How Long Can Yingluck Hide From The Big Tough Issues?

[ginjag]

Anterian #93

Not really shouting as it was only 1 word, trying to show you that you do not come across as being neutral. That's all.

To me evil as I was taught was despicable- the devil - you seem to want to use it for other reasons. I have been honest in what has been reality-and answered you honestly, and only disagreed with you re-the both men were evil. I am saying one was, most people knows who that is. His convictions, I do not know K. Thaksin personally only what the court has told us, and what he has committed.

Back on topic is the best move here, It will be interesting to see the head to head with Yingluck/Abhisit. I really do hope she doesn't show herself up the same as she did on Aussie T.V....... I honestly would like to see her demonstrate her ability on the serious matters she will have to face-Corruption ( that no one person has the power to stop) and her awareness of international matters, being able to compete with the global leaders. I have an idea the electorate will not see that side of her. Money handouts and her photo's plastered all over the country is all I see as yet.

[anterian]

Never mind, I don't take these political debates seriously

I gather that now.

So glad, why run the risk of an aneurysm over an issue which you have no influence over, all becomes lucid in time

The language, vocabulary, with which a question is posed often reveals the intentions of the questioner.

[anterian]

Anterian #93

Not really shouting as it was only 1 word, trying to show you that you do not come across as being neutral. That's all.

To me evil as I was taught was despicable- the devil - you seem to want to use it for other reasons. I have been honest in what has been reality-and answered you honestly, and only disagreed with you re-the both men were evil. I am saying one was, most people knows who that is. His convictions, I do not know K. Thaksin personally only what the court has told us, and what he has committed.

Back on topic is the best move here, It will be interesting to see the head to head with Yingluck/Abhisit. I really do hope she doesn't show herself up the same as she did on Aussie T.V....... I honestly would like to see her demonstrate her ability on the serious matters she will have to face-Corruption ( that no one person has the power to stop) and her awareness of international matters, being able to compete with the global leaders. I have an idea the electorate will not see that side of her. Money handouts and her photo's plastered all over the country is all I see as yet.

The problem is a lot has been discussed about his trial and conviction, both in the Nation blogs and the BP blogs, Thai and Farangs from the legal fraternity thrashed it out at great length and over many weeks. As you say, you only know what the court has told you. It was not that simple, but I cannot elaborate or my post will get banned.

If we accept that both Yingluck and Abhisit are both puppets, then any debate between them will revolve upon who is the better actor and does not fluff the lines prepared by the spin doctors. Thus in one sense such a debate would prove nothing.

As to what is evil, well ""The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish, and the tyranny of evil men." but the truly righteous man does not surrender the fight.

[whybother]

If we accept that both Yingluck and Abhisit are both puppets, then any debate between them will revolve upon who is the better actor and does not fluff the lines prepared by the spin doctors. Thus in one sense such a debate would prove nothing.

What if we don't accept that both are puppets?

[anterian]

If we accept that both Yingluck and Abhisit are both puppets, then any debate between them will revolve upon who is the better actor and does not fluff the lines prepared by the spin doctors. Thus in one sense such a debate would prove nothing.

What if we don't accept that both are puppets?

Up to you, everyone is entitled to an opinion.... I think

[ginjag]

Anterian #93

Not really shouting as it was only 1 word, trying to show you that you do not come across as being neutral. That's all.

To me evil as I was taught was despicable- the devil - you seem to want to use it for other reasons. I have been honest in what has been reality-and answered you honestly, and only disagreed with you re-the both men were evil. I am saying one was, most people knows who that is. His convictions, I do not know K. Thaksin personally only what the court has told us, and what he has committed.

Back on topic is the best move here, It will be interesting to see the head to head with Yingluck/Abhisit. I really do hope she doesn't show herself up the same as she did on Aussie T.V....... I honestly would like to see her demonstrate her ability on the serious matters she will have to face-Corruption ( that no one person has the power to stop) and her awareness of international matters, being able to compete with the global leaders. I have an idea the electorate will not see that side of her. Money handouts and her photo's plastered all over the country is all I see as yet.

The problem is a lot has been discussed about his trial and conviction, both in the Nation blogs and the BP blogs, Thai and Farangs from the legal fraternity thrashed it out at great length and over many weeks. As you say, you only know what the court has told you. It was not that simple, but I cannot elaborate or my post will get banned.

If we accept that both Yingluck and Abhisit are both puppets, then any debate between them will revolve upon who is the better actor and does not fluff the lines prepared by the spin doctors. Thus in one sense such a debate would prove nothing.

As to what is evil, well ""The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish, and the tyranny of evil men." but the truly righteous man does not surrender the fight.

Reality for me-a down to earth person is if I see a debate (head to head) I would get a general Idea which person could be the better for Thailand. I see you are very busy with other posters so I will no waste your time. But what you came back to me about evil definition, Please give me a break. (quote) As to what is evil, well ""The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish, and the tyranny of evil men." but the truly righteous man does not surrender the fight." As I said down to earth replies are best ==example the Myra H=Peter B-Child killers- Hitler-this is what is defined as evil , easier to speak openly not what was written from the past.

[longway]

Buchholz,

too many nested comment and I can't be bothered to sort them out, but Pi Sek was right in that respect, it was not a relevant question.

However I will explain, I much prefer explaining to elucidating, making things lucid is difficult to a closed mind

After having read all the scornful comments about Yingluk and her debating skills, from yourself and others, I expected her to be hesitant, stumbling, nervous and incoherent, in fact she was none of them. Thus she was better than I expected. As to her evading questions, it seems she is already learning the tricks of the politician's trade.

Now i know you are a rabidly fanatical Thaksin family hater, but you are really wasting your time attacking my comments, you see I don't like them either, I'm just not blindly in love with Abhisit and his crew of corrupt misfits.

If I had voting rights, I would not use them, I can't even decide which is the lesser of two evils, but as been said many times, people get the government they deserve. :jap:

Lets be fair then please, you are impartial ?? Quote 2 evils>> Abhisit evil ?? Not charged with any offence( admitted corruption cannot be controlled==and we all know why),, The ex P.M. has been convicted and on the run. You already stated your not a Thaksin lover maybe for the said reasons, but WHY would you label Abhisit and put them on par ??

The big powers here control NOT the P.M. we ALL know that. Until it is officially announced that Abhisit has wronged-and has (sticky) fingers don't even try to compare the man with the man on the run.

Ah, you talk about fairness, well I cannot reply in an open forum, you see in Thailand it is an offence to criticise the courts and judiciary. So it a null contest as a discussion However, "on the run" I can discuss, if being given an honorary police escort whilst departing with dozens of suitcases is being "on the run" then I think we need to redefine this term. Equally the posturing to have him returned are just that, posturing. Equally in law there is the concept of collusion and being an accessory to the fact. Abhisit's fingers may not be that sticky, but he has, and is aware of, some very sticky fingered members of his crew.

To accept, nay condone corruption, is to me no different from being corrupt, it's that simple. Thaksin got kicked out by the big powers that you suggest, Abhisit is simply a servant to those powers. Thaksin is evil because he tried to be too strong, Abhisit is evil because he is too weak.

Being weak is evil? He is in a weak position without a doubt, but a good election could enhance his position, at least he had the guts to call one. He definitely has to tolerate corruption (not sure how you know he accepts it or condones it), as does anyone who lives in Thailand. I guess that makes you weak and evil too.

Edited June 7, 2011 by longway

[longway]

If we accept that both Yingluck and Abhisit are both puppets, then any debate between them will revolve upon who is the better actor and does not fluff the lines prepared by the spin doctors. Thus in one sense such a debate would prove nothing.

What if we don't accept that both are puppets?

Up to you, everyone is entitled to an opinion.... I think

Well yours is just wrong. If he is such a puppet why to the yellows hate him too? He is not to popular with Newin and Barnham either, all the right people hate his guts.

[animatic]

If we accept that both Yingluck and Abhisit are both puppets, then any debate between them will revolve upon who is the better actor and does not fluff the lines prepared by the spin doctors. Thus in one sense such a debate would prove nothing.

What if we don't accept that both are puppets?

Up to you, everyone is entitled to an opinion.... I think

Well yours is just wrong. If he is such a puppet why to the yellows hate him too? He is not to popular with Newin and Barnham either, all the right people hate his guts.

Quite so, in politics your success is often judged, as much or more, by who are your enemies, as by who are your current friends.

[cdnvic]

The amount of personal bickering going on in these political threads is getting tiresome. If it keeps up the participants will have their posting rights removed until after the election. So if you are happy being silenced for this period, just keep it up.