Another Abhisit Flip-Flop Vendor Arrested

[TheyCallmeScooter]

To Scooter, (there are so many embedded quotes in your message it is very difficult to pull out the comments I would like to answer).

The issue is, is the CRES able to defy the prime minister over this issue? The CRES is supposed to be headed by the PM. I was not attacking the PM over the issue of putting his image on shoes. I am pondering why the CRES thinks they need to legislate against it, when the man himself says it is something that is a constitutional right. It is not Abhisit that is the issue, it is the CRES. Abhisit is basically saying I don't want your protection, yet they insist on providing it.

As for the Lese Majeste issues, I am not concerned about that, since it is covered very clear and serious laws and everyone is more than aware.

The idea however, that putting a lay person's face on a shoe is something that the CRES should get involved in and issue laws punishing such images, is as the PM has mentioned something he doesn't want the CRES to get involved in. But they refuse to back down.

I have to be a bit careful here, not out of any sense of requirement for delicacy (I have no sense)...but because I'm purely speculating. But I believe the PM has never headed CRES. I believe he's been effectively a check on CRES? I think the violence in Apr/May would have been a lot worse and would have happened a LOT sooner, if Abhisit was not - tempering - the instincts of trained military forces to...counter-attack / defend their positions with return fire. I wasn't much of a soldier in my day, but I was in sheer awe at the discipline of the Army - put me in their spot? Well...it's good for everyone I was not in their spot. Again, this is just my gut read and pure speculation on my part.

But if I'm right, and logic supports this position (I think), then Abhisit has always been playing a very brilliant (no doubt frustrating) game of brinkmanship, copping the responsibility whenever things were out of his control....so as to not compromise what partial control he did have by making public the quite obvious fact that some things were going over his head, or around him. Only *some* things, mind...by and large, he seemed to get the job done at a stunning strike rate...eventually.

I think...and speculation is always dangerous, because I'm now talking out of my hat...but I *think* Abhisit's vocal criticism of the CRES edict this week was a sign. He didn't need to take that dispute public, he knew it would result in them slapping him down, but he did it anyway. And they slapped him down, in my opinion. Quite cutely...in a way - I've always had the ability to respect a play I disagree with. I think this is the slap:

Despite Prime Minister Abisit's demand that it review its order on grounds that it might breach the constitution in relation to the rights of expression, the CRES said it would maintain its rights to ban the sale or distribution of items displaying political symbols, pictures, or words deemed disrespectful or even offensive to the royal institution. However, the red-shirt could still distribute any items they wished to, as long as they did not involve the monarchy..

lol right? What does that leave them with? Abhisit & Suthep? With Suthep off galavanting around the world having well-publicised / planned-in-advance 'secretive' meetings with various fugitive/s against Abhisit's wishes...I guess that just leaves Abhisit to be vilified legally?

Cute, certainly.

But very unfair to target him. More importantly, not only unfair, but...perhaps bait the UDD should not have taken? I dunno...regardless, I think the worst-kept secret in the world (that Abhisit does not reign supreme) is surely out in the open now? But no doubt the UDD will continue to attack him, as will Thaksin's spin teams, and CRES had to know this....leading me to believe everyone wants one scenario. And whilst I respect the fact there is a GREAT OCEAN of stuff I'm clueless about...my military background says that scenario is going to have one. possible. result.

I guess we'll see.

[Thai at Heart]

To Scooter, (there are so many embedded quotes in your message it is very difficult to pull out the comments I would like to answer).

The issue is, is the CRES able to defy the prime minister over this issue? The CRES is supposed to be headed by the PM. I was not attacking the PM over the issue of putting his image on shoes. I am pondering why the CRES thinks they need to legislate against it, when the man himself says it is something that is a constitutional right. It is not Abhisit that is the issue, it is the CRES. Abhisit is basically saying I don't want your protection, yet they insist on providing it.

As for the Lese Majeste issues, I am not concerned about that, since it is covered very clear and serious laws and everyone is more than aware.

The idea however, that putting a lay person's face on a shoe is something that the CRES should get involved in and issue laws punishing such images, is as the PM has mentioned something he doesn't want the CRES to get involved in. But they refuse to back down.

I have to be a bit careful here, not out of any sense of requirement for delicacy (I have no sense)...but because I'm purely speculating. But I believe the PM has never headed CRES. I believe he's been effectively a check on CRES? I think the violence in Apr/May would have been a lot worse and would have happened a LOT sooner, if Abhisit was not - tempering - the instincts of trained military forces to...counter-attack / defend their positions with return fire. I wasn't much of a soldier in my day, but I was in sheer awe at the discipline of the Army - put me in their spot? Well...it's good for everyone I was not in their spot. Again, this is just my gut read and pure speculation on my part.

But if I'm right, and logic supports this position (I think), then Abhisit has always been playing a very brilliant (no doubt frustrating) game of brinkmanship, copping the responsibility whenever things were out of his control....so as to not compromise what partial control he did have by making public the quite obvious fact that some things were going over his head, or around him. Only *some* things, mind...by and large, he seemed to get the job done at a stunning strike rate...eventually.

I think...and speculation is always dangerous, because I'm now talking out of my hat...but I *think* Abhisit's vocal criticism of the CRES edict this week was a sign. He didn't need to take that dispute public, he knew it would result in them slapping him down, but he did it anyway. And they slapped him down, in my opinion. Quite cutely...in a way - I've always had the ability to respect a play I disagree with. I think this is the slap:

Despite Prime Minister Abisit's demand that it review its order on grounds that it might breach the constitution in relation to the rights of expression, the CRES said it would maintain its rights to ban the sale or distribution of items displaying political symbols, pictures, or words deemed disrespectful or even offensive to the royal institution. However, the red-shirt could still distribute any items they wished to, as long as they did not involve the monarchy..

lol right? What does that leave them with? Abhisit & Suthep? With Suthep off galavanting around the world having well-publicised / planned-in-advance 'secretive' meetings with various fugitive/s against Abhisit's wishes...I guess that just leaves Abhisit to be vilified legally?

Cute, certainly.

But very unfair to target him. More importantly, not only unfair, but...perhaps bait the UDD should not have taken? I dunno...regardless, I think the worst-kept secret in the world (that Abhisit does not reign supreme) is surely out in the open now? But no doubt the UDD will continue to attack him, as will Thaksin's spin teams, and CRES had to know this....leading me to believe everyone wants one scenario. And whilst I respect the fact there is a GREAT OCEAN of stuff I'm clueless about...my military background says that scenario is going to have one. possible. result.

I guess we'll see.

As I said at the very beginning, I think the reason that Abhisit is being cast as the bad guy, is that it is a very convenient way of confusing the fact that the CRES is writing laws.

He has called their bluff very well by essentially saying, if it is not lese majeste, this type of protest is constitutionally protected. He doesn't want them to involve themselves in declaring putting his face on a shoe is illegal. It firmly puts his cards on the table about the limits of the CRES. Will they like it? Not one bit I am sure, hence their apparent strop and pedantic answer. It isn't often that a Thai PM even attempts to tell the Thai army what to do. He has shown this obsessive attitude of the CRES to be absurd and is taking the sticks and stones approach to say I am above this kind of thing. So butt out. He is telling them that there are far more serious things to worry about than his pictures on shoes. Very clever I reckon, and he is absolutely right.

You may be right about the results of the crackdown being lessened by Abhisit's influence. Any committee with Suthep at the head and the army sitting next to him doesn't exactly fill me with confidence. That said, we will never know.

I have a feeling that once the politicians had apparently run out of ways to solve the problem, the army just did what they had to, carte blanche, no messing. I don't get the feeling that senior Thai army personnel take to well to being lectured by what they may consider to be young, silver spooned politician or a dodgy overlord from down south.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

I don't get the feeling that senior Thai army personnel take to well to being lectured by what they may consider to be young, silver spooned politician or a dodgy overlord from down south.

I remember a guy in the US, young fella, Abhisit reminds me a lot of him. Liberal, but one miscalculated him at one's misfortune. Until of course, they got tired of the young upstart.

I hope I'm wrong, but I see Abhisit's actions this week as the beginning of the end of a magnificent fight. But it seems to me as if he's ready to tap the table, and concede the game.

I hope I'm wrong, but I see dark days ahead for this nation. It's tragic if I'm right, as I think so many people have been backing the wrong horse for the better part of a decade.

But I risk embarrassing myself with not just pure speculation, but even sentimentalism, so I'd best leave it there and limit the potential embarrassment.

Edited November 25, 2010 by TheyCallmeScooter

[Thai at Heart]

I don't get the feeling that senior Thai army personnel take to well to being lectured by what they may consider to be young, silver spooned politician or a dodgy overlord from down south.

I remember a guy in the US, young fella, Abhisit reminds me a lot of him. Liberal, but one miscalculated him at one's misfortune. Until of course, they got tired of the young upstart.

I hope I'm wrong, but I see Abhisit's actions this week as the beginning of the end of a magnificent fight. But it seems to me as if he's ready to tap the table, and concede the game.

I hope I'm wrong, but I see dark days ahead for this nation. It's tragic if I'm right, as I think so many people have been backing the wrong horse for the better part of a decade.

But I risk embarrassing myself with not just pure speculation, but even sentimentalism, so I'd best leave it there and limit the potential embarrassment.

I think you are very wrong.

He might not be universally loved in the country, but which politician is anywhere? He has been groomed for this role, and he has a lot of back room family clout too. He may go in an election, but if I understand anything about the country, a coup to oust Abhisit will only happen if

a. He is actively damaging the army's interests

b. He is provably damaging the natural order of business and wealth creation for the family cliques at the top. (He gave them Mapthaput, he is admittedly messing with alcohol, but corporation taxes are going down)

c. There is a better obvious short term option

d. He does anything that will make it possible for Thaksin to genuinely be rehabilitated.

Having a strop about being told not to worry about putting his face on a flip flop can hardly be spun as justification for anything. Abhisit is right about this issue and I expect to see him around until the next election.

[whybother]

<snip> and I expect to see him around until the next election.

Unless he gets banned of course.

But, hopefully that won't happen.

[Thai at Heart]

<snip> and I expect to see him around until the next election.

Unless he gets banned of course.

But, hopefully that won't happen.

Ergo, he won't get banned.

[whybother]

Does this mean Abhisit got his way?

CRES revokes ban on sale or distribution of rally materials and souvenirs aimed at sparking societal disharmony after no cases found offensive to monarchy /MCOT

[TheyCallmeScooter]

Does this mean Abhisit got his way?

CRES revokes ban on sale or distribution of rally materials and souvenirs aimed at sparking societal disharmony after no cases found offensive to monarchy /MCOT

I can't find any news on this on Google? But literally...it's unreal. How he always gets his way (the right way) in the end. He's a once-in-a-generation politician and Thailand hardly recognises it.

[Buchholz]

Does this mean Abhisit got his way?

CRES revokes ban on sale or distribution of rally materials and souvenirs aimed at sparking societal disharmony after no cases found offensive to monarchy /MCOT

I can't find any news on this on Google? But literally...it's unreal. How he always gets his way (the right way) in the end. He's a once-in-a-generation politician and Thailand hardly recognises it.

Score another for Team Abhisit...

CRES Reverses Ban on Political Rally Souvenirs

The Center for Resolution of Emergency Situation has decided to reverse its ban of goods and souvenirs sold during political rallies since no lese majeste content were seen on them.

The Center for Resolution of Emergency Situation, or CRES, Spokesperson Colonel Sansern Kaewkamnerd gave a press conference following a CRES meeting which was presided over by Supreme Commander General Songkitti Jakkabatara, saying that security preparations were discussed for the upcoming celebration of His Majesty the King's birthday from December 1 to 9.

The National Police Bureau has been assigned to draw up the security plan and coordinate efforts with related agencies to ensure maximum efficiency.

The CRES has also agreed to lift the ban on politically-related souvenirs and goods sold during political rallies since reports showed there was no offensive content against the Monarchy on them. However, if the situation becomes more volatile, the CRES may consider reinstating the ban.

As for the red shirt and yellow shirt protests scheduled for December, the CRES will discuss them in its next meeting.

-- Tan Network 2010-11-26

Edited November 26, 2010 by Buchholz

[phiphidon]

So, now all the back slapping has ended, presumably Team Abhisit will give the vendor back his flip flops and only charge him with obstructing the footpath instead of plotting to bring the government down?

[whybother]

So, now all the back slapping has ended, presumably Team Abhisit will give the vendor back his flip flops and only charge him with obstructing the footpath instead of plotting to bring the government down?

You will need to talk to the police about that, not the government, but you'll also need to ask if the change in the law is retroactive or not.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

The CRES has also agreed to lift the ban on politically-related souvenirs and goods sold during political rallies since reports showed there was no offensive content against the Monarchy on them. However, if the situation becomes more volatile, the CRES may consider reinstating the ban.

The logic here is just...

One would presume the purpose of a law was to prevent certain action/s. When the law is successful, it is repealed. Unsuccessful? I guess new, bigger laws are needed, i.e. abortion 'scandal'.

Wonderful stuff.

So, now all the back slapping has ended, presumably Team Abhisit will give the vendor back his flip flops and only charge him with obstructing the footpath instead of plotting to bring the government down?

Who's in "Team Abhisit"?

I was under the impression that the earlier discussion in this thread cleared up that 'confusion'.

I was also under the impression that CRES were only going to give the vendor seller a slap on the wrist for obstructing the footpath when the law was in effect.

Pol Maj Gen Ronnasilp Pusara, Metropolitan Police commander, said that the police made the arrest to check whether the flip-flops were considered items prohibited by the announcement of the Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES) or not. However, he said that the vendor might probably be fined only for obstructing the footpath.

The Democrat Party, the Royal Thai Army and the monarchy are three uniquely separate entities. I'm not sure you are aware of that? The government is currently a coalition of political parties - each of which are uniquely separate entities. Lumping them all together for the purposes of criticism (which I respect opponents here are exceptionally good at - constructive criticism? less so...) is cheap point-scoring and unproductive.

Whilst I can see how cheap points are 'scored' by someone who wants their party to return to power (for as-yet-unarticulated reasons, across the - entire - political spectrum), surely you can also see that attempting to score cheap points is a bit....cheap? Perhaps even...tacky?

[Buchholz]

So, now all the back slapping has ended, presumably Team Abhisit will give the vendor back his flip flops

I can see why Team Whatever is eager to see it "ended" quickly after 3 days of...

Unfortunately it's not the government that is over reacting - the "law" was promulgated by CRES and signed by one General Prayuth Chan-ocha and the "law" will not be rescinded despite Abhisits "request". Now tell me who is in charge again?

that doesn't help to explain the fact that it appears that Abhisit may not really in full control of the country and that the CRES may simply be subverting democracy and civil liberties.

If Abhisit isn't running the country, why not?

Isn't this essentially what is being shown by the CRES defying the PM over this issue?

Edited November 26, 2010 by Buchholz

[phiphidon]

So, now all the back slapping has ended, presumably Team Abhisit will give the vendor back his flip flops

I can see why Team Whatever is eager to see it "ended" quickly after 3 days of...

Unfortunately it's not the government that is over reacting - the "law" was promulgated by CRES and signed by one General Prayuth Chan-ocha and the "law" will not be rescinded despite Abhisits "request". Now tell me who is in charge again?

that doesn't help to explain the fact that it appears that Abhisit may not really in full control of the country and that the CRES may simply be subverting democracy and civil liberties.

If Abhisit isn't running the country, why not?

Isn't this essentially what is being shown by the CRES defying the PM over this issue?

Team Abhisit was your phrase. It took 7 days for CRES and the the PM to sort out their differences and to get rid of a "law/ban" that was plainly not needed. Don't blame me if recent events show a lack of coordination of Government and their management of the SOE. There does seem to be some confusion about what the CRES can and cannot do legally, which is a worry.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

There does seem to be some confusion about what the CRES can and cannot do legally, which is a worry.

I disagree, quite strongly in fact.

Confusion, as it relates to the exercise of absolute power/s, is always healthy. When there is NO confusion, then....that would be worrying.

There is no confusion in North Korea about what Kim Jong Il can legally do.

On the other side of the extreme, there is also no confusion in Somalia about what anyone can 'legally' do.

If the 'storm' is about a law which was not needed and which hurt nobody, that's a pleasant storm in a teacup to be worried about - don't you agree?

[Siam Simon]

There does seem to be some confusion about what the CRES can and cannot do legally, which is a worry.

I disagree, quite strongly in fact.

Confusion, as it relates to the exercise of absolute power/s, is always healthy. When there is NO confusion, then....that would be worrying.

There is no confusion in North Korea about what Kim Jong Il can legally do.

On the other side of the extreme, there is also no confusion in Somalia about what anyone can 'legally' do.

If the 'storm' is about a law which was not needed and which hurt nobody, that's a pleasant storm in a teacup to be worried about - don't you agree?

Off you go again....It's not about an irrelevant law, it's about who's making the decisions. Seems to me that there is a quiet-ish (but monumental) battle going on at the heart of power. Abhisit was brought in as a camera-friendly stooge/patsy by the uglies who battle Thaksin's bunch for control of the pig stye. Unfortunately for his patrons, Abhisit is proving to be anything but a stooge/patsy. He's still David versus Goliath, and his victories are still small. But, just like David, he's outsmarting Goliath at every turn. Things could get really interesting.

[whybother]

Off you go again....It's not about an irrelevant law, it's about who's making the decisions. Seems to me that there is a quiet-ish (but monumental) battle going on at the heart of power. Abhisit was brought in as a camera-friendly stooge/patsy by the uglies who battle Thaksin's bunch for control of the pig stye. Unfortunately for his patrons, Abhisit is proving to be anything but a stooge/patsy. He's still David versus Goliath, and his victories are still small. But, just like David, he's outsmarting Goliath at every turn. Things could get really interesting.

Just because Abhisit is PM, doesn't mean that he can simply just get things changed. There is a process to go through. He is not a dictator. He can't just change the laws when he wants.

In this case, he pointed out that a law wasn't needed and went through the process to get it changed.

[MikeyIdea]

Did he feel being offended?

I think you can answer that one yourself Ase. It's called common sense that insults hurt. I'll give you an opportunity to answer after you have read this

I will not get violent or anything if you insult me, I will just comment that since your parents were so useless at teaching you manners, I bet they aren't missed by anyone now when they are dead

Do you still pretent not to know if an insult makes you feel offended and hurt? Please answer below this

Edit: Grammar

Edited November 29, 2010 by MikeyIdea

[Siam Simon]

Did he feel being offended?

I think you can answer that one yourself Ase. It's called common sense that insults hurt. I'll give you an opportunity to answer after you have read this

I will not get violent or anything if you insult me, I will just comment that since your parents were so useless at teaching you manners, I bet they aren't missed by anyone now when they are dead

Do you still pretent not to know if an insult makes you feel offended and hurt? Please answer below this

Edit: Grammar

I'll answer this in the hope of helping you Mikey. I wouldn't be offended because I'm a sensible adult who sees an insult for what it is and doesn't go off at the deep end over it .

[MikeyIdea]

Did he feel being offended?

I think you can answer that one yourself Ase. It's called common sense that insults hurt. I'll give you an opportunity to answer after you have read this

I will not get violent or anything if you insult me, I will just comment that since your parents were so useless at teaching you manners, I bet they aren't missed by anyone now when they are dead

Do you still pretent not to know if an insult makes you feel offended and hurt? Please answer below this

Edit: Grammar

I'll answer this in the hope of helping you Mikey. I wouldn't be offended because I'm a sensible adult who sees an insult for what it is and doesn't go off at the deep end over it .

Good, since you are so sensible and realise that I am not you, then you do agree that I should be able to take you to court and request compensation for the insult as well as compensation for all costs that it will cost to get justice, right? Come on, it's not even a hundred thousand bath in total, are you saying that you wouldn't pay?

Edited November 29, 2010 by MikeyIdea

[Siam Simon]

Did he feel being offended?

I think you can answer that one yourself Ase. It's called common sense that insults hurt. I'll give you an opportunity to answer after you have read this

I will not get violent or anything if you insult me, I will just comment that since your parents were so useless at teaching you manners, I bet they aren't missed by anyone now when they are dead

Do you still pretent not to know if an insult makes you feel offended and hurt? Please answer below this

Edit: Grammar

I'll answer this in the hope of helping you Mikey. I wouldn't be offended because I'm a sensible adult who sees an insult for what it is and doesn't go off at the deep end over it .

Good, since you are so sensible and realise that I am not you, then you do agree that I should be able to take you to court and request compensation for the insult as well as compensation for all costs that it will cost to get justice, right? Come on, it's not even a hundred thousand bath in total, are you saying that you wouldn't pay?

No, I'd just tell you to grow up or sue me, Mikey.

[MikeyIdea]

<quote name='Ase' timestamp='1290674313' post='4047034'>

Did he feel being offended?

</quote>

I think you can answer that one yourself Ase. It's called common sense that insults hurt. I'll give you an opportunity to answer after you have read this

I will not get violent or anything if you insult me, I will just comment that since your parents were so useless at teaching you manners, I bet they aren't missed by anyone now when they are dead

Do you still pretent not to know if an insult makes you feel offended and hurt? Please answer below this

Edit: Grammar

I'll answer this in the hope of helping you Mikey. I wouldn't be offended because I'm a sensible adult who sees an insult for what it is and doesn't go off at the deep end over it .

Good, since you are so sensible and realise that I am not you, then you do agree that I should be able to take you to court and request compensation for the insult as well as compensation for all costs that it will cost to get justice, right? Come on, it's not even a hundred thousand bath in total, are you saying that you wouldn't pay?

No, I'd just tell you to grow up or sue me, Mikey.

Good you don't live in the country where I grew up then because there you would indeed be both sued and - grow up - when you had to pay the compensation or go to jail if you refused, compensation money would then be deducted from your salary once you got out and got a job, difficult to get with a conviction though

[Siam Simon]

Good you don't live in the country where I grew up then because there you would indeed be both sued and - grow up - when you had to pay the compensation or go to jail if you refused, compensation money would then be deducted from your salary once you got out and got a job, difficult to get with a conviction though

Just as I'd thought, Mikey, you're a Thai posting on a forum for farang with vested interests in Thailand. Thanks for confirming this .

[whybother]

Good you don't live in the country where I grew up then because there you would indeed be both sued and - grow up - when you had to pay the compensation or go to jail if you refused, compensation money would then be deducted from your salary once you got out and got a job, difficult to get with a conviction though

Just as I'd thought, Mikey, you're a Thai posting on a forum for farang with vested interests in Thailand. Thanks for confirming this .

Aren't Thai's allowed to post on TVF? I thought it just had to be English language, or does that mean that you can't post here if you're from a non-English speaking country. And you're not allowed to post here if you have vested interests in Thailand. That will narrow down the number of posters, won't it.

[Siam Simon]

Good you don't live in the country where I grew up then because there you would indeed be both sued and - grow up - when you had to pay the compensation or go to jail if you refused, compensation money would then be deducted from your salary once you got out and got a job, difficult to get with a conviction though

Just as I'd thought, Mikey, you're a Thai posting on a forum for farang with vested interests in Thailand. Thanks for confirming this .

Aren't Thai's allowed to post on TVF? I thought it just had to be English language, or does that mean that you can't post here if you're from a non-English speaking country. And you're not allowed to post here if you have vested interests in Thailand. That will narrow down the number of posters, won't it.

And another Thai confirmed .

[whybother]

Good you don't live in the country where I grew up then because there you would indeed be both sued and - grow up - when you had to pay the compensation or go to jail if you refused, compensation money would then be deducted from your salary once you got out and got a job, difficult to get with a conviction though

Just as I'd thought, Mikey, you're a Thai posting on a forum for farang with vested interests in Thailand. Thanks for confirming this .

Aren't Thai's allowed to post on TVF? I thought it just had to be English language, or does that mean that you can't post here if you're from a non-English speaking country. And you're not allowed to post here if you have vested interests in Thailand. That will narrow down the number of posters, won't it.

And another Thai confirmed .

.... riiigghhhtt ...

That shows a lot about your judgement on a lot of other issues ....

Edited November 29, 2010 by whybother

[animatic]

It is not a forum for farangs with Thai interests, but a forum about Thailand and issues with in it. so that includes Thais with English skills and an interest in the farang perspective, and in some cases seems to unintentionally include some Thais attempting to influence the farang perspective... And yes you are allowed to post in Thai, but with added English translations also being preferred. No other languages are permitted, except as possible colloquialisms, and/or if English translation is also added it some times gets a pass.

Edited November 29, 2010 by animatic

[MikeyIdea]

Good you don't live in the country where I grew up then because there you would indeed be both sued and - grow up - when you had to pay the compensation or go to jail if you refused, compensation money would then be deducted from your salary once you got out and got a job, difficult to get with a conviction though

Just as I'd thought, Mikey, you're a Thai posting on a forum for farang with vested interests in Thailand. Thanks for confirming this .

Aren't Thai's allowed to post on TVF? I thought it just had to be English language, or does that mean that you can't post here if you're from a non-English speaking country. And you're not allowed to post here if you have vested interests in Thailand. That will narrow down the number of posters, won't it.

Siam Simon, thanks for confirming how pathetically low your knowledge about Thailand and the Thais are. Yet you have opinions about Thailand and the Thais... Take this opportunity to learn how the Thais see this, after all, we are in a Thai forum

Thais do not argue if insults are offending or not or if they are legal or not. Thais know just by using common sense that insults are offending. Perhaps you should associate a bit with them, they seem to have a lot to teach you

If you walk around thinking that since you don't get offended by insults,others don't either, may I recommend that you walk around the Klong Toey slums and practice there

Edited November 29, 2010 by MikeyIdea

[Siam Simon]

cut/and in some cases seems to unintentionally include some Thais attempting to influence the farang perspective.../cut

Yes....quite.....which leads us to the poster quoted in my next post:

[whybother]

cut/and in some cases seems to unintentionally include some Thais attempting to influence the farang perspective.../cut

Yes....quite.....which leads us to the poster quoted in my next post:

And don't forget me.