Just because the person who voices a critic isn't perfect himself doesn't mean his critic is wrong.

The Americans can leave South-East Asia and just leave their phone number in case of emergency: 14-18-39-45

No.It is a summary of the position related to me by a senior member of an EC embassy official in Bangkok.

Considering that you and your friends have a tendency to be quite loose with the truth, your claimed source is quite doubtful, at the very least.

Don't be a dolt.Every statement on this anonymous forum can be questioned in that way.If however you can demonstrate the EC position on Thailand is other than described, by all means do so.

As long as you fail to support your claim, I don't have to, particularly since you are demanding to prove a negative. Look that one up.

Until you do, your claim is just another "because I say so" assertion. Furthermore, the statement about Prayuth's travels to Europe is based on tbthailand's earlier 'assured assertion' that Prayuth was banned from travel to Europe -- until he was proven incorrect by pesky facts (notably Prayuth traveling to Europe).

Prayuth can travel anywhere he likes but he will not be received officially by senior leaders except in the circumstances I described earlier.

He is entirely entitled to attend international meetings such as the recent Europe-Asia one in Milan.But he will only be able to speak to EC leaders in corridors etc.He will not be snubbed or disrepected.The Thailand relationship is one that the EC values and every effort will be made to encourage a return to democracy.

But it is not a "normal" relationship at the moment.The British Ambassador's blog makes the reasons crystal clear why:

http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/markkent/2014/12/12/real-rights-for-real-people/

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=444783478997121&id=220407968101341&refsrc=https%3A%2F%2Fm.facebook.com%2Fvideo.php

General Prayuth meets with TEBA business leaders

As long as you fail to support your claim, I don't have to, particularly since you are demanding to prove a negative. Look that one up.

Until you do, your claim is just another "because I say so" assertion. Furthermore, the statement about Prayuth's travels to Europe is based on tbthailand's earlier 'assured assertion' that Prayuth was banned from travel to Europe -- until he was proven incorrect by pesky facts (notably Prayuth traveling to Europe).

Prayuth can travel anywhere he likes but he will not be received officially by senior leaders except in the circumstances I described earlier.

He is entirely entitled to attend international meetings such as the recent Europe-Asia one in Milan.But he will only be able to speak to EC leaders in corridors etc.He will not be snubbed or disrepected.The Thailand relationship is one that the EC values and every effort will be made to encourage a return to democracy.

But it is not a "normal" relationship at the moment.The British Ambassador's blog makes the reasons crystal clear why:

http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/markkent/2014/12/12/real-rights-for-real-people/

Well, if the UK is not the same as London, I assume all British members here will hastily return home to dismantle that oppressive bastion called London.

Anyway, if the junta was as oppressive as some claim I fear the Honorable Ambassador M. Kent would be asked to leave the country. Mind you it would seem the worthy gentleman realises that

"For a democracy to be genuine, it must be inclusive."

That is like stating that Thailand never was a real democracy. Same with

"importance of freedom of expression to a strong democratic culture."

As long as you fail to support your claim, I don't have to, particularly since you are demanding to prove a negative. Look that one up.

Until you do, your claim is just another "because I say so" assertion. Furthermore, the statement about Prayuth's travels to Europe is based on tbthailand's earlier 'assured assertion' that Prayuth was banned from travel to Europe -- until he was proven incorrect by pesky facts (notably Prayuth traveling to Europe).

Prayuth can travel anywhere he likes but he will not be received officially by senior leaders except in the circumstances I described earlier.

He is entirely entitled to attend international meetings such as the recent Europe-Asia one in Milan.But he will only be able to speak to EC leaders in corridors etc.He will not be snubbed or disrepected.The Thailand relationship is one that the EC values and every effort will be made to encourage a return to democracy.

But it is not a "normal" relationship at the moment.The British Ambassador's blog makes the reasons crystal clear why:

http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/markkent/2014/12/12/real-rights-for-real-people/

Well, if the UK is not the same as London, I assume all British members here will hastily return home to dismantle that oppressive bastion called London.

Anyway, if the junta was as oppressive as some claim I fear the Honorable Ambassador M. Kent would be asked to leave the country. Mind you it would seem the worthy gentleman realises that

"For a democracy to be genuine, it must be inclusive."

That is like stating that Thailand never was a real democracy. Same with

"importance of freedom of expression to a strong democratic culture."

No EC country or Bangkok based Ambassador believes otherwise than Mr Kent on the defects of the current government, awkward though that may be for some of you.

No EC country or Bangkok based Ambassador believes otherwise than Mr Kent on the defects of the current government, awkward though that may be for some of you.

I assume you have the sources to back up that claim? Oh right, you don't. As usual.

You see, the problem with activists like yourself resorting to utter absolutes is that absolutes always make those who use them be wrong all the time. This is an absolute statement that is always right. ;-)

No EC country or Bangkok based Ambassador believes otherwise than Mr Kent on the defects of the current government, awkward though that may be for some of you.

I assume you have the sources to back up that claim? Oh right, you don't. As usual.

You see, the problem with activists like yourself resorting to utter absolutes is that absolutes always make those who use them be wrong all the time. This is an absolute statement that is always right. ;-)

I have given conclusive proof of the views of a key EC country.EC countries act in unison on these matters.

You have provided no evidence of anything except, rather stupidly in my view, a link to the Thai European Business Association.Nobody has suggested economic relationships have been affected.

Unless you can raise your game you will just be another troll - not an amusing one and certainly not an informed one.

As long as you fail to support your claim, I don't have to, particularly since you are demanding to prove a negative. Look that one up.

Until you do, your claim is just another "because I say so" assertion. Furthermore, the statement about Prayuth's travels to Europe is based on tbthailand's earlier 'assured assertion' that Prayuth was banned from travel to Europe -- until he was proven incorrect by pesky facts (notably Prayuth traveling to Europe).

Prayuth can travel anywhere he likes but he will not be received officially by senior leaders except in the circumstances I described earlier.

He is entirely entitled to attend international meetings such as the recent Europe-Asia one in Milan.But he will only be able to speak to EC leaders in corridors etc.He will not be snubbed or disrepected.The Thailand relationship is one that the EC values and every effort will be made to encourage a return to democracy.

But it is not a "normal" relationship at the moment.The British Ambassador's blog makes the reasons crystal clear why:

http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/markkent/2014/12/12/real-rights-for-real-people/

Well, if the UK is not the same as London, I assume all British members here will hastily return home to dismantle that oppressive bastion called London.

Anyway, if the junta was as oppressive as some claim I fear the Honorable Ambassador M. Kent would be asked to leave the country. Mind you it would seem the worthy gentleman realises that

"For a democracy to be genuine, it must be inclusive."

That is like stating that Thailand never was a real democracy. Same with

"importance of freedom of expression to a strong democratic culture."

Well quite, if I could understand what you are on about.

I think this photo properly conveys how the past Thai government was viewed in Europe.This has as much chance of happening to General Prayuth as Boris Johnson once memorably observed of his head being decapitated by a frisbee.

No EC country or Bangkok based Ambassador believes otherwise than Mr Kent on the defects of the current government, awkward though that may be for some of you.

I assume you have the sources to back up that claim? Oh right, you don't. As usual.

You see, the problem with activists like yourself resorting to utter absolutes is that absolutes always make those who use them be wrong all the time. This is an absolute statement that is always right. ;-)

I have given conclusive proof of the views of a key EC country.EC countries act in unison on these matters.

You have provided no evidence of anything except, rather stupidly in my view, a link to the Thai European Business Association.Nobody has suggested economic relationships have been affected.

Unless you can raise your game you will just be another troll - not an amusing one and certainly not an informed one.

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government and any government before, very awkward indeed.

Furthermore the near uninterrupted economical cooperation shows a certain level of hypocracy, cynism. The "don't ask, don't tell" idea.

As long as you fail to support your claim, I don't have to, particularly since you are demanding to prove a negative. Look that one up.

Until you do, your claim is just another "because I say so" assertion. Furthermore, the statement about Prayuth's travels to Europe is based on tbthailand's earlier 'assured assertion' that Prayuth was banned from travel to Europe -- until he was proven incorrect by pesky facts (notably Prayuth traveling to Europe).

Prayuth can travel anywhere he likes but he will not be received officially by senior leaders except in the circumstances I described earlier.

He is entirely entitled to attend international meetings such as the recent Europe-Asia one in Milan.But he will only be able to speak to EC leaders in corridors etc.He will not be snubbed or disrepected.The Thailand relationship is one that the EC values and every effort will be made to encourage a return to democracy.

But it is not a "normal" relationship at the moment.The British Ambassador's blog makes the reasons crystal clear why:

http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/markkent/2014/12/12/real-rights-for-real-people/

Well, if the UK is not the same as London, I assume all British members here will hastily return home to dismantle that oppressive bastion called London.

Anyway, if the junta was as oppressive as some claim I fear the Honorable Ambassador M. Kent would be asked to leave the country. Mind you it would seem the worthy gentleman realises that

"For a democracy to be genuine, it must be inclusive."

That is like stating that Thailand never was a real democracy. Same with

"importance of freedom of expression to a strong democratic culture."

Well quite, if I could understand what you are on about.

I think this photo properly conveys how the past Thai government was viewed in Europe.This has as much chance of happening to General Prayuth as Boris Johnson once memorably observed of his head being decapitated by a frisbee.

Since H.M. the Queen does what the UK government tells her as befits a constitutional Monarchy with a parliamentary system of governance ... ...

PS your ability to understand seems severally effected by the level of agreement.

As long as you fail to support your claim, I don't have to, particularly since you are demanding to prove a negative. Look that one up.
Until you do, your claim is just another "because I say so" assertion. Furthermore, the statement about Prayuth's travels to Europe is based on tbthailand's earlier 'assured assertion' that Prayuth was banned from travel to Europe -- until he was proven incorrect by pesky facts (notably Prayuth traveling to Europe).

Prayuth can travel anywhere he likes but he will not be received officially by senior leaders except in the circumstances I described earlier.

He is entirely entitled to attend international meetings such as the recent Europe-Asia one in Milan.But he will only be able to speak to EC leaders in corridors etc.He will not be snubbed or disrepected.The Thailand relationship is one that the EC values and every effort will be made to encourage a return to democracy.

But it is not a "normal" relationship at the moment.The British Ambassador's blog makes the reasons crystal clear why:

http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/markkent/2014/12/12/real-rights-for-real-people/

Well, if the UK is not the same as London, I assume all British members here will hastily return home to dismantle that oppressive bastion called London.

Anyway, if the junta was as oppressive as some claim I fear the Honorable Ambassador M. Kent would be asked to leave the country. Mind you it would seem the worthy gentleman realises that

"For a democracy to be genuine, it must be inclusive."

That is like stating that Thailand never was a real democracy. Same with

"importance of freedom of expression to a strong democratic culture."

Well quite, if I could understand what you are on about.

I think this photo properly conveys how the past Thai government was viewed in Europe.This has as much chance of happening to General Prayuth as Boris Johnson once memorably observed of his head being decapitated by a frisbee.

Since H.M. the Queen does what the UK government tells her as befits a constitutional Monarchy with a parliamentary system of governance ... ...


PS your ability to understand seems severally effected by the level of agreement.

Isn't that what happens in all constitutional democracies? The reception by the British monarch is nevertheless a mark of favour to a PM with legitimacy and a democratic mandate.Those who seized power should probably not expect similar treatment.

No idea what your second sentence means I'm afraid.

Since H.M. the Queen does what the UK government tells her as befits a constitutional Monarchy with a parliamentary system of governance ... ...

PS your ability to understand seems severally effected by the level of agreement.

Isn't that what happens in all constitutional democracies? The reception by the British monarch is nevertheless a mark of favour to a PM with legitimacy and a democratic mandate.Those who seized power should probably not expect similar treatment.

No idea what your second sentence means I'm afraid.

So only when it's convenient politically, economically or so.

BTW you still having no idea only gives a QED effect.

BTW you still having no idea only gives a QED effect.

I wonder if he even realizes what he did. ROTFLOL.

No EC country or Bangkok based Ambassador believes otherwise than Mr Kent on the defects of the current government, awkward though that may be for some of you.

I assume you have the sources to back up that claim? Oh right, you don't. As usual.

You see, the problem with activists like yourself resorting to utter absolutes is that absolutes always make those who use them be wrong all the time. This is an absolute statement that is always right. ;-)

I have given conclusive proof of the views of a key EC country.EC countries act in unison on these matters.

You have provided no evidence of anything except, rather stupidly in my view, a link to the Thai European Business Association.Nobody has suggested economic relationships have been affected.

Unless you can raise your game you will just be another troll - not an amusing one and certainly not an informed one.

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government and any government before, very awkward indeed.

Furthermore the near uninterrupted economical cooperation shows a certain level of hypocracy, cynism. The "don't ask, don't tell" idea.

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government ...

??

Anything like the reservations that they have for this 'government', Rubl?

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government and any government before, very awkward indeed.

Furthermore the near uninterrupted economical cooperation shows a certain level of hypocracy, cynism. The "don't ask, don't tell" idea.

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government ...

??

Anything like the reservations that they have for this 'government', Rubl?

Do they?

It seems the only thing dear tbthailand's capable of doing is 'begging the question'

It will get pushed further.

Nothing can change for a while. I mean they have only just completed a little of the purge.

Yes , but do you think they can be all purged out by 2016

All? They could go on until 2116 if that was really the object of this exercise.

A post and replies alleging other members are paid to post have been removed. Please don't make such accusations on the open forum..

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government and any government before, very awkward indeed.

Furthermore the near uninterrupted economical cooperation shows a certain level of hypocracy, cynism. The "don't ask, don't tell" idea.

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government ...

??

Anything like the reservations that they have for this 'government', Rubl?

Do they?

Rubl, you claim that the EC had grave doubts about the YL government.

While that might be true, I never heard about it. Could you please elaborate?

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government and any government before, very awkward indeed.

Furthermore the near uninterrupted economical cooperation shows a certain level of hypocracy, cynism. The "don't ask, don't tell" idea.

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government ...

??

Anything like the reservations that they have for this 'government', Rubl?

Do they?

Rubl, you claim that the EC had grave doubts about the YL government.

While that might be true, I never heard about it. Could you please elaborate?

Most of the wikileaks I'm not allowed to quote or link to. There's even one which clearly states that

"Diplomatic cables leaked by WikiLeaks reveal that the US essentially approved the military coup that toppled Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra on September 19, 2006, while publicly distancing itself from the takeover. The cables shed further light on the anti-democratic activities of the US and other major powers behind the cloak of secret diplomacy."

Some of that leak is too close to LM to post here. Do some searching yourself.

The EC also had grave doubt about the Yingluck government ...

??

Anything like the reservations that they have for this 'government', Rubl?

Do they?

Rubl, you claim that the EC had grave doubts about the YL government.

While that might be true, I never heard about it. Could you please elaborate?

Most of the wikileaks I'm not allowed to quote or link to. There's even one which clearly states that

"Diplomatic cables leaked by WikiLeaks reveal that the US essentially approved the military coup that toppled Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra on September 19, 2006, while publicly distancing itself from the takeover. The cables shed further light on the anti-democratic activities of the US and other major powers behind the cloak of secret diplomacy."

Some of that leak is too close to LM to post here. Do some searching yourself.

how is that about the Yingluck government (which is what you stated)?

As he clearly invited you to do "do some search yourself" - or is google, somehow, too technical a mystery to you?

Using your own prior logic, if the U.S. felt that way about Thaksin, then it is obvious they would feel the same way about his self-described 'clone' and would have the same reservations about her (ie supporting the coup in private while publicly claiming to distance themselves from it). Seems legit.

As he clearly invited you to do "do some search yourself" - or is google, somehow, too technical a mystery to you?

Using your own prior logic, if the U.S. felt that way about Thaksin, then it is obvious they would feel the same way about his self-described 'clone' and would have the same reservations about her (ie supporting the coup in private while publicly claiming to distance themselves from it). Seems legit.

Amazing, as Rubl claimed the EC not the US had doubts about the Yingluck government not Thaksin's government who preceded it by 6 years.

But I get it, people that oppose the coup need to present proof, whilst people that support it, can get away with referring to a completely unrelated wikleaks article, that apparently cannot be posted because of LM. That article does not claim there were doubts about the Yingluck governement any more than the article claims those doubts were uttered by the EC.

The fact of the matter is, that the EC has publicly said they want Thailand to return to democracy as soon as possible, which seems to indicate they do not support the coup.

Nonsense and trolling posts have been removed.

Why is it that when America speak negatively about Thailand or any other country it is seen as acceptable, but when anyone speaks negatively about America is it "America Bashing" or "America Hating"

Seems as though a lot of Americans on this thread operate a double standard.

Why is it that when America speak negatively about Thailand or any other country it is seen as acceptable, but when anyone speaks negatively about America is it "America Bashing" or "America Hating"

Seems as though a lot of Americans on this thread operate a double standard.

You are not telling the truth. If you are and I'm wrong then use the quote function instead of general flames against one country or another. Unless you do that the only double standard will continue to be where it is now "in your mind."

But I get it, people that oppose the coup need to present proof

Glad you finally understand that. Please provide sources from now on.

So far, those who disagree with you have done a pretty consistent job providing sources. So far, you have been consistent in refusing to do so.

But I get it, people that oppose the coup need to present proof

Glad you finally understand that. Please provide sources from now on.

So far, those who disagree with you have done a pretty consistent job providing sources. So far, you have been consistent in refusing to do so.

You edited his post to completely change it's meaning. The part you left out is, "The fact of the matter is, that the EC has publicly said they want Thailand to return to democracy as soon as possible, which seems to indicate they do not support the coup."

I guess you are saying that the EU did not state they want Thailand to return to a democracy as soon as possible. Is that what you mean?

No, I said people need to support their assertions, lest they be considered baseless and invalid.

No, I said people need to support their assertions, lest they be considered baseless and invalid.

I agree with you. When responding to a post it is sometimes better to use the quote function. I think you are responding to me but I'm not sure. What I asked was, "I guess you are saying that the EU did not state they want Thailand to return to a democracy as soon as possible. Is that what you mean?"

Or I in other words, do you think the EU wants Thailand to return to a democracy as soon as possible?