of holidays that don't feel like them.

Sometimes I look at his smiling eyes while he's making a tongue in cheek joke about some small thing and I laugh.

And I wonder. I wonder if, after these years, does he still love her? hmmmn.

This holidays are not holidays I can assure you -.- What with Kids BP coming up in KL and my piano exam ( which I canNOT fail :| ) At least Girls' Brigade is easier to handle at the moment :)


ughhhh. I honestly don't know what to do.  My results are spiralling hopelessly downwards. And i seem to be content with it. Which is not the way to go if you want to improve. I am content with getting a B for my Additional Mathematics, while my classmates achieve almost perfect scores. One year before, I'd be screaming my lungs out and crying the whole week. Very kiasu, I admit, but it fueled my anger to push me on.

I don't know what to do anymore, it's like I've lost my dynamic self somewhere between this year and last year. And I don't want to get caught in anymore love frenzy issues anymore, so please back off. You know who you are, all of you. I have had enough distractions already.

I cannot lose myself anymore. I'm still Hui Mei. Right?


It's SPM next year.


It's horrible how jealous I get. One of my greatest weaknesses. I get so very envious and I start to hate. I honestly wanted to hate you, hate your existence, hate the fact that you excelled in many other things compared to me. I hated the fact that you were replacing me, slowing taking over what I used to be, that instead of me, they now talked about you. I really wanted to hate you, you know that?

I hated being weak, having to ask for your help all the time. But there obviously wasn't much of a choice for me. 不耻下问.

I knew that this thing was bad. Being so depedent on you couldn't be healthy. What would I do in the future when we're not in the same university?

But I couldn't bring myself to hate you. Who, right in their mind, hates their best friend and someone who helps them so much? You've always supported me and you don't hate me at all. So I don't know what to do. Sometimes I wished you were a calculating evil maniac that didn't like me at all, and then I could hate you and vow to beat you in whatever we were vying for.

But you just had to like me and be a nice friend.

So I don't know what to do now. I need to do something about my grades..

Hiatus.

She stared out of her window, the hurt and pain she felt washing through her flimsy fragment of a heart crushing her, knocking all the breathe out of her.

She heard him calling her, yet she chose to walk on, to ignore, to pretend. She strode on, quickening her pace a little, willing that the throngs of sweaty, hot human bodies and the defening shouts would engulf her and deem her invisible for the moment. She did not want to see him.

I woke up and knew he was gone. Straightaway I knew he was gone. When you love somebody you know these things.

She lowered her eyes, pushing her way through the crowd. It was no good. He continued to shadow her, waiting to confront her, waiting to tear her down unconsciously.

But she had to do it, didn't she? Lynette, the twin sister of the one they fought for. How many ships and men had been sacrificed for her sister, and how it was all a cruel joke played by those who resided in Olympia. Helen would never approved of her. She never did.

Her aching, torn heart that had seen the way Paris gazed at Helen. So gently, so softly, so in love. Who wouldn't?

Noone knew how Helen had carved the 3 scars on her face to make sure noone else could exceed her beauty. The fluttering, thumping, frightened thing in her heart turns cold and heavy.


She felt a strong hand land on her shoulder and turn her around. And she stared at him darkly.

She would steal away this very night.

Kuching Debate League 2012

The Squirrels joined the Kuching Debate League Asian Parlimentary Style 2012 hosted by Unimas :D hohoho.

We did fairly okay, I guess :) this was a small-scale sparring thing, so there was 3 rounds and no elimination rounds. Ranking was determined by wins and then by the speaker scores. As usual, this debate was opened to university and high school students, so we had opponents that were wayyyy better than us. (think Swinburne debaters and St. Joseph seniors)

We ranked 2nd after team Sleepy (Abel Law, Sophia Ong and Sailesh) with 3 wins and a speaker score of 382.82 I believe. Although my memory may fail me at this precise moment, I digress.

And yes, we were team Squirrels (WOOOOOTS :D) consisting of Malachi Ting, Melanie Chan and I myself. Pure Greenian team :D

So. As how Cassandra was expecting (it's become this assignment thing for me already- like a reflection on the debates we had. LOL.):

Round 1: THW extend child abuse laws to include punishing parents who force their homosexual children to be straight.
Gov: Adoh Pop
Opp: Squirrels (win)
Chair: Dr. Simon

Basically gov classified forcing homosexual kids to be straight as a form of mental abuse. They said the harms of not punishing the kids would be how it prevents self-actualisation, and how it becomes a message to the younger generation that being homosexuality is not okay (if you do not punish parents who force their kids to be straight), thus bringing kids up with a homophobic mindset, causing further discrimination of homosexuals. They brought up points on the nature of the child's sexuality, duty of the government (to protect the kid's rights), and the society's views on this issue.

The opp argued how that it is hard to actually define force in the first place, and if it went as how the gov defined it (ie: the effects of it), we will assume that the parents are being punished for inflicting abuse on the kids, be it mental/physical abuse, and that itself is already included under the current laws and charters. Hence it is unnecessary to enact this new law. We also analysed the status quo and what is the norms of the society, and how it would harm the child to be exposed to the dangers in a homophobic community (Therefore proving that parents have a duty of care, just as how parents can decide for the ir children like field trips and whatnot, it proves that parents do have a certain right to control their kids.). If the parents would not accept their sexuality in the first place, why would the community do so?

We argued that by disallowing parents to force their kids to be straight, you may be able to stop active suppresion on them, but you cannot change the mindset of the people, the parents. There will still be adversion, and just because parents do not have a say does NOT mean they accept it. (Gov painted a very nice picture of how the society would start to accept homosexuality.) I felt the main clash in this debate was whether the punishment would cause change for the better, or just cause further and deeper harm to the homosexual kids.

However, apparently we won because we prove that there are existing laws to tackle this abuse issue, and how is it that it is unnecessary to enact a new law. Which is interesting. o.o


Round 2: THS the use of charity rather than state welfare systems.
Gov: Squirrels (win)
Opp: MSN
Chair: Benjamin

Gov defined the state welfare systems as direct monetary funding only, ie: BR1M, excluding free education (because both rich and the poor get free education while BR1M is only afforded to the poor) and state vocational programs and MARA, or FELDA programs. [i'm not sure how legal this is in debate though.] We talk about how development for the WHOLE of Malaysia is still not done (especially borneo) and those paying taxes are not getting the full capacity for what their taxes can actually provide. We argued for representative taxation instead of distributive taxation and how taxation, even if it is distributive, has failed those who really need the help because the government is channeling money into so many different sectors it is negligible.

We talked about how is it that charity organisations can cut through all red tape and deal with those that really need the help in the first place and thus is more effective. Secondly, charity's funds are limited, and thus they are more selective and more careful of where their money goes to. This can cut down the dependancy of the people on the government and force those who have the actual ability to work to actually do so. Even if they do not have good qualifications, the government provides free education and vocational programs for them, so the government doesn't need to hand out money directly to people. (See how crucial our definition of state welfare system was? Again, I do not know how legal this is.)

Opposition talked about the Duty of the Government, possible corruption and misuse of the funds and how the rich gets richer (and the poor gets poorer). We countered that the Government HAS provided the means to a bettter quality of life by free edu and training programs, and how corruption was not exclusive to our case, but even if it WAS, charity organizations must have a license and must be accountable for what they do to whoever they registered to, and finally, I pointed out that they said the problem with status quo was their 3rd point-how the rich gets richer. And what was the SQ? Redistributive taxation. (however, I felt I didn't deal with that issue well enough. :| )

Round 3: THBT the Hunger Games is a resolution to prison overpopulation.
Gov: IDK
Opp: Squirrels (win)
Chair: Ting Ting

HUNGER GAMES FOR THE WIN ♥

I saw the motion and I was like: THIS IS SO MY MOTION. MINEMINEMINEMINEMINE OHYEAAAAAAHHH <3 :DD

yes. A humour round. And funny, as much as we profess to hate humour rounds, we screamed for humour rounds instead of the alternative theme: Malaysia. Goes to show how love adn hate are closely interlinked. :P

This motion is a bit.... LOL I don't know how to classify the issues. But the motion we vetoed out was worse: THBT the anus is only for exit. HOW DO YOU MAKE CLASHES FOR THAT MOTION? *horror*

Well, the Opposition proposed an improved parole system to curb over population while the government wanted the criminals to kill each other off. LOL. :D

We argued that if death was the best way to curb overpopulation and if death was the best deterrence, why not just give every petty crime the death penalty? Or just give other punishments for petty crimes instead of locking them up. We also talked about how idiotic the idea was, because on the most cruel, cold, calculating, psychotic killer would survive and goodness knows what he'd be after the Hunger Games where his "hunting" skills would be sharpened. Also, only 2 "tributes" from each prison per year would be chosen, and how ineffective that was compared to our parole system where there no limit on the number of prisoners and also no limit on when you can let them for parole? isn't that a more effective way to curb overpopulation and you save resources (yes, there was going to be an island especially set for them and also tracking and surveillance cameras everywhere which we countered with saying IF you already have the resources to fit tracking devices onto them, why not save the trouble and do it in society where they can actually reintergrate and be tracked at the same time?) AND you respect human rights at the same time. so TADA :D



This was an awesome experince, and Unimas! I look forward to your panggangs (from the last BP one you hosted), your curry puffs (I had 4. mmmm.) and MOST DEFINITELY, your teh :D we call it teh tarik. Is it? :DD

WE SQUIRRELS WILL BE BACK FOR ANOTHER FIGHT! :DD Lots of love:)



♥

think?

It does hurt.





Severing yourself from something, then transferring yourself to another.


2 decisions I will never forget.

Some of people believe I am a heartless thing, not allowing any emotions or long-standing relationships to influence my decision, just letting it go, just like that, without a second thought.

Sometimes I am like that.

But those decisions come back to haunt me when I suddenly jolt awake in the murky depths of the night. 1 year later, here I am, thinking I could have done better, thinking I could have changed you, thinking that I could have forseen this ice wall between us.


Thinking we could be happy now, just as we were then, laughing and chatting, without any hint of animosity or sarcasm. No need for careful treads, no need for held back words.



But the harm is done.




Big decisions have to be made, and I will miss them. 3 years of something that you have fought so hard for, and cried so much for, and stood up against your parents for will not just obliterate itself within a short time span.


It refuses to leave. But my rationality triumphs over my emotions.

As how he put it, there is no turning back. Its either a yes or no.



Some part of me will forever be there, I think.


But everything happens for a reason, and all this is humbling, just as how being taught how to march by a 9-year old girl is humbling.

♥

Answering the Guy Questions.

everybody's waiting

for you to break down

everybody's watching

 to see the fall out

even when you're sleeping

keep your eyes open.

Taylor Swift (Eyes Open-Hunger Games)

This is a book I read, borrowed from my friend who borrowed it from her friend. But good books get handed down like that, no? :D

Girls often wonder why they cannot find love that used to exist in the past, where guys were actually compassionate, kind, protective and they respected women. They whine in despair that guys aren't what they used to be, which has a level of truth to it, where in these days, being a man was getting wasted every weekend, and getting drunk and high on drugs. In Asian countries, it isn't so bad yet, but Satan's influence is slowly spreading.

Us girls aren't so good either. We wear provocative miniskirts and see through blouses while campaigning for our rights to clothing. What.

Let me ask those with logic:

Why do you wear those incredibly mini-stuff?

Is it not because you want to attract men in the first place? To turn heads?

If you are a Christian, or of any other religion for that matter, have they not asked us women to be careful with our ways, and to be modest in our clothing?

Why?

It all boils down to the whole point. Why are there the ten commandments, or laws we have to abide by? Is God trying to make our lives difficult? Really?

Or is it to protect us?

If you debate, you would know the Social Contract Theory. If you do not, I'll explain it in a simple way: why are there laws to govern a country, where we give up some of our fundamental human rights (Eg: We give up our total right to choice. We cannot choose to kill other people.)?

Imagine this (cliche example :P): If i had the absolute right to choice, which means I have the right to punch you and the police could NOT detain me, and you'd be powerless against me. Which also means that I'd have the right to choose to abuse my children, or the right to choose whether I want to rape that sweet young thing that lives across the street, right? Life would be great for me, no? total power, nobody to tell me what is right or wrong.

BUT, that would have to mean I have to be either very rich, very powerful, or very strong to be able to survive. Because if I have the right to do all that, it probably means EVERYONE ELSE has that right too, and I probably wouldn't like it if I got beaten up and there was no law to protect me from that.

The Ten Commandments work the same way. It protects you, protects me, protects our loved ones.

So why do you provocate men? It's like waving a huge sausage in front of a starved dog, just keeping it out of reach. Why expose yourselves to so much danger, risks?

You're just looking for trouble.

Here:) I'll write more about this book if I can, but the core idea here that I believe can help many girls is this:

What should I do when I'm attracted to a guy?

It isn't wrong to be attracted, but allowing your attraction to overtake your thoughts and emotions makes him an "idol" and sways your focus from Christ.

1. Give it to God ♥

Say a prayer: Lord, thank you for the qualities I see in this guy. Please take my emotions and guard them. Enable me to keep my heart protected for my future husband. If it is Your desire that I enter a relationship with this guy, then I leave the details in Your hands. May I not manipulate or grow impatient, but allow You to reamin in complete control. You will be faithful. You care more about this area of my life than I even do.

Never lower your standards for a guy, for God only wants the best for you.(: So if you're holding out, not willing to take relationships easily, only wanting to give your heart to someone who is willing to possibly have it forever, hang in there, even if you're being pressured :) For diamonds are formed under pressure. Without it, they are just coal.

2. Guard your thought life

The enemy (Satan) often cites the Scripture for his purpose, and he will use this opportunity to sway you from Lord, exposing you to more temptations.

Remember that God wants us to continuously dwell on Christ, not on the guy himself. Therefore, a true warrior-poet (a man that stands strong in the Lord) will induce you to think MORE about the Lord rather than him. That is the importance of finding a Christian spouse(:

Thinking about him is not wrong, but being obsessive is. The moment you start thinking about him, start praying. Praying for him is okay, but it can lead to obsessiveness too. Pray for other people that need your prayer, and whenever the enemy tries to distract you from God, hit back by praying for an unsaved person. The enemy will back off when he realizes that it only turns you into a prayer warrior for the kingdom of God.

Memorising the Scripture is another excellent way to keep your thoughts focused on God. :DD

3. Don't act differently around him

Remember to let God take full control of the situation, for if you change yourself around the guy, you are being manipulative, (coercing him into thinking you are somebody that you aren't.) Remember: "Delight yourself in the Lord, and He will give you the desires of your heart." (Psalm 37:4) Ask Him for the graces to remain trusting and yielded-no matter how strong your feelings can get. Remember that impatience often breaks the beauty that God has planned for you. (think premarital sex and so forth)

"Oh, taste and see that the Lord is good; blessed is the man who trusts in Him! Oh, fear the Lord, you His saints; there is no want to those who fear Him. The young lions lack and suffer hunger; but those who seek the Lord shall not lack any good thing." (Psalm 34:8-10)

I really love this book:) there's a blueprint to form a healthy Christian relationship,w hich I hope to be able to explain more, but in a nutshell:

Principle One: Keep Christ at the centre of your relationship.

Principle Two: Vigilantly Protect Purity

Principle Three: Experience God's Restoration

Take a step back from the relationship to allow God to speak clearly to you about the relationship and allow your parents to play a role in this, as they can be your mentors and accountability partners. You will be less compelled to do rash things as you know that you will have to account for them at the end of the day to your parents or spiritual leaders :)

"Charm is deceitful and beauty is passing, but a woman who fears the Lord, she shall be praised." (Proverbs 31:30)

Here's the link to the author's website :D setapartgirl ♥

♥

SSIDC2012/WSDC2012

First things first,

1. I still cannot come to terms with the revelation that the founder of the Squirrels is a vodka guzzler (unless she mistakenly place her hand on the bootle of vodka instead of the innocent ornage juice before her) :B

2. I ALSO cannot come to terms with the change of name of the debating tournament. I REFUSE TO ACCEPT THE CHANGE! :DD *hear hear!*

I mean, "Swinburne Sarawak Interschool Debate Championships", also known as SSIDC, can also mean "Seriously Speaking, I Don't Care". Which is horribly depressing. Kasun did ask me why SSIDC2012 seemed modest compared to last year's hype, and although I do not know why myself, perhaps the switch of names influenced the fengshui hocus pocus?

After all, William Shakespeare did quote: "What's in a name?"

But I digress.

This post is to chronicle my first year in the senior category of the tournament. Third year here, and Swinburne's going stronger than ever, presenting to us greater challenges and higher standards. A wider spectrum of adjudicators and a larger field of debateing opponents. :)

This year, things were slightly different, for which I am entirely grateful. My team wouldn't have broken into the elimination rounds if it was not for the fact that they added an octo-final round to the tournament(: Thank God.

I am very proud of all the Squirrels, in a good way, not an arrogant way. We had our own personla conflict in the club and also many issues, but everyone pulled through(: Even though the junior team did not break, they gave their best, i believe:)

Meanwhile, all 3 teams (YES, 3 TEAMS :DD) of the senior teams broke into the elimination rounds :D

Elaine, Melanie and Karen broke with 4 wins (SMKGR B); Jaan Ee, Ching Ing and myself broke with 3 wins (SMKGR A); Avery, Bibiana and Kee Fung broke with 3 wins too (SMKGR E). :) I love every single Squirrel here for being strong and standing strong agains the opponents who were definitely above average ♥

To my beloved seniors who did not have the privilege to join us for the tournament, and somehow, I cannot find you on facebook (yes, CEDRIC :D) Green Road were the senior runners up in this competition this year (: and I am very very very proud of my two teammates, who had the jitters almost all the time before the whole tournament, but they put on a brave front and stood by our faith, that we would just debate and do our very best, and not worry about whether we won or not. :)

So here goes the technical stuff :)

Mock round: (Prelim 0)
GOV: Kolej Haji Bujang B
OPP: SMK Green Road A

Motion: THW teach magic in schools. (win)
We won by a very close margin, and it was from this round that we began to realise that our biggest problem was not our manner or method, but rather, our matter. The Government argued for the establishment of magic clubs in schools, where magic was defined as the sleight of hand and optical illusions, and they took on the stance of inducing creativity of the students. The Opposition argued about the risk of misuse and possible abuse it could cause, and how the Government's case contradicted their own stance.

Personally, I was not satisfied with this round even though we won, but it was a good warm-up for the tournament.

Prelim 1
GOV: SMK Green Road A
OPP: SMK St. Thomas A

Motion: THW stand by the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English (PPSMI) (win)
The Government started off the debate by analysing the problem on how Malaysia was categorized as a third world country and how it was still dependent on foreign, much more developed nations such as the USA. We went on to argue that the root of the problem was the fact that much of Malaysians were not well educated in the field of Science and technology, and how was it that if you were to change it all into Bahasa Malaysia (proposed by Opposition), it would stifle the competence and quality of the Malaysians (think: Science conferences and published AND recognized abstrcts etc; also, how much of the resources of high quality were all in English).

Opposition brought up examples of the Japanese, Koreans, and French, and they proposed using the national language for a sense of identity and also that the average Malaysian would understand BM better than English.

The motion stood.

Prelim 2
GOV: SMK Green Road A
OPP: SMA Katholik Santu Petrus B (Indonesia)

Motion: THB the celebration of earth hour bears no impact on environmental problems. (Loss)
The Government tried to implement a better form of environmental awareness by yearlong campaigns and personal visits to corporate companies that contributed the largest to the carbon footprint and such, as we analysed the problem to be that Earth Hour was inconsistent, it misled the public (gave a false perception to the public about being environmentally friendly) and that it caused more harm than good.

Opposition, naturally, stood by status quo.

The motion fell on the basis that we failed to justify our mechanism with concrete examples. Still rather lost about this one. Must all mechanisms be justified with proven examples? I agree it would be better, but should it be a deciding factor instead of the points?

However, I conceed that we lacked matter.

Prelim 3
GOV: SMK Green Road A
OPP: SMK Chung Hua Miri A

Motion: THBT the hosting rights of the Olympic Games should be done on a continental rotation basis. (Loss)
(Note: We started to hate being Government -.-") We brought up examples of how the IOC (International Olympic Committee, i think) was convicted of 15 cases fraud and bribery (think: Salt Lake City) and we analysed why countries wanted to host the Games in the very first place, and how Africa and Asia was always neglected, or failed to gain their bids. 

Of course, we did not think about how Brazil was the next one and that China wasn't the only Asian country to host it. But the Opp didn't know too. heehee.

However, I agreed wholly with the Adjudicator on his decision due to the fact that we failed to see the problems that would also arise in our mechanism (as pointed out by the Opp) :) so this was okay.

Prelim 4
GOV: SMK St. Joseph A
OPP: SMK Green Road A

Motion: THW outlaw arranged marriages. (Win)
FINALLY OPPOSITION. The Governement talked about how marriage should be done on the basis of true love, but the Opposition countered by questioning the definition of love and happiness. We equated happiness to financial stability and a decent background, and how parents knew best and wanted the best for their children. If I were to fell in love with a gambler and womaniser, and if I were to marry him (on the basis of "true love"), would it guarantee my future happiness? no. But financial stability and being of a decent family background could, to some extent.

They argued about how divorce rates would skyrocket, but again, we countered by analysing what exactly was the real cause of divorces. Was it not abuse, family rejection and financial instability?

Basically, our concept was that marriages are combinations of 2 families, not just two individuals.

My English sucked in this round, with constant blunders and whatnot -.- (think: MADAM SPEAKER SIR. -.-") pffft.

But honestly, and only Elaine knows about this, is that I have been wishing for this motion ever since forever. I kind of fell for this motion, if you could say so. Heehee. I have been debating about this topic with her (and I have always been FOR arranged marriages) so yeah:)

having said that, I would not like my parents to choose my future husband -.-

Prelim 5
GOV: SMK Green Road A
OPP: DPHA Gapor B

Motion: THW intorduce a pet tax. (silent round) (win)
We talked about the problems of strays and pet abuse, and we proposed a mechanism where annual tax would be imposed on pets. The Government argued that the tax imposed would allow people to think twice before actually owning a pet, and it would also be a standard to check on the owner's financial ability to sustain the animal. We also argued that there will be more animal shelters built to accomdate pets that their owners could not afford, using the tax gained and how it would go into the maintainence and improvement of the shelters, and how, in the long run, animals being abandoned and sent to shelters would actually decrease.

The motion stood.

Octofinals (top 16)
GOV: SMK Kuching High B
OPP: SMK Green Road A (ranked 10th)

Motion: THW allow transgender contestants the right to represent their countried int the Miss Universe pageant. (win)
Basically, the Opposition analysed the real aim of the Miss Universe pageant, where it was for empowering women, and hence, should be exclusively for biological women. Also, we argued about how exposing the transgenders to such a huge competition at this time would actually be detrimental to them instead of raising awareness and symphathy as how the Government proposed as they are still discriminated, especially by conservative countries.

The motion fell.

Quarterfinals (top 8)
GOV: Lodge National A
OPP: SMK Green Road A

Motion: THW lift the ban on controversial books. (win)
This was a close win, with 2-1 split, and Lodge was a tough opponent. I salute them. They introduced a mechanism which was a bit complicated, by using libraries and identity cards to ensure minors wouldn't get their hands on the books and how that the books would only be circulated through public llibraries and not be held up for sale.

We exploited their policy on how it was very assumptous (first, is maturity defined by number? (>21), second, they argued that matured adults would read on both sides of the stories (assuming they would pick up two very conflicting controversial books and read them)), but again, I applaud this team, and honestly, no sarcasm. :)

We argued for national security, especially in a fragile country like Malaysia (politically, race-ly and religion-ly)

Semifinals (Top 4)
GOV: SMK Green Road A
OPP: SMK Chung Hua Miri B

Motion: THW grant greater autonomy for Sarawak. (win)
We argued for more political, economical and educational autonomy for Sarawak, but mainly about the economical aspect, and how Sarawak was grossly underfunded. It was a 5-0 win, and I am happy that we managed to pull through, because my team knew NOTHING.

We only had our brainwave during the last 5 minutes of the prep time. Not advisable for any debate team.

The Opposition argued that it would cause disorganisation and how Sarawak was not ready. But I felt that this was a misconception on their part as they addressed the issue as Sarawak wanting full independence from Malaysia.

Grand Finals
GOV: SMA Katholik Santu Petrus A (Indonesia)
OPP: SMK Green Road A

Motion: THBT Syria's internal strife is its own business. (Loss)
5-6 split, close, but still a loss. :) I still thank God that we managed to come so far ♥

Both sides agreed to the fact that Syria was wracked by uprisings, sectarian wars and revolts (fololowing the Arab Spring), and the Government argued for political autonomy and state sovereignity. The Opposition, on the other hand, pointed out that that Al-Assad's regime was doing nothing to improve the situation,. instead, fuelling more revolts and protests, and how human rights were at stake, hence justifying international interference and the UNSC capturing Al-Assad to be tried in the ICC for his crimes against humanity.

All I can say is that we really gave it our all in this round and although there is still much space for improvement, I am really proud of Ching Ing and Jaan Ee for sticking with me throughout the whole tourney. Anyone who's been my teammate will know how irritable I get during prep time ._. BUT I PROMISE TO CHANGE THAT :DD



Thank you, Swinburne, for holding this tournament, and I grew in more ways than one. :) 

On a lighter note, thank you for awarding me the 3rd overall best speaker award :D



We will come back, and this does not mark the end of our debating journey! :D




The Squirrels will be back, and next time, we will be stronger.

♥

A love letter.

Nothing annoys me more than those spam bots at my chatbox. Will comtemplate removing the very thing itself. grrrr. Those with features against spambots cost money. :(

*cough* wells. Hello people:) I am on a blogging-spree these few days, before school life engulfs me and another flurry of sickening (think ang. I salute you if you understand those two words ;) ) events.

Saw this in a book and thought it'll be great to share :DD

Father's Love Letter

Every gift you receive comes from my hands (James 1:17)
For I am your provider & I meet all your needs (Matt 6:31-33)
My plan for your future has always been filled with hope (Jer 29:11)
Because I love you with an everlasting love (Jer 31:3)
My thoughts toward you are countless as the sand on the seashore (Psalms 139:17-18)

And I rejoice over you with singing (Zeph 3:17)
I will never stop doing good to you (Jer 32:40)
For you are my treasured possession (Exodus 19:5)
I desire to establish you with all my heart and all my soul (Jer 32:41)
And I want to show you great and marvellous things (Jer 33:3)

If you seek me with all your heart, you will find me (Deu 4:29)
Delight in Me and I will give you the desires of your heart (Psalm 37:4)
For it is I who gave you those desires (Phil 2:13)
I am able to do more for you than you could possibly imagine (Eph 3:20)
For I am your greatest encouragement (2 Thes 2:16-17)

I am also the Father who comforts you in all your troubles (2 Corinthians 1:3-4)
When you are broken-hearted, I am close to you (Psalm 34-18)
As a shepherd carries a lamb, I have carried you close to my heart (Isaiah 40:11)
One day I will wipe away every tear from your eyes (Rev 21:3-4)
And I'll take away all the pain you have suffered on this earth (Rev 21:3-4)

Jesus died so that you and I could be reconciled (2 Cor 5:18-19)
His death was the ultimate expression of my love for you (1 John 4:10)
I gave up everything I loved that I might gain your love (Rom 8:31-32)
If you receive the gift of my Son Jesus, you receive Me (1 John 2:23)
And nothing will ever separate you from my love again. (Rom 8:38-39)

Come home and I'll throw the biggest party heaven has ever seen (Luke 15:7)
I have always been Father, and will always be Father (Eph 3:14-15)
My question is: Will you be my child? (John 1:12-13)
I'm waiting for you. (Luke 15:11-32)

Love, your dad,
Almighty God.


♥