muttley

""Please understand that prostitutes are not bad women. Prostitutes only sell their bodies, but a bad woman has been wandering around trying to sell the country.""

I don't know what was written in Thai, but in English it looks more a case for the prostitutes as they are thought to be like PM Yingluck whereas it's clear from the text that the prostitutes are NOT bad women

In your use of the English, you are implying PM Yingluck is a bad women - at least the cartoonist didn't mention the name Yingluck in this context - probably because he is aware of the defamation law, unlike yourself it seems.

Terribly sorry and all that. Excuses all over. Please understand I'm a Dutchman, a Dutch uncle even. I'm blunt by birth, nature, education. I lack a certain level of respect for official figures, even when not mocking them. To English that must be difficult to understand at times

BTW I might imply, but certainly I didn't say, now did I?

Don't tell me, save it for the court. Personally speaking I don't think you'll find that's much of a defence though...............

With companies voicing concern that the median prices set are about half of one would expect to be able to fullfill project requirements, one may wonder what can be done with the 'only 350 billion' set aside especially if there's an 30% administrative margin.

The 'help against the locals' sounds like yet another opportunity to increase the administrative overhead and at the same time induce local communities to stop protesting with help of boss and his goons (or should that be guns?).

In the mean time we Dutch simply do it 'our way' back home.

No disrespect rubl, but it does make me grin when I think of "experts" in water schemes coming from a race of people who ostensibly built their homes on water - I can see the appeal of Bangkok to you now

censorship of what? convicted fugitive on the run conversations with MP's?

First off he's hardly on the run if everybody knows where he is - it was the same during the democrat year/s. Secondly, lets agree to disagree on the "value" of the conviction. To the meat of your "argument".

You think it's perfectly acceptable to ask the Constitution Court to stop the MPs from talking with a Thai Citizen on Skype.

Have a think about that statement.

Thaksin is not a Thai citizen. His Thai passport is illegal. His Montenegro, Uganda, Fidji, Takki-Tukaland or Mongolian Passport in his collection are irrelevant.

He only can get his Thai passport back in a Thai jail.

Has Thaksins citizenship been revoked? I don't recall hearing about this. Please provide more details as I'm fascinated by this revelation.

DSI saying it can't do anything? I wonder if that is 'situation normal'?

Love the comment - Burning Central World was arson not terrorism - so they could claim insurance. Weng certainly has sh*t for brains if he thinks like that. And he has a seat in parliament...

Have another read. Weng "submitted the request after the Civil Court ruled in some cases that the arson attack on the CentralWorld department store was not an act of terrorism, but the result of unrest - a result which ensured that insurance firms would have to compensate injured parties."

It wasn't his original thought - it was an official verdict from the Civil Court. You may wish to reconsider your indirect criticism of the Judges verdict.

""Please understand that prostitutes are not bad women. Prostitutes only sell their bodies, but a bad woman has been wandering around trying to sell the country.""

I don't know what was written in Thai, but in English it looks more a case for the prostitutes as they are thought to be like PM Yingluck whereas it's clear from the text that the prostitutes are NOT bad women

In your use of the English, you are implying PM Yingluck is a bad women - at least the cartoonist didn't mention the name Yingluck in this context - probably because he is aware of the defamation law, unlike yourself it seems.

Rich teacher, the topic is 58 senators from four different committees wanting to grill PM Yingluck over her speech in Mongolia. Any suggestion that these senator might only do so because they don't like the Pheu Thai party is a simple ploy to deflect from the topic.

PM Yingluck in her role as Prime Minister of Thailand said things which were not true, belabored her poor brother and the harm done to her family. All that at a conference about 'democracy'. Of course senators in their supervisory role would like to ask the PM what she said, what she meant by what she said and following form an opinion and possible judgement on that. Democracy it's called, described in the constitution. Why not read it to check I'm not lying here?

BTW senators in other countries do similar things I'm told :-)

Which "things" were not true, Rubl?

It was a bold and forthright speech, if perhaps a bit too personal ("my family has suffered..." c'mon), and a brilliant strategy. She pointed out to an international audience that her young government is in constant danger of being taken down by another coup d' etat. If it happens, that speech will be seen as prophetic.

As for having to appear before a bunch of stacked 'committees' to explain herself, she should flip them all off with two big middle fingers. The speech stands on its own, and she doesn't need to apologize to anybody.

As for the lady being an 'airhead' (you haters, intellectuals all, no doubt, are wearing that one out, it's tired), she's running a country, doing a decent job, while you all have nothing better to do than trash talk day and night. Shame on you.

I'm glad that someone on here can see what the speech was about.

Whatever the "reasons" perceived by the military for a coup, whether or not it is a "bloodless" coup, there is no escaping the fact that coups are illegal (unless you rewrite the constitution of course) and about as undemocratic action as you can get on the democracy front.

If you look at it with an unjaundiced eye, as would the various countries around the world that jealously guard their democracies, they see a coup overthrowing an elected government.

There is no argument that there was no government in place at the time. The PM, contrary to opinion on here, had not resigned, there was a caretaker government in place, with political parties campaigning for the next royally endorsed election which was just weeks away, when the coup took place.

Another coup is the last thing this country needs and I cannot believe that posters on here call for one.

You continue to attack a bloodless coup as illegal. You defend every goofy thing the PTP with their red shirt armed contingent do. Yet you say she was democratically elected in spite of the reality that 52% of the population voted against her. That is not democracy.

Why do you not attack bloodless corruption?

It is as undemocratic as her election.

Undemocratic? That way of holding elections has been accepted in 1st World democracies for some time now. If Yinglucks parties election is undemocratic in your eyes what the $#@& did you think of the Dems getting into power?

And what is the relevance of it. A crime was committed and he was found guilty - and the guilt was obvious to all. Your "conviction" is a conviction, and you conveniently forget the other serious charges pending.

Criminals make enemies, and their enemies use the law to defeat them.

BTW just because you are paranoid doesn't mean there isn't somebody out to get you.

I can see you read it thoroughly and understood the various points made - of course you did .

Why would I bother to read your irrelevant obfuscations? Will they change that the law was in place, and the act committed?

I was answering a posters query not setting out obfuscations.

So to sum up recent events;

It started with politically motivated conviction, swiftly followed by politically motivated demonstrations, politically motivated riots, politically motivated elections and politically motivated charter changes, which should culminate in a politically motivated amnesty and possibly if your lucky the politically motivated conviction of Abhisit. All the while liberally and evenly spread with an ample amount of politically motivated corruption.

There appears to be a pattern in Thai politics, wouldn't you agree?

Crying foul of political motives for actions in Thailand's political system is like complaining of getting suntan while sunbathing.

It appears that Whizzbang disagrees with you hence my post in reply to him.

Not sure how Court can give any orders to individual out of its jurisdiction

Perhaps court should issue order for Government MP's to stop talking with wanted fugitive

So you're all in favour of censorship then?

So your in favour of a convicted criminal running the country then?

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

See my post above.

Are you one of Thaksins so called "cyber warriors"?

No, what makes you say that?

And what is the relevance of it. A crime was committed and he was found guilty - and the guilt was obvious to all. Your "conviction" is a conviction, and you conveniently forget the other serious charges pending.

Criminals make enemies, and their enemies use the law to defeat them.

BTW just because you are paranoid doesn't mean there isn't somebody out to get you.

I can see you read it thoroughly and understood the various points made - of course you did .

but those who have been charged for terrorism in the political upheaval are not included on the AMLO list.

So they are not going to include Thaksin or any of the other red shirt leaders.

How convenient.......... but they are a govt body aren't they?

Or the Yellow shirt s facing terrorist charges. At last, some kind of "Single Standard". Unless you are a convicted terrorist you are not going to end up on the list. Seems fair enough to me, embracing human rights like that.

The genus of the problem can then be seen with the Pibun right wing nationalist regime stemming from their treatment of the malay in the south, joining the nazis and Japanese Axis the same day that Pearl Harbor was attacked.

It's worth therefore remembering that pridi Banomyong, thailand's true hero and founder of democracy in Thailand, a socialist to boot, was ambassador to the us at the time. Pibun ordered pridi to declare war against the us and Britain.

He refused and helped set up the Thai resistance.

He was regent of Thailand after the war. He drew up plans for the redistribution of wealth from the feudal elite.

Well that didn't happen and he had to flee and died an exile in France.

My point being that it is not the liberal elite who helped foster the problems in the south nor the rest of the country.

It is those who have propagated 17 coups so far who are responsible. For me there is a clear divide. The Thai army takes the lions share of the blame for the current crisis.

In Britain we had to talk to the IRA. The Irish have long memories that the English forget.

I believe there was only one unit of resistance in Ireland the IRA not a constantly changing hand full of them. And the IRA had their own political party to maintain contact with the English.

Not even in the same ball park as the southern provinces.

You believe wrong, very wrong.

Well the nation certainly pins its heart on its sleeve. I don't think they support this government .

Can anybody tell me what these sentences have to do with the Peace Process?

"Thai authorities, in their haste to help Thaksin Shinawatra, have botched the latest attempt to the end the insurgency in the deep South"

"Moreover, sources in the Thai government say the thinking behind this peace plan came from a small number of people whose priority is to whitewash former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and the current administration headed by his sister Yingluck."

"Certainly there are other ways to derail the process, such as Hasan admitting that the entire thing is a set-up to save Thaksin's hide."

Yet in the entire rant there is not a jot of evidence how the peace plan is supposed to help, whitewash or save Thaksins hide.

What a pathetic, nasty little piece of "journalism"

Lets get real. The ruling minority won't be winning elections.

The Nation is softening up the crowd for another coup.

Does anyone really believe anything this newspaper puts out?

Let Thai people vote with international observers and the losers respect the outcome.

The army does not have the credibility to do the choosing every time they disagree with the winner.

If there's a coup, the red shirts and the PTP are the ones who pushed it.

They're the ones trying to intimidate the judiciary and replace them with their own people. Isn't that a coup also? You win an election and you think you have the right to decide how the judiciary rules? No one likes a coup but I'd sooner have one then have these red idiots turn this country into Thaksin's little kingdom. Stay the F out.

And how do you propose the PTP " replace them with their own people" ? If you are not aware on how the CC Judges are determined read this

The highest court of Thailand is the Constitutional Court. This nine judge panel is selected in various ways. Three members are elected by the Supreme Court of Justice from among its ranks. Two are similarly elected from the Supreme Administrative Court. The final four are not judges prior to obtaining this post. The Constitution mandates that two of these members must be legal professionals, while the other two members must be in the fields of political science, public administration, or social sciences with a background in public affairs. These four judges are selected by the Selective Committee comprised of the other judges of the Constitutional Court, the Presidents of the House majority and minority, and the President of the Constitutional independent organizations. The Senate then approves the nomination, and the King officially appoints them to the Court

http://www.constitutionnet.org/country/constitutional-history-thailand

Doesn't leave much room for nepotistic nominations does it ? - well, at least not from the PTP side, from the Senate/Judges side it's a different matter completely, which is why there is a call to shake things up from the government.

Are these the same judges that were caught red handed on video colluding with the Democrats?

No. If you read up on it, you will find that they weren't "colluding with the Democrats". The assistant that took the videos is the one that organised the meetings, then he did a runner, and then he joined the PTP.

Well that's one way of looking at it. Have you heard the phrases, often used on here, "There's no smoke without fire", "If it looks like a duck etc".

It does show that while PT and the red mobs do things by threats and intimidation.

Those who oppose them try to do things by legal means.

A big difference, one side respects the rule of law the other does not.

Unfortunately the side that has no respect for the law is the one who is supposed to be governing the country.

Unfortunately the side that supposedly "respects" the law ( a democrat party euphemism for misusing) has a disproportionate reliance on judges interpretation of the "law" to make up for their unelectability. They have previous.

Not sure how Court can give any orders to individual out of its jurisdiction

Perhaps court should issue order for Government MP's to stop talking with wanted fugitive

So you're all in favour of censorship then?

So your in favour of a convicted criminal running the country then?

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

See my post above.

Not sure how Court can give any orders to individual out of its jurisdiction

Perhaps court should issue order for Government MP's to stop talking with wanted fugitive

So you're all in favour of censorship then?

censorship of what? convicted fugitive on the run conversations with MP's?

First off he's hardly on the run if everybody knows where he is - it was the same during the democrat year/s. Secondly, lets agree to disagree on the "value" of the conviction. To the meat of your "argument".

You think it's perfectly acceptable to ask the Constitution Court to stop the MPs from talking with a Thai Citizen on Skype.

Have a think about that statement.

Not sure how Court can give any orders to individual out of its jurisdiction

Perhaps court should issue order for Government MP's to stop talking with wanted fugitive

So you're all in favour of censorship then?

It was a bold and forthright speech, if perhaps a bit too personal ("my family has suffered..." c'mon), and a brilliant strategy. She pointed out to an international audience that her young government is in constant danger of being taken down by another coup d' etat. If it happens, that speech will be seen as prophetic.

As for having to appear before a bunch of stacked 'committees' to explain herself, she should flip them all off with two big middle fingers. The speech stands on its own, and she doesn't need to apologize to anybody.

As for the lady being an 'airhead' (you haters, intellectuals all, no doubt, are wearing that one out, it's tired), she's running a country, doing a decent job, while you all have nothing better to do than trash talk day and night. Shame on you.

I'm glad that someone on here can see what the speech was about.

Whatever the "reasons" perceived by the military for a coup, whether or not it is a "bloodless" coup, there is no escaping the fact that coups are illegal (unless you rewrite the constitution of course) and about as undemocratic action as you can get on the democracy front.

If you look at it with an unjaundiced eye, as would the various countries around the world that jealously guard their democracies, they see a coup overthrowing an elected government.

There is no argument that there was no government in place at the time. The PM, contrary to opinion on here, had not resigned, there was a caretaker government in place, with political parties campaigning for the next royally endorsed election which was just weeks away, when the coup took place.

Another coup is the last thing this country needs and I cannot believe that posters on here call for one.

Well, in pure economic terms of GDP growth, one would have to ask on which issue you are asking?

I agree that the flood stuff is going to turn into a corrupt mess, and the rice issue has turned to crap. But in all reality, with the world in a heap of c**p, how is the country not doing particularly badly. Yes exporters are going to struggle, and if 300 baht a day was enough to make the creak like they claim, then what type of companies were they?

Inflation is ok, GDP is ok, Debt to GDP is under 50% so far. GDP growth is expected to be 5.31% according to the google search I just made. Do you know how many countries in the world would bite off their left arm for a number like that? I have to play devils advocate about people making simple answers to complex issues, and yes, PTP is as corrupt as hell, but are the other bunch any better?

The rest of the world really doesn't want to have to deal with an army government, so better hope that the Dems do better at the ballot box.

I must say that I'm not too hot up on official GDP growth figures and inflation rates. But I do notice that the price of a bowl of noodle soup or a khao pad or whatever has gone up very heavily. Petrol... much more expensive since PTP took office. Cigarettes - again. These are the main things on which I spend my money.

I did study a bit of economics and I'm not convinced that GDP is a good way of measuring quality of life. Most economists aren't - it is a standard A-level economics question as to why (in the UK anyway). GDP = Consumer expenditure + Investment + Government expenditure. That means you can increase the national income by, say, having the government pay over-the-odds for rice or by investing a load of money into high-speed train infrastructure (which may or may not be necessary). The next stage of national income is GNP, which includes the balance of payments (exports - imports), and as you correctly mention this has taken a big hit because of the rice pledging scheme. Anyway, I digress - I'm not so sure the quality of life has risen under PTP. It hasn't for most people I know, but then I do live in Suratthani province and Surat people are (sometimes unfairly) biased against anything non-Democrat.

I think the minimum wage is a lot more damaging than I think you give it credit for. I agree a minimum wage was needed, but 300 Baht a day was extreme - not really the amount, but the increment. A lot of companies are laying people off. And if you increase the base-level 6,000 Baht salaries to 9,000 Baht, you have to increase the 12,000 Baht staff to 16,000 Baht (18,000 Baht if it was all relative).

Socially - no, sorry, absolutely not. Not from what I've seen. But again, I rarely travel north of Chumphon.

Please don't start me on corruption within the Democrats - I have personally given Suthep Thaugsuban's son Tan a roasting on it, he wasn't impressed.

Your last sentence - spot on.

By the way, kudos for presenting your arguments in such a reasonable fashion - a rare commodity these days.

I am really awaiting to see the true effects of the minimum wage, because, whatever comes out of the government is slanted and what is reported from the other side claims catastrophe. I filled up my car today, and the prices are steady, that is the benefit of a strong baht. But, when people come in here and claim the world is falling economically on Thailand, with a debt to GDP ration under 50% (currently I admit) maybe 4 to 6% GDP growth and a (stupidly) reported unemployment rate of under 1%, it isn't as though Thailand is going to become Cyprus tomorrow.

The minimum wage and unemployment is a jokey measurement in Thailand because every company worth it's salt can undercut any minimum wage workforce very simply by importing foreign labour, which is economically ludicrous, and simply hurts Thai workers. That said, the increases since 1997 have been utterly pitiful, and I myself wouldn't have done the increase in one fell swoop, but no company is ever going to say they like an increase.

I studied my fair share of economics, and realise that Thailand's is at a vey large cross-roads today, but they have a well made plans to develop the eastern seaboard, but have to balance what this creates socially, plus, it has emptied the country side, so CP must be fed, and I don't underestimate how cynical that company is to plan to force people back to the fields. it has become time to develop the rest of the country for economic and social reasons, and to that logic I absolutely agree. Everything have been too Bangkok/Eastern Seaboard centric for too long. Time to spread the wealth out, not just for economic reasons, but it can't be a continual plan to drag 100s of thousands of people to the factories. They must come to the people.

If I may interrupt this praise Thaksin admiration club meeting I did ask a question and would appreciate an answer to it.

Care to explain how she is doing a better job than her immediate

predecessors and bear in mind her party does not need any other parties

approval unlike Abhist who had to appease other parties she does not she has enough seats to do the job how ever she wants she does not have to appease other parties.

Being honest upright citizens that you are you will of course bear that in mind.

They also do not have to fight off

terrorists who invade hospitals and advocate burning Bangkok down and

then proceed to attempt to burn it down.

Why is she standing in front of the whole world defending her brother?

Is that what the conference was about?

Why is she standing in front of the whole world defending her brother?

Is that what the conference was about?

Well, Dolly, she was at the Ministerial Conference of the Community of Democracies, so it seems to me, a reasonable place to talk about Thailands fairly recent experience with a military coup which is as totally un-democratic an action you can get. She also explained the follow on problems as a result of that coup. A perfect forum for that kind of discussion.

The Pheu Thai MPs who ignore summons seem to forget that with parliament in recess they are no longer safe under "parliamentary immunity". If police could be found brave enough to enforce summons the MPs couldn't just say they are "politically victimized" as their ignoring a court summons because of a ploy by a criminal fugitive seems somewhat politically victimising a court already.

BTW we moved from Pheu Thai MPs to Government MPs and Senators it seems. That's indeed a bold move which directly challenges the checks and balances which the government thinker never really liked anyway.

What summons are you on about?

Bout time the heat came down on him NO EXCUSE for the number of civilians killed and he was the one in charge, time to pay the piper AV

And who was in charge of the Red shirts in 2010 that killed 20 or so officials and terrorized Bangkok for months? Millions of people lived in fear. Who was in charge of instigating the Red mob?

It's 12 officials (see the other thread) and it's not been proved that the red shirts were responsible for any of those deaths, so you're being a bit presumptive.

This is revenge, coupled to a full court press power play of pressure.

Pure and simple, nothing more to it.

But it portends the type of Dictatorship that will happen should Thaksin gain full control.

At some point his constant over-reaching will trigger another coup, but this one likely

more violent towards Thaksin and his power structure to remove it from the game.

Sad to say and unwanted, but not unlikely if this continues as it is.

Well actually it's just logic. As the original charge against them arose from the first inquest that pointed out that the military were responsible for the deaths of civilians ( and by definition of the ROE, the responsibility is passed to Abhisit and Suthep as PM and head of CRES respectively) each and every other inquest that determines the responsibility for civilian deaths was by the military will be added to the original charge.

So don't peak too soon on the emotional front, there's more where that come from.