Investigators fail to identify killers of foreign journalists

No, it is not. His work is built on his reputation for getting the clients desired result. He is effectively a whore. Amsterdam is a special new breed of international 'super' lawyer who has represented an array of corporate and political clients. He needs to win his cases or the work dries up.....However, as I'm sure you are aware, there is no case and he isn't even in Thailand, so he is at liberty to say what the hell he wants, with no repercussions....and you guys just lap it up. Hilarious. Would you believe anyone else in such a position? He can say what he wants, with no responsibility, no one to challenge him, no consequences....it is the antithesis of all that is democratic (Oh and fair and reasonable, just, correct, responsible, equitable etc). But you guys lap it up....just how sad is that...

He's doing his job pretty well you might say....he has a lot of folks totally fooled, forgetting the source of the information they devour with such fevour.

Worth every penny...!

Btw, Surely you aren't defending lawyers?

Really?

It seems like the reality distortion field is strong today. Red shirts defending lawyers....what's next, mass murderers are just misunderstood? Politicians are honest? Up is down and down is up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomta

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thaihome

Most of what Amesterdam writes can be dismissed because it is littered with fallacy agruments such as half truths, cheery picking, generalizations, bandwagon, repetition, error of fact, red herrings, emotive language, fallacy of origins and two wrongs make a right.

---

Thaihome, it would advance the argument considerably if you could reference those criticisms directly to Amsterdam's statements.

Why not start by listing the factual errors in the major document his firm has written, the White Paper called The Bangkok Massacres: A Call for Accountability
I have read it carefully and I haven't been able to identify any factually incorrect claims. Perhaps you can help me?

---

"For four years, the people of Thailand have been the victims of a systematic and unrelenting assault on their most fundamental right — the right to self-determination through genuine elections based on the will of the people."

This is the opening sentence of the Executive Summary of this “white paper” that you have read carefully and can find no “factually incorrect claims”. If you see nothing factually incorrect in that claim, there is very little reason to discuss anything further with you.

Nevertheless, I will cite two examples from just the first page of 77 page document showing the fallacy arguments I mentioned.

This claim of lack of a "right to self-determination through genuine elections based on the will of the people" is classic fallacy argument of Argument By Repetition (Argument Ad Nauseam), if you say something often enough, some people will begin to believe it.

The fact is an election was held in December 2007. This election was monitored and reported on by The Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL). The conclusion of that report is that the elections were far from perfect but does include the line:
“The Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL) commends the Election Commission on holding Thailand’s elections, the results of which generally reflect the will of the people. “

The fact is that the Members of Parliament elected in December 2007 are still sitting in Parliament. Any member that was unseated due to any court decision has been replaced in a by-election. The majority of those elected members voted for Abhisit to be Prime Minister in December 2008.

The fact is the people of the districts whose MP’s joined the coalition that elected Abhisit as PM have not participated in the UDD protests and there has been no move by the voters in those districts to remove their MP’s because the did join the coalition. There is ample evidence these voters are satisfied with their representation and will re-elect these same MP’s again in the next general election.


So, wouldn’t a factually correct version of that sentence be:

In past 4 years Thailand has had one general election and several by-elections which according to at least one International Election Monitoring organization is acknowledged to represent the will of the people.



First sentence of the second paragraph:

When the successor to Thai Rak Thai managed to win the next national election in late 2007, an ad hoc court consisting of judges hand-picked by the coup-makers dissolved that party as well, allowing Abhisit Vejjajiva’s rise to the Prime Minister’s office.

A classic example of the Argument by Selective Observation, pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of data that may contradict that position.

A few facts that were not included in this sentence which contradicts the circumstance it attempts to portray.

The successor to the TRT did not win the election. They won the most seats in Parliament but did not win enough to control a majority. The formed a coalition with a number of smaller parties to control Parliment.

When the court ruled to dissolve the PTP, based on overwhelming evidence of vote buying (a case highlighted by ANFREL in the report a sign of successful enforcement) all the non-executive Members of Parliament were allowed to join other parties without losing their seats. Few actual MP's were unseated.

Most of the MP's joined the PPP, but several factions instead joined the BJT and along with the Chart Thai factions joined the Democrats in a coalition that elected Abhisit PM.

Subsequently, by-elections were held to replace the unseated MP’s and the members of the coalition won 21 of the 29 seats, thereby increasing the majority in Parliament.

So wouldn’t a sentence[s] containing all the data be along the lines of:

The successor to Thai Rak Thai, after failing to win control of Parliament in the next national election in late 2007, formed a coalition. Later, based on overwhelming evidence of the Deputy Party leaders attempt to bribe local government officials, an ad hoc court, consisting of judges hand-picked by the coup-makers, dissolved that party but allowed most MP’s to keep their seats. In the resulting political scramble a number of dissatisfied factions joined the Democrat Party in electing Abhisit Vejjajiva’s to the Prime Minister’s office. Subsequent by-elections to replace the party executive members of the successor party have resulted in increasing the majority of the Democrat led coalition.

So, there you have a two examples, without going any further then the first page.

TH

To make things worse the Thai embassy in Rome sent Fabio Polenghi's sister an invitation to celebrate HM's birthday.

nice argument TH, but again you are arguing with uneducated fools, no doubt explaining their association with a certain crowd

so a bit pointless at the end :)

^^ Indeed Scara, I found that very very odd.

Nice reply TH....love this line...and it is well chosen to reinforce my above argument too....

"For four years, the people of Thailand have been the victims of a systematic and unrelenting assault on their most fundamental right — the right to self-determination through genuine elections based on the will of the people."

I'd love to know what all those by-elections next week are....

The thing is, when the elections are held next year, which even PT seems to think they will be (as demonstrated by the uptick in activity), will someone come along and call Amsterdam on this bullshit?

No

And will the myopic red shirt crowd fess up and admit to being wrong....

No

And will any lessons be learnt by the red shirts...?

No

And will paranoid delusions of a persecutory nature be continued to be vomited forth by the same red shirt fans...?

Yes.

I still recall have a heated debate here with a few red shirts about the phantom deaths of the Songkran riots in 2009. Oh how they believed Jatuporn's bullshit (for which he is in court at the moment!!). But despite my being an eye-witness to events....they still believed Jatuporn. There is no proof of any deaths at that time...nor has any ever been forthcoming, but still I'm sure some here still believe it.

As it was with that, so it will be with this.

I would say it is fair and reasonable to be mindful of those who are without a shred of integrity....

No, just calling it as it is....

But please feel free to attack the poster and not address the post....

Oh look, you just did.

"If you're not with us, you must be against us"

Ahhh, the profound thinking of those with bias....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

"If you're not with us, you must be against us"

Ahhh, the profound thinking of those with bias....

---

I could not care where you stand. The one thing that you are not is unbiased, though you claim you are.

Maybe, just maybe....I might claim I'm unbiased....because <drumroll>......I am!!!!!

yes, I know, that goes against your views and doesn't fit with your paradigm of how things should be.

BUT....

Maybe, just maybe....you and others who are very much biased, misperceive my intentions/actions/words because of your bias...you see it as an attack...but it isn't.

Nah, how could I possibly know what I'm doing...? I must be mistaken.

Instead, claiming I'm unbiased must be some huge conspiracy or trying to lull you guys into some weird false sense of security.

Really...you and others have claimed I'm biased, even calling me a PAD supporter at times....

Now, think on this for a bit....

Why would I claim to be unbiased...? What would be my reasoning? My motivation?

Why would I do such a bizarre (to you and a few others) thing....

Why would I secretly be biased but claim to be unbiased...?

You have to admit it would be a pretty weird thing to do....

So, come on, you (or someone) please supply me with a credible reason as to why I would say I am unbiased, when in fact you seem to think I'm not...

I simply can't wait.......

Oh and as an aside, seeing as none of you have met me or know who I am, how is it that you think know me sooooooooo well, but I apparently don't know my own mind or my own thinking....

You have to admit...it would be a little odd....

Looking forward to the insights....baited breath and all that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Maybe, just maybe....I might claim I'm unbiased....because <drumroll>......I am!!!!!

---

No you are in denial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

yes, I know, that goes against your views and doesn't fit with your paradigm of how things should be.

---

Sorry, but your statements do show obvious bias. Again I really don't give a toss what side you are on. I treat you with equal contempt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

BUT....

Maybe, just maybe....you and others who are very much biased, misperceive my intentions/actions/words because of your bias...you see it as an attack...but it isn't.

---

Sorry I don't see it as an attack. I respect far more of what Butterfly and TH has to say as they don't pretend. I don't see what they say as an attack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Nah, how could I possibly know what I'm doing...? I must be mistaken.

---

Ah, do I have to bow to you self perceived superior intellect. :kma:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Instead, claiming I'm unbiased must be some huge conspiracy or trying to lull you guys into some weird false sense of security.

Really...you and others have claimed I'm biased, even calling me a PAD supporter at times....

---

No you may not think you are biased, but what you write contradicts your thinking on bias.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

You have to admit it would be a pretty weird thing to do....

---

The world is full of weirdo's.

ROTFL

I think my point is proven.....

I'm in denial....:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Denial of what???????????

Is there a group I can attend....a bit like AA....I can stand up and say "I'm a forum poster and I'm in denial of my bias".

I obviously need the help....

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Really, think about what you are writing, it is sooooooo bizarre!

Why would I be in denial of my postings? Why??????????

For what possible reason?

Come on...humour me....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thaihome

"For four years, the people of Thailand have been the victims of a systematic and unrelenting assault on their most fundamental right — the right to self-determination through genuine elections based on the will of the people."

---

This is Thai History. Nothing new here. The only part incorrect is the number of years. I would not limit it to 4. When the army orders its soldiers to not vote for a particular party then it is hardly could be called a fair election.

^^ It happens in other 'democracies' too......

The Sun newspaper ( a Murdoch owned paper) famously credits itself with 'advising' its readership on who to vote for...they claim to have been a massive influence in the past, on who was elected in the UK. English politicians have also courted them for that very reason.

The various interested parties (read; religious groups) in the US elections also 'advise' (but it is in effect an order) their flock on who they should vote for.....Murdoch and his financial support of the republican party is also a well known example of how things work....he uses the media there too, to suggest, cajole, or tell others on how to behave.

People are sheep.

Ah, democracy...it is lovely isn't it...

Here it is blatant. In the west it is sophisticated. The result is the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Butterfly

SD, why do you even bother talking to Red nutters who only interact with slagdogs and petty criminals

and vote BNP of course, what else :)

---

I'm interested in their mindset. I'm curious. I also like to dispel a few myths a long the way :).

Just how do such people arrive at the conclusions they do?

It is an ongoing piece of research.

Thus far the results are inconclusive, as it appears they are unaware of why they think the way they do....( I ask for credible rationalisations, I get name calling...).

The research continues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Denial of what???????????

---

Your bias.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

"I'm a forum poster and I'm in denial of my bias".

---

Now there's a start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

I obviously need the help....

---

You say you are a shrink so you may only need a mirror.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Really, think about what you are writing, it is sooooooo bizarre!

---

What is so bizarre about commenting on your bias in what you write.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Why would I be in denial of my postings? Why??????????

---

Something you should ask yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

For what possible reason?

---

Other then what you write, I don't know you from a bar of soap. I don't really care about the motives behind what you post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Come on...humour me....

---

Why bother?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Butterfly

SD, why do you even bother talking to Red nutters who only interact with slagdogs and petty criminals

and vote BNP of course, what else :)

---

I'm interested in their mindset. I'm curious. I also like to dispel a few myths a long the way :).

---

Ah the shrink shite again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Just how do such people arrive at the conclusions they do?

---

You could start by reading what you are writing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

It is an ongoing piece of research.

---

And again......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Thus far the results are inconclusive, as it appears they are unaware of why they think the way they do....( I ask for credible rationalisations, I get name calling...).

---

I did not call you any name other then SD. I just called out your bias in posting, and took a guess at what colours are in your wardrobe. You don't have to be so defensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

^^ It happens in other 'democracies' too......

The Sun newspaper ( a Murdoch owned paper) famously credits itself with 'advising' its readership on who to vote for...they claim to have been a massive influence in the past, on who was elected in the UK. English politicians have also courted them for that very reason.

The various interested parties (read; religious groups) in the US elections also 'advise' (but it is in effect an order) their flock on who they should vote for.....Murdoch and his financial support of the republican party is also a well known example of how things work....he uses the media there too, to suggest, cajole, or tell others on how to behave.

People are sheep.

Ah, democracy...it is lovely isn't it...

Here it is blatant. In the west it is sophisticated. The result is the same.

---

No direct orders in the military are vastly different then listening to what is advised in a newspaper etc. With the advice in the newspapers or by other groups there is no consquences if you are found out voting the other way. You can totally disregard it. For most people who do not have a pre-determined voting patern, then they can take advice from other sources to form their own view on who to vote for. The sheep you speak of have only voted for one party in their lives and most likely it is the same for their parents. Their vote does not change with the environment around them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Denial of what???????????

---

Your bias.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

"I'm a forum poster and I'm in denial of my bias".

---

Now there's a start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

I obviously need the help....

---

You say you are a shrink so you may only need a mirror.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Really, think about what you are writing, it is sooooooo bizarre!

---

What is so bizarre about commenting on your bias in what you write.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Why would I be in denial of my postings? Why??????????

---

Something you should ask yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

For what possible reason?

---

Other then what you write, I don't know you from a bar of soap. I don't really care about the motives behind what you post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Come on...humour me....

---

Why bother?

---

You don't care....but yet have felt the need to continually question my bias and reply over and over to my posts....

Ummmm.

Not sure I require a psychologist to work that one out :smileylaughing:

Okay, your argument is a fallacy. You can not claim I am something, when I know my own thoughts and motives. You interpret my posts, based upon your own slant/bias.

Suggesting I am biased actually reveals more about you than it does me. And yeah, I doubt you'll understand that.

I know my own mind....you don't. Getting it yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Butterfly

SD, why do you even bother talking to Red nutters who only interact with slagdogs and petty criminals

and vote BNP of course, what else :)

---

I'm interested in their mindset. I'm curious. I also like to dispel a few myths a long the way :).

---

Ah the shrink shite again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Just how do such people arrive at the conclusions they do?

---

You could start by reading what you are writing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

It is an ongoing piece of research.

---

And again......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Thus far the results are inconclusive, as it appears they are unaware of why they think the way they do....( I ask for credible rationalisations, I get name calling...).

---

I did not call you any name other then SD. I just called out your bias in posting, and took a guess at what colours are in your wardrobe. You don't have to be so defensive.

---

See, there ya go again, with that misinterpretation stuff.....

It's odd.

Trust me...it's odd.

I was just taking the piss....but you took it so seriously. I'm sure most people realise what I was doing. Well, some...

Chill out mate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

See, there ya go again, with that misinterpretation stuff.....

---

misinterpretation ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

It's odd.

Trust me...it's odd.

---

Yes, bias is odd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

I was just taking the piss....but you took it so seriously. I'm sure most people realise what I was doing. Well, some...

Chill out mate.

---

Don't worry I don't take your posts seriously, you just made that assumption.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

I'm interested in their mindset. I'm curious. I also like to dispel a few myths a long the way

---

there is nothing to analyze, they are dumb, as much as the silly cattle they support. They think in linear and binary terms, a very simple thought process model, found in 90% of the world population. Never forget we descend from monkeys and it's hard to tell some of us apart :)

---

So how is frog logic better?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

^^ It happens in other 'democracies' too......

The Sun newspaper ( a Murdoch owned paper) famously credits itself with 'advising' its readership on who to vote for...they claim to have been a massive influence in the past, on who was elected in the UK. English politicians have also courted them for that very reason.

The various interested parties (read; religious groups) in the US elections also 'advise' (but it is in effect an order) their flock on who they should vote for.....Murdoch and his financial support of the republican party is also a well known example of how things work....he uses the media there too, to suggest, cajole, or tell others on how to behave.

People are sheep.

Ah, democracy...it is lovely isn't it...

Here it is blatant. In the west it is sophisticated. The result is the same.

---

No direct orders in the military are vastly different then listening to what is advised in a newspaper etc. With the advice in the newspapers or by other groups there is no consquences if you are found out voting the other way. You can totally disregard it. For most people who do not have a pre-determined voting patern, then they can take advice from other sources to form their own view on who to vote for. The sheep you speak of have only voted for one party in their lives and most likely it is the same for their parents. Their vote does not change with the environment around them.

---

Like I said, one is blatant, one is sophisticated. The result is the same.

Most people don't change. It's like in America, the candidate who appeals to the ultra-conservative christian evangelical movement automatically counts on a substantial percentage of voters. They are in the bag and seldom deviate. They are a certain type of person....

Most people are sheep.

Here they tell them what to do....there they make sure they do what they want them to do...

The result is the same. Manipulation or coercion. The result is the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

See, there ya go again, with that misinterpretation stuff.....

---

misinterpretation ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

It's odd.

Trust me...it's odd.

---

Yes, bias is odd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

I was just taking the piss....but you took it so seriously. I'm sure most people realise what I was doing. Well, some...

Chill out mate.

---

Don't worry I don't take your posts seriously, you just made that assumption.

---

Misinterpretation....yes, you took a guess at my colours and you also posted I was being defensive.....

Both are equally wrong.

You are still to supply any evidence that I'm biased, other than your own opinion (which of course can be very wrong...).

Still waiting.

What are my reasons for claiming to be unbiased, when you and others are so sure I am biased.....?

Can I have an answer?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Misinterpretation....yes, you took a guess at my colours and you also posted I was being defensive.....

Both are equally wrong.

---

You are defensive. Every time somebody questions your bias, you keep posting until you get the last post in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

You are still to supply any evidence that I'm biased, other than your own opinion (which of course can be very wrong...).

---

Ok, lets start here......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

And will the myopic red shirt crowd fess up and admit to being wrong....

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

And will any lessons be learnt by the red shirts...?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

And will paranoid delusions of a persecutory nature be continued to be vomited forth by the same red shirt fans...?

---

Where is the balance?

LOL

The balance my friend is that I will attack the reds, yellows, government, Thaksin and anyone else i can think who is deserving of such treatment. I take no side. All are game.

No faction here is worthy of support, except the common folk who have to endure this farce...and are victims of it. At this point, there isn't anyone who has the best interests of the Thai people at heart amongst the warring political factions, all are after one thing....power and the trappings that go with it.

Like I said earlier, it is your perception that is at fault....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

The balance my friend is that I will attack the reds, yellows, government, Thaksin and anyone else i can think who is deserving of such treatment. I take no side. All are game.

---

As has been pointed out to you that is where you are way off the mark with your self perception.

You critisise the government and the PAD, true and has been acknowledged by everybody.
But in stark contrast to that you attack and ridicule the Red and those who support them every time you get half a chance.

Self reflection is an awkward thing as it forces you to verify your own action and that can sometimes hurt. You should try it anyway. You feel better afterwards, I promise.

LOL

True to form takeovers....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

The balance my friend is that I will attack the reds, yellows, government, Thaksin and anyone else i can think who is deserving of such treatment. I take no side. All are game.

---

Your attacks on yellows and the Dems are few and far between. Rather more a confused slap rather then an attack. Noted you do attack Newin's mob, but certainly not the Dems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

No faction here is worthy of support, except the common folk who have to endure this farce...and are victims of it.

---

Ah now your heart goes out to reds? Or do you think the common folk drive Mercs and shop at Central World etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

At this point, there isn't anyone who has the best interests of the Thai people at heart amongst the warring political factions, all are after one thing....power and the trappings that go with it.

---

No there are actually several who have been fighting for democracy for years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Like I said earlier, it is your perception that is at fault....

---

No, it is very clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

The balance my friend is that I will attack the reds, yellows, government, Thaksin and anyone else i can think who is deserving of such treatment. I take no side. All are game.

---

As has been pointed out to you that is where you are way off the mark with your self perception.

You critisise the government and the PAD, true and has been acknowledged by everybody.
But in stark contrast to that you attack and ridicule the Red and those who support them every time you get half a chance.

Self reflection is an awkward thing as it forces you to verify your own action and that can sometimes hurt. You should try it anyway. You feel better afterwards, I promise.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

LOL

True to form takeovers....

---

Spot on takeovers......

Thai money offer slammed
https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif
Isabella Polenghi, sister of slain Italian photograher Fabio Polenghi, pays her last respects at his funeral at a temple in Bangkok. -- PHOTO: AFP


BANGKOK - THE sister of an Italian photographer killed in Bangkok during this year's anti-government protests accused Thai authorities of offering money to 'close our mouths', in a letter released on Friday.

Elisabetta Polenghi's brother Fabio was gunned down on May 19, the day of the bloody military crackdown in Bangkok that brought two months of 'Red Shirt' demonstrations to an end.

'Certainly, the institutions in Thailand have made offers of financial compensation as you well know,' Ms Polenghi said in the letter to Somsakdi Suriyawongse, Thailand's ambassador in Rome.

She described those offers as 'absolutely inappropriate' and said 'we believe it is an obvious attempt to close our mouths and pay back the dignity of our Fabio with a little money'.

Polenghi was killed while working as a freelance photographer covering the protest, in which thousands of Reds brought Bangkok's retail heart to a standstill for two months with demands for snap elections.

Days of street battles between armed troops and protesters during the April and May unrest left over 90 people dead and nearly 1,900 injured, mainly civilians. -- AFP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

The balance my friend is that I will attack the reds, yellows, government, Thaksin and anyone else i can think who is deserving of such treatment. I take no side. All are game.

---

Your attacks on yellows and the Dems are few and far between. Rather more a confused slap rather then an attack. Noted you do attack Newin's mob, but certainly not the Dems.

---

Oh dear, you really need to read more....

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...ad-for-pm.html

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...er-2010-a.html

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...-disunity.html

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...pers-pm-s.html

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...tice-bill.html

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...egitimacy.html

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...igns-army.html

And on and on and on.....so many more....

Why is it that I post so many threads openly critical of this government....

I have also been a very vocal critic of this government about the May murders (note my wording of the thread above...I used "slaughter" for a reason).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

No faction here is worthy of support, except the common folk who have to endure this farce...and are victims of it.

---

Ah now your heart goes out to reds? Or do you think the common folk drive Mercs and shop at Central World etc.

---

No, which is why I post and update threads on a range of issues that relate to the normal people of Thailand, such as land rights, medical malpractice, minimum wage, education, human rights, social security etc....

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...re-system.html

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...defenders.html

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...ppearance.html

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...-normalcy.html

What is it that you do again? Ah yes, sweet fuck all.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

At this point, there isn't anyone who has the best interests of the Thai people at heart amongst the warring political factions, all are after one thing....power and the trappings that go with it.

---

No there are actually several who have been fighting for democracy for years.

---

I'm sure, but none of them are in a position of power or influence and arguing my above point will just make you look really stupid. You support the reds, their leaders are after the return of Thaksin and are closely aligned with Puea Thai. So, I'd think about your point again if I were you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Like I said earlier, it is your perception that is at fault....

---

No, it is very clear.

---

As clear as mud it would appear. You have no idea.

It is your perception that is at fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

THE sister of an Italian photographer killed in Bangkok during this year's anti-government protests accused Thai authorities of offering money to 'close our mouths', in a letter released on Friday.

---

must of confused the locals no end to discover that they can't buy every one off . :rolleyes:

^ Indeed, a much more strongly worded example of this news item exists which says as much, but it can't be posted here I think...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

The balance my friend is that I will attack the reds, yellows, government, Thaksin and anyone else i can think who is deserving of such treatment. I take no side. All are game.

---

Your attacks on yellows and the Dems are few and far between. Rather more a confused slap rather then an attack. Noted you do attack Newin's mob, but certainly not the Dems.

---

Oh dear, you really need to read more....

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...ad-for-pm.html

---

Ok lets go through them 1 by 1. Above is the first one. Where is your stinging comments? Are we to believe your attacks on the Dems is just limited to posting an articles critical to the government? No points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...er-2010-a.html

---

The second one. Yep again lots of reposting. Lots of pictures of reds. Very nice work, much appreciated, but still no comments other then you are not biased.

Do I need to go through the rest?

SD, I am not questioning bias about your reposts as they do contain information about both sides. This is good stuff. What is in question is when you actually comment in your own words. The words are not the same unbiased quality as your reposts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

^ Indeed, a much more strongly worded example of this news item exists which says as much, but it can't be posted here I think...

---

It is posted on Thai Visa. I can't see anything remotely LM in it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Hilarious. Would you believe anyone else in such a position? He can say what he wants, with no responsibility, no one to challenge him, no consequences....it is the antithesis of all that is democratic

---

Carefull itchy, the watching PAD/yellows might just think you are describng the topman there.
Come to think of it you would be right for once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thaihome

In past 4 years Thailand has had one general election and several by-elections which according to at least one International Election Monitoring organization is acknowledged to represent the will of the people.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thaihome

The successor to Thai Rak Thai, after failing to win control of Parliament in the next national election in late 2007, formed a coalition. Later, based on overwhelming evidence of the Deputy Party leaders attempt to bribe local government officials, an ad hoc court, consisting of judges hand-picked by the coup-makers, dissolved that party but allowed most MP’s to keep their seats. In the resulting political scramble a number of dissatisfied factions joined the Democrat Party in electing Abhisit Vejjajiva’s to the Prime Minister’s office. Subsequent by-elections to replace the party executive members of the successor party have resulted in increasing the majority of the Democrat led coalition.

---

So there we have the point of view of Party A, and the point of view of Party B.
nothing different in that.
But as you know the arbitor of the legitimacy of each view is currently at the discretion of the ad hoc military appointed judges, ie tampered judiciary.
They would go with party B, they are party B, they are the same people.
That is where it is undemocratic, I have told you that before, it is not where Amsterdam is aiming he knows he can never win there.
A view re-inforced by the slaying of innocent protestors on the streets of bangkok
Just look at the court decisions since the coup, impartial ??.
no, Amsterdam is setting up for the impartial democratic international court, where the view of Party B isn't loaded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thaihome

The successor to the TRT did not win the election. They won the most seats in Parliament but did not win enough to control a majority. The formed a coalition with a number of smaller parties to control Parliment.

---

The winner of a national election is the party that wins the most seats. The leader of the winning party becomes Prime Minister elect, and gets the right to form the next government either outright or in coalition- but only one national election ever held in Thailand has returned an absolute majority for the winning party, being the re-election of Thaksin. Every other elected government has been a coalition.

^ Indeed, in a Parliamentary Democracy system the party with the most seats can appoint a PM and govern as a minority government, letting Parliamentary Democracy take its course.
Where TH loses it , is he cannot explain where military coup, "coup-issued law", and tampered judiciary sit in a Parliamentary Democracy.