Koreksi! The press conference will take place at Helang Room, Legends hotel, and NOT at PWTC. Thanks Shar101.Peace Conference. I plan to be at Putra World Trade Centre tomorrow, Sunday 4 Feb at 1230pm, for a press conference by Dr M on the conference, which will be held from 5 Feb to 7 Feb.
I hear Screenshots, 3540 Jalan Sudin, and Kickdefella will be there, too.
Bloggers are NOT feared there so if you have the time, let's meet there.
Go here for conference details; here for the War Tribunal that Dr M will set up to try Bush and Blair.
Stumbled across this posting in a Spore forum http://bohtong.mywowbb.com
ReplyDeletePosted: Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 08:56 pm
Quote
Reply
"The political scene in Malaysia stinks like hell!!! Own party members are fighting each other.
Now the bloggers are being sued and the atmosphere is tense amongst Malaysian bloggers. Not much freedom there I can see. Blame Spore for every single thing. ..Even the god given flood was caused by Spore....Ridiculous and Rubbish!!!"
It will be interesting to listen to Dr M, on what he has to say.
ReplyDeletebru and other bloggers!
ReplyDeleteplease ask dr mahathir about the action taken against you and jeff, about blogging in general, about standards of journalism.'
i think you all should cucuk him to start blog like anwar and uncle kit. the more the merrier. ask him to repeat what he said about some people and see if he'll get sued!
then you guys can go to jail together. {joke, joke}.
"Go here for conference details; here for the War Tribunal that Dr M will set up to try Bush and Blair."
ReplyDeleteIs this Tribunal predisposed to try Bush and Blair and presumably persons from the Western allies? I have not come across any article that says the Tribunal will also look into atrocities commandeered by Al Queda, Hamas and Hezbollah or any of the many insurgent groups in the theatre of conflict. Are beheadings (shown on the internet) war crimes ?
If it is one-sided only, then this Tribunal is not being objective in its purpose.
To: santokh of putra permai,
ReplyDeleteI seriously don't find your last sentence of your 'post' is that funny!
Anon (9.05pm),
ReplyDeleteThere's something even more hilarious in RedDotCom.
PAP government sending in their agents into RDC 'anti-establishment' blogs and posting comments using pseudonyms or anonymously.
That's what I would call doing a 'sly' PR job. Very much like what's happening here too.
More at "mr brown".
...................................
Rocky,
You said PWTC and J.O. mentioned Legend Hotel (Helang room). Which one?
Hey Rocky ,
ReplyDeleteYou forgot to count me in !!!
why not alQaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah? easy t0 answer that. the tribunal aims to tell the blairs and bushes of the western world that they can't do as they wish, including killing the innocents, raping women, and milking a country's oil dry for their own people's sake, in the name of eliminating terrorists and saving mankind.
ReplyDeleteben laden may be a terrorist but that does not give bush or blair the right to attack countries and do the above to weed him out. saddam may be a dictator, but who gave these two Bs the right to attack the country and send him to the gallows (and make a mockery out of it too)?
you may hate mahathir, but let's not colour everything he does black. don't be blind.
Hi Rocky,
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid on this issue, many bloggers will part company. You will not find any unity on this.
Any right thinking person would support peace.
But you will find a significant number of people who think this Tribunal is simply focussed on its a specific political agenda and closes both eyes to other war-related wrongs. And many people have no respect for TDM's pronouncements on kangaroo courts. Dr. Mahathir is Malaysia's very own world-class expert on setting up kangaroo courts.
Basically, Iraq was and still is an Invasion till today. It was done on the pretext of WMD. Concertrated on the issue. If I am not mistaken there was no valid proof of any alQaeda links on this matter either. There is also more as you read up the history of how Iraq and Saddam came to be.
ReplyDeleteAs for you will find no unity on this matter, I think we will. Infact, Japan have recently announce that Iraq is a mistake. As weather US soldier should leave or stay in Iraq soil is still debatable (taking into consideration the domino effect of the mistake that has been done) as long as we agree to disagree like any other topic.
me also going, tks for the info on the PC :D see u there :D at legend @ 12.30pm right?
ReplyDeletehey rocky,
ReplyDeletenope din go for press conference today. :D
itz sunday :D ~~~~~~
cya tomorrow :D
it'll be hard to miss a public face like yours :D
The War Tribunal is for state-sponsored terrorism.
ReplyDeleteFor other types of terrorists, there's always Gitmo and CIA rendition sites.
[Sent in originally at 11.25pm. MRHubris, you left notes for yourself, undeleted, at the end of your comment. I took the liberty to thrown them in the bin].-- Rocky's Bru
ReplyDeleteTo impolitic, I what to share an opinion on what you wrote.Its up to u if u want to see is a rebutal but to me its not.Rather, just exposing another dimension on the issues u raised for your consideration. I want to touch on 2things that you wrote, especially in your second comment: 1) The Israeli-Palestinian conflict 2) The sacking of the ex-DPM Since you cite an example of an Isreali offensive on the Palestinians which was reciprocated by a Hamas bomber, I would also like begin my comments on the example u cite. An Isreali offensive inflicted on the Palestinians civilians is an act of mass murder. It is an act of tyranny and terror.There is no doubt about that. A Hamas suicide bomber when he decides to commit the act on Isreali civilians that earns him his title, is also commiting an act of mass murder(maybe not to the same extant as the isreali act, but that's secondary to my point)It is also an act of tyrany and terror.There is also no doubt about that. Now although, both are DEFINATELY an act of tyranny and terror, they do NOT occupy the same moral or immoral status or deserve the same kind of condemination. One is commited by the state of Israel while the other is an individual(private entity) act. When it is commited by the state, in this case Israel, than such acts of tyranny and terror must be seen as a act of goverment policy. It has official status and it is done by the elected represantatives of the Isreali people. When a hamas suicide bomber blows himself up, it has to be seen as an individual act. It doesnt represant the wishers of the community , and is not endorsed by them.As such it is not an official policy of the Palestinian people. If at all it represants any other party beyond the individual bomber, then it represants Hamas.And until last year, though Hamas was founded in 1987,and has been utilising suicide bombing since April 16,1993 Hamas was never elected by the Palestinians in any official capacity. So until it was elected last year, all the previous instances where Hamas employed suicide operations, must be seen as only represanting itself. I hope you can see the differance between an act of terror that is an official goverment policy and act by a private entity.For example when the Communist Party of malaya attacks a particular kampung, if the same act was done by the Tentera DiRaja Malaysia it doesnt carry the same equivalant.The former was represanting itself and its legitamacy is not recorgnized officialy while the latter , though its legitamacy is still questionable, was an official act of goverment.That makes it worse. Anyway,regardless of the example above, in any conflict involving 2 parties or more, voilence will be commited by both sides. This is unavoidable.The Israel- Palestinian conflict is no exception. But that doesnt make the injustice commited by the parties involved, equal. There is such a thing as violence commited by the victimizers and their is such a thing as violence commited by the victims.Or to put it another way, the violence of oppressor and the violence of the oppressed.One is a provocation and the other is a reaction to a provocation.Though both acts can be argued to be wrong, nonetheless, they don not occupy the same moral status.One is definately more wrong than other. There is simply no moral equivalant between the two. In the Isreali/Palestinian conflict its up to you to furnish yourself with the relevant details and determine who is the victimizer and who are the victims and hence appropriate blame accordingly. Now in the case of DR M making a "moral jugdement" on the DPM to sack him from UMNO before he was tried by the courts, what is so unusual about that? "Mata Lembam" organized the sacking of a Deputy Minister from Johore by the name of Siti Zainab in June or july of 1997, on alleged charges of mismanagement of party funds when he was acting PM. He never waited for the courts to decide, if at all it was brought to the court. Also, alot of people has been sacked or suspended by UMNO on allegations that was never proven by the courts like Sharir Samad during Anwars time and also Isa samad under the presant regime.Mustapha kamal of Gopeng was aslo suspended because of alleged money politics in party elections which were never proven in court. Kassitah Gaddam has also been dropped as a minister before the chargers against him were legally proven to be correct. Our blogger friend Sang kelembai was also sacked by UMNO recently based on what u would deem a "moral judgement" so what makes Anwar's case so differant? In Umno, the capacity to disipline its members is seen as prerogative of the party regardless of what the courts think on the matter. I'm not sure about thier exact areas of jurisdiction as of right now, but until very recently, the partys dsciplinary commitee and the MT is empowerd to play that function.Our ex DPM knew that, infact during his time the discplinary commitee was chaired by him and many people were disipline which of course includes getting the sack. So since he has been priviligde to excersise those powers on others what's wrong with having that power excersized on him?( of course, one can question having such a commitee in the first place, but that's a differant issue) Finally, the way u write "moral judgement" seems to suggest that u think its wrong for DrM to use it.Is it? Not whistanding the fact that it was the MT that decided to sack DSAI,and that in terms of disiplining its members, UMNO's actions are indepandant of the court, what is so wrong about the so called "moral judgement" of DRM? After all, if we say that a "moral judgement" is wrong, arent we also commiting a kind of "moral judgement"?So how come its wrong for Mahathir to do it on Anwar(engage in moral judgement)but its ok for us to do it on Mahathir? By saying that mahathir's moral judgement was wrong, we are inadvertantly also commiting a form of moral judgement, arent we not?
Rocky bro,
ReplyDeleteHahahahahaaha!What have i done?
Thank u rocky and a thousand appologies for the trouble. I see that i have also forgotten the wonders of paragraphing..huhmmm must be the medication
Hopefully whatever u threw in the bin was not incriminating in any way..boy oh boy!
Bro by any chance, can u just delete the whole thing if its not too much too ask?I'll try to edit the above and repost it later
No, its not that i'm not gratefull for what u did, but i have to say my comment above is really visually offensive. BUT if its too much trouble than dont bother!
Thanks a heap,bro
Hey Rocky, you inspired me to start my own blog, please check it out....http://nicholas-governance.blogspot.com/
ReplyDeletemat rempis hubris - you ROCK man!!
ReplyDelete