Editor's note: The Post visited meeting organizer Om

Yentieng on July 25 to ask him about the July 4 meeting. This is an edited extract

of that meeting, with comments in Khmer in brackets {}.

Phnom Penh Post: We have heard what our sources say the meeting is about, but I would

like to know from your side.

Om Yentieng: No. From me I have the right to request to you: please ask the source.

I think that I'm, I'm, I don't have a good feeling to answer about your question,

because I feel that I will be your prisoner if I answer this question to you. You

don't have the obligation to force me.

No, I know.

You have the right to question, I have the right to answer. This is my answer.

I understand that. Of course you do. I am only here to try and ask-

I think that you are a spy. You [should work] like a journalist; you [should not]

work like a spy. OK, another question please.

Sure. This meeting on July 4-

Another question please. Another question please.

Well, I would like a confirmation or a denial that such a meeting took place. That

is all I am after.

I am not your prisoner.

I am not suggesting you are.

You are not the police to ask me like this.

I am aware of that. We are going to run a story detailing this meeting, so the government-

My answer is clear. I am not answering anything to you about this. Please ask your

source. It is better than me.

We already have.

Up to you. But don't include me in here.

So you won't confirm or deny such a meeting took place?

{I repeat again: I am not your prisoner. Go back to your source.}

Absolutely, well we are just trying to get a response from the government.

{As I told you, I won't answer any questions about that and you have to go back

to your source. Don't work as a spy. You are a journalist.}

I am trying to be a journalist. Honestly I am. I am just trying to get two sides

of the story.

My side is like this-my side is already answered to you very clearly.

But you won't even confirm or deny that-

Please, please on your source. This is my answer. It is my answer. It is clear that

I wish you to base on your source. Go ahead. For me, I am not your prisoner to answer

about this.

Of course, and no-one is suggesting you are. All I want to know from the government

is whether such a meeting even happened. Maybe it didn't even happen?

Up to you, up to you. It is not my affair.

But I was told you organized it, which is why we have come to speak to you today.

It is like this-if you clarified to me from the first time, I don't pay my time to

see you today. It is not interesting to answer about this, because you have your

own source already. Please, go ahead.

You know as well as I do that a good journalism story has two sides.

You think I don't have any rights.

Of course you have rights.

That you can abuse my rights?

I am not trying to abuse your rights.

Please, go ahead. Another question please.

Well, all the questions are about this story.

No. Please, if you have only this story, then I think maybe I cannot help you. Maybe

I cannot help you.

Not even to confirm or deny that this meeting even happened?

Looks like don't see me. It is better. You must look like you don't see me today,

it is better. Finished. {If you are just talking about this issue, then it is

better that we never met.}