Prev Page 2 of 2 1 2 Please log in to reply 31 replies to this topic

[bigbamboo]

Arkady, on Today, 13:08 , said:

"Abhisit sees 'whitewash' move behind reconciliation billl"

A master of understatement.

Well spotted, Mr Wishywashy.

But shouldn't that be 'reconciliation bin'?.... much more appropriate considering it's rubbish.

Edited by bigbamboo, 15 minutes ago.

[jayboy]

rixalex, on 33 minutes ago, said:

jayboy, on Today, 14:02 , said:

As to foreign views most were sympathethic to the redshirt cause.If you can name a few reputable sources who took a different view let's hear about them.

It's not a question of who can find the most links to Western media articles that either were sympathetic to the red shirts or weren't, it's a case of whether based on a selection of Western media articles we can surmise the feeling of the ENTIRE CIVILISED WORLD... which was precisely what you did without batting an eyelid.

Well you appear not to be able to find any!

[OzMick]

jayboy, on 25 minutes ago, said:

rixalex, on 41 minutes ago, said:

jayboy, on Today, 14:02 , said:

If your thesis is correct it's odd that the Thai people elected a party with strong affiliations to the redshirt movement to a comfortable victory.

It's only odd if you consider that the general election was some sort of a judgement on what Thai people thought of the red shirts and the actions of the red shirts. I don't believe it was. I believe it was a judgement based on which government they thought might do most for them, and when you consider what election promises PTP made, compared with what election promises the Dems made, the result was so great surprise.

I'm not saying redshirt support was the only reason for the PTP victory but to deny its major contributory significance seems wilfully obtuse.

As is saying that 92+ deaths blamed on Abhisit didn't affect his election chances.

[jayboy]

OzMick, on 17 minutes ago, said:

jayboy, on 25 minutes ago, said:

rixalex, on 41 minutes ago, said:

jayboy, on Today, 14:02 , said:

If your thesis is correct it's odd that the Thai people elected a party with strong affiliations to the redshirt movement to a comfortable victory.

It's only odd if you consider that the general election was some sort of a judgement on what Thai people thought of the red shirts and the actions of the red shirts. I don't believe it was. I believe it was a judgement based on which government they thought might do most for them, and when you consider what election promises PTP made, compared with what election promises the Dems made, the result was so great surprise.

I'm not saying redshirt support was the only reason for the PTP victory but to deny its major contributory significance seems wilfully obtuse.

As is saying that 92+ deaths blamed on Abhisit didn't affect his election chances.

I agree.To preside over the military's killing of innocent civilians does not improve any politician's election prospects.

[MILT]

jayboy, on Today, 13:17 , said:

OzMick, on Today, 09:46 , said:

whybother, on Today, 09:35 , said:

OzMick, on Today, 09:31 , said:

"And the amnesty law must distinguish between protest leaders and regular people...."

Well there goes another basic priciple of democracy.

There is but one law for all, namely that law which governs all law, the law of our Creator, the law of humanity, justice, equity -- the law of nature and of nations.  Edmund Burke

I think he's referring to "regular people who just happened to be there" and "protest leaders who organised and incited the regular people".

The followers should be given amnesty, and the organisers / inciters shouldn't.

A law can be applied proportionally to degree of responsibility and participation, but should be applied to all. Even if it was merely a reprimand for civil disobedience, the message that this was NOT the right thing to do has to be proclaimed.

But in the view of millions of Thais the redshirt protest was the right thing, a entirely justifiable stand against anti democratic forces - in the tradition of 1973,1976 and 1992.This was also the view shared around the civilised world.So please do not assume that your distorted morality is taken as the norm.

Paleeees In the view of other millions of Thais the coup was the right thing to do to stop Thaskin in his tracts. Nothing more! Thaskin didn't like getting spanked and has refused to trust the legal system Why? Because they can't be bought like votes seemingly can or promised things that don't amount to squat. The view shared around the civilized world? (What world are you talking about?) From the news media? That's a laugh.

[MILT]

jayboy, on Today, 13:17 , said:

OzMick, on Today, 09:46 , said:

whybother, on Today, 09:35 , said:

OzMick, on Today, 09:31 , said:

"And the amnesty law must distinguish between protest leaders and regular people...."

Well there goes another basic priciple of democracy.

There is but one law for all, namely that law which governs all law, the law of our Creator, the law of humanity, justice, equity -- the law of nature and of nations.  Edmund Burke

I think he's referring to "regular people who just happened to be there" and "protest leaders who organised and incited the regular people".

The followers should be given amnesty, and the organisers / inciters shouldn't.

A law can be applied proportionally to degree of responsibility and participation, but should be applied to all. Even if it was merely a reprimand for civil disobedience, the message that this was NOT the right thing to do has to be proclaimed.

But in the view of millions of Thais the redshirt protest was the right thing, a entirely justifiable stand against anti democratic forces - in the tradition of 1973,1976 and 1992.This was also the view shared around the civilised world.So please do not assume that your distorted morality is taken as the norm.

Paleeees In the view of other millions of Thais the coup was the right thing to do to stop Thaskin in his tracts. Nothing more! Thaskin didn't like getting spanked and has refused to trust the legal system Why? Because they can't be bought like votes seemingly can or promised things that don't amount to squat. The view shared around the civilized world? (What world are you talking about?) From the news media? That's a laugh.

[anterian]

When I read the comments from both sides of this debate I am reminded of the great divide in perception between Darwin and Bishop Usher. A controversy which led to the famous debate between Wilberforce and Huxley http://spiritualmean...el-wilberforce/
This debate continues to this day so I guess the "Great Thaivisa debate" will continue indefinitely. The question is, are Ozmick and friends Darwinites or Usherites