Yingluck invited on 'personal basis'

[lucky11]

Hahaha.

They sent it on headed paper and requested to meet with her.

They didn't ask her out for a coffee at their house did they.....

I have letters from my UK MP, written on HoP headed paper.

But he speaks for himself in them, not on behalf of HM Government.

The two who signed to letter should clarify if this is a personal invitation, if it on behalf of their respective committees, or it is ob behalf of the EU Parliament.

If the former, they should declare if there has been any involvement of lobbyists.

If, as you imply, the invitation is from 2 members and not on behalf of parliament then it is basically unimportant and considering the forthcoming court case and the seriousness of that, it is inappropriate for such a meeting to take place at this inconvenient time.

If they think that they would be gaining an insight into the current situation in Thailand (coming from her mouth) then they are mistaken. All they would hear is lie after lie as she flutters her eyelids at them with a puppy dog look in her eyes - as she did much to Michelle obama's disdain.

If they think she has been wronged then they are either unfurnished with all of the facts and ignorant of what her government did or they are plain stupid and should keep their nose out of Thailand's business!!

[bangrak]

Well, what happened? Today, no more: 'EU invite', no more 'EU Parliament invites Yingluck' or other spins, even from 'uncle''s side...

Seemingly forced to by the reality of the facts, the whole 'Shins' fan club' has, altogether(!) and swiftly, taken a sharp inward curve, covering their 'strategic(!) retreat' with a lot of their too usual 'but's and 'if's, twisting and turning at a pace that would make a trained darvish dizzy...

Now, about the facts:

that famous letter:

Clearly not a fake, it is undersigned by two EP members. True, one is the EP President, the other the EP Secretary General and head of the EP foreign affairs commitee, both Germans, from the same political party (CDU), no 'lighweights' inside the EP.

There resides IMO already a first big issue: those two experienced politicians know oh too well the status of their official function inside the EP, though rather 'decorative', gives a not to neglect extra-weight to what they undersign, together the more so, and, now you have it: when they do it in their official function, creating, each at its level, some form of binding commitment for what they represent the EP for.

Well, don't tell me there is no serious reason then for these two versed politicians NOT TO use their title, not in the adress, not in the text, not in the signature! This reduces the existence of this letter to its real 'value': a 'personal' initiative by 2 of the 751 EPMs towards a private person of Thai nationality!

The 'form' of the letter:

Being a EU citizen who had the privilege(?) to learn a few bits about the ways of doing things inside of the Ubu-esk Babel tower the EU institutions have become, from 6 to 25 member States, with tens of thousands of massively overpaid out-of-this-world Mandarins. Let me tell you there are some very 'a-typical', 'unusual' elements in the text, to say the least.

The English language used for the letter is totally below-par. Even when it would have been prepared in German language, there are thousands(!) of top(!)-translators working for the EU, and the English would have been tip-top, not just grammatically correct. Bringing up next questions: about who the persons are who have been 'preparing', all of, or parts of, that 'limping' text, which is the language originally used, and who translated it...

The content of the letter:

Compared to the accustomed, 'cushioned' and tip-toeing, EU-style is quite astonishing. Never have I heard of or seen a letter on any of the EU institutions' headings with such an incisive, square-ish tone, totally un-diplomatic, missing any nuance, ...and very 'one-sided' (I'd say biased), with some big parts (the ones for sure in 'so-so' English) which are as good as a duplication of pure un-edited Shins' PTP/UDD propaganda releases... May I sincerely doubt any, even very private, letter of this kind was ever addressed on any EU heading to that, real, Lady, of a totally different 'caliber', in Burma...

The 'timing' of the letter:

This letter is coming just at a far too 'ideal' time for Yingluck. Very 'odd' in itself too, were it that the 'timing' was set by those two EMPs by themselves, what I cannot be totally sure of...

Also, the time it took for the letter to 'surface', say made public by the Shins' 'PR services'. Nobody would come up with the idea to send any important paper by regular mail from Europe to Thailand: it takes 3 weeks or more, when it ever arrives... 'Normal' EMS would be a basic choice, taking up to 2 weeks. 'Express' would be less than 10 days. Was the EP envelope containing the letter stamped, where, ...and when? We don't know. Or was the letter carried and delivered? We don't know either. There must be a good reason though why it 'sat' for days and weeks before being 'revealed', the Shins' strategists for sure know, we won't...

Also, please note that the EP, one of the three pillars of the EU institutions, next to the Council (political authority) and Commision (executive and administrative authority), initially supposed to be lawmakers, iwas set to become the most important of all, in the basic EU treaties, but the political union never materialised, making from the EP a hugely expensive 'big machine' (having seats in both Stratsburg and Brussels with alternate place of gathering makes it very heavy and intricate too) with as good as no authority at all (all the decisions of importance, are taken by the Council, and, even more, behind it) very 'buzzing' with those expensive 751 EPMs, having each a, richly paid, official following (the general cost per EPM ranging in the millions of Baht ...per month), 'holding court', meeting, discussing, ...making a lot of wind in an attempt to justify their existence...

Last, but not least, there are: the EU 'lobbyists'...!

As a, very specialized, 'trade' on its own, they were a nearly non-existant species for the EU a good twenty years ago, now it must have become like around the US Federal authorities, with hundreds(!) of individuals and companies making a very good living 'lobbying' the EU institutions, ...as a profession attempting to influence important EU individuals favourably towards the needs of their paying clients, or opposite towards their rivals or competitors.

And an utterly hard, vicious and corrupt business it is! Mind you, rarely brown envelopes or donut boxes are used there, rather using luxury goods, 'advantages', 'participations', 'connexions', 'free-rides', even vice...

Making me wonder whether this letter might possibly, at least for some part, have been the work of some 'lobbyist(s)', working for the Shins.

That Thaksin &Co. have been already using the services of 'lobbyists' is no secret, the name of Robert Amsterdam f.i. is quite well known in Thailand...

[Thai at Heart]

Well, what happened? Today, no more: 'EU invite', no more 'EU Parliament invites Yingluck' or other spins, even from 'uncle''s side...

Seemingly forced to by the reality of the facts, the whole 'Shins' fan club' has, altogether(!) and swiftly, taken a sharp inward curve, covering their 'strategic(!) retreat' with a lot of their too usual 'but's and 'if's, twisting and turning at a pace that would make a trained darvish dizzy...

Now, about the facts:

that famous letter:

Clearly not a fake, it is undersigned by two EP members. True, one is the EP President, the other the EP Secretary General and head of the EP foreign affairs commitee, both Germans, from the same political party (CDU), no 'lighweights' inside the EP.

There resides IMO already a first big issue: those two experienced politicians know oh too well the status of their official function inside the EP, though rather 'decorative', gives a not to neglect extra-weight to what they undersign, together the more so, and, now you have it: when they do it in their official function, creating, each at its level, some form of binding commitment for what they represent the EP for.

Well, don't tell me there is no serious reason then for these two versed politicians NOT TO use their title, not in the adress, not in the text, not in the signature! This reduces the existence of this letter to its real 'value': a 'personal' initiative by 2 of the 751 EPMs towards a private person of Thai nationality!

The 'form' of the letter:

Being a EU citizen who had the privilege(?) to learn a few bits about the ways of doing things inside of the Ubu-esk Babel tower the EU institutions have become, from 6 to 25 member States, with tens of thousands of massively overpaid out-of-this-world Mandarins. Let me tell you there are some very 'a-typical', 'unusual' elements in the text, to say the least.

The English language used for the letter is totally below-par. Even when it would have been prepared in German language, there are thousands(!) of top(!)-translators working for the EU, and the English would have been tip-top, not just grammatically correct. Bringing up next questions: about who the persons are who have been 'preparing', all of, or parts of, that 'limping' text, which is the language originally used, and who translated it...

The content of the letter:

Compared to the accustomed, 'cushioned' and tip-toeing, EU-style is quite astonishing. Never have I heard of or seen a letter on any of the EU institutions' headings with such an incisive, square-ish tone, totally un-diplomatic, missing any nuance, ...and very 'one-sided' (I'd say biased), with some big parts (the ones for sure in 'so-so' English) which are as good as a duplication of pure un-edited Shins' PTP/UDD propaganda releases... May I sincerely doubt any, even very private, letter of this kind was ever addressed on any EU heading to that, real, Lady, of a totally different 'caliber', in Burma...

The 'timing' of the letter:

This letter is coming just at a far too 'ideal' time for Yingluck. Very 'odd' in itself too, were it that the 'timing' was set by those two EMPs by themselves, what I cannot be totally sure of...

Also, the time it took for the letter to 'surface', say made public by the Shins' 'PR services'. Nobody would come up with the idea to send any important paper by regular mail from Europe to Thailand: it takes 3 weeks or more, when it ever arrives... 'Normal' EMS would be a basic choice, taking up to 2 weeks. 'Express' would be less than 10 days. Was the EP envelope containing the letter stamped, where, ...and when? We don't know. Or was the letter carried and delivered? We don't know either. There must be a good reason though why it 'sat' for days and weeks before being 'revealed', the Shins' strategists for sure know, we won't...

Also, please note that the EP, one of the three pillars of the EU institutions, next to the Council (political authority) and Commision (executive and administrative authority), initially supposed to be lawmakers, iwas set to become the most important of all, in the basic EU treaties, but the political union never materialised, making from the EP a hugely expensive 'big machine' (having seats in both Stratsburg and Brussels with alternate place of gathering makes it very heavy and intricate too) with as good as no authority at all (all the decisions of importance, are taken by the Council, and, even more, behind it) very 'buzzing' with those expensive 751 EPMs, having each a, richly paid, official following (the general cost per EPM ranging in the millions of Baht ...per month), 'holding court', meeting, discussing, ...making a lot of wind in an attempt to justify their existence...

Last, but not least, there are: the EU 'lobbyists'...!

As a, very specialized, 'trade' on its own, they were a nearly non-existant species for the EU a good twenty years ago, now it must have become like around the US Federal authorities, with hundreds(!) of individuals and companies making a very good living 'lobbying' the EU institutions, ...as a profession attempting to influence important EU individuals favourably towards the needs of their paying clients, or opposite towards their rivals or competitors.

And an utterly hard, vicious and corrupt business it is! Mind you, rarely brown envelopes or donut boxes are used there, rather using luxury goods, 'advantages', 'participations', 'connexions', 'free-rides', even vice...

Making me wonder whether this letter might possibly, at least for some part, have been the work of some 'lobbyist(s)', working for the Shins.

That Thaksin &Co. have been already using the services of 'lobbyists' is no secret, the name of Robert Amsterdam f.i. is quite well known in Thailand...

I don't think u are in any position to know the official protocol for signing letters of invitation from the EU parliament.

[Thai at Heart]

Hahaha.

They sent it on headed paper and requested to meet with her.

They didn't ask her out for a coffee at their house did they.....

I have letters from my UK MP, written on HoP headed paper.

But he speaks for himself in them, not on behalf of HM Government.

The two who signed to letter should clarify if this is a personal invitation, if it on behalf of their respective committees, or it is ob behalf of the EU Parliament.

If the former, they should declare if there has been any involvement of lobbyists.

If, as you imply, the invitation is from 2 members and not on behalf of parliament then it is basically unimportant and considering the forthcoming court case and the seriousness of that, it is inappropriate for such a meeting to take place at this inconvenient time.

If they think that they would be gaining an insight into the current situation in Thailand (coming from her mouth) then they are mistaken. All they would hear is lie after lie as she flutters her eyelids at them with a puppy dog look in her eyes - as she did much to Michelle obama's disdain.

If they think she has been wronged then they are either unfurnished with all of the facts and ignorant of what her government did or they are plain stupid and should keep their nose out of Thailand's business!!

They sit on various committees. They can ask who they like under the guise of their responsibility for the committees they sit on vis a vis Asia.

This is what they do. They gather info for the EU parliament to make strategy. I don't see why everyone is so shocked by this. It's what people in parliaments do every single day.

[Srikcir]

The invitation was made on a personal basis and Prayut will disapprove the visit on a personal basis.

Quid pro quid.

[lucky11]

Hahaha.

They sent it on headed paper and requested to meet with her.

They didn't ask her out for a coffee at their house did they.....

I have letters from my UK MP, written on HoP headed paper.

But he speaks for himself in them, not on behalf of HM Government.

The two who signed to letter should clarify if this is a personal invitation, if it on behalf of their respective committees, or it is ob behalf of the EU Parliament.

If the former, they should declare if there has been any involvement of lobbyists.

If, as you imply, the invitation is from 2 members and not on behalf of parliament then it is basically unimportant and considering the forthcoming court case and the seriousness of that, it is inappropriate for such a meeting to take place at this inconvenient time.

If they think that they would be gaining an insight into the current situation in Thailand (coming from her mouth) then they are mistaken. All they would hear is lie after lie as she flutters her eyelids at them with a puppy dog look in her eyes - as she did much to Michelle obama's disdain.

If they think she has been wronged then they are either unfurnished with all of the facts and ignorant of what her government did or they are plain stupid and should keep their nose out of Thailand's business!!

They sit on various committees. They can ask who they like under the guise of their responsibility for the committees they sit on vis a vis Asia.

This is what they do. They gather info for the EU parliament to make strategy. I don't see why everyone is so shocked by this. It's what people in parliaments do every single day.

Bunch of overpaid wasters if you ask me!! Why don't they go and get a proper job?

[Thai at Heart]

Hahaha.

They sent it on headed paper and requested to meet with her.

They didn't ask her out for a coffee at their house did they.....

I have letters from my UK MP, written on HoP headed paper.

But he speaks for himself in them, not on behalf of HM Government.

The two who signed to letter should clarify if this is a personal invitation, if it on behalf of their respective committees, or it is ob behalf of the EU Parliament.

If the former, they should declare if there has been any involvement of lobbyists.

If, as you imply, the invitation is from 2 members and not on behalf of parliament then it is basically unimportant and considering the forthcoming court case and the seriousness of that, it is inappropriate for such a meeting to take place at this inconvenient time.
If they think that they would be gaining an insight into the current situation in Thailand (coming from her mouth) then they are mistaken. All they would hear is lie after lie as she flutters her eyelids at them with a puppy dog look in her eyes - as she did much to Michelle obama's disdain.
If they think she has been wronged then they are either unfurnished with all of the facts and ignorant of what her government did or they are plain stupid and should keep their nose out of Thailand's business!!

They sit on various committees. They can ask who they like under the guise of their responsibility for the committees they sit on vis a vis Asia.

This is what they do. They gather info for the EU parliament to make strategy. I don't see why everyone is so shocked by this. It's what people in parliaments do every single day.

Bunch of overpaid wasters if you ask me!! Why don't they go and get a proper job?

Well that's by the by. It's what they do. Have meetings, discussions, gain knowledge. Thai parliamentarians should try it.

It makes for peaceful policy making a instead of guns and protests.....

[smotherb]

Hahaha.

They sent it on headed paper and requested to meet with her.

They didn't ask her out for a coffee at their house did they.....

Are you implying she was ordered--or otherwise pressured--to attend?

Not at all. 2 members of various committees asked her to attend to discuss issues pertaining to these responsibilities to places where these two people carry out their professional responsibilities. They send a letter using official note paper, signed, dated, containing a reference.

And the interpretation is, "she was asked privately".

It's like getting a letter from your doctor asking you to come to the practice to discuss your recent health issues.

And someone claims the request to attend is private.

Or a business calls to offer the boss another training course to follow up on one they attended one year before.

Obviously a private request???

The article said, ""Elmar Brok and Werner Langen, both members of the European Parliament, decided to extend a personal invitation, given that they did not identify their position in the letter," Sek explained."

Did not see a "private" request. Using only their names rather than their official titles was the explanation of the "personal" terminology.

[lucky11]

Please explain how a bunch of bureaucrats sitting round a table discussing things they haven't got a clue about will magically stop protests and violence amongst squabbling factions.

They solve nothing and are full of their self-importance (even though they have none) - Can't they see what the last government was all about? what is their take on the rice scam, I wonder. Is it right that Thaksin can buy gullible people's votes and run up losses of 500 BILLION baht simply in an attempt to gain an amnesty?

The Thai government should tell them to naff off, stop interfering and find something useful to do (if that's at all possible, which I doubt).

[Thai at Heart]

Hahaha.

They sent it on headed paper and requested to meet with her.

They didn't ask her out for a coffee at their house did they.....

Are you implying she was ordered--or otherwise pressured--to attend?

Not at all. 2 members of various committees asked her to attend to discuss issues pertaining to these responsibilities to places where these two people carry out their professional responsibilities. They send a letter using official note paper, signed, dated, containing a reference.

And the interpretation is, "she was asked privately".

It's like getting a letter from your doctor asking you to come to the practice to discuss your recent health issues.

And someone claims the request to attend is private.

Or a business calls to offer the boss another training course to follow up on one they attended one year before.

Obviously a private request???

The article said, ""Elmar Brok and Werner Langen, both members of the European Parliament, decided to extend a personal invitation, given that they did not identify their position in the letter," Sek explained."

Did not see a "private" request. Using only their names rather than their official titles was the explanation of the "personal" terminology.

Exactly. The moment it's on a letter head, it's a professional request, not personal.

They seem to be confusing formal, professional and personal. It's not a private request since its on an EU parliament letter head.

It is sent from his professional guise as an EU member.

Not as a private citizen.

[bangrak]

Well, what happened? Today, no more: 'EU invite', no more 'EU Parliament invites Yingluck' or other spins, even from 'uncle''s side...

Seemingly forced to by the reality of the facts, the whole 'Shins' fan club' has, altogether(!) and swiftly, taken a sharp inward curve, covering their 'strategic(!) retreat' with a lot of their too usual 'but's and 'if's, twisting and turning at a pace that would make a trained darvish dizzy...

Now, about the facts:

that famous letter:

Clearly not a fake, it is undersigned by two EP members. True, one is the EP President, the other the EP Secretary General and head of the EP foreign affairs commitee, both Germans, from the same political party (CDU), no 'lighweights' inside the EP.

There resides IMO already a first big issue: those two experienced politicians know oh too well the status of their official function inside the EP, though rather 'decorative', gives a not to neglect extra-weight to what they undersign, together the more so, and, now you have it: when they do it in their official function, creating, each at its level, some form of binding commitment for what they represent the EP for.

Well, don't tell me there is no serious reason then for these two versed politicians NOT TO use their title, not in the adress, not in the text, not in the signature! This reduces the existence of this letter to its real 'value': a 'personal' initiative by 2 of the 751 EPMs towards a private person of Thai nationality!

The 'form' of the letter:

Being a EU citizen who had the privilege(?) to learn a few bits about the ways of doing things inside of the Ubu-esk Babel tower the EU institutions have become, from 6 to 25 member States, with tens of thousands of massively overpaid out-of-this-world Mandarins. Let me tell you there are some very 'a-typical', 'unusual' elements in the text, to say the least.

The English language used for the letter is totally below-par. Even when it would have been prepared in German language, there are thousands(!) of top(!)-translators working for the EU, and the English would have been tip-top, not just grammatically correct. Bringing up next questions: about who the persons are who have been 'preparing', all of, or parts of, that 'limping' text, which is the language originally used, and who translated it...

The content of the letter:

Compared to the accustomed, 'cushioned' and tip-toeing, EU-style is quite astonishing. Never have I heard of or seen a letter on any of the EU institutions' headings with such an incisive, square-ish tone, totally un-diplomatic, missing any nuance, ...and very 'one-sided' (I'd say biased), with some big parts (the ones for sure in 'so-so' English) which are as good as a duplication of pure un-edited Shins' PTP/UDD propaganda releases... May I sincerely doubt any, even very private, letter of this kind was ever addressed on any EU heading to that, real, Lady, of a totally different 'caliber', in Burma...

The 'timing' of the letter:

This letter is coming just at a far too 'ideal' time for Yingluck. Very 'odd' in itself too, were it that the 'timing' was set by those two EMPs by themselves, what I cannot be totally sure of...

Also, the time it took for the letter to 'surface', say made public by the Shins' 'PR services'. Nobody would come up with the idea to send any important paper by regular mail from Europe to Thailand: it takes 3 weeks or more, when it ever arrives... 'Normal' EMS would be a basic choice, taking up to 2 weeks. 'Express' would be less than 10 days. Was the EP envelope containing the letter stamped, where, ...and when? We don't know. Or was the letter carried and delivered? We don't know either. There must be a good reason though why it 'sat' for days and weeks before being 'revealed', the Shins' strategists for sure know, we won't...

Also, please note that the EP, one of the three pillars of the EU institutions, next to the Council (political authority) and Commision (executive and administrative authority), initially supposed to be lawmakers, iwas set to become the most important of all, in the basic EU treaties, but the political union never materialised, making from the EP a hugely expensive 'big machine' (having seats in both Stratsburg and Brussels with alternate place of gathering makes it very heavy and intricate too) with as good as no authority at all (all the decisions of importance, are taken by the Council, and, even more, behind it) very 'buzzing' with those expensive 751 EPMs, having each a, richly paid, official following (the general cost per EPM ranging in the millions of Baht ...per month), 'holding court', meeting, discussing, ...making a lot of wind in an attempt to justify their existence...

Last, but not least, there are: the EU 'lobbyists'...!

As a, very specialized, 'trade' on its own, they were a nearly non-existant species for the EU a good twenty years ago, now it must have become like around the US Federal authorities, with hundreds(!) of individuals and companies making a very good living 'lobbying' the EU institutions, ...as a profession attempting to influence important EU individuals favourably towards the needs of their paying clients, or opposite towards their rivals or competitors.

And an utterly hard, vicious and corrupt business it is! Mind you, rarely brown envelopes or donut boxes are used there, rather using luxury goods, 'advantages', 'participations', 'connexions', 'free-rides', even vice...

Making me wonder whether this letter might possibly, at least for some part, have been the work of some 'lobbyist(s)', working for the Shins.

That Thaksin &Co. have been already using the services of 'lobbyists' is no secret, the name of Robert Amsterdam f.i. is quite well known in Thailand...

I don't think u are in any position to know the official protocol for signing letters of invitation from the EU parliament.

Hmm, but you are in such a position, are you, so then please share with the plebs... LOL! Any personal and constructive contribution outside of that ...?

[bangrak]

Exactly. The moment it's on a letter head, it's a professional request, not personal.

They seem to be confusing formal, professional and personal. It's not a private request since its on an EU parliament letter head.

It is sent from his professional guise as an EU member.

Not as a private citizen.

Twisting it again, are you? There is a major difference between them both sending a letter as 2 individual EMP among the 751, so in persona, like in this case, and them both sending a letter in their quality of respectively EP president and secretary general & head of the foreign affairs commission, using their title in it and undersigning with it, quod non, as you could very well know, but choose to ignore because it doesn't fit well in all this Shins' PTP PR services' theater! A bit of 'intellectual dishonesty on your side then, maybe?

Edited November 26, 2015 by bangrak

[Thai at Heart]

Exactly. The moment it's on a letter head, it's a professional request, not personal.

They seem to be confusing formal, professional and personal. It's not a private request since its on an EU parliament letter head.

It is sent from his professional guise as an EU member.

Not as a private citizen.

Twisting it again, are you? There is a major difference between them both sending a letter as 2 of the 751 EMPs, like in this case, and them both sending a letter using their respective title of, and undersigning it as, EP president and secretary general & head of the foreign affairs commission, quod non, as you could very well know, but choose to ignore because it doesn't fit well in all this Shins' PTP PRservices' theater! A bit of 'intellectual dishonesty then, maybe?

There is a difference. Whether they request a chat as MPs or as the head of a parliament committee it is still a professional request NOT a private one.

[bangrak]

They sit on various committees. They can ask who they like under the guise of their responsibility for the committees they sit on vis a vis Asia.

This is what they do. They gather info for the EU parliament to make strategy. I don't see why everyone is so shocked by this. It's what people in parliaments do every single day.

Bunch of overpaid wasters if you ask me!! Why don't they go and get a proper job?

Well that's by the by. It's what they do. Have meetings, discussions, gain knowledge. Thai parliamentarians should try it.

It makes for peaceful policy making a instead of guns and protests.....

I'd like to see some of the wise guys having such a high opinion about the EP explain to us what the EP does, with its 751 golden bullfrogs of EMPs, in concreto, except wasting tons of money...

(Without a political union, to come in the year 2525, maybe, there is about zilch the EP can decide about by itself, all what matters a bit being decided by the politicians of the governments of the members states together, eventually in the Council, and executed by the Commission)

I do know some EMPs and all, nice people or mean bastards, have been put on the list to go there by political parties as a golden bone for old gundogs, or trashbin to dump annoying hard to dsciplin cocks in...

[bangrak]

Exactly. The moment it's on a letter head, it's a professional request, not personal.

They seem to be confusing formal, professional and personal. It's not a private request since its on an EU parliament letter head.

It is sent from his professional guise as an EU member.

Not as a private citizen.

Twisting it again, are you? There is a major difference between them both sending a letter as 2 of the 751 EMPs, like in this case, and them both sending a letter using their respective title of, and undersigning it as, EP president and secretary general & head of the foreign affairs commission, quod non, as you could very well know, but choose to ignore because it doesn't fit well in all this Shins' PTP PRservices' theater! A bit of 'intellectual dishonesty then, maybe?

There is a difference. Whether they request a chat as MPs or as the head of a parliament committee it is still a professional request NOT a private one.

Ah-ha, there is another difference: now you speak about 'private' (what it is not, indeed) and 'professional' (correct: as individual EMPs), replacing 'personal' (what it still is, sorry) and 'official' (which is riding bycicle on a wire). Maybe by tomorrow when I come back you will have sorted it out in a correct way...

[Thai at Heart]

Exactly. The moment it's on a letter head, it's a professional request, not personal.

They seem to be confusing formal, professional and personal. It's not a private request since its on an EU parliament letter head.

It is sent from his professional guise as an EU member.

Not as a private citizen.

Twisting it again, are you? There is a major difference between them both sending a letter as 2 of the 751 EMPs, like in this case, and them both sending a letter using their respective title of, and undersigning it as, EP president and secretary general & head of the foreign affairs commission, quod non, as you could very well know, but choose to ignore because it doesn't fit well in all this Shins' PTP PRservices' theater! A bit of 'intellectual dishonesty then, maybe?

There is a difference. Whether they request a chat as MPs or as the head of a parliament committee it is still a professional request NOT a private one.

Ah-ha, there is another difference: now you speak about 'private' (what it is not, indeed) and 'professional' (correct: as individual EMPs), replacing 'personal' (what it still is, sorry) and 'official' (which is riding bycicle on a wire). Maybe by tomorrow when I come back you will have sorted it out in a correct way...

It is a professional request by two people. Thus it can't be personal since its more than one person....

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

Just another bogus attempt by the red propaganda machine to try and add some credibility to Yings useless cause. FAIL!!!!

[JingerBen]

The EU members clearly hold her in high regard.

The rest of the world sees a democratically elected Prime Minister ousted by a dictator/general who has demonstrated his contempt for human rights and free speech as well as the democratic process several times since seizing power.

Analysts also see a ruling elite that having removed Takhsin himself set plans in motion to ensure no socialist government could ever take power again even when elected by the people of Thailand.

The rice scheme and all the other charges laid at Yinglucks door were orchestrated by the yellows long before they happened in order to oust her and the reds.

Corruption? Maybe, possibly? No area of politics either local or national is free of it as it is embedded in the civil structures whichever style of government has control.

Takhsin shook that system up a bit and they wanted rid of him. Same with his sister.

The same will happen with any red leader whom the people vote in.

The rich will always take care of themselves and their friends at the expense of the majority and that is true the world over but at least people are fooled into believing they have freedom because they are allowed to criticise.

Whatever it takes, no matter how many lies are needed; Yingluck will be banned from politics and have her assets seized.

Do I think that she and her brother are any different from the rest of the so called elites?

Not much, but they were democratically elected and most people in the north east saw a small improvement in their lives during the red reign.

Maybe the voting was rigged? If so, voting for all parties was rigged and thousands of people were paid by both sides but the people chose to vote red.

Take off those dark shades, Dave.

You'll see things a lot more clearly.

[DrTuner]

Ain't she getting a bit old to be in the game?

[JingerBen]

So are Elmar Brok and Werner Langen personally paying her airfare, hotel and shopping expenses, or is it the EU tax payer who is funding this "jolly"

Not to worry... none of the above will have to pay for this junket.

She can always get her "caddy" to foot the bill.

He can afford it.

[Linky]

They sit on various committees. They can ask who they like under the guise of their responsibility for the committees they sit on vis a vis Asia.

This is what they do. They gather info for the EU parliament to make strategy. I don't see why everyone is so shocked by this. It's what people in parliaments do every single day.

Bunch of overpaid wasters if you ask me!! Why don't they go and get a proper job?

Well that's by the by. It's what they do. Have meetings, discussions, gain knowledge. Thai parliamentarians should try it.

It makes for peaceful policy making a instead of guns and protests.....

I'd like to see some of the wise guys having such a high opinion about the EP explain to us what the EP does, with its 751 golden bullfrogs of EMPs, in concreto, except wasting tons of money...

(Without a political union, to come in the year 2525, maybe, there is about zilch the EP can decide about by itself, all what matters a bit being decided by the politicians of the governments of the members states together, eventually in the Council, and executed by the Commission)

I do know some EMPs and all, nice people or mean bastards, have been put on the list to go there by political parties as a golden bone for old gundogs, or trashbin to dump annoying hard to dsciplin cocks in...

What difference does it make what they do and what you think they do, or whether you agree with them or not. That is all irrelevant.

They are on the EP and they requested to meet with her. They, in their professional opinion and experience, which, I dare say is a lot more experience than you have about their job, thought would be a good idea.

So if they want to discuss things with her then who are you to say they shouldnt?

Edited November 26, 2015 by Linky

[Linky]

It seems some on here are upset that an ex PM is invited to the EP simply because they dont like her and have their knickers in a twist that not everyone holds the same view.

Poor old general must be throwng his toys around thinking other countries consider her opinions more valuable than his. But he's got that world power PNG to hold his hand.

[bangrak]

Well that's by the by. It's what they do. Have meetings, discussions, gain knowledge. Thai parliamentarians should try it.

It makes for peaceful policy making a instead of guns and protests.....

I'd like to see some of the wise guys having such a high opinion about the EP explain to us what the EP does, with its 751 golden bullfrogs of EMPs, in concreto, except wasting tons of money...

(Without a political union, to come in the year 2525, maybe, there is about zilch the EP can decide about by itself, all what matters a bit being decided by the politicians of the governments of the members states together, eventually in the Council, and executed by the Commission)

I do know some EMPs and all, nice people or mean bastards, have been put on the list to go there by political parties as a golden bone for old gundogs, or trashbin to dump annoying hard to dsciplin cocks in...

What difference does it make what they do and what you think they do, or whether you agree with them or not. That is all irrelevant.

They are on the EP and they requested to meet with her. They, in their professional opinion and experience, which, I dare say is a lot more experience than you have about their job, thought would be a good idea.

So if they want to discuss things with her then who are you to say they shouldnt?

I'd agree with you it would be a 'good idea' that their 'professional' (good you didn't write 'personal'...) 'opinion and experience'... concerning Thailand(!) would be the most/only 'relevant' part, but when you think they have any worth more than 25 setang, it's you don't know a thing about those Mandarins...

As for the both 'requesting to meet her' I'll leave the choice of words to you, a new version differing from the basic propaganda blah-blah it is anyway...

And, yes, as a EU citizen, I say, loud and clear, they shouldn't 'discuss things with her', wrong choice, bad timing, for Thailand, and for Europe!

[bangrak]

The invitation was made on a personal basis and Prayut will disapprove the visit on a personal basis.

Quid pro quid.

Quid pro quo?

[bangrak]

Hahaha.

They sent it on headed paper and requested to meet with her.

They didn't ask her out for a coffee at their house did they.....

Are you implying she was ordered--or otherwise pressured--to attend?

According to propagandist 'Linky' #51 it's: 'requested to meet her'... LOL

[Thai at Heart]

Hahaha.

They sent it on headed paper and requested to meet with her.

They didn't ask her out for a coffee at their house did they.....

Are you implying she was ordered--or otherwise pressured--to attend?

According to propagandist 'Linky' #51 it's: 'requested to meet her'... LOL

Well how else would you characterise it?

[bangrak]

Exactly. The moment it's on a letter head, it's a professional request, not personal.

They seem to be confusing formal, professional and personal. It's not a private request since its on an EU parliament letter head.

It is sent from his professional guise as an EU member.

Not as a private citizen.

Twisting it again, are you? There is a major difference between them both sending a letter as 2 of the 751 EMPs, like in this case, and them both sending a letter using their respective title of, and undersigning it as, EP president and secretary general & head of the foreign affairs commission, quod non, as you could very well know, but choose to ignore because it doesn't fit well in all this Shins' PTP PRservices' theater! A bit of 'intellectual dishonesty then, maybe?

There is a difference. Whether they request a chat as MPs or as the head of a parliament committee it is still a professional request NOT a private one.

Thank you for honestly confirming there is a difference, and to avoid you to fall again in intellectual dishonesty, let's call it an 'individual' initiative, not a 'private' one, is that OK with you? Thank you three times then, for agreeing about a matter you took hundreds of lines to twist and deny... (The) KISS (principle?)

[bangrak]

Pretty obvious it is not an official UE invitation if it had no seals or stamps to indicate it as such. Given the world sees YL and even Thaksin as political targets it is easy to make the assumption that this invitation has nothing to do with the UE. At any rate, with YLs pending court hearing she should not be allowed to leave unless the current gov sees it as a way to be rid of her. In which case they should make her pay a surety bond of a few hundred billion baht.

Its on official paper. What do you want? Candlewax and a cygnet ring?

Believe it or not, unlike in Asia, not everything has to have a stamp to be official......If you think PTP is going around forging letterheads, then they really are playing with fire.Letters from Mps, Presidents and PMs all over the world are sent with no stamp.

A signature is sufficient....

What was that story toda yabout the army asking for booze... on official paper, with the Garuda on top? Nah, joking that was really, truly, 100% a fake.

Just about that 'official paper' of yours, as if that's telling anything...

(but, indeed, there is a personal invite made in individual name by two EMPs on EP paper, nothing less, and nothing more)

Edited November 26, 2015 by bangrak

[Thai at Heart]

Pretty obvious it is not an official UE invitation if it had no seals or stamps to indicate it as such. Given the world sees YL and even Thaksin as political targets it is easy to make the assumption that this invitation has nothing to do with the UE. At any rate, with YLs pending court hearing she should not be allowed to leave unless the current gov sees it as a way to be rid of her. In which case they should make her pay a surety bond of a few hundred billion baht.

Its on official paper. What do you want? Candlewax and a cygnet ring?

Believe it or not, unlike in Asia, not everything has to have a stamp to be official......If you think PTP is going around forging letterheads, then they really are playing with fire.Letters from Mps, Presidents and PMs all over the world are sent with no stamp.

A signature is sufficient....

What was that story toda yabout the army asking for booze... on official paper, with the Garuda on top? Nah, joking that was really, truly, 100% a fake.

Just about that 'official paper' of yours, as if that's telling anything...

(but, indeed, there is a personal invite made in individual name by two EMPs on EP paper, nothing less, and nothing more)

Do u reckon that letter from the army to the coppers was fake?

Do you think this letter from the MEPs is fake?

The MEP one isn't, and neither probably is the army one.

[Linky]

Well that's by the by. It's what they do. Have meetings, discussions, gain knowledge. Thai parliamentarians should try it.

It makes for peaceful policy making a instead of guns and protests.....

I'd like to see some of the wise guys having such a high opinion about the EP explain to us what the EP does, with its 751 golden bullfrogs of EMPs, in concreto, except wasting tons of money...

(Without a political union, to come in the year 2525, maybe, there is about zilch the EP can decide about by itself, all what matters a bit being decided by the politicians of the governments of the members states together, eventually in the Council, and executed by the Commission)

I do know some EMPs and all, nice people or mean bastards, have been put on the list to go there by political parties as a golden bone for old gundogs, or trashbin to dump annoying hard to dsciplin cocks in...

What difference does it make what they do and what you think they do, or whether you agree with them or not. That is all irrelevant.

They are on the EP and they requested to meet with her. They, in their professional opinion and experience, which, I dare say is a lot more experience than you have about their job, thought would be a good idea.

So if they want to discuss things with her then who are you to say they shouldnt?

I'd agree with you it would be a 'good idea' that their 'professional' (good you didn't write 'personal'...) 'opinion and experience'... concerning Thailand(!) would be the most/only 'relevant' part, but when you think they have any worth more than 25 setang, it's you don't know a thing about those Mandarins...

As for the both 'requesting to meet her' I'll leave the choice of words to you, a new version differing from the basic propaganda blah-blah it is anyway...

And, yes, as a EU citizen, I say, loud and clear, they shouldn't 'discuss things with her', wrong choice, bad timing, for Thailand, and for Europe!

Well you are obviously not in their position. They consider the worth of her opinion more highly than you do, and thats all that matters. If you do not agree with them then that is a matter for you.

I'm sure you think your opinion is worth more to them.