Appointment Of Red-Shirt Natthawut Not Good For Unity: Thai Opinion

[anterian]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

[Siam Simon]

Scorecard is falling into a common mistake, he is trying to establish that Kasit was the lesser evil of the two. This is irrelevant and in any case a subjective assessment.

The point is both are evil, and both the Dems and the PT have been equally guilty of endorsing evil acts by appointing them to government posts.

Well that's your opinion.

I can't accept that kasit is evil. However IMHO:

- The PAD made a big mistake in occupying the airport, and did more harm that good to their image and their cause.

- Kasit used poor judgement to make speeches on stage at the airport.

- In hindsight, it was probably 'not worth it' for the dems to appoint him as foreign minister.

Neither of the two politicians being discussed is out-and-out evil (cue the "burned Bangkok" ranters.....). Both behaved idiotically/showed poor judgement, and neither should have been rewarded with ministerial posts. It's not even as if Kasit was any good as FM. Hopefully, Nattawut will turn out to be more competent in the Agriculture Ministry, but I won't be holding my breath.

[TAWP]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

[Siam Simon]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

Of course, we could go down the semantics route favoured by posters of TAWP's ilk. What exactly is a PAD leader? Apart from having had a fair bit of military backing in the past, do they have a military-style heirarchy with official ranks? Whilst not a core day-to-day PAD leader, the fact that Kasit gave a speech to the main protest at the airport made him some sort of leader. His little place in history is certainly going to be marked by his action in leading the demonstration that day.

[DocN]

Unity?

[Buchholz]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

Of course, we could go down the semantics route favoured by posters of TAWP's ilk. What exactly is a PAD leader? Apart from having had a fair bit of military backing in the past, do they have a military-style heirarchy with official ranks? Whilst not a core day-to-day PAD leader, the fact that Kasit gave a speech to the main protest at the airport made him some sort of leader. His little place in history is certainly going to be marked by his action in leading the demonstration that day.

Semantics?

Kasit was not a PAD Leader.

Fact.

No semantics.

Natthawut is a UDD Leader.

Fact.

No semantics.

.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Buchholz

[Siam Simon]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

Of course, we could go down the semantics route favoured by posters of TAWP's ilk. What exactly is a PAD leader? Apart from having had a fair bit of military backing in the past, do they have a military-style heirarchy with official ranks? Whilst not a core day-to-day PAD leader, the fact that Kasit gave a speech to the main protest at the airport made him some sort of leader. His little place in history is certainly going to be marked by his action in leading the demonstration that day.

Semantics?

Kasit was not a PAD Leader.

Fact.

No semantics.

Natthawut is a UDD Leader.

Fact.

No semantics.

.

Kasit was ca key speaker one day at an unofficial occupation of the airport. He didn't ask the protestors to disperse, as any responsible politician would have done. He encouraged and incited the demonstrators (even dragging Cambodia into things, with his inflammatory nonsense about washing his feet in Hun Sen's blood). By definition, he led the protests that day. Like I already stated: Not a core day-to-day leader, but a leader on the day he spoke.

[rixalex]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

Of course, we could go down the semantics route favoured by posters of TAWP's ilk. What exactly is a PAD leader? Apart from having had a fair bit of military backing in the past, do they have a military-style heirarchy with official ranks? Whilst not a core day-to-day PAD leader, the fact that Kasit gave a speech to the main protest at the airport made him some sort of leader. His little place in history is certainly going to be marked by his action in leading the demonstration that day.

Whether or not Kasit was a leader of PAD, he should never had been made FM, and it was clearly a mistake on many levels that justifiably drew much criticism.

Pathetic though that this stupid decision by the Dems is now being used to in some way justify the appointment of this idiot, but of course, what other way is there for red shirt supporters to defend their side? We have seen it from day one: "Thaksin is guilty of corruption, but so are other people. Red shirts burnt Bangkok, but the yellow shirts closed the airport. PTP appoint an idiot, but so did the Dems".

Just for once, wouldn't it be nice to hear a red shirt supporter hold up his hands and say yes, that is/was wrong, instead of this desperate and constant finger pointing in every direction away from themselves?

[Buchholz]

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

Of course, we could go down the semantics route favoured by posters of TAWP's ilk. What exactly is a PAD leader? Apart from having had a fair bit of military backing in the past, do they have a military-style heirarchy with official ranks? Whilst not a core day-to-day PAD leader, the fact that Kasit gave a speech to the main protest at the airport made him some sort of leader. His little place in history is certainly going to be marked by his action in leading the demonstration that day.

Semantics?

Kasit was not a PAD Leader.

Fact.

No semantics.

Natthawut is a UDD Leader.

Fact.

No semantics.

Kasit was ca key speaker one day at an unofficial occupation of the airport. He didn't ask the protestors to disperse, as any responsible politician would have done. He encouraged and incited the demonstrators (even dragging Cambodia into things, with his inflammatory nonsense about washing his feet in Hun Sen's blood). By definition, he led the protests that day. Like I already stated: Not a core day-to-day leader, but a leader on the day he spoke.

throwing facts completely out the window now

Kasit was not a politician at the time.

Kasit did not lead the protest that day.

Kasit was not a PAD Leader.

The subject of this thread, Natthawut, is a UDD Leader.

Facts.

No semantics.

No squirming.

Perhaps best to return to the subject of the thread.

.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Buchholz

[Siam Simon]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

Of course, we could go down the semantics route favoured by posters of TAWP's ilk. What exactly is a PAD leader? Apart from having had a fair bit of military backing in the past, do they have a military-style heirarchy with official ranks? Whilst not a core day-to-day PAD leader, the fact that Kasit gave a speech to the main protest at the airport made him some sort of leader. His little place in history is certainly going to be marked by his action in leading the demonstration that day.

Whether or not Kasit was a leader of PAD, he should never had been made FM, and it was clearly a mistake on many levels that justifiably drew much criticism.

Pathetic though that this stupid decision by the Dems is now being used to in some way justify the appointment of this idiot, but of course, what other way is there for red shirt supporters to defend their side? We have seen it from day one: "Thaksin is guilty of corruption, but so are other people. Red shirts burnt Bangkok, but the yellow shirts closed the airport. PTP appoint an idiot, but so did the Dems".

Just for once, wouldn't it be nice to hear a red shirt supporter hold up his hands and say yes, that is/was wrong, instead of this desperate and constant finger pointing in every direction away from themselves?

Dear, oh dear, oh dear. Not that I'm a "red shirt supporter", but you only have to go back a handful of posts in this very thread to find my condemnation of Nattawut's behaviour in 2010 (along with Kasit's behaviour in 2008). Oh well. Never mind .

[Siam Simon]

throwing facts completely out the window now

Kasit was not a politician at the time.

Kasit did not lead the protest that day.

Kasit was not a PAD Leader.

The subject of this thread, Natthawut, is a UDD Leader.

Facts.

No semantics.

No squirming.

Perhaps best to return to the subject of the thread.

.

Kasit Piromya wasn't politically active in 2008?

A key speaker at an event is, by definition, leading that event at the time. No semantics. Just fact.

You need to stop squirming your double somersaults through hoops semantics, lay off the 'perception management' and get back to basics. You're in orbit.

[Buchholz]

throwing facts completely out the window now

Kasit was not a politician at the time.

Kasit did not lead the protest that day.

Kasit was not a PAD Leader.

The subject of this thread, Natthawut, is a UDD Leader.

Facts.

No semantics.

No squirming.

Perhaps best to return to the subject of the thread.

.

Kasit Piromya wasn't politically active in 2008?

You said he was a politician.

He was not.

Another of your off-topic lies.

Stay off the sauce.

.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Buchholz

[anterian]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

I strongly resent being called a liar, perhaps you are not as clever with words as I thought. I am well aware of what "facts" are. They are actions which can be corroborated by many independent unbiased sources. You it seems prefer to present a biased and distorted view of these facts, perhaps you should look in a mirror when you use the word liar.

[rixalex]

Dear, oh dear, oh dear. Not that I'm a "red shirt supporter", but you only have to go back a handful of posts in this very thread to find my condemnation of Nattawut's behaviour in 2010 (along with Kasit's behaviour in 2008). Oh well. Never mind .

Exactly, red shirt supporters' - not that that is how i am describing you personally - most famous party trick is of course the "i'm no fan of Thaksin, but..." or "i condemn this but...." or "they are bad but the others are as bad/worse blah blah blah....".

Precisely the point i was making.

[anterian]

Leaving personalities out of it, can we not all agree that both the Dems and the PT have made stupid mistakes with cabinet appointments, in each case based on perceived favours owed to those appointed. Can we not also agree that whilst this is standard behaviour in Thailand it is not the way any government should operate, appointments should not be rewards but based on ability.

[Siam Simon]

Dear, oh dear, oh dear. Not that I'm a "red shirt supporter", but you only have to go back a handful of posts in this very thread to find my condemnation of Nattawut's behaviour in 2010 (along with Kasit's behaviour in 2008). Oh well. Never mind .

Exactly, red shirt supporters' - not that that is how i am describing you personally - most famous party trick is of course the "i'm no fan of Thaksin, but..." or "i condemn this but...." or "they are bad but the others are as bad/worse blah blah blah....".

Precisely the point i was making.

Yes, I remember posting a video of Abhisit caught out lying about the Rohingya debacle a while ago, and you immediately retorted with a video of Thaksin lying about a completely unrelated issue. Funny, that, isn't it, doing something that one accuses others of doing? Just like when you first brought up the SJ issue with me at around the same time, claiming that you took all posters at face value. I only had to go back a few posts in your posting history at the time to find you accusing a poster of being a returning specific banned poster .

Anyway, good, sensible and balanced comments from Anterian in his last post.

[ballpoint]

At least Kasit was qualified for the job. A quick look at his CV before being made FM:

• 3rd Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (1968)

• 3rd Secretary, News Analysis Division, Dept. of Information (1969)

• 3rd Secretary, SEATO Division, Dept. of International Organizations (1972)

• 3rd & 2nd Secr., Thai Embassy & European Union Mission, Brussels (1975)

• 2nd Secretary, International Economic Affairs Div., (1979)

• 1st Secretary, Office of the Director-General, Economic Affairs Dept. (1979)

• Director, Commerce and Industry Div., ASEAN Dept. (1981)

• Director, Economic Information Div., Dept. of Economic Affairs (1983)

• Director, Policy and Planning Div., Office of the Permanent Secretary (1984)

• Deputy Director-General, Dept. of Economic Affairs (1985)

• Ambassador Attached to the Ministry (European Affairs) (1988)

• Director-General, Dept. of International Organizations (1988)

• Ambassador of Thailand to:

– Soviet Union and Mongolia (1991)

– Russian Federation and Mongolia (1992-1993)

– Indonesia and Papua New Guinea (1994-6)

– Germany (1997-2001)

• Ambassador attached to Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and seconded to the Prime Minister Secretariat Office (2001)

• Adviser to Deputy PM and Commerce Minister Somkid Jatusripitak, and Banthoon Lamsam (Kasikorn Thai Bank)

• Ambassador of Thailand to Japan (2001)

• Ambassador of Thailand to the United States (2004-5)

• Adviser to the Senate Committee (2006)

• Democrat Party-List Candidate (2006)

• Adviser to the Democrat Party and PAD Movement (2006-2008)

• Democrat Shadow Deputy Prime Minister (2008)

Thaksin obviously thought him good enough to be appointed as ambassador to the US in 2004. Now, what qualifications does Nuttawut have for his appointment? Indeed, what qualifications does the current FM have? (Apart from also being a prominant member of the red shirts).

[Buchholz]

At least Kasit was qualified for the job. A quick look at his CV before being made FM:

• 3rd Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (1968)

• 3rd Secretary, News Analysis Division, Dept. of Information (1969)

• 3rd Secretary, SEATO Division, Dept. of International Organizations (1972)

• 3rd & 2nd Secr., Thai Embassy & European Union Mission, Brussels (1975)

• 2nd Secretary, International Economic Affairs Div., (1979)

• 1st Secretary, Office of the Director-General, Economic Affairs Dept. (1979)

• Director, Commerce and Industry Div., ASEAN Dept. (1981)

• Director, Economic Information Div., Dept. of Economic Affairs (1983)

• Director, Policy and Planning Div., Office of the Permanent Secretary (1984)

• Deputy Director-General, Dept. of Economic Affairs (1985)

• Ambassador Attached to the Ministry (European Affairs) (1988)

• Director-General, Dept. of International Organizations (1988)

• Ambassador of Thailand to:

– Soviet Union and Mongolia (1991)

– Russian Federation and Mongolia (1992-1993)

– Indonesia and Papua New Guinea (1994-6)

– Germany (1997-2001)

• Ambassador attached to Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and seconded to the Prime Minister Secretariat Office (2001)

• Adviser to Deputy PM and Commerce Minister Somkid Jatusripitak, and Banthoon Lamsam (Kasikorn Thai Bank)

• Ambassador of Thailand to Japan (2001)

• Ambassador of Thailand to the United States (2004-5)

• Adviser to the Senate Committee (2006)

• Democrat Party-List Candidate (2006)

• Adviser to the Democrat Party and PAD Movement (2006-2008)

• Democrat Shadow Deputy Prime Minister (2008)

Thaksin obviously thought him good enough to be appointed as ambassador to the US in 2004. Now, what qualifications does Nuttawut have for his appointment? Indeed, what qualifications does the current FM have? (Apart from also being a prominant member of the red shirts).

The current FM has only one qualification and it out-trumps Kasit's lengthy CV.

He's Thaksin's cousin.

.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Buchholz

[rixalex]

Yes, I remember posting a video of Abhisit caught out lying about the Rohingya debacle a while ago, and you immediately retorted with a video of Thaksin lying about a completely unrelated issue.

I think your memory is failing you. A link would of course prove otherwise.

Just like when you first brought up the SJ issue with me at around the same time, claiming that you took all posters at face value. I only had to go back a few posts in your posting history at the time to find you accusing a poster of being a returning specific banned poster .

SJ...deary me....

[whybother]

Of course, we could go down the semantics route favoured by posters of TAWP's ilk. What exactly is a PAD leader? Apart from having had a fair bit of military backing in the past, do they have a military-style heirarchy with official ranks? Whilst not a core day-to-day PAD leader, the fact that Kasit gave a speech to the main protest at the airport made him some sort of leader. His little place in history is certainly going to be marked by his action in leading the demonstration that day.

Does that make the farang that gave a speech on the Ratchaprasong stage a red shirt leader?

[Buchholz]

Of course, we could go down the semantics route favoured by posters of TAWP's ilk. What exactly is a PAD leader? Apart from having had a fair bit of military backing in the past, do they have a military-style heirarchy with official ranks? Whilst not a core day-to-day PAD leader, the fact that Kasit gave a speech to the main protest at the airport made him some sort of leader. His little place in history is certainly going to be marked by his action in leading the demonstration that day.

Does that make the farang that gave a speech on the Ratchaprasong stage a red shirt leader?

He seems to think there was a round-robin system of having a different PAD Leader every day.

Give a speech and your that day's Daily PAD Leader.

It's mind-boggling what obfuscations of the reality that are tried and tossed out by the red shirt supports.

[Ricardo]

Kasit was ca key speaker one day at an unofficial occupation of the airport. He didn't ask the protestors to disperse, as any responsible politician would have done. He encouraged and incited the demonstrators (even dragging Cambodia into things, with his inflammatory nonsense about washing his feet in Hun Sen's blood). By definition, he led the protests that day. Like I already stated: Not a core day-to-day leader, but a leader on the day he spoke.

By this definition, and given that he made regular speeches by video-link to the 'peaceful protest', wouldn't this make former-PM Thaksin a Red-Shirt leader ? I don't recall his asking them to disperse, or condemning the threats to burn Bangkok, either ?

[Siam Simon]

Of course, we could go down the semantics route favoured by posters of TAWP's ilk. What exactly is a PAD leader? Apart from having had a fair bit of military backing in the past, do they have a military-style heirarchy with official ranks? Whilst not a core day-to-day PAD leader, the fact that Kasit gave a speech to the main protest at the airport made him some sort of leader. His little place in history is certainly going to be marked by his action in leading the demonstration that day.

Does that make the farang that gave a speech on the Ratchaprasong stage a red shirt leader?

I know you've tried your best to make the most absurd comparison possible, but the answer is "possibly". Whilst it's obvious that he wasn't a core day-to-day leader, if he was carrying the crowd, he was by definition leading them. That's the nature of protests, as opposed to official organisations. And that's why leading protest figures often spring up seemingly out of the blue.

But none of this discussion diverts from the fact that public figures such as Nattawut and Kasit, who disgrace themselves by getting involved in illegal protests, should not be rewarded by promotion to high public office.

[Siam Simon]

Kasit was ca key speaker one day at an unofficial occupation of the airport. He didn't ask the protestors to disperse, as any responsible politician would have done. He encouraged and incited the demonstrators (even dragging Cambodia into things, with his inflammatory nonsense about washing his feet in Hun Sen's blood). By definition, he led the protests that day. Like I already stated: Not a core day-to-day leader, but a leader on the day he spoke.

By this definition, and given that he made regular speeches by video-link to the 'peaceful protest', wouldn't this make former-PM Thaksin a Red-Shirt leader ? I don't recall his asking them to disperse, or condemning the threats to burn Bangkok, either ?

Thaksin's support of the Red Shirt Movement has been well-documented (and sometimes fantasized about) on this forum. Anyway, well done on bringing Thaksin into this particular discussion. I'm sure one-or-two posters will now jump all over this in their haste to derail the thread.

[Ricardo]

Kasit was ca key speaker one day at an unofficial occupation of the airport. He didn't ask the protestors to disperse, as any responsible politician would have done. He encouraged and incited the demonstrators (even dragging Cambodia into things, with his inflammatory nonsense about washing his feet in Hun Sen's blood). By definition, he led the protests that day. Like I already stated: Not a core day-to-day leader, but a leader on the day he spoke.

By this definition, and given that he made regular speeches by video-link to the 'peaceful protest', wouldn't this make former-PM Thaksin a Red-Shirt leader ? I don't recall his asking them to disperse, or condemning the threats to burn Bangkok, either ?

Thaksin's support of the Red Shirt Movement has been well-documented (and sometimes fantasized about) on this forum. Anyway, well done on bringing Thaksin into this particular discussion. I'm sure one-or-two posters will now jump all over this in their haste to derail the thread.

So that's a 'No Comment' then.

My personal view is that a one-off speech would not make someone a Red-Shirt or PAD leader, but that repeated speeches or helping finance a protest probably would, for what its worth.

[waza]

Kasit was ca key speaker one day at an unofficial occupation of the airport. He didn't ask the protestors to disperse, as any responsible politician would have done. He encouraged and incited the demonstrators (even dragging Cambodia into things, with his inflammatory nonsense about washing his feet in Hun Sen's blood). By definition, he led the protests that day. Like I already stated: Not a core day-to-day leader, but a leader on the day he spoke.

By this definition, and given that he made regular speeches by video-link to the 'peaceful protest', wouldn't this make former-PM Thaksin a Red-Shirt leader ? I don't recall his asking them to disperse, or condemning the threats to burn Bangkok, either ?

Thaksin's support of the Red Shirt Movement has been well-documented (and sometimes fantasized about) on this forum. Anyway, well done on bringing Thaksin into this particular discussion. I'm sure one-or-two posters will now jump all over this in their haste to derail the thread.

So that's a 'No Comment' then.

My personal view is that a one-off speech would not make someone a Red-Shirt or PAD leader, but that repeated speeches or helping finance a protest probably would, for what its worth.

I agree. that would make Thaskin, a convicted crimial fleeing justice, the leader and finacer of the movement.

Edited January 26, 2012 by waza

[TAWP]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

I strongly resent being called a liar, perhaps you are not as clever with words as I thought. I am well aware of what "facts" are. They are actions which can be corroborated by many independent unbiased sources. You it seems prefer to present a biased and distorted view of these facts, perhaps you should look in a mirror when you use the word liar.

So restate again, who is Kasit and who was he for PAD?

I am giving you a chance for a blank slate. You can take it or go the route of some of your brothers in arms, restate the untruths and then proclaim it is all semantics.

[anterian]

For TAWP the comparison fails simply because of his political leanings. A cat may play with a rat until the rat is dead, a dog will worry a rat until it is dead, but to the rat both are equally killers. Publicly addressing and supporting a demonstration, or publicly leading a demonstration, are they really that different? TAWP may be clever with words, but his words do not negate the facts.

Caught out with a lie and you proclaim the there is no difference between a lie and the truth? The facts are that what you say is false. That is the facts. What do you think 'facts' means?

I strongly resent being called a liar, perhaps you are not as clever with words as I thought. I am well aware of what "facts" are. They are actions which can be corroborated by many independent unbiased sources. You it seems prefer to present a biased and distorted view of these facts, perhaps you should look in a mirror when you use the word liar.

So restate again, who is Kasit and who was he for PAD?

I am giving you a chance for a blank slate. You can take it or go the route of some of your brothers in arms, restate the untruths and then proclaim it is all semantics.

I am not sure why you think I should need a blank slate, nor come to that who are my brothers in arms? You may see yourself as one of a group but I do not, I comment as I see fit.

You seem to be applying a strange logic, a one off appearance in support of the PAD does not count, it has to be multiple appearances that count. Rather like saying it is ok to commit a robbery if you only do it once. You see it is nothing to do with semantics, just simple logic.

You have chosen to argue with me because you think I am a red supporter, a big mistake! I used to be a PAD supporter until they occupied the airport, that was the point of no return for me. Yet this does not make me a red shirt supporter, even though I am sympathetic to some of their objectives. Equally I find the blinkered defense that some like you write in support of the Dems or PAD and the equally vitriolic attacks on the PT and red shirts shows a complete lack of critical thinking. In real life there are rarely situations that are black or white, most are shades of grey.

[Buchholz]

A lot has been said, but I think reducing it down to the precise contention might be helpful to resolution.

Personally, I would simply call it a misstatement.

remember the PAD leader Kasit Piromya as Foreign Minister.

Kasit was not a PAD leader.

[jayboy]

So restate again, who is Kasit and who was he for PAD?

I am giving you a chance for a blank slate. You can take it or go the route of some of your brothers in arms, restate the untruths and then proclaim it is all semantics.

Kasit was not a PAD leader but he could be described as a cheerleader.He visited the international airport when it was seized by the yellow mob, and made some encouraging words of support to that mob.He praised the seizure of the airport and observed this was "a new innovation in public protest."

Notwithstanding his support for terrorism he was appointed Foreign Minister by Abhisit.The memory of his appalling behaviour at the airport in some ways has receded in memory given his more striking record of incompetence and buffoonery as Foreign Minister.To be fair to Abhisit one of the reasons Kasit was appointed was that he had a perfectly satisfactory record as an Ambassador and his poor and often laughable performance was something of a surprise.

As to his terrorist sympathies, many good people were caught up in the enthusiasm of the early PAD days (including Korn for example).But Kasit has never distanced himself or even apologised for his errors.It's not his biggest failure however.That was his record as Foreign Minister.

On a personal note please don't try to obfuscate.There are plenty of matters on which reasonable people may disagree but I don't think the record of this disgraceful incompetent is really one of them.