CRES Lifts Ban On Material Satirising Thailand's Political Elite

[Buchholz]

You said his claims that he's being blocked are empty. TOT is blocking him. Therefore his claims of being blocked aren't empty are they? They're true.

For the millions of people that use the internet through other than TOT, the claims are empty and false.

I can't speak for the users of TOT as I don't use their service nor would I want to from the sounds of it.

.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Buchholz

[whybother]

<snip> And it revealed who has the real power.

But I thought Abhisit was a dictator.

What it shows is that as PM you can't just change the laws at the drop of a hat. There are processes to go through.

Edited November 28, 2010 by whybother

[mca]

You said his claims that he's being blocked are empty. TOT is blocking him. Therefore his claims of being blocked aren't empty are they? They're true.

For the millions of people that use the internet through other than TOT, the claims are false.

Is he being blocked in any way by anybody? Yes or No. Simple question.

Edited November 28, 2010 by mca

[SergeiY]

I can only get at the start page of facthai.wordpress.com/, if i wanna browse there any further i get redirected to the CAPO/CRES announcement that "an access to such information has been temporarily ceased"

I get the whole website without any difficulty whatsoever. I could send you something if there is anything you needed from there?

Perhaps sign their petition?

Now is the start page somehow blocked too.

But if you have access to it, could you look up some recent articles that mention Supinya Klangnarong, she is a former FACT coordinator, worked together with CJ Hinke. I would like to know what she has to say now.

[Buchholz]

You said his claims that he's being blocked are empty. TOT is blocking him. Therefore his claims of being blocked aren't empty are they? They're true.

For the millions of people that use the internet through other than TOT, the claims are false.

Is he being blocked in any way by anybody? Yes or No. Simple question.

Declarative and definitive and absolute answers are rarely simple.

If you are asking everyone to preface every statement they post with... "In my experience,"

that's a bit much I think, but if it helps to stop the circle jerk, I can oblige with amending my original statement to :

In my experience, along with millions of other people but apparently not including those internet subscribers who use TOT, the blogger's claim that his website is blocked are empty.

[mca]

Appreciated. It takes a man to admit they're wrong and correct themselves.

[SergeiY]

<snip> And it revealed who has the real power.

But I thought Abhisit was a dictator.

What it shows is that as PM you don't you can't just change the laws at the drop of a hat. There are processes to go through.

Hello. CRES and emergency decree violates the constitutional law and a couple of universal civil liberties and rights.

And CRES obviously can drop, change and create laws as they want. And all what that democrat PM does is to say it wasn't me and there isn't much i can do about.

just check into the older discussion from last month:

Use of security laws comes under attack:

[Buchholz]

I can only get at the start page of facthai.wordpress.com/, if i wanna browse there any further i get redirected to the CAPO/CRES announcement that "an access to such information has been temporarily ceased"

I get the whole website without any difficulty whatsoever. I could send you something if there is anything you needed from there?

Perhaps sign their petition?

Now is the start page somehow blocked too.

But if you have access to it, could you look up some recent articles that mention Supinya Klangnarong, she is a former FACT coordinator, worked together with CJ Hinke. I would like to know what she has to say now.

Nothing on there about her being a former FACT coordinator. Are you certain of your fact as they only mention her being the chairwoman of the Campaign for Popular Media Reform and coordinator of the Thai Netizen Network, however I didn't read all the search results so maybe it is a fact and I just haven't found that fact.

If you would like to know what she has to say now, I'd suggest subscribing to her Twitter account:

http://twitter.com/supinya

[whybother]

<snip> And it revealed who has the real power.

But I thought Abhisit was a dictator.

What it shows is that as PM you don't you can't just change the laws at the drop of a hat. There are processes to go through.

Hello. CRES and emergency decree violates the constitutional law and a couple of universal civil liberties and rights.

And CRES obviously can drop, change and create laws as they want. And all what that democrat PM does is to say it wasn't me and there isn't much i can do about.

just check into the older discussion from last month:

Use of security laws comes under attack:

http://www.thaivisa....s-under-attack/

CRES and the emergency decree do not violate constitutional law. Yes, it violates some civil liberties and rights, but that is it's aim in controlling people that are violating others civil liberties.

But overall, it's time the SOE and CRES were put to bed ... but first we'll see what happens next week when the Dems are not banned.

[Buchholz]

Appreciated. It takes a man to admit they're wrong and correct themselves.

I expect to see some very long posts in the future as statements must now cover every minutia of the topic they are describing so as to be "correct." Posts need to include all aspects and be all encompassing to avoid being considered "false" or "wrong."

Perhaps we can begin with yours.

Why does it take a man to admit they're wrong? Are women always wrong or always correct? What about children?

Disclaimer: The above questions are rhetorical and are asked without them intending to be really answered.

.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Buchholz

[SergeiY]

I can only get at the start page of facthai.wordpress.com/, if i wanna browse there any further i get redirected to the CAPO/CRES announcement that "an access to such information has been temporarily ceased"

I get the whole website without any difficulty whatsoever. I could send you something if there is anything you needed from there?

Perhaps sign their petition?

Now is the start page somehow blocked too.

But if you have access to it, could you look up some recent articles that mention Supinya Klangnarong, she is a former FACT coordinator, worked together with CJ Hinke. I would like to know what she has to say now.

Nothing on there about her being a former FACT coordinator. Are you certain of your fact as they only mention her being the chairwoman of the Campaign for Popular Media Reform and coordinator of the Thai Netizen Network, however I didn't read all the search results so maybe it is a fact and I just haven't found that fact.

If you would like to know what she has to say now, I'd suggest subscribing to her Twitter account:

http://twitter.com/supinya

Yes she is, a former FACT coordinator. I remember some press releases that came also with her name. But like many other Thai activists they all have their own mini organisations.

She always good for some statement about the freedom of the media in Thailand, meanwhile twitter is probably not the best channel to to that there, because one can just send some short messages.

[mca]

^^ My final word. Your post said that the claims made about FACT being blocked were empty. Empty means without any validity. There was no ambiguity in your statement. There was no other way of interpreting your post. You were then proven wrong. Firstly ( and sadly unsurprisingly ) you tried to bullshit your way out rather than admit your error. Then ( and quite surprisingly ) you corrected yourself possibly, nay probably, because you didn't have any other answer.

BTW. My post. I'm completely wrong. I should have said " It takes a person of all genders and ages to admit they're wrong and correct themselves "

See? Easy.

Edited November 28, 2010 by mca

[SergeiY]

<snip> And it revealed who has the real power.

But I thought Abhisit was a dictator.

What it shows is that as PM you don't you can't just change the laws at the drop of a hat. There are processes to go through.

Hello. CRES and emergency decree violates the constitutional law and a couple of universal civil liberties and rights.

And CRES obviously can drop, change and create laws as they want. And all what that democrat PM does is to say it wasn't me and there isn't much i can do about.

just check into the older discussion from last month:

Use of security laws comes under attack:

http://www.thaivisa....s-under-attack/

CRES and the emergency decree do not violate constitutional law. Yes, it violates some civil liberties and rights, but that is it's aim in controlling people that are violating others civil liberties.

But overall, it's time the SOE and CRES were put to bed ... but first we'll see what happens next week when the Dems are not banned.

Even Abhisit said that it violates constitutional rights

read here carefully the OP:

But okay at least you understand and admit that this emergency decree violates civil rights and liberties. But i see also that you are totally unable to understand what is wrong with this violation.

[brahmburgers]

That's a bit of relief for those writing and reading political satire, such as this new ebook satirizing Thaksin, his family and bosom buddies.

[whybother]

Hello. CRES and emergency decree violates the constitutional law and a couple of universal civil liberties and rights.

And CRES obviously can drop, change and create laws as they want. And all what that democrat PM does is to say it wasn't me and there isn't much i can do about.

just check into the older discussion from last month:

Use of security laws comes under attack:

http://www.thaivisa....s-under-attack/

CRES and the emergency decree do not violate constitutional law. Yes, it violates some civil liberties and rights, but that is it's aim in controlling people that are violating others civil liberties.

But overall, it's time the SOE and CRES were put to bed ... but first we'll see what happens next week when the Dems are not banned.

Even Abhisit said that it violates constitutional rights

read here carefully the OP:

http://www.thaivisa....with-his-image/

But okay at least you understand and admit that this emergency decree violates civil rights and liberties. But i see also that you are totally unable to understand what is wrong with this violation.

Apologies ... I read your statement "CRES and emergency decree violates the constitutional law" as their existence violates constitutional law, which it doesn't.

What I see as a problem is an armed group (or any group) trying to force a legal government to step down. If some laws need to be temporarily put in place to stop violent groups violating peoples civil rights and liberties, then I am for that. That time has now passed.

The ban on having Abhisit's face on slippers was more of a cultural thing, because Thais take great offense to issues with the feet. Abhisit didn't agree that causing offense in that way was a problem and said so.

[Buchholz]

But if you have access to it, could you look up some recent articles that mention Supinya Klangnarong, she is a former FACT coordinator, worked together with CJ Hinke.

Nothing on there about her being a former FACT coordinator. Are you certain of your fact as they only mention her being the chairwoman of the Campaign for Popular Media Reform and coordinator of the Thai Netizen Network, however I didn't read all the search results so maybe it is a fact and I just haven't found that fact.

Yes she is, a former FACT coordinator. I remember some press releases that came also with her name.

In keeping with mca's strict guidelines, until you can produce the fact that she was formerly a FACT coordinator, it remains as an unproven fact.

[Buchholz]

^^ My final word. Your post said that the claims made about FACT being blocked were empty. Empty means without any validity. There was no ambiguity in your statement. There was no other way of interpreting your post. You were then proven wrong. Firstly ( and sadly unsurprisingly ) you tried to bullshit your way out rather than admit your error. Then ( and quite surprisingly ) you corrected yourself possibly, nay probably, because you didn't have any other answer.

And my final word is that at the time of my original post, as far as I could tell with the ISP that I am using, it was empty and without validity. Subsequent to that, it was revealed that for TOT subscribers, it apparently was blocked. My posts subsequent to that included that caveat to my original and factual statement that it wasn't blocked to millions of people like myself that don't use TOT. There was essentially no change in my posts to "correct" myself other than including all previous statements into one long sentence which you then found acceptable for some reason when it was previously stated in earlier posts.

[SergeiY]

PS He,he. I just noticed something funny. Can anyone spot what went wrong with the Abhisit photo in that billboard?

........he dialed the wrong number and is now calling with Thaksin ?

LaoPo

okay, time to answer my own question.

The photo of Abhisit was flipped(flopped)by the billboard 'graphic designer', its mirror-inverted. That makes it to a photoshop desaster brute.

Btw. not the first time that i saw Abhisit on posters mirror-inverted even on those for election campaign.

Anyone knows at what event Abhist picks up the phone? Its not about that some report improper website to the authorities as the billboard suggest, but was in a different context.

If you know your Abhisit well you should be able to answer that.

[phiphidon]

Funny what Jay considers as "scurrying around" was nothing more than about 8 seconds of googling.

The besmirching of the blogger is done by himself and his empty claims that his blog is being blocked when I've been accessing it all year. His self-aggrandizement of somehow feeling important enough that the Deputy Prime Minister should call him personally and fix his internet connection problem was a bit much as well.

Just another misinformation attempt by Jay that fails.

Ah, I've got the hang of this now, mention a name in a reply and post a picture and thats satire

PM Abhisit anyone

or Deputy PM Suthep

[whybother]

Funny what Jay considers as "scurrying around" was nothing more than about 8 seconds of googling.

The besmirching of the blogger is done by himself and his empty claims that his blog is being blocked when I've been accessing it all year. His self-aggrandizement of somehow feeling important enough that the Deputy Prime Minister should call him personally and fix his internet connection problem was a bit much as well.

Just another misinformation attempt by Jay that fails.

Ah, I've got the hang of this now, mention a name in a reply and post a picture and thats satire

PM Abhisit anyone

or Deputy PM Suthep

Not quite. You have to link it to the topic. Eg Abhisit losing face by wearing a ridiculous hat, or Suthep looking down at his flip flops.

[Buchholz]

Ah, I've got the hang of this now, mention a name in a reply and post a picture and thats satire

PM Abhisit anyone

or Deputy PM Suthep

You're nearly there; just missing some academic replies from jayboy

how creepy

exceedingly creepy

[whybother]

Ah, I've got the hang of this now, mention a name in a reply and post a picture and thats satire

PM Abhisit anyone

or Deputy PM Suthep

You're nearly there; just missing some academic replies from jayboy

how creepy

exceedingly creepy

Yawn ...

edit: no ... that's someone else, isn't it ...

Edited November 28, 2010 by whybother

[jayboy]

Ah, I've got the hang of this now, mention a name in a reply and post a picture and thats satire

PM Abhisit anyone

or Deputy PM Suthep

You're nearly there; just missing some academic replies from jayboy

how creepy

exceedingly creepy

Abhisit is a public figure and thus a fair target.In your case you sought to ridicule (though actually failing to do so) a non public figure leading a respected anti censorship organization.You did so within minutes of the post on FACT being made.It was a profoundly creepy thing to do.We know (and it's an open secret how we know) that you are a strong supporter of censorship and the stifling of public debate.If these are your views then make the case with considered arguments if you are able.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

You said his claims that he's being blocked are empty. TOT is blocking him. Therefore his claims of being blocked aren't empty are they? They're true.

For the millions of people that use the internet through other than TOT, the claims are false.

Is he being blocked in any way by anybody? Yes or No. Simple question.

It's the ISP's decision to block websites. The guy publishing deceitful and insulting letters ostensibly posted to Thailand's PM should correct the false record he is desperately trying to create, then capitalise upon.

If his website is not blocked by Abhisit, but rather by a single ISP in Thailand, should not his letter be addressed to ToT rather than the Prime Minister?

I could block you on this forum. Would you then write to the Prime Minister demanding he unblock you? If not, why not?

Would you be blocked in any way by anybody? Yes or No. Simple question.

Not quite. You have to link it to the topic. Eg Abhisit losing face by wearing a ridiculous hat, or Suthep looking down at his flip flops.

Abhisit was requested to put that condom hat on to raise awareness for AIDS Prevention.

The only people who lose face are petty types who would try to hijack an honourable cause like PREVENTING AIDS into an 'attack' on the Prime Minister of Thailand.

I find such behaviour reprehensible. And vile.

[Buchholz]

Ah, I've got the hang of this now, mention a name in a reply and post a picture and thats satire

PM Abhisit anyone

or Deputy PM Suthep

You're nearly there; just missing some academic replies from jayboy

'jayboy'

how creepy

'jayboy'

exceedingly creepy

Abhisit is a public figure and thus a fair target.In your case you sought to ridicule (though actually failing to do so) a non public figure leading a respected anti censorship organization.You did so within minutes of the post on FACT being made.It was a profoundly creepy thing to do.We know (and it's an open secret how we know) that you are a strong supporter of censorship and the stifling of public debate.

Who determined that only public figures are to have their photos posted? There are literally hundreds of threads spread across dozens of sub-forums with posts that incorporate a photo with it of people that are not of public figures.

I posted a humorous shot of him having a good time along with a satirizing comment. You finding that "creepy" would perhaps carry more weight if your own posts weren't pock-marked repeatedly with derogatory, depreciating, insulting words to a very large number of different posters that often end up either edited out or deleted.

As for your ridiculous claim that I am a strong supporter of censorship and stifling of public debate (whatever that means), I would only ask for proof of such an outlandish assertion.

It's funny that your posts keep escalating from "how creepy" to "exceedingly creepy" to now, "profoundly creepy." They keep creeping up the level of hyperbole.

.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Buchholz

[Siam Simon]

Ah, I've got the hang of this now, mention a name in a reply and post a picture and thats satire

PM Abhisit anyone

or Deputy PM Suthep

You're nearly there; just missing some academic replies from jayboy

'jayboy'

how creepy

'jayboy'

exceedingly creepy

Abhisit is a public figure and thus a fair target.In your case you sought to ridicule (though actually failing to do so) a non public figure leading a respected anti censorship organization.You did so within minutes of the post on FACT being made.It was a profoundly creepy thing to do.We know (and it's an open secret how we know) that you are a strong supporter of censorship and the stifling of public debate.

Who determined that only public figures are to have their photos posted? There are literally hundreds of threads spread across dozens of sub-forums with posts that incorporate a photo with it of people that are not of public figures.

I posted a humorous shot of him having a good time along with a satirizing comment. You finding that "creepy" would perhaps carry more weight if your own posts weren't pock-marked repeatedly with derogatory, depreciating, insulting words to a very large number of different posters that often end up either edited out or deleted.

As for your ridiculous claim that I am a strong supporter of censorship and stifling of public debate (whatever that means), I would only ask for proof of such an outlandish assertion.

It's funny that your posts keep escalating from "how creepy" to "exceedingly creepy" to now, "profoundly creepy." They keep creeping up the level of hyperbole.

.

John, your previous remark about the difference between public and private figures..... oh....i give up.....creepy is as creepy does. Never mind.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

John, your previous remark about the difference between public and private figures..... oh....i give up.....creepy is as creepy does. Never mind.

Please don't give up. I'm attempting to understand your position.

I understand Buchholz's comments about satirising public figures. But I'm failing to understand how anyone would consider this fellow to be a private figure or how anyone would consider his 'after'-hours exploits to be off-limits?

This is someone who publishes a letter they (ostensibly) have mailed to the Prime Minister demanding he reverse something that is not - actually - in existence (in reality), and therefore cannot be reversed...and they represent themselves as an officious-sounding organisation, one which warrants a response from the leader of a very large (and troubled) nation...I fail to understand how someone who does this can then reasonably expect their private life to be 'off-limits'? It's kind of ridiculously relevant, no? It's important when seeking to determining the true nature of their 'organisation' and who else is in it and how they conduct themselves when they're not busy posting officious-sounding letters to leaders of countries demanding those leaders 'fix' something that isn't broken. Not sure the realities of their 'private' life gets any more relevant, actually...?