Saturday, December 23, 2006
I've got a cooler phone than bb!
Got e N80 despite feedbacks from various friends of its slow start up and buggy software. Just gotta get something to shut bb up n shatter her miserable dream of having e coolest cellphone.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Stupidity
Guys while i agree tt its perfectly fine to have a good time but pls at least try not to look stupid while having it... Quote of e day: "E spastic too can have their spastic fun without revealing their spasticity"
Tuesday, December 5, 2006
asshole
Who e fuck r u to tell me when to shave? E only thing tt needs shaving now are my balls so either u shave em clean or get e fuck outta my face.
Sunday, December 3, 2006
Monday, October 23, 2006
Wads Empty
Currently Empty :
- My refrigerator
-My libido
-My wallet
-My stomach
-My bong
-Kearn's(name disguised to protect subject's true identity) head...
- My refrigerator
-My libido
-My wallet
-My stomach
-My bong
-Kearn's(name disguised to protect subject's true identity) head...
Saturday, October 14, 2006
Pa thinks i'm switching sides
Pa called me during dinner, its been awhile since we last talked, maybe bcos my sis forgotten to provide him with my new cell no. Well? not my fault. Asked abt school, weather, and e normal stuff. Found out that i was watching a movie and asked abt e title (Come on! Wads e freaking pt of asking when you dun have a clue abt hollywood movies, ANY movie for all i know). Besides x-men is a movie crappy enugh to not even remember watching. Just as i was wondering if this is gonna turn to another one of those "papa interrogation" calls, his golfing buddies arrived. Whew...low life uncles saved e day(or rather my night)!
Knn! Apparently one of the old men thought i'm watching some gay porno shit and gave my old man some "insightful" buddy advice. Again, living in San Francisco dun seem to help 1 bit now. Upon clarifying myself, my old man still didn't seem 100% convinced, well its cool tt he hung up anyways but nt b4 warning me nt to involve in "monkey business". Wtf is he thinking abt?!? Great juz greaaat! U sure fucked up my day uncle kee.
Knn! Apparently one of the old men thought i'm watching some gay porno shit and gave my old man some "insightful" buddy advice. Again, living in San Francisco dun seem to help 1 bit now. Upon clarifying myself, my old man still didn't seem 100% convinced, well its cool tt he hung up anyways but nt b4 warning me nt to involve in "monkey business". Wtf is he thinking abt?!? Great juz greaaat! U sure fucked up my day uncle kee.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
From a Regular's perspective
My friend Melvin's take on SAF regulars
(okok, my ultimate buddy...happy?)
I love music and my whole life revolves ard it! Wonder why i am in SAF oso.. but since i'm in.. i'll work thru the 10yrs happily! i also love clubbing and drinking.. guess the rock n roll lifestyle's for me!
Stuff he left out:.......Alternative lifestyle??I always knew i was different in a way which i hate to conform to societal norms. The SAF advocates uniformity, integrity which means everyone is usually the same.Some traits of a SAF regular:1. The need to own a car/ bike even though Singapore is so f**king small and our public transportation system is so good. We are recognised by the car we drive. (e.g. ooh...Melvin who? is it the one that drive the black Ferrari one ah?) haha! The f**king petrol price is sky high! lets not keep donating money to the Saudis can!2. The 3G SAF regular plays online games. In the 80s, common talking points at the SAF yellow box will be girls, clubbing, cars, movies, football. In 2006s; Experience points, gold, silver, copper, raid, potion, spell, etc (some keywords i picked up when listening to conversations which i dun understand a f**k shit)3. 90% SAF regulars are all in debt; Its either you have a house or a car (loans), credit card debts (overspending?) or other debts.4. 99.99% of SAF regulars believe that it is just right that in life we get married have kids and fade away. hmm... Asian mentality? Fear of change?5. Most SAF regulars stereotype people. By typing this shit most of you will think i've gone insane right? ok... i'll add on next time... haha!
I'll fill in point 6 & 7 after operation "i'm in deep shit"
(okok, my ultimate buddy...happy?)
I love music and my whole life revolves ard it! Wonder why i am in SAF oso.. but since i'm in.. i'll work thru the 10yrs happily! i also love clubbing and drinking.. guess the rock n roll lifestyle's for me!
Stuff he left out:.......Alternative lifestyle??I always knew i was different in a way which i hate to conform to societal norms. The SAF advocates uniformity, integrity which means everyone is usually the same.Some traits of a SAF regular:1. The need to own a car/ bike even though Singapore is so f**king small and our public transportation system is so good. We are recognised by the car we drive. (e.g. ooh...Melvin who? is it the one that drive the black Ferrari one ah?) haha! The f**king petrol price is sky high! lets not keep donating money to the Saudis can!2. The 3G SAF regular plays online games. In the 80s, common talking points at the SAF yellow box will be girls, clubbing, cars, movies, football. In 2006s; Experience points, gold, silver, copper, raid, potion, spell, etc (some keywords i picked up when listening to conversations which i dun understand a f**k shit)3. 90% SAF regulars are all in debt; Its either you have a house or a car (loans), credit card debts (overspending?) or other debts.4. 99.99% of SAF regulars believe that it is just right that in life we get married have kids and fade away. hmm... Asian mentality? Fear of change?5. Most SAF regulars stereotype people. By typing this shit most of you will think i've gone insane right? ok... i'll add on next time... haha!
I'll fill in point 6 & 7 after operation "i'm in deep shit"
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
North Koreans goes NUCLEAR
North Korea Tested an Atom Bomb; Now What?Four potential scenarios—all bad.
By Fred KaplanPosted Monday, Oct. 9, 2006, at 5:44 PM ET
Kim Jong-il has now done what the Iranian mullahs are still a few years from accomplishing and what Saddam Hussein never came close to pulling off. He has apparently exploded an atom bomb. He probably can't yet pack a nuke into the nose cone of a missile or drop one from a plane. But as the term is generally (and aptly) defined, North Korea is now a nuclear-armed power. What's the rest of the world going to do about it?
The "international community" has a chance to behave as if the term were more than a polite or ironic euphemism. If there's a single national leader in the world who likes this new development, he hasn't said so. The U.N. Security Council quickly voted 13-0 to condemn the nuclear test. Several nonmembers have joined in the criticism. Now all we need is a next step—action.
This is nothing to shrug off. The combination of Kim Jong-il and a nuclear arsenal is a nightmare. It doesn't mean he's going to fire A-bombs at the United States or, for that matter, at South Korea or Japan. Kim may be a monster, but he's not suicidal; his top priority is the survival of his regime, and he must know that a nuclear attack would be followed by obliterating retaliation.
But what nuclear weapons do provide is cover for lesser sorts of aggression. The "club" of nuclear nations is a sort of mafia. The bomb provides protection, and thus a certain swagger, whether the other club members like it or not.
It doesn't take more than a handful of nukes to become a "made man" in this club. If Saddam Hussein had possessed some nukes in 1990, before he invaded Kuwait, it is doubtful that the U.S.-led coalition (and that really was a coalition) would have mobilized armed forces to push his troops back. If Mao Zedong had not possessed an atomic arsenal in 1969, during intense border clashes with the Soviet Union, it is likely that Leonid Brezhnev would have mounted an invasion. More to the point, without the nukes, Mao wouldn't have had the nerve to trigger the border clashes to begin with.
Kim Jong-il—like his father, Kim Il-Sung, before him—has kept his tiny, impoverished country afloat all these decades precisely by stirring up trouble and provoking confrontation (to justify his totalitarian rule), then playing his bigger neighbors off one another (to keep the tensions from spinning out of control and into his borders). His quest for nukes was propelled by a desire for the ultimate protection, mainly against an American attack. But now that he has them, he can be expected to play his games of chicken more feistily—and with still more opportunities for miscalculation.
Sunday's nuclear test has four other potential, dreadful consequences.
First, Kim Jong-il could churn out more bombs and sell at least some of them to the highest bidders. North Korea is dreadfully short of resources; his scheme to counterfeit American money has run into roadblocks; nukes might be his new cash cow. During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, President Bush rallied domestic support by invoking the image of Saddam Hussein selling A-bombs to al-Qaida. It was a highly improbable scenario; even if Saddam had been building A-bombs, he would almost certainly have kept them under tight control. Kim, on the other hand, is a guerrilla-anarchist; he maintains his power not by trying to shape, or seek greater influence in, the international system but rather by throwing the system into a shambles. He's much less likely to have qualms about trading bombs for hard currency, regardless of the customer.
The second possible consequence of a nuclear North Korea is the unleashing of a serious regional arms race. The Japanese have long had the technical know-how and the stash of plutonium to build atomic (or possibly even hydrogen) bombs. They've foresworn that route because of moral qualms stemming from their own militarism in World War II. They also cite their security arrangement with the United States. But it's an open question how long these 60-year-old qualms would endure in the face of a clear and present danger. Just last month, a Japanese think tank run by former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone published a study calling on the nation to "consider the nuclear option." North Korea's nuclear test can only fuel these temptations.
If Japan goes nuclear, the Chinese might decide that it's in their security interests to resume nuclear testing. China's moves could incite India to accelerate its nuclear program, which would almost certainly compel Pakistan to match that effort. The South Koreans, meanwhile, might feel they need their own bomb to deter any crazy ideas from their northern neighbor, which could push the cycle into still higher gear.
Third, it's a fair bet that the Iranians will be closely watching the coming weeks' events. If the world lets tiny, miscreant, destitute North Korea—the freaking Hermit Kingdom—get away with testing a nuke, then who will stop the oil-rich, leverage-loaded, modern-day Persian Empire from treading the same road?
For many reasons, then, the world's major powers and organizations—if they have any capacity for coordinated action—must take actions to punish Kim Jong-il for what he has done, not to pound him with airstrikes (for better or worse, an impractical option), but to make his regime suffer in all other ways, to let those around him know that his actions are the cause of their suffering.
However, this leads to a fourth risky scenario that Sunday's test has set in motion: the danger of escalation and war.
A plan of economic pressure or sanctions depends crucially on cooperation from China. Without Chinese food, fuel, and other forms of aid, Kim Jong-il's regime would soon crumble. And that's the problem: The Chinese don't want the regime to crumble, for their own security reasons. It's a delicate matter to punish Kim just enough to affect his actions but not enough to trigger his downfall. The question is whether pressure from other countries—or the Chinese leaders' own anger at Kim's defiance of their warnings not to test—will lead them to walk this line and decide whether such a balancing act is possible.
It may well be that, back in 2003, the Chinese took the lead in creating a diplomatic forum to solve the North Korean nuclear crisis because they thought the Bush administration was about to order a military strike. They relaxed their sense of urgency once they realized a strike wasn't imminent after all. (This theory is held not only by White House hawks but also by many outside specialists who have pushed for direct negotiations between Washington and Pyongyang.)
It is therefore conceivable that, in light of Sunday's test, some White House officials are proposing, once again, to send signals of impending military action against North Korea—if just to unnerve Beijing into going along with sanctions. The danger, of course, is that such stratagems can spiral out of control: Signals can be misread, threats can escalate to gunshots.
The current predicament is the outcome of three missteps: a major strategic blunder by President Bush (who refused to negotiate with the North Koreans when they were practically begging for talks and their course was still easily reversible); an only slightly less gigantic blunder by Chinese President Hu Jintao (who thought he could bring the North Koreans in line with minimal arm-twisting); and severe miscalculations, from start to finish, by Kim Jong-il (who thought Washington would have leapt at negotiations by now and who, apparently, didn't think his nuclear test would cause quite such excitement).
So, here we are. The two major powers in this confrontation are led by blunderers; the provocateur is a chronic miscalculator. It doesn't look good.
http://www.slate.com/id/2151216/?GT1=8702
By Fred KaplanPosted Monday, Oct. 9, 2006, at 5:44 PM ET
Kim Jong-il has now done what the Iranian mullahs are still a few years from accomplishing and what Saddam Hussein never came close to pulling off. He has apparently exploded an atom bomb. He probably can't yet pack a nuke into the nose cone of a missile or drop one from a plane. But as the term is generally (and aptly) defined, North Korea is now a nuclear-armed power. What's the rest of the world going to do about it?
The "international community" has a chance to behave as if the term were more than a polite or ironic euphemism. If there's a single national leader in the world who likes this new development, he hasn't said so. The U.N. Security Council quickly voted 13-0 to condemn the nuclear test. Several nonmembers have joined in the criticism. Now all we need is a next step—action.
This is nothing to shrug off. The combination of Kim Jong-il and a nuclear arsenal is a nightmare. It doesn't mean he's going to fire A-bombs at the United States or, for that matter, at South Korea or Japan. Kim may be a monster, but he's not suicidal; his top priority is the survival of his regime, and he must know that a nuclear attack would be followed by obliterating retaliation.
But what nuclear weapons do provide is cover for lesser sorts of aggression. The "club" of nuclear nations is a sort of mafia. The bomb provides protection, and thus a certain swagger, whether the other club members like it or not.
It doesn't take more than a handful of nukes to become a "made man" in this club. If Saddam Hussein had possessed some nukes in 1990, before he invaded Kuwait, it is doubtful that the U.S.-led coalition (and that really was a coalition) would have mobilized armed forces to push his troops back. If Mao Zedong had not possessed an atomic arsenal in 1969, during intense border clashes with the Soviet Union, it is likely that Leonid Brezhnev would have mounted an invasion. More to the point, without the nukes, Mao wouldn't have had the nerve to trigger the border clashes to begin with.
Kim Jong-il—like his father, Kim Il-Sung, before him—has kept his tiny, impoverished country afloat all these decades precisely by stirring up trouble and provoking confrontation (to justify his totalitarian rule), then playing his bigger neighbors off one another (to keep the tensions from spinning out of control and into his borders). His quest for nukes was propelled by a desire for the ultimate protection, mainly against an American attack. But now that he has them, he can be expected to play his games of chicken more feistily—and with still more opportunities for miscalculation.
Sunday's nuclear test has four other potential, dreadful consequences.
First, Kim Jong-il could churn out more bombs and sell at least some of them to the highest bidders. North Korea is dreadfully short of resources; his scheme to counterfeit American money has run into roadblocks; nukes might be his new cash cow. During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, President Bush rallied domestic support by invoking the image of Saddam Hussein selling A-bombs to al-Qaida. It was a highly improbable scenario; even if Saddam had been building A-bombs, he would almost certainly have kept them under tight control. Kim, on the other hand, is a guerrilla-anarchist; he maintains his power not by trying to shape, or seek greater influence in, the international system but rather by throwing the system into a shambles. He's much less likely to have qualms about trading bombs for hard currency, regardless of the customer.
The second possible consequence of a nuclear North Korea is the unleashing of a serious regional arms race. The Japanese have long had the technical know-how and the stash of plutonium to build atomic (or possibly even hydrogen) bombs. They've foresworn that route because of moral qualms stemming from their own militarism in World War II. They also cite their security arrangement with the United States. But it's an open question how long these 60-year-old qualms would endure in the face of a clear and present danger. Just last month, a Japanese think tank run by former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone published a study calling on the nation to "consider the nuclear option." North Korea's nuclear test can only fuel these temptations.
If Japan goes nuclear, the Chinese might decide that it's in their security interests to resume nuclear testing. China's moves could incite India to accelerate its nuclear program, which would almost certainly compel Pakistan to match that effort. The South Koreans, meanwhile, might feel they need their own bomb to deter any crazy ideas from their northern neighbor, which could push the cycle into still higher gear.
Third, it's a fair bet that the Iranians will be closely watching the coming weeks' events. If the world lets tiny, miscreant, destitute North Korea—the freaking Hermit Kingdom—get away with testing a nuke, then who will stop the oil-rich, leverage-loaded, modern-day Persian Empire from treading the same road?
For many reasons, then, the world's major powers and organizations—if they have any capacity for coordinated action—must take actions to punish Kim Jong-il for what he has done, not to pound him with airstrikes (for better or worse, an impractical option), but to make his regime suffer in all other ways, to let those around him know that his actions are the cause of their suffering.
However, this leads to a fourth risky scenario that Sunday's test has set in motion: the danger of escalation and war.
A plan of economic pressure or sanctions depends crucially on cooperation from China. Without Chinese food, fuel, and other forms of aid, Kim Jong-il's regime would soon crumble. And that's the problem: The Chinese don't want the regime to crumble, for their own security reasons. It's a delicate matter to punish Kim just enough to affect his actions but not enough to trigger his downfall. The question is whether pressure from other countries—or the Chinese leaders' own anger at Kim's defiance of their warnings not to test—will lead them to walk this line and decide whether such a balancing act is possible.
It may well be that, back in 2003, the Chinese took the lead in creating a diplomatic forum to solve the North Korean nuclear crisis because they thought the Bush administration was about to order a military strike. They relaxed their sense of urgency once they realized a strike wasn't imminent after all. (This theory is held not only by White House hawks but also by many outside specialists who have pushed for direct negotiations between Washington and Pyongyang.)
It is therefore conceivable that, in light of Sunday's test, some White House officials are proposing, once again, to send signals of impending military action against North Korea—if just to unnerve Beijing into going along with sanctions. The danger, of course, is that such stratagems can spiral out of control: Signals can be misread, threats can escalate to gunshots.
The current predicament is the outcome of three missteps: a major strategic blunder by President Bush (who refused to negotiate with the North Koreans when they were practically begging for talks and their course was still easily reversible); an only slightly less gigantic blunder by Chinese President Hu Jintao (who thought he could bring the North Koreans in line with minimal arm-twisting); and severe miscalculations, from start to finish, by Kim Jong-il (who thought Washington would have leapt at negotiations by now and who, apparently, didn't think his nuclear test would cause quite such excitement).
So, here we are. The two major powers in this confrontation are led by blunderers; the provocateur is a chronic miscalculator. It doesn't look good.
http://www.slate.com/id/2151216/?GT1=8702
Monday, October 9, 2006
Sick but funny!
Former postal worker sentenced for tainting co-workers’ coffee with urine.
Updated: 2:21 p.m. PT Sept 19, 2006
AKRON, Ohio - A former postal worker who poured urine into his co-workers' coffee must serve six months in a jail work-release program.
Thomas Shaheen, 50, of suburban Springfield Township, also must pay $1,200 to the people he used to work with to cover their cost of making a secret video of his role in tainting the office coffee.
Shaheen stood and apologized to several postal workers in Akron Municipal Court where he pleaded guilty on Monday to two misdemeanor charges of tainting food.
"I don't know what became of me," said Shaheen, a postal employee for 13 years fired from his job at a post office vehicle maintenance facility in Akron. "I hope you find it in your hearts someday to forgive me."
The tainting occurred over several months. When workers realized what was going on, they told supervisors and an investigation began. When nothing came of the probe, workers had a video camera installed in the room where staffers made coffee.
Shaheen was videotaped on two occasions in July 2005 pouring urine into a coffee pot in a break room.
He didn't offer a motive, but his lawyer, Paul Adamson, said Shaheen had been frustrated about his work.
Shaheen’s co-workers weren’t exactly celebrating the moment in their lives.
"We can't believe Thomas would even stoop to this level for his own personal revenge," said Jene Jackson, who worked with Shaheen. "He would sit in the same room with people and watch them drink his sick little brew and think nothing of it."
© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14909843/
This is soooo sick! It muz b revenge at its sweeeetest! I personally can't think of anything tts more gross, hmm...atleast for now... Orchestrating a "drink my pee" session n having a front row seat---priceless.
Updated: 2:21 p.m. PT Sept 19, 2006
AKRON, Ohio - A former postal worker who poured urine into his co-workers' coffee must serve six months in a jail work-release program.
Thomas Shaheen, 50, of suburban Springfield Township, also must pay $1,200 to the people he used to work with to cover their cost of making a secret video of his role in tainting the office coffee.
Shaheen stood and apologized to several postal workers in Akron Municipal Court where he pleaded guilty on Monday to two misdemeanor charges of tainting food.
"I don't know what became of me," said Shaheen, a postal employee for 13 years fired from his job at a post office vehicle maintenance facility in Akron. "I hope you find it in your hearts someday to forgive me."
The tainting occurred over several months. When workers realized what was going on, they told supervisors and an investigation began. When nothing came of the probe, workers had a video camera installed in the room where staffers made coffee.
Shaheen was videotaped on two occasions in July 2005 pouring urine into a coffee pot in a break room.
He didn't offer a motive, but his lawyer, Paul Adamson, said Shaheen had been frustrated about his work.
Shaheen’s co-workers weren’t exactly celebrating the moment in their lives.
"We can't believe Thomas would even stoop to this level for his own personal revenge," said Jene Jackson, who worked with Shaheen. "He would sit in the same room with people and watch them drink his sick little brew and think nothing of it."
© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14909843/
This is soooo sick! It muz b revenge at its sweeeetest! I personally can't think of anything tts more gross, hmm...atleast for now... Orchestrating a "drink my pee" session n having a front row seat---priceless.
Sunday, October 8, 2006
This tasted like army food
Tried out this really cool looking Taiwanese restaurant in Clement st. Their food tasted somewhat like what i had when i was in the army...tHAT somehow brought back some unforgettable memories~~~(My first awakening during my first wk in Army: I realised somethings' really wrong with food at home when army food actually tasted better!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
