mrbrown: The great Mas Selamat non-detection mystery
In case you're new to the story, this is what you need to know... Arrested in 2006 under the suspicion of plotting to bomb Changi Airport, Mas Selamat escaped from the Whitley Detention Center where he was held in custody. His escape sparked a country-wide manhunt which lasted over a year before being caught in Johor Bahru, Malaysia. Currently, he is detained (but not formally charged) in Singapore under the Internal Security Act.
I feel a little sorry for newly appointed Home Minister Shanmugam. He is answering some awkward questions that the former Home Minister, Wong Kan Seng, should be answering. But that's life.
MPs have asked, for instance, when an terrorist escapes, isn't it standard operating procedure for security forces to actually stake out the homes of immediate family members?
To which the home minister replied that it would be against Singapore's interests to disclose details of operational security matters.
Best. Answer. Evah.
A question of semantics
But fear not, gentle reader. The home minister also went on to assure us that "what was done has been reviewed" and that he was "satisfied that all the necessary steps were taken."
Well as long as YOU are satisfied, sir, then it's all peachy.
In a nutshell, the minister was saying that a) I cannot tell you whether we watched his brother's home or not; and b) Just trust me when I say my Home Team did all the right things.
This approach is usable in all kinds of situations. Say, you lost a key client, or got caught photocopying your butt on the office copy machine. Just tell your boss, "Sorry, I cannot tell you whether that is my butt in the picture or not. It will compromise national security."
And then tell your boss, "Trust me, I looked into it and all the necessary steps were taken."
It's a sure win.
You can't win this argument
Actually, even if the good minister answered the question, it may not appease public outrage.
If he had answered, "No, we did not send men to watch his immediate family after he escaped," people will say, "That was shortsighted of you. Every TV drama says the first people you check on after a fugitive escapes are the immediate family members."
If he had replied, "Yes, we were watching the immediate family," folks would have said, "And yet he still managed to get into his brother's home, right under your noses, and leave disguised as a tudung-wearing woman, with food, water, illumination stick and a map?"
Screwed if you say No. Screwed if you say Yes.
The home minister also helpfully added that "excluding relatives of Mas Selamat's wife, the terrorist's network of relatives numbered more than a hundred."
Dude, the MP was asking you if you surveilled the escaped terrorist's immediate family. Not his entire freaking village.
What really happened?
Other questions on top of our minds include:
1. How did he get from Whitley Road Detention Centre to his brother's house in Tampines? We all know what a pain it is to get a cab around the Whitley Road area. And there are no convenient MRT stations near the detention center either; they should totally fix that.
2. Why did it take three days to get to Tampines? Did he take the scenic route? Perhaps he needed to shop at some of our fine suburban malls before proceeding to his safe house.
3. And did he ensure that the lady's outfit his niece gave him was color coordinated? Just because you are an escaped cross-dressing terrorist/fugitive doesn't mean you should throw fashion sense out of the cell. You don't want the Fashion Police on your case too, right?
Big brother, epic fail
You may wonder why Singaporeans are so obsessed with this case. It is because we live in a society that is so safe, where the cops are so competent, that such a lapse is unheard of.
We have cameras and sensors installed in our elevators to catch molesters and those who pee in the lift but this chap made it to his brother's home undetected.
You cannot drive your car around the island without your movements tracked by electronic road-pricing gantries registering your comings and goings, but one terrorist with a limp escaped to Malaysia with hundreds of police officers and soldiers hunting him down on our tiny island.
My friend got caught by an eagle-eyed National Environment Agency officer throwing his cigarette butt on the pavement (S$300 (US$230) fine for the first offense, up to S$5,000 (US$3,850) for the second time) but no eagle eyes spotted Mas Selamat in his woman's garb.
Don't get me wrong. I am glad we caught this terrorist (thanks again, Malaysian Police, for catching him for us!). But we are going to miss Mas Selamat for all the drama he is giving us.
Money can turn you funny
Our usual crimes are white-collar, like the recent case of an ex-employee of telco M1 who embezzled S$1.96 million and blew it on Porsches, Rolex watches, Audemars Piguets and, I am not making this up, a S$196,000 stingray.
No, not a Corvette Stingray. A stingray, the kind that swims, the kind you eat.
At first, I thought he must have been ripped off by one of those dodgy seafood stalls at our tourist trap of a Newton Food Centre ("Never bluff you! Our seafood special price for tourist like you! I don't sell special Super Mutant Tiger Prawn to local, only special for you!"). But then I found out it was a LIVE stingray.
I wonder how this telco embezzler was planning his exit strategy. I doubt there's enough space in a Porsche's trunk for a huge live stingray.
Maybe he was planning to hide in his brother's house. Everyone knows the cops won't look for him there.
