8 Jul 69

"Kravir" lapped the "People's Party" lie-distorted! Post accused the government MP of voting in favour of the congressman to grant amnesty, excluding the 112 case, but cleared the wrong "Hua Swan" before editing the text, telling him not to lower his standard to the low ground, asking how to be responsible.

On July 8, 69, Korn Weir Enigma Nantkul, Ang Thong MP, Proud Thai Party, Chairman of the Whipped Government, Posted

"Today, the People's Party came out with a post accusing that

"Government MPs voted in favour of the congressman to grant amnesty, excluding the 112 cases, but cleared the wrong people who fell the election.

This is an ugly distortion.

The fact is, there is not a single word in the bill about the Hua Sen. case.

No from the beginning, no amendments, and no resolution on the matter.

This is not a difference of opinion, but it is a distortion of facts.

Section 112 is not new.

This bill reaffirms the original principle since the previous council: excluding offences under the Penal Code, section 112.

And this has been the stance of the Thai Proud Party and many other political parties since the beginning.

As for political rally cases, whether it's yellow shirts, red shirts, the DEA closing airports, or political events in the past.

That's why this amnesty law needs to be enacted.

To unravel the wounds, a political conflict that dragged on for decades.

Mixing things that don't exist in the law with things that exist to mislead the public.

That's not a check.

It's a lie. Distort the facts.

After the post was published, many people misunderstood the page, so the People's Party edited the message later (see before-after).

The question is...

Once the truth is solved, the misunderstanding of the people. Who will be responsible?

How will the People's Party be responsible for this action??

Politics is verifiable, it's controversial, it's different.

But politics, which weapons falsehood, uses slander as a tool for political gain.

Is this the new way of doing politics?

It should not be the standard of a political party claiming itself to have a noble standard.

To raise politics, to raise your own standards.

Not lowering your own standards until low, low, like this...

P.S. After editing the text on the page, I want to know how the People's Party is responsible for this?? "