關於 be woken up by ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

ZOOM WITH MY FRIENDS 👨🏻‍💻

This was me and my friends T and A (sorry, I’m not allowed to share their names on social media) doing our homework together on Zoom last night. We were working on an Ancient Greek translation together, called 'The Stag And The Lion'. It’s a fable by Aesop about not putting too much trust in bad friends.

Aesop’s fables are a collection of stories known worldwide, each with a valuable moral to take from them. Aesop wrote many famous fables (stories), some of the most recognised including 'The Hare And The Tortoise' and 'The Goose With The Golden Eggs'.

Anyway, we were having fun collaborating together, and we eventually said goodbye to each other, looking forward to seeing each other at school the next morning.

Fast forward to the next day - earlier on this morning…I had just woken up and was just about to get ready for school, when Mrs Mom called me quickly and broke the news to me: a boy in my class had tested positive for coronavirus!

So yes, I did see my friends again…only this time, it was over Zoom - again! Yep, we’re having to self isolate for the second time, right into the Christmas holidays, and we’ll be having a week of online school, like we’ve done previously.

All I can do is pray that this coming week goes as smoothly as last time, and that The Almighty keeps us all safe and shielded from harm. I hope January comes quickly so I can see my friends again next year - in person, not over Zoom!

Sad 😭,
O. Mukhtar O. Mukhlis
#theomarmukhtar
#TheLionZoomsTonight 🦁

Don’t Be Naive! Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is Standing on the Side Against Human Civilization
　
Peaceful world order after WWII had been established upon the philosophy worshiping multilateralism. The cultural basis supporting such multilateralism contained an imagination believing in the ultimate good of the respect for diversity.
　
The Rise of China and the Naivete of EU
　
However, as time progressed into the Post-Cold War era of the 90's, globalization in trade became the dominant trend. Following the global embrace of multilateralism and respect for diversity, it was believed that China would have been influenced by open and positive values once she had participated in this big family of global trade. Indeed, China took advantage of its role as the "world factory" and gained a huge economic leap forward. After China joined the WTO in 2000, within seventeen to eighteen years, China had grown nine-fold compared in terms of its aggregate economic volume. Furthermore, it surpassed Germany in 2005 and Japan between 2009 and 2010, becoming the second-largest economy in the world.
　
In particular, due to the global financial crisis derived from the subprime mortgage in 2007 and Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy in 2008 in the United States, the PIGGS countries turned into victims in Europe. China thus took advantage of this crisis to expand its power, bridging China’s role as depicted in Hu JinTao's "China's peaceful rise" to that in Xi JinPing's "China dream." Finally, China has revealed its ambition to compete for the position as a world leader and a planner of a new world order. The United States has finally, recently woken up to this nightmare of Xi, who has long intended to use China's almighty economic power to achieve his political agenda and hegemony. Unfortunately, many EU countries who consider themselves as advanced, civilized, pro-human rights and respectful to diversification, such as Germany and France, still fail, or refuse, to see the CCP regime’s true color and remain extremely naive towards it.
　
Repulsion towards Vulgarity, Tolerance towards Violence
　
Ironically, the two leading EU countries, Germany and France, prefer a dictatorial emperor, Xi, over Trump elected by the Americans with their ballots. The two countries do not shy away from showing them disgusted by Trump’s vulgar behaviors, but reluctantly show intolerance towards Xi’s cruelty and dictatorship. As a result, the EU countries develop inconceivable and mysterious stubbornness: they loudly criticize countries practicing death penalty based on their own judicial system; however, they are generous and subdued when it comes to the violence happening in HongKong where the HongKong police and Chinese GongAn basically bypass all applicable, or reasonable, laws. We should find this contrast deeply disturbing.
　
Seeing CCP through the eyes of Mao
　
In fact, these european countries and the western world are deluded by the so-called “respect for diversity.” Let’s use the wisdom of the CCP’s spiritual leader, Mao Ze Dong, as a framework to rethink this diversity concept in civilization. In his work “Correct Handling of Contradictions Between People,” published in 1957, Mao clearly classified social contradictions into “contradictions of two different natures”: “contradictions between ourselves and the enemy” and “internal contradictions among the people”. Contradictions between ourselves and the enemy are antagonistic, for example the contradictions between the exploiting and the exploited classes; but contradictions among people is non-antagonistic. Therefore, the former can not be mediated and resolved, but the latter one can be. Mao further advocated that contradictions between ourselves and the enemy should be resolved by dictatorship, but contradictions between the people should be resolved by a method of “cooperation-criticism-cooperation.” In other words, incompatible contradictions between ourselves and the enemy can only be solved by suppression, but internal contradictions can be softened by cooperation.
　
Civilization and CCP - Two Incompatible Conflicting Systems
　
It is time for us to recognize that CCP, a sovereign of authoritarianism and digital dictatorship, should not have been regarded as a representation of the diversity of human civilization. Diversity should be defined based on a founded premise, i.e., a premise confined with certain agreements and consensus, necessary and beneficial for composing diversity. In fact, the value CCP stands for is against the universally accepted values of the world, just like the “incompatible contradictions between ourselves and the enemy”, as Mao said. As long as the existence of the CCP regime continues, human civilization will continue to be persecuted. It can be seen in the current situation of Hong Kong, where China approved the new bill of national security, thereby destroying the remaining freedom guaranteed to Hong Kongers, and assigned the “secret” police gangs to enforce the so-called “justice”.
　
To see the contracting natures of civilization and the CCP regime, we make an analogy with food. Normally, we respect other people’s choice for food. For instance, Ann prefers rice, Bob prefers noodles, John is a meat lover, Mary only eats seafood, etc. Although those four people have different choices of what they like to eat, they respect each other’s choices of food. However, when Daniel comes over and tells the group that he prefers to eat faeces and needs to be respected for his preference, we can start to see the ridiculousness in it. At first, the four people think eating faeces is a personal choice for Daniel, and Daniel can do whatever he/she wants as long as he/she does it at his/her home. The problem rises when Daniel starts to force other people to eat faeces, while the other four people think faeces is inedible, and should never be served on a plate.
　
The food analogy tells us that the CCP regime is inherently against human civilization. As a reasonable human being could not categorize feces as food, we should not be tricked to believe that the authoritarian regime of China can blend in and contribute to human civilization. The CCP regime is incompatible to human civilization just like we should not consider to eat a meal with feces in it. As the master of CCP, Mao, admitted, one can never resolve the contradiction between the authoritarian regime of China and human civilization. The existence of Chinese authoritarian regime is a symbol for deprivation of human civilization. For us to maintain and preserve human civilization, Chinese authoritarian regime must be eradicated. There is no room for the coexistence of the CCP regime and human civilization.
　　
Draw a Bottom Line to the Respect for Diversity
　
Therefore, among western countries, the United States have started or should start to realize that although diversity needs to be respected and tolerated, a reasonable bottom line should be drawn to such respect. Like what I have mentioned above, rice, noodles, meat, seafood and so on should be viewed as food; however, as we can all reasonably agree, feces should not be a part of the league. The United States is now acting to exclude “feces” from the democratic league and draw a bottom line for respect-worthy diversity. However, leading EU countries are still trapped in their fancy, unconditional acceptance to “respect for diversity.” Such respect is hypocritical, empty and baseless. Now, you should be able to understand why leftards in the EU would vigorously criticize death sentences executed under a legitimate judicial system but remain indifferent to the CCP regime’s merciless, relentless and oppressive killings. Namely, they simply set a wrong premise, including feces as an eligible option for “diversity.” As for those who embrace the CCP regime because of economic benefits, they do not even deserve to be viewed as EU leftards, but merely gold diggers in the EU.
　
--
　
Special Thanks to our supporters in North America for translation🙏

【#TheDiplomat: 沈旭暉隨緣家書英文版🇭🇰】很久沒有向國際關係評論網 The Diplomat 供稿，但國際線十分重要，不應放棄。這次他們希望分享23條、國安法、反恐法風雨欲來的「新香港」前瞻，願國際社會能多了解快將出現的危機：

While the world is preoccupied with a fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing has been tightening its political grip on all aspects of Hong Kong’s civil society. Rumor has it that Beijing will push through legislating national security laws under Article 23 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law by unconventional means, such as massively disqualifying pro-democratic legislators or even directly applying a national law, widely argued as a major step to destroy the rights and freedom of Hong Kongers, and bring Chinese authoritarianism to Hong Kong.

After the 2019 protests, the administration of Carrie Lam, who theoretically is still leading the special administrative region of China, has little political capital at stake, with its legitimacy reaching rock bottom. The pro-government camp has dwindling prospects for the city’s upcoming Legislative Council election. The government‘s ”nothing to lose“ mentality is apparent from its recent blatant reinterpretation of the Basic Law’s Article 22 (another article that limits the influence of China’s offices in Hong Kong’s internal affairs). The debate is nothing new, but the pressure this time is quite different.

This article highlights the different strategies Beijing could adopt to enact Article 23 insidiously or under disguise to avoid backlash from the international community, while continuing to reap benefits from the city’s globally recognized special status. This seems to be part of Beijing’s brinkmanship to bring Hong Kong protesters and their supporters to their knees and move the city closer to authoritarianism. To counter these moves, Hong Kongers must define the boundaries beyond which Hong Kong falls into authoritarian rule and make a case as to why the city’s downfall is detrimental to the international community‘s interest.

The Long-Term Controversy Over National Security Laws

Back in 2003, the implementation of Article 23 was thwarted by the moderate pro-establishment politician James Tien. In face of overwhelming public disapproval of the law, he withdrew support and votes from his Liberal Party. However, 17 years later, it is hard to imagine Beijing following the old legislative playbook: start with a public consultation, followed by public discourse and political debate, and end with the majority rule. This playbook only works in peaceful societies ruled by a trustworthy government with integrity.

The aftermath of 2003, as well as the 2019 protests, should have taught Beijing and the Hong Kong government a lesson: pushing through national security legislation in a flawed parliament controlled by the minority pro-government camp would inevitably set off another full city-scale protest — and undoubtedly more fierce and focused this time. Given the current government’s numerous displays of dishonesty, it is conceivable that they will embark on a less-traveled path to implement Article 23.

Strategy One: “Anti-Terrorism”

In principle, one possible strategy could be to directly enact Chinese national law across Hong Kong, which can be achieved by declaring a state of emergency in the city. However, this is risky business as it would tarnish the integrity of “one country two systems” and subsequently Hong Kong’s international standing. Beijing, a risk-averse regime, is also unwilling to see Hong Kong’s status as a middleman for laundering money disappear into thin air.

Instead, Beijing could be concocting a narrative that would see Chinese national law applied to Hong Kong while not damaging Hong Kong’s international standing and Beijing’s own interests. The key word in this script is “anti-terrorism.” As early as 2014, pro-Beijing scholars have been claiming the emergence of “local terrorist ideology” on Hong Kong soil. Since the anti-extradition bill protests last year, government rhetoric frequently described the protests, which caused no deaths at all in the entire year, with phrases like “inclination to terrorist ideology.” That was a signal to the world that Hong Kong’s internal conflicts had ballooned into a national security issue. This gives the government the legitimacy to justify the implementation of Chinese national laws across the highly autonomous region to counter terrorism. The Chinese government knows that if it can persuade the world that terrorism exists in Hong Kong, and that it is as severe as the terror threat facing many other nations today, the international community will be less critical of Beijing’s actions in Hong Kong. Enacting Chinese laws directly is a convenient path that will save Beijing from having to tackle Hong Kong’s internal conflicts, basically turning the Hong Kong issue into a nonissue.

Strategy Two: Stacking the Legislature by Disqualifying Candidates

An even bolder strategy was probably foretold by a recent incident where the Hong Kong government and Beijing’s agencies for Hong Kong affairs (HKMAO and the Liaison Office) jointly criticized lawmaker Dennis Kwok for filibustering, framing it as “misconduct in public office” and “violating his oath.” It is incomprehensible to claim that filibustering goes against a lawmaker’s main duty; rather, it is common understanding that legislative work includes debating the law and representing public opinion against unreasonable laws. In a parliament controlled by the minority, pro-democratic members representing the majority of Hong Kongers are forced to express their objections using means like filibustering. Wouldn’t a lack of different political opinions turn the legislative branch into a rubber-stamp institution?

The above allegation has set a dangerous precedent for twisting the logic behind a certain provision in the Basic Law to target opposing lawmakers. In other words, to fulfill Beijing’s interpretation of the principal requirement for holding public office in Hong Kong, one could be required to take a meticulously legalistic approach to uphold the Basic Law down to its every single wording. A public official, by this new definition, not only needs to support “one country, two systems” or object Hong Kong independence, but also must abide by every single provision in the Basic Law. Worst of all, based on the previous cases, whether an official’s words or actions oversteps a provision is up to Beijing’s interpretation of his/her “intent.”

If this approach is applied, in the next election, there might be additional official questions for screening candidates like the following: “The Basic Law states that the enactment of Article 23 is a constitutional duty. Failing to support Article 23 legislation violates the Basic Law. Do you support it?” This question would suffice to disqualify even moderate or even pro-establishment candidates like James Tien. Even if any pro-democratic candidates were elected, once Article 23 re-enters the legislative process, they could risk ouster by raising objections.

Despite the absurdity of this tactic, the Chinese regime may just be tempted enough if such a strategy could resolve two of China’s current nuisances — voices of dissent in the Legislative Council and the previous failure to implement Article 23.

Strategy Three: The “Boiling Frog Effect”

Article 23 is not yet implemented, but the dystopian world that the protesters pictured in 2003 is already becoming reality. Regular citizens have been persecuted for “sedition” for sharing their views on social media or participating in legal protests; workers face retaliation for taking part in strikes; corporations are pressured to publicly side with the government’s stance; employees who have the “wrong” political views are fired; schools have been closely monitored for teaching material; protest-supporting fundraisers were framed for money laundering; a retweet or like may lead to persecution, under a colonial-era law. Only now have Hong Kongers woken up to their new reality — although the Basic Law technically protects citizens’ rights to speak, rally, march, demonstrate, and go on strike, the government could enfeeble civil rights by bending antiquated laws and legal provisions. The frequent abuse of law enforcement power on a small scale, such as improper arrests and police violence, is desensitizing the public and the international community. In a few years, Hong Kong will become unrecognizable. This is indeed a clever play on Beijing’s part to slowly strip away Hong Kong’s autonomy and freedom, without causing much international attention.

Counter-Strategies Against Beijing’s Brinkmanship

Beijing’s overarching goal is to hollow out Hong Kong but, at the same time, avoid major backlash from the international community, which could spell the end of the privileged global status of Hong Kong not granted to other Chinese cities. Beijing also aims at preventing single incidents that could cascade down into mass protests as seen in 2003, 2014, and 2019; and eliminating any resistance forces from within Hong Kong’s legislature. The tactics outlined above are typical in a game of brinkmanship.

In response, Hong Kongers in Hong Kong and on the so-called “international frontline” must know their strengths and bargaining chips on this negotiating table with Beijing.

Unlike Xinjiang and Tibet, Hong Kong is a city with transparency and free flow of information. Hong Kongers need to make a case to the world that the protests are not acts of terrorism. Some suggestions include comparing the Hong Kong protests to similar struggles in 20 or so other counties in the world at the present time, none of which were classified as terrorism; collecting a large amount of concrete evidence of the disproportionate use of force by the Hong Kong police; and showing how enacting Chinese national laws in Hong Kong will end the city’s autonomy and spell disaster for international community‘s interests.

The Legislative Council is the institution that can counteract Beijing’s “boiling frog” strategy and to keep Hong Kongers’ hope alive in the system. Those who plan to run for legislative office must be prepared to be disqualified from running. If only individuals are banned, there need to be alternative candidates as back-up plans. However, if and when the disqualification process is applied broadly to entire camps of candidates (for example, all who object to Article 23), the pro-democracy camp must make a strong case to the Hong Kong and global public that this is the endgame for Hong Kong democracy. Then the incumbent popularly elected legislators will hold the internationally recognized mandate from the public and serve as the last resistance.

These recommendations delineates how the slogan “if we burn, you burn with us,” often seen in the protests, may play out in the game of international relations. If the national security laws are “passed” by a legislature that is jury-rigged in this manner, or if related national laws are directly implemented in Hong Kong, Hong Kongers should signal clearly to the world that it goes way beyond the promised “one country, two systems.” Crossing this red line by Beijing should be seen by the world as a blunt violation of its promised autonomy to Hong Kongers. At that time, if the international community led by the United States and the United Kingdom decided to revoke the “non-sovereignty entity” status of Hong Kong and regard the SAR as an ordinary Chinese city, it shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Dr. Simon Shen is the Founding Chairman of GLOs (Glocal Learning Offices), an international relations start-up company. He also serves as an adjunct associate professor in the University of Hong Kong, Chinese University of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, and associate director of the Master of Global Political Economy Programme of the CUHK. The author acknowledges Jean Lin, Coco Ho, Chris Wong, Michelle King, and Alex Yap for their assistance in this piece.

▶️ 高度自治 vs 全面管治
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwt8wZl8jHQ

Listen to UA: https://jvcmusic.lnk.to/_UA

Subscribe to UA’s channel: http://www.youtube.com/c/UAofficialchannel

Follow UA:
https://www.facebook.com/uauaua.jp
https://www.instagram.com/ua_japonesiansinger_official/
https://twitter.com/UA__KA
http://uaua.jp/

released on March 30, 2005
directed by Yasunori Kakegawa and Tetsuya Nagato
programming, electric guitar: Kazuhisa Uchihashi
acoustic bass: Masato Suzuki
cello: Ayumi Hashimoto, Tomoki Iwanaga, Makoto Ohsawa, Miyuki Ohnuma, Ayano Kasahara, Misako Tanji, Toshihiko Tsuchida, and Toshihiko Nagayama

samples
MUTANT (saxophone trio without mouthpiece): Kou Iwata, Yasuhisa Mizutani, Satoshi Inoue
daxophone: Kazuhisa Uchihashi
bass clarinet: Gene Coleman
voice: UA

music/arranged by Kazuhisa Uchihashi
lyrics by UA

The color of empty sky

I’ve woken up at dawn soundlessly
The one inside me is floating roundedly
And I hear the murmur of the waves
Leaves whisper

The sound of the wind is born to blow
I’m feeling boundless possibilities

The one inside me is spreading
through my limbs
Shadow returns to me
I open my eyes slowly again
Like willow swings an arm

The color of empty sky has changed
The boundless possibilities I’ve touched
Turning into my own size
Then I can undress and walk
To weave with
The color of empty sky has changed
I know I’ve lost my waxed wings
But countless roots have grown out of my skin
To be grounded as a tree

Stretching my branches
Leaves dry and fall
I bloom sounds watery
As a tree of the forest
Echo flows to you
A tree named fountain

空っぽな空の色

夜明けに目覚めた 音も無く
私の中にあるものが 丸くうかんでる
吐息がきこえる
つぶやき 葉のささやき

風のうまれる音がする
限りない可能性を感じている

丸くうかんでいたものが 私の中にゆきわたり
影がかえってくる
そして私はもう一度 ゆっくり目を開く
柳が枝をゆらすように

空の色が変わりはじめた
さっき感じた可能性は今 私のサイズに
服を脱ぎ 歩き出す
織るように
空っぽな空の色が変わりはじめる
ろうで固めた羽根は失くしてしまった
けれど今 私の皮膚から無数の根が地に伸びる
木になるように

手足を伸ばす
いつかその葉は枯れ落ちて
私は音を咲かせよう
大きな森の1本の木として
あふれる音は水のように
あなたのところまで流れますように
泉という名の1本の木

#UA #Thecolorofemptysky #Breathe

🎧 KKBOX：https://kkbox.fm/8a2x6k
🎧 Spotify : https://goo.gl/GWufdq
🎧 Apple Music：https://goo.gl/yGvPmA
🎧 MyMusic : https://www.mymusic.net.tw/ux/w/song/show/p000304-a0499339-s143458-t008-c9
🎧 OMusic : http://omusic.friday.tw/albumpage_song.php?song_id=1357560008
🎧 網易云 : https://music.163.com/#/song?id=507782579

誕生於2016年的冬天，知名音樂製作人 Skot Suyama 陶山首次與 Julia 見面。在聽了這首歌的 demo 後立馬加上編曲，賦予了歌曲全新生命。終於可以為這首歌配上優美的MV畫面，導演Director K讓整首歌的氣氛又上一層了。
When Julia first met music producer Skot Suyama, he was thrilled at the fact she was such a great writer, he took a backseat from songwriter and went straight at bringing Julia’s Garageband idea into the song you need to cruise to this summer. Finally almost a year after the song's release we have a music video for the song directed by Director K, bringing the song's chill vibes back to life again.
_______________________________________________

我需要你 (Need You Now)

詞曲：Julia Wu 吳卓源
編曲製作：Skot Suyama 陶山

I can’t think no more
我已經無法思考
Don’t even know what to do no more
完全不知該如何是好
And I think you should know
我想你應該知道
This ain’t about me and you no more
這已經不是我和你而已

And everything we said fell apart
我們說好的未來早已不在
Was it a dream I should’ve woken up
我也早該從這虛幻的夢中醒來
This paradise we thought we were in
曾以為你就是我的天堂
Left me stranded here and I
但現在這個天堂卻只剩下我

I need you now
我需要你
Can’t get my head straight baby tell me how
混亂的思緒快要爆炸
I need you now
我好想念你
It isn’t hard but we can’t work it out
為什麼我們無法解決這簡單的問題
I need you now
我真的需要你
I shouldn’t be so selfish but I
我知道我不該自私地想你
I need you now
但是我真的好想你


Thought it was you for sure
以為你是我的未來
I never doubted us before
從未懷疑過我們的一切
Is this a pause I should have known
這個停頓是我應該接受的嗎？
Lost in blurry eyes I tried
我努力想看清楚，但淚水模糊了視線

And everything we said fell apart
我們說好的未來早已不在
Was it a dream I should’ve woken up
我也該從這虛幻的夢中醒來
This paradise we thought we were in
曾以為你就是我的天堂
Left me stranded here and I
但現在這個天堂卻只剩下我


I need you now
我需要你
Can’t get my head straight baby tell me how
混亂的思緒快要爆炸
I need you now
我好想念你
It isn’t hard but we can’t work it out
為什麼我們無法解決這簡單的問題
I need you now
我真的需要你
I shouldn’t be so selfish but I
我知道我不該自私地想你
I need you now
但是我真的好想你

(Was it a dream oh baby)
這難道只是一個夢
(It seems so real I can’t see)
為什麼感覺如此地真實

Was it a dream oh baby
這難道只是一個夢
It seems so real I can’t see
為什麼感覺如此地真實

I need you now
我需要你
Can’t get my head straight baby tell me how
混亂的思緒快要爆炸
I need you now
我好想念你
It isn’t hard no no oh
愛 不應該這麼困難
I need you now
我真的需要你
I shouldn’t be so selfish but I
我知道我不該自私地想你
I need you now
但是我真的需要你
_______________________________________________

Director/Video Editor: Director K
Director of Photography: 曾偉斌
Special Effects: Ray luo
Production Team: Play Industry
Hair & Makeup : 平平

加入我的私人通訊群組
Join my private message group: http://bit.ly/2SrFNpI

KKBOX：https://kkbox.fm/ua14Cw

誕生於去年的冬天，知名音樂製作人 Skot Suyama 陶山首次與 Julia 見面。在聽了這首歌的 demo 後立馬加上編曲，賦予了歌曲全新生命。When Julia first met music producer Skot Suyama, he was thrilled at the fact she was such a great writer, he took a backseat from songwriter and went straight at bringing Julia’s Garageband idea into the song you need to cruise to this summer.

★ Julia Wu 吳卓源 - 藝人簡介

華裔澳籍女歌手 Julia Wu 吳卓源 2017 年發行首張個人全英文 EP《H.E.N.R.Y》，以全新美式 PB R&B 曲風為歌壇注入一股全新氣息，有著女版方大同的她 8 歲隨雙親移居澳大利亞，擁有 10 年以上古典鋼琴經歷，2012 年以每年 20,000 美金的高額獎學金條件進入美國 Berklee College of Music 伯克利音樂學院攻讀表演專業，主修鋼琴，音樂創作實力不容小覷；2013 年起陸續錄製《小時代》電影原聲帶主題曲、參加澳大利亞 X-FACTOR 選秀比賽、韓國最大影視娛樂公司 CJ E&M《Miss Korea Season 2》真人秀女主角及 KKTV 原創電速劇《重新。沒來過》插曲演唱；2016 年受邀擔任 Vanness 吳建豪《#MWHYB音樂不羈》海外粉絲見面會巡迴指定伴唱。


★ Julia Wu 吳卓源 KKBOX：http://kkbox.fm/Cp0GNB
★ Julia Wu 吳卓源 Official Facebook：https://www.facebook.com/JuliaWuMusic/
★ Julia Wu 吳卓源 Official Instagram：http://instagram.com/juliawu94

——————————————————————————————————————————

I can’t think no more
don’t even know what to do no more
and I think you should know
this ain’t about me and you no more

And everything we said fell apart
was it a dream I should’ve woken up
this paradise we thought we were in
left me stranded here and I

I need you now
can’t get my head straight baby tell me how
I need you now
it isn’t hard but we can’t work it out
I need you now
I shouldn’t be so selfish but I
I need you now

Thought it was you for sure
I never doubted us before
Is this a pause I should have known
lost in blurry eyes I tried

And everything we said fell apart
was it a dream I should’ve woken up
this paradise we thought we were in
left me stranded here and i

I need you now
can’t get my head straight baby tell me how
I need you now
it isn’t hard but we can’t work it out
I need you now
I shouldn’t be so selfish but I
I need you now

Was it a dream oh baby
it seems so real I can’t see

——————————————————————————————————————————

Written by Julia Wu.
Produced, Arranged, Recorded and Mixed by Skot Suyama.
Guitars: Julia Wu.
All programming: Skot Suyama.
Recorded and Mixed @Skot’s House.