So up to now nobody has respected the Thai FM when they have asked that Thaksin be asked to leave a country, Sweden, Dubai, Cambodia, Montenegro.

the truth guys this is all propaganda from the Thai FM for the Thai press and the gullible Thai people. The truth is the current unelected government does not want Thaksin back on Thai soil, the minute he is back here their goose is cooked and they know that. All they are doing at the moment is playing for time until he does come back at the request of the next elected Thai government.

Words of wisdom from an Ex UK Bobbie...... legally elected government please... Pass another Chang...

What about Gordon Brown..did he come from election?

Ah connel, a fellow ex plod

as for gordon brown, he had no need to come from an election as his party had power, you vote for the party and not the pm, of course come election time you know who the leader of the parties are and therefore who will become PM, but if he decides to step down his own party will decide who should become PM until the next election, they can do this as the ruling party. Abhisit did not come to power under these circumstances to it is like comparing apples to oranges.

U

So up to now nobody has respected the Thai FM when they have asked that Thaksin be asked to leave a country, Sweden, Dubai, Cambodia, Montenegro.

the truth guys this is all propaganda from the Thai FM for the Thai press and the gullible Thai people. The truth is the current unelected government does not want Thaksin back on Thai soil, the minute he is back here their goose is cooked and they know that. All they are doing at the moment is playing for time until he does come back at the request of the next elected Thai government.

Words of wisdom from an Ex UK Bobbie...... legally elected government please... Pass another Chang...

What about Gordon Brown..did he come from election?

Ah connel, a fellow ex plod

as for gordon brown, he had no need to come from an election as his party had power, you vote for the party and not the pm, of course come election time you know who the leader of the parties are and therefore who will become PM, but if he decides to step down his own party will decide who should become PM until the next election, they can do this as the ruling party. Abhisit did not come to power under these circumstances to it is like comparing apples to oranges.

Yes. Twist the system to suit you.

In both UK and Thailand it's the same system. People vote for the MP who happens to be of a particular party. The labour party in the UK were able to put a new person in as PM because they controlled the house with the majority of MPs. That is exactly what happened in Thailand.

It is not unusual for a government to go after a criminal. Can’t fault the Thai government to go after Thaksin anywhere he is. Especially when e has no regard in the sovereign of a country and the rule of country

Please help me! With the exception of the UK, what other countries have complained that Thaksin has either violated their sovereign rights or their laws? I don't know of any.

Germany and there is a reason he cannot go to the US. He hasnt been there in years for a reason, something about a former business partner whom has filed some lawsuits against him. China also asked him to leave. Which is why he is not residing in his multi million dollar house there

Could you please supply me with the sources. I have been unable to find any government statements confirming your claims.

You are aware that only the countries have the right to make such declaratioons. Other people, government officials, countries cannot make such declarations. What so and so says doesn't matter.

I still await some enlightenment about where,

Military Junta Coup.

Military Junta "coup-issued law"

Military Junta appointed judiciary

sit in a democracy.

Any takers?

Don't edit my posts please, it is against forum rules, please quote the full post, thanks.

Thanks for the advice. The rule says:

30) Do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes, added emoticons, or altered wording.

Can you explain in what way I modified your words? or even modified the meaning of your words?

By not quoting the full post you have modified it, simple as. Do you need help with the meaning of 'modernise'?

You have altered it, therefore you have modernised it. Just quote the full post, there's a good boy.

Thanks but I don't need any help with the meaning of the word "modernise", but apparently you need some help with the spelling of the word "modified" because you got it wrong twice in 2 lines of your post. You see the problem with being patronising to other posters is that it detracts from your wonderful insights into the topic of the thread, so maybe you should just quote the forum rule which says you have the right to make up forum rules and insist on other posters using them, there's a good boy.

What about Gordon Brown..did he come from election?

Ah connel, a fellow ex plod

as for gordon brown, he had no need to come from an election as his party had power, you vote for the party and not the pm, of course come election time you know who the leader of the parties are and therefore who will become PM, but if he decides to step down his own party will decide who should become PM until the next election, they can do this as the ruling party. Abhisit did not come to power under these circumstances to it is like comparing apples to oranges.

Yes. Twist the system to suit you.

In both UK and Thailand it's the same system. People vote for the MP who happens to be of a particular party. The labour party in the UK were able to put a new person in as PM because they controlled the house with the majority of MPs. That is exactly what happened in Thailand.

Yes its the same system within a parliament, but

In the uk the parliament was fundementally the product of democratic elections free of any military intervention or coups, "coup-issued" law, or military appointed judiciary judgements.

In thailand the parliament was the product of military coup interference, coup-issued law, and military appointed judiciary judgements.

In thailand The Military coup and military interference took the dem out of democracy

In thailand The Military coup and military interference took the dem out of democracy

Yawn How about the elections after the coup?

In thailand The Military coup and military interference took the dem out of democracy

Yawn How about the elections after the coup?

Well done, you make my point far more succintely than ever I could do.

Now which Military Junta General are you quoting there then!

In thailand The Military coup and military interference took the dem out of democracy

Yawn How about the elections after the coup?

Well done, you make my point far more succintely than ever I could do.

Now which Military Junta General are you quoting there then!

Clod appears unable to answer the question re the elections after the coup.

In thailand The Military coup and military interference took the dem out of democracy

Yawn How about the elections after the coup?

Well done, you make my point far more succintely than ever I could do.

Now which Military Junta General are you quoting there then!

Clod appears unable to answer the question re the elections after the coup.

You know as well as I do.

The "election" preceding the samak government was voided in democratic terms by the undemocratic interference in the democratic process by the Military Junta appointed judiciary, and the" coup-issued law".

You know as well as I do.

The "election" preceding the samak government was voided in democratic terms by the undemocratic interference in the democratic process by the Military Junta appointed judiciary, and the" coup-issued law".

I don't think I do know as 'well' as you do.

For a start I don't have a pair of Thaksin goggles and a red clown outfit. Essential prerequisites.

With a pair of Thaksin goggles on I would be able to see that the reds did not action the violence last Songkran and with the clown's outfit I would not be able to see the election corruption of Thaksin's party leadership.

The latest fashion.

You know as well as I do.

The "election" preceding the samak government was voided in democratic terms by the undemocratic interference in the democratic process by the Military Junta appointed judiciary, and the" coup-issued law".

Didnt Samak get the PM post, or am I missing the point of your logic?

You know as well as I do.

The "election" preceding the samak government was voided in democratic terms by the undemocratic interference in the democratic process by the Military Junta appointed judiciary, and the" coup-issued law".

Didnt Samak get the PM post, or am I missing the point of your logic?

You can't miss something that doesn't exist.

Back to the initial post ...if Sweden didn't tell Thaksin to leave, does that mean Suthep didn't speak the truth?

You know as well as I do.

The "election" preceding the samak government was voided in democratic terms by the undemocratic interference in the democratic process by the Military Junta appointed judiciary, and the" coup-issued law".

Didnt Samak get the PM post, or am I missing the point of your logic?

Thats it, followed by somchai, all democratic following the peoples election.

Then the military junta "coup-issued law" and appointed junta judiciary were activated to void the earlier election and install abisit.

You know as well as I do.

The "election" preceding the samak government was voided in democratic terms by the undemocratic interference in the democratic process by the Military Junta appointed judiciary, and the" coup-issued law".

Didnt Samak get the PM post, or am I missing the point of your logic?

Thats it, followed by somchai, all democratic following the peoples election.

Then the military junta "coup-issued law" and appointed junta judiciary were activated to void the earlier election and install abisit.

Simply translated, this means that the courts wouldn't allow the Thaksin-led electoral corruption continue and the red cheerleaders are pissed off about that.

They fail also to point out that Thaksin's forces were based on a coalition and that some of his coalition partners bolted.

The street demonstrations have as one of their objectives the objective of putting pressure on past partners to force them back into line.

You know as well as I do.

The "election" preceding the samak government was voided in democratic terms by the undemocratic interference in the democratic process by the Military Junta appointed judiciary, and the" coup-issued law".

Didnt Samak get the PM post, or am I missing the point of your logic?

Thats it, followed by somchai, all democratic following the peoples election.

Then the military junta "coup-issued law" and appointed junta judiciary were activated to void the earlier election and install abisit.

Simply translated, this means that the courts wouldn't allow the Thaksin-led electoral corruption continue and the red cheerleaders are pissed off about that.

They fail also to point out that Thaksin's forces were based on a coalition and that some of his coalition partners bolted.

The street demonstrations have as one of their objectives the objective of putting pressure on past partners to force them back into line.

So where exactly does,

Military junta Coup,

Military Junta "coup-issued law"

Military Junta appointed judiciary sit in a democracy.

Explain it in the Swedish democratic model, if attempting the thai model embarasess you

"Mr Panich said the Foreign Ministry had asked Sweden not to let Thaksin use it as a base to conduct political activities against Thailand and it had agreed to cooperate".

I think we have to understand little of the diplomatic language. "Agreed to cooerate" is not the same as "the Swedish goverment asked Thaksin to leave Sweden". And I think thaksin had left Sweden before this was an issue.

So where exactly does,

Military junta Coup,

Military Junta "coup-issued law"

Military Junta appointed judiciary sit in a democracy.

Explain it in the Swedish democratic model, if attempting the thai model embarasess you

Talk to us about the court/the court members/the court laws under which Thaksin was recently convicted for corruption and money laundering.

Try not to mimic Thaksin's lies this time as per denying that the reds actioned last year's Songkran violence.

Sweden probably too clean for Thaksin.

Montenegro more his style.

So where exactly does,

Military junta Coup,

Military Junta "coup-issued law"

Military Junta appointed judiciary sit in a democracy.

Explain it in the Swedish democratic model, if attempting the thai model embarasess you

Talk to us about the court/the court members/the court laws under which Thaksin was recently convicted for corruption and money laundering.

Try not to mimic Thaksin's lies this time as per denying that the reds actioned last year's Songkran violence.

Sweden probably too clean for Thaksin.

Montenegro more his style.

Typical strawman response.

Not that of a real "anti-thaksin apologist"