candide

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    1,595
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,840 Excellent

About candide

  • Rank
    Super Member

Recent Profile Visitors

3,608 profile views
  1. They also want to charge her for overreacting to the PDRC.....
  2. That's exactly what a forum us for, for the sake of commenting!
  3. Same for the Rajabhakti Park, Prayuth's assets, Prayuth's brother, Prayuth's nephew, Rolls Royce corruption case, High speed train contract, etc....
  4. I think the public understands too well.....
  5. If he was not ignorant, he would know you are not allowed to quote a source dealing with certain subjects in Thailand. People need to start one day before becoming a long standing member...
  6. It is a policy decision. Technically it covers all deads and injuries between 2005 and 2010 so no distinction between yellow and red. It just happens that more red shirts died than yellow shirts Actually, according to the NACC they did not follow the right procedure, so they may convict her for this reason. Of course, the Junta followed the same procedure.....
  7. Of course you prefer to ignore it because it undercuts one of your main arguments. You can repeat it like a Mantra, but it will not change what have been reported by news agencies (APA, Reuters) and in the press (ex BBC, Daily Nation). They all report that from the start, the principle agreement was conditional of the dissolution date. They did not just suddenly change their mind from one day to the next as you pretend. It could not be more clearly expressed as in this quote from a BBC article: "We want Abhisit to come back to us with a clear parliamentary dissolution date instead of an election date and we will meet and consider it again," he said. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8659590.stm It is also clearly explained in these articles that the key issue of disagreement was that both sides wanted to be in power for the reshuffle of the police and the military. (Of course it is pure coincidence that the army chief who was nominated by the Abhisit government was the chief of the soldiers who fired at protesters and also the same who made a coup a few years later).
  8. Same information in Associated Press: "Abhisit has said he wants enough time in office to pass a budget for next year. But both sides also want to be in control of the government when a key reshuffle of top military posts occurs in September so they can influence the outcome." http://archive.li/NWEeQ Up to my knowledge he gave an election date, not a dissolution date. In case I am wrong, please show your sources. And in case he proposed one, I doubt it was before the nomination of the army chief.
  9. Bring her to power? I thought they were risking their lives to get elections? That's the yellow shirts who have been rewarded for bringing someone to power.. PS Read my next post before answering that there was an agreement
  10. Are policy decisions illegal now? It did not reach the poor farmers as the objective was to subsidize production. Is it illegal? She (not sure the decision process was that simple) chose an objective over another by keeping dams shut. Is it illegal?
  11. It comes from a different case. It is an administrative decision (translate: Junta's decision) which is different from the judicial case. She has been "fined" by the Junta.
  12. Not to mention that one of the main stakes behind the 2010 crisis was his nomination. Had anticipated elections occured early in 2010, he probably would not have been nominated as army chief.
  13. You forget to mention those who were killed. And there was no mention of people who were sent to jail in the scheme. But you could not help yourself but make it look worse... http://www.nationmul...s-30182791.html
  14. So a poor at the countryside who does not want to travel and uses water from a well gets 200 baht. Great!
  15. “All opinions went in the same direction so there was no need to vote,” I think there is a mistake. It should be read "All opinions came from the same direction...."