The haunting of dubious politicians

[Eric Loh]

9 minutes ago, robblok said:

Thing is if I don't say that the junta should be punished you call me a fanboy and call it unfair. I constantly get attacked by fanatics like pornprong if I don't say that even in a topic that is all about Thaksin. For me it goes without saying that everyone who is corrupt should face justice but here I have to constantly put the junta there too otherwise people call you fanboy and say I am pro junta. So yea I have to get boring but that is because of the mindless red drones here.

Anyone who read your posts know that you only applied cursory junta condemnation and really come off as a junta fanboy. You did said that between Thaksin and the junta, you like the junta more. How is that even a comparison. Really absurd to compare. Thaksin is corrupted but it is up to the people to decide. Junta seized power and have not been accountable to the people and ignore the people wishes to have an elected government.  

[Jonmarleesco]

'... their fall from power should serve as a fresh reminder for all politicians that, in a civil society, no one is above the law.'

 

No one? Hardly. Unless, of course, a future government decides to prosecute some of the current bunch.

 

'Najib denied any wrongdoing and said not all the charges were true.'

 

No wrongdoing, but Najib implies some of the charges are true

 

'Najib said in a video, “I accept that today is the day my family and I face the world’s tribulation.”'

 

They what? The tribulation(s) are his, not the world's.

[Ulic]

There is a lot of focus on Thaksin's corruption and who is more corrupt. But what about Thaksin's

alleged extrajudicial killings. Are these not bigger crimes and would Thailand not be better off trying

to extradite him from western countries on these crimes, or are they too difficult to prove?

[manarak]

8 hours ago, pornprong said:

Your obsession with Thaksin is the ultimate example of gullibility and stupidity.

Thaksin is no doubt both corrupt and at the same time less corrupt than all the unelected governments that preceded him and succeeded him.

"Thaksin is the devil" is simply a red herring that deceives fools whilst democracy is trampled.

Every single crime Thaksin is either guilty of or accused of - the junta has done much, much worse - by an order of magnitudes.

 

Let the Thai people choose their own government.

 

I too believe that with the "Thaksin system" in place and with risks associated with the Throne succession, there were real risks for Thailand to fall into civil war or slide into another uncontrollable situation.

I don't know if the latest coup was necessary or not. But I would say better safe than sorry.

Thanksin system removed - good.

Peace and stability preserved in moments of uncertainty - good.

But now it's time for the junta to make space for democracy again.

 

 

[humbug]

we have some real junta fan boys on here

 

'junta needs to come to power for the country to be safe' blah blah

 

From the 1950's to now the junta had been the main 'power' on this land oppressing, torturing, killing

 

anyone remember tak bai?

anyone remember 1976,1992,2010?

anyone remember hundreds of people bring kicked out of helicopters in oil drums being set alight?

 

Now we have the junta version of China's 20 year strategy being sneakily put through behind the media coverage of the cave boys

 

People handing 50 million to join a pro junta party, can you imagine what would happen if someone at pheu thai did that? they would laugh.

 

How about the trillions of baht in contracts being handed this year, last year etc, unprecedented government spending.

 

Apart from the yellow shirted media, civil servants getting a free ride and the ultra rich most people just dont want to be taken and eliminated.

 

The junta knows this thats why if they ever allow a real elected government with real powers voted by the people then the organised crime/business/power of the junta would be DISMANTLED

 

fear works both sides

[robblok]

14 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Anyone who read your posts know that you only applied cursory junta condemnation and really come off as a junta fanboy. You did said that between Thaksin and the junta, you like the junta more. How is that even a comparison. Really absurd to compare. Thaksin is corrupted but it is up to the people to decide. Junta seized power and have not been accountable to the people and ignore the people wishes to have an elected government.  

Yes I said I disliked the junta less that is in a way the same as liking them more but shows I dislike them both. Its a valid comparison and has nothing to do with how they got in power. You have accepted that Thaksin is a corrupt criminal but you seem to be ok with it because he is voted in. The people should no longer be able to vote for Thaksin (and they are not) In this country they ban corrupt officials and that is a good thing. Seems you are of the opinion that corrupt people should still be involved in politics. I feel differently, and so does the Thai law. Once caught and convicted its over and out. 

 

You seem to put a lot of stock in being accountable.. why is it then that you don't feel that Thaksin should be accountable for his corruption. Does your accountability work only one way ? I posted plenty of real negative remarks in the watch scandal. I have seen you make one small mention of Thaksin being corrupt here but never comment on how bad it is. Seems you still are far more bias than I. 

[robblok]

3 hours ago, humbug said:

we have some real junta fan boys on here

 

'junta needs to come to power for the country to be safe' blah blah

 

From the 1950's to now the junta had been the main 'power' on this land oppressing, torturing, killing

 

anyone remember tak bai?

anyone remember 1976,1992,2010?

anyone remember hundreds of people bring kicked out of helicopters in oil drums being set alight?

 

Now we have the junta version of China's 20 year strategy being sneakily put through behind the media coverage of the cave boys

 

People handing 50 million to join a pro junta party, can you imagine what would happen if someone at pheu thai did that? they would laugh.

 

How about the trillions of baht in contracts being handed this year, last year etc, unprecedented government spending.

 

Apart from the yellow shirted media, civil servants getting a free ride and the ultra rich most people just dont want to be taken and eliminated.

 

The junta knows this thats why if they ever allow a real elected government with real powers voted by the people then the organised crime/business/power of the junta would be DISMANTLED

 

fear works both sides

Thaksin has always been accused of paying his MP's and the fact that these guys switch for money show that to be true. Beause if these guys were true believers they would not have switched. I have commented against this on both sides you are just condemning the junta for it while you act like Thaksin did not do it. For these payments there is as much proof as there is for the payments from Thaksin to his MP's. (nothing on paper just strong rumors on both sides) So why not mention both.

[pornprong]

6 hours ago, manarak said:

I too believe that with the "Thaksin system" in place and with risks associated with the Throne succession, there were real risks for Thailand to fall into civil war or slide into another uncontrollable situation.

Nonsense!

Pathetic nonsense!

 

 

6 hours ago, manarak said:

I don't know if the latest coup was necessary or not. But I would say better safe than sorry.

Safe from who?

 

6 hours ago, manarak said:

Thanksin system removed - good.

Thaksin system?

Do you mean democratically elected governments - because that's what they were.

All Thaksin governments were elected by the people of Thailand and could be removed by the people of Thailand with just a simple pencil and ballot paper - no guns, no death, no economic sabotage, no attitude adjustment camps, no section 44 required.

There is nothing good about military coups.

 

6 hours ago, manarak said:

Peace and stability preserved in moments of uncertainty - good.

What a silly, silly philosophy.

So all the minority has to do is create an atmosphere of uncertainty (cue Suthep) and then overthrowing elected governments and democracy it is the right thing to do.

Silly indeed.

 

 

6 hours ago, manarak said:

But now it's time for the junta to make space for democracy again.

Ohhh, Prayuth doesn't want to leave though.

What can you do about it other than take comfort in your security whilst Prawit continues adding to his watch collection.

[manarak]

4 hours ago, pornprong said:

Nonsense!

Pathetic nonsense!

 

 

Safe from who?

 

Thaksin system?

Do you mean democratically elected governments - because that's what they were.

All Thaksin governments were elected by the people of Thailand and could be removed by the people of Thailand with just a simple pencil and ballot paper - no guns, no death, no economic sabotage, no attitude adjustment camps, no section 44 required.

There is nothing good about military coups.

 

What a silly, silly philosophy.

So all the minority has to do is create an atmosphere of uncertainty (cue Suthep) and then overthrowing elected governments and democracy it is the right thing to do.

Silly indeed.

 

 

Ohhh, Prayuth doesn't want to leave though.

What can you do about it other than take comfort in your security whilst Prawit continues adding to his watch collection.

 

--> nonsense? Bangkok events? Seh Daeng? hundreds dead? on what planet were you living?

 

--> Safe from civil war

 

--> Thaksin System = catch votes using populist promises that were detrimental to the country + buying votes using a self-financing bribe machine by using the state apparatus brought under his control, replacing state apparatus members with cronies, especially the police and starting in the court system, also passing AMNESTY BILLS for past crimes, which made their prosecution impossible. This is what I believe triggered civil society to act.

The following video does a good job explaining why the Thaksin regime was no democracy - it's biaised, but gets the main facts right, IMO:

 

--> what you call an "atmosphere of uncertainty" was an open war on the streets of Bangkok leaving hundreds dead.

 

--> I certainly can't do anything about it, as I'm a foreigner and therefore not allowed to vote nor to have political activities.

[pornprong]

3 hours ago, manarak said:

 

--> nonsense? Bangkok events? Seh Daeng? hundreds dead? on what planet were you living?

 

--> Safe from civil war

 

--> Thaksin System = catch votes using populist promises that were detrimental to the country + buying votes using a self-financing bribe machine by using the state apparatus brought under his control, replacing state apparatus members with cronies, especially the police and starting in the court system, also passing AMNESTY BILLS for past crimes, which made their prosecution impossible. This is what I believe triggered civil society to act.

The following video does a good job explaining why the Thaksin regime was no democracy - it's biaised, but gets the main facts right, IMO:

 

--> what you call an "atmosphere of uncertainty" was an open war on the streets of Bangkok leaving hundreds dead.

 

--> I certainly can't do anything about it, as I'm a foreigner and therefore not allowed to vote nor to have political activities.

Probably about time to change the quote that appears below your posts for it appears you certainly do believe that ignorance is indeed an opinion.

[manarak]

20 minutes ago, pornprong said:

Probably about time to change the quote that appears below your posts for it appears you certainly do believe that ignorance is indeed an opinion.

so your "opinion" is that there never was such a "Thaksin system" ?

 

denial always works, right?

Thaksin cornered the Thai state and its institutions.
Post your facts for the Shinawatra Family's discharge please or stop denying.

Edited July 7, 2018 by manarak

[Chris Lawrence]

Just when you think it is safe, the election wheels start again. 

 

The Malaysians have been doing this for years, so has most SE Asian countries; all taught by their colonial masters. 

 

What did 'old pineapple face say',: "when I am in power I will do everything in my power to stay in power" or something like that. Pineapple Face was the head of the Panama Junta; ring any bells?

 

This is just feeding the chooks; as Flo B-P would say.

[Chris Lawrence]

On ‎7‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:26 PM, robblok said:

Agreed Eric, but that does not make Thaksin innocent just means that Prayut is guilty too and should face justice.

 

Simple instead of defending someone who is obviously corrupt by saying but they did it too, just try to get both of them to face justice. Would be far more beneficial then letting them both walk free and set an example for future politicians / junta ect.

 

 

Agree Rob.

 

However the 2008 court cases were 5 charges were levied against Mr T and his wife only one charge stuck and that was against Mrs T. On appeal it ran itself out of time. The culprits then were the mad monk and Abhisit; not the sharpest tools in the shed. The boil on the Thai backside is now being pushed and prodded by sharper tools. This is for election purposes. The bust could cover all full of puss or just a small amount of crocodile tears. Its like a wee contest up the brick wall until one contestant steps into the wind; and u know what happens then.

 

In time new charges were brought against Mr T and his sister. Now his sister never had a forensic review of the rice stores? So over time the juridical system has been guided to seek more charges. Something Kangaroo poo about this type of action.

 

With the Malaysian guy, what he did sounds different to Mr T. In the OP I can't draw a comparison between the two.

 

If the juridical system was in order so a fair trial could be had, maybe things would be different?

 

Can you imagine how a coup would be with no one to blame?

[humbug]

the junta fan boys at it again armed with yellow shirt youtube links  blah blah blah

 

junta has been using thailand as its cash cow since the 1950's owning banks(anyone remember TMB now CIMB), media companies, tv stations, great swaths of land ownership along with directorships, minister roles, spending trillions of baht of the countries money on every project known to man. All that while controlling one of the MOST CORRUPT COUNTRIES on the planet.

 

Freedom for people through elections is the biggest FEAR of the junta. Thats why over the decades they have massacered thousands of people to keep their power

 

20 year plan is laying all the cards on the table in the poker game with a loaded gun under the table.  The only thing holding back people to win the game is 'FEAR' the same as the Junta. Something has to give over the coming years 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 7, 2018 by humbug

[tomta]

18 hours ago, Ulic said:

There is a lot of focus on Thaksin's corruption and who is more corrupt. But what about Thaksin's

alleged extrajudicial killings. Are these not bigger crimes and would Thailand not be better off trying

to extradite him from western countries on these crimes, or are they too difficult to prove?

Immensely popular crimes and their popularity reached into the highest of high places. Let that sink in.Too many people implicated in this in all sides of politics and outside politics. Thaksin didn't fire the bullets.To get the evil genii, one has to get the triggermen. And they don't want to be got and won't be.

[tomta]

17 hours ago, manarak said:

 

I too believe that with the "Thaksin system" in place and with risks associated with the Throne succession, there were real risks for Thailand to fall into civil war or slide into another uncontrollable situation.

I don't know if the latest coup was necessary or not. But I would say better safe than sorry.

Thanksin system removed - good.

Peace and stability preserved in moments of uncertainty - good.

But now it's time for the junta to make space for democracy again.

 

 

Care to elaborate on the risks associated with the succession? Of course, you can't. It's against the law. But rumours can be spread and hatred and confusion whipped up to make people like you fearful and nervous. So you can say :better be safe than sorry , they've got rid of the bogeymen.

 

Exactly, the same tactics were used against progressive PM Pridi Banomyong in 1947. He had to go into exile to avoid spurious assassination charges and slander by the royalist Democrat party.

 

And now you meekly and pathetically ask: "Please sirs, can you make a little space for democracy". 

[tomta]

5 hours ago, manarak said:

This is what I believe triggered civil society to act.

Except in both 2006 and 2014 "civil society" did not quite get the job done, did they? "Civil society" does make it all sound lovely but it was military society that did the heavy lifting.

[manarak]

8 hours ago, tomta said:

Except in both 2006 and 2014 "civil society" did not quite get the job done, did they? "Civil society" does make it all sound lovely but it was military society that did the heavy lifting.

yes, well spotted. i thought the same some time after posting, but it was too late to edit my post. 

yet, even if it is indeed funny to talk about civil society when it's the army that stepped in, i don't think that the army acted without approval from other important powers.

[manarak]

9 hours ago, tomta said:

Care to elaborate on the risks associated with the succession? Of course, you can't. It's against the law. But rumours can be spread and hatred and confusion whipped up to make people like you fearful and nervous. So you can say :better be safe than sorry , they've got rid of the bogeymen.

 

Exactly, the same tactics were used against progressive PM Pridi Banomyong in 1947. He had to go into exile to avoid spurious assassination charges and slander by the royalist Democrat party.

 

And now you meekly and pathetically ask: "Please sirs, can you make a little space for democracy". 

lol.

heh, no reason to be fearful and nervous when there is war in the streets of bangkok eh?

silly me.

 

but fear or not fear, Thaksin had cornered the country's institutions and voting system, i don't think there was another way to remove him.

do you think otherwise?

Edited July 7, 2018 by manarak

[tomta]

3 hours ago, manarak said:

lol.

heh, no reason to be fearful and nervous when there is war in the streets of bangkok eh?

silly me.

 

but fear or not fear, Thaksin had cornered the country's institutions and voting system, i don't think there was another way to remove him.

do you think otherwise?

Thaksin clearly had not cornered  the country's institutions -  General Prem, the President of the Privy Council had delivered a famous speech against him,  he had not cornered the military, major elements of the media were critical of him, and he had been criticized by  the highest institution. As for the voting system, it has been ruled to be generally free and fair by international observers although certainly not flawless.

 

Had the forces opposing him chosen to put up some policies and oppose him in an election, they might have even won. Probably not though because he was very popular. And they weren't. Of course, if you think it is not fair that popular people win elections, then that is what you should argue. Don't pretend to be democratic

 

So how is it that a man who has cornered all the country's institutions was deposed so easily in a bloodless coup - not once but twice (if we take Yingluck as his proxy which is fair enough)? The all-powerful Satan turned out to be so weak.

[tomta]

4 hours ago, manarak said:

yes, well spotted. i thought the same some time after posting, but it was too late to edit my post. 

yet, even if it is indeed funny to talk about civil society when it's the army that stepped in, i don't think that the army acted without approval from other important powers.

Indeed, the army did act with approval from other important powers. 

 

These powers were not  "civil society". They did not represent the sovereign power of the Thai people.

 

If you think that's OK, just say so and give up any pretence at holding democratic values.

[manarak]

4 hours ago, tomta said:

Thaksin clearly had not cornered  the country's institutions -  General Prem, the President of the Privy Council had delivered a famous speech against him,  he had not cornered the military, major elements of the media were critical of him, and he had been criticized by  the highest institution. As for the voting system, it has been ruled to be generally free and fair by international observers although certainly not flawless.

 

Had the forces opposing him chosen to put up some policies and oppose him in an election, they might have even won. Probably not though because he was very popular. And they weren't. Of course, if you think it is not fair that popular people win elections, then that is what you should argue. Don't pretend to be democratic

 

So how is it that a man who has cornered all the country's institutions was deposed so easily in a bloodless coup - not once but twice (if we take Yingluck as his proxy which is fair enough)? The all-powerful Satan turned out to be so weak.

sorry, I again was imprecise in  my choice of words - Thaksin had cornered the country's DEMOCRATIC institutions, as well as law enforcement and started to chip away at the judicial institutions.

 

and don't avoid the question - how else could Thaksin be removed?

[robblok]

18 hours ago, Chris Lawrence said:

Agree Rob.

 

However the 2008 court cases were 5 charges were levied against Mr T and his wife only one charge stuck and that was against Mrs T. On appeal it ran itself out of time. The culprits then were the mad monk and Abhisit; not the sharpest tools in the shed. The boil on the Thai backside is now being pushed and prodded by sharper tools. This is for election purposes. The bust could cover all full of puss or just a small amount of crocodile tears. Its like a wee contest up the brick wall until one contestant steps into the wind; and u know what happens then.

 

In time new charges were brought against Mr T and his sister. Now his sister never had a forensic review of the rice stores? So over time the juridical system has been guided to seek more charges. Something Kangaroo poo about this type of action.

 

With the Malaysian guy, what he did sounds different to Mr T. In the OP I can't draw a comparison between the two.

 

If the juridical system was in order so a fair trial could be had, maybe things would be different?

 

Can you imagine how a coup would be with no one to blame?

Chris,

 

I can only say the cases now against Thaksin, are solid the case of forcing the bank to loan money under cost to Birma and have Birma buy telecom equipment from his is clearly corruption. You don't need much investigating to come to that conclusion a bank losing 670 billion on interest so they can buy from a Thaksin company while he fills his pockets.

Bribing of a judge with a cake box of money... if that isnt i crime I don't know what is.

 

There is an other bank loan case too believe its pretty solid too. As I said before Thaksin fled before the more serious charges could be pressed.

 

The Malaysian guy is an exact example why Thaksin / YL had to be removed before they could be investigated. That Malaysian guy also kept all investigations blanking as long as he was in power. I believe Thaksin and YL would have tried to do the same (actually just look at the case of the passports and YL not wanderings the ombudsman shows that once in power they do as they please). As for YL they rightfully got her for allowing fake g2g deals (those were proven remember people went to jail for it)., stopping the corruption was negligence. But I will say this YL is guilty of far less then anyone else, if we use her example and judge everyone like that we won't have any politicians left. Still its negligence, but that is low on my list of things to punish.. just punishing all corruption is hard enough to do. 

 

So in my mind there is no question about the guilt of Thaksin, he is corrupt. So stop defending the guy and better put pressure to for instance go after Suthep too. The guy is also clearly corrupt , far better to keep the spotlight on him and have reds demonstrate to get his cases reviewed instead of using people to stop cases against Thaksin. Only way to move forward is to make sure corruption is punished on all sides so it gets less profitable to be in government (once that is the case they (both sides)  won't send their minions out to kill others)

[tomta]

3 hours ago, manarak said:

sorry, I again was imprecise in  my choice of words - Thaksin had cornered the country's DEMOCRATIC institutions, as well as law enforcement and started to chip away at the judicial institutions.

  

 and don't avoid the question - how else could Thaksin be removed?

You need to be more precise. It seems that what you mean by "corner" is to be voted in by a democratic majority. You are  really flagrantly abusing common  meaning.

 

 

He could have been removed by all the normally accepted or if not accepted, at least legal, mechanisms

1. elections

2. no-confidence vote in parliament

3. impeachment by parliament

4. impeachment by courts

5. the monarch withdrawing his commission

 

Don't try and argue that he'd cornered the voters and the parliamentarian unless by "corner" you mean gained the support of.That sort of "cornering" is just what happens in a democratic system.

 

Other methods are 1. a coup d'etat implicitly backed by violence, 2. assassination (many have reccommended this)

[tomta]

3 hours ago, robblok said:

But I will say this YL is guilty of far less then anyone else, if we use her example and judge everyone like that we won't have any politicians left. Still its negligence, but that is low on my list of things to punish.. just punishing all corruption is hard enough to do. 

You supported the coup that removed Yingluck's inheritor government, even though the courts had removed Yingluck from office.

 

Why?

 

You supported the junta even after they had immediately proclaimed an amnesty for themselves for all past and future actions. This indicates that they were thoroughly corrupt. Had they been pure  in their stated desire to sacrifice themselves for Thailand , they would have said: "We are suspending the laws and the constitution for now because Thailand was in such grave danger we had no alternative but to do so. However, as true patriots we will be happy to stand trial for treason when that time comes. And to be executed if needs be."

 

Such a statement may have justified them. Their actions have been thoroughly corrupt. And you supported them.

 

Why?

 

 

[ChrisY1]

On 7/6/2018 at 7:35 AM, ramrod711 said:

True, he is protected by his billions, which he stole, or "bilked", if you prefer. Coups are not desirable or effective in the long term, but ridding the country of the Shins certainly is.

do some homework please before posting silly posts.

[sjaak327]

On ‎7‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 3:36 AM, robblok said:

Finally the more serious cases get prosecuted and only the most die hard red supporters still try to deny the guy was corrupt. Clear cases like the one now where he forced a bank to loan money below cost 670 million loss for the bank, so Birma could buy telecom equipment from Thaksin his own company. Clear case of corruption.

 

Part of it is futile of course as he will remain on the run, but at least it will be finally clear that he was guilty of much more then a simple land deal. Corrupt politicians should be prosecuted no exceptions of who they are or who they serve, corrupt military should be prosecuted too. Unfortunately the military and some politicians are protected from prosecution a really bad situation that should be solved too. But that should not mean that other corruption cases like that of Thaksin and others should not be dealt with. Quite a few red supporters seem to think that because other politicians don't get convicted Thaksin should walk too.

 

I of course disagree, because if you let him walk what is next.. let all the bureaucrats and politicians that stole from the poor in the scandals go too.. I mean where does it end if you let clear cases of corruption walk free because other cases are not prosecuted.

 

Its of course stupid reasoning to do so, it would be far more logical to rally against those cases that are not being prosecuted and put pressure on the goverment to do so. That way your trying to improve thing here instead of giving everyone a free pass on corruption only strengthening the belief of politicians and others its ok to be corrupt. 

There you go again. Whilst he might been corrupt, what the Junta is doing gives Thaksin a free pass. They have changed a law, without a mandate, then applied that law retroactively on a case over a decade old. So even if he is found guilty, that convicted isn't worth the paper it is written on, as he did not receive a fair trial. This is a clear case of the Junta changing the law to go after their political enemies. It is therefore a political conviction and precious few countries in this world will extradite him on this basis. But again, that's not the purpose, the purpose is a plot to reduce the likelihood of PTP gaining a lot of votes in the next election. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

If recent, relevant history in the Thai electoral landscape is anything to go by, this plan will backfire. Can't wait to see that happen to be honest. Power should reside with the electorate. 

Edited July 8, 2018 by sjaak327

[sjaak327]

23 hours ago, tomta said:

Care to elaborate on the risks associated with the succession? Of course, you can't. It's against the law. But rumours can be spread and hatred and confusion whipped up to make people like you fearful and nervous. So you can say :better be safe than sorry , they've got rid of the bogeymen.

 

Exactly, the same tactics were used against progressive PM Pridi Banomyong in 1947. He had to go into exile to avoid spurious assassination charges and slander by the royalist Democrat party.

 

And now you meekly and pathetically ask: "Please sirs, can you make a little space for democracy". 

Pridi, none of the current idiots would even be worthy of tying his shoe lases. But I am certain which side Pridi would choose, it's democracy, not military rule, and not royalist rule. 

[sjaak327]

5 hours ago, robblok said:

Chris,

 

I can only say the cases now against Thaksin, are solid the case of forcing the bank to loan money under cost to Birma and have Birma buy telecom equipment from his is clearly corruption. You don't need much investigating to come to that conclusion a bank losing 670 billion on interest so they can buy from a Thaksin company while he fills his pockets.

Bribing of a judge with a cake box of money... if that isnt i crime I don't know what is.

 

There is an other bank loan case too believe its pretty solid too. As I said before Thaksin fled before the more serious charges could be pressed.

 

The Malaysian guy is an exact example why Thaksin / YL had to be removed before they could be investigated. That Malaysian guy also kept all investigations blanking as long as he was in power. I believe Thaksin and YL would have tried to do the same (actually just look at the case of the passports and YL not wanderings the ombudsman shows that once in power they do as they please). As for YL they rightfully got her for allowing fake g2g deals (those were proven remember people went to jail for it)., stopping the corruption was negligence. But I will say this YL is guilty of far less then anyone else, if we use her example and judge everyone like that we won't have any politicians left. Still its negligence, but that is low on my list of things to punish.. just punishing all corruption is hard enough to do. 

 

So in my mind there is no question about the guilt of Thaksin, he is corrupt. So stop defending the guy and better put pressure to for instance go after Suthep too. The guy is also clearly corrupt , far better to keep the spotlight on him and have reds demonstrate to get his cases reviewed instead of using people to stop cases against Thaksin. Only way to move forward is to make sure corruption is punished on all sides so it gets less profitable to be in government (once that is the case they (both sides)  won't send their minions out to kill others)

Suthep will NEVER EVER be prosecuted. When do you wake up and realize how the country you live in works ? Oh my god.. Haven't you still figured out how this works ?

 

Why do you think the law change that now makes trial in absence possible (together with the abolishment of statue of limitation) only covers political crimes ? The red bull idiot is part of the very same elite that is running the show, and to shield him and a few others, the law was changed to just cover political office holders, of which PTP people are the main target. Look how Suthep escaped even a trial for his role in the major <deleted> in 2010, where he as Deputy PM ordered the army to go after a few red shirt protesters. He would have been incarcerated in any normal country, but in Thailand he is above the law. And he knows it. 

Edited July 8, 2018 by sjaak327

[manarak]

5 hours ago, tomta said:

You need to be more precise. It seems that what you mean by "corner" is to be voted in by a democratic majority. You are  really flagrantly abusing common  meaning.

 

 

He could have been removed by all the normally accepted or if not accepted, at least legal, mechanisms

1. elections

2. no-confidence vote in parliament

3. impeachment by parliament

4. impeachment by courts

5. the monarch withdrawing his commission

 

Don't try and argue that he'd cornered the voters and the parliamentarian unless by "corner" you mean gained the support of.That sort of "cornering" is just what happens in a democratic system.

 

Other methods are 1. a coup d'etat implicitly backed by violence, 2. assassination (many have reccommended this)

1- no, since his buying of small parties, bribing voters, etc. assured him of the support of enough voters to back him

2- a parliament where his party held the majority?

3- same as above

4- that's a nice fake argument, there is no prosecution without investigation and guess who controlled the police and ministry of interior, justice?

5- I'm sure that would be considered intervening in politics, a thing the throne doesn't do.

 

no, Thaksin didn't corner his voters, he bought them. and no, that sort of "gaining support" is not just what happens in a democratic system. most of Thaksin's methods for "gaining support" are illegal in democracies.

Thaksin effectively cornered Thailand's democratic institutions.

 

NONE of the methods you listed above would have worked to remove Thaksin or his cronies. Thaksin is just the head of the hydra, remove him and another one grows in his place. The "Thaksin system" and it's accomplices was the problem - let's hope Thailand got rid of it.