Thai protest leader told to surrender

[hellodolly]

Of course they are personal insults, but go for it - doesn't bother me in the slightest as the source is you.

"you accepting it and also using it as a defense for a corrupt government makes you almost as bad.

Let's take this as an example of your skills . . . where do I accept it and where do I use it as a defense? Let's just forget the childish 'makes you almost as bad'.

I look forward to you showing me where I accept this behaviour and where I use it as a defense for their actions.

I am merely stating the facts, not living in a schoolboy dreamland where one can simply decide not to do something because someone else is not doing it either.

Reality, sadly, shows that the ones in power hold the reins.

Anyway, anticipating your response, thanks

Hey it you want to take what I write as a personal, go for it.

You are accepting that it's alright to have 2 different set of rules to the enforcement of law here. Deny it all you want. Call it childish if it makes you feel better. If this government is going to selectively enforce the law then Suthep shouldn't have to abide by it and surrender if they're not going to do the same for all the other criminals who are allied with the present government.

Yes in a perfect world there would be only one set of rules and it would be handled equally but we do not live in a perfect world. Notice I said world not Thailand.

Yes he takes it personal he says

Of course they are personal insults, but go for it - doesn't bother me in the slightest as the source is you.

Then goes on about prove it to him.

That is a problem with the forum. It is to easy for people to take things personally. Particularly when they expect perfection.

[Sing_Sling]

So, it's another case of 'I can't back up my assertions but I'll add some more' . . . nice.

Yet again . . . I have taken no sides, and have mentioned that several times -something which still evades you . . . now you include that I 'don't are' . . . how sweet.

Ah, and the final assault on all logic and intelligent discourse:

"Perhaps it's because you support this corrupt government."

I'm sure that's it . . . you got me . . .

You claim you're not taking sides but your own posts betray you and speak volumes. I can claim I'm neutral and not on the side of the protestors but I think my posts expose where my sympathies lie too.

I do indeed and despite me asking you to quote me on each of your spurious claims . . . a big nothing, just more schoolyard temper tanties.

I don't have a side in this as I think they are both as bad as each other when it comes to having the country's best interests at heart . . . when it comes to personalities I doubt there are any worse than Dubai-Thaksin on this stage.

As for the law, you can stand and cry about how unfair it is until you're blue in the face, but that is the way it is being handled . . . my wife is a lawyer, albeit specialising in corporate law, and she says fairly well all lawyers are frustrated at the manipulation of the law . . . but they can't change it because it is so politicised and taking a stand invariably leads to being pigeon-holed by those with a lack of understanding of the situation . . . like you.

All your replies are on this thread. I'm not going to waste my time cutting and pasting them when this thread is only 4 pages long. You know what you wrote and people have read what you have wrote. I can say I don't have a side in this neither. But my posts tell otherwise.

Fine, your lawyer wife doesn't like the law. Good for her. Will things change when Suthep overthrows this corrupt government. Maybe, maybe not. But I'm more then happy to see this government fall and hope the next government changes things.

Now you pretend to speak for 'people' to try and underline your ridiculous untruths . . . oh, and using the ever popular 'I'm not going to quote what you say to prove my accusations' . . .

[Sing_Sling]

Of course they are personal insults, but go for it - doesn't bother me in the slightest as the source is you.

"you accepting it and also using it as a defense for a corrupt government makes you almost as bad.

Let's take this as an example of your skills . . . where do I accept it and where do I use it as a defense? Let's just forget the childish 'makes you almost as bad'.

I look forward to you showing me where I accept this behaviour and where I use it as a defense for their actions.

I am merely stating the facts, not living in a schoolboy dreamland where one can simply decide not to do something because someone else is not doing it either.

Reality, sadly, shows that the ones in power hold the reins.

Anyway, anticipating your response, thanks

Hey it you want to take what I write as a personal, go for it.

You are accepting that it's alright to have 2 different set of rules to the enforcement of law here. Deny it all you want. Call it childish if it makes you feel better. If this government is going to selectively enforce the law then Suthep shouldn't have to abide by it and surrender if they're not going to do the same for all the other criminals who are allied with the present government.

Yes in a perfect world there would be only one set of rules and it would be handled equally but we do not live in a perfect world. Notice I said world not Thailand.

Yes he takes it personal he says

Of course they are personal insults, but go for it - doesn't bother me in the slightest as the source is you.

Then goes on about prove it to him.

That is a problem with the forum. It is to easy for people to take things personally. Particularly when they expect perfection.

Perfection? No. Truthfulness? Yes.