Sad to see a lot of 'us and them' posts going on at the moment - so I'll try to avoid doing it myself.
To answer the original post, the comment made in #101 in the other thread is incorrect. Period.
There are a multitude of subtleties and nuances in the rules about how ATC is done - the interpretation of some fundamental points differs between countries. A couple of principles can normally be assumed. First that ATC will have a reason for taking any particular decision or issuing any particular instruction. It won't always be the decision that suits everybody best because we don't live in an ideal world but it will be made with safety in mind (i.e. controllers do not normally issue a clearance that will not result in a safe outcome). Remember, too, that no pilot will have all of the information that the controller has and so it is not possible for a pilot to second guess the reason for a decision. Unfortunately it is not possible to explain all of the factors that affect an controller's decision making process in a Pprune post - that's why it takes a while to train to be a controller.
The second principle is that the pilot is responsible for the safety of his/her aircraft and that may mean that, in extremis, the pilot does something contrary to the rules or an ATC instruction. In this case, just as a controller will have to do if rules are broken, the pilot will have to have a darned good justification.
Oh, what the hell................. I like to think that I'm a fairly easy-going sort but I do get a little riled when an idiot who - if his/her profile is true - has the experience level of PPL and nothing more than a C172 under their control comes out with tripe like #101. Not only is it out and out wrong but is plants ridiculous ideas into other people's minds.