Yingluck sentenced to five years in jail

[SheungWan]

6 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Not the answer I am looking for. Try again. 

The only answer some people are looking for ultimately is giving Thaksin a free pass. Its all about Thaksin.

Edited September 29, 2017 by SheungWan

[SheungWan]

53 minutes ago, Becker said:

Point - what point? We all know by now that you don't really care who's in power as long as it's not a Shin so do you honestly believe you should be taken seriously?

A very reasonable and very serious position.

Edited September 29, 2017 by SheungWan

[Dumbastheycome]

A  Government  which  by  virtue  of  electoral   manipulation   and  law  enacted   while in  power  to   ensure its  longevity  and  control  is  not a   valid  legal  Government  .

The Junta    makes  no  claim  to  be  an  elected   government but  an interim   agent  to  bring  about an electoral  situation  which  it  hopes  will  provide  a more   balanced  democratic  objective.

And  as  and  for as  long  as  resistance is given  to that objective  the  longer  it will  take.

If  it were only a  matter  of  establishing  an alternate  power   monger  base then  people should   reject all of  the infrastructural  improvements, the  reduction  of  corruption or  at  least the  transparent  attempts..etc.

The  attempt  to  bring Thailand  into  line  with  the  accepted  global   situation is  not a  task that  can happen in a  short  period  of  time.

The   Yingluck  controversy   is  an ongoing  challenge  to  the attempt  to achieve some   social/  cultural   equity.

It  is  significant  that  she  lied  to  her  deluded  supporters. Most  likely  in  recognition  of the  fact  that  the expected verdict  eventually  issued   was  not a  product  of    anything  other  than that  under  long existing  Thai   Law. 

I  would  applaud the  fall of  the  same  judicial  hammer   falling  on  all and   any  who  have  ransomed the  deliberately  contrived   ignorance   of   many   people  Thai !

Interestingly  to  me  is  to  observe  the   blatant   failings  of  the  democratic  system   on a  global  scene.

As  do  people  in a  daily   manner  we  move   one  way  or  another without  knowing  for  a  fact  if the  move  was the  best.

But  in  terms  of   human  justice  which  is  that which  I  would  think  is  the  expectation  of   the  democratic  ideal that there   be  total  honesty  in  the   presentation   of  choices  to decide  on.

A  ridiculous  ideal  

We  are generally   still  greedy  stupid   apes  in  truth !

That  we  live  in  symmetrically  contrived   caves, often  vertical to an extreme,  does  not  change  that.

.

 

 

[SheungWan]

7 hours ago, halloween said:

Some of us it was to stop criminals pillaging the country, borrowing so there would be more to steal, suborning the police, reducing funding for independent agencies, ignoring parliamentary procedure, and trying to write amnesty for their criminal behaviour.

Right on the money.

[tomta]

54 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

The Junta    makes  no  claim  to  be  an  elected   government but  an interim   agent  to  bring  about an electoral  situation  which  it  hopes  will  provide  a more   balanced  democratic  objective.

Interim? The claim is falsified by the fact that they said that they said they were a stopgap, a safety valve, and would hold elections in 2015, then 2016, 2017, now late 2018. As well as providing 20 year plans and all manner of "reform". By the end of his time, Prayuth will be one of the longest serving Thai PMs 

[scorecard]

9 minutes ago, tomta said:

Interim? The claim is falsified by the fact that they said that they said they were a stopgap, a safety valve, and would hold elections in 2015, then 2016, 2017, now late 2018. As well as providing 20 year plans and all manner of "reform". By the end of his time, Prayuth will be one of the longest serving Thai PMs 

 

Good news!!!

[Artisi]

11 minutes ago, tomta said:

Interim? The claim is falsified by the fact that they said that they said they were a stopgap, a safety valve, and would hold elections in 2015, then 2016, 2017, now late 2018. As well as providing 20 year plans and all manner of "reform". By the end of his time, Prayuth will be one of the longest serving Thai PMs 

Being longest served wouldn't be too difficult in Thailand ?

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, SheungWan said:

The only answer some people are looking for ultimately is giving Thaksin a free pass. Its all about Thaksin.

Not at all. I am saying why some get free passes by virtue of their position and allegiance while some don't. Junta supporters like you seem to have apathy for junta and their allies corruption. Really you in no position to judge others.

[SheungWan]

8 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Not at all. I am saying why some get free passes by virtue of their position and allegiance while some don't. Junta supporters like you seem to have apathy for junta and their allies corruption. Really you in no position to judge others.

If I was a Thai judge I could look forward to Thaksin offering me a lunchbox stuffed with cash.

[scorecard]

9 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Not at all. I am saying why some get free passes by virtue of their position and allegiance while some don't. Junta supporters like you seem to have apathy for junta and their allies corruption. Really you in no position to judge others.

 

The irony in your last line el, what a laugh.

[Becker]

15 hours ago, SheungWan said:

A very reasonable and very serious position.

5555! Thanks, I love a good cup of irony in the morning.

[steven100]

Like brother like sister .....

seems the apple doesn't fall far from the tree ..... 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, steven100 said:

Like brother like sister .....

seems the apple doesn't fall far from the tree ..... 

I wonder why he didn't just give himself a blanket pardon?  Oh yeah, only the military can do that.

[LannaGuy]

1 hour ago, steven100 said:

Like brother like sister .....

seems the apple doesn't fall far from the tree ..... 

I guess your Dad was not too smart then

[heybruce]

On 9/29/2017 at 10:02 AM, Dumbastheycome said:

A  Government  which  by  virtue  of  electoral   manipulation   and  law  enacted   while in  power  to   ensure its  longevity  and  control  is  not a   valid  legal  Government  .

The Junta    makes  no  claim  to  be  an  elected   government but  an interim   agent  to  bring  about an electoral  situation  which  it  hopes  will  provide  a more   balanced  democratic  objective.

And  as  and  for as  long  as  resistance is given  to that objective  the  longer  it will  take.

If  it were only a  matter  of  establishing  an alternate  power   monger  base then  people should   reject all of  the infrastructural  improvements, the  reduction  of  corruption or  at  least the  transparent  attempts..etc.

The  attempt  to  bring Thailand  into  line  with  the  accepted  global   situation is  not a  task that  can happen in a  short  period  of  time.

The   Yingluck  controversy   is  an ongoing  challenge  to  the attempt  to achieve some   social/  cultural   equity.

It  is  significant  that  she  lied  to  her  deluded  supporters. Most  likely  in  recognition  of the  fact  that  the expected verdict  eventually  issued   was  not a  product  of    anything  other  than that  under  long existing  Thai   Law. 

I  would  applaud the  fall of  the  same  judicial  hammer   falling  on  all and   any  who  have  ransomed the  deliberately  contrived   ignorance   of   many   people  Thai !

Interestingly  to  me  is  to  observe  the   blatant   failings  of  the  democratic  system   on a  global  scene.

As  do  people  in a  daily   manner  we  move   one  way  or  another without  knowing  for  a  fact  if the  move  was the  best.

But  in  terms  of   human  justice  which  is  that which  I  would  think  is  the  expectation  of   the  democratic  ideal that there   be  total  honesty  in  the   presentation   of  choices  to decide  on.

A  ridiculous  ideal  

We  are generally   still  greedy  stupid   apes  in  truth !

That  we  live  in  symmetrically  contrived   caves, often  vertical to an extreme,  does  not  change  that.

.

Of course the 2011 election was independently monitored and declared legitimate (unlike the sham referendum on the sham constitution), and the elected government was attempting to hold a new election when the coup was staged to prevent it, but why let facts interfere with your rant on how bad democracy is.

 

"The Junta    makes  no  claim  to  be  an  elected   government but  an interim   agent  to  bring  about an electoral  situation  which  it  hopes  will  provide  a more   balanced  democratic  objective."

 

Are you really that easily duped, that ignorant about Thailand's history of military governments, and that clueless about how this sham constitution will enshrine military power?

[Dumbastheycome]

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

Of course the 2011 election was independently monitored and declared legitimate (unlike the sham referendum on the sham constitution), and the elected government was attempting to hold a new election when the coup was staged to prevent it, but why let facts interfere with your rant on how bad democracy is. 

 

"The Junta    makes  no  claim  to  be  an  elected   government but  an interim   agent  to  bring  about an electoral  situation  which  it  hopes  will  provide  a more   balanced  democratic  objective."

 

Are you really that easily duped, that ignorant about Thailand's history of military governments, and that clueless about how this sham constitution will enshrine military power?

I  make  no  reference  to  other  than  the  current  regime. And  in  doing  so  also  refer  to  the  statements  of  Prayut as  to  his  definition  of  the  aspirations  his  junta  desire as  an outcome.

I  am  not   either  duped or  ignorant  as  to  the  number of  historical  military  interventions.

Those  historical  events  are   totally  superceded   by the  current situation.

If  you  were   to  compare   apple against  apple  from   seasons   well  apart you  would  likely  find  the  only  common factor was  apples. Even  assuming if the  variety  of  apple being  compared is  the  same could  you  guarantee the  flavour  was  identical?

Sham  constitution? More  or  less  so  than   any  other? At  least  this  one  is  being presented,  debated,  edited at  open invitation ! No  mandatory infliction other  than that if   the eventual objectives of  concensus   are  abrogated then   intervention  will  be applied. 

The   sobbing  of those that  have enjoyed  the  historical situation is  a passing of  wind !

As  for  military  power?   What  country  that  has  a regular  Army  does  not  rely  on it  for  the protection  of  its  people  from  outside or  inside ? 

And  in Thailand  as  of  now can  you  in veracity  state that the  majority  have  objection to the  current situation or  their  expectations of the  future??

 

 

 

 

 

[heybruce]

7 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

I  make  no  reference  to  other  than  the  current  regime. And  in  doing  so  also  refer  to  the  statements  of  Prayut as  to  his  definition  of  the  aspirations  his  junta  desire as  an outcome.

I  am  not   either  duped or  ignorant  as  to  the  number of  historical  military  interventions.

Those  historical  events  are   totally  superceded   by the  current situation.

If  you  were   to  compare   apple against  apple  from   seasons   well  apart you  would  likely  find  the  only  common factor was  apples. Even  assuming if the  variety  of  apple being  compared is  the  same could  you  guarantee the  flavour  was  identical?

Sham  constitution? More  or  less  so  than   any  other? At  least  this  one  is  being presented,  debated,  edited at  open invitation ! No  mandatory infliction other  than that if   the eventual objectives of  concensus   are  abrogated then   intervention  will  be applied. 

The   sobbing  of those that  have enjoyed  the  historical situation is  a passing of  wind !

As  for  military  power?   What  country  that  has  a regular  Army  does  not  rely  on it  for  the protection  of  its  people  from  outside or  inside ? 

And  in Thailand  as  of  now can  you  in veracity  state that the  majority  have  objection to the  current situation or  their  expectations of the  future??

 

So much BS.  Let's see how much I can cover.

 

"I  make  no  reference  to  other  than  the  current  regime."

 

In other words, you refuse to learn from the past.

 

"And  in  doing  so  also  refer  to  the  statements  of  Prayut as  to  his  definition  of  the  aspirations  his  junta  desire as  an outcome."

 

You trust a general who stages an unnecessary coup, grants himself amnesty for this, rules with unchecked power using Article 44, and promised  elections in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018....

 

"I  am  not   either  duped or  ignorant  as  to  the  number of  historical  military  interventions.

Those  historical  events  are   totally  superceded   by the  current situation."

 

How so?  Are you referring to the fact that the protests were on the verge of collapsing and there was the real possibility of an elected government being allowed to hold an election and being replaced by another elected government?  I don't know if "superceded" would be the correct description, I think unprecedented is the correct adjective.

 

"Sham  constitution? More  or  less  so  than   any  other? At  least  this  one  is  being presented,  debated,  edited at  open invitation ! "

 

As sham as the last military constitution imposed on the country in sham referendum and then treated as so much toilet paper when it no longer suited the military.  Need I remind you that shortly after this constitution was "approved" in a referendum in which "impolite" criticism could result in prison, the "approved" constitution was rewritten immediately after approval to accommodate a party that can not be mentioned here.

 

Regarding your claims of debate, you are blind, or more likely willfully ignorant, about the effects of censorship?

 

"As  for  military  power?   What  country  that  has  a regular  Army  does  not  rely  on it  for  the protection  of  its  people  from  outside or  inside ? "

 

In my country the military largely focuses on external threats and stays out of politics.  The exact opposite of Thailand, or should I say the Bangkok Empire.  Here in Thailand the oversized military doesn't defend the borders (though it does manage and profit from illegal smuggling across the borders).  The Thai military exists largely to protect the privileged minority from the Thai people.

 

"And  in Thailand  as  of  now can  you  in veracity  state that the  majority  have  objection to the  current situation or  their  expectations of the  future??"

 

I can state that there were protest that were quickly suppressed after the coup, even though these protests were not covered in the censored press.  I can state that there were curfews, roadblocks, and soldiers in the streets outside of Bangkok long after the coup, also not mentioned in the censored press.  Whether this was happening in the majority of the country I can not say, because the nationwide censorship kept me and others uninformed.  I can state that censorship and fear of elections shows a fear of the majority opinion. 

 

I think a military government that censors speech and the press and is afraid of elections is afraid of the people it rules.  What do you think?

Edited October 7, 2017 by heybruce

[halloween]

15 hours ago, heybruce said:

I wonder why he didn't just give himself a blanket pardon?  Oh yeah, only the military can do that.

His sister gave it a bloody good try, and thought to include herself and her government. A shame that didn't work, said Boonsong.

[heybruce]

9 hours ago, halloween said:

His sister gave it a bloody good try, and thought to include herself and her government. A shame that didn't work, said Boonsong.

Yeah, that's the difference between being an elected government with checks and balances, and a military government with unchecked power.

[jayboy]

I  make  no  reference  to  other  than  the  current  regime. And  in  doing  so  also  refer  to  the  statements  of  Prayut as  to  his  definition  of  the  aspirations  his  junta  desire as  an outcome.
I  am  not   either  duped or  ignorant  as  to  the  number of  historical  military  interventions.
Those  historical  events  are   totally  superceded   by the  current situation.
If  you  were   to  compare   apple against  apple  from   seasons   well  apart you  would  likely  find  the  only  common factor was  apples. Even  assuming if the  variety  of  apple being  compared is  the  same could  you  guarantee the  flavour  was  identical?
Sham  constitution? More  or  less  so  than   any  other? At  least  this  one  is  being presented,  debated,  edited at  open invitation ! No  mandatory infliction other  than that if   the eventual objectives of  concensus   are  abrogated then   intervention  will  be applied. 
The   sobbing  of those that  have enjoyed  the  historical situation is  a passing of  wind !
As  for  military  power?   What  country  that  has  a regular  Army  does  not  rely  on it  for  the protection  of  its  people  from  outside or  inside ? 
And  in Thailand  as  of  now can  you  in veracity  state that the  majority  have  objection to the  current situation or  their  expectations of the  future??
 
 
 
 
 

Since when has this constitution been debated? It is in fact prohibited to do so.The Junta won a referendum without any debate taking place.What this implies is open to interpretation.What is not open to interpretation is that any kind of debate took place.

The proposed constitution cannot be compared to the 1997 constitution since it is neither democratic, properly debated nor intelligently managed.

The purpose of the Thai army is not to defend the country from external enemies since there are none.Its purpose is to reinforce the internal power structure and to conduct business.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Dumbastheycome]

2 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

Since when has this constitution been debated? It is in fact prohibited to do so.The Junta won a referendum without any debate taking place.What this implies is open to interpretation.What is not open to interpretation is that any kind of debate took place.

The proposed constitution cannot be compared to the 1997 constitution since it is neither democratic, properly debated nor intelligently managed.

The purpose of the Thai army is not to defend the country from external enemies since there are none.Its purpose is to reinforce the internal power structure and to conduct business.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

I  believe   you  are mistaken .

Where  did I   make  any  comparison  with   the  1997  constitution?

Intelligently   managed? Or as cleverly contrived  as  possible? Debate against an overwhelming   majority makes  it  democratic? 

And  if  you  believe  the Thai  Army  is nothing  more than a  Home  Guard try  suggesting that  to  those  who  have faced  off with both   Cambodian  and  Myanmar troops. Or  those  regulars  that  serve   alongside  international military on UN issues. 

[jayboy]

59 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

I  believe   you  are mistaken .

Where  did I   make  any  comparison  with   the  1997  constitution?

Intelligently   managed? Or as cleverly contrived  as  possible? Debate against an overwhelming   majority makes  it  democratic? 

And  if  you  believe  the Thai  Army  is nothing  more than a  Home  Guard try  suggesting that  to  those  who  have faced  off with both   Cambodian  and  Myanmar troops. Or  those  regulars  that  serve   alongside  international military on UN issues. 

You said - I summarise - all constitutions are much of a muchness.They aren't:the 1997 Constitution developed under the lead of Anand Panyarachun was a model document properly consultative, thoroughly democratic, including necessary checks and balances and universally praised by all sides.Your comments on it are unintelligible so no response on my part is needed.The current proposed constitution is what it is;its purpose is well known and it was drafted by Junta stooges.

 

I made no comment on the quality of the Thai army's fighting qualities.I made a comment on the objectives of the Thai army which to recapitulate have nothing to do with deterring the country's non-existent enemies and everything to do with politics and money.

[Dumbastheycome]

On 10/8/2017 at 7:40 PM, jayboy said:

You said - I summarise - all constitutions are much of a muchness.They aren't:the 1997 Constitution developed under the lead of Anand Panyarachun was a model document properly consultative, thoroughly democratic, including necessary checks and balances and universally praised by all sides.Your comments on it are unintelligible so no response on my part is needed.The current proposed constitution is what it is;its purpose is well known and it was drafted by Junta stooges.

 

I made no comment on the quality of the Thai army's fighting qualities.I made a comment on the objectives of the Thai army which to recapitulate have nothing to do with deterring the country's non-existent enemies and everything to do with politics and money.

 

On 10/8/2017 at 7:40 PM, jayboy said:

You said - I summarise - all constitutions are much of a muchness.They aren't:the 1997 Constitution developed under the lead of Anand Panyarachun was a model document properly consultative, thoroughly democratic, including necessary checks and balances and universally praised by all sides.Your comments on it are unintelligible so no response on my part is needed.The current proposed constitution is what it is;its purpose is well known and it was drafted by Junta stooges.

 

I made no comment on the quality of the Thai army's fighting qualities.I made a comment on the objectives of the Thai army which to recapitulate have nothing to do with deterring the country's non-existent enemies and everything to do with politics and money.

An interestingly  dogmatic  reply.

Your summary of  my  comments  is  no  summary  of  my  comments   at all. It  is  merely  an expression of  your  own view  wrongly  applied  to  my  words.

The issue  I   am attempting  to  express  a view  on involves   the  current  situation.

Historical events are  only  relevant to  what  it  has  culminated  in  as  of   now.

What of  the  "perfection"  of  the  1997  constitution? 

How  long was  it in place?

Apart  from  tokens it  did  little  to  enhance social equality in real  terms.

 

What  constitution was  in place  at the   time of the  latest  coup?

Who  instituted  it?

Who  assisted  that institution?

Who has run  or  been head rolled  from the  repercussions ? 

There  is   no   democracy.

There  is  only  the  political application  of  democratic principles in reasonable  defence  against the inequitable distribution of living  standards, social and  legal justice,honest social free enterprise and  thus...money.

I  am  not  dismissive  of  your   viewpoint.