Thais in Turkey warned of violence following attack against consular office

[Alexuk]

There is TÜRKish people here watch out what are U saying Ladies & gents.... If that protesters was real Turks I'm pretty sure that Thai embassy (useless people)will be demolished by now!!

[TimmyT]

Still don't know why they couldn't have gone to Turkey.

The Turks were prepared to accept them and I'm sure the refugees would have preferred this solution to going back to the Chinese authorities.

Well actually I'm fairly sure I know why they were sent to China, but it would be speculation on my part so I'll keep my theories to myself.

why don't you understand a simple thing - it's a choice of Thailand, an independent nation. They have a right to choose to send them back to the country of origin - according ti international laws. And they did it.

and I can tell you why: they don't want to make a precedent. if these Uygurs will be granted an asylum in Turkey - many more of them will try to cross the border to Thailand. and Thais don't want to make there country a transshipment for Muslim refugees.

remember, you are just a guest here and have absolutely no moral right to impose your moral values. internal affairs in Thailand, it's policy are none of your business. you have just two options: accept it or go somewhere else. As simple as that.

If you compassionate Uygurs and Rohyngya so much - go to your homeland and raise a campaign to grant all of them a political refuge. This could make a change. and solve Rohyngya and Uygur problem.

I am sure they will be so happy in US or UK or wherever are you from.

instead of this you keep bitter useless ranting on TVF about what Thailand must do (according to leftist Western values).

Edited July 10, 2015 by TimmyT

[Bluespunk]

Still don't know why they couldn't have gone to Turkey.

The Turks were prepared to accept them and I'm sure the refugees would have preferred this solution to going back to the Chinese authorities.

Well actually I'm fairly sure I know why they were sent to China, but it would be speculation on my part so I'll keep my theories to myself.

why don't you understand a simple thing - it's a choice of Thailand, an independent nation. They have a right to choose to send them back to the country of origin - according ti international laws. And they did it.

and I can tell you why: they don't want to make a precedent. if these Uygurs will be granted an asylum in Turkey - many more of them will try to cross the border to Thailand. and Thais don't want to make there country a transshipment for Muslim refugees.

remember, you are just a guest here and have absolutely no moral right to impose your moral values. internal affairs in Thailand, it's policy are none of your business. you have just two options: accept it or go somewhere else. As simple as that.

If you compassionate Uygurs and Rohyngya so much - go to your homeland and raise a campaign to grant all of them a political refuge. This could make a change. and solve Rohyngya and Uygur problem.

I am sure they will be so happy in US or UK or wherever are you from.

instead of this you keep bitter useless ranting on TVF about what Thailand must do (according to leftist Western values).

Leftist western values, same old tune from you.

Humanitarianism is not left or right. Not sending people into danger and persecution is not left or right. Giving genuine refugees sanctuary is not left or right.

Why can't you understand that these people fled persecution and to send them back to it is morally wrong?

Why can't you understand that making this decision is less understandable because there was another country willing to accept them?

You accuse me of bitterness when just about every post you make is full of intolerance, prejudice, tin foil hat rants about lefty this or that (I still laugh whenever I recall your "leftist socialist EU" claims. Hilarious) and bile. The irony of your accusations towards me is just sad.

Oh and finally, the whole go back to your own country speel you include ......

Yawn.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Bluespunk

[TimmyT]

Still don't know why they couldn't have gone to Turkey.

The Turks were prepared to accept them and I'm sure the refugees would have preferred this solution to going back to the Chinese authorities.

Well actually I'm fairly sure I know why they were sent to China, but it would be speculation on my part so I'll keep my theories to myself.

why don't you understand a simple thing - it's a choice of Thailand, an independent nation. They have a right to choose to send them back to the country of origin - according ti international laws. And they did it.

and I can tell you why: they don't want to make a precedent. if these Uygurs will be granted an asylum in Turkey - many more of them will try to cross the border to Thailand. and Thais don't want to make there country a transshipment for Muslim refugees.

remember, you are just a guest here and have absolutely no moral right to impose your moral values. internal affairs in Thailand, it's policy are none of your business. you have just two options: accept it or go somewhere else. As simple as that.

If you compassionate Uygurs and Rohyngya so much - go to your homeland and raise a campaign to grant all of them a political refuge. This could make a change. and solve Rohyngya and Uygur problem.

I am sure they will be so happy in US or UK or wherever are you from.

instead of this you keep bitter useless ranting on TVF about what Thailand must do (according to leftist Western values).

Leftist western values, same old tune from you.

Humanitarianism is not left or right. Not sending people into danger and persecution is not left or right. Giving genuine refugees sanctuary is not left or right.

Why can't you understand that these people fled persecution and to send them back to it is morally wrong?

Why can't you understand that making this decision is less understandable because there was another country willing to accept them?

You accuse me of bitterness when just about every post you make is full of intolerance, prejudice, tin foil hat rants about lefty this or that (I still laugh whenever I recall your "leftist socialist EU" claims. Hilarious) and bile. The irony of your accusations towards me is just sad.

Oh and finally, the whole go back to your own country speel you include ......

Yawn.

OK. I write simple:

it's your moral. keep it to yourself. you are a guest here. it's none of your business what Thai authorities do.

Edited July 11, 2015 by TimmyT

[Bluespunk]

Ah, the old ones are the best.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Bluespunk

[NongKhaiKid]

Still don't know why they couldn't have gone to Turkey.

The Turks were prepared to accept them and I'm sure the refugees would have preferred this solution to going back to the Chinese authorities.

Well actually I'm fairly sure I know why they were sent to China, but it would be speculation on my part so I'll keep my theories to myself.

why don't you understand a simple thing - it's a choice of Thailand, an independent nation. They have a right to choose to send them back to the country of origin - according ti international laws. And they did it.

and I can tell you why: they don't want to make a precedent. if these Uygurs will be granted an asylum in Turkey - many more of them will try to cross the border to Thailand. and Thais don't want to make there country a transshipment for Muslim refugees.

remember, you are just a guest here and have absolutely no moral right to impose your moral values. internal affairs in Thailand, it's policy are none of your business. you have just two options: accept it or go somewhere else. As simple as that.

If you compassionate Uygurs and Rohyngya so much - go to your homeland and raise a campaign to grant all of them a political refuge. This could make a change. and solve Rohyngya and Uygur problem.

I am sure they will be so happy in US or UK or wherever are you from.

instead of this you keep bitter useless ranting on TVF about what Thailand must do (according to leftist Western values).

Leftist western values, same old tune from you.

Humanitarianism is not left or right. Not sending people into danger and persecution is not left or right. Giving genuine refugees sanctuary is not left or right.

Why can't you understand that these people fled persecution and to send them back to it is morally wrong?

Why can't you understand that making this decision is less understandable because there was another country willing to accept them?

You accuse me of bitterness when just about every post you make is full of intolerance, prejudice, tin foil hat rants about lefty this or that (I still laugh whenever I recall your "leftist socialist EU" claims. Hilarious) and bile. The irony of your accusations towards me is just sad.

Oh and finally, the whole go back to your own country speel you include ......

Yawn.

OK. I write simple:

it's your moral. keep it to yourself. you are a guest here. it's none of your business what Thai authorities do.

As a non-Thai i don't have a vote but that doesn't stop me having an opinion on many issues.

Things that the Thai authorities do is my, and so many others, business when it affects me, I just can't do much about it and please don't dredge up the ' then leave ' routine.

[TimmyT]

Let me make it simple for you.

This is a forum to debate ideas and express views.

If you don't like that find another one.

you debate from the basis that everybody should share your moral values. this is wrong. so all of your ranting cost nothing

why most of Westerners here believe Thais should share there moral values?

they came to Thailand because it differs from there homeland. and instead of being thankful to authorities who granted them visas - they keep bashing Thailand because it differs from there homeland.

I am really interested to know - if everything is so bad in Thailand, why did you choose to live here? why don't you go to Hawaii for example? or Philippines?

it reminds me how once I met a guy from US in front of Thai embassy in Vientiane. We were waiting for the embassy to open and all this time the guy was ranting Thais - how they are hypocrites, likes only money, cheating him all the time, do not respect him as a foreigner and elder. And how Lao people are much better, more open, happy to do anything for just a few dollars, etc so finally I said: hey man, you are in Laos already! Why are you waiting for Thai visa? relocate here and be happy!

he didn't reply anything and looked on me like on an enemy for the rest of waiting time.

same as you, people... Bluespank, Nongkaikid and that guy with a blue hand on avatar.

PS I am wondering how old are you, pals. bet older than 60

Edited July 11, 2015 by TimmyT

[TimmyT]

As a non-Thai i don't have a vote but that doesn't stop me having an opinion on many issues.

Things that the Thai authorities do is my, and so many others, business when it affects me, I just can't do much about it and please don't dredge up the ' then leave ' routine.

so if you can't do much (actually nothing at all) - choice is the same - accept it or leave it. or do you have another option?

[Bluespunk]

Let me make it simple for you.

This is a forum to debate ideas and express views.

If you don't like that find another one.

you debate from the basis that everybody should share your moral values. this is wrong. so all of your ranting cost nothing

why most of Westerners here believe Thais should share there moral values?

they came to Thailand because it differs from there homeland. and instead of being thankful to authorities who granted them visas - they keep bashing Thailand because it differs from there homeland.

I am really interested to know - if everything is so bad in Thailand, why did you choose to live here? why don't you go to Hawaii for example? or Philippines?

it reminds me how once I met a guy from US in front of Thai embassy in Vientiane. We were waiting for the embassy to open and all this time the guy was ranting Thais - how they are hypocrites, likes only money, cheating him all the time, do not respect him as a foreigner and elder. And how Lao people are much better, more open, happy to do anything for just a few dollars, etc so finally I said: hey man, you are in Laos already! Why are you waiting for Thai visa? relocate here and be happy!

he didn't reply anything and looked on me like on an enemy for the rest of waiting time.

same as you, people...

You don't see that you are doing exactly the same thing with non Thais?

I've never generalized and said any of those things about Thais and never will because I don't think they are true. Some people are like that but that's true everywhere.

I'm not telling anyone I'm right.

I'm expressing a view and my opinion. You don't like it, fine by me, now prove why I am wrong.

Don't just rant on about "it's none of your business" or "western moral values".

Show me exactly why I am wrong.

[TimmyT]

Let me make it simple for you.

This is a forum to debate ideas and express views.

If you don't like that find another one.

you debate from the basis that everybody should share your moral values. this is wrong. so all of your ranting cost nothing

why most of Westerners here believe Thais should share there moral values?

they came to Thailand because it differs from there homeland. and instead of being thankful to authorities who granted them visas - they keep bashing Thailand because it differs from there homeland.

I am really interested to know - if everything is so bad in Thailand, why did you choose to live here? why don't you go to Hawaii for example? or Philippines?

it reminds me how once I met a guy from US in front of Thai embassy in Vientiane. We were waiting for the embassy to open and all this time the guy was ranting Thais - how they are hypocrites, likes only money, cheating him all the time, do not respect him as a foreigner and elder. And how Lao people are much better, more open, happy to do anything for just a few dollars, etc so finally I said: hey man, you are in Laos already! Why are you waiting for Thai visa? relocate here and be happy!

he didn't reply anything and looked on me like on an enemy for the rest of waiting time.

same as you, people...

You don't see that you are doing exactly the same thing with non Thais?

I've never generalized and said any of those things about Thais and never will because I don't think they are true. Some people are like that but that's true everywhere.

I'm not telling anyone I'm right.

I'm expressing a view and my opinion. You don't like it, fine by me, now prove why I am wrong.

Don't just rant on about "it's none of your business" or "western moral values".

Show me exactly why I am wrong.

you opinion is based not on facts but on your "moral values". so it can't be proven wrong. I am just showing you that your opinion is based on your moral values and Thai opinion (and mine too) on Thai moral values.

and that I think that the most immoral thing is trying to impose your moral values to others.

are you trying to do that? if not - your opinion is useless. because you will keep your moral values and Thais (and me) will keep our moral values. that's it.

you think that government should help refugees in spite of the damage to it's own citizen. I think it shouldn't. and Thais, thank God, think the same. the one and only goal of existence of any government is there citizen welfare. any other goals are criminal.

so what ever you think and say - you will have your own values and Thais will have theirs. so your ranting worth nothing.

[Bluespunk]

Rant rant rant. Just no talking to some people.

[TimmyT]

Rant rant rant. Just no talking to some people.

and that's all you can answer?

Bluespunk, Nongkai kid and a guy with a blue hand on avatar... the unholy socialist trinity of TVF

pathetic...

Edited July 11, 2015 by TimmyT

[Bluespunk]

Rant rant rant. Just no talking to some people.

and that's all you can answer?

pathetic...

Your post got the response it deserved.

[TimmyT]

Rant rant rant. Just no talking to some people.

and that's all you can answer?

pathetic...

Your post got the response it deserved.

and why don't you try to prove I am wrong? out of arguments, like all reds?

[Bluespunk]

Rant rant rant. Just no talking to some people.

and that's all you can answer?

pathetic...

Your post got the response it deserved.

and why don't you try to prove I am wrong? out of arguments, like all reds?

Reds, ha, ha, ha. You just see them everywhere don't you.

You made no point disproving that it is wrong to send genuine refugees back to persecution especially when there was a country willing to take them in.

You know, the topic this thread is about.

Edit: Actually, no I'm wrong there I guess, it's about the attack on the Thai office in Turkey.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Bluespunk

[stickylies]

TimmyT is soooooooo Thai, wow. Give the guy a free 1 year visa!

"the one and only goal of existence of any government is there (SIC) citizen welfare"

Still a looooooooooong way to go here then, 5555.............................................

Edited July 11, 2015 by stickylies

[TimmyT]

Reds, ha, ha, ha. You just see them everywhere don't you.

You made no point disproving that it is wrong to send genuine refugees back to persecution especially when there was a country willing to take them in.

You know, the topic this thread is about.

Edit: Actually, no I'm wrong there I guess, it's about the attack on the Thai office in Turkey.

yes, you are red, a socialist, but would never admit it because in modern political discourse (which was imposed by US) socialist is a synonym of enemy (came from McCarthy's witch-hunt in 1950s). now your political values are called - liberalism (but it's nothing like a true liberalism in it real meaning), tolerance, multiculturalism etc. but they are truly socialist. and not just socialist, but trotskyist.

my point is (which you are pretending not to understand): any government should defend interests of it's citizen only. any other goals are crimes against citizen.

[TimmyT]

TimmyT is soooooooo Thai, wow. Give the guy a free 1 year visa!

"the one and only goal of existence of any government is there (SIC) citizen welfare"

Still a looooooooooong way to go here then, 5555.............................................

Are you trying to discredit my position on the base of mistakes in English grammar?

charming...

[stickylies]

TimmyT is soooooooo Thai, wow. Give the guy a free 1 year visa!

"the one and only goal of existence of any government is there (SIC) citizen welfare"

Still a looooooooooong way to go here then, 5555.............................................

Are you trying to discredit my position on the base of mistakes in English grammar?

charming...

nah your gramar is not an issue. i'm simply taking the p*zz with your macho-wanna-be-tough-anti-red BS "slogans" which are in fact the least applicable here....

[TimmyT]

TimmyT is soooooooo Thai, wow. Give the guy a free 1 year visa!

"the one and only goal of existence of any government is there (SIC) citizen welfare"

Still a looooooooooong way to go here then, 5555.............................................

Are you trying to discredit my position on the base of mistakes in English grammar?

charming...

nah your gramar is not an issue. i'm simply taking the p*zz with your macho-wanna-be-tough-anti-red BS "slogans" which are in fact the least applicable here....

an idea that when citizen is against the state citizen is always right (except if the state is a true "free" socialist republic) - is completely a left-wing mantra... read what Leon Trotsky wrote about this 80 years ago.

Edited July 11, 2015 by TimmyT

[Bluespunk]

Reds, ha, ha, ha. You just see them everywhere don't you.

You made no point disproving that it is wrong to send genuine refugees back to persecution especially when there was a country willing to take them in.

You know, the topic this thread is about.

Edit: Actually, no I'm wrong there I guess, it's about the attack on the Thai office in Turkey.

yes, you are red, a socialist, but would never admit it because in modern political discourse (which was imposed by US) socialist is a synonym of enemy (came from McCarthy's witch-hunt in 1950s). now your political values are called - liberalism (but it's nothing like a true liberalism in it real meaning), tolerance, multiculturalism etc. but they are truly socialist. and not just socialist, but trotskyist.

my point is (which you are pretending not to understand): any government should defend interests of it's citizen only. any other goals are crimes against citizen.

Hilarious. Edited July 11, 2015 by Bluespunk

[stickylies]

sigh, i read trotsky and then was then and now is now. the world is not the same place. i live in the now. the world has issues for which governments (left and right) must find solutions. any government willing to be part of the globalisation (thailand not in the least) has responsibilities surpassing its own short-term-interests resulting in long-term efficiency (both locally and globally). navel-gazing and ego-masturbation will result in downfall.

[gezginrocker]

yes, you are red, a socialist, but would never admit it because in modern political discourse (which was imposed by US) socialist is a synonym of enemy (came from McCarthy's witch-hunt in 1950s). now your political values are called - liberalism (but it's nothing like a true liberalism in it real meaning), tolerance, multiculturalism etc. but they are truly socialist. and not just socialist, but trotskyist.

LOL, this is hilarious indeed. I especially loved the "and not just socialist, but trotskyist" section. What is this, some kind of accusation? Then why you accuse him of being a trotskyist? Would it be better if he was a stalinist or a maoist for example ? What are you, some kind of hillbilly expert on marxism that can point our if you are a trotskyist, leninist, maoist, stalinist etc?

This paragraph reminds me this quote: "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." Bertrand Russell

[TimmyT]

yes, you are red, a socialist, but would never admit it because in modern political discourse (which was imposed by US) socialist is a synonym of enemy (came from McCarthy's witch-hunt in 1950s). now your political values are called - liberalism (but it's nothing like a true liberalism in it real meaning), tolerance, multiculturalism etc. but they are truly socialist. and not just socialist, but trotskyist.

LOL, this is hilarious indeed. I especially loved the "and not just socialist, but trotskyist" section. What is this, some kind of accusation? Then why you accuse him of being a trotskyist? Would it be better if he was a stalinist or a maoist for example ? What are you, some kind of hillbilly expert on marxism that can point our if you are a trotskyist, leninist, maoist, stalinist etc?

This paragraph reminds me this quote: "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." Bertrand Russell

I can't call myself an expert but I know the difference between Trotsky's, Mao's, Stalin's, Marx's, Lenin's, Plekhanov's, Kim Ir Sen's and Pol Pot's views on communist ideology.

Trotskism is much more hardcore communist ideology than modern leftism. That's why I mentioned this.

Edited July 14, 2015 by TimmyT