« Prev Page 4 of 8 2 3 4 5 6 Next » Please log in to reply 189 replies to this topic

[alex_aka_P]

hanuman1, on 2010-09-01 18:10:16, said:

I was referring to countries that consider themselves democratic.

Well than, I am also feel and consider myself as a Chinese Emperor. Am I a Chinese Emperor, or should I be sent to the nearest psycho clinic?

hanuman1, on 2010-09-01 18:10:16, said:

And I never said anything about 'pure'.

No, you did not. I did it while asking you for a sample. "Consider themselves as a sample" will not work here (as it leads to the clinic, as we see), thus you should provide a GOOD sample as long as you started to mention about "democratic countries".
That's what I asked (and you've failed, YAWN).

Edited by alex_aka_P, 2010-09-01 18:29:03.

[rubl]

alex_aka_P, on 2010-09-01 18:26:41, said:

hanuman1, on 2010-09-01 18:10:16, said:

I was referring to countries that consider themselves democratic.

Well than, I am also feel and consider myself as a Chinese Emperor. Am I a Chinese Emperor, or should I be sent to the nearest psycho clinic?

hanuman1, on 2010-09-01 18:10:16, said:

And I never said anything about 'pure'.

No, you did not. I did it while asking you for a sample. "Consider themselves as a sample" will not work here (as it leads to the clinic, as we see), thus you should provide a GOOD sample as long as you started to mention about "democratic countries".
That's what I asked (and you've failed, YAWN).

Failed ? As emperor you demand an answer or some-one fails ? Maybe the psycho clinic you mentioned would be the right place  

[hanuman1]

alex_aka_P, on 2010-09-01 18:26:41, said:

hanuman1, on 2010-09-01 18:10:16, said:

I was referring to countries that consider themselves democratic.

Well than, I am also feel and consider myself as a Chinese Emperor. Am I a Chinese Emperor, or should I be sent to the nearest psycho clinic?

hanuman1, on 2010-09-01 18:10:16, said:

And I never said anything about 'pure'.

No, you did not. I did it while asking you for a sample. "Consider themselves as a sample" will not work here (as it leads to the clinic, as we see), thus you should provide a GOOD sample as long as you started to mention about "democratic countries".
That's what I asked (and you've failed, YAWN).

Out of sympathy for everyone else reading this thread apart from you, I now declare this pointless exercise in pedantry CLOSED.

Now please go back to sleep.

Edited by hanuman1, 2010-09-01 18:38:59.

[asiawatcher]

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics.  Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

[TAWP]

I am not convinced that the photo is fake.
None of the 'proofs' sofar posted can be guaranteed to not be due to compression artifacts.


If we are talking creds, I have worked for a professional photo company that apart from developing film on paper and celluloid also did digital retouching for print, anything ranging from information booklets for museums to center fold photo shots for Hustler magazine.

Aaanyway...

[jayboy]

asiawatcher, on 2010-09-01 18:52:39, said:

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics.  Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

Because for most of the outside and informed world Thaksin - despite all his flaws (and they are many) - represents more than anyone else the Thai majority.So despite the rants and lies and froth of the criminal corrupt feudalist elite, the world at large recognises the truth

[hanuman1]

asiawatcher, on 2010-09-01 18:52:39, said:

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics.  Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

Because to you he's a crim, but to Mandela he just 'maybe a crim'.

And Taksin would look a complete idiot if Mandela's office denied the meeting took place. Why would he risk that? The meeting would appear to be a matter of public knowledge. Surely it would be pretty easy to get an official confirmation/denial of it happening.

For all Taksin's faults, I think he certainly knows a thing or two about marketing. It doesn't make any sense to fake such a verifiable event.

[Buchholz]

Soutpeel, on 2010-09-01 16:48:58, said:

I personally think this meeting never took place, as the court case against the guy who killed Nelson Mandela's great granddaughter in a car crash was postponed to August 27 by the Johannesburg Magistrate's Court, so somehow, dont think he would have been in mood for a photo-op with the esteemed Ex-PM of Thailand.

That's the same date Noppadon said for the other alleged photo with Nelson's wife. Anyone wanna give a crack at whether this one is fake or not?

[rubl]

jayboy, on 2010-09-01 19:13:16, said:

asiawatcher, on 2010-09-01 18:52:39, said:

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics.  Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

Because for most of the outside and informed world Thaksin - despite all his flaws (and they are many) - represents more than anyone else the Thai majority.So despite the rants and lies and froth of the criminal corrupt feudalist elite, the world at large recognises the truth

You have a way with words, jayboy. I think some part of this world we live on also recognizes K. Thaksin is part of a criminally corrupt elite which dominated their part of the country in a paternalistic way keeping the masses down and them rich.
Of course none of this has anything to do with whether the photo is true or not  

[Hakuchi]

TAWP, on 2010-09-01 18:56:34, said:

I am not convinced that the photo is fake.
None of the 'proofs' sofar posted can be guaranteed to not be due to compression artifacts.


If we are talking creds, I have worked for a professional photo company that apart from developing film on paper and celluloid also did digital retouching for print, anything ranging from information booklets for museums to center fold photo shots for Hustler magazine.

Aaanyway...

I agree with your point  about the compression artifacts,...

but your self claimed creds are dubious worthless as they come from an anonymous in an internet discussion. even if true, you just could have been their coffee boy or office cleaning lady and still work for them.  
better show your professionalism with your knowledge and content in your  comments.

[Englander]

asiawatcher, on 2010-09-01 18:52:39, said:

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics.  Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

Apart from the ANC with him in charge being responsible for the genocide of white farmers, crimes that are happening to this day, and him fathering children and having nothing to do with them he's full of ethics.

[Buchholz]

asiawatcher, on 2010-09-01 18:52:39, said:

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics.  Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

He needed a refill on his Ugandan SIM card so he asked the telecommunications guru of Africa to hook him up and Thaksin subsequently brought him one from the headquarters of his regional distribution center.

I think he's pointing at the Research and Development wing of the huge complex.

Edited by Buchholz, 2010-09-01 19:39:24.

[TAWP]

Hakuchi, on 2010-09-01 19:31:46, said:

TAWP, on 2010-09-01 18:56:34, said:

I am not convinced that the photo is fake.
None of the 'proofs' sofar posted can be guaranteed to not be due to compression artifacts.


If we are talking creds, I have worked for a professional photo company that apart from developing film on paper and celluloid also did digital retouching for print, anything ranging from information booklets for museums to center fold photo shots for Hustler magazine.

Aaanyway...

I agree with your point  about the compression artifacts,...

but your self claimed creds are dubious worthless as they come from an anonymous in an internet discussion. even if true, you just could have been their coffee boy or office cleaning lady and still work for them.  

To be overly obvious, I was one of the people doing the touch-ups of the digital images we got in.

Hakuchi, on 2010-09-01 19:31:46, said:

better show your professionalism with your knowledge and content in your  comments.

I did. And I say that we cannot say anything for sure yet.

[Buchholz]

TAWP, on 2010-09-01 18:56:34, said:

center fold photo shots for Hustler magazine.

Please post proof of that.  

[rubl]

TAWP, on 2010-09-01 19:41:30, said:

I did. And I say that we cannot say anything for sure yet.

Correct. Let's stop this fruitless discussion. Wait and see if we can get news from our correspondent in South Africa or the Embassy here  . The 27th is barely a week ago and this photo-op wouldn't be important news unless someone starts/started asking questions.

[TAWP]

Development into the issue: http://saiyasombut.w...nelson-mandela/

[jayboy]

rubl, on 2010-09-01 19:27:18, said:

jayboy, on 2010-09-01 19:13:16, said:

asiawatcher, on 2010-09-01 18:52:39, said:

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics.  Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

Because for most of the outside and informed world Thaksin - despite all his flaws (and they are many) - represents more than anyone else the Thai majority.So despite the rants and lies and froth of the criminal corrupt feudalist elite, the world at large recognises the truth

You have a way with words, jayboy. I think some part of this world we live on also recognizes K. Thaksin is part of a criminally corrupt elite which dominated their part of the country in a paternalistic way keeping the masses down and them rich.
Of course none of this has anything to do with whether the photo is true or not  

As I say I don't know whether the photo is true or not.And the woman with Thaksin is Winnie, not his current squeeze but his former wife - arch bitch and murderess.Life ain't straight forward.

[rubl]

TAWP, on 2010-09-01 19:49:11, said:

Development into the issue: http://saiyasombut.w...nelson-mandela/

So K. Thaksin met Mr. Mandela in a courtesy call, not an official meeting. The Foundation has no photo's. Strange K. Thaksin also had a courtesy call to Mandela's ex. As for the photo's still no official comment. Why did K. Noppadon have to say they were real and not edited?

Edited by rubl, 2010-09-01 20:02:31.

[Hakuchi]

TAWP, on 2010-09-01 19:41:30, said:

Hakuchi, on 2010-09-01 19:31:46, said:

better show your professionalism with your knowledge and content in your  comments.

I did. And I say that we cannot say anything for sure yet.

yeah, keep up with the good work.

don't need to mention your creds.  specially when it makes you sound like the typical fake spotter in an old internet meme.




Beside that,  in many photo of Thaksin it always look to me like a life size cardboard cut of him. Specially when taken in front. The one with Mandelas wife is another example for it.  But i think he was real there, he just have a somewhat strange appearance/look.

Edit: failed to verify the information provided by Buchholz. I meant of course Thaksin in the photo with Winni, Mandelas ex-wife, where he looks a litte bit like a life size cardboard cut.(IMHO)

Edited by Hakuchi, 2010-09-01 20:30:29.

[Roachiebkk]

That's not even Mandela that's the dead kid from Diffrent Strokes! Gary wots his name.

[Roachiebkk]

jayboy, on 2010-09-01 19:54:45, said:

rubl, on 2010-09-01 19:27:18, said:

jayboy, on 2010-09-01 19:13:16, said:

asiawatcher, on 2010-09-01 18:52:39, said:

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics.  Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

Because for most of the outside and informed world Thaksin - despite all his flaws (and they are many) - represents more than anyone else the Thai majority.So despite the rants and lies and froth of the criminal corrupt feudalist elite, the world at large recognises the truth

You have a way with words, jayboy. I think some part of this world we live on also recognizes K. Thaksin is part of a criminally corrupt elite which dominated their part of the country in a paternalistic way keeping the masses down and them rich.
Of course none of this has anything to do with whether the photo is true or not  

As I say I don't know whether the photo is true or not.And the woman with Thaksin is Winnie, not his current squeeze but his former wife - arch bitch and murderess.Life ain't straight forward.

Hmm, actually this photo looks more shopped than the Nelson shot. He seems to be standing awfully close to her........looks like a 'cut and shut'

[def2708]

whybother, on 2010-09-01 08:37:01, said:

rak sa_ngop, on 2010-09-01 08:09:36, said:

Strange how the back of Tacky's hand is 'white' and yet his fingers are 'black'!

Shadows?

dirty hands????

[zthyadat]

Insight, on 2010-09-01 09:15:53, said:

If you check the date of this blog post with photos of other people (inc Bill Clinton) in the same room also with Mandela, who is also in the same attire as the Thaksin photo, one could conclude the photos were taken around the World Cup period.

That's not the same shirt Mandela is wearing, and the books behind the desk are in a completely different arrangement.

[Roachiebkk]

Wasn't there something mentioned in the Paul Handley book about some old royal photos that had Mr T transposed into them?

[zthyadat]

I saved it and then opened it in Lightroom and the fingers are more white - sometimes it is just the computer rendering that makes the difference. Not saying it isn't a fake, just that the fingers argument is weak.