Boonsong suffers the fate of the ‘hired gun’

[stephen tracy]

On ‎8‎/‎31‎/‎2017 at 10:24 AM, ovi1kanobi said:

Dont do the crime, If you cant do the time.....And dont drop the soap!  He got what he deserved. LOL

Exploiting the patronage system is only a crime when your political foes deem it so.  Otherwise it's just "Thainess".  And give that rapists, murderers and child molesters, would not get anywhere near 4 decades behind bars, it does seem rather disproportionate.  In handing out that sentence the junta (because the judiciary is controlled by the junta) has basically said they want him to die in jail. And one way or the other, he probably will.

[stephen tracy]

On ‎8‎/‎31‎/‎2017 at 2:06 PM, robblok said:

You could try to dispute the facts of the thread.. but I know how much those on the red side hate facts.

There's no "red side" Rob.  Why do you not get it?  You think because you pick a side, everyone else does. What is it that obstructs your brain from understanding this very basic fact.  Is it the pathological hatred that denies you your sovereignty of reason or are you simply unhinged generally?

[scorecard]

2 hours ago, Squeegee said:

 

I don't dispute "facts" with stupid people. Precisely because you are disrespectful of others to say "on the red side" marks you as unworthy of a reasonable debate. You deserve ridicule.

 

I hope your going to apply your 'rule' to both camps.

[scorecard]

11 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

There's no "red side" Rob.  Why do you not get it?  You think because you pick a side, everyone else does. What is it that obstructs your brain from understanding this very basic fact.  Is it the pathological hatred that denies you your sovereignty of reason or are you simply unhinged generally?

Naah, not good discussion points.

 

By the way impolite/ abusive words not needed or valid for a civil discussion. 

[stephen tracy]

5 minutes ago, scorecard said:

Naah, not good discussion points.

 

By the way impolite/ abusive words not needed or valid for a civil discussion. 

I take offense at being called a red shirt supporter by someone based on nothing. Oh, don't like the junta, must be red... that's the depth of the logic applied. I also find the general level of ignorance among TV members who label anyone that criticizes the junta is a red-shirt/Shin supporter.  It speaks volumes of their breath-taking bias and complete lack of understanding that not everyone is partisan.  It seems it's just too difficult a concept to comprehend. 

[scorecard]

43 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

I take offense at being called a red shirt supporter by someone based on nothing. Oh, don't like the junta, must be red... that's the depth of the logic applied. I also find the general level of ignorance among TV members who label anyone that criticizes the junta is a red-shirt/Shin supporter.  It speaks volumes of their breath-taking bias and complete lack of understanding that not everyone is partisan.  It seems it's just too difficult a concept to comprehend. 

 

Well OK, but here's another linked point. Many TV contributors who criticize the paymaster, his sister, and the red leaders etc, get instantly labelled as 'junta huggers' / 'junta lovers'.  

 

Another one, criticize the paymaster, his sister, the family or the red leaders and get instantly labelled as 'spewing bile'.

 

Many TV contributors who have criticized the paymaster, his sister, and the red leaders etc, have also mentioned many times that they don't see a military government as the best alternative and have criticized the current economic performance etc., but the 'junta huggers' / 'junta lovers' labels still persist. 

 

QUOTE:  "  It seems it's just too difficult a concept to comprehend."

 

I don't argu that might well be true. also tru, IMHO, plenty of posters here who have an agenda, perhaps even a paid agenda, to try to make the paymaster, family and the red leaders look red folks look genuine, and lilly white. 

 

Edited September 2, 2017 by scorecard

[stephen tracy]

19 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

Well OK, but here's another linked point. Many TV contributors who criticize the paymaster, his sister, and the red leaders etc, get instantly labelled as 'junta huggers' / 'junta lovers'.  

 

Another one, criticize the paymaster, his sister, the family or the red leaders and get instantly labelled as 'spewing bile'.

 

Many TV contributors who have criticized the paymaster, his sister, and the red leaders etc, have also mentioned many times that they don't see a military government as the best alternative and have criticized the current economic performance etc., but the 'junta huggers' / 'junta lovers' labels still persist. 

 

QUOTE:  "  It seems it's just too difficult a concept to comprehend."

 

I don't argu that might well be true. also tru, IMHO, plenty of posters here who have an agenda, perhaps even a paid agenda, to try to make the paymaster, family and the red leaders look red folks look genuine, and lilly white. 

 

I agree with a lot of what you say here.  I too am guilty of using the terms like 'junta-hugger' etc. but some members here, as is the case on the BBK Post website, refuse to accept any criticism of the junta whatsoever, and the hatred expressed to red shirts and their following is a little disturbing.  It's not rational.  It's like an all-consuming loathing that either clouds probably otherwise reasonable judgment, or like you say, paid for.  I was happy to see the YL removed initially, but that was until I saw what replaced her.  Once you make speech a crime and declare that you can do "whatever" you like ude to the self-proclaimed immunity (among many, many other things), you no longer have any legitimacy whatsoever.  And there are no if and buts about that.

[scorecard]

29 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

I agree with a lot of what you say here.  I too am guilty of using the terms like 'junta-hugger' etc. but some members here, as is the case on the BBK Post website, refuse to accept any criticism of the junta whatsoever, and the hatred expressed to red shirts and their following is a little disturbing.  It's not rational.  It's like an all-consuming loathing that either clouds probably otherwise reasonable judgment, or like you say, paid for.  I was happy to see the YL removed initially, but that was until I saw what replaced her.  Once you make speech a crime and declare that you can do "whatever" you like ude to the self-proclaimed immunity (among many, many other things), you no longer have any legitimacy whatsoever.  And there are no if and buts about that.

 

"...hatred expressed to red shirts and their following is a little disturbing.  It's not rational."

 

...well 'hatred' is evident...

 

...on the other hand, IMHO, detailed analysis of many of the the red actions and speeches etc., could lead plenty of folks to have an opinion which is less than flattering of 'the reds' and their paymaster.

 

But it's certainly a multifaceted discussion and everybody is entitled to their opinion.

[473geo]

2 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

"...hatred expressed to red shirts and their following is a little disturbing.  It's not rational."

 

...well 'hatred' is evident...

 

...on the other hand, IMHO, detailed analysis of many of the the red actions and speeches etc., could lead plenty of folks to have an opinion which is less than flattering of 'the reds' and their paymaster.

 

But it's certainly a multifaceted discussion and everybody is entitled to their opinion.

And here we see the flaw - no comment on the very relevant dialogue in the latter part of the post you respond to......almost as though you did not see it

[stephen tracy]

3 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

"...hatred expressed to red shirts and their following is a little disturbing.  It's not rational."

 

...well 'hatred' is evident...

 

...on the other hand, IMHO, detailed analysis of many of the the red actions and speeches etc., could lead plenty of folks to have an opinion which is less than flattering of 'the reds' and their paymaster.

 

But it's certainly a multifaceted discussion and everybody is entitled to their opinion.

Agreed.

[scorecard]

Just now, 473geo said:

And here we see the flaw - no comment on the very relevant dialogue in the latter part of the post you respond to......almost as though you did not see it

 

Read further...

[robblok]

3 hours ago, Reigntax said:

 

So if military subordinates are bashing trainees to death in the barracks and the PM knew about it because it has happened before, by your logic the PM should be held fully accountable for the murders.

 

Or the road carnage kills 10's of thousandss per year. Unlicenced drivers, unregistered cars, incompetent police . The PM is in charge, is aware of the situation but nothing has been done. Shouldnt he then with charged with dereliction of duty?

 

But i have yet to see you call for the PM to be charged. How could that be?

 I guess you did not think about the many layers between your example and those between YL and her cabinet members.... then you will see its far closer... I guess your example does not cut it

 

[473geo]

4 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

Read further...

I know when I'm beat you win I see now your comment regarding the point made

 

 " Once you make speech a crime and declare that you can do "whatever" you like ude to the self-proclaimed immunity (among many, many other things), you no longer have any legitimacy whatsoever.  And there are no if and buts about that."

 

Reads....

 

Was there all along I do apologise

[YetAnother]

On 8/31/2017 at 5:08 AM, webfact said:

‘hired gun’

hired guns can always say no; and if they fear for saying same then they need flee;

 

or of course they are just stupid

(my bet)

[robblok]

3 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

The vast majority of people you call "Shin defenders" couldn't give a toss about the Shins, they are just opposed to the junta.  It is clear that you will never be able to make the mental leap to understand that.  It is actually possible to be opposed to both.  I am aware that this information will be a little to much for you to digest. 

If they are opposed to the junta.. then why do they defend the crimes of the shins.. its now proven in court that there was high ranking corruption in the rice program. I often comment on the faults of the junta.. havent seen the same of those always defending the Shins. Is it so hard to celebrate some people who stole 30 billion baht going to jail.

[stephen tracy]

55 minutes ago, robblok said:

If they are opposed to the junta.. then why do they defend the crimes of the shins.. its now proven in court that there was high ranking corruption in the rice program. I often comment on the faults of the junta.. havent seen the same of those always defending the Shins. Is it so hard to celebrate some people who stole 30 billion baht going to jail.

I think you need a hobby that doesn't involve rice.

[candide]

3 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

Well OK, but here's another linked point. Many TV contributors who criticize the paymaster, his sister, and the red leaders etc, get instantly labelled as 'junta huggers' / 'junta lovers'.  

 

Another one, criticize the paymaster, his sister, the family or the red leaders and get instantly labelled as 'spewing bile'.

 

Many TV contributors who have criticized the paymaster, his sister, and the red leaders etc, have also mentioned many times that they don't see a military government as the best alternative and have criticized the current economic performance etc., but the 'junta huggers' / 'junta lovers' labels still persist. 

 

QUOTE:  "  It seems it's just too difficult a concept to comprehend."

 

I don't argu that might well be true. also tru, IMHO, plenty of posters here who have an agenda, perhaps even a paid agenda, to try to make the paymaster, family and the red leaders look red folks look genuine, and lilly white. 

 

To my eyes, the problem is not to criticise the Shins per se. The problem is that the so-called Junta lovers use these critics to justify PDRC actions and to justify the coup and further Junta's behaviour. And usually by making it worse as it really was, or distorting facts.

Edited September 2, 2017 by candide

[ramrod711]

3 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

There's no "red side" Rob.  Why do you not get it?  You think because you pick a side, everyone else does. What is it that obstructs your brain from understanding this very basic fact.  Is it the pathological hatred that denies you your sovereignty of reason or are you simply unhinged generally?

It could possibly be that he assumes that people pick sides because of the "Junta fan boy" label that everyone who doesn't wave the Shin flag gets saddled with. I know you would never do that because you are so polite, as your "simply unhinged" comment demonstrates. Pot, Kettle Black.

[stephen tracy]

15 minutes ago, ramrod711 said:

It could possibly be that he assumes that people pick sides because of the "Junta fan boy" label that everyone who doesn't wave the Shin flag gets saddled with. I know you would never do that because you are so polite, as your "simply unhinged" comment demonstrates. Pot, Kettle Black.

If the cap fits?

[Squeegee]

7 hours ago, scorecard said:

I hope your going to apply your 'rule' to both camps.

 

I would, but in this regard both camps are dissimilar in that pro-yellow behave unreasonably whereas there seems to be fewer instances of pro-reds being so unreasonable, partially explained I think precisely because of the problem highlighted in robblok's silly reply to me: most of the time, it is not 'reds' posting. It's tiresome stuff and I don't believe they (rob and others like him) are completely unaware they are doing it, thus the disdain.

[halloween]

7 hours ago, Squeegee said:

 

I would, but in this regard both camps are dissimilar in that pro-yellow behave unreasonably whereas there seems to be fewer instances of pro-reds being so unreasonable, partially explained I think precisely because of the problem highlighted in robblok's silly reply to me: most of the time, it is not 'reds' posting. It's tiresome stuff and I don't believe they (rob and others like him) are completely unaware they are doing it, thus the disdain.

Yes, it is SO unreasonable to point out that the government is corrupt. How dare they! Don't they realise that a minority 49% lose all rights when they lose an election, and that the majority 51% have given their criminals a mandate to steal as much as they can.

[scorecard]

12 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

I think you need a hobby that doesn't involve rice.

 

I think you need to read roblocks' valid comment again.

[Squeegee]

1 hour ago, halloween said:

Yes, it is SO unreasonable to point out that the government is corrupt. How dare they! Don't they realise that a minority 49% lose all rights when they lose an election, and that the majority 51% have given their criminals a mandate to steal as much as they can.

 

I don't understand your point. You seem to be being sarcastic. Is that an anti-democracy rant or are you complaining about The Shins again?

 

Here's me meeting you half way....

 

 

 

O my, that's awful.

[halloween]

24 minutes ago, Squeegee said:

 

I don't understand your point. You seem to be being sarcastic. Is that an anti-democracy rant or are you complaining about The Shins again?

 

Here's me meeting you half way....

 

 

 

O my, that's awful.

I was commenting on your statement that " pro-yellow behave unreasonably ". What is unreasonable about demanding your government is not corrupt?

[robblok]

I think you need a hobby that doesn't involve rice.

My hobby is lifting weights and staying in shape. Debating politics is just a distraction to keep both sides sharp.

I ask you again what is wrong with punishing corrupt ministers who stole around 30 billion. 30 billion that could have helped a lot of rice farmers including those who killed themselves waiting for money that was never paid. This already started b4 YL stepped down.

You will hear me cheering as loud if they get an army man or democrat with his hand in the till. But now its the reds who otherwise would have gotten away with it that are punished. As long as they were in power they worked against all investigations of the program or had some light weight ones to say there was no corruption.

You might not understand but unfortunately it takes a change of government to bring out the truth. Its the same with the democrats. That is why Thailand no real democracy. Other mechanisms would have been as powerful as a government change to root out corruption. But it does not work that way here as governments when they come in power place their men in key positions to sabotage investigations.

Example YL slashed the budget of the NACC when she came in power.

And the BS that voting keeps things in check is laughable the farmers would have voted her in always as long as they got the high rice prices even if the policy wrecked the country.

[pornprong]

19 minutes ago, halloween said:

I was commenting on your statement that " pro-yellow behave unreasonably ". What is unreasonable about demanding your government is not corrupt?

Who exactly is demanding a government without corruption?

It is certainly not the yellows for they are demanding an unelected government to perpetuate the decades of institutional corruption that has developed under previous unelected governments.

 

If you think that any coup has had anything to do with ending corruption you have no idea what you're talking about.

[robblok]

 
I don't dispute "facts" with stupid people. Precisely because you are disrespectful of others to say "on the red side" marks you as unworthy of a reasonable debate. You deserve ridicule.

Im disrespectful because the other side is too. If you post bad things about the shins your a junta hugger or opposed to democracy. Your remark was not really respectful either and never touched the facts of this topic. Just a ohhh so nice to see all those in favor of the junta in one topic. One can condemn the Shins and junta on actions they did both sides did some good things too.

[craigt3365]

8 minutes ago, pornprong said:

Who exactly is demanding a government without corruption?

It is certainly not the yellows for they are demanding an unelected government to perpetuate the decades of institutional corruption that has developed under previous unelected governments.

 

If you think that any coup has had anything to do with ending corruption you have no idea what you're talking about.

The "yellows" started their protests when the governing party tried to illegally ram through legislation to pardon Thaķsin. That's what started all this.

[pornprong]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

The "yellows" started their protests when the governing party tried to illegally ram through legislation to pardon Thaķsin. That's what started all this.

If the concern was amnesty, then why after three years has there still not been an election?

 

 

[halloween]

30 minutes ago, pornprong said:

Who exactly is demanding a government without corruption?

It is certainly not the yellows for they are demanding an unelected government to perpetuate the decades of institutional corruption that has developed under previous unelected governments.

 

If you think that any coup has had anything to do with ending corruption you have no idea what you're talking about.

Is it that difficult to separate the yellow movement from the military. Even when they are being forced to pay damages for their protest by the courts you claim are under the control of the junta? Or does it suit your agenda to couple them?

Those that didn't vote for PTP have every right to protest when they show themselves to be as corrupt and self-serving as was expected, when they see the police being suborned by bribes and nepotism, and billions of baht of public money being stolen and wasted under the rice scam.

In which part of the world is that unreasonable, as Squeegee claimed? Oh that's right, you don't know anything about Boonsong's theft and think Yingluk did a good job. Welcome back, can't keep a good propagandist away.