esoteric/random bites

I find it a little bit strange that your wardrobe is 85% sleeveless shirts, spaghetti straps and various other sleeveless apparel but when you see me you're always covering your sleeves. I also find it strange that you always seem to want to call a third party along when I ask you out when it's pretty obvious it's only your company that I prefer at said time and indeed, that was said intention of me asking you out in the first place. You could be shy I suppose, but I have ever been the perfect gentleman. Sadly, I guess the gut and the facial hair and the whole OhMyGodHeUsedToLikeMe and HeUsedToStareAtMeConstantly memories from the evergreen college years remain my legacy at a certain Higher Education Learning Programme Institute and continue to haunt me even in my post college years.

No, you may not sue me for being discriminatory against homosexuals. I merely stated my personal opinion that I disagree with their lifestyle. I did not in any way or form say that they shouldn't be homosexual, nor did I propagate any hate crimes against them. Sure, I may not understand them fully, and I draw upon personal experiences for having such personal opinions, but I do not hate them Hitler style. Neither would I frequent gay/lesbian clubs/events carrying hateful placards and chanting discriminatory slogans. I do not consider them less then human for I know that they are. I just don't agree with their lifestyle. Let that be the end of the matter

The cows go moo, and they can't get a permit because of their skins. They defile a sacred article of faith, spat out and photographed no less, and the only man who has the courage to say anything sits on the feather throne no longer. They say no, and they repress the press. They snatch the dead before they're even in the ground. They whip and cane those they feel deserve it, while the deserving get away with sin. You can join the club but you can never leave. Not even your spouse. Faith is like the rain from the heavens, man is like the earth. When they meet, only mud is the outcome.

You must know someone to get anywhere. Your merits, your education, your parent's and your own effort, they count for nothing now. Oh yeah, you can probably get some low-mid level job, but will you ever be the man on top? Not unless you know somebody. Hell, I knew somebody. You can call it contacts and networking. No one seems to think its all about the fact that its not what you know, its who you know.

"Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations"- Emma Goldman. You were wrong Emma. You forgot that we're humans first, individuals last.

If you worked at a job offering you 5000rm/month and then someone came along and offered you 10000rm/month, which would you choose?. If you worked at Progressive Ali's Fine Muslim Indian Cuisine Restaurant and someone came and offered you a job BAT for 3x what you're earning, which would you choose? Your school nurtured you and taught you to become the man you are, but would you then be obliged to work for them once you graduate? Think about that Fédération Internationale de Football Association before you decide to condescend and make an example out of certain English clubs. And to a certain French club in the city of Lens, that's football, its a business, not oh boo hoo mama, he stole my toy.

I'm guilty, green slippers. I suppose i should say sorry, but I dint think it will help. Yes, I will just relax.

I spend time with you and you call it smothering and clingy. I dint spend time with you and you say I'm not giving you enough attention. Hey, I'm not a mind reader. Pick a fucking stance and stick by it. You can't have your cake and fucking eat it too. This saying comes from the notion that one should share a cake because cake should be shared and not eaten alone. Therefore, it would be wrong to have the cake and eat the whole bloody thing and not share it, you greedy little fuck.

Yes it occurred to me that the post was made on 9/9/09. And that should have special significance why?Because it will never happen again? Big deal. A date's a date, just numbers to help the human mind make sense of time in motion. On the numerology stance, well, I can humbly state that I personally think its all bullshit and don't believe a single iota of it.The same with horoscopes. My life is not dictated by a couple of numbers or how the stars are aligned. It's by the choices I make, right or wrong, and how I live by them.

You're never happy unless you're unhappy. Which is why I think that we could have never worked out. Besides the whole difference of opinion on sexual orientation. You can't accept the fact that life has indeed given you a ladle of the gravy train and that life's must always be about the struggle, the shit. Look, it's not my fault you have an inferiority complex, or that life has been one pile after another of shit to you since your dad left, or the guy(s) you "loved" treated you like shit and broke your heart. You have to realize that Im not, nor have I ever been,that guy or like your dad(and I dont mean that in a Oedipus Complex way) and that you can't use that as an excuse and justification for hurting me and people like me. Yes, I may have faults, who doesn't, but the least you can do is have some common courtesy and overlook them, like how I did yours. And don't get it twisted. This has nothing to do with sexuality. This has to do with character and personality. Meh, what do I know? Im just some emo fuck.

Keep your hips squared. Hunch your back. Keep your chin in. Hands on your forehead. Keep your back foot up and bend the knees. Circle off. T.E.S. Balance. Conditioning. Crazy Monkey Defence Programme. Armbar. Those are the words that constantly permeate my mind currently

Homosexual Propoganda debunked/ Mom read the bottom of this article

So here we are again after a long exile from blogsphere. Not here to make apologies, for I feel I have none to make to the 5 of you reading this. I do not think it is my duty or obligation to burden and pontificate my personal world views to you, or bore you with tedious details of what I did, who I went out with and the contents of my bowels once it has been expunged from my body through my anus. You already have CNN and the E!channel for all that good stuff, sans bowel content(it does not make for good conversation unless you have constipation and said conversation takes place in the confines of the clinic with a doctor and maybe nosy attending nurse).

I do however have to pontificate on a personal world view that most of you have already called me out on and metaphorically tarred and feathered me and severed long standing ties with. Yes, I'm talking about homosexuals. I have, and will, never believe the main argument that the homosexual propaganda machine tries to enforce and uphold for its own political agenda that homosexuals are born the way they are and that there is an inherent gay gene which causes said homosexuality. No one is born that way. There is no gay gene. Any "research paper" that you have read doesn't know the first thing about genetics and the slightest hope that homosexuals can see as a self justifying mechanism in regards to these "researches" are pounced upon by the liberal homosexual propaganda machine.

And just before you start you attacks and blog/flame wars and "oh ju-lian you're so blinded and biased and write such hurtful things" comments because you think I'm just blowing smoke up your ass and propagating homosexual hate crimes(which I'm not you fucking overly sensitive prick/bitch) here's my proof.

Is there a gay gene?

Many laymen now believe that homosexuality is part of who a person really is ­ from the moment of conception.

The "genetic and unchangeable" theory has been actively promoted by gay activists and the popular media. Is homosexuality really an inborn and normal variant of human nature?

No. There is no evidence that shows that homosexuality is simply "genetic." And none of the research claims there is. Only the press and certain researchers do, when speaking in sound bites to the public.

How The Public Was Misled

In July of 1993, the prestigious research journal Science published a study by Dean Hamer which claims that there might be a gene for homosexuality. Research seemed to be on the verge of proving that homosexuality is innate, genetic and therefore unchangeablea normal variant of human nature.

Soon afterward, National Public Radio trumpeted those findings. Newsweek ran the cover story, "Gay Gene?" The Wall Street Journal announced, "Research Points Toward a Gay Gene...Normal Variation."

Of course, certain necessary qualifiers were added within those news stories. But only an expert knew what those qualifiers meant. The vast majority of readers were urged to believe that homosexuals had been proven to be "born that way."

In order to grasp what is really going on, one needs to understand some little known facts about behavioral genetics.

Gene Linkage Studies

Dean Hamer and his colleagues had performed a common type of behavioral genetics investigation called the "linkage study." Researchers identify a behavioral trait that runs in a family, and then:

a) look for a chromosomal variant in the genetic material of that family, and

b) determine whether that variant is more frequent in family members who share the particular trait.

To the layman, the "correlation" of a genetic structure with a behavioral trait means that trait "is genetic"-in other words, inherited.

In fact, it means absolutely nothing of the sort, and it should be emphasized that there is virtually no human trait without innumerable such correlations.

Scientists Know the Truth about "Gay Gene" Research

But before we consider the specifics, here is what serious scientists think about recent genetics-of-behavior research. From Science, 1994:

Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated. "Unfortunately," says Yale's [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute."{1}

Homosexual Twin Studies

Two American activists recently published studies showing that if one of a pair of identical twins is homosexual, the other member of the pair will be, too, in just under 50% of the cases. On this basis, they claim that "homosexuality is genetic."

But two other genetic researchers--one heads one of the largest genetics departments in the country, the other is at Harvard--comment:

While the authors interpreted their findings as evidence for a genetic basis for homosexuality, we think that the data in fact provide strong evidence for the influence of the environment.{2}

The author of the lead article on genes and behavior in a special issue of Science speaks of the renewed scientific recognition of the importance of environment. He notes the growing understanding that:

... the interaction of genes and environment is much more complicated than the simple "violence genes" and intelligence genes" touted in the popular press.The same data that show the effects of genes, also point to the enormous influence of non genetic factors.{3}

More Modest Claims to the Scientific Community

Researchers' public statements to the press are often grand and far-reaching. But when answering the scientific community, they speak much more cautiously.

"Gay gene" researcher Dean Hamer was asked by Scientific American if homosexuality was rooted solely in biology. He replied:

"Absolutely not. From twin studies, we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors...not negate the psychosocial factors."{4}

But in qualifying their findings, researchers often use language that will surely evade general understanding making statements that will continue to be avoided by the popular press, such as:

...the question of the appropriate significance level to apply to a non Mendelian trait such as sexual orientation is problematic.{5}

Sounds too complex to bother translating? This is actually a very important statement. In layman's terms, this means:

It is not possible to know what the findings mean--if anything--since sexual orientation cannot possibly be inherited in the direct way eye color is.

Thus, to their fellow scientists, the researchers have been honestly acknowledging the limitations of their research. However, the media doesn't understand that message. Columnist Ann Landers, for example, tells her readers that "homosexuals are born, not made." The media offers partial truths because the scientific reality is simply too unexciting to make the evening news; too complex for mass consumption; and furthermore, not fully and accurately understood by reporters.

Accurate Reporting Will Never Come in "Sound Bites"

There are no "lite," soundbite versions of behavioral genetics that are not fundamentally in error in one way or another.

Nonetheless, if one grasps at least some of the basics, in simple form, it will be possible to see exactly why the current research into homosexuality means so little and will continue to mean little, even should the quality of the research methods improve so long as it remains driven by political, rather than scientific objectives.

Understanding the Theory

There are only two major principles that need to be carefully understood in order to see through the distortions of the recent research. They are as follows:

1. Heritable does not mean inherited.

2. Genetics research which is truly meaningful will identify, and then focus on, only traits that are directly inherited.

Almost every human characteristic is in significant measure heritable. But few human behavioral traits are directly inherited, in the manner of height, for example, or eye color. Inherited means "directly determined by genes," with little or no way of preventing or modifying the trait through a change in the environment.

How to "Prove" That Basketball-Players are Born that Way

Suppose you are motivated to demonstrate for political reasons--that there is a basketball gene that makes people grow up to be basketball players. You would use the same methods that have been used with homosexuality: (1) twin studies; (2) brain dissections; (3) gene "linkage" studies.

The basic idea in twin studies is to show that the more genetically similar two people are, the more likely it is that they will share the trait you are studying.

So you identify groups of twins in which at least one is a basketball player. You will probably find that if one identical twin is a basketball player, his twin brother is statistically more likely be one, too. You would need to create groups of different kinds of pairs to make further comparisons--one set of identical twin pairs, one set of nonidentical twin pairs, one set of sibling pairs, etc.

Using the "concordance rate" (the percentage of pairs in which both twins are basketball players, or both are not), you would calculate a "heritability" rate. The concordance rate would be quite high--just as in the concordance rate for homosexuality.

Then, you announce to the reporter from Sports Illustrated: "Our research demonstrates that basketball playing is strongly heritable." (And you would be right. It would be "heritable"--but not directly inherited. Few readers would be aware of the distinction, however.)

Soon after, the article appears. It says:

"...New research shows that basketball playing is probably inherited. Basketball players are apparently 'born that way!' A number of outside researchers examined the work and found it substantially accurate and well performed..."

But no one (other than the serious scientist) notices the media's inaccurate reporting.

What All Neuroscientists Know:
The Brain Changes with Use

Then you move on to conduct some brain research. As in the well-known LeVay brain study which measured parts of the hypothalamus, your colleagues perform a series of autopsies on the brains of some dead people who, they have reason to believe, were basketball players.

Next, they do the same with a group of dead non basketball players. Your colleagues report that, on average, "Certain parts of the brain long thought to be involved with basketball playing are much larger in the group of basketball players."

A few national newspapers pick up on the story and editorialize, "Clearly, basketball playing is not a choice. Not only does basketball playing run in families, but even these people's brains are different."

You, of course, as a scientist, are well aware that the brain changes with use...indeed quite dramatically. Those parts responsible for an activity get larger over time, and there are specific parts of the brain that are more utilized in basketball playing.

Now, as a scientist, you will not lie about this fact, if asked (since you will not be), but neither will you go out of your way to offer the truth. The truth, after all, would put an end to the worldwide media blitz accompanying the announcement of your findings.

Gene Linkage Studies:
"Associated With" Does Not Mean "Caused By"

Now, for the last phase, you find a small number of families of basketball players and compare them to some families of non players. You have a hunch that of the innumerable genes likely to be associated with basketball playing (those for height, athleticism, and quick reflexes, for example), some will be located on the x-chromosome.

You won't say these genes cause basketball playing because such a claim would be scientifically insupportable, but the public thinks "caused by" and "associated with" are synonymous.

After a few false starts, sure enough, you find what you are looking for: among the basketball-playing families, one particular cluster of genes is found more commonly.

With a Little Help from the Media

Now, it happens that you have some sympathizers at National People's Radio, and they were long ago quietly informed of your research. They want people to come around to certain beliefs, too. So, as soon as your work hits the press, they are on the air: "Researchers are hot on the trail of the Basketball Gene. In an article to be published tomorrow in Sports Science..."

Commentators pontificate about the enormous public-policy implications of this superb piece of science. Two weeks later, there it is again, on the cover of the major national newsweekly: "Basketball Gene?"

Now what is wrong with this scenario? It is simple: of course basketball playing is associated with certain genes; of course it is heritable. But it is those intermediate physiological traits-muscle strength, speed, agility, reflex speed, height, etc.-which are themselves directly inherited. Those are the traits that make it likely one will be able to, and will want to, play basketball.

In the case of homosexuality, the inherited traits that are more common among male homosexuals might include a greater than average tendency to anxiety, shyness, sensitivity, intelligence, and aesthetic abilities. But this is speculation. To date, researchers have not yet sought to identify these factors with scientific rigor.

What the majority of respected scientists now believe is that homosexuality is attributable to a combination of psychological, social, and biological factors.

From the American Psychological Association "[M]any scientists share the view that sexual orientation is shaped for most people at an early age through complex interactions of biological, psychological and social factors."{6}

From "Gay Brain" Researcher Simon LeVay "At this point, the most widely held opinion [on causation of homosexuality] is that multiple factors play a role."{7}

From Dennis McFadden, University of Texas neuroscientist: "Any human behavior is going to be the result of complex intermingling of genetics and environment. It would be astonishing if it were not true for homosexuality."{8}

From Sociologist Steven Goldberg "I know of no one in the field who argues that homosexuality can be explained without reference to environmental factors."{9}

As we have seen, there is no evidence that homosexuality is simply "genetic"--and none of the research itself claims there is.

Only the press and certain researchers do, when speaking in sound bites to the public.

Taken from the NARTH(National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuals)

Now I KNOW you must be thinking, oh ju-lian, that taken from such an obviously biased NGO. You've taken it out of context and you're just being spiteful because Michelle hates you now. While you are entitled to whatever notions and opinions you may have, let it be known that I never ever hate for the sake of hating nor do I blindly follow what is being fed to me like the rest of you sheep.

Here's another study, from a NON NGO

The trumpets were left at home and the parades were canceled. The press releases and campaign signs were quietly forgotten. The news was big, but it did not contain what some had hoped for. On April 14, 2003, the International Human Genome Consortium announced the successful completion of the Human Genome Project—two years ahead of schedule. The press report read: “The human genome is complete and the Human Genome Project is over” (see “Human Genome Report...,” 2003, emp. added). Most of the major science journals reported on the progress in the field of genetics, but also speculated on how the information would now be used. The one piece of information that never materialized from the Human Genome Project was the identification of the so-called “gay gene.”

Homosexuality has been practiced for thousands of years. Simply put, homosexuality is defined as sexual relations between like genders (i.e., two males or two females). It was Sigmund Freud who first postulated that parental relationships with a child ultimately determine the youngster’s sexual orientation. But this “nurturing” aspect has effectively given way to the “nature” side of the equation. Can some behaviors (e.g., alcoholism, homosexuality, schizophrenia) be explained by genetics? Are these and other behaviors influenced by nature or by nurture? Are they inborn or learned? Some individuals believed that the answer would be found hiding amidst the chromosomes analyzed in the Human Genome Project.

The human X and Y chromosomes (the two “sex” chromosomes) have been completely sequenced. Thanks to work carried out by labs all across the globe, we know that the X chromosome contains 153 million base pairs, and harbors a total of 1168 genes (see NCBI, 2004). The National Center for Biotechnology Information reports that the Y chromosome—which is much smaller—contains “only” 50 million base pairs, and is estimated to contain a mere 251 genes. Educational institutions such as Baylor University, the Max Planck Institute, the Sanger Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, and others have spent countless hours and millions of research dollars analyzing these unique chromosomes. As the data began to pour in, they allowed scientists to construct gene maps—using actual sequences from the Human Genome Project. And yet, neither the map for the X nor the Y chromosome contains any “gay gene.”

you can read the rest of the legnthy discussion here http://www.trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp

Now for the kicker. I did not say that you CAN'T be a homosexual. Its a CHOICE and hey, who am I to tell you any differently. I don't agree with your lifestlye choice and thats just my own PERSONAL OPINION and I will defend my right to it. But please do not come and pontificate to me that you're born the way you are. The articles above have proven that that is utter bullshit and written by experts in the field. And im pretty sure they dont have their own homophobic agenda. Dosent bode well for their PhD you see. If im wrong, please feel free to correct me. So yeah, take that liberal media and GLAAD and PLU and Katagender and associated homosexual propoganda machines.

Hope that tides you over for a few months

Congratulations on reaching the end of this article. You've just wasted about 10 minutes of your time which you could have used for more productive things like watching porn or feeding the hungry children of the world or saving the whales. But thank you all the same.

Mom, this is just a status update. Im fine, working, joining the gym, everyone here is fine, there arent any racial riots here, yet. Still smoking but cutting down in an effort to be fit for the gym and not look like a tired fat fool in the workout classes and yes, for my own personal health and well being. Plus please try and get me a LA Dodgers replica baseball (home) jersey with Ethier on the back if they win the World Series in October. No, I can't get it over here. L size should be fine. Hope you're fine too. Love you.
Ju

Keroncong Hujan/ My Yasmin Ahmad tribute

Mega mendung di angkasa
Hembusan bayu dingin terasa
gerimis berderai di merata
bagai mutiara

Rahmat dibawa bersama
Limpahannya meresap dijiwa
adakala bahgia dirasa
meskipun duka nestapa

Tika hujan turun
sayup mendayu lagu keroncong
merdu irama dialun
bersenandung

Hujan membasahi bumi
melahirkan keluhuran budi
mengeratkan paduan suci
kasih sayang abadi

Translation;

Clouds overcast the sky
The gust of a cold breeze is felt
Drizzle drips everywhere
Like pearls

Blessings are brought together
It's gift overflows into the soul
Bliss is sometimes felt
In spite of the sadness of woes

When the rain falls
Faint rumbles(whispers) of a song
With Melodious rhymes bellowing
Croons

Rain wets the earth
Giving birth to noble deeds
Strengthening pure solidarity
An eternal love.




apologies if i've made any mistakes in the translations

Guess not

Nope. Still alive.

Last post(?)

so yeah.. i might be dying due to the H1N1. Watch this space for further developments. Or not, in which case im dead.

I guess some people finally got their wish huh?

Book of the law/ Ouroboros

If you're still here after seeing all three videos, here's my opinion.

Do what thou wilt. I'm sure most of you live by that. But this Christian propaganda is not without its merits. At what point do we draw a line as to what is right and wrong? Hitler followed his heart and 6 million Jews and 2 million others died because one man wanted to do his own thing. From a personal view, for example, I find homosexual lifestyle distasteful and disagree with it, but I know many of you do not. I did my own thing by saying what I felt was right in my heart and I was condemned for it. So it is right then for you to do your own thing when other are also doing their own thing by telling you you cant do your own thing? If you say that you followed your heart, would it not also be correct to say that I followed mine as well? And by denying me my right to follow my own will, are you not being hypocritical? Is it fairer to say that you can do your own thing while what someone else does that offends you is not the right thing and that person shouldn't be doing it? On that, I believe that doing what thou wilt is utter bullshit. We live in a society that is extremely selfish and individualist. There is no altruism to allow for there to be anarchical communality. Nobody "does their own thing". That is why we have laws. Would it be more accurate to say that "I'm do as I will within the confines and parameters of the laws of the land"? Does that not go against the idea of doing as thou wilt? Listen to what Charles Manson said. Why then do you paint him a villain and a monster if you are all for "doing your own thing?"

Oh sure, you can tell me that you're not like Hitler, Charles Manson, Anton LeVay, Alister Crowley. They were all just psychos. Criminals. But they all did their own thing didn't they? I'm not arguing against free will. I'm arguing for the fact that most people who say that they want to and should be able to do their own thing are nothing but hypocrites. If I was a God fearing Christian, as it is stated in my MyKad, and if I was to say that lesbians are scum of the earth and sinners of the highest nature I'm sure that that would draw flak from almost every acquaintance that I know. Mind you, I'm saying IF. But then we come back to doing your own thing. Would not being a God fearing Christian and saying such derogatory and inflammatory statements be me doing my own thing? Why then should the above said hypothetical statements be considered wrong and derogatory and inflammatory? Its because we do in fact live in a society that hypocritically claims that it has free will but are just in denial of the fact that they want to be subjugated to laws as and when it suits their own individual advantage, i.e. laws that protect them from those who would follow their hearts by denying you what your hearts wants.Even then, the law is subject to men who do as they wilt and we all suffer because of it, as Iran and our own Malaysia can attest You see the vicious cycle developing here? Its a loop within a loop within a loop. At what point of the Ouroboros does the head meet the tail? The answer is that it does not, and we are all bound in this endless circle of right and wrong and the middle path that leads to nowhere. We are all hypocrites for believing that we are "good people"and that we can and shall do what we will.

Nuptial Congratulations/Death/A fat man's worldview

First off, I did like to congratulate Ms(or should that be Mrs. now?) Chompunatt Krenger on tying the knot with Mr Krenger. Your brother was kind enough to send some of the pictures and like I told him, you looked beautiful. Here's to having many many many years of marital bliss and happiness.

Death has not been kind. Not to the celebrities anyway. I mean, I realize that death is an everyday part of life. Just last week there was a funeral behind my house. And a dead dog that was repeated run over till it resembled something akin to tomato puree near my dad's house. And the 5 mosquitoes I just killed and impaled their heads upon little improvised pikes to scare away their kin before they take another bite from He who's Blood is Like a Nutmeg and Honey Donut with Chocolate Sprinklings , or in mosquitonese. EEeEEEEeeeeeeeeE. And the 50 ants I killed with Commercial insect spray. You get what I mean. Death happens. But only to us "normies". Its like every week there's a celebrity death. Ms. Fawcett, Mr Jackson, Ms Ahmad, Mr Robson, Mr Mays. The list goes on. And it was all in the space of one month. Methinks death has become bored of us normies and craves to be hispter death with above mentioned celebrities. Or maybe he's forming a football team, with Mr Bobby Robson as coach. Anyway, what Im trying to say is, death is stalking, paparazzi style, and its disconcerting. These people entertained us and will no longer now. Instead the guilty, the corrupt and the immoral are still as springy as a spring chicken and no doubt at this very moment making the world a lot more shittier for the rest of us normies. Disconcerting. Oh, and I suppose condolences to the family and acquaintances of the deceased mentioned above. You touched our lives briefly but you touched us nonetheless. Metaphorically.

So, I admit i read Michelle's blog off and on. And surprisingly, Im not angry or "emo" as she put it anymore. In fact Im happy that she's found some happiness and is getting on with her life rather well. I don't know if its sincerity or indifference. Or maybe a bit of both. I can't say. All i can say is that Im not angry anymore and our chapter has come to a close. She has been relegated(or elevated) to memory of which i sometimes recall and then smile and say, that is the past and promptly get distracted by a scantily glad girl sashaying her way across the street while I hum The Door's "hello I love you" in my head and stare, at which point said girl catches my stare and promptly walks away faster upon realizing that she received a stare from a potential contestant on The Biggest Loser Asia.

Speaking of which, I entertained the thought of entering said competition, mainly for the money, partly for the weight loss which will guarantee me a 110% increase in pussy getting. Pussy as in the derogatory term for a woman's vagina and not the Michael(the cat) kind. But upon sizing up( pun unintended) the competition, I felt that I would dismissed out of hand as someone who requires just a little bit more exercise to ensure hot tamale-esque physique. It also got me thinking that I should befriend some of the said competition to be used as a foil so that I would seem thinner in the group of the BMI challenged. Having established what a bastard I am to think of such a thought, I promptly wondered if my friends see me that way since they all aren't BMI challenged while I am bordering on said levels. I then despaired till i saw a girl in short shorts(or micro minies..whooo) and fishnets with a tube top(and looking good I might add) and all was well again. Yes, I seem to live or be at areas where hot people peruse and wander through, causing us normies to stare and have a sharp intake of breath and spontaneously burst into humming obscure dittys about hot girls. Or the playlist at zouk, whichever takes one's fancy first.

Great, now i can't get that door's song out of my head. Then again I just came back from a mamak which catered to the after clubbing hours crowd and I was humming the song for a good half an hour.

Pussy......cat./ Paws Animal Welfare Society

Say hi to Michelle. No, I'm not being spiteful. It was just the first name that came to mind. I found her in my backyard 2 nights ago. Abandoned, cold and mewing for the end of the world. Having bought powdered milk( kittens can't take cows milk because they're lactose intolerant i.e. they'll die. Ignore the picture on the bottom left, it was taken pre googling of how/what to feed kittens) I promptly had a sleepless night due to her endless mewing and constant need to be fed through a syringe. After said feeding she attempted to explore her surroundings at which point I played traffic police and directed her away from electrical plugs and stairs while she ambled on tiny feeble paws. After tiring out from said explorations I tucked her in her towel/blanket and stroked her head and looked into her eyes until she feel asleep again. Repeat process 3 hours later while attempting to sleep before she mewed again.

I finally gave her away to PAWS. Why? Because everyone here hates cats and I don't feel responsible enough to take care of her. I don't know if I did the right thing or not. The receptionist/admin/volunteer told me Michelle was quite young and probably not vaccinated and will most probably catch something from the other unvaccinated cats in residence and die... Before quickly adding that they don't kill their animals unless they're terminally ill. And taking my Rm50 surrender fee. I didn't even say bye to her. While filing out the release forms a creepy old man/volunteer took her away, box and towel and all and I couldn't find her as I left the compound. If there was anything this animal planet episode thought me, it's that I'm an incompetent kitten care giver, and I'm definitely not responsible enough to own a kitten. And I'm missing her already.

If the 3-5 of you are reading this and feel that you want to give and/or are capable of giving Michelle a good home, please visit PAWS in Subang(near the old airport road) ASAP. She's about a couple of weeks old, black/gray and brown fur. Beautiful gray eyes. May or may not answer to the name of Michelle. There's a nominal adoption fee to pay but I'm sure Michelle would appreciate it very much. Closed on Wednesdays.

P.S i just read up that Michelle could potentially be Michael. Cat genitalia don't form till they're about 3 weeks old. I didn't see the twigs and berries so I assumed it was a female. But its supposed to be slit like and Michelle had a roundish looking genitalia thing. So... yeah. Goodbye Michael.

Fuzzy angry logic/ The fucking point/ Juice

So last night was fuzzy to say the least. So fuzzy I didn't realize I wrote last night's you-can-barely-call-it-a poem. Yes, I have the uncanny ability to craft barely passable poetry in the midst of a drunken haze. And the fact that I didn't fuck up on the spelling is also quite uncanny, seeing as my sober myself usually makes more spelling and grammar mistakes than someone suffering from dyslexia. It's a joke. If you cant take it ukfc oyu.

On that note, I'm sick and tired of being the calm one. It obviously doesn't get you anywhere in life and in some sick twisted and ironic way I can see why Michelle is happy the way she is. She just doesn't give a fuck about what everyone else thinks and she sleeps easier at night, alone or in the arms of her lover. And in some way, I think that should be applauded. Why the fuck should I be nice to you when its just so much fucking easier to fuck you over for my own benefit? Why should I give a fuck what you think when it's obvious that what I do think doesn't really matter to you in the first place anyway? We're brought up to think that we live in such an altruistic society. That we should fucking care for everyone and love thy neighbor and all that hippie propaganda bullshit. They lied to us. Society doesn't care about society. If they did there wouldn't be crime, there wouldn't be war, there wouldn't be cynicism and depression. But there it is. Outside your fucking temples, your churches, your mosques, your schools, your homes. Everyone has become a statistic, a target, an object to be ravished and destroyed for your own selfish pleasures and needs. No one's human. No one cares. You see a fucking road accident victim and you don't stop. You see a robbery in progress and you stare dumbly and helpless as your "fellow" man gets relieved of his possessions. Don't even fucking talk to me about sex. Society is just a big whore that fucks itself with a dildo. You just have to fucking go on the star's website and see that the most read stories are all about fucking rape and sex scandals and nude pictures being posted up by people who said victims thought they could fucking trust. They, as you all are, are fucking mistaken into thinking we're all fucking altruistic and "good" people. Money, might and carnal satisfactions have more say than love and peace. So why the fuck should we even fucking bother anymore? Why the fuck should I care about you?

Because I'm fucking better than you at being a human being.

You have to be Dante and travel through the Inferno to know that maybe, just maybe, there just might be something better to it than all of this. God knows I'm no fucking angel. I've fucked up big time in the past, and I know I will again sometime in the future. But the fact is, I wasn't and never will be, cruel like you. I've been there, and I don't like it. And I can't live like you. The above shows I've thought about it. Considered it. But I can't. I'm jaded but I'm not fucking blind to the fact that, despite everything above being true, there is some good left in this world. Its just that we've been mired in the shit for so long we can't see it so clearly anymore. I'm sick of looking at all the shit. Just for once, I did like to see something good. I pray that there is some good. Otherwise.. what is the fucking point..

Now, the emo shit out of the way, here's today's funny( or not) pic. It's all about the juice.

Angry Song

Fragile, fragile, fragile.
Your views and your stands.
Evermore were you nothing but guile.
Nevermore are you and me friends.

Lies, lies, lies
Your every promise and intimation
Our friendship at a demise
The hellish road paved with your cruel intention

Unrepentant, unrepentant, unrepentant
In your ways and in your actions
Our time together and the caring irrelevant
My dear, you have no fucking justifications

Anon, Anon, Anon
You move on
I will not mourn
While I sing this angry song