I try to be amicable, but how am I supposed to defend my views when my mature opposition simply calls it half-baked and that’s it. What’s more how have you defended your own ill-founded opinions by saying that? You once got the matter of my background wrong, so I guess I have a little bit more of a basis for using the word “ill-founded” than you with “half-baked”. You do realize this debate could be so much more than a mud-slinging match if there was content to be debated. But I still don’t even know if the half baked comment was directed to Ladyboy or me, I’m assuming at my own risk here.

Strong confirmation that you WERE telling the truth about being Thai born and bred. Sorry about that.

Apology accepted, but I reserve the right to bring it up to against you at all times. Nah, that would be childish wouldn’t it.

PS: BTW do you prefer Thaksin these days? A lot of my friends do.

What do you mean by prefer? If I could pick anyone to be Prime Minister I wouldn’t pick Thaksin, not by a million miles. If I am constrained by whatever reason to pick between Thaksin and a royally appointed Prime Minister, I would pick Thaksin based on HMK’s track record with royally appointed prime ministers.

I think you will find it difficult to categorize where I stand, but one thing’s for sure, I am definitely for the curtailment of royal powers and influence, for the repeal of lese majeste, and the opening of all royal activities to public scrutiny as well as forcing royals to pay taxes and swear allegiance to the Constitution.

At the same time, I support bringing Thaksin to trial for his crimes and clearly enforce the rule of law. However, as much as the curtailment of royal powers will not happen anytime soon, same is with Thaksin. At this point for Thailand I don’t believe any politician will make much of a difference. The people must do it for themselves. We have to change as a nation in order to reach the point where the rule of law or curtailment of extra-constitutional powers is a feasible dream rather than hope some preferred big guy will do it for you.

Teth: your summary of how YOU think I think is half ripe and half raw i.e. half-baked. Strong confirmation that you WERE telling the truth about being Thai born and bred. Sorry about that.

Frank Lee

PS: BTW do you prefer Thaksin these days? A lot of my friends do.

No tongue-in-cheek, although literally speaking the tongue can never be on the cheek…

I was not being sarcastic in my post, I totally was being sincere in my wrong call made about your wrong call.

I shall tread with caution here because I don’t detect sarcasm in your post, but do suspect it… In any case, in my time of trawling the internet, so many things are said tongue-in-cheek that are not meant to be tongue-in-cheek…

Never got to see your reply here.

your post #34 was spot on

I stand corrected, you had no idea he was being sarcastic in his tone.

I do ask you read the last sentence that was the giveaway to his sarcasm when mariner wrote:

“How many western agencies can boast initiatives which neither harm the environment not have any human costs?”

Since nothing and no one in life is perfect….

maybe too blind by your perception, you don’t read things with an open mind and take it for what it is, rather for what you would prefer it to be, so you can claim the moral high ground and score points.

No, sir, its more that I am unfamiliar with Mariner and what he posts. You, however, didn’t manage to avoid the high horse when criticizing me either. Surely with your open mind, you did not assume that sarcasm is unable to fly above others heads. As for “sarcasm laden”, Mariner’s post was far more understated and satirical (if it is, and I still debate that until I get to see more of Mariner’s posts) than your regular sarcastic piece for you seem to underestimate the ignorant and delusional views I’ve experienced (and once held on to). Sometimes the lines are very difficult to spot won’t you say?

RE: scoring points, please find out where it is that I attack Mariner to score points. I questioned what I believed were to be his views and put forward those questions. I’d like to think that I argue with people not for the benefit of observers, scorekeepers, or the “I’m-more-anti-monarchist-than-thou” brigade but to iterate, argue, and exchange views with whomever it is I reply to. But as this is a public forum (of sorts) I must also listen to your criticism and to others’ comments about what I say.

have they (or you) even gone so far as congratulating Thongchai on this historic ICT where they *gasp* debated the role of HMK, and the discussion, while not open, was a step forward in the direction of debating Royal roles in public discourse.

I haven’t been criticizing how anti-royal academics are and personally do not want to join that debate. I haven’t congratulated them yet, so let me do that now. Yes, it is a step forward for more openness and rational discussion and infinitely more courageous than what I am doing here and yes their actions deserve this praise.

So, it seems obvious that this is a good place for ordinary people to start doing something that will begin a process of change. To sit back & blame the big players, while waiting for a squeaky-clean hero to come along & save the situation won’t do anything. There’s been ample evidence that this merely perpetuates the situation.

I agree with you on this point, but I am not simply sitting back and doing nothing, sir. Plus, regardless of what I decide to “start doing”, is my argument still valid?

RE: Your criticism of Mariner’s post.

re-read his post till you get the sarcasm laden words he used.

I have a hint on how you might just get the sarcastic wit and humor.

Get off your moral high horse! Mariner’s final quote was the confirmation of sarcasm: how can any project not have consequences?

ahaaa

maybe too blind by your perception, you don’t read things with an open mind and take it for what it is, rather for what you would prefer it to be, so you can claim the moral high ground and score points.

don’t be a poster like Republican or Somsak….

have they (or you) even gone so far as congratulating Thongchai on this historic ICT where they *gasp* debated the role of HMK, and the discussion, while not open, was a step forward in the direction of debating Royal roles in public discourse.