Boycott against Citibank

There is a thread in TRE titled ‘Singaporean should boycott Citibank’ by a blogger calling himself, Angry Singaporean Customer. He is unhappy with the knowledge that Citibank is one of the foreign banks that employed a predominant number of foreigners as staff of the bank. 40% of the banks staff is foreigners or it is more? Some banks regard PRs as locals and lump them together with Singaporeans. If this is the case, then the percentage of foreigners could be much bigger.

With the influx of foreigners into the little island and with many PMEs being replaced, and with foreigners and foreign banks found to practise discriminatory employment policies against Singaporeans, the anger is growing among the Singaporeans against foreigners and foreign institutions. Citibank has been quoted in many places as one of the biggest culprit in favouring the employment of foreigners.

In the thread concerned, the author is calling for Singaporeans to boycott Citibank and not to do business with the bank. Many bloggers have responded positively to the call and some claimed to have cut their credit cards from the cards and stop using them. Some have been urged to bring away their deposits or business elsewhere.

This is probably the second time in recent months that there were calls in social media to boycott foreign businesses. The first was against Jollybeans that was not much of a success. Would this call to boycott Citibank end with similar result that it was all noise and nothing much will happen?

How would Citibank head office in the US view this threat of unhappiness against Citibank here? If the anger grows and becomes widespread, it would definitely have some negative impact on Citibank and also affect the reputation of the bank as one that is anti Singaporeans or even a racist bank.

The thread just appeared today and still gathering responses from netizens that are unhappy with the situation created in the bank. Maybe it will just fizzle out in a couple of days, like all protests in this little sanitised island. A little noise is all there is to it.

A case of the thief crying. US hypocrisy on Cyber Hacking

Home / Opinion / Op-Ed Contributors

A case of the thief crying

Updated: 2013-06-19 08:55

By Wang Hui ( China Daily)

Comments Print Mail Large Medium  Small

Since Edward Snowden, the former US government subcontractor, stepped into the media limelight to reveal secret US surveillance programs less than two weeks ago, the war of words between the United States and China over cybersecurity has taken an abrupt turn. While watching the Snowden drama continue to unfold, the world has a chance to contemplate the US' hypocrisy and urge the country to stop peeping into other people's backyards.
In the past few months, high-ranking US officials had ratcheted up their accusations about cyberattacks and even cyber espionage allegedly by China. They claimed the Chinese government and military were behind the alleged wrongdoings. Such finger-pointing has cast a shadow on the generally rosy picture of China-US relations as it has helped whip up a new round of anti-China sentiment in the US.
China has repeatedly denied the US' accusations and the world's sole superpower has failed to provide any tenable evidence to justify its allegations. Beijing has offered to cooperate with Washington over cybersecurity issues as it, too, is a victim of cyberattacks. Yet it seems Beijing has been talking to deaf ears. Worse, with Western companies dominating the global media apparatus, Beijing's rebuttals and tangible concerns have more often than not been drowned out by the biased one-sided chorus of US politicians and the Western media, which have been loudly trumpeting a cyber threat from China.
Had it not been for the Snowden drama, the world might have remained ignorant of the fact that the US' holy-than-thou grandstanding was merely misdirection to reinforce the illusion that it was the victim not the perpetrator. According to the revelations of Snowden and a Foreign Policy website article, the US security authorities have habitually instigated cyberattacks against China in the past years.
In an interview with the South China Morning Post on June 13, Snowden made explosive claims that the US National Security Agency's controversial Prism program has for years been hacking into computers in Hong Kong and on the Chinese mainland in a systematic way.
Meanwhile, a Foreign Policy website article published on June 10, entitled "Inside the NSA's Ultra-Secret China Hacking Group", reports at length about the formation and function of the Office of Tailored Access Operations, under the NSA, which is the biggest spy surveillance organization in the world.
According to the article, TAO has successfully penetrated Chinese computer and telecommunications systems for almost 15 years, generating intelligence information about what is going on inside the country.
If true, both the scope and the long duration of the US hacking directed at China are beyond tolerance. Compared with the hollow US accusations against China, allegations of US hacking against China from an ex-CIA employee and a respected media outlet sound far more reliable and convincing.
Hence, the hypocrisy of Uncle Sam is self-evident: For a long time Washington has played the game of a thief crying, "Stop! Thief!".
Regrettably, there is still no sign that the US authorities are ready to learn a lesson from the on-going information collection scandal and stop wrongdoings that infringe upon the rights and privacy of other people and countries.
To continue their mud-throwing game, some in the US, former vice-president Dick Cheney most prominently have called Snowden a "traitor" and alleged that he may be a spy for China. Such a claim is clearly absurd, and it is clear that the US authorities are at their wit's end about how to deal with the chain reactions Snowden's leaks have set off.
An honest reflection on the wrongdoings and reparative measures are the right way for the US to cope with the aftereffects of the hot potato dropped by the ex-CIA analyst and a former employee working for defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton at the NSA. Any attempt to shirk these responsibilities would only further erode the credibility of the US.
The author is a senior writer with China Daily
E-mail: wanghui@chinadaily.com.cn

Extraditing Snowden an unwise decision

Extraditing Snowden an unwise decision

Global Times | 2013-6-17 1:03:01 By Global Times

Share on twitter Share on facebook Share on sinaweibo Share on linkedin More Sharing Services 19  E-mail   Print

For more, see Daily Specials: World reacts to Edward Snowden's leak

More than 20 public organizations in Hong Kong launched a demonstration last weekend, backing ex-CIA whistle-blower Edward Snowden. In the meantime, Leung Chun-ying, Chief Executive of Hong Kong, has said that the government will handle it "in accordance with the laws and established procedures of Hong Kong." A poll initiated by the South China Morning Post shows that more than half the Hong Kongers surveyed are opposed to extraditing Snowden back to the US. But Beijing has not yet made an explicit statement.

Washington must be grinding its teeth because Snowden's revelations have almost overturned the image of the US as the defender of a free Internet. After losing this image, which has been abused by the US government to boss others around, there is no way it won't want Snowden to be extradited.

However, it would be a face-losing outcome for both the Hong Kong SAR government and the Chinese Central government if Snowden is extradited back to the US. Unlike a common criminal, Snowden did not hurt anybody. His "crime" is that he blew the whistle on the US government's violation of civil rights. His action supported "human rights" as defined in the UN Charter, and has been applauded  worldwide. 
Snowden believes in the democracy and freedom of Hong Kong. His whistle-blowing is in the global public interest. Therefore, extraditing Snowden back to the US would not only be a betrayal of Snowden's trust, but a disappointment for expectations around the world. The image of Hong Kong would be forever tarnished.

Diplomatically, Snowden has cast a shadow over the new Sino-US relationship right after the Xi-Obama meeting. The sooner the incident is wrapped up, the better the ties between the two countries will be.

Cyber attacks, a weapon frequently used by the US government, have turned out to be its own Achilles' heel. China is generous enough not to hype this incident in consideration of the Sino-US relationship.

The Chinese government has no responsibility to help the US quench the fire.

Sino-US ties have their own flexibility. On the one hand, under pressure from public opinion, Washington must have made preparations in case it can't extradite Snowden. On the other hand, Beijing needs to demonstrate it can't just be pushed according to Washington's wishes.

The consequences of extraditing Snowden back to the US would be more troublesome than the alternative, because the local reaction would bring more trouble to Hong Kong and the Chinese mainland.

China's growing power is attracting  people to seek asylum in China. This is  unavoidable and should be used to accumulate moral standing.

The "no comment" attitude of the Chinese Central government and the ambiguous statements from the Hong Kong administration are the proper responses. China should follow public opinion and safeguard its interests.

You people are just too much!

How can you people blame our govt for the haze problem huh? Rightly Shanmugam has told the people to leave the govt alone. We are just a small dot and when our neighbours farted we are sure to kongsi the ‘ba ooh’ right. You people don’t be like dat lah. Everything also wants to blame the govt. And Vivian tried to talk to the Indonesians and kena slammed. Feel so sorry for him for trying to fight for our right and safety. If like that our airport may go out of business too. But still it is their domestic affair ok. Don’t anyhow go and kacho. Wait kena bokok then you know.

What happens inside our neighbour’s house is their business. They want to cook curry, eat durian, fried smelly toufu, and the smell comes over, just bear with it lah. Won’t die one.

Next time if we want to go nuclear, locate our nuclear plant in one of the southern most island or in the northern most island and tell our neighbours don’t kacho, it is our domestic affair also. And if our northern neighbor locate their nuclear plant just next to the Straits of Johore, also none of our business.

We shall all be good neighbours and fart for as much as we want. Think of the good stuff, free smoke, duty free some more. Don’t forget to say thank you.

Sinkie thinking?

• Ex-e2i Staff:


June 17, 2013 at 10:35 pm (Quote)

Until I left e2i in March this year to pursue my own venture, e2i had helped thousands of retrenched workers over the past 5 years. However, some remained retrenched and unemployed not because there is no job for them but because they are unwilling to face the reality that in their late 40s and 50s, they can no longer command the same pay they were getting prior to being retrenched.

• Many of you are saying you have friends who are very well qualified but still cannot get a job after so many years and their jobs are snatched away by foreigners.

Let me say this: There are many people who have gone through very difficult periods but got up from where they fell and rose again.

If you don’t have what it takes to succeed, don’t complain. Doesn’t mean that by virtue of being Singaporean you are entitled to a GREAT LIFE.

• Ex-e2i Staff:

June 17, 2013 at 11:07 pm (Quote)

And for goodness sake, please stop instigating Singaporeans to hate foreign workers.

The above are comments by this ex e2i staff in my thread on NTUC helping PMEs in more training posted in TRE. Reading his comments we can understand the few underlying assumptions or principles that he subscribed to and probably could also be the same beliefs and assumptions that he learned from his organizations.

1. A person who is in his 40s and 50s must expect to earn less

2. It is okay for citizens to lose their jobs to foreigners in their home country. Or as he put it, it is okay for foreigners to snatch away jobs from citizens

3. Singaporeans cannot expect anything more than foreigners in our own country. Yes, must compete with foreigners in a level playing field. Try to go to another country and see if they let you compete equally in their country.

4. And there is the assumption that foreigners are fighting equally and fairly for jobs in Singapore with Singaporeans. He has not heard of foreigners hiring their own kind and discriminating against Singaporeans. He has not heard of fake qualifications and experience.

5. Fighting for the rights of Singaporeans to have jobs in Singapore in preference to foreigners is anti foreigners. Singaporeans have no rights to jobs in Singapore vis a vis foreigners.

Could this person be a foreigner, a PR? Is he really a Singaporean? If all Singaporeans think this way, soon all Singaporeans will be out of jobs and their jobs taken over by foreigners.