Activists File Complaint Against Yingluck, Pracha

[webfact]

WATER MISMANAGEMENT

Activists file complaint against Yingluck, Pracha

The Nation

A group of activists calling themselves the Green Group lodged a petition with the National Anti-Corruption Commission yesterday accusing Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and Justice Minister Pracha Promnok of criminally mishandling the flood crisis.

The petition said that Yingluck and Pracha, as chief of the Flood Relief Operations Centre, had committed malfeasance and did not do their duty, which caused grievances to others.

Meanwhile, the Central Administrative Court will make a decision on Tuesday about a complaint lodged by the public against FROC and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) calling for an injunction ordering the salvation of Route 340 to be stopped.

Bangkok governor Sukhumbhand Paribatra said he was not worried about the complaint because he and the BMA had made no mistakes in handling the floods, though Sanya Cheewanit, chief of the drainage operations, said he was discouraged by the complaint.

Three of the Nonthaburi complainants said that salvaging Route 340 should be stopped immediately and instead it should be used to serve as a channel to drain Bang Bua Thong district more quickly.

A survey conducted by Abac showed that the public looked upon soldiers as their saviours and were the least happy with lawmakers and local politicians.

Soldiers won 98.3 per cent approval from 1,087 people surveyed across the country between Tuesday and Thursday, while Thais working to boost morale won 98.2 per cent and volunteers and donors 96.6 per cent.

When asked who they were least impressed with, 51.8 per cent of the respondents chose MPs and local politicians; 64.3 went for FROC; and 67.7 said Yingluck.

In response to whether the capital city should be relocated, 60.4 per cent said no, though 27.8 per cent said yes and proposed Nakhon Ratchasima as an option.

-- The Nation 2011-11-26

[Buchholz]

In response to whether the capital city should be relocated, 60.4 per cent said no, though 27.8 per cent said yes and proposed Nakhon Ratchasima as an option.

tut, tut, tut... the administration has a way to go then to re-promote Thaksin's failed attempt to move the capital to Nakhon Nayok.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=512559&view=findpost&p=4849031

With more than a Trillion Baht at stake for the stakeholders in the original plan, I'm sure we'll see that effort escalate.

.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Buchholz

[phiphidon]

The Nation - 1 article about filing complaint againgst Yingluck and Pracha, 5 seperate stories and the very first reply mentions Thaksin who doesn't appear at all in the OP!

Business as normal.............

[binjalin]

Green group? What next? Purple or will they run out of colours?

[Bowery99]

Green group? What next? Purple or will they run out of colours?

Orange, between the reds and yellows would burn the flood water away

[virtualtraveller]

Let the law suits fly, they're all political and will be wiped clean in the 2012 Amnesty Law....

[lannarebirth]

The Nation - 1 article about filing complaint againgst Yingluck and Pracha, 5 seperate stories and the very first reply mentions Thaksin who doesn't appear at all in the OP!

Business as normal.............

I think most people know this is a proxy government. Number three if I recall correctly. Thaksin picked the PM. He or Potjaman or Yaowapa picked the ministers. Why pretend otherwise?

[animatic]

The Nation - 1 article about filing complaint againgst Yingluck and Pracha, 5 seperate stories and the very first reply mentions Thaksin who doesn't appear at all in the OP!

Business as normal.............

What? You didn't see the campaign promise and slogan?

Thaksin Thinks and Peua Thai Acts

If it has to do with PTP Thakin is fair game, he owns the party.

And that is BUSINESS AS USUAL.

Edited November 26, 2011 by animatic

[animatic]

Green group? What next? Purple or will they run out of colours?

Orange, between the reds and yellows would burn the flood water away

Napalm.

[phiphidon]

The Nation - 1 article about filing complaint againgst Yingluck and Pracha, 5 seperate stories and the very first reply mentions Thaksin who doesn't appear at all in the OP!

Business as normal.............

What? You didn't see the campaign promise and slogan?

Thaksin Thinks and Peua Thai Acts

If it has to do with PTP Thakin is fair game, he owns the party.

And that is BUSINESS AS USUAL.

The link that Buchholz refers to is an idea of Thaksin from 2003 - Now that really is tenuous linking if you ask me. But if it makes you and yours happy to drag out old Thaksin stories and link them to present day thinking, knock yourselves out....................

Would you like to make a comment on the main story of the OP now,? In case you've forgotten it's headlined "Activists File Complaint against Yingluck, Pracha" and is helpfully subtitled "Water Mismanagement" for those in the hard of thinking camp.

[Bagwan]

The Nation - 1 article about filing complaint againgst Yingluck and Pracha, 5 seperate stories and the very first reply mentions Thaksin who doesn't appear at all in the OP!

Business as normal.............

I think most people know this is a proxy government. Number three if I recall correctly. Thaksin picked the PM. He or Potjaman or Yaowapa picked the ministers. Why pretend otherwise?

Most people know that this is a proxy Government. Increasing numbers use one letter less to describe it.

[JurgenG]

The Nation - 1 article about filing complaint againgst Yingluck and Pracha, 5 seperate stories and the very first reply mentions Thaksin who doesn't appear at all in the OP!

Business as normal.............

You noticed too ?

[Buchholz]

The Nation - 1 article about filing complaint againgst Yingluck and Pracha, 5 seperate stories and the very first reply mentions Thaksin who doesn't appear at all in the OP!

Business as normal.............

What? You didn't see the campaign promise and slogan?

Thaksin Thinks and Peua Thai Acts

If it has to do with PTP Thakin is fair game, he owns the party.

And that is BUSINESS AS USUAL.

The link that Buchholz refers to is an idea of Thaksin from 2003 - Now that really is tenuous linking if you ask me. But if it makes you and yours happy to drag out old Thaksin stories and link them to present day thinking, knock yourselves out....................

Would you like to make a comment on the main story of the OP now,? In case you've forgotten it's headlined "Activists File Complaint against Yingluck, Pracha" and is helpfully subtitled "Water Mismanagement" for those in the hard of thinking camp.

The OP mentions the moving of the capital.

The Pheu Thai MP's have indicated they want to move the capital to Nakhon Nayok, the same location as Thaksin tried to do in 2003.

Tenuous link??

yeah right, it's merely coincidental that of the 1,000's of communities in Thailand, the Thaksin proxy party just happened to pick the same one that Thaksin did earlier.

If you have a problem with how The Nation writes articles with more than 1 topic included in them, take that up with the newspaper's board.

Otherwise, accept that if a topic is mentioned in the OP, then it's not off-topic to discuss it.

.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Buchholz

[JurgenG]

The Nation - 1 article about filing complaint againgst Yingluck and Pracha, 5 seperate stories and the very first reply mentions Thaksin who doesn't appear at all in the OP!

Business as normal.............

What? You didn't see the campaign promise and slogan?

Thaksin Thinks and Peua Thai Acts

If it has to do with PTP Thakin is fair game, he owns the party.

And that is BUSINESS AS USUAL.

The link that Buchholz refers to is an idea of Thaksin from 2003 - Now that really is tenuous linking if you ask me. But if it makes you and yours happy to drag out old Thaksin stories and link them to present day thinking, knock yourselves out....................

Would you like to make a comment on the main story of the OP now,? In case you've forgotten it's headlined "Activists File Complaint against Yingluck, Pracha" and is helpfully subtitled "Water Mismanagement" for those in the hard of thinking camp.

Some (most) allegation have long been proven to be defamatory and their author convicted in court.

For some people, it is not about the truth, it's all about character assassination.

If you've followed the current vendetta against Thaksin since the beginning, the only charges that stick is about a controversial land deal near the new aiport.

When you compare that to the money involved in a recent scandal linked to a member of the previous coalition, you would come to the conclusion that Thaksin was not the master of corruption as described is some medias but too small a player for the local political scene.

The war on drugs was actually a war against corruption (for people who understand what was really going on). When you realize the money involved, you understand that Thaksin had to go ....

Edited November 26, 2011 by JurgenG

[rubl]

Some (most) allegation have long been proven to be defamatory and their author convicted in court.

For some people, it is not about the truth, it's all about character assassination.

If you've followed the current vendetta against Thaksin since the beginning, the only charges that stick is about a controversial land deal near the new aiport.

When you compare that to the money involved in a recent scandal linked to a member of the previous coalition, you would come to the conclusion that Thaksin was not the master of corruption as described is some medias but too small a player for the local political scene.

The war on drugs was actually a war against corruption (for people who understand what was really going on). When you realize the money involved, you understand that Thaksin had to go ....

The only charges that were acknowledged in court leading to a verdict was indeed the 'land case'. mind you, all other cases will not proceed unless the accused is present to hear the charges.

If you compare that to 'recent scandals', you may only conclude that till now there are many accusations and rumours, but no charge as yet. So against k. Thaksin it's character assassination and against others it's useful to diminish any wrongdoing by k. Thaksin. Small fry only, hardly worthwhile mentioning, peanuts.

The war on drugs was a war on drugs with 2500++ deaths, lots or most extra-judicial depending on who you ask. To suggest it was about corruption is again trying to deflect from what was going on, even if corruption was in play. Of course the current 'war on drugs' led by Dept. PM Chalerm is purely and only about eradication of drugs.

Anyway the topic was about 'water mismanagement' I think. Obviously that's totally irrelevant in the whitewash of k. Thaksin.

Edited November 26, 2011 by rubl

[phiphidon]

The link that Buchholz refers to is an idea of Thaksin from 2003 - Now that really is tenuous linking if you ask me. But if it makes you and yours happy to drag out old Thaksin stories and link them to present day thinking, knock yourselves out....................

Would you like to make a comment on the main story of the OP now,? In case you've forgotten it's headlined "Activists File Complaint against Yingluck, Pracha" and is helpfully subtitled "Water Mismanagement" for those in the hard of thinking camp.

The OP mentions the moving of the capital.

The Pheu Thai MP's have indicated they want to move the capital to Nakhon Nayok, the same location as Thaksin tried to do in 2003.

Tenuous link??

yeah right, it's merely coincidental that of the 1,000's of communities in Thailand, the Thaksin proxy party just happened to pick the same one that Thaksin did earlier.

If you have a problem with how The Nation writes articles with more than 1 topic included in them, take that up with the newspaper's board.

Otherwise, accept that if a topic is mentioned in the OP, then it's not off-topic to discuss it.

.

You quite sure about that Buchholz? The PTP have indicated Nakon Nayok as the place they want to relocate the capital?

Not just one PTP who mentioned Nakon Nayhuk as a good place and then also mentioned Phetchabun as another suggestion and that a committee were going to discuss it further?

Because that is a hell of a lot different to what you are saying, but then, it wouldn't fit in with your Thaksin story would it?

[JurgenG]

The war on drugs was a war on drugs with 2500++ deaths, lots or most extra-judicial depending on who you ask. To suggest it was about corruption is again trying to deflect from what was going on, even if corruption was in play. Of course the current 'war on drugs' led by Dept. PM Chalerm is purely and only about eradication of drugs.

According to the Narcotics Control Board, the policy was effective in reducing drug consumption, especially in schools, by increasing the market price.^[86]

At the highest level Thaksin was praised and those who counted only dead drug dealers while ignoring deaths caused by drugs were criticized.

Furthermore : While he was opposition leader, Abhisit Vejjajiva accused Thaksin of crimes against humanity for his alleged role in the campaign. After being appointed Prime Minister, Abhisit opened an investigation into the killings, claiming that a successful probe could lead to prosecution by the International Criminal Court. Former attorney-general Kampee Kaewcharoen led the investigation and the investigation committee was approved by Abhisit's Cabinet. Abhisit denied that the probe was politically motivated. Witnesses and victims were urged to report to the Department of Special Investigation, which operated directly under Abhisit's control.^[93][94][95] As of the August 2011 parliamentary elections, Abhisit's investigation failed to find or publicize any evidence linking Thaksin or members of his Government to any extrajudicial killings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaksin_Shinawatra

As I said before, the only thing the opposition has against Thaksin is a controversial land deal.

Which doesn't mean he is guilty of anything, It's just the only thing after more than 5 years of investigation they have to show.

A military coup, more than 5 years of unrest, for only an unproven controversial land deal ?

When you can't win an election democratically, some people are really ready for the lowest things to get the job .....

[JurgenG]

A military coup, more than 5 years of unrest, for only an unproven controversial land deal ?

And I forgot, to get that result, they had to amend the constitution.

Edited November 26, 2011 by JurgenG

[whybother]

Some (most) allegation have long been proven to be defamatory and their author convicted in court.

For some people, it is not about the truth, it's all about character assassination.

If you've followed the current vendetta against Thaksin since the beginning, the only charges that stick is about a controversial land deal near the new aiport.

When you compare that to the money involved in a recent scandal linked to a member of the previous coalition, you would come to the conclusion that Thaksin was not the master of corruption as described is some medias but too small a player for the local political scene.

The war on drugs was actually a war against corruption (for people who understand what was really going on). When you realize the money involved, you understand that Thaksin had to go ....

Which allegations have proven to be defamatory?

You obviously haven't followed the current vendetta, because the controversial land deal wasn't anywhere near the new airport.

The money stolen from the transport permanent secretary was a fraction of what was confiscated from Thaksin.

[whybother]

As I said before, the only thing the opposition has against Thaksin is a controversial land deal.

Which doesn't mean he is guilty of anything, It's just the only thing after more than 5 years of investigation they have to show.

A military coup, more than 5 years of unrest, for only an unproven controversial land deal ?

When you can't win an election democratically, some people are really ready for the lowest things to get the job .....

And I forgot, to get that result, they had to amend the constitution.

They didn't amend the constitution to find Thaksin guilty for the land deal. He was found guilty under a 1997 law (National Counter Corruption Organic Act, BE 2542 (1997)).

The courts convicting him to 2 years jail means that he has been found guilty of something. The only thing he has been found guilty of is the land deal. The only reason he hasn't been found guilty of anything else is because he fled and hasn't been here to front court for other cases to proceed.

[JurgenG]

That's what I said.

A major ally of the United States stages a coup when its democratically elected leader is attending an international function in New York, they better find a good reason for that.

All the accusation have been proved falsed, the main responsible of them has been repeatedly convicted of defamation.

The only thing you have now is a controversial land deal.

It's so ridiculous I wouldn't mention that if I were you, considering the international implication of the coup.

Edited November 26, 2011 by JurgenG

[rubl]

The war on drugs was a war on drugs with 2500++ deaths, lots or most extra-judicial depending on who you ask. To suggest it was about corruption is again trying to deflect from what was going on, even if corruption was in play. Of course the current 'war on drugs' led by Dept. PM Chalerm is purely and only about eradication of drugs.

According to the Narcotics Control Board, the policy was effective in reducing drug consumption, especially in schools, by increasing the market price.[86]At the highest level Thaksin was praised and those who counted only dead drug dealers while ignoring deaths caused by drugs were criticized.

Furthermore : While he was opposition leader, Abhisit Vejjajiva accused Thaksin of crimes against humanity for his alleged role in the campaign. After being appointed Prime Minister, Abhisit opened an investigation into the killings, claiming that a successful probe could lead to prosecution by the International Criminal Court. Former attorney-general Kampee Kaewcharoen led the investigation and the investigation committee was approved by Abhisit's Cabinet. Abhisit denied that the probe was politically motivated. Witnesses and victims were urged to report to the Department of Special Investigation, which operated directly under Abhisit's control.^[93][94][95] As of the August 2011 parliamentary elections, Abhisit's investigation failed to find or publicize any evidence linking Thaksin or members of his Government to any extrajudicial killings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaksin_Shinawatra

As I said before, the only thing the opposition has against Thaksin is a controversial land deal.

Which doesn't mean he is guilty of anything, It's just the only thing after more than 5 years of investigation they have to show.

A military coup, more than 5 years of unrest, for only an unproven controversial land deal ?

When you can't win an election democratically, some people are really ready for the lowest things to get the job .....

Activists are unreliable, leftish rabble, like the HRW. Reminds me of RobertA's report to the ICC about possible crimes against humanity. No reaction, no conviction, obviously equally untrue

Conclusion: no convictions, so obviously not true. K. Thaksin is innocent, pure as gold, etc., etc. Clearly a politically motivated conviction. You sure you're JurgenG and not RobertA?

June 8, 2003

"Letter to U.S. President George Bush: Press Thaksin on Extrajudicial Executions, Burma"

http://www.hrw.org/news/2003/06/08/letter-us-president-george-bush-press-thaksin-extrajudicial-executions-burma

October 6, 2004

"Thailand: Anti-Drug Campaign Reaches New Low"

http://www.hrw.org/news/2004/10/04/thailand-anti-drug-campaign-reaches-new-low

31 July 2007

"A fit and proper Premiership?"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/6918718.stm

Aug 16, 2007

"Thaksin May Yet Pay for Bloody 'War-on-Drugs'

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=38910

The war on drugs was widely criticized by the international community. Thaksin requested that the UN Commission on Human Rights send a special envoy to evaluate the situation, but said in an interview, "The United Nations is not my father. I am not worried about any UN visit to Thailand on this issue."[90]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaksin_Shinawatra

[Buchholz]

The link that Buchholz refers to is an idea of Thaksin from 2003 - Now that really is tenuous linking if you ask me. But if it makes you and yours happy to drag out old Thaksin stories and link them to present day thinking, knock yourselves out....................

Would you like to make a comment on the main story of the OP now,? In case you've forgotten it's headlined "Activists File Complaint against Yingluck, Pracha" and is helpfully subtitled "Water Mismanagement" for those in the hard of thinking camp.

The OP mentions the moving of the capital.

The Pheu Thai MP's have indicated they want to move the capital to Nakhon Nayok, the same location as Thaksin tried to do in 2003.

Tenuous link??

yeah right, it's merely coincidental that of the 1,000's of communities in Thailand, the Thaksin proxy party just happened to pick the same one that Thaksin did earlier.

If you have a problem with how The Nation writes articles with more than 1 topic included in them, take that up with the newspaper's board.

Otherwise, accept that if a topic is mentioned in the OP, then it's not off-topic to discuss it.

You quite sure about that Buchholz? The PTP have indicated Nakon Nayok as the place they want to relocate the capital?

Not just one PTP who mentioned Nakon Nayhuk as a good place and then also mentioned Phetchabun as another suggestion and that a committee were going to discuss it further?

Pheu Thai Party MP Sathaporn Maneerat made his "suggestion" for Nakhon Nayok as the leader of a group 20 Pheu Thai MP's voicing their goal of moving the capital.

While not the most stable of Pheu Thai Party MP's,

Link to Bizarre Photo

Sathaporn Maneerat (right), a member of the Pheu Thai Party gestures with a slingshot while wearing a mask commonly used by red shirt protesters during his debate against the Thai government at the Parliament in Bangkok June 1, 2010.

his views on moving the capital, nevertheless, represent more than one Pheu Thai.

We'll see what the Pheu Thai committee acts, after Thaksin thinks on it.

.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

Some (most) allegation have long been proven to be defamatory and their author convicted in court.

If you've followed the current vendetta against Thaksin since the beginning, the only charges that stick is about a controversial land deal near the new aiport.

The only charges that were acknowledged in court leading to a verdict was indeed the 'land case'. mind you, all other cases will not proceed unless the accused is present to hear the charges.

It's amazing how many times that even basic and long-standing facts, like this particular one, are so often repeatedly distorted which necessitate replies to re-establish the fundamental facts of law to be re-posted and re-posted...

As I said before, the only thing the opposition has against Thaksin is a controversial land deal.

Which doesn't mean he is guilty of anything, It's just the only thing after more than 5 years of investigation they have to show.

The courts convicting him to 2 years jail means that he has been found guilty of something. The only thing he has been found guilty of is the land deal. The only reason he hasn't been found guilty of anything else is because he fled and hasn't been here to front court for other cases to proceed.

and re-posted and re-posted...

oh well, kudos to you two that take on that challenge.

.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Buchholz

[whybother]

That's what I said.

A major ally of the United States stages a coup when its democratically elected leader is attending an international function in New York, they better find a good reason for that.

All the accusation have been proved falsed, the main responsible of them has been repeatedly convicted of defamation.

The only thing you have now is a controversial land deal.

It's so ridiculous I wouldn't mention that if I were you, considering the international implication of the coup.

When were all the other accusations proven false? He hasn't been here to defend them, so how could he prove them false?

Last I checked, it was Thaksin that left the country prior to the coup and not the elected leader (since Thailand didn't have an elected leader at the time if the coup).

[JurgenG]

The war on drugs was a war on drugs with 2500++ deaths, lots or most extra-judicial depending on who you ask. To suggest it was about corruption is again trying to deflect from what was going on, even if corruption was in play. Of course the current 'war on drugs' led by Dept. PM Chalerm is purely and only about eradication of drugs.

According to the Narcotics Control Board, the policy was effective in reducing drug consumption, especially in schools, by increasing the market price.[86]At the highest level Thaksin was praised and those who counted only dead drug dealers while ignoring deaths caused by drugs were criticized.

Furthermore : While he was opposition leader, Abhisit Vejjajiva accused Thaksin of crimes against humanity for his alleged role in the campaign. After being appointed Prime Minister, Abhisit opened an investigation into the killings, claiming that a successful probe could lead to prosecution by the International Criminal Court. Former attorney-general Kampee Kaewcharoen led the investigation and the investigation committee was approved by Abhisit's Cabinet. Abhisit denied that the probe was politically motivated. Witnesses and victims were urged to report to the Department of Special Investigation, which operated directly under Abhisit's control.^[93][94][95] As of the August 2011 parliamentary elections, Abhisit's investigation failed to find or publicize any evidence linking Thaksin or members of his Government to any extrajudicial killings.

http://en.wikipedia....ksin_Shinawatra

As I said before, the only thing the opposition has against Thaksin is a controversial land deal.

Which doesn't mean he is guilty of anything, It's just the only thing after more than 5 years of investigation they have to show.

A military coup, more than 5 years of unrest, for only an unproven controversial land deal ?

When you can't win an election democratically, some people are really ready for the lowest things to get the job .....

Activists are unreliable, leftish rabble, like the HRW. Reminds me of RobertA's report to the ICC about possible crimes against humanity. No reaction, no conviction, obviously equally untrue

Conclusion: no convictions, so obviously not true. K. Thaksin is innocent, pure as gold, etc., etc. Clearly a politically motivated conviction. You sure you're JurgenG and not RobertA?

June 8, 2003

"Letter to U.S. President George Bush: Press Thaksin on Extrajudicial Executions, Burma"

http://www.hrw.org/n...xecutions-burma

October 6, 2004

"Thailand: Anti-Drug Campaign Reaches New Low"

http://www.hrw.org/n...reaches-new-low

31 July 2007

"A fit and proper Premiership?"

http://news.bbc.co.u...ity/6918718.stm

Aug 16, 2007

"Thaksin May Yet Pay for Bloody 'War-on-Drugs'

http://www.ipsnews.n...sp?idnews=38910

The war on drugs was widely criticized by the international community. Thaksin requested that the UN Commission on Human Rights send a special envoy to evaluate the situation, but said in an interview, "The United Nations is not my father. I am not worried about any UN visit to Thailand on this issue."[90]

http://en.wikipedia....ksin_Shinawatra

I would like to have your opinion on this (part of my post) : why focus on the "unfortunate" death of a couple of drug dealers and conveniently forget the hundred of thousand of direct and indirect victims of the drug trade ?

Beside that, the number of death related to the war on drugs have repeatedly been greatly exagerated. But lets focus on the main point, why all the attention about the death of a couple of criminal and nothing about the death of their hundred of thousand of victims ? What your bleeding heart activists have to say about that ?

Edited November 27, 2011 by JurgenG

[Ricardo]

The Nation - 1 article about filing complaint againgst Yingluck and Pracha, 5 seperate stories and the very first reply mentions Thaksin who doesn't appear at all in the OP!

Business as normal.............

I think most people know this is a proxy government. Number three if I recall correctly. Thaksin picked the PM. He or Potjaman or Yaowapa picked the ministers. Why pretend otherwise?

"Why pretend otherwise ?"

Because RA is still trying to spin the notion, that the former-PM actually believes in Democracy, and is a hero who was an elected-PM when the coup took place, so the idea that just one man actually makes all the appointments & decides all the policies is inconvenient ?

And if it's true that "Thaksin Thinks, Pheu Thai Acts", then DL also carries part of the blame for any cock-ups during the floods, not just his current nominees being complained-about. Speaking of which, when did those South-Korean pumps actually arrive, was it in-time to be any real use, and who paid for them, and how much, will it ever emerge ?

But perhaps that's wandering too far off-thread. Sorry !

[phiphidon]

You quite sure about that Buchholz? The PTP have indicated Nakon Nayok as the place they want to relocate the capital?

Not just one PTP who mentioned Nakon Nayhuk as a good place and then also mentioned Phetchabun as another suggestion and that a committee were going to discuss it further?

Pheu Thai Party MP Sathaporn Maneerat made his "suggestion" for Nakhon Nayok as the leader of a group 20 Pheu Thai MP's voicing their goal of moving the capital.

/snip

his views on moving the capital, nevertheless, represent more than one Pheu Thai.

We'll see what the Pheu Thai committee acts, after Thaksin thinks on it.

.

Sorry, I'm not going to let this go. The one PTP MP you mention did not suggest Nakhon Nayok, he referred to it as being Thaksins choice in 2003. He also referred to the other destination Petchabun as being another destination favoured by a former PM .

Yes this MP is part of a group of 20 MPs that wish to discuss relocation through a committee.

When the committee comes to a decision then you can state that the PTP have chosen a place for a possible relocation of the capital. To suggest anything else, as you did, was a fabrication to suit your story about it being relevant to include Thaksin in a debate about an OP he does not feature in.

Facts not Fabrication.

[Buchholz]

We'll see what the Pheu Thai committee acts, after Thaksin thinks on it.

<snip>

When the committee comes to a decision

<snip>

Yes, but have to remember the order in which the slogan goes,

Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai committee acts.

.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Buchholz

[phiphidon]

We'll see what the Pheu Thai committee acts, after Thaksin thinks on it.

<snip>

When the committee comes to a decision

<snip>

Yes, but have to remember the order in which the slogan goes,

Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai committee acts.

.

So you admit you were economical with the truth to suit your argument. Thank You.