mm. caberet. very interesting, and risque like hell. don't bring kids. scandalous, would be the word.
to those who ask. and the one who knows why.
Why Should I Wake Up?
Why should I wake up?
This dream is going so well.
When you're enchanted,
Why break the spell?
Drifting in this youthful state,
Morning can wait, let it come late.
Why should I wake up?
Why waste a drop of the wine?
Don't I adore you
And aren't you mine?
Maybe I'll someday be lonely again,
But why should I wake up?
Why should I wake up till then?
Thursday, July 27, 2006
oh good lords. anyone seen the new detainee trial proposal bill? where hearsay evidence that has been "determined to be probative and reliable" will be brought into consideration. they "may be tried and punished at any time without limitations" and held until hostilities are completed, even if found not guilty by a commission. defendants can be excluded from their own trial for the sake of "national security".
WTF. WHAT THE EFFING HELL. WHAT BLOODY SYSTEM ARE YOU LIVING IN.
i really can't say anything, except thank GODS this is just a discussion paper. if you ever prayed for anything, pray that this isn't the final thing.
although this righteous-anger-schit i'm spouting does beg the question of "what else would you do".
hold a trial, maybe? if you can't trust your judiciary to keep state secrets or your system to screen out a proper nation-loving jury (if you have one), then autocracy is your best bet, hmm? call a spade a spade, why don't you. jeez.
one man, one vote. only thing is, bush is the man, and he got the vote. and it not necessarily a good thing, too.
i'd rather a vetinari.
WTF. WHAT THE EFFING HELL. WHAT BLOODY SYSTEM ARE YOU LIVING IN.
i really can't say anything, except thank GODS this is just a discussion paper. if you ever prayed for anything, pray that this isn't the final thing.
although this righteous-anger-schit i'm spouting does beg the question of "what else would you do".
hold a trial, maybe? if you can't trust your judiciary to keep state secrets or your system to screen out a proper nation-loving jury (if you have one), then autocracy is your best bet, hmm? call a spade a spade, why don't you. jeez.
one man, one vote. only thing is, bush is the man, and he got the vote. and it not necessarily a good thing, too.
i'd rather a vetinari.
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
HAHAHAHAHAH the producers has really gotten under my skin. as has real gone.
Haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Mit a bang
Mit a boom
Mit a bing-bang bing-bang boom
Aaah, haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Mit a bang
Mit a boom
Mit a bing-bang bing-bang boom
Russian folksongs und French oo-la-la
Can't compare with a German oom-pah-pah!
Ve're sayin'...
Haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Mit a zetz, mit a zap, mit a zing...
Polish polkas, they're stupid und they're rotten
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that
Schweigen-reigen-schone-schutzen-schmutzen sauerbraten!
Key change!
Ve're sayin'...
Haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Mit a zetz, mit a zap, mit a zing...
It's ze only kind of musik
Zat ve huns und our honeys
Love to sing!
music of the moment - sheryl crow - real gone
mood of the moment - amused and content, in a i-dont-care-sort-of-way.
Haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Mit a bang
Mit a boom
Mit a bing-bang bing-bang boom
Aaah, haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Mit a bang
Mit a boom
Mit a bing-bang bing-bang boom
Russian folksongs und French oo-la-la
Can't compare with a German oom-pah-pah!
Ve're sayin'...
Haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Mit a zetz, mit a zap, mit a zing...
Polish polkas, they're stupid und they're rotten
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that
Schweigen-reigen-schone-schutzen-schmutzen sauerbraten!
Key change!
Ve're sayin'...
Haben sie gehort das Deutsche Band
Mit a zetz, mit a zap, mit a zing...
It's ze only kind of musik
Zat ve huns und our honeys
Love to sing!
music of the moment - sheryl crow - real gone
mood of the moment - amused and content, in a i-dont-care-sort-of-way.
Monday, July 17, 2006
so i thought i felt bad walking away. turns out you can feel worse.
the weather outside's bleak, which is surprising and rather apt. so this is what it feels to be gutted. hollow. catch-22. dead.
i wouldn't feel so bad, i think, if it didn't hit while i was fucking hormonal. or maybe i would.
i cannot sing anymore.
It's just a thought, only a thought...
If my life is for rent,
And I don't learn to buy,
Well I deserve nothing more than I get
'Cos nothing I have is truly mine.
music of the moment - dido - life for rent
mood of the moment - emotionless. i lie, of course.
the weather outside's bleak, which is surprising and rather apt. so this is what it feels to be gutted. hollow. catch-22. dead.
i wouldn't feel so bad, i think, if it didn't hit while i was fucking hormonal. or maybe i would.
i cannot sing anymore.
It's just a thought, only a thought...
If my life is for rent,
And I don't learn to buy,
Well I deserve nothing more than I get
'Cos nothing I have is truly mine.
music of the moment - dido - life for rent
mood of the moment - emotionless. i lie, of course.
Friday, July 14, 2006
Saturday, July 08, 2006
many things to talk about:
1. the gagging of the mr brown, and the purported registration of singapore bloggers. one wonders why, if the government is so clean, you need to gag one of singapore's most prominent bloggers. if he's just pointing out a coincidence, then why should you be scared of rebutting him especially if you're in the right as you always say? doing this just invites the usual criticism of "no opposition at all", and the sneaking suspicion of patronising paternalism. and if you're so "pro-free-speech", why cancel his column? is it for fear of retribution by the government? so much for pluralism, as mr tan tarn how says (the senior research fellow at the institute of policy studies if you had read the article).
and though cherian george may say that this co-opting of "hip online culture" is just to up newspapers hip quotient, and that it may not be "acceptable to give the same individual the same status in a more public platform" vis-a-vis the internet, doesn't the fact that you're co-opting him in the first place mean that you value his opinion? or at least, that you're willing to give him the soapbox? so saying things on the internet is fine, but in the newspapers, is clearly Not Good. despite the internet being a much more powerful (albeit more informal) tool than the internet in dissemminating information. so i guess that means it just reinforces the idea that paper is a more controllable soapbox than the internet.
which is true. also for enforcability. like the hare-brained idea to make "all authors of singapore blogs" to register with the media development authority (mda).
how bloody enforcable is THAT????? and what the hell, does that mean kids who bitch about school are going to be forced to sign on the line before being able to open an account with blogger.com, which, incidentally, is an american site. [on a side note, i wonder who's jurisdiction is law when it comes to such things. probably singapore's, but i is not sure.] its bloody chafing that's what. and [dare i say it] arrogant, to assume your arm and reach is as long as the damn internet is deep. china tried it, and china is much much more controlling than we are. needless to say, they failed.
2. the road to guantanamo. struck me a lot. i mean, what can i say. i was all angry at their treatment, how they were considered guilty without ever being given a trial, how they were lied to in an attempt to have them "admit guilt", how they were tortured into admitting lies, and just how much a lack of finesse that the weapons on the war on terror has.
but then my colleague pointed out to me: you do realise the context is just set after sept 11. the us of a and the soldiers are not likely to be forgiving. and if you do come across the real hardcore people, this is really the only way you'll get information out of them. and so i asked him, what would you do if you were them? and he said, the same thing, probably. what would you do? and i realised i had no answer. its a bloody bitter thing to realise, that you have no way to have effectiveness and finesse at the same time. and every attempt to utilise finesse will result in less effectiveness.
but things i remember from the movie:
when rumsfeld was commenting on guantanamo. so he says "they [the terrorists] are held in appropriate conditions", treated "humanely", and conditions there "consistent with the geneva convention. for the most part". and you realise soon that he's left himself a gaping loophole, he's used sophistry to cover his ass. good lord. its so deathly ironic that you want to cry.
the guard taking a photo of the detainees protesting over the riot police beating up a crazy detainee. i couldn't help thinking, i'll bet they used that photo for some propaganda shit. really.
the humane acts from the guards. sounds crazy, but true. like when the guard asks one of the tipton three to rap for him, and laughs about it. or when the guard stomps on the tarantula in his cell one night. more of the former. but still. its nice to see the film doesn't portray the guards as total bastards, who are so much easier to hate. though the interrogators are supposedly total assholes, and easy to vilify.
would be interesting to see a story told from their pov though.
so yes. have interesting project that i might take up, who knows. might even get blacklisted (i just watched mi:3 hence the spy stories playing out in my head). but singapore is covered up too much, and the governement isn't giving us enough credit. we're being patronised and patted on the head, and we see through many of the facades and falsities you present us. please, stop insulting us.
1. the gagging of the mr brown, and the purported registration of singapore bloggers. one wonders why, if the government is so clean, you need to gag one of singapore's most prominent bloggers. if he's just pointing out a coincidence, then why should you be scared of rebutting him especially if you're in the right as you always say? doing this just invites the usual criticism of "no opposition at all", and the sneaking suspicion of patronising paternalism. and if you're so "pro-free-speech", why cancel his column? is it for fear of retribution by the government? so much for pluralism, as mr tan tarn how says (the senior research fellow at the institute of policy studies if you had read the article).
and though cherian george may say that this co-opting of "hip online culture" is just to up newspapers hip quotient, and that it may not be "acceptable to give the same individual the same status in a more public platform" vis-a-vis the internet, doesn't the fact that you're co-opting him in the first place mean that you value his opinion? or at least, that you're willing to give him the soapbox? so saying things on the internet is fine, but in the newspapers, is clearly Not Good. despite the internet being a much more powerful (albeit more informal) tool than the internet in dissemminating information. so i guess that means it just reinforces the idea that paper is a more controllable soapbox than the internet.
which is true. also for enforcability. like the hare-brained idea to make "all authors of singapore blogs" to register with the media development authority (mda).
how bloody enforcable is THAT????? and what the hell, does that mean kids who bitch about school are going to be forced to sign on the line before being able to open an account with blogger.com, which, incidentally, is an american site. [on a side note, i wonder who's jurisdiction is law when it comes to such things. probably singapore's, but i is not sure.] its bloody chafing that's what. and [dare i say it] arrogant, to assume your arm and reach is as long as the damn internet is deep. china tried it, and china is much much more controlling than we are. needless to say, they failed.
2. the road to guantanamo. struck me a lot. i mean, what can i say. i was all angry at their treatment, how they were considered guilty without ever being given a trial, how they were lied to in an attempt to have them "admit guilt", how they were tortured into admitting lies, and just how much a lack of finesse that the weapons on the war on terror has.
but then my colleague pointed out to me: you do realise the context is just set after sept 11. the us of a and the soldiers are not likely to be forgiving. and if you do come across the real hardcore people, this is really the only way you'll get information out of them. and so i asked him, what would you do if you were them? and he said, the same thing, probably. what would you do? and i realised i had no answer. its a bloody bitter thing to realise, that you have no way to have effectiveness and finesse at the same time. and every attempt to utilise finesse will result in less effectiveness.
but things i remember from the movie:
when rumsfeld was commenting on guantanamo. so he says "they [the terrorists] are held in appropriate conditions", treated "humanely", and conditions there "consistent with the geneva convention. for the most part". and you realise soon that he's left himself a gaping loophole, he's used sophistry to cover his ass. good lord. its so deathly ironic that you want to cry.
the guard taking a photo of the detainees protesting over the riot police beating up a crazy detainee. i couldn't help thinking, i'll bet they used that photo for some propaganda shit. really.
the humane acts from the guards. sounds crazy, but true. like when the guard asks one of the tipton three to rap for him, and laughs about it. or when the guard stomps on the tarantula in his cell one night. more of the former. but still. its nice to see the film doesn't portray the guards as total bastards, who are so much easier to hate. though the interrogators are supposedly total assholes, and easy to vilify.
would be interesting to see a story told from their pov though.
so yes. have interesting project that i might take up, who knows. might even get blacklisted (i just watched mi:3 hence the spy stories playing out in my head). but singapore is covered up too much, and the governement isn't giving us enough credit. we're being patronised and patted on the head, and we see through many of the facades and falsities you present us. please, stop insulting us.
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
reading about drinking games on wikipedia is HILARIOUS. must play fuzzy duck and roman numerals. but possibly the most amusing one i came across (because i was so tickled by the descriptions) was this:
The Manowar Drinking Game: for fans of Heavy Metal band Manowar, known for the extensive use of certain words in their lyrics. Every time Eric sings "steel", "blood" or "kill", take a drink. Even using just beer you'll be wasted after 2-3 songs. If you use dude you'll die. Seriously, don't do it.
Monday, July 03, 2006
isn't it amazing what a simple line can do. like the drawings in the king james bible. or something like that. i can't remember the edition.
i just checked. it's the good news bible. and it says a lot that if i want to find it, i look in my brothers room now. brother has just got religion, and while i guess i'm happy for him, i'm...i dunno. uneasy. more at me and myself than anything. there're too many questions. more and more pressure, and the ugly realisations that occur after that. so tell me why, when i realise that i'm not religious because i don't want to be (for no particular reason, really), that i feel guilty? is it because so many around me are? I DONT KNOW. YOU TELL ME. and this doesn't just apply to religion. yet another reconciliation of old and new world, old and new beliefs, and just plain old how-the-hell-do-i-rationalise-this. i can't. i'm just a parrot, repeating dull old tired saws that i heard before.
and no, i don't understand anything. and i don't know what i want. and no, i don't know my stand on anything any more, not after the whole recent barrage of "oh everybody does it" on all topics from premarital sex to [insert vice of your choice"] and at what price popularity and fame and the flippancy of it all and...GRRYYYAAAH.
i want cuddles. just plain cuddles, no strings attached.
see, i'm heading into "physical comfort" only, how shallow. ok this is just me metaphorically speaking, i hope. it's quite a bit more with mr ducky.
ARGH LEAVE ME ALONE, BRAIN.
(although it's been doing that for quite a while now, so hah.)
i just checked. it's the good news bible. and it says a lot that if i want to find it, i look in my brothers room now. brother has just got religion, and while i guess i'm happy for him, i'm...i dunno. uneasy. more at me and myself than anything. there're too many questions. more and more pressure, and the ugly realisations that occur after that. so tell me why, when i realise that i'm not religious because i don't want to be (for no particular reason, really), that i feel guilty? is it because so many around me are? I DONT KNOW. YOU TELL ME. and this doesn't just apply to religion. yet another reconciliation of old and new world, old and new beliefs, and just plain old how-the-hell-do-i-rationalise-this. i can't. i'm just a parrot, repeating dull old tired saws that i heard before.
and no, i don't understand anything. and i don't know what i want. and no, i don't know my stand on anything any more, not after the whole recent barrage of "oh everybody does it" on all topics from premarital sex to [insert vice of your choice"] and at what price popularity and fame and the flippancy of it all and...GRRYYYAAAH.
i want cuddles. just plain cuddles, no strings attached.
see, i'm heading into "physical comfort" only, how shallow. ok this is just me metaphorically speaking, i hope. it's quite a bit more with mr ducky.
ARGH LEAVE ME ALONE, BRAIN.
(although it's been doing that for quite a while now, so hah.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)