Amnesty for Former TRT Executives?

**StrontiumDog** · 30-04-2012, 03:11 PM

Suriyasai: Thaksin playing tricks | Bangkok Post: news

Suriyasai: Thaksin playing tricks

Published: 29/04/2012 at 09:47 PM
Online news: Politics

Deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra was using three reconciliation strategies to ensure his return to Thailand, Green Group coordinator Suriyasai Katasila said on Sunday.

Mr Suriyasia also said that even though some red shirt leaders were unhappy about the recent meeting between Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda, his view was that it was simply colour politics.

He singled out red shirt core member Shinawat Haboonpad, who had strongly declared some members of the movement were against the Prem meeting, but now is silent on the issue.

It should be noted that red shirt key figures who had extensively attacked the "amataya (elite) regime" have chosen now to keep quiet. This ,therefore, reflected the belief that UDD leaders were only using political issues to encourage their supporters to rally and suffer for them and their personal interests.

The former key member of the anti-Thaksin People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) said red shirt political comments seen by some academics as a people’s force to build democracy and justice is invalid. This was because Thaksin was still playing puppeteer and maintaining absolute power over them.

“Given the current atmosphere of reconciliation, I believe Pol Lt Col Thaksin will make a quick move in advancing his cause by using three strategies including holding secret talks with influential figures in society, enacting an amnesty bill and maintaining his red shirt army to control negotiating power,” Mr Surayasai said.

“He will either get it by trickery or ruse so that he can return home at the earliest. He can’t wait anymore because the popularity of his sister’s government is going downhill.”

**Calgary** · 30-04-2012, 04:38 PM

[QUOTE]Suriyasai: Thaksin playing tricks | Bangkok Post: news [/QUOTE]

".............. Green Group coordinator Suriyasai Katasila said on Sunday.

In other words, "PADite coordinator".....truly amazing how PADites always like to distance themselves, from themselves.

It should be noted that red shirt key figures who had extensively attacked the "amataya (elite) regime" have chosen now to keep quiet

Yes they have.

Keep in mind they unfailingly will defend Ms. Y. and company against the coupists. They are patient and aware that there are many political forces for Ms. Y. to deal with, and they are not about to exert pressure on her to be a "bull in a china shop".

This pisses off the coupist PAD/Amart. As a result, they haven't been able to lay a finger on Ms. Y. They would love to drag her into a political morass and keep goading her. But they are just 'suckin sand'.

This therefore, reflected the belief that UDD leaders were only using political issues to encourage their supporters to rally and suffer for them and their personal interests.

No it doesn't.

It reflects political astuteness.

The former key member of the anti-Thaksin People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) said red shirt political comments seen by some academics as a people’s force to build democracy and justice is invalid.

Not seen by "some academics", but by "PADite academics"

And one wouldn't expect anything else from them.

The electorate repudiated them and this self-serving spin.

This was because Thaksin was still playing puppeteer and maintaining absolute power over them.

They cannot get the notion of electoral success through their thickness, can they.

They just cannot fathom political astuteness by anyone other than themselves. As a result, they are on the political sidelines.

Poor babies.

"...............maintaining his red shirt army to control negotiating power,” Mr Surayasai said.

An electoral based majority controlling negotiating power is the norm in a Democracy.

Their alternative are pro-coup armed aggressors killing these people. The election took care of their idiocy real good.

He can’t wait anymore because the popularity of his sister’s government is going downhill.”

Talk about unsubstantiated wishful thinking to the extreme. This guy will have the next election results shoved down his throat. Hope he chokes.

**mao say dung** · 30-04-2012, 06:59 PM

^BP does a good job with tracking various polls and so far they show this government maintaining popularity and voter confidence... "going downhill" my ass.

**Calgary** · 30-04-2012, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by mao say dung

^BP does a good job with tracking various polls and so far they show this government maintaining popularity and voter confidence... "going downhill" my ass.

It gets boring sometimes countering such loose, agenized verbiage with nothing behind it other than wishful thinking.

But if ya don't counter it, becomes fact. Farangs read this stuff in the Post and Nation all the time, and unless one takes the time to deal with it, becomes fixed as reality.

Especially over "on the dark side", they eliminate the option of countering this stuff, instead sending in their own operatives to reinforce it. It is a travesty what is done to Farangs over there.

**Tom Sawyer** · 30-04-2012, 10:06 PM

I'm looking forward to a post-Thaksin, post-PAD, social democrat movement. How about you Calgary?

**Calgary** · 01-05-2012, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

I'm looking forward to a post-Thaksin, post-PAD, social democrat movement. How about you Calgary?

I think we are closer to a post-Thaksin situation, than many people think. The PADites and Amart would argue against that point vociforously, as they think their criminalization campaign has damaged him. They work hard to tie the UDD/Red Shirts to him. They hope thereby to deprive this Democracy Movement of any political context. Last year's election disproved that point.

But watching and listening to Thaksin in Cambodia, plus other indicators, suggest to me he is quite happy to be an elder-statesman, exercising behind the scenes influence. His sister is doing a hell-of-a-job, and there are other "young Turks" in waiting. I don't think he is 'pining away' to get back out in front of this next generation.

The PAD is written off by many, but I'm not so sure. They were a top-down creation, serving as the "Protest wing" of the Amart. The Amart could crank them up again at will I think. If a big-wig told them to re-group, with funding to follow, they could re-constitute themselves in a hurry.

**Calgary** · 01-05-2012, 12:08 PM

Deleted by self

**mao say dung** · 01-05-2012, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by Calgary

They were a top-down creation, serving as the "Protest wing" of the Amart

This is not precisely true... initially there was as much grass in the roots as the Reds ever had... they did, however, end up serving as shock troops for a palace/military coalition.

**Calgary** · 01-05-2012, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by mao say dung

Originally Posted by Calgary

They were a top-down creation, serving as the "Protest wing" of the Amart

This is not precisely true... initially there was as much grass in the roots as the Reds ever had... they did, however, end up serving as shock troops for a palace/military coalition.

Several thoughts come to mind as an extension of your points MSD:

Motivation is open to speculation. The majority of PADites were Government Officials, hence a captive audience of said Government. Whether they reported to work, or to a protest made no difference to them. They did whatever their bosses prescribed. The protest was a lot more fun, was pensionable service with all expenses paid, including a spanking new T-shirt.

It would be instructive to look at their entire "body of work" so to speak. When one tallies all the regional rallies carefully blacked out by the media, plus all the Bangkok stuff, research would show, I think, that PADite activities in volume and membership, would pale in comparison to that of the UDD/Red Shirts.

The propaganda media would like to deprive the UDD/Red Shirts of a political context by suggesting everything they did was funded by Thaksin. That they had no political context beyond what they were paid to do. Such is their arrogance and conceit and exagerated political self-opinion, they slander and villify the Red Shirts in this way. I would suggest that when it came to funding, the PAD was funded immensely compared to the Red Shirts.

Speaking from personal observations and assistance provided, local Red Shirts worked overtime, doing fund raisers for their activities. I never saw any of that being undertaken by the PAD. The Red Shirts were supported financially as is any protest movement, but this would pale in comparison to the PAD in my view.

All of this goes to the question of motive and grassroots desire, drive, incentive and disposition.

The hard core of the PAD would be every bit as driven, but the totality of this pales in comparison I think.

The UDD/Red Shirts are truly a 'grassroots Movement" whereas the PAD would be described otherwise: A paid and motivated protest arm of the Amart. Once the Amart achieved its' aims, the PAD was 'put on the shelf'. You will notice that the UDD/Red Shirt continue as strong as ever, both defending this Government and advancing its objectives of never again to be trodden underfoot by the Amart. That is indicative of a "movement" IMHO.

The PAD continue being the protest arm of the Amart and Opposition, as evidenced by the faux creation of all these so-called protesting networks and distancing themselves from themselves, by pretending to be coloured differently.

**mao say dung** · 01-05-2012, 01:06 PM

^I was responding to your suggestion that they were a "top-down creation", thereby suggesting that they were initially less "genuine" than the early reds. I don't think this is the case.

PAD formed out of the late-2005 series of "demonstrations" that took place around the moving of Sondhi's TV show from MCOT, due to Thaksin having him taken off the air for criticizing his administration (and using defense of the Monarchy as the excuse... where have we heard that before?), to the web and various outdoor venues... culminating in the 50K or more who showed up at Lumpini.

What PAD became later and what its roots were are arguably not the same thing. Small point, but ignoring the history in the interests of rhetoric serves no one with a desire to maintain some sense of where we've been and where we're headed in this ongoing struggle.

A lot of Thais, some of whom are now no doubt redshirts, were very angry with Thaksin with good reason in 2005/2006. It didn't take "amart propaganda" to make them feel that way; it just took paying attention to Thaksin's behaviour in power.

**mao say dung** · 01-05-2012, 01:16 PM

Here's a timeline I assembled a couple of years ago on another site:

August 2005- Sondhi begins criticizing Thaksin blatantly on his TV show Thailand Weekly Up until just before this, Sondhi had been a loud and clear cheerleader for Thaksin, which was probably why his show was the only remaining political commentary program on Thai TV.

15 September 2005- Sondhi removed from broadcast television, as previous critics had been long before. Moves his show to a public stage at Thammasat. 3000 people attend. Shpw is available as video on Manager website and ASTV cable, thus becoming the very first politically dissident TV broadcast in Thai history. Shows concentrate on analysis of all the undemocratic things Thaksin has done, but popularity rises sharply when Sondhi hits the corruption theme button. Thaksin responds with lawsuits and secures an injunction to halt the cable broadcast, meaning ASTV viewers must attend rallies if they want to continue experiencing this unique event. Thailand Weekly draws 80,000 to its Lumpini edition in early December. Just before being taken off air, Sondhi had introduced a novel element: accusations that Thaksin did not respect the monarchy. At Lumpini, just before the King's birthday, Sondhi wears a yellow T-shirt with the slogan "We Fight For The King".

November 11 2005- Sondhi calls for the King to supplant Thaksin and initiate political reform.

November 18 2005- All three Armed Forces chiefs, plus the Supreme Commander, rebuke Sondhi for bringing the King so blatantly into politics. Next day, Sonthi Boonyaratklin is asked about a coup coming out of this and says "Gone is the era when soldiers staged coups."

December 4 2005- King's birthday speech- "not even I am above criticism"- criticises lawsuits (Thaksin) and politics on TV (Sondhi). "They want to see soap dramas instead....Do not quarrel. No quarelling. Do not over-do." Thaksin drops lawsuits and Sondhi tones down the shows. Mid-January Sondhi's Thailand Weekly draws 2000 people. Sondhi calls for a rally to invade government house and gets 2000 people and nothing really happens. Sondhi announces a final "farewell" show for February 4 2006.

January 23- Shin Corp is sold to Temasek.

February 4- 50,000 attend the "farewell", which has now taken on the appearance of new beginning. After the show, emissaries from the rally go to the Royal Household Bureau (which is "surprisingly" open at 9pm!) and to Prem's house, at both of which they are received warmly. Sondhi goes personally to Sonthi and asks "Are you going to stand by the people?" "I will stand by the people because I am a soldier of the people".

February 9 2006- PAD is formed.

By the time PAD was officially PAD, they were what you suggest. That there was a strong element of grass in the roots is undeniable. Sondhi was getting ready to pack it all in when 50K folks showed up for that farewell performance. That's grass no matter how you mow it.

**Calgary** · 01-05-2012, 01:32 PM

MSD - #3892 ^
A lot of Thais, some of whom are now no doubt redshirts, were very angry with Thaksin with good reason in 2005/2006. It didn't take "amart propaganda" to make them feel that way; it just took paying attention to Thaksin's behaviour in power.

On the other hand, many admired Thaksin immensely. Electoral results suggest most of them did. This is powerful evidence countering Amart attempts to criminalize him. Were all those people blind? Were they angry at Thaksin's behavior? Were they all stupid being led around by the nose? The only blind ones IMHO, are the ones who have been following the self-serving Amart media, framing things for them, during and after Thaksin's tenure.

Some very well-educated, mature Red Shirts around here, who have been political junkies their entire life, who speak of being integrally involved with historical political upheavels, will speak eloquently, knowledgably with significant political astuteness of the pre-Thaksin era vs. Post-Thaksin.

The improvement was huge in their opinion. They will speak of Democrat Party corruption which dwarfed anything during and after Thaksin. They call it a criminal organization. They have voluminous historical facts and insight to back it up.

They know the Amart and its' MO. They know of the Governing entitlement these people attribute to themselves. They speak at length about their 'eyes' being open now, with respect to other institutions.

The aggressive actions of Thaksin self-servingly painted by the Amart one way, was in fact just a defence against Amart power-plays, including the utilization of their media. To suggest that during Thaksin's reign, the media was his, is untrue. It never was. It was a tool operating at the behest of the Amart and used against him, and he reacted accordingly. Their made-up stories were legendary, to the point he was forced to take them to court to verify the veracity of their stuff reported as fact. In light of today's coupist, Amart anti-Yingluck media, it is deja vu all over again.

I defer to my highly educated Thai confidants whose opinions I respect highly, for their interpretation of political realities preceding my tenure here of ten years. Their historically-rooted knowledge and interpretation of the Thaksin years as related to the years before, with all of it corroberated by electoral results, is based on a thorough understanding. I sympathise with their perspective completely, and do not accept the way the Amart and their media frames it. The credibility of the Amart, its' media and all other institutions compared to them, is obvious to me.

**mao say dung** · 01-05-2012, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by Calgary

The aggressive actions of Thaksin self-servingly painted by the Amart one way, was in fact just a defence against Amart power-plays, including the utilization of their media.

I have made this argument myself on a number of occasions over the years, but I have never fallen into the trap of suggesting that Thaksin's authoritarian, anti-democratic actions while in power were "just" that.

You need to read some of the books written by non-amart journalists and academics concerning his years in power. If you can still come away believing that his antics were "just" defense against amart manipulation, I'd recommend laying off the Kool-Aid for a while.

I've been fed-to-the-teeth with being called a "Thaksin apologist/supporter" for my support of the UDD as democracy advocates. I accept that Thaksin is the democratic choice of a majority of Thais. I don't accept that that means he was anything but what he so clearly was when in power.

That Thaksinite policies were in many cases significant advances on previous administrations' is not in doubt. Neither is the impact that his admininstration has had on politicizing formerly disenfranchised Thais. Neither of these things mean that Thaksin himself is a democracy advocate or that his machinations in power were all intended to improve democracy in Thailand. He isn't and they weren't.

I'm still waiting to see whither the UDD once all the ducks are in a row. Whether I continue to support them as democracy advocates will depend on how they behave towards a Thaksin administration that gets comfortable in power. At the moment, I'm less than sanguine.

Just as an aside, Calgary, what is your take on Thaksin's choice of Samak Sundaravej as proxy leader before there was a sister ready to run? "Kill them all... kill them all" was not really the sort of rhetoric you expect from an anti-amart democracy activist, no matter how well he cooked.

**Calgary** · 01-05-2012, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by mao say dung

Just as an aside, Calgary, what is your take on Thaksin's choice of Samak Sundaravej as proxy leader before there was a sister ready to run?

I bandied that question about here, with people more knowledgable than I.

At the time, the Amart was 'making hay' with its' accusations that Thaksin was anti a certain institution.

Samak had impeccable credentials in that regard.

This was a key reason for his selection, to blunt that attack.

Samak however learned some realities, and ultimately died because of them.

That is about as specific as I can be MSD.

**mao say dung** · 01-05-2012, 02:15 PM

That is nothing more nor less than the standard "take". Of course it was his credentials as a royalist that made him attractive as a leader.

My question was about his credentials as a leading member of the amart, as a promoter of mass slaughter of pro-democracy protesters, and as someone willing to lie through his teeth in international media as he laughed off the insignificance of the deaths of phrai and students back in the day.

**Calgary** · 01-05-2012, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by mao say dung

That is nothing more nor less than the standard "take". Of course it was his credentials as a royalist that made him attractive as a leader.

My question was about his credentials as a leading member of the amart, as a promoter of mass slaughter of pro-democracy protesters, and as someone willing to lie through his teeth in international media as he laughed off the insignificance of the deaths of phrai and students back in the day.

Maybe the 'standard take' has a reason for being the 'standard take', with respect to the question about why him, at that time.

I passed this past some people. Some comments I received:

Everyone knows who was responsible for some of the things you reference, but just don't speak about it.

Samak didn't have the power for such a thing.

Discussing these matters is a little bit like discussing French military history without ever referencing Napoleon.

There is a lot of information and understanding about all of this, which you and I will not discuss.

The historical events you reference involved students....R'song involved old men, old women and everything in between.

Who had the power to authorize that?....certainly not Abhi.

When one can only discuss 1/2 of the story, talking about the other 1/2 is misleading.

How can one get a grip on 15 coups the last number of years? Is there a commonality? Does one blame Abhi. for R'song? Does one blame Samak for his involvement? Which other Prime Ministers and military leaders does one blame for those 15 coups? How many R'songs were authorized?

'round and 'round we go, with no consensus. But there seems to be consensus with some people. The Red Shirts have this T-shirt with a big eye-ball on it.

**mao say dung** · 01-05-2012, 02:46 PM

OK. I give.

Have to say though: that riff of non-sequiturs would go down well in any of the mainstream English language media in Thailand.

**LooseBowels** · 02-05-2012, 05:09 AM

Originally Posted by mao say dung

they did, however, end up serving as shock troops for a palace/military coalition.

Thats putting it mildly

Actually they were no more than amart terrorist, falang propaganderising, brainwashing , nut jobs, on 500 baht a day.
Still walking the streets.

You can't argue with that

**longway** · 02-05-2012, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by mao say dung

Originally Posted by Calgary

The aggressive actions of Thaksin self-servingly painted by the Amart one way, was in fact just a defence against Amart power-plays, including the utilization of their media.

I have made this argument myself on a number of occasions over the years, but I have never fallen into the trap of suggesting that Thaksin's authoritarian, anti-democratic actions while in power were "just" that.

You need to read some of the books written by non-amart journalists and academics concerning his years in power. If you can still come away believing that his antics were "just" defense against amart manipulation, I'd recommend laying off the Kool-Aid for a while.

I've been fed-to-the-teeth with being called a "Thaksin apologist/supporter" for my support of the UDD as democracy advocates. I accept that Thaksin is the democratic choice of a majority of Thais. I don't accept that that means he was anything but what he so clearly was when in power.

That Thaksinite policies were in many cases significant advances on previous administrations' is not in doubt. Neither is the impact that his admininstration has had on politicizing formerly disenfranchised Thais. Neither of these things mean that Thaksin himself is a democracy advocate or that his machinations in power were all intended to improve democracy in Thailand. He isn't and they weren't.

I'm still waiting to see whither the UDD once all the ducks are in a row. Whether I continue to support them as democracy advocates will depend on how they behave towards a Thaksin administration that gets comfortable in power. At the moment, I'm less than sanguine.

Just as an aside, Calgary, what is your take on Thaksin's choice of Samak Sundaravej as proxy leader before there was a sister ready to run? "Kill them all... kill them all" was not really the sort of rhetoric you expect from an anti-amart democracy activist, no matter how well he cooked.

What are the things that the UDD, in their role as 'democracy advocates' have done that advance democracy in this country that is not tied in with helping the PT and Thaksin?

Why is is that when 95% of the country support democracy as the best form of government only 14% or so identify themselves as red-shirts or lean towards them?

**Calgary** · 02-05-2012, 11:33 AM

Longway, #3901^
What are the things that the UDD, in their role as 'democracy advocates' have done that advance democracy in this country

Win elections and challenge coupists, even though it cost some their lives.

Not complicated.

Any other questions?

**longway** · 02-05-2012, 12:04 PM

^ Yes you help the PT and Thaksin, thats a given, but what else do you do that advances democracy in this country? Something that is not tied in with their interests. Anything?

**Calgary** · 02-05-2012, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by longway

^ Yes you help the PT and Thaksin, thats a given, but what else do you do that advances democracy in this country? Something that is not tied in with their interests. Anything?

Lots.

Challenging coupists at a cost of lives is the supreme sacrifice. Challenging them for their coupist ways and not accepting coups vs. elections. Then having a subsequent election validate these challenges.

Having a vibrant anti-coup stance, causing coupists to thank twice about seizing power via non-democratic means. Thereby forcing democratic practices on them. That is progress.

And yes, electoral victories are predicated on one side being populated, in this case by the winning political party, and openly associated with Thaksin. Something the voters had a full knowledge of when last voting. The Democratically elected Government have a number of constituancies, all helping each other winning democratic elections.

Your implied notion that one constituancy helping another is somehow undemocratic doesn't fly. Like the Opposition trying to denigrate the various components of the winning side as being 'cronies'.

You bet,............ out with Abhisit cronies, and in with PTP/Red Shirt/Thaksin cronies. That is what winning elections do for ya.

The current administration is there via nation-wide elections, the previous one was not. That is advancing Democracy, wouldn't you say?

To your point of advancing Democracy not linked to the interests of electorally winning elements, one needs look no further than the massive politicization of the largest Political Movement in Thailand. A politicization the Amart and its electoral minority arrogantly dismisses. But let me tell you, these people have a clear idea about what democracy is, what it means, and even a clearer idea of whom is not well served by it and anti-democratic as a result. Such people are exemplified by those who attacked them at R'song......all institutions.

That is education and development my friend. A horribly unanticipated consequence for the coupist Amart.

Now, if one wants to foist all the deficiencies of Thai Democratic practices on the notion that Democracy is not advancing, is a false argument. Nobody expects perfection, and it wont come to Thailand for some time.

But given all of the above, progress has been tremendous, even though that progress has been at the expense of the minority who cannot be elected due to their minority status, but yet believe they are the entitled ones. They would self-servingly denigrate and deny all of the above, and I wouldn't expect anything else from them.

Tell your friends over 'on the dark side' Longway, as they insure members are 'ostriched' from this type of thinking and information. That is what is called undemocratic and censoring those they fear...Me.

You OK with that? Don't get me wrong. I appreciate the likes of you and Thaihome plus others being over here. One can have debates from two sides of the fence without disturbing the fence censoriously leaning against one side.

**mao say dung** · 02-05-2012, 01:16 PM

^Someone doesn't understand that politics, including democratic politics, is always about advancing your interests.

Given the degree of certainty attached to a democratic election in Thailand resulting in a Thaksin victory for the past decade or so, what could anyone do to promote democracy that wouldn't be helping Thaksin and PT, longway?

**Calgary** · 02-05-2012, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by mao say dung

^Someone doesn't understand that politics, including democratic politics, is always about advancing your interests.

Given the degree of certainty attached to a democratic election in Thailand resulting in a Thaksin victory for the past decade or so, what could anyone do to promote democracy that wouldn't be helping Thaksin and PT, longway?

Let me also address this question in addition to Longway.

One way of doing that would be for the Amart and Democrat Party competing for the 'hearts and minds' of majority of Thai's. It would also help, if they were a bit more selective about who their friends are.

They have not been competitive, and have tied their star to fading anti-democratic elements. They only have themselves to blame.

[B[I]]"..........politics, including democratic politics, is always about advancing your interests"[/B]

[/I]Good point.

That is more Democratic progress and what the UDD/Red Shirts have accomplished.

Their membership is now thoroughly aware of what their political interests are.

Again, this is arrogantly disparaged by the Amart, who conceitedly speak as if only they know anything about 'political interests'. As a result, in their exagerated self-opinion, only they have the wherewithal to advance the 'political interests' of the country as a whole. Such arrogance has them on the political sidelines and is merely a testament to their self-perceived sense of governing entitlement.

Placing them electorally on the sidelines is progress in Democratic practices.

**longway** · 02-05-2012, 01:47 PM

^ Not too sure what Calgary said in post 3904, but basically sounds like nothing, same with 3905, you cant name a thing can you? UDD have done nothing that does not serve to further PT interests. It always looks as if the PT controls the UDD on the whole.

Now you guys know why you are labelled deluded Thaksin apologists.

If the UDD interests are served by supporting the PT then they are not democracy advocates, but PT advocates, whose special interests are served by ensuring PT are in power.

As for what they can do outside serving the PT

in a nutshell they should be developing tactics that hobble the patronage system that pervades every aspect of the government, police and army and strangles any movement to democracy and the rule of law, and cements the ties between criminals and politics.

They have had 5-6 years to come up with something, so far, as far as i can find out - zero. They have done nothing that doesn't serve their PT masters.

Thread: Amnesty for Former TRT Executives?

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions