If you were an American living abroad you would be used to it.

I am a US citizen & live abroad part of the year.

Happy to say I have not had to get use to it as I have not been subjected to it.

Thai's seem to like my background

Well, Thais are notorious for not knowing about what's going on beyond their borders. Next time ask your Thai friends what they think of American policies in Central America in the 1980s. I'm a US citizen and have spent over 14 of the past 16 years living abroad in several different countries in 3 different parts of the globe. Places where the people are more aware of American history so my experiences differ from yours.

Well the Thais I associate with know quite well what goes on. But they also know as I said my background. I am not saying the Thais I know do not find what the US govt is doing to be acceptable. I am saying they find me acceptable.

I do not discount that you may have found folks unfavorable towards you or the country your from. Based as you say on their foreign policies.

Well the Thais I associate with know quite well what goes on.

I'm sure they do. I haven't met anyone on this section of Thai visa yet who doesn't hang out ony with the best and brightest Thailand has to offer.

Well the Thais I associate with know quite well what goes on.

I'm sure they do. I haven't met anyone on this section of Thai visa yet who doesn't hang out ony with the best and brightest Thailand has to offer.

See ......this is how these meaninglessness flame wars get going here.

The folks I know are not the best nor the brightest folks I have known.

Those are your words not mine. But I will say that they are informed of major world events. more importantly they are genuinely interested in the view points of folks who are on the actual ground level as many times their actual view is different than what is fed through various medias.

Also again as I stated in my post....They accept me which does not automatically mean they accept the

foreign policies of the country from which I come.

But.......These folks are smart enough (unlike some ) to know that the people of any country do not necessarily represent/agree with the actions taken by their government.

We know why there are no Nazie terrorists for they like to see the torture first hand rather than shoot down planes or fly them into buildings. Or perhaps the Nazies are not sophisticated enough. What do you think Naam? You seem to have some special knowledge about this topic.

-when the Nazi regime ended i was 15 months old. my knowledge has faded since then and i can't help out. to the best of my knowledge Nazi terrorists never existed but Nazi criminals existed galore.

Pretty sad if folks are branded by their birth countries prior mistakes.

Also makes you wonder about those being born today in various countries.

Do they also inherit their countries atrocities? Hope not...don't they call that lumping or pigeon holing ?

not to forget that i was born in Switzerland to an austrian-swiss mother and a german father. perhaps Khun Venturalaw will hold me responsible that Switzerland assists tax-evaders who moved their dough out of the Greatest Nation on Earth™ to escape the IRS?

All thru' out history.......

You pay for the sins of your ancestors.

Speshully so in NZ, paying for British colonial sins.

All thru' out history.......

You pay for the sins of your ancestors.

Speshully so in NZ, paying for British colonial sins.

i don't!

As I have tried in vain to explain as simply as possible to you in the past....You do not comprehend it.

Yes, you are just so much more "aware" than all the rational people. Do you really buy your own mad rantings?

not to forget that i was born in Switzerland to an austrian-swiss mother and a german father.

The point is not about where you are from; it is about your repeated references to other posters religious backgrounds which you refer to in an insulting manner. Strong insinuations that every poster who disagrees with you is a "Jew" would be a no-no even if you were not German.

We know why there are no Nazie terrorists for they like to see the torture first hand rather than shoot down planes or fly them into buildings. Or perhaps the Nazies are not sophisticated enough. What do you think Naam? You seem to have some special knowledge about this topic.

-when the Nazi regime ended i was 15 months old. my knowledge has faded since then and i can't help out. to the best of my knowledge Nazi terrorists never existed but Nazi criminals existed galore.

Pretty sad if folks are branded by their birth countries prior mistakes.

Also makes you wonder about those being born today in various countries.

Do they also inherit their countries atrocities? Hope not...don't they call that lumping or pigeon holing ?

not to forget that i was born in Switzerland to an austrian-swiss mother and a german father. perhaps Khun Venturalaw will hold me responsible that Switzerland assists tax-evaders who moved their dough out of the Greatest Nation on Earth™ to escape the IRS?

And Hitler was born in Austria. What does that have to do with it? Nice try. It was your appointing Jewish names to posters with whom you disagree that was your outing. Just own up to it and move on.

Do you really buy your own mad rantings?

Ummm that would be yes. I do stand behind what I say/believe.

As opposed to someone who talks a lot but never really says anything. Does not have a stance nor an actual opinion.

As opposed to one who believes patriotism is a blind faith in the actions of its chosen government/country.

Never once looking at the intent of the forefathers/framers of said country & what the country was actually founded on.

As opposed to one who has no point of view other than to bob his head in a constant yes fashion with what ever the government of choice has to offer as a reason for its actions even if those actions are in contrast of what said country was founded on.

As opposed to someone who must believe that all these action come free as they do not understand the creation of debt associated with it or the bill it will leave with future generations.

I need not ask if you really buy your lack of opinion as it is obvious in your posts.

I hope we can get past this low orbit you seem to enjoy & actually discuss something. If not no problem but I no longer want to be dancing this dance with you. If you have nothing to contribute leave it at that.

You even went so far as to chase me into the general section the other day. Your post/attack on me was deleted by Lite Beer but again I wonder what is your point? You did not even answer/participate in that topic/thread. You just came there to lodge a personal attack against me. Just as I said makes me wonder what your on about. Just bored?

Lastly I see you visited my profile a day ago.....Was there something you wanted to know? Just ask if it is not personal I will answer it for you.

And Hitler was born in Austria. What does that have to do with it? Nice try. It was your appointing Jewish names to posters with whom you disagree that was your outing. Just own up to it and move on.

i asked a valid question and did not "appoint jewish names" to anybody. based on my experience with more than a dozen jewish friends that question makes sense! they are all normal people and discuss each and everything rationally except when it concerns Eretz Yisrael, the "promised land" and the Palestinians. quite interesting is the fact that even the agnostics and atheists among them start quoting the bible when this topic is mentioned.

and now little boy i am looking for your next twisting of my postings

Ironic isn't it? BTW, if you wish for me to explain irony to you, well - you know about Google so figure it out for yourself.

I expect that the Brit use is the same as the Antipodean use....and it isn't anything like sarcasm. It is indeed simmilar to the firehouse burning down. VL used it with good intent, though with poor execution when he tried to say MY use of the word "spurious" was spurious.

Do you actually ever read the previous posts to which you refer? It does not appear that you do. I'll break it down for you.

Here is what I said: "You made a claim (which turned out to be false, i.e. spurious) following your statement "Apparently you're a lawyer......You make some very spurious arguments." Ironic isn't it?"

The statement that you made was that "20 000 died in Bopal due to American company executives, (and thousands more alive and still suffering today)......but there is no prejudice towards Dupont. The company was Union Carbide. So you were mistaken, hence your statement was spurious.

Irony in this case was you, who made a spurious statement, referred to me as one who makes 'very spurious arguments'. Understand?

With regard to you correcting my contention that there are no Jewish terrorists, I agree. I was incorrect.

I think you need to comprehend the word "spurious". It does not mean "incorrect" or "mistaken" or "wrong". The word may carry a connotation of being wrong, but it's closer to being disingenuous.

As to "spurious" being an insult.....even with your apparent use of the word, accusing someone of being wrong is not insulting, it is merely disagreeing. I am sorry that you felt insulted and I told you that I did not intend to insult you.....On the other hand, you use a word that you find insulting, which means that you intended to insult.

Fortunately, since I do not find the word insulting, I was not insulted. But your intent is a bit of a worry.

BTW, koheesti corrected me on my Dupont mistake, which I admitted. Again, to clarify, a mistake, not something spurious.

You have proven my point that you do not read previous posts to which you refer. Now you are challenging the meaning of spurious. I provided an online dictionary definition with the reference.

Disingenuous requires intent (lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere).

You want to keep avoiding the obvious. You saying 'sorry' was clearly disingenuous (as presented in my previous post where I quoted you). I won't argue with you about this any more for it is clear that when proven that you are not correct, you won't, as you once professed about me, be a "gentleman or a real man" and own up to it.

And Hitler was born in Austria. What does that have to do with it? Nice try. It was your appointing Jewish names to posters with whom you disagree that was your outing. Just own up to it and move on.

i asked a valid question and did not "appoint jewish names" to anybody. based on my experience with more than a dozen jewish friends that question makes sense! they are all normal people and discuss each and everything rationally except when it concerns Eretz Yisrael, the "promised land" and the Palestinians. quite interesting is the fact that even the agnostics and atheists among them start quoting the bible when this topic is mentioned.

and now little boy i am looking for your next twisting of my postings

You're correct, you did not appoint. You asked. BTW, I'm not a little boy (you like to insult don't you - as though you are superior), nor Jewish before you ask. The question is why you would even think of asking if one has a Jewish middle name. Actually, there is no question. It's clear to most who post here. You just don't want to admit it. That's fine. Up to you.

You even went so far as to chase me into the general section the other day. Your post/attack on me was deleted by Lite Beer but again I wonder what is your point?

You really are delusional. I did not chase you anywhere. I saw that your post was very misleading to someone who has not read the usual trash posted in outside the box and I pointed it out. As far as both our posts being deleted, that does not mean that what I said was not true. Many times mods will send me a PM telling me that they agree with what I said, but they have to enforce the rules against bickering.

By the way, the reason why I don't bother to debate you about your poison-pen, anti-American rantings is that they are so nonsensical that they are not worth responding to. Why keep going around in circles when you don't even listen to anyone but yourself?

As far as looking at your profile goes, stop being so paranoid, I go to pretty much everyone's profile that I agree with or disagree with in order to read all their old posts to see exactly where they are really coming from. That is what those functions are for you know.

You have proven my point that you do not read previous posts to which you refer. Now you are challenging the meaning of spurious. I provided an online dictionary definition with the reference.

Disingenuous requires intent (lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere).

You want to keep avoiding the obvious. You saying 'sorry' was clearly disingenuous (as presented in my previous post where I quoted you). I won't argue with you about this any more for it is clear that when proven that you are not correct, you won't, as you once professed about me, be a "gentleman or a real man" and own up to it.

Yes, you provided the definition, then went on to say my post was spurious because I had cited Dupont. My mention of Dupont was a mistake, not a spurious argument. As I pointed out, the two things are different.

It is you who is not seeing the obvious.

You have proven me incorrect in nothing, hence I confess to nothing.

I saw that your post was very misleading to someone who has not read the usual trash posted in outside the box and I pointed it out. As far as both our posts being deleted, that does not mean that what I said was not true.

As I said before i do not wish to do this low orbit dance with you any further. You will always attempt to mislead

You will always confuse unwillingness towards blind faith of govt policy with anti Americanism. That alone shows how little you understand how & where America came from.

For anyone who cares to read it here is the post UG is attacking

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Situation-Ho...49#entry3363549

As can be seen it is consistent with what I always say. That there are problems & we as a people need to fix them.

That TPTB are leading us down a one way street.

That we as a people owe it to the next generation to try & repair it.

Yes my post after yours was deleted because I said directly what I thought of yours.

You are obviously still under some kind of fog due to lack of comprehension or god knows what.

But again you are the last person X-pat to be preaching patriotism. If you enjoy arm chair quarterbacking find a new sport.

This one has no good result for you.

As I said I do not wish to continue this useless dance with you as such.....

I will be back in Chiang Mai in a few months & these things may be better left to talking in person.

Then you can tell me in person what you think.

Apologies to others for taking this topic so far off topic.

I saw that your post was very misleading to someone who has not read the usual trash posted in outside the box and I pointed it out. As far as both our posts being deleted, that does not mean that what I said was not true.

As I said before i do not wish to do this low orbit dance with you any further. You will always attempt to mislead

You will always confuse unwillingness towards blind faith of govt policy with anti Americanism. That alone shows how little you understand how & where America came from.

For anyone who cares to read it here is the post UG is attacking

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Situation-Ho...49#entry3363549

As can be seen it is consistent with what I always say. That there are problems & we as a people need to fix them.

That TPTB are leading us down a one way street.

That we as a people owe it to the next generation to try & repair it.

Yes my post after yours was deleted because I said directly what I thought of yours.

You are obviously still under some kind of fog due to lack of comprehension or god knows what.

But again you are the last person X-pat to be preaching patriotism. If you enjoy arm chair quarterbacking find a new sport.

This one has no good result for you.

As I said I do not wish to continue this useless dance with you as such.....

I will be back in Chiang Mai in a few months & these things may be better left to talking in person.

Then you can tell me in person what you think.

Apologies to others for taking this topic so far off topic.

It was good you brought it up...no need to apologise (to me anyway).

I'm a little confused because UG said that both your posts had been deleted.....and your post obviously hadn't and obviously should not have been.

From my perspective, I feel that you, like me, are a little perterbed by UG's irrational behaviour lately. I don't understand his insistance to wear blinkers and not-rose coloured spectacles. I don't think he was like that before.

Nevermind. This is just a virtual world.

Regarding your post in General....kudos to you with your obvious love of your country and high level of patriotic integrity.

You have proven my point that you do not read previous posts to which you refer. Now you are challenging the meaning of spurious. I provided an online dictionary definition with the reference.

Disingenuous requires intent (lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere).

You want to keep avoiding the obvious. You saying 'sorry' was clearly disingenuous (as presented in my previous post where I quoted you). I won't argue with you about this any more for it is clear that when proven that you are not correct, you won't, as you once professed about me, be a "gentleman or a real man" and own up to it.

Yes, you provided the definition, then went on to say my post was spurious because I had cited Dupont. My mention of Dupont was a mistake, not a spurious argument. As I pointed out, the two things are different.

It is you who is not seeing the obvious.

You have proven me incorrect in nothing, hence I confess to nothing.

At least you're consistent.

Well the Thais I associate with know quite well what goes on.

I'm sure they do. I haven't met anyone on this section of Thai visa yet who doesn't hang out ony with the best and brightest Thailand has to offer.

The folks I know are not the best nor the brightest folks I have known.

Those are your words not mine.

Those are not my words as can be plainly seen.

Some Americans abroad find they are more liked and thought of as "enlightened" or "intellectual" the more critical they are of their own country. I think this was the same motivation for Bill Clinton when he protested against the US while a student in England.

It can be said of other countries as well. If you met a Russian who thought Russia was #1 and that Putin was great you would think differently of him than if he thought Putin was bad for Russia. You'd probably not want to invite the former to your party.

You have proven my point that you do not read previous posts to which you refer. Now you are challenging the meaning of spurious. I provided an online dictionary definition with the reference.

Disingenuous requires intent (lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere).

You want to keep avoiding the obvious. You saying 'sorry' was clearly disingenuous (as presented in my previous post where I quoted you). I won't argue with you about this any more for it is clear that when proven that you are not correct, you won't, as you once professed about me, be a "gentleman or a real man" and own up to it.

Yes, you provided the definition, then went on to say my post was spurious because I had cited Dupont. My mention of Dupont was a mistake, not a spurious argument. As I pointed out, the two things are different.

It is you who is not seeing the obvious.

You have proven me incorrect in nothing, hence I confess to nothing.

At least you're consistent.

I have always admitted my mistakes when they have been shown to me. Most recently koheesti pointed out a mistake of mine (UC not Dupont). Even though he has been on the opposite side of many of our discussions, I freely admit when I am wrong.

What is your point in inferring that I am consistant in confessing to nothing?

You are right in that I am consistant.....but consistant in not confessing???? No. I think categorically state that you are wrong there.....and I hope you don't feel insulted by my contradiction as you were insulted by my previous innocuous accusation.

It seems more and more plain that my accusation of your belligerance was right. I don't understand where it comes from.

It was good you brought it up...no need to apologise (to me anyway).

I'm a little confused because UG said that both your posts had been deleted.....and your post obviously hadn't and obviously should not have been.

Regarding your post in General....kudos to you with your obvious love of your country and high level of patriotic integrity.

Thanks

My post is the same as what I always say. It was not deleted because it was on topic.

As to deleted post I had one deleted where I responded to UG's false accusations.

I agree with having it deleted as it would have made no sense once UG's personal attack was removed by Lite Beer

I'm sure they do. I haven't met anyone on this section of Thai visa yet who doesn't hang out ony with the best and brightest Thailand has to offer.

The folks I know are not the best nor the brightest folks I have known.

Those are your words not mine.

Those are not my words as can be plainly seen.

Yes please excuse my non literal reply...

Would it have been better if I had said they are not the brightest Thailand has to offer?

That aside the rest of my post stands....

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Son-Hamas-Fo...83#entry3374883

Especially the part about this is how these detours get started.

As for this........

Some Americans abroad find they are more liked and thought of as "enlightened" or "intellectual" the more critical they are of their own country.

I do not doubt it but it is not the case in my situation.

All of the talking I do is from a financial perspective & that is what the Thai's I spoke of & speak with are interested in.

Because of course it has a relation to their existence.

Even here in this forum 99% of my posts are made in the financial section. I can honestly say I have never discussed foreign policy of the US with Thai's. I cannot imagine they would really be interested.

But because they are intelligent enough to keep up on news I am sure they have an opinion on it. But as I said we have not discussed it. They are as I said more interested in business as that is what affects them. They know if the US economy is in trouble it will affect theirs to some degree.

Lets perhaps return this topic to its point & again excuse me for helping take it off course in responding to some.

Lets perhaps return this topic to its point & again excuse me for helping take it off course in responding to some.

Before I even read your reply I was going to apologize for moving the topic in that tit-for-tat direction I hate so much. So I agree, let's get back to the topic.

Lets perhaps return this topic to its point & again excuse me for helping take it off course in responding to some.

Before I even read your reply I was going to apologize for moving the topic in that tit-for-tat direction I hate so much. So I agree, let's get back to the topic.

Agreed

As to deleted post I had one deleted where I responded to UG's false accusations.

Are you capable of telling the truth about anything?

I did not make any false accusations and I did not attack you. I mearly pointed out that what you posted might be misleading if one had not read your posts in "Outside the Box" and I suggested that Tinkerbell check them out to see for herself.

Another thing, if your offer to meet "face to face" is a thinly veiled threat, I have been threatened by lunatics plenty of times over the years and I am still walking around.

I have no interest in talking to you in person, because you don't listen to anyone but yourself and you have revealed too much about your mental state on here - why bother? We are not going to agree. However, you can be very sure that if you insist on bothering me in person, you will regret it.

Semper Fi

I did not make any false accusations and I did not attack you.

good night Gertrude.

My dance card is full. Continue as you wish.

The facts were there as your post was deleted because it was an attack.

Your claim that you were merely pointing out that you were attacking my character

since your post had nothing to do with the thread is why it was removed. I was surprised you were not banned.

As for meeting......I thought you called me paranoid it seems you are the paranoid.....Man take a chill pill or eat a cupcake what ever does it for you. It was no threat I just feel your so far off topic a personal discussion would be better. Do you only call folks liar or lunatic on a keyboard? If so no problem as I see you rather not talk. As I said it was no threat on my part only your perception made it so. Yet your reply of how I would regret it did make me smile.

Semper bye silly boy lets return this thread to its topic for the last time.

You have proven my point that you do not read previous posts to which you refer. Now you are challenging the meaning of spurious. I provided an online dictionary definition with the reference.

Disingenuous requires intent (lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere).

You want to keep avoiding the obvious. You saying 'sorry' was clearly disingenuous (as presented in my previous post where I quoted you). I won't argue with you about this any more for it is clear that when proven that you are not correct, you won't, as you once professed about me, be a "gentleman or a real man" and own up to it.

Yes, you provided the definition, then went on to say my post was spurious because I had cited Dupont. My mention of Dupont was a mistake, not a spurious argument. As I pointed out, the two things are different.

It is you who is not seeing the obvious.

You have proven me incorrect in nothing, hence I confess to nothing.

At least you're consistent.

I have always admitted my mistakes when they have been shown to me. Most recently koheesti pointed out a mistake of mine (UC not Dupont). Even though he has been on the opposite side of many of our discussions, I freely admit when I am wrong.

What is your point in inferring that I am consistant in confessing to nothing?

You are right in that I am consistant.....but consistant in not confessing???? No. I think categorically state that you are wrong there.....and I hope you don't feel insulted by my contradiction as you were insulted by my previous innocuous accusation.

It seems more and more plain that my accusation of your belligerance was right. I don't understand where it comes from.

No belligerence here. I provided my perspective with quotes, you did yours without. No reason to carry on. It's been suggested several times to return to the topic. I agree with that.

Naam: not to forget that i was born in Switzerland to an austrian-swiss mother and a german father. perhaps Khun Venturalaw will hold me responsible that Switzerland assists tax-evaders who moved their dough out of the Greatest Nation on Earth™ to escape the IRS?

venturalaw: Hitler was born in Austria.

and then he asks why i call him "little boy"

I did not make any false accusations and I did not attack you.

As for meeting......I thought you called me paranoid it seems you are the paranoid.....Man take a chill pill or eat a cupcake what ever does it for you. It was no threat I just feel your so far off topic a personal discussion would be better.

We are fighting like cats and dogs and you stop insulting me only long enough to tell me that you want to get together for tea in three months when you come over to Thailand for a visit.

Oh my, how could I have misconstrued your innocent meaning and why don't I believe you since you are always so amazingly honest?

I'm starting to understand why you are always making excuses for the poor misunderstood Hamas terrorists.