Scribblings on a tablet

2009-08-06T01:27:00.002+13:00

It has been quite a while since I last updated this blog, but now I shall whilst im convalescing here on my bed, aching all over like an old man. Growing old sucks, ok? Don't let anybody psycho you with all that bullshit about growing old 'gracefully'. When your butt and boobs start to sag, it ain't pretty.

Speaking of which, you sld really check out the latest photos of Putin. Arguably one of the few politicians in the world who CAN be photographed naked. It's said to be part of his re-election campaign by attempting to score points with young women - erm, seriously? so tall blonde slav chicks did old dyedushkas? i thought it was only a babushka thing. ah well.

Elsewhere in the world, Ahmadinejad's (omg i spelt it off-hand, and PS: its pronounced ACKH-ma-dee-nee-jad) coronation took place. Interesting to see how things wld play out for the coming months. Is this the tipping point for the conservatives in Iran? Can we finally say Goodbye to the Ayatollah?

and in the Straits Times, PROZZIES ARE SEEN AS MORE TRUSTWORTHY THAN PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN CHINA! HAHAHAHAHA. omg this is hilarious.

well.

at least u know what you're getting into when u give a prostitute $50.

Tuesday Happy Day

2009-06-16T15:53:00.002+13:00

It's been almost half a year since I last updated this blog. Many things happened. Many of which are hardly worth a dime in recounting or retelling. Some are meant to be forgotten. The urge to write has somehow diminished as well.

Silence, and three weekends more.

Inspiration

2009-02-23T20:45:00.001+12:00

You don't get inspiration sitting in an office all day long.

It is an elusive creature that needs to be sought out
pounces upon you unknowingly when
you're pouring the tea
or watching the
clock.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

2009-02-23T02:52:00.003+12:00

An absolutely beautiful movie exemplifying the transcendental value of Fitzgerald's short story and it's incisive study of life and what it means to grow old - well, in the case of Benjamin, younger. This simple subversion is just so brilliant.

I'm plunged back into an existential crisis.

What the hell am I doing with my life? But what is the point of it all if we're going to die? Why go through all that love and pain? And no I don't the buy the story that we're all here because we're living a life of guilt and that we live in shame so we can go to heaven. If that's the only prerequisite needed to enter a perfect universe, the world as we know it wouldn't exist. The naive sheep don't talk about the other requirements like adherence to certain 'rules' though. Nobody actually follows everything.

Anyway

The movie was slow and painful. Just like life. Love, loss, hope, laughter, and death. Every single moment heart wrenching. Every life fated for something. Every life lived was for something.

And in the end was Death.

I also loved how the movie captured American history in the nutshell - from the post WW1 euphoria right up to the Beetles era, and then ending with Katrina. The centrality of New Orleans exemplifies the timeliness and the importance of context in appreciating the full power of the film. It's something that I'm going to keep thinking about cuz I don't think I really got it yet. Watch out for the clock at the end when the flood comes in though. It was said to have been a requiem to all the deaths during the war, and the desire for the dead to return back to life. for time to go back. maybe it's the same as with hurricance Katrina. absolutely beautiful metaphor.

oh i love the accents as well. There's something so beautifully exotic and distant about it. Something from our recent past, and yet suggestive of so much Black culture and history. Something very seductive.

The frequent recurrence of the storm acted very much like a Wagnerian leitmotif as well. Loved it.

Yet death pervades the entire movie right from the started. Benjamin sees death all around it. People come and go. He meets them at the end of their lives whilst he just begins his. Every moment is painful. Every death, loss. In the end was his, as with his lover.

What is life? love sex loss death pain pleasure happiness melancholy. Shakespeare knew that. So did Fitzgerald.

What am I doing with my life? Every life is one worth living but what for? I need to know.

I need to know.

I keep asking people for the answer and I continually ask myself that as well. But i wish i knew. Or maybe I will only find out in the end, just like in the movies. When I'm on my deathbed.

When that time comes, who will I be with? Who will i remember in those sudden stream of flashbacks? will there be any?

I wonder. And the young don't.

Of Decisions

2009-02-22T19:23:00.004+12:00

It's Sunday and I'm out at Millennia Walk sitting at starbucks with a good hot chocolate typing this article.

This, particularly enraged me yesterday. According to Agence France-Presse, radical cleric Qatada, once labelled Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe by a Spanish judge, was awarded $5400 by the Strasbourg European Court of Human Rights - which will also rule on a final appeal against his deportation from Britain. It was this very court that also ruled against the UK's DNA project, hampering what could possibly have been a major milestone in the development of scientific research in DNA and the history of Man.

The European court noted that the level of compensation was "substantially lower than those which it had made in past cases of unlawful detention", and that it reflected the fact that his detention "was devised in the face of a public emergency" and weighed protecting the public against a duty not to return people to countries where they faced a real risk of ill-treatment. The ruling was of course made a day after the House of Lords ruled that he could be deported to Jordon - where he already has been sentenced to life imprisonment for terror offences - and could possibly face torture.

I am personally against the ruling.

The sentence ruled on the following bases:

1) That it was ultimately an unlawful detention.

2) That the duty not to return peoples to a place where they could face torture outweighs the duty to protect the public.

Simplified as such, the ruling is stupid, idiotic and beyond the claims of common sense. If the sentence is to be believed, it is clear that the Strasbourg Court believes that the right of one outweighs the rights of the people. The logic goes like this:

Fact: Qatada is a convict in Jordan who has been sentenced to life imprisonment for terrorist activities.

Fact: Torture is prevalent in Jordan.

Premise 1: Man has the right to be protected from torture and from dangerous terrorists.

Premise 2: However, Qatada has been detained without clear evidence for terrorism in Britain.

Conclusion: Since his threat to the public is not immediate as such, his right to freedom from unlawful detention supersedes the concerns of the public and their desire for preventive detention, which is in this case deemed unlawful. And, until he is proven guilty otherwise, he shall enjoy the same rights as any other man in Europe, namely the right to protection from torture.

Let us re-examine the case...

Firstly, Qatada is a convicted terrorist, albeit in Jordan. He is therefore a threat - underlying and possibly subversive, though not immediate. There is therefore absolutely no guarantee that society is free from his machinations in the future. There is also absolutely no indication that he 'has turned over a new leaf', or that he has embraced Western culture and values. NYET! NON!

It is a given that every man has the right to certain basic provisions under the rule of law as law-abiding citizens. However, Qatada's status as a 'law-abiding' citizen is at best doubtful. While he may not have committed a crime under European soil as such, there is little doubt that the crimes of which he is convicted of in Jordan would similarly apply in the UK and in Europe. He cannot therefore be given the same status as with any other ordinary citizen. He is not.

Finally, while the judiciary has to be wary and mindful of the 'mob-mentality' so precarious in democracies (note: Atheneins killing Socrates), I find little in this case to support the idea that Qatada should have been COMPENSATED. This sends the wrong signal to the world, and to all terrorists out there who are seeking to undermine the fundamentals of our society - namely, our human rights.

The Court could have ruled against unlawful detention, but need not have compensated him.

That having said, I am against the use of torture on any man. However, as my concern ultimately lies with the safety of the public AND the protection of our value and way of life, and that no immediate conviction can be made in the UK, the only way to safeguard the safety of my citizens is to sentence Qatada to deportation to a country where he has indeed already been convicted of terrorism - the crime which seeks actively to subvert the prevailing order of society - so that he can be safely displaced from society. Qatada is no lamb or scapegoat. HE IS A CONVICTED TERRORIST! HE DESERVES IT! We should NOT in any way kid ourselves to think otherwise! He is NOT INNOCENT ON ANY ACCOUNT AND SHOULD NOT BE TREATED LIKE ONE. He needs to be put away for the sake of the world.

What the UK govt can do is to solicit a guarantee from the Jordanian govt for his freedom of torture. This compromise is arguably the lesser evil than releasing him back into the arms of the society of which he seeks actively to destroy. In fact, he hell shouldn't even have been granted asylum in the UK in the first place. What is wrong with these people????

---

On another note,

I found a Lonely Planet Guide on AFGHANISTAN yesterday and I just had to buy it. It's not as thick as the usual guides, 80% of the book is peppered with security warnings, that I have absolutely no idea how those guides even got round Afghanistan in the first place. It's quite cool really, with awesome pictures. Anyway, here's a picture of the Shah-e Doh Shamshira Mosque, which i got from http://flickr.com/photos/56905260@N00/2551848509/

I would still like the opportunity to work in some third world country for a period of time. Maybe not Afghanistan or any 'hot' war zone at the current moment. Somewhere relatively stable preferably. I'll like to make a real contribution, where politiking often fails. It's something I'll like to do soon. At least once in my life and not when I'm 60.

It is something so Singaporean to lament about the horrible state of affairs in the world whilst reading the newspaper, but forgetting it as soon as you close it because 'it doesn't directly concern you'. These are also the people who profess religions and morals. They fawn over people who actually do volunteer work, but when asked, shy away for 'personal reasons'.

I think double-standards governs every aspect of our lives, and that is should be the 8th deadly sin.

One of the first things you notice when growing up are your parent's double-standards. I should know. I had intimate encounters with them. So would you. However as time goes by, you lose that childish curiosity and the natural inclination to question, accepting things as the way they are and becoming immune to them. Many begin to adopt similar positions. When pressed further, they shut you out by means of linguistic or authoritative turns - as with what their parents once did.

There are also those who survive and become a better person.

Many however still bandy about postmodernist lingo like how 'there's nothing certain the world', or that 'no one is right or wrong', and adopt these positions for expediency to support a particularly whim at a particular moment in time.

Mommy, why does the maid not eat at the table with us?

Because she's the maid.

But why?

Shut up and eat your food. and it's because I say so.

.. and we should all strive to save paper in this office for the sake of the environment!

OH and secretaries, pls make sure that you print all documents with font size 14 only, and pls don't put 2 pages into one sheet as it will spoil my pretty eyes. remember! single-side for extremely classified documents...

double-standards. we all burn in hell.

BECAUSE I SAY SO.

On Human Rights and Politics

2009-02-20T01:23:00.002+12:00

I reserve the right to digress.

It's really not healthy lying on your tummy (or really chiseled and hard pecs) on your bed with your laptop/Apple and think the proverb really went 'an Apple a day keeps le medecin away!'

En Contraire...

anyway

Human rights cannot be divorced from politics.

Politics is the vehicle by which we futher human rights. Political action leads to legislation, which in turn serves the larger human rights cause by either protection or enforcement.

Activists are what they are because they are attempting to influence the public, and are hoping that enough public pressure would spur politicians on to adopt their positions and translate them into policy. It's therefore really hilarious when a human rights activist tells you he 'hates politics and politicians'. No 'human right' can be enforced without politicians, but politicans, definitely, can do without human rights activists. That is the nature of relations between the two.

Human Rights are a human invention and creation. Nothing is self-evident about it.

Rights can be understood in various levels and degrees. Underneath the culture of every society lies certain very very broad commonalities. Every culture has an idea of 'good', 'bad', 'the moral', what should be protected, what should be treasured, so on and so forth. Go up higher those levels, and the differences become more stark and evident. Thererein lies the problem of enforcing a 'universal' standard of Rights.

The embodiment of Rights in legal documents itself raises a set of legal, linguistic, and historical problems. Legal documents are open to interpretation. The Common Law system is premised upon the continual building-upon on a tradition - particularly with reference to past judgments, and the creation of new norms with new cases. The use of law to protect or enforce rights therefore engenders change and evolution. The interpretation of those rights therefore can change.

The abuse of interpretation is however not always avoidable, given the problems of linguistics - semantics, in particular. Meaning changes with context. The problems of a 'universal' definition triple-fold.

Then there's the issue of 'freedom to' and 'freedom from'.

IS freedom necessarily about positives? The freedom to have sex with animals or the freedom to live a frigid and virginal life?

We give 'things' which are unable to speak for themselves 'rights' too. We say that children have the right to be protected. But why shouldn't children be given the right to choose their own parents or their own school? why should the forest have a 'right' from destruction and us humans the right to use its resources at our will?

Who told us that we 'know better' and that we therefore have the right to decide about the fate and lives of others?

Should the parent in a polygamist sect have the right to make her 14 yr old daughter marry a 40 yr old man?

Given the myriad of opinions and views, we need politics. Political parties advocate positions and sort out the mess. They simplify things, giving us debatable but generally discernible principles and policies. Otherwise nothing would be decided.

WE need activists to remind politicians not to get too presumptious. A govt should be scared of its people, not the other way round. But activists nevertheless do not make for a good govt.

balance balance balance.

Valentine's Day!

2009-02-14T17:40:00.008+12:00

You know its Valentine's Day when you find moi at a Starbucks by the bay blogging.

Je suis fatigue. For some strange reason I am. Though I think it's due to the general lack of excitement or apprehension of anything. Just relaxing. Just floating.

I found this photo on IHT:
A historic moment alright, taken at the White house in 1979 after the Egypt-Israeli peace treaty. Sadat, Carter, Begin.

The cameras, the flashes, the smiles. The smiles that lasted only as long as the reception, receding like the tide at the end of the day. The carpets kept and the crumpets swept away. Peace remains ever elusive.
Do I think the conflict can ever be solved?

Yes. No conflict is unsolvable. All it takes is a little political resolve. That will not come, however, with a new right-wing Likud govt under Netanyahu who doesn't favour a 2-state solution. The problem with Israeli politicians is that they are still stuck in Camp David. Americans, in 1967. A 2-state solution is no longer sufficient to keep the peace. New problems have cropped up. The world has changed and the dynamics of international relations - the balance of power in the region has been shifting slowly, and in fact it seems particularly unstable at this moment in history with a new American president and the biggest global economic slump since the great depression.
Hamas has to be part of the solution, but peace will not come until they resolve to recognise Israel. That, or destruction. Or continued persecution and turmoil to the citizens of Gaza, as per.

The Israelis and Americans have to stop living the past. Things aren't just going to be 'OKAY' just because everyone suddenly agrees to abide by the pre-1967 boundaries. Israeli settlements are not going to be reversed overnight. Political boundaries and sovereignty are just the beginning. The Palestinian Authority requires substantial aid in order for it to commence vital infrastructural projects, essential to the Palestinians, and especially so in order for the PA to regain it's credibility and authority. All we need is for America and its people, like George Soros, to stop pouring money into the deep end in Moscow, stop babying the Israelis, and say 'enough is enough, time to help the Palestinians, directly'.

Another problem hence, is the Israeli lobby in the US. That is an endemic problem, but they also have to realise that they are NOT the persecuted Jews of the past. Nukes, Iran may have, but any nuclear warfare in the region automatically puts the entire region at risk. Israelis don't like it, but I'm sure that their Arab neighbours feel pretty much the same as well.
As such, Iran is not just an American or Israeli problem. Stop victimising yourself and start doing proactive diplomacy with your neighbours. If there's anything needed to counter the threat posed by Iran, it's the entire Middle East working hand in hand. This means that it's time to stop 'divide and rule'.
Ultimately, to prevent a return of Bush energy policies and their vested interests in Middle East Oil, substantial funding MUST go into the usage of alternative energy sources in the US. This is the only way to break the oil spell. Oil Oligarchs should be ignored, their pet projects and peeves broken - and for this to happen, the current US administration needs to introduce harsh legislation. if this doesn't happen now during this crisis, it never will. It's time for it to stop being an endemic feature of US politics.

As for the Palestinian problem - stop looking back to history. Deal with the present. Acknowledge present realities and work with the current situation. Truth and Reconciliation is possible, but we got to start somewhere.

--
And down in the outback...

I got this off the BBC at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7887561.stm. It's really tragic. Over a 100 ppl have died for nothing. Bushfires are common in Australia and yet it is only now that they are promising to remove bureaucratic hurdles that have prevented the creation of a nationwide fire alert system???? This is absolutely crazy. How can anybody live with that? It is irresponsibility at it's max.

Somebody has also been arrested for arson, but that does little to reveal the inadequate measures that they have against a foe which they have been all but too familiar with. I'll like to call it Australia's Day of Infamy.

These kind of things should not be happening in a First World country. Maybe we just have inflated ideals about the 'first world'. Or maybe it's because we as human beings deserve so much more.

---

And tomorrow will mark the 20th anniversary of the Soviet Union pulling out of Afghanistan. Read more about it on the BBC!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/15/newsid_4160000/4160827.stm
and
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7888566.stm?lss

particularly the 2nd link...

Interestingly enough, tml also marks the day which Singapore is forced to surrender to the Japanese. Now, a day marked only as a footnote in sec2 history textbooks. The BBC notes that 'The British capitulation comes one week after Japanese forces invaded Singapore and only two weeks since their onslaught on the Malay Peninsula forced the British troops' withdrawal to the island.'

That is also the premise on which most of Singapore's state history is founded. The old tale which basically argues that self-reliance is therefore necessary because we cannot rely on any one else to defend our sovereignty.

They however forget to mention that we were nothing but a vassal. An important trading post rather, which only gained significance because we were the 'final frontier' against the Japanese.

Blame it on the British, not. Even that is taken forgranted in the national narrative today. The country has moved on from WW2 and the generation which lived through it is all but a step away from their graves. Nobody remembers. Nobody wants to. It doesn't concern them. The narrative is now about constant and steady progress. Slow and conservative, but nevertheless progressive. The past remains the past and the future is the now. The twain shall never meet.

I think that it is of the greatest ironies that success at peace breeds complacency and a general disbelief at the possibility of war. fantasy becomes reality and no one really understands war apart from what they see in the movies. Man spends so much of its time and effort PREVENTING war and devising ways and means of creating enduring peace. And yet in this tiny country, this speck in time, where peace has endured virtually since independence, a certain element of pomposity and complacency is bred.

Singapore is unreal.
Somalia is.

Sure. A particular mode of governance seems to have 'worked' in ensuring peace. Yet in a world where peace is the exception and not the norm, how long can it ensue? I can only wonder.

Food for thought.

WED

2009-02-12T02:06:00.003+12:00

What's scarier?

Feeling, or realising that you don't, anymore?

Is that what they meant by 'growing up'?

Weekend

2009-02-10T02:05:00.002+12:00

I had a rather eventful weekend. Not the most exciting, but at least it was packed.

3 notable mentions.

1) What the Butler Saw

It was really funny! I liked it. It was 'transcribed' and 'indigenized' from the original play by Joe Orton - which would explain the quintessentially British plots; the twists and turns. the ironies.

The play was also blatantly subversive. I'll leave it there. The audience lapped everything up like dogs, relishing every single minute of it. It did border somewhat dangerously on almost being a 'tragedy' though, and its extreme oscillations between comedy, tragedy and farce dampened my spirits somewhat and made it far less convincing than what it should have been.

Nevertheless, $30 well spent i guess. I'm too tired to go into details about the play, though i guess one can definitely google it online.

--

2) Jie Chen Piano Recital

I loved her interpretation of Bach-Busoni's Chaconne from Partita in D minor. Intense and emotional, it totally encapsulated the term 'sturm und drang'. Absolutely fascinating stuff. I teared.

Her ballads are less impressive though. After the intensity of the Busoni right before the interval, it seems almost inevitable that the general mood had to go down before picking up again - approximately around the 3rd ballade though. Her Ballade no 1 was crap. She got the interpretation wrong. didnt grasp the mood and tone of the piece properly and made various stark and i dare say careless note mistakes. the 2nd was slightly better. overall i thought she went really fast with all 4 ballades with kind of got me irked a little here and there, as though she was rushing through them.

i found the chinese pieces (liu yang river and bai nian chao feng [hundred birds paying respect to the phoenix] - yes chinese titles dont make sense in english) refreshing, but otherwise severely lacking in the logic encapsulated in her opening hayden and the busoni that followed them. im ok with guzheng-like imitations of the effect, but not when its the climax of the piece and seems to go on forever! it's absolutely percussive, non-harmonic and really really superfluous. i hate it. otherwise, the pieces were actually rather cute.

oh and i made it a point to give her my compliments after the concert during the autograph session. as a musician myself i feel compelled and somewhat obligated to do so.

lets put a smile on that face.

---

3) Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited

and I'm starting to write like Sebastian in Brideshead. Oh dear. in any case, my writing is no where comparable to Evelyn Waugh. His writing in BH is lush, evocative and compelling. i love it. its a slow and painful process of seduction.

Brideshead leaves many questions unanswered. ENIGMA. all the characters are, in someway. a very intense psychological study.

in many ways i also identify with the predicament of some. no, not all and certainly not everything. im neither of their position, predicament or period to begin with. the events dont tally and match up. nevertheless i find myself seduced by this novel with the sole identification with the loneliness and incomprehension that pervades throughout the story and the characters. those, on top of distance and indifference. many things pointed out in the story, i have come across somewhat, sometime in my life before, though it's just the beginning of mine.

i also find myself rediscovering the wonderful world of literature.

I'm only halfway through Brideshead, but i already feel as disturbed as i have been whilst watching the movie.

--

and I'm listening to the Walton Viola concerto on youtube now. wistful.

I love this article!

2009-02-04T02:54:00.002+12:00

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/03/why-americans-need-to-know-more-about-canada/
we sld really have more of this!

many thanks to the AC360 team. i love you guys!

Thanks.

2009-02-01T03:25:00.001+12:00

Many thanks to you guys for coming to my dad's CNY dinner thingy. Wouldn't have been so fun if it weren't for all of you. Thanks! :D

The Top 10 Scientific Discoveries of 2008

2009-01-31T19:04:00.001+12:00

THIS IS SO COOL. check it out ppl:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2008/top10/article/0,30583,1855948_1863947,00.html

I survived!

2009-01-31T18:36:00.002+12:00

I SURVIVED FRIDAY! WOO!

I SURVIVED THE BLOODY GOMBAK CROSS-COUNTRY RUN! yea baby!

It was a 'treacherous' (quote: chengxi) and gruelling (quote: subhas) 4.1km run up gombak hill. Goodness. I have technically never actually ran up hill - not to mention up and down various rocky inclines and one hell of an inline of 28degrees??? i dont recall a single person having actually ran up that slope.

and I STILL managed to beat CDF! woo! i'm good! :D i so thought i was gonna come in last. Towards the end I could hear my heart beating ONLY. many thanks to god for everything.

...

I also made it for the COA CNY reception. A job well done too! :D
my 2nd emceeing experience - less hallowing than the first and much better too. Of course, with the annoying emcee accent.

Yes. and today is laze around day as I finally feel my glutes, thighs and calves after such a long long while.

I swear to god that i have never felt so alive after the run yesterday. my nasal passageways were absolutely clear it was kinda freaky, and i was feeling really light headed too. wow! does wonders for confidence. yay!

what's next?

Of Romantics and Republicans

2009-01-29T16:42:00.004+12:00

It just enrages me every now and then in the midst of my book - Holy Madness: Romantics, Patriots, and Revolutionaries, 1776-1871.

No I have nothing against Zamoyski.

I just get riled up and pissed off when I read about some silly Romantic patriot who's so engulfed by his ideals - or the similarities between state-worship and christian-worship. however you define it. The irony of the 19th century is that a belief in rationality coincided with a widespread irrationality of the Romantic sort that pervaded through Europe like a disease; and through Europe the world!

Come the 21st century, reason and emotionality can't be defined and separated clearly anymore. American politics is a good example. So is YW, the epitome of dark irrationality.

It issn't the case that what we say goes.

And no, you don't decide the facts, or what's right and wrong. (As a side point, I have decided to coin a term ("confusionasionism"), meaning the emotive attempt to assert one's moral superiority over another through the posing of a question in a seemingly innocent way, but subverts truth through the use of poor reasoning smoked in a series of illogical - but not always identified clearly - arguments.)

In other news, Obama's stimulus package has been approved by Congress - but rejected by all house Republicans. Am I surprised? No. What irks me is all the confusionasionism going on. Facts and truths are subjugated amidst emotive appeals to 'poverty', 'transparency' and 'accountability'.

I think a good 99% of AC360 viewers have NEVER scrutinized the bill firsthand.

I also think that a good number of Republican reps close to that never have probably never bothered because voting FOR could lose them their seat.

And above all I think that no plan is perfect, but doing something is better than doing nothing at all. If there's anything I learnt, it seems pretty much that a system which has the greatest possibility of instilling confidence also encapsulates the worst. Why should it be otherwise? The American coin can flip either way any day. I'm just unable to comprehend at the present moment the complexity and alien-ness of American politics to my own country and culture. There is something wrong in all this. Democracy wasn't meant to be like that. Then again, why shouldn't it be?

We need a plan that is viable and accountable. I think the debate has to move away from 'what we should do'. Republican policy is hollow and empty. 8 yrs is enough. But we need to improve the current one as well so that the world won't go down to hell with the Americas.

MR Hong Kong 08

2009-01-26T19:54:00.007+12:00

It's old news but I'm watching it on TV now on CNY. Yes it's a very boring 1st day of CNY.

I'm reminded of the unfairness of the world once more and how I'm probably slapbang right at the top of the bellcurve. The winner was Michael Tsu. some hong-kong born american i think.

Apart from that I was frankly quite appalled and tickled by all the himbo-ness flying around. Oh god. It's so hilarious when they say 'im cute and hot and here to make you happy! vote for me!' *rolls eyes* sheesh. Not to mention the few really lame-ass vomit-inducing moments which made me say 'oh FUCK' involuntarily.

I need better entertainment, pronto.

Chomsky on Gaza

2009-01-26T19:39:00.006+12:00

You be the judge.

Chomsky comes in around 30mins+
http://mikeely.wordpress.com/2009/01/25/obamas-gaza-policy-it-is-approximately-the-bush-position/

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/23/noam_chomsky_obamas_stance_on_gaza

Unfairness

2009-01-25T22:07:00.003+12:00

Its not fair how some guys can be so hot.

Check this guy out:

chisled looks - check

double-chin - check

sunny sunshine looks - check

boyish grin - check

perfectly symmetrical face - check

almost flawless skin - check

amazing chest and pecs - check

and he even has a workout video on youtube!

OKAY.

inspiration to work harder...

The West's Selective Reading of History

2009-01-25T22:02:00.002+12:00

A very good article from Le Monde! Here's an extract:

Only the individual who fully recognises the humanity of others can be called civilised. “For a long time,” Todorov continues, “the ideas of the Enlightenment served as a source of inspiration for a liberal, reformist tendency that fought conservatism in the name of universalism and equal respect for all. Things have changed now, and the conservative defenders of the superiority of western thought claim to be the heirs of the Enlightenment, battling against the ‘relativism’ that they associate with the Romantic reaction of the early 19th century. But they can only achieve this by renouncing the true Enlightenment tradition with its articulation of universal values and cultural pluralism. We must go beyond the clichés: Enlightenment thought should not be confused either with dogmatism (my culture must be imposed upon all) or nihilism (all cultures are equally valid). To use it to denigrate others, as an excuse to subject or destroy them, is simply to hijack the Enlightenment.”

But was the Enlightenment really hijacked, or did it go along willingly? Hobson argues that the construction of 18th- and 19th-century European identity allowed the affirmation of an “exceptionalism” that no other civilisation has ever asserted. “Ultimately, the Europeans did not seek to remake the world simply because ‘they could’ (as in materialist explanations). They sought to remake the world because they believed they should. That is, their actions were significantly guided by their identity that deemed imperialism to be a morally appropriate policy.” Many European supporters of the anti-colonialist struggle and the Third World rejected this vision, often in the name of the Enlightenment. The debate will no doubt continue.

You can find the whole thing at: http://mondediplo.com/2009/01/07west

Happy CNY guys!

2009-01-25T21:43:00.001+12:00

Happy CNY folks! on this gloomy and cloudy day.

what will 2009 bring?

China's DWP 2008

2009-01-24T01:15:00.004+12:00

I was reading a Foreign Policy analysis of the Chinese Defence White Paper and was rather skeptic. Therefore i decided to scrutinise it myself.
http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/22/you_were_at_the_inauguration_china_was_planning_to_fight_america

In essence, "China's national defense policy for the new stage in the new century basically includes: upholding national security and unity, and ensuring the interests of national development; achieving the all-round, coordinated and sustainable development of China's national defense and armed forces; enhancing the performance of the armed forces with informationization as the major measuring criterion (took a tip or two from georgia); implementing the military strategy of active defense; pursuing a self-defensive nuclear strategy; and FOSTERING a security environment conducive to China's peaceful development."

Nevertheless, I have to say that I concur with the writer Dan Twining that the White Paper's primary audience is the USA. They aren't very subtle of course. Look at this:

"World peace and development are faced with multiple difficulties and challenges. Struggles for strategic resources, strategic locations and strategic dominance have intensified. Meanwhile, hegemonism and power politics still exist, regional turmoil keeps spilling over, hot-spot issues are increasing, and local conflicts and wars keep emerging. The impact of the financial crisis triggered by the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis is snowballing. In the aspect of world economic development, issues such as energy and food are becoming more serious, highlighting deep-seated contradictions. Economic risks are manifesting a more interconnected, systematic and global nature. Issues such as terrorism, environmental disasters, climate change, serious epidemics, transnational crime and pirates are becoming increasingly prominent."

It's a summary which I daresay some GP kids can't even do themselves, though it seems more of a checklist of developments in the later part of the 20th century. But look at the underlying resentment with the specific reference to 'THE U.S. subprime mortgage crisis'. It's not the 'global economic crisis', but a pinpointing of what the Chinese feel IS THE ROOT CAUSE. Not too different from Russia in this aspect.

And then there's this. It's thick.

"Driven by competition in overall national strength and the development of science and technology, international military competition is becoming increasingly intense, and the worldwide revolution in military affairs (RMA) is reaching a new stage of development. Some major powers are realigning their security and military strategies, increasing their defense investment, speeding up the transformation of armed forces, and developing advanced military technology, weapons and equipment. Strategic nuclear forces, military astronautics, missile defense systems, and global and battlefield reconnaissance and surveillance have become top priorities in their efforts to strengthen armed forces. Some developing countries are also actively seeking to acquire advanced weapons and equipment to increase their military power. All countries are attaching more importance to supporting diplomatic struggles with military means. As a result, arms races in some regions are heating up, posing grave challenges to the international arms control and nonproliferation regime."

The notables here is really the not-too-subtle reference once again to the US, which is the indisputed leader of the RMA (albeit with its own difficulties but nevertheless STILL the indisputed leader...). The usage of these terms should send 'pings!' into you. I'm not sure about the 'arms races' bit, though i think the reference to 'international arms control' and the 'nonproliferation regime' are just diplomatic-talk meant to appease the UN.

Again,

"At the same time, the U.S. has increased its strategic attention to and input in the Asia-Pacific region, further consolidating its military alliances, adjusting its military deployment and enhancing its military capabilities. In addition, terrorist, separatist and extremist forces are running rampant, and non-traditional security issues such as serious natural disasters crop up frequently. The mechanisms for security cooperation between countries and regions are yet to be enhanced, and the capability for coping with regional security threats in a coordinated way has to be improved...In particular, the United States continues to sell arms to Taiwan in violation of the principles established in the three Sino-U.S. joint communiques, causing serious harm to Sino-U.S. relations as well as peace and stability across the Taiwan Straits."

It's interesting to see how this blatant reference to the US presupposes the US itself to be part of the problem. The Chinese stand is therefore officially this: we ain't pursuing any extension of a sphere of influence, so you shouldn't as well. I'm wondering if China will go Putin in the future, if America keeps walling up China and pushing it back.

It's also not to subtle on things like - "China is playing an active and constructive role in multilateral affairs, thus notably elevating its international position and influence."

and even ASEAN is mentioned - "The conclusion of the ASEAN Charter has enabled a new step to be taken toward ASEAN integration. Remarkable achievements have been made in cooperation between China and ASEAN, as well as between ASEAN and China, Japan and the Republic of Korea."

While this is interesting - "The Six-Party Talks on the Korean nuclear issue have scored successive achievements, and the tension in Northeast Asia is much released."

This portion illicits careful reading though: "Issues of existence security and development security, traditional security threats and non-traditional security threats, and domestic security and international security are interwoven and interactive. China is faced with the superiority of the developed countries in economy, science and technology, as well as military affairs. It also faces strategic maneuvers and containment from the outside while having to face disruption and sabotage by separatist and hostile forces from the inside. "

There is lingering suspicion of American espionage attempts attempting to aid rebellion and resistance within China. This brings to mind the Tibet fiasco last year, not to mention annoying human rights groups based in America as well, though the bottom line is that internal threats to the regime are still their primary concern. The status quo can be jeopardised however, by international developments (i.e. global credit crunch and impact on the CCP).

It is nevertheless, good to know that "China will never seek hegemony or engage in military expansion now or in the future, no matter how developed it becomes", though the question begs as to how it plans to FOSTER 'a security environment conducive to China's peaceful development'
...

Technology is the essence of RMA and this is how the Chinese plan to do it:
" Persisting in taking mechanization as the foundation and informationization as focus, China is stepping up the composite development of mechanization and informationization. Persisting in strengthening the military by means of science and technology, China is working to develop new and high-tech weaponry and equipment, carry out the strategic project of training talented people, conduct military training in conditions of informationization, and build a modern logistics system in an all-round way, so as to change the mode of formation of war-fighting capabilities. "

However I think on the whole, 'the strategic project of training talent people' is highly flawed. My impression of the chinese system is still rather 'factory-like' in its produce, and im not sure about their capability to produce leadership which looks beyond mere knowledge of technical facts. They may prove me wrong, but I don't think that their 'talent management scheme' is currently producing much results, esp with cronyism in the upper echelons.

Meanwhile with their economy in deep shit too, I highly doubt their ability to "call for the building of a lean and effective deterrent force and the flexible use of different means of deterrence." I'm quite concerned about this - It takes military operations other than war (MOOTW) as an important form of applying national military forces, and scientifically makes and executes plans for the development of MOOTW capabilities. - which could point to greater Chinese exposure through the UN platform (or not). Not sure where they got their idea from...

OOOO and this part i like: The PLA insists on putting ideological and political work first, and pushing forward the innovative development of ideological and political work, to ensure the Party's absolute leadership over the armed forces, the scientific development of the military, the all-round development of the officers and men, the increase of combat capabilities and the effective fulfillment of historical missions...The PLA persists in arming its officers and men with the theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics, educates them in its historical missions, ideals, beliefs, fighting spirit and the socialist concept of honor and disgrace, and carries forward the fine traditions of obeying the Party's orders, serving the people, and fighting bravely and skillfully. The PLA's ideological and political education adheres to six principles: to be guided by scientific theories, to put the people first, to focus on the central task and serve the overall interests, to aim at concrete results, to educate through practical activities, and to encourage innovation and development.

I really don't see how any of this is 'socialist'. It's Maoist alright, but merely cliche. The 'historical' part makes me laugh out loud cuz its vaguely marxist, but really just an abuse of commie jingo. It all goes downhill from there...

Hotness

2009-01-24T00:38:00.002+12:00

I found this on Prof Chris Blattman's blog. this is so cool -

http://chrisblattman.blogspot.com/2009/01/political-science-and-economics-hot-or.html

In 2006, James Felton, Peter T. Koper, John Mitchell and Michael Stinson conducted research that sought to establish, inter alia how perceived hotness of professors affected their RateMyProfessors evaluations for teaching quality. As part of this exercise, Felton et al. ranked (Table 2 in their paper) the relative hotness quotients of 36 different academic disciplines.

so sorry rajesh!
anyway its kind of queer how religion is high in the rankings...

On another note, I found a brilliant article on the AC360 blog linked to foreignpolicy.com. its by Prof Stephan M. Walt who has a blog on FP.com. The full text is here - http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/17/the_myth_of_israels_strategic_genius

Here are some excerpts...

"In the late 1980s, Israel helped nurture Hamas -- yes, the same organization that the IDF is bent on destroying today -- as part of its long-standing effort to undermine Yasser Arafat and Fatah and keep the Palestinians divided. This decision backfired too, because Arafat eventually recognized Israel and agreed to negotiate a two-state solution, while Hamas emerged as a new and dangerous adversary that has refused to recognize Israel's existence and to live in peace with the Jewish state.

The signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993 offered an unprecedented chance to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict once and for all, but Israel's leaders failed to seize the moment. Prime Ministers Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, and Benjamin Netanyahu all refused to endorse the idea of a Palestinian state -- even Rabin never spoke publicly about allowing the Palestinians to have a state of their own -- and Ehud Barak's belated offer of statehood at the 2000 Camp David summit did not go far enough. As Barak's own foreign minister, Shlomo Ben-Ami, later admitted, "if I were a Palestinian, I would have rejected Camp David as well." (bolding and colors mine) Meanwhile, the number of settlers in the West Bank doubled during the Oslo period (1993-2001), and the Israelis built some 250 miles of connector roads in the West Bank. Palestinian leaders and U.S. officials made their own contributions to Oslo's failure, but Israel had clearly squandered what was probably the best opportunity it will ever have to negotiate a peace agreement with the Palestinians. Barak also derailed a peace treaty with Syria in early 2000 that appeared to be a done deal, at least to President Bill Clinton, who had helped fashion it. But when public opinion polls suggested that the Israeli public might not support the deal, the Israeli Prime Minister got cold feet and the talks collapsed. "

and...

"Finally, a similar strategic myopia is apparent in the assault on Gaza. Israeli leaders initially said that their goal was to inflict enough damage on Hamas so it could no longer threaten Israel with rocket attacks. But they now concede that Hamas will neither be destroyed nor disarmed by their attacks, and instead say that more extensive monitoring will prevent rocket parts and other weapons from being smuggled into Gaza. This is a vain hope, however. As I write this, Hamas has not accepted a ceasefire and is still firing rockets; even if it does accept a ceasefire soon, rocket and mortar fire are bound to resume at some point in the future. On top of that, Israel's international image has taken a drubbing, Hamas is probably more popular, and moderate leaders like Mahmoud Abbas have been badly discredited. A two-state solution -- which is essential if Israel wishes to remain Jewish and democratic and to avoid becoming an apartheid state -- is farther away than ever. The IDF performed better in Gaza than it did in Lebanon, largely because Hamas is a less formidable foe than Hezbollah. But this does not matter: the war against Hamas is still a strategic failure. And to have inflicted such carnage on the Palestinians for no lasting strategic gain is especially reprehensible. "

"The moral of this story is that there is no reason to think that Israel always has well-conceived strategies for dealing with the problems that it faces. "

--

Well said Prof Stephen. You can find his blog here-http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/

This gives me great ideas with my time in oxford! I will probably be posting random stuff abt the things im reading and on current affairs too! We need cool profs in ox too.

Ode to Idiocy

2009-01-23T03:01:00.002+12:00

when you're illogical and stubborn
you're life sucks but you don't know it
and you think others are bad.

your life is really really sad and i feel for you.
contempt.
anger.
irritated.

it seems clear to me now that your foolishness cannot be eradicated easily without a traumatic and terrible experience that will destroy whatever inclinations you have. it is unfortunate that you will never go through that.

education has failed you.
reason has eluded you.
and the Enlightenment never was.

King of the Office

2009-01-22T13:57:00.003+12:00

I'm alone in the office this morning! I'm hereby King for the morning! MUAHAHAHA.

Obama's Transatlatic Challenges

2009-01-22T13:51:00.002+12:00

http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=3179

MADRID, Spain -- Barack Obama begins his presidency with an unprecedented level of goodwill among Europeans, who are hoping he will reverse many of the unpopular policies that embittered transatlantic relations under his predecessor. As the contours of Obama's foreign policy come into focus, however, much of the onus for smoothing the frayed relationship will lie with Europe, not the United States.

Obama faces a daunting list of domestic and foreign policy challenges, at a time when the United States' historic levels of debt -- combined with the faltering American economy -- will force him to call on Europeans to do more. Transatlantic relations will certainly suffer if Europeans are unwilling to meet his requests.

But even if Europeans do come to Obama's aid, the transatlantic landscape will still be subject to tension. Not only are Obama's positions on many key domestic and foreign policy issues quite different from those held by European leaders, he is likely to make many of the same demands on Europe that his predecessor did.

His formidable national security team, too, surrounds him with advocates of "American pre-eminence" (Secretary of State Hillary Clinton), and the unilateral use of military force in the absence of U.N. support (Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice). Neither approach is likely to win him friends in European capitals.

The following is a brief summary of what Obama's first year in office holds in store for transatlantic relations.

Afghanistan. Afghanistan will, more than any other foreign policy issue, determine the course of transatlantic relations during Obama's presidency. Obama plans to send as many as 30,000 additional American soldiers to Afghanistan, while also seeking greater troop contributions from his already very reluctant European counterparts. The tension will come to a head in April 2009, when leaders of the 26-member NATO alliance gather for a summit in France and Germany.

Iran. Obama has vowed to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, declaring on the one hand that he "will never take military options off the table," while on the other that he would like to engage Iran with no preconditions. This puts him on a collision course with European officials, who want to continue with the existing European-led diplomatic track that makes Iran's suspension of uranium enrichment a precondition for U.S. engagement.Moreover, should Obama's own diplomatic outreach fail to elicit a shift from Tehran, efforts to establish new, more comprehensive sanctions will prove a hard sell in Europe, which has a robust trading relationship with Iran.

European-based Missile Defense. As a candidate, Obama said he would cut spending on "unproven" missile defense systems, but he has not made any definitive declarations on a planned missile defense system based in Poland and the Czech Republic. Despite a NATO endorsement for the plan at the Bucharest summit in April 2008, Europeans remain deeply divided over the issue. Poland and the Czech Republic believe missile defense will enhance their security vis-à-vis Russia, while much of Western Europe is nervous about antagonizing Moscow, which strongly opposes the system's deployment.

NATO. In addition to the problem of troop commitments, the United States and its European allies have fundamentally different ideas about what is needed to turn Afghanistan into a functioning country. The practical effect of the rift has been to undermine NATO's credibility by exposing the alliance's inability to carry out ambitious projects. Allies are also divided over the issue of NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine. Obama says he supports their admission to NATO "when they are ready." NATO allies like France and Germany, however, are opposed to expanding the alliance, again for fear of provoking another confrontation with Russia.

Climate Change. Obama has vowed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 80 percent by 2050, and invest $150 billion in new energy-saving technologies. If approved by the U.S. Congress, his approach will be far more ambitious than anything proposed by Europe, which nevertheless portrays itself as the global leader on this issue.EU leaders agreed to new climate change targets in December 2008, but the issue will come to a head in December 2009, at scheduled U.N. talks in Copenhagen on a pact to replace the Kyoto Protocol.

Global Economics. While Obama has pledged to implement a comprehensive series of reforms to the American economy designed to prevent a repeat of the current financial crisis, he is unlikely to agree to European demands to "rewrite the rules of global capitalism." Transatlantic differences over the appropriate levels of state intervention will come to a head at a major economic summit in London in April 2009.

Arab-Israeli Conflict. European leaders are hoping for more "balance" in the American approach to the conflict, but indications are that U.S.-Israeli ties will remain close. Although Obama's position will in part depend on the winner of Israeli elections in February, he has expressed sympathy for Israel's security dilemma, and Clinton has historically been a staunch supporter of Israel.

Guantánamo. Although Obama wants to shut down the Gitmo detention camp, the many legal challenges involved means that it may take as long as a year to actually close the site. European governments, who have for years called for the camp's closure, will be under pressure to help Obama find a home for some of its 248 remaining detainees. But Europeans remain split on the issue, with some countries saying they will consider taking some inmates, and others insisting it is Washington's responsibility.

Despite Obama's much-vaunted global worldview, as president he will put American interests first. But the help he receives from Europe could well determine how successful he is in advancing them. In this context, one of Obama's major trump cards is European public opinion, which across the political spectrum genuinely wants him to succeed. As a result, European governments may find it easier to support Obama on the the most difficult and important issues in ways not possible before.

Soeren Kern is senior fellow for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group.

Inauguration

2009-01-21T17:12:00.003+12:00

I'm watching CNN's Larry King Live. Caught glimpses of it.

An elderly black man was sobbing, saying something about how the inauguration was a reflection of the US being a 'good country'. True emotions poured out. Pain and anguish. The triumph over oppression.

In many ways, the Obama administration should not be idealised. But in many other ways, it has come to symbolise much more.

He has his way with words, but those words can only take effect because they mean so much more and give so much more to the people. They give hope. I find myself moved. Will def post the speech here and give my thoughts on it soon.

Tuesday

2009-01-20T22:24:00.002+12:00

IT's just one of those long days when I'm stuck in office while some meeting just refuses to end and I'm left high and dry without any real food cept for a couple of grapes and wasabi pops. not exactly the kind of dinner Jamie would have in mind...

Either way, I'm here.

I started re-reading Adam Zamoyski's Holy Madness: Romantics, Patriots, and Revolutionaries, 1776-1871.

It's everything I expect my first yr module in Oxford to be. Broad-based with a somewhat thematic approach covering lots of ground together with the ability to see trends. It wasn't till I got through the first few pages that I remembered his horrilbly factual ramblings were the reason I stopped halfway the first time. Almost 2 yrs ago in fact - i bought the book in New York and stopped reading soon after I got back. In a way it's a good thing too, cuz I actually know a little bit more now to comprehend whatever he's trying to tell me.

For instance, I managed to get through a good 80% of Tommaso Astarita's Between Salt Water and Holy Water: A History of Southern Italy, which is really REALLY easy to read. It's fascinating, exciting and colorful. He has a lovely writing style. Simple easy to understand prose that captivates like any good novel does. That really contributed much to ameliorate the severe drought in understanding rgrding not just Italy, but also medieval history in general.

And back to Zamoyski. My initial impression was pretty much transfixed on his ability to make a wonderfully exciting era become so placid and boring that I almost fell asleep at my desk (again). Nevertheless, things really picked up towards the chapters on 'Civil Rites' and 'Holy War' where he went rather in-depth into the French Revolution - which is in my opinion is a fascinating epoch. A turning-point in the evolution of humanity.

From what I gather, 'nationalism' then is really the rationale by-product of religion after processing it through the factories of the enlightenment. The desire to supplant the Catholic Church in turn brought about a newfound religiosity in REASON as the ultimate aim and goal in life. This was a process started way back from the renaissance and the two reformations. As of now, religion has fought back but we never replace the role of reason and science in society

- unless you're living in some polygamist sect in the middle of America -

SEA nationalism then is different in that it's leaders aimed to create that kind of emotionale fervour from scratch. in some cases, nationalism = a more refined expression of culture and religion in that particular society. This differs much from that in Europe, in degrees of course. Nationalism, as with many other -isms, was merely layered upon the fabric of society and in many ways became entertwined with its various parts. You can't pick them out easily anymore.

And I'm only in Chapter 7 trying to get through Hungarian nationalism! Got to plough through my details...

I've also unfortunately stopped reading Anton La Guardia's Holy Land Unholy War, which is actually very good but just overflowing with details. It's good journalism. Less boring than academia, but the style of writing gets into you after a while. Good for general knowledge, bad for studying. And yes, it was getting really depressing too.

One of the things that baffles me greatly is the ongoing Israel V Hamas war. Arrogance? Hubris? The belief that they would actually achieve some long-lasting good out of a punitive strike in Gaza? Have they never considered the lives lost, the anger and pain, the possibility of greater support for anti-Israeli movements regardless of the short-term capabilities of Hamas?

One wonders what leaders think. Maybe they don't think at all.

And we all know which one doesn't.

All hands up in favour of the inauguration!

I'm so proud to be alive to witness history in the making. Daunting as it may seem, I hope to place my little and tiny faith in the possibility of Obama making a difference to the ongoing crises. He is no messiah. The least we could do though is to give him a chance.

No more shit from the Whitehouse! That should be our slogan.

Betrayed Babies

2009-01-19T03:23:00.001+12:00

Betrayed Babies
17 January 09, 3pm
Esplanade Recital Studio

A missed opportunity.

Betrayed Babies is essentially a play about techies acting as actors when none show up for rehearsal, and are of course acted by none other by the techies in Panggung ARTS themselves. It is funny and light-hearted, spoofing the Sandiwara-style of TV dramas, which so happens to be titled ‘Betrayed Babies’ as well, but says little about what ‘family’ really is.

Me: Could you perhaps elaborate on the title ‘Betrayed Babies’? Why did you decide on this?

Director: *Blank look*. Erm… I’ll leave you to make the association…

Sure, I found the humour and the melodrama really funny. I identified with the dynamics of back-stage work. The director cum playwright Aidli Mosbit herself professed that the people at Panggung ARTS were like a family to her – coupled with the somewhat matriarchal production director, the need to balance professionalism with friendships, and so on. She also noted the growing presence of women in backstage work in the Singapore arts scene, which was clearly reflected in this all-female production.

Once you get past the melodrama and the spoofs, you also realise that the play is rather bold in the issues it explores, ranging from lesbianism to pre-marital sex to fuck-buddies, together with a whole slew of lies, and deceit. The portrayal of a retarded-girl being the illegitimate offspring of an ‘ulamma’ and everyone dancing in their prayer outfits was perhaps the more memorable moments of the play which bordered on the blasphemous.

Nevertheless, it wasn’t clear if the play’s focus as a whole was on the life of the backstage crew, or the play that they were acting out. Little on what ‘family’ is was probed or discussed. During the post-show dialogue, they merely reflected on how hard acting really was, and the play seemed only like an avenue for personal exploration. The verdict? The majority would rather continue being techies – safe backstage with fewer chances of screwing up.

With the play acted in Singlish and punctuated with Malay and the occasional Chinese, the play has limited appeal beyond our shores, not to mention those who have never known the existence of Suria, and it is unlikely to even stand a chance in conservative Malaysia. While it was perhaps a learning experience and a brave attempt for the techies of panggung ARTS, it was less so for the audience of the half-filled Esplanade Recital Studio. The girls were having fun, but that’s about all there was.

_father.mother.dog

2009-01-19T03:22:00.000+12:00

_father.mother.dog/
16 January 09, 8pm
Seminar Room, National Museum of Singapore

Family just is.

I absolutely loved _father.mother.dog/. It bedazzles. It is provocative, eccentric, disturbing and yet enthralling. Humour is blended with tension, angst and resent, strewn in with a dash of Freud and a pick of the future. Amongst all the plays in the Fringe Festival that I watched, it was perhaps the only one which dared to portray a vision for a radically different notion of ‘family’, and boldly questioned human nature itself.

--

FMD is a male-oriented play.

Three men dominate - a renowned unmarried French professor with 4 daughters who have 6 mothers, an Italian manager representing the ‘classical’ notion of family, and the German researcher/protagonist who is obsessed about finding a solution to the problem of ‘the family’.

The beginning was abrupt and disturbing. I have no inkling whatsoever about German absurdist theatre (think Bertolt Brecht) apart from the groans from my Theatre-studies friends in NUS, but starting of with a power-point presentation titled ‘Research Project on the Prospect of New Family Structures by The Institute for the Studies on Marriage and Family Matters’ in a Seminar Room, clearly set my head wheeling, and I seriously thought that the Italian guy donning a beekeeper suit humming a strange Italian tune and playing with honey whilst walking around was going to seriously hamper my ability to write this review.

Nevertheless, it turned out to be a wonderful experience.

While the actors professed to have toned down the stereotyping for their first non-European audience, the characters nevertheless each represent a prototype of their nationality (together with friendly jibes that their stereotypes). Though the play leaves little room for real character development, it skilfully explores the question of human nature successfully.

Schneider is the gung-ho German social scientist whose ultimate aim in this project is to create a ‘new family structure’. This very aim and desire itself however suggests something of a darker nature, as he seems almost bent on freeing himself from the bonds of familial ties. Yet the painful dramatic irony is his susceptibility to it. In his lecture he argues that parenthood is delinquency and urges his audience against the ‘dumbmastification’ of humanity. Yet, he reminisces over a few baby toys (presumably his), lunges maniacally towards a ‘father-figure’ trying to shake him off, and writhes in angst, horror and ultimately pain as his creation refuses to acknowledge him as father.

French prof rips off shirt exclaiming: Schneider! Be a man! Run into me like a cannonball! I will hold you!

Schneider: ahhhhhh!

French prof: It’s ok Schneider. Papa’s got you. It’s ok… And now I will let you down. You can come down now. (German guy climbs onto him). Erm… Schneider?

Towards the end, the play even bordered along horror, continuing the tradition of Shelley in Frankenstein, Huxley in Brave New World and yes – even Hollywood (The Island). A blister is presented (uncannily similar to the ‘embryos’ in The Island really…) with a creature inside - a human without any notion of familial bonds. The offspring of Schneider, but hardly his son.

I couldn’t help but feel immensely disturbed when the blister was finally unwrapped at the end, revealing the voodoo doll-like robot thing which is supposedly the end-point and pinnacle of evolution and humanity. Sure - the thing is cute with his blue-pin eyes, its whirling heads and limbs, and it’s Bart impression of ‘eat my shorts’, but it shocks me at the same time. It really does. Ultimately, the play doesn’t explain why familial ties are the way they are – indeed they can’t. They just are, according to the Italian. But that becomes the strength of the play because it indirectly forces me to consider whether our notion of family is really inherent to us. A prerequisite to being human.

I shall not dive into a discussion of philosophy now, but it would be interesting to note John Locke’s theory of the Tabula Rasa – the blank slate (The actors themselves also did a crazy amount of research prior to the production and I’m sure that they would have come across it). Are all humans born a blank slate, waiting to be filled with knowledge via the senses, or are certain things inbred and born within us like our notion of family, love, ties and kinship? Even the promiscuous French professor has a very conservative notion of family - almost sobbing visibly upon hearing his son having done well in school. Having come from an incomplete family myself, it makes me wonder if this is an inevitable truth.

And then they were the bees.

Bees just are. They don’t ask why they exist or why they carry out that particular function. They just do it. Kinship, is merely a natural impulse and instinct. The instinct to produce honey for instance. At the moment of ‘revelation’ of the creature, the beekeeper guy runs in panicking. All the bees had left. No drones, no queen, no nothing. While the playwright had drawn inspiration from the recent news of the decreasing number of bees in America, it also served as a strong and resounding parallel to the action of the main plot. There, the scientists had found a new possibility of humanity – the abolishment of the family in itself. The bees similarly, seemed to have broken away from the very ties which kept them together in the first place. Two disturbing phenomena mirror and illuminate each other at the same time. No bees no honey. No family no love?

It would be impossible to cover all the issues brought up by the play in this article itself. You have to watch it yourself. I liked how the actors were inspired to do this play not only to bring awareness to the pressing issue of population decline in their homeland, but also their own personal journey to fatherhood as they all become fathers for the very first time. The fact that this performance was also the first time the actors did it in English instead of German to a non-European audience also heightens the universality of the issues discussed and presented. Ania, a German lady I spoke to, noted its pertinence to her being a German.

It’s relevance to Singaporeans? During the post-show dialogue, one of the actors noted chancing upon the ‘Romancing Singapore’ website while doing up research on Singapore – which was promptly noted by a member of the audience to be ‘a national embarrassment’. Nevertheless, it does clearly exemplify the difficulty of even breaking out of that ‘classical’ idea of a family – father.mother.child. The furthest we have come to, is perhaps only father.mother.dog.

Unfortunate? I leave that to you.

On the brink of history

2009-01-18T20:47:00.003+12:00

One of the few articles actually written by Anderson. Catch the inauguration LIVE this coming tuesday the 20th of Jan! It promises to be a historic moment. I'm proud and excited to be alive to witness it.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/17/on-the-brink-of-history/

Anderson Cooper

Searching the paper on the way to Washington, looking for news of the inaugural, the headlines warn of what lies ahead: “Big firms Deepen Job, Wage Cuts.” “Circuit City To Liquidate.” The storm clouds are all around us.

The challenges Barack Obama is about to take on are overwhelming, but not, of course, unprecedented. Abraham Lincoln took office with fears the country itself was on the brink of dissolution. Fears for his safety were so great he had to sneak through Baltimore on board his train. Maryland, like Virginia, was a slave state.

FDR’s first inaugural was in the midst of the Depression. 1933. Relief would not come for many years more. So, as Barack Obama heads to Washington today, on a train trip that will re-trace some of Lincoln’s own train journey, he shoulders a great burden, but one past presidents have as well. He arrives in Washington this evening with a groundswell of public support. More than Clinton did, more than Reagan.

On the plane heading to Washington this morning, there is excitement. People pose for pictures with one another, wanting to document, savor each moment of their journey to history. These next few days, are ones without politics, without labels, without divisions. That is how it should be at least. We are a young country, one that rejected the traditions of the past in order to form itself anew.

When we inaugurate a president, we celebrate our youth, our democracy, our vitality, our ability to transfer power peacefully. Today, and in the days to come, we pause on the brink of history, looking forward, and looking back, and we repeat the traditions which we ourselves created after our independence.

Traditions which remind us that we have faced worse problems in the past, and we have succeeded. We walk in the path of those who have come before us. Like the President-Elect, we do not make this journey on our own.

A rather disparaging remark abt CNN brainwashing the public was posted in the AC360 blog. That guy is probably a Republican sore loser whom I have little sympathy for... I think the world, and America especially, deserves to get excited about somebody after 8 years of failure. And yes - the very same nation which voted him into office in the first place and got all excited and patriotic about the 2 wars. Brainwashing? Some how no one has admitted to be victim or culprit as yet. History will tell.

Will post my review of Father.Mother.Dog and Betrayed Babies soon.

Sunday blahness

2009-01-12T02:18:00.002+12:00

Cleaned ou my cupboards today. that's only a fifth of my entire room and it took the whole afternn alrdy. At least the room feels clean already.

All KI students sld read this blog entry by Chris Blattman: http://chrisblattman.blogspot.com/2009/01/what-do-marx-freud-and-adler-have-in.html

And here's a random love poem by Pushkin.

Dear Chains
Rose-maiden, no, I do not quarrel
With these dear chains, they don't demean.
The nightingale embushed in laurel,
The sylvan singers' feathered queen,
Does she not bear the same sweet plight?
Near the proud rose's beauty dwelling,
And with her tender anthems thrilling
The dusk of a voluptuous night.

Galaxy M 74

2009-01-11T03:32:00.001+12:00

http://server6.wikisky.org/starview?object_type=2&object_id=78

Peter Bergen

2009-01-11T03:16:00.002+12:00

And I love his commentaries. Here are the main points taken straight out of the article:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/09/bergen.war.obama/index.html
--

First, the United States must lower the temperature in the Muslim world to help win back the "swing voters" in the Islamic world who turned against America and provide passive support to al Qaeda.

A second strategic doctrine should be: first, do no harm. Its rationale lies in the several major strategic weaknesses from which al Qaeda and its associated groups suffer.

The third doctrine is to disaggregate our enemies. The United States must not fall into bin Laden's rhetorical trap of believing there is a monolithic global jihadist militant movement united against it. The United States should be splintering, buying off and co-opting its enemies -- the kind of policy that severely damaged al Qaeda in Iraq.

The fourth doctrine is to approach the war on al Qaeda and allied groups as a global counterinsurgency campaign, something that thoughtful students of the global war on terror like the Australian anthropologist/infantry officer Lt. Col. David Kilcullen and Bruce Hoffman, the dean of terrorism studies, have advocated for years.

Finally, promoting more open societies in the Muslim world will undermine the jihadist terrorists. It is no accident that so many members of jihadist terror organizations come from countries such as Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Algeria and Egypt -- countries ruled by authoritarian regimes.

Peter Bergen is CNN's national security analyst and a fellow at the New America Foundation in Washington and at New York University's Center on Law and Security. His most recent book is "The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader." This is the second of two commentaries on the war on terror. Read the first piece here

What the Box really means

2009-01-11T03:03:00.000+12:00

We Live in a Box by Irfan Kasban (Singapore)
10 January 09, 3pm, The Substation Theatre

WE LIVE IN A BOX is Irfan Kasban’s debut English play which was held at the Substation. The small enclosed space provided by the Guinness Theatre clearly fits the bill as suggested by the title, though somebody has got to do something about those darned seats. If you are reading this, please purchase more fizzy drinks from the vending machine at the entrance to help the Substation.

Sypnosis: WE LIVE IN A BOX is concerned about the concept of a home, and is obsessed about the use of space, its meaning, the dialogue between a house, home and its occupants, and ultimately questioning the idea of relationships. Two plots run parallel to each other which are ultimately related – the soul and mind of the foetus, and the drama of its parents in the ‘outside’ world.

SPACE. The central focus of the play indeed. After reminding myself of the dangers of the ‘economy-class’ syndrome, I got used to the dingy dark room (I use this term literally here for now…) I found myself in with eccentrically stringed light-bulbs and regularly placed white strips on the floor illuminated by incandescent UV lamps at the side making for a more ghostly version of life-size chess playing.

Before entering though, a Philips light-bulb was placed into my hand. The playwright himself, now part of the play, collected the light-bulbs from the audience after we seated, gingerly Ding ding! Symbolism number ONE).

Symbolism is one of Irfan’s strong points indeed. As spoken by himself during the short dialogue session after the play, he made conscious use of multi-layered symbolism throughout the entire play. Light-bulbs are themselves fragile, just like life. The gas within it is necessary to sustain the burning of the filament. Break it and it dies. Just as when you abort a foetus, you break it away from the confines of the womb. A mind without a soul is not a mind, so on and so forth. The use of light in a dark and claustrophobic space similarly engages the audience like mayflies. They represent hope, ideals, dreams, and life itself. Yet even so, the sudden brightening of a darkroom (here meaning the room used to develop photographs…) destroys the dreams of the female lead of finally unlocking the lost memories of her past as she clutches at the now messed up roll of film, just as it illuminates that of her husband who now finally has the child to make his family and home complete.

The space provided by the theatre was also easily transformed with gestures and sound – yet another of his strong points. The crowded MRT noted by the audience with the simple raising of the hand to the bulb wires. The familiar rustling of people, background humming, the doors, the way Irfan mimicked cordial and civil conversations, made for effective drama. I was also particularly impressed by how the audience become part of the scene as ‘passengers’ within the make-believe MRT itself. Reality and fantasy collided. We felt the awkwardness and uneasiness of the female protagonist as she attempts to evade the truth, just as we shared her disdain for the embarrassing outbursts of her long-lost classmate. That was the scene which arguably made the play. In addition, the effective use of dual simultaneous conversation to evoke tension with constant and repeated alliteration heightened the climax of the play and thereby demonstrated Irfan’s immense potential for English plays in the near future. I loved the music, intoxicating and still playing non-stop in my head, and also the avant-garde like video clips. The other dramatic moments – the dropping of the film, or the phone – were but simple tricks.

Nevertheless, the vivacity of the angel, the stoic awkwardness of the soul-figure, and the comic presentation of the angel Michael via a persistent and annoying male Indian receptionist caused the play to oscillate violently between a philosophical and incomprehensibly farcical tone. It wasn’t set right at the beginning. Although Irfan explained the presentation of the angels during the dialogue, it didn’t seem clearly self-evident. Perhaps the few raw, unpolished segments which were overdone in the play and particularly got under my skin…

ENTRAPMENT. Nevertheless, WE LIVE IN A BOX was a brave attempt. The failure to present a radical revision of the meaning of family and home, therefore captures the essence of living within a ‘box’. You cannot escape the box, but you can make it better, familiar. ‘Home’ is the familiar. Home is also the box. The box is reality. The box also represents the mindsets, the ideologies and beliefs that we are trapped in. We are trapped in reality. Hence, the dissipation of happiness and the possibility of any relationship for the protagonist at the end forces audiences to consider the belief in the impossibility of having a real ‘family’ and ‘home’ without the presence of a child. The protagonist’s marriage fails due to the inability, and ultimate refusal, to conceive. Similarly, the soul-figure is ultimately trapped within the confines of the mind even as he tries to make its menacing surroundings ‘home’ and cannot escape his impending death.

All in all, this kudos to Irfan for a job well-done! I look forward to his other plays in the future with much anticipation, as he finds himself and his style within ‘the box’.

Why the crisis in Gaza is happening

2009-01-11T02:56:00.002+12:00

Taken from the AC360 blog again
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/09/crisis-in-gaza-why-is-this-happening/

Of course, its not perfect. There's more to the history, but the point is clear - how far back can the blame go?

Dave SchechterCNN Senior National Editor

Any attempt to answer the question “why is this happening?” — this effort included — will be found wanting by supporters of both Israel and the Palestinians, who will decry omissions of history, over-simplification, lack of sufficient context and invalidation of truths they hold to be self-evident.

Nonetheless, for those not steeped in the minutiae of the conflict, a guide for the perplexed.
There are no good dates left on the calendar.

That’s been my line for years about the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

By now every square on the calendar can be checked off as the date when one side committed what the other considers to be an atrocity.

(For purposes of this piece, we’ll use a definition of atrocity from the dictionary on my desk: “An act of vicious cruelty, esp. the killing of unarmed people.”) There is no black-and-white, only shades of gray.

That is my other line about the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

The hard-core on both sides, of course, see matters in absolute terms.

When viewed as a zero-sum game, in which what one gains is offset by what another loses, compromise is difficult, if not impossible. The first thing to keep in mind is that there are two narratives at play, narratives that began thousands of years ago.

It’s as if an Israeli vehicle collided with a Palestinian vehicle but the drivers steadfastly maintain radically different versions of what happened, of who did what to whom.
And there often is little respect for the viewpoint of the other.

The storyteller Noa Baum, who performs a piece she calls “A Land Twice Promised,” in which she intertwines the stories of Israeli and Palestinian women, puts it this way on her website: “I believe that at the heart of this conflict are two parallel narratives of two national movements struggling to gain sovereignty over the same piece of land. This conflict is characterized by endless layers of memories of pain, injustice and victimization. At the same time there is a lack of listening and no willingness to legitimize the narrative of the other side. I believe that acknowledgement of the other’s story is the first step toward creating dialogue and relationship building, which is the foundation for healing and peace - the only alternative to the spiraling vortex of violence.” Right now we are in that “spiraling vortex of violence.”

Why is this happening?

History can be a guide, but history is in the eye of the beholder. How far back do you want to go?

In the Bible, Abraham’s wife Sarah was barren and he fathered a son, Ishmael, by Hagar, who was Sarah’s handmaiden (and depending on the interpretation, a gift from an Egyptian Pharaoh).

Fourteen years later, the story goes, Sarah became pregnant and bore Abraham another son, Isaac.

The book of Genesis tells believers that God commanded Abraham to expel Hagar and Ishmael, but promised to make a great nation of their people.

Isaac’s people became the Jews; Ishmael’s the Arabs and Muslims.

Too far back?

At the end of the 1800s, European Jews fleeing persecution began arriving in the land of Zion (ergo, Zionists) seeking to establish a Jewish homeland in “Eretz Israel,” the land of Israel, the soil of their ancestors.

A people without a land for a land without people.

Except, of course, that wasn’t the case.

While there had remained a relatively small Jewish presence in the land called Palestine, the newcomers returned “home” and found there a much larger number of Ishmael’s descendants with a claim to the same soil. Still too far back?

In 1947, as the British sought to extricate themselves from the land they took in war from the Ottoman Turks, the fledgling United Nations offered the original two-state solution.
At the time the population in the affected area was roughly two-thirds Arab, one-third Jewish.

The Jews were unhappy with their allotment (a majority of the land but much of it in the Negev Desert) but accepted the proposal.

Arab leaders unhappy with their portion rejected both the partition plan and the idea of an eventual Jewish nation in Palestine.

In 1948, Israel declared its independence, followed almost immediately by war with the Arab nations, in which Israel captured far more land than had been allotted in the U.N. plan.
What the Jews celebrate, the Palestinians call the “nakba,” or catastrophe.
In the months leading up to the war, several hundred thousand Arabs fled their homes, beginning the refugee issue that persists today.

Debate continues over the degree to which they were forced out by the Jews or encouraged by their own leaders to leave, expecting to return when the Jews were defeated.
In the months and years following the war, several hundred thousand Jews left their homes in Arab nations, the majority settling in Israel. Not recent enough?

In the 1967 “Six-Day War,” Israel conquered the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza strip, the West Bank (as in the West Bank of the Jordan River), the eastern half of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. (For purposes of this piece, we’ll call the Gaza Strip “Gaza,” as distinct from Gaza City.) Egypt had controlled the Gaza since 1948. Now it became Israel’s headache.

In a relatively small strip of land along the Mediterranean Sea (25 miles long and 4-7 miles wide, slightly more than twice the size of Washington, D.C.) was a rapidly growing Arab population (then approximately 280,000, now an estimated 1.5 million people), living in what politely could be referred to as squalor.

Gaza, as densely crowded a piece of real estate as you will find on this planet, has been a boiling cauldron. That squalor is the enduring memory of my first visit to Gaza more than 20 years ago.

Sewage running down gutters in alleys and streets.

People crammed into makeshift housing that became permanent over time.

A hospital operating without air conditioning in stifling heat and without window screens to keep out flies.

One prominent family living in palatial surroundings less than a stone’s throw from abject poverty.

My favorite metaphor for Gaza was the rusting freighter then stuck and decaying some 100 yards off the coast of the Al-Shati refugee camp. Over the years, the leaders of Arab and Muslim nations have used protests about the plight of the Palestinians as a convenient way to let their populace blow off steam over unrelated domestic issues.

The Palestinians have reason to feel used, if not betrayed, by some of their brethren.
Expressions of this sentiment have been heard in recent days from a frustrated population in Gaza and echoed by Hezbollah’s leadership in Lebanon and the authors of opinion pieces in the Arab press.

Iran, which is Islamic but not Arab, supports both Hamas and Hezbollah, the Lebanon-based Islamic political and military organization that fought a 2006 war with Israel.

Israel’s vaunted military may not be trying to compensate for its perceived “loss” in Lebanon but in Gaza surely has implemented solutions to the harsh lessons learned fighting Hezbollah.
It’s that influence of Iran through Hamas and Hezbollah that makes the rulers of numerous Arab nations nervous about Islamic movements gaining an even greater foothold than they already have in their own countries.

The global affairs think tank Stratfor summarized this point: “With somewhat limited options to contain Iranian expansion in the region, the Arab states ironically are looking to Israel to ensure that Hamas remains boxed in. So, while on the surface it may seem that the entire Arab world is convulsing with anger at Israel’s offensive against Hamas, a closer look reveals that the view from the Arab palace is quite different from the view on the Arab street.” And now we reach the year 2009.

Three years after forcing religious-based settlers to leave Gaza, Israel maintains tight control of the crossing points on land, the seas offshore and the skies above.

Israel is at war against Hamas, a Sunni Muslim organization created more than 20 years ago; its name an acronym for the Arabic words “Harakat Al-Muqawama Al-Islamia” meaning Islamic Resistance Movement.

Hamas is a political party and provides social services in Gaza.

It also has a military component.

Israel and the United States are among those who consider Hamas to be a terrorist organization.

Hamas has taken credit (a more boastful stance than a mere claim of responsibility) for suicide bombings that have killed hundreds of Israelis.

Hamas also has fired several thousand rockets and mortars into Southern Israel during the past several years.

The rockets are crude by modern military standards, though Israel says that Iran has given Hamas rockets with longer range and greater accuracy. An Israeli blockade on relief supplies failed to pressure Hamas into halting rocket attacks.

But it did give Palestinians the chance to link Israel’s tactics to the Holocaust by calling the blockade “the siege of the Gaza ghetto,” a barely veiled reference to the Nazi siege of the Jewish ghetto in Warsaw.

Israel and Hamas each say the other’s actions precipitated the collapse a couple of weeks ago of a temporary truce brokered by Egypt.

After declaring the “tadiyeh” no longer in effect, Hamas stepped up rocket attacks that had tapered off during those six months.

Israel decided that it no longer could tolerate 1.5 million of its citizens living in fear.

Israel struck first from the air and then on land.

Palestinians accuse Israel of “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing.”

Israelis are offended by the linguistic linkage to the Holocaust and point to language such as this from Hamas’ 1988 convenant: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.” Israel contends that while its military tries to limit civilian casualties, Hamas fires rockets from residential neighborhoods and the grounds of schools and other institutions, using the local population as “human flak jackets,” Chemi Shalev wrote in the newspaper Israel Hayom.

Did Hamas underestimate Israel’s willingness to hit and hit hard or count on that response?
From an Israeli perspective, Hamas is willing to suffer mass casualties among the Palestinians if it mobilizes world opinion against Israel.

Speaking in Damascus, Hamas official Moussa abu Marzouk told a reporter from New American Media that “When Israel uses these means, it doesn’t decrease support for Hamas. It accomplishes the opposite. The popularity of Hamas has increased sharply among the Palestinian people and people throughout the Muslim world.”

From a Palestinian perspective, the scope of Israel’s air and ground assault and the mounting toll of dead and wounded in Gaza is a disproportionate response to the firing of rockets and mortars that have killed and injured a relatively small number of Israelis.

In the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharanoth, Gilad Sharon offered no sympathy: “There are those who say that we are striking at civilians and a population in Gaza that is not to blame,” he wrote, adding , “This is self-righteousness; we did not elect Hamas, the public in Gaza did, in droves.If they are suffering, they should elect someone better next time”.

Writing in the Arab News, Osama al Sharif lamented: “Israel’s killing machine could not be reined in, and as diplomacy stumbled, or was intentionally aborted, anger and calls for action swept through world capitals. The show of solidarity with the Palestinians, and in particular with the people of Gaza, was universal in spite of a brittle resolve of governments, especially members of the Security Council.” The past, the present and now, the future.

Barack Obama will be sworn in as the U.S. president on January 20.

Playing the “one President at a time” card, President-elect Obama has held his tongue thus far, but promises to have much to say once in office.

Despite reiterating his support for Israel (a contentious issue during the campaign) there is wariness in Israel about how the new President Obama will handle the intractable problem that has bedeviled his predecessors.

If only in the interest of getting off on a positive foot, might Israel consider concluding its current Gaza campaign before the Oval Office changes hands? President George Bush has been an outspoken friend of Israel, supportive of the Palestinian National Authority and critical throughout of Hamas.

Many Israelis and Palestinians alike were disappointed by the level of U.S. activity (or inactivity, if you choose) in American efforts to resolve the conflict during most of his eight-year administration.

Having watched the failure of President Bill Clinton’s heated Camp David diplomacy, the White House initially allowed that pot to simmer on a back burner.

Toward the end of his administration, President Bush spoke perhaps too optimistically about Israel and the Palestinians concluding an agreement before he left office.

“I was the first American President to call for a Palestinian state, and building support for the two-state solution has been one of the highest priorities of my Presidency. To earn the trust of Israeli leaders, we made it clear that no Palestinian state would be born of terror,” he said in a speech delivered in December.

Looking the future, President Bush predicted, “The day will come when people from Cairo and Riyadh to Baghdad and Beirut to Damascus and Tehran live in free and independent societies, bound together by ties of diplomacy, tourism, and trade.”

“The day will come when al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas are marginalized and then wither away, as Muslims across the region realize the emptiness of the terrorists’ vision and the injustice of their cause,” he said. President Obama will be an interested spectator when Israel goes to the polls on February 10 to elect a new Knesset, its parliament.

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu head the slates of the three parties expected to gain the most seats, though whichever party garners the most seats likely will have to form a coalition government that includes smaller parties.

With the Israeli military at war neither Livni nor Barak (the Israeli Prime Minister at those failed Camp David negotiations) wants to appear soft when most segments of the Israeli public back the campaign against Hamas and an election battle looms with the decidedly hawkish Netanyahu.

Meanwhile, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas could call for elections this spring that would pit his more secular Fatah movement against the Islamist Hamas.

It was Hamas’ stunning (to the United States, if not also Israel) victory in the 2006 elections that led to the current situation in which Abbas and Fatah control the West Bank while Hamas rules in Gaza.

The U.S. and Israel would like Abbas and Fatah to extend their governance to include Gaza, but there is no money to be made betting on that outcome. Just as the Jews achieved their dream of a national homeland, the Palestinians yearn for a nationality to call their own.
But the past (how far back do you want to do?) years have embittered Israelis toward Palestinians and Palestinians toward Israelis.

Generations have been born and grown up and grown old knowing no other reality.
Until that cycle ends, there won’t be many “good” dates on the calendar.

2009-01-08T03:23:00.002+12:00

The computer is so unbelievably slow today it's getting on my nerves.

---

I feel kind of sad that I just can't talk and connect with G. Sure. He says I can call him whenever if i want to talk, but then what? There's this nagging feeling that he can't get over his Catholic prejudice of me. Or maybe I'm just thinking to much.

Lack of direct communication can cause mis-communication.

Gaza Update

2009-01-07T01:47:00.002+12:00

Taken from the AC360 website. http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/05/on-the-ground-near-the-gaza-border/

Program Note: Watch Anderson report LIVE from Israel tonight on AC360° at 10 pm ET.

Anderson Cooper

You see the explosions before you hear them. A giant plume of gray smoke rising in the air, it’s not until seconds later that the sound of the impact reaches you, here in Israel about 2 miles from the border.

Of course, it’s not like that for those on the ground in Gaza. Those close to the fighting no doubt hear the missiles before they see them, before they even hit. We are stuck on a hill overlooking the border, within sight of the battleground, but a world away.

If we had a choice we’d be on the ground in Gaza, but the Israeli government won’t let reporters get any closer.

We are entering the third night of ground combat operations, and its impossible to get a sense of how the battle is going. All sides project confidence. All sides give you numbers:
The Israelis say at least 40 Hamas rockets were fired into Israel Monday and at least 40 airstrikes were launched against Hamas targets.
No Israeli civilians have been killed today, though 4 Israelis have been killed by rockets since the crisis began.
Palestinian medical authorities say well over 500 Palestinians have died so far; and more than 2750 wounded. One Israeli soldier was killed yesterday, the first fatality since ground operations began.

The numbers tell a part of the story, but they don’t truly give you a sense of the pain, the fear, the anger.

Positions are hardening. A senior Hamas official today made greater threats, saying Israelis “legitimize the killing of their people all over the world when they killed our people.”

Diplomatic efforts are gaining momentum, and outrage over the civilian casualties in Gaza appears to be growing. But most Israelis still strongly support their government’s efforts to stop the Hamas rockets, and the fighting shows no sign of letting up anytime soon.

--

have i mentioned how much I love anderson?

2009-01-05T02:00:00.002+12:00

I found this website called wikisky.org which is SO COOL!

Here's a taster, the Carsina Nebulae. It's absolutely BEAUTIFUL!

I want a TARDIS to go there RIGHT NOW! (Since the world of STAR WARS doesn't exist. hmph).

And I love The NOW Show. Pls go download the podcast from the BBC! It's so funny! (:

2009 HERE I COME!

I GOT IN

2008-12-31T03:15:00.002+12:00

The most amazing thing happened yesterday.

Dad called during movie(Australia). Cancelled call. Called after it. Letter had came in. Panic. Dinner quick. Cabbed home. Got off. Ran up, got letter. Met Joshua. Plonked down on bench at void deck. Ripped open letter. Screamed. Teared. Hugged Joshua. Gay moment. Got shoved away. Started calling people who refused to pick up their phones. Cried. Tears of joy. A miracle. People staring. Me, oblivious. More tearing, congratulations and thanks. Thanked Josh for being there. Cldn't have done it without him.

Keble College, Oxford, October 2010, History and Politics...

HERE I COME!

Happy New Year everyone! :D

The most amazing gift from the powers that be.

Xmas Party

2008-12-28T15:28:00.001+12:00

That's the last of it.
Was so knocked out last night I slept almost immediately after bathing.
Fini.

Gerard's Choir Concert

2008-12-20T04:05:00.003+12:00

Attended Gerard's Choir Concert tonight. Way to go bro (:

I have no qualms about supporting friends for their concerts because I would like them to do the same for me. It means so much to a performer for the people they care about to support them, visibly.

Sometime back I chanced upon Lizzy's blog entry on the 2006 MEP concert (yes I googled my name, again) and I remember being touched, again, by what she said. Those very same people supported me again in 2007 - plus Rajesh that time - and yes, I thank all of you from the very bottom of my heart once again. TJ MEP gave me the experience of a lifetime and opened my eyes to so many things.

--
On a random note, I was in the middle of the hymns that I realised how magical the VOICE was as the source of all music and how all musical instruments in the world essential were created with the aim of emulating or even surpassing the VOICE as the mode of music production. The closest that comes to it are the wind instruments, but even then the brilliance of the flute or the piccolo fails to tingle the strings of the heart, like a plaintive hymn or soulful song. The human voice is truly remarkable.
--

I was at the concert with Petrina and Stephanie! I CANNOT BELIEVE THEY ARE BACK FROM THE UK SO SOON. anyway, no one will be seeing me until the summer of my 2nd year. I will be travelling before that! touring the world and stuff. It's good to see them again (:

God its only now when my friends resurface themselves that I realise once again how isolated I am and how much I miss them. I feel horribly socially inept now, just a mere robot incapable of meaningful conversation. I feel disengaged and distant, as if I've lost all semblance of a connection and unable to string the right words together to express the right idea. It seemed like it was just not too long ago when I sat in the MCYS canteen talking to steph on my HP about MCYS, the PSC psychological interview and stuff, or running around the isle during SYC with gerard, pet and others. There were laughter and there were tears. I remember Steph's farewell. The cheers, the songs, the goodwill and the parting smiles. She was surrounded by a whole entourage and was loved for being who she was. It seemed only yesterday that G was talking to me about his crush, or the time we studied in the National Library and me just embarking on my preliminary study of Benjamin Britten's Curlew River.

Where did all the time go?
Where did all the friendship go?

What happened to all those friends whom were close and where did all the closeness and friendship go to? They become locked away in a box deep within the subconscious, forgotten until perhaps the time when one faces the white tunnel into eternity and never-ever.

Friends come and go Weiyang says. I wonder if I have been an irresponsible friend playing that part in the lives of others as well. For many, we simply grew apart. A change in thinking. A new life, a new environment, a new destiny. Some, we choose to avoid and distance. For some, it was just not meant to be. Their hearts and minds remained somewhere else, transfixed onto another.

Perhaps it is just life. C'est la vie! Separation. Meeting. The twin curses of living. Many take it forgranted. To them it's not worth a second thought. But I desist in having to treat it as a mere 'normality'. In a life full of separation, it is oft thought that that person would have been long immune to it. Perhaps they are too busy with their own lives and their own world to realise. I don't.I refuse to accept it. I want to feel for every single relationship and person in my life, be it for good and bad. Everybody is special and means something to me. Only the most abhorrent of traits and character can make me turn against them.

Therefore in a most serendipitous way, I love.

--

Dear friend, far off, my lost desire,
So far, so near in woe and weal;
O loved the most, when most I feel
There is a lower and a higher;

Known and unknown; human, divine;
Sweet human hand and lips and eye;
Dear heavenly friend that canst not die,
Mine, mine, for ever, ever mine;

Strange friend, past, present, and to be;
Loved deeplier, darklier understood;
Behold, I dream a dream of good,
And mingle all the world with thee.

CXXIX, In Memoriam A.H.H, Alfred Lord Tennyson

--
But who will love me?

Books books

2008-12-18T02:12:00.002+12:00

I've been reading a couple of new and good books. I shall do an extensive (i think) book review of em once i actually finish em! I shall post it here so the world can take a hint or two and perhaps read em as well.

So far, I've finished 'PREMPTION: A knife that cuts both ways' by Alan M. Dershowitz. It's a brilliant book analyzing the legal implications of a premptive and preventive war, and does a wonderful analysis of the Bush Doctrine. For all you people who do not want to become like Sarah Palin, or potentially facing a Katie Couric, READ THIS DAMN BOOK. It is essential reading. I must admit that I found the chapter on the history of the legal system boring to the point where I almost dozed off at my desk, but the rest were good. Dershowitz essentially argues that premptive war needs to be discussed and taken seriously. It is, in his view, wholly legitimate, and in fact has been practiced before in history. Premptive war should not be confused with the Iraq War. Nevertheless there are various considerations, which he does point out, which I think still remain as potent obstacles. Of these include humanist and ethical considerations. The other big problem, is of course the problem of sovereignty, etc etc.

In fact, PREMPTION is just 1 out of the 3 books in the 'Issues of our time' series, which are absolutely brilliant. I'm 3/4 through COSMOPOLITANISM: Ethics in a world of strangers now, the 3rd book of the series, and I shall tell you what I think soon.

The other book which I stopped halfway is Chris Patten's Cousins and Strangers: America, Britian, and Europe in a new century.

While I'm personally biased towards conservatives in general, this book is actually quite good as a introduction into cross-atlantic relations. Patten does go a little deep into the domestic politics of Britain, and at times the book sounds horribly like an autobiography - apologetic and explanatory - and one cannot help but wonder if he was making up excuses to explain away the title of being 'the worst governor of hongkong'. Even so, I have not actually came across a book that deals specifically with this issue and its refreshing in fact. The only problem though is that it was written in 2005 and certain things have happened - though i think many continuities exist and remain. I just wish he was less descriptive and more analytical.

In other news, Anderson Cooper just got a facebook fan page! yay! 1 more day to Gerard's concert, 2 days to Kettling, and a little more than a week to RAUNCHY 2008.

OCS Commissioning Parade

2008-12-14T03:20:00.003+12:00

Before I go on to the actual topic, let me share this lovely poem I suddenly found while browsing through my copy of Harold Bloom's 'The Best Poems of the English Language'.

This Consciousness that is aware - Emily Dickinson

This Consciousness that is aware
Of Neighbours and the Sun
Will be the one aware of Death
And that itself alone

Is traversing the interval
Experience between
And most profound experiment
Appointed unto Men -

How adequate unto itself
Its properties shall be
Itself unto itself and None
shall make discovery.

Adventure most unto itself
The Soul condemned to be -
Attended by a single Hound
Its own identity.

What I thought was interesting was the focus upon identity, soul and consciouness and the speaker's thoughts on death. I liked how the speaker captured the omniscience of consciousness, presumably encapsulated in the soul, when he mentions that consciousness is 'the one aware of Death/ And that itself alone/ Is traversing the interval/ Experience between...' The word 'interval' acknowledges the finite nature of life itself, and the speaker regards LIFE as 'experience', as part of a larger 'profound experiment appointed unto men'. While 'experiment' makes it somewhat clinical, 'appointed' clearly draws it back to the idea of the divine and the presence of something larger than life above us all.

However even so, death itself is only known to itself. 'None/ shall make discovery'. No one can gain knowledge about death. 'Experience' ends with death. Life ends with death. Since consciousness cannot preclude life, it is such that Man will always be painfully aware of DEATH as a condition, just as one knows ones neighbours, or his/her surroundings, but cannot KNOW it per se.

I thought the word 'discovery' and the tone of exploration and curiosity made it an interesting take on the speaker's attitude towards 'death'. Since life is about experience, it is hence also like an 'adventure' full of 'discovery'. That is the essence of life. To discover is to experience. The experience itself makes it like an adventure. The 'interval' between birth and death is therefore, an adventure itself, as we attempt to find out and indeed KNOW MORE about who or what we are, and what everything really is or what they mean. In this case, the soul is therefore CONDEMNED to adventure. We cannot run away from new experiences, just as we cannot run away from LIFE. To live is to experience.

I did find the last line interesting and am not too sure what to make of it, though I gather that 'adventure' is that 'single Hound' which attends to the Soul, and therefore is it's identity. Not sure that I agree with that conclusion, but it's worth thinking about.

--- Moving on ---

I just came back from Jiawei's Commissioning Parade. I am so proud of you my dear bro.

I couldn't help but feel sad when I see all these young men (and women) experiencing emotions which I hadn't felt in a long while. The elation and joy of being somewhat 'liberated' from what seemed to be a tortuous 9 months. And yet, there's that sense of pride in it all. Something inside them that says 'Hey, I survived, and I'm tougher now'. That's something bonding them together and it's something I don't get to experience. Once again, I'm out of the current, and it sucks.

Chor was talking to me about BMT this morning and it seemed that he really liked it. I beg to differ. Did it change my life? Non. Not when I'm surrounding by whiny arseholes who cant stop complaining for nuts. (no offense!) It's this utter lack of purpose which disgusts me and makes me sick. That's not the way to win the 'hearts and minds' of the people. How can we let this group of people fall through the net being disgruntled with everything?

When I think about war and real soldiers who have seen real action, I become painfully aware of the naivety, ignorance and juvenile attitudes all around me. There is something wrong with everything, but I just don't know what.

When soldiers grow old, they tell their grandchildren abt their war stories, describe their medals and fill them with fear and awe at the same time. When I go to university, I become the laughing stock of my peers when I tell them I went through National Service doing less than 100 push-ups and being at the beck and call of secretaries.

some 50 years back, when the British and French had National Service, they would share if their friends abt their exploits in the Somme, Africa, Iraq, etc. When people look at me, they can't believe I had actually been in service. It's a big joke. When I meet up with my own peers decades later, I hardly have anything in common with them.

So many men find the military appealing because it appeals to their innate competitive nature. A civilised outlet for innate aggression, competition, and camaderie. They get a sense of pride, and vanity, from accomplishing courses, missions, operations. That's something that people outside of the circle, and yes, the less masculine of the race, cannot comprehend. You take that all away, and they are nothing. Or rather, nothing different that the common office rat. subdued.

Andy and Yeewen's Wedding

2008-12-08T02:04:00.002+12:00

Just came home for Andy and Yeewen's wedding dinner.

Andy is the son of a family friend btw. 11 years older than me, which makes him about 31 yrs old. Nice guy, lively, with a great smile. Don't really know him or have spoken to him much, but first impressions count...

A wedding. The institution designed to seal the vows of commitment as a mark of true love. That's not always the case nowadays is it? I wish him all the best (:

As i sat there on the couch sipping white wine amidst the crowd and my family, i cldn't help but find myself slipping away into the gloom. i entered my little own world again, oblivious to the people around me. nobody really noticed or cared. i don't remember talking much either, apart from the voices inside my head. it made me depressed. i begin thinking about the unhappiness.

I am envious of happy families. I see them all around me. I think it's an evil I'm destined to live with, and I'm stuck in this wholesomely impossible situation where I don't even talk or communicate with my dad much or to the people around me. After all that has happened all these years I have come to reject many things about them even though things have changed. There is this psychological barrier which I just cannot overcome. I need therapy. Or perhaps just the courage to face it down and eradicate it once and for all, but it would mean digging up the skeletons of the past which are just too painful. I just want to forget them and put them aside. That's not happening. I'm living in the past. That is wrong.

I just want to be happy. have a happy family, like any other normal kid. I want to be able to laugh with them, be carefree and comfortable with them - not be paranoid about what i say or do. I want to be able to talk to anybody confidently with some pride, saying - hey come meet my folks, they would love to meet you! I want to be around people where I can joke and laugh comfortably with them, knowing that they dont take everything seriously and they love me for who I am and not what I try to be.

I just want to be comfortable in my own skin with the people around me.

I look at the wedding dinner and it's proceedings, and I am envious.

That is partly the reason why I say I would never get married.

2008-12-01T02:27:00.002+12:00

Watching L'Amelie has made me realise the importance of spending your life with someone who shares your view of the world and who sees the world in the same way as you. It is so so important. Sure, opposites can attract but there must be some sort of commonality to hold them both together.

I want to spend my life with that someone. That someone who sees the world the same way that i do.

at the same time, i am fully aware of the extremely low possibility of actually meeting such a person. I want it to be as serendipitous as l'amelie. tis true. im a closet romantic. i am perfectly aware of the possibility of remaining single forever... but yea. hope is good right?

right?

--

what do lonely people do to feel better?

French Cinema

2008-12-01T01:58:00.002+12:00

I ABSOLUTELY LOVE FRENCH CINEMA FROM TODAY ONWARDS. IT IS OFFICIAL!

I watched 2 brilliant films over the weekend - Le Fabuleux destinee l'Amelie Poulain, and Bon Voyage.

I absolutely love everything about them. oh god. I love french cinema! and I love french! it is such a beautiful language.

pompish colonizers they may have been, but you can't deny that many of them are good looking.

Bon Voyage was brilliant in its ability to capture the tension of WW2. The plot is amazing, the action, wonderful. A tastefully done love story, as with l'Amelie. I relate particularly to l'Amelie for various reasons...

yep.

I really love them! :D

2008-11-24T01:42:00.003+12:00

I watched Das Experiment and Catching Adam Cheng over the weekend. Busted over $70 but here are my views:

DAS EXPERIMENT: THE BLACK BOX.

Everyone who can MUST go and see it. It is a brilliant polemic on what it means to be human and an incisive study of power and human relations under particular stressing and dire consequences. I felt that the space and setting was used rather effectively though i it gave the impression of being cluttered in certain areas. The acting was good - brilliant in fact, for the leading characters. I thought the 'doctors' were not that good though, perhaps due to a lack of real character development. Again there were too many layers of meaning and too many possible ways of analysing that so many questions are thrown up without being ableto be answered adequately. The shock, tension, and anger aroused is however very much commendable on the part of the actors, acting, and the use of props - like the gun shot. Certain moments created a huge impact and impression and the actors must be applauded.

I did also feel that there was a disproportionate development of character for the characters, which I guess is inevitable given the numbers and their relative importance. The lead male actor is absolutely brilliant. He deserves a standing ovation.

On a more personal level, I found many uncanny similarities with BMT. Surprise surprise. Talk about a social study or a social experiment. The main difference is that there is a cap to the amount of power and authority in the military, in the real world. But the very fact that the play is based on a real incident says enough about humans and the possibilities of abuse, given the right coctail of circumstances. Note the abuse of prisoners at Abu Gharaib some yrs back.

I noted some very subtle political criticism with the constant references to 'internal security' and 'only doing our job' etc etc. True that the play as a whole certainly does not make a nice and fitting parallel, but i do not think that it would have been a viable option as it would deviate the play from it's original purpose and intent. What I did like about the play was how the divide between stage and audience, reality and unreality, seemed to slowly merge right from the beginning. By the end of the play, who - actors and audience - could be said to be solely and merely 'spectators' to these unfortunate turn of events? As the play progressed, I began to wonder how I myself would have reacted under those situations and it was dreadfully frightening to see little bits of me appearing on stage now and then when I least expected it. It was as if something out from the dark reached out to remind me of the horror and extremities of emotions I once felt.

More on human nature. Many questions were raised, but I can safely conclude that humans are more than just wires in a box. Liberty is so important to LIFE itself. Liberty is more than just a 'political concept' oft abused by politicians and human rights activists alike. It is something fundamental to BEING HUMAN. Yet to survive we exchange certain elements of it in return for something else - like safety and security. I felt that many humanitarian questions were raised - particularly about crime and punishment - which is impossible to be dealt with by just me alone. I feel horribly perturbed simply because there were so many contradictory 'prototypes' presented and it seemed to be that humans can go either way - or any way in fact! Every human being is different. Can we be simply reduced to mere generalisations and predictions?

That was on saturday night. And on another note, quite a few mediacorp artistes were watching on the same night as me. how lovely. pity i dont like their shows or their acting. i think that theatre offers a better glimpse into real talent.

--

CATCHING ADAM CHENG.

Funny and heartwarming. Sure, it was cheesy and cliche at some points and it started slow, but it got progressively better. As a comedy, I didn't expect much character development, though I found the way the characters were unfolded was nicely done. Kudos to IRWIN for his 'maiden' attempt at theatre! It's really not bad. (: good work mr see. nicely done.

and yes, it made me laugh so hard at certain points. good job.

--

Now, what's next?

2008-11-21T01:58:00.002+12:00

I love Gyorgy! and I got his signature on a poster. I am going to frame it up!
I also managed to tell him what I really thought, and yes - he is absolutely brilliant and a true inspiration.

I haven't felt that way or got excited about anything for such a long time. It's amazing how music can move people at times. Lovely. Just lovely.

Mood: uplifted.

2008-11-18T02:16:00.003+12:00

ADAM GYORGY's concert this wednesday! I absolutely love his piano-playing! He's playing almost the same songs as last yr in the same concert hall BUT OH WHAT THE HELL.

Had to go The Substation to get the tics and chanced upon that row of shophouses which i had never ventured to before. Shall definitely go there with nadia after her exams!

in fact there's so much i wanna do with nadia after her exams. cooking is on the list. ah cant wait.

I'm gonna watch Das Experiment and Catching Adam Cheng over the weekend too. yes.

i need more excitement in my life, and im going to get it.

2008-11-17T01:13:00.002+12:00

Today was such a fiendishly hot day that I suddenly I remembered I was slapbang in the heart of Southeast Asia. my goodness. it was so intolerably warm.

Spent the early afternoon trying to find the Rough Guides' Southeast Asia bk at BORDERS to no avail, before meeting Kerry for her final shakeup for Lit Paper 4.

I need more students - if you need help in history, literature, KI or GP, I'M YOUR MAN. call me!

There were quite a few things buzzing around my head but I'm having a splitting headache now. I shall attempt to recall...

--

I was out with them for dinner last night. I felt myself drifting into the background almost as soon as they arrived. It was kinda scary cuz it only usually happens when there's the whole lot of us and they keep talking amongst themselves about people and things of which I have obviously no inkling and no part of. But it happens and they do it. I decided to drift into this semi-state of consciousness and just ignored what was going on. I think it's horrible how that has to happen when one is supposedly among friends, but I was never close to them in any case. I'm not crazy or cool enough for them, though strangely enough some people think that I am absolutely crazy. It takes 2 hands to clap and I don't think it's right to say that one hand sld go looking for a hand when the hands around it mind their own business. Many just give up and I don't think I blame them for that.

It was a timely reminder though. I hate it. I hate the fact that I seem to be more excited about seeing them than they me, or that my existence is the equivalent of an ornament to 'hang around', without any sincere desire at engagement or conversation. It's stupid. Really stupid. People don't invite themselves to things they weren't originally invited to. I'm sorry but that's not how friendships work.

Maybe it's because life goes on for them and they have moved on, but it doesnt explain why that has been the case since forever. time immemorial. i think im more than just the guy who provides the occasional words of wisdom and advice where one desires it. (I.E. I'M NOT YOUR BOOTY CALL).

I find that as time goes by I close myself off to people more and more as I realise the futility of opening up to them. Friendships don't work that way. It's not a trade-off, that just because you tell them things that they will as well, or that they see you taking this relationship seriously.

And yes, friends are more than just 'having fun together'.

--

I think I am now just waiting for the next big RESET button coming my way in 2010.

--

This guy came up to me yesterday at City Hall. He was an ex-convict selling pens at exhorbitant pricies. I was appalled at his desperation to sell something. Dignity? Nyet. I don't know why it made such an impact on me but I was thoroughly disturbed by it - it seemed, to put it very bluntly, like he was grovelling and almost begging in a very pathetic way. is society really that impossible for a man? who's the real culprit in the blame game? the crime? prejudice? the fact that he had pre-marital sex and has to raise a child with an equally adolescent wife? Why am I even bothered at this lack of dignity? Who's doing a thing about it?

--

I find that I feel for a lot of people. Some have told me I feel too much. Some might say that I am foolish in loving and trusting people that much. I find that it makes me human and it is part and parcel of who I am as a person. I don't think people need to identify with that, but they should at least respect it. You don't have to agree, but you don't have to trample on it either.

I thought that all my past experiences would have hardened me up to the point where I would become an unfeeling scrooge hating the entire world and blaming everyone else like an utter loser. Or perhaps just a cynical prick like many of my fellow countrymen. I don't find it to be the case.

--

By blogging what I say, I lose all objectivity. I fail to become a neutral observer on things. That has always been a myth though. No one is entirely objective, but I must at least stress that I have my own perculiar way of seeing the world, and of defining myself and who I am. Perchance there might come a day when understanding takes the place of mere criticism (without suggestions or remedies).

Rain

2008-11-13T00:52:00.003+12:00

I love the rain.

The darkness around me. The muffled shades of grey etched in the horizon like a pensive impressionist painting. I walk on and I feel the breeze on my face, touching me and reminding me that I am still alive. I sing with all abandon. I see someone coming and I mouth the words before launching into another crescendo after a safe distance away. sometimes they hear it but i dont care. it's my song now. the song of youth and energy. something you dont have.

i am free because i can sing my song.

I am listening to Rachmaninov Preludes now - another of my favourite composers. Music of which I can never play or compose. That is perhaps the pity and regret. The palette of colors enter me and become brainwaves strumming the drum that is my ear. the sensuous warm tones of the piano provide warmth in this chilly night.

It is yet another night alone. but i am not lonely, because i have my music.

I decide i shall sleep early tonight. I am on the bed typing this. I shall sleep so I can plough through some legal history and theoretical discussions in PREMPTION tml. It will be thursday. I have no plans for tml but to read.

Music is the embodiment of ephemerality because try as we may, we cannot grasp onto the fleeting passions of the moment - the colors, the contours, the emotional highs and lows; the warmth or the cold. That is perhaps the beauty of music and the truth which it reveals to us. Art does reveal certain truths about the world, but it is up to each one of us to find out what it is, to us.

Who said music is useless?

CHOPIN

2008-11-12T01:40:00.002+12:00

I'm listening to Chopin as I am typing this entry on my bed.

Some time back, music was the ultimate outlet and the ultimate escape from everything that is reality. I still love music for that reason. I can get lost in the world of the score - that little paradise which the composer creates and fills with structures, progressions, colors, rhythms and form. meaning. contours and artificial highs and lows. a breathtaking cadence takes me into a strange tonal level. every step a new refreshing angle.

i love the crunch of the keys as i listen to the polonaise in A.

the taking away of music then, is the removal of one form of escape. and im forced to look and listen to myself - particularly my inner thoughts. this is an extremely frightening thing to do.

why do i fear myself?

WHY I DONT BLOG (OFTEN)

2008-11-12T00:19:00.002+12:00

Have you ever heard yourself say something of which you become ashamed of?

I do. so very often. it is not because i do not think before i speak, but that many a times i am just too embarrased, afraid and yes, ashamed of facing up to the real me.

i hide.

there was too much pain the past and that has left its indelible mark. I run and I bury it within. they resurface once in a while with a vengence. a small and short reminder of the darkness of the past and the ghosts within. the loss. i run further and i dig deeper.

blogging becomes superficial because i do not say what i really feel. i refuse to face up to them - not merely for politically correct, or mere 'sensitivity to others'.

but I have to try right? get the ink flowing once more and get me in touch with me, so that i can get better. life is too short to be spent running away or living in fear. yet it cripples one ever so irrationally.

this is going to be a long and treacherous path.

ANDERSON COOPER

2008-11-12T00:08:00.003+12:00

ANDERSON COOPER.

I absolutely love you.

The chances are you reading this are NIL. So here goes:

I read your memoirs. I picked it up at Carrefour for $6. I recognised your face from CNN. and then I read.

I remember this line from The History Boys where Hector talks about the experience of reading literature, and how the best moments are when one finds somebody writing about a feeling, an emotion or experience, where he once thought was peculiar and special to him.

That is the feeling I get when I read your book. I sympathise and I empathise. Don't get me wrong - I know only too well the fallacies of a person saying 'I understand what you went through'. I don't. Perhaps I never will. But I have experienced my fair share of pain in this short life of mine, and I dare say that it was absolutely freaky to read about somebody vocalising that which I have tried so hard to bury deep within me.

It has been a long time since I have achieved any sort of connection with anyone or anything. You have done it. bravo.

I want to believe that every single thing written in that book is true. I feel that it is. I want to put my cynicism aside and for once BELIEVE in something. I am a child of post-modernity and insecurity is only nature.

I believe in you. Pls keep doing whatever you are doing and keep believing in what you do because it does make a difference to people - and to the world - no matter how small or insignificant it may seem. Pls do. If I become a war correspondent one day, it will be because of you, and I want you to know that. Maybe if i follow in your footsteps, perhaps I may find want im looking for in this life. Perhaps then, I can finally escape.

If I was christian and religious, I would say that you would definitely be on my prayer every night and may God help you find the peace that you want and the happiness that you deserve.

I love you.

2008-10-18T09:23:00.003+13:00

I am currently using the hotel internet.

I absolutely LOVE PARIS. OMG.

I absolutely LOVE LONDON AND OXFORD.

Good looking men everywhere.
Good looking babes too.
Style. Fashion. Glitz.

OMG and the grandeur of all those buildings. spectacular spectacular! i love it! i fell in love with them again. irwin was right.

I would give anything to stroll down the lourve or versailles everyday.

I will definitely update you guys on the details of the trip when I get back. It's only 9.30pm but I've been doing one HELLA of walking over the past week and BOY AM I TIRED.

My oxford interview is on 24 oct, 1230pm at RJC. wish me luck guys. this is it!

I absolutely love life right at this moment.

and yes,
it's great to be back.

Paris

2008-10-08T03:14:00.002+13:00

I will be leaving for Paris this friday night and for the first time I feel horribly unprepared for the trip.

I am so ready to get lost in Paris.

This week's Newsweek is good. I liked the article on Palin more than the one in the previous week, though it did illicit some pretty strong views for elitism on my part, and I liked the Francis Fukuyama article on Reaganomics. Thought it summarised it pretty deftly. That's what I like about such journalism - i relish the clarity of expression, thought and articulation. Often incisive and at times provocative. It adds colour into an otherwise dull profession. This would never happen here though. This is the reason why I will not do political journalism in this country.

I'm supposed to be giving Shane bro my Being and Nothingness theory but I'm too tired to really mull over existentialist issues now. Will definitely post that up soon.

Meanwhile, all fingers crossed for the financial crisis!

US Vice-Presidential Debates

2008-10-04T04:02:00.002+13:00

OK the US Vice-Presidential debates actually went better than i thought! I thought there was a good exchange of ideas in a generally amiable atmosphere. Biden was controlled and yet assertive at the issues and beliefs he held strongly onto, and even Gov. Palin was rather well prepared! Though both did not answer all the questions directly at times, and Palin's certain phrases gave the sense of an overt attempt to score points with the 'hockey moms', there was a sense that the debate did indeed go well. I am too tired to give my detailed analysis of the debate (i read the transcript and re-watched the debate) as of now - probably tml or something - so I'll reserve my judgement as to who won the debate, till later.

MR D.

NATO and the Russians

2008-09-30T04:36:00.002+13:00

A good has come out of the Ossetian Crisis.

Several countries have made the first steps towards a stronger NATO and (perhaps) a more united Europe. The creation of identity often requires an 'other' and 'outsider', and Russia has conveniently fashioned itself as such. Kudos to Vladimir!

According to Defence News research, the Swedish military budget may see an increase from $5.9bil to $6.5bil next year and the Norwegian budget from $5.8bil to $6.3bil. A substantial increase in budget and spending in the Nordic states is spurred no doubt due to the 'unanticipated' events of Georgia in August. Premier Fredrik Reinfeldt's 4-party center-right coalition govt in Sweden had to suspend further cuts to core military operations, after facing increasing criticism over his government's handling of defense reorganisation programs since 2006.

Russia's flexing of its muscle has also rekindled the debate as to whether Finland and Sweden - neutral and non-NATO countries- should join the alliance. According to Finland's foreign minister Alexander Stubb, "We should consider the possibility of NATO membership. [though] We cannot draw the conclusion from the crisis in Georgia that now the door to NATO membership is open." Even so, there is the widespread realisation that current trends of military modernisation and spending are untenable. Opposition leaders in Sweden have laid barrage on hard-hitting cuts to defence spending leaving Sweden 'fundamentally defenseless'. Urban Ahlin, the Social Democrats foreign affairs spokesman, commented that 'Russia crossed a line, which I thought would be impossible after the post-Soviet drawing of the European map... We must now reassess the need for a stronger defense and security strategy.'

Even Lithuania's military is pushing for increased spending.

While it is disheartening that European integration can only take place with the increased prospect of war, it could also be hoped that these nations would find a policy of positive integration and engagement with each other and not merely create marriages of conveniences, in order to weather the current political storm. It is good that these events are happening without direct US involvement, though we cannot discount that the probability of US blessings, and that a stronger stand (not hardline as yet) is needed to be taken by Europe in order to maintain the fragile balance of power in the region. Russia may not be expansionist, but soft power needs to be countered actively before it is too late.

MR D.

Pakistan and the Taliban

2008-09-30T04:25:00.003+13:00

Defence News, 22 September 2008.

US Lt. Col. Chris Nash has alleged that Pakistan has repeatedly flown helicopter missions into afghanistan to resupply the Taliban during a fierce battle in June 2007. According to Nash, The Pakistani forces not only sent helicopter missions, but also provided logistical support, training, and even direct and indirect fire for the Talivan and its allies in his area of operations.

Apparently, the Afghan government's intelligence service, the National Directorate of Security, had sources which confirmed that the helicopters were on a supply mission. While Nash hardly relies on Afghan reports, they were confirmed by a separate set of Marine trainers advising an Afghan National Army Battalion in the region.

While there is dispute both in the US military and Pakistani officials as to the truth of the matter, it is an undeniable fact that the fluidity (i use this word extremely flexibly) of the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan has indeed provided the Taliban/Al-Qaeda with a secure hiding base. As to whether Pakistan is helping the Taliban, that awaits to be seen. But it is not too far a deduction to say that corrupt and inept Pakistan is sabotaged by it's own people - insiders perhaps, who may surreptitiously aid the enemy in return for monetary benefits. OR maybe tribal-religious ties are stronger than national ties in that region. OR maybe it's a grand Pakistani plan to keep the US 'interested' in the region and use their soft power to legitimise their clearly not-so-democratic political scene.

Whatever the case, the Republican policy towards Pakistan is horribly naive.

MR. D

2008-09-29T03:48:00.003+13:00

For all Americans out there, this is for you. Save your country AND THE WORLD. Do not vote for idiocy!

2008-09-29T03:25:00.004+13:00

This is the reason why I love MATT DAMON:

'Tit for Tat'. Hegemons, Impunity, and the end of International Law

2008-09-16T19:37:00.003+13:00

International Law is dead, but the Russians are not the only murderers.

The fragile international system erected at the end of WW2 has never worked as it was supposed to. Up till today, the UN rests upon a flimsy charter that postulates the need for collective security in order to deter aggression and ensure peace. This ideal has never been fulfilled in the ways which it's founding father envisaged it to. Collective Security only happens effectively when a hegemon chooses to step forward and lead the world into the maelstrom of a disaster - or so we think. Contrary to our beliefs in the benefits of a 'benevolent hegemony', this has been more of a bane than a boon, and the world must repudiate this concept in order to restore the sanctity of international law and create conditions stable enough for global peace to ensue.

The recent Ossentian crisis has given cry to a few claims. These will be addressed and debunked.

1) The Russians were doing the Ossetians a favour.

Wrong. Yes, the Georgians were about to pulverized them. Yes, the Russians have protected the Ossetians momentarily by intervening on their behalf, hereby preventing a massacre of sorts comparable to ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. It is seeming blindness however, to ignore the larger implications of the matter. Russia, until very recently, has been obstructing attempts by the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) to conduct observation patrols in the 'security zone' created, displaced Georgians residing in the troubled regions in order to shake the faith placed in the Saakashvili government, discredited the Saakashvili regime further by hitting hard at the very nationalist mandate the government rests upon (to restore the seccessionist territories of Ossetia and Abkhazia), and have even resorted to imposing a regime of fear instigated by an ethnic chechen battalion caleld the 'Vostok' with a reputation for cruelty and looting. Continued Russian presence in Georgia is a devious attempt to cripple the country in the long-term.

Russia has been attempting to reassert it's sphere of influence, which had eroded via multifold political and economic problems, not just withstanding the terrible transition from communism back into the fold of socialist democracy, but also partly due to the lost of strategic influence over the Slavonic states, with the expansion of EU and NATO possibly up to it's borders. The crippling occupation of Poti, Georgia's largest Black Sea port, Senaki, home to a Georgian military base, and coming close physically to Tbilisi itself is the attempt to exert both real and psychological influence in the region, and internationally. This is not just about distracting a domestic polity from ongoing economic woes at home. This is the attempt to tighten the reins and consequently demand 'respect' and 'authority' as a world power. This is not the harbinger of international peace.

2) This is the beginning of a New Cold War.

Wrong. The crisis is not premised upon an ideological rivalry with the West. Rather, Russia was merely appropriating the 'practices' of the West, and merely using it in a seemingly childish 'tit-for-tat' way that makes international law and regimes a mockery. For this, we have America to thank. The US fiasco in Afghanistan and Iraq has shown the world that it exemplifies a pityful double-standard - or perhaps, a single-standard, as Prof. Chomsky has shown in his various books, that the opinion and dictates of others are necessarily subservient to US interests. This mask of benevolence has been violently ripped off their faces. With this loss of credibility, the US has lost the moral high-ground to criticise a returning hegemon, Russia, for its impudence in the international scene.

The lesson learnt then, is that the promises of the hegemon, be it their verbal declarations or our high idealistic expectations, cannot and will not always be fulfilled. The dangerous precedent set by a loose and rampant America in the previous decades could very well spell the end of sovereignty, and the sanctity of international law as we speak, for they have shown that every and any hegemon can do whatever it wants.

3) International Peace is best secured in a bi-polar world.

A terrible lie and falsehood.

The hegemon's idea of international peace is that which is ensured when the goals of it's 'underlings' match with their own. However while the states within the sphere of influence are free from the other faction, freedom cannot be guaranteed from the hegemon itself. They are free, and yet imprisoned. As such, any attempts to return to a bipolar system would necessarily abrogate the basic tenets and fundamentals of international law, which includes the sanctity of sovereignty of the nation-state and non-intervention in domestic affairs. These are necessarily freedoms in order to ensure relative domestic peace and prosperity, before international peace can ensue.

In order to protect our world from the ruthless war-mongering of a few, we need to take a strong stand against unilateral aggression, and the belief in the benefits of hegemony. A world without hegemons is a better bet for international security as everyone would be equally weak, and therefore need international law and the regimes to ensure their survival. The hegemons must be forced to be as free as the rest of the world. While an 'inter-state communism' is not going to happen because of the necessary geopolitics facing each state, the international community, and especially the EU, needs to unite and strongly repudiate and discourage countries with hegemonic intentions.

MR D.
16 September 2008