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

[waza]

Appointment Of Red-Shirt Natthawut Not Good For Unity

Appionting an accused terrorist to a government position obviously would cause disunity, with the public. Same as appionting another on a US ban list for immoral dealings would cause international disunity. However, what would you expect from a cabinet of millionaires who are controlled by a convicted criminal on the run from justice and headed by the criminals sister who refuses to show leadership.

[animatic]

Kasit made one speach.

Nattawat made hundreds, as a controling member of the Red Leaders Committee

He lead dozens of disruptions of trafic and non-red peoples lives.

He negotiated terms with the PM and was in the forefront

of all aspects of the red rallys and paths of its insurection.

He supurvised and allowed construction of baracades.

He never once agreed to let innocent others get on with their lives

Around the rally neighbothood if he did't get his way.

He never once repudiated the violence started by reds.

Kasit made one speach.

Edited January 28, 2012 by animatic

[TAWP]

As far as I am concerned, when an important public personage arrives at a mob situation and supports and endorses the actions of that mob, then he aligns himself with the leaders of that mob. Exactly as a guest speaker at a conference is part of that conference.

Exactly, he aligns himself, showing support.

Nothing along the lines of 'is a leader of..'.

Thank you for proving the point of my issue with the previous statements that flew around here.

[Siam Simon]

Kasit made one speach.

Nattawat made hundreds, as a controling member of the Red Leaders Committee

He lead dozens of disruptions of trafic and non-red peoples lives.

He negotiated terms with the PM and was in the forefront

of all aspects of the red rallys and paths of its insurection.

He supurvised and allowed construction of baracades.

He never once agreed to let innocent others get on with their lives

Around the rally neighbothood if he did't get his way.

He never once repudiated the violence started by reds.

Kasit made one speach.

Kasit led an illegal protest in making one speech encouraging and inciting the protestors (a protest that directly cost his country billions of baht in lost revenues which cannot be claimed back from insurers). It was one speech too many, and should have ruled him out of public office for the rest of his life. But he was almost immediately given the Foreign Office portfolio. Amazing Thailand.

[TAWP]

Kasit led an illegal protest in making one speech encouraging and inciting the protestors /../

This kind of hyperbole is funny.

Making one speech is leading a protest?

What was the name of the farang on the Red Shirt stage? I want to talk to a farang Red Shirt that obviously led the protests downtown.

[Siam Simon]

Kasit led an illegal protest in making one speech encouraging and inciting the protestors /../

This kind of hyperbole is funny.

Making one speech is leading a protest?

What was the name of the farang on the Red Shirt stage? I want to talk to a farang Red Shirt that obviously led the protests downtown.

Why don't you, then? He might even have some interesting stories about it. Who knows? If his audience was listening to him and believing what he was telling them, then he was leading their protest at that moment. Protest, by their nature, only have informal and transitory leaders: They don't have official protest generals, colonels, captains, prime ministers, CEO's or suchlike. Didn't you notice?

[anterian]

As far as I am concerned, when an important public personage arrives at a mob situation and supports and endorses the actions of that mob, then he aligns himself with the leaders of that mob. Exactly as a guest speaker at a conference is part of that conference.

Exactly, he aligns himself, showing support.

Nothing along the lines of 'is a leader of..'.

Thank you for proving the point of my issue with the previous statements that flew around here.

Well if you think that that counts as a victory all I can say is Pyrrhus thought the same

[waza]

Kasit made one speach.

Nattawat made hundreds, as a controling member of the Red Leaders Committee

He lead dozens of disruptions of trafic and non-red peoples lives.

He negotiated terms with the PM and was in the forefront

of all aspects of the red rallys and paths of its insurection.

He supurvised and allowed construction of baracades.

He never once agreed to let innocent others get on with their lives

Around the rally neighbothood if he did't get his way.

He never once repudiated the violence started by reds.

Kasit made one speach.

Kasit led an illegal protest in making one speech encouraging and inciting the protestors (a protest that directly cost his country billions of baht in lost revenues which cannot be claimed back from insurers). It was one speech too many, and should have ruled him out of public office for the rest of his life. But he was almost immediately given the Foreign Office portfolio. Amazing Thailand.

Great so you agree, leading an illegal protest, making speechs and inciting protestors should rule people like Natthawut out of public office for the rest of his life. Therefore his appiontment is not good for unity. Yes, Miracle amazing Thailand.

[Buchholz]

Kasit led an illegal protest in making one speech encouraging and inciting the protestors /../

This kind of hyperbole is funny.

Making one speech is leading a protest?

What was the name of the farang on the Red Shirt stage? I want to talk to a farang Red Shirt that obviously led the protests downtown.

Why don't you, then? He might even have some interesting stories about it. Who knows? If his audience was listening to him and believing what he was telling them, then he was leading their protest at that moment. Protest, by their nature, only have informal and transitory leaders: They don't have official protest generals, colonels, captains, prime ministers, CEO's or suchlike. Didn't you notice?

Conor Purcell, Red Shirt "Leader" of "millions" of Red Shirts

[animatic]

Kasit made one speach.

Nattawat made hundreds, as a controling member of the Red Leaders Committee

He lead dozens of disruptions of trafic and non-red peoples lives.

He negotiated terms with the PM and was in the forefront

of all aspects of the red rallys and paths of its insurection.

He supervised and allowed construction of baracades.

He never once agreed to let innocent others get on with their lives

Around the rally neighbothood if he did't get his way.

He never once repudiated the violence started by reds.

Kasit made one speach.

Kasit led an illegal protest in making one speech encouraging and inciting the protestors (a protest that directly cost his country billions of baht in lost revenues which cannot be claimed back from insurers). It was one speech too many, and should have ruled him out of public office for the rest of his life. But he was almost immediately given the Foreign Office portfolio. Amazing Thailand.

Great so you agree, leading an illegal protest, making speechs and inciting protestors should rule people like Natthawut out of public office for the rest of his life. Therefore his appiontment is not good for unity. Yes, Miracle amazing Thailand.

Give them enough rope for their argument, and

they inevitably HANG by their own illogical designs.

[warfie]

"Appointment Of Red-Shirt Natthawut Not Good For Unity"

ah, so it's not only my w... (er, someone I know) who has a particular talent for statements of the bleeding <deleted> obvious!

Edited January 28, 2012 by warfie

[Siam Simon]

Kasit led an illegal protest in making one speech encouraging and inciting the protestors (a protest that directly cost his country billions of baht in lost revenues which cannot be claimed back from insurers). It was one speech too many, and should have ruled him out of public office for the rest of his life. But he was almost immediately given the Foreign Office portfolio. Amazing Thailand.

Great so you agree, leading an illegal protest, making speechs and inciting protestors should rule people like Natthawut out of public office for the rest of his life. Therefore his appiontment is not good for unity. Yes, Miracle amazing Thailand.

Read the thread, man.

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.

[Siam Simon]

Kasit made one speach.

Nattawat made hundreds, as a controling member of the Red Leaders Committee

He lead dozens of disruptions of trafic and non-red peoples lives.

He negotiated terms with the PM and was in the forefront

of all aspects of the red rallys and paths of its insurection.

He supervised and allowed construction of baracades.

He never once agreed to let innocent others get on with their lives

Around the rally neighbothood if he did't get his way.

He never once repudiated the violence started by reds.

Kasit made one speach.

Kasit led an illegal protest in making one speech encouraging and inciting the protestors (a protest that directly cost his country billions of baht in lost revenues which cannot be claimed back from insurers). It was one speech too many, and should have ruled him out of public office for the rest of his life. But he was almost immediately given the Foreign Office portfolio. Amazing Thailand.

Great so you agree, leading an illegal protest, making speechs and inciting protestors should rule people like Natthawut out of public office for the rest of his life. Therefore his appiontment is not good for unity. Yes, Miracle amazing Thailand.

Give them enough rope for their argument, and

they inevitably HANG by their own illogical designs.

At least you tried .

Having any luck persuading that imaginary friend to give evidence on what 's/he' 'saw' at the 2010 troubles, btw?