PM Abhisit Recounts His Ordeal Under Rioting Reds

[SergeiY]

I am asking you.

please prove: Thaksin often sued because he didn't like what was said about him, not because they were lies.

From the Asia Times article posted by OtherStuff.

The reason: severe criticism of the government in a public sermon by respected, senior Buddhist monk Luangta Maha Bua published in the newspaper on September 27.

Thaksin didn't sue because of lies. He sued because of criticism.

Yep, that is the flesh eating zombie case. Do you think that is not a lie or intended at creating hatred?

[SergeiY]

And Serge ---- you posted info where the people that were sued by Abhisit were found guilty

yes, here. 12 month for saying that Abhisit is unusual rich. You can be so proud of your PM that he brought these dangerous criminals to justice and the TRUTH were told in court.

Supreme Court issues arrest warrants against 2 former Thai Rak Thai MPs

The Supreme Court Friday issued arrest warrants against 2 former Thai Rak Thai MPs after they failed to turn up to hear the verdict of the court in a defamation case filed by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

The court ordered that Suporn Atthawong and Thirachai Saenkaew be arrested and brought to the court to hear the verdict at 9 am on April 21.

The two were accused of defaming Abhisit by saying the prime minister was unusually rich.

The lower courts gave 12-month suspended jail term against Suporn and a six-month suspended jail term against Thirachai

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Supreme-Court-issues-arrest-warrants-against-2-for-30125074.html

[whybother]

I am asking you.

please prove: Thaksin often sued because he didn't like what was said about him, not because they were lies.

From the Asia Times article posted by OtherStuff.

The reason: severe criticism of the government in a public sermon by respected, senior Buddhist monk Luangta Maha Bua published in the newspaper on September 27.

Thaksin didn't sue because of lies. He sued because of criticism.

Yep, that is the flesh eating zombie case. Do you think that is not a lie or intended at creating hatred?

I don't put it in the same category as "he ordered the army to kill red shirts".

[jdinasia]

And Serge ---- you posted info where the people that were sued by Abhisit were found guilty

yes, here. 12 month for saying that Abhisit is unusual rich. You can be so proud of your PM that he brought these dangerous criminals to justice and the TRUTH were told in court.

Supreme Court issues arrest warrants against 2 former Thai Rak Thai MPs

The Supreme Court Friday issued arrest warrants against 2 former Thai Rak Thai MPs after they failed to turn up to hear the verdict of the court in a defamation case filed by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

The court ordered that Suporn Atthawong and Thirachai Saenkaew be arrested and brought to the court to hear the verdict at 9 am on April 21.

The two were accused of defaming Abhisit by saying the prime minister was unusually rich.

The lower courts gave 12-month suspended jail term against Suporn and a six-month suspended jail term against Thirachai

http://www.nationmul...r-30125074.html

Perhaps you just don't understand what is meant by "unusually rich" --- you asked for proof -- and you supplied it. They were suggesting that the PM had amassed his wealth through illegal means. That was proven in court to be untrue.

The difference being between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit goes after the statements (leaving people free to make more statements, Thaksin went after them, their money, the press that printed anything said about him he didn't like etc.

Finally he just got to the point of giving his astrologer's recommendation as an excuse for not answering questions, and even holding up a paddle when he would not answer questions from the press.

Your die-hard defense of him IS amusing to watch Keep it up!

[Buchholz]

I don't put it in the same category as "he ordered the army to kill red shirts".

oh, c'mon now... that's just a

silly lawsuits.

Anyway, whatever tiny doubt I had about Post # 50 has been sorted with the subsequent pallet of posts since.

[jdinasia]

Yep, that is the flesh eating zombie case. Do you think that is not a lie or intended at creating hatred?

I don't put it in the same category as "he ordered the army to kill red shirts".

One is a metaphor ... the other is a lie.

[termad]

How many defamation and libel cases has the PM as the plaintiff running?

How many egregious and totally false claims have been made publicly against him, might be another way of looking at it. I would say the number of suits filed pales in comparison to the lies told from Red and yellow stages. The ones actually prosecuted against are rather few in comparison.

Because of the many thousands of web sites closed down since Abhisit was installed as PM it's not possible to answer your question.

[SergeiY]

And Serge ---- you posted info where the people that were sued by Abhisit were found guilty

yes, here. 12 month for saying that Abhisit is unusual rich. You can be so proud of your PM that he brought these dangerous criminals to justice and the TRUTH were told in court.

Supreme Court issues arrest warrants against 2 former Thai Rak Thai MPs

The Supreme Court Friday issued arrest warrants against 2 former Thai Rak Thai MPs after they failed to turn up to hear the verdict of the court in a defamation case filed by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

The court ordered that Suporn Atthawong and Thirachai Saenkaew be arrested and brought to the court to hear the verdict at 9 am on April 21.

The two were accused of defaming Abhisit by saying the prime minister was unusually rich.

The lower courts gave 12-month suspended jail term against Suporn and a six-month suspended jail term against Thirachai

http://www.nationmul...r-30125074.html

Perhaps you just don't understand what is meant by "unusually rich" --- you asked for proof -- and you supplied it. They were suggesting that the PM had amassed his wealth through illegal means. That was proven in court to be untrue.

The difference being between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit goes after the statements (leaving people free to make more statements, Thaksin went after them, their money, the press that printed anything said about him he didn't like etc.

Finally he just got to the point of giving his astrologer's recommendation as an excuse for not answering questions, and even holding up a paddle when he would not answer questions from the press.

Your die-hard defense of him IS amusing to watch Keep it up!

I am not defending Thaksin. Your trying die-hard to defend Abhisit with some argument that involved finger pointing at Thaksin and declare he did the same or he did worse. straw man arguments.

[jdinasia]

1) My argument in defense of Abhisit is that it is the ONLY appropriate way to deal with these criminal lies, and that unlike some people's hero, he isn't going after the press or people's money. He is going after the truth.

2) You have defended Thaksin

I am asking you.

please prove: Thaksin often sued because he didn't like what was said about him, not because they were lies.

followed by the flesh eating zombie comment and in other places. Thaksin attempted to stifle the press using both AIS/Shin advertising (withdrawing it) and by suing the press for millions and millions, as well as suing other people that dare speak out against him for huge sums of money.

You did neatly avoid the "unusually rich" remark

If you don't see a difference in what is happening now and what has happened in the past, is there any real sense in talking to you? (BTW -- congrats on dropping the persona!)

[SergeiY]

1) My argument in defense of Abhisit is that it is the ONLY appropriate way to deal with these criminal lies, and that unlike some people's hero, he isn't going after the press or people's money. He is going after the truth.

2) You have defended Thaksin

I am asking you.

please prove: Thaksin often sued because he didn't like what was said about him, not because they were lies.

followed by the flesh eating zombie comment and in other places. Thaksin attempted to stifle the press using both AIS/Shin advertising (withdrawing it) and by suing the press for millions and millions, as well as suing other people that dare speak out against him for huge sums of money.

You did neatly avoid the "unusually rich" remark

If you don't see a difference in what is happening now and what has happened in the past, is there any real sense in talking to you? (BTW -- congrats on dropping the persona!)

My argument is that there are other ways and much better ways for a PM to react than to sue anyone.

No matter if it Thaksin or Abhisit.

I think that arguments in defense of Abhisit that go 'Thaksin did the same' or Thaksin did much worse' are pretty lame excuses.

The question about some cases where Abhisit sued successfully and the court proved all the allegations as false is still open. just one example, the 'unusual rich' case, isn't really a final answer.

And in question of freedom of the press - did you check the press freedom index yet and compared some rankings from the past with a ranking now?

[Sao Jiang Mai]

OK, I will bite. Please tell us what Abhisit should do when faced with one lie after another about him Sergei?

[SergeiY]

OK, I will bite. Please tell us what Abhisit should do when faced with one lie after another about him Sergei?

Okay, one question for you. In what cases in the past Abhisit won his lawsuits and the allegations in question were declared false. If lawsuits are really the successful method to expose lies than you should be able to name a few cases when the list of lies is so long.

I already explained here in a couple of post what i would think is a better tactic to react to defamations and why. I repeat one here for you:

Okay, take the case 'Mr Jatuporn on a at the UDD demonstration at Wat Phai Khiew on May 10 alleged the Prime Minister for not being in his motorcade while the UDD besieged the Interior Ministry' or Mr Arisman said on October 11 and 17 last year that Mr Abhisit became became premier by "robbing the people's power" or that Mr Thaksin said Abhisit must be 'mentally ill, given the way he dealt with anti-government protests in April last year by red-shirt supporters.'

How he could react to it, he could just think pffff and yawn why bother, dismiss these false allegetion with a sttement to the press and continue with the important work he has to do as PM or run on monday morning to the court and file some important libel suits after a weekend where he tuned into some red channel to listen their rants about him.

And the question of 'reputation' - well, that is a thingy that a politician gains in the eyes of the public with, most important, good work, with good PR, with charisma and a back bone but not so much with winning lawsuits that gives opponents a 2 year in jail sentence for making the false allegation the PM is unusual rich.

Edit to add PS.

PS. In in comparison to Thaksin ... Wouldn't you agree that his lawsuits didn't do him much favour PR wise? What makes you think it would be different for Abhisit.

Edited December 3, 2010 by SergeiY

[SergeiY]

Okay, as i can see no-one of you who argued all these lawsuits are necessary so that Abhisit can prove that the other lie and his reputation is reconstructed or whatever can come forward and bring some examples of such lawsuits.

It guess the myth is busted, it seems there is no necessity and useful effects of such lawsuits in terms of public reputation and image.

[Piengrudee]

PM Mark survive the Red. Now he can survive every challenge.

[whybother]

Okay, as i can see no-one of you who argued all these lawsuits are necessary so that Abhisit can prove that the other lie and his reputation is reconstructed or whatever can come forward and bring some examples of such lawsuits.

It guess the myth is busted, it seems there is no necessity and useful effects of such lawsuits in terms of public reputation and image.

Does that mean that every question that you have failed to answer is a busted myth?

[SergeiY]

^^

It means you made claims and statements you cannot back up nor prove them somehow.

[whybother]

Okay, as i can see no-one of you who argued all these lawsuits are necessary so that Abhisit can prove that the other lie and his reputation is reconstructed or whatever can come forward and bring some examples of such lawsuits.

It guess the myth is busted, it seems there is no necessity and useful effects of such lawsuits in terms of public reputation and image.

Does that mean that every question that you have failed to answer is a busted myth?

^^

It means you made claims and statements you cannot back up nor prove them somehow.

YOU not answering a question means I have failed to back up my claims?

[jdinasia]

OK, I will bite. Please tell us what Abhisit should do when faced with one lie after another about him Sergei?

And please, when you consider the question, remember you are in Thailand and not the UK/US/Oz. Remember that the red propaganda machine says a lot of things but they don't break certain laws and thus when Abhisit wins a case they do 2 things. Stop lying about that one fact and 2) either ignore the verdict so their followers don't hear the truth or they report it in 2 sentences.

Rather than call a press conference and stamp his feet and cry "I did not say/do that", he does the right thing and makes it an official statement from someone else that he didn't.