JoeLing

Waooo, I'm confuzled, soooo much to read, will take me for ever.......

At least, will I get a degree once I read AND understood it all, or at least some of it??

Concentration improves where money changes hands !

How much?

Now I wonder, how would Thai People react if .......?

That may be partially true but the reason is because of what incited the leaders which is the vid. Unreasonable to do so or not it's the vid that is at the root and the cause of the problem.

One concept that seems to escape people is that the standard for fighting words is not the same for everyone and it's not the speaker who decides it's the listener , you could call one person say me a nigger and since I am white get away with it because it's not considered fighting words but to a black man it would be. People don't seem to understand that just because they don't think somethng is offensive or because it doesnt offend them that means that it shouldnt offend anyone else either and legally thats just not the case. People will eventually understand that intentionally offending even muslims is the same as intentionally offending anyone else and when done in a meaningless way is in fact illegal.

The arugment that their love for their god is unreasonable so they shouldn't be so offended won't pass muster at the Supreme Court I assure you. Insulting someones mother is considered fighting words , the argument that there god is false or whatever way people try and package it will not make meaningless instults any more legal , if insulting your mother is fighting words obviously your god also qualifys ....... Should it be that way ? I don't know, all I know is that no one is going to win a case using the 1st amendment as a defence for a meaningless insult against a muslim the way the laws are written today. The idea that ..... well they are just offended to easily , is not gona work in a court trust me.

All I can tell you is wait and see if you don't believe me and just read the part I posted about fighting words and the law.

How can it be legal for one group to insult another but the other not be able to insult them back in the same way ? Bacause the 2 groups have different beliefs and are insulted by different things at differing levels of anger , just because you can insult a christan by saying jesus isn't real doesn't mean you can do so to a muslim about their muhummad , because a christian doesnt get so angered it's considered injurious to say that , but to a muslim it is. Once again it's the listener that gets to decide not the talker. If in fact Christians got as angered that would be illegal as well but thats just not the case.

Why can a black man call me a honkey but me not call him a nigger back ? Because of the different levels of anger created by racist terms, it's considered injurious on it's face for him and hence illegal for me to say but to call me a honkey or some other white person slur would not be considered fighting words because it doesn't offend me in the same way.

I would point this out ...... it's illegal to insult a muslims mother just like your's or mine , do you really think any court will hold a muslims god in lesser status than their mother ?

Your argument is a straw man, because the 'speech' under discussion was not delivered to any specific person, so can not fall under the 'fighting words' construction. It expressed an idea about a historical figure that a group of people who do not subscribe to the same idea found offensive. Further, it is impossible to know the intent of the author; he may have just wanted to vent, or he MAY have wanted to sow discontent, but he clearly did not intend to harm a living person. The reaction of the relatively few who committed violence as a means of expressing their disagreement with this person can not be justified, period. Under your premise, my Aunt Sadie could justify mayhem upon hearing of the cooking of cauliflower, to which she prays bi-weekly...(she's a batty old bird)

I would like to see evidence for your notion that the listener determines what the standard is for 'fighting words'.

Your other assertions, regarding State and local laws, are meaningless as well, because the subject is the First Amendment, against which those State and local laws must be tested. That they are de facto laws does not validate them as constitutional. If they are litigated, and move through the court system, and the Supreme Court agrees to hear them, the outcome will be considered precedent.

For a scholarly discussion of the First Amendment and what is and is not protected speech, see http://www.bsos.umd....htingwords.html

That is, if you're interested in scholarly work, as opposed to pulling it out of the oft referred to orifice...

It's not correct to think that the fighting word doctrine only applys to speaking to an individual , my statement that meaningless insults are not a protected form of speech is quite true and if you actually read the Article you posted thats pretty much a 101 or high school level not Scolarly you would know that.

I was looking to the future and didn't say this case would rise to the level of meaningless hate speech that would fall under the fighting words exception , however I suspect it lacks the required significance of artistic , sceintific or literary value the doctrine requires ..... I said that in the future you won't win any cases using the 1st amendment as a defence against whats already been decided as illegal ..... meaningless insults

You are once again confused by saying that anyone is justifyed or that anything I have said would justify mayhem , Rioting is not legal just because you claim it was incited. However if you made meaningless insulting comments to your aunt over her vegetables or anything else it's not protected speech as NO meaningless insulting speech is legal contrairy to your incorrect beliefs. Which is why people are arrested all the time for disturbing the peace for making insulting stupid comments. Not including public figures as an exception.

What I mean when I say it's the listener who decides I figured it was obvious enough that I meant the listener is the only one who's going to complain.

Finally you are also confused when you state that laws that have not been overturned for being unconstitutional are meaningless they are the Law and only become meaningless IF they are overturned and you are also so confused and incorrect about whats legal and whats not that you think they have not already reached the Superior or State Supreme court level because they have, and the reason the Supreme Court doesn't need to hear them is because the defenition of meaningless has alredy been decided by them. And all those kinds of cases revolve around the defenition of "significant" which has also been defined before the defenition of "meangless" was.

Oops one more thing you are incorrect about ..... A persons intention is not what matters in situations like this , what matters is if " A reasonable person would know or should have known ...." Not what the possible offender knew or should have known or his intention. The meashurement is a "reasonable person" not the paticular person involved or the paticular persons intention but that of OTHER people who would be considered reasonable.

It's hard to tell if you are more incorrect or confused but it's easy to tell you know nothing about the limitations on the 1st Amendment which the Supreme Court has already decided include any conduct that is insulting , rude . offensive ect that does not have significant literary , scientific or artistic value ( I may be forgetting one more) And that would include speaking to a croud not just an individual, magazines , books and yes the internet as well. I guess you missed the argument about vaginas having artistic value in magazines. Or the argument that Calvin peeing of a Ford does not, allowing for those stickers to be illegal in some parts of America where some whiner complained.

Waooo, I'm confuzled, soooo much to read, will take me for ever.......

At least, will I get a degree once I read AND understood it all, or at least some of it??

........

Sure glad all those Libyans have long memories and are still grateful to the Americans for all they did in helping to get rid of Gaddafi LESS THAN A YEAR AGO. Little wonder the US doesn't want to get involved in Syria. Seems the more you help certain groups of people, the more they resent you and want to stab you in the back, while (usually) still holding out their hands begging for money.

Nothing wrong with your article but,

I don't belive the US helped the Lybian people just for humanitarian reasons but more likely they helped them to help themself to get favorable terms for oil contracts and to establish Coke and McD in every street corner. (I know, desserts have no corners but there are plenty of towns in Lybia that do). So not quite sure why Lybian people should be greatfull to the US.

America, Britain and France provided air cover and other support for the people who were fighting to rid themselves of a lunatic dictator who had ruled for 42 years. Think about it.

And they did it within days of troubble starting there, unlike in Syria. Suppose the biggest reason was Gadhafies quest to unite all Arabic states, in fact he wanted to unite half of Africa and then we would realy have had to worry in our western world. The USA had a long standing problem with Libya, so did Britain and Italy.

Further more, there is oil but no Coke, KFC's or McD's in Libya. So nothing at all to do with "Liberating the poor souls in Libya". Not realy sure why France joined in. But I suppose that would be a complete different story for a different tread.....

I love the "Adventure Sport" bit. -

Katoy riding, muff diving, .....

and all "velly, velly" cheap.

I know about femidons, those things she uses to stuff up her punany.

But what the heck is a "Female Condom"??

Seriously? Sheltered life I guess as they were 1st used in the 1980s.

A female condom (also known as a femidom) - wiki

A female bull (also known as a cow) - lingi

A male chicken (also known as a rooster) - wiki

Suppose they dress the "female penis" with a "female condom"

The reason for people these days driving without much care is the increasing number of automobiles being produced around the world.

......., which mean that they are unable to choose in selling the cars to people who have good driving skills.

Haven't read so much chickenshit in years. Who is this guy? Does he work for the Cartoon Network?

If we assume the year 610 AD ......... as the time when Islam was invented we see that they today are still in their Medieval Period. And when we take a look at the Christians of the 15th century AD we see that they were an equally violent mob, ready to go on murderous rampages against jews, pagans or "heretics" at a moment's notice. However there is one excuse. They didn't know any better. The Age of Enlightenment was still to come.

This line of reasoning defies belief.

So you're saying that because Islam was 'invented' some 600 years after the supposed time of Jesus being around, then by your logic you subtract 600 odd years from the current year - thereby making Islam's current year of progress equivalent to Christianity in the 15th century......

REALLY???

There are so many holes in this I don't know where to begin.

Next time don't start an illogical argument like that with "If we assume" - it lumps the rest of us in there with you....

Well, I quite liked that assumption as it seams that the majority of arabic states are still hundreds of years behind the western, developed countries BUT if I look further, then Thailand should be very well ahead of our western society,and we're definately not.

Suppose the main issue is Compassion. A luxury we have in the west but not in the muslim countries nor the hindu or buddhist countries show much of it.

I know about condoms, those thinks we use to put over our knobbies.

I know about femidons, those things she uses to stuff up her punany.

But what the heck is a "Female Condom"??

Didn't know they come in different sexes.

How does one check if the condom you just bought is male or female?

Can a male condom inpegnate a female condom?

............. If we assume the year 610 AD (oh the blasphemy - Anno Domini!) as the time when Islam was invented we see that they today are still in their Medieval Period. And when we take a look at the Christians of the 15th century AD we see that they were an equally violent mob, ready to go on murderous rampages against jews, pagans or "heretics" at a moment's notice. However there is one excuse. They didn't know any better. The Age of Enlightenment was still to come.

So what is the excuse of the Muslims?

They don't know any better. The Age of Enlightenment is still to come.

Although, if "Life of Brian" (I love that movie) would have been produced today by some one called Bin Laden, I'm sure we would have riots all over the western world too.

I believe he was in the life of Brian...a member of the suicide squad...

It's actually a Double Like

If you bow to ignorant uneducated bigoted mobs then one day we will all end up in the same gutter alongside them.

Fully agree with you on that. I read every day ignorant, uneducated, bigoted comments and speeches from people here on TV and from Thai politicians and you see, I'm in the same gutter alongside with all of you living here :-)

Exactly.....When Monty Python put out the life of Brian...where there riots in the streets, people murdered in the name of religion...dont think so....leave it up

Although, if "Life of Brian" (I love that movie) would have been produced today by some one called Bin Laden, I'm sure we would have riots all over the western world too.

...... "It might be a hallucination but we found (weapons) many times.'

" ......., adding that the effectiveness could be "something above science"

On mushrooms practicing vodoo?

.......... Does this mean the U.S. will close the embassy in Libya and Egypt?

Well, suppose there is no one there to staff the embassy now ;-)

this must be the joke of the day??? What about Ayutthaya or Sukothai? Anyone???

Well, if the government sais they not flooded, then they arn't!!!

Our PM reasured us earlier in the year that we will not have any floods anymore

and on an other subject she said " It's all just in our immagination"

They might just water the flowers a bit too much.

Many people call themselves your friend in Pattaya if you have money, you soon find out if they really are a good friend if you find yourself with no money !!

Not only in Pattaya - the whole world over!

Didn't he listen to his boss?

Didn't she say there will be no more floods?

So sure, it's just high water not floods.

Give me a heads up on this when we become "The Hub" of Hantavirus

Maybe "Hub" of rats but "Hub" of hanta virus?

Unless elephants carry the virus. They make a lot of poo so might infect a lot of people.

........ show me an honest man that wouldn't have taken the bung!!!!

Pile of Buffalo S**t. A complete contradiction.

Honest man who "take the bung" are NOT honest.

ah come on, better to pay 400 bth than drive to police station, ah, i paid 500 bht to policeman too because of my bike and no licence

i was relived that I did not have to go down to police station

same happens in Bali, I think it is even worse

So you're commiting a bigger crime (corrupting a police officer)

in order to get a lower fine for a very small violation of the law?

Just doesn't make sense to me.

Just wonder what are the "real" penalties for driving a bike without licence

and what are the "real" penalties for corrupting a police officer?

I completely dissagree with corruption.

People paying corruption are as guilty as the once receiving it.

I can understand the statement of "Not flodding" but

"... airport will remain dry through rainy season" ?

Did they buy a huge umbrella?

The exclusive Ferrari dealer in Thailand is Cavallino Motors, owned by the owner of Red Bull and the owner of Singha beer in partnership. http://www.cavallino.co.th/press.aspx It's no "coincidence" that the local Thai Ferrari dealer, Cavallino, has "no expertise" in diagnosing the car's black box.

Secondly, no "murder" charges yet? It's an obvious case of murder. The only question is what class of murder? Premeditated, negligent homicide - both compounded by drunk driving, or will this one be allowed to slide?

Premeditated? In Thailand?

"A butler at Worrayuth's house, Suwes Hom-ubol, who initially claimed to have driven a Ferrari and crashed into accident victim Pol Snr Sgt Major Wichean Klinprasert, has been indicted at Bangkok South Municipal Court for giving a false statement and assisting others to flee criminal action"

The were quick to charge the butler and why do I get the feeling that he will face the full force of the law and probably be punished more severly than the driver who is the cause of all this.

There is no mention of the parents and police officer being indicted along with the Butler. Was the Butler acting alone in the attempt to pervert the course of justice or are the parents imune from prosecution. It has all come down to the "Butler did it" Personally I say let the Butler go and throw the book at the parents and Police Officer who used him as the attempted scape goat.

The butler did it.

That's a change, usualy it's the gardener .....

At least this time, it's not the bad farang