S’pore requires travellers with over S$30,000 to make declaration
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/308019/1/.html

Basically, nothing much about it. But on print copy of ST (2 Oct 2007) page H2, it seems that CNA did not say everything as in the print version.

On the second paragraph, it states:

“The rule also applies to those who send and receive money through cargo, post or other means, but electronic transactions are excluded.”

Now, why money transferred electronically excluded? Does it mean that large electronic monetary transfers need not be declared?

We know that electronic transfers are documented effectively and can be traced, if desired. But, the question here is will the authority be actively monitoring those large electronic monetary transfers done by undesirable entities.

Some information about remittances:
Remittance agents only need to keep the records of the remittance transactions for 5 years and all transactions need not to be reported to MAS, unless when asked upon to do so by the authority.
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_retrieve.pl?actno=REVED-187

This Act is not clear about the amount of remittance that one can remit back to their home. I believe that alarms (to MAS) would be raised when suspiciously large amount of money is being transferred in our banks and financial institutions.

But Mr Shanmugaratnam who is also the Education Minister said that satisfying as they might be, sanctions would not bring reconciliation.

‘We don’t think economic sanctions make sense, certainly not at this point,’ he said at a press briefing of finance ministers from key members of Asean, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

‘We should keep up external pressure, but the evidence so far has showed that economic sanctions have not worked in Myanmar.’ The suppression of the Buddhist monk-led street protests in Myanmar last month killed 10 people, according to the military junta that rules Myanmar. Western governments say the toll was probably much higher.

The minister expressed support for a visit to the country by UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari next month, aimed at jump-starting a dialogue between the government and the opposition. These efforts are a ‘key strategy,’ he said. — REUTERS

http://app.mfa.gov.sg/2006/press/view_press.asp?post_id=3252

Some information about remittances:
The remittance agents need only to keep records for the remittance transactions, but do not need to report all transactions to MAS.
MONEY-CHANGING AND REMITTANCE BUSINESSES ACT (CHAPTER 187)

Transcript of reply to NCMP Sylvia Lim’s question: Singapore has very few defence interactions with Myanmar. But we have to maintain links with the military because it is a key institution. These are largely limited to interactions at multilateral events such as ASEAN-related meetings, international defence exhibitions, and sports activities like the Army Half Marathon.

“been carefully limited to items that are not suitable for countering civilian unrest”

OK, it means that the items sold to Burma are meant for military use or not to use on civilians. It means that the sold items are for military use, if there is a war.

But, if our bullets are sold for military use and not for countering civilian unrest, can anyone tell me if the bullets can differentiate between their enemies in a war and their civilians.

Why would the Burmese junta buy something that cannot harm their enemies in the event of a military operation? If the items are supposed to harm their enemies, then the equipment can also harm civilians too.

Bullets kill human beings, whoever you are…

Its one of my posts with regards to arms sales: http://pseudonymity.wordpress.com/2007/10/17/brothers-in-arms/

Remember how our CPF is used for Temasek oversea expansion.