A sudden realisation

i was eating my Char Kway Teow (with "hum" ok.. wat's char kway teow w/o "hum"??) with a mug of teh bing in front of me n flippin thru our state print media when sth clicked in my brain.. today is MY fav day of every yr. well.. it's supposed to b. Juz bcoz it's 11th Nov (11/11). i mean, yeah, my fav no. is 11, so yes i guess 11/11/11 would b a day i ought to look fw to.

i duno y but it prob has gotta do with Ryan Giggs (e guy u see on tis pg, for those who still persists in tinkin tt's me... WAKE UP. i'm not 1x10^-oo as handsome). As a young n innocent pri sch kid, i've luv-ed watchin Giggs play for e red devils. He was young n suave n pacy. He was left footed, yet he could cross with his right, much better than some right footers. bah, i could go on n on abt his skills. Most prominently under his name was two vertical digits, 11. i tink it was thus tt i adopted 11 as my fav no., although thus far, it has not served in bringin me luck nor fame (rememberin my vball jersey no. is 11 n i single-handedly accounted for e opposition's more than 15pts in a single set). but nonetheless, it is my hypothesis tt there is no clear relation b/w a fav no. n a lucky no., although some might adopt a coincidental lucky no. as their fav. (i'm sorry if i appear to b imitating Amartya Sen.. haha to CS ppl) Aniwae, apparently my bdae is in Nov so haha, juz make me happy la ok? dun argue. :P

So on tis day thus far, i had a nice 12 hr sleep from 1130pm last nite (not on purpose i swear) till 1130am tis morn. cool rite? and juz fyi, i've a paper on Mon but i shall settle tt later. enjoy my 11th. :D For e first time in 2-3wks (prob an underestimate), i read e ST. And i'm listenin to Jay Chou on my comp, listenin to e Chopin of our era on tis Nov day.

And i was readin abt e plight of France vs its Muslim community. Being e superficial me (dun seek to tell me otherwise.. it's so well proven by now. haiz.. but i shall immerse myself being superficial since tt's who i am), i read e articles presented with much empathy yet apathy. On pg26 of e main paper, e heading "Muslim press blames Paris for violent riots" caught my eye n intrigued me enuf to wan to read on. Tis ongoing battle of minority agst e govt (or isit?) has been for e past.. 1-2wks? or longer? i'm not too sure frankly. but i question, in my pea brain, e wisdom of attributing blame to e govt of France. or to e rioters. in absolute terms. i quote "But France's popularity... ... did not prevent most commentators from blaming the state rather than the rioters." Is there such a need? i'm not sure but i see it as a breakdown on both sides, n tt we shld seek a problem solving orientation rather than a historical analysis n blame according stance. Can u realli blame e govt for e ppl's actions? Isit realli e govt who instigated all e fires, all e car wrecks, all e violence? U could say tt these ppl were "driven" into doin all these.. u could. But does it reali help e matter? We r at e age where males n females r on e verge of REAL equality, where countries r pressing others for complete press freedom, where some "liberalise" others in e name of democracy n peace. I duno any French ppl personally, but i would feel tt there r many of them out there who r not racists, who r not fascist for tt matter. Thru constant sincere interaction, many misunderstandings n conflicts can b clarified, can't they? i'm not sure. i bet there r so many perspectives i've not considered. aniwae, mabe they can listen to Jay.. "如果生命, 对每个人都不公平, 也没道理; 那就让我, 带着孤寂, 继续前进! 直到光明, 继续前进!"

i'm prob too ignorant.. i muz admit tt for myself, ever since sec1, i haven had much interaction with non-Chinese. (Harrick is an exception eh? :D i can ramble away in Mandarin at him haha n he'll come back at me in Hokkien haha.) There's prob a lot more to racial harmony den i can understand. i guess tt's y a heavy notion of "calibrated coercion" (George, 2005) [:D] in S'pore does serve as a gd suppressor of racism. Building on tis, e ppl slowly find their balance to it n social pressures den keep others from disturbing tis hard-built harmony. juz some post-102 n 111 tinkin, haha. dun bother to comment la.. i dun tink u ppl shld waste ur time on an ignorant superficial being. hahaz.

i'm in e mood to blog. (although i haven study for my 108.. but hey, i contributed a website. hehe. check ur mails cs peops! someone tell Chris his email keep bouncing? fw to him if u care~)

and then there's tis article on wat US shld do to its relations with China? haiz. i can only sigh sia. shan't tok abt it la. haha. go read if u wan. says briefly abt expandin US forces in Pacific region to counter Chinese military buildup blah blah blah. i tink lidat US has cause for concern over S'pore's military improvements also lor. HAHA. aniwae in e Money section got tis article on "Huge US trade gap 'nothin to lose sleep over' ". well, my take on e US economy is tt they'll continue to run larger n larger trade deficits despite pushin China to revalue its currency. Due partly to its level of consumerism, both of e ppl AND e Federal govt. US govt enjoy using fiscal measures to meet its agenda. like spendin on liberalising others. i tink Mr Steve Forbes is making a mistake when he says it's ok to haf huge trade deficit. bcoz e govt, in addition, also runs budget deficits. in other words, US is in debt. :) can u imagine? they 欠过年 every yr u noe? tts bad for e country. But i tink he has a pt when he says tt China's bankin system is not ready for revaluation. mabe Mr Alan Greenspan shld make his swan song speech on tis. hehe.
[juz comments.. no defamation of wateva sort intended.. e writer only got B in A level econs where he din do e qn on "Money n Prices" nor does he remem doin a qn on "National Income". judge his credibility from here n dismiss his pts accordingly. hehe. he is not particularly pro-China nor anti-US either. Mr Greenspan is not his far-relative while Mr Forbes has done nth to harm him b4 too.]

Hehe another topic woh~ (when did i become a current affairs person? dun answer thanx, rhetorical qns aren't meant to b answered) "To hang or not to hang? Activisits must be consistent". There's a blog i used to read "But why did Mr Wang say so?" which touched on political n social issues with wit n sharp insights but he cease tokkin abt these le. so sad. he'd b so able to comment n enlighten tis pea brain here typin nonsense away. aniwaez, i was tokkin with Dylan on tis.. n i told him i "have-not" [read in Prof Lee Jae Shin tone, juz for entertainment purpose n to remind ourselves 108 is Mon] decided on whether death penalty is gd or not. but i only pity Mr Nguyen to a certain extent. Dylan said, "my gosh, u r so cold-hearted!" [sorry, Dylan feel free to clarify cos i can't remem wat u said exactly.. oops :X] when i said i dun see it in e light of e debate tt's ongoing. i told him tt i see it from e present situation. ie, S'pore HAS tis law "Corruption, Drug Trafficking and other serious crimes (confiscation of benefits) Act", Chap 65A, and it IS widely famous (or infamous, depending on ur stand) with e consequence of DEATH. And Mr Nguyen, an educated n well-informed human being of e world, had his choice, knowing well tt he would, on answering tis million-dollar qn (perhaps more as Dylan says, cos S'pore is a tough nut to trafficking so if he succeeds, he may not juz pay off his brother's debt), has used his 50-50 option to b left with (a) $1m!! (b) death. and he chose his path. behind each option, there are consequences tt go beyond juz e surface. behind each option, ripples r created. behind each option, (fill in e blank). [desperate attempt at triads fail amusingly occasionally embarrasingly]. As a sidetrack, yes Dylan, i tink i'm a very "consequence" person. Overly so. next time we chat, i'll ask u if u can enlighten me on wat r e pros n cons.. cos i'm lazy to tink abt it myself. oops. haha. but aniwae, so when he chose (a), he has thrown his stone. e result is now rippling. notice i haf not touched on e debate on morality of e capital punishment. heartless? perhaps. but humans ARE supposed to b able to change situations, not let situations change us. mabe not too often bah. i pity him, dear handsome Mr Nguyen, bcoz his noble act of saving his brother was his motivating factor. it was a gd cause, sir, n i applaud u. i admire u, sincerely. i would, as a brother, try my hardest n more to bail out my sis if she ever needs me to. but i would fall short of goin agst e law, sir. perhaps, u may label me as a pathetic product of e country's brainwashing production plant. i accede to u. but i noe when e situation comes, tt i would slog my physique out to achieve e goal tt i haf set out to. and i will work for e law, with e law, to e law to get accomplish my agenda. bcoz tis world is not all damning. it is not all condemning. it is not all unredeeming. as much as i haf been a pessimistic pest, deep down in me, i truely hope to hope tt hope abounds. Dear Mr Nguyen n ur supporters, pls do not hate me.
[sidetrack- hey Dylan, aft tokkin to u, for a while i was left with a air of tot of self superficiality, until i found dear ST journalist Ms Laurel Teo saying "i admit readily tt i haf yet to make up my mind on this (captial punishment)." hee. i feel relieved somehow. :) nonetheless, it was a nice n refreshin chat. thanx dylan. haha.]

so wow. long entry. content is v entree. there's another article on "Govt-media relations: Aim for mutual respect". i duno wat to comment cos i tink it's kinda not v deep n v "routine" an article tt serves not much purpose to press or political freedom. if anyone reads e 弦外之音, 字里之意, pls pls tell me! haha. thanx in advance. oh, for those who live in Buangkok, ur neighbourly mrt station mabe opening soon woh! 恭喜老爷贺喜夫人! [i dun tink JJ reads tis but hehe..] there's an interesting conversation in e article whereby e qn of "So is e planned opening of e station a sweetener for e upcoming general election?" to which e reply was "It's coincidental". hehe.

aniwaez, happy 11/11 to myself. n to all u out there who likes 11 as much as i do, or who likes everyday for wat it holds in store for u. u deserve to b happy.