As above.

First, my name IS Alex Toh. Second, I don't sing. Third, if you boys want to bitch fight i suggest dismemberment as a pre-cursor. Fourth, this is obviously my blog, if you read anything you would know. Fifth, if you still can't take a hint i want both of you to just fuck off. Can't you just email each other to bitch?

The excesses of our generation is epitomised in its stupidity. The glorification of which is the greatest excess. You only need to look as near as MTV or as far as the school yard to bear witness to the moronism intermixing with mirth. "Life is wasted on the young" to see it been split so wastefully because they can afford it.

I was just done reading The Great Gatsby by... Scot Fitzgerald or something like that. I'm too lazy to get the name right but it should be close. My advice, Don't read it. It reads like the script from days of our lives. Shallow intrigue, materialistic women, rich men and the excesses of the wealthy. Unfortunately, that was the intention of the book. To capture the soulless deceitful lives of the rich in his time. The author was aparrently one himself. Rich, socialite accompanied with the requisite glamourous fabulous wife.

There we go... my book review for the week. Back to Art 82 and abuse of dominant position. United Brands etc...

(This entry originates from something I wrote in my journal)

There was a great divide that split the world at the onset of the world's greatest invention, the pen. It if often said that the "Pen is mightier than the sword", the humble pencil is left behind.

There is something delightfully simple and satisfying about manual writing. Something the tippy tap of fingers on a keyboard cannot resonate with. When I write, I do not prefer the rhythmic sounds of the keyboard and the harsh light of the LCD. Its the simple delight of a pen and paper which scrowls my thoughts in the most lucid fashion.

Lead, however brings the controversy to another level. There is romantic appeal to the etchings of graphite and lead. Even if the medium is set in an unelegant rotten wooden casing or a product of faber castel. To some people, the touch of lead and graphite encased in wood is a luxury not easily replaced. I would. To me the replacement is in the words that i write. The pencil is not as permanent as the pen. Pencil marks can easily be erased. I require my thoughts to be etched in something alot more permanent. It would be all to easy to rub me away otherwise.

The pen is the scribe which communicates great thoughts and ideas onto paper. It would be inappropriate to wipe out of existence the words which represent great ideas with a rubber. It does not represent the revolution and inertia which the world clings on to at points of revolution. The Pen is the instrument of permanency which i choose to carve out my ideas, i cannot accept the transitory nature of the pencil.

Pen, pencil then keyboard? maybe it is time for a revolution in my mind. The irony is you heard this first through a keyboard.

This journal entry is long overdue. I've always held strong opinions about the progess that Thailand has made in the last few years which are favourable opinions. I obviously being in Europe means that you don't get so much Asian news because I just recently found out about the ongoings in Thailand a couple of days ago. Now... my comments.

Wikipedia summarises the situation at hand well.

"On Monday, January 23, 2006, three days after new Thai Telecommunication Act (2006) passed on Friday January 20, his family sold all stake in Shin Corporation, a leading communication company in Thailand, to Temasek Holdings with tax liability exemption. The Shinawatra and Damapong (Potjaman's maiden name) families netted about 73 billion baht (about US$1.88 billion) tax-free from the buyout..."

Firstly, I'm pleasantly surprised at the move by Temasek Holdings, which is a GLC in Singapore. Primarily because its an indicator of the level of trust and confidence and cooperation between govts in Asia. We do not harbour the same distrust which some other countries may have about foriegn firm ownership. Take the US shipping thing for example, when a company from the middle east wants to buy a US shipping firm the xenophobes begin to cry foul. All the talk of free trade when its in their interests, but xenophobia otherwise. I think we should be proud of the level of cooperation between Thailand and Singapore. Unlike the immeasurable phobias and distrust the west harbor towards other countries, I think Asia has taken things in the right perspective. Thailand trusts Singapore not to sabotage its telecommunications industry, why can't US trust the middle east? In business, its a symbiotic relationship. My gains and losses are yours too. Why wouldn't Temasek want the telecom arm of Shin Corp to do well? Similarly, with shipping. Why wouldn't the middle eastern BUSINESSMEN, want their own shipping company to do well? INstead, UK is afraid. Scared of its perceived reliance and therefore vulnerability. Sometimes you have to rely on others to improve. Its the basis of the concept of free trade isn't it? You produce what you're good at and I do the same, then we exchange so we both get the best of both worlds. Its a siege mentality because the west is under attack. Maybe they understand that their dominance now is begin threatened. So what do they do? Sabotage Thailand's progress through the west's most effective technique so far, Human Rights.

"Thaksin's 2003 campaign against drug dealers was alleged to amount to the extrajudicial execution of several hundred suspects, and was heavily criticized by civil rights watchdogs. There have also been complaints that Thaksin has been stacking the civil service with his relatives and business associates, for example by elevating his cousin, General Chaiyasit Shinawatra, from a remote district to Army commander-in-chief."

They make it seem that eradicating the illegal and not to mention violent, powerful and criminal drug trade was a bad thing. The truth behind the matter is that in this case human rights would have been to the advantage of the drug lords. In critcising the drug campaign, the human rights groups place the government in political disrepute, reducing support for politicians against the drug trade. Indirectly, this would have been to the advantage of the drug lords. I will not go so far as to say that this was the intention of Amnesty International, however, there is something to say about the recipeint of human rights.

Though, human rights was conceived to be universal, it was clearly targetted disruptive governments. The disruptive agents in the case of the drug wars are the drug lords. They have taken human rights and reversed its original purpose, the betterment of the average person would definitely not have been furthered by allowing criminals to hide behind it. Take Italy for example, in the south crime is rampant and there are still reminants of mafia influence. But fair trial and rights against preventive detention prohibit the effectiveness of current measures. I'm not saying that you take all humn rights away, I'm just advocating for more extreme measures for extreme circumstances.

My last point. Proportionality of public reaction just one year ago,

"He was re-elected in the February 2005 elections. In spite of reports of widespread corruption in his administration, Thaksin won a landslide victory, with his Thai Rak Thai party sweeping 374 out of 500 seats in Parliament, while the main opposition Democrat Party lost more than a quarter of its representation, retaining only 96 seats."

He had widespread support for the economic progress, less crime and the new underground train system in Bangkok (which gets you about anywhere, solved transportation issues clearly). Now, he sells shares, which are his own to another company. A private matter. He's called to step down.
Generally, we are afraid of politicians who siphon off money at the expense of the economy. They leave the economy in ruin and abscon the gains. In this case, Thaksin would not have been able to sell his shares for so much money if not for the fact that Shin Corp was doing well. Thats the point isn't it? the company grew along with the economy. It was managed properly and profitable such that another company found it worth 1 billion dollars to invest. I stress again that the sale of shares was a private matter. Now, he's been called to step down dispite everything he's done for the country in the short period of time he's been in power. Where is the proportionality in that? I think they will be hard pressed to find a successor to Thaksin.
Good Luck Thailand and remember you heard it first on this blog.

This post is could be dated in the 1990s when the IRC and ICQ first came up. Of course, in the good old days no one used msn, but now there's no other way to chat.

Sometime in the 90s began a critique of internet communication. Some people said that the idea of communicationn through the internet redefined human communication such that people became distanced from one another rather than closer. The argument was that electronic communication was simply not a substitute for real communication. It conveyed less than the telephone and even less than meeting up in person. We lost our ability to communicate with another party through regular channels, social skills were on the decline. I didn't believe what they were talking about at that point of time. I couldn't even see what was wrong with IRC, much less object to the critique. How can you argue against something you can't even see?

Now I think differently. Internet communication is bad. You know how there were these emails about the Bill Gates being the devil? It might just be true cause MSN is the purveyor of evil in this decade, more people use this chat engine nowadays than any otehr i know.

Firstly, your person is a facade on MSN. Are you really represented by little bits carried across your contact list? Or are you represented by that little picture you have beside your chat window when you talk? It would be an insult to say that the sum of all those little things are all that you are. If you cannot be represented by all which MSN has to offer, then what you present on MSN is not you. Your imagine on MSN must be a false representation of yourself. MSN allows you to change your nickname frequently and I suspect that some people use this facility to shamelessly advertise themselves to their contacts. I am a book not a rolling quotation. So i believe that MSN is incapable of projecting a true image of a person dispite being equipted with the best facilities any chat engine has to offer.

What does falsehood create? A buffer zone. It allows you to hide behind an MSN persona, a restricted representation of yourself. You don't need to commit to the exposure which facial expressions, tone of voice and awkward pauses in conversation create. It is the ultimate tool for the modern generation. Non-commital chatting. No commitment of your true self is required past your nick and a photo, which needn't even be your own. We all feel insecure about ourselves in some way or another. A buffer zone is the perfect method keep out of reach from the other party in a conversation, all insecurities. Its safety we seek. The security to hide in an increasingly critical world, the self. What is sex and the city, if not 4 women cricising society, relationships and men. what are magazine pictures, if not criticising you for not being glamourious enough. We all want to be fabulous and glamourous, but if you're not, what does hiding on MSN say about your tenacity?

Finally, the effect on human interaction. The thing with proper face or voice interactions is simply that you have no where to hide. You do not have the luxury of the buffer zone, of not replying or blocking someone from your contact list. It doesn't happen in the same way. You are forced to deal with all your insecurities in public and when you can't you clam up and wish you were on MSN with your 'friends'. Question: Are they your friends because you're actually comfortable with them or are you more comfortable with the buffer? This is the death of human interaction, the death of the full representation of your self. In the end, we don't know how to deal with who were are in the face of other people and seek to hide behind something. We have become fully dependent on the keyboard and the screen to create barriers. Barriers to friendship and interaction because we start to create these barriers which don't come down until we have somewhere to hide.

Final comment: How many hours do you spend on the internet? Why in the world is this time not better spent hanging out at someone's place or chatting with that person you somewhat know down the corridor? Maybe there's some truth in all of this afterall.

Note: Author does use MSN, but to supplement interaction cause some people just live so damn many miles away.

Thought of the day... why do those Americans insist on being the only jokers in the world who pronounce Iraq like an Apple Mac product? I-Raq, "I" as in me, Raq sounds like Rag.
However, when it comes to Iran. They choose to pronounce it the regular way. Iran, as in Ee-ran. Ee ran away with nuclear weapons.

Proves one thing, Americans, sigh...

I'm in Danmark. Famous for bacon, open sandwiches, Tivoli and recently, Racism.

Firstly, don't give me any more of that freedom of speech bullshit. It really is crap. Sure! There must be freedom to speak. I mean they were allowed to publish weren't they no one stopped them. But there must also be some self censorship. If noone's going to police free speech then the speakers must take responsibility.

Does this give Muslims the right to burn embassys all over the world? Of course Not! But i'd be on their side defending them. I'd say that the Danish had it coming. They knew that the result of their actions would be a full all out reaction like this. I say they knew full well but did it anyway. Just like any other teenage kid on the planet.

And now, when the muslims who are not stoning or burning eembassies being to burn flags, make placards and other th to demonstrate on the streets. Who's playing the freedom of speech card for them? Instead its not a matter of freedom of speech on their behalf. Apparantly muslims can't plead the freedom of speech, thats a sole right of the west. When they speak out loud and clear, they are "overreacting".

Which brings me to the last point. Who is to say that they are overreacting anyway? They are a religion under siege at the moment. There are certain things to say at certain times and certain things not to say. to critcise, No! to MOCK a religion under siege at this point of time is to provoke a response from a people under a siege mentality. No one criticised USA for invading Afghanistan (but Iraq is another story). For fear of terrorism, USA is lso under a siege mentality. But who's going to call "freedom of speech" when someone cries bomb at an airport. Maybe its time we understand and empatise with the muslim community during their time of need.

(The Author is neither muslim, danish, american nor an idiot)

As most kids are nowadays, we are heavily influenced by popular culture. I started off reading Harry Potter due the Hollywood remake of the first book. Now i'm reading Narnia because of the first movie.

As you may know, or not, that CS Lewis is not only famous for the Chronicles of Narnia but also for his book on christian apologetics. I was surprised while reading the first chapters of Narnia to see so many references to the bible. So much so that I was inclined to think that this really read like a children's bible rather than a work of fiction. For instance, all the human beings are refered to as children of adam and of eve and the lion which created Narnia was killed by the evil witch but was resurrected to save Narnia again. This is all already a movie, the next book in the Chronicles will turn out to be controversial.

Titled, 'The Horse and his Boy' the book caricatures the land of Narnia to be a little haven of justice and peace away from the scheming diabolical minds of the land of Calormen. The people of Calormen are darker skinned, wore turbans and carried scimitars and every reference to their king would be followed by "may he live forever". This must naturally be a reference to the Islamic Moors. After some Wikipedia-ing, it turns out that the spread of the Moorish influence to the north was halted by the Franks in the Battle of Tours. It involved the islamic Army moving northward but stopped by the christian Charles Martel in Tours, France. The Moorish forces were largely cavalry and notably the Berbers were most famous for their horses. In the CS Lewis' book, the antagonistic forces consists of 200 cavalry who advance north to invade Narnia. The moors are caricatured as people of riches but vain to excesses and of questionable morality.

The most controversial theme of the book in this era will turn out to be the reference of the people of Narnia as 'free'. Therefore, the attack of the Islamic army on Narnia is to be viewed as an attempt on the free world. The aftermath of 9/11 was to polarise the world into factions, many along religious lines. Many of you would note that in 2002 Bush coined the now infamous term "axis of evil" and that his re-election was largely attributed to the vote of christian groups. Now consider the fact that the next instalment of Narnia will be produced by America. I think it is easy to see how the controversy is turning out. I predict that the idea of Narnia being a country of the free will be played up and the islamic elements and vainty of the Moors basterdised. The free will naturally win the war, in fact CS Lewis' says that the leader of the invading army is turned into a donkey or "ass" and sent back to his kingdom.

Narnia, is a children's book and Narnia is a children's film. I find it hard to accept the idea that kids from such a young age should be inculcated with the prejudices of the polarised world. I sincerely hope that they skip this instalment of CS Lewis' book altogether. For the sake of young minds everywhere, not to grow up thinking that they are all inherently good and the rest of the world inherently bad. For those are prejudices which eventually lead to honest intentions to save the 'rest' but not realising that they don't require saving. The evil is not across our borders, rather is it there in our minds.

Simply put. After a visit to this city is really puts the traditional must goes to shame (London amd Paris). Seriously... you eat better than London and you club just as well as Paris without the inflated costs. We´re talking good food, great drinks and fantastic sights. For the record, as a law student the particular sentence ¨for the record¨ means a great deal. It is the best city in Europe that i´ve been to. Food is great. As for drinks the local champange is worth raving about at about 10 to 14 euros a bottle. The architecture is gorgeous. Come barcelona and ask me along cause i swear that this will not be my last visit to this city.

Forget london and paris southern europe.... Fantastic.

I'm currently going through Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco. Its really good. The plot's really just a cheap mystery flick but the detail and writing and the way facts are intelligently revealed to the reader makes it a great novel. The story works on many levels. With tons of theological discussions going on. Half of which i don't really understand. More philosophical discussions about the thin line between good and evil and whether they can actually be told apart or whether there is such a distinction even. THen there's blood and gore woven in with dead monks in vats of blood and sex too. Cool eh? not to mention some politics thrown in onto the historical backdrop of the novel. The church and its factions, the regent and the pope vying for power. I say read it if you haven't.

The other book i'm just done with, The Sea by John Banville. Won the MAN Booker Prize 2005. Why in the world do they always empahsise the MAN? Wassup with that? i know it used to be the booker... but is the emphasis really necessary? In any case, I feel he won solely on the subtality of his narration. Truly sublime. You know how many books start off with intense, deep detailed and complex narration but slowly wane into simple clear prose to get the story across in the end? This book doesn't. The strong powerful narrative is sustained to the end. My biggest complaint. You really don't get the point of the story until the end when everything links together in a span of a couple of pages. personally, that only works if its Harry Potter or a movie. Which is way Harry Potter is now available in cinemas. I would like to understand the focus of the book as I go on, if not i lose interest. And in this case its easy because most of its really just the old man ranting and recollecting his life.

3 more books i got today. Life of PI, which i should have read a long time ago. I Am Charlotte Simons, which I thought would be easier on the brain after Umberto Eco's. And a 3rd i can't remember, largely cause waterstone's having a 3 for the price of 2 offer.

Its true. Sometimes you think that you have alots of things to write about but you're not at the computer. On the other hand when you actually westle possession of a computer for a long enough time to write a journal entry your mind becomes blank. One truly confounding problem to the progress of my journal.

To usher in the new year, I've decided to make a couple of resolutions. As I'm writing this i suddenly come to the shocking realisation that I'm actually like bridget jones. She started her fir diary entry after the new year with a list of resolutions. So bring on the movie and book deals!

(1) Exercise. I have a tummy grown to such sizeable proportions its beginning to fold over my jeans. Not a good sign, the pot-belly look I intended to achieve has come 20 years too early. Some things we do not wish to over achieve. We meaning me and my tummy.

(2) Read. If old and fat is the only route i'm destined to head for, my only salvation will be that I will not be old fat and stupid. Why? At least if I still have brains I can be a celebrity poet or author and get to date models well into my 60s. Ambition shall be my downfall.

(3) Blog. Which is what i'm doing now.

This has been one totally useless post. I don't care cause i'm on holiday! ciao!

Now you see... my girlfriend's pretty bored and i'm pretty bored. So i kinda promised her to blog about something. Its kind hard for me to blog about something proper because it can't be any frivolous blog. when I first heard of the idea of blogging, I immediately decided that my blogs shouldn't be a collection of my photos and notes of my life. Every blog entry should have a point, maybe in some satirical manner or emotional manner or intellectual manner. I didn't want it to turn into a forum or an outlet for me to display my everyday life to the many strange people i don't know who come across my blog. Instead, I've always hoped that some entry that i make would either make someone laugh or get someone thinking about what i've wrote. Clearly, there is a philosophy to blogging to me.

To me, there is a distinction between your personal ideas and your personal life. The latter is intimate and not freely displayed in such a manner that the whole world is privy to it. The former is exactly what one needs to tell the whole world about. Ideas change the world and i hope to be part of this progress. I believe that the most influential thing a person can do is to change a person's mind. Ask yourself, has there not been a movie, a person or a book that has impacted your life? That is why idea should not be kept in one's head because it only has efficacy when expressed. Thats why a blog, simply because of its public nature is the perfect forum for the common person to get these ideas out of his/her head.

Have we abused or misused this power given to us? Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that a blog can be so much more than what it has been generally used for at the moment. I mean do we really need to know what someone has had for lunch or dinner? I agree its fun to read though and its not really an abuse in the sense of "possibly of genuine worldwide communication and what do people use it for? Porn". So therefore, its not misuse in the latter sense that its great for catching up and getting informed and reading about each other's lives.

But seriously, has blogging reached its full potential?

This is just an observation of the general behaviour of human persons near exams time.

Hightened awareness of everything around you except your books. Everything else seems to take particular significant at this point of time. Emails suddenly become a priority. All of a sudden you realise that you haven't yet taken out the trash nor did some washing which you must urgently do, even though you have left it for the past few days. The symptoms of heightened awareness increases closer to the date of the exams. Most people experience a drastic decrease in these symptoms a couple of hours just before the aforementioned paper. Unfortunately, by that time it is usually too late to save the victim as he or she is most likely a goner already.

There are 10 hours to my exams. Death is a mere countdown away.
(This post is also dedicated to Sha)

I'm currently in Copenhagen for the week. The city is really beautiful in the day, more beautiful when there's the odd occurence of sun during winter. There is, however, always another side to the city, even if we're talking about one of the most successful social welfare states in the world.

I'm taking the metro, just 3 stops towards the city centre. When i get the train, i sit at one of those 4 seaters where the benches face each other. Naturally in such a situation you have to encounter the odd problem of figuring out where to stare. You don't want to stare away all the time because that just simply won't be polite on the other hand you don't want to stare at the person opposite you. If you do one of 2 things will probably happen, the person thinks you're some perverted creep or you have to engage in a non-commital pointless conversation which tends to revolve around the weather.

The awkward situation persists for a whole one stop, which to this author seems more approximate towards eternity. Then it happens, the woman opposite me leaves and from the door behind her a huge rat enters the train. I should clarify that he is not really a rat but he could very well be mistakened as one. He has disshevelled hair, stick out of his head in tuffs. They are dry and stringy, which he emphasises by playing with the ends of the hair which stick out at odd angles above his ears. He hasn't shaved in at last a couple of days and the shadow of a beard is darkened by dirt all over his face and hands.

As he approaches, i begin to hold my breath. There is this stale smell emmitting from his direction which i did not notice before. But it grows steadly stronger has he approaches. It is as if the air around him freezes in its place and he carries it around like the rest of the dirt and grime on his body. Naturally he chooses to sit opposite me.

He has big eyes, huge in fact, that dart about constantly. His cheeks have sunken in so much that you can see the clear definition of his cheek bones and the shadow cast in the hollow of his cheeks. His mouth manages to protrude from his face making his jaw area jut out horizontally and concically. He begins to make strange noises with his mouth and teeth. A sort of irritating sucking sliva noise coupled with a lower indentation of a jaw chucking noise. Unfortunately for me its directed towards me. With his portruding lips its as if his mouth is almost touching my face. I'm utterly disgusted and give him as stare, to which he does not seem to notice.

His fidgiting doesn't stop. He's really like a rat. moving his hands on his lap veritcally up and down. very disconcerting by the way. then twitching his legs up and down. intermittently he'll pick at his hair and put it in his mouth. purse his lips at nothing. Probably the most irritating man in the world.

So that was enough for 2 more stops and i was only too glad to hop off the train leaving him behind. Phew!

There are many things which I will swear to do and this is one of them. I swear to do update my blog more regularly. Notice that I have chosen not to swear on something cause that would probably be risky.

I wouldn't want to swear on
(1) My mother's life, which for some reason happens to be a favourite. Similarly not using the lives of anyone i know which to swear upon
(2) Not swearing upon the lives of people whom i do not know. It would be totally unethical to do so cause I couldn't care less if i didn't know them so there could potentially be many people just dropping like flies on the street. Moreover, how would you like it if you were to drop dead on the street cause someone you didn't know swore on your life? Not very pleasant eh?
(3) Not swearing upon my immortal soul because i don't believe in it and if a number of people whom I hope to never see again are right, I may not have one to swear on.
(4) My Penis, because i love it and so should you. Unless of course you're homosexual then please admire from a distance. Thank you.
(5) The clothes on my back. Firstly, considering what i'm wearing now i can't see why they would be worth anything. Secondly, i'm obviously running out of examples
(6) I'm obviously running out.

So begins my first blog entry in a long time. So far we have established that the author is either male or used to be female, and is a penis egomaniac. Has a questionable sense of humour and seems to enjoy swearing alot.

I hope that this spurt of writing will last a lot longer than the last one. I would really like to keep it going. If you know me and i haven't updated my blog in sometime do come up to me and prod me and say "Hey, your blog ah... <>" So please change all web links. From now I reside here.