tony clearly no ball. chikened out after arul accept his challenge and remove the condition. and malaysia kini change all title and news to talk show. all coward just like najib.

If you found the wikipedia for talk show, then you've answered your own question as well. I don't know if you've watched talk shows before. The guests do question the host but it's usually within the topic.

"A talk show or chat show is a television programming or radio programming genre in which one person (or group of people) discusses various topics put forth by a talk show host."

Compare these 2:

talk show
noun
noun: talk show; plural noun: talk shows; modifier noun: talk-show; noun: talkshow; plural noun: talkshows

a television or radio show in which various topics are discussed informally and listeners, viewers, or the studio audience are invited to participate in the discussion.

de·bate
dəˈbāt/
noun
noun: debate; plural noun: debates

1.
a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.
synonyms: discussion, discourse, parley, dialogue; More
argument, counterargument, dispute, wrangle, war of words;
argumentation, disputation, dissension, disagreement, contention, conflict;
negotiations, talks;
informalconfab, powwow
"a debate on the reforms"
an argument about a particular subject, especially one in which many people are involved.
"the national debate on abortion"

verb
verb: debate; 3rd person present: debates; past tense: debated; past participle: debated; gerund or present participle: debating

1.
argue about (a subject), especially in a formal manner.
"the board debated his proposal"
synonyms: discuss, talk over/through, talk about, thrash out, hash out, argue, dispute; More
informalkick around, bat around
"they will debate the future of rail transport"
consider a possible course of action in one's mind before reaching a decision.
"he debated whether he should leave the matter alone or speak to her"
synonyms: consider, think over/about, chew over, mull over, ponder, revolve, deliberate, contemplate, muse, meditate; formalcogitate
"he debated whether to call her"

This isn't about the meaning of words or their synonyms literally but to what set of rules, setting and context they adhere to. For example, the word 'forum' used to mean a physical gathering for a discussion but among the youngsters they would infer it as an online forum. The word forum is also synonymous with court/tribunal but that's not what people usually associate with. By the way, the world talk is also synonymous with discuss.

This post has been edited by neoexcaliber: Oct 31 2015, 10:47 PM

agreed

but never a strict 1-way Question-Answer session..& an academical Talk-Show never had strict 1-way Question-Answer session..its always 2-way comm of discussion..please give me an example of a real academical/professional talk-show with a strict 1-way question-answer only without any discussion..remember, it is NOT a discussion if its only 1-way Question-Answer

even court also have debate, not just 1 session of 1-way question-answer..what more with a more-freedom talk-show

the reason Tony change the rule is because he know he will having a hard time to protect himself from Arul's rebuttal

im not defending Arul..i just feel disgusted with Tony Pua who likes to act arrogantly lansi but when his opponent stand up & fight he chickened out suddenly balls shinking changing rule here & there

Well, Tony Pua would have to watch his big fat mouth that he does not blurt anything out that he learnt from PAC. I think he can and is careful enough.

However, in the case of Arul, he is happily giving interviews, making speeches (like yesterday's). He doesn't seem to mind spilling as much as he can. Lets see how well he performs with a hostile interviewer like Tony.

I am actually looking at this as another step in the long windy road to get to the bottom of 1MDB. We have been starved for more info and are eager for a speedy outcome because it has dragged on for months and months, made worse by the suspension of PAC, the "retirement" of the AG, investigation of MACC officers, etc. etc. Not only that our economy has been somewhat affected by the uncertainties surrounding 1MDB. It isn't just for entertainment, although it is mildly entertaining.

PAC is going to be the jury, it might deliver some "justice" but it doesn't have any prosecutorial powers. It can only make recommendations for further action. So, judge, jury and executioner is stretching it. Oh and Tony Pua is just one member of the PAC.

Tony isn't changing the rules at all. There are tons of talk shows where the host asks questions and the guest answers but they're usually pre-recorded. I agree that a live show would definitely be 2-way communication regardless since we're talking about 2 people within the same vicinity talking to each other but it's not the same as debating each other. This is what Tony said:

“It should be a question-and-answer session and not a debate, because I am asking the questions.
“There’s nothing for him (Arul) to ask me,”

It's not the same as Tony explicitly refusing to answer questions outright, which we will not know till the actual show. Tony won't be able to stop Arul from asking him questions anyway.

see, we are using play of words here, just to justify the saint tony pua's action.

comonnnnn really?

from what i see, simple thing, lets put the word debate or talkshow out.
1. Tony asked for live session with Arul
2. Arul say he accepted challenge with condition that Tony resign from PAC
3. Tony disagree and ask him to accept it without condition like a man
4. Arul say fine he will accept it without that condition.
5. Tony chickened out and say Only i can ask questions, Arul got no questions for me.

to be honest, there wasn't any clear "i ask question only session" mentioned in the first place. it only happens after Arul accepted it without condition. Else, why would someone(Arul) accept to such outrageous request that he will be on a live prosecution trial?

Tony says Arul afraid to go live like a man, but why is Tony afraid to let Arul ask any questions like a man as well? is he afraid of not being able to answer question imposed?

This is another example of "you BN you are wrong to start with so I have all the rights to question you, i PKR i got nothing wrong and rakyat favours me so you cannot question me.

well well, talk is cheap, lets wait till the debate/talkshow/liveQ&A and we will know.

But if i predict correctly, Tony will have a preset question, and whenever Arul answer it he will hentam it and change to another question immediately, to look strong on himself, leaving Arul speechless. Somehow that's what I see about Tony, yes i do hate him for his big mouth, and no I don't like big mouth like him that put the DAP in a risky position with his words without action.

Does this answer your question? Excerpt from October 29.

“Since Arul proudly proclaimed that there is absolutely no cover-up to 1MDB, may I humbly propose that the 1MDB president attends a ‘live’ talk show which I will host and ask the questions.
“He will be given every opportunity and as much time as he likes to answer these questions.

You guys are free to whack him for not being courageous enough and I agree with that but claiming he's shifting the goal post is untrue.

shifting the goal post is still valid

Tony didnt gave any detail information of what kind of Talk-Show it will be during the initial invitation..that statement that u quoted from Tony Pua is AFTER Arul accepted the invitation unconditionally in the end, WITHOUT knowing what kind of the "Talk-Show" is Tony Pua talked about.

thats why Arul responded like this;



Tony Pua is chickened out..thats the proof

u already stated there what kind of talk-show Tony will conduct

Tony will be the one to ask question but Arul must not counter-check Tony

why can't Tony just make it 'no hold barred' total freedom disscussion (if u dont like the word debate) if the goal is to get the REAL TRUTH...???

All is see is Tony Pua attempting to gain his own political milage by conducting a a circus talk-show where he knows the result will get to no where, it won't solve the actual problem but will give bad image to 1MDB (as Arul cannot counter-check with Tony) & positive image to DAP

sounds like UMNO, isnt it..??? dont i already said many times that DAP is an UMNO-mirror image..??

and double ptui to that!

I see you are also adept at shifting the goal post. The excerpt I've posted and the one you've quoted are from the challenge Tony issued BEFORE Arul responded with his conditions and that excerpt already clearly mentions what kind of talk show it would be. Like I said in the other reply and which most people have already grasped, while there will be 2-way communication the format is not a debate where 2 parties propose arguments and counter them. There's nothing stopping Arul from questioning Tony but the crux of the talk show is still 1mdb and the questions regarding their operations. Here are excerpts from Malaysiakini, although from the article it seems like Tony issued the challenge the night before, I can't find any time reference.

29 Oct 2015, 7:54 am
"Since Arul proudly proclaimed that there is absolutely no cover-up to 1MDB, may I humbly propose that the 1MDB president attends a ‘live’ talk show which I will host and ask the questions.
“He will be given every opportunity and as much time as he likes to answer these questions.

29 Oct 2015, 11:40 am
1MDB president Arul Kanda today accepted DAP Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua's challenge to participate in a live talk show with him but only on the condition the latter resigns from the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

This post has been edited by neoexcaliber: Nov 1 2015, 11:36 AM

Did Tony said that..??? may i know in which statement Tony said Arul have the right to question him during the show...??? can u show the proof..???

This post has been edited by keown83: Nov 1 2015, 11:35 AM

He did not explicitly state that he can't be questioned and he did not explicitly state that he can be questioned. The argument was on whether Tony changed his stance after issuing his challenge which is untrue. Can you prove that Tony changed his stance, then? It must be explicitly stated as well.

This post has been edited by neoexcaliber: Nov 1 2015, 11:40 AM

so that means u just made up that statement isn it..?? another lie................

then its still a valid statement that Tony didnt want to let Arul question him..He already stressed that it will be he who question Arul, Arul didnt have anything to question him..or may be u wanna tell me that Tony have a very good twisted tongue..his statement about TSKI before & after Kajang Move is a testament of this

already stated before that the stance have change..from debate to talk-show..from a normal talk-show to a 1-way Question-answer Talk-Show..so i shouldnt explain further

Tony obviously didnt want a true picture of 1MDB scandal to be revealed..it shud be a 'no holds barred' discusssion, to reveal the truth for us, as what we want it to be...not a silly circus-like of 'I ask question & u answer only' talk-show which obviously will take us to nowhere, only to damage 1MDB image further..it is just like we charge 1MDB guilty before an actual trial even started

chicken is still chicken

This post has been edited by keown83: Nov 1 2015, 11:59 AM

I have a feeling you've already made up your mind and no amount of proof or statements from both Arul and Tony is gonna change that. I can see why joe gave up.

I did not make up any statements or lie. It was an assumption, but the fact remains that Tony did not change the format from a debate to a talk show. The onus is on you to prove otherwise. Tony has clearly mentioned that it'll be a talk show where he'll be the host asking Arul questions regarding 1mdb on October 29, before Arul set some conditions and withdrew those conditions.

Can you explicitly prove that Tony is out to intentionally damage 1mdb's image by quoting any of his previous statements? Or is that an assumption based on his actions and statements so far? An assumption is not an explicit proof, yet you use assumptions in your argument but others can't, eh? Both Arul and Tony are good at reading between the lines, perhaps you should too.

This post has been edited by neoexcaliber: Nov 1 2015, 12:22 PM

u made assumption...OK...so its not impossible also that Tony did not want to let Arul rebut him..hey, Tony already respond that only he question arul & arul cannot do the same

justo & claire & petrosaudi fabricated doc is a valid rebuttal to 1MDB scandal as its directly related to it..Arul have every right to rebut Tony if any question Tony ask related to data he received from the said document

this is why its essential to have a 'no holds barred' discussion/debate/talk-show

....& now u trying to justified Tony with the "TALK-SHOW" wording & its format....

everyone know this talk-show will lead to nowhere with current format setup..

now answer my question regarding this talk-show of 1MDB:

do u want to know the real truth, the 'no holds barred' truth, the actual better picture for what is happening inside out

or

do u want a truth according to Tony Pua format & standard..???

OK let just say i made that assumption even though from the news already shows that Tony wanna hit Arul but didnt wan to get hit back..u made assumption & i made assumption..so its fair, isnt it..???

nobody can change anybody in internet..u & DAP-fag made up ur mind that what Tony did is right..i with lots of non-DAP-fag out there seen how chicken Tony Pua is..everybody have their own thought anyway



This post has been edited by keown83: Nov 1 2015, 01:01 PM

There were 2 different challenges. The first one from August was a non-televised (it was not mentioned at all) debate or open dialogue which wasn't accepted. The latest challenge was to attend a live talk show with Tony as the host in response to Arul attending such an event on Bernama TV on the 28th of October and this challenge was posed on the 29th of October 2015 or maybe the night before which I can't verify. It was to this challenge that Arul responded to, set conditions, withdrew those conditions and accepted as is. Whether or not the live talk show is sufficient to deal with this issue a different matter.

Now, did Tony move the goal post/chicken out or were you wrong to assume that when there are press statements and media reports that have consistently mentioned a live talk show?

hmm..u didnt answer my question..OK..

again..ur rebuttal is still surrounding on the so-called wording & date of the "TALK-SHOW/DEBATE" challenge

hey, its Tony that made the statement, not me...obviously both challenge is related..u trying so hard on justifying tony statement using the date, when all i see both challenge all regarding 1MDB..why u say its not related..??? both challenge is about recent statement from Arul that Tony disagree about so he made that several challenges..can u tell me why both challenge is not related to 1MDB especially with what Tony disagree about with Arul statement..???

if Talk-Show is what Tony want he will stated it from his fb page earlier, and not a DEBATE..clearly Tony twisting word

& the real issue remain the same..did Tony dare to a 'no holds barred' talk-show/discussion/debate/whatever or not...??? can he gives a 100% guarantee that he will not interfere or remain silent if Arul rebut him & he will answer accordingly just as what he expect from Arul to answer his question..??? becos tat is what a professional talk-show is all about..a revelation from both side



aiyoooo dun la just becos he is DAP & he is Tony Pua so everything he did even if its ridiculous u still defended it..it makes u no better than those protek2 UMNO goon

This post has been edited by keown83: Nov 1 2015, 01:57 PM

Of course the date is important. That's the context of this discussion and the challenge Tony made. Both challenges are similar yet different. That's like me offering you a RM 50 loan 4 months ago but you refuse. I offer you a loan for RM 30 today and you accuse me of giving you RM 20 less.

Chronology:
August 14
Tony Pua challenges Arul to a debate or open dialogue

October 28
Arul appears on Bernama TV's special talk show to answer questions on 1mdb

October 29 7.54 am
Tony challenges Arul to a live talk show with him as the host

October 29 11.40 pm
Arul asks Tony to quit the PAC first

October 29 12.20 pm
Tony declines and says PAC is more important

October 31 11:14 am
Arul withdraws conditions, says ok

October 31 11:35 am
Pua re-asserts that it'll be a talk show and not a debate as reported by some media.

I didn't answer your other question because it's not relevant to your initial statement that Tony changed the format from debate to talk show. Like I've said, whether or not it's appropriate or sufficient is another question. Whether or not Tony will refuse to answer questions posed by Arul remains to be seen as his statement so far is only this:

“It should be a question-and-answer session and not a debate, because I am asking the questions. There’s nothing for him (Arul) to ask me,”

He hasn't come out and explicitly stated that Arul cannot ask him questions or that he won't answer them yet. You came to that conclusion based on those 2 sentences but I didn't.

This post has been edited by neoexcaliber: Nov 1 2015, 02:30 PM

I think this statement from Tony a few minutes ago can put this discussion to rest:

“It does not matter who wins or loses in the debate or talk show with Arul. What is important is that the information can be put out there so the people can have a better understanding of the 1MDB issue.”

Tony found his balls.