JR8 if you have been living in Singapore that long you should be able to understand that MOM , ICA, MHA works hand in hand. If the OP comes here to apply for a job, his application will be vetted thoroughly that I am very sure. Central Narcotics Bureau works very closely with other foreign agencies. If he lied, he is done for. If he declared truthfully, a background check with DEA and other agencies in US or Canada will be done. ...
Thanks for the links, interesting reading. I'm sure the SG govt share data between all their departments. They increasingly do this in the UK too. What is unclear is the level of international data sharing. If a US citizen applies for an EP, do they just run a criminal check on him in the US (as has been suggested here). What if that person has lived for many years in several other countries ... do they run checks with those countries too? I can understand high level international cooperation, but having access to international records of 'misdemeanours' would surprise me...
There is no correlation between SGer thinking out of the box and lying on official documents. I do agree Sger need to have this approach and the need of FT but this is not and I do not think nor it is an option for OP to consider.
Sorry but my comment was completely tongue-in-cheek, it was followed with a
You touch on one point I alluded to: if your application arguably is a long shot (I'm saying -if-, I am in no way commenting on the original poster's specific position), then one might consider what one has to lose.
No, having a criminal record does not disallow travel to the US
You are wrong I have seen more than one example, granted there may occasionally be ways around it but there is nothing 'space cake' in that observation, like it or not it is a fact. As for the music industry even Cat Stevens found himself in some bother! There are means and ways to find out we may not know or like all of them but they are there!
Hmmm! Well in that case why do the US ask (on the visa waiver scheme) if you have ever been convicted of a crime involving 'moral turpitude', but SG on their visa app ask if you have ever been convicted of a crime? It is because the US for the purposes of the VWS do not refuse entry for crimes that do not involve moral turpitude. Furthermore note, that if you have committed a crime involving moral turpitude (which I generally understand to equate to a felony, or two+ misdemeanours in aggregate), then you can go and apply for a visa. You won't always get it, but there is no blanket refusal policy. I used to frequent a busy travel forum on the web, and this question would come up every other week, so believe me, I've heard people's US visa/criminal record sagas trotted out for years on end....
My BiL, twice removed? - never could figure out relationships - My Wife's brother's wife's sister's husband (a Yank like myself) is a retired US DEA agent who worked out of Singapore for almost 15 years between Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand & Cambodia. He is now ownes a security firm here in Singapore (after he retired from the US Gov't DEA) I've been told by him that the level of cooperation and depth that the gahmen here goes when vetting people is huge. They have their own vetting teams in the Major countries to do background checks on each and every application. Often, that is why is takes so long to do some countries citizen's applications - lack of infrastructure and the need to do it all manually and often not without some grease in certain Asian countries - them's the one's that take 4 or 5 weeks.
Interesting. Do they only screen the 'home country' of citizenship? If so you might think that a weakness that crims are aware of and work around. For example what if someone is clean as a whistle in the US, but has a drug distribution network based out of Mexico, or one of many other countries? Surely the logical end point point might be having to check crim records on an individual in every country in the world... ?
p.s. Writing this on a cranky litttle netbook that self deletes more than it posts. So apologies for the blown-out formatting. I am relying on the patience of the original posters to whom I am replying to recall which bits they wrote