nurofiend Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 The issue here is an MP screaming repeatedly Heil Hitler. It is unacceptable behaviour. Full Stop. The usual gang has rallied to the MP's defence, offering all sorts of childish and tangental excuses. The fact of the matter is that MPs are regularly cut off by House Speakers. It happens in the UK, Canada, Australia, Israel, the USA and in Russia. No matter how upset the MP is, he or she does not start screaming Heil Hitler. I would have respect for many TVFers that consistently denigrate and insult the elcted government of Thailand if they would do the right thing and admit that the behaviour of this Democrat MP was wrong. It is not the first time he has had a tantrum in the House. What is more disappointing is that the former PM Abhisit has said nothing. No distancing of himself from the behaviour which disgraces the House and all MPs. It is also telling that an alternative source had to bring this event to everyone's attention. TAN and the Nation did not break this story did they? I note the number of people making excuses here are also the same ones that call the PTP faciasts and make comparisons of Thaksin to Hitler. If one steps back and puts aside political sympathies, surely a rational person can see that this behaviour was just wrong in so many ways. The man should resign from caucus and if he doesn't resign, he should be removed. Mr. Abhisit as this man's political leader, needs to demand an apology on behalf of all MPs and this chap must apologize to the House and to the Speaker. Everytime something like this occurs, Mr. Abhisit shows that he absolutely no moral compass and is not fit to be an elected leader of Thailand. His timidity in this matter shows that he is weak. Mr. Abhisit could show his leadership to the nation if he took the moral high ground in this matter. He won't and once again an opportunity to show why he is different is squandered. Hopefully, the Speaker will deal with this despicable guttersnipe appropriately. So you have no problem with the real faschism in this story of the house speaker not letting an MP speak in a debate. Yes the way the MP reacted was wrong but that is not the most worrying aspect of this story. Not letting people speak in a debate is. As for respect I also think that you have none from people on here. And personally if I have no respect from you then I take that as a compliment. the most worrying aspect of this story is the house speaker... right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volk666 Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 And that, Boys and Girls, is how you spin from a democrat MP losing his temper, shouting Heil Hitler and giving the Speaker of the House Hitler salutes to that same Speaker of the House being the "Bad Guy", in 9 pages of "discussion". ... Yeah, should have started from there but Saksith, the blogger who wrote the article for this thread, is such a skillful spinmeister that lots of people assumed there was genuine worship of Nazis going on in parliament. Guess what happens when you deny people their right to speak - they call you a dictator. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right? Well in the UK the speaker of the House "presides over the House's debates, determining which members may speak. The Speaker is also responsible for maintaining order during debate, and may punish members who break the rules of the House." Wiki, I know, but difficult to argue against the definition. Yes but you'll find the speaker of the house in th UK is impartial. so are you saying it wasn't because he wanted to wrap up a long session and it was simply to censor the democrats, is that what you really think happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 And that, Boys and Girls, is how you spin from a democrat MP losing his temper, shouting Heil Hitler and giving the Speaker of the House Hitler salutes to that same Speaker of the House being the "Bad Guy", in 9 pages of "discussion". ... Yeah, should have started from there but Saksith, the blogger who wrote the article for this thread, is such a skillful spinmeister that lots of people assumed there was genuine worship of Nazis going on in parliament. Guess what happens when you deny people their right to speak - they call you a dictator. i think you mean they scream heil hitler at the top of their lungs. little different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volk666 Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Little different, agree. Everybody has his own buttons pushing which can drive that person crazy. The Speaker seems to have found the way to piss of the MP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregb Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 As much as I hate the Pheu Thai, even I have to admit that Heil Hitler was a bit too extreme for this situation. Yes, the speaker was being a real bastard and I wouldn't at all have been sad to see someone give him a fist in the jaw for being an asshol_e, but that is only a dream and in reality you have to be more mature than that. "Heil Hitler" should be reserved for Thaksin, who truly is an evil demagogue and for whom the chant would actually be appropriate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volk666 Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Another aspect - the MP seems to be genuinely interested in what he has to say, he wasn't stalling, he wasn't dragging his feet, he wasn't trying to troll, he just wanted to make a point. Imo he was taking himself and his job way too seriously but if people agree to follow the rules of democracy he was doing a fine job, the best he could. He didn't turn up drunk, he didn't flip through porn pix on his phone, he didn't doze off in the middle of the day, he was trying to say whatever he thought was important. And he was unceremoniously cut off and treated like a child - "can't hear you, can't see you." 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 (edited) you can understand him being frustrated, he might have been waiting all day to say his bit. still doesn't excuse it. Edited May 5, 2012 by nurofiend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millwall_fan Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 The activities of the ruling elite and their SS stormtroopers in the Democrat party in murdering 90+ people in 2010, should leave you unsurprised that that K. Boonyod should use the phrase 'Heil Hitler' -He's got an audience though: a number of hi-so kids are going through a Hitler is Cool period at the moment. If one party (of a coalition) is responsible for all deaths during an event due to policy then that means that Thaksin and TRT was responsible for 2500+ deaths during the drug-crackdown. Thaksin's drug crackdown was wildly popular with the Thai public and the drug smugglers themselves are responsible for the deaths of countless Thai kids, whereas the deaths caused by the Democrat government, were of ordinary Thais protesting against the usurping of power by the Democrats after their friends in the judiciary banned the PPP party without a proper trial on order to end the illegal occupation of the airport by the Ruling Elites shock troops the Yellow Shirts (Blackshirts?) And yes, this does smack of Nazism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 ... And yes, this does smack of Nazism again... i think he's saying it tongue in cheek! Still think it's toungue in cheek? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 The activities of the ruling elite and their SS stormtroopers in the Democrat party in murdering 90+ people in 2010, should leave you unsurprised that that K. Boonyod should use the phrase 'Heil Hitler' -He's got an audience though: a number of hi-so kids are going through a Hitler is Cool period at the moment. If one party (of a coalition) is responsible for all deaths during an event due to policy then that means that Thaksin and TRT was responsible for 2500+ deaths during the drug-crackdown. Thaksin's drug crackdown was wildly popular with the Thai public and the drug smugglers themselves are responsible for the deaths of countless Thai kids, whereas the deaths caused by the Democrat government, were of ordinary Thais protesting against the usurping of power by the Democrats after their friends in the judiciary banned the PPP party without a proper trial on order to end the illegal occupation of the airport by the Ruling Elites shock troops the Yellow Shirts (Blackshirts?) And yes, this does smack of Nazism Thanks for clarifying what you meant instead of the jokers that tried to explain your post for you. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harryfrompattaya Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 I thought Thai's didn't know who Hitler was. My personal experience - most thai's dont know history beyond the borders of burma ! Well you know nothing All you know is about the low class. They know more than you which is easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 It seems that the workings of a parliament with an impartial Speaker of the House doesn't work too well in Thailand. A StH cutting of an MP, indicating he can't hear that MP anymore and getting a five finger salute with voice-over for additional effect. Now imagine for a moment we'd have this sequence in parliament in one of the Western democracies. It would be funny only if it wasn't really sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastitche Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right? Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right? Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right? Where did you get the idea that he had an allocated time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katana Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 And he was unceremoniously cut off and treated like a child - "can't hear you, can't see you." As I understood it, he said mai hen duay which means "I don't agree/concur/assent" rather than 'I can't see you'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastitche Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 (edited) Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right? Well in the UK the speaker of the House "presides over the House's debates, determining which members may speak. The Speaker is also responsible for maintaining order during debate, and may punish members who break the rules of the House." Wiki, I know, but difficult to argue against the definition. Yes but you'll find the speaker of the house in th UK is impartial. Edited May 5, 2012 by pastitche Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastitche Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right? Well in the UK the speaker of the House "presides over the House's debates, determining which members may speak. The Speaker is also responsible for maintaining order during debate, and may punish members who break the rules of the House." Wiki, I know, but difficult to argue against the definition. Yes but you'll find the speaker of the house in th UK is impartial. What do you know about the impartiality of the Speaker of the UK's House of Commons? He/she is selected by the House but has previous service as an MP from one political party or another; indeed it is accepted practice that in a general election that he/she will be elected unopposed. You seem to be saying that the Thai parliament is different and that the rules of debate here are not followed. Do you have evidence to substantiate this?From what party did the previos Thai Speaker come? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osten Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 It was done as sarcasm... The leader didnt understand......... The man was quoting as sarcasm HE WAS NOT PROMOTING HITLER..Even though it is a BAD gig to do this he was not in the promotion role.......... He is Blue/ democrat party and was not promoting the man with a funny moustash!!.. He was saying YOU DO WHAT YOU WANT JUST LIKE HITLER... he was not impressed with what was happening......HE supports the Blue! Please dont flame the guy for doing this..ask your girlfriend!! Of course it was done in sarcsam. Surprised by how many people here didn't see that? Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volk666 Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 And he was unceremoniously cut off and treated like a child - "can't hear you, can't see you." As I understood it, he said mai hen duay which means "I don't agree/concur/assent" rather than 'I can't see you'. Literally "mai hen duay" means "can't see, too" and it naturally follows "mai dai yin krap" phrase, "can't hear", that was discussed on the first page of this thread. Nevermind the translation, if you imply that "I don't agree" is a better excuse for not letting an MP speak then it takes Speaker's behavior on a far more sinister level and a step close to Hitler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullcave Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 Obviously he insinuating that the speaker is acting like dictator by comparing him to Hitler. ..next.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastitche Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 It seems that the workings of a parliament with an impartial Speaker of the House doesn't work too well in Thailand. A StH cutting of an MP, indicating he can't hear that MP anymore and getting a five finger salute with voice-over for additional effect. Now imagine for a moment we'd have this sequence in parliament in one of the Western democracies. It would be funny only if it wasn't really sad. Yes Let's imagine what would happen, it's quite simple. The MP would have been removed from the chamber . Or do you think differently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 ... And yes, this does smack of Nazism again... i think he's saying it tongue in cheek! Still think it's toungue in cheek? the original post... kinda yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 the original post... kinda yeah. Right, so he went from tongue in cheek to serious, both saying the Democrats were nazis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 the original post... kinda yeah. Right, so he went from tongue in cheek to serious, both saying the Democrats were nazis. yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Throatwobbler Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 The issue here is an MP screaming repeatedly Heil Hitler. It is unacceptable behaviour. Full Stop. The usual gang has rallied to the MP's defence, offering all sorts of childish and tangental excuses. The fact of the matter is that MPs are regularly cut off by House Speakers. It happens in the UK, Canada, Australia, Israel, the USA and in Russia. No matter how upset the MP is, he or she does not start screaming Heil Hitler. I would have respect for many TVFers that consistently denigrate and insult the elcted government of Thailand if they would do the right thing and admit that the behaviour of this Democrat MP was wrong. It is not the first time he has had a tantrum in the House. What is more disappointing is that the former PM Abhisit has said nothing. No distancing of himself from the behaviour which disgraces the House and all MPs. It is also telling that an alternative source had to bring this event to everyone's attention. TAN and the Nation did not break this story did they? I note the number of people making excuses here are also the same ones that call the PTP faciasts and make comparisons of Thaksin to Hitler. If one steps back and puts aside political sympathies, surely a rational person can see that this behaviour was just wrong in so many ways. The man should resign from caucus and if he doesn't resign, he should be removed. Mr. Abhisit as this man's political leader, needs to demand an apology on behalf of all MPs and this chap must apologize to the House and to the Speaker. Everytime something like this occurs, Mr. Abhisit shows that he absolutely no moral compass and is not fit to be an elected leader of Thailand. His timidity in this matter shows that he is weak. Mr. Abhisit could show his leadership to the nation if he took the moral high ground in this matter. He won't and once again an opportunity to show why he is different is squandered. Hopefully, the Speaker will deal with this despicable guttersnipe appropriately. So you have no problem with the real faschism in this story of the house speaker not letting an MP speak in a debate. Yes the way the MP reacted was wrong but that is not the most worrying aspect of this story. Not letting people speak in a debate is. As for respect I also think that you have none from people on here. And personally if I have no respect from you then I take that as a compliment. the most worrying aspect of this story is the house speaker... right. So you have no problem then with a peaker who refuses to let an opposition MP speak. Next he acts like a 6 year old, I can't hear you, I can't see you etc. This is no problem for you. Rings no alarm bells, nothing, nada. You feel fine that future debates will be handled in a professional way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 The issue here is an MP screaming repeatedly Heil Hitler. It is unacceptable behaviour. Full Stop. The usual gang has rallied to the MP's defence, offering all sorts of childish and tangental excuses. The fact of the matter is that MPs are regularly cut off by House Speakers. It happens in the UK, Canada, Australia, Israel, the USA and in Russia. No matter how upset the MP is, he or she does not start screaming Heil Hitler. I would have respect for many TVFers that consistently denigrate and insult the elcted government of Thailand if they would do the right thing and admit that the behaviour of this Democrat MP was wrong. It is not the first time he has had a tantrum in the House. What is more disappointing is that the former PM Abhisit has said nothing. No distancing of himself from the behaviour which disgraces the House and all MPs. It is also telling that an alternative source had to bring this event to everyone's attention. TAN and the Nation did not break this story did they? I note the number of people making excuses here are also the same ones that call the PTP faciasts and make comparisons of Thaksin to Hitler. If one steps back and puts aside political sympathies, surely a rational person can see that this behaviour was just wrong in so many ways. The man should resign from caucus and if he doesn't resign, he should be removed. Mr. Abhisit as this man's political leader, needs to demand an apology on behalf of all MPs and this chap must apologize to the House and to the Speaker. Everytime something like this occurs, Mr. Abhisit shows that he absolutely no moral compass and is not fit to be an elected leader of Thailand. His timidity in this matter shows that he is weak. Mr. Abhisit could show his leadership to the nation if he took the moral high ground in this matter. He won't and once again an opportunity to show why he is different is squandered. Hopefully, the Speaker will deal with this despicable guttersnipe appropriately. So you have no problem with the real faschism in this story of the house speaker not letting an MP speak in a debate. Yes the way the MP reacted was wrong but that is not the most worrying aspect of this story. Not letting people speak in a debate is. As for respect I also think that you have none from people on here. And personally if I have no respect from you then I take that as a compliment. the most worrying aspect of this story is the house speaker... right. So you have no problem then with a peaker who refuses to let an opposition MP speak. Next he acts like a 6 year old, I can't hear you, I can't see you etc. This is no problem for you. Rings no alarm bells, nothing, nada. You feel fine that future debates will be handled in a professional way. eh no, i just don't think the house speaker is the most worrying aspect of this incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Throatwobbler Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 [the most worrying aspect of this story is the house speaker... right. So you have no problem then with a peaker who refuses to let an opposition MP speak. Next he acts like a 6 year old, I can't hear you, I can't see you etc. This is no problem for you. Rings no alarm bells, nothing, nada. You feel fine that future debates will be handled in a professional way. eh no, i just don't think the house speaker is the most worrying aspect of this incident. They are both worrying aspects. You just seem very happy to brush one of them under the carpet and not talk about it. As for which is the most worrying aspect. One is an individual from a party. One is the speaker of the house whose responsibility it is to hold debates in a fair manner. Different people will draw different conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 (edited) [the most worrying aspect of this story is the house speaker... right. So you have no problem then with a peaker who refuses to let an opposition MP speak. Next he acts like a 6 year old, I can't hear you, I can't see you etc. This is no problem for you. Rings no alarm bells, nothing, nada. You feel fine that future debates will be handled in a professional way. eh no, i just don't think the house speaker is the most worrying aspect of this incident. They are both worrying aspects. You just seem very happy to brush one of them under the carpet and not talk about it. As for which is the most worrying aspect. One is an individual from a party. One is the speaker of the house whose responsibility it is to hold debates in a fair manner. Different people will draw different conclusions. an mp, nazi saluting and shouting heil hitler in parliament seems worse than a house speaker shushing an mp, yes. i'm not brushing anything under the carpet.. Edited May 5, 2012 by nurofiend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volk666 Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 an mp, nazi saluting and shouting heil hitler in parliament seems worse than a house speaker shushing an mp, yes... But that's not what really happened, is it? Right from the start this topic should read: "Frustrated opposition MP addresses House Speaker as Hitler and gives him a Nazi salute." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
folium Posted May 5, 2012 Share Posted May 5, 2012 an mp, nazi saluting and shouting heil hitler in parliament seems worse than a house speaker shushing an mp, yes... But that's not what really happened, is it? Right from the start this topic should read: "Frustrated opposition MP addresses House Speaker as Hitler and gives him a Nazi salute." Parliament here is a toothless talking-shop. The real power lies elsewhere as it always has done. Some silly little MP has a temper tantrum and throws teddy out the pram and a couple of stiff arm salutes. Pathetic and irrelevant, being discussed by a group on non-voters. Next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.bc523c85a8d558dbc282dca7a2e602c9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now