Thai Democrats deny supporting pre-coup protests

[whybother]

I wonder how many PTP MPs attended red shirt rallies in the months before the coup.

No idea, maybe a few.But if some did I am not aware they lied about it.Frankly the photograph of Abhisit enjoying a snog with Suthep and holding a whistle says it all.

Did Abhisit lie about it?

[jayboy]

I wonder how many PTP MPs attended red shirt rallies in the months before the coup.

No idea, maybe a few.But if some did I am not aware they lied about it.Frankly the photograph of Abhisit enjoying a snog with Suthep and holding a whistle says it all.

Did Abhisit lie about it?

He is and was the Democrat leader.

Seriously are you not slightly ashamed of yourself in seeking to defend the indefensible?

[jayboy]

I wonder how many PTP MPs attended red shirt rallies in the months before the coup.

No idea, maybe a few.But if some did I am not aware they lied about it.Frankly the photograph of Abhisit enjoying a snog with Suthep and holding a whistle says it all.

Did Abhisit lie about it?

He is and was the Democrat leader.

Seriously are you not slightly ashamed of yourself in seeking to defend the indefensible?

[jayboy]

I wonder how many PTP MPs attended red shirt rallies in the months before the coup.

No idea, maybe a few.But if some did I am not aware they lied about it.Frankly the photograph of Abhisit enjoying a snog with Suthep and holding a whistle says it all.

Did Abhisit lie about it?

He is and was the Democrat leader.

Seriously are you not slightly ashamed of yourself in seeking to defend the indefensible?

[whybother]

I wonder how many PTP MPs attended red shirt rallies in the months before the coup.

No idea, maybe a few.But if some did I am not aware they lied about it.Frankly the photograph of Abhisit enjoying a snog with Suthep and holding a whistle says it all.

Did Abhisit lie about it?

He is and was the Democrat leader.

Seriously are you not slightly ashamed of yourself in seeking to defend the indefensible?

Yes. Can you please point out where he said that the Democrats didn't support the protests?

[Thanet]

Re Abhisit's comment that he wore a whistle but did not blow it, it now looks like he'll have to change this to something akin to 'smoked but did not inhale'.

I think that anybody vaguely sane will know what happened, but that is highly unlikely to lead to a negative court decision. I'm continually amazed by the TVF posters who do not acknowledge the obvious connections between the PC, the leadership of the armed forces, much of the judiciary and the senior backers of the Democrat Party,

On questioning Mr. Abhisit why he was wearing the PCAD trademark whistle despite denials that the Democratic Party supported the protest movement, he responded with a remark from the Bill Clinton text book: "I wore the whistle, but I never blew it!"

Doh!

I

Doh!

He's not inhaling here either:

Looks very much like a whistle to me though.

And here too:

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/People-blow-whistle-on-govt-30218751.html

Just for fun mind you, and does't mean that the party he leads supports the PDRC.

And here's another one - the whistle being just a fashion accessory and most certainly NOT related to the party he leads supporting the PDRC:

Edited September 22, 2014 by Thanet

[whybother]

What a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive.

1.Look at article on which this thread is based

2.Check whether Abhisit is the Democrat leader and if so whether he has rebuked his senior colleagues for their lies

3.Reflect on your foolishness and shameful dishonesty

So now you're saying that because Abhisit hasn't rebuked someone (or it hasn't been reported anyway) that HE is a liar?

That's twisting things a bit.

[maxme]

Couple of dems/suthep supporters have painted themselves into a corner and trying to wriggle themselves free by trying to change color. Quite amusing...

Edited September 22, 2014 by maxme

[Nickymaster]

Couple of dems/suthep supporters have painted themselves into a corner and trying to wriggle themselves free by trying to change color. Quite amusing...

If you say so..

[whybother]

OK, I'll make this easy by drawing real world comparisons in other areas.

Let's say that Barrack Obama travels to Syria, and posed for a photo shoot in Raqqa, standing on a tank hugging that al-Baghdadi guy, while waving an ISIS flag. He then goes home, and, with a perfectly straight face, tells the US public that his party doesn't support ISIS, but he (as an individual) has a right to support them and that people should draw no conclusions from his trip. Wouldn't that be viewed by the public as hypocritical? No to you though. By your logic, that would be OK, right? Just because he, as the leader of his party, supports the enemy, doesn't in the slightest way confer to the public that this is the agenda of his party.

Another example - during a game of football one of the players in a team suddenly runs over and scores a goal for the other team against his own side. He then runs back and resumes playing for his own side, explaining to the rest of his team that he was acting in his capacity as an individual, not as part of their team, and that his actions did not mean that he supports the other team. OK with you as well, I guess?

I think that you are letting your blind love for Abhisit cloud your judgement. He comes across as smooth and convincing, but this article exposes his as a lying charlatan and hypocrite. He would be doing Thailand a favour by quitting politics in the name of reconciliation.

You're comparing Obama supporting ISIS to Abhisit supporting the PDRC????

[thaiguzzi]

According to all the Yellow Elite lovers on this forum, Abhisit's sh#it smells of roses too.

[whybother]

I'm sorry that you appear not to understand rhetorical figures of speech, and you now appear to be sneering at me because of this, and because you have run out of sensible arguments.

Unless, that is, you are agreeing with me that the metaphor of Obama supporting ISIS as an individual, then expecting people to believe that he supports the opposite as the leader of his party, is just as incongruous a notion as Abhisit publicly supporting the PDRC, then trying to have us believe that as the leader of a party he actually doesn't.

I am not sure how you expect anyone to understand a comparison of Obama supporting ISIS, who he's "vowed to destroy", and Abhisit supporting the PDRC.

Abhisit hasn't even said that he doesn't/didn't support the PDRC. Someone from his party has said that "the party" didn't support the protests. That was in relation to an allegation that the Democrats should be dissolved for (supposedly) doing so. It was probably also related to financial/operational support at the party level.

I'm sure, as a politician, Abhisit most likely lies. But this statement was made by a party spokesman about support by the Democrat party. It wasn't a statement that the Democrat members didn't personally agree with the protests and support the protesters, and it wasn't a statement by Abhisit that he personally didn't attend protests and support the protesters.

I suppose you would also call Yingluck a liar because someone in PTP said that they didn't support the red shirts.

[whybother]

According to all the Yellow Elite lovers on this forum, Abhisit's sh#it smells of roses too.

All two of them?

[metisdead]

Some overly inflammatory posts have been removed as well as the replies. Pretty childish when a person needs to post in this manner to make his point. If you cannot post in a civil manner, don't bother posting.

Another post containing off topic deflection rhetoric has been removed as well as the replies.

[rubl]

With all the non-news posted, I seem to have missed when the Constitutional Court will start hearing the case lodged.

Anyone who knows when the fun starts ?

[Robby nz]

What matters most is people perception as it influence their vote. Perception to most are that the Dem Party is in cahoot with the PDRC. Doesn't matter how much they deny.

That's right Eric just another lie like the murder lie.

Anything to blacken the name of your opposition when you have nothing positive to offer, and of course to cover up your own misdeeds.

This whole thing looks very much like another Amsterdam dirty tricks ploy, doesn't matter if they are guilty or not as long as they get enough publicity to generate some more hate.

[whybother]

With all the non-news posted, I seem to have missed when the Constitutional Court will start hearing the case lodged.

Anyone who knows when the fun starts ?

The Constitutional Court probably won't even look at it unless Sa-ngiam has provided some actual evidence of party level support.

Of course, red shirt and PTP supporters will use that as "another example" of "the elite looking after the Democrats".

Of course, not having any evidence has nothing to do with it.

[rubl]

Dosnt really matter Rubi, its already common knowledge as to the stark truth, law book detail or not, the case will just highlight it and remind everyone.....

You mean just like the 'fact' Ms. Yingluck headed corruption with her RPPS ?

Didn't I hear about that one that we should wait to condemn as not all details known, still witnesses to be heard and so on?

Are you really in favour of double standards?

[rubl]

Why would I care if they are found not have broken the law ? the law is whatever they say it is, big deal, it still dosnt affect the truth of the link between the Dems and them supporting the PDRC made up of a few Ex Dems .... uhhh duh ..

OK. They're linked. So what?

Leading members of the Democrat Party have denied the allegation that their party supported the anti-government protest campaign that was launched at the end of last year.

So they are lying, what a great bunch ... but if that floats your boat...

So, do you have prove the Democrat party as in their executive committee formally supported the anti-government protests ? Or are you just 'interpreting'?

BTW leading members of Pheu Thai party also seemed in dubio how to handle the case of a Ms. Yingluck cabinet member speaking in what seemed favourably for a Lanna State breaking up the Thailand he represented. I guess my misunderstanding to even dare to mention this here. Obviously the man was lying to placate UDD and red-shirt only, he didn't rally mean it and therefor it should reflect on him or his party and certainly not on Ms. Yingluck. It was probably only because of those dastardly Dems who provoked with their support of anti-government protesters while being private citizens.

[rubl]

I believe they won't be dissolved because they didn't break the law.

Unless you can show me the law that they broke, that's what you should believe too.

If all you're going on is someone saying that "they broke the law and should be dissolved" and someone else saying "no we didn't", then that highlights that, for you, this is all about what you want to believe.

Why would I care if they are found not have broken the law ? the law is whatever they say it is, big deal, it still dosnt affect the truth of the link between the Dems and them supporting the PDRC made up of a few Ex Dems .... uhhh duh ..

So, with a Yingluck Cabinet Minister speaking at a UDD red-shirt meeting acknowledging the possibility of a Lanna State, we have obviously no problem as Ms. Yingluck knew nothing and even bravely stated ALL parties to stop talking like that.

Therefor the Democrat Party should be abolished, or more to the point as out well know Pheu Thai party list (now former) MP and UDD leader Dr. weng once said "we want to eradicate the Dems" and his wife Ms. Thida later on just refining to "wipe out the last of the Nationalists".

All very democratically, even our criminal fugitive would agree on that.

So, the groundwork for rejecting a possible 'not right' decision by the Constitutional Court has been laid. Only difference with six months ago is that we're unlikely to see new grenade attacks or intimidations by 'peaceful protesters'. IMHO.

[fab4]

I wonder how many PTP MPs attended red shirt rallies in the months before the coup.

No idea, maybe a few.But if some did I am not aware they lied about it.Frankly the photograph of Abhisit enjoying a snog with Suthep and holding a whistle says it all.

For PT its is difficult to lie about it indeed. Here is the interior minister at a red shirt rally.

From Thursday night and into Friday morning, the regime’s Interior Minister had taken the stage of the pro-regime rally, stirring up their mobs even as gunshots were fired and protesters were being killed, just beyond the walls of the stadium. Speakers took turns taking to the stage, with their colleagues smirking in the background, all while the foreign media began reporting on violence and deaths.

http://truthfrequencyradio.com/thailand-regime-deploys-black-clad-militants/

[rubl]

oh yea who was that Abhisit look-a-like with the whistle then? what a hypocrite

Timing my dear. Please remind me of

- when Abhisit resigned as MP

- when Abhist resigned as Democrat party leader

- when he blew a whistle while at a democratically allowed anti-government protests (at least the firsr few days it was called such even by the Government of the day)

following just to put things in perspective

- which Yingluck Cabinet Minister spoke at a UDD rally in favour of a separate Lanna State

- was said Minister still 'full' minister, 'caretaker' minister or just 'not-caretaking' minister

- did Pheu Thai executives condemn the chap and threw him out of the party?

It would seem that double standards are still with us today. Unfortunately the NRC reforms will not alter that as far as foreigners are concerned.

PS I missed something, sorry, my mistake. At the time k. Charupong was still Pheu Thai party leader. Of course that was not real, he was just an innocent clone

Edited September 22, 2014 by rubl

[englishoak]

I believe they won't be dissolved because they didn't break the law.

Unless you can show me the law that they broke, that's what you should believe too.

If all you're going on is someone saying that "they broke the law and should be dissolved" and someone else saying "no we didn't", then that highlights that, for you, this is all about what you want to believe.

Why would I care if they are found not have broken the law ? the law is whatever they say it is, big deal, it still dosnt affect the truth of the link between the Dems and them supporting the PDRC made up of a few Ex Dems .... uhhh duh ..

So, with a Yingluck Cabinet Minister speaking at a UDD red-shirt meeting acknowledging the possibility of a Lanna State, we have obviously no problem as Ms. Yingluck knew nothing and even bravely stated ALL parties to stop talking like that.

Therefor the Democrat Party should be abolished, or more to the point as out well know Pheu Thai party list (now former) MP and UDD leader Dr. weng once said "we want to eradicate the Dems" and his wife Ms. Thida later on just refining to "wipe out the last of the Nationalists".

All very democratically, even our criminal fugitive would agree on that.

So, the groundwork for rejecting a possible 'not right' decision by the Constitutional Court has been laid. Only difference with six months ago is that we're unlikely to see new grenade attacks or intimidations by 'peaceful protesters'. IMHO.

Im sticking with the topic, they are lying, they have always been lying and probably always will. Im really not in the slightest bit interested in excuses or diversions or anything else to do with another party this topic is about the Dems....

and they are full of it... .. so whats new other than its certain they are all as bad as each other in this country so pick your scumbag woo hoo...

Edited September 22, 2014 by englishoak

[whybother]

Im sticking with the topic, they are lying, they have always been lying and probably always will. Im really not in the slightest bit interested in excuses or diversions or anything else to do with another party this topic is about the Dems....

and they are full of it... .. so whats new other than its certain they are all as bad as each other in this country so pick your scumbag woo hoo...

So you have proof that the Democrat party financially or operationally supported the PDRC protests?

[rubl]

I wonder how many PTP MPs attended red shirt rallies in the months before the coup.

No idea, maybe a few.But if some did I am not aware they lied about it.Frankly the photograph of Abhisit enjoying a snog with Suthep and holding a whistle says it all.

For PT its is difficult to lie about it indeed. Here is the interior minister at a red shirt rally.

From Thursday night and into Friday morning, the regime’s Interior Minister had taken the stage of the pro-regime rally, stirring up their mobs even as gunshots were fired and protesters were being killed, just beyond the walls of the stadium. Speakers took turns taking to the stage, with their colleagues smirking in the background, all while the foreign media began reporting on violence and deaths.

http://truthfrequencyradio.com/thailand-regime-deploys-black-clad-militants/

Nice picture, fabs.

BTW wasn't it Charupong Reuangwusan who spoke at the UDD gathering, might that be the same who's also a self-exiled fugitive. Busy man, seems to try to set up a government-in-exile. Seems months last we heard about that, obviously junta censorship.

"Earlier last Sunday at the protest rally of the red-shirts in Nakhon Ratchasima where caretaker Interior Minister and ruling Pheu Thai party leader Charupong Ruangsuwan attended, hardcore redshirts declared to secede the country’s north and northeast regions to establish what they called “Isan-Lanna” state and also encouraged over 10 millions of people who have guns to get ready for final showdown with anti-government protesters."

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/anti-secession-banner-emerges-phitsanulok/

That was in February this year.

[rubl]

Im sticking with the topic, they are lying, they have always been lying and probably always will. Im really not in the slightest bit interested in excuses or diversions or anything else to do with another party this topic is about the Dems....

and they are full of it... .. so whats new other than its certain they are all as bad as each other in this country so pick your scumbag woo hoo...

You seem somewhat obsessed, my dear Oak. To the point of forgetting to bring forward any objective arguments rather than just a "they lied, they lied".

You remind me of hard-hard yellows who would say the same about our dear, innocent Ms. Yingluck.

Now as my friend fabs likes to say, where is the tangible evidence ? Things which can be used in court for instance.

Edited September 22, 2014 by rubl

[Thanet]

Dosnt really matter Rubi, its already common knowledge as to the stark truth, law book detail or not, the case will just highlight it and remind everyone.....

You mean just like the 'fact' Ms. Yingluck headed corruption with her RPPS ?

Didn't I hear about that one that we should wait to condemn as not all details known, still witnesses to be heard and so on?

Are you really in favour of double standards?

Of course everyone deserves a fair hearing. But in a backdrop of military rule, one where the judiciary is controlled by the NCPO, what makes you think it will be fair? Of course, I forgot, the general told you on Friday Prayers, and you believe everything he says. After all, according to you, the junta only came into being on the day of the coup, and the army had no interest in politics before that.

In any case, you digress. This topic is about Abhisit's highly amusing denial of his party's support for the PDRC, in spite of various photos of him attending rallies and blowing whistles in various places. A bit like a child denying stealing sweets, and smiling up at you with chocolate stains all over his face.

Needless to say, he leaves his whistle at home now.

[fab4]

Nice picture, fabs.

BTW wasn't it Charupong Reuangwusan who spoke at the UDD gathering, might that be the same who's also a self-exiled fugitive. Busy man, seems to try to set up a government-in-exile. Seems months last we heard about that, obviously junta censorship.

"Earlier last Sunday at the protest rally of the red-shirts in Nakhon Ratchasima where caretaker Interior Minister and ruling Pheu Thai party leader Charupong Ruangsuwan attended, hardcore redshirts declared to secede the country’s north and northeast regions to establish what they called “Isan-Lanna” state and also encouraged over 10 millions of people who have guns to get ready for final showdown with anti-government protesters."

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/anti-secession-banner-emerges-phitsanulok/

That was in February this year.

If you'll allow me a misquote of Samuel Johnson, referencing Cartalucci is the last refuge of a scoundrel (and a desperate poster).

Anyway, being at a UDD gathering where certain hard core redshirts rhetorically called for succession is hardly making it official PTP or UDD policy but if you say it's so, it must be true.

However, these headlines tell a different story

No plans for separation, UDD leader stresses

Weng Tojirakarn, a leader of the United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship and a former Pheu Thai MP, on Wednesday rebutted the claim made by the anti-government People's Democratic Reform Committee secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban, that the red shirts had a plan for national separation.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/No-plans-for-separation-UDD-leader-stresses-30227853.html

Yingluck asks red shirts to exercise restraint

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra Wednesday dismissed the red shirts' rhetoric of country dividing and asked them to exercise restraint.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/Yingluck-asks-red-shirts-to-exercise-restraint-30227876.html

Meanwhile, back to the topic (isn't that usually your line?).........................

Edited September 22, 2014 by fab4

[ThailandNoob]

I believe they won't be dissolved because they didn't break the law.

Unless you can show me the law that they broke, that's what you should believe too.

If all you're going on is someone saying that "they broke the law and should be dissolved" and someone else saying "no we didn't", then that highlights that, for you, this is all about what you want to believe.

Why would I care if they are found not have broken the law ? the law is whatever they say it is, big deal, it still dosnt affect the truth of the link between the Dems and them supporting the PDRC made up of a few Ex Dems .... uhhh duh ..

So, with a Yingluck Cabinet Minister speaking at a UDD red-shirt meeting acknowledging the possibility of a Lanna State, we have obviously no problem as Ms. Yingluck knew nothing and even bravely stated ALL parties to stop talking like that.

Therefor the Democrat Party should be abolished, or more to the point as out well know Pheu Thai party list (now former) MP and UDD leader Dr. weng once said "we want to eradicate the Dems" and his wife Ms. Thida later on just refining to "wipe out the last of the Nationalists".

All very democratically, even our criminal fugitive would agree on that.

So, the groundwork for rejecting a possible 'not right' decision by the Constitutional Court has been laid. Only difference with six months ago is that we're unlikely to see new grenade attacks or intimidations by 'peaceful protesters'. IMHO.

We're not going to see any "peaceful protestors" sending "popcorn gunmen" to polling stations for a shooting spree either. The reason being that their military have launched a coup to give them what they want, a stop to elections and rule by an unelected council.

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[rubl]

No doubt prominent executives and members of the Democrat party supported the anti-government protests. The question seems to be if they had resigned as MP, executive or member and when.

I would assume an MP can join a protest, but maybe not lead it, but a 'normal' party member would be under no such restrictions, especially when his party has no parliamentary representation. Even in the (very) first days of the protests PM Yingluck admitted to the democratic rights of protesting.

Semantics basically ... and thats all and well re a case but in the end everyone knows the truth of it.

Now wondering what the Constitutional Court will think about semantics, the 'letter of the law' and "everyone knows".

Oh, I think I can guess exactly what they'll think, and will probably be right on the nose too - the "band of brothers" have previous.

And somehow you phase your sentence to try to make it sound sinister, allegedly that is, as you have been doing previously.

Well all the nonsense here only makes it clear that some will only accept the right decision. Right being dissolution to some, throw out the charge to others.

Till know I have failed to notice 'facts' as opposed to opinions, siggestions and the like. Anything a court could use. Tangible things, you know.