Outgoing Pm's Office Minister Is ... Angry?!

[chevykanteve]

BangkokPost.com

Outgoing PM's Office minister Thirapat Serirangsan issued a scathing challenge to the new government on Friday: Put ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra on trial or face new street protests.

He also warned the new government of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej against granting an amnesty to Mr Thaksin, who was banned from politics for five years - along with 110 political allies - by the Constitution Tribunal last May.

Defying current wisdom, he insisted the Sept 19, 2006, coup against Mr Thaksin was justified, even though his allies have swept back into power after elections in December.

And the outgoing minister, who helped organise huge street rallies aginst the Thaksin government in 2006, defended the government he served, which is currently being criticised as ineffective and worse.

"The military coup made a positive contribution to Thailand, which was not under democratic rule but under a democracy used for the benefit of capitalists," Mr Thirapat told reporters.

"Today I declare myself the eternal enemy of anyone who exploits democracy by interfering in the judicial process, or in independent agencies such as the National Counter Corruption Commission.

"People who love justice will rise up and our country will plunge into mutiny" unless the cases against Mr Thaksin proceed, he vowed.............

[britmaveric]

Laffable - we all knew what the result would be after they decided to have their hissy fit and stage a coup. Thaskin will get amnesty and be back in as PM sooner rather than later.

[pete_r]

So much for national reconciliation...

[jackspratt]

So much for national reconciliation...

So much for rule of law.....

[Lilawadee]

So much for giving post a (sub)title that's consistent with the content of the article.

I agree with the article, but no need to spin it even more as it's paints the picture of this individual's mindset very well just by itself.

There was another interesting article in either the BKK Post or Nation (most likely BKK Post, as Nation is still biased beyond belief), but anyway I couldn't find it in the web edition to lift and post here. It was about Human Rights Watch again bashing the military for staging the coup, and highlighting the terrible consequences once again. Thailand was listed with the 'usual suspect' no-hope basket case countries. (As well as Russia, though, which they're also concerned about.)

[Prakanong]

So much for national reconciliation...

So much for rule of law.....

Exactly - overthrowing democratically elected governments at gunpoint is not seen as legal by the international community - even the USA took their money away from the military in Thailand because of it.

[Siripon]

How many NGOs disappeared under Thaksin's watch? Over 15

Under the military?

How many died in the drug's war? And as mentioned by the 'neutral' Bangkok Post today in reference to the recent terrible crimes of the border police planting drugs- how many of those cases in the drugs war were drugs planted?

Every TV programme that criticised Thaksin was removed- ask Dr Chermsak.

Every newspaper that criticised Thaksin had adverts withdrawn, both Shin and government agencies.

Thaksin was far worse, in part because he pretended, and still does, to be a democrat.

Edited February 3, 2008 by Siripon

[Lilawadee]

Give me one good reason why Thaksin should have kept throwing ad money at rags like The Nation even after they kept persisting in peddling lies?

I wouldn't.

I actually stopped buying it, so maybe that's anti democratic too? It's called taking your business elsewhere, and I for one applaud the good doctor for it.

Edited February 4, 2008 by Lilawadee

[Siripon]

Give me one good reason why Thaksin should have kept throwing ad money at rags like The Nation even after they kept persisting in peddling lies?

I wouldn't.

I actually stopped buying it, so maybe that's anti democratic too? It's called taking your business elsewhere, and I for one applaud the good doctor for it.

Thaksin didn't really care about The Nation, he was concerned about Thai Rath, Daily News and The Matichon, phone calls made sure negative stories didn't appear, the threat of loss of advertising , both state and Shin was enough for a long time. But in was on TV where he really excelled at censorship, buying up ITV and cancelling any critical talk shows.

[Lilawadee]

And I guess martial law and enforced censorship from men with guns is preferable?

Thank god that's largely at an end. Until the next coup, of course. Nice way to develop a country..

[MengWan]

So much for national reconciliation...

So much for rule of law.....

Exactly - overthrowing democratically elected governments at gunpoint is not seen as legal by the international community - even the USA took their money away from the military in Thailand because of it.

I was a big fan of "western-style" democracy (say idolizing).

The "western-style" reactions to the coup made me understand and made me change my mind !

Thanks a lot to you and the fans of "Mr Thaksin", I'm now undecided, between a totally corrupt "democratically-elected gov" (how much ?) and a wise and honest "dictatorship" ...

Remains the vote-buying question, can someone explain to me (poor graded mind) how can "democracy" be based on vote-buying ?

[Lilawadee]

Remains the vote-buying question, can someone explain to me (poor graded mind) how can "democracy" be based on vote-buying ?

Sure.

Vote buying in the West

A, the right: "Vote for me and I will lower your taxes! Money for you!!"

B, the left: "Vote for me and I will subsidize your rent, offer free health care and other cool handouts! Money for you!!"

Vote buying in the Eest

"Vote for me and here's all the Changs you can drink, and by the way come vote tomorrow and here's a cool x00 baht."

Now, my personal opinion is that Thaksin at least moved towards the Western style of vote buying, namely with a lot of populist programs that poor people benefitted from, and actually kept his promises to them (another first). This is why he is the first and still only Thai political figure to ever get re-elected, and with an absolute majority at that. International observers recognized that in Thaksin's second election victory, there was overall less vote buying than ever. Of course you could argue that this is just because a successful move to the Western model of buying support, but I guess that must be just fine & dandy in a democracy.

Edited February 5, 2008 by Lilawadee

[jbowman1993]

Remains the vote-buying question, can someone explain to me (poor graded mind) how can "democracy" be based on vote-buying ?

Sure.

Vote buying in the West

A, the right: "Vote for me and I will lower your taxes! Money for you!!"

B, the left: "Vote for me and I will subsidize your rent, offer free health care and other cool handouts! Money for you!!"

Vote buying in the Eest

"Vote for me and here's all the Changs you can drink, and by the way come vote tomorrow and here's a cool x00 baht."

Now, my personal opinion is that Thaksin at least moved towards the Western style of vote buying, namely with a lot of populist programs that poor people benefitted from, and actually kept his promises to them (another first). This is why he is the first and still only Thai political figure to ever get re-elected, and with an absolute majority at that. International observers recognized that in Thaksin's second election victory, there was overall less vote buying than ever. Of course you could argue that this is just because a successful move to the Western model of buying support, but I guess that must be just fine & dandy in a democracy.

We finally agree on something Lil. This is spot on, except for the highlighted part, which we will have to agree to disagree on.

[MengWan]

Remains the vote-buying question, can someone explain to me (poor graded mind) how can "democracy" be based on vote-buying ?

Sure.

Vote buying in the West

A, the right: "Vote for me and I will lower your taxes! Money for you!!"

B, the left: "Vote for me and I will subsidize your rent, offer free health care and other cool handouts! Money for you!!"

Vote buying in the Eest

"Vote for me and here's all the Changs you can drink, and by the way come vote tomorrow and here's a cool x00 baht."

Now, my personal opinion is that Thaksin at least moved towards the Western style of vote buying, namely with a lot of populist programs that poor people benefitted from, and actually kept his promises to them (another first). This is why he is the first and still only Thai political figure to ever get re-elected, and with an absolute majority at that. International observers recognized that in Thaksin's second election victory, there was overall less vote buying than ever. Of course you could argue that this is just because a successful move to the Western model of buying support, but I guess that must be just fine & dandy in a democracy.

OK, that kind of answer is just too cynical for me ...

1.Is any politician that promises to govern properly (so a lot gets better) is "buying" votes ?

2.Is "the West" always good and "the others" always bad ?

The "totally corrupt" style of government that you seem to applaude is indeed self-sustainable, one needs to get elected just once and seize all levers of power (in the case of vote-buying that is MONEY).

I am puzzled to hear, talking about corruption, the double language in "the West", where one tends to despise any "other" country for its corruption but, when dealing with its politicians, finds a very easy middle-ground because those can be "bought" and finally disserve their people instead of serving it.

I thought that democracy was defined as the government for the people, in its name and for its interests and not simply the fact that the government is more or less the result of an electoral process.

I was always labelled naïve ...

[MrSnrang]

The thing about Thaksin is that while he did some good he also did too much in his own interests and abused his power.

Closing bars, street-killings of drug peddlers, beating up protesters with personal bodyguards, saying he wouldn't sell his company then the newt day it's been sold to Singapore, media censorship, an unnecessary airport, practically useless healthcare scheme, the list goes on.

Thaksin was a businessman, he did what he could not because he wanted the poor to have a better life, but because it allowed him to make as much money as he could.