Confusing Title?
Maybe I'm not reading something properly, and someone can explain it to me. But the article title states that the fast is to end corruption. But the first sentence of the article states that the protesters "joined a nationwide protest campaign against an anti-corruption bill." So the protesters are protesting a bill that is set to fight corruption, yet the protesters are against corruption? I know the article goes on to state that the protesters are upset about not being consulted for opinions on the bill, but I'm confused as to how protesting an anti-corruption bill equates to being against corruption. Is the anti-corruption bill corrupt in itself? Is this double-speak? Maybe there's some way to clarify this.
They are protesting an anti-corruption bill that they feel is totally inadequate, has no teeth and gives the ombudsman no investigative or enforcement powers and therefore will not stem corruption. They demand citizens give input into the bill. They want a bill that will actually attack corruption. Mattisse (talk) 00:37, 8 April 2011 (UTC)