- Popular Post

stephen tracy
-
Posts
2,268 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by stephen tracy
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
In the name of religion we will tell you what to do or you will go to jail. You cannot possibly think for yourself, that's not allowed.
-
5
-
1
-
Over the last month I've noticed the very conspicuous absence of the former pro-junta members here on TV. Have they finally run out of excuses and flimsy justifications?
-
2
-
-
How can Prayuth be a victim of fake news? He's the worst offender... every Friday night. And just for the record, my car didn't work after I filled it with water!
-
Gonna need to "uncover" another cache of red shirt weapons.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
6 hours ago, bluesofa said:Am I missing the obvious here - is it because it was a foreign reporter, not a Thai reporter?
Perhaps Man-Child and Dumbo think the rest of the world doesn't know what's going on in Thailand (despite numerous diplomatic missions and foreign correspondents), and thought this one reporter was gonna let the cat out of the bag. Maybe they thought the UK Daily Mail was the only foreign newspaper to ever report on Thailand, and they figured they had that one covered... apart from the slight inconvenience of VPNs, and the fact that Man-Child and Dumbo were confounded when they discovered it was not possible to sue the Internet.
-
3
-
1
-
Amazing isn't it? Good, educated people paid next to nothing and persevering somehow, and meanwhile Dumbo is walking around with 50 luxury watches gifted to him by a corpse. There really is something very wrong with all this.
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, PREM-R said:
" Security tight at Government House, though Prayut has his fans"....... What ever became of Century Steve?
Last I heard he'd moved to Venezuela and was recently spotted posting pro-Maduro comments with bouncing emojis on the Caracas Post Online.
-
- Popular Post
3 hours ago, hansnl said:Oh dear!
Any difference elsewhere?
Umm, yes.
-
2
-
1
-
“We do not practise bias or preferential treatment" = We adhere to a strict policy of only practising bias and preferential treatment.
-
10 hours ago, pornprong said:
Anyone? Baerboxer
Anyone? Robblok
Anyone? Scorecard
Anyone? Halloween
steven100?
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, djayz said:
... and when people can't have a drink in a bar or restaurant on Buddhist holidays.
And elections
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, lemonjelly said:
Would it include Chinese tanks n submarines, or maybe massive amounts of cash allocated to the army to buy rubber products to ease the rubber farmers woes?
I expect the first one (tanks/subs) could come under peace and reconciliation, and the second one (rubber) qualifies for economic reform. They genuinely do actually believe the people are stupid.
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
36 minutes ago, Eligius said:The mystery third party - infiltrating the demo - could well be (if it exists at all - which is doubtful) agents provocateurs from the junta itself. It is not at all unusual for unprincipled governments and suchlike to plant paid trouble-makers into a crowd, to make that crowd look bad - and then the government can claim that all demonstrations must cease forthwith, as they pose a threat to 'national security'.
I would not put anything past this bunch of criminals (the junta, that is!).
Took the words out of mouth (off my keyboard). It would be extraordinarily stupid and counter productive if Thaksin (and that is exactly who they're referring to - let's not beat around the bush here) to provoke anything at this very delicate stage. And whatever people think of him, Thaksin is anything but stupid. He can run circles round Man-Child and Dumbo with hands tied behind his back. He must know full well that right now it's best for him to sit back and watch the show because he doesn't really need to anything . Man-Child and Dumbo are doing it for him but are far too stupid to realise this. And of course he knows that any kind of mass protest against the junta must be seen as genuine and not manufactured. In short, he does not stand to gain by interfering. The junta however thinks it stands to gain by portraying the opposition as violent and therefore justify its continued role at the helm. If there is violence, look no further than the junta.
-
4
-
5
-
5 hours ago, missoura said:
A well known private university in Bangkok is where I started working in Thailand in 1999 for B24,500 a year. I taught classes like ‘English & Tourism’, Business English and conversational English.
Some students would show up for class but most did not. One male on the soccer team finally showed up to class, on the last day. He flunked his final exam but received an A anyway as Western teachers could not assign the final grades. That responsibility was given to a committee that gave students grades ranging from a 3.0 to a 4.0.
These students attending this prestigious university come from rich and connected parents. In my class it was common to have the latest movie or fashion star along with the students involved with a sports team. One term, I had the girls on the Badminton team in class, but it was only for the first day; then I never saw them again. They still passed with flying colors. The requirements for graduation was simple, pay the school fees.
Was it Assumption?
-
4 hours ago, Darcula said:
Motorcycle taxis are now a national security issue.
Yeah, but in terms of threats to the state security apparatus they rank second after twerking while reading Orwell.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:
Nice videos with the op article!
And who ever said Thailand isn't an eminently civilized place!
That's nothing. Try the UK on a Friday night.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, greenchair said:
You don't know if I have gay friends or not, my own nephew is gay ,so since it's non chattable issue I shan't bother. I have never said gay people should not raise children that are their own. I have expressed my opinion that I am against gay couples adopting other people's children (except if it is an express wish of the parents ).
I am against marriage, but support civil union with equal rights. This LGBTIQQ stuff is rediculous so I continue use the universally understood word of gay for same sex couples. Which I believe the gay community will eventually go back to. It's a time waster and irrelevant to the cause. I do believe and statistics show a majority of gays were molested as children or were raised in drug addicted or abusive families. It's not a criticism, it's a sad fact.
I don't believe religion, or homosexuality should be taught in schools, both are confusing and not necessary for my family.
I strongly am against the promotion of drugs, cigarettes, homosexuality and radical brainwashing of religion to children.
None of these things are critical of the gay community, nor homophobic, nor racist. They are serious issues and if the gay c continue to bury their head in the sand and refuse to accept or even discuss the issues in a rational way, then expect the fight for equal rights to be long.
"statistics show a majority of gays were molested as children or were raised in drug addicted or abusive families. It's not a criticism, it's a sad fact. " What utter nonsense. Show your sources for this "fact".
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
39 minutes ago, Monomial said:While I find this an interesting argument, it should be made clear that absolutely nobody has ever said a homosexual couple can not raise a child. That is a specious argument that you are throwing in to try and reframe the discussion. The issue under discussion is whether or not adoption and surrogacy should be extended to homosexual couples. In the event a homosexual couple can acquire a child through natural means, absolutely nobody is saying they do not have the same rights as everyone else to raise the child.
This is strictly about whether or not extraordinary means via social institutions should be extended to homosexual couples, and whether or not this a right everyone deserves. Non married people are already denied this right, so there is no fundamental reason why homosexuals couples are being persecuted by this rule. Furthermore, in the case of adoption, the couples background is extensively investigated, and adoption is denied in the case of an unfit home. For surrogacy, heterosexual married couples where the woman is infertile are denied surrogacy options in the case where no female blood relatives are available.
There are many, many cases where these social institutions are denied to any number of people and it has absolutely nothing to do with sexual preference, so it seems to me this does represent a specific case of discrimination, but rather a more nuanced set of rules dictated by social norms.
I can appreciate that everyone wants this option, but so far, nobody has made a valid argument why homosexual couples should be entitled to adopt children when entire groups of others are denied this chance. The problem is this has absolutely nothing to do with discrimination, and everything to do with considering the needs of the child. And in this case, society currently takes the most conservative view of what makes the optimal home for a child. It is not personal and in my opinion not discriminatory.
"it should be made clear that absolutely nobody has ever said a homosexual couple can not raise a child". I think you're wrong
-
3
-
1
-
31 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:
that is calling him a liar
abuse
I called it like I saw it.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:
Well, to be fair, Stephen, it is a forum in which comment and opinion are invited. To take the heat out would be a good idea, so... if this thread were about footballers, someone would not have to have footballer friends in order to make a valid comment or have a valid opinion. Room for all surely?. It's also not necessary to be intimately familiar with the activities of footballers in order to have a lack of empathy, or even hostility towards footballers.
And I strongly suspect that most support or tolerance for footballers is largely based on not having a close proximity to the game of football or satisfying themselves that the close proximity of the footballing lifestyle is not something they should worry about.. I can't demonstrate this, but I was in Australia during the i960's and 70's, and again during he 1980's. The active hostility demonstrated towards footballers in personal conversations was pretty consistent and apperently unrelated to legislation passed in the interregnum. This and similar situations in the UK, leads me to believe that tolerance of and support for footballers has more to do with a perception of what enlightenment means today, than it does any form of genuine tolerance and belief in personal choices.
Don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but, setting aside what we might want to believe for a moment, people are generally not to be trusted to express opinions if there is any law or social convention that may bring them into scorn or ridicule. Most people care about social inclusion. I personally don't give a damn, but most people do, and honesty in the face of the possibility of social exclusion for having non-politically-correct views, is a very rare occurrence.
Things are not always as clear-cut as our own preferences might suggest. For this reason, I predict that the whole 'live and let live' culture we find ourselves in a a result of intensive lobbying by a community with vested interests, will pass as the cycle of social trends comes full circle. As history suggests it surely will.
"Well, to be fair, Stephen, it is a forum in which comment and opinion are invited": So I commented. And expressed my opinion that he doesn't have any gay friends, as he claimed.
-
You can't bring about reform if you're the very obstacle to that reform. It's a non-starter.
-
1
-
-
“If we have elections today, but no one respects the law, then having democracy would be in vain.” Absolutely spot on! Now go tell that to Man-Child and Dumbo. It would probably go over their heads though, especially Dumbo's. Good 'ole Dumbo.
-
1 minute ago, Unsane said:
Let's elaborate. A red light is not a suggestion, it's an order.
Having once been hit by a taxi running a red light in BKK, I agree with your sentiment (100 percent) but I like the first one better. I think it might make the motorist in question stop and think a little. Although I don't know if will sound as good in Thai as it does in English. Member rkidlad could probably land a job in advertising or PR. That was inspired.
-
10 hours ago, rkidlad said:
If true, a nice lengthy prison sentence. Send a message loud and clear - a red light is not a suggestion!
"a red light is not a suggestion!" I must admit, I really like that. It should be sign-posted in Thai at all traffic lights. It's a great slogan.
Don: European nations preparing for Gen Prayut’s visit
in Thailand News
Posted
Let's hope when he gets back he writes another song about his trip. Perhaps something along the lines of "it's not easy being green". And on that note (pardon the pun), I wonder if he's taking his pet frog with him and what the visa situation will be in that case.