YOU’RE MY FRIEND (‘TIL THE END )

From Movie Soundtrack “ TEMAN “

Composed on 18^th June 2007 (Monday)

Song: Ross Ariffin ( EMI Publishing Sdn Bhd )

Lyrics : Ross Ariffin ( English/Original )

Lyrics (Malay): Unknown as yet

Verse One

We started all together down this winding road,

Seeking truth and doing things that others wouldn’t dare,

But in…all in what we did together,

We just forgot, we just forgot to care…

About the friendship that we share,

Chorus *

You’re my friend,

Til the end,

Thru our pain and joy until we..

Understand, life you’ll see..

This way was meant to be,

Though we can’t,

Change out fate,

We will always stand together,

We are friends, til the end,

You’re my friend,

You’ll be there ….til the end

Mmmmm…

Verse Two

We all have found that people..

Are not what they seem, ohhh…

We just fall into their trap..

It almost killed the dream,

But in, all in what we did together,

We just forgot, forgot to care about..

This friendship that we share,

Chorus**

You’re my friends,

Til the end,

Thru our pain and joy until we..

Understand, life you’ll see..

This way was meant to be,

Though we can’t,

Change out fate,

We will always stand together,

I’ll be there, til the end,

You’re my friend, he’s my friend,

We are friends …ohhhhhh…...til the end

Bridge^

But this darkness has now come into my life,

Will you help up, and lead me to the light…..ohhh…the light..

Last Chorus ***

You’re my friends,

Til the end,

Thru our pain and joy until we..

Understand, life you’ll see..

This way was meant to be,

Though we can’t,

Change out fate,

We will always stand together,

I’ll be there, til the end,

You’re my friend, He’s my friend,

We are friends …. Ummmmm……til the end

We are friends….

We are friends….Yeah, Yeah…

We are friends….Hmmmmm..

You’re my friend.

Pirates of the Caribbean - At World's End!

Watch the preview trailer

Most Malaysians are such cowards!!

Recently we had one dog owner who wanted us to board his dog for one day. My wife and daughter have known him for sometime now. But I personally have never really taken to him. Theres something freaky about him. He speaks with what we call " marbles in the mouth" ie; pseudo-kinda-english. An english accent that is put-on. I should know. I was brought up speaking english as my mother tongue by my english born mum. At least I speak english the normal way!!

Then the same day in the evening after he had taken back his dog ( by the way my wife and daughter took three goddamn hours to clean his dog up of ticks galore!! ) my daughter found out from an online friend that his dog namely Arune was sick and had vomitted. Concerned my wife talked to this freak on her mobile. Its pretty obvious that this motherfucker ( chinese by the way!! )used this opportunity to accuse us of trying to mutilate and murder his filthy mutt.My wife tried in vain and in all honesty to defend herself. But to no avail as this motherfucker shouted and called my poor wife a "bitch" and accused her falsely in trying to kill and "mutilate" his filthy mutt. My poor wife couldnt get a word in!

The next morning he sent a nasty demanding sms to my wife's mobile.I decided to make my move. I was eagerly waiting for this shithead to try his luck one more time.

And I sent him no less than THREE messages from my mobile to his. And to my full expectation we have not heard from him since then.Ha ha ha!!

It always works when I do my part to fight back and give as good as it gets!!

My message to him if he reads this is....

" Fuck off you chinese mother-fucker and dont let us see you ever again!!"

Ohh by the way..Ive got a strong feeling that this motherfucker is GAY!!

Malaysia a hub for illegal wildlife trade!

KUALA LUMPUR (AFP) - Criminal gangs are using Malaysia as a hub for exporting millions of dollars worth of wildlife for the Chinese market, wildlife officials said Sunday.

Officials said trafficking of wildlife had hit alarming levels in Malaysia, which also plays the role of source and consumer.

Traders from Indonesia's Sumatra and Borneo island regularly smuggle the animals to middlemen in Malaysia, said Chris Shepherd of wildlife trade monitoring network Traffic.

"Criminal syndicates are mainly behind the trafficking. It is growing at an alarming rate," he told AFP.

"Unless tough measures are put in place to contain the illegal activity, it will have a serious impact on the wildlife, including animals in the Malaysian jungle, which are also being poached," Shepherd added.

Traffic is a joint programme of the WWF and the World Conservation Union.

Shepherd said among the most sought after creatures are fresh water turtles, tortoises, many species of snakes, pangolins, Sumatran rhino, tiger and sambar deer.

Shepherd said the Malaysian middlemen smuggle the animals to Thailand and then to China to be eaten, adding that meat from the sambar deer and sun bear is also consumed in Malaysia.

Six people have been arrested so far this year for attempting to smuggle snakes and pangolins into Thailand, said Pazil Abdul Patah, a wildlife official in the northeastern Kelantan state, which shares a porous border with Thailand.

"I estimate the annual value of the illegal trade to be worth millions of dollars," he told AFP, adding that "the public have to come forward to tip us off of the illegal activity."

"If the trafficking is not stopped, I fear our wildlife will become extinct," he warned.

Pangolins, or scaly anteaters, found in Asia and Africa, are considered a delicacy in China and are prized for their use in traditional medicine.

Pet food recall expands to new wet brand

WASHINGTON - The recall of wet and dry pet foods contaminated with a chemical found in plastics and pesticides expanded Saturday to include a new brand even as investigators were puzzled why the substance would kill dogs and cats.

Nestle Purina PetCare Co. said it was recalling all sizes and varieties of its Alpo Prime Cuts in Gravy wet dog food with specific date codes. Purina said a limited amount of the food contained a contaminated wheat gluten from China.

The same U.S. supplier also provided wheat gluten, a protein source, to a Canadian company, Menu Foods, which this month recalled 60 million containers of wet dog and cat food it produces for sale under nearly 100 brand labels.

Menu Foods and the
Food and Drug Administration, which regulates the pet food industry, have refused to identify the company that supplied the contaminated wheat gluten.

Hill's Pet Nutrition said late Friday that its Prescription Diet m/d Feline dry cat food included the tainted wheat gluten. The FDA said the source was the same unidentified company. Hill's, a division of Colgate-Palmolive Co., is so far the only company to recall any dry pet food.

Federal testing of some recalled pet foods and the wheat gluten used in their production turned up the chemical melamine. Melamine is used to make kitchenware and other plastics. It is both a contaminant and byproduct of several pesticides, including cyromazine, according to the
Environmental Protection Agency. Melamine is toxic only in very high doses and has been shown in rats to produce bladder tumors, according to the EPA.

The federal pet food testing failed to confirm the presence of aminopterin, a cancer drug also used as rat poison, the FDA said. Cornell University scientists also found melamine in the urine of sick cats, as well as in the kidney of one cat that died after eating some of the recalled food.

Earlier, the New York State Food Laboratory identified aminopterin as the likely culprit in the pet food. But the FDA said it could not confirm that finding, nor have researchers at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey when they looked at tissue samples taken from dead cats.

Experts at the University of Guelph in Canada detected aminopterin in some samples of the recalled pet food, but only in very small percentages.

"Biologically, that means nothing. It wouldn't do anything," said Grant Maxie, a veterinary pathologist at the university. "This is a puzzle."

The FDA was working to rule out the possibility that the contaminated wheat gluten could have made it into any human food.

Menu Foods announced the recall this month after animals died of kidney failure after eating the company's products.

An FDA official allowed that it was not immediately clear whether the melamine was the culprit. The agency's investigation continues, said Stephen F. Sundlof, director of the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine.

Menu Foods said the only certainty was that imported wheat gluten was the likely source of the deadly contamination, even if the actual contaminant remained in doubt.

"The important point today is that the source of the adulteration has been identified and removed from our system," said Paul Henderson, Menu Foods chief executive officer and president. Henderson suggested his company would pursue legal action against the supplier.

About 70 percent of the wheat gluten used in the United States for human and pet food is imported from the
European Union and Asia, according to the Pet Food Institute, an industry group.

One veterinarian suggested the international sourcing of ingredients would force the U.S. "to come to grips with a reality we had not appreciated."

"When you change from getting an ingredient from the supplier down the road to a supplier from around the globe, maybe the methods and practices that were effective in one situation need to be changed," said Tony Buffington, a professor of veterinary clinical sciences at Ohio State University.

Sundlof said the agency may change how it regulates the pet food industry.

"In this case, we're going to have to look at this after the dust settles and determine if there is something from a regulatory standpoint that we could have done differently to prevent this incident from occurring," he said.

Britain is Taking Right Approach with Iran

This weekend, Britain will mark the 25th anniversary of the start of the Falklands War, when Argentine forces invaded the small group of British islands in the South Atlantic, 1,500 miles off the coast of Argentina.

It was inevitable, given the coincidence of timing and the circumstances, that comparisons would be drawn between that conflict, which ended in a triumphant recovery of the islands by UK forces two months later, and the humiliation heaped on Britain in the last week by the seizure of 15 British sailors in the waters near the Persian Gulf.

Then, as now, the incident involved an obvious breach of international law by an odious regime, a serial offender against human rights. Then, as now, a large section of the British media chose to remain essentially neutral in the struggle (or even exhibited sympathy with the enemy), questioning the validity of the British claims, and seeming to give equal weight to the words of the prime minister in Downing Street and the autocratic government on the other side. Then , as now, even gung-ho hardliners in Britain expressed grave doubts about the idea that there might be a military solution to the crisis.

In the current interpretation of history that is where the similarities end. The key difference, according to
Tony Blair's critics in the UK, is that, whereas he wrings his hands and does nothing to halt this flagrant abuse of British rights and of the country's citizens, Margaret Thatcher, prime minister in 1982, boldly declared the outrage would not stand, assembled a massive naval task force to confront it and pulled off a magnificent military victory that restored international law and healed Britain's wounded pride.

Let me state, for the record, that I am an inveterate fan of Mrs Thatcher's and regard her as one of the giants of the 20th century for her contribution to the advancement of political and economic freedom around the world. But it is important to record that this version of events that occurred 25 years ago and the sorry contrast it seems to represent with what is happening today is simply hooey.

The first point to make is that it was the ineptitude and weakness of Mrs Thatcher's government in the face of mounting indications of aggression from Argentina that allowed the Falklands to be captured in the first place. Her ministers had spent a good deal of time and effort over the previous three years (by their own admission) hinting to an increasingly hostile Argentine government that they would essentially like to get rid of the Falklands, which were regarded by Whitehall as an expensive nuisance.

The critical decision that historians are agreed probably emboldened the Argentines to invade was the announcement by the Thatcher government a few months earlier of Britain's intention to scrap HMS Endurance, the only naval vessel on patrol in the area and the only military materiel even vaguely capable of defending the Falklands. This is particularly worth noting given the criticism now being leveled against Mr Blair for his programme of cuts in the Royal Navy's surface fleet. What's more, the criticism of the British naval commander in the Gulf incident echoes the criticism of the commander of Royal Marines on the Falklands when the Argentines invade in early April 1982. The Marines offered only token resistance and in fact surrendered shortly after the invasion after incurring only minimal casualties.

Second, while it is indeed true that the Thatcher government, under great political pressure from its own Conservative MPs and the Labor opposition, launched an enormous task force from Britain days after the invasion, it was far from clear that it would actually fight to retake the islands. For weeks as the task force sailed, Britain was involved in frantic diplomatic efforts to seek a settlement that would have averted war, but at considerable cost to international law and to Britain's honor.

A few weeks after the invasion Mrs Thatcher came perilously close to accepting a compromise on the future of the Falklands - brokered, by the way, by the US administration of
Ronald Reagan (of which more in a moment) - that would have provided for a kind of joint administration of the Falklands. In other words, Argentina would have been rewarded for its aggression by achieving something it had never managed before - a powerful say over the political control of the islands.

It was only thanks to the sheer idiocy of the Argentine government, led by the oafish General Leopoldo Galtieri, that the deal was not accepted. It is highly questionable whether Mrs Thatcher could possibly have survived the humiliation such a "compromise" would have represented. She would have been forced out, either by her own party, or by the electorate, after just one term.

In a further instructive twist to the debate about what Britain should do about its Iranian-held hostages today, it is worth noting that Mrs Thatcher and her government faced considerable opposition to a successful military recovery of the Falklands from an unlikely source - that administration of President Reagan.

The military junta in Argentina was Washington's valuable ally in the global struggle against communism. America had lingering historical objections to colonial British intervention in the western hemisphere. Jeanne Kirkpatrick, the US ambassador to the
United Nations at the time, and an early champion of a neoconservative foreign policy, was firmly on the Argentine side, a useful reminder that in those days some of the most influential neocons actually rather liked and supported fascist dictatorships.

It was only the steely and determined efforts of Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger (later, pointedly, knighted by the Queen), the sheer bovine implacability of the Argentine leadership and the good judgment of Ronald Reagan himself that ensured the US eventually jumped the right way and provided diplomatic and military logistical support to the UK. So when you hear American conservatives bemoaning the fact that there is no-one of Mrs Thatcher's stature in Britain these days, remind yourself that the main reason she survived was no thanks whatsoever to their contributions.

Where does all this leave Mr Blair and his government as it seeks to recover Britain's sailors and restore its pride? This time, thank goodness, the US is firmly on our side. But it is not clear what difference that will make. The military options open to the British government look rather limited. It lacks the intelligence and the military capacity to mount a rescue mission from its meager task force in the Gulf. Though the US has much more firepower and presumably better intelligence, I'm guessing the US navy does not plan to start a war with
Iran in an effort to rescue 15 British sailors.

The right approach, as frustratingly dilatory as it seems, is the one the UK is currently taking. The Iranian attack is an outrage, but it presents an important opportunity to demonstrate to the world (which shouldn't need reminding, but does) just how vile a regime Teheran is. Let no-one be in any doubt as to who is the aggressor is. Produce the evidence that this was no hostile action by the British but simply an operation rooted in international law. Steadily ratchet up the diplomatic pressure on Iran, isolating the country in international opinion. All of that will lay a much better groundwork in global public opinion as the US and its allies prepare for the long difficult struggle to stop Iran from achieving regional hegemony under the shelter of its own nuclear umbrella.

It is frustrating work, but all of the alternatives are worse. What is certain is that bewailing British weakness through false analogies to a very different crisis a quarter of a century ago won't bring anyone home anytime soon.

Humiliated and shaking,..was she forced to confess?

WEARING a black headscarf, her voice trembled as she spoke to her unseen interviewer.

Leading Seaman Faye Turney appeared on Iranian television in civilian dress to tell the world she and her colleagues had "trespassed" into Iranian waters.

Her eyes downcast and forehead furrowed, in a monotone voice the mother said she had been treated well and that her captors were "nice people".

The brief series of clips also showed some of the 14 other British service personnel eating, still in uniform.



The broadcast triggered fears that the woman sailor had been coerced by Iran's Revolutionary Guards into speaking.

The British government immediately condemned the Iranian move, with Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, saying she had deep concerns.

Ldg Smn Turney, who was shown looking tense and at times smoking, said: "Obviously we trespassed into their waters. They were very friendly, very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people. They explained to us why we had been arrested, there was no aggression on their part."

Unlike a similar crisis in 2004, the sailors were not wearing blindfolds, but this may suggest Tehran plans to treat them as suspects rather than prisoners, with a view to putting them on trial.

Unusually, the images were broadcast on Iran's Arab- language channel, rather than state TV, which broadcasts in Farsi, the main language of Iran. Broadcasting in Arabic ensures that the film will be shown across the Middle East, portraying Iran as the victors over America's closest allies in homes from Baghdad to Beirut.

Fuelling fears there had been coercion of the hostages, the Iranian embassy released a letter, which it said was from Ldg Smn Turney to her parents. She wrote that the British crew had "apparently" strayed into Iranian territory, a less emphatic statement than her TV interview, in which she had said the crew had "obviously" transgressed the boundary in the Persian Gulf.

Mrs Beckett said: "I am very concerned about these pictures and any indication of pressure on or coercion of our personnel. I am particularly disappointed a private letter has been used in a way which can only add to the distress of the families."

Earlier, the Iranian foreign minister appeared to make assurances that Ldg Smn Turney, 26, would be released.

However, Manouchehr Mottaki last night claimed he had been "probably misquoted" over that promise but said Tehran had agreed to allow British officials to meet the 15 sailors and marines in Iranian custody.

"Measures are underway (to arrange meeting). They can meet them," he said.

Mr Mottaki did not specify when, adding: "First they have to admit that they have made a mistake."

British ministers ordered a suspension of all bilateral government business with Tehran.

The pressure on Iran intensified after Emyr Jones-Parry, the British ambassador to the United Nations, pledged to seek Security Council action. The timing is crucial as the UK will take over the presidency of the UN Security Council next week, a point emphasised yesterday by Tony Blair.

The Prime Minister threw down the gauntlet by disclosing that Iran changed its evidence to try to prove the British crew had been in Iranian waters during the sailors' seizure at gunpoint. It provided one set of co-ordinates but, when the British pointed out these were in Iraqi waters, another set was given.

Mr Blair said there was "no justification" for the sailors' detention. He added: "It was completely unacceptable, wrong and illegal.

It is time to ratchet up the diplomatic and international pressure to make sure the Iranian government understands their total isolation on this issue."

Defence chiefs also produced evidence showing the 15 sailors were captured in Iraqi waters. Both acts would be seen as embarrassing for Iran, leaving the regime increasingly isolated. However, Iran was emphatic the sailors had entered its territory.

Speaking before the interview with Ldg Smn Turney was aired, Mr Mottaki suggested for the first time that the Royal Navy party may have entered Iranian waters by mistake.

Downing Street last night made clear its disapproval of the broadcast and said such actions were against the Geneva and Vienna conventions on the treatment of prisoners.

Earlier, Vice-Admiral Charles Style, deputy chief of the defence staff, gave detailed co-ordinates which he said showed the party had been seized 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters. "It is hard to understand this change. We unambiguously contest both the positions provided by the Iranians," he said.

The boarding party from HMS Cornwall was seized after completing a routine search of an Indian-flagged cargo ship.

Vice-Admiral Style said the ship's master had confirmed his position was 29 degrees 50.36 minutes North, 048 degrees 43.08 minutes East, placing the vessel well within Iraqi waters, where it remained at anchor.

The Ministry of Defence also released a picture of a global positioning satellite device in HMS Cornwall's Lynx helicopter as it overflew the ship, confirming its position. Vice-Admiral Style said that coalition forces backed by the Iraqi navy had carried out 66 such boardings in the northern Gulf since March - four of them in the same area as the Royal Navy party were seized - without incident.

He said interviews with the Lynx crew, which was in the air at the time, and the master of the cargo ship indicated they had been "ambushed" by Iranian Revolutionary Guard patrol boats.

A senior officer said it had taken the two Iranian patrol boats - equipped with machine-guns and rocket-propelled grenades - three minutes to reach them from the coast. In contrast, the boarding party had only SA80 assault rifles and sidearms.

Robert Phipps, a body language expert , last night said Lng Smn Turney's expressions in the broadcast revealed her true state of mind. Despite her insistence that she was being treated well, her mannerisms and words indicated a woman feeling pressurised and nervous, he said.

"The smile she gave was a fixed smile; it vanished as quickly as it appeared showing it wasn't genuine," he added.

"Her forehead was furrowed and it was like she had been told what to say."
'A BREACH OF CONVENTION'

PARADING hostages on television is a clear breach of the Geneva Convention - but it is questionable if the 15 sailors are covered by the law as Iran and Britain are not technically at war.

Paul Beaver, a defence analyst, said: "[The sailors] are being held without trial, have not been allowed consular access. We presume they have had access to medical provision.

"However, this is not an act of war, as we are not in the middle of a conflict with Iran. It doesn't really come under the convention."

He added that Iran had, in effect, carried out a criminal act by "kidnapping" the sailors.
Britain recoils - but 'gentle' images may offer hope of quick end to impasse

WATCHING a nervous young Faye Turney facing the cameras and the world, the overall impression I obtained was that the Iranians - or at least an element - were trying to find a way out of the impasse, writes CLIVE FAIRWEATHER.

Last night's TV depicting a demure, cigarette-smoking individual sporting a headscarf was a far cry from the brutal images we have often seen of captives in the Middle East, starting with the US diplomats held for 444 days in Tehran in 1980. Similarly, the battered faces of navigator John Nichol and pilot John Peters, shot down by Iraq in the first Gulf war, became an iconic image.

Last night's "gentle" images are an attempt by the Iranians to show they are more sophisticated and could mean that the affair need not be as long drawn-out as many have feared.

It seemed focusing on a young woman, complete with a heartfelt letter written by her to family at home, that the Iranians were studiously avoiding controversy. Faye herself was, I thought, making the best of a tricky situation. By co-operating in the way she has, she may have done as much, if not more, than Margaret Beckett to help ease tensions.

Even the admission in her letter that her party had "apparently" strayed into Iranian waters contains a get-out clause, which could be crucial.

That we are seeing such undemonstrative and "gentle" images augurs well, at this stage.

• Clive Fairweather, ex- second in command of the SAS, served as an adviser to Iranian forces in 1970

Comments

syntax, Edinburgh / 1:48am 29 Mar 2007

Tony Blair is weak and every country knows it.... There should have been a quick military response ! Get them out of there !!!

Maggie Thatcher wouldn't have wasted any time... Labour are crap. All spin and no substance !!

Angus Lindsay, Hong Kong / 1:52am 29 Mar 2007

We've seen it all before. It's the Islamic way. Human shields, hostages, "confessions". Achmadinnerjacket is a mischief-making, twisted, little creep whose downfall is as assured as that of all the tinpot dictators that preceded him.



Privateman, Anywhere but here / 11:02am 29 Mar 2007

If all the deskchair generals who inhabit this message board with their ludicrously over the top solutions were actually in charge of the military then God help us all.

#118 Who started this? Do you have any evidence whatsoever that that had anything to do with Iran?

The fact is Iran is well aware from its history that Britain has been poking its nose in the region since the 19th century (much longer ago than 9/11), first to prevent Tsarist Russia from having a sphere of influence in Persia and threatening Imperial India then, from the First World War onwards, to shore up our interests in the Suez canal and oil in the Middle East and their country. Remember we drew the borders of Iraq based on some ridiculous antiquarian view of Mesopotamia and a promise to give a kingdom to an Arab Sheikh? Recipe for future trouble. Remember Anglo-Persian Oil and its blatant exploitation of their resources? Remember we overthrew a government in Iran and installed the Shah because they sought to end that? Remember Suez (not supported by the USA)? Why doesn't it surprise you that they distrust us and our motives when we have a history of adventurism in the region? It was bad leadership by whoever allowed our servicemen to be so close to a water border inadequately defined which put them in such danger on an otherwise routine mission. May they come home safely and not be used by the blinkered, anti-Muslim lynch mob you all represent.

CindyUSA, USA / 3:43pm 29 Mar 2007

This business with Iran and the UK soldiers is so politics! I really think Iran is pushing their luck and wants war. Personally, I would appologize, kiss and makeup and get my kids home. The minute they are home is another matter. At that point I would make it clear the next time Iran moves in like that, we consider it an act of clear aggression and go from there.

I don't want another war with anyone, but Pulllleeeezzzzzzeeeee quit antagonizing the powers that be.

Iran is spitting in everyone's face and we are getting aggita over it. Get the kids out, say ur r sorry and then make it clear that we will not tolerate this type of behavior again.

Where is the NATO people?? Why isn't Russia, China, and Japan backing the UK. Why is it the US always has to be the ones to stand up for someone else's rights. I think the US and UK are the only ones with a "set" anymore. We are both always helping everyone else out and we get spit on, kicked and told GET OUT! These people are set on destroying themselves and I honestly don't get it.

Dougie Welsh, Canada / 4:14pm 29 Mar 2007

The Iran-Iraq region has been the "Cradle of Civilisation" for over 6000 years, and for over 6000 years, the peoples of the region have been fighting each other. They are not going to stop because WE think their system of life is wrong. It isn't wrong for them.

Our error lies in trying to make them into phony Brits and Yanks. They are not, and will never be! What they have done is follow ancient tradition to embarrass the leaders of their present enemies, as they have done for thousands of years. They have said "You can't teach us anything, you can't even protect your own soldiers!"

We need to do one of two things:

1. Pound them into the dust until they are no more than a distant memory and resettle the region with people who have a tradition of democracy.

or

2. Get the hell out NOW, and let them find their own solutions to post-Saddam life in the region. Even if that means standing by and watching as they kill each other by the millions.

Sooner or later, the survivors will stop shooting at each other and ask for our help. THEN, we might be able to save the remaining children.

Your comments?

Chloe is ONE Year old!

Date: March 26th!

Our beloved funny face Chloe turned one year!. Here are a couple of photos of Chloe enjoying the heartfelt attention!

Chloe cant wait to get at her birthday cake!



Look at her new rugby ball!



I in particular do find Chloe such a cutie whenever she holds in her mouth or balances on her nose any object!.

*a million hugs for our dearest Chloe*

Amber_Mae Does It Again!!

The greatest news came to my ears earlier this afternoon, when my wife told me that some people approached her with regards to Amber_Mae being selected and later confirmed to be part of an advertisement for a Johnsons & Johnsons advert (on screen!) for India!. Apparently Amber should be earning about RM1K per day and it will entail two days of shooting!.

Later that afternoon, fast approaching early evening, my wife got the confirmation mobile call that she (Amber) was definitely chosen. Whoa...I thought!. This is the next step towards true stardom for our golden retriever who already has won two significant awards at puppy.com events.

Could this be Amber's entry into the world of TV stardom and celebrity status internationally?. Sure looks like it!

Anyway,here are some more recent photos of our furbabies and the family minus yours truly. Becoz I was not around. Sundays are my day off work and I tend to stay at home and just laze about!.

Wouldnt you?.