Prayut comes under blistering attack as political bans are lifted

[sjaak327]

On 12/14/2018 at 2:25 AM, hansnl said:

The opposition?

You mean the Thaksin led groups that want to use "democracy" for their own means and solely for the benefit of those groups?

Their aims are a complete clamp on the country to milk it empty, a change of constitution like they tried before, and ultimately a sole dictatorship.

That opposition?

 

You are confused, you just decribed the current governement. 

[zzaa09]

15 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

You are confused, you just decribed the current governement. 

The day might come when we can't decipher the difference between the lot. 

As there really isn't any....

 

 

Opposition, indeed.

[sjaak327]

On 12/14/2018 at 7:43 AM, Baerboxer said:

 

Unless they refuse to go, dispute any election results they don't like, change or ignore laws to suit themselves. etc etc.

 

The decline in real democracy, with associated law, order and meaningful checks and balances on governments and parliaments is seemingly a world wide phenomenon of the IT digital age. When in fact, the opposite should be true!

They can't refuse to go of course, other than Prayuth, they actually were subjected to the law. I just refer to the impeachment of Samak and Yingluck to disprove your point. How can we get rid of Prayuth ? He is here for almost five years, without a mandate. Yet you keep re-iterating the Shinawatras imagined transgressions. They COULD be made to go away, and that is really all that matters. 

[sjaak327]

39 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

The day might come when we can't decipher the difference between the lot. 

As there really isn't any....

 

 

Opposition, indeed.

Disagree, there IS a clear difference. I deal with facts, not with fairy tales. 

[sjaak327]

23 hours ago, comeondoit said:

sorry but the previous governement was much worse than what we see now. They were spending money, taxpayers money and did not bother to rise money. The political memory is so short living, all already forgotten?. The problem is that the Thai people are not knowing what is democracy and need therefore a strong hand. So strong hand or not there are always fails and errors when doing things...the balance is what counts, more good than bad?? Judge by yourself but based on facts not on statistics.

Obviously one lack of the actual governement is its unability to accept and try to learn from contradicition. However that is a lack of the Thai society in general and I fear that no one coming after will be better in that

Hold on, this government has spent even more money. And they don't even have a mandate. Why do you think Thailand's reserves are now depleted. How come the difference between rich and poor has sharply risen during this administration. Why are you asleep and blisfully unware of how this all works. Stating the previous government was worse, is so utterly beside the point, it isn't even funny. And... that government did not have article 44, did not threw away the constitution and had a whopping 300 out of 500 MP's mandate. 

 

The Thai people do know what is democracy, and they have a much better grasp of what is happening in their country than you.

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, zzaa09 said:

The day might come when we can't decipher the difference between the lot. 

As there really isn't any....

 

 

Opposition, indeed.

That’s the yellow shirt’s line. Will fool some but not most Thais. 

 

Guns will be needed when you don’t have popular support. 

[robblok]

2 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

Disagree, there IS a clear difference. I deal with facts, not with fairy tales. 

In your mind Thailand had a democracy and that is different.. while in reality they did not have a real democracy and in both cases the leaders were bleeding the country dry with corruption and breaking laws. Just because they got voted in make their crimes any better. Voting is just 1 of the things in a democracy, its not called a democracy if you don't follow all the rules of one. 

[marqus12]

24 minutes ago, robblok said:

In your mind Thailand had a democracy and that is different.. while in reality they did not have a real democracy and in both cases the leaders were bleeding the country dry with corruption and breaking laws. Just because they got voted in make their crimes any better. Voting is just 1 of the things in a democracy, its not called a democracy if you don't follow all the rules of one. 

is it written for free??? or sib baht???

[zzaa09]

47 minutes ago, robblok said:

In your mind Thailand had a democracy and that is different.. while in reality they did not have a real democracy and in both cases the leaders were bleeding the country dry with corruption and breaking laws. Just because they got voted in make their crimes any better. Voting is just 1 of the things in a democracy, its not called a democracy if you don't follow all the rules of one. 

I've always astounded [not really] towards those whom consider that they truly understand Thai society/affairs - yet, they clearly haven't a clue. Very prominent and common character trait within this austere venue...

[JAG]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

In your mind Thailand had a democracy and that is different.. while in reality they did not have a real democracy and in both cases the leaders were bleeding the country dry with corruption and breaking laws. Just because they got voted in make their crimes any better. Voting is just 1 of the things in a democracy, its not called a democracy if you don't follow all the rules of one. 

zzaa09 replied:

25 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

I've always astounded [not really] towards those whom consider that they truly understand Thai society/affairs - yet, they clearly haven't a clue. Very prominent and common character trait within this austere venue...

I wouldn't say that I am astounded, although I have for some time found it irritating (now becoming tedious) that you repeatedly suggest that you (effectively alone) understand what is happening/has happened in the Thai political scene, and regret that others, including some long serving and thoughtful TVF commentators "don't have a clue". Yet to my knowledge you have never offered to share your wisdom or insight into what is happening. I have said it before, and I will say it again, I think you are an "empty vessel", intent only on creating the impression that you are so much wiser and better informed than the rest of us.

 

I have known "roblock" on this forum for quite a few years now. I frequently, no, almost invariably, disagree with his interpretations, as he does with mine. We have clashed many times, and are in many ways poles apart, certainly in our political views, and from what I have discerned in our backgrounds as well. Yet neither of us has ever described the other as not having a clue, (although I did once call him a Teutonic pedant!); when we disagree we always offer our interpretations, and debate them. We don't rely upon enigmatic suggestions that we alone have the secrets...

 

By the way, an austere venue is an uncomfortable, spartanly furnished place. Are you sure that is what you mean?

Edited December 15, 2018 by JAG

[sjaak327]

3 hours ago, robblok said:

In your mind Thailand had a democracy and that is different.. while in reality they did not have a real democracy and in both cases the leaders were bleeding the country dry with corruption and breaking laws. Just because they got voted in make their crimes any better. Voting is just 1 of the things in a democracy, its not called a democracy if you don't follow all the rules of one. 

That does not mean there isn't a difference. Rob, one set of people forced themselves on us, and won't go away. The others were at any point in time accountable to the Thai electorate. And yes Rob the Thai had a democracy. that cannot possibly be denied. Let's hope they will get it back, the version as was envisioned in the 97 constitution that is. Getting sick and tired of the bullshit about Thailand not being a democracy to be used as a lame excuse for coups. 

 

the reason coups happen is because a tiny portion of the Thai still are not ready for democracy, it's that one percent that apparently owns 66% of the wealth. 

[Odysseus123]

9 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

I've always astounded [not really] towards those whom consider that they truly understand Thai society/affairs - yet, they clearly haven't a clue. Very prominent and common character trait within this austere venue...

As you say.

 

Whilst i am as equally astounded with the poor quality of the hired help.

[Odysseus123]

8 hours ago, JAG said:

zzaa09 replied:

I wouldn't say that I am astounded, although I have for some time found it irritating (now becoming tedious) that you repeatedly suggest that you (effectively alone) understand what is happening/has happened in the Thai political scene, and regret that others, including some long serving and thoughtful TVF commentators "don't have a clue". Yet to my knowledge you have never offered to share your wisdom or insight into what is happening. I have said it before, and I will say it again, I think you are an "empty vessel", intent only on creating the impression that you are so much wiser and better informed than the rest of us.

 

I have known "roblock" on this forum for quite a few years now. I frequently, no, almost invariably, disagree with his interpretations, as he does with mine. We have clashed many times, and are in many ways poles apart, certainly in our political views, and from what I have discerned in our backgrounds as well. Yet neither of us has ever described the other as not having a clue, (although I did once call him a Teutonic pedant!); when we disagree we always offer our interpretations, and debate them. We don't rely upon enigmatic suggestions that we alone have the secrets...

 

By the way, an austere venue is an uncomfortable, spartanly furnished place. Are you sure that is what you mean?

Well said.

[Vacuum]

On 12/13/2018 at 8:29 PM, webfact said:

Over the past four to five years, people have been suffering and falling under the burden of debt

Self-inflicted....

[robblok]

9 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

That does not mean there isn't a difference. Rob, one set of people forced themselves on us, and won't go away. The others were at any point in time accountable to the Thai electorate. And yes Rob the Thai had a democracy. that cannot possibly be denied. Let's hope they will get it back, the version as was envisioned in the 97 constitution that is. Getting sick and tired of the bullshit about Thailand not being a democracy to be used as a lame excuse for coups. 

 

the reason coups happen is because a tiny portion of the Thai still are not ready for democracy, it's that one percent that apparently owns 66% of the wealth. 

There is a marginal difference Sjaak and that is it, yes the others got voted in and then disregarded all other democratic principles. Then both of them start to bleed the country dry with corruption. Then yes the difference is getting voted in but I can't call it a true democracy in the way they behave break the laws and ignore the checks and balances. 

 

You keep acting like that is not the case, I can tell you if the checks and balances truly were adhered too the rice program and YL her investigation in it that did yield any results (surprise surprise) plus her bullying the whisleblower on the case would have ended far quicker and would not have needed an coup to get to the bottom of it all.  I could give you countless more examples of not working checks and balances and I think deep down you know its not working I cant believe anyone thinking checks and balances work with the huge corruption going on here. 

 

I don't care that your getting tired of it i get tired of you calling this a true democracy when it surely is not and all in power could not give a rats ass about it being a democracy or not as long as they are bleeding the country dry. 

 

The reason coups happen is because of money.. not because wealth distribution in your socialist mind that might be the reason. If there was no money to be made in goverment (no corruption and stealing) then there would not be such a vicious power struggle where both sides employ violence to get in power. Barharn even said that being in opposition is like starving yourself (guess what he means). I guess your projecting your western socialist ideas on a purely money thing. If it was about ideals then those mass defections would not happen. Coups will continue to happen for as long as corruption flourishes. All sides have the power to change this but none ever will as that is not why they are in politics. 

 

Anyway lets agree upon the fact that voted in here is marginally better but I wont agree that we have a full functioning democracy here with working checks and balances.  Its a kleptocracy if anything.

[HalfLight]

Hmmm. I'm really not sure if the euphoria generated by the proximity of elections is well-founded, and I fear for Thailand if Prayuth does not win.

 

I know that many think the new head boy authorised the coup in 2014 but I'm not so sure and never have been; I think that may have been a device for Prem to seal his own legacy and look what has happened to Prem - sidelined and just waiting to die - if he hasn't already. What worries me is the seldom reported or discussed fact that this latest coup differs from the previous coups in that the authority for the army performing it was not on prominent display, and hasn't been referred to in any way that I'm aware of.

 

Look also at the beefing up of security for the new head boy, who now literally has what is effectively his own army under the guise of a protection unit. 

 

Many people think the removal of the plaque was the doing of the new head boy, but if it was an initiative by Prayuth, would anyone be able to tell the difference? I just can't shake of the feeling that the new guy appears to be one thing while bolstering his own credentials. This might explain quite a lot, though I doubt it has much currency in the Thai rumour mill.

 

Whatever happens, I look at Prayuth/Prawit and fear for Thailand if he does not win, I confess to feeling no great optimism at the imminence of elections and I doubt this guy, who is clearly a narcissist in my view (narcissism being close to sociopathy) will simply accept the decision of the people if it does not go his way; and I doubt his coterie of boot-polishers will urge him to accept the results for fear of what might well be in store for them.

 

Perhaps I am comparing Thailand to a civilised (democratic) country and shouldn't do so...

 

 

[robblok]

12 hours ago, JAG said:

zzaa09 replied:

I wouldn't say that I am astounded, although I have for some time found it irritating (now becoming tedious) that you repeatedly suggest that you (effectively alone) understand what is happening/has happened in the Thai political scene, and regret that others, including some long serving and thoughtful TVF commentators "don't have a clue". Yet to my knowledge you have never offered to share your wisdom or insight into what is happening. I have said it before, and I will say it again, I think you are an "empty vessel", intent only on creating the impression that you are so much wiser and better informed than the rest of us.

 

I have known "roblock" on this forum for quite a few years now. I frequently, no, almost invariably, disagree with his interpretations, as he does with mine. We have clashed many times, and are in many ways poles apart, certainly in our political views, and from what I have discerned in our backgrounds as well. Yet neither of us has ever described the other as not having a clue, (although I did once call him a Teutonic pedant!); when we disagree we always offer our interpretations, and debate them. We don't rely upon enigmatic suggestions that we alone have the secrets...

 

By the way, an austere venue is an uncomfortable, spartanly furnished place. Are you sure that is what you mean?

I don't think you have a clue what he is saying, i know that I don't and just let him be. I wonder if he himself has any clue.

 

I just see this struggle as a non idealistic struggle but one about money and power. If it was idealistic those mass defections and such would not happen and they would have made laws to combat corruption instead of off the books loans and such. The people are just means to an end toss them a few scraps to get in power then whoever is in power enriches themselves and their buddies. I don't see a good side anymore.

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, HalfLight said:

Hmmm. I'm really not sure if the euphoria generated by the proximity of elections is well-founded, and I fear for Thailand if Prayuth does not win.

 

I know that many think the new head boy authorised the coup in 2014 but I'm not so sure and never have been; I think that may have been a device for Prem to seal his own legacy and look what has happened to Prem - sidelined and just waiting to die - if he hasn't already. What worries me is the seldom reported or discussed fact that this latest coup differs from the previous coups in that the authority for the army performing it was not on prominent display, and hasn't been referred to in any way that I'm aware of.

 

Look also at the beefing up of security for the new head boy, who now literally has what is effectively his own army under the guise of a protection unit. 

 

Many people think the removal of the plaque was the doing of the new head boy, but if it was an initiative by Prayuth, would anyone be able to tell the difference? I just can't shake of the feeling that the new guy appears to be one thing while bolstering his own credentials. This might explain quite a lot, though I doubt it has much currency in the Thai rumour mill.

 

Whatever happens, I look at Prayuth/Prawit and fear for Thailand if he does not win, I confess to feeling no great optimism at the imminence of elections and I doubt this guy, who is clearly a narcissist in my view (narcissism being close to sociopathy) will simply accept the decision of the people if it does not go his way; and I doubt his coterie of boot-polishers will urge him to accept the results for fear of what might well be in store for them.

 

Perhaps I am comparing Thailand to a civilised (democratic) country and shouldn't do so...

 

 

You should not compare it to a democracy a kleptocracy is more like it. Maybe its a beginning of a democracy.. but certainly NOT a full fledged working western democracy. 

 

I don't think anything will happen if Prayut loses (nothing violent anyway) and I don't think much will change if he loses just an other group of thieves in power. 

 

There wont be much violence as the people of Thailand have no real alternative to the thieves and have now learned not to lie down their life to bring new crooks to power. Give them a real good alternative and they might change but not the old politicians.

[HalfLight]

16 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

The day might come when we can't decipher the difference between the lot. 

As there really isn't any....

 

 

Opposition, indeed.

 

That's a very good observation imho. There really isn't any difference that hasn't been created by themselves for the sake of appearances. Any semblance of difference is accounted for Thaksin and his merry men (and women) wanting to be official robber barons and those already having that distinction not wanting nouveau-riche money in the club.

 

I believe everything in the past 15 years can be better understood by casting that baleful light on events.

 

 

 

 

[robblok]

13 hours ago, marqus12 said:

is it written for free??? or sib baht???

What are you babbling about ? 

[robblok]

6 minutes ago, HalfLight said:

 

That's a very good observation imho. There really isn't any difference that hasn't been created by themselves for the sake of appearances. Any semblance of difference is accounted for Thaksin and his merry men (and women) wanting to be official robber barons and those already having that distinction not wanting nouveau-riche money in the club.

 

I believe everything in the past 15 years can be better understood by casting that baleful light on events.

 

 

 

 

That is how i see it, not a socialist struggle just a power struggle to become part of the criminals feeding of the treasury. Before i saw Thaksin as bad, and he is but other Suthep are just as bad. I will keep commenting on all those robber barons on what side they are I don't care. 

 

Its all about the money, not about the people the sooner people understand that the sooner they understand that no progress will be made in Thailand until there is a viable alternative to those robber barons. (meaning a non corrupt party that really will work for the people)

 

 

[HalfLight]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

That is how i see it, not a socialist struggle just a power struggle to become part of the criminals feeding of the treasury. Before i saw Thaksin as bad, and he is but other Suthep are just as bad. I will keep commenting on all those robber barons on what side they are I don't care. 

 

Its all about the money, not about the people the sooner people understand that the sooner they understand that no progress will be made in Thailand until there is a viable alternative to those robber barons. (meaning a non corrupt party that really will work for the people)

 

 

 

Keep dreaming, dreams are good. Dreams have been the fundamental component of the previous 6+ decades of propaganda which moulded and formed the mess that we call modern Thailand. In my opinion, you should focus on dreaming dreams which have at least an outside chance of becoming reality.

 

Interesting to see reports of how this coup has enabled the rich to become richer in Thailand, yet I do not believe it is business as usual since the robber barons will not contemplate an interloper, no matter how much grease that interloper smears on the wheels of their machinations.

 

Comparing Thailand to anything but another tin-pot, 3rd-world country is attempting to explain that a cockroach has an intellect.

 

A cockroach is a cockroach, not a divine creature come to lead the land of cockroaches into the light.

 

 

 

[billd766]

2 hours ago, HalfLight said:

< snip>

 

Whatever happens, I look at Prayuth/Prawit and fear for Thailand if he does not win, I confess to feeling no great optimism at the imminence of elections and I doubt this guy, who is clearly a narcissist in my view (narcissism being close to sociopathy) will simply accept the decision of the people if it does not go his way; and I doubt his coterie of boot-polishers will urge him to accept the results for fear of what might well be in store for them.

 

Perhaps I am comparing Thailand to a civilised (democratic) country and shouldn't do so...

 

 

I fear for Thailand if he DOES win.

 

IMHO he will drive Thailand further back towards the dark ages of an absolute ruler.

 

OTOH if he does NOT win There is another Army commander who has threatened yet another military coup which in turn will drive Thailand further back towards the dark ages.

 

I think "interesting times" for Thailand is the future for the next several years.

[HalfLight]

46 minutes ago, billd766 said:

I fear for Thailand if he DOES win.

 

IMHO he will drive Thailand further back towards the dark ages of an absolute ruler.

 

OTOH if he does NOT win There is another Army commander who has threatened yet another military coup which in turn will drive Thailand further back towards the dark ages.

 

I think "interesting times" for Thailand is the future for the next several years.

 

I wonder if perhaps there's something in what you say. Personally, I think it's time that any non-military incoming government started ceasing general's pensions and started shooting some generals for treason as well as deleting their posts from the armed forces registries so they will never again be filled..

 

I doubt there'd be another coup  if it was perceived that was the likely result, one could argue that a part of the reason Thailand has had so many is that due retaliatory steps have never been taken against coup-makers.

 

 

Edited December 16, 2018 by HalfLight

[candide]

3 hours ago, robblok said:

That is how i see it, not a socialist struggle just a power struggle to become part of the criminals feeding of the treasury. Before i saw Thaksin as bad, and he is but other Suthep are just as bad. I will keep commenting on all those robber barons on what side they are I don't care. 

 

Its all about the money, not about the people the sooner people understand that the sooner they understand that no progress will be made in Thailand until there is a viable alternative to those robber barons. (meaning a non corrupt party that really will work for the people)

 

 

What you describe is essential to understand Thai politics. However, it doesn't mean that nothing else matters. There's a difference between promoting submission and the contrary. There's a difference between a logic of imposition and a logic of election. They are nearly all crooks, but chosing one's crook is not the same as being imposed one. Different types of crooks can make society move to different directions. Thaksin was a crook but because of him some people understood that they could make their own choice, that they too had some power.

After chosing crooks for a certain (long) time,  it can be expected that a learning process leads the people to chose non-crooks some day.

[robblok]

7 minutes ago, candide said:

What you describe is essential to understand Thai politics. However, it doesn't mean that nothing else matters. There's a difference between promoting submission and the contrary. There's a difference between a logic of imposition and a logic of election. They are nearly all crooks, but chosing one's crook is not the same as being imposed one. Different types of crooks can make society move to different directions. Thaksin was a crook but because of him some people understood that they could make their own choice, that they too had some power.

After chosing crooks for a certain (long) time,  it can be expected that a learning process leads the people to chose non-crooks some day.

If its not all about the money then explain to me the massive defections and people doing U turns in their political allegiance if they see they have more chance with an other party to make money. 

 

I don't see much difference between any of them and talking about submission.. do you remember YL in her expensive boots on pontoons while others waded. I don't see how she was any different in keeping the status quo between the have's and have not. They are just an other part of people who want to be elite.. not people who want to change the system for the better.

 

And yes its marginally better to have voted in crooks then those appointed, I hope that indeed one day the Thais wake up and start voting for non crooks and the country will change. But it wont unless better choices are available. 

[candide]

9 minutes ago, robblok said:

If its not all about the money then explain to me the massive defections and people doing U turns in their political allegiance if they see they have more chance with an other party to make money. 

The defections are caused by greed, although it is not sure they would make much less money otherwise. However they are also motivated by the fact that the political faction they turned to has the power to convict or not convict them.

 

As to my main point: Thai politicians may well be all motivated by greed, I don't desagree with you.  My point is that in order to reach their goal, they may be led to move the Thai society to different directions (independently of the fact that they may or may not believe in the ideals they profess). The yellow/green establishment logically promotes submission and a system based on appointments, in order to perpetuate itself. Their opponents have no other choice than to promote democratic values in order to get access to the gravy train. Even if they do it for money, even if they abuse these ideas, it contribute to move society to the right direction.

[robblok]

33 minutes ago, candide said:

The defections are caused by greed, although it is not sure they would make much less money otherwise. However they are also motivated by the fact that the political faction they turned to has the power to convict or not convict them.

 

As to my main point: Thai politicians may well be all motivated by greed, I don't desagree with you.  My point is that in order to reach their goal, they may be led to move the Thai society to different directions (independently of the fact that they may or may not believe in the ideals they profess). The yellow/green establishment logically promotes submission and a system based on appointments, in order to perpetuate itself. Their opponents have no other choice than to promote democratic values in order to get access to the gravy train. Even if they do it for money, even if they abuse these ideas, it contribute to move society to the right direction.

So we are moving from junta to kleptocracy.. in the hope it will evolve in a democracy. At least its a small step in the right direction. But Thailand has stayed so long in the kleptocracy stage without evolving I wonder if there is much to cheer about as those leading a kleptocracy would never want it to evolve further, just like a junta does not want to be without power.

[GarryP]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

If its not all about the money then explain to me the massive defections and people doing U turns in their political allegiance if they see they have more chance with an other party to make money. 

 

I don't see much difference between any of them and talking about submission.. do you remember YL in her expensive boots on pontoons while others waded. I don't see how she was any different in keeping the status quo between the have's and have not. They are just an other part of people who want to be elite.. not people who want to change the system for the better.

 

And yes its marginally better to have voted in crooks then those appointed, I hope that indeed one day the Thais wake up and start voting for non crooks and the country will change. But it wont unless better choices are available. 

The threat of further investigations into the rice mortgage scheme was enough to get those involved to shift allegiance. It was a tool used for that specific purpose - "you will be safe with us". 

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, GarryP said:

The threat of further investigations into the rice mortgage scheme was enough to get those involved to shift allegiance. It was a tool used for that specific purpose - "you will be safe with us". 

So obviously those guys were guilty of corruption (money) and now could keep it and were not prosecuted if they switched sides. That does not make me change my mind about the quality of Thai politicians (and the hypocrite junta for not prosecuting people).