Thai Democrat MP Khanchit Sought In Murder Case

[geriatrickid]

Do you expect all MPs accused of serious crimes to "withdraw from the caucus"? How do you know he is ignoring it. He just hasn't said anything to the media about it. Maybe he knows that the MP is not guilty, but is allowing the police investigation to run it's course, which is something that some Deputy PMs should take notice of.

I find it amusing that you are grabbing at anything to excuse a serious political and moral mistake on the part of Mr. Abhisit. I expect an MP accused of premeditated murder, no matter the political affiliation, to be removed from political caucus. This is the standard procedure in every parliamentary democracy. Please show one case where an alleged murderer was not removed from caucus. Mr. Abhisit has been given enough rope to hang himself and he is doing it in his slow and dainty manner. It was Mr. Abhisit that has made the demands for honest and ethical government. And yet, once again here is an opportunity for him to lead by example and he again fails to do so. Removal from caucus is the very least that can be done as its sends the clear message that the accused's alleged violent bloodthirsty act is neither condoned nor supported by the party. More importantly, in keeping with Mr. Abhisit's demands for honest and ethical government, he should be the one introducing a motion stripping the accused of parliamentary immunity since the alleged crime was not related to his duties as an MP, unless I am wrong and the Democrat policy platform includes the murder of political opponents.

Edited December 28, 2011 by geriatrickid

[VoterPower]

^^ Like who, like what

Edited December 28, 2011 by VoterPower

[whybother]

^^ Like who, like what

Generic question. Do you think that those charged with serious crimes withdraw from parliament?

[geriatrickid]

Glad we are in agreement then. I look forward to the day when those who initiated and benefited from the actions of the red shirts face similar charges as their mercenary lackeys,

Your obsessive crusade against the redshirts has no relevance. No redshirt supported, back or aligned MP planned and carried out a brutal murder. On the other hand, there is a member of the Democrat party that is accused of just that.

No Democrat MP planned or carried out a brutal murder. One has been accused of it, but not charged.

Jatuporn and a number of PTP MPs have been accused and charged of serious crimes, and are only out of jail because of their MP status.

You are close to drowning in your own rhetoric on this. You and others have made the constant demands for honest government, ethical behaviour etc. Well, here you have a case, and a rather strong one at that, of a man accused of a brutal premeditated murder and the best you can do is trot out jolly Mr. Jatuporn. You could at least recognize that you and others are hypocrites now that you are confronted with a much more serious case, a savage murder, and you go into excuse and denial mode.

I anticipate that the next phase of this thread will be to ridicule the PM, or mention another former PM, since the Abhisit fan club are in bad shape right now.

[geriatrickid]

^^ Like who, like what

Generic question. Do you think that those charged with serious crimes withdraw from parliament?

MPs charged with murder should at the very least be removed from their political caucus. That's a serious as one can get in terms of a crime.

Your attempt to bait a distraction by the use of the term "serious crime" is unnecessary. Why not just say what it is your trying to say, instead of trying to lure people into providing an answer in good faith, only to have it taken out of context. Deal with the specific case at hand, a Democrat MP accused of planning and carrying out a violent brutal murder, that still is a member of the Democrat caucus.

[OzMick]

Glad we are in agreement then. I look forward to the day when those who initiated and benefited from the actions of the red shirts face similar charges as their mercenary lackeys,

Your obsessive crusade against the redshirts has no relevance. No redshirt supported, back or aligned MP planned and carried out a brutal murder. On the other hand, there is a member of the Democrat party that is accused of just that.

Your sycophantic defense of those who planned and carried out an armed insurgency which resulted in the deaths of 91 people while meanwhile claiming outrage over an opposition MP accused of murder is more than slightly hypocritical, but not unusual.

[OzMick]

Do you expect all MPs accused of serious crimes to "withdraw from the caucus"? How do you know he is ignoring it. He just hasn't said anything to the media about it. Maybe he knows that the MP is not guilty, but is allowing the police investigation to run it's course, which is something that some Deputy PMs should take notice of.

I find it amusing that you are grabbing at anything to excuse a serious political and moral mistake on the part of Mr. Abhisit. I expect an MP accused of premeditated murder, no matter the political affiliation, to be removed from political caucus. This is the standard procedure in every parliamentary democracy. Please show one case where an alleged murderer was not removed from caucus. Mr. Abhisit has been given enough rope to hang himself and he is doing it in his slow and dainty manner. It was Mr. Abhisit that has made the demands for honest and ethical government. And yet, once again here is an opportunity for him to lead by example and he again fails to do so. Removal from caucus is the very least that can be done as its sends the clear message that the accused's alleged violent bloodthirsty act is neither condoned nor supported by the party. More importantly, in keeping with Mr. Abhisit's demands for honest and ethical government, he should be the one introducing a motion stripping the accused of parliamentary immunity since the alleged crime was not related to his duties as an MP, unless I am wrong and the Democrat policy platform includes the murder of political opponents.

The Democrat policy platform does NOT include the murder of political opponents - perhaps he should switch to PTP where such skills are more appreciated.

[Buchholz]

Abhisit Vejjajiva, the Democrat Party leader and opposition head, was aware of the warrant but decided not to react, pending police taking regular steps to deal with the case, party spokesman Chavanont Intharakomalsut said.

TVF would have erupted in angry comments from the anti government contingent if the killer was alleged to have been PTP and PM Yingluck not reacted. Why the double standard here?

Not reacting is what you're supposed to do. Reacting by way of obfuscation, pressuring judicial bodies, spinning lies is what you're not supposed to do. Presumably there are agencies to deal with these things. Would you prefer it be ajudicated in the politcal realm like all the Red Shirt felonies?

Wrong. The first thing any responsible political leader is to ask an MP under investigation for a serious crime like murder is to withdraw from the caucus. The standard protocol is to state that until a person is cleared, it is inappropriate for an alleged murderer to sit in caucus. The fact that Abhisit is ignoring the situation speaks volumes and is reprehensible.

The same standard would result in not one, but 12 Pheu Thai Party MP's being removed from the caucus.

Where's the condemnation for the reprehensible action of your Madame Yingluck?

,

[koosdeboer]

Glad we are in agreement then. I look forward to the day when those who initiated and benefited from the actions of the red shirts face similar charges as their mercenary lackeys,

Your obsessive crusade against the redshirts has no relevance. No redshirt supported, back or aligned MP planned and carried out a brutal murder. On the other hand, there is a member of the Democrat party that is accused of just that.

Your sycophantic defense of those who planned and carried out an armed insurgency which resulted in the deaths of 91 people while meanwhile claiming outrage over an opposition MP accused of murder is more than slightly hypocritical, but not unusual.

Geriatrickid acts like a redshirt. Complains about double standards but uses it constantly.

See also this text posted on facebook:

Today, Team-Korn would like to share some interesting observations made by Komchadluek newspaper yesterday regarding Democrat MP Khanchit Thapsuwan's alleged involvement in the murder of Samut Sakhon Provincial Administration Organisation president Udon Kraiwatnussorn.

- The only eyewitness testimony came from the victim's driver.

- Do the police actually have enough hard evidence in linking the murder of Khun Udon to MP Khanchit Thapsuwan and the Democrat Party? Or was the call politically motivated?

- In a similar case, why has the police not linked the murder of Chutidet Suwannakerd (Democrat Party canvasser in Don Muang murdered in early December 2011) to any political parties?

[whybother]

Geriatrickid acts like a redshirt. Complains about double standards but uses it constantly.

<snip>

Agreed. He's forever defending red shirts (and PTP MPs) that are CHARGED with serious crimes, but thinks the world should stop when a Democrat MP is ACCUSED of a serious crime.

[jayboy]

I had suspected the usual suspects to be wriggling with discomfort on this thread but hadn't expected this level of double think and even dishonesty.For some Yingluck becomes the subject even when the discussion is meant to be about - well we know what it's meant to be about.

The biggest laugh however comes from his koosdeboer with his shared thoughts of Team Korn (that bastion of carefully repressed PAD prejudice) and Komchadluek.

For rational people simply make a mental note to revisit this subject in a couple of months when the position is clearer.

[TAWP]

jayboy>> Unlike you I have openly stated that if this man is guilty I hope he goes away for a long time. You see, I abhor all criminals such as this and see no reason to make excuses for them. Unlike you.

[jayboy]

jayboy>> Unlike you I have openly stated that if this man is guilty I hope he goes away for a long time. You see, I abhor all criminals such as this and see no reason to make excuses for them. Unlike you.

It's not about me however irritated you might be about this matter.Reality has a way of making built in political prejudices look absurd.

I have not stated my opinion, unlike you dare I say, on his guilt one way or the other, because of the presumption of innocence - regardless of political background.That's why I suggested revisit this matter in a few months.

My interest albeit a little facetious was in the comical contortions the usual suspects have got themselves into on this affair.Somehow it stretches credulity to believe their defensiveness and double speak would be apparent if the accused was of a different political party.

[TAWP]

jayboy>> Unlike you I have openly stated that if this man is guilty I hope he goes away for a long time. You see, I abhor all criminals such as this and see no reason to make excuses for them. Unlike you.

It's not about me however irritated you might be about this matter.Reality has a way of making built in political prejudices look absurd.

I have not stated my opinion, unlike you dare I say, on his guilt one way or the other, because of the presumption of innocence - regardless of political background.That's why I suggested revisit this matter in a few months.

My interest albeit a little facetious was in the comical contortions the usual suspects have got themselves into on this affair.Somehow it stretches credulity to believe their defensiveness and double speak would be apparent if the accused was of a different political party.

For someone that pretends to be clever it somehow flew straight over your head that this is a direct continuation of the previous thread, as outlined earlier in this thread too, where Mr K. attacked another MP in the cafeteria. A thread where you were very busy 'explaining' how bad the attacked MP was.

And not denouncing Mr. K. until pressed on the matter.

See, here is where you and I are different. In my very first post in this thread, said that if this man is guilty of this crime I hope he gets sent away for a long time. No excuse.

It would be interesting when you stop decrying others of having a 'political prejudice' when it is clear that looking over this and the previous thread there is only one side that is overly one-sided in their focus.

Edited December 28, 2011 by TAWP

[Orac]

Glad we are in agreement then. I look forward to the day when those who initiated and benefited from the actions of the red shirts face similar charges as their mercenary lackeys,

Your obsessive crusade against the redshirts has no relevance. No redshirt supported, back or aligned MP planned and carried out a brutal murder. On the other hand, there is a member of the Democrat party that is accused of just that.

Your sycophantic defense of those who planned and carried out an armed insurgency which resulted in the deaths of 91 people while meanwhile claiming outrage over an opposition MP accused of murder is more than slightly hypocritical, but not unusual.

Geriatrickid acts like a redshirt. Complains about double standards but uses it constantly.

See also this text posted on facebook:

Today, Team-Korn would like to share some interesting observations made by Komchadluek newspaper yesterday regarding Democrat MP Khanchit Thapsuwan's alleged involvement in the murder of Samut Sakhon Provincial Administration Organisation president Udon Kraiwatnussorn.

- The only eyewitness testimony came from the victim's driver.

- Do the police actually have enough hard evidence in linking the murder of Khun Udon to MP Khanchit Thapsuwan and the Democrat Party? Or was the call politically motivated?

- In a similar case, why has the police not linked the murder of Chutidet Suwannakerd (Democrat Party canvasser in Don Muang murdered in early December 2011) to any political parties?

According to the original story in this thread the shooting was caught on camera and there is also other forensic evidence. It also refers to eye-witness accounts plural which suggest there was more than one eye-witness. Though I would not rely totally on a report in The Nation it does seem to suggest there is more to it than an allegation from the victims driver.

[webfact]

House to Decide on Immunity for MP Named in Murder Case

The Democrat leader says the decision whether to allow immunity from investigation during the House session for his party's MP, who is facing a murder charge, relies on the judgment of Parliament.

Democrat leader AbhisitVejjajiva said police have already submitted a request with the House speaker seeking permission to bring his party's Samut Sakhon MP Kanchit Tapsuwan into the judicial process as he has been named a suspect in the murder of chairman of Samut Sakhon Provincial Administration Organization Udon Kraiwatnusorn.

Abhisit stated the House will decide if Kanchit can exercise his parliamentary immunity to postpone his meeting with investigators while it is still in session.

Democrat MP for Patthalung Niphit Intharasombat, who chairs the party's legal panel, said Kanchit still attended today's House meeting while suggesting his colleague should be given a chance to carry out his MP duties until his case is finalized.

Niphit remarked although his party does not command the majority of seats in the Lower House, every MP who faces a lawsuit is always allowed immunity if they are named in any lawsuit.

The MP then questioned why the arrest warrant against Kanchit can be sought within 24 hours after the crime took place, but no progress has been seen in the murder of a former Democrat MP candidate's vote canvasser.

Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobumrung commented that the decision on Kanchit's parliamentary immunity must be based on the Constitution and said the court usually grants bail for suspects who turn themselves in no matter how severe the charges.

The deputy premier then stated although Kanchit has denied his charge, the police have evidence against him, but they have suggested the crime was not politically motivated.

Government chief whip Udomdej Rattanasatien said the ruling coalition still has not discussed whether to allow Kanchit to use his parliamentary immunity to postpone his meeting with investigators, but noted he should be permitted to do so as the House always grants such a right for its lawmakers who face lawsuits.

-- Tan Network 2011-12-28

[geriatrickid]

Abhisit Vejjajiva, the Democrat Party leader and opposition head, was aware of the warrant but decided not to react, pending police taking regular steps to deal with the case, party spokesman Chavanont Intharakomalsut said.

TVF would have erupted in angry comments from the anti government contingent if the killer was alleged to have been PTP and PM Yingluck not reacted. Why the double standard here?

Not reacting is what you're supposed to do. Reacting by way of obfuscation, pressuring judicial bodies, spinning lies is what you're not supposed to do. Presumably there are agencies to deal with these things. Would you prefer it be ajudicated in the politcal realm like all the Red Shirt felonies?

Wrong. The first thing any responsible political leader is to ask an MP under investigation for a serious crime like murder is to withdraw from the caucus. The standard protocol is to state that until a person is cleared, it is inappropriate for an alleged murderer to sit in caucus. The fact that Abhisit is ignoring the situation speaks volumes and is reprehensible.

The same standard would result in not one, but 12 Pheu Thai Party MP's being removed from the caucus.

Where's the condemnation for the reprehensible action of your Madame Yingluck?

I expect no less from you. You can't deal with the fact that there is an alleged cold blooded killer sitting in the Democratic caucus, a party led by a man that has pledged zero tolerance of such behaviour. Instead you try to deflect the argument to the PTP. Deal with this case. Why is it none of your cabal can practice what you preach? You demand integrity and the rule of law. Fine. Then live up to those requirements and recognize that this Democrat should not be in the caucus.

In respect to the 12 PTP MPs you dragged into this matter, none of the MPs is accused of undertaking a premeditated murder. None of the MPS is charged with engaged in physical assault with the intent to kill. The 12 MPs were engaged in a very open protest against the alleged illegal and unethical activities of the previous administration that came to power as a result of an illegal military coup. However, that's not the issue here. the fact of the matter is that there is only one alleged murderer sitting in a party's political caucus and that is a Democrat MP.

[whybother]

I expect no less from you. You can't deal with the fact that there is an alleged cold blooded killer sitting in the Democratic caucus, a party led by a man that has pledged zero tolerance of such behaviour. Instead you try to deflect the argument to the PTP. Deal with this case. Why is it none of your cabal can practice what you preach? You demand integrity and the rule of law. Fine. Then live up to those requirements and recognize that this Democrat should not be in the caucus.

In respect to the 12 PTP MPs you dragged into this matter, none of the MPs is accused of undertaking a premeditated murder. None of the MPS is charged with engaged in physical assault with the intent to kill. The 12 MPs were engaged in a very open protest against the alleged illegal and unethical activities of the previous administration that came to power as a result of an illegal military coup. However, that's not the issue here. the fact of the matter is that there is only one alleged murderer sitting in a party's political caucus and that is a Democrat MP.

"previous administration that came to power as a result of an illegal military coup." - You've got your timelines mixed up haven't you?

There is one alleged murderer and 12 alleged terrorists, but you're only complaining about one.

So often you go on about waiting for facts but straight away here you have jumped on the "he's guilty" band wagon.

[Buchholz]

Glad we are in agreement then. I look forward to the day when those who initiated and benefited from the actions of the red shirts face similar charges as their mercenary lackeys,

Your obsessive crusade against the redshirts has no relevance. No redshirt supported, back or aligned MP planned and carried out a brutal murder. On the other hand, there is a member of the Democrat party that is accused of just that.

Your sycophantic defense of those who planned and carried out an armed insurgency which resulted in the deaths of 91 people while meanwhile claiming outrage over an opposition MP accused of murder is more than slightly hypocritical, but not unusual.

+ 1

The "usual", indeed.

.

[Buchholz]

Glad we are in agreement then. I look forward to the day when those who initiated and benefited from the actions of the red shirts face similar charges as their mercenary lackeys,

Your obsessive crusade against the redshirts has no relevance. No redshirt supported, back or aligned MP planned and carried out a brutal murder. On the other hand, there is a member of the Democrat party that is accused of just that.

Your sycophantic defense of those who planned and carried out an armed insurgency which resulted in the deaths of 91 people while meanwhile claiming outrage over an opposition MP accused of murder is more than slightly hypocritical, but not unusual.

Geriatrickid acts like a redshirt. Complains about double standards but uses it constantly.

Yep.

.

[Buchholz]

Not reacting is what you're supposed to do. Reacting by way of obfuscation, pressuring judicial bodies, spinning lies is what you're not supposed to do. Presumably there are agencies to deal with these things. Would you prefer it be ajudicated in the politcal realm like all the Red Shirt felonies?

Wrong. The first thing any responsible political leader is to ask an MP under investigation for a serious crime like murder is to withdraw from the caucus. The standard protocol is to state that until a person is cleared, it is inappropriate for an alleged murderer to sit in caucus. The fact that Abhisit is ignoring the situation speaks volumes and is reprehensible.

The same standard would result in not one, but 12 Pheu Thai Party MP's being removed from the caucus.

Where's the condemnation for the reprehensible action of your Madame Yingluck?

I expect no less from you. You can't deal with the fact that there is an alleged cold blooded killer sitting in the Democratic caucus, a party led by a man that has pledged zero tolerance of such behaviour. Instead you try to deflect the argument to the PTP. Deal with this case. Why is it none of your cabal can practice what you preach? You demand integrity and the rule of law. Fine. Then live up to those requirements and recognize that this Democrat should not be in the caucus.

In respect to the 12 PTP MPs you dragged into this matter, none of the MPs is accused of undertaking a premeditated murder. None of the MPS is charged with engaged in physical assault with the intent to kill. The 12 MPs were engaged in a very open protest against the alleged illegal and unethical activities of the previous administration that came to power as a result of an illegal military coup. However, that's not the issue here. the fact of the matter is that there is only one alleged murderer sitting in a party's political caucus and that is a Democrat MP.

We have an accusation, not the confirmation of a finalized "cold blooded killer" that you purport. I'm only highlighting the hyprocrisy in your condemnation of only 1 side. I don't have any problem condemning the accused in this case if the charges he faces are proven. You demand he be removed from the caucus based on the accusation. I ask that you condemn the others that are also MP's and also have been acccused of crimes.

You can't do that .... because of hyprocrisy.

.

[craigt3365]

One post has been removed from view. Please abide by forum rules:

In using Thai Visa I agree:

1) To respect fellow members.

[Crushdepth]

Abhisit Vejjajiva, the Democrat Party leader and opposition head, was aware of the warrant but decided not to react, pending police taking regular steps to deal with the case, party spokesman Chavanont Intharakomalsut said.

TVF would have erupted in angry comments from the anti government contingent if the killer was alleged to have been PTP and PM Yingluck not reacted. Why the double standard here?

Not reacting is what you're supposed to do. Reacting by way of obfuscation, pressuring judicial bodies, spinning lies is what you're not supposed to do. Presumably there are agencies to deal with these things. Would you prefer it be ajudicated in the politcal realm like all the Red Shirt felonies?

Wrong. The first thing any responsible political leader is to ask an MP under investigation for a serious crime like murder is to withdraw from the caucus. The standard protocol is to state that until a person is cleared, it is inappropriate for an alleged murderer to sit in caucus. The fact that Abhisit is ignoring the situation speaks volumes and is reprehensible.

So those MPs charged with terrorism will now stand down, to set a good example? Maybe their criminal fugitive leader will surrender himself too :-)

The guy has surrendered to police, asked for his immunity to be waived and Abhisit has put in a request for the matter to be dealt with (waiving immunity is the decision of the house). Those are the facts you choose to ignore.

[Moruya]

It looks like some games are being played out here.

If the reports in the BP are correct then Khanich has impeded the investigation by failing to provide his car and his gun to the police.

If Chalerm is correct (He's usually full of hot air) then Khanich' father has been attempting to muscle witnesses out of the way (pot, kettle and all that!)

I think the Dems should do the right thing here and suspend the guy until the legal case is concluded. Wonder if they are waiting for the PTP to vote on it and then haul them over the red-shirt terrorist coals?

[animatic]

Democrat MP Kanchit turns himself in following issuance of arrest warrant for murder of Samut Sakhon PAO chief/TAN_Network

What?? He didn't do a runner?? He'd never cut it as a red shirt.

No Red Shirts who "have done a runner" have been directly implicated in the murder of a fellow MP so the comparison hardly stands does it?

No, just peripherally or circumstantially implicated in the deaths of many.

And many more circumstantially implicated in covering up crimes.

If you live in a glass house P don't throw stones, you'll get cut by the shards.

[geriatrickid]

"previous administration that came to power as a result of an illegal military coup." - You've got your timelines mixed up haven't you?

There is one alleged murderer and 12 alleged terrorists, but you're only complaining about one.

So often you go on about waiting for facts but straight away here you have jumped on the "he's guilty" band wagon.

I believe the MP is due the presumption of innocence. However, the charges are sufficient enough to warrant a removal from caucus at the very last. He can continue in his seat until the house decides otherwise. That has been my position. What part do you not understand? I have not said he was guilty.

[animatic]

Your obsessive crusade against the redshirts has no relevance. No redshirt supported, back or aligned MP planned and carried out a brutal murder. On the other hand, there is a member of the Democrat party that is accused of just that.

Your sycophantic defense of those who planned and carried out an armed insurgency which resulted in the deaths of 91 people while meanwhile claiming outrage over an opposition MP accused of murder is more than slightly hypocritical, but not unusual.

Geriatrickid acts like a redshirt. Complains about double standards but uses it constantly.

Yep.

.

Allegedly +1 likely many more than that.

But who's counting.

[geriatrickid]

No, just peripherally or circumstantially implicated in the deaths of many.

And many more circumstantially implicated in covering up crimes.

If you live in a glass house P don't throw stones, you'll get cut by the shards.

Your logic is that because you perceive the Redshirts to have done wrong, that it is ok for an alleged cold blooded killer to sit in the Democrat caucus. Need I remind you of Mr. Abhisit's repeated statements on the need for honesty and ethics? What bigger fail on the subject than to allow an alleged brutal murderer to remain in caucus. The right thing to do is to ask the MP to withdraw until he is cleared. This thread is not about Redshirts. it concerns an MP that is alleged to have planned a murder and then shot the victim in the head. The refusal of Mr. abhisit to remove the man from the caucus is nothing short of tacit support for the accused. Mr. Abhisit has demonstrated once again that he talks alot but can't meet the standards he demands of others.

[animatic]

"previous administration that came to power as a result of an illegal military coup." - You've got your timelines mixed up haven't you?

There is one alleged murderer and 12 alleged terrorists, but you're only complaining about one.

So often you go on about waiting for facts but straight away here you have jumped on the "he's guilty" band wagon.

I believe the MP is due the presumption of innocence. However, the charges are sufficient enough to warrant a removal from caucus at the very last. He can continue in his seat until the house decides otherwise. That has been my position. What part do you not understand? I have not said he was guilty.

If that were the case,

then PTP would have clearly already lost their Parliamentary edge in the house,

from removals for cause, under your criteria.

Not winning the Glass Houses arguments for double standards as S.O.P. yet again.

[animatic]

No, just peripherally or circumstantially implicated in the deaths of many.

And many more circumstantially implicated in covering up crimes.

If you live in a glass house P don't throw stones, you'll get cut by the shards.

Your logic is that because you perceive the Redshirts to have done wrong, that it is ok for an alleged cold blooded killer to sit in the Democrat caucus. Need I remind you of Mr. Abhisit's repeated statements on the need for honesty and ethics? What bigger fail on the subject than to allow an alleged brutal murderer to remain in caucus. The right thing to do is to ask the MP to withdraw until he is cleared. This thread is not about Redshirts. it concerns an MP that is alleged to have planned a murder and then shot the victim in the head. The refusal of Mr. abhisit to remove the man from the caucus is nothing short of tacit support for the accused. Mr. Abhisit has demonstrated once again that he talks alot but can't meet the standards he demands of others.

Ah but you are going for the hang em high approach on this case,

and makes it proper for comparison to your past comments defending

PTP and Redshirt suspects. Or do you subscribe to double standards yet again?

There is more than enough publicly viewable evidences to support my conclusion,

the context for which that you have EDITED OUT of this continuation of the discussion.

And by using your logic, such as it is, then the redshirts MP's

and the PTP MPs who colluded with them,

as caught on video and pictures and public statements,

should all be asked to step down till their cases are properly adjudicated.

And that is likely enough to remove parliamentary advantage.

Edited December 30, 2011 by animatic