On Friday 12 May, the Straits Times published an article written by the journalist Alfred Lee (in London): Nigerian tyrant's millions 'stashed away abroad'.

The article says in part:

"The accounts are said to be in the names of the dictator's close family, friends and members of his military government. Other money is believed to be stored in banks in Hongkong, Dubai, the United States and other countries."

Two days before (May 10) the Straits Times published Alfred Lee's article, the London Guardian published a similar report by Andrew Osborn in Brussels: Abacha's stolen millions 'in British banks'.

Osborn's article says:

"The money is allegedly in accounts belonging to some of Abacha's close family and friends and some former members of his military government. It is thought to be part of an estimated £2bn systematically looted from Nigeria's central bank during the dictator's five-year rule. Britain is not the only place where the money is stored - banks in Singapore, (emphasis added by Singapore Window) Hong Kong, Dubai, the US, Liechtenstein, Switzerland and Luxembourg are also involved."

A reading of the Guardian's article and the Straits Times report in its entirety reveal numerous points of similarity in terms of the sequential order of the information presented in both articles. [Sintercom compares both articles.]

In the two respective passages reproduced above. There is a passage in which both articles have a particular sequence: "[Singapore!!], Hong Kong, Dubai, the US..."

Sintercom asks:

"why 'Singapore' was removed from Alfred Lee's list when our country has been highlighted as one of the places where the late Nigerian dictator's has his money - quoting ST 'stashed away abroad'? Why then was a certain regional [read Hong Kong] "rival" listed?"

Sintercom notes that the Guardian's piece was published two days before the Straits Times article attributed to Alfred Lee in London and suggests that Lee's article was "sourced from Andrew Osborn's article in the Guardian UK paper or, at the very least, shares the same source from which Andrew Osborn's article is based".

"If so, this suggests that Alfred Lee's source has our country "Singapore" highlighted originally and this piece of information was deliberately left out by someone," Sintercom contends.

The writer of this posting then asks: "Is it because the ST feels bound in some way not to undermine the reputation of Singapore and the efforts to present our country as a respectable regional financial centre with strict regulations and safeguards against illegal money?"

Christopher Len cites two other articles from British newspapers which refer to a "Singapore connection".

Earlier this year (Jan 9) the Guardian ran an article: Butcher of Cambodia set to expose Thatcher's role about Ta Mok, one of Pol Pot's genocidal henchman.

That article says: "Ta Mok's lawyer, Benson Samay, said the court would hear details of how, between 1985 and 1989, the Special Air Service (SAS) ran a series of training camps for Khmer Rouge allies in Thailand close to the Cambodian border and created a 'sabotage battalion' of 250 experts in explosives and ambushes. Intelligence experts in Singapore , (emphasis added by Singapore Window) also ran training courses, Samay said."

Christopher Len says: "The Singapore connection to activities in Cambodia was, to my knowledge, never reproduced when ST reported on the possible War Crime trial of Ta Mok."

Len gives another example from News Statesman magazine of a less than savoury Singapore connection.

In the article How Thatcher gave Pol Pot a hand (Apr 17) journalist John Pilger writes:

"In Bangkok, the Americans provided the "coalition" with battle plans, uniforms, money and satellite intelligence; arms came direct from China and from the west, via Singapore (emphasis added by Singapore Window). The non-communist fig leaf allowed Congress - spurred on by a cold-war zealot Stephen Solarz, a powerful committee chairman - to approve $24m in aid to the "resistance"."