canoncan @ stock.xchng

Here’s how I understand S&M, or sadomasochism sex. Or at least the masochistic part of it anyway.

You know how when you hit your shin on something, or kick something hard and the pain just courses through your body and you clutch yourself in agony? And then when the pain starts to subside, you feel a relief? To those who’d like to be dominated and have pain inflicted upon them, the masochists, I’d surmise that this relief is felt more intensely by them than the average person. And hence, it’s pleasurable to them.

And about being submissive, perhaps it’s also a form of relief. Perhaps the person always have to be the dominant one at home or at work, not by choice but by circumstance. They have to make the major decisions, and plan and control almost everything. Maybe it’s a a relief to not being in charge and not knowing what is to come, which is pleasurable to them in a perverse way.

I’m not a masochist but I can understand how masochistic role-play can be sexy and exciting for some.

As for sadists and dominants, they are the exact opposite. They have no control over the major aspects of their lives or perhaps they are downtrodden at home or at work. So it feels good to turn the tables around in the bedroom. That part I understand but aggressive sex and wanting to inflict pain is just kinda freaky to me. I guess that’s why you would need “safewords” - a pent-up person may have a big load of aggression to unload which may be dangerous.

What brought this on? I hit my shin and it felt good afterwards. Don’t tell anyone I said that. And no I do not want to be dominated. I prefer equal opportunity sex.

p.s. If you are reading this at work, are you nuts?!

post apocalyptic design @ flickr
(via everystockphoto)

swisschee @ stock.xchng

A whole lot of questions …

Other than just not feeling like it, the only time that I could decline an invite to go out with friends would be if I was sick or there was a family thing going on. But here’s the tricky part: what if you felt better later in the night, or the family thing ended earlier than thought and another friend called to ask you out, what would you do?

Go out with this friend?
Reject this second invite and call up the first friend and tell them you can make it after all?

And what if you go out with the second friend, and then the first friend found out?

What are your excuses then? “I haven’t seen the other friend for longer”? I mean what can you say that can possibly make that friend feel less rejected?

Or how about other times, you ditch your friend for a date with a single available male/female? Would that be the only clause acceptable? And what if that male/female becomes a boyfriend/girlfriend? The juggling becomes even more complicated. Sex or friends? Sex is always good but friends last longer than boyfriends or girlfriends usually. Hmm, tough one.

Do your friends exist and are ranked in your head, on imaginary A-lists, B-lists, and C-lists? Do your friends know about your lists? Do they understand that an A-list invite trumps one from the B or C-lists? How would a B or a C-list friend get onto your A-list? Or would they be so pissed off that they are not on your A-list that they don’t care about being friends with you anymore?

The social scene is such a mine field. I reckon it’d be easier if you were a bastard and not care about how other people feel. But then, you wouldn’t have that many friends then, and you wouldn’t be having these issues in the first place!

How do you juggle your social invites? Tips? Advices? Let me know.

via CuteOverload

I’m loving it! But damn it, I haven’t been in either cat’s position for way too long. Although there was that one time last year but it wasn’t that enjoyable so I’m not counting it. In other words, this picture is making me feel oh so very deprived. Because among other things …

Best of luck to the singles who will be out on the prowl this weekend.

Let’s put aside all the issues about the fairness and legality (revoking the visa was completely within the Immigration Minister’s right) and have a look at the operational blunders.

The Visa

If I was the government and I wanted Haneef to remain in the country so that I can incarcerate him for however long as I wish, I would not have revoked his visa. In fact I would have let him out on bail and tailed him throughout the trial which at the point was still being conducted.

He had no passport, and the surveillance would most likely be heavy enough that he would not pose an imminent threat to the community, if he really was a terrorist. This was what the Australian Federal Police had intended to do before Minister Andrews preempted them.

Mr Andrews’ decision, taken after discussions with John Howard and the national security committee of cabinet, caught the AFP by surprise. Investigators had already planned how they would tail a bailed Dr Haneef on the Gold Coast.

There were also inconsistences in the statements by Minister Andrew regarding the revoking of Haneef’s visa.

In the meantime [after charges had been dropped], Mr Andrews said Dr Haneef would be held in “residential detention” only, meaning he was free to move about in the community.

Yet only 11 days earlier, Mr Andrews had said part of the reason for revoking Dr Haneef’s visa was for “the protection of the Australian community”.

Last-ditch bid to save political skin | The Australian

If I was the government, I would wait till the trial had run its course and then decide on the visa. I’d still have time to detain him under immigration laws if the trial did not go my way. What was the hurry?

And if I could not hold him in the country any longer, and he had wanted to leave, the end result would be the same as what we have now. Except with less embarassment and less “foot in the mouth” moments. With cooperation from the Indian police which is happening currently, Haneef could still be investigated and charged if warranted.

Indian anti-terror police last night warned Dr Haneef they wanted to “interrogate” him over his links to alleged British bombers Sabeel and Kafeel Ahmed. Officers of the Anti-Terrorism Squad in Bangalore were reported to have called at Dr Haneef’s family home and told relatives to pass on the message they wanted to speak to him.

The joint Commissioner of Police in Karnataka state, Gopal B. Hosur, told The Australian last night it was likely that Dr Haneef would be called for questioning in a few days.

Keelty blunders again on Haneef | The Australian

As it is, everyone involved in this debacle: the Australian Federal Police and its commissioner Mick Keelty, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions Damien Bugg, Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews, and even the PM John Howard, Attorney General Philip Ruddock, and Foreign Minister Alexander Downer - all of them, have been made to look very foolish.

The IM Transcript

And regarding the transcript of the instant-message conversation between Haneef and his brother, if an English translation of the excerpt can be released, why not the original version in Urdu? What’s the harm? I can understand the assertion that releasing the entire transcript may jeapordise investigations, but not the above.

Is there something dodgy with the translation or what?

Also, Kevin Andrews released this transcript without mentioning that Haneef had tried to contact British police on at least four occasions.

Police transcripts reveal that Dr Haneef tried to call British police from Australia four times after the bombings.

Dr Haneef has reportedly said he wanted to tell the police that he had left a SIM card with a cousin who was implicated in the attacks.

Andrews tight-lipped on Haneef’s calls to police - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

It has been called this a while back and it still is a complete “farce”. Right-wingers call us “bleeding hearts” and for letting potential terrorists take advantage of our laws and democracy to wreak havoc. But all that we are asking for is good governance and transparency. Both of which are sorely lacking with regards to the handling of Dr. Haneef.

where the magic happens

Blogging has been real good for me. It started out as a creative outlet way back when, then I met and got to know other bloggers, some of whom have become real life friends. And as mentioned in my latest podcast, blog advertising has also given me a nice little side income.

And this is the latest toy that I’ve bought with that side income: an LG 20″ widescreen monitor, $299. This is on top of the camera I bought in May for $399 - a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ7.

The ironic thing is, if I wasn’t a blogger I could have made do with my older camera, and if I wasn’t spending so much time in front of the computer, I would not have been tempted to upgrade the monitor.

Oh well, never mind. I’m now working towards the funds for my end of year holiday.

“Assassin’s Creed”, being produced by Ubisoft Montreal is another game I’m anxiously waiting for to get for my Xbox 360. You play Altair, “(الطائر, Arabic, “The Flyer”), a member of the Hashshashin sect (the original “assassins”), whose objective is to slay the nine historical figures who are propagating the Crusades”.

Assassin’s Creed - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The backstory is a real interesting one. The Hashshashin sect existed for real in the Middle Ages and terrorised both Crusade figures and “Muslim rulers whom they saw as impious usurpers”. The word “assassin” is derived from the sect. The Wikipedia entry is a fantastic read.

The trailer above is another “killer app” one like the “Gears of War” ad - it really makes you want to buy the game. The song playing in it is “Lonely Soul” by UNKLE.

Check out the official site for another great trailer. It’s tentatively scheduled to be released in November this year. AWESOME!

Incidentally, the producer for the game Jade Raymond is hot.

I would like to start by saying that I have no problems with the anti-terrorism laws that Australia has in place. However, as we now realise the laws can potentially be used on the wrong person for the wrong reasons which can result in a serious loss of liberty and rights.

So all this started about four weeks ago …

We first heard that Dr. Haneef was arrested at Brisbane Airport with a one-way ticket to India, just a few days after the attacks at Glasgow Airport. He is related to some of the suspects already arrested in the UK. He was arrested on the grounds that a SIM card that he once owned was found on one of the UK suspects in Glasgow.

Suspicious behaviour? Justified arrest? Based on what the public knew at the time, there were no doubts on both.

Then a judge released Dr. Haneef on bail based on the following reasons:

[Magistrate Jacqui] Payne had listed eight reasons for granting bail, including the fact that prosecutors did not allege that Haneef had been directly involved with a terror group.

…

Among her reasons for granting bail, Payne had said Haneef’s SIM card had not been used in relation to the attempted bombings in London and Glasgow last month.

She also cited Haneef’s good employment record, his lack of a criminal history, and the fact that he was employed as a doctor.

Government cancels suspect’s freedom | The Australian

Never mind that Dr. Haneef was not a flight risk as he had already surrendered his Indian passport, the Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews then decided to immediately withdraw his working visa because in the minister’s point of view, Dr. Haneef has failed the character test to remain in Australia. So essentially, the government is assuming Haneef’s guilt when a court has not decided on it.

A bit heavy-handed? Yup. Haneef would have been sent to a detention camp if he had made bail. Essentially, he’d be going from one jail to another. So what’s the point of making bail then? None, and so Dr. Haneef remained in custody.

And then the big news broke.

THE crucial piece of evidence against the terrorism suspect Mohamed Haneef - that his mobile phone SIM card was found at the scene of a British car bombing - is wrong, the Australian Federal Police have admitted.

Haneef case descends into farce - National - smh.com.au

The Australian police had said that they only acted based on the information given to them by the British police. The British police said that they supplied the correct information to the Australian police, and that it was the Australian police who had bungled things. But who cares really? Dr. Haneef’s life and reputation had now been trashed.

Along with that, it was discovered that Dr. Haneef had applied for emergency leave to see his wife and baby, that he told friends and colleagues about it. His flight had been planned before the attacks in Glasgow. He wasn’t “fleeing justice” in any sense of it.

By now, there was no other choice for the Director of Public Prosecutions but to drop the charges against Dr. Haneef. His only true “crime”? He is related to lousy cousins who were terrorists. Bloody hell.

Haneef released as charges dropped - National - smh.com.au

So he’s now released but he no longer has his visa. And he had been planning to fly back to India to see his wife and then 6-day old infant daughter when he was arrested. Naturally, he wanted to be on the first flight out. If for no other reason, I wouldn’t stay a minute longer in Australia than I have to after what I had gone through the past four weeks. Would you?

But Minister Andrews was not done …

On Friday the charges were dropped and Dr Haneef freed after intense criticism of the federal police and the Director of Public Prosecutions. But Mr Andrews has refused to give back his working visa and yesterday persisted in pointing to Dr Haneef’s potential guilt by saying his quick departure from Australia early yesterday for Bangalore “actually heightens rather than lessens my suspicion”.

I would dob in a terrorist, cousin or not: Haneef - National - smh.com.au

And now the finger pointing can start. The Australian Federal Police (AFP) said that they were supplied bad info. The Director of Public Prosecutions and the Immigration Minister both said that they acted on the AFP’s advice. Even if we allow that mistakes do happen and what a doozy these are, no apology or compensation is forthcoming to Dr. Haneef.

Yet, he’d still consider coming back to Australia if his visa was reinstated. Somehow, in the midst of all the face-saving by the Government now, I doubt that will happen. But damn I have to admire his sense of forgiveness.

Would I return? If I could get a visa - National - smh.com.au

Security at the cost of liberty is not security at all. I’m feeling ever more convinced that I will be voting for the opposition, the Labor party this upcoming federal election. Remember, you get the government you deserve.

Further reading:

• Comprehensive summary of Dr. Haneef’s history and the incidents surrounding his arrest:
  Just an ordinary life - National - smh.com.au
• His 60-Minutes interview prior to leaving Brisbane:
  Doctor may not be gone for long | The Australian
• His Wikipedia entry with comprehensive round-up of facts:
  Mohamed Haneef - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia