How To Stop The Million Man March Legitimately

[Ulysses G.]

you have to admit that your one-liners certainly don't ADD any balance to the discussion. You provide no information or discuss any issues. You just make a quick snide remark about posters and then retreat (as a general rule.)

Incorrect, I refute silly posts, provide ignored facts and point out inconsistencies. What I don't often do is spin the truth, distort facts to fit my OWN agenda or pontificate for page after page about one particular subject.

This is not the Royal Debating Society, it is the internet, and pointing out when someone is rather full of it, is a lot more effective than trying to refute endless page after page of obsessive, opinionated nonsense.

Edited March 6, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

Please point me too them, as I have yet to see any.

You need to go back and read the thread. I just gave an excellent example about HITLER (hint hint).

Refuting that Thaksin is not like Hitler is not giving explanations of why you think he is not corrupt.

You asked me to point out lies about Thaksin, but did I say that he is not corrupt? I said that he has a WHOLE LOT of company.

[Lizard]

Why would you want to stop a march? are you against democracy? is your shirt yellow?

Thaksin was a great Prime Minister of Thailand, he wanted to get it out of it's 3rd world quagmire, and get it more like Singapore is, clean living, rode rules observed, etc. etc. etc. etc. Now this Military run country is more like a dictatorship, they can do, say and stop anything they dam_n well please. There is a lot more to it, but I might be chastised by our illustrious Thai Visa Controller, for really saying whats going on here in Thailand. You people better really get your facts right, there is going to big some huge changes made here in Thailand when the Monarchy topples.

Yes for the march, no for milatary control-

You have it right I am pro RED SHIRT !!!

I searched your post for a single fact.

Alas, I found none.

LOL ya you and many thousands others, this is why it's a snow job by the present Government, built on lies.

[rixalex]

Incorrect, I refute silly posts, provide ignored facts and point out inconsistencies. What I don't often do is spin the truth, distort facts to fit my OWN agenda or pontificate for page after page about one particular subject.

Wow. You really are one very deluded man if that's how you see your posts.

Let me guess, when you look in the mirror you see a slightly tubby Brad Pitt, don't you?

[tomahawk]

Whether you agree with reds or yellows or neither, I think the main point of this posting is that someone should not be allowed freedom of assembly because of their political beliefs. Would OP object to million man march of yellow shirts? I doubt it. I have my own opinions of the red and yellow business but this discussion has been talked to death and many people are sick of hearing about it. My own feeling is anyone should be allowed to peacefully demonstrate or voice their opinion. It is bad enough when native people want to suppress the peoples' rights but for foreigners to come here and do this is particularly ridiculous.

[rixalex]

You asked me to point out lies about Thaksin, but did I say that he is not corrupt? I said that he has a WHOLE LOT of company.

Saying that Thaksin has "a WHOLE LOT of company" is perfectly reasonable and most likely factual. What it is not is excusing or diminishing. That's where you and the reds fall flat on your faces.

[rixalex]

Whether you agree with reds or yellows or neither, I think the main point of this posting is that someone should not be allowed freedom of assembly because of their political beliefs. Would OP object to million man march of yellow shirts? I doubt it. I have my own opinions of the red and yellow business but this discussion has been talked to death and many people are sick of hearing about it. My own feeling is anyone should be allowed to peacefully demonstrate or voice their opinion. It is bad enough when native people want to suppress the peoples' rights but for foreigners to come here and do this is particularly ridiculous.

Can't disagree with any of that.

[Tod Daniels]

How to stop the Million Man March???

Plain and simple; ban the sale of alcohol that day. …

[RPETER65]

Sorry, I was just using the magic word invoked by Thaksin and UDD. I just thought "democracy" was what this whole fight was about. We all know there is no such thing as a "perfect" democracy that truly represents the "of the people, for the people, by the people". But it could be said that the reason Thaksin was removed was because he was taking down the safeguards that protected Thailand from becoming a dictatorship- it was well on its way to being a government of Thaksin, for Thaksin and by Thaksin- the interests of the "people" only came into it when he was deposed.

I understand what you're saying, all I have been trying to say is that all of these feelings of injustice and resentment are only going to have any chance (albeit slim) of being put to bed when everybody believes that the government are in place because that is what the majority want.

I don't think you have a clear understanding of the realities in Thailand at the present time, if you did you would see that as long as Thaksin keeps palying games from the side lines there will never be a government that is not protested. To many people are scared of the possibity of Thaksin returning to power, until all this is put to bed there will be disscontent from one side or the other, if there was a vote at this time and the democrats were voted out the yellow shirts would return to the streets probably stronger than before, on the other hand as long as the dems hold power they will troubled by the reds. Get rid of Thaksin and his way of government and democracy may have a chance in Thailand.

[Moonrakers]

you have to admit that your one-liners certainly don't ADD any balance to the discussion. You provide no information or discuss any issues. You just make a quick snide remark about posters and then retreat (as a general rule.)

Incorrect, I refute silly posts, provide ignored facts and point out inconsistencies. What I don't often do is spin the truth, distort facts to fit my OWN agenda or pontificate for page after page about one particular subject.

This is not the Royal Debating Society, it is the internet, and pointing out when someone is rather full of it, is a lot more effective than trying to refute endless page after page of obsessive, opinionated nonsense.

Utter, utter crap.

I wonder if more people might join these discussions but posts like yours and tony websters make discussion near on impossible and so many just don't bother, myself included much of the time.

[jdinasia]

you have to admit that your one-liners certainly don't ADD any balance to the discussion. You provide no information or discuss any issues. You just make a quick snide remark about posters and then retreat (as a general rule.)

Incorrect, I refute silly posts, provide ignored facts and point out inconsistencies. What I don't often do is spin the truth, distort facts to fit my OWN agenda or pontificate for page after page about one particular subject.

This is not the Royal Debating Society, it is the internet, and pointing out when someone is rather full of it, is a lot more effective than trying to refute endless page after page of obsessive, opinionated nonsense.

:-)

I have looked for where you have provided ignored facts or even pointed out inconsistencies in the political threads and, other than the possible exception of today, I just don't seee it. Today it still isn't about anything other than the posters that you disagree with but at least a few of the posts have some merit

(If it were food ..........)

edit --- BTW posting a smiley and a bogeyman picture doesn't "provide" anything

Edited March 6, 2010 by jdinasia

[Ulysses G.]

Incorrect, I refute silly posts, provide ignored facts and point out inconsistencies. What I don't often do is spin the truth, distort facts to fit my OWN agenda or pontificate for page after page about one particular subject.

Wow. You really are one very deluded man if that's how you see your posts.

Let me guess, when you look in the mirror you see a slightly tubby Brad Pitt, don't you?

No I don't and I am not the one who has been posting page after page of lies, half truths and distortions for month after month. Maybe you should look in the mirror.

[Ulysses G.]

you have to admit that your one-liners certainly don't ADD any balance to the discussion. You provide no information or discuss any issues. You just make a quick snide remark about posters and then retreat (as a general rule.)

Incorrect, I refute silly posts, provide ignored facts and point out inconsistencies. What I don't often do is spin the truth, distort facts to fit my OWN agenda or pontificate for page after page about one particular subject.

This is not the Royal Debating Society, it is the internet, and pointing out when someone is rather full of it, is a lot more effective than trying to refute endless page after page of obsessive, opinionated nonsense.

Utter, utter crap.

Ditto.

[Ulysses G.]

That's where you and the reds fall flat on your faces.

Calling every one who disagrees with your views a 'Red" is where you fall flat on your face.

[rixalex]

Maybe you should look in the mirror.

What a brilliantly witty come-back. Well done.

[rixalex]

That's where you and the reds fall flat on your faces.

Calling every one who disagrees with your views a 'Red" is where you fall flat on your face.

Refer to my earlier post:

Most of the foreigners who are not convinced by the arguments of the Grand Inquisitors do not support Thaksin.

How do you know that? Do you have get-togethers?

I'd like to know the difference between someone who supports Thaksin / the reds, and someone who is a Thaksin / reds supporter?

You certainly support, but apparently you are not a supporter.

[Ulysses G.]

Maybe you should look in the mirror.

What a brilliantly witty come-back. Well done.

Look who's talking.

Let me guess, when you look in the mirror you see a slightly tubby Brad Pitt, don't you?

[Ulysses G.]

I have looked for where you have provided ignored facts or even pointed out inconsistencies in the political threads and, other than the possible exception of today, I just don't seee it.

There you go. Ignored fact and inconsistency and only two sentences!

If only the East German Stasi thought of this when people were going to the wall!

What heroic movement has corrupt convicted fugitive criminal Thaksin NOT been compared to? The trouble with these comparisons is that the red's man doesn't even begin to live up to them. Nelson Mandella, indeed.

Mandella was a convicted terrorist who ended up doing a lot of good things. There is no reason why Thaksin could not end up as a force for good as well.

[Ulysses G.]

After months of going over and over the same ground, I know better than to put any real work into a post. The Thaksin-haters will just ignore anything that they do not agree with and look for something of no real importance to attack or pretend not to see that their questions have been answered as "anotherpeter" has done several times in this very thread:

Now that is a load of crap. A few obsessive Thaksin haters - who don't seem to think about much else - bring him up over and over again on the forum, and lie, justify and twist the truth to attempt to convince other's that their opinions are the only ones that are right.

OK ... Please explain to me how the laws and contracts that he changed while PM that benefitted Shin Corp was not corruption.

How many times do I need to answer this?

Actually, they usually point out that Thaksin was corrupt, but so was every other Prime Minister before him from the beginning of time. Why is only Thaksin supposed to be the bogeyman?

Edited March 6, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[rixalex]

Mandella was a convicted terrorist who ended up doing a lot of good things. There is no reason why Thaksin could not end up as a force for good as well.

In the same way as the Hilter comparison was daft, so is the Mandella one. The only similarity at present is that both have been found guilty of crimes. Whereas Mandella accepted punishment and endured great personal hardship and self-sacrifice, and then went on to do great things, Thaksin refuses to accept punishment, instead fleeing like a coward, and now continues to stir up trouble for the sake of nothing else but his money.

[rixalex]

I know better than to put any real work into a post.

It shows.

[Ulysses G.]

Short answers give less information for some folks to twist and distort.

[bigtime]

not that i have much hope that anyone particularly cares, but here's my take.

Do the red shirts have legitimate grievances? absolutely. HOWEVER, here are a few problems I see :

1) It's pretty obvious the rank and file red shirts are being used as pawns by the organizers. I'e talked to a lot of red shirt sympathizers, and most of them are very weak in their knowledge of the facts. All they know is that their leaders have told them to rally.

2) It's also pretty obvious that despite protestations otherwise, it's becoming a "get back Thaksin's money no matter what" rally, not a democracy rally. The sad thing is that the real concerns of the reds will be tainted by association with Thaksin's manipulations

3) No matter how legit the concerns are, the reds are damaging their country. People are afraid to come here when they hear rabble rousing statements about "people's war" and "civil war".

[Ulysses G.]

I agree with all of that and I really don't want any revolution. The problem is that it seems like no one cares about any "legitimate grievances" unless protesters cause some sort of disturbance.

[rixalex]

not that i have much hope that anyone particularly cares, but here's my take.

Do the red shirts have legitimate grievances? absolutely. HOWEVER, here are a few problems I see :

1) It's pretty obvious the rank and file red shirts are being used as pawns by the organizers. I'e talked to a lot of red shirt sympathizers, and most of them are very weak in their knowledge of the facts. All they know is that their leaders have told them to rally.

2) It's also pretty obvious that despite protestations otherwise, it's becoming a "get back Thaksin's money no matter what" rally, not a democracy rally. The sad thing is that the real concerns of the reds will be tainted by association with Thaksin's manipulations

3) No matter how legit the concerns are, the reds are damaging their country. People are afraid to come here when they hear rabble rousing statements about "people's war" and "civil war".

Good points.

[termad]

if Mark had the most votes i would support him,

I guess you support him then

does he have the most votes from the electorate? did his party win enough seats to form the government or did the PPP win enough with a coalition? Surely if the dems were wanted they would have been voted in at the last election, they were not voted in and had to rely on the disbandment of the ruling party, I know you will say for vote buying etc but I am sure there were also dems disqualified for this.

Anyway there is one way to solve this, he is confident that he will 240 seats so put it to the vote, let the Thai people decide rather than a bunch of farangs trying to score brownie points of one another on an anonymous internet forum.

You have had this addressed innumerable times .. There is no reason that PM Abhisit should call fresh elections at this time while his term of office and his coalition are still valid/in place.

Again you plaster the forum with apples and oranges .... Vote buying etc-- TRT and and PPP leadership were involved in electoral fraud. No Dem leadership has been found to be involved in electoral fraud. Party dissolution occurs when party executives are caught breaking electoral law.

The fact that the minor parties that helped PPP form a coalition had agreed PRIOR to the elections not to do that is only an issue to their constituents. The fact that they jumped ship is again only an issue to their electorate.

I get that you are trying to, as you call it, "score points on an anonymous internet forum". Pushing the red (anything BUT democratic) agenda is just your way to do that. Snapping at people for "snide" remarks and then answering with " " is all that someone's well thought out reply is worth ???? typical.

The word that comes to mind is specious.

Let me put a hypotheses.

Supposing that there was once the Leader of the Opposition in that grand country Pratep Nowhere. However, even though being the leader of the opposition was a great job he really wanted to be the Prime Minister but knew that he had no chance of winning an election because the peope did not want him. This really irked him because he knew that he was much more handsome and much better educated than the Prime Minister

Then one day the decendents of a great and powerful king who were known as the MR Club invited their friends (the Top Generals in the land) to a meeting. In that meeting they decided that none of them liked the Prime Minister because he was too much loved by the people and way, way too popular. 'This is wrong the great kings's descendants,' said. 'We should still be running the country (behind the scenes) as we always have.' 'Yes,' said the Top Generals, 'and we don't like him either. He's not scared of us the way other Prime Ministers have been in the past and he bosses us about.'

The MR Club and the Top Generals then hatched a dastardly scheme. They went to a group of MPs in the Prime Minister's party and said if you break the trust of the people who elected you and join the Opposition Party we will give each of you bags and bags of gold. These forty MPs were greedy unprincipled men and they said 'Yes, yes,' 'give us the money. The MR Club and the Top Generals then went to the Leader of the Opposition and told him to meet the forty greedy unprincipled MPs and they would pledge alliegence to him. This he did. That night he told his wife what was going to happen. She was horrified. 'How could you be so dishonourable,' she exclaimed. 'Millions of people gave their votes and trust to those forty villains and now you have bought those millions of votes for gold so that you can become Prime Minister even though the people don't want you. Shame on you husband!'

'No. no,' said the ex Leader of the Opposition, 'my concience is clear because you see I didn't actually buy the votes myself because the MR Club and the Top Generals gave them the gold so all I'm doing is using the stolen votes. What's wrong with that? Do you think it makes me an unprincipled villain too?'

The wife said, 'Husband I think that you are ....... ...... ...... ...... ......' ?

Edited March 6, 2010 by termad

[way2muchcoffee]

^^ I think you meant for the above post to be in the 2010 Oscars thread!!

Edited March 6, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[rixalex]

Let me put a hypotheses.

Supposing that there was once the Leader of the Opposition in that grand country Pratep Nowhere. However, even though being the leader of the opposition was a great job he really wanted to be the Prime Minister but knew that he had no chance of winning an election because the peope did not want him. This really irked him because he knew that he was much more handsome and much better educated than the Prime Minister

Then one day the decendents of a great and powerful king who were known as the MR Club invited their friends (the Top Generals in the land) to a meeting. In that meeting they decided that none of them liked the Prime Minister because he was too much loved by the people and way, way too popular. 'This is wrong the great kings's descendants,' said. 'We should still be running the country (behind the scenes) as we always have.' 'Yes,' said the Top Generals, 'and we don't like him either. He's not scared of us the way other Prime Ministers have been in the past and he bosses us about.'

The MR Club and the Top Generals then hatched a dastardly scheme. They went to a group of MPs in the Prime Minister's party and said if you break the trust of the people who elected you and join the Opposition Party we will give each of you bags and bags of gold. These forty MPs were greedy unprincipled men and they said 'Yes, yes,' 'give us the money. The MR Club and the Top Generals then went to the Leader of the Opposition and told him to meet the forty greedy unprincipled MPs and they would pledge alliegence to him. This he did. That night he told his wife what was going to happen. She was horrified. 'How could you be so dishonourable,' she exclaimed. 'Millions of people gave their votes and trust to those forty villains and now you have bought those millions of votes for gold so that you can become Prime Minister even though the people don't want you. Shame on you husband!'

'No. no,' said the ex Leader of the Opposition, 'my concience is clear because you see I didn't actually buy the votes myself because the MR Club and the Top Generals gave them the gold so all I'm doing is using the stolen votes. What's wrong with that? Do you think it makes me an unprincipled villain too?'

The wife said, 'Husband I think that you are ....... ...... ...... ...... ......' ?

Someone's been watching too much Jackanory methinks.

[WeeGB]

termad wrote

The word that comes to mind is specious.

Let me put a hypotheses.

Supposing that there was once the Leader of the Opposition in that grand country Pratep Nowhere. However, even though being the leader of the opposition was a great job he really wanted to be the Prime Minister but knew that he had no chance of winning an election because the peope did not want him. This really irked him because he knew that he was much more handsome and much better educated than the Prime Minister

Then one day the decendents of a great and powerful king who were known as the MR Club invited their friends (the Top Generals in the land) to a meeting. In that meeting they decided that none of them liked the Prime Minister because he was too much loved by the people and way, way too popular. 'This is wrong the great kings's descendants,' said. 'We should still be running the country (behind the scenes) as we always have.' 'Yes,' said the Top Generals, 'and we don't like him either. He's not scared of us the way other Prime Ministers have been in the past and he bosses us about.'

The MR Club and the Top Generals then hatched a dastardly scheme. They went to a group of MPs in the Prime Minister's party and said if you break the trust of the people who elected you and join the Opposition Party we will give each of you bags and bags of gold. These forty MPs were greedy unprincipled men and they said 'Yes, yes,' 'give us the money. The MR Club and the Top Generals then went to the Leader of the Opposition and told him to meet the forty greedy unprincipled MPs and they would pledge alliegence to him. This he did. That night he told his wife what was going to happen. She was horrified. 'How could you be so dishonourable,' she exclaimed. 'Millions of people gave their votes and trust to those forty villains and now you have bought those millions of votes for gold so that you can become Prime Minister even though the people don't want you. Shame on you husband!'

'No. no,' said the ex Leader of the Opposition, 'my concience is clear because you see I didn't actually buy the votes myself because the MR Club and the Top Generals gave them the gold so all I'm doing is using the stolen votes. What's wrong with that? Do you think it makes me an unprincipled villain too?'

The wife said, 'Husband I think that you are ....... ...... ...... ...... ......' ?

Did you know that termad is an anagram of dreamt?

And then you woke up....

Edited March 6, 2010 by WeeGB

[cdnvic]

This thread is being closed because:

1. It duplicates a thread running in the news forum.

2. The last several pages are just back and forth bickering that adds nothing to the discussion.