iendo

Have you been shopping on Beach Road?

You are far from the regular 60 year old IMHO. You don't look the part either. 😎

I would say the boys or boyfriends from my past whom I took for granted.

Sounds like a very big tip, considering what the estimated average wage was back then. I was 10 at the time, but I'd love to see what the scene was like in that decade.

Posters on the windows said something about being closed and re-opening in the near future.

He says and jumps straight back into the same political jibber jabber

I get your point, Keith. For me it’s not really about getting annoyed. I’m trying to understand what drives Moses and why he argues the way he does. I’ve been reading a lot of stoic philosophy lately, so I’m more interested in observing the pattern than fighting it. It’s actually quite fascinating to watch how certain discussions unfold and how people react when the topic becomes sensitive. But I agree that there’s no real point in pushing the debate further. Anyone reading the thread can draw their own conclusions. I’m fine leaving it here.

Moses, this isn’t about one detail or one case. It’s about the pattern that appears every time you debate these topics. You often skip the main point and go straight to a tiny side detail, as if addressing that one fragment somehow cancels the rest. When someone gives several examples, you leave most of them untouched and shift the focus to something safer or unrelated. The core issue then disappears, and the discussion goes in circles. When the conversation becomes uncomfortable, you often deflect to things like McCarthyism or “this has always existed in human history”, which avoids the actual point being discussed. At the same time, you accuse others of lying or acting in bad faith instead of addressing their argument directly. You also tend to give half a fact without the broader context, so something technically true ends up being misleading. And you position yourself as the reasonable person who is being misunderstood, while not really engaging all the points people bring to you. This isn’t about politics. It’s about the method. It makes a normal, good-faith conversation very difficult, because the focus constantly moves away from the main argument. I am always willing to admit when someone makes a valid point. That’s how honest discussion works. I also understand that this kind of openness might not be an option for you, depending on your personal situation. But if we want productive conversation here, we need to address the whole argument, not just the smallest part of it.

McCarthyism is also remembered as a period of political repression and fear, which is exactly why it is viewed negatively today. If the best comparison is another period of political persecution, then that only reinforces my point, not the opposite. Sleep well.

If someone can receive seven years in prison because he is disliked by other council members, that actually proves my point about the system not being free. In a functioning legal system, personal relationships or office politics cannot send a person to prison. Only the law and the facts of the case should matter. So if your explanation is that he was punished because colleagues disliked him, that makes the situation even worse, not better.

Whether it was a council meeting in his district or a city meeting does not change the basic fact. You have now confirmed that a deputy was sentenced to seven years for speaking about civilian deaths in Ukraine and calling it a war. That is the point. Since we agree on this case, let’s move to the next one: Maria Ponomarenko Journalist from Barnaul, sentenced to six years under Article 207.3 for posting anti-war messages online. Do you also agree that this happened?

Thank you for confirming the essential point: Gorinov received seven years in prison for making an anti-war statement at a public meeting. The exact job title and the exact number he mentioned do not change the fact that he was prosecuted and imprisoned for publicly speaking about the war. So we agree that this case happened. I would call this progress!

If you prefer to focus on one example at a time, that is completely fine. Let’s start with the first clear case. Alexei Gorinov, Moscow City Council deputy, was sentenced to seven years after saying the words “children are dying in this war” during a recorded city council meeting. This is a Russian court case under Article 207.3, published by Russian authorities. Do you agree that this happened?

But what about the other examples? You seem to be cherry picking.

The example you posted doesn’t contradict what I said. It actually confirms that anti-war expression in Russia leads to threats, police intervention, and removal of artworks. The fact that this is considered “normal” already shows how limited the space for dissent really is.

We are talking about official Russian court documents, not Western TV

Your argument keeps jumping away from the point. You are now denying things that are documented in Russian law and Russian court decisions. If we want a serious discussion, we cannot pretend these things never happened. 1. About the word “war” Putin saying it once in December 2022 changes nothing about the legal situation at that time. Between March 2022 and June 2024, Article 207.3 of the Russian Criminal Code punished anyone who spread “false information” about the army, and hundreds of people were fined or prosecuted specifically for calling the invasion a war. These cases are public and can be checked in Russian court records. A single speech from Putin does not erase those prosecutions. 2. About independent media This is not about “supporting opposition.” Almost every major non-state outlet was blocked, shut down, declared a foreign agent, or forced abroad. Dozhd, Novaya Gazeta, Ekho Moskvy, Meduza, TV Rain, all blocked or dismantled. Some smaller projects remain, but they must label themselves “foreign agents,” cannot earn normal advertising income, and can be shut down at any moment. That is not media freedom. You do not have to like Western media to admit this basic reality. 3. You still did not answer the core question You avoided it again by changing the topic. So let me ask you directly one more time: Do you agree that people in Russia were fined or prosecuted for calling the war a war under Article 207.3 before the law changed? Yes or no? This is not a question about opinion. It is a simple factual question with hundreds of documented cases. If we cannot agree on something as basic as documented court sentences, then what are what's the use of this discussion? I asked some ai help to do some research: These are real legal cases under Article 207.3 of the Russian Criminal Code, introduced in March 2022. This law punished “discrediting the Russian armed forces” — and the authorities explicitly treated calling the invasion a “war” as “discrediting.” Below are some of the clearest examples. 1. Alexei Gorinov — Moscow City Council member Sentence: 7 years in prison (later adjusted) Reason: At a council meeting he said, “children are dying in this war”. Legal basis: Article 207.3 Evidence: Video of the meeting was used as proof. This is one of the most publicized cases because he was punished for merely using the word “war” in an official discussion. 2. Maria Ponomarenko — journalist from Barnaul Sentence: 6 years in prison Reason: Posting online about the attack on the Mariupol theater, using the word “war.” Legal basis: Article 207.3 Her post explicitly said Russia was “waging war.” 3. Ilya Yashin — opposition politician Sentence: 8.5 years in prison Reason: YouTube video where he said that Russian troops committed crimes in Bucha and referred to the conflict as a war. Legal basis: Article 207.3 Even in court, he stated: “I refuse to call it a special military operation; it is a war.” 4. Dmitry Ivanov — student activist Sentence: 8.5 years in prison Reason: Telegram posts calling the invasion a “war.” Legal basis: Article 207.3 5. School teachers and ordinary citizens fined Between March 2022 and early 2024: Thousands of cases in the Russian judicial database show fines of 30,000 to 50,000 rubles for “discrediting the army” — often for: Writing “No to war” on social media Holding a sign with the word “war” Referring to soldiers “dying in a war” in conversations recorded or reported Examples include: • Yelena Osipova (artist, St. Petersburg) Fined for holding a sign that said “No war.” • Multiple teachers across Russia Fired or fined after students recorded them saying “war” in class. • People fined for social media comments like: “Why are we at war?” “This war should stop.” “Russian soldiers die in this senseless war.” These are all documented under the “discrediting” law — again, Article 207.3.

I was lovely for the both of us 😅

It is something like Classic boys. I passed it tonight and that is what I remember.

We are still talking about basic documented facts, not opinions. You are free to support Russia, but we cannot pretend these things do not exist. If we want a good faith discussion, both sides must at least accept verifiable reality. 1. Using the word “war” Your examples do not show what you claim. Putin started using the word only after the Duma changed the law in June 2024. For two years before that, people were fined or prosecuted for calling it a war. There are court cases, charges, and sentences that are publicly documented. We cannot erase that just because the Kremlin later changed strategy. 2. Independent media Saying “there are a lot” is misleading. Almost all major independent outlets were blocked, closed, or forced abroad between 2022 and 2023. What survives inside Russia is tiny, restricted, and can be labeled “foreign agents” at any moment. Again, this is documented by Russian authorities themselves. Ukraine has corruption, but it still has active investigative journalism and actual media pluralism. These are not comparable situations. 3. People falling out of windows, poisonings, disappearances Dismissing all of it as “Western urban legends” is not serious. Many cases were reported by Russian police, Russian hospitals, and even state media before censorship tightened. Some of these people were officials, oligarchs, or critics who died under extremely unusual circumstances inside Russia or inside state buildings. You do not have to blame the state for every case, but denying that these events happened at all is simply not honest. Now I will repeat my question, because you avoided it completely: Do you agree that for years people in Russia could be fined or prosecuted for calling the war a war, that independent newspapers were shut down or forced abroad, and that several critics and businessmen died or disappeared under suspicious circumstances? If we cannot agree on these very basic, fully documented facts, then it becomes impossible to have a discussion with you in good faith.

I understand your point, but I still disagree. Ukraine and Russia are not the same, even if both countries have corruption and political pressure. In Russia, there is no real opposition, no independent media, no investigative journalism, and no way for courts or the public to challenge decisions from the top. People who criticise the government face prison or worse, and there is no outside institution that can force the government to reverse its actions. In Ukraine, corruption is a serious problem, but the difference is that things can still be exposed. Journalists publish investigations, courts sometimes block decisions, civil society protests, and international partners can pressure the government to undo illegal steps, as happened in the NABU case. None of that is possible in Russia. And before we continue, I would also like to know if you agree with what I said earlier. Calling the war a war can lead to prison in Russia. Independent newspapers are closed. People fall out of windows or disappear after criticising the state. If we want to have a good faith discussion, we cannot deny that these things happen. Do you agree with that part?

I understand that you think Western media also uses propaganda. I agree that every country presents information in its own way and that you always need to look at multiple sources. But the situation in Russia cannot be compared to the West. The scale, the methods, and the consequences are completely differen In Russia, people are arrested for criticism, journalists disappear, political opponents fall from balconies, businessmen die under strange circumstances, and even using the word “war” can lead to prison. That is not an “urban legend.” It is documented by Russian courts, Russian laws, and human rights organisations. No Western country arrests people for using the wrong word, or shuts down every independent newspaper. So yes, the West has bias, but it does not have a system where public criticism automatically leads to prison. That difference matters. About Ukraine: I know the NABU case you mentioned, and it shows that Ukraine still struggles with corruption and political pressure. But it also shows the opposite of your conclusion. Things came out because: journalists could report it, EU institutions stepped in, the government had to reverse its actions under international pressure Those mechanisms only work in countries where transparency still exists. In Russia, nothing like this would even appear in the news, and there would be no external institution able to intervene. So, corruption in Ukraine does not mean Ukraine and Russia are “the same.” It means Ukraine is still chaotic and imperfect, but it is not a closed authoritarian system where everything is suppressed. That difference is important when we talk about propaganda or compare political systems.

I can tick Boystown off my list. I went inside Toyboy and X-Boys. The first had around twelve to fifteen boys at most, and the latter had a show that I had not seen in Pattaya for a long time. Make of that what you will. The drinks in Toyboy were 280, and 380 in X-Boys. This included four ice cubes that did a good job filling the glass. For twinks, I think JC is the better option, and I will not return to Boystown in the coming months. I might give it another try when the disco next to Toyboy reopens.

You can place your orders now.

I remember 2 years ago, they moved that disco idea to the opposite side of the soi. Is that still going? Was also a bit weird and i think a lot of straights.