Malaysian mock tribunal finds Bush, Blair guilty of 'crimes against peace'

[Chonburiram]

1322157214[/url]' post='4870014']

1322156245[/url]' post='4870005']

Please could you explain to a forgetful reader like me which race he is promoting to hate?

Jews. Anti-semitism is racism.

I think that is a trick question though, because it's complicated. Jews are not a race, they are a people, and not all Jews are at all religious and many who are religious profess other religions than Judaism such as Buddhism, so there is more to it than just religion. If you need to know more, read some books. Too big a topic for a thread like this.

If you don't understand the difference between a race and a people, here are some other examples of peoples:

Tai people, Kurdish people, Roma people, Australian Aboriginal people, Slovak people, etc. To further complicate it, mainstream anthropologists are now rejecting the concept of race altogether in the conventional sense where we distinguish between so called races like Caucasians and Asians as different races. But even if there is no biological basis for different races (skin color etc. represents a very tiny part of the human race's genetic code), racism still exists as racism is a SOCIAL construct as opposed to a biological one.

http://en.wikipedia....al_antisemitism

Thanks for clearing this; next question: what's wrong with antisemitism?

[Jingthing]

Thanks for clearing this; next question: what's wrong with antisemitism?

Now fully showing your true colors. Brilliant.

Edited November 25, 2011 by Jingthing

[janverbeem]

Please could you explain to a forgetful reader like me which race he is promoting to hate?

Jews. Anti-semitism is racism.

I think that is a trick question though, because it's complicated. Jews are not a race, they are a people, and not all Jews are at all religious and many who are religious profess other religions than Judaism such as Buddhism, so there is more to it than just religion. If you need to know more, read some books. Too big a topic for a thread like this.

If you don't understand the difference between a race and a people, here are some other examples of peoples:

Tai people, Kurdish people, Roma people, Australian Aboriginal people, Slovak people, etc. To further complicate it, mainstream anthropologists are now rejecting the concept of race altogether in the conventional sense where we distinguish between so called races like Caucasians and Asians as different races. But even if there is no biological basis for different races (skin color etc. represents a very tiny part of the human race's genetic code), racism still exists as racism is a SOCIAL construct as opposed to a biological one.

http://en.wikipedia....al_antisemitism

Do they also have a specific name for anti-palestinian?

[ludditeman]

I think that is a trick question though, because it's complicated. Jews are not a race, they are a people, and not all Jews are at all religious and many who are religious profess other religions than Judaism such as Buddhism, so there is more to it than just religion. If you need to know more, read some books. Too big a topic for a thread like this.

Who cares, move on.

Seconded. Borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring.

I wouldn't dream of depriving the Negative Nellies another chance at the pleasure they clearly get by broadcasting their simplistic bile.

On the other hand, I sincerely think that most people in the world haven't gotten the news yet that mainstream anthropologists don't think there is a biological basis for the concept of different races within our one human race. I reckon the unapologetically racist internationally disgraced former PM of Malaysia Mahathir Mohamad responsible for the political theater Kangaroo court trial is among those not yet enlightened.

BTW, if a LEGITIMATE international court wanted to judge Bush (I hold Blair less responsible as the poodle), that would be a different story.

Problem is, it's you that is the racist (or religionist)

I don't care about your religion (or your sexuality) or what happened to people of your religion in the past.

You are the one that keeps banging on about Jews, not me.

It's almost as if you revel in being part of minority groups.

Get over it and move on. Most of us really don't care.

[Chonburiram]

1322240574[/url]' post='4871856']

1322240284[/url]' post='4871846']

Thanks for clearing this; next question: what's wrong with antisemitism?

Now fully showing your true colors. Brilliant.

Sorry, no intend to insult, I tried to use red but my iPad did not let me mark any text in red, it was a technical problem, so I had to choose this light green;

please do not misinterpret me as a muslim, I hate all religions equal.

[Jingthing]

Problem is, it's you that is the racist (or religionist)

Thanks so much for falsely calling me a racist when I don't even accept the concept of race based on modern scientific evidence. What high level discussion we have here. Made my day. Religionist? I suppose that exists to those people (not me) that are actually ... religious.

[Jingthing]

1322240574[/url]' post='4871856']

1322240284[/url]' post='4871846']

Thanks for clearing this; next question: what's wrong with antisemitism?

Now fully showing your true colors. Brilliant.

Sorry, no intend to insult, I tried to use red but my iPad did not let me mark any text in red, it was a technical problem, so I had to choose this light green;

please do not misinterpret me as a muslim, I hate all religions equal.

I'm flabbergasted. BTW, please don't make any assumptions about how I interpret you; chances are great you wouldn't get it.

Edited November 25, 2011 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

Do they also have a specific name for anti-palestinian?

That term would be Anti-Palestinian. Bingo. You could also say Anti-Arabism. The former term in general would most commonly be used in a political context. The latter, definitely of the racist category.

Back to the topic, my position all along about this topic is that because the Kangaroo Malaysian court was started by a virulent racist, it's credibility is greatly damaged. Similarly, again as I clearly stated before, if a Phony Court was started by PM Netanyahu of Israel (or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, etc.), who has so little credibility globally, the "convictions" of leaders of other countries would be similarly discounted. That's all I'm saying and I truly think I've made a good case.

Edited November 25, 2011 by Jingthing

[MrMuddle]

ludditeman wrote

"Problem is, it's you that is the racist (or religionist)

I don't care about your religion (or your sexuality) or what happened to people of your religion in the past.

You are the one that keeps banging on about Jews, not me.

It's almost as if you revel in being part of minority groups.

Get over it and move on. Most of us really don't care. "

I believe that this sort of behaviour is known as attention-seeking. The unusually large number of posts submitted reinforces this theory, or it could just be a serious lack of a life.

[Jingthing]

ludditeman wrote

"Problem is, it's you that is the racist (or religionist)

I don't care about your religion (or your sexuality) or what happened to people of your religion in the past.

You are the one that keeps banging on about Jews, not me.

It's almost as if you revel in being part of minority groups.

Get over it and move on. Most of us really don't care. "

I believe that this sort of behaviour is known as attention-seeking. The unusually large number of posts submitted reinforces this theory, or it could just be a serious lack of a life.

Everyone's either a psychiatrist, a comedian, or both. Thanks for sharing, Dr. Freud. Let us keep to the TOPIC or better yet, forget the topic because this court is rather worthless anyway, considering the source.

What I find interesting (psychologically?) is not one poster has bothered to even try to rebut my point about comparing Mahathir Mohamad to Netanyahu and how both being of very low regard internationally, neither have any business ruling on the guilt or innocence of the national leaders of OTHER countries. Instead, just personal insults. I reckon I've won the debate here (by default).

Edited November 25, 2011 by Jingthing

[MrMuddle]

Please could you explain to a forgetful reader like me which race he is promoting to hate?

Jews. Anti-semitism is racism.

I think that is a trick question though, because it's complicated. Jews are not a race, they are a people, and not all Jews are at all religious and many who are religious profess other religions than Judaism such as Buddhism, so there is more to it than just religion. If you need to know more, read some books. Too big a topic for a thread like this.

If you don't understand the difference between a race and a people, here are some other examples of peoples:

Tai people, Kurdish people, Roma people, Australian Aboriginal people, Slovak people, etc. To further complicate it, mainstream anthropologists are now rejecting the concept of race altogether in the conventional sense where we distinguish between so called races like Caucasians and Asians as different races. But even if there is no biological basis for different races (skin color etc. represents a very tiny part of the human race's genetic code), racism still exists as racism is a SOCIAL construct as opposed to a biological one.

http://en.wikipedia....al_antisemitism

Do they also have a specific name for anti-palestinian?

There are several: Republican, Israeli, or anybody that seeks to deny people rights in their own land.

[Jingthing]

There are several: Republican, Israeli, or anybody that seeks to deny people rights in their own land.

Thai?

Look, dude, the topic is this Malaysian court started by a notorious anti-semite ex-PM. I suggest you stick with the topic.

There are quite commonly some threads going here about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Post there when those threads come up. This thread is about the Malaysian court and yes I have brought forward the issue of the lack of respect the founder of that court deserves.

Also note, a real court starts from a place of relative objectivity. Perfect objectivity is a human impossibility but an effort should be made. This Malaysian court was started by a man who had made up his mind about the guilt of Bush long, long, ago. In other words, 100 percent bias. From a justice point of view, that's a total farce. You also wouldn't want to put me in charge of a court to judge Bush, because I am also convinced he is guilty. If he is to be judged though, the court needs to be a fair one. This Malaysian court was nothing like that.

http://thewe.cc/contents/more/archive/mahathir_mohamad.html

Edited November 26, 2011 by Jingthing

[thaifkrlim]

There are several: Republican, Israeli, or anybody that seeks to deny people rights in their own land.

Thai?

Look, dude, the topic is this Malaysian court started by a notorious anti-semite ex-PM. I suggest you stick with the topic.

There are quite commonly some threads going here about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Post there when those threads come up. This thread is about the Malaysian court and yes I have brought forward the issue of the lack of respect the founder of that court deserves.

Also note, a real court starts from a place of relative objectivity. Perfect objectivity is a human impossibility but an effort should be made. This Malaysian court was started by a man who had made up his mind about the guilt of Bush long, long, ago. In other words, 100 percent bias. From a justice point of view, that's a total farce. You also wouldn't want to put me in charge of a court to judge Bush, because I am also convinced he is guilty. If he is to be judged though, the court needs to be a fair one. This Malaysian court was nothing like that.

http://thewe.cc/cont...ir_mohamad.html

The topic is ALSO about the defendants, actually more focused on the mock conviction of alleged war criminals

why the bias notion and keep harping on the so-called notorious anti-semite ex PM, not citing the notorious international crooks in question, every post by you is about the plaintiff, instead of the defendants

your true colours show that you hate him so much for personal reasons

why so serious , re-read the topic it's a mock tribunal

anyway there are no kangaroos in malaysia 555

[Jingthing]

This court prejudged Bush and Blair. So it's irrelevant what their verdict was. Seriously, can anyone imagine the court in Malaysia started by that particular openly biased PM possibly coming up with any other verdict than guilty? Of course not, that's impossible. So it was a political show trial with a predetermined outcome. In other words, totally worthless. Speaking as someone who also thinks Bush is guilty.

Yes, I do happily and openly plead guilty to detesting racists of all kinds, including anti-semites.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Jingthing

[ludditeman]

This court prejudged Bush and Blair. So it's irrelevant what their verdict was. Seriously, can anyone imagine the court in Malaysia started by that particular openly biased PM possibly coming up with any other verdict than guilty? Of course not, that's impossible. So it was a political show trial with a predetermined outcome. In other words, totally worthless. Speaking as someone who also thinks Bush is guilty.

I can't imagine any just court in the world not finding them guilty and either handing out a death sentence or life imprisonment for both.

[frankthetank123]

I never said or implied he was currently PM. Also that one speech is but one instance of that man's long record of virulent anti-semitism.

What a surprise a post being hi-jacked by tingtongting, and forcing rubbish about something that never happened down peoples throats!

[MrMuddle]

ludditeman wrote

"Problem is, it's you that is the racist (or religionist)

I don't care about your religion (or your sexuality) or what happened to people of your religion in the past.

You are the one that keeps banging on about Jews, not me.

It's almost as if you revel in being part of minority groups.

Get over it and move on. Most of us really don't care. "

I believe that this sort of behaviour is known as attention-seeking. The unusually large number of posts submitted reinforces this theory, or it could just be a serious lack of a life.

Everyone's either a psychiatrist, a comedian, or both. Thanks for sharing, Dr. Freud. Let us keep to the TOPIC or better yet, forget the topic because this court is rather worthless anyway, considering the source.

What I find interesting (psychologically?) is not one poster has bothered to even try to rebut my point about comparing Mahathir Mohamad to Netanyahu and how both being of very low regard internationally, neither have any business ruling on the guilt or innocence of the national leaders of OTHER countries. Instead, just personal insults. I reckon I've won the debate here (by default).

A case of premature exclamation ?

Perhaps that explains the huge number of utterly boring, tiresome postings. Not everything in the world is related to Jews or anti-semitism, no matter how hard you try to push your irrational beliefs.

The plain fact is, with the amount of evidence available, that Bush and Blair deceived their governments, the people that elected them, the United Nations, in fact anyone who believed their lies, into starting an unjust war in Iraq.

In a just court, anywhere in the world, they would be found guilty and sentenced. Thousands of people, have died or have had their lives totally wrecked because of Bush & Blairs deceit. The fact that the vast majority of the victims are Muslim, only worsens any argument about a narrow minded perception of anti-semitism.

[Jingthing]

I never said or implied he was currently PM. Also that one speech is but one instance of that man's long record of virulent anti-semitism.

What a surprise a post being hi-jacked by tingtongting, and forcing rubbish about something that never happened down peoples throats!

What never happened?

BTW, I don't think I've hijacked anything here. People if they have any opinion on the matter have already decided whether they think Bush is guilty or not. Raising the issue of the obvious international illegitimacy of the Malaysian court in such a matter is perfectly on point to the news item.

A note from tingtongting

If you don't accept that, please report me the authorities and while you're at it, you might want to report yourself.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

In a just court, anywhere in the world, they would be found guilty and sentenced. Thousands of people, have died or have had their lives totally wrecked because of Bush & Blairs deceit. The fact that the vast majority of the victims are Muslim, only worsens any argument about a narrow minded perception of anti-semitism.

Possibly or probably but the fact remains that any court anywhere in the world that starts with a verdict is an unjust court.

Don't be disingenuous about this please. We all know this Malaysia court was not capable of being remotely objective about Bush and Blair. It was theater, pure and simple.

To be clear, I never said the fake court was specifically antisemitic ; I did say the founder of the court is demonstrably so.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

This court prejudged Bush and Blair. So it's irrelevant what their verdict was. Seriously, can anyone imagine the court in Malaysia started by that particular openly biased PM possibly coming up with any other verdict than guilty? Of course not, that's impossible. So it was a political show trial with a predetermined outcome. In other words, totally worthless. Speaking as someone who also thinks Bush is guilty.

I can't imagine any just court in the world not finding them guilty and either handing out a death sentence or life imprisonment for both.

I can imagine it depending on the weighing of the evidence. I already told you I think Bush is guilty. I have some question whether he should be sentenced though, and that is clearly not any business of a court in Malaysia founded by an infamous antisemite and anti-American.

[khaowong1]

May I suggest to the Malaysian court an immediate prosecution of Captain Kangaroo.

BTW, while I am no fan of Bush/Blair, virulent anti-semite Mahathir Mohamad has even less credibility on the global stage.

What has anti-semitism got to do with the story ? By introducing this subject, it kills the 'debate', as anyone who is in favour of this tribunal is judged, by your statement, to be anti-semetic. Nowhere in the OP is there a mention of Israel, it's people, or religion. As for Mr Mahathir Mohamads' lack of credibility, have you proof of this ? Or is it just anti-muslim bias on your part?

The sad truth is, that instead of a mock trial of Bush & Blair being held in Malaysia, it should have been held for real by the International Criminal Court, and the pair of them, and many of their political associates, should have been charged for real with Crimes Against Humanity. I sincerely hope that this "mock" trial in Malaysia will lead to a real prosecution, in the future.They both deserve to be tried, on behalf of the thousands who have died, been injured or who have suffered because of their evil deeds.

Well said.

Yes, well said

[Jingthing]

Look peoples, read the thread and you can see that I have well defended mentioning the credibility issues of both the anti-semite Mahathir Mohamad and the Malaysia court he founded. The topic is about both the credibility or lack thereof of the court and the accused. Both are issues related to the topic. I can see many people are annoyed about talking about the truth about Mahathir Mohamad but they don't have a problem talking about the truth of Bush and Blair.

If you check my posting history, you can find that I have advocated a war crimes trial for Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld multiple times. But not from a biased Malaysian court. If you seriously think that this Kangaroo Court in Malaysia is going to encourage this case to be taken up in the Hague, well, you're simply wrong. If anything, it does the opposite. Back to reality, these people are not going to judged in a legitimate international court even though many of us think they should. We all know that.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

Like I said ...

War crimes trials?

April 28th, 2008 John Quiggin

It’s not that surprising to read that former Malaysian PM Mahathir Mohamad has called for an international tribunal to try Western leaders with war crimes over the war in Iraq, nominating Bush, Blair and Howard in particular. Mahathir is well-known as a provocateur, with a fondness for extreme statements, which have included anti-Semitic attacks on George Soros and others. So it’s unlikely that anyone will pay much attention to him.

http://johnquiggin.com/2008/04/28/war-crimes-trials/

BTW, inspired by the leadership of Mahathir "the elder statesman of anti-Semites", today's Malaysia still remains a hotbed of antisemitic racism.

http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/42308-in-malaysia-when-in-doubt-blame-the-jews-

...

Most citizens of the overwhelmingly Asian economic giant have never and will likely never meet a Jew in their lifetime. And yet the folks at Utusan Malaysia, which is influential among Muslims in rural areas who rely on government-linked media to shape their worldview, are apparently confident warnings about a "Jewish plot" would resonate in a land without Jews.

To understand why, you need only look at the track record of the man who dominated his nation for a quarter of a century, Malaysia's fourth prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Jingthing

[Naam]

as so often a thread has deteriorated and the discussion became irrelevant. that former Malaysian PM Mahathir is quite obviously an "anti-semite" has no bearing on the fact that in the eyes of any rationally thinking human being Bush and Blair are war criminals who should be tried in the court at The Hague and Mahathir's antisemitic stance does not disqualify him to chair a mock court.

unfortunately the latter is very unlikely even though their decisions and actions, based on blatant lies, has cost the lives and bodily harm of tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) human beings. period!

p.s. at least the (at that time) lying bàstard Colin Powell had the guts to confess his lies and repent. neither Bush nor Blair made the slightest attempt in that respect.

[Jingthing]

that former Malaysian PM Mahathir is quite obviously an "anti-semite" has no bearing on the fact that in the eyes of any rationally thinking human being Bush and Blair are war criminals who should be tried in the court at The Hague and Mahathir's antisemitic stance does not disqualify him to chair a mock court.

Actually, yes blatant antisemitism added to his long history of blatant anti-Americanism does indeed disqualify him as a credible actor in such a court. Agree they should be tried at the Hague but they won't be, of course. I find it hard to understand why people don't get this. A court started by a body that has ALREADY concluded the guilt of those on trial is totally illegitimate. In other words, TOO BLOODY BIASED, a fair trial in that setting, totally impossible.

Mahathir, a fierce critic of the West, is known for his anti-Jewish and anti-American statements in Muslim-majority Malaysia.

Last year, he said if the US could make the 3D science fiction film Avatar, “they can make anything”, adding there was strong evidence that the 9/11 attacks were staged.

He has also condemned Bush and then-British prime minister Tony Blair as “child killers” and “war criminals”, saying they should be put on trial for the military invasion of Iraq.

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/09/11/mahathir-911-not-work-of-muslims/

What's next here? Touting a theater trial run in North Korea convicting Obama of war crimes? The shockingly biased Malaysia "court" in reality devalues any legitimate argument that Bush should really be tried by an actual, credible court.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Jingthing

[frankthetank123]

seriously who cares about the guys views, you like all the others cant let it go lol nastyeww

Edited November 28, 2011 by sabaijai
racist epithet

[Jingthing]

nastyeww

Whatever.

Anyway, in your last enlightening post on this thread you claimed that I had

forcing rubbish about something that never happened down peoples throats!

but then I asked you what have I said here that never happened ... and ... silence. Thanks so much for the scintillating debate.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

seriously who cares about the guys views, you like all the others cant let it go lol nastyeww

I see you added "content" to your post.

Who cares? He's not a taxi driver. He's probably the most famous Malaysian politician in history, and still lives. Malaysia, a country that bars entry to all Israelis, even Israeli taxi drivers, a country where it is reported Mein Kampf, the Elders of Zion, and the racist writings of Henry Ford are prominently displayed at Kuala Lumpur airport.

We can only assume he still holds the vile and bizarre views documented on this thread, as he has not retracted them. Beyond Malaysia, he has asserted himself as an "intellectual" leader among Islamic nations.

So when such a man starts a court as he did, people will quite justly take notice of what kind of man he is. If he wanted to retire in peace, he could have, but he himself has sought continued international exposure. Sure, he may still be a legitimate leader among anti-semites, dogmatic anti-Americans, and many nationalistic Malaysians, but that's pretty much it.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Jingthing

[frankthetank123]

seriously who cares about the guys views, you like all the others cant let it go lol nastyeww

I see you added "content" to your post.

Who cares? He's not a taxi driver. He's probably the most famous Malaysian politician in history, and still lives. Malaysia, a country that bars entry to all Israelis, even Israeli taxi drivers, a country where it is reported Mein Kampf, the Elders of Zion, and the racist writings of Henry Ford are prominently displayed at Kuala Lumpur airport.

We can only assume he still holds the vile and bizarre views documented on this thread, as he has not retracted them. Beyond Malaysia, he has asserted himself as an "intellectual" leader among Islamic nations.

So when such a man starts a court as he did, people will quite justly take notice of what kind of man he is. If he wanted to retire in peace, he could have, but he himself has sought continued international exposure. Sure, he may still be a legitimate leader among anti-semites and many nationalistic Malaysians, but that's pretty much it.

Well guess i should buy him a drink then!

[Jingthing]

Well guess i should buy him a drink then!

It feels good to come out, mate.