Jatuporn unfazed with bail withdrawal prospect

[webfact]

Jatuporn unfazed with bail withdrawal prospect

 

 

BANGKOK: -- United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) chairman Jatuporn Promphan said on Wednesday that he was unfazed with the prospect that he may return to the detention cell if his bail is withdrawn by the Office of the Attorney-General.

 

Also, the OAG has asked the court to withdraw the bails granted to other UDD leaders who include Natthawut Saikua, Weng Tochirakarn, Veerakarn Musikapong and Nisit Sindhuprai accusing them of breaking the terms of the bail.

 

Jatuporn said that the political groups, UDD, the People’s Alliance for Democracy and the People’s Democratic Reform Committee share different ideologies and have different origins.

 

Full story: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/jatuporn-unfazed-bail-withdrawal-prospect/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2016-09-08

[The stuttering parrot]

Why wouldn't he be unfazed he speaks the truth about the yellows trying to seize power unlawfully opening up the opportunity for a military coup.

Unfortunatley Sutep and his cronies are unfazed to and hid away in a temple until  it was deemed safe that enough time had passed.

Some monks and pollies are Teflon coated and get a free pass to bring down a democratically elected government.

[whatproblem]

He unfazed because he will live in style in his luxury cell with days out the back door way IF it happens and that's a big IF ,buy committing a crime a previous bail should of been revoked but not here if you have the right protection

[wvavin]

This big-mouthed Jatuporn has to be put away for the well being of a more harmonious society.

[williamgeorgeallen]

probably helps his cause to be locked up.

[halloween]

Let's see how unfazed he is when he gets his sentence.

[robblok]

2 hours ago, The stuttering parrot said:

Why wouldn't he be unfazed he speaks the truth about the yellows trying to seize power unlawfully opening up the opportunity for a military coup.

Unfortunatley Sutep and his cronies are unfazed to and hid away in a temple until  it was deemed safe that enough time had passed.

Some monks and pollies are Teflon coated and get a free pass to bring down a democratically elected government.

 

The reds grabbed power from Abisith in a similar manner. Now the yellows did it (and would never have happened if Thaksin did not have himself included in the amnesty and the reds had not bombed and shot the yellows). So who is to blame.. 

 

When the reds burn BKK (violent protests unlike the yellows) its ok but not when yellows peacefully try to bring down a corrupt lying government. 

 

2 mistakes of the red led to this.. 1 Thaksin his amnesty when the people stood up against it, 2 the bombing and shooting of yellows gave the army good reason to step in. Its all on their own heads.

[Grubster]

16 minutes ago, robblok said:

 

The reds grabbed power from Abisith in a similar manner. Now the yellows did it (and would never have happened if Thaksin did not have himself included in the amnesty and the reds had not bombed and shot the yellows). So who is to blame.. 

 

When the reds burn BKK (violent protests unlike the yellows) its ok but not when yellows peacefully try to bring down a corrupt lying government. 

 

2 mistakes of the red led to this.. 1 Thaksin his amnesty when the people stood up against it, 2 the bombing and shooting of yellows gave the army good reason to step in. Its all on their own heads.

What makes you so sure the reds did the bombing and shooting, I feel its likely the yellows did it to make it look like reds. Putin would be proud of the current government here. Maybe thats what the Thai people want, I don't know.

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, The stuttering parrot said:

Why wouldn't he be unfazed he speaks the truth about the yellows trying to seize power unlawfully opening up the opportunity for a military coup.

Unfortunatley Sutep and his cronies are unfazed to and hid away in a temple until  it was deemed safe that enough time had passed.

Some monks and pollies are Teflon coated and get a free pass to bring down a democratically elected government.

 

He also speaks a lot of lies. 

 

But he's not on bail for that. If he broke his bail conditions, set by a court, then he should have his bail revoked. He isn't above the law and nor should he be.

 

Maybe he thinks he's going to get a nice 5 star cell and VIP treatment.

 

Ssshhh - don't mention "democratically elected" - UDD leaders weren't.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Baerboxer

[JAG]

24 minutes ago, robblok said:

 

The reds grabbed power from Abisith in a similar manner. Now the yellows did it (and would never have happened if Thaksin did not have himself included in the amnesty and the reds had not bombed and shot the yellows). So who is to blame.. 

 

When the reds burn BKK (violent protests unlike the yellows) its ok but not when yellows peacefully try to bring down a corrupt lying government. 

 

2 mistakes of the red led to this.. 1 Thaksin his amnesty when the people stood up against it, 2 the bombing and shooting of yellows gave the army good reason to step in. Its all on their own heads.

No, the "Reds" won power in a democratic election.

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, Grubster said:

What makes you so sure the reds did the bombing and shooting, I feel its likely the yellows did it to make it look like reds. Putin would be proud of the current government here. Maybe thats what the Thai people want, I don't know.

They linked the reds to it.. just look at the Trad massacre where they threw handgrenades in the crowd and shot with machine guns into a crowd. This was told live on stage of a red shirt meeting saying our brothers did a successful attack and then they all cheered... only later someone made them stop because that person realized how bad the PR would be. But many cheered (ok they did not know two kids were among the dead) but they cheered for the attack. 

 

Also the Rambo from Isarn did the attacks around Chang wattana also public knowledge and in response the popcorn man and the red got into a fire fight. So yes.. its sure the reds were the ones doing this. Violent terrorists. The reds are the armed hand of the previous goverment kinda like the IRA was the armed hand for  Sinn Fein. 

[robblok]

6 minutes ago, JAG said:

No, the "Reds" won power in a democratic election.

They did not.. the coalition fell.. Abisith formed an other coalition with the parties that left the PTP coalition. 

 

Are you American ? Dont you know the concept of a coalition. They can change even through a government period then a government falls legally and a new one can be formed by negotiating. 

[hansnl]

6 minutes ago, Grubster said:

What makes you so sure the reds did the bombing and shooting, I feel its likely the yellows did it to make it look like reds. Putin would be proud of the current government here. Maybe thats what the Thai people want, I don't know.

It really is a sign of the times to blame the victims doing it to themselves.

Like Erdogan, Putin and more of those.

The reds have a long history of violence, threatening to form an army to fight the country, dividing the country and threatening political opponents.

Please inform me what acts of violence can be blamed on the yellow shirts.

It is really up to the Thai people what they want, you sound as if you don't like that.

Well, so sorry, if you are a guest here, not your business.

[debate101]

The problem with politics is that opinionated demagogues can be exactly right in their criticism of others and yet be terrible, unconscionable people themselves.

[metisdead]

A post and a reply have been removed:

 

8) You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages, vulgarities, obscenities or profanities.

[xineohp]

One thing is certain, with the return to democracy Jatuporn will have accumulated a whole lot of material and evidence to give him a very strong case for wrongful arrest and detention etc.  Given that a new democratic government will replace the current political/military judiciary with fresh faces, Jatuporn has plenty to look forward to.   

[JAG]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

They did not.. the coalition fell.. Abisith formed an other coalition with the parties that left the PTP coalition. 

 

Are you American ? Dont you know the concept of a coalition. They can change even through a government period then a government falls legally and a new one can be formed by negotiating. 

1). The " Reds did not grab power from Abisith. " They formed a government  with a coalition of parties, yes, and the coalition was broken by pressure from the military. They subsequently won again, in 2010, by a bigger margin, and subsequently formed a government. On neither occasion  did they grab power as you so melodramaticaly suggest. Grabbing power is rather the speciality of the other side - three times in eight years is it?

2). No, I am not an American, I am an Englishman.I am not quite sure why my nationality, or perhaps more pertinently the suspicion on your part that I may be an American  has to do with the  matter. 

3). Yes, I fully understand the concept of coalition government, and see no reason to bow to your presumed expertise on the subject.  I also understand the  concept of democratic government,  as the result of elections. A concept which rather seems to have eluded you.

Edited September 8, 2016 by JAG

[robblok]

12 minutes ago, JAG said:

1). The " Reds did not grab power from Abisith. " They formed a government  with a coalition of parties, yes, and the coalition was broken by pressure from the military. They subsequently won again, in 2010, by a bigger margin, and subsequently formed a government. On neither occasion  did they grab power as you so melodramaticaly suggest. Grabbing power is rather the speciality of the other side - three times in eight years is it?

2). No, I am not an American, I am an Englishman.I am not quite sure why my nationality, or perhaps more pertinently the suspicion on your part that I may be an American  has to do with the  matter. 

3). Yes, I fully understand the concept of coalition government, and see no reason to bow to your presumed expertise on the subject.  I also understand the  concept of democratic government,  as the result of elections. A concept which rather seems to have eluded you.

 

Your nationality was only asked because in the US they only have 2 parties, no coalitions are formed there. So I thought maybe you did not understand the concept.

 

The Abisith government was in power after it had formed a coalition with forrmer allies of the PTP and as a result there were street protests that resulted in the burning of BKK and stepping down of the government. Sounds like a powergrab to me.  The same happened with the yellow street protests (just a lot less violent than the red protests). They forced a government to step down too. 

[Anthony5]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

Your nationality was only asked because in the US they only have 2 parties,

 

Really?

[JAG]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

 

Your nationality was only asked because in the US they only have 2 parties, no coalitions are formed there. So I thought maybe you did not understand the concept.

 

The Abisith government was in power after it had formed a coalition with forrmer allies of the PTP and as a result there were street protests that resulted in the burning of BKK and stepping down of the government. Sounds like a powergrab to me.  The same happened with the yellow street protests (just a lot less violent than the red protests). They forced a government to step down too. 

Abhisit  did not step down as a result of the street protests. He was defeated. In an election called some considerable time later.

 

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, Anthony5 said:

 

Really?

That was what i thought.. always hear about those 2 parties.. never heard about a coalition in the US.

 

Unlike in my country where 2-3 and sometimes 4 parties are needed to form a government.

Edited September 8, 2016 by robblok

[ianf]

4 hours ago, The stuttering parrot said:

Why wouldn't he be unfazed he speaks the truth about the yellows trying to seize power unlawfully opening up the opportunity for a military coup.

Unfortunatley Sutep and his cronies are unfazed to and hid away in a temple until  it was deemed safe that enough time had passed.

Some monks and pollies are Teflon coated and get a free pass to bring down a democratically elected government.

"The truth"? What truth? His truth? Your truth? Perhaps he's unfazed because he loves being the hero martyr. But is there a more ignorant nasty fellow in Thai politics? Probably, but he's certainly in the top ten.

[debate101]

18 minutes ago, robblok said:

 

Your nationality was only asked because in the US they only have 2 parties, no coalitions are formed there. So I thought maybe you did not understand the concept.

 

The Abisith government was in power after it had formed a coalition with forrmer allies of the PTP and as a result there were street protests that resulted in the burning of BKK and stepping down of the government. Sounds like a powergrab to me.  The same happened with the yellow street protests (just a lot less violent than the red protests). They forced a government to step down too. 

 

Have you ever considered that the 2010 chaos was the unfortunate but inevitable backlash against the military's 2006 "bloodless" coup? Perhaps armed intervention is a destabilizing rather than stabilizing influence on politics? Just a thought...

[seajae]

1 hour ago, debate101 said:

 

Have you ever considered that the 2010 chaos was the unfortunate but inevitable backlash against the military's 2006 "bloodless" coup? Perhaps armed intervention is a destabilizing rather than stabilizing influence on politics? Just a thought...

considering the 2010 chaos was the result of thaksin organizing the reds to do his dirty work I doubt it, it was based solely on what thaksin wanted and the reds did just that, suggest you actually look up the facts

[debate101]

Haha, so there are no legitimate opponents of military manipulation of politics, my Thai and foreign charity worker friends being shot at by snipers in Wat Patumwan were just being manipulated by Thaksin, and the rest is my imagination. Got it. Guess I'll have to look up the "facts" next time.

Edited September 8, 2016 by debate101

[elgordo38]

7 hours ago, The stuttering parrot said:

Why wouldn't he be unfazed he speaks the truth about the yellows trying to seize power unlawfully opening up the opportunity for a military coup.

Unfortunatley Sutep and his cronies are unfazed to and hid away in a temple until  it was deemed safe that enough time had passed.

Some monks and pollies are Teflon coated and get a free pass to bring down a democratically elected government.

Its called reverse democracy. 

[elgordo38]

5 hours ago, wvavin said:

This big-mouthed Jatuporn has to be put away for the well being of a more harmonious society.

If we had a big mouth contest I am sure there is someone else that would be the head and shoulders winner. 

[gamini]

1 hour ago, debate101 said:

Haha, so there are no legitimate opponents of military manipulation of politics, my Thai and foreign charity worker friends being shot at by snipers in Wat Patumwan were just being manipulated by Thaksin, and the rest is my imagination. Got it. Guess I'll have to look up the "facts" next time.

you mean shot at by Taksins black/red shirt snipers disguised in army uniform to make the army look bad

[Shawn0000]

5 hours ago, robblok said:

 

The reds grabbed power from Abisith in a similar manner. Now the yellows did it (and would never have happened if Thaksin did not have himself included in the amnesty and the reds had not bombed and shot the yellows). So who is to blame.. 

 

When the reds burn BKK (violent protests unlike the yellows) its ok but not when yellows peacefully try to bring down a corrupt lying government. 

 

2 mistakes of the red led to this.. 1 Thaksin his amnesty when the people stood up against it, 2 the bombing and shooting of yellows gave the army good reason to step in. Its all on their own heads.

 

They rioted and caused deaths and mayhem, but they did not grab power, following all the trouble they were lawfully elected.  I do not condone what the Reds did in Bangkok but it is rather different, they were calling for an election after an unelected party were put into power by the military, they were fighting for democracy not against it like the other side.

[Shawn0000]

6 minutes ago, gamini said:

you mean shot at by Taksins black/red shirt snipers disguised in army uniform to make the army look bad

 

Wow, did some people actually believe it when the army said they didn't kill any civilians and all civilian deaths by people who appeared to be soldiers were actually Red Shirts in disguise?  Incredible!