watch your back. twice.

perth is not very safe after all. (courtesy of ABC news 16 august 2007)

Police in Perth have held a media conference to reveal they have found the body of missing woman Corryn Rayney in Kings Park.

Her body was found in a grave off Lovekin Drive. The body has not been removed from the site, and police say they have identified Mrs Rayney from DNA samples. The cause of death has not been revealed, but police say they are treating the case as a murder inquiry. Police began searching Kings Park yesterday after Mrs Rayney's car was found abandoned in the nearby suburb of Subiaco. A trail of fluid from the vehicle, believed to be oil, led them to a site in Kings Park.

History of Corryn Rayney case
Mrs Rayney, aged 44, is a mother of two young girls and a Supreme Court registrar. She has been missing for nine days after leaving a bootscooting class at the Bentley Community Centre on August the 7th.

Police had their first breakthrough in the case on Tuesday night when her abandoned car was found locked in Kershaw Street, Subiaco. It is believed a trail of fluid from the vehicle led Police to a site near a toilet block in nearby Kings Park. Mrs Rayney's estranged husband, LLoyd Raney, is a former prosecutor for the Director of Public Prosecutions. He has been representing a police officer at a Corruption and Crime Commission inquiry into the wrongful conviction of Andrew Mallard for the 1994 murder of Pamela Lawrence.

____________________________

this goes to prove - one can never be safe/cautious enough, especially if you are a girl. don't just think you know it all. danger is very real. and it's not you who just pays the price of misjudgment with your life, it's your loved ones.

so charlotte, don't be blindsighted by the smooth talker. remember, innocence once lost can never be regained. and, what if it just isn't innocence you lose?

backpadding to square 1?

i know i should not backtrack on the progress i've made so far. sorry mark/jeff.. but the inevitable always happens to us, the emotionals. we relapse. let's just hope this is temporal and i'll scuttle past this hurdle fast enough.

as it is, i know you have fed me lies upon lies upon lies last semester. that's fine.... i'm learning to stomach and swallow that nonsense, pretending to be that dumb blonde who laps it all up and takes your twisted word for it. but since you have made it clear you despise me so much, why continue feeding me more lies? telling me you did not renew your driver's license when evidently in the mail, came the renewed license... what do you take me for? an imbecile? it's not like i enjoy asking you to help me, but come on, it is 7 freaking degrees in the pouring rain, i am in a polo tee and shorts 1 hour away from home, do you not have a conscience?

oh wait, what am i saying? it's you we're talking about. what conscience? does it even exist in your vocabulary? i guess not. i am struggling to comprehend this whole situation right now - why even bother lying to me when you hate me so much. you might as well tell it like it is "no, i don't want to pick you up." why beat around the mulberry bush for someone you don't have any basic respect for? i think its these fresh serve of lies i am just struggling to swallow - i want to suck it in and further my progress, but yet it's getting wedged in my throat.

i was listening to rihanna's good girl gone bad. if people knew me well enough, i'm not the most angelic of girls... but i know i've been good. but you've tainted that innocence i once had. i've become such a cynical, vengeful and wary girl. and that innocence once lost can never be regained.

but here is my personal vow, to myself and to the people who have faith in me. i will bounce back. stronger than before.

the traditional keynes and hicks approach to hedgers vs speculators

keynes and hicks felt that hedgers are short on average and speculators long. speculators are optimists in that they will think that prices will rise, so they buy long. hedgers, on the other hand, may be the producers of goods and will sell goods forward to remove the risk by locking it the price.

if that is the case, the expected future spot price has to be greater than the forward price. this "greater than" disparity compensates speculators for the risk. for example, speculators buy oil at $70 where it could possibly fetch $75 in the future. they think they will make a profit of $5 - and this compensates them for the risk. they will not sell it for $70 as there is no compensation for the risk. hedgers may also think the price of oil will be $75 in the future but they will still lock in a selling price of $70 so as to remove the element of risk. hence, both parties will be happy.

this situation is called 'normal backwardation' and keynes and hicks felt that this happens quite frequently. in this situation, the forward price is not a reflection of the expected future spot price, it is actually a little less.

it can also be the other way around where the hedgers are long and the speculators are short on average. for example, qantas needs alot of oil to operate the air planes in the future hence they buy the oil forward (hedge). if there are alot of players in the market like this, hedgers generally adopt the long position. it can be that the speculators expect a falling price and sell their products short. in this situation, the expected future spot price is less than the forward price. the hedger is willing to pay more than the expected future spot price but are happy to do so to get rid of the risk. they are willing to pay $75 for oil even though they could think that they can get it for $70. conversely, speculators sell forward at $75 and they will think it is a good price because they have a belief that the future spot price will drop to $70 - compensated for the risk.

and this is called 'contango', the former being more 'common' as felt by keynes and hicks.

my aussie happy land.

it's pirate party time @ the uni tavern. mimi and i didn't have time to plan for a get up because we decided to go in the eleventh hour.

giving johnny depp in pirates of the carribbean a run for his money with my smoked eyes. all made possible by xing+caro - M.A.C eyeliner is the way to go!

cam-whoring in the uni toilet with our eye patches. roarrr.

change of plans and we decided to head to the mustang. that's when my lesbo tendencies rears its elusive head.

mimi's model talents shining through. in freezing temperatures.

ended up returning to our first love, our aussie happy land, the mustang bar!

guess who popped into the photo? i also have no idea!?!!

our favourite band, the cheekymonkeys! my namesake.... they were fawesome!

that's right, the cheekymonkeys, friday night live @ the mustang bar 11pm till late.

you gotta be there or you wouldn't know what you're missing out on. and in the process, gain an insight to my happy land, the only outlet here for me that is.

taking christianity out of context?

i'm a christian. i go to church. i have close christian friends. i also have many very close non-christian friends.

now, what gets me aggrieved is the way my christian friends are wary of my socialisation with non-christians, which i thoroughly do not agree with. i repeat. i do not condone some christians' way of thinking that we, christians, should not mix with the unevenly yoked. however, going back to establishing my agenda for this post, the greater emphasis in biblical teachings is that we, christians, should not date/marry non-christians - "do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. for what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? and what communion has light with darkness?" (2 Corinthians 6:14)

firstly, i do not question that biblical law. after all, it is written in the bible. therefore, when pastors/elders realise, for example, that one teenager in the church is going to date a non-christian, they may intervene. ok.... i can understand their reasons for intervention.

BUT! when you tell me, both teenagers are christians, both holding leadership positions in church, but that one leader has the greater potential to develop something more while the other has already maxmised her potential - therefore, that disparity in potential to grow/serve is the cause for objection from the pastors/elders - THAT I CANNOT UNDERSTAND.

i think it looks quite confusing so let me break that down for you. i have a young friend at church, B, young, charismatic leader, the baby of the leaders in his ministry who is tauted to be like "the next big thing" in leadership. he met a girl in church, G, sweet young thing, a stable christian serving as a leader in her ministry. been hanging out, decide that they like each other alot. but B's mentor/pastor stepped in saying - "no, i don't think she is good enough for you. her potential to serve is already maximised. but as for you, you still have a lot more room to grow. if you go out with her, she will pull you down."

ok.... what. the. hell. now, i have alot of respect for the elders/mentors/pastors of the church - after all, their faith, belief and teachers are alot more concrete than mine. but to impose such restrictions and reasoning on a teenager boy - and going to the extent of driving past his house at night to see if he is at home - is ridiculous. B is a regular teenage boy. he is also a good boy. just because he has some star potential to be the 'next big thing' in church or something, doesn't mean his personal love life should be hindered as a result. G isn't a regular church going christian, let alone a non-christian. how can you use a disparity in serving capacities as a logic behind disapproving the r/s?

furthermore, both the parties' parents have no objections to the relationship proceeding, why do the pastors/mentors have to kick up the fuss? don't get me wrong, this has nothing to do with God now. God has never made such commandments or passed these decrees. rather, it appears to me, the pastor/mentor is taking all these teachings and principles, out of context and misusing his position of authority.

i am sure, the pastor/mentor has his concerns, but there is a fine line between concern and going overboard. in mu humble opinion, i think he has crossed that fine line. pastors/mentors are meant to guide, educate and faciliate the spiritually young - which i am sure most have done a fine job of. but at the end of the day, you stick close to the biblical teachings and not manipulate/formulate your own reasoning and thinking it is in line with the black-and-whites. because sadly, sometimes it may not entirely be GOD-prompted.

maybe this is why non-christians are so wary - when a few christians take their beliefs out of context and alot of unpleasantries arise. thankfully, the proportio of these christians are minimal and there is nothing to be cautious about, my fellow friends. at the end of the day, as long as we christians live by our principles/beliefs, be who we are and help others and be a good testimony, let the seeds be sown. the rest, is up to God to do the watering and nurturing.

*disclaimer: this speaks for only a small proportion of christians. i am definitely not putting down any christians in this entry.

indifference is the new bliss.

there will be 2 posts today simply because i forgot what i wanted to type in the first post. now that i suddenly remembered what i set out to establish in post no. 1, here is post no. 2.

i think mark and jeff will be proud of me. for someone with remarkably low self-esteem, i have to say, i reckon i have done pretty well these few weeks. i never thought i would be able to overcome all those terrible feelings i was going through last semester, being burdened by the shit going on around me. that betrayal, hurt, anger and shame. i was a living wreck last sem. i thought it's gonna be a while before i can stomach it. but i have presently surprised myself this time around.

i have reached the stage of indifference. i'm not happy, definitely not. but neither am i the wreck i once was. i am learning to let go. it's a good feeling. it's one of those things that we, the emotionals, struggle to comprehend and manage every day. the pain, hurt and all still remains, it won't go away.... but learning to suck it in and keep myself in stride at a good pace is probably the most pertinent object i have in mind now. and my baby steps into being a big girl is going well.

i suppose i don't see the necessity of bitching about *him anymore. i could if i wanted to. you'll see paragraphs and paragraphs of useless ranting... ranting which wouldn't change anything. a leopard never changes its spots. just like some things just don't change. i don't expect it to anyway. i got to get on with my life, somewhat, despite having the permanent thorn in my flesh, metophorically speaking. and i will.

i look around me and i see all the problems my loved ones face... i was so blindsighted by my own foolishness to not acknowledge everyone else's. this time, it's gonna be different.

D will be looking down, and proud.

snap back to reality.

30 wine tastings from sandalford, houghton and lancester wineries + unlimited chocolate samples from margaret river chocolate factory later, rach is 2 kg heavier and bloated. :(

it's time for detoxing. gosh. while i was definitely pampered, i am also feeling worse for wear. there has been too much shopping, good food and drinking. have heaps to catch up on. tuts, ilectures, notes, readings and assignments to do. -groans- bring on the mugging fever! arghh. with pleasure comes pain.

snapshot of her royal highness. tsk.

telltale signs indicating my path to being a spinster.

1. you find yourself mixing/lunching with your didi's and lil cousin's high school mates. such as in the case of 18 year old daniel bey, yang's schoolmate from victoria school and alex, eugene's school mate from st patricks school.

and hell, you think that they are the cutest things ever.

2. you start doing the math to calculate the probability of snagging a guy. and then, you mop at the prospect that the odds are against you.

i.e. wrong guy at the wrong time = wrong guy
wrong guy at the right time = wrong guy
right guy at the wrone time = still wrong guy
right guy at the right time = right guy (it's about time!)

so at the end of the day, you have 1/4 chance to get it right. dammit.

3. alex tells you on msn "rachhh!!!! i saw the future you at tampines mall line dancing". -pukes blood- just to defend myself, i rather be a pole-dancing whore than an old aging spinster caught line dancing in the heartlands. excuse you.

investing 101

as some of you may know... i am into investing. specifically stocks investing.

and well, starting off as a noob, i am always more than happy to listen to 'old wise men' share their five cents worth on this subject matter. thus, when my dad's uni friend, uncle choo, and i started dicussing shares and counters over caesar salad and banana bread yesterday, i was more than keen to milk some advice from him.

never did i expect that the best piece of advice he shared with me was given to him by my very own daddy years ago.

ok. for all you noobs like me. this is the secret in investing 101. years ago, my dad was the CEO of SEMAC - for all the ignorant out there, that's the rubbish collection/disposal company which the govt privatised in around 1998 (prior to take, my dad was with the ministry of environment). i think it has been subsequently renamed SembWaste or something to that effect. as head rubbish man, so we say, my dad therefore knows quite a fair bit about people's unwanted stuff - who knows, he may sieve through them himself.

anywho. as a result, my daddy, the head rubbish man, devised his own theory - it goes something like this. "orhhhhh, xxx company is chucking out so much shit, this means the company is expanding/producing at full capacity, this means good news, go buy xxx company counter!" similarly, "wah lau, xyz company has no shit, must be something bad happen. no business, no investment, bad news. better avoid, later lose money!"

moral of the story: in all aspects, the amount you shit indicates your inner health/wealth.

smack that!

i spy with my little eye, some thing starting with an 'e'. that's right e-y-e-c-a-n-d-y! alas, it seems that school has gotten a little more interesting than the usual white skin blonde hair, yellow skin fake accent, acbc boys. cutting the long story short, i nearly shit in my pants when i walked into money,banking and the financial markets tut to see the most drop dead gorgeous, well-built blue-eyed blonde guy leaning over the rostrum in a casual, chic manner, waiting for the clock to strike 11am to start the tutorial.

thats right, this hellava stunner is my econs tutor. the name's kieren gray. tall, broad shoulders, chiselled chest and piercing blue eyes.... he is every bit the billabong model. he also happens to be more than just a himbo. he studies law and commerce. now, why haven't i ever seen him around the law faculty? beats me... perhaps i was too busy paying attention to the ABI, arvind or that latest squeeze (who only turns out to be attached) to really see this pretty damn gorgeous kieren hanging around the law library. anywhos, i ended up spending the whole tut drooling away. did i also mention he is left handed and i am a S.U.C.K.E.R for lefties? -blush-

anyways. as the title suggest - i think i am gonna get screwed by my dad. i brought uncle choo and charlotte to this pub to drink. remember carnegies? its the pub that jem brought me to... a place laden with bittersweet memories and much fun. it was halfprice cocktails. my treat. yayness!! bought uncle choo, another uncle a pint of swan draught each, charlotte a mango margarita and myself my favourite long island tea. i swear that they make the best long island teas! it taste so bloody pleasant that you can drink on happily without accounting for the amount you drink.

charlotte and i went to dance. highlight of the night - the moment they played smack that. jiehua should know i am crazy about that song. omg. i love smacking strangers. charlotte got picked up by the hottest asian guy at the club. omg. he had puppy dog eyes and a really gorgeous smile. his name is andrew and he managed to knick charlotte's number from her. lucky bitch. he is a stunner. apparently, he studied law @ uwa. honestly, i don't know if he was trying to impress her and crapping it because in my 4 years at uwa, i have never ever seen him. the law community is pretty tight and such a cutie like him, i wld have definitely spotted him. oh well. let's hope he's not a heartbreaker.

i think uncle choo will so think i frequent these areas and start fearing for his daughter if i bring her to these places in the future. i don't think i have that much time. but damn, this was wicked fun. i love it! the last time i went to carnegies with jaimee last sem, it was so disappointing. glad that i gave carnegies another chance.

welcome back to awesomeness, carnegies! =)