Reconciliation to begin with ‘agreement on truth’: Prawit

[Jonmarleesco]

20 hours ago, webfact said:

The agreement will be the “social contract” that all conflicting parties must abide by regardless of its legal bindingness, ... the deputy PM has said that they will be bound by social pressure.

Bindingness? Tinglish, or Prawitlish? And bound by social pressure? Not something that seems to faze the junta.

[candide]

The agreement will be the “social contract....

 

Obviously he has absolutely no idea about the origin of this expression. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Social_Contract

 

[sjaak327]

The truth, being bound by social pressure. Two things Prawit knows nothing about. I hear they now use this 'reconciliation' process as an excuse to not hold the promised 2015 elections in 2017.

 

Apart from a few misguided and lost souls, nobody believes this bull anymore.

[sjaak327]

9 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

Or maybe the 'red' side will insist their version of reconciliation is that they have done nothing wrong (one of their paymasters famous one liners) and they are entitled to rule, to break serious laws and conventions,  and entitled to claim amnesty for their salary provider. And in the same sentence they probably won't mention anything about a specific manifesto to move Thailand forward with equality for all. 

The red side is on to something. They most definitely were entitled to rule, since the 2011 elections gave their party a 265 seat clear majority.

 

It's best not to talk about breaking laws, and amnesty, because the cold hard facts are that any red short polictician caught breaking the law has been impeached and the amnesty you talk about never made it.

 

I am surprised why you seem to imply that things are better now. None of the current law breakers will ever be impeached or punished and that mainly due to an amnesty that actually did make it. No 265 seat majority needed to get that one through.

 

I always get a chuckle with the resident junta fanboys. They criticise PT but fail to realize that the people that replaced them are a few times worse. And no checks and balances, no transparancy and as usual in these kinds of governments fully equippped with various human rights violations. Elections ? Oh whenever Yingluck's ban has ended :)

 

 

 

[edwinchester]

4 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

The red side is on to something. They most definitely were entitled to rule, since the 2011 elections gave their party a 265 seat clear majority.

 

It's best not to talk about breaking laws, and amnesty, because the cold hard facts are that any red short polictician caught breaking the law has been impeached and the amnesty you talk about never made it.

 

I am surprised why you seem to imply that things are better now. None of the current law breakers will ever be impeached or punished and that mainly due to an amnesty that actually did make it. No 265 seat majority needed to get that one through.

 

I always get a chuckle with the resident junta fanboys. They criticise PT but fail to realize that the people that replaced them are a few times worse. And no checks and balances, no transparancy and as usual in these kinds of governments fully equippped with various human rights violations. Elections ? Oh whenever Yingluck's ban has ended :)

 

 

 

I'm no fan of PT, The Democrats and definitely the current Junta but just wanted to say could not fault your post at all.

[Farang99]

"Agreement of truth"

 

They mean to say that you can have truth or alt.truth! Sounds like a Trump disciple.