Monday, September 12, 2005

Because you have got to have heard about this already...

Quoting a news network's sidebar: "Bush: The worst disaster to hit the U.S in recent history" (read into that, what you may...)

So, Mother Nature once again, proves that she is a mighty force to reckon with. The disaster that occured in New Orleans just recently have only served to fortify her true strength, we humans too often take for granted. Yes, we could go on and on about how sad and depressing the incident was, and how like Marvin the Paranoid Android said in Hitchhiker's Guide, "It's all going to end in tears", but really. Where's the conspiracy in that?

We throw this question to you: Why did the government of USA, undoubtedly the strongest in the world (in terms of economic and military power) choose to react so slowly in dealing with the aftermath of the disaster?
Fact: The majority of residents in New Orleans are African-American. More accurately, African-Americans make up a total of 67.25% of the demographic there- or at least according to Wikipedia it does.

Fact: The idea of a 'United' States of America has often been considered one of the greatest ironies . History tells us that racial lines have proven to be a source of tension time and again in America. Since the early days of slavery during Abraham Lincoln's time to the divided 1960s during the Civil Rights War, and even to present day America with the controversial election of Bush as president in 2000, America has constantly proved itself unable to maintain a united front. Therefore it comes to no surprise that racial lines would be incited in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

(Side feminist rant, Karen: By the way, why are typhoons and hurricanes, source of disasters basically, given female names?! The connotations. Jeez. What? We will destroy everything when we somehow hold an ounce of power? Jesus Christ.)

The goverment of America did not respond immediately to the events, leaving masses stranded at the Superbowl stadium and others stranded in the confines of their house. Rescue operations were conducted pretty slow, considering that this is the very same country that entered Iraq without much hesitations and delay. Where were the same speedy troops? Did it matter less because this wasn't about oil?

We propose that there is a major correlation between the delay in rescue operations and the issue of race in regards to the tragedy in New Orleans. The fact that the general population merely earns average wages as well come into play. What can a bunch of black people who don't contribute as much to the economy offer to America? Keep in mind, this should not be read as a racist statement. Ad and I are peace-loving people who believe in 'a fair go' and doing whatever that rocks your boat. Just check the facts. African-Americans on average are more likely to drop out of high school, be unemployed, and earn less than a Anglo-American would. Statistics are worth a thousand words. Less people to take out unemployment benefits, means more money for military expenditure. More money for military expenditure, means a more powerful America. And a more powerful America, means a happy Bush! (The flip side: A happy Bush, means many unhappy fervant anti-Bush supporters.)

The fact that blacks are more likely to vote Democrat should also be taken into account. In presidential elections, voting lines have been the same for ages. The east and west coasts of America will vote Democrat while the middle bits will support the Republicans. It is also not a coincidence that Middle America is primarily populated by whites (think Texan hicks and Alabama hill-billies) while immigrants from foreign countries and blacks generally live in the east or west coasts. No doubt, Bush, a Republican, has not have an easy presidency. The guy has received plenty of flack from everyone and anyone. Some still insist that he isn't a legitimate president! So, wouldn't it be such a convenience if plenty of African-Americans aren't there to vote in the next election?

Monday, July 25, 2005

Because it's so dodgy...


This subject isn't black or white. It's gray. During an Anthropology lecture, a lecturer posed this question.

Did God create man or did man create God?

People who believe in faith would agree with the former while those who belive in the religion of science would probably go with the latter. We all know most religious faiths believe that God is the ultimate creator, but could it also be possible that man was the ultimate creator?

Man evolved from primates, became self-reliant and developed intelligence as life progressed. How is it not possible that they could have created God in a bid to relieve themselves of the burden of answering all questions and claiming full responsibility? With a supposed powerful supreme being who cannot be seen but can only be trusted, they have generally unloaded a huge amount of responsibility on God. During early times, famine, draught, sickness, death etc. were all blamed on God(s). But in reality, they could have very well been the faults of their own (or nature) and yet, man chose to shirk responsibility, knowing that they could blame it on God.

"God is, to me, pretty much an idea. God is, to me, pretty much a myth created over time to deny the idea that we're all responsible for our own actions." - Seth Green

Personally, I think that the subject of God is truly the greatest conspiracy of all-time. Even greater, than some might say, the question of Jessica Simpson's intelligence. How is it that this iconic figurehead developed into a whole new separate doctrine and religion? Isn't it easier to place the blame of our wrong-doings on someone else rather than admit our own frailties? It's Psychology 101 really. C'mon. Even a movie star gets it.

Religion can be interpreted as a form of rules or laws that function to keep actions and behaviors in check. The Ten Commandments are quite like ten various codes of law. If you break it, you go to jail, or in this case, Hell. And God would then be like the head of Interpol or the FBI; ever watchful, ready to apprehend anyone who pushes the boundaries of the law. The Bible makes Him out to be compassionate, loving, vigilant, clever, and ever patient. But why would someone who is often deemed the personication of Goodness act in the way that He does? Two things that I'll just briefly comment on.

In Genesis, Noah and the flood

I understand that the men of Earth were corrupt and wicked. Yet what God chose to do in combating this problem was to basically, kill all of them, save Noah. Does saving one good man justify the killing of many wicked men? The world was probably in shambles, yet couldn't God, being the almighty authoritative figure that He is, choose some other way to fix the situation? Understandably, you cannot force something upon someone who isn't receptive to change. Had God chose to force his word on the men, He would have probably failed. Yet, why the harsh act of mass genocide? Killing women and children (especially). Is it not pure hypocrisy to kill tons of people then create a commandment that forbids one from killing another? Comparing Adolf Hitler to God could possibly create a huge controversy. But is that not what Hitler did as well?

The need to test His follower's faith

Repeatedly in the Bible, God creates dilemmas for his believers in order to assure their undying and unquestioning faith to Him. Actions of a paranoid megalomaniac? The poor guy (I forgot his name) was deluded into thinking he had to sacrifice his son for God. The Book of Job. All these are examples of common folk being put to the test just to prove that their faith in God is unwavering. If God is all powerful and omnipotent, shouldn't He already have been assured of their trust in him? The United States of America come to mind. The USA has constantly put pressure on it's allies to prove their undeviating support. While this may all seem like an act of diplomacy, it could also be interpreted as a way to exhibit the supremacy of the USA. All-powerful, USA is widely regarded as the forefront example of the triumph of liberal capitalism and democracy. Not much unlike God and his actions?

It's not that we're hardcore jaded cynics and skeptics. We just want some kind of indication. I mean, who doesn't? Take a look at the state of the world. Poverty. The success of disco music in the 80s. Abortion. War. Killings. If God created man, why did He let his own creations go about killing themselves? As the ultimate creator, He surely could have 'saved' mankind. I read in an article that God in these times, is playing the role of the patient father. Instead of choosing to punish us, He is merely observing our growth in the hopes that someday we mature and we learn our lessons after much trial and error. It's all fine and dandy and explanatory but it would really make more sense if unicorns existed and Simple Plan didn't. Surely, any father would not just stand back and watch his child self-destruct without some sort of intervention?

It's easy to say that what the world needs is more faith. What if we put God aside and start claiming 100% responsibility for our own actions? Maybe when we finally accept that all the shit that is happening are the by-products of our actions, it's possible that things would run a lot more smoothly. A lot more efficiently.

Or at least the lines in Malaysia's public government offices will.

Sunday, July 10, 2005

Because it's so much easier being the winner than the loser...

The scene of the crime : Central London 2005
Type of crime : 'Terrorist' attack
Perpetrators : Why.. Gee whiz. Who else could it possibly be but Muslim fundamentalists?

If Sept 11 will go down in history for anything, it'll be for creating a whole new awareness regarding Muslims in the western sphere of the globe. The gapping flaw in American internal security pre-2001 comes in a close second though. Of course, any prospective traveller or student can assure you that that problem has been rectified.

The unfortunate events that have unfolded in London over the last couple of days no doubt signifies the horrors of reality. Somehow these days, human lives are just expendable. Sad but true. Anyways, what sets this tragedy apart from the Bali bombings or other acts of terrorism, Ad and I think, is the external factors that lead up to the incident. Not making much sense? Keep going..

Prior to the attacks, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) were gathered in Singapore to decide where the 2012 Games will be hosted at. (To the ignorant, China has got dibs on 2008). Recollecting from what I read but if memory serves, it was between five countries: Spain, Russia, London, France, New York. Suffice to say that when it came down to crunch time, the two countries on the line were London and France. In the end, London walked away the proud host(ess?) of the 2012 Games; a mere four votes ahead of France (54-50).

Cut to real time, not even 24 hours after the decision, the bombs go off in London. A serious case of really atrocious sportsmanship from the French? We're thinking, "Hell yeah!". See, if you think about it, all the other terrorist attacks happened unexpectedly. By that I mean, without much warning. It was just kinda random. Now this happening not even a day after the results of the IOC...

Does it smell kinda fishy in here or what?

Friday, July 01, 2005

Because it's like, duh! Omigod. It's, like such a publicity stunt...

Unless you've been living in Easter Island for the last six months or so (I tend to not have a lot of faith in news circulating around in a country that has only one ATM machine), there is very little chance in you missing out on the hot news of the hour.

Apparently Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise are "so in lurvvveeee". They've been basically going out for all of what 5 weeks, and suddenly they're engaged. Interesting. Did you hear about 'ol Mr Pitt and Miss Jolie as well? What with the whole hoo-ha the paparazzi were creating around the two, one would have thought that between the both of them Jesus had come around to being reborn on Earth again. Hmmm. Although maybe that would be featured more on 'Christianity Today' or something to that effect. Oh well.

What is with Hollywood? Time and time again, Hollywood and it's participants insists on insulting the our intelligence. We get it! In Hollywood, marriage isn't exactly a very sacred ideal. We swear if properly analyzed, studies will show that Hollywood is responsible for half the divorce, separation and annulment numbers in the world. Seriously. So you think we're a bunch, actually a pair of, cynical, unromantic fellas? Not really. We just happen to think that in Hollywood, the only true everlasting love that can possibly exist is between Sarah Jessica Parker and her Manalo Blahniks, as well as Kevin Federline, that's Mr Britney Spears to the ignorant, and his trucker caps. Yes, he displays a strange affinity to those ugly piece of clothing some might consider caps.

Take this for example. In Hollywood, staying in the spotlight usually equates to wild antics and controversial behavior. Say, Paris Hilton. That alone is enough said. Sadly, marriage life does not present the same opportunites. For example, Drew Barrymore. We occasionally see or read snippets of information regarding her in the press. But the frequency of her press sightings is usually drastically decreased during her marriage periods. Let's take her brief marriage with Tom Green (who is NOT related to Seth Green in any way). During the time they were married, hardly any news regarding the two emerged in the news. After they divorced, pictures of the newly single actress starts circulating around in tabloid magazines, especially after the release of Charlie Angels 2. Maybe some of you can't remember this far back. No problemo.

Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. And the whole fiasco with Jennifer Aniston. After 3 years +, the blonde couple parts ways with allegations of Brad having an affair with Jolie while shooting Mr and Mrs Smith. Naturally, the press plays it up; showing pictures of the two canoodling while another depicts the gaunt features of Aniston. Coincidentally enough, all the hype around 'Mr and Mrs Smith' causes the public to flock to the opening, thereby securing it a pretty hefty return in box-office tickets. The film opened at number one, raking in $50 million in a single weekend. Considering that this movie isn't exactly thick plot-wise, and the acting was merely sub-par, how weird is it that it managed to drum up that much amount of money? Hollywood executives first rule of money making: create interesting conflict, eg. love story = publicity generated = say hello to money! It's as easy as burping the alphabet!

Ahhh. Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. The current 'It' couple. Before all this, I swear I don't think I've ever seen Holmes in the limelight this much before. What a coincidence.. Batman Begins was coming out on June 15. And Cruise... War of the Worlds, anyone? Now if you think that love is possible between the two, read this interesting bit of info. As reported in The Malay Mail, Tom Cruise actually asked Jessica Alba if she wanted to 'date' him a couple of days before he and Katie Holmes blew up the front pages. Alba declined (I think you could already guess that much) and now we have Cruise-Holmes, the new love-child of Hollywood. How many ways can you say publicity stunt?

Last but not least, I can't possibly end this post without a jab at dear 'ol Paris Hilton. Who, for those who are out of the loop, is currently engaged to Paris Latsis. Some billionaire's son who's good eye candy. Paris and Paris. Sigh.. Marketing director's wet dream. P2P will have a whole new meaning once these two hits the marriage carpet.

Right. Give us a shot of reality please.

We're not that dumb.

Wednesday, March 09, 2005

Because there is no spoon...

ESP. Extra Sensory Perception. What is ESP? Who has this extra perception? Who doesn't? Are humans capable of having this ESP? And if so, how do we know they do? Can it be proven? So many questions. And yet. So little answers.

"Better than watching Geller bending silver spoons, Better than witnessing newborn nebulaes in bloom". Incubus- Nice to Know you. [Morning View]

We've all heard of the amazing Uri Geller and his ability to bend spoons and keys. Is the act of moving things with one's mind (or better known as tele- or psychokinesis) possible in reality? We've seen Prue Halliwell and countless amounts of demons display this 'power' in abundance on Charmed. Some have claimed that they can indeed move things with their minds and this act can actually be self-taught. Google the words tele-kinesis and you will find website after website advertising their teachings on how to move things without physical contact. Those who claim to have this type of ESP have said that during the act of moving an object, they can see this object in their mind, every electron and every molecule. The object in their mind is then manipulated to move as they wish it to.

Science has, until now, failed to prove this. Moving something without physical contact is deemed impossible to the world of Science. After all, in Science everything can be explained with one theory or another. For example, in Uri Geller's case, scientists have refuted his 'special' ablity by claiming that that is just merely a 'sleight-of-hand' trick that most magicians would be able to pull off. But would a normal magician be able to pull such a trick over long-distances? In 1973, Geller appeared on a live British radio broadcast and demonstrated his skills. A skeptic would say, "Yeah well the radio jockey probably got paid hush money." Well, if that is so, then how does one explain the many calls that were received from astonished homes who reported a wide-spread epidemic of spontaneously bending metal utensils, conincidentally after Geller finished his demonstration? Do you put this down to one of the best hoaxes in the history of, well, hoaxes, or just possibly, proof of existing Extra Sensory Perception in human life?

But wait. Before you scoff at the absurdity of this post, think hard about ESP. Strain a neuron if you have to (By the way, Adeline and Karen takes no responsibility for injuries or bodily damage). Think hard about any event in your life that happened and which you might have thought was a little bit out of the normal loop. Thought of it? Good. Well, this exceptional perception also includes telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, retrocognition, mediumship and psychometry. To the clueless, here's a basic explanation of what the above mental abilities are.

Telepathy - the ability to read another person's thoughts.

Clairvoyance - the ability to "see" events or objects happening somewhere else.

Precognition - the ability to see the future

Retrocognition - the ability to see into the distant past

Mediumship - the ability to channel dead spirits

Psychometry - the ability to read information about a person or place by touching a physical object

This wide range of mental abilities are all parts of the ESP phenomenon. So, what you thought of, did it apply to any of the above? Even if it didn't, think about twins. Or specifically, how it's been claimed that twins often share a certain sense of bond that transcends our world of normalcy. Well, if you think that the whole theory about twin ESP is a whole lotta crock of bull, how do you then explain the existence of mediums? Consecutive cases of pure luck and coincidence? Man. Lady Luck must have gave birth to them if that's the case.

True story [Karen]: My mum went to a chinese medium once. Not so much because she wanted to know about the future, but more for the heck of it. I mean, a mutual family friend had previously visited this Freaky Medium Lady, and apparently she's THE real thing. So, my mum walks into the room. Before she even sits down, Freaky Medium Lady suddenly relates to her her life story. How she's a mom to three kids and is one of those traitorous Singaporeans who have immigrated to Malaysia. 'Course the freaky thing is she knew almost everything about the kids. She could explain our characters in great detail to my mum and even give a brief analysis about our strengths and weaknesses. And about 98.9% of what Freaky Medium Lady said was true. (I absolutely refuse to admit that I am that stubborn. Pfft. What stubbornness?). How the hell do you explain that?

Well, let's assume that ESP does exist. Then we would also have to assume that some people are going to be 'more powerful' than others. What makes some people more gifted than others? Is it because of the power that one harnesses in one's soul? Through accepting that the soul is the centre of all ESP abilities, then we would have to face another conundrum. Is there such a thing as the soul? Is there something inside us that is our rooted driving force in life? Do you need a lot of soul to exhibit ESP abilities? I know this is going to be refuted by some of you adamant skeptics, but, don't you need a lot of soul to carry a tune? Aretha Franklin, Eva Cassidy, even Tina Turner- they all have soul. So much that when listening to their tunes, some of us even get goosebumps and chills.

What's the point of this whole rant? It all comes down to number 21. No no, not the age where we attain supposed independence. 21 grams. The weight of a person that is lost when he/she dies. Is that due to the soul exiting the body or just cause of fluid retention, or something scientific to that effect? Since 1909, scientific experiments have been conducted to investigate this mysterious event. Recent scientists have however, argued that the weight loss is attributed to the sudden rise in body temperature at death, when the blood stops being air-cooled via its circulation through the lungs. Sweating and moisture evaporation caused by the sudden rise in body temperature would account for the drop in the humans’ weight. However, even with the scientific debate raging, it would be unwise to disregard the possible existence of a human's soul and it's technical connections to the phenomenon of ESP.

Remember kids. Just 'cause you can't explain it, doesn't mean it isn't real.

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

Because we've always wondered if little green men walked on the red planet...

So, where do you stand on the subject of aliens? Non-believer, skeptic, fanatic, unopinionated? The existence of aliens, or extraterrestial beings, have long been debated and questioned in the history of mankind. A by-product of the naturally curious and over-imaginative human mind or a myth created over time to explain the occurences of the unexplainable? In this latest episode, we bring you the lowdown on our 'other-worldly neighbours'. Literally.


There are many things in today's world that are unaccounted for and have been atrributed to the interference of these beings -
the giant statues in Easter Island, Stonehenge, the Great Pyramid in Egypt, and probably the most infamous of them all, crop circles. Of course, it could be argued that the only astonishing factor about the 450 feet tall and 13 acres wide Great Pyramid is the unrelenting determination and ingenuity of man. But how is it possible that such a gargantuan monument was built without a single flaw? Each side is 756 feet in length at the base and no side is more than eight inches different in length to another and the whole pyramid is aligned perfectly to the points of the compass. Even if we overlooked the undeniable problem of technology-related limitations, the idea of the pyramids, Stonehenge and statues of Easter Island is still something of a bafflement. How could the people of ancient times have possibly built such architectural wonders with limited to none of the technology we see today? So many unanswered questions bog these creations down. How could the people of ancient times have managed to lift tones and tones of bricks 450 feet high with no help whatsoever from machines we know today as cranes? Really. Makes you wander if they really did get help from otherworldly creatures. Which brings us to our next point. Crop circles.

The first reported crop circle was in 1678 in Hertfordshire, UK, there have been over 5,000 reported cases since. Crop circles have a tendency to pop out overnight, thus provoking questions as to how they were formed. Many farms have reported crop circles after going to bed with perfectly lined corn rows and waking up to a field of strangely shaped symmetrical patterns of flattened crops. We're not talking about miniature artistic bouts, mind you. We're talking about shapes occupying areas as large as 200,000 sq feet. Some reported cases have even had eye-witnesses claiming they saw beams of light coming from the sky prior to the formation of crop circles at that particular area. There have even been rumours saying that these crop circles were actually masterminded by 2 sexagenarians named Doug and Dave.

But then again. People have all too often proven that crop circles can, in fact, be man-made. As proven by CircleMakers, these crop circles can actually be made by us mere human beings with the simplest of tools and in the shortest of times. With some planks, ropes and a creative mind, one can be on ones way to making the weird and the wacky happen. So if the mysterious appearances of crop circles could actually be the undoings of a bunch of 13 year-old punks, where does that leave the aliens?

Uncle Sam. Oh yes. That little political organization responsible for just about every cock-up America faces. Every once in awhile, governments like to take control of public interest in unexplained phenomena by a process called 'debunking'. Debunking is a technique that was developed by the US government after WWII for the sad purpose of controlling mass opinion. It can only be assumed that these 'debunkers' were clocking in overtimes trying to cover the true nature of locations and happenings such as Area 51 and the 1947 Roswell crash. Was Area 51 really a testing ground for military air-crafts? Or was it another smoke screen cooked up by the US government to conveniently hide the existence of alien landings and sightings? What else has the US government hidden from the public? Are there anymore, or rather many more sites such as these to be found? Who knows?

There have been too many incidents that have alien connotations connected to them and too many unanswered questions. Unless these otherworldly beings make contact with us, we may never actually be able to prove their existence or have legitimate answers to the questions we ask. As Agent Mulder summarizes it very amptly:

"The truth is out there"

Wise words indeed, Agent Mulder.

Wednesday, January 26, 2005

Because y'all didn't get it...

So, correct us if we're wrong but a blog is basically an online journal - a place to spill about your feelings, your day, your week, your month, and that time you were spastic and could not drop Optrex drops into your infected eye. (Lol. Refer to Chen Chou. Sorry man. You're just too freaking hilarious). But "The weird, the wacky + the random" isn't a place to pen our frustrations or feelings. The point of this blog, and no, it's not solely focused on reality TV, is to allow Adeline and Karen to share our conspiracies with the world in the hopes that the world will respond, be it good or bad (Ie: Discussions or comments). Cause the world, as we view it, shouldn't just be evaluated on the surface level. What we think, is that there are more to stuff than the eye can see and the brain can conprehend - conspiracies.

Our history: It might look like we have caved to increasing peer pressure to jump on the blog bandwagon but in all honesty, we only decided to do this because we couldn't afford a website (Hence the first post, not coincidentally) It's like this. We've always wanted to create a site where we could share our conspiracies to the public. This, of course, after discovering that we each had not-completely-conventional opinions about everyday events, and after watching this really cool episode of Alias in Season 1, where there was an 'extra' who mentioned the URL
It's a long story.

So, we checked it out and it turns out money is involved in the creation of a website. Not just any kind of money, but US currency kinda money. We're talking US$19.99 at the very least. Disappointment set in a for a little while. Then Karen came up with this kooky plan to carry on our original idea through hosting a blog. And she was pretty apprehensive because as we all know, dearest Addie isn't too friendly towards blogs. Thankfully though, Ad dug deep and decided that for the good of it all, her particular dislike towards blogs had to be put aside.

Thus, much like how God said "Let there be light, and there was light", Ad and Karen said, "Let's do it", and as you are obviously reading, this is it.

Here's to hoping that y'all don't reach the end of this post and still go, "Huh?". C'mon. Bring on the lightbulb. *ting*