A maid got herself involved the loan sharks. Initially, the amount she got from the sharks were only $3000 and of course being loan sharks they told the maid to return $6000 double the amount!
The employer has been receiving multiple harassment text messages such as:
“You worker owe me money So call me back to setter asap If not tonight we will ask man go up you place to do something.”
Source: http://sgkaypoh.com
The AGC said it decided to act after Mr Li, 32, the eldest son of Mr Lee Hsien Yang and nephew of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, failed to remove the Facebook post and to apologise by an extended deadline of 5pm on Friday.
In the Facebook post on July 15, which Mr Li set to “friends only” privacy setting but which was published by several websites and widely circulated on social media, he said foreign media had been cowed into self-censorship because of previous legal action.
He shared a link to a Wall Street Journal newspaper article giving a summary of the recent dispute which saw his father and aunt Lee Wei Ling on one side, and his uncle on the other, over their late father Lee Kuan Yew’s home on 38, Oxley Road. The article was titled Singapore, A Model Of Orderly Rule, Is Jolted By A Bitter Family Feud.
He also included a link to a 2010 New York Times commentary that was critical of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew and the Government over what it deemed as censorship of the foreign press.
AGC, in its statement on Friday, said it issued a letter of warning on July 21 to Mr Li.
In that letter, Senior State Counsel Francis Ng noted that the New York Times article described the Singapore Government as “an authoritarian regime which aggressively uses the Singapore judicial system to silence its critics, even where such criticisms are fair or valid”. The article also described the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew as the designer of “draconian press laws”, which have been used to suppress legitimate criticism, he wrote.
Referring to Mr Li’s Facebook post, he said: “The clear meaning of the post, in referring to ‘a pliant court system’, is that the Singapore judiciary acts on the direction of the Singapore Government, is not independent, and has ruled and will continue to rule in favour of the Singapore Government in any proceedings, regardless of the merits of the case”.
“This assertion is reinforced by your reference to, and clear endorsement of, the article,” he added, referring to the New York Times story.
Mr Li was asked to comply with the following by 5pm on July 28:
– Delete and remove the post from his Facebook page and any other social/online media and other documents in his possession, custody or control; and
– Issue and post prominently a written apology and undertaking in the terms stated in the AGC’s letter on his Facebook page.
Mr Li then wrote to the AGC to request an extension of time till 5pm on Aug 4 to respond to the AGC’s letter.
The extension was granted. But he failed to purge the contempt and to apologise by the extended deadline, said AGC.
In a Facebook post earlier on Friday, Mr Li said the post in question was not an attack on the judiciary.
“It is not my intent to attack the Singapore judiciary or to undermine public confidence in the administration of justice. Any criticism I made is of the Singapore Government’s litigious nature, and its use of legal rules and actions to stifle the free press,” he said.
“However, to avoid any misunderstanding of my original private post, I have amended the post so as to clarify my meaning,” he added.
His amended post was not made public on his Facebook page.
Responding to AGC’s decision to start contempt of court action against him, Mr Li wrote in a Facebook post on Friday night: “Well, this is a new development. Fortunately, my friends know how to call a spade a spade.”
Source: www.straitstimes.com
Members of Parliament (MP) and foreign relations experts reacted with concern and shock that a senior academic had been identified by the Government as an “agent of influence” working for an unnamed foreign country, given his involvement in several think-tanks and “privileged position” here.
Professor Huang Jing, 60, and his wife Shirley Yang, had their permanent residence statuses revoked by the Ministry of Home Affairs and will be barred from re-entering Singapore.
National University of Singapore political scientist Bilveer Singh, pointing to the seriousness of the matter, said: “He is in (a) privileged position in Singapore, sitting on so many boards with people who are opinion-makers.”
He was concerned that Prof Huang had held a senior position at “one of Singapore’s top think-tanks” and had lived here for several years.
“A person like him is in a very strategic position to shape the mind, the thinking, and ideology of our key people who, in turn, can affect national policies, for example,” said Associate Professor Singh, who is also an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Centre of Excellence for National Security at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies.
Sembawang MP Vikram Nair, who chairs the Government Parliamentary Committee for Defence and Foreign Affairs, described Prof Huang’s attempts to influence the Government as “very serious” and “worrying”.
“It may not be so much the effect he had, but the intentions … Whether or not he succeeded, that is a worrying fact … I mean, if he was successful, it could be similar to what Marxists used to do to try and influence governments. (They start) by influencing the population, then the leaders,” said Mr Nair.
Over the years, the Government has uncovered cases of individuals carrying out subversive activities for foreign countries.
For example, in 1997, a female civil servant was detained for passing on classified government information to a man who was working under deep cover for a foreign intelligence service. In another case in 1998, four Singaporean men were detained for collecting classified government information for a foreign intelligence service. One of the four had also acted as a recruiter.
The threat could be bigger now, with Bukit Panjang MP Teo Ho Pin pointing to the difficulties in mitigating “the influence of external agencies” in today’s “Internet world”.
“Singaporeans must keep themselves informed of what’s happening in our country through reliable sources of information, such as government’s announcements,” he said.
Referring to other countries’ experiences, Dr Teo reiterated that the potential impact of individuals working as agents of foreign countries “could be serious and will affect Singaporeans’ quality of life”.
For someone to have not just his employment terminated but also be permanently barred from entering Singapore suggests that the extent and degree of foreign influence was “deeply troubling and problematic”, said Dr Mustafa Izzuddin, a fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.
“Especially for a small state like Singapore, foreign interference in internal affairs is regarded as a serious threat which could also have long-term adverse implications for the governing of the country,” he added.
Dr Mustafa and Assoc Prof Singh also questioned if the Republic may have let its guard down in this episode.
“The domestic populace (would ask questions) on why a thorough background check was not done to sieve out such subversive activities before the said foreign person was hired in the first place,” said Dr Mustafa.
Agreeing, Assoc Prof Singh said: “This is a good lesson for us that, in order to protect our interest, we should be a little bit more discerning, whoever is recruiting at the think-tanks.”
News of Prof Huang’s expulsion also created some ripples overseas, with academics and political observers taking to social media to express their views.
Dr Euan Graham, director of the International Security Programme at Lowy Institute, an independent think-tank based in Sydney, said on Twitter that he was “not entirely surprised” with the news, but “wow(ed) all the same”.
Mr Nile Bowie, Singapore-based political commentator and columnist for The Malaysian Reserve newspaper, tweeted: “Elephant in the room is whether the country in question is #US or #China? … Curious to hear statement from #HuangJing and also how this incident will affect the already strained Sino-Singapore relationship.”
Source: www.todayonline.com
A senior academic from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP), Professor Huang Jing, has been identified as “an agent of influence of a foreign country,” announced the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on Friday (Aug 4).
“He knowingly interacted with intelligence organisations and agents of the foreign country, and cooperated with them to influence the Singapore Government’s foreign policy and public opinion in Singapore,” said MHA in a news release, without naming the foreign country.
It added that Prof Huang, who is LKYSPP’s Lee Foundation Professor on US-China relations, gave what he claimed was “privileged information” about the foreign country to prominent and influential Singaporeans, with the aim of influencing their opinions in favour of that country.
Among those who Prof Huang gave the “privileged information” to was a senior member of LKYSPP, said MHA, without naming the person. LKYSPP is a postgraduate school of the National University of Singapore.
“The information was duly conveyed by that senior member of the LKYSPP to very senior public officials who were in a position to direct Singapore’s foreign policy. The clear intention was to use the information to cause the Singapore Government to change its foreign policy,” said MHA.
“However, the Singapore Government declined to act on the ‘privileged information.”
According to his profile on the school’s website, Prof Huang, who is an American citizen, has published extensively on subjects such as US-China relations, Chinese elite politics, China’s development strategy and foreign policy, Sino-Japanese relations and security issues in the Asia Pacific.
Apart from the numerous journal articles he has written, Prof Huang, who was director of the Centre on Asia and Globalisation, also edited books on subjects like China’s Taiwan policy, the South China Sea dispute and China-India relations.
His opinion pieces and columns have appeared in newspapers including Global Times, The Straits Times and Lianhe Zaobao. He has also appeared on Channel NewsAsia.
“Huang used his senior position in the LKYSPP to deliberately and covertly advance the agenda of a foreign country at Singapore’s expense. He did this in collaboration with foreign intelligence agents,” said MHA. “This amounts to subversion and foreign interference in Singapore’s domestic politics.”
According to MHA, Prof Huang recruited others to aid his operations. It added that his wife, Shirley Yang Xiuping, was aware of what he was doing.
The Singapore Permanent Residency of Prof Huang and his wife – both US citizens – have been cancelled by Singapore authorities.
“Huang’s continued presence in Singapore, and that of his wife, are therefore undesirable. Both will be permanently banned from re-entering Singapore,” said MHA.
“MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN”: NUS
The National University of Singapore (NUS) said Prof Huang has been suspended without pay with immediate effect.
“This is a matter of serious concern,” said an NUS spokesperson. “NUS does not tolerate such acts of foreign interference, even as we continue to value and uphold the diverse and international character of our university.”
The spokesperson also said that Prof Huang’s employment at NUS is conditional on the necessary permits for working in Singapore. “As these permits have been cancelled, we would not be able to continue with his employment.”
The statement added that LKYSPP is cooperating fully with MHA. “As this matter relates to national security, the university is unable to comment on the details of the case,” said the spokesperson.
Prof Huang also sits on the board of many organisations, including Singapore’s Keppel Land. When contacted for comment, a Keppel Land spokesperson said: “We have just been alerted to this development and will be looking into the matter.”
Source: www.channelnewsasia.com
Dear all,
My name is Marini. I would like to seek your kind attention with regards to the recent viral post of my brother’s wrongdoing. We know that what our brother did was wrong and we have already handed him over to the police the moment we found out about his deed from the viral posts.
What he did was wrong and he has disappointed his family. My family and I would like to kindly request to the general public to stop sharing our family pictures as it is causing great distress to our family. Please understand that some of our siblings are still young and need to be protected from being cyberbullied. They are not to be blamed for the conduct of their brother.
As this is already in the hands of the police, we hope the public will let the authorities handle the case now and allow our family some privacy in coming to terms with all that has happened. Thank you and we greatly appreciate the public’s understanding.
Rilek1Corner