Has Thaksin finally found a way of returning to Thailand ‘through the front door’?

[candide]

4 hours ago, robblok said:

I am talking pre stepdown anyway reds have their scum bombers and the yellow has their stupid guards too. But you only seem to remember yellow violence. Not the mob and terrorists controlled by Charlem. How bias, then again Thaksin lovers often are. 

 

https://www.khaosodenglish.com/news/crimecourtscalamity/crime-crime/2017/03/18/firearms-explosives-seized-redshirt-djs-house/

 

No weapons of any sort ever used by the reds. all true angels.

I never said red shirts have not been violent. What I wrote was that they always protested to get elections or to support elected governments, while the yellow shirts always protested against elections and elected government. That's a fact, not an opinion.

BTW, the bombing you mentioned in your previous post occurred more than one month after Yingluck dissolved the parliament, not before.

[billd766]

On 7/30/2021 at 2:24 PM, possum1931 said:

"no farang i ever knew liked the 90 reporting."  Except the ones who live near their local immigration offices. ????

I live 65km from my Immi office in Kamphaeng Phet but I go to KPP once a month for a bulk shop and I slot the 90 report into one of my trips.

[NoshowJones]

7 minutes ago, billd766 said:

I live 65km from my Immi office in Kamphaeng Phet but I go to KPP once a month for a bulk shop and I slot the 90 report into one of my trips.

I do the exact same on the motorbike, I am 60 Ks from my IO.

[robblok]

33 minutes ago, candide said:

I never said red shirts have not been violent. What I wrote was that they always protested to get elections or to support elected governments, while the yellow shirts always protested against elections and elected government. That's a fact, not an opinion.

BTW, the bombing you mentioned in your previous post occurred more than one month after Yingluck dissolved the parliament, not before.

So violence is good if it supports a elected government. Your naive IMHO especially if its about a crooked government. Plenty of dictators and strong man have their own mob just like the red shirts. Sorry but I just look at violence and violence is violence and bombs are bomb no matter who uses them. 

 

Are you saying my friend had no right to protest against YL I though that one could always protests against a government and during those protests bombs were thrown at people by redshirts. So its ok that they bomb peaceful protesters ? Bit rich coming from you. Both sides used violence and it should be condemned on both sides. That is a fact too. 

[candide]

19 minutes ago, robblok said:

So violence is good if it supports a elected government. Your naive IMHO especially if its about a crooked government. Plenty of dictators and strong man have their own mob just like the red shirts. Sorry but I just look at violence and violence is violence and bombs are bomb no matter who uses them. 

 

Are you saying my friend had no right to protest against YL I though that one could always protests against a government and during those protests bombs were thrown at people by redshirts. So its ok that they bomb peaceful protesters ? Bit rich coming from you. Both sides used violence and it should be condemned on both sides. That is a fact too. 

Please stop putting words into my mouth. 

[Mr Meeseeks]

22 minutes ago, robblok said:

So violence is good if it supports a elected government. Your naive IMHO especially if its about a crooked government. Plenty of dictators and strong man have their own mob just like the red shirts. Sorry but I just look at violence and violence is violence and bombs are bomb no matter who uses them. 

 

Are you saying my friend had no right to protest against YL I though that one could always protests against a government and during those protests bombs were thrown at people by redshirts. So its ok that they bomb peaceful protesters ? Bit rich coming from you. Both sides used violence and it should be condemned on both sides. That is a fact too. 

Which side set the precedent of using violence or the threat of violence to achieve their aims? Yellows.

 

Which side was the first to actually use violence? Yellows.

 

Which side raided and occupied govt. house which resulted in clashes with Police and several dead? Yellows.

 

Which side shut down the international airports, costing the country billions? Yellows.

 

Which side started a border conflict with Cambodia resulting in needless deaths on both sides? Yellows.

 

Which side used the threat of violence and violence to force court decisions against their leaders and depose a prime minister? Yellows.

 

Which side is supported by the elite and serves their interests above those of the general public and the country as a whole? Yellows.

Edited August 1, 2021 by Mr Meeseeks

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

Which side set the precedent of using violence or the threat of violence to achieve their aims? Yellows.

 

Which side was the first to actually use violence? Yellows.

 

Which side raided and occupied govt. house which resulted in clashes with Police and several dead? Yellows.

 

Which side shut down the international airports, costing the country billions? Yellows.

 

Which side started a border conflict with Cambodia resulting in needless deaths on both sides? Yellows.

 

Which side used the threat of violence and violence to force court decisions against their leaders and depose a prime minister? Yellows.

 

Which side is supported by the elite and serves their interests above those of the general public and the country as a whole? Yellows.

Yes so that makes violence of the other side on innocent protesters ok. Not to mention the violence in BKK burning of buildings. Thugs are Thugs no matter what side they are on. Violence should be condemned on all sides not just on the side you like. I guess that does not suit your agenda. 

 

Shall i make a list of all the crimes of the red's would make a nice list like yours too. Fact is the ones doing the violence on both sides are evil and Charlem had a big hand in it and he is Thaksins right hand man. So violence sanctioned by the highest levels of the PTP.

 

I remember the protests with Charlem in public saying he could not protect them while secretly sending out thugs. Sounds like a great party the PTP.

 

Violence is violence not sure what people like you are thinking. Now they want Thaksin back.. such a great idea let the war start again. Better options should be sought. 

 

Anyway i remember Thaksin his famous words that he would be there when the bullets would fly.. where was he ? A man of his word.. in hiding and his family safe while he let his supporters die for his cause.

 

I say it again if I have to choose between Prayut and Thaksin i choose neither. Both are evil.

 

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

Yes so that makes violence of the other side on innocent protesters ok. Not to mention the violence in BKK burning of buildings. Thugs are Thugs no matter what side they are on. Violence should be condemned on all sides not just on the side you like. I guess that does not suit your agenda. 

 

Shall i make a list of all the crimes of the red's would make a nice list like yours too. Fact is the ones doing the violence on both sides are evil and Charlem had a big hand in it and he is Thaksins right hand man. So violence sanctioned by the highest levels of the PTP.

 

I remember the protests with Charlem in public saying he could not protect them while secretly sending out thugs. Sounds like a great party the PTP.

 

Violence is violence not sure what people like you are thinking. Now they want Thaksin back.. such a great idea let the war start again. Better options should be sought. 

 

Anyway i remember Thaksin his famous words that he would be there when the bullets would fly.. where was he ? A man of his word.. in hiding and his family safe while he let his supporters die for his cause.

 

I say it again if I have to choose between Prayut and Thaksin i choose neither. Both are evil.

 

 

It's like a broken record with the false equivalences between elected governments and the results of military coups.

 

But you still don't get it so let me put it as simply as I can for you:

If there were no yellow shirts there would have been no red shirts. Cause and effect.

If the democratic process was allowed to work without coups and outside interference then there would be more efficient governance and less useless turnips in power as we have now.

 

Capiche?

[zhounan]

He could make a plastic surgery

[robblok]

13 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

It's like a broken record with the false equivalences between elected governments and the results of military coups.

 

But you still don't get it so let me put it as simply as I can for you:

If there were no yellow shirts there would have been no red shirts. Cause and effect.

If the democratic process was allowed to work without coups and outside interference then there would be more efficient governance and less useless turnips in power as we have now.

 

Capiche?

I always thought that protests were allowed in Democracies. You can prevent them by ruling fairly would you not say. So basically if Thaksin was not so corrupt the normal yellows would not have wanted him out. Capiche.

 

I still remember this one

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/23/thai-gunmen-kill-girl-anti-government-rally

 

5 year old girl at a yellow protest dies with no reds in sigh all of a sudden 2 trucks drive in spraying the protests with bullets and throw grenades. Such nice people those red shirts.

 

Id rather not have those violent thugs in power just like i dont want the current mob

Capiche. 

[candide]

6 minutes ago, robblok said:

I always thought that protests were allowed in Democracies. You can prevent them by ruling fairly would you not say. So basically if Thaksin was not so corrupt the normal yellows would not have wanted him out. Capiche.

 

I still remember this one

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/23/thai-gunmen-kill-girl-anti-government-rally

 

5 year old girl at a yellow protest dies with no reds in sigh all of a sudden 2 trucks drive in spraying the protests with bullets and throw grenades. Such nice people those red shirts.

 

Id rather not have those violent thugs in power just like i dont want the current mob

Capiche. 

It's allowed to protest against any government. It' allowed to protest in order to ask for new elections.

 

It's not allowed to protest in order to put into power an unelected fascist regime (Suthep's government of the "people") and to block elections.

[robblok]

1 minute ago, candide said:

It's allowed to protest against any government. It' allowed to protest in order to ask for new elections.

 

It's not allowed to protest in order to put into power an unelected fascist regime (Suthep's government of the "people") and to block elections.

Lot of these protests and the one where that 5 year old girl was murdered by red terrorists was to have YL step down. 

 

So a perfectly legal protests and what happens reds come with two trucks spraying bullets and grenades. 

 

Sorry but I think both sides are evil and given the history i rather not have any of them in power.

 

Realistic.. probably not. However i take no side i dislike both and see both as evil. So i dont support either side and will debate with those claiming that one side is much better then the other. They are not both used horrible violence both are corrupt. How can anyone support either side is strange to me.

 

Both are certainly no strangers to violence and corruption. Both suppress bad news and hide the truth. Too similar both sides once in power consolidate power eliminate opponents ect ect. Tarit anyone ? I mean worked both sides. So many of them have worked on both sides. 

[candide]

12 minutes ago, robblok said:

Lot of these protests and the one where that 5 year old girl was murdered by red terrorists was to have YL step down. 

BS! She was already in caretaker mode since 13 December. They protested in order to seize power and get an unelected government of the "people" a la Suthep. And was not at all allowed by the Constitution.

Edited August 1, 2021 by candide

[zzaa09]

7 hours ago, Myran said:

I sure hope not. Him and all the other dinosaurs, including the ones in uniform, should leave the ruling of the country to younger people who actually care about it.

A romantic notion, to be sure. Replacing dinosaur tradition with fresh younger blood, as has been practiced the world over forever - yet never comes to fruition.

Can't be guaranteed that a younger set, even with good intentions towards the commons, will not be engaged with the same self-serving vested skullduggery that has plagued the political game from time immemorial - 

[robblok]

2 hours ago, candide said:

BS! She was already in caretaker mode since 13 December. They protested in order to seize power and get an unelected government of the "people" a la Suthep. And was not at all allowed by the Constitution.

 

Sure that makes it all right then for the reds to gun down kids. The army also told the reds in the past not to protest and burn BKK but they did and got shot. Is that ok then too ? or are we going to say no that is not ok but this killing was.

Maybe its time for you to see things how they are, both sides committed violence and killed for whatever they believed in. And you seem to think that either side are a good choice. Thank you but im not yet that far gone.

 

If I have to choose between two evils i rather not choose at all. Mind you there were bombings and all before her caretaker mode too. I just found this incident striking kept with me for a long time. I still remembered it how bad it was back then. Neither side is a solution.  Future forward might be at least they don't have blood on their hands like the other sides.

 

 

[geisha]

On 7/29/2021 at 4:17 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

There was never any restriction for him to come back to Thailand. He has Thai citizenship, he could and can return anytime.

The only thing which holds him back is the fact that he thinks he is above the law. He is not. How many years does he need to understand that simple concept?

There are many who think they are above the law ! Corruption ? Even the best world wide have been corrupt. Looking  at the present leaders , I think he’d do a much better job , he’s learnt a lot since then.

[candide]

7 minutes ago, robblok said:

 

Sure that makes it all right then for the reds to gun down kids. The army also told the reds in the past not to protest and burn BKK but they did and got shot. Is that ok then too ? or are we going to say no that is not ok but this killing was.

Maybe its time for you to see things how they are, both sides committed violence and killed for whatever they believed in. And you seem to think that either side are a good choice. Thank you but im not yet that far gone.

 

If I have to choose between two evils i rather not choose at all. Mind you there were bombings and all before her caretaker mode too. I just found this incident striking kept with me for a long time. I still remembered it how bad it was back then. Neither side is a solution.  Future forward might be at least they don't have blood on their hands like the other sides.

 

 

Maybe there were, but the objective has always been to illegally seize power. They protested for her to step down, and after she went into caretaker mode they still protested and blocked elections in order to put into power an illegal unelected government. As if they didn't know Suthep was a facist crook!

 

I don't support violence. My point is that protesting to get elections or support an elected government is not the same as protesting in order to illegally seize power.

 

I know plenty of nice people protested, but being nice people doesn't legitimate their aim.

[Mr Meeseeks]

3 hours ago, robblok said:

I always thought that protests were allowed in Democracies.

They are, but blockades of airports and invasions of government buildings are not "protests".

[robblok]

13 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

They are, but blockades of airports and invasions of government buildings are not "protests".

Should tell that to the French, but then against hutting BKK down and barricading yourself sounds also a lot like what you described.

[puck2]

On 7/30/2021 at 6:28 PM, OneMoreFarang said:

And what does that prove? Maybe more people, especially up country, like Thaksin. But Thaksin is still a wanted criminal. And that status won't go away by majority vote.

 

And last but not least. I think it's almost funny when many people think Thaksin would have handled Covid better. Why? He was not in power and he didn't have to make, often difficult, decisions. It's obviously easy for Thaksin to criticize others and pretend he would have done it better. Would have, could have and all that.

If Thaksin is such a great guy why is he not PM anymore and hiding outside of Thailand? The short answer is: he could still be PM if he wouldn't have been so greedy.

Thank you blind eye (and deaf ear)!

• and why did Prayut make a coup?
• and why doesn't Prayut allow criticism?
• and why does Prayut save 45k vaccines without declaring for what?
• and why does Prayut order the lowest quality of vaccines after returning from China?
• and why does't he allow student protests and why does he send protester in prison?
• and why didn't Prayut swear an oath in the parliament?
• and why is Prayut a billionare with a "low" monthly salary in the army and now in the parliament?
• and why did Prayut manipulate the last "election"?.
• and why did Prayut not enter Corevac?
• and (most important) why did "sleepy Pinocchio" not react to the outbreak of Covid.
• the .lis goes on and on

If you go on reading more than the first line of my report, why are you not able to concede that Prayut ist still working as an incompetent dictator? You wouldn't like to compare Prayut to Thaksin, because Prayut is/was a lame duck! And Thaksin was not.