Yusril Ihza Mahendra

May 14th, 2007, in IM Posts, by

View the original article here.


114 Comments on “Yusril Ihza Mahendra”

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]

  1. avatar JOY says:
    November 27th, 2007 at 10:24 pm

    Oh… no.., Achmad has a twin..!!! LOL

  2. avatar Bonar says:
    November 28th, 2007 at 1:47 am

    @Dragonwall:

    I kinda disappointed reading your reply. You, again, sucessfully incorporated ad hominems into your (probably)valid arguments.

    My arguments with you, were never about what Yusril did or did not.
    My arguments with you were -consistently always- about Logical fallacies which happens when discussing about Yusril, after all, thats what you quoted here to attack me, and necessitated me to reply.

    My point is this: if you have facts and evidences, you might want to better arrange it in a logically robust manner. Instead, you created a soup of logical fallacies. From my point of view, you always -personally- attack people(again, prove me wrong, i beg you).

    I understand very well your writing that said “people who slandered”, you are referring to not only me but others too!

    No, im quite sure that i was referring specifically to you when writing that. :)
    you again misrepresented a position that i have already clarify. and again, this is your most favorite Dishonest Tricks #4.

    2.Do I get the understanding that both you and YIM was just born yesterday or have been in Indonesia recently? and that both of you did not know the existence of corruption that have been rampant and were almost out of control?

    no u dont. :)

    This was the factor C(=corruption have been rampant). Using my previous logical notations:
    He Fix A Creating B, B+C Creating D
    or
    A=>B
    B+C=>D

    Ironically, we can prove causative statement if there is no corruption before (C=0):
    A=>B=>D

    explanation:
    If there were no corruption before that, then Yusril will be found guilty of promoting corruptions. Your point that “corruptions have been rampant” instead fortifying the correlative.

    See what i mean? if you dont put extra logical thought to your accusations, strange conclusions happen. Knowing that corruptions have been rampant will only negate the causative conclusion.

    …And suddenly all passionate arguments and solid facts are reduced to mere uneducated rants.

    I hate to repeat miself, but i have also stated, there is also a possibility of taking deliberate risks on yusril’s/his dept’s part, “to fix immediate interests”, in policy making this is common.

    One thing we must prove before publicly “lynching” him is, whether the immediate interests weighed more than corruption. And again, that is still correlative not causative.

    On the other hand, you might AT LAST actually hit the spot with the words “negligence” and “misfit” -without- being slanderous. Yes, you can validly accuse him that.

    All you need to prove are the damage(whos the direct victims), factual causation, and legal causation (but then again this can be a bit difficult), etc.
    you might even be able to do class action. heck, if you wanna do that, im in! :)

    Dear wise dragonwall. I admire your passion, but the purpose does not justify the means. We must make sure both purpose and means are noble.

    If something worth to do, its worth to be done right.
    If you want to eradicate corruption, do it RIGHT!

    Slanderings will only make things worse to people who ACTUALLY fight corruptions in real life.

    But then, lets use your ways of using ad hominem, just for fun’s sake. please take my ad hominems with a grain of salt.

  3. avatar Bonar says:
    November 28th, 2007 at 2:35 am

    continuing… (warning, light amount of personal attacks)

    The law is the law! If he were to draft a law to confiscate the properties of all Indonesian Chinese and had become a law and that make him unskilled, unthoughtful?

    Of course not! i will not simply call him unthoughtful. There is a direct causative statement on that law you assume. If he do that, he actually violate rights of the people.

    For you to take this kind of example, is an insult to your own intelligence, dont u find ?

    I suppose, that you say you dislike what he did, and does that mean that you are a Pribumi Christian and that you could easily convert yourself into a Muslim, (not being discriminative) by Subjecting Christians to be govern by Islamic Law is that discrimination? Yes or No?

    Shocking statement. Petty ad hominem. how you can be this low is beyond me.

    You might think that by (allegedly) inciting suspicions between pri-non pri, it will distract me or others from acknowledging that you did personal attacks.

    It will not.

    And no, it wont be easy for me to convert miself from christianity to any, in fact, never.

    One more thing “the MF f88k the morons of Moro”. Are Moros Islamic? Are they radical? He had returned from the Philippines who knows if he had made any agreements with the Moros if not why is he subjecting the Christians to Islamic Law?

    Again, my arguments against you was the “emotionally toned words” which is one of “dishonest argument tricks” plus your argumentum ad hominem.

    My suggestion was, you can actually retract that “..MF f88k” statement, apologize(again, yes it is that cheap), then re arrange your arguments to a more polite and honorable manner,
    only then u might make a valid statement.

    Moreover, you jumped from one case to another, then taking conclusion for other case using yet another case. Your “facts” about moro wont support your position on VoA, it wont even support your ad hominems.

    I mean, seriously! you might actually got something here, but instead you destroy them to mere trashes.

    Or maybe i was wrong after all? maybe your wisdom is far greater than logic and commonly accepted norms in making arguments?
    Oh great wise Dragonwall, enlighten us with your wisdom. :)
    .
    .
    .
    .

    That argument aside, my thinktank group’s analysis actually concluded that it would be more advantageous for non-moslems across the world -in the long term-, albeit with lots of possible casualties, if Yusril becomes president and implements sharia law, for reasons i prefer to talk in private.

    FYI, Im active in a thinktank group that promote open society (yes. its a lil bit liberal leftist. No. its not affiliated with soros).

  4. avatar Dragonwall says:
    November 28th, 2007 at 6:38 am

    Dear Mr. Think-tank
    No wonder it took you two days to come up with some lengthy reply to my conclusion. Here I failed to understand how you keep repeating and ever so eager to stress that I am always making personal attack on others(*), presenting dishonest arguments (*)and when you can’t come up with a straight answer on the questions asked to you.
    You are telling me now directly that my thoughts is being pitted against that many of you think-tankers! I am really flat”¦”¦”¦.tered.
    Good.
    First of all we are referring to the case of YIM whose involvement in some of those proven allegations that were proven facts. In this debate, you are making excuses by deliberating to that effect that it seemed you were trying to defend and all questions went unanswered and only could swallow by agreeing with negligence and misfit. (Dengarnya lebih halus ya) I was right to say that he had displaced some sidekicks into the IM. Before that, you jumped the conclusion by saying “And then all hell broke loose”¦free for all” stuffs that became controversial to you when I have no control over other’s opinion. Then you keep repeating correlative and the manner words were being place by me that tend to make other believe them to be a fallacy. Are you trying to teach English to me?

    In a public forum, and you are thinking others are pea brain, not as smart as you guys, for you to keep repeating the ABCD stuffs and to have that chronologize!.

    Do you know what kind of debate you are putting up with your think tankers! You had me grasping for breath because I thought it was ting tang tung.

    You said:

    “If there were no corruption before, then Yusril will be found guilty of promoting corruptions“. Then I perhaps should have termed it as “he then further promotes and encourage more corruption” to be right! Does that sound better to you? (No wonder someone said ‘menghabiskan umur”.)
    I ccccccccccccc. So is that your bottom line and your kind of ABCD correlation?
    YOU ARE TRYING TO BRING TO LIGHT BY IMPLYING THAT YIM IS NOT GUILTY (NEVER CHARGED (+) AS ALLEGELY REPORTED?

    Meaning that if there was no discrimination before it will make him guilty of discrimination? If there is discrimination before then by approving some law that is discriminating will not make him guilty of discrimination? If someone had made illegal transfer and money laundering before, that made him innocent in transferring illegal money and money laundering and corruption? And is money laundering and illegal transfer a corrupt practice and a crime?
    Clap, clap clap for your ABCD correlative chronology. Don’t you think you looked stupid!

    Then can I sum up to saying this!

    If someone had smuggled imported drugs or heroin before, then I will not be guilty for trafficking illegal drugs?
    DOES THAT MAKES YOU MORE EDUCATED?
    Calling yourself a member of a think-tank, your are a flop that does not surprise me at all. Don’t forget in my earlier comment I said (*) entrapment, IT GOES BOTH WAY and I know what you are implying. This is really should be termed a dishonest argument (defending and arguing). What a novice.
    Promoting discrimination is no proof of damage? Being corrupt is no proof of damage? Ah”¦. How stupid of us.. We must catch him on the spot doing the act! Ya kan?

    I cannot eradicate corruption.. Only the Indonesian Government can with a grain of your salt.

    By looking further into your comments, I would say L”¦O”¦L”¦ (I mean no joke)
    Approve a law to discriminate is being unthoughtful. New words to me. Like killing someone and be termed as careless. Do you know violating a person’s right in a democratic country is what under the law? And violating a law like gambling is what?

    Nothing discriminating was intended. How low can you go will all depend how you want to translate the meaning.
    When I refer “I suppose, that you say you dislike what he did, and does that mean that you are a Pribumi Christian and that you could easily convert yourself into a Muslim” is that I want to be assure that there is no bias in the debate. Will a Chinese Indonesian and or Christians want to be subjected to Islamic Law? But for a Pribumi there is a possibility for them to say I can always convert to a Muslim when Christians will further be made the disliked! How does that sound to you whereas a Chinese will not. No one is distracting but stop pretending.okay.

    You want me to retract a statement? Let me show you an example. Prior and after the 1998 riot William Cohen from the CIA was in the US meeting two person Wiranto and Prabowo. These two are the most discriminating persons to the Chinese and the latter was considered a Golden Boy of the Pentagon. The rest are history.
    YIM shaft the SHARIA bills down the throats of those parliamentarians and appear himself in the Philippines. Perhaps to seek a wife is secondary? So are MOROS Islamic? Then he is running for 2009 Presidency! Could he be having some kind of agreements with those people to support him? or”¦to do something during the campaign.?

    PLEASE NOTE WHEN FACTS ARE PRESENTED THERE IS NOTHING TO ARGUE ABOUT. I AM SURE YOU CAN PUT YOUR THINK TANK IN THE IM AND OPEN YOURSELVES UP TO THE SOCIETY. PRIVATE TALKS ARE FOR CLOSE DOORS. IT DOES NOT NECESSARY INTEREST OTHERS ABOUT YOUR AFFILIATION WITH WHOSOEVER.

    Have a test case for your think tank.

    If a person found carrying drugs into Indonesia, is he guilty of smuggling and trafficking? Place all precedents in light. If you say not guilty, then what kind of people are you guys will be like mountain dew, crisp clear.

    If I am the AG (Jaksa Agung) I will tell you what will I do.

    I will put him on the trial no doubt. He was being sacked by SBY but he did not receive any Presidential Pardon and so he is not immune to prosecution.
    Here I can tell you that your correlations are, in the eyes of the law, known as mitigation trying to make excuse in defense by saying he didn’t know, he is unthoughtful, careless, etc etc.
    Also note a plea bargain construed a light sentence for his co-operation during investigation, whereas being a person who knows the law and committing as said, the AG will press for the most deterrent sentence. Sentencing will depend on the mitigation or defense put up like your correlation and whether if they are accepted on compassionate ground or otherwise. And whatever you presented in the defense collapse in view of overwhelming evidence. His case fails. He will be sentence as charged.

    I hope Andi Matallata could take the initiative, but doubted very much.

    I think you will need at least four days to deliberate on these with your t..

    Not I will not waste anymore time with you.

  5. avatar Awang says:
    November 28th, 2007 at 2:25 pm

    Thumbs up for dragonwall for unveiling Mr. TicTacToe…

    What so special about name? We intentionally put our forefather’s name so people will respect our names rather than our own characters?

  6. avatar Bonar says:
    November 29th, 2007 at 1:16 pm

    lol, again @Dragonwall (and yes this is with your style of ad hominems too ^_^ please dont take my personal attack so seriously, its just for fun):

    Oh, you actually waited for my replies? so sorry… :) i was out ‘plesiran’. And if its too long, sorry again, typing is so easy, sometimes i got carried out. I’ll try to shorten them up so your brain wont explode. :)

    Again, you deliberately misrepresented my statement by extending it(Dishonest argument #4), and this time you put analogy(Dishonest argument #34) which can not be applied to represent my previous statement.

    lets compare them:

    A = Yusril fix problem regarding immigration, becoz previously the govt doesnt know whos in whos out of the country
    C= corruption has been rampant

    your analogy:

    A= someone smuggled drugs, becoz… well, for whatever reason
    C = drug trafficking has been rampant

    The difference between them is clear for people with sound logic:
    yusril did things which is in line with his duty and jurisdiction with a clear goal,
    that other someone do criminal and against the law.

    Probably i can give you example on making analogy:
    A= A teacher gave low scores to Tono on crucial subject (his jurisdiction).
    B= becoz of that, Tono didnt get his highschool diploma (the intended result).
    C= Tono was so poor, that he couldnt hold on another year without hs diploma and the teacher knew that.(previous conditions)
    D= Tono killed himself (unintended consequences)

    There’s no logically sound judge can rule that “The teacher killed Tono”. It is that simple. As simple as ABCD. Hopefully this simple lesson on logic doesnt blow your mind.

    you said:

    If someone had made illegal transfer and money laundering before, that made him innocent in transferring illegal……

    As far as i remember, i havent talk about them yet, and i reserve them for my future arguments with Yusril himself. I only refute your UNSOUND logic on VoA, and your use of Dishonest Arguments.
    No point trying to attribute my argument against money laundering, coz i havent state my stances on it yet. (this way of yours is Dishonest trick #6, BTW)

    About Negligence and Misfit, well, actually i have indicate them from the beginning when talking about “deliberate mistake” and unintended consequences. I’ve been wondering why it took you so long to get it.
    Against “Yusril promote corruption”, Not only “lebih halus”, it also has different LEGAL MEANINGS.

    you said:

    By looking further into your comments, I would say L”¦O”¦L”¦ (I mean no joke)
    Approve a law to discriminate is being unthoughtful. New words to me. ….

    Again, dont misrepresent my statement, this time you omit the word “NOT”. I guess it is supposed to clear that violating human rights is a crime? Oh, i forgot… i was talking to you. I clearly stated, on your new suppositions, there is a direct causation. Plz deh.

    you said:

    You want me to retract a statement? Let me show you an example. Prior and after the 1998 riot William Cohen from the CIA was in the US meeting

    New irrelevant facts.
    Again, i was attacking your “Dishonest Tricks #1″ which is “MF F88k”.
    Not the spirit/essence of it, but the way you said it. After all, you bait me to do it by accusing me “yang tidak tidak” (though i happily accept :) )

    you said:

    is that I want to be assure that there is no bias in the debate.

    from my side? no, after all i was only defending about -my logical statement-, not the content of the statement or the implications.

    Must i REPEAT my stance? this is it:
    “Dragonwall was using Logical Fallacies, and Dishonest Argument”

    Unlike you, i didnt bring new facts to be atributed to you. I FOCUSED on things that you attacked at the first place.
    You can bring your suspicions, prejudices,and accusations for me they’re all irrelevant.

    and about OSTT, well, if u dont get the meaning of words “that argument aside…”, and if that made you draw conclusion that I actually put several people into thinking about this,
    then really, your other statement is probably right, this is “cuma menghabiskan umur”, :)
    taking that kind of illogical conclusion (again) is just an insult to your own intelligence, isnt it?

    On the second thought, i have lots of free time, i think i can pet you around for years :)

  7. avatar Bonar says:
    November 29th, 2007 at 2:24 pm

    Ok, aside from talking about dragonwall’s logical incapabilities, I also want to present some of my/my organization stances. However risky this is.

    Now some of these are not my own conclusions,albeit having involved so heavily on the discussion last year. I now simply state the result of the analysis.

    dragonwall said (and by this im NOT attacking his statement below):

    Will a Chinese Indonesian and or Christians want to be subjected to Islamic Law?

    SURE. If the end result is advantageous for future christians, sure. Some of us are willing to take that risk.

    Christian have been subjected to that law for hundreds of years, and we survived.

    Christians managed to get Spain back. Turkey is now spiralling to secularism and liberalism (in other words: open society) after centuries of using that law. Sudan is another ongoing success, albeit still in preliminary stage. Malaysia still have a long way to go, though.

    The big difference is, now the technology is far better, not to mention the media freedom here. The process might be alot more rapid than spanish reconquista or Turkey.

    Lets assume dragonwall was right, Yusril is a misfit, maybe for any administration positions (some of my friends count on it).
    And from his previous stances, he supported sharia. The chance is, he will implement it.

    Now, look at this popularity contest called Indonesia. This is the country which economy is spiralling down. And we also have the largest moslem population in the world.

    The equation becomes like this:
    (Allegedly) incapable leader + Sharia Law + Persecutions+ failing economy + whiny populations + Largest moslem populations + Free media

    The probability that the law will fail in such conditions is HUGE, not necessarily becoz of the law -ansich-, but merely becoz the previous conditions were not fully compatible with the law. Even with “tangan besi”, enforcing the law will be a major problem (take sudan for example)

    Imagine if an ancient law that was used to control small tribal populations with no free media, is used to control HUGE amount of whiny people(us :) ). It might become a gargantuan disaster.

    The failure of implementation of that law in -Indonesia-, might prevent its implementation across the world, perhaps for several centuries.

    And that is even without taking any active roles. Using Michael Crichton’s words with his intrepretation on chaos theory, cmiiw: “The fractal pattern will collapse into itself, it is doomed to destroy itself by design”

    There will be casualties, yes. It was one of my uneasiness.

    but the fact is, there are some people already prepared for near-future persecutions.
    In contrary to “Me VS Dragonwall” and our bickerings, there are already several pacifist-martyrs-to-be who are willing to sacrifice their life and their jobs in the next 10 years for this cause, following the examples of spanish martyrs.

    now, no matter in what religion were you, would you? ^_^

  8. avatar Bonar says:
    November 29th, 2007 at 3:46 pm

    Oh some petty leftovers (and yes these are “personal attacks” a la dragonwall, only for fun, dont take this seriously):

    you said:

    In a public forum, and you are thinking others are pea brain, not as smart as you guys, for you to keep repeating the ABCD stuffs and to have that chronologize!.

    Oh no. only you. :) And not all the time, only recently. :)

    you said:

    Then you keep repeating correlative and the manner words were being place by me that tend to make other believe them to be a fallacy. Are you trying to teach English to me?

    Oh no. not english, im sure you are better than me on that. Only logic.
    And its a common practice, if somebody keep evading with new irrelevant arguments, we repeat the original argument.
    After all, u asked for it:

    I have read a posting by Bonar in Unspun’s blog.
    Someone by the initial of Bonar said fallacies = deception? How was that?

    you said:

    But for a Pribumi there is a possibility for them to say I can always convert to a Muslim when Christians will further be made the disliked!

    That sounds like genetic fallacy. It is suspicive, shallow, and irrelevant, the worst part is, i’ve already refuted that with the word “NEVER”.
    Wow, u really try to use all 38 dishonest argument tricks and all of Logical Fallacies arent you? kudos! ^:)^

    You are telling me now directly that my thoughts is being pitted against that many of you think-tankers! I am really flat”¦”¦”¦.tered.

    oh no. i didnt say that, i specifically stated otherwise.
    But if you want to(be flattered), i might be able to get you free invitation, we meet 3 times a year. Next year will be in papua in january/february, where should i contact you? :) u might learn alot. And u might want to read Karl Popper’s “Open Society and it’s enemies” first to understand the basics.

    ok, its been fun today, and oh, sorry for many typos in my previous 2 posts… too lazy today.

    cya.

  9. avatar Mr. TicTacToe says:
    November 29th, 2007 at 5:58 pm

    @Awang:

    Thumbs up for dragonwall for unveiling Mr. TicTacToe”¦

    Lol, funny nickname, i’ll take it!

    From now on, Bonar will be known as Mr. TicTacToe. Thx!

    What so special about name?

    Agreed, I’ve already change my stance on nicknames long time ago @unspunblog.

  10. avatar Dragonwall says:
    November 30th, 2007 at 4:21 am

    One word for ting tang tung. I suppose you did not catch this!

    Oh”¦ no.., Achmad has a twin..!!! LOL

    If you were to back track those comments sentence for sentence, you will find that on many occasions you have been entrapped (*) into taking the bait. And since you have a pea brain, I can’t blame you as you have I had earlier said “I understand of the psychological effect of admitting so that no others will wrong you kind of counter psychological effect, how about making things simple.

    Your ever wanting others to believe that your elementary ABCD stuffs is right and that a person who had done something wrong should not be found guilty”
    THIS IS DECEPTIVE. And please, please stop repeating like a novice hillbillys (kampungan).

    If you want to refer a person’s action to the Law, then understand it better before you comment and stop making yourself an idiot.

    This also clearly shows how your “cow dang brain” mentor or your tic tac toe were obstinate enough to place an idiotic sidekick to defend a stupid by biding around the bush trying to make yourself look like a fools. (I have not begin insulting you yet because it doesn’t make any sense for me to insult a fool.)

    Tell me which part of the Constitutional Law of Indonesia that says:
    “Should there be a precedent, then whoever that commits a similar crime thereafter is not guilty?”

    To size you up, you were actually coached into putting words such as unthoughtful, careless, unskilled, unaware, negligence, misfit all those crap (blaga bego) in order to DECEIVE OTHER’S INTO PICTURING HIM TO BE INNOCCENT and to lighten the weight on his stance.

    Haven’t you heard of “Ignorance is no excuse of the Law?”

    When you were caught smuggling or commit anything and proven you have caught with that, then you are guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! with regardless.

    And being a lawmaker (he describe himself as Ahli Tata Hukum Negara):
    1) Writes a Law, puts forward a Law for approval and knowing that it discriminate others, so that is promoting and that is a crime against humanity. In the presence of overwhelming evidence, he could be tried before the UN tribunal for such a crime against humanity. (So by asking whether if you are a pri or non-pri is not discriminative but fair and not to be bias during discussion)
    2) Did something to the effect that in a way promotes or encourage corruption, and that is considered abetting and being an accessory is also a crime. Nothing was disputed in regards to the fee or venue but the practice like I said from Sabang to Merauke, I ought to mean:
    (a) Lets say 20 embassy x 5 staffs = 100 people
    (b) From one end (Sabang) to the other (Merauke) there maybe 10, 15, 20 or 30 entry point, so lets say 30 x 10 staffs per shift x 3 shifts = 900 people. So from 100 to 900 people. He had prevented the embassy staffs from doing it but he provides the opportunity for those to capitalize on, so knowing corruption in Indonesia is rampant, is this promoting? Are you sure all the money goes to the state coffer?
    3) He subjected all Christians and not only you, (who knows if you were pretending to be a Christian), to adhere to the Islamic Law with the exception of matrimonial and monetary matters. Is this promoting discrimination?

    So please stop uttering rubbish.

  11. avatar Abdullah Araral says:
    December 1st, 2007 at 11:38 am

    Wow, if Yusril Ihza Mahendra is actually reading and replying on this blog, I have much respect for him. I hope our beloved president take some times visiting this site.

    In contrast to Yusril, SBY is actually busy doing something good for this country.

    SBY doing something good for the country? Hell yeah. Cut the crap, people!

  12. avatar Mr TicTacToe says:
    December 3rd, 2007 at 10:51 am

    If you were to back track those comments sentence for sentence, you will find that on many occasions you have been entrapped (*) into taking the bait.

    oooohhh….. sure… :p u are a genious.

    you:

    THIS IS DECEPTIVE. And please, please stop repeating like a novice hillbillys (kampungan).

    Thank you :p

    but i was just using that “elementary” ABCD logic to refute your misleading analogy. I adapted simple rules specifically for your simple mind.

    Rule of arguments, when your opponent tried to evade, restate your original stance, and use the same method to refute the evasion.

    If you cant handle or refute this elementary logic, instead you demand me not to use them, then there must be something wrong with you statements and analogy.

    you:

    “Your ever wanting others to believe that your elementary ABCD stuffs is right and that a person who had done something wrong should not be found guilty”

    You will always misrepresented my stances then attack them, wont you? tsk tsk tsk, i thought after this long, you will learn something…
    I only said “your argument’s logic is weak”, and if by showing that you conclude that he is innocent, then the problem is yours dude.

    Tell me which part of the Constitutional Law of Indonesia that says:
    “Should there be a precedent, then whoever that commits a similar crime thereafter is not guilty?”

    Nowhere! Thats a weird statement. Assumptive, weak and shallow. Are you sure you’re okay?
    On VoA, your rhetoric is not applicable. Hes doing something in his jurisdiction(and your statement assumed this is a crime).
    And did he do the corruption on this specific VoA matter?
    if there are corruptions in immigrations, did he do the similar crime?

    I have refuted every single arguments you have presented me, then you came up with new irrelevant things acting like your previous arguments didnt exist.
    Instead you demand me not to use simple argument that has successfully refute your many irrelevants. and moreover your suspicious mind accused me “yang tidak tidak”.

    you’re just something, arent you? :)

    Haven’t you heard of “Ignorance is no excuse of the Law?”

    Sure. but what law did he break on this VoA matters, again?

    you said:

    When you were caught smuggling or commit anything and proven you have caught with that, then you are guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! with regardless.

    Oh are you refering to your previous flawed analogy?
    The difference is clear for a sound mind, i suppose. the smuggler did a direct violation against the law. Yusril did things that are allowed in his jurisdiction. It was YOUR analogy that makes him look innocent.

    you said:

    And being a lawmaker (he describe himself as Ahli Tata Hukum Negara):
    1) Writes a Law, puts forward a Law for approval and knowing that it discriminate others, so that is promoting and that is a crime against humanity

    Blah blah blah… irrelevant. go back to the original argument!

    you said:

    3) He subjected all Christians and not only you, (who knows if you were pretending to be a Christian), to adhere to the Islamic Law with the exception of matrimonial and monetary matters. Is this promoting discrimination?

    ohhh… you poor soul…. I almost pity you…. NOT
    come here, lets go to the OSTT conference to prove it. how to contact you? :)

    “So please stop uttering rubbish.”

    You really have to listen to yourself more.

  13. avatar Dragonwall says:
    December 4th, 2007 at 1:48 am

    What a waste consider you saying the word “otherwise’ when you pitted your ting tang tung against me and only able to come up with such repeated logics over and over again. Talking to people with your kind of logics who only want to say what they feel its right will show how a menial peon (actually I borrowed this word) you are. No wonder you could only be nothing else but a “pelayan” in a cybercafe.

    We were all this while focusing on the subject on what Yusril did, but you ended up in the chronology of action which was intentionally meant to defray to somewhere else to distract attention.

    If he had the jurisdiction, then what he did, had made him even more guilty for implementing something that is detrimental to the interest of Indonesian economic in term of corruption and that makes him an even bigger culprit on the VoA case. Doesn’t mean that you are in that office you have the rights to do what you like to the disinterest of the people. Then come your chronology and forgetting about the rest. Please stop telling me that you have not started that yet!

    You are comparing to a pembantu, she sees a dirty car she cleans it, she does not know using a scouring pad will damage the paint but she did the cleaning. Then she is to be considered clueless, unskilled and unthoughtful being unable to see the outcome of the damage. This is exactly the same analogy that you presented to make Yusril looks innocent. When she is innocent for not knowing the outcome whereas Yusril knew the outcome very well but in your argumentative arguments presented it to make it looks as though it is not his fault and cannot be responsible thus making him innocent. No, I don’t think the law sees it that way. I mean promoting and encouraging corruption knowing that such practice have been rampant and he holding the office of a Justice and HAM.

    Ah..maybe I forgot something. How stupid you are. When you have the jurisdiction you can do what you want! How nice. If in your house or your company and you have the jurisdiction you could do that. But this is referring to a country, her economy, people, the future, the image, the integrity of a country. Not your kampung house!

    One other thing is that we are presenting the case as a whole in discussing Yusril’s action as a whole whereas you are breaking things up bit by bit and making distraction in your deceptive chronology. You know like “be o sedikit keluar dari wc kemudian kembali be o lagi’ kind of stuff. We have no interested in hearing your kind of divided debates. If you wwant to defend him outright put everything on the table instead of hiding thigs up your sleeves.

    And being a lawmaker (he describe himself as Ahli Tata Hukum Negara):
    1) Writes a Law, puts forward a Law for approval and knowing that it discriminate others, so that is promoting and that is a crime against humanityyou ended with Blah blah blah”¦ irrelevant. go back to the original argument!

    This is what I mean defraying. Unable to andswere the original arguments which were those ABCD stuffs making that irrelevant.

    Before I write I ponder my mind over before doing it. When I do it I an actually anticipating what will your reply is going to be. I am not a Christian. This forum is discussing about what happened in Indonesian without any prejudicial or bias perceptions.

    I think you minds are more or less distorted that you have things that you want to discuss with yusril in private whereas on the other hands trying to ever trying to make the stance on Yusril to make him looks innocent by fighting so hard in defending him.

    Look at all those that you had wrote all these while, it is semmingly nothing was important being debated. YOU SHOULD CONSIDER PROCLAIMING YOURSELF INSTEAD OF A NOVICE IN ARGUMENTS TO BE A MARTYR IN YOUR OWN PLOT OF LAND BY ALWAYS SAYING others ‘then attack’ you kind of crap.

    This also shows you were actually trying to attract people to sympathesize the poor souls of both of you.

    You had display the low mentality by being unable to come up with a straight answer like those question on whether he is guilty or not it just went unanswered and continue with other irrelevant stuffs.
    From ever demanding the identity of a person to accept being annonymous is hard for you to swallow and for you to change into a nick will outright tell us that you being a Christian you are the biggest ‘munafiks’. I said earlie please stop pretending, right! Understand when I said it will be easy for you to convert into Islam! the saying goes “You are what you are because of what you were”.

    taking that if you were to take things as is instead of trying to twisting and turning into a fallacy you would have been a better person.

    You don’t seemed to learn that logic was never that important, but facts are!(+*+)
    Of course perhaps I missed that part that you were a school drop out working as a pelayan in a cybercafe free loading on the air time. Pitiful. back to square one.

    One other thing. If you were trying to continue all these repetition I suggest the Yusril or Unspun blog will be a better venue for you. There you will get everyone to agree with you more than here.
    In the IM blog people are only interested in discussing more towards the topic and hopefully there are more efficient parlementarians or minister who have the integrity in upholding the country’s tarnished image by provide a source of remedy.

  14. avatar Dragonwall says:
    December 5th, 2007 at 4:00 am

    To whoever you are Bonar or tic tac toe or ting tang tung.
    Before you guys could turned up with some new logics trying to displace his misdeeds, let me continue by saying this:
    1. When Yusril was empowered with full authority in office as Minister of Justice and HAM (I think more fitting bacon) he had misuse his jurisdiction without properly thinking of the consequences in the case of changing venues for visas, it is clear that he had not made and due diligence in carrying out his order and knowing that pejabat manning the station (given the beneift of doubt if not all at least there could be predicted that half of them) tends to capitalize on the situation and continue practicing corruption. Therefore he should be considered as guilty in promoting and encouraging continued corruptions during the course of action. So to consider him guilty is beyond shadow of doubts. The President should order an investigation into his action how severe were the damage cause and done with his action. If his intentions were good then he should have at least advice the President or the current Justice Minister that something needs to be corrected in order to pick up some respect. His action had greatly affected other Ministers (given the benefit of doubt) that they are clean. And at least give some integrity back to the Indonesian Republic and her citizens.
    2. When Yusril was empowered in office as Minister of Justice and HAM (I don’t think he even fits to have that HAM title at all) he had deliberately force the Sharia through parliament for it to be approved and carried out with the blessing of the SBY Government (showing that SBY had became timid in light of the religion that favors the majority) whereas Agung Laksono could only investigate that to see if any envelopes were passed around to get the law approve. Nonetheless he had go against the UU 45 in which the Constitutional Statute that guarantees every Indonesian citizens their right to domicile, worship, freedom by creating more rooms for discrimination against the minorities at large with a consolation that any matrimonial or monetary were being excepted. In view of this by nations around the globe, the United Nations, he had cause those minorities to suffer by creating an irreversible loss and fear of being dictated. This had in some way casue Indonesia to lose out in any economic competition or even try to break from away from the cocoon. So he should also be deemed to be guilty of being discriminative and promoting discrimination by being partial with intention to marginalize and betraying the oath he swore when assuming office as Minister of HAM.
    These were his action during his term as Minister of Justice and HAM.

    He had displayed his arrogance and corrupt by disregarding his oath that is to protect and serve the country by abetting an ex-con in laundering and transfer of illegal funds while in office as Secretary of State. This gives the impression by other nation that a high ranking echelon Government Official could disregard the law, (knowing the law very being a Justice Minister earlier) in carrying out such irresponsible act and should also be found guilty of the offence. He should be brought to the court for trial for his action, if the current Justice Minister and SBY has the guts and not just letting him go freely. He was only dismissed from his post. Since the Constitution to guarantees her citizens the right of law, should take action against any person under the Indonesian sun with regardless whether he is clerics, champion of Islamic values, minister or whosoever. He should also be sentenced to even more severe sentence and see how he will be treated in state penetentiary. Like Nusa Kambangan would be a nice resort for him to rest his life.

    Someone had him boasting that he is taking out his critics (when he earlier said Patung and Dragonwall) Dragonwall in his blogs that looked like a circus of clowns.

    If you cannot come to agree with those pointed to his direction then I think you should return to Unspun blog, like I said instead of being a novice of arguments you should called yourself a Martyr (you know the saying goes like knowing that he is wrong but, tahu mati juga bela mati matian) in your endeavor.

    Oh ya one more thing.
    When Juwono Sudarsono said of the problem with Indonesia were caused by the 3 C’s (Chinese Conglomerate Crony) I had it rephrase to 3 P’s (Pejabat Pemerintah Pengecut).

  15. avatar Dragonwall says:
    December 7th, 2007 at 12:41 am

    Check out the meaning of:
    Bribery, Corruption, Discrimination, and negligence at wikipedia and try coming up with any new form of correlation to that effect.

  16. avatar Dragonwall says:
    December 9th, 2007 at 1:16 am

    Aha..finally I noticed that the martyr of bela mati matian is engross with arguments into Malasyian affairs. This sidekick might have realized that he is defending a wrong cause .. who knows!

    I sense the downplaying on YIM at unspun blog with the removal of “Yusril takes on crtics headon with Patung (earlier remove) and Dragonwal (also missing now).

    While I had tried to put up an article seeking support on bribery, corruption and discrimination, to my surprise he finally realized what he did was wrong amidst news by SBY recently that said “Yang Pesta Lupa Cuci Piring” (cleaning up the corruption and collusion mess in BPPN, BLBI etc). the President also urged outsiders to watch instead of putting a finger while the investigation is going on. Like StAR on Soeharto apparently seeking the return of the alleged 15 mil to 35 b USD in stolen money (very likely nothing will happen), BPPN claim 4T from PT Timor that was sold to PT Vesta that was deemed illegal and TS is fighting a litigation instead of paying (likely outcome looks glummy to me). Djoko Santoso being accused of importing luxurious cars which he rebutted. How interesting.

    A question for Patung. Did you receive the email I had send you on the article that I hoped to put up or a rephrase/rewrite/re-term is required. I am dead serious on seeking this support to bring them up to the United Nation and assistance from Amnesty International. The Indonesian will not be frigid in taking all these people to task and considering the damage the outcome will be for those involved as well as the government..for a cause.. A Cleaner Government, A Better Tomorrow – Indonesia (Will this title be suitable).

    Appreciate your response.

  17. avatar Mr TicTacToe says:
    December 9th, 2007 at 10:16 pm

    LOL @dragonwall, not really… I’ve always defended logic, its never a wrong cause

    and since you said:

    You don’t seemed to learn that logic was never that important

    I rest my case lah.

    :)

    Its kinda proving my first statement that you attacked.

    But I will continue playing later anyway, I’m kinda busy lately, u know lah “pelayan’s” life never easy ;) that I have to limit my daily discussion to 3 topics per day, sorry that yours weren’t included that you had to stalk my conversations @ unspun. LOL

    cya after new year. ^_^

  18. avatar Dragonwall says:
    December 10th, 2007 at 6:45 am

    You have proven nothing in these terminologies of Bribery, Corruption, Discrimination, and negligence from the beginning that’s it.
    It’s the Indonesian norm to complained that “saya dikeroyok-attacked”. That’s OK with me.
    We have proven our points and will continue to do so in a new topic as you will see in http://www.indonesiamatters.com/1494/minorities/.
    I thought you guys were so frustrated in expressing your views and were inviting others to unspun blog? To see how you guys blog! Stalking in other blogs is common stuffs where you failed to establish facts but only wants others to know your logics.
    I will be quite busy over the ‘Minority Groups” blog so I will try and take some time checking things out as I will be too busy to and can’t be bothered to argue.
    So that you understand those with LOL had laugh last.

  19. avatar Dragonwall says:
    December 28th, 2007 at 7:54 am

    I am about to roll the dice and see what will happen to this guy later on.

  20. avatar Hadi M says:
    July 9th, 2008 at 1:53 am

    dragonwall is a peanut, he hit indonesia but I want to know in where he life, in Indonesia RRC or Taiwan? why he not use original name?
    I support Yusril for RI one for 2009 election.

  21. avatar Dragonwall says:
    September 20th, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    Hadi Mister Peanuts,

    I am writing because my secretary told me something on this blog and I felt compel to wake up the idea of this person.

    where he life

    I suppose you are referring to where I live and for that I had disclose that from the very start and as to

    why he not use original name

    I think you lack the intellectual intuition in such understanding and knowing on a broader scope. The basic understanding of blogging. And that

    dragonwall is a peanut, he hit indonesia

    I suppose you are referring to that I have been bashing at Indonesia! Then I think if you put an effort by reading more carefully on comments I posted in these blogs you can differentiate whether if I had hit Indonesia or hit some Indonesians (I mean especially those whom were considered to be the scumbags of the Indonesian society).

    And as for

    I support Yusril for RI one for 2009 election.

    And you said you are supporting a person, who is a lawyer and had held important posts such as Minister of Justice & HAM and later promoted to Secretary of State and sacked from the cabinet and a person who have proen himself to be bias, discrimative, corrupt, involved in criminal activities, and partial, for RI one for 2009?

    So does this makes me a peanut or you a peanut?

    You just woke up from your sleep.

  22. avatar Sera says:
    July 31st, 2009 at 4:55 am

    By the way…???
    ini web site berbahasa Inggris or Indonesia… Komentar-2nya ada dua bahasa…
    Mas Dragon Wall salam kenal…

  23. avatar la Sali mangari weru says:
    April 19th, 2010 at 6:06 am

    Visa on arrival is another best way of serving our guest ( tourist ) to the country.

  24. avatar Qaharuddin says:
    September 9th, 2010 at 1:54 pm

    Never ending disscusion. Any issues arised here just become meaningless. So, I hope -especially to Pak Yusril- to ignore a man/woman named dragonwall. It’s very bad if knoweledge you have must be compared with a man named dragonwall. If there are issues that undeniably weird, I sugest to not be responded.

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]



Your view on “Yusril Ihza Mahendra” :


RSS
RSS feed
Email

Copyright Indonesia Matters 2006-14
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact