heh yes this colour's called pepto-bismol pink in american magazines, and pepto-bismol is a type of medicine. don't know if it's the same one kelly's talking about.

omg i just had the most distressing half-hour ever, just now. my internet connection died, inexplicably, stayed dead for a while, and then was resurrected, inexplicably.

anyway. i think it was admirable of sharon to pull out of gaza, but issuing a statement like that in his speech -- about palestine bearing the burden of proof, true though it may be -- seems as though he's challenging palestine to do something, because he knows that if palestine attacks in any form, they'll come off worse internationally whereas up till now they've sort of been the victims. it's a bit un-classier than if he hadn't said things that seem like a challenge to palestine, such as "The world is waiting for the Palestinian response - a hand stretched out to peace or the fire of terror. To an outstretched hand we shall respond with an olive branch, but we shall fight fire with the harshest fire ever."

it's a bit like nicole kidman refusing to say anything about tom cruise after their divorce, which was Teh Classy, whereas jennifer aniston is, well, she's the victim because it's pretty obvious that brad's happily cavorting with The Hottest Angelina Jolie, but it was relatively unclassy of her to give an interview in Vanity Fair and be all publicly wronged. you know what i mean?

but either way, the gaza thing is a huge deal and it's really very admirable. although at the ground level it's a bit sad to see the millions of jews having to pack up their whole lives and leave. i wonder if it's any consolation to them that they're part of a historic change. it probably doesn't make much of a difference to most of them. maybe p.urvis is getting to me. sounds like his sort of opinion.

oh and. i just read an article in Time by kishore mahbubani, and some of what he says disturbs me greatly. his overwhelming confidence in the amazingness of ASEAN, and in the benignity of the US. he attributes the rise of asian societies/economies partly to the rise of the US, "the most benign power in human history" -- a pretty damn controversial statement right now. and he doesn't even qualify it. although i guess discussing the benignity of the US is rather out of the scope of the article. but still, it's so contentious that it demands atleast a little bit!

on the other hand, his statements about the asian advance (or lack thereof) on the cultural front really struck a chord. in the sense that asia is really making a mark economically, with asian products constituting almost 40% of world GDP but there's hardly a proportional stake in cultural industries such as film, tv, print media etc. but then it's pretty well-acknowledged that "a full belly seems more important than a free press" (from another article in the issue, about Park Chee Hung's rule in South Korea) so i guess it's on its way. eventually, eventually. so he made a very insightful statement that asians have yet to explain themselves in their own terms to the rest of the world.

maybe that's where fundamentalist violence is trying to go -- to gain enough attention to express their needs/situation. except that it's a rather primal, aggressive way of communicating a message. and it's a depressing method to have to resort to, obviously. but then the modern asia the articles are talking about are primarily south asia, east asia etc. not really the middle east. apparently it'll take around 9 years to remove the insurgency in iraq. did bush know that's what he signed up for 2 years ago?

ugh. i have killed a moth and some other small insect today. my stack of rough paper is very useful to smash against small-ish irritants. and moths, when crushed, become this sort of silver crushed thing. maybe their blood's silver. how cool is that. it wasn't a large moth of course. it was the tiny sort or else i wouldn't have dared go near it.