Yingluck Dismisses Photo Of Her With Fugitive Red Shirt Arisman

[timekeeper]

Familiarity breeds contempt.

Or is it guilt by association.

Certainly in most countries being seen in the company of a wanted terrorist would be an election killer photo.

He looks a bit too familier with her.

And she seems unworried about his overtly friendly hands on her. Particularly in ' not show physical affection publicly Thailand'. If you don't want inferences to be made, explain it, don't fall silent.

2 years ago and Arisaman was involved in the 1st set of Songkran riots and attempts at insurrection.

The photo is said to be made in February 2009 when k. Arisman was still reasonably respectable.

2 months later and he would be arrested for violating Article 116 of the Criminal Code by inciting insurrection by encouraging red-shirt protesters to seize Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

So i should avoid people at parties in case they decide to do something 2 months in the future

Some of you need to get a grip of yourselves, some of the straw clutching in here is embarrassing to be honest

somehow i don't think you are going to have that problem..........

[whybother]

Did it not come from the Dem's newspaper, The Nation.

The Nation reported on her dismissal regarding a photo on the internet.

Do you read the articles?

News is slow, no I did not read the Democrats paper The Nation. But I did notice a lot of people are showing the video that is in the other good paper.

So you don't even bother reading the OP. That sounds very trollish.

[trisailer]

It's a terrible thing to advocate burning Bangkok and the result was a terrible thing, but the fact remains that people are angry, otherwise why would they do something as terrible as wanting to burn Bangkok. The government has to respond to that anger and cool things down. Every government in every country has faced these kinds of challenges and some have defused the situation with well reasoned approaches and other have let their city's burn.

This guy should be punished for his speech, but so too should the people who shut down the airport. The current government is responsible for addressing this situation. They and they alone are responsible for the red shirt gathering and the resulting damage. They are also responsible for what ever outcome of this election is because they are in power. They had a choice to deal with the demonstration which started out peaceful. A good politician expects these kinds of challenges and knows history, knows how to fix things.

Any simpleton can say that the reds are wrong in their methods, but this government produced them. If they had addressed their issues with competence it would have never happened.

Only a fool would think that Yinluck was not associating with the red leadership. If the current government continues to address the problems than the reds will win and then we'll have a new set of problem.

Civil war is not a pretty sight. The damage lasts for decades. Only a fool

[sbk]

Ok, so Mme. Yingluck has an embarrassing photograph out there. So what?

Do you think PM Abhisit regrets this one with Newin ?

How about Tony Blair with Gaddaffi?

Or this one of smiling Rumsfeld and Hussein?

People take away what they want from an image. Is Rex Grossman into sodomy or was it just an inopportune photograph?

Here's another memorable grab attempt.

None of which have anything to do with the topic at hand. Lets refrain from posting further unrelated photos, cheers

[random]

So i should avoid people at parties in case they decide to do something 2 months in the future

Some of you need to get a grip of yourselves, some of the straw clutching in here is embarrassing to be honest

somehow i don't think you are going to have that problem..........

?

[whybother]

...

This guy should be punished for his speech, but so too should the people who shut down the airport.

Why should the Director of AOT be punished?

But besides that, the yellow shirts have been charged and are going through the court processes. They didn't do a runner like some people who should be punished.

The current government is responsible for addressing this situation. They and they alone are responsible for the red shirt gathering and the resulting damage. They are also responsible for what ever outcome of this election is because they are in power. They had a choice to deal with the demonstration which started out peaceful. A good politician expects these kinds of challenges and knows history, knows how to fix things.

How should the government have handled the peaceful protest?

The government let them protest. The government let them roam the streets of Bangkok with their protest. The government tried to shut the protests down when they stopped being peaceful.

[random]

Ok, so Mme. Yingluck has an embarrassing photograph out there. So what?

Do you think PM Abhisit regrets this one with Newin ?

How about Tony Blair with Gaddaffi?

Or this one of smiling Rumsfeld and Hussein?

People take away what they want from an image. Is Rex Grossman into sodomy or was it just an inopportune photograph?

Here's another memorable grab attempt.

None of which have anything to do with the topic at hand. Lets refrain from posting further unrelated photos, cheers

It has a lot to do with the topic at hand, it shows that pictures can be innocent and the poster is highlighting pictures that can also be misconstrued. certain people are trying to use the picture for political brownie points and this poster is showing how futile that is with examples.

[sbk]

Ok, so Mme. Yingluck has an embarrassing photograph out there. So what?

Do you think PM Abhisit regrets this one with Newin ?

How about Tony Blair with Gaddaffi?

Or this one of smiling Rumsfeld and Hussein?

People take away what they want from an image. Is Rex Grossman into sodomy or was it just an inopportune photograph?

Here's another memorable grab attempt.

None of which have anything to do with the topic at hand. Lets refrain from posting further unrelated photos, cheers

It has a lot to do with the topic at hand, it shows that pictures can be innocent and the poster is highlighting pictures that can also be misconstrued. certain people are trying to use the picture for political brownie points and this poster is showing how futile that is with examples.

Yes I did grasp that was the point but whatever point was attemtped, its been made. amply. No need to waste people's bandwidth with further.

[phupaman]

Hi All.

It is pointless argueing about the riots in Bkk , The simple truth is . Take out the Finance and hey presto everyone goes home.No money = No riots and no Death.

phupaman.

[animatic]

whats that expression lawyers and police use?

is it ''guilty by association''.........?

No, that is a fallacy demagogues and haters use.

http://www.fallacyfi...g/guiltbya.html

So...

the guys working with Pol Pot were not bad guys?

They associated with a psychotic marxist zealot and dictator,

and they all killed 4 million of their own citizens,

but they are not bad by that association until the courts say they are..

Righty O dude.

Grasping at straws, or 'strawman arguments'

Edited June 17, 2011 by animatic

[eezergood]

The Dems are really desperate now aren't they. This really is no news and as usual Yingluck has dealt with it in the appropriate manner.

I love your unwavering unbiased approach to postings, will your dumy be thrown if she looses? or will you do as is expected and take up arms at the travesty ?

[animatic]

So i should avoid people at parties in case they decide to do something 2 months in the future

Some of you need to get a grip of yourselves, some of the straw clutching in here is embarrassing to be honest

somehow i don't think you are going to have that problem..........

?

Do you REALLY need it explained to you?

[steveyinasia]

A photo that was taken two years ago......must be getting desperate

[theseahorse]

It's a terrible thing to advocate burning Bangkok and the result was a terrible thing, but the fact remains that people are angry, otherwise why would they do something as terrible as wanting to burn Bangkok. The government has to respond to that anger and cool things down. Every government in every country has faced these kinds of challenges and some have defused the situation with well reasoned approaches and other have let their city's burn.

This guy should be punished for his speech, but so too should the people who shut down the airport. The current government is responsible for addressing this situation. They and they alone are responsible for the red shirt gathering and the resulting damage. They are also responsible for what ever outcome of this election is because they are in power. They had a choice to deal with the demonstration which st - arted out peaceful. A good politician expects these kinds of challenges and knows history, knows how to fix things.

Any simpleton can say that the reds are wrong in their methods, but this government produced them. If they had addressed their issues with competence it would have never happened.

Only a fool would think that Yinluck was not associating with the red leadership. If the current government continues to address the problems than the reds will win and then we'll have a new set of problem.

Civil war is not a pretty sight. The damage lasts for decades. Only a fool

A good leader understands in times of conflict there are two sides and the only way forwrad is to comprimise and hope that both sides can be at least a little happier. If they just keep one side happy the other is going to revolt. The only way to have resolved the issues last year was through talks and and coming to a compromise, this how adults do things. During the talks last year an offer of a compomise was given and was turned down (from whoever was on the other end of that phone) if the Reds had have excepted the offer of an early election they could have walk away celebrating how they won the battle and true democracy was coming due to their efforts, no lose of face and no massacre. But it obviously wasn't about democracy was it or they would have excepted an offer of real democracy - an early election! A compromise to try and keep both sides happy.

The biggest mistake Abhisit made was to let it get so big. No other PM would have let them take over an area like that for so long, they would have sent in the troops much earlier.

[random]

So i should avoid people at parties in case they decide to do something 2 months in the future

Some of you need to get a grip of yourselves, some of the straw clutching in here is embarrassing to be honest

somehow i don't think you are going to have that problem..........

?

Do you REALLY need it explained to you?

yes please, is it some form of joke? is he saying i am not popular at parties? how can he say this when he does not even know me? is he saying i should know what people will be doing 2 months down the line but not knowing?

So many unanswered questions, my guessing though it was just a shit attempt at humour that fell flat.

[animatic]

2 months later he was helping create riots across the city.

Hard to believe his mindset suddenly degraded so much 2 months later...

This is like saying hanging with Osama Bin Laden 2 months before he ordered the WTC bombing suddenly makes it OK looking back, because he hadn't YET given the order. 20 years earlier maybe, 2 months... nope same guy, yet to go over the edge.

But this ALSO shows an early connection between

Thaksin's; political, familial and street army connections.

Oh wait he is not involved with the Red Shirts, other than lil sister playing cozy with Arisi'

No, when she was pictured with him he had already beaten an old man on television for daring to ask for promised compensation for political work in a losing election battle. And he was actively giving proto-insurrectionist speeches that were dividing the country for his bosses personal political ends.

They guy was already well and truly despicable when this shot was taken.

Edited June 17, 2011 by animatic

[samurai]

whats that expression lawyers and police use?

is it ''guilty by association''.........?

No, that is a fallacy demagogues and haters use.

http://www.fallacyfi...g/guiltbya.html

So...

the guys working with Pol Pot were not bad guys?

They associated with a psychotic marxist zealot and dictator,

and they all killed 4 million of their own citizens,

but they are not bad by that association until the courts say they are..

Righty O dude.

Grasping at straws, or 'strawman arguments'

What is a strawman argument?

[animatic]

'random' timestamp='1308276232' post='4494210'

So i should avoid people at parties in case they decide to do something 2 months in the future

Some of you need to get a grip of yourselves, some of the straw clutching in here is embarrassing to be honest

somehow i don't think you are going to have that problem..........

?

Do you REALLY need it explained to you?

yes please, is it some form of joke? is he saying i am not popular at parties? how can he say this when he does not even know me? is he saying i should know what people will be doing 2 months down the line but not knowing?

So many unanswered questions, my guessing though it was just a shit attempt at humour that fell flat.

ye gawds. it refers to your member... twice.

'Clutching your'self, 'grabbing', thin as a 'straw'...

Went right over head didn't it?

Don't shoot the translator.

[animatic]

From Wiki: A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.^[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

^{http://www.nizkor.or.../straw-man.html}

Description of Straw Man^{The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual}

• Person A has position X.
• Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
• Person B attacks position Y.
• Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

......................................................

So by trying to twist the argument to theoretically and incorrectly, resemble someone else's positions, and equating them to the original post out of actual context, it is a strawman argument.

Edited June 17, 2011 by animatic

[random]

2 months later he was helping create riots across the city.

Hard to believe his mindset suddenly degraded so much 2 months later...

This is like saying hanging with Osama Bin Laden 2 months before he ordered the WTC bombing suddenly makes it OK looking back, because he hadn't YET gave the order. @0 years earlier maybe, 2 months... nope same guy, yet to go over the edge. But this ALSO shows an early connection between Thaksin's political, familial and street army connections.

No, when she was pictured with him he had already beaten an old man on television for daring to ask for promised compensation for political work in a losing election battle. And he was actively giving proto-insurrectionist speeches that were dividing the country for his bosses personal political ends.

They guy was already well and truly despicable when this shot was taken.

and as already explained by the journo from the Nation, she was not posing for a photo with him, she just happened to be at the same place, he grabbed her to try and get her to dance, so what is your point exactly? Get everyone to write down what they will be doing in 2 months times and if anyone plans anything bad then don't go to the party??

[random]

ye gawds. it refers to your member... twice.

'Clutching your'self, 'grabbing', thin as a 'straw'...

Went right over head didn't it?

Don't shoot the translator.

No,s till don't get it, what am i missing here?? is it a joke or is it not a joke? I think we can agree whatever it is it is a pile of shabite.

(by the way, I am fully aware, just being sarcastic to point out what a poor attempt it is, but thanks for your translation efforts) :jap:

[animatic]

2 months later he was helping create riots across the city.

Hard to believe his mindset suddenly degraded so much 2 months later...

This is like saying hanging with Osama Bin Laden 2 months before he ordered the WTC bombing suddenly makes it OK looking back, because he hadn't YET gave the order. @0 years earlier maybe, 2 months... nope same guy, yet to go over the edge. But this ALSO shows an early connection between Thaksin's political, familial and street army connections.

No, when she was pictured with him he had already beaten an old man on television for daring to ask for promised compensation for political work in a losing election battle. And he was actively giving proto-insurrectionist speeches that were dividing the country for his bosses personal political ends.

They guy was already well and truly despicable when this shot was taken.

and as already explained by the journo from the Nation, she was not posing for a photo with him, she just happened to be at the same place, he grabbed her to try and get her to dance, so what is your point exactly? Get everyone to write down what they will be doing in 2 months times and if anyone plans anything bad then don't go to the party??

Consider carefully who you will associate with.

Clearly not the case here.

Why would he think he has the right to get this close to her in public?

Inappropriate physical contact in public is highly frowned on in Thailand. This looks way too familier.

Or if he accosting her... why is she smiling.

Spin all you want, this is a cock-up for their campaign.

Edited June 17, 2011 by animatic

[random]

2 months later he was helping create riots across the city.

Hard to believe his mindset suddenly degraded so much 2 months later...

This is like saying hanging with Osama Bin Laden 2 months before he ordered the WTC bombing suddenly makes it OK looking back, because he hadn't YET gave the order. @0 years earlier maybe, 2 months... nope same guy, yet to go over the edge. But this ALSO shows an early connection between Thaksin's political, familial and street army connections.

No, when she was pictured with him he had already beaten an old man on television for daring to ask for promised compensation for political work in a losing election battle. And he was actively giving proto-insurrectionist speeches that were dividing the country for his bosses personal political ends.

They guy was already well and truly despicable when this shot was taken.

and as already explained by the journo from the Nation, she was not posing for a photo with him, she just happened to be at the same place, he grabbed her to try and get her to dance, so what is your point exactly? Get everyone to write down what they will be doing in 2 months times and if anyone plans anything bad then don't go to the party??

Consider carefully who you will associate with.

Clearly not the case here.

Why would he think he has the right to get this close to her in public?

Inappropriate physical contact in public is highly frowned on in Thailand. This looks way too familier.

Or if he accosting her... why is she smiling.

Spin all you want, this is a cock-up for their campaign.

Ask him why he thinks he has the right, pictures can say many things and those things are normally based on the bias of the viewer, as explained by the Journo already she was trying to pull away from him, she has her back to him, does she even know who is grabbing her?

And as already mentioned this was before he was involved in the illegal activities, so now you will castigate her for not being a fortune teller, or a seer, or not having a time machine

I notice you are quiet about the picture of abhisit with sondhi

a cock up in their campaign yes a 2 year old picture that isnt even posed for, a cock up

Edited June 17, 2011 by random

[trisailer]

A good leader understands in times of conflict there are two sides and the only way forward is to compromise and hope that both sides can be at least a little happier. If they just keep one side happy the other is going to revolt. The only way to have resolved the issues last year was through talks and and coming to a compromise, this how adults do things. During the talks last year an offer of a compromise was given and was turned down (from whoever was on the other end of that phone) if the Reds had have excepted the offer of an early election they could have walk away celebrating how they won the battle and true democracy was coming due to their efforts, no lose of face and no massacre. But it obviously wasn't about democracy was it or they would have excepted an offer of real democracy - an early election! A compromise to try and keep both sides happy.

The biggest mistake Abhisit made was to let it get so big. No other PM would have let them take over an area like that for so long, they would have sent in the troops much earlier.

You are absolutely correct. There are two sides to the story and I doubt that any of us know those two sides, but If I were the leader would know. I would have intelligence from people who can talk to the other side to learn exactly what they want and have some process behind the scenes of trying to achieve a compromise. That is the essences of leadership. I would have never let it get to this point, let them take over anything or build the fortress.that they built. There are security professionals all over the world who are experts at defusing these situations and controlling crowds. I would certainly not let people enter the demonstration with weapons and gasoline. That is just plain incompetence.

I'm sure that there were ways to get a message to the supporters that some of their demands could be met. I agree that some of these people just want destruction and mayhem, those people could have been arrested on the way. I don't know. I'm not a security expert, but I have participated in a lot of demonstrations where we were allowed to make our point, but things didn't get out of hand. We were inspected for weapons and large groups were split up. People from the other side talked as much as our own leaders.

The leadership of the reds have some real problems if they are leading people towards violence, but the supporters have some legitimate complaints that will have to be addressed or else this will continue to esculate. These issues have been simmering for decades.

The role of a good leader is to evaluate these situations with intelligence and compassion. That Abhist refuses to acknowledge the illegal shutting down of the airport by the yellows while hammering the reds is a problem IMO.

[ToffeEFCpower]

Looks like Arisman just wanted to 'get his leg over' that night. Suggests he is not a god and is human after all lol

[jdinasia]

Did it not come from the Dem's newspaper, The Nation.

The Nation isn't owned by the Dems, and the owner is fighting with the Dems ... so ... no

[anterian]

Ok, so Mme. Yingluck has an embarrassing photograph out there. So what?

Do you think PM Abhisit regrets this one with Newin ?

How about Tony Blair with Gaddaffi?

Or this one of smiling Rumsfeld and Hussein?

People take away what they want from an image. Is Rex Grossman into sodomy or was it just an inopportune photograph?

I admire people who research to make their point, a brilliant set of pictures

[moe666]

Go to a Thai night club and the guys are all over the women, no different at this level, probably less respect for women.

[steffi]

It's a terrible thing to advocate burning Bangkok and the result was a terrible thing, but the fact remains that people are angry, otherwise why would they do something as terrible as wanting to burn Bangkok. The government has to respond to that anger and cool things down. Every government in every country has faced these kinds of challenges and some have defused the situation with well reasoned approaches and other have let their city's burn.

This guy should be punished for his speech, but so too should the people who shut down the airport. The current government is responsible for addressing this situation. They and they alone are responsible for the red shirt gathering and the resulting damage. They are also responsible for what ever outcome of this election is because they are in power. They had a choice to deal with the demonstration which started out peaceful. A good politician expects these kinds of challenges and knows history, knows how to fix things.

Any simpleton can say that the reds are wrong in their methods, but this government produced them. If they had addressed their issues with competence it would have never happened.

Only a fool would think that Yinluck was not associating with the red leadership. If the current government continues to address the problems than the reds will win and then we'll have a new set of problem.

Civil war is not a pretty sight. The damage lasts for decades. Only a fool

So do you feel that Thaksin should answer for his crimes then or not? Or do you think he's been punished already?

Edited June 17, 2011 by steffi

[animatic]

Keep the spin coming, we need the humor here.