My two dangerous hobbies

I thought writing and photography are two of the best hobbies for an oldie to take up. After reading the papers, I am got this feeling that they are extremely dangerous hobbies. I read that a photojournalist was handcuffed while taking photos of the flood and the official reason given was that he was obstructing the rescue work. And the author of a book 'Once a Jolly Hangman', Alan Shadrake, was arrested for defamation. I must be very very careful not to obstruct the law and not to defame anyone. But I would like some MPs to ask questions on when and what kind of acts would necessitate a person to be handcuffed. Many people are shocked by such news.


Anonymous said...

Getting worried Mr Bean ? There are lot more who wrote and write more terrorly than You.

Unless You sneak into protected area or state property, You should be quite safe, but if You fit super-telephoto lenses to your cameras and is found around the vicinity, You may get fixed.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Actually I am quite safe when photography is concerned. I only take beautiful things.

A friend related how he accidently took a pic of the American Embassy and was tracked down by the police. He got to surrender whatever he took in his camera. Don't anyhow shoot at govt offices or military camps for sure. The closest I shot was the old supreme court: )

Jafri said...

The laws governing the security and safety of the concerned parties is being overwhelmingly abused.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Hi Jafri, welcome to the blog.

Now that Zaobao if fighting for the photojournalist, it will be interesting to watch the outcome.

Now there are two issues, whether there is abuse of power and who is lying. Oops, better not say who is lying but who is telling the truth. Cannot say someone is lying.

Anonymous said...

Singaporeans, our law enforcers are very good in this kind of highly professional work. Luckily, Dr Chee was not there or else you can expect riot squads surrounding him.

Can you blame Singaporeans for not doing anything when people get assaulted? I think 'boh chup' is the safest thing to do.

Anonymous said...

When you happen to be taking pictures with your camera, you better give the white MPs a wide berth, if you, by chance, come across them, particularly one named Mr. Seng.

This is just a friendly 'national' advice.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Thanks for the friendly advice. Ok, other than taking beauty shots for portraiture, the other angle is to take faces with strong characters.

The choices are quite limited actually. For safety measures I should just stick to dragonflies. For tiny flies I can poke my nose right into their faces and they won't mind nor fly away.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

As for Dr Chee and other politicians, the threat is quite serious. They can topple the govt in an election, and peacefully. So cannot underestimate their prowess.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Chee is dangerous, as diagnosed by the mental one himself.

Anonymous said...

In a little isolated corner of a little island stands a tombstone that reads:

"Here lies the law"

Weep not. Save your tears for what comes after.

Anonymous said...

The forest is safe if there is no man eater.

The dark is safe if there is no evil.

The road is safe if there's no highway robber.

A society is safe when its' leaders are respected and loved by the people. BUT, in SIN, everone is jittery.

Why? Why? Why?


Anonymous said...

'Many people are shocked by such news'

Hahaha. Not me. It is the law. As to what law, I am just as puzzled as Dr Lim Hock Siew.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

The one that can cause an earthquake is the arrest of Alan Shadrake. Pressure is coming in from many places.

Anonymous said...

Now, we know how dangerous blind loyalty that caused blind obedience can lead too.

The day of the Army ordered to deal with their fellow countrymen, friends, RELATIVES and FAMILIES may not be as remote most think.

The jittery leaders have lost their cools and collectedness already and are on the edges.



agongkia said...

Mr Bean.
Hehe...Worry not becos you are not a GOH.
Dr Goh Keng Swee passed away this year.
Mr Goh Meng Seng got implicated for illegal hawking.
Mr Goh Keng Soon got handcuffed for taking photo.
I feel that this is not a good year for the GOH.
As such I,Goh Ah Gong has avoid giving comments this year.

Anonymous said...

Dearest Agongkia.

You are not insinuating that SM Goh Chok Tong should remain at home and avoid going into the wet bathroom as well.

Gohs are much in the news for wrong and wrongful reasons, then the news are all sub sub sui. Maybe a famous Goh will make the news more newsworthy, you neber know.

Sir, if you are as as loaded as SM Goh, let your maid accompany you 24/7.

Anonymous said...

Famous Goh is probably somewhere, maybe planning Pro Alien Party's election strategy.

I hope his plans do not end up like what Agongkia predicted, for those with the surname Goh.

During the last election our famous Goh went to Hougang and Potong Pasir to announce the ripening of the chikus and papayas. This time I hope he goes again to help Low and Chiam win more votes, if Agongkia's prediction proves true to form.

Matilah_Singapura said...

Jaffri 1148

> The laws governing the security and safety of the concerned parties is being overwhelmingly abused <

The problem is the existence of those laws in the first place.

Fancy having a law which states it is punishable to "defame" a country -- any country. "Criminal defamation". What the fuck?

As I've posted on my blog, this is nothing more than straight out of Orwell's 1984 -- a thoughtcrime -- any words of "dissent" against the state or the country which is controlled by absolute powers who abuse their positions because they can, and take an "negative comment" about their country personally.

See how downright stupid this is? This is not the thinking from people who are so-called "educated" , rational, logical or mature enough to accept opinion as opinion even if they themselves disagree with it.

Does Singapore/ the judiciary need to be criticised? The question is irrlevant. When it comes to freedom of conscience, individuals are free to express themselves in any non violent way, afterall, it is only ideas they are expressing.

The "audience" of those ideas themsleves have the power of choice to accept or reject those ideas for their own personal reasons.

It is never, and can never be the position of the state to police what goes on in peoples' minds.

Unless of course you are one of those people who likes "controlling" others -- who are conducting their affairs in peaceful ways, even if their ways somehow "offend" you.