Jump to content
Login with your Gmail HERE and start posting in seconds! ×
Don't just read! Be part of the Community! Join the conversation ×

Surapong challenges Suthep to debate with Chalerm or Jatuporn

webfact

By webfact
in Thailand News Headlines

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

AleG Platinum Member

AleG

Posted
Posted

Surapong's main message is correct: a public debate will do nothing to solve the conflict. Discussions mediated by the UN is the only way forward at this point.

Public debate of ideas is the basis of Democracy, so that the electorate can make informed decisions at the time of casting their votes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jonclark Platinum Member

jonclark

Posted
Posted

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Fryslan boppe Silver Member

Fryslan boppe

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

Edited by Fryslan boppe
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bakseeda Silver Member

Bakseeda

Posted
Posted

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters as evidenced on Social Media last night, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

Gee mate.... get a life...!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
mrtoad Star Member

mrtoad

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Mr Surapong further said that if Mr Suthep really wanted a public debate then the latter should better challenge Chalerm Yubamrung, director of Centre for Maintaining Peace and Order, or red-shirt core leader Jatuporn Promphan which would be a better match instead of Ms Yingluck who could not match Mr Suthep anyway.

Even her family know that she is totally incompetent, but getting a vote of no confidence from The Gimp, it doesn't get much worse laugh.png

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrtoad Star Member

mrtoad

Posted
Posted

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters as evidenced on Social Media last night, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

Ferwert, you need to go and take your meds dear boy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fryslan boppe Silver Member

Fryslan boppe

Posted
Posted

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters as evidenced on Social Media last night, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

Ferwert, you need to go and take your meds dear boy.

LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jonclark Platinum Member

jonclark

Posted
Posted

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

Nonsense!

Representatives of the government in negotiations are fully authorized to make binding decisions which are then enacted through parliament.

A recent example of this would be the representatives sent to the UN by the Syrian government to negotiate and make decisions on behalf of the Syrian government in discussions with the various rebel factions.

So send Chalerm in that capacity - Call Surapongs bluff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnthompson Senior Member

johnthompson

Posted
Posted

Yingluck has never had a debate with anyone. Not with Abhisit, not with Suthep. Imagine Obama getting elected as president without ever having to have a debate with his opponents. You can't. He would get crucified.

I find that very peculiar. How can the public make an informed decision if the candidate has never talked about his/her policies in public? This is a flaw in the Thai democracy. They don't make rational informed decisions after studying the facts and they don't penalize a candidate for mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
siampolee Ruby Member

siampolee

Posted
Posted (edited)

A massed debate with Chalerm, Jutuporn Suthep? indeed this might well be worth asking the Oxford Union to host.

Or in reality the local K.3 class at the local school would be a far more suitable venue for all those dummies and toys thrown out of the pram and playpen.

kindergarten-cop-arnold-schwarzenegger-c

Edited by siampolee
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tezzainoz Gold Member

tezzainoz

Posted
Posted

"He said that the TV appearance would look like a debate rather than a negotiation to resolve a conflict. If Mr Suthep is sincere about talks to settle the conflict, he suggested that the two sides should hold talks in closed doors, he added". Why negotiate behind closed doors? I thought Pheu Thai was the party for democracy. What are they afraid the public will know about. whistling.gif.pagespeed.ce.FVjgnKnWS1.pn

The above statement itself proves beyond doubt

1) Yingluck should not be PM

2) Pheu Thai are definatley trying to hide something

3) Yingluck if you are innocent, turn up to court like the Democrat leader did, to face your accusers

4) when your brother asked you to be his stooge, you agree so you must accept what you recieve

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tezzainoz Gold Member

tezzainoz

Posted
Posted

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

we live on different planets

My wife and all her friend have said they will not longer protest if there is a debate on National TV

They want piece

Thank god farlang can not vote in Thailand

we would be back to the American Civil War

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tezzainoz Gold Member

tezzainoz

Posted
Posted

One side wants open debate

One side wants SECRET talks

hahahahahahahahahahah

Rubbish. You missed the point. A debate was not requested by Suthep. He wanted to televise the negotiations. Not the same thing.

Yes it was the PTP that said it would be debate

and after realising what they had said

said we not want a debate,, ( could reveal to much to the thai people)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigbamboo Diamond Member

bigbamboo

Posted
Posted

A massive own goal by Surapong. It's bad enough to hint that Yingluck is not up to the job of defending the government but to actually come out and say it is downright embarrassing. And then he puts the tin lid on it by suggesting that PM wannabe Chalerm would be a better choice!

If she isn't good enough then why is she in the top job?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldsailor35 Ruby Member

oldsailor35

Posted
Posted

Mr Surapong further said that if Mr Suthep really wanted a public debate then the latter should better challenge Chalerm Yubamrung, director of Centre for Maintaining Peace and Order, or red-shirt core leader Jatuporn Promphan which would be a better match instead of Ms Yingluck who could not match Mr Suthep anyway.

Two things about this:

1 why should Suthep have a debate with Chalerm of Jatuporn? Are they the leaders of this govt?

2 Even Surapong admits that Yingluck is no match for Suthep...

It shows the trust the PT has in their dear leader.smile.png

Likewise, why should Yingluck have a debate with Bully Boy Suthep, Is he leader of the opposition ?.

Both Bully Boy and Jutaporn have very little office, Jutaporn is a party spokesman but Bully Boy a nobody.

Yep ! Bully Boy how about a chat with Jutaporn, or are you too gutless for that and only take on weaker women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jonmarleesco Gold Member

Jonmarleesco

Posted
Posted

Well, Mr Surapong, debate or not, Yingluck is, supposedly, Thailand's political leader. Hence, it is to be expected that she should be able to hold her own in a one-on-one discussion. Any debate involving Chalerm or Jatuporn would inevitably degenerate into a garbled melee. Come to that, why don't you accept Suthep's challenge on behalf of Yingluck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wolf5370 Ruby Member

wolf5370

Posted
Posted (edited)

Mr Surapong further said that if Mr Suthep really wanted a public debate then the latter should better challenge Chalerm Yubamrung, director of Centre for Maintaining Peace and Order, or red-shirt core leader Jatuporn Promphan which would be a better match instead of Ms Yingluck who could not match Mr Suthep anyway.

Two things about this:

1 why should Suthep have a debate with Chalerm of Jatuporn? Are they the leaders of this govt?

2 Even Surapong admits that Yingluck is no match for Suthep...

It shows the trust the PT has in their dear leader.smile.png

Likewise, why should Yingluck have a debate with Bully Boy Suthep, Is he leader of the opposition ?.

Both Bully Boy and Jutaporn have very little office, Jutaporn is a party spokesman but Bully Boy a nobody.

Yep ! Bully Boy how about a chat with Jutaporn, or are you too gutless for that and only take on weaker women.

You do realise it is supposed to be about talks between the Government and the PDRC, not PTP and the Dems, right? Suthep is the leader of the PDRC and Yingluck is the leader of the Government.

I can understand that the Government does not want to have such a dialogue in front of the cameras, as that would just them play to the cameras and stand a hard line - no one would want to appear soft in front of the nation, ergo it would be a failure. Surapong's, or rather YL's, response should have been, not to offer up irrelevant replacements without the power to negotiate, they should have offered up a compromise such as an independent (most likely trusted foreign intermediary) to chair a say, 3 on 3 team - closed door. That way the intermediary can report/publish the final agreement (or none) without all the juxtapositioning and airing of dirty laundry - after all it is a result that is wanted, and peace or a least cessation of violence and escalation to civil war.

BTW: Thatcher was a women - Merkel is a woman - I am sure few would like to take either on in a debate when they were (are) leaders of their respective countries!

Edited by wolf5370
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wprime Gold Member

wprime

Posted
Posted

Amazing. Yingluck no confidence to match Suthep. Wonder why that is yet she is running the country. She is a music hall joke. Ha Ha.

Make it in English too - I just love watching Yingluck debate in English - she's so inspirational! Whenever she debates in English she makes me believe, if she can become PM, then I could achieve anything!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldsailor35 Ruby Member

oldsailor35

Posted
Posted

Good to see the PTP have so much faith in their dear leader.

Still, I would like to see Chalerm, renowned for his gift of the gab, in a debate with Suthep. Pure comedy.

It amuses me to see some quoting "dear leader" as is used in North Korea where there are no elections but appointed leaders which is the very opposite to what Yingluck wants, she wants free elections, however old Bully Boy Suthep is the one who wants to be "dear leader".............you know, no elections, government to be by appointment with him, no doubt in the background telling his team what they can and cannot do. And he has plenty of land in the south where he can put those in camps for education if they happen to object. He really thinks that he is already there with his orders and demands. Sooner or later, this Bully Boy of a Benito is going to come down to earth with a mighty crash, and the sooner the better for Thailand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








  • Topics

  • Latest posts...

    1. 54

      PM Faces Pressure Over Thaksin's Alleged Hospital Fake-Out

      A new version of MFP has already started. They will continue...
      scorecard in Thailand News Headlines
    2. 23

      Whistleblower Testifies Titan Sub Tragedy Was 'Inevitable' Due to Ignored Safety Warnings

      I wasn't paying attention to this event, but when watching them on the TV news tightening the bolts on that thing, knowing that the only way out would be via the same equipment, it dawned on me just how crazy this idea is. Then there was that guy and his son who were happy when someone cancelled out and they took their place. The Appointment in Samarra, As retold by W. Somerset Maugham [1933] The Speaker is Death There was a merchant in Bagdad who sent his servant to market to buy provisions and in a little while the servant came back, white and trembling, and said, Master, just now when I was in the marketplace I was jostled by a woman in the crowd and when I turned I saw it was Death that jostled me. She looked at me and made a threatening gesture; now, lend me your horse, and I will ride away from this city and avoid my fate. I will go to Samarra and there Death will not find me. The merchant lent him his horse, and the servant mounted it, and he dug his spurs in its flanks and as fast as the horse could gallop he went. Then the merchant went down to the marketplace and he saw me standing in the crowd and he came to me and said, Why did you make a threating getsture to my servant when you saw him this morning? That was not a threatening gesture, I said, it was only a start of surprise. I was astonished to see him in Bagdad, for I had an appointment with him tonight in Samarra.
      bendejo in World News
    3. 31

      Thailand Live Thursday 19 September 2024

      to continue: Thailand Live Friday 20 September 2024 https://aseannow.com/topic/1338623-thailand-live-friday-20-september-2024/
      webfact in Thailand Live
    4. 1

      Thailand Live Friday 20 September 2024

      Bangkok braces for floods as heavy rain and upstream water Photo: TNA Bangkok, (TNA)– Bangkok authorities have issued a warning to communities living outside the Chao Phraya River dike, urging them to be vigilant against potential flooding. Full story: https://aseannow.com/topic/1338602-bangkok-braces-for-floods-as-heavy-rain-and-upstream-water/
      webfact in Thailand Live
    5. 1

      Thailand Live Friday 20 September 2024

      The State Railway of Thailand (SRT) has been instructed to finalise the Sino-Thai high-speed railway project by the first quarter of next year. This directive, targeted at newly appointed SRT Director Veeris Ammarapala, was announced by Transport Minister Suriya Jungrungreangkit. SRT Directed to Expedite Sino-Thai Railway Completion by 2025 Full Story: https://aseannow.com/topic/1338597-srt-directed-to-expedite-sino-thai-railway-completion-by-2024/
      webfact in Thailand Live
    6. 93

      Game over

      I know perfectly well about the various kinds of tests, you think this is some secret sacred knowledge, only you posess, but in reality a 12 year old can get it off google. I also studied carefully the studies for and against the effectiveness of masks, and my position is extremely well informed. So Chinese potash miners, huh? Overseas Banks? Aha. Do carry on. And if you could tell me what you're taking I wouldn't mind trying half a pill. Looks like a powerful trip.
      Cameroni in COVID-19 Coronavirus
    7. 93

      Game over

      Time for Cameroni to go to sleep.
      MicroB in COVID-19 Coronavirus
    8. 2

      Now I'm getting older: I worry that my aging brain is making me feel crazy. (You too?)

      You Know, Folks.... Anytime I think I might NOT be Crazy...then..... At the very least...... I am usually CRYIN', over one thing or another.... Like, maybe PEA Stickers on my Air Conditioner units..... And, just about the ONLY think about crying which ever sounded half-way GOOD to me...is this song.... About Cryin'...... I guess most of you old guys are NOT like me..... And, I.... Am just so glad. I'm So Glad I I'm Glad, I'm Glad, I'm glad.......! But, forget about the Cream song....and instead.... Hope you Old Guys can first Cream over this:....! OK... NOW, you can listen to this..... I'm so Glad, really, to be here on The TV Farang Pub...... Yeah, BABY! Me and TOM WOLFE.....! I have always loved TOM....as have many of you, no doubt...... Let your mind run. Let your mind wander. What can it hurt?????
      GammaGlobulin in ASEAN NOW Community Pub
    9. 93

      Game over

      https://www.nature.com/articles/s44161-023-00336-5 Scientists should be wary of using the term "definitive" because it rarely is, and 5 year olds might misunderstand, and think all science is settled after a few months of study.
      MicroB in COVID-19 Coronavirus
    10. 93

      Game over

      Not a theory at all, but sarcasm at your selective acceptance of medical advice. You merrily accept the tests, without a clue how they were produced or function, but shout about masks based on a hunch. As I indicated, people who thought cloth masks didn't work at the start didn't really understand how masks work. You get a similar misunderstanding in the whole car filter debate; there was a huge debate why K&N oiled cloth or HKS foam air filters didn't cause an engine to grenade itself (basically because some people think air filters work like a sieve, and filter based on particle size, not on particle charge). Kids found a way to effectively bunk off school rather quickly https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210705-how-children-are-spoofing-covid-19-tests-with-soft-drinks https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-53383-8 You obviously missed the theory that the throat swab included with the Chinese made rapid tests was coated with nanoparticles. The mass distrubution of rapid tests were, to an extent, part of the theatre conducted to attempt to control the outbreak. The masks had a filtering function, but their most powerful effect was through behaviour modification, lines on the floor in supermarkets, handwash stations, lockdowns. None of them would be fully adhered to, but the intention was really to limit admissions. Chinese hospitals were initially over whelmed. Subsequent Chinese control measures meant that the admissions to their temporary hospitals were relatively modest. Italian hospitals came close to being overwhelmed, but local innovation prevented that. In the UK, the Nightingale Hospitals were in the end redundant, because of a combination of control measures and improved standards of care. The RAF were pretty serious in their C130 touch and go drills at City Airport, and tere were efforts to do a full 40 minute turn around of ambulances through the MOD. The antigen tests met acceptable performance under idealised conditions, But that was never matched in the field. People didn't swab throats properly, or their nose. They put too much buffer on, or not enough. The people at th testing stations were barely trained, so accuracy was less than ideal, but the testing, en masse, was enough to give a sense of direction. Thats why usage fell off the edge of a cliff in April. Usage is limited right now to syndromic surveillance, where that tersting is more under idealised conditions, with properly trained nurses testing, and conducting controls. Interesting theory #2; Sars-Cov-2 was uncovered by itinerant Chinese potash miners. Another idea was that investments by overseas banks had pushed Chinese smallholders onto virgin land, and thus into contact with novel diseases. There is an immunological reason why bats tend to be the origins of viruses that can really do a number on the human body.
      MicroB in COVID-19 Coronavirus
    11. 54

      PM Faces Pressure Over Thaksin's Alleged Hospital Fake-Out

      Agreed, it's called focus on survival. In time it will change.
      scorecard in Thailand News Headlines
    12. 2,205

      Thai gov. to tax (remitted) income from abroad for tax residents starting 2024 - Part II

      A fairly easy to read explainer which says that the SRT can make a person UK tax resident, even if the number of days spent in another country, makes them tax resident there also. Whilst technically not tax resident perhaps in the UK under formal rules, tax that arises there is still due and payable. The net affect being tax residency in two countries. https://www.uhy-uk.com/insights/becoming-non-uk-resident-can-you-escape-grasp-uk-taxation
      chiang mai in Jobs, Economy, Banking, Business, Investments
    13. 93

      Game over

      Oh really? Really???? Let's see, shall we, MicroB? “There have been many studies attempting to prove whether the virus is infecting cells of the inner blood vessel wall or not. “By conducting our experiments using real, infectious virus rather than fragments of the virus’s spike protein, we can definitively say it is not.” https://www.uq.edu.au/news/article/2021/10/vascular-disease-covid-19-not-caused-viral-infection-of-blood-vessels Oh dear. Does that mean you were talking nonsense, MicroB? It does, doesn't it? These studies support the conclusion that SARS-CoV-2 does not confer endothelial cell damage and vascular thrombosis through direct viral infection of those cells. They further demonstrate that the levels of circulating virus are too low to infect even endothelial cells that express very high levels of hACE2, and therefore that most COVID-19 pathology arises due to aerosol infection of the nasal and pulmonary epithelium. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10562591/ Yeah, looks like it does. Oh well.
      • 1
      • Haha
      Cameroni in COVID-19 Coronavirus
    14. 35

      Thai Khmer - is it alive anywhere in South Isaan?

      What they are called does not make them something they are not. The whole political system us didderent for a city. Wikipedia can be written and amended by anyone. Not a trustworthy source.
      youreavinalaff in Isaan
    15. 93

      Game over

      Yes it does. And clearly you don't understand the science. Your links don't support your claim that Covid is a "vascular "disease. For instance your nature article just talks about the effects Covid can have on the vascular system. You obviously simply fail to understand that COVID-19 can impact the entire body and cause a wide range of symptoms and complications. However, the latest research shows that the vascular symptoms of COVID-19 are caused by inflammation and not COVID-19. This means COVID-19 is still considered a respiratory disease, but it can have serious effects on the vascular system. Medical professionals and researchers have been studying the link between COVID-19 and vascular symptoms since the beginning of the pandemic. They have learned that people with severe COVID-19 are at a risk of strokes, blood clots, and other vascular complications. These observations led to several hypotheses that COVID-19 was a vascular disease with respiratory symptoms and not a respiratory disease. Studies in 2020 and 2021 supported this theory. These studies concluded that although people with mild to moderate COVID-19 only had respiratory symptoms, COVID-19 was primarily a vascular disease. However, additional studies published later in 2021and into 2022 have contraindicated these findings. New studies indicate that COVID-19 doesn’t attack the vascular system at all. https://www.healthline.com/health/covid-respiratory-or-vascular Like I said, not hard to understand, MicroB. You just need to read up a bit more. I'm sure you'll get there.
      • 1
      • Haha
      Cameroni in COVID-19 Coronavirus
×
×
  • Create New...
""