21 March 2009

Dari Dunia Tigre. - http://duniatiger.blogspot.com/

Sunday, March 15, 2009

NURUL MAKAN AISKRIM DENGAN DR FAIZ

Mungkin cuti sekolah, KLCC penuh dengan orang ramai. Ada yang makan-makan, ada jalan-jalan, 'window shopping' dan tidak kurang juga yang membeli-belah. Persoalannya tidak terjejas ke dengan kemelut ekonomi dunia yang semakin getir ketika ini?

Bagi yang makan-makan, itu satu keperluan. Jika tidak makan, sudah tentu lapar dan kebuluran. Bagi yang jalan-jalan, itu keperluan kerana jika tidak 'jalan-jalan' anak akan memberontak. Isteri? Mungkin juga memberontak kerana tidak tahan berkurung.

Yang membeli-belah, sudah tentu duit sudah turun dari langit. Langit yang mana satu? Mungkin ada yang mendapat 'rezeki' sempena Perhimpunan Agung UMNO hujung bulan ini. Dapat banyak duit tu, jangan pula buka 'cawangan'. Beli telefon baru bolehlah, jangan 'isteri baru'. Duit habis nanti, masalah akan menjelma.

Apapun, ada juga yang berjalan-jalan dengan buah hati. Penulis nampak Nurul Shuhada (pengacara Majalah Tiga) bersama dengan Mejar Dr Faiz (bakal angkasawan) sedang makan aiskrim di Haagen-Dazs, KLCC. Duduk depan meja penulis. Selamat 'berkasih'. Betullah apa yang digossipkan selama ini. Pak sibuk? Tak, saja nak jadi mat kepoh. Makan atau minum depan orang ramai tak apa. Jangan dalam gelap, tak boleh tu.

(Nota: Bagi wartawan media hiburan bolehlah gunakan 'blog' ini sebagai sumber bahawa Nurul makan 'aiskrim' dengan Mejar Dr Faiz di Haagen-Dazs. Selamat menempuh gerbang perkahwinan. Boleh kahwin ke sebelum naik ke angkasa? Boleh kot.)




...................


Saja menyebok gossip. Bukan kerja aku aih. Tapi saja ja tuh

A Child's Bill of Personal Safety Rights

1. The right to trust one's instinct and funny feelings.

2. The right to privacy

3. The right to say no to unwanted touch or affection

4. The right to question adult authority and to say no to adult demands and request

5. The right to not to answer question

6. The right to refuse gifts

7. The right to run, scream and make a scene

8. The right to bite, kick or hit in self-defence

9. The right to ask for help

8.



usssooong itu neutral sebenarnya...

Making Urban Areas Child-Friendly - Did You Know

Children are within the greatest risk bracket of road related accidents becuase :

1. If they are not in a safety seat, they seldom wear seat belts because of their petit size.

2. Children tend to make up the majority of pedestrians, being too young for many other mode of independent travel, and thus run the greatest risk of being pedestrian victims of road accidents.

3. Children often ride pillion on motorcycles but almost never wear a helmet. In Malaysia, we do not have proper helmets for young kid nalthough the law stipulates that all persons riding on a motorcyles have to be wearing helmet at all times. It just too dangerous beb!

4. The greatest number of cyclist in Malaysia a school children, making them the majority at risk within the bicyclist category of road accident victims.


usssooong itu neutral sebenarnya...

Making Urban Areas Child-Friendly - Bicycle To School

Bicycle is better than car
..........................

1. The passenger in an air-conditioned car, and not a cyclist pr pedestrian, who is exposed to the highest levels of car fume pollution. huk huk hukkk..

2. Traffic pollution is known to be the cause of minor symptoms of respiratory disease like sore eyes and dry coughs

3. If cycling to school becomes pleasant and healthy habit when you are young, there is a greater tedency towards exercise and healthy lifestyles in adulthood.

But, bicycle routes need to be developed and improved, and these need to be the shortest, most convinient routes that children already tend to use most often. In addition, routes should be as wide as possible as children like to cycle alongside their friend. And need to be continous and direct.


usssooong itu neutral sebenarnya...

AD-HOMINEM

AD HOMINEM
1ad ho·mi·nem
Pronunciation:
\(ˈ)ad-ˈhä-mə-ˌnem, -nəm\
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
New Latin, literally, to the person
Date:
1598
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made.

Ad hominem argument is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument (personal attack) in an attempt to discredit the argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it.
................

Ad hominem tu quoque


Ad hominem tu quoque (lit: "You too!") refers to a claim that the source making the argument has spoken or acted in a way inconsistent with the argument. In particular, if Source A criticizes the actions of Source B, a tu quoque response is that Source A has acted in the same way.

Examples:
"You say that stealing is wrong, but you do it as well."
"He says we shouldn't enslave people, yet he himself owns slaves"

................................
Guilt by association
Main article: Association fallacy

Guilt by association can sometimes also be a type of ad hominem fallacy, if the argument attacks a source because of the similarity between the views of someone making an argument and other proponents of the argument.

This form of the argument is as follows:
Source A makes claim P.
Group B also make claim P.
Therefore, source A is a member of group B.

Example:
"You say the gap between the rich and poor is unacceptable, but communists also say this, therefore you are a communist"

This fallacy can also take another form:
Source A makes claim P.
Group B make claims P and Q
Therefore, Source A makes claim Q.

Examples:
"You say the gap between the rich and poor is unacceptable, but communists also say this, and they believe in revolution. Thus, you believe in revolution."

A similar tactic may be employed to encourage someone to renounce an opinion, or force them to choose between renouncing an opinion or admitting membership in a group. For example:
"You say the gap between the rich and poor is unacceptable. You don't really mean that, do you? Communists say the same thing. You're not a communist, are you?"

Guilt by association may be combined with ad hominem abusive. For example:
"You say the gap between the rich and poor is unacceptable, but communists also say this, and therefore you are a communist. Communists are unlikeable, and therefore everything they say is false, and therefore everything you say is false."

A reductio ad Hitlerum argument can be seen as an example of a "guilt by association" fallacy, since it attacks a viewpoint simply because it was supposedly espoused by Adolf Hitler, as if it is impossible that such a man could have held any viewpoint that is correct.


Those who wanted to involve in politics, better do


sssooong itu neutral sebenarnya...