Lets also note that yesterday the former president and first lady of Taiwan were convicted

for similar offenses to Thaksin's charges... Both got LIFE SENTENCES...

And MILLIONS of dollars in punitive fines.

And not a peep from them about; biased courts, third hands or corrupt elites.

The ONLY reason for Thaksin to do a runner over a dinky 2 years sentence,

is because he KNOWS full well there are many more charges and with factual basis's.

If he serves the 2 he likely will also not be able to avoid the following charges.

But there is a current new precedent for a former leader of the state to get HARSH punishment

for abusing his position for his own enrichment. Mr. and Mrs Chen will have

plenty of time to think about that one. And I bet Thaksin is not sleeping as well either...

Khun Publicus, Jom wasn't fired. He resigned himself.

Khun Publicus, Jom wasn't fired. He resigned himself.

A fine distinction indeed which regardless has the same effect as a summary dismissal. If anyone here screwed up big time and the bosses said resign or be fired, how could that be much of a choice or alternative? The guy blew it and was immediately forced out. Because the power and authority of the state is behind the forced departure of Jom, the state has to tread lightly lest it be seen as Thaksin and the reds claim it to be.

Jom was out of line and his motives need to be examined, however, MCOT also is obligated to provide more information and a detailed explanation of how Jom's outrageous invitation to Thaksin to an interview, made a month earlier, was allowed to occur and was allowed to stand apparently without notice or question until Thaksin did explosively take up Jom on his ill considered offer.

Who's running the place, who's aware of what the other hand is doing, and how and why was Jom allowed to run apparently free and unchecked in such a matter?

Who is more intimidated by the prospect of an inquiry, Jom or MCOT? Or if both, to what extent by each?

In short, how did this crazy thing happen and why? How to preclude this and any such additional disasters?

Politicians, former politicians, convicted politicians and public figures we dislike have proper names. Please use them. Posts deleted and stronger action will follow.

Already tried to ask SHYTALK some direct questions but he avoids them and goes for mindbogglingly dull rhetoric every time instead.

Hence it is clear he is a troll.

TAWP. SHYTALK may well be a troll, he obviously is a Thaksin supporter and it's patently clear he has different views from you, but he is entitled to his opinion in a democracy,Thaksin was not all bad he did some good things which you of course would never give him credit for being such a fervent yellow "cant do any wrong supporter" all Thai governments are the same, one for all and more for me, this country will never be a true democracy in your lifetime so wake up and recognize the failings on both sides and the lack of resolve to rectify the problems other than to announce yet another crackdown.

We know that opinions are like a**holes because everyone's got one including you or I. I don't read that anyone is calling for the forumist to be banned or threatened with sanctions or probation or anything of the sort.

Differing views are not the issue. The issue concerning the forumist is that he has for some time now become glib, trite, given to juveline schoolyard tripe and thus boring. The issue and rightly so is the quality of his posts. This we can comment on both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Already tried to ask SHYTALK some direct questions but he avoids them and goes for mindbogglingly dull rhetoric every time instead.

Hence it is clear he is a troll.

TAWP. SHYTALK may well be a troll, he obviously is a Thaksin supporter and it's patently clear he has different views from you, but he is entitled to his opinion in a democracy,Thaksin was not all bad he did some good things which you of course would never give him credit for being such a fervent yellow "cant do any wrong supporter" all Thai governments are the same, one for all and more for me, this country will never be a true democracy in your lifetime so wake up and recognize the failings on both sides and the lack of resolve to rectify the problems other than to announce yet another crackdown.

We know that opinions are like a**holes because everyone's got one including you or I. I don't read that anyone is calling for the forumist to be banned or threatened with sanctions or probation or anything of the sort.

Differing views are not the issue. The issue concerning the forumist is that he has for some time now become glib, trite, given to juveline schoolyard tripe and thus boring. The issue and rightly so is the quality of his posts. This we can comment on both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Now can we get back on topic?

I have wanted to post on this topic for a long time, The problem was i had to wade through so much crap i lost the plot.

Already tried to ask SHYTALK some direct questions but he avoids them and goes for mindbogglingly dull rhetoric every time instead.

Hence it is clear he is a troll.

TAWP. SHYTALK may well be a troll, he obviously is a Thaksin supporter and it's patently clear he has different views from you, but he is entitled to his opinion in a democracy,Thaksin was not all bad he did some good things which you of course would never give him credit for being such a fervent yellow "cant do any wrong supporter" all Thai governments are the same, one for all and more for me, this country will never be a true democracy in your lifetime so wake up and recognize the failings on both sides and the lack of resolve to rectify the problems other than to announce yet another crackdown.

We know that opinions are like a**holes because everyone's got one including you or I. I don't read that anyone is calling for the forumist to be banned or threatened with sanctions or probation or anything of the sort.

Differing views are not the issue. The issue concerning the forumist is that he has for some time now become glib, trite, given to juveline schoolyard tripe and thus boring. The issue and rightly so is the quality of his posts. This we can comment on both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Now can we get back on topic?

I have wanted to post on this topic for a long time, The problem was i had to wade through so much crap i lost the plot.

Scroll to top read it and comment, no one is stopping you. Except yourself.

The discussion about a disrupter purposely trying to make us all lose the

course of the discussion with non-sequiter comments is not a reason to forget your argument.

---------------------------------

If this reporter had balls, he would have stood his ground.

He did make a mistake asking for and doing the interview, and should have expected this reaction. But he should not have resigned.

He COULD have done a response interview, from an opposing position, and that might have given him more validity in his argument .

But he would have gotten more points for his argument of he had stood his ground till literally fired,

rather than submit to boilerplate pressure to resign.

Scroll to top read it and comment, no one is stopping you. Except yourself.

The discussion about a disrupter purposely trying to make us all lose the

course of the discussion with non-sequiter comments is not a reason to forget your argument

Discussion, what discussion the topic is about whether the interview should indeed have been carried out, this should be defined in law, either he has the legal right or he doesn't, if he does then I'm sure he could have found a sympathetic radio station to air Thaksins views on any subject he so desired given the rights of this DEMOCRACY, I use the term with tongue in cheek, with one exception.

Unfortunately this discussion has deteriorated into another round of rhetoric, ignore the posters from both sides of the fence and debate this issue.

Scroll to top read it and comment, no one is stopping you. Except yourself.

The discussion about a disrupter purposely trying to make us all lose the

course of the discussion with non-sequiter comments is not a reason to forget your argument

Discussion, what discussion the topic is about whether the interview should indeed have been carried out, this should be defined in law, either he has the legal right or he doesn't, if he does then I'm sure he could have found a sympathetic radio station to air Thaksins views on any subject he so desired given the rights of this DEMOCRACY, I use the term with tongue in cheek, with one exception.

Unfortunately this discussion has deteriorated into another round of rhetoric, ignore the posters from both sides of the fence and debate this issue.

Funny,

you completely ignored MY discussion of the topic, to continue your off topic diatribe.

Legal right, moral right and for the best interests of all are totally different concepts.

We get free speech, but still can't yell fire in a crowded theater.

Or publicly yell at troops to shoot the countries leader.

He should have thought about greater issues than just his 'Legal Ability' to do something.

We can do many things legally that should NOT be done for very logical reasons in many situations.