Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's speech on the amnesty bill

[gerry1011]

Your point is that the people "should" look beyond Thaksin. However, the reality is that millions of Thais don't want to do what you recommend them to do. So, any solution should start by taking the reality into account. Not what one thinks people should do.You are a good example of someone who is not ready to even consider a solution that does not completely fit your own personal ideas...

Millions what Thaksin. Millions don't want Thaksin. That's the reality.

I recommend that the millions that want Thaksin "move forward" without him. They don't need him.

Why do you give yourself the privilege to recommend to millions of people to move forward without their leader?

One could also recommend to the other millions of people to change their stance and stop attacking the former PM...

Again, it's useless to continue to follow a path that does not lead anywhere.

Both sides must look at the reality and do with it. That includes Thaksin coming back.

Sent from my iPhone...

Edited November 5, 2013 by gerry1011

[Hawkman]

If you agree with him coming back but no access to politics it is already a very good start. At least you soften your stance and give a chance to reconciliation. Only thinking like this is opening the door to a solution. If such an idea is put on the table, constructive discussion can start. Without the usual negative rant that immediately jeopardizes any constructive thinking...

By not taking part in politics Thaksin would make an enormous compromise.

If you continue in that positive direction you should not refer to the money that was confiscated from him as stolen money. Because it is not a constructive way of addressing the issue. And it is not stolen money either.

My point is that it is useless to think that Thaksin can be left out of any plan.

Its just not possible.

Unfortunately some are just not ready yet to accept that obvious fact.

So, if the dems were ready to accept that too, and give a chance to reconciliation instead of being always against everything, it would be much more constructive.

Compromise cannot be reached if the parties do not sit together.

I don't think that I am wrong in saying that the dems, until now, never have been willing to sit at the reconciliation table.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I don't think you're right

My point is that people should look beyond this annoying man who threatens the tranquility of Thailand and it's population. Had he indeed retreated from politics he would have been living in Thailand by now as respected senior adviser or the like. As it is now, a return may not be safe for him.

Compromise meaning a forced through amnesty for those who don't need it, rewarding corruption, and the like. Reconciliation table, with one arrm strapped to the back and the other shot off and a 'impartial' speaker switching offf microphone and so on and so forth?

Your point is that the people "should" look beyond Thaksin. However, the reality is that millions of Thais don't want to do what you recommend them to do. So, any solution should start by taking the reality into account. Not what one thinks people should do.

You are a good example of someone who is not ready to even consider a solution that does not completely fit your own personal ideas...

But you're doing exactly the same thing. There's millions who don't want Thaksin and that is the reality too but you're saying people should move on from that.

You're offering no compromise.

Totally hypocritical!

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

[whybother]

Your point is that the people "should" look beyond Thaksin. However, the reality is that millions of Thais don't want to do what you recommend them to do. So, any solution should start by taking the reality into account. Not what one thinks people should do.You are a good example of someone who is not ready to even consider a solution that does not completely fit your own personal ideas...

Millions what Thaksin. Millions don't want Thaksin. That's the reality.

I recommend that the millions that want Thaksin "move forward" without him. They don't need him.

Why do you give yourself the privilege to recommend to millions of people to move forward without their leader?

One could also recommend to the other millions of people to change their stance and stop attacking the former PM...

Again, it's useless to continue to follow a path that does not lead anywhere.

Both sides must look at the reality and do with it. That includes Thaksin coming back.

Sent from my iPhone...

You asked what I recommend they do. That's what I recommend. For the good of the country. Why do they need him?

Why doesn't Thaksin look at the reality that if he does come back that he will face constant protests?

You still haven't answered what the red shirt/PTP compromise is? The fact that you look at the reality being that he is "coming back" shows that you haven't moved in anyway towards compromise either.

I will ask again: If Thaksin comes back and stays involved in politics, where is the compromise?

[gerry1011]

 

 

Your point is that the people "should" look beyond Thaksin. However, the reality is that millions of Thais don't want to do what you recommend them to do. So, any solution should start by taking the reality into account. Not what one thinks people should do.You are a good example of someone who is not ready to even consider a solution that does not completely fit your own personal ideas...

 

 

Millions what Thaksin.  Millions don't want Thaksin.  That's the reality.

 

I recommend that the millions that want Thaksin "move forward" without him.  They don't need him.

 

Why do you give yourself the privilege to recommend to millions of people to move forward without their leader?

One could also recommend to the other millions of people to change their stance and stop attacking the former PM...

Again, it's useless to continue to follow a path that does not lead anywhere.

Both sides must look at the reality and do with it. That includes Thaksin coming back.

Sent from my iPhone...

 

 

You asked what I recommend they do.  That's what I recommend.  For the good of the country.  Why do they need him?  

 

Why doesn't Thaksin look at the reality that if he does come back that he will face constant protests?

 

You still haven't answered what the red shirt/PTP compromise is?  The fact that you look at the reality being that he is "coming back" shows that you haven't moved in anyway towards compromise either.

 

I will ask again: If Thaksin comes back and stays involved in politics, where is the compromise?

We have spoken about compromises in the posts above. Have another look at them.

It is of course no "us" who must define the compromises to be done, but rather the politicians themselves. But since one part never wants to sit at the reconciliation table it is of course difficult to start to negotiate.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[whybother]

We have spoken about compromises in the posts above. Have another look at them.

It is of course no "us" who must define the compromises to be done, but rather the politicians themselves. But since one part never wants to sit at the reconciliation table it is of course difficult to start to negotiate.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The PTP aren't offering a compromise. All they have is to go back to the start. There is no point sitting at the table if that is all they have to "offer".

You keep going back to the anti-thaksin side not compromising, but have not offered any evidence of the Thaksin side wanting to compromise.

If Thaksin had stepped away from politics when he said he was going to in mid-2006, then there wouldn't have been a coup and there wouldn't need to be an amnesty.

The solution for the COUNTRY is for Thaksin to stay away. The problem is that Thaksin isn't looking for a solution for the country.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[fab4]

Millions what Thaksin. Millions don't want Thaksin. That's the reality.

I recommend that the millions that want Thaksin "move forward" without him. They don't need him.

How magnanimous of you.

[fab4]

The PTP aren't offering a compromise. All they have is to go back to the start. There is no point sitting at the table if that is all they have to "offer".

You keep going back to the anti-thaksin side not compromising, but have not offered any evidence of the Thaksin side wanting to compromise.

If Thaksin had stepped away from politics when he said he was going to in mid-2006, then there wouldn't have been a coup and there wouldn't need to be an amnesty.

The solution for the COUNTRY is for Thaksin to stay away. The problem is that Thaksin isn't looking for a solution for the country.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

If Thaksin had stepped away in 2006? In effect he had. He was a caretaker PM (don't be pedantic over this, the important thing is, there was an election scheduled) keeping the seat warm as it were for the next general election which was due to be held on October 15th.

He had already said he would not contest the next Election but the Military held their coup anyway. There was a very high chance that Thaksins party would have won the election if it was allowed to happen and the military and their backers knew that. The coup had been in planning since february of that year so your theory of the coup and therefore amnesty not happening is extremely unlikely. There was no way a Thaksin party election win was going to be allowed to happen whether Thaksin was at the helm or not.

[Thaddeus]

The PTP aren't offering a compromise. All they have is to go back to the start. There is no point sitting at the table if that is all they have to "offer".

You keep going back to the anti-thaksin side not compromising, but have not offered any evidence of the Thaksin side wanting to compromise.

If Thaksin had stepped away from politics when he said he was going to in mid-2006, then there wouldn't have been a coup and there wouldn't need to be an amnesty.

The solution for the COUNTRY is for Thaksin to stay away. The problem is that Thaksin isn't looking for a solution for the country.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

If Thaksin had stepped away in 2006? In effect he had. He was a caretaker PM (don't be pedantic over this, the important thing is, there was an election scheduled) keeping the seat warm as it were for the next general election which was due to be held on October 15th.

He had already said he would not contest the next Election but the Military held their coup anyway. There was a very high chance that Thaksins party would have won the election if it was allowed to happen and the military and their backers knew that. The coup had been in planning since february of that year so your theory of the coup and therefore amnesty not happening is extremely unlikely. There was no way a Thaksin party election win was going to be allowed to happen whether Thaksin was at the helm or not.

Wow, where do you get all this clandestine information from?

I had subscribed to many 'Joke of the day' sites in the past, but let them lapse when they stopped being funny and repetitive.

But your info appears to be from a new vein of comedy gold, how do I join?

[waza]

The PTP aren't offering a compromise. All they have is to go back to the start. There is no point sitting at the table if that is all they have to "offer".

You keep going back to the anti-thaksin side not compromising, but have not offered any evidence of the Thaksin side wanting to compromise.

If Thaksin had stepped away from politics when he said he was going to in mid-2006, then there wouldn't have been a coup and there wouldn't need to be an amnesty.

The solution for the COUNTRY is for Thaksin to stay away. The problem is that Thaksin isn't looking for a solution for the country.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

If Thaksin had stepped away in 2006? In effect he had. He was a caretaker PM (don't be pedantic over this, the important thing is, there was an election scheduled) keeping the seat warm as it were for the next general election which was due to be held on October 15th.

He had already said he would not contest the next Election but the Military held their coup anyway. There was a very high chance that Thaksins party would have won the election if it was allowed to happen and the military and their backers knew that. The coup had been in planning since february of that year so your theory of the coup and therefore amnesty not happening is extremely unlikely. There was no way a Thaksin party election win was going to be allowed to happen whether Thaksin was at the helm or not.

Wow, where do you get all this clandestine information from?

I had subscribed to many 'Joke of the day' sites in the past, but let them lapse when they stopped being funny and repetitive.

But your info appears to be from a new vein of comedy gold, how do I join?

Trouble is the country wouldn't have made it to October 15th. Protestors were dying and being maimed at an alarming rate and had bunkered themselves in at Swampy, cutting off Thailand from its tourists. Thaksin's death squad weren't up to the task of scaring the protestors off, so he had called for the border rangers to come and finish the job. The choice was a coup or a bloodbath and Thaksin has shown on a few occasions that he isn't afraid of drawing Thai blood.

While this was going on his caretaker government were re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic trying to make his corruption legal.

Edited November 5, 2013 by waza

[MikeOboe57]

The PTP aren't offering a compromise. All they have is to go back to the start. There is no point sitting at the table if that is all they have to "offer".

You keep going back to the anti-thaksin side not compromising, but have not offered any evidence of the Thaksin side wanting to compromise.

If Thaksin had stepped away from politics when he said he was going to in mid-2006, then there wouldn't have been a coup and there wouldn't need to be an amnesty.

The solution for the COUNTRY is for Thaksin to stay away. The problem is that Thaksin isn't looking for a solution for the country.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

If Thaksin had stepped away in 2006? In effect he had. He was a caretaker PM (don't be pedantic over this, the important thing is, there was an election scheduled) keeping the seat warm as it were for the next general election which was due to be held on October 15th.

He had already said he would not contest the next Election but the Military held their coup anyway. There was a very high chance that Thaksins party would have won the election if it was allowed to happen and the military and their backers knew that. The coup had been in planning since february of that year so your theory of the coup and therefore amnesty not happening is extremely unlikely. There was no way a Thaksin party election win was going to be allowed to happen whether Thaksin was at the helm or not.

I want to be pedantic. Thaksin wasn't even "caretaker PM" at that time. He had conveniently "forgotten" to seek royal endorsement after quitting the caretaker job and coming back after a few weeks to reclaim the seat.

As you sound rather "compos mentis" do you really believe that Thailand needs an undisturbed rule by some pocket size dictator? Don't you ever look at other countries that shared or still share that fate? How did the Philippines benefit from Ferdinand Marcos or Zimbabwe blossom under Robert Mugabe or Romania move forward under Nicolae Ceausescu?

If Thailand wants to "move forward" it will have to leave Thaksin behind and everything he stands for: Corruption, greed, incompetence, cronyism, vote buying and most of all the hideous idea that someone like YS can do the job of PM of Thailand.

edit: typo

Edited November 5, 2013 by MikeOboe57

[dkitti]

"More importantly, the bill is being portrayed as a whitewash of corruption, but this is beside the point."

No, this is entirely the point, and is all too true, so she will ignore it completely !

Yay for Red Anti-Corruption !

More than any ither tgat one sentence also jumped out at me.

An incredible thing to say.

Bingo. This one sentence says it all

[gerry1011]

We have spoken about compromises in the posts above. Have another look at them.

It is of course no "us" who must define the compromises to be done, but rather the politicians themselves. But since one part never wants to sit at the reconciliation table it is of course difficult to start to negotiate.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The PTP aren't offering a compromise. All they have is to go back to the start. There is no point sitting at the table if that is all they have to "offer".

You keep going back to the anti-thaksin side not compromising, but have not offered any evidence of the Thaksin side wanting to compromise.

If Thaksin had stepped away from politics when he said he was going to in mid-2006, then there wouldn't have been a coup and there wouldn't need to be an amnesty.

The solution for the COUNTRY is for Thaksin to stay away. The problem is that Thaksin isn't looking for a solution for the country.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

How can you request from millions of people that Thaksin must stay away?

Again, you give yourself quite a strange privilege, especially knowing that the Thaksin side is the strongest side, reelected election after election.

You seem to think that it is right for the dems not to sit together with the PT and the coalition members. But I don't see how anyone could negotiate a compromise without sitting together.

Your stance is too negative and radical, and it obstructs all creativity in searching for a solution. Same as the dems... it only allows the present conflict to go on.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited November 5, 2013 by gerry1011

[MaiChai]

If your dear brother gave up politics, like he promised his wife, then all of this would not have happened. Who instigated the coup: your brother. Who financed the red shirts in 2010 and tried to overthrow the government: your brother. Who needs to walk away and stop meddling with Thailand's politics: your brother. Who keeps stirs it all up?

[whybother]

 

 

 

The PTP aren't offering a compromise. All they have is to go back to the start. There is no point sitting at the table if that is all they have to "offer".

You keep going back to the anti-thaksin side not compromising, but have not offered any evidence of the Thaksin side wanting to compromise.

If Thaksin had stepped away from politics when he said he was going to in mid-2006, then there wouldn't have been a coup and there wouldn't need to be an amnesty.

The solution for the COUNTRY is for Thaksin to stay away. The problem is that Thaksin isn't looking for a solution for the country.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

 

 

If Thaksin had stepped away in 2006? In effect he had. He was a caretaker PM (don't be pedantic over this, the important thing is, there was an election scheduled)  keeping the seat warm as it were for the next general election which was due to be held on October 15th.

 

He had already said he would not contest the next Election but the Military held their coup anyway. There was a very high chance that Thaksins party would have won the election if it was allowed to happen and the military and their backers knew that. The coup had been in planning since february of that year so your theory of the coup and therefore amnesty not happening is extremely unlikely. There was no way a Thaksin party election win was going to be allowed to happen whether Thaksin was at the helm or not.

 

 

 

Wow, where do you get all this clandestine information from?

 

I had subscribed to many 'Joke of the day' sites in the past, but let them lapse when they stopped being funny and repetitive.

 

But your info appears to be from a new vein of comedy gold, how do I join?

 

Trouble is the country wouldn't have made it to October 15th.  Protestors were dying and being maimed at an alarming rate and had bunkered themselves in at Swampy, cutting off Thailand from its tourists.  Thaksin's death squad weren't up to the task of scaring the protestors off, so he  had called for the border rangers to come and finish the job.  The choice was a coup or a bloodbath and Thaksin has shown on a few occasions that he isn't afraid of drawing Thai blood.

While this was going on his caretaker government were re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic trying to make his corruption legal. 

Coup ... 2006. Yellow shirts at swampy ... 2008.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[webfact]

NATION ANALYSIS
Confused remarks spark anger
Jintana Panyaarvudh
The Nation


Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra delivers a statement on the amnesty bill at Government House yesterday.

Yingluck gets her team to call media to clarify stance, says she is ready to back down

BANGKOK: -- The statement Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra delivered at lunchtime yesterday initially appeared to add fuel to the fire.

Her statement, delivered after a Cabinet meeting, came amid growing protests against the controversial amnesty bill, which offers total absolution to everybody who was involved in politics-related offences since 2004.

People expected Yingluck's speech to ease the tension, but instead it ended up sparking ire as evidenced by the angry messages posted on social media. Many said they wanted a clear answer to one question - will the ruling Pheu Thai Party retreat on the bill? However, many also found her statement confusing, while others insisted that she and her party were not backing down on the bill.

Yingluck began her statement by saying she was all for the principle of amnesty because she believed that granting amnesty would reduce conflicts and help the country move forward if all concerned parties forgave each other. Then she went on to say that many were distorting the aim of the bill and using it as a political tool in order to overthrow her government and democracy.

She has obviously forgotten that people from all walks of life nationwide have taken a stand against this bill, ranging from academics, students and businessmen to doctors and villagers.

Most of these protesters are non-partisan people who are taking a stand because they find it unacceptable to grant absolution to those facing corruption charges.

So, she is not correct in assuming that all opponents are against the government.

However, looking closer at the speech, one might see some signs of retreat.

After all, Yingluck did say that the fate of the bill was now up to the Senate, which will be deliberating on it next Monday. Perhaps, she was signalling to the upper house that her government was ready to take a step back.

She also said that the MPs who voted for the bill would accept the Senate's decision, which could mean that despite the government's majority in the House of Representatives, it might choose not to reaffirm Prayuth Siripanich's controversial version of the bill if the Senate rejects it.

The Constitution's Article 148 states that a bill rejected or withheld by the Senate can be reconsidered by the House, but only after observing a 180-day lapse.

Yingluck reportedly found the strong public reaction to her speech rather shocking and asked her staff to call the media and explain that she and her government would not push the bill forward.

Sadly, judging from what the Pheu Thai Party has been doing in terms of the bill, few people believe her.


PM's speech

Dear People,

The country has sustained damage inflicted by political conflict for the past 10 years.

After I was elected, I believe every citizen agreed the country would not move forward if the conflict persisted. When this government took office, I announced a clear policy to bring about reconciliation under the rule of law. Recently, I pushed to form a political-reform venue where all differing sides could join hands to mend fences and foster unity.

Under the democratic principle of balanced sharing of powers, the government - particularly myself as the prime minister - has refrained from interfering with the legislature, as seen in the case of amending the Constitution.

I have been wrongly accused of neglecting to perform my concurrent duty as MP when, in fact, I want the legislature to freely do its job. In regard to the recent House vote for the passage of the amnesty bill, which has spawned much public debate, it is a fact that countries, when mired in political conflict causing loss of lives and properties, would grant amnesty. Thailand should emulate the amnesty lesson.

In principle, amnesty is an option worthy of consideration. If all sides agree to forgive each other, I believe the conflict would dissipate and the country would move on.

It is to be regretted that hundreds of people were killed and thousands injured in the political violence triggered by attempts to overthrow an elected government.

Amnesty does not mean we should forget this painful lesson. We are obliged to learn and understand, so that our children would not face a repeat of such tragedies.

In the meantime, we have to cooperate with one another to overcome the conflict and move the country forward.

The resumption of peace means all sides must grant forgiveness - without bias or emotion - and be open-minded to allow the airing of dissenting opinions. I understand this is difficult to do, but we have to put the greater good before personal interest.

As of today, the amnesty bill was passed by the House and forwarded to the Senate for deliberation. This is in accordance with normal legislative proceedings. Relevant parties have differing views on amnesty, spawning wide differences among sectors of society, institutions, and between and within political parties.

Despite the House passage of the bill, several groups appear not ready to embrace forgiveness and are mired in differences.

I don't want to see the politicisation of the bill with the aim of unseating the elected government and derailing democratic rule once again.

The bill has been distorted to cause misunderstanding as a fiscal issue. I, as the prime minister, would have to endorse a fiscal-related bill, but I have never lent my signature to endorsing amnesty.

More importantly, the bill is being portrayed as a whitewash of corruption, but this is beside the point. Amnesty is designed to absolve victims of the power seizure, which happened outside the rule of law, and those accused of committing offences related to life, physical injury and property.

I reaffirm that the government will strive to serve the national interests and that it will not use its majority contrary to the people's feelings.

I will heed the views of proponents and opponents. The government's main goal is to bring about reconciliation. In the face of prevailing differences, the government would like all sides to pause in order to stop causing further divisiveness.

Under the Constitution, the bill is now under the purview of the Senate. I want to plead for the senators, those appointed and those elected, to use their discretion while deliberating the bill. It is well known that the Senate is beyond interference.

So I hope the senators will deliberate on the bill on the basis of forgiveness and compassion so as to dispense justice equally for those with grievances and pain.

The deliberation on amnesty should factor into the country's interest. Regardless of the outcome of the Senate's decision, be it to disagree with, to withhold or to revise the bill, I believe the Members of Parliament, who cast the vote for the bill's passage, will accept the result for the sake of reconciliation. The legislative procedures should prevail to completion and everyone should uphold this in order to safeguard the freedom of every Thai citizen.

In conclusion, I would like to thank everyone in the legislature for striving to achieve reconciliation. It is now time for all Thai citizens to unite and decide on the way to bring about understanding without bias and emotion. Open-heartedness and compassion should be the basis to achieve reconciliation.

Thank you.


-- The Nation 2013-11-06

[whybother]

We have spoken about compromises in the posts above. Have another look at them.

It is of course no "us" who must define the compromises to be done, but rather the politicians themselves. But since one part never wants to sit at the reconciliation table it is of course difficult to start to negotiate.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The PTP aren't offering a compromise. All they have is to go back to the start. There is no point sitting at the table if that is all they have to "offer".

You keep going back to the anti-thaksin side not compromising, but have not offered any evidence of the Thaksin side wanting to compromise.

If Thaksin had stepped away from politics when he said he was going to in mid-2006, then there wouldn't have been a coup and there wouldn't need to be an amnesty.

The solution for the COUNTRY is for Thaksin to stay away. The problem is that Thaksin isn't looking for a solution for the country.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

How can you request from millions of people that Thaksin must stay away?

Again, you give yourself quite a strange privilege, especially knowing that the Thaksin side is the strongest side, reelected election after election.

You seem to think that it is right for the dems not to sit together with the PT and the coalition members. But I don't see how anyone could negotiate a compromise without sitting together.

Your stance is too negative and radical, and it obstructs all creativity in searching for a solution. Same as the dems... it only allows the present conflict to go on.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

So, in other words, they're not prepared to compromise, and its all about one man.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[gerry1011]

If your dear brother gave up politics, like he promised his wife, then all of this would not have happened. Who instigated the coup: your brother. Who financed the red shirts in 2010 and tried to overthrow the government: your brother. Who needs to walk away and stop meddling with Thailand's politics: your brother. Who keeps stirs it all up?

Very constructive...

Its not with people like you that a solution will ever be found, that's for sure.

A solution requires the people to start behaving like adults and come up with wiser comments.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[wonder6281]

Does compromise equate to losing face? Let's not forget who made the PM Chief of Defence and on who's advice and for what reason?

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Hawkman]

If your dear brother gave up politics, like he promised his wife, then all of this would not have happened. Who instigated the coup: your brother. Who financed the red shirts in 2010 and tried to overthrow the government: your brother. Who needs to walk away and stop meddling with Thailand's politics: your brother. Who keeps stirs it all up?

Very constructive...

Its not with people like you that a solution will ever be found, that's for sure.

A solution requires the people to start behaving like adults and come up with wiser comments.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

You still haven't offered a compromise yet from your side of the argument, you've just been avoiding it. You're moaning about the dims and us not compromising, but nor are you - saying, that Thaksin HAS to be involved, that's not compromising, that's being childish and UNcompromising.

As I see this, there is NO compromise that will suit both sides and let's not forget there are many Red Shirts who are angry with Thaksin now and this bill.

Here's a question for you, if Thaksin was to remove himself from politics 100% truthfully and legally (I know this would never happen, but...) what would the Reds do then? Would they fold? Or would we see the country start to build bridges and work together and lose the focus on one man.

That is the solution.

It's him that is causing this divide, not the dems, not the people, him. You seem to think he is more important than the country and its people, that's just wrong.

[kotsak]

ratcatcher, on 05 Nov 2013 - 17:33, said:

The caption on the advertising under the characters seems to refer to "Foot and Mouth" disease. I often wonder whether dear lady Poo suffers from the more common ailment affecting politicians, called "Foot In Mouth" disease.

Plus it says that the upper parts are not functional..

[tominbkk]

If your dear brother gave up politics, like he promised his wife, then all of this would not have happened. Who instigated the coup: your brother. Who financed the red shirts in 2010 and tried to overthrow the government: your brother. Who needs to walk away and stop meddling with Thailand's politics: your brother. Who keeps stirs it all up?

Very constructive...

Its not with people like you that a solution will ever be found, that's for sure.

A solution requires the people to start behaving like adults and come up with wiser comments.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

You would prefer people be quiet and smile as Shinaland (or Thaksinland) is put into place brick by brick? When people stop commenting, we are doomed. People were once being put in ovens because nobody wanted to get involved.

[AleG]

If your dear brother gave up politics, like he promised his wife, then all of this would not have happened. Who instigated the coup: your brother. Who financed the red shirts in 2010 and tried to overthrow the government: your brother. Who needs to walk away and stop meddling with Thailand's politics: your brother. Who keeps stirs it all up?

Very constructive...

Its not with people like you that a solution will ever be found, that's for sure.

A solution requires the people to start behaving like adults and come up with wiser comments.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

You still haven't offered a compromise yet from your side of the argument, you've just been avoiding it. You're moaning about the dims and us not compromising, but nor are you - saying, that Thaksin HAS to be involved, that's not compromising, that's being childish and UNcompromising.

As I see this, there is NO compromise that will suit both sides and let's not forget there are many Red Shirts who are angry with Thaksin now and this bill.

Here's a question for you, if Thaksin was to remove himself from politics 100% truthfully and legally (I know this would never happen, but...) what would the Reds do then? Would they fold? Or would we see the country start to build bridges and work together and lose the focus on one man.

That is the solution.

It's him that is causing this divide, not the dems, not the people, him. You seem to think he is more important than the country and its people, that's just wrong.

That there hasn´t been compromises from the side opposing Thaksin is <deleted>, after the coup his party was elected, and proceeded to try to whitewash Thaksin at all costs, fast forward to 2011, his party again in government in spite the whining of people saying that the elites would not allow it and a coup would ensue, then again, surprise surprise, the new government strives constantly to do Thansin´s bidding. One of the very first things they did was to negotiate a visa for Thaksin so he could go to Japan, then the illegally issued passport, now, this whitewashing bill aimed at ONE MAN.

Time and time again these "uncompromising" elites have allowed Thaksin´s supporters to chose a government, the problem has always been that those governments can´t see past the needs of ONE MAN and use their time and energy to carry out his schemes and quest to be above and beyond the law. Thaksin is obsessed with himself, screw Thailand, his party is owned by him and at his beck and call, getting over that ONE MAN is unthinkable, yet is those other people who are suppossed to be obsessed with Thaksin.

[Artisi]

If your dear brother gave up politics, like he promised his wife, then all of this would not have happened. Who instigated the coup: your brother. Who financed the red shirts in 2010 and tried to overthrow the government: your brother. Who needs to walk away and stop meddling with Thailand's politics: your brother. Who keeps stirs it all up?

Very constructive...

Its not with people like you that a solution will ever be found, that's for sure.

A solution requires the people to start behaving like adults and come up with wiser comments.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

May well be time to practice the gospel you preach, especially behaviour and comments and unless you haven't noticed there is only one and only 1 impediment delaying a start down the road to recovery - the white-washing of a fugitive criminal deeds which certainly don't warrant any consideration what so ever.

[Magenta2013]

An excellent speech and shows that she and her advisors know how to "play the game" now.

She has, correctly, kept out of the amnesty bill debate - the stupid people on the opposite side have tried to goad her into comment as they want to trap her - but she has resolutely not taken their bait.

She now very cleverly hands the bill over to the Senate and will let them either ammend it, throw it out or pass it.

Whatever the Senate does its nothing to do with her - had she been politically naive and made her stance known on the amnesty bill - it would be a serious blow to her and PTP if it were thrown out - but they have shown have they have grown up now and know how to play the political game with the ammart and Yellow shirts/Dems.

If Sentate ammeds it, it gets ammended. If its thrown out then they have to wait 180 days before submitting in a different format. If it passes it passes.

But whatever the result it has no effect on Yingluck.

Some very smart political moves going on by PTP - at the moment everyone is focussed on the Amnesty Bill - whilst all eyes are off of the two trillion baht loan for infrastructure development, the rice scheme and many other proposals and ongoing things.

This time around it is the Dems and the Yellows who are appearing to be stupid, appearing to be naive and who will be losing votes left, right and center at the moment. Their protests and causing obstruction are losing them votes.

Meanwhile Yingluck and PTP quietly and calmy sit there and say let the Democratic process take its course - the Sentate will decide and this is the process we follow as a government and people. Showing true leadership with calm authority.

This all says to me that it is a ploy of PTP to have new elections within the next 6 months - they are letting the Dems appear stupid, emotional, morally corrupt and letting them lose voters with their silly protests - meanwhile PTP appears calm, following the law and due process of the constituion and can garner more voters at the expense of the Dems.

Well played PTP !!

[AleG]

^^^ mind boggling.

[Tatsujin]

The PTP aren't offering a compromise. All they have is to go back to the start. There is no point sitting at the table if that is all they have to "offer".

You keep going back to the anti-thaksin side not compromising, but have not offered any evidence of the Thaksin side wanting to compromise.

If Thaksin had stepped away from politics when he said he was going to in mid-2006, then there wouldn't have been a coup and there wouldn't need to be an amnesty.

The solution for the COUNTRY is for Thaksin to stay away. The problem is that Thaksin isn't looking for a solution for the country.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

If Thaksin had stepped away in 2006? In effect he had. He was a caretaker PM (don't be pedantic over this, the important thing is, there was an election scheduled) keeping the seat warm as it were for the next general election which was due to be held on October 15th.

He had already said he would not contest the next Election but the Military held their coup anyway. There was a very high chance that Thaksins party would have won the election if it was allowed to happen and the military and their backers knew that. The coup had been in planning since february of that year so your theory of the coup and therefore amnesty not happening is extremely unlikely. There was no way a Thaksin party election win was going to be allowed to happen whether Thaksin was at the helm or not.

Facing yet another ban I'll be polite.

Please get your facts straight before attempting any further debate (and reading/buying into the "red" propaganda doesn't count).

[tingtongteesood]

Dear People,

The country has sustained damage inflicted by political conflict my brother Thaksin for the past 10 years.

After I was elected to take my brother bribed my way into office, I believe every Thai citizen agreed the country would not move forward if the conflict persisted.

When this government took office, I announced a clear policy to bring about reconciliation my brother home under the rule of law. by any means necessary.

You get the idea......

[Baerboxer]

If your dear brother gave up politics, like he promised his wife, then all of this would not have happened. Who instigated the coup: your brother. Who financed the red shirts in 2010 and tried to overthrow the government: your brother. Who needs to walk away and stop meddling with Thailand's politics: your brother. Who keeps stirs it all up?

Very constructive...

Its not with people like you that a solution will ever be found, that's for sure.

A solution requires the people to start behaving like adults and come up with wiser comments.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Indeed, the Thai people need to find a solution. Compromise with Thaksin and his regime ? Would you believe a government who openly, and by admission, lie and say it acceptable ? A government that acts illegally and breaks the law?

How can you compromise with somebody who lies, cheats, and doesn't honor agreements? Any agreements made would simply be broken when it suited.

Nevile Chamberlain believed a compromise with Hitler would avoid war. He happily sold out the Czechs for an "agreement" and went around waving a worthless piece of paper he'd signed with Hitler. History has many more examples of power crazed dictators that consider lies, cheating, and any actions acceptable to further their own course and profit. Thaksin was happy to sacrifice some red shirt canon fodder and would do it again. He's lied many times before, and would do it again.

A political compromise needs to be found. But that cannot include whitewashing so many criminals. Nor can it involve Thaksin for he as shown many times his word means nothing.

[Ricardo]

If your dear brother gave up politics, like he promised his wife, then all of this would not have happened. Who instigated the coup: your brother. Who financed the red shirts in 2010 and tried to overthrow the government: your brother. Who needs to walk away and stop meddling with Thailand's politics: your brother. Who keeps stirs it all up?

Very constructive...

Its not with people like you that a solution will ever be found, that's for sure.

A solution requires the people to start behaving like adults and come up with wiser comments.

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

What's wrong with just applying the law, to everyone ?

Why should law-breakers & fugitives be rewarded, for not plunging the country into dissension and civil-war, yet again ?

What's wrong with an amnesty for the low-level people, but excluding the leaders, as originally proposed ?

Apart from it not being, what Thaksin demands and instructs, from afar ?

[Baerboxer]

An excellent speech and shows that she and her advisors know how to "play the game" now.

She has, correctly, kept out of the amnesty bill debate - the stupid people on the opposite side have tried to goad her into comment as they want to trap her - but she has resolutely not taken their bait.

She now very cleverly hands the bill over to the Senate and will let them either ammend it, throw it out or pass it.

Whatever the Senate does its nothing to do with her - had she been politically naive and made her stance known on the amnesty bill - it would be a serious blow to her and PTP if it were thrown out - but they have shown have they have grown up now and know how to play the political game with the ammart and Yellow shirts/Dems.

If Sentate ammeds it, it gets ammended. If its thrown out then they have to wait 180 days before submitting in a different format. If it passes it passes.

But whatever the result it has no effect on Yingluck.

Some very smart political moves going on by PTP - at the moment everyone is focussed on the Amnesty Bill - whilst all eyes are off of the two trillion baht loan for infrastructure development, the rice scheme and many other proposals and ongoing things.

This time around it is the Dems and the Yellows who are appearing to be stupid, appearing to be naive and who will be losing votes left, right and center at the moment. Their protests and causing obstruction are losing them votes.

Meanwhile Yingluck and PTP quietly and calmy sit there and say let the Democratic process take its course - the Sentate will decide and this is the process we follow as a government and people. Showing true leadership with calm authority.

This all says to me that it is a ploy of PTP to have new elections within the next 6 months - they are letting the Dems appear stupid, emotional, morally corrupt and letting them lose voters with their silly protests - meanwhile PTP appears calm, following the law and due process of the constituion and can garner more voters at the expense of the Dems.

Well played PTP !!

My wife voted PTP - naieve perhaps, but believing Yingluck would be independent and bring some much needed fresh changes.

All the scams, lies, trips, lack of leadership, stupid comments, corruption and the real agenda of bringing Thaksin back mean she now regrets this. She and all her university old friends will never vote for PTP again. They see it for what it is. A vehicle for the Shin clan to run Thailand as they see fit, dominated by a convicted criminal who is trying to whitewash all his crimes.

It's very disappointing for Thais who really wanted democracy and a government that governs for the benefit of the people and country, not for themselves and their clan.