Recently i got to know a charbor. Ok not say very chio, mai hiam buay pai type, can say slightly above average. Anyway after some initial chit chat here and there we went out twice. Also not say dates lah, just go out makan, watch a movie and walk around orchard road like thousands of other couples or couples-to-be... you look at me i look at you, checking each other's couple out hahaha.
So i admit a bit interested. Then i got her MSN and once a while we will talk cock on MSN. She already graduated and started working. Then recently on MSN the topic went into politics...
on NKF and Temasek...
Me: it is very unhealthy when the wealth of a nation is concentrated in the hands of one family, worse they seem to have something to hide, so unwilling to reveal anything
Her: as long as our cpf is there, with good interest rate, that's good
Me: isn't it better to be transparent if there is nothing to hide
Her: well if they r not public they r not oblige to give full report
Me: exactly like nkf isn't it? these r warning signs lor
Her: if u ask me, i think a corrupted govt eg philipines if they have a chance to have a company like gic, sure all the money will be gone and they will blame the downturn and say something they can't help it but i can see gic is continually making progress with new people and new investment opportunities
Me: .........
Her: i think i trust the lee
Me: right now no one even knows how GIC is doing, whether they r making or losing $$
Me: same goes for temasek
Her: true there is lack of transparency but to infer there is something to hide like nkf, that's very mean thing to say
Me: again if there is nothing hide, defend yourself, open your books for sgians scrutiny
Her: maybe they take high salaries and are not making money, and too embarassed to show
Her: they dont want people to be worried and disappointed
Me: rubbish then they r treating us like kids
Her: but you know gic is really run by top people from different discipline, not like nkf
Me: accountability means if u r not up to the job, u quit and someone else better do it
Me: i dun see ho ching quitting after all the bad biz decisions
Her: and let who take over? who can guarantee 100%?
Her: with such huge reserves, only can trust the elite and the honest
Her: i think that's why lky makes himself the chairman
Me: plse lah where got guarantee 100% profitability in the universe?
Me: let who takeover? how about george soros? how about waren buffet? they are world best and all proven men
Her: but those on board are also proven man
Her: tony tan is, so is dhanabalan
Me: (really buay tahan liao...) hey i go take shower liao :)
Her: ya sure
Me: bye
Her: yep bye
(end of session)
another time, on LHL...
Me: without his daddy he will never be PM
Her: well he is quite capable lah
Me: maybe capable as a bureaucrat, but as a politician and leader he cannot make it
Her: u sound like anti pap leh
Me: of cos i am, i belong to the 33.3
Her: what's that?
Me: the 33.3% who voted opposition
Her: oic
Her: with philip yeo in charge of biomed, the govt should have no worries
Me: philip yeo? HAHAHA!
Her: philip yeo is very capable leh, see what he did with edb
Me: i think we change topic lah, some things no point talking about
Her: what's wrong with philip yeo?
Me: oh many things wrong with him
Her: why he stepped on your toes izit?
Me: he stepped on all male sgian toes when he said male sgians are wimps! fuck him lah
Me: ah forget it lah
(end of 2nd chat session)
Last week we chatted on msn again and she wanted to come out watch movie, but i gave some excuse say not free. Then recently whenever i see her online i quickly go hide and put my status to offline. Dunno why all of a sudden very sian, no mood to talk to her liao. I dont think i want to take this relationship any further lor... I don't think I can carry out a normal conversation with a 66.6 anymore. Its really just a waste of time. And Derrick says the scary thing is dat many Sg gals are lidat... ignorant about current and world affairs. And most of them will vote for PAP. Progress Package can sponsor their latest dress and makeup they damn happy liao... fucking hell!
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Friday, January 12, 2007
NUS don slams new media
This is an excerpt from a news article in the nation-building newspapers.
New media: Why young can't tell good from bad
Critical thinking skills lag behind speed of tech changes: NUS don
By Ken Kwek
When young Singaporeans surf the internet, many are unable to discern the good from the bad and ugly, said a media lecturer.
Often they are also ill prepared to defend what they post on the Internet, said Miss Lim Sun Sun, an assistant professor at the NUS.
This inability to process and analyse the content of new media such as the Internet can be traced to one factor - their critical thinking skills.
While many know how to use the Internet, many have not learnt how to think critically of the flood of information they encounter daily on the worldwide web.
The job of improving media literacy, she felt, should be a focus of the Government, the media and schools.
A member of the audience asked why there was a particular need for such instruction now, more than in the past. Prof Lim's reply: because there is a "growing atrophy" in students' critical thinking skills, a situation which suggests media literacy lags behind development of new media technology.
I don't know what they are teaching students at NUS, but this Ms Lim does not sound like a lecturer who knows how to teach.
1st of all, media literacy is always going to play catch up with media technology. This was the case 1000 yrs ago and this is the case today. The media puts something out, people consume it. That is the nature of the media, you become more or less literate as a result of media, not the reverse. Therefore I think it is more accurate to say that media literacy is dependent on the state of the media. This is especially so when the media in Sg is a tighly controlled and regulated one. However Ms Lim does not seem too concerned about this.
2ndly Ms Lim says that many "young sporeans are not able to tell good from bad" when it comes to the internet. I wonder how she makes this conclusion. Becos the same could be said for older sporeans too who can't tell the good from bad, the truth from the half-truths in traditional media. Are the old anymore media literate than the young? Here Ms Lim seems to imply traditional media is naturally credible and good by default - a standard PAP gahment view...
Then the question from the member of the audience to Ms Lim is a very good one: why all of a sudden this concern with critical thinking skills now? Why not in the past? Ms Lim's 1-line answer "because there is growing atrophy in critical thinking skills" sounds really lame to me & doesn't say anything. She does not attempt to justify herself neither does she explore the underlying reasons behind this atrophy thing that she invented. Being an educator shouldn't she be asking these questions? So if we take a step back and look at what she says... do we see any signs of critical thinking skills in all she said? Where is the analysis and defending of her own statements? I dun think she really understands what critical thinking skills is about.
Well maybe Ken Kwek the reporter was not given enough space to write a fuller article that gives a more complete picture of what Ms Lim said. But hey that would mean this traditional media is far from 'good' and credible right? Hahahaha!
The overall impression i get is a familiar one, that once again some people are trying to paint the new media as a threat. That instead of letting you think and decide for yourselves what is good and bad, they feel the need to dictate and decide what is good for you. Keep going on like this how not to atrophy critical thinking skills.
New media: Why young can't tell good from bad
Critical thinking skills lag behind speed of tech changes: NUS don
By Ken Kwek
When young Singaporeans surf the internet, many are unable to discern the good from the bad and ugly, said a media lecturer.
Often they are also ill prepared to defend what they post on the Internet, said Miss Lim Sun Sun, an assistant professor at the NUS.
This inability to process and analyse the content of new media such as the Internet can be traced to one factor - their critical thinking skills.
While many know how to use the Internet, many have not learnt how to think critically of the flood of information they encounter daily on the worldwide web.
The job of improving media literacy, she felt, should be a focus of the Government, the media and schools.
A member of the audience asked why there was a particular need for such instruction now, more than in the past. Prof Lim's reply: because there is a "growing atrophy" in students' critical thinking skills, a situation which suggests media literacy lags behind development of new media technology.
I don't know what they are teaching students at NUS, but this Ms Lim does not sound like a lecturer who knows how to teach.
1st of all, media literacy is always going to play catch up with media technology. This was the case 1000 yrs ago and this is the case today. The media puts something out, people consume it. That is the nature of the media, you become more or less literate as a result of media, not the reverse. Therefore I think it is more accurate to say that media literacy is dependent on the state of the media. This is especially so when the media in Sg is a tighly controlled and regulated one. However Ms Lim does not seem too concerned about this.
2ndly Ms Lim says that many "young sporeans are not able to tell good from bad" when it comes to the internet. I wonder how she makes this conclusion. Becos the same could be said for older sporeans too who can't tell the good from bad, the truth from the half-truths in traditional media. Are the old anymore media literate than the young? Here Ms Lim seems to imply traditional media is naturally credible and good by default - a standard PAP gahment view...
Then the question from the member of the audience to Ms Lim is a very good one: why all of a sudden this concern with critical thinking skills now? Why not in the past? Ms Lim's 1-line answer "because there is growing atrophy in critical thinking skills" sounds really lame to me & doesn't say anything. She does not attempt to justify herself neither does she explore the underlying reasons behind this atrophy thing that she invented. Being an educator shouldn't she be asking these questions? So if we take a step back and look at what she says... do we see any signs of critical thinking skills in all she said? Where is the analysis and defending of her own statements? I dun think she really understands what critical thinking skills is about.
Well maybe Ken Kwek the reporter was not given enough space to write a fuller article that gives a more complete picture of what Ms Lim said. But hey that would mean this traditional media is far from 'good' and credible right? Hahahaha!
The overall impression i get is a familiar one, that once again some people are trying to paint the new media as a threat. That instead of letting you think and decide for yourselves what is good and bad, they feel the need to dictate and decide what is good for you. Keep going on like this how not to atrophy critical thinking skills.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Thoughts on Ah Gayle
Gayle Goh's language skills put me to shame. She is also a debater. Once a while i will pop over to her blog to see see look look. Wah lan she is not that much younger than me, but makes hell of a lot more sense than myself and all those sillyzens out there. I think NS and SAF really screws up a person's brain and thinking. Just look at those jiat liao bee paper generals now masquerading as politicians and CEOs. No wonder PAP wants more women in politics. Of course our PM is an exception.. bcos his NS is not really the same NS that ordinary Sporean males go through... hehe.
Anyway back to ah Gayle. Recently she appear on a mediacock show call BlogTV. I only knew about it (and the show) bcos i also drop by Mr Wang's blog, otherwise wtf is BlogTV who knows or care? Which goes to show how successful the TV show is, hahaha. To cut a long story short, Mr Wang declined to go on the show but Gayle did. And then Gayle wrote in her blog the reasons she did so which sounded to me like she tried to defend her actions, also at the same time she gave Mr Wang her opinions why engaging the enemy is not such a bad thing and so on, which in turn attracted replies from other bloggers, some agreeing with her and others don't. There is just too much blogs to read and comments to go through. But it got me thinking about people like ah Gayle and Mr Wang.
It wasn't that long ago i was in JC too. Family is middle class, no worries of the future. And then i sat for my A levels, didn't do too well, couldn't get into the local unis, so now have to look for study opportunities in private education providers. Of cos before that i kena conscripted into the CCB NS for 2 fucking yrs. I can say in the past 3 yrs i have "grown up". My thinking now compared to JC and pre-NS days are almost 180 degrees different. NS and working part time now shows me the kind of lives other sporeans lead other than my privileged one. Some things i witnessed myself also played a part in this "growth". So idealism is still very much in ah Gayle and this is what makes her attractive to the PAP who is now going all out to recruit and co-opt people like them.
Ah Gayle is not wrong to think that engaging the enemy is a constructive way to make changes. In fact her thinking is probably very close to political parties like the Workers Party and people like Chiam See Tong. Their approach is to try to survive within the current PAP-set system no matter how bad the odds are stacked against them and how ridiculous they are made to look. 忍辱偷生 comes to mind. The threat of unjust legal actions and invisible OB markers made them self censor and not say too much. I personally think in the long run such an approach will do more harm than benefit to the political health of this country. If today you cannot stand your ground and say what is on your mind and you back off half a step, it is only a matter of time before the day comes when you totally shut up. Maybe they dangle some carrots to make it easier for you to swallow. It is what some people call the slippery slope. The gentle and reasoned approach does not work with the PAP, which is a party founded on pragmatism and not ideology. The history and actions of PAP tells us that it only listens to those who has a bigger fist and heavier punch than them. LKY himself, whenever he is confronted with charges of authoritarianism and draconian acts, will not try to reason things out but instead just deflect them by saying "hey! get organised and challenge me, i'm not stopping you am i?" Of course if you take that bait u give him reasons to humtum you with his despotic ways. So i really do not think engaging the PAP, under the current political and social circumstances imposed by the PAP, will amount to effective changes. In fact if u engage them u risk losing credibility and let them run you down. Why play a game that is defined and set by them? Why not play your own game instead. I only agree with LKY on one thing and that is yes get organised, do something, but do something of your own and not the something they want you to do. The new media is forcing the PAP to bend to it, but the PAP is very smart and resourceful and it is now trying to subvert or control this media.
Mr Wang on the other hand is an interesting case. He is obviously much older, has more life experience and appears to hold a good job that pays very well. He is also a lawyer and ex-public prosecutor. His profile fits that of an elite as defined by the PAP. I consider him a moderate. And most of the time I agree with Mr Wang's take on things. But like an older person Mr Wang is also harder to read. One can only judge such a person by their actions. Same as how one should judge the PAP. By their actions and not their pretty and high sounding words.
Mr Wang is right not to attend the show. There is just too much to lose and nothing to gain. The time for engagement has past long ago. If you put something in place, then you also have to be the one to undo it. This is what the PAP has to do before people will come forward. It has to undo what it did in the past. Otherwise you cannot move forward in a meaningful manner. This is call accountability - a word i really like though i hate A level accounting hahaha! Going forward without facing up to the past, sooner or later the past will catches up and undo all your good work. I consider LHL no different from LKY, so in this sense Spore is still stuck in the LKY era. This is another reason why the PAP is targeting the young, bcos the young does not know and remember the past. So it is easier to co-opt them without having to be accountable. In Spore there is no lack of old or elderly people who are capable and can contribute to either politics or society. But why is the PAP sidelining them? I think the answer is obvious.
So all i can say is ah Gayle is young and no different from any 18 yr old. Too much is expected of her. If today she appears to have gone over to the dark side bcos she sincerely believes that is the way to make changes (and not bcos of carrots and goodies) or maybe she jus wants to have a bit of fun on TV, than so be it. Her actions in the future remains to be seen.
Anyway back to ah Gayle. Recently she appear on a mediacock show call BlogTV. I only knew about it (and the show) bcos i also drop by Mr Wang's blog, otherwise wtf is BlogTV who knows or care? Which goes to show how successful the TV show is, hahaha. To cut a long story short, Mr Wang declined to go on the show but Gayle did. And then Gayle wrote in her blog the reasons she did so which sounded to me like she tried to defend her actions, also at the same time she gave Mr Wang her opinions why engaging the enemy is not such a bad thing and so on, which in turn attracted replies from other bloggers, some agreeing with her and others don't. There is just too much blogs to read and comments to go through. But it got me thinking about people like ah Gayle and Mr Wang.
It wasn't that long ago i was in JC too. Family is middle class, no worries of the future. And then i sat for my A levels, didn't do too well, couldn't get into the local unis, so now have to look for study opportunities in private education providers. Of cos before that i kena conscripted into the CCB NS for 2 fucking yrs. I can say in the past 3 yrs i have "grown up". My thinking now compared to JC and pre-NS days are almost 180 degrees different. NS and working part time now shows me the kind of lives other sporeans lead other than my privileged one. Some things i witnessed myself also played a part in this "growth". So idealism is still very much in ah Gayle and this is what makes her attractive to the PAP who is now going all out to recruit and co-opt people like them.
Ah Gayle is not wrong to think that engaging the enemy is a constructive way to make changes. In fact her thinking is probably very close to political parties like the Workers Party and people like Chiam See Tong. Their approach is to try to survive within the current PAP-set system no matter how bad the odds are stacked against them and how ridiculous they are made to look. 忍辱偷生 comes to mind. The threat of unjust legal actions and invisible OB markers made them self censor and not say too much. I personally think in the long run such an approach will do more harm than benefit to the political health of this country. If today you cannot stand your ground and say what is on your mind and you back off half a step, it is only a matter of time before the day comes when you totally shut up. Maybe they dangle some carrots to make it easier for you to swallow. It is what some people call the slippery slope. The gentle and reasoned approach does not work with the PAP, which is a party founded on pragmatism and not ideology. The history and actions of PAP tells us that it only listens to those who has a bigger fist and heavier punch than them. LKY himself, whenever he is confronted with charges of authoritarianism and draconian acts, will not try to reason things out but instead just deflect them by saying "hey! get organised and challenge me, i'm not stopping you am i?" Of course if you take that bait u give him reasons to humtum you with his despotic ways. So i really do not think engaging the PAP, under the current political and social circumstances imposed by the PAP, will amount to effective changes. In fact if u engage them u risk losing credibility and let them run you down. Why play a game that is defined and set by them? Why not play your own game instead. I only agree with LKY on one thing and that is yes get organised, do something, but do something of your own and not the something they want you to do. The new media is forcing the PAP to bend to it, but the PAP is very smart and resourceful and it is now trying to subvert or control this media.
Mr Wang on the other hand is an interesting case. He is obviously much older, has more life experience and appears to hold a good job that pays very well. He is also a lawyer and ex-public prosecutor. His profile fits that of an elite as defined by the PAP. I consider him a moderate. And most of the time I agree with Mr Wang's take on things. But like an older person Mr Wang is also harder to read. One can only judge such a person by their actions. Same as how one should judge the PAP. By their actions and not their pretty and high sounding words.
Mr Wang is right not to attend the show. There is just too much to lose and nothing to gain. The time for engagement has past long ago. If you put something in place, then you also have to be the one to undo it. This is what the PAP has to do before people will come forward. It has to undo what it did in the past. Otherwise you cannot move forward in a meaningful manner. This is call accountability - a word i really like though i hate A level accounting hahaha! Going forward without facing up to the past, sooner or later the past will catches up and undo all your good work. I consider LHL no different from LKY, so in this sense Spore is still stuck in the LKY era. This is another reason why the PAP is targeting the young, bcos the young does not know and remember the past. So it is easier to co-opt them without having to be accountable. In Spore there is no lack of old or elderly people who are capable and can contribute to either politics or society. But why is the PAP sidelining them? I think the answer is obvious.
So all i can say is ah Gayle is young and no different from any 18 yr old. Too much is expected of her. If today she appears to have gone over to the dark side bcos she sincerely believes that is the way to make changes (and not bcos of carrots and goodies) or maybe she jus wants to have a bit of fun on TV, than so be it. Her actions in the future remains to be seen.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Another eat shit letter...
from the usual por lumpar sillyzen. Here is how the fuck face look like. Don't know why but all PAP types really cannot make it. Like my mum always say 全部贼头贼脑，祖宗背景不好 hahaha! Anyway the issue is about the lack of enforcement on smoking at coffeeshops brought up recently by the papers.
Consider suspending the licences of coffeeshops that let customers smoke
Letter from Ace Kindred Cheong
Two months ago, I was having supper at Henderson Coffeeshop and was disappointed to find many diners violating the smoking ban.
I was even more disappointed to see parents smoking while their children, some as young as six or seven, were seated and eating next to them.
I agree that there are not enough NEA officers to enforce the anti-smoking laws at every coffeeshop.
But to send a strong message to errant coffeeshops that conveniently turn a blind eye to violators, why not consider a suspension of their business licences if warnings and fines fail?
Doing so will shame and educate those who do not abide by the law.
Anyone who takes public transport will also know that smoking is banned at bus stops even before the ban at coffeeshops took place, but today we still see people puffing away without a care. Personally I think the law is a good thing except for the part on enforecement. If the gahment wants to come up with a new law it should also have the means to enforce it. Otherwise it is just all sound and fury，虎头蛇尾，a half fuck measure typical of the SAF. But the most ridiculous thing is they play tai-ji and pass the buck to the coffeeshop owners, saying it is the owners' responsibility to enforce on customers. And here our shit brain Ass Cheong chipped in as usual to agree. KNN if not enough NEA officers is it the fault of NEA or the fault of the coffeeshops? Why is the gahment passing the buck to others and expect others to do the job for them? Like that coffeeshop owners need to employ more staff, overhead goes up, then how? You going to pay for that Mr Ass Cheong? Don't make any fucking sense.
What about people smoking at bus stops? Why not talk about fining and shaming LTA since LTA as owners also do nothing and turn a blind eye to smokers? LTA didn't enforce leh, so how Mr Ass Cheong??
Consider suspending the licences of coffeeshops that let customers smoke
Letter from Ace Kindred Cheong
Two months ago, I was having supper at Henderson Coffeeshop and was disappointed to find many diners violating the smoking ban.
I was even more disappointed to see parents smoking while their children, some as young as six or seven, were seated and eating next to them.
I agree that there are not enough NEA officers to enforce the anti-smoking laws at every coffeeshop.
But to send a strong message to errant coffeeshops that conveniently turn a blind eye to violators, why not consider a suspension of their business licences if warnings and fines fail?
Doing so will shame and educate those who do not abide by the law.
Anyone who takes public transport will also know that smoking is banned at bus stops even before the ban at coffeeshops took place, but today we still see people puffing away without a care. Personally I think the law is a good thing except for the part on enforecement. If the gahment wants to come up with a new law it should also have the means to enforce it. Otherwise it is just all sound and fury，虎头蛇尾，a half fuck measure typical of the SAF. But the most ridiculous thing is they play tai-ji and pass the buck to the coffeeshop owners, saying it is the owners' responsibility to enforce on customers. And here our shit brain Ass Cheong chipped in as usual to agree. KNN if not enough NEA officers is it the fault of NEA or the fault of the coffeeshops? Why is the gahment passing the buck to others and expect others to do the job for them? Like that coffeeshop owners need to employ more staff, overhead goes up, then how? You going to pay for that Mr Ass Cheong? Don't make any fucking sense.
What about people smoking at bus stops? Why not talk about fining and shaming LTA since LTA as owners also do nothing and turn a blind eye to smokers? LTA didn't enforce leh, so how Mr Ass Cheong??
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Stupid Grace
Sometimes I wonder at the amazing stupidity of some S'poreans...
Jan 4, 2007
No cause to doubt credibility of HDB
I do not think that it is justified to press the Housing Board for its land and construction costs or doubt its word that the flats are subsidised.
In the first place, Singaporeans are not obligated to buy HDB flats. If they suspect that the flats are not 'at market price', they can buy private apartments.
She reminds of Marie Antoinette. "Oh you are without food? How about some cakes then?"
However, the ongoing demand for the flats speaks for their market value. If a comparison were to be made, private apartments are still beyond the reach of the majority of Singaporeans.
Secondly, in view of the subsidy, owners should sell their flats back to HDB if they want to upgrade. However, HDB is good enough to allow owners to sell their flats in the open market and make a tidy profit.
What the fuck is she talking about? Anyone think she is making sense here???
Thirdly, the flats have improved in design and size since they were first built. If the flats are not 'at market price' and therefore unattractive, why are some Singaporeans using the names of their siblings, aunts and uncles who are still single to purchase these flats with the intention of selling them later?
I voted for a government which is trustworthy, honest and capable in every sense of the word and I have no cause to doubt the credibility of the HDB.
In fact, I appreciate what the Government has done to house poor Singaporeans like me in the 1960s when we were desperate for a roof over our heads during the Indonesian Confrontation.
Today, our housing system is a pride of the nation. It is unfair to throw brickbats of any kind at the HDB when it deserves bouquets.
Grace Cheah Gek Neo (Miss)
People like Grace Neo who is so trusting of everything, is like an ostrich with its head in the sand. I wonder is she just another elite who is out of touch with the real world? No one doubted Durai and his NKF, but look what was really going on? Grace Neo is what my friend Derek will call a 愚民 (stupid citizen), or a sillyzen. These people will be death of this country.
Jan 4, 2007
No cause to doubt credibility of HDB
I do not think that it is justified to press the Housing Board for its land and construction costs or doubt its word that the flats are subsidised.
In the first place, Singaporeans are not obligated to buy HDB flats. If they suspect that the flats are not 'at market price', they can buy private apartments.
She reminds of Marie Antoinette. "Oh you are without food? How about some cakes then?"
However, the ongoing demand for the flats speaks for their market value. If a comparison were to be made, private apartments are still beyond the reach of the majority of Singaporeans.
Secondly, in view of the subsidy, owners should sell their flats back to HDB if they want to upgrade. However, HDB is good enough to allow owners to sell their flats in the open market and make a tidy profit.
What the fuck is she talking about? Anyone think she is making sense here???
Thirdly, the flats have improved in design and size since they were first built. If the flats are not 'at market price' and therefore unattractive, why are some Singaporeans using the names of their siblings, aunts and uncles who are still single to purchase these flats with the intention of selling them later?
I voted for a government which is trustworthy, honest and capable in every sense of the word and I have no cause to doubt the credibility of the HDB.
In fact, I appreciate what the Government has done to house poor Singaporeans like me in the 1960s when we were desperate for a roof over our heads during the Indonesian Confrontation.
Today, our housing system is a pride of the nation. It is unfair to throw brickbats of any kind at the HDB when it deserves bouquets.
Grace Cheah Gek Neo (Miss)
People like Grace Neo who is so trusting of everything, is like an ostrich with its head in the sand. I wonder is she just another elite who is out of touch with the real world? No one doubted Durai and his NKF, but look what was really going on? Grace Neo is what my friend Derek will call a 愚民 (stupid citizen), or a sillyzen. These people will be death of this country.
Monday, January 01, 2007
2007 is here
Happy new year!
ORD is sibei song! But it is also the beginning of reservist... fucking hell the system really makes a slave out of the s'porean male. Go die lah chao cheebye...
ORD is sibei song! But it is also the beginning of reservist... fucking hell the system really makes a slave out of the s'porean male. Go die lah chao cheebye...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
