Jump to content

Chupup

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    594
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Chupup

  1. If you regard this as a 'simplistic rant' then shame upon you. The point is about the support claimed for his drugs war is the difference between theory and practice. Thaksin used a series of popularist images to get people on his side, but the reality of the practice was vastly different. You posters who come out with these comments should think a little deeper about the issues because behind these types of policies there may lie a greater truth. For example, the campaign against identifying the Jews as the enemy was an approach taken by a certain regime - but this became a runaway train and people - who may have been perfectly good and ordinary working class souls - found themselves on the train aiding a regime in the slaughter of many people. This is how mass psychology works. Thaksin's case is not comparable in its mass, but he used similar psychology: Build up the picture of the enemy and once that is accepted go in for the kill. In this case it did no good whatsoever, partly because the main dealers were not targeted and also because he used this as a) a smokescreen to get rid of certain opponents and cool.png build popularity and show himself as a man of steel. Sadly many of those killed were not dealers. The charity that promotes reducing the harm caused by drug addiction identified many of those killed as harmless drug users who were pulled out of drop in centres and shot in the back of the head. Interesting here because a real drugs policy would not order extra judicial executions, however popular that may seem. It's undemocratic and autocratic and stinks of the kind of dictatorship you'd find in North Korea. The high places that you refer to made no comment in public about this. However, when those in much higher places identified the drug cultivation problem, they set up a projects which changed the game: instead of growing poppies people were encouraged to develop market gardens. Decisions at this intelligent and critical level can impact on and change society in a beneficial way as we have seen. Undemocratic decisions that lead to the slaughter of innocents in order to solve a problem in society is hardly an intelligent or even humane approach. If you would like chapter and verse on Mass Psychology, and in particular the mass psychology as used in both some religions and in politics such as communist or fascist regimes, I am happy to help you.

    You misunderstand my post. I have nothing but contempt for Thaksin and I personally view his "war on drugs" as evil, particularly as I know (innocent) people who were murdered in it. However, it was just another of his populist policies and you won't find many Thai politicians bringing it up as a weapon against him as many of them supported it.

    It's easy to paint Thaksin as evil, a dictator etc etc, but doing so is just playing the anti-democracy game. If you can't see that the current problem is far more than just Thaksin's past misdemeanours or crimes, you should do some reading around the subject!

    (And you might want to make your rants easier to read by using paragraphing!)

    well it's really easy to condemn Thaksin if you mention only the bad things (in your opinion!) but what about Health Insurance, what about water management, what about Public Transport, what about the rice scheme (in it's real sense)? For developing Thailand he was a mile stone!!

    Which will be hanging around most Thai s necks for a long time

  2. NACC 'judges' had lose an important opportunity to explain that it is independence, conducted investigation transparently and that it is free of conflict of interest.

    The 'judges' have not resolved the issue raised by caretaker PM that it took only 21 days to complete the investigation from the date the complain was filed while the probe against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva over the rice price guarantee scheme has been going on for about four years. Instead of addressing the issue raised, it related and connected the investigation as has been going on as far back as December 2012. This argument is irrelevant and open up more questions on their independence, transparent and free from conflict of interests.

    The 'judges' also did not reply directly to a written request to change investigators before the investigation concluded - they went to the press instead.

    The caretaker PM did not raise the issue in confrontation but that it is now a public interest wanting to know why AV's case has been dragging for about 4 years.

    The NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and guilty of conflict of interest.

    Really, did you actualy read the thread, and this is not about A/V its about YL rolleyes.gif

×
×
  • Create New...