Bills not aimed at getting Thaksin his money back: PM

[gand]

The country is on the brink of civil war and the Burberry cannot be bothered to read the bill, the bill may not be 'aimed' at getting TS his money back, but that and his amnesty will be the end result.

[473geo]

Not another tactic that has totally flummoxed the opposition.....poor souls....Abhisit can't show off his debating skills.....

Yea we all know debates are worthless in a democracy.

Where a decision can be overuled and overturned......quite possibly

[rubl]

Sorry geo, I don't want to go into what either you or GK think the approach of the PM has been. I'm merely saying that regarding the topic it does seem somewhat strange or even hilarious to have the PM say that a bill she hasn't read is not aimed at getting k. Thaksin (oh and by the way herself) some money back.

BTW I first replied with "^ #109" because I was still in Opera browser which doesn't like the TVF frontend. Now switched to firefox

Actually Rubl it does not appear strange at all......in fact given her continued avoidance of any potentially 'difficult' areas .......a keen and astute follower of recent Thai politics might be forgiven for thinking her reaction was to be expected....

There's a difference in 'performing one's duty' and 'reaction as expected'. So back to the topic and in 'free style' interpretation "you should believe me, I'm smiling nicely"

Don't tell me now her smile is throwing the opposition......what next?

If I did confuse you with my free style interpretation of the topic, I do apologize. I simply meant that your remarks as still quoted here are not relevant to either my replies nor the topic.

To try to make it a bit more clear, the topic is "bill not aimed at getting thaksin his money back" and this said by a PM who admitted not to have read the bill.

If you want to discuss other subjects that's fine with me, but this particular topic seems not to be suited for that. PM me, if you feel so inclined

Edited June 3, 2012 by rubl

[gand]

Not another tactic that has totally flummoxed the opposition.....poor souls....Abhisit can't show off his debating skills.....

Yea we all know debates are worthless in a democracy.

Where a decision can be overuled and overturned......quite possibly

Huh?

[473geo]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

[gand]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

So you do agree TS will get his money back as a result of this bill?

[rubl]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

Your logic is flawed, dear geo. If you believe her saying she hasn't read the bills, how can you believe her saying it's not about getting thaksin his money back. It may be something she believes, but that believe is not based on the contents of the bill as she doesn't know it's contents. There is a chance she happens to be right, but that has nothing to do with knowledge, only all with luck.

As for your last sentence, although I'm somewhat overweight I'm still only 'one of me' rather than 'all of you'. Even if I (and only I) believe the PM saying 'she believes the bill is not about money', I'm less inclined to believe her when she says she insists. Again that's related to her not having read the bill.

BTW we came to this point as it seemed proper to get here and back on topic rather than detouring around what democrats might or might not have done, or should have been doing. You also missed the chance to discuss the material the moon is made of, roquefort or gorgonzola cheese

Edited June 3, 2012 by rubl

[473geo]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

So you do agree TS will get his money back as a result of this bill?

I have not read any of the 3 bills but I am led to believe........

[473geo]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

Your logic is flawed, dear geo. If you believe her saying she hasn't read the bills, how can you believe her saying it's not about getting thaksin his money back. It may be something she believes, but that believe is not based on the contents of the bill as she doesn't know it's contents. There is a chance she happens to be right, but that has nothing to do with knowledge, only all with luck.

As for your last sentence, although I'm somewhat overweight I'm still only 'one of me' rather than 'all of you'. Even if I (and only I) believe the PM saying 'she believes the bill is not about money', I'm less inclined to believe her when she says she insists. Again that's related to her not having read the bill.

BTW we came to this point as it seemed proper to get here and back on topic rather than detouring around what democrats might or might not have done, or should have been doing. You also missed the chance to discuss the material the moon is made of, rochefort or gorgonzola cheese

Well Rubl in my opinion the aim is to bring Thaksin back free of all charges, priority, main and almost exclusive point.......money is lower on the list, not to my mind a priority......so work it out, the bills are not primarily about money......got it......perhaps you should lay off the cheese

[rubl]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

Your logic is flawed, dear geo. If you believe her saying she hasn't read the bills, how can you believe her saying it's not about getting thaksin his money back. It may be something she believes, but that believe is not based on the contents of the bill as she doesn't know it's contents. There is a chance she happens to be right, but that has nothing to do with knowledge, only all with luck.

As for your last sentence, although I'm somewhat overweight I'm still only 'one of me' rather than 'all of you'. Even if I (and only I) believe the PM saying 'she believes the bill is not about money', I'm less inclined to believe her when she says she insists. Again that's related to her not having read the bill.

BTW we came to this point as it seemed proper to get here and back on topic rather than detouring around what democrats might or might not have done, or should have been doing. You also missed the chance to discuss the material the moon is made of, rochefort or gorgonzola cheese

Well Rubl in my opinion the aim is to bring Thaksin back free of all charges, priority, main and almost exclusive point.......money is lower on the list, not to my mind a priority......so work it out, the bills are not primarily about money......got it......perhaps you should lay off the cheese

Now you're hitting the nail on it's head. All this nonsense about insisting that the bill is not about money or getting k. Thaksin some money back, is a clear case of obfuscation. It distracts a lot of people from what the bill really aims at:: get back Thaksin freed of possible charges, freed of a sentence, etc., etc.

BTW I already mentioned this a few days go when Pheu Thai spokesman Prompon mentioned it to be just a misunderstanding and people would feel better about the bill knowing it was not about money.

Edited June 3, 2012 by rubl

[473geo]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

Your logic is flawed, dear geo. If you believe her saying she hasn't read the bills, how can you believe her saying it's not about getting thaksin his money back. It may be something she believes, but that believe is not based on the contents of the bill as she doesn't know it's contents. There is a chance she happens to be right, but that has nothing to do with knowledge, only all with luck.

As for your last sentence, although I'm somewhat overweight I'm still only 'one of me' rather than 'all of you'. Even if I (and only I) believe the PM saying 'she believes the bill is not about money', I'm less inclined to believe her when she says she insists. Again that's related to her not having read the bill.

BTW we came to this point as it seemed proper to get here and back on topic rather than detouring around what democrats might or might not have done, or should have been doing. You also missed the chance to discuss the material the moon is made of, rochefort or gorgonzola cheese

Well Rubl in my opinion the aim is to bring Thaksin back free of all charges, priority, main and almost exclusive point.......money is lower on the list, not to my mind a priority......so work it out, the bills are not primarily about money......got it......perhaps you should lay off the cheese

Now you're hitting the nail on it's head. All this nonsense about insisting that the bill is not about money or getting k. Thaksin some money back, is a clear case of obfuscation. It distracts a lot of people from what the bill really aims at:: get back Thaksin freed of possible charges, freed of a sentence, etc., etc.

BTW I already mentioned this a few days go when Pheu Thai spokesman Prompon mentioned it to be just a misunderstanding and people would feel better about the bill knowing it was not about money.

And I mentioned quite a while ago that Thaksin would not return without the agreement of the real power brokers.....it would appear he has not achieved this reconciliation as yet....

[mca]

Wasn't it Abhisit who insisted a vote for PTP was a vote for Thaksin....and didn't all you guys fully agree.........

Well the votes rolled in..... ......and here we are

But isn't it so that all those guys don't have a vote?

You think he would have gained a higher total? ........from The Tvisa guys above..if they could vote...can you read?

So what was the point of your post,you think any of the people who voted Thaksin PTP read this forum?

Let me help you with that.

The majority of people who voted that way can't read at all, let's stand an English language forum.

It might be best not to follow up a derogatory comment about the reading ability of a percentage of the Thai electorate with a load of incomprehensible <deleted>.

[Buchholz]

But with her comments on the video and her revelations that she has not seen the Reconciliation Bill she proves once and for all that Thailand has an Ineptocracy.

She's just been given an extra 60 days to complete her homework assignment project:

Read Reconciliation Bills To Learn How It Means Giving Me 900 Million Baht.

Two month recess after the House session tomorrow aims to calm political tension

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Govt-to-call-for-a-pause-in-debate-on-unity-bills-30183450.html

[Buchholz]

I love the last bit about him being away for 8 years etc. The ONLY thing stopping Thaksin from returning to Thailand is........Thaksin.

Along with her other academic shortcomings, the PM isn't too hot with her math skills.

Thaksin's been away for 4 years, not 8.

Perhaps the year, 2008, threw her off.

.

Edited June 3, 2012 by Buchholz

[473geo]

Wasn't it Abhisit who insisted a vote for PTP was a vote for Thaksin....and didn't all you guys fully agree.........

Well the votes rolled in..... ......and here we are

Well, if you want to believe that, then its clear that "a majority of the people don't want Thaksin back".

Sent from my shoe phone

Oh I never believed Abhisit for one moment, if you recall, my take was a vote for PTP was a vote against the Dems for their lacklustre performance in government, but Abhisit was unlikely to push my opinion was he?

Yingluck on the other hand, like Abhisit will have no say in the return of Thaksin, or his money, neither will Thaksin...........

[Colin Yai]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

So you do agree TS will get his money back as a result of this bill?

Hey come on now Gand ,its just a coincidence that TS will get his dough back , now be fair

[Yunla]

Of course she has read the bills. It is just that she is trying to have her cake and eat it.

She wants the familial oligarchy of Shin Family Robinson to be finally reunited in the seats of Thai high-power infront of hordes of cheering fans all wearing her brothers face on their cheap red made-in-china Tshirts. She wants her brothers 46bn murder-money returned to him, & his unfortunate custodial sentence given to him by the relatively hard-to-bribe and truly pesky Supreme Court to be nulled and preferably forgotten by history (that inconvenient history that remembers and records things in unnecessary detail and allows the unwashed commoners to read about it too), she wants the 900m baht for some nice new shooz, and she wants all this in a country where most people are mindblowingly poor and have been relentlessly trampled on by people just like Yingluck since the jurassic era.

She wants all those things from the bill, but what she doesn't want in any way is to be associated with the bill or the contents of the bill, or the street-warfare and dead peasants that will most likely arise from the bill.

Edited June 3, 2012 by Yunla

[473geo]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

So you do agree TS will get his money back as a result of this bill?

Hey come on now Gand ,its just a coincidence that TS will get his dough back , now be fair

Have you read the bills?

[marquess]

Dear Yingluck,

A word of advice for you..... It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.

Have a nice day...

Or it is better to look stupid and be clever than to look clever and be stupid!

[yoshiwara]

The significance of the money is critical and not a sideshow or even a mere sop to Thaksin's vanity. The confiscation of the funds was the penalty for the convictions. Why does anybody think he refused to apply for a pardon? What he wants is the expunging of the convictions and return of the monies would be evidence of his 'innocence'. Increasingly the masks of reconciliation are seen through for what they are. Beyond threadbare. This is all about Thaksin. Get me my money back and you will get paid. The Al Capone of Thailand

[OzMick]

Well Rubl the if you have no interest in how we came to this point, then discuss away on face value, if Yingluck says she has never read the bills I believe her, if she insists that the bills are not about Thaksin getting his money back I believe her too

And so should all of you because you have been stating ad nauseum what you percieve the bills are set to achieve and the main aim is not money

So you do agree TS will get his money back as a result of this bill?

Hey come on now Gand ,its just a coincidence that TS will get his dough back , now be fair

Have you read the bills?

Neither have you, but you agree that Thaksin is to brought back free, clear and innocent as a new born babe. Of course the Thai people stole B46 billion from that innocent, and you think he won't want it back.

Obviously you have little understanding of Thai people, their pride and concept of face, and in particular the venality of Thaksin.

Sent from my Cray XT5-HE

Edited June 4, 2012 by OzMick

[gand]

Should not Thailand be charging TS with an additional 46 billion baht for all his addition death and destruction ha has caused and will cause should he set foot back in Thailand?

[DLock]

Has anyone actually checked and confirmed Yingluck's academic achievements?

It's hard to believe someone so stupid actually went beyond 5th Grade.

[GentlemanJim]

So you do agree TS will get his money back as a result of this bill?

Hey come on now Gand ,its just a coincidence that TS will get his dough back , now be fair

Have you read the bills?

Well I have read enough to know that Thaksin will get his money back.

Key points of the National Reconciliation Bill:

Article 3: Any conduct related to political assembly or expression of political opinions between September 15, 2005, and May 10, 2011, that were deemed illegal will no longer be illegal and the wrongdoers will be freed from responsibility for their misconduct.

The term "misconduct" includes:

1. Misconduct caused by political assembly or expression of political opinion, including violation of the law prohibiting anti-government gatherings, statements or advertisements, or disobedience of government officials, as well as protests that affect other people physically or their assets.

2. Any conduct by government officials or anybody involved in the prevention or suppression of political assembly, expression of political opinions or any related conduct.

Article 4: Once this law is put into force, investigation and legal action against any person as per Article 3 must be stopped. If the case is in court, then the court must dismiss it. If the person is already convicted, then the person must be deemed as never having been convicted. If the person has been serving a penalty, then the penalty must end and the person released.

Article 5: People affected by the conduct or operation of an organisation or group of people appointed under orders of the Council for National Security, or the council's chairman, which seized power on September 19, 2006, will not be considered suspects or wrongdoers. The statement in Article 4 shall be applied and all related organisations will treat the people according to the rule of law.

Article 6: The revocation of the voting rights of former executives of a dissolved political party will be ended and those persons will be deemed as those whose voting rights had never been revoked, once this law is effective.

Article 7: Any conduct according to this law will not be considered as a reason to end one's right to take civil action and seek compensation for any damages caused by people whose penalty has been lifted as per this law.

Thaksin is freed from all responsibility of any crime, ergo the cash that was confiscated must be returned. I don't know why you keep going on about it. It does not matter whether the return of the cash is the primary or secondary or even tertiary reason for the bill. The fact is the bill will lead directly or indirectly to Thaksin getting his money back, though quite how they are going to cook it all so that tax evasion suddenly becomes a politically motivated crime will be entertaining to see.

Yingluck keeps harping on about how the PTP have a mandate from the people and that as the majority of people voted for them that means that the majority of people must support whatever the MP's now have free reign to do. Rather than consider that people elected an MP to govern responsibly she thinks it was done to give the respective MP's a ticket to rape and pillage the nation, which is exactly what they are doing. So semantics shemantics, if the bill is passed, Thaksin is cleared and his bank balance doubles.

[silsburyhill]

Its a shame the country keeps getting dragged back to the past by Taksin. The best thing that could happen is for the country to forgot about Taksin and move forward and on.

The people have no change to forget about Thaksin. He is holding this country (and people) hostage. It's liking trying to sleep at night but every 30 min Thaksin will call you and say: "He what are you trying to do? Sleeping? What about me? I am still in Dubai and I still haven't gotten my 46 billion". Yes Khun Thaksin but how about us? There are 60 million Thai people that want to go on with their lives?"

Well this one's easy. The media won't let you. If you had a grudge but no money to pay off media shills, your ranting would be mere piss in the wind. I include successive inept 'administrations' in this for allowing this megalomaniac to publicly broadcast from overseas. Incredible when you consider how Thailand's so keen on censorship and able to block things they don't like at the drop of a hat.

What was that line about 'giving the oxygen of publicity' from the odious Thatcher?

Edited June 4, 2012 by silsburyhill

[lannarebirth]

Has anyone actually checked and confirmed Yingluck's academic achievements?

It's hard to believe someone so stupid actually went beyond 5th Grade.

Interestingly, in addition to her poor command of the English language , most literate Thais are appalled at how she mangles the Thai language as well.

[473geo]

Well I have read enough to know that Thaksin will get his money back.

Key points of the National Reconciliation Bill:

Article 3: Any conduct related to political assembly or expression of political opinions between September 15, 2005, and May 10, 2011, that were deemed illegal will no longer be illegal and the wrongdoers will be freed from responsibility for their misconduct.

The term "misconduct" includes:

1. Misconduct caused by political assembly or expression of political opinion, including violation of the law prohibiting anti-government gatherings, statements or advertisements, or disobedience of government officials, as well as protests that affect other people physically or their assets.

2. Any conduct by government officials or anybody involved in the prevention or suppression of political assembly, expression of political opinions or any related conduct.

Article 4: Once this law is put into force, investigation and legal action against any person as per Article 3 must be stopped. If the case is in court, then the court must dismiss it. If the person is already convicted, then the person must be deemed as never having been convicted. If the person has been serving a penalty, then the penalty must end and the person released.

Article 5: People affected by the conduct or operation of an organisation or group of people appointed under orders of the Council for National Security, or the council's chairman, which seized power on September 19, 2006, will not be considered suspects or wrongdoers. The statement in Article 4 shall be applied and all related organisations will treat the people according to the rule of law.

Article 6: The revocation of the voting rights of former executives of a dissolved political party will be ended and those persons will be deemed as those whose voting rights had never been revoked, once this law is effective.

Article 7: Any conduct according to this law will not be considered as a reason to end one's right to take civil action and seek compensation for any damages caused by people whose penalty has been lifted as per this law.

Thaksin is freed from all responsibility of any crime, ergo the cash that was confiscated must be returned. I don't know why you keep going on about it. It does not matter whether the return of the cash is the primary or secondary or even tertiary reason for the bill. The fact is the bill will lead directly or indirectly to Thaksin getting his money back, though quite how they are going to cook it all so that tax evasion suddenly becomes a politically motivated crime will be entertaining to see.

Yingluck keeps harping on about how the PTP have a mandate from the people and that as the majority of people voted for them that means that the majority of people must support whatever the MP's now have free reign to do. Rather than consider that people elected an MP to govern responsibly she thinks it was done to give the respective MP's a ticket to rape and pillage the nation, which is exactly what they are doing. So semantics shemantics, if the bill is passed, Thaksin is cleared and his bank balance doubles.

How bizzare, you highlight only part of an article which explains an action, but you do not take into account the subject matter

[473geo]

Neither have you, but you agree that Thaksin is to brought back free, clear and innocent as a new born babe. Of course the Thai people stole B46 billion from that innocent, and you think he won't want it back.

Obviously you have little understanding of Thai people, their pride and concept of face, and in particular the venality of Thaksin.

Sent from my Cray XT5-HE

Given your obsession with Thaksin I am surprised you have failed to notice the extraordinary measures he has undertaken to avoid serving a jail sentence and further charges. Your reasoning, as often is the case, is based on your mind reading skills

[GentlemanJim]

Well I have read enough to know that Thaksin will get his money back.

Key points of the National Reconciliation Bill:

Article 3: Any conduct related to political assembly or expression of political opinions between September 15, 2005, and May 10, 2011, that were deemed illegal will no longer be illegal and the wrongdoers will be freed from responsibility for their misconduct.

The term "misconduct" includes:

1. Misconduct caused by political assembly or expression of political opinion, including violation of the law prohibiting anti-government gatherings, statements or advertisements, or disobedience of government officials, as well as protests that affect other people physically or their assets.

2. Any conduct by government officials or anybody involved in the prevention or suppression of political assembly, expression of political opinions or any related conduct.

Article 4: Once this law is put into force, investigation and legal action against any person as per Article 3 must be stopped. If the case is in court, then the court must dismiss it. If the person is already convicted, then the person must be deemed as never having been convicted. If the person has been serving a penalty, then the penalty must end and the person released.

Article 5: People affected by the conduct or operation of an organisation or group of people appointed under orders of the Council for National Security, or the council's chairman, which seized power on September 19, 2006, will not be considered suspects or wrongdoers. The statement in Article 4 shall be applied and all related organisations will treat the people according to the rule of law.

Article 6: The revocation of the voting rights of former executives of a dissolved political party will be ended and those persons will be deemed as those whose voting rights had never been revoked, once this law is effective.

Article 7: Any conduct according to this law will not be considered as a reason to end one's right to take civil action and seek compensation for any damages caused by people whose penalty has been lifted as per this law.

Thaksin is freed from all responsibility of any crime, ergo the cash that was confiscated must be returned. I don't know why you keep going on about it. It does not matter whether the return of the cash is the primary or secondary or even tertiary reason for the bill. The fact is the bill will lead directly or indirectly to Thaksin getting his money back, though quite how they are going to cook it all so that tax evasion suddenly becomes a politically motivated crime will be entertaining to see.

Yingluck keeps harping on about how the PTP have a mandate from the people and that as the majority of people voted for them that means that the majority of people must support whatever the MP's now have free reign to do. Rather than consider that people elected an MP to govern responsibly she thinks it was done to give the respective MP's a ticket to rape and pillage the nation, which is exactly what they are doing. So semantics shemantics, if the bill is passed, Thaksin is cleared and his bank balance doubles.

How bizzare, you highlight only part of an article which explains an action, but you do not take into account the subject matter

What's bizzare? What have I not taken into account? Would you like me to highlight the whole article? The subject matter is the National Reconciliation Bill.

[473geo]

Well I have read enough to know that Thaksin will get his money back.

Key points of the National Reconciliation Bill:

Article 3: Any conduct related to political assembly or expression of political opinions between September 15, 2005, and May 10, 2011, that were deemed illegal will no longer be illegal and the wrongdoers will be freed from responsibility for their misconduct.

The term "misconduct" includes:

1. Misconduct caused by political assembly or expression of political opinion, including violation of the law prohibiting anti-government gatherings, statements or advertisements, or disobedience of government officials, as well as protests that affect other people physically or their assets.

2. Any conduct by government officials or anybody involved in the prevention or suppression of political assembly, expression of political opinions or any related conduct.

Article 4: Once this law is put into force, investigation and legal action against any person as per Article 3 must be stopped. If the case is in court, then the court must dismiss it. If the person is already convicted, then the person must be deemed as never having been convicted. If the person has been serving a penalty, then the penalty must end and the person released.

Article 5: People affected by the conduct or operation of an organisation or group of people appointed under orders of the Council for National Security, or the council's chairman, which seized power on September 19, 2006, will not be considered suspects or wrongdoers. The statement in Article 4 shall be applied and all related organisations will treat the people according to the rule of law.

Article 6: The revocation of the voting rights of former executives of a dissolved political party will be ended and those persons will be deemed as those whose voting rights had never been revoked, once this law is effective.

Article 7: Any conduct according to this law will not be considered as a reason to end one's right to take civil action and seek compensation for any damages caused by people whose penalty has been lifted as per this law.

Thaksin is freed from all responsibility of any crime, ergo the cash that was confiscated must be returned. I don't know why you keep going on about it. It does not matter whether the return of the cash is the primary or secondary or even tertiary reason for the bill. The fact is the bill will lead directly or indirectly to Thaksin getting his money back, though quite how they are going to cook it all so that tax evasion suddenly becomes a politically motivated crime will be entertaining to see.

Yingluck keeps harping on about how the PTP have a mandate from the people and that as the majority of people voted for them that means that the majority of people must support whatever the MP's now have free reign to do. Rather than consider that people elected an MP to govern responsibly she thinks it was done to give the respective MP's a ticket to rape and pillage the nation, which is exactly what they are doing. So semantics shemantics, if the bill is passed, Thaksin is cleared and his bank balance doubles.

How bizzare, you highlight only part of an article which explains an action, but you do not take into account the subject matter

What's bizzare? What have I not taken into account? Would you like me to highlight the whole article? The subject matter is the National Reconciliation Bill.

Try using the descriptive terms of the bill........i.e....."article 3"