
jayboy
-
Posts
9,396 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by jayboy
-
-
- Popular Post
"Neutrality in this instance is a non-existent opportunistic chimera created purely to divert a proper analysis of the real conditions within which the Thai Army operate.”
Well Mr Robert Amsterdam.
You should do a little research on your client (Mr Shinawatra). and you will find he has committed some rather appalling atrocities against his own people, as well as buying votes in order to seize power.
As for an "opportunistic chimera".... You are surely one yourself if ever there was one.... You just like the money and the high profile client.... You are a lawyer and would probably work with the Devil himself if the money was there..... Admit it to yourself and shut TFU.
This is typical of the response to Robert Amsterdam's comments on the Thai army, though probably this one is less literate and more crass than most.The approach is to pile on the personal abuse, attempt to change the subject but above all not to respond to the points made.
The reason of course is that Amsterdam's comments are spot on and undeniable.
-
4
-
Since when was it amsterdams place to blast the Thai army.
Oh yes, he is Thaksins mouthpiece so he is talking for the convicted crim.
How dare the army attempt to prevent the chosen one from returning to claim his rightful place as the dictator.
Please highlight what part of Amsterdams article was factually incorrect so we can all discuss
difficult, just like highlighting what is factual correct. Clever lawyers are like that. Some can even make you wonder whether you really saw what you saw.
In other words you cannot identify any inaccuracies in Amsterdam's remarks on the Thai army.
Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand
-
Since when was it amsterdams place to blast the Thai army.
Oh yes, he is Thaksins mouthpiece so he is talking for the convicted crim.
How dare the army attempt to prevent the chosen one from returning to claim his rightful place as the dictator.
The problem with that is that you would only permit information/news/argument supporting YOUR perspective to be available. It's healthy to be able to hear all sides....even that which might be considered by some to be extreme
And the problem with your argument is that Amsterday is the paid mouthpiece of a convicted fugitive from justice and therefor anything but unbiased.
Forget Amsterdam's personal circumstances for a moment.Can you or indeed anybody demonstrate that his comments on the Thai army are other than accurate? Thought not.
Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
Since when was it amsterdams place to blast the Thai army.
Oh yes, he is Thaksins mouthpiece so he is talking for the convicted crim.
How dare the army attempt to prevent the chosen one from returning to claim his rightful place as the dictator.
Please highlight what part of Amsterdams article was factually incorrect so we can all discuss
He can't because every point raised by Robert Amsterdam is true.It doesn't matter whether he is "on the payroll" or not.
It's presumably too difficult for some people to debate rationally given their comments do not suggest much intelligence or knowledge (though to be fair it's not really intellectually possible to defend the lies, brutality, corruption and political meddling of the Thai army)
But the reality is that Robert Amsterdam is absolutely correct and the army's response is mere bombast.
-
3
-
"I have no knowledge of any previous such cases but on the evidence I have seen the circumstances are very indicative of the absurd entitlement Indian middle class expect.By this I mean it is beyond imagination that a similar lower level diplomat from say Japan,France,Russia,China, the UK or Canada would feel the neeed (or be able to afford) taking a personal servant on an international posting.My reaction is why doesn't this woman do her own cleaning, ironing, cooking like everybody else?"
Do you have any knowledge of India?
Domestic service is a massive source of employment there. Live in or visiting maids, housekeepers, cooks, gardeners, drivers etc. It's like Europe was 100 years ago,
Working, professional educated classes - from lower middle upwards, expect servants. One has to demonstrate one's position in a society that is still heavily caste and class based. Any lady like this would expect to not have to do household chores. Not just India - look throughout the Middle East and South East Asia and the use of maids and servants is very high. And in lots of cases, they don't get paid very much and not always treated very well.
I have long experience of India, and your remarks (all agreed) simply confirm my earlier comments. Whatever she was used to in India is however beside the point since she was working in New York.There is no reason why she should not have adapted to the norm there, as have millions of Americans with Indian heritage. There is nothing specifically cultural which requires someone else to do one's household chores. The class and caste system of India is in no way admirable.
-
1
-
-
Yeah, that's an important detail.I don't know all the details of this case
She wasn't a diplomat at the time of arrest, she was a consulate employee. Therefore no diplomatic immunity at the time of arrest.
India gave her diplomatic status after the arrest hoping to retroactively shield her from prosecution.
Doesn't change my opinion that this wasn't worth it.
Prosecutors aren't legally obligated to pursue convictions on all cases, you know?
Probably didn't predict the blowback on this. Maybe they SHOULD have?
Well, employing people like this is illegal and is one step away from people trafficking. Why it only caught the Indians so far I don't know. Maybe she was the biggest offender.
I have no knowledge of any previous such cases but on the evidence I have seen the circumstances are very indicative of the absurd entitlement Indian middle class expect.By this I mean it is beyond imagination that a similar lower level diplomat from say Japan,France,Russia,China, the UK or Canada would feel the neeed (or be able to afford) taking a personal servant on an international posting.My reaction is why doesn't this woman do her own cleaning, ironing, cooking like everybody else?
-
1
-
-
Nice pic above of YL.....
But.....Suthep has offered her an Olive branch many times.....all she has to do is resign...along with the rest in the Shinawatra clan in politics.....it's not hard....
Yes indeed.For some reason she persists in thinking that the confidence of the Thai people as expressed in the last election gives her some kind of mandate.
Still there is some evidence the strain is also getting to Suthep.
"The confidence of the Thai people" ?
come on, jayboy, you can do better than this
I'm not straining for rhetorical heights here nor looking to score debating points,simply stating a fact.As potential Prime Minister her party won an easy victory at the last general election.The old guard, Abhisit, Suthep etc know that the Thai people would still show enough confidence in her to give her another election victory should a contest be held now.That is why they are resorting to their current tactics, hoping (Plan A) to provoke violence thus enabing a military intervention or - more likely - (Plan
judicial intervention in a drawn out slow motion death by a thousand cuts.The joke is that even if their plans result in this government falling, they still will not be able to squeeze the toothpaste back in the tube.
When I speak of the THai people I do of course mean all the THai people not just the "good very educate" people.Perhaps that distinction is what confused you.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Nice pic above of YL.....
But.....Suthep has offered her an Olive branch many times.....all she has to do is resign...along with the rest in the Shinawatra clan in politics.....it's not hard....
Yes indeed.For some reason she persists in thinking that the confidence of the Thai people as expressed in the last election gives her some kind of mandate.
Still there is some evidence the strain is also getting to Suthep.
-
6
-
Articles like this show how incompetent, sided and poor is Thai journalism.
If I was the author of this article and had faced US prosecutors in respect a grimy record in paying for political favours, I might hesitate before accusing other people.
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/192/1037/594125/
-
2
-
-
*Deleted posts edited out*
I see that on twitter Korn has expressed extreme frustration that the court has strayed into commenting on matters which are of no concern to it, effectively accepting this a a kangaroo politicised court.Korn is in favour of the proposal but disagrees with the financing method.
-
1
-
-
It would have been tough to pin anything on her on this one, as PT carefully kept her out of Parliament to allow her to claim she had no clue about any legislation pushed by her government.
The Rice Pledging scheme is another matter because she was chairman of the committee. The NACC seems to have been dragging its heels in investigating this.
This is unbelievable bizarro world stuff.No doubt it makes sense to Arkady and other extremists but in the rational world at large (and for that matter for most Thais) the NACC decision is seen as absurd and irrelevant.
As the New York Times points out, the parliamentarians are being punished for doing their jobs.Why on earth cannot the the junta imposed constitition not be amended? Why should not a more democratic Senate be contemplated? Plenty to argue about but corruption on the part of those who voted for democracy? Madness.
Macbeth's witches had it right
"Fair is foul and foul is fair"
-
1
-
-
More evidence of the steady overhaul of the Democrat Party under Abhisit.
Too bad that Thaksin has never had the same good intentions.
Possibly he wasn't under quite the same pressure as Abhisit since despite military coups, directed judicial intervention and a military rigged constitution, the Thai people continued to have faith in parties very closely associated with Thaksin.Successive general elections speak for themselves.
-
2
-
-
Why stop with Yingluk there are plenty of wealthy people in Thailand and you can take their assets also to fill your vault. It is becoming very clear what your real aim is. Lets not forget your dislike for farangs also, you can take their assets also, condos bank accounts etc.
The aim is to get rid of the Shin Regime of which she is a part. STOP TRYING TO MAKE THIS INTO SOMETHING IT IS NOT. Your constant hyperbole is extremely annoying and misleading. FACTS please.
It is in fact annoying and misleading hyperbole to refer to the "Shin Regime".It is not a regime.It is the democratically elected government of Thailand.
Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
Naive. Hmmm. Do you think the government is behaving like this because they deeply care for the safety and well being of the Thai people? That they really respect the right of protest, democracy and will listen to the people and implement reforms that will benefit the country as a whole?
Or might it just be the usual often confusing machinations associated with their manipulative grand strategist?
Trying to dress up the international approvals as support for PTP is wearing a bit thin now. Not one single government has come out and actually supported the Yingluck government or PTP.
Yes.Obviously the government has concern for the safety and well being of the Thai people.No government (of any political persuasion) wants to harm or damage its own people and only those with a a cartoon "Mr Evil" outlook would believe otherwise.But as the recent protests have shown the current government is much more responsible than its predecessor about public safety.
The current government obviously respects the right to demonstrate and in terms of respecting democracy generally is way in advance of the "Democrats" and Suthep.
In terms of the implementation of reforms you have veered off issue.What reforms are you referring to? Suthep's proposals are often vague and sometimes unacceptable.
As to foreign governments you evidently have some difficulty in grasping the point.None of them support one side or the other.However many have commented Thailand should respect democracy and follow the rule of law.And many have praised Khun Yingluck for her approach to civil disturbances in the current crisis.
My ass ! There are 3 reasons for the relative peacefulness :
1) The anti government protestors are mostly peaceful.
2) The army refused to act. PT begged and begged and they said no.
They know that they can't start killing people without very good reason. Despite the government's lies and trying every tactic they can to make for violent confrontations ( ie saying terrible things about the protestors over the loud speakers at government house in efforts to make them angry and violent ), they still haven't managed to create the excuse they need. No people burning tyres and buildings and shooting at people, for the most part. I still want proof the bullet in the policeman was from a protestor, prove it !
3) Yingluck doesn't want to be brought up on murder charges.
However it is too late for that.
Black shirts, 'third hand', lies.threats and intimidation. The violence in Ramkamhang was caused by the reds. Still no word who was shooting at the university from the tollway. Protest leaders homes attacked no doubt by reds. The country can never have peace till the red menace is removed...
Very sad indeed.
You are letting your prejudice overwhelm any critical faculties you might have (though frankly there is precious little evidence of the latter).
1.Yes I agree the anti government protests have been mostly peaceful.That is to the protestors credit.But there are unpleasant thuggish elements on that side and there have been incidents of violence including more than one murder.
2.The army has so far acted responsibly though one suspects its ultimate allegiance is to reactionary elements.Still lessons have been learnt from 2010.Your suggestion the government has begged them "to act" is a lie.
3.It is not the government looking for an excuse as all but apparently a few well understand.Suthep and the powers behind the need the army to intervene (and for that to happen there will need to be a major undisciplined and violent action from the government side).Suthep knows he has lost unless this happens.So your contention the government is looking for an excuse is not only nonsense but completely illogical.
4.Of course Yingluck does not want to be accused of murder.Whatever one's views it must be recognised she more plausibly than most on the other side dreads the thought of blood being spilt.Her government's tolerant attitude reflects this and explains why she has garnered so much international credit.
5.Your account of the Ramkhamhaeng violence is inaccurate.Do your research before making statements such as "violence was caused by the reds".
-
3
-
Agreed absurd... as is claiming that vote buying makes no difference.
Doesn't guarantee it but it does help. If it didn't, politicians wouldn't waste their money on it, would they.paying people doesn't guarantee they will vote for you. The dems paid my wife's family last time and they voted for Yingluk. Took the money and thought suckers.People will still vote for whoever they want
Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app
both sides do it and it's wrong and we all know that but the "they only win because of vote buying" is absurd
Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app
If you regard two of the foremost political analysts (and incidentally strong critics of Thaksin) as absurd, so be it.Intelligent analysis and cool appraisal of evidence is not for everyone.
There are many who share your your view - eg the silly Sino Thai grannies in my moobaan.They and their kind will never change.
-
Doesn't guarantee it but it does help. If it didn't, politicians wouldn't waste their money on it, would they.
paying people doesn't guarantee they will vote for you. The dems paid my wife's family last time and they voted for Yingluk. Took the money and thought suckers.Great idea because the Shin dynasty have more money than the opposition with which to buy votes. Without any reform, the election is simply a financial transaction as it is sold to the highest bidder. The number of posts I have seen banging on about a democratically elected government is heartbreaking. How is buying an election democratic?
People will still vote for whoever they want
Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app
You raise a fair point, ie if vote buying doesn't affect the results why do polticians do it? Chris Baker and Acharn Pasuk in their BP recent article on the "dangerous nonsense" about vote buying (google it for the usual reasons) said that some candidates at elections still do this for fear of being called small hearted or ungenerous.But it doesn't affect the results.
As I have pointed out elsewhere the suggestion that Thailand's elections are other than fair (ie not distorted by vote buying) isn't now a credible one.Of course it's part of the opposition mantra but you won't hear educated and serious politicians (like Korn or Abhisit) making that claim.
There are plenty o otherf valid reasons to criticise the "tyranny" of the electoral majority and lack of properly effective checks and balances.
-
I am not trying to wade into your disagreement with someone else, but, as you are probably aware, Transparency International bases it's Corruption Index on perceptions of people in international organizations outside of Thailand.
In addition, even if you wanted to argue that it is the best unbiased international view we have, you should know that even Transparency International views that corruption in Thailand is worse in 2013 compared to 2012.
Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand
Thanks for the background.You will appreciate however that I am not arguing about the level of corruption.Indeed my contention is that the current standoff is not really about corruption at all.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1) Everyone who lives in Thailand knows that the corruption is worse than ever before
2) It tackle the Shinawatra systeme, vote buying and corruption and want to bring MORE democracy and of course general elections in approx. 1 year.
3) Which unelected elites??? Bangkok middle class and Southern Rubber farmer are the unelected elites???
4) Popular or not is not important, he is a criminal on the run.....also Hitler was the most popular politician, still he wasn't good for the country.
5) They should stay for 1 year with the sole purpose to prepare elections.....not much harm they can do. Beside the undemocratic Surayud government was the least corrupt and one of the best one in the last 15 or so years.
Again more nonsense, though certainly quite widely shared.Dealing with your points in turn.
1) Corruption is and was a problem in Thailand.However by some criteria Transparency International (the leading authority on the matter) believes it is less prevalent now than hitherto.There is no evidence to suggest it is worse than before.
2) The protests may be against the "Shinawatra system", but that is just another way of saying the Democrats are unable to persuade enough Thais to vote for them.They would be better advised to improve their policies, dismiss its incompetent leadership and recruit more ordinary Thais as members.In that way they might be able to compete with the "Shinawatra system".It has already been explained to you that vote buying had nothing to do with the electoral performance of the Thaksin associated parties.If what you mean is that the protests are against populist policies (improving the lives of less privileged Thais), then be honest enough to say so.Anti populism in itself is not something to be ashamed of - the Tea Party in the US had much the same view about tax payers subsidising the less well off.However it is odd that the Democrats copied Thaksin's populist policies at the last election.
3) You fail to grasp the point.Of course the urban middle class and Southerners are not unelected elites: they are merely the useful idiots.The current battle is one conducted at a higher level.
4) I made no comment on the significance of Thaksin's great popularity, nor do I disagree that popularity in itself conveys no moral stature.I mentioned it only to demonstrate your claim there was unanimous disapproval of him was untrue.
5) You skip over the horrors of Suthep's proposed praesidium and the damage it would do.Frankly your crude melange of fantasy, lies, propaganda and stupidity was beginning to annoy me.However I then noticed your comment about the virtues of the Surayud government (the laziest, most incompetent and derided administration in half a century) so finally understood you were only having a laugh.Nice one.
-
4
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
This is a good article, that summarizes many salient points. Indeed, corrupt practices have become so endemic that it is not surprising that the very nature of democracy has been affected. Reform's sweeping objective is to truly tackle corruption. For those who very much want the status quo of corruption to remain in place, however, will use every tactic at their disposal to do so. One of those tactics has been to wrap the whole protest movement around Suthep. This is not about Suthep. It is about Thaksin. If you stop anyone on the street, they will all - unanimously identify Thaksin. He has become the symbol of all that is corrupt in this administration. Yet you take Thaksin away, and still many corrupt practices remain in place. When a platform for reform has finally been established, all parties - including Pheu Thai must be involved. The greatest mistake any reforms could make would be to exclude Pheu Thai. That would merely cement the conflict. Similarly, not only the Democratic party must not be excluded, but neither all parties and people from all walks of life. As the political conflict has been centered on two particular parties, neither should have majority sway in the new reform. A proposal brought forth recently by a group of business leaders - whereby Pheu Thai and the Democratic party would compose just one-third each of a coalition of reform partners, together with other non-partisan sectors of society - has the greater potential of uniting the country. So two things must be avoided. No one must be excluded from the process, yet no one party should exercise a monopoly. And that would inspire greater public confidence and trust in politics.
Wrong on so many grounds (though I agree Suthep is not the central issue) though no doubt meant sincerely.
1.No evidence that corruption is worse now than at any time in the last 20 years.Suthep himself however is a notoriously venal and corrupt figure.
2.Reform's primary idea is not to tackle corruption but to ensure Thai people cannot choose leaders at a general election.
3.The protest is not "about Thaksin" though he is the symbol of what the unelected elites, Suthep's Southerners and urban Sino Thai middle class hate.The real reasons are more complex.
4.Since Thaksin is still the most popular Thai politician I doubt whether the unanimous disapproval you suggest of the man on the street is true.
5.You are hopelessly incorrect to think an undemocratic praesidium of approved political hacks and non elected "good people" would improve the position.It would have the opposite effect.
-
4
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
A nation does not make a better democracy by abandoning democracy.
Some tell that idiot Suthep this. But of course you know he would not understand it because he is an X democrat.
Someone did obviously as Suthep never wanted to abandoning democracy. Actually he want to end vote buying.
No you are completely wrong. In fact Suthep does not say very much about vote buying - and the well educated Democrats (Abhisit,Korn etc) scarcely refer to it at all. The reason for this is that the overwhelming evidence is that recent elections in Thailand have been fair and reasonably well conducted. More specifically it has been demonstrated while vote buying does exist, it has not had an impact on the election outcome. Very recently Chis Baker and Acharn Pasuk wrote an article demolishing the vote buying myths propagated by many.
The argument that Suthep does put forward is a different concept of vote buying, namely populism. By this he and his followers mean persuading uneducated and uninformed people to vote for politicians who promise education, health care, cheap credit etc.This has the merit of some logic as opposed the nonsense you spout out. But it too is wrong because it overlooks the reality that in all democracies people vote for policies which they think will improve their lives. If the Democrats and Suthep concentrated on abuses of populism (such as the rice support scheme) they would have much more credibility.
-
9
-
Bad news for Suthep if the reds actually do that and avoid confrontation he won't have the violence he needs.
You've posted a lot of dumbass stuff but I think this counts as one of the dumbest. No one wants any violence and everyone on both sides of this conflict is breathing a sigh of relief that there probably won't be a confrontation.
You are seriously naive if you believe Suthep (and equally importantly his backers) would not like to see the government/security forces crack down violently, not least because it would allow the army/directed judges to step in and remove the Yingluck government.Unfortunately for them the government has been very patient and has won international approval for its approach.
Naive. Hmmm. Do you think the government is behaving like this because they deeply care for the safety and well being of the Thai people? That they really respect the right of protest, democracy and will listen to the people and implement reforms that will benefit the country as a whole?
Or might it just be the usual often confusing machinations associated with their manipulative grand strategist?
Trying to dress up the international approvals as support for PTP is wearing a bit thin now. Not one single government has come out and actually supported the Yingluck government or PTP.
Yes.Obviously the government has concern for the safety and well being of the Thai people.No government (of any political persuasion) wants to harm or damage its own people and only those with a a cartoon "Mr Evil" outlook would believe otherwise.But as the recent protests have shown the current government is much more responsible than its predecessor about public safety.
The current government obviously respects the right to demonstrate and in terms of respecting democracy generally is way in advance of the "Democrats" and Suthep.
In terms of the implementation of reforms you have veered off issue.What reforms are you referring to? Suthep's proposals are often vague and sometimes unacceptable.
As to foreign governments you evidently have some difficulty in grasping the point.None of them support one side or the other.However many have commented Thailand should respect democracy and follow the rule of law.And many have praised Khun Yingluck for her approach to civil disturbances in the current crisis.
-
The real story
A propaganda piece which fails at the first hurdle by repeating lies about the numbers involved in the protests "maybe the biggest in the modern world" - 6 million on December 22 apparently.The reality is the numbers never exceeded 200,000.It gets worse with the usual mantra of uneducated rural people perverting the democratic process.I get the same message from the nice but silly old Chinese Thai grannies who are my neighbours.The underlying reasons for the current hysteria are never mentioned.
Any intelligent person would simply shrug at this nonsense.So the question remains.What exactly is the intended audience or is it just preaching to the converted?
-
1
-
-
As an aside, I consider the OP "news" cutting to be somewhat politically biased.
Is there such a thing as a politically independent English language national newspaper or news service in Thailand that anyone can point me to, please?
Thanks in advance.
No there is not.In the English language press there is a clear editorial tendency to extreme reaction and the old order and against the government though to be fair there are occasional guest contributions which provide an alternative viewpoint.Some of the Nation key staff contributors (Thanong,Kavi etc) seem blind to reality.
There is for little or no coverage of developments which don't fit in with the Suthep narrative, eg the latest New York Times report
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/04/world/asia/thailand.html?_r=1&
-
1
-
-
Bad news for Suthep if the reds actually do that and avoid confrontation he won't have the violence he needs.
You've posted a lot of dumbass stuff but I think this counts as one of the dumbest. No one wants any violence and everyone on both sides of this conflict is breathing a sigh of relief that there probably won't be a confrontation.
You are seriously naive if you believe Suthep (and equally importantly his backers) would not like to see the government/security forces crack down violently, not least because it would allow the army/directed judges to step in and remove the Yingluck government.Unfortunately for them the government has been very patient and has won international approval for its approach.
The government is being 'patient' because they have no choice, the army won't back them. They have already said they 'would stand on the side of the people' if the police cracked down on the protestors.
I don't think the army chiefs have quite said that though I agree their sympathies are with the protests.But even accepting your hypothesis that the government has no choice but to be conciliatory, that surely represents progress of sorts in the way political disputes are handled in Thailand.Equally I'm not sure the army has much choice but to be restrained given the disastrous experience during the last major Bangkok political protest under Abhisit.This is far from being a criticism of the army or the current government; they may have little choice but they are also (so far) being smart.
Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app
Thai Army strongly slams Thaksin’s lawyer, Robert Amsterdam
in Thailand News
Posted
How difficult is it to grasp a simple point? I don't see anyone engaged in defending Amsterdam:I certainly have no interest in doing so.
The thread subject matter deals only with his comments on the Thai army and to date these have not been refuted.
Since the observations are undeniably true, the only alternative is to spew random abuse.But I am afraid you and others of your persuasion have lost the argument.