Extradition of Yingluck not easy: PM Prayut

[JAG]

Yingluck couldn't do that because she was not supplanted by a military coup.

If that were true it would be a possibility but it isn't; Yingluck was not ousted by a military coup.

The coup was held to forstall an election, called in accordance with the requirements of the constitution, in which she was standing. If, as was possible (probable) she had won then she would have been reinstalled as prime minister.

Oddly enough the very same circumstances surrounded the previous coup, which similarly dealt with her brother.

 

I do understand that for some it may be tiresome that I keep pointing this out, but you see declaring that Yingluck, or indeed her brother, were not "ousted by a coup" does ignore a rather large part of the truth - truth which does rather put the matter into context as it were.

 

 

Sent from my KENNY using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

[Mattd]

20 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

Before the coup occurred she was removed from office by the Constitutional Court (for abuse of power?) and replaced by Niwattumrong Boonsongpaisan.

Yes, sorry, you are correct, however, I still standby my statement that the UK would not extradite her to a Military ran government that took power by a Coup D'état, especially one that took place only 3 weeks after she was removed from office and to be honest I do not think that the military government want her back either, far too much hassle for them.

[Just Weird]

12 minutes ago, JAG said:

 

The coup was held to forstall an election, called in accordance with the requirements of the constitution, in which she was standing. If, as was possible (probable) she had won then she would have been reinstalled as prime minister.

Oddly enough the very same circumstances surrounded the previous coup, which similarly dealt with her brother.

 

I do understand that for some it may be tiresome that I keep pointing this out, but you see declaring that Yingluck, or indeed her brother, were not "ousted by a coup" does ignore a rather large part of the truth - truth which does rather put the matter into context as it were.

 

I am not 'declaring'  that she was not ousted by the coup, which could sound like an outrageous opinion to some, I am simply stating a fact.  She was not the PM when the coup started as so many posters seem to think.  I made no reference to her brother so don't try to slide that one in.

[Becker]

5 hours ago, PattayaAngel said:

 

Thank you Steven100!!!

 

At last you have seen the 'light' and, yes, Thais want Yingluck their first female PM.  They voted for her and would again if given the chance.

 

I really appreciate your honesty, integrity and open-mind to come back to us and admit that Yingluck is WANTED.

 

I'll even give you a 'Thanks'  +1   (now I never thought that would happen my dear friend - can I call you 'friend' now you are with the majority?)

I thing you overestimate Steven. He's continues to be very confused about the whole political situation and to this day he still believes that the junta took power to root out corruption and "fix" Thailand

 

Unfortunately for him the junta's days are numbered and he will have to move away from Thailand when the next Shin supported government is installed. I, for one, will be at the airport waving goodbye as I will miss the silly old bugger!

[PattayaAngel]

34 minutes ago, Becker said:

I thing you overestimate Steven. He's continues to be very confused about the whole political situation and to this day he still believes that the junta took power to root out corruption and "fix" Thailand

 

Unfortunately for him the junta's days are numbered and he will have to move away from Thailand when the next Shin supported government is installed. I, for one, will be at the airport waving goodbye as I will miss the silly old bugger!

 

But... But... I thought he'd 'seen the light'?  and realized Thailand wanted Yingluck?  and... just maybe.. he wanted her too?  I must have misunderstood his intentions  

[HHTel]

When Yingluk dissolved parliament, she called a snap election in the February of that year.  Because of the protests and blockading of polling stations, the election was declared null and void and a further election was called for July.  In the meantime, the constitutional court removed Yingluk, along with her cabinet, from office.  So there was an election held before the coup but the result was declared void.

[PattayaAngel]

9 minutes ago, HHTel said:

When Yingluk dissolved parliament, she called a snap election in the February of that year.  Because of the protests and blockading of polling stations, the election was declared null and void and a further election was called for July.  In the meantime, the constitutional court removed Yingluk, along with her cabinet, from office.  So there was an election held before the coup but the result was declared void.

 

That's true because the result was not what the Army wanted

[Media1]

2 hours ago, Becker said:

I thing you overestimate Steven. He's continues to be very confused about the whole political situation and to this day he still believes that the junta took power to root out corruption and "fix" Thailand

 

Unfortunately for him the junta's days are numbered and he will have to move away from Thailand when the next Shin supported government is installed. I, for one, will be at the airport waving goodbye as I will miss the silly old bugger!

Prayut is top ranked worst PM in the history of the country in my opinion. 

As for people going on and on about Shins. This is non productive and I doubt there even interested. what is important is a real man in control..One willing to show what the criminals have been doing whilst pretending to reform. 

Someone must stand up and go down in history as the only man that ever did. To date they are all crooks.

[JAG]

3 hours ago, Just Weird said:

I am not 'declaring'  that she was not ousted by the coup, which could sound like an outrageous opinion to some, I am simply stating a fact.  She was not the PM when the coup started as so many posters seem to think.  I made no reference to her brother so don't try to slide that one in.

I'm sorry, but I think that what happened to her brother is relevant to the debate.

[mindfulness]

... ‘four legs good, two legs bad’. 

 

[Just Weird]

17 hours ago, JAG said:

I'm sorry, but I think that what happened to her brother is relevant to the debate.

That's your opinion but it's not relevant to my comment that you brought him into with your response.

[JAG]

3 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

That's your opinion but it's not relevant to my comment that you brought him into with your response.

So, if I make a point in a discussion, you have the right to rule it not relevant?

 

By all means, argue against what I said. You may think it is factually wrong, then say so, and perhaps explain why. If you think it is not relevant, and it troubles you that much, then again explain why, but please don't appoint yourself as the arbiter of relevance when I make a point.

[Just Weird]

1 minute ago, JAG said:

So, if I make a point in a discussion, you have the right to rule it not relevant?

 

By all means, argue against what I said. You may think it is factually wrong, then say so, and perhaps explain why. If you think it is not relevant, and it troubles you that much, then again explain why, but please don't appoint yourself as the arbiter of relevance when I make a point.

"So, if I make a point in a discussion, you have the right to rule it not relevant?".

 

Yes, I do when you are making a point to me about something that I did not comment about.    Thaksin was irrelevant to my comment.  If you want to comment about his situation make that comment to someone who has mentioned him, not me because making the comment to me suggests that I may have instigated it.

[JAG]

21 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

"So, if I make a point in a discussion, you have the right to rule it not relevant?".

 

Yes, I do when you are making a point to me about something that I did not comment about.    Thaksin was irrelevant to my comment.  If you want to comment about his situation make that comment to someone who has mentioned him, not me because making the comment to me suggests that I may have instigated it.

This is getting silly. If we look at my original post, I pointed out that whilst you were quite correct that Yingluck was not Prime Minister at the time of the coup, the coup had the effect of preventing her from being re-elected. I then pointed out that exactly the same thing happened in the case of her brother The pattern of actions by the military - staging a coup to prevent re-election made that relevant, in my opinion.

 

Now you are entirely free to argue or ignore my point. Declaring it irrelevant does neither. If you think that what I said somehow corrupted or deflected the debate, then of course you could complain to the moderators, but as this forum is pretty strictly monitored, and it has been allowed to stand so far, I presume that they don't consider that to be the case. Shall we leave it there?

[jayboy]

I've been here living and working a long time and this is my opinion, I'm entitled to it and just because it doesn't match yours or others doesn't make me crazy .  I'm not going to qualify it any more than that and you are welcome to yours.

In other words you operate under the impression that one person’s view is as good as another’s.Problem is that isn’t really the case with such factors as intelligence, good judgment, knowledge and civilised values coming into the equation.

You seem to fail on all criteria.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Get Real]

On 2018-01-09 at 10:17 PM, webfact said:

Prayut yesterday told Government House reporters that he had not received any official report on her whereabouts. However, when a reporter informed him that Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai had earlier yesterday said British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson had told him in September that Yingluck was in London, the PM responded that the matter would be dealt with in according with the relevant legal process.

Must be nice to can talk so much, and really believe that people forget the first sentence when you start the second one. 

[jayboy]

1 hour ago, James HKT said:

How superior you are. 

 

I respect anyone's right to have an opinion, even if it differs from my own. I do not judge them and do not question their intelligence, their judgement, their knowledge, or values. I merely accept that my opinion is not widely shared, or even shared at all. But I have the right to it and that does not make me stupid, of bad judgement, lacking of knowledge or civiised values. 

 

 

The fact remains that some peoples' views are not worth much and others are worth consideration.The factors I have already mentioned are key.

[The Old Bull]

It's not easy because no western government would be in a hurry to return a democratically elected premier to a self appointed military dictatorship.

[jayboy]

1 hour ago, James HKT said:

So where do your views fall in your scale of worthless to worth consideration as if I even need to ask. The fact is even your criteria are subjective and the " Jayboy Scale" of what is a worthy view is only relevant to you.

If you feel there is no need to ask, I suggest you do not do so.As regards criteria that make some opinions worth listening to, I have listed some areas which are crucial.Nevertheless it is not an exclusive list and if you have any suggestions by all means feel free to put them forward.But if I may say so, and without wishing to appear impolite, your belief the current PM is "doing a good job" does not immediately suggest your input will be of any great value.

[metisdead]

Inflammatory posts and replies have been removed. Posts containing disallowed references to the current government have been removed.