 years ago

This perspective focusses on our cultural preferences, but there Singapore has very liberal immigration policies relative to other rich countries, providing many from more impoverished neighboring countries a route to advancement.

Also note that its human development index is higher than the UK's, so we're talking about a country that, on paper, is extremely good at providing for its residents: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Deve...

From an American perspective of course, these things are not impressive: we don't need green cards since we are free to work anywhere in a giant, highly-advanced, not-particularly-repressive society. But from the perspective of someone living in, say, Indonesia, where living standards are very low, the possibility of immigrating Singapore could potentially be a godsend.

Obviously it's shady what happened to the guy in op's article, but it's not like there is some other magical country where nothing bad every happened to anyone.

api2• 13 years ago

I didn't say it was the worst place on Earth. There are obviously a lot of candidates for that, and I can see how people from some surrounding regions would prefer it. But it's definitely not something to idolize unless you really love a micromanaging surveillance state with ridiculously unbalanced penalties for petty and victimless crimes.

As this story suggests, it's also an authoritarian oligarchy in which you have no real rights and can be "disappeared."

I honestly found it disturbing to see it idolized by smart people. Do they have no appreciation for cultural freedom? Or do they really believe that yuppie upscale boutique fascism is an ideal worth aspiring to?

Seriously, watch a film called THX-1138. "Buy, and be happy..." Sometimes I think politicians watch dystopian films and think "wow! that's a great idea! I never thought of that."

Learn to appreciate your local ghetto. Like the song says: you don't know what you've got 'till it's gone.

e3pi• 13 years ago

Refactor, bless, autovivicate: "...I personally see it as some kind of horrible sci-fi "Stepford Wives" "smile or die" dystopia... like a yuppie latte-sipping upscale version of North Korea. It makes me thankful for ghettoes and dirt and bums, given the alternative...", and encapsulate into a black walnut shell, and let yc help you plant and grow it. Or at least, you've a screenplay kernel.

jacoblyles4• 13 years ago

I'm amazed at how many people romanticize ghettoes, dirt, and bums. Breaking and entering, rape, murder, homelessness, and human feces on the street are pretty common in areas of San Francisco. They aren't common in Singapore. I consider that a win for Singapore. I would love for a young Lee Kwan Yew to run San Francisco for a year or ten.

People change their minds when it happens to them. It feels fine to romanticize some abstract ghetto. But when your female friend posts on Facebook how someone tried to rape her in the Mission district when she went out for a night, or when your car is the one with its window smashed in so someone can steal the earbuds you left laying out, then you yearn for a more civilized society.

You say that Singapore is an "upscale version of North Korea", but in what ways? First of all, there is no upscale version of North Korea by definition since communism can never produce a high standard of living. Singapore's economy went from the third world to the first world in a single generation while North Korea has languished in squalor.

In Singapore, we see a country that is very well run. It has a low burden of regulation and taxation with a great social safety net. And it is very safe and open to the world. In what ways is it similar to North Korea again?

jchan2• 13 years ago

I agree with the vast majority of your comment, but please stop saying that North Korea is communist and that "communism can never produce a high standard of living." the former is patently false - North Korea is a Juche (which is not communist) dictatorship that uses communist theory as a carrot to keep its population hopeful. Read the Communist Manifesto if you doubt me.

The latter is unknown, as there has never been a true communist country (this isn't a "No True Scotsman fallacy" - a true state of communism is pretty clearly defined in the Manifesto).

I don't consider myself a communist (if anything more of a socialist) but reading this sort of FUD about communism is almost as painful as reading about blind hate for socialism in America.

asdkl234890• 13 years ago

Just because you don't romanticize Singapore, does not mean you do romanticize San Francisco. I personally only romanticize Switzerland.

(This is turning into Libertarian bingo.)

mhartl3• 13 years ago

for some strange reason

Singapore is a thriving metropolis with negligible crime and essentially no graffiti, has the third-highest per-capita income in the world, and manages to govern four major ethnic groups without devolving into pogroms or race riots. Is it really so strange to idolize such a place?

Singapore does have the death penalty for a few too many things, I'll admit, but you're not likely to get the ax for carrying a little weed. (You might get caned, though.) It's also true that it has laws against homosexuality, but (as with the many US states that have anti-sodomy laws on the books) they're essentially never enforced. Singapore also has no meaningful democracy, but this is a feature, not a bug. (I'll fear the worst if the quasi-communist Workers' Party ever wrests control from the ruling People's Action Party.)

like a yuppie latte-sipping upscale version of North Korea

North Korea is a prison state with the 197th highest income per capita. Singapore lets you leave any time and allows you to become a permanent resident by paying a small fee (~$150) to start a corporation, which then hires you.

Singapore and North Korea are alike the way 18th century Prussia and 1930s Germany were alike: ruled, in effect, by a single individual. But Frederick the Great was no Hitler, and the Yews are no Kims. Do you really not see the difference between Lee Kuan Yew and Kim Il Sung, just because neither is Barack Obama?

I personally see it

Have you personally seen it? Spend an evening strolling around Marina Bay some time (don't miss the Hooters!) and see if it fills you with longing for ghettoes and dirt and bums—or for the famines and death marches of its putative Korean doppelgänger.

mhartl3• 13 years ago

N.B. I should have written "Lees" instead of "Yews", as Lee Kuan Yew (born "Harry Lee") uses the Chinese (and Korean) convention of listing the family name first. His successor as Singapore's prime minister is his son Lee Hsien Loong, much as Kim Il Sung's successor was Kim Jong Il.

brown9-25• 13 years ago

Mrs Todd read the notes and handed them back to the detective. “My son might have killed himself, but he did not write this,” she said with some calm.

The notes were surprising, she said later. One praised IME and its management. Another apologised for being a burden to his family. Neither sounded like Shane. One, Shane had never been a burden – “he had excelled at everything he put his mind to,” Mrs Todd said. Two, “he hated the way IME was run and the way top management treated people.” Shane’s girlfriend later said she was sure Shane’s last moments were not spent lauding IME. “He hated his job,” she said.

It's always amazing how in (possible) conspiracies like this, the perpetrators make one simple mistake that so clearly gives the whole thing away.

pyre2• 13 years ago

"By the way, Bob (who definitely did not kill me and fake it as a suicide) should get a promotion and maybe even a Christmas bonus this year for his excellent work!"

raylu• 13 years ago

The "being a burden to his family" bit really stuck out to me. That is something that has been deeply embedded into east Asian culture for a long time and would not be at all strange for an Asian to say. On the other hand, it's not something you usually hear from someone brought up in America.

brown9-25• 13 years ago

I am not Asian but it the idea of praising your company's leadership, even on the brink of death, seems stereotypical "east Asian culture"ish too doesn't it?

ayah77• 13 years ago

With the Singapore media reporting nearly every event that happen on the island, from the mundane to the salacious, how is it that the unusual death of a young American expat gets no ink at all? Obviously a higher up must have ordered SPH to suppress the story. Why? As history has shown time and again, once there is a cover up, the bells should be ringing... Something's rotten in Singapore.

ftay• 13 years ago

Suicides generally don't get reported unless they are exceptional in some way (e.g. celebrities, murder-suicide combo)

verytrivial• 13 years ago

I wonder if the Todd family have transcripts of the Skype calls where Shane aired his concerns regarding the demands being made of him, and what he was planning to do about it went back State-side -- I venture that the Chinese government does.

john3572• 13 years ago

Pretty obvious that the Chinese military industrial complex had Shane Todd snuffed. The Singapore police and government are caught in the middle and had no other choice but to whitewash the whole thing. The obvious conclusion is that if you're a brilliant young American or European working on something sensitive in Singapore then this could happen to you too. Be very careful...

Death in Singapore

Related Stories