TR EMERITUS

I refer to The Straits Times’ Opinion, “Crime wave in the US: Concerns growing over public safety” (Feb 4). Actually pursuing and advocating for the basic principles of democracy and human rights are nothing wrong or appropriate. As, the qualities of transparency and equality are the core basis for achieving the high standards of everything we do. However, democracy and human rights are quite easily be abused by some people, it is especially so in the US. It’s not surprised to notice that crime is on the rise in the US, and it is especially exacerbated in the recent decades. Just look at the various shootings in the US : - Texas Shooting Kills 26 at Southern Baptist Church on 5 Nov 2017, and Alabama church shooting in 17 June 2022, of which 2 killed and 1 injured. In 14 May 2022, the mass shooting at Buffalo supermarket which killed 10 people and wounded three others. A shooter in Uvalde, Texas killed 22 people at an elementary school last year on May 24. The U.S. has had 2,032 school shootings since 1970 and these numbers are increasing. Alarmingly, 948 school shootings have taken place since the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012. Gun violence and school shootings have really become a major issue in the US and a uniquely American epidemic. Thus, incidents of gun violence occur frequently across the country. Undeniably, the specific crimes of shootings are attached with various reasons. For examples: - a) Racial and religious hatred or racism. b) Easily influenced by violence on TV, in movies, in videos, and in computer and video games. c) Affected by the consumption of alcohol or use drugs. d) It is easy for the culprit(s) to get a gun. e) Shooters have mental problems. f) The culprits have been victims of physical abuse at home g) Taking revenge because of other kids pick on them, make fun or them, or bully them h) Due to the entanglement of personal or family issues However, regardless whatever possible causes we can find, we need to ask one vital and pertinent questions: 1)Why does an individual who lives in the civilised, highly democratic and first world country like the USA requires to own a gun? 2)Does it mean owing a gun to show the entitlement of an individual’s social status and prestige? 3)Or, purely for the protection of own safety and personal property? 4)Do the American administration and politicians realise by now that they have to pay a high stake of price for their worrisome social security or public order because of their persistent (long-standing) advocacy and opting/voting in favour of the possession of personal protective weapon? Hence, it is time to test the wisdom and resilience of President Joe Biden Administration for dealing with the prevalence of crime wave and exasperated policing problem. Recently, a friend of mine who lives in California for three decades also expressed his concerns and worries pertaining to the shootings occurred in various cities of the US. He lamented that the situation of community shooting is seemed out of control. Luckily, our Singapore’s law strictly prohibits the people to own/possess any type of dangerous or lethal weapons which include firearm, air gun and Airsoft gun. This will greatly safeguard our social security or public order.   Teo Kueh Liang (Mr)      Read More →

I got an unsolicited response in my Linkedin box today about my Dad from a former creative director of a large multinational agency who once worked with him. He said that he liked my old man because he treated his film crew well. He made the point that my dad trained his crew and ate with them instead just hobnobbing with the clients and creative directors from the agency. This former creative director’s comments brought me two months back when I met with two of his old crew. Called them “Uncle,” and realized that I wasn’t being polite to older people but stating a fact. My father’s crew had been with him for nearly thirty years. They had seen me grow up and he saw to it that they were there at family events and he was at theirs. The only thing that didn’t make them family was biology. My dad took care of his team and I he took it personally when the government preferred to let a White Australian director of photography leading a Hong Kong based crew into shoot military ads over him because he had a predominantly Malay crew. I bring up these instances because they are fundamental to the heart of social dynamics, particularly in a place Singapore, which places so much emphasis on things like economic growth and attracting the world’s rich. I’ve argued that we are the Wet Dream of Confucianism – a place where bureaucrats who did well at school, run the show. In fairness, there is plenty going right with Singapore and as every foreign friend I have says “What are you complaining about?” I agree that much of Singapore does work and the there are parts of Singapore that are really nice and I get that even the not so nice parts of Singapore compare very well – or as an American navy boy I took to Geyland says, “If this is your worst neighbourhood, come to America and I’ll show you a bad neighbourhood.” However, whilst much may seem right, a place run on elitist principles, has one dangerous flaw, which is the fact that the myth that everything good about society is due to the top. Hence, anyone with a brain cell or two starts sucking up to the top in order to get to the resources there and anyone who isn’t in the race is left to die. At the same time, the top develops a belief that it’s the top because of some divine right. Let’s remember that we are the place where a daughter of an elected member of parliament took to social media to tell someone talking about job insecurity to “get out of my elite uncaring face.” The father actually tried to defend his daughter by telling people they didn’t want to hear harsh truths and only apologized after a public backlash. Whilst these things are not criminal per se, they do reflect a rather sad mentality or a confusion between elitism and meritocracy. The elite believes it is the elite based on merit because that’s what it has been conditioned to think. Being “uncaring” is associated with being “elite.” As a matter of disclosure, I am not from “humble” beginnings. I have never known a day of hunger in my life. I’ve always had shelter. I belong to a very privileged minority and having a PMET job has always been understood. Yet, I have always been weary as seeing myself as being “better” because I can use the letter “BA II” behind my name. Whenever I hear people talk about “Oh but you are a graduate,” or “You know so and so,” I am inclined to question why these things matter. I’ve grown up understanding that to get to the top, you need to know how to work. Part of it does require ego stroking but I’ve also grown up with the idea that people at the top know that you will inevitably suck up to them because they have the power and money over you and so you have no choice but to be nice to them. If anything, people at the top of reputable organizations should inevitably be more interested in your character, which is revealed by how you treat people with nothing to offer you and so, at a certain level, the job interview is being taken out to dinner. You get what they call the “waiter test,” because how you treat the waiters says everything about you. One of the most famous quotes on this comes from Mohammed Ali: The boxing champion wasn’t the only person to work on the principle that people who were rude to waiters couldn’t be trusted. As the following link suggests – CEO’s of big corporations do make judgments as to how you treat the “little people.” [LINK] Which if I look at the things that have been said to me about my father into perspective. My father remains a very talented photographer and advertising film director. He studied techniques of the great photographers of the day intensely and he did well. He treated his people well (I mean who in the private sector works for a single employer for nearly 30-years) and they worked well for him. What has struck me is the fact that one of the creative directors mentioned this aspect of my father as a key point for liking him. Given that the ad agency creative directors have a say in who becomes director of photography, it struck me that the people who are giving you work are taking note of your character. Functional organizations will value character in the people and contractors they work with. They will look out for it and no matter how clever or talented you are, they will test your character and if you fail character test you will not be hired. Dysfunctional organisations on the other hand forget that character counts. They tolerate your talents to suck up to the top rather than your character because that’s all that really matters. If an organization doesn’t test your character, you should ask yourself whether that’s an organization you really want to work for.   Tang Li *Although I’ve been based mainly in Singapore for nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of being able meet people who have crossed borders and cultures. I’ve befriended ministers and ambassadors and worked on projects involving a former head of state. Yet, at the same time, I’ve had the privilege of befriending migrant labourers and former convicts. All of them have a story to tell. All of them add to the fabric of life. I hope to express the stories that inspire us to create life as it should be.      Read More →

1. My pro-US friend said that the US military is justified to treat the wandering weather balloon as a security threat. He explained: a) The weather balloon has equipment to measure the temperature, air pressure and other readings. It also has a high resolution camera to take photos of the landscape. b) When the "harmless" weather balloon wanders all over the place, it will take high resolution photos along the way. These climate readings and photos are sent back to the server. c) While 99.99% of the photos are useless from a military standpoint, perhaps 0.01% (maybe less) may have strategic value, as it is taken near a US military base. The AI algorithm will be able to pick out the photos that have strategic value. 2. After listening to his rational explanation, I can understand why the US military is concerned about the wandering weather balloon. 3. I am still not convinced that it is necessary to use an expensive missile to take down the balloon. After all, the US already had a large national debt. They should not spend money wastefully. 4. Anyway, the US has the right to shoot down any balloon or other aerial craft, that did not get official permission to fly into US air space. 5. Fortunately, I do not fly a private aircraft. I do not like, one day, to have my private aircraft drift into US air space (without prior permission) and be shot down by an advanced missile.   Tan Kin Lian      Read More →