Red-shirt rift shows it's time to move beyond politics of personality

[AleG]

I thought this was a topic about the Red Shirts having to choose between what they claim to champion and being Thaksin's minions, an unpalatable topic for some so they try to derail it into talking about the coup.

[Thaddeus]

There are gaps in your knowledge that even Isambard Kingdom Brunel would be challenged to build a bridge over them.

Sorry, forgive me, leaving out some things and changing some others is not a lack of knowledge is it, it's more like intentional.

Well you don't seem ready to part with them, so instead of making comments about people all the time you might try and contribute to the debate. Here's your chance, tell me where my Isambard Brunel Bridge size gaps are in my knowledge. You must have them on the tip of your tongue being so confident in your knowledge of contemporary Thai history?

I'm still waiting, Thaddeus...............

Read the second line.

[fab4]

So Thaksin said he WOULDN'T contest the election... Link please.. also is this the same Thaksin that says his sister is his clone, he is her caddy or in fact he has nothing to do with PTP decision making etc etc (depending on the time of day)

oh and i agree the COUP was illegal. But you never seem to agree that Thaksin is a convicted criminal on the run, Banned from politics but yet still in control of the government.. strange.

Some interesting reading for you. Sorry for being a bit tardy in my response but I had to answer a couple of other posts first (thats what it's like when you have a different viewpoint to the majority on here)

Firstly, Thaksin won't contest the election here - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/679445-red-shirt-rift-shows-its-time-to-move-beyond-politics-of-personality/page-3#entry7010191

Saves boring people.

And now denying Thaksin is a criminal - I deny he's a criminal because the of the way he was charged and found guilty. Even the people who sold his wife the land ( FIDF) and the Head of the Bank of Thailand did not think that there was anything wrong with the transaction - they even appeared as witnesses for the Defence! It was the Military Juntas AEaC that put all the pressure on. I'm not going to go into it here but read this (all of it ) and see if you still think he is a convicted criminal. And having done so you could also see why they reluctant to come back if that was the standard of "straight" justice they were going to see.

http://slimdogsworld.blogspot.com/

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/17/politics/politics_30083619.php

Edited November 7, 2013 by fab4

[fab4]

In addition to that, Thaksin said in April 2006 immediately following the election that he will not accept the post of Prime Minister when parliament reconvenes, which never happened because there weren't enough MPs and then the election was invalidated. This wasn't anything to do with the October election.

Political Turmoil in Thailand:

Thaksin, Protests, Elections, and the King

by Michael H. Nelson

.....................prompted Thaksin, on 4 April 2006, to go on TV and declare that he would

not be a candidate for prime minister in the next government.

However, he would remain at the helm of TRT and fulfill his duty as an elected MP.

http://www.academia.edu/2089166/Political_Turmoil_in_Thailand_Thaksin_Protests_Elections_and_the_King

Thank you for confirming that it wasn't anything to do with the October election.

How many elections do you know of that were scheduled for after 4th April 2006 and the end of the year. I can think of only one, the next one, the one after the one that had just been held (and a month later declared null and void), the only one that had been endorsed by the King - in other words the

OCTOBER 15TH ELECTION

Comprehension problems?

[robblok]

So Thaksin said he WOULDN'T contest the election... Link please.. also is this the same Thaksin that says his sister is his clone, he is her caddy or in fact he has nothing to do with PTP decision making etc etc (depending on the time of day)

oh and i agree the COUP was illegal. But you never seem to agree that Thaksin is a convicted criminal on the run, Banned from politics but yet still in control of the government.. strange.

Some interesting reading for you. Sorry for being a bit tardy in my response but I had to answer a couple of other posts first (thats what it's like when you have a different viewpoint to the majority on here)

Firstly, Thaksin won't contest the election here - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/679445-red-shirt-rift-shows-its-time-to-move-beyond-politics-of-personality/page-3#entry7010191

Saves boring people.

And now denying Thaksin is a criminal - I deny he's a criminal because the of the way he was charged and found guilty. Even the people who sold his wife the land ( FIDF) and the Head of the Bank of Thailand did not think that there was anything wrong with the transaction - they even appeared as witnesses for the Defence! It was the Military Juntas AEaC that put all the pressure on. I'm not going to go into it here but read this (all of it ) and see if you still think he is a convicted criminal. And having done so you could also see why they reluctant to come back if that was the standard of "straight" justice they were going to see.

http://slimdogsworld.blogspot.com/

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/17/politics/politics_30083619.php

Everyone knows he is a convicted criminal with more cases waiting for him. He has gone to trial and lost.. I seem to recall something about a cake box full of money too.

All those reds wanting to hold Abisith responsible for the deaths but don't want to hold Taksin responsible for the killings by the police and Tai Bak killings. Dual standards id say.

I wonder if your one of those paid Taksin supporters that are hired to represent him on online forums.

[fab4]

I thought this was a topic about the Red Shirts having to choose between what they claim to champion and being Thaksin's minions, an unpalatable topic for some so they try to derail it into talking about the coup.

Sorry, I got carried away trying to explain something to one of the more intellectually challenged members

[fab4]

So Thaksin said he WOULDN'T contest the election... Link please.. also is this the same Thaksin that says his sister is his clone, he is her caddy or in fact he has nothing to do with PTP decision making etc etc (depending on the time of day)

oh and i agree the COUP was illegal. But you never seem to agree that Thaksin is a convicted criminal on the run, Banned from politics but yet still in control of the government.. strange.

Some interesting reading for you. Sorry for being a bit tardy in my response but I had to answer a couple of other posts first (thats what it's like when you have a different viewpoint to the majority on here)

Firstly, Thaksin won't contest the election here - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/679445-red-shirt-rift-shows-its-time-to-move-beyond-politics-of-personality/page-3#entry7010191

Saves boring people.

And now denying Thaksin is a criminal - I deny he's a criminal because the of the way he was charged and found guilty. Even the people who sold his wife the land ( FIDF) and the Head of the Bank of Thailand did not think that there was anything wrong with the transaction - they even appeared as witnesses for the Defence! It was the Military Juntas AEaC that put all the pressure on. I'm not going to go into it here but read this (all of it ) and see if you still think he is a convicted criminal. And having done so you could also see why they reluctant to come back if that was the standard of "straight" justice they were going to see.

http://slimdogsworld.blogspot.com/

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/17/politics/politics_30083619.php

Everyone knows he is a convicted criminal with more cases waiting for him. He has gone to trial and lost.. I seem to recall something about a cake box full of money too.

All those reds wanting to hold Abisith responsible for the deaths but don't want to hold Taksin responsible for the killings by the police and Tai Bak killings. Dual standards id say.

I wonder if your one of those paid Taksin supporters that are hired to represent him on online forums.

Why don't you bring that accusation up with the Mods ?

[whybother]

How many elections do you know of that were scheduled for after 4th April 2006 and the end of the year. I can think of only one, the next one, the one after the one that had just been held (and a month later declared null and void), the only one that had been endorsed by the King - in other words the

OCTOBER 15TH ELECTION

Comprehension problems?

Are you suggesting that Thaksin KNEW that there was going to be October elections on April 6th? He didn't even know that he wouldn't be able to form parliament at that point.

I have heard that his fortune teller is pretty good, but didn't realise how good.

[robblok]

So Thaksin said he WOULDN'T contest the election... Link please.. also is this the same Thaksin that says his sister is his clone, he is her caddy or in fact he has nothing to do with PTP decision making etc etc (depending on the time of day)

oh and i agree the COUP was illegal. But you never seem to agree that Thaksin is a convicted criminal on the run, Banned from politics but yet still in control of the government.. strange.

Some interesting reading for you. Sorry for being a bit tardy in my response but I had to answer a couple of other posts first (thats what it's like when you have a different viewpoint to the majority on here)

Firstly, Thaksin won't contest the election here - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/679445-red-shirt-rift-shows-its-time-to-move-beyond-politics-of-personality/page-3#entry7010191

Saves boring people.

And now denying Thaksin is a criminal - I deny he's a criminal because the of the way he was charged and found guilty. Even the people who sold his wife the land ( FIDF) and the Head of the Bank of Thailand did not think that there was anything wrong with the transaction - they even appeared as witnesses for the Defence! It was the Military Juntas AEaC that put all the pressure on. I'm not going to go into it here but read this (all of it ) and see if you still think he is a convicted criminal. And having done so you could also see why they reluctant to come back if that was the standard of "straight" justice they were going to see.

http://slimdogsworld.blogspot.com/

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/17/politics/politics_30083619.php

Everyone knows he is a convicted criminal with more cases waiting for him. He has gone to trial and lost.. I seem to recall something about a cake box full of money too.

All those reds wanting to hold Abisith responsible for the deaths but don't want to hold Taksin responsible for the killings by the police and Tai Bak killings. Dual standards id say.

I wonder if your one of those paid Taksin supporters that are hired to represent him on online forums.

Why don't you bring that accusation up with the Mods ?

About you being hired to represent him ? its a suspicion but even if it were true they would not act on it as even then you have a right to post here. Just heard rumors of people like that hired to post stuff to put the convicted criminal Taksin in a good light.

Just about the only reason I can think why an educated foreigner would ever support him. Everyone can see how corrupt he was and how utterly destructive he still is. I can understand the brainwashed masses but not educated people without financial gain.

[JRSoul]

How many elections do you know of that were scheduled for after 4th April 2006 and the end of the year. I can think of only one, the next one, the one after the one that had just been held (and a month later declared null and void), the only one that had been endorsed by the King - in other words the

OCTOBER 15TH ELECTION

Comprehension problems?

You continue to ignore that that whole sorry mess was caused by Thaksin calling a snap election 14 months into a 4 year term, despite having a solid majority. Yes the Oct 2006 election was delayed until Dec 2007, more than a year prior to when they were due if Thaksin hadn't wished to distract his critics from the just accusations of corruption over his telco sale.

Without his rash action there would have been no coup, more likely he would have been jailed.

[fab4]

Are you suggesting that Thaksin KNEW that there was going to be October elections on April 6th? He didn't even know that he wouldn't be able to form parliament at that point.

I have heard that his fortune teller is pretty good, but didn't realise how good.

You think he didn't know what was going to happen to his chance of forming a government after the dems plus boycotted the election. It's a political weapon - no opposition, no quorum, no government.

abhisit had said he was ready to contest the election on the 25th February.

“I’m ready to become a prime minister who adheres to the principles of good governance and ethics, not authoritarianism.” – Abhisit Vejjajiva, leader of the Democrat Party, 25th February 2006. http://www.tmponline.org/2010/06/07/thailand-democracy-dissent/

Two days later The Democrat Party, Thai Nation Party and the Mahachon Party announced they would boycott the Election.

Thaksin didn't need a fortune teller, he'd known for over a month what was going to happen.

[rubl]

Nice rehash of the past including the call for a new election while hardly a year in term and only because the sale of ShinTelecom a day after a law allowing that had passed was troubling people. The problems amply rich can have, imagine.

So, now lets return to the topic of 'move beyond politics of personality'. That's the golf caddy personality which is referred to. The criminal fugitive who has been so maligned and still bears no grudges. He even skypes-in into cabinet meetings to offer free and (unwanted) advise. He's a regular Dutch uncle in that, just like me

Are you suggesting that Thaksin KNEW that there was going to be October elections on April 6th? He didn't even know that he wouldn't be able to form parliament at that point.

I have heard that his fortune teller is pretty good, but didn't realise how good.

You think he didn't know what was going to happen to his chance of forming a government after the dems plus boycotted the election. It's a political weapon - no opposition, no quorum, no government.

abhisit had said he was ready to contest the election on the 25th February.

“I’m ready to become a prime minister who adheres to the principles of good governance and ethics, not authoritarianism.” – Abhisit Vejjajiva, leader of the Democrat Party, 25th February 2006. http://www.tmponline.org/2010/06/07/thailand-democracy-dissent/

Two days later The Democrat Party, Thai Nation Party and the Mahachon Party announced they would boycott the Election.

Thaksin didn't need a fortune teller, he'd known for over a month what was going to happen.

[AleG]

Nice rehash of the past including the call for a new election while hardly a year in term and only because the sale of ShinTelecom a day after a law allowing that had passed was troubling people. The problems amply rich can have, imagine.

So, now lets return to the topic of 'move beyond politics of personality'. That's the golf caddy personality which is referred to. The criminal fugitive who has been so maligned and still bears no grudges. He even skypes-in into cabinet meetings to offer free and (unwanted) advise. He's a regular Dutch uncle in that, just like me

What OP? Nah, the menu for today is egg and bacon; egg, sausage and bacon; egg and coup; egg, bacon and coup; egg, bacon, sausage and coup; coup, bacon, sausage and coup; coup, egg, coup, coup, bacon and coup; coup, coup, coup, egg and coup; coup, coup, coup, coup, coup, coup, baked beans, coup, coup, coup and coup; or lobster thermidor aux crevettes, with a mornay sauce garnished with truffle paté, brandy and a fried egg on top and coup.

Posted with my deepest apologies to Monty Python

[whybother]

You think he didn't know what was going to happen to his chance of forming a government after the dems plus boycotted the election. It's a political weapon - no opposition, no quorum, no government.

abhisit had said he was ready to contest the election on the 25th February.

“I’m ready to become a prime minister who adheres to the principles of good governance and ethics, not authoritarianism.” – Abhisit Vejjajiva, leader of the Democrat Party, 25th February 2006. http://www.tmponline.org/2010/06/07/thailand-democracy-dissent/

Two days later The Democrat Party, Thai Nation Party and the Mahachon Party announced they would boycott the Election.

Thaksin didn't need a fortune teller, he'd known for over a month what was going to happen.

All that was needed for the empty seats was to have by-elections.

Unofficial results as of 3 April 2006 gave Thaksin's TRT Party victory, with 462 seats in Parliament and 66% of the popular vote. However, 38 TRT candidates, all in the Democrat-dominated south, failed to win up to 20% of votes from eligible voters in their constituency, thus forcing the Election Commission to hold by-elections[73] on 23 April.

Government could still be formed until May 3. It wasn't until May 8 that the election result was invalidated.

Thaksin was referring to the April elections when saying he wouldn't be PM, not the future elections which he didn't even know would be needed.

[ballpoint]

You're right about the numbers and they have become politicized. I've posted on this topic at least once before and I recall sharing the post you're quoting from: http://asiancorrespondent.com/20405/2275-where-did-this-number-come-from/

So apologies if I'm repeating myself here, but I still wonder why these numbers have become politicized. Does having 2,275 deaths instead of 1,329 bodies on the street really make it *that* much worse? After all - as Fab4 has pointed out in a previous post - if you look at the numbers objectively, you'll see that the number of deaths accorded to the WOD can't possibly be 2,275 unless no one else had been murdered for any other reason during that period. That's the total number of murders for the period, and they're all due to the WOD? Pretty implausible.

And beneath the original BKK Pundit article, back in 2007, Azwar Thi (the pseudonym of a human rights worker in Thailand, had a great blog called Rule of Lords), cautioned against 'playing the numbers game'. Each of those killed were individuals and were killed unjustly, that's the important thing to remember. Sometimes we risk obscuring the severity of a crime by debating numbers, even though I believe it's important to get the facts right.

IIRC, Azwar Thi drew on Agamden's concept of the Homo Sacer: the man so scorned by society, he may be killed by anyone, to elucidate how something like the WOD could be allowed to take place. Drug dealers were so demonized that society become irrational, and anything could be justified so long as the scourge was extirpated. During the WOD you had prominent monks saying it was fine to kill drug dealers etc. Similarly, if you look at what was going on before the Thammasat Massacre in 76, you'll find senior monks justifying killing communists. And I think there were also elements of this in 2010: the fabricated lom chao plot, for instance. Hence, though we don't know for sure what happened, it wouldn't be *that* surprising, if in the case of, say, the temple shootings, soldiers had acted irrationally and out of hatred of people they considered enemies of society, not fellow citizens. I think that's why if we care about human rights, we should be wary of rhetoric that seeks to exclude and demonize others.

There's a lot more to say about this, but since it seems somewhat OT, I'll leave it at that. This invaluable piece by academic Michael Connors goes into more details on the numbers, and more crucially, discusses how the WOD came about: http://sovereignmyth.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/war-on-drugs.html

I agree with Connors when he writes: 'I still consider the human rights abuses carried out during the War on Drugs to be the worst committed during the tenure of an elected government since Thailand liberalised in the 1980s.'

Can't fault any of the above except to add that the politicalisation of it has quite deliberately been taken one step further to personalise / demonise one person of having been responsible for every single death that occurred during that period - there are still supposedly educated posters on here convinced of that "fact".

That's rich coming from a member of the team that not only regularly tries to bump up the number of killed during the 2010 red riots from 91 to 100, but also tries to squarely place the blame on two men. Including the members of the military killed by red black shirts. And the nine who weren't even killed. And I didn't see opponents of the war on drugs ghoulishly raid bodies from hospital/police morgues and parade them on stage like your red loonies did. Tell us again who tries to politicise the dead? Disgusting.

[fab4]

There are gaps in your knowledge that even Isambard Kingdom Brunel would be challenged to build a bridge over them.

Sorry, forgive me, leaving out some things and changing some others is not a lack of knowledge is it, it's more like intentional.

Well you don't seem ready to part with them, so instead of making comments about people all the time you might try and contribute to the debate. Here's your chance, tell me where my Isambard Brunel Bridge size gaps are in my knowledge. You must have them on the tip of your tongue being so confident in your knowledge of contemporary Thai history?

I'm still waiting, Thaddeus...............

Read the second line.

OK I'm still waiting - what things have I left out and what things have I changed - you obviously know?

It's an obvious style of argument that you, whybother and a few others use. First off you're caught out on something, dare I say it you're wrong. There then follows a semantic drawn out argument hoping I'll get bored, in between time other questions are posed either distracting from the original discussion or trying to "trip me up" in some clever (and usually not so clever wordplay)

So rather than posting a post with the enigmatic message "read the second line" and hoping I don't see your post again in the deluge of other one line wonders, why didn't you point out these "things" that I have left out or changed?

[rubl]

Deliberate step to personalise / daemonise? You mean like charging Abhisit / Suthep for premeditated murder and even committed as private persons rather than officials?

Mind you, even those lovable red-shirts who want to move away from 'one person' still want 'two persons' found guilty for their deaths.

Can't fault any of the above except to add that the politicalisation of it has quite deliberately been taken one step further to personalise / demonise one person of having been responsible for every single death that occurred during that period - there are still supposedly educated posters on here convinced of that "fact".

[whybother]

OK I'm still waiting - what things have I left out and what things have I changed - you obviously know?

It's an obvious style of argument that you, whybother and a few others use. First off you're caught out on something, dare I say it you're wrong. There then follows a semantic drawn out argument hoping I'll get bored, in between time other questions are posed either distracting from the original discussion or trying to "trip me up" in some clever (and usually not so clever wordplay)

So rather than posting a post with the enigmatic message "read the second line" and hoping I don't see your post again in the deluge of other one line wonders, why didn't you point out these "things" that I have left out or changed?

Do mean like being wrong about Thaksin miraculously knowing about an election 6 months away before he even knew the election 2 days before would be invalidated?

[fab4]

OK I'm still waiting - what things have I left out and what things have I changed - you obviously know?

It's an obvious style of argument that you, whybother and a few others use. First off you're caught out on something, dare I say it you're wrong. There then follows a semantic drawn out argument hoping I'll get bored, in between time other questions are posed either distracting from the original discussion or trying to "trip me up" in some clever (and usually not so clever wordplay)

So rather than posting a post with the enigmatic message "read the second line" and hoping I don't see your post again in the deluge of other one line wonders, why didn't you point out these "things" that I have left out or changed?

Do mean like being wrong about Thaksin miraculously knowing about an election 6 months away before he even knew the election 2 days before would be invalidated?

You still going on about a election he was aware of what the result would be at least a month earlier than it happened. That's not wrong in my book. Unfortunately because of your pedentary ways you completely missed the original argument - whether or not an army coup that prevented the Thai electorate from exercising their right to vote (in the Oct 15th Election which Thaksin was not going to contest as PM ) was illegal or not. I don't think even you could argue with that, but if you do , count me out, I really haven't got the time you seem to have to waste.

[bigbamboo]

There are gaps in your knowledge that even Isambard Kingdom Brunel would be challenged to build a bridge over them.

Sorry, forgive me, leaving out some things and changing some others is not a lack of knowledge is it, it's more like intentional.

Well you don't seem ready to part with them, so instead of making comments about people all the time you might try and contribute to the debate. Here's your chance, tell me where my Isambard Brunel Bridge size gaps are in my knowledge. You must have them on the tip of your tongue being so confident in your knowledge of contemporary Thai history?

I'm still waiting, Thaddeus...............

Oh dear. Sounds like fab4 has turned into Diana Ross.

That sort of thing happens here.

[whybother]

You still going on about a election he was aware of what the result would be at least a month earlier than it happened. That's not wrong in my book. Unfortunately because of your pedentary ways you completely missed the original argument - whether or not an army coup that prevented the Thai electorate from exercising their right to vote (in the Oct 15th Election which Thaksin was not going to contest as PM ) was illegal or not. I don't think even you could argue with that, but if you do , count me out, I really haven't got the time you seem to have to waste.

The Thai prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, is to resign from office in the face of mass protests calling for him to depart after Sunday's disputed election.

"I am sorry that I will not accept the premier post," Mr Thaksin said in a news conference, shortly after he returned from visiting Thailand's constitutional head, King Adulyadej Bhumibol.

But he added that he would remain as caretaker prime minister until his successor has been selected after parliament resumes in a month's time.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/apr/04/thailand1

[rametindallas]

When Dr. Thaksin was PM, he dissolved Parliament because of protests over his tax free sale of 49% of his telecom business to Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund. During the new elections, his TRT party broke the election law that states when a party has no opposition candidate in a district, they must win 40% of the electorate (not 40% of the votes cast). The Democrat Party boycotted the elections and TRT was running unopposed in many districts. It is difficult to get enough turnouts to get 40% of the electorate so the TRT party paid other, smaller parties to run against them and got caught and the election was nullified by the EC. Thaksin had 60 days to hold new elections after the previous elections were voided but failed to do so. At the end of those 60 days, his mandate to govern was over and he moved out of Government House and a caretaker PM was installed to facilitate new elections. After a couple of weeks, Dr. Thaksin moved back into government house and there was no power to stop him. Though Dr. Thaksin was in Government House acting as PM, he had no legal authority to be there. When the Army moved in, they did not oust a sitting PM but they did oust a pretender and power grabber. Who else was going to enforce Constitutional rules that should be enforced by the Executive Branch of Government? In this case, The Executive Branch had been coopted by a pretender (Dr. Thaksin) who was not following the Constitution that he was supposed to obey. The Army is the Last Resort to prevent dictatorship and abuse at the highest levels. I repeat, Dr. Thaksin was not a legal PM when the Army moved in and in fact, when the Army held elections, they did not prevent the installation of a government by Dr. Thaksin's nominee, K. Somchai after he won. Now you can see why so many people can never trust an undemocratic figure as Dr. Thaksin has proved himself to be.

Actually the coup was more than four months AFTER the judgment and he STILL hadn't held new elections.

2006

January 23 - The Shinawatra family announce the sale of its controlling stake in telecom company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion.

February 24 - Thaksin dissolves parliament, calls for snap elections on April 2 amid protests and mounting criticism over his family's sale of shares in Shin Corp.

March 5 - Tens of thousands attend rally by newly formed People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to call for Thaksin's resignation for alleged abuse of power, corruption and business conflicts of interest.

April 3 - Thaksin claims victory after snap election, which opposition parties boycotted over corruption allegations. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party was the only major party to participate.

May 8 - Constitutional Court rules April election invalid.

September 19 - Military seizes power in a bloodless coup following series of PAD rallies, while Thaksin is at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

source: Thailand timeline 2001-2011 http://www.cnn.com/2...line/index.html

How many elections do you know of that were scheduled for after 4th April 2006 and the end of the year. I can think of only one, the next one, the one after the one that had just been held (and a month later declared null and void), the only one that had been endorsed by the King - in other words the

OCTOBER 15TH ELECTION

Comprehension problems?

Are you suggesting that Thaksin KNEW that there was going to be October elections on April 6th? He didn't even know that he wouldn't be able to form parliament at that point.

I have heard that his fortune teller is pretty good, but didn't realise how good.

He's just trolling. He will never answer a direct question. I posted the timeline from CNN to educate him but he is a broken record and can't get off the scratched part.

Edited November 7, 2013 by rametindallas

[rametindallas]

Some interesting reading for you. Sorry for being a bit tardy in my response but I had to answer a couple of other posts first (thats what it's like when you have a different viewpoint to the majority on here)

Firstly, Thaksin won't contest the election here - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/679445-red-shirt-rift-shows-its-time-to-move-beyond-politics-of-personality/page-3#entry7010191

Saves boring people.

And now denying Thaksin is a criminal - I deny he's a criminal because the of the way he was charged and found guilty. Even the people who sold his wife the land ( FIDF) and the Head of the Bank of Thailand did not think that there was anything wrong with the transaction - they even appeared as witnesses for the Defence! It was the Military Juntas AEaC that put all the pressure on. I'm not going to go into it here but read this (all of it ) and see if you still think he is a convicted criminal. And having done so you could also see why they reluctant to come back if that was the standard of "straight" justice they were going to see.

http://slimdogsworld.blogspot.com/

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/17/politics/politics_30083619.php

Everyone knows he is a convicted criminal with more cases waiting for him. He has gone to trial and lost.. I seem to recall something about a cake box full of money too.

All those reds wanting to hold Abisith responsible for the deaths but don't want to hold Taksin responsible for the killings by the police and Tai Bak killings. Dual standards id say.

I wonder if your one of those paid Taksin supporters that are hired to represent him on online forums.

Why don't you bring that accusation up with the Mods ?

About you being hired to represent him ? its a suspicion but even if it were true they would not act on it as even then you have a right to post here. Just heard rumors of people like that hired to post stuff to put the convicted criminal Taksin in a good light.

Just about the only reason I can think why an educated foreigner would ever support him. Everyone can see how corrupt he was and how utterly destructive he still is. I can understand the brainwashed masses but not educated people without financial gain.

What he or his handlers fail to realize is that every time he posts misinformation or distorts history, he will be proven wrong many times over. He can no win because in an open forum the truth will come out.

[Thaddeus]

There are gaps in your knowledge that even Isambard Kingdom Brunel would be challenged to build a bridge over them.

Sorry, forgive me, leaving out some things and changing some others is not a lack of knowledge is it, it's more like intentional.

Well you don't seem ready to part with them, so instead of making comments about people all the time you might try and contribute to the debate. Here's your chance, tell me where my Isambard Brunel Bridge size gaps are in my knowledge. You must have them on the tip of your tongue being so confident in your knowledge of contemporary Thai history?

I'm still waiting, Thaddeus...............

Oh dear. Sounds like fab4 has turned into Diana Ross.

That sort of thing happens here.

Oh dear, does that mean I have to turn into Elton John, I'm still standing.

Actually I'm sitting down and still waiting for the fab one to get past the first line of the post I made all that time ago.

In order to simplify it, I will just ask a direct question to fab4, why do you support the PTP, Thaksin and everything they do?