random Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Sorry my mistake. In which case, the OP is extremely misleading. He is jailed on accusations of, awaiting trial. Isn't he jailed on terrorism charges? Certainly not convicted though. No, he is on remand for breach of bail. he was on bail for the terrorism charges, this is not the same of being in jail on terrorism charges or being on remand for terrorism charges. Simply he is on remand for breach of bail conditions, not for being charged with terrorism. This said however, and it has to be reiterated many times it seems for the hard of thinking, he is not a convicted terrorist, in fact as far as I am aware he has never been convicted of ANY offence, maybe when he gets out kasit can move into his cell, hopefully he will be charged soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 No, he is on remand for breach of bail. he was on bail for the terrorism charges, this is not the same of being in jail on terrorism charges or being on remand for terrorism charges. Simply he is on remand for breach of bail conditions, not for being charged with terrorism. This said however, and it has to be reiterated many times it seems for the hard of thinking, he is not a convicted terrorist, in fact as far as I am aware he has never been convicted of ANY offence, maybe when he gets out kasit can move into his cell, hopefully he will be charged soon He was given bail for his terrorism charges. His bail was revoked because he breached his bail conditions. Therefore he is no longer on bail and is in jail (on remand) for his terrorism charges. Kasit has been charged (but I don't think with terrorism), and his charges are currently proceeding through the courts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteeleJoe Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 wow . . . this is just more than real fiction ! this is really red, stay tuned ! amazing Thailand ! Happens in South Africa as well. Nope. In South Africa Nelson Mandela was acknowledged by the government of the time to be a political prisoner and released from prison. Only after that was he elected to office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thequietman Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 a man in prison is elected an MP - that is really the way to impress the rest of the world and to ensure true justice for its citizens (the poor ones ) ??????? pull your neck in. does Bobby Sands, northern ireland ring a bell with you. what about the lady from myanmar. she was in jail but was elected an mp, i suppose that doesnt impress you either. one mans criminal is another mans freedom fighter. i am not saying it applies in this case, however it does happen and sometimes for the better good. :jap: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
random Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 (edited) No, he is on remand for breach of bail. he was on bail for the terrorism charges, this is not the same of being in jail on terrorism charges or being on remand for terrorism charges. Simply he is on remand for breach of bail conditions, not for being charged with terrorism. This said however, and it has to be reiterated many times it seems for the hard of thinking, he is not a convicted terrorist, in fact as far as I am aware he has never been convicted of ANY offence, maybe when he gets out kasit can move into his cell, hopefully he will be charged soon He was given bail for his terrorism charges. His bail was revoked because he breached his bail conditions. Therefore he is no longer on bail and is in jail (on remand) for his terrorism charges. Kasit has been charged (but I don't think with terrorism), and his charges are currently proceeding through the courts. so I reiterate, he is on remand because he breached his bail, he is not on remand because he has been charged with terrorism, if he was on remand for terrorism then he would not have been bailed, and/or the bail would have been revoked because of terrorism, not breaching his bail. I guess law is not your strong point edit to add, lets knock this pointless back and forth on the head, however much you want to try and muddy waters, the fact is he is not convicted of terrorism, and whether he is remanded for breach of bail or terrorism is irrelevant, as much as you hate this and will try and twist it, these are the facts Edited August 2, 2011 by random Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 so I reiterate, he is on remand because he breached his bail, he is not on remand because he has been charged with terrorism, if he was on remand for terrorism then he would not have been bailed, and/or the bail would have been revoked because of terrorism, not breaching his bail. I guess law is not your strong point edit to add, lets knock this pointless back and forth on the head, however much you want to try and muddy waters, the fact is he is not convicted of terrorism, and whether he is remanded for breach of bail or terrorism is irrelevant, as much as you hate this and will try and twist it, these are the facts I guess law or logic is not your strong point. He was charged with terrorism and put in jail (on remand). He was given bail. His bail got revoked. So he is no longer on bail. He is jail (on remand) because of his terrorism charges. If he wasn't in jail because of terrorism charges, then why would he be in jail? I don't know why you keep coming back a me with the fact that he is not convicted of terrorism, because I have never stated that he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 related topic: Jatuporn, Nisit Released On Bail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastitche Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Why not? Why so many slamming Thailand over this? It's not like our home countries haven't allowed evil people to run things. Agreed - Bobby Sands, a convicted IRA terrorist was elected to the UK parliament whilst on a fatal hunger strike. He would never have attended parliament, being committed to the cause that he espoused but nonetheless his election was legitimate. The same is true of members of the present Northern Ireland Assembly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastitche Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Ok, please enlighten us as to which convicted criminal was pardoned and endorsed as an MP in Britain, US, Australia, Canada or New Zealand? We're waiting! Why not? Why so many slamming Thailand over this? It's not like our home countries haven't allowed evil people to run things. As I pointed out before, Bobby Sands was convicted - not pardoned- but elected to the UK parliament Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phiphidon Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 A convicted terrorist currently in jail in the parliament? Does this put Thailand on the axis of evil? I didn't agree with the terrorism charge anyway, but the situation where he has been convicted and is then allowed to sit in the parliament is a farce legally. Convicted?????? really????? when was this???????????? Sorry my mistake. In which case, the OP is extremely misleading. He is jailed on accusations of, awaiting trial. No, The OP is par for the course, This is the Nation reporting, with long memories and biased reporting as a consequence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phiphidon Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I have ALWAYS stated convicted in my postings. However, I have seen his and his "red mates" rantings on stage (translation supplied by me dear wife) encouraging the more renegade factions to "burn Bangkok to the ground" as their illegal stay in the capital was ending and either my wife was lieing about what he, and his cohorts were saying, or this was indeed a "terrorist act of incitement to violence and arson". That Norwegian racist lunatic has not been convicted yet but do YOU doubt his guilt??? What's the difference?? That is not the point anyway really. It is more to do with violating his bail conditions and the doubts surrounding his membership of a political party, if true, this should have prevented him from being able to contest the election and that should have prevented his endorsement. This investigation is said to be ongoing but does anyone not doubt that anything will come of it!!! "This investigation is said to be ongoing but does anyone not doubt that anything will come of it!!!" Remember this? The ongoing investigation on the deaths of 89 people, both security personnel and anti-government protesters of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), during a military operation earlier this year will be completed next week, a senior official said Saturday. Tharit Pengdit, director-general of Department of Special Investigation (DSI), said he had ordered his deputy, Col Narat Sawettanant to conclude the investigation on the deaths within next weekhttp://www.mcot.net/...age/141429.html. Though he did qualify his statement with The expected limit of the public disclosure is due to safety of the witnesses and also because the investigative report is considered "classified," Mr Tharit said. Reasserting that the DSI has no authority to disclose details of the investigation to the public unless there is a "special order" from the government, Mr Tharit said his agency had already informed progress of the investigation of Mr Muramoto's death to Japanese embassy officials and that they were satisfied with the outcome of the investigation. Would you like to inform me of precisely what progress Abhisits and his flunkies have made wrt the above investigation since May last year or even since the Tharit statement in December 2010? And dare I ask which investigation you think is more important? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 What can any of you guys do about it.......what difference can you make....... Voice your opinions............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKK Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 And the process of amnesty begins.......who's next, Thaksin! Shame on you Thailand....you are heading to be the laughing stock of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 please continue: Jatuporn, Nisit Released On Bail Follow this link: //CLOSED// Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts