http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html/ zh-tw Roodo Blog System All Rights Reserved 馬總統發怒肅貪　2高階警官中箭　購槍涉弊遭收押]]> http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18899301 文章回應 Fri, 10 Apr 2009 14:41:20 +0800 http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18899293 文章回應 Fri, 10 Apr 2009 14:39:25 +0800 http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18898133 wildkid.t@gmail.com(wildkid) 文章回應 Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:15:58 +0800 菲律賓ABS-CBN新聞引述法新社的報導裡，有這麼一段話："Singapore and Hong Kong retained their top two rankings as the region's least corrupt economies, although there are concerns about private-sector fraud, according to the survey by the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC), made available to AFP."，似乎這個調查是AFP出資的，所以不用去懷疑PERC是否跟中共掛鉤或是favor馬囧，當然公司基地在香港對中國歌頌一下是再自然也不過，但萬一評估太離譜失準頭，買他報告的外商怎麼可能會放過他，委託銅鑼灣扛壩子或是東興烏鴉幹掉他。 二、扁案是藍營提款機，就好像國民黨黨產是綠營提款機一樣的道理，雖然藍營＂理性＂支持者都希望把扁家偷向狗頭閘，但假如＂提款機＂這個假設前提是成立的，那麼這次肅貪顯然不是針對扁案。(當然，f大所說的，宣揚優質中國，也不意外) 三、如果沒記錯，最近的是先有國軍集體買官案，然後貪污報告外電出來一天，中央社報導了(中間穿插一個體委會入聯A錢)，馬騜馬上震怒，總統府開記者會，奇怪，這個政府何時效率這麼高了？然後王清楓宣示3個月查弊。所以我猜操作邏輯是這樣： 阿扁貪腐->老外說台灣比中國貪腐->馬蝗震怒，果然被阿扁害了->國軍買官，發生在前朝->肅貪3個月->前朝資金挪用+杜正勝機要費等通通抓、國軍高階拉幾個非自己人馬出來墊背->7月起訴、8-10月一審宣判有罪->藍營好威、真清廉(綠營貪贓枉法)->11月選舉宣傳(綠營這麼貪，600萬擺腿上)->12月選舉--END--]]> http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18897847 文章回應 Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:17:34 +0800 http://news.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007Cti-News/2007Cti-News-Content/0,4521,130504+132009040900044,00.html 現在澳門日報是台灣六中國十，台灣的報紙不管哪一家都是中國八台灣九，這一定有更詭異的因素在裡頭。]]> http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18896241 RWorkingman@gmail.com(Portnoy) 文章回應 Fri, 10 Apr 2009 01:03:20 +0800 http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18894531 文章回應 Thu, 09 Apr 2009 19:12:25 +0800 http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18894263 文章回應 Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:58:49 +0800 http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18893061 文章回應 Thu, 09 Apr 2009 14:12:11 +0800 http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18893017 文章回應 Thu, 09 Apr 2009 14:00:58 +0800 http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18888609 chihtao@gmail.com(走索者) 文章回應 Thu, 09 Apr 2009 01:49:04 +0800 http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18886281 文章回應 Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:31:22 +0800 2005年的舊聞，還真準咧 XD 更加深我對這起事件炒作成分居多的懷疑]]> http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html http://blog.roodo.com/no_difference/archives/8659973.html#comment-18884881 文章回應 Wed, 08 Apr 2009 12:46:25 +0800