Thaksin In Talks With Smaller Parties: Suthep

[animatic]

"She downplayed the impact of the Democrat Party's political at Ratchaprasong Thursday evening, saying the information on the Red Shirt demonstrations and their clashes with security forces cited by the Democrat heavyweights on the stage was not new as it was debated in parliament."

Should I take this as an endorsement of it's veracity. After all, deceiving parliament is grounds for an MP's dismissal, at least where I come from.

Deceiving parliament ? Do you mind to explain how you came to this conclusion ?

If it is nothing new and was debated by parliament

and DECIDED on by Parliament then that becomes legal fact.

So it appears she now endorses the version stated at Ratchaprasomg,

because she did not disagree with it's truth

Where did you read that "and DECIDED on by Parliament then that becomes legal fact." ?

English is not my mother tongue so I'm prepared to be corrected but so far what I understand is the allegation of the democrats have already been debated (debated, nothing more) and she has nothing to add.

You can alternatively read it : "It's total BS, we already talked about it, case closed"

Could the masters of the english language please help us here ?

Parliament makes laws

and it's decisions on censure votes also turn those decisions into legal fact.

She didn't say that nothing new was added that she disagrees with,

but she said that all was discussed in parliament during the censure debate,

and so is known. Since she did not dispute what is known,

she is tacitly agreeing with the Parliaments decisions in the exact same info.

Lying to Parliament is the same as lying to a court Perjury and grounds for dismissal.

No clue why Jatuporn remained an MP. His lies were legion and legend.

Edited June 26, 2011 by animatic