rixalex Posted March 21, 2010 Share Posted March 21, 2010 Sure in 2001, the TRT won the elections with 40,6% of the votes.But everybody, it seems, has forgotten that in order to obtain a comfortable and total majority, TS cooked a deal with both the New Aspriration Party (Chavalit) and the Thai Nation Party. This gave him a comfortable 325 seats on 500... It's something even the BBC seems to like to forget. Number of times i have seen them talk about Thaksin's two landslide victories... Makes you wonder.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted March 21, 2010 Share Posted March 21, 2010 What is it about making people abide by the law, that you find revolting? Possibly the fact that these laws are used about as arbitrarily as possible? Nah, that couldn't be it, surely You can quote pretty much any passage from the Constitutional Laws and see it applied, or not . . . whoever seems to be in power Yes i agree, but where as i find it revolting when laws are not applied as they should be, others seem to find it revolting when they are. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sing_Sling Posted March 21, 2010 Share Posted March 21, 2010 (edited) What is it about making people abide by the law, that you find revolting? Possibly the fact that these laws are used about as arbitrarily as possible? Nah, that couldn't be it, surely You can quote pretty much any passage from the Constitutional Laws and see it applied, or not . . . whoever seems to be in power Yes i agree, but where as i find it revolting when laws are not applied as they should be, others seem to find it revolting when they are. Go figure. But that is precisely the point, the arbitrary nature of their application makes them useless . . . or very useful. The way I see it, the only place (derogatory nickname removed) has the moral authority <shudder> here is the fact that he was elected into his office, irrespective of the alliances he may or may not have had to make. Edited March 21, 2010 by 7by7 See post below Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted March 21, 2010 Share Posted March 21, 2010 (edited) Yes i agree, but where as i find it revolting when laws are not applied as they should be, others seem to find it revolting when they are. Go figure. But that is precisely the point, the arbitrary nature of their application makes them useless . . . or very useful. They are useless when people in power manage to dodge round them. In the case of Samak, he wasn't able to. That's a good thing right? We should notch one small victory up for justice and call for other politicians to face the same fate. But no, people continue to come on here and defend Samak and blame the courts. They have it all upside down. These same people defend Thaksin in exactly the same way. "Thaksin wasn't the first corrupt Prime Minister, so why should he have to face justice?" type of nonsense. The way I see it, the only place (derogatory nickname removed) has the moral authority <shudder> here is the fact that he was elected into his office, irrespective of the alliances he may or may not have had to make. Same goes for Abhisit. Edited March 21, 2010 by 7by7 See post below Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sing_Sling Posted March 21, 2010 Share Posted March 21, 2010 (edited) Absolutely, Samak not dodging the la was a good thing . . . as for Abhisit being on par with (derogatory nickname removed) on the election issue . . . well, that's simply not the case, is it?! I think (derogatory nickname removed) is a mass-murderer who should be in prison for human rights violations, allowing death squads to be formed and operate etc etc etc . . . but that doesn't mean what the current mob are doing is any more legitimate, just look at the current foreign minister. The mire of Thai politics is so vile that it beggars belief Edited March 21, 2010 by 7by7 See post below Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted March 21, 2010 Share Posted March 21, 2010 (edited) Absolutely, Samak not dodging the la was a good thing . . . as for Abhisit being on par with (derogatory nickname removed) on the election issue . . . well, that's simply not the case, is it?! In terms of out and out popularity, no Abhisit is not on par. In terms of being legitimately in power, yes he is. Edited March 21, 2010 by 7by7 See post below Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7by7 Posted March 21, 2010 Share Posted March 21, 2010 I have edited some posts, and others quoting them, to remove a derogatory nickname. Kindly refer to politicians, and others, by their real names in future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penefattore Posted March 22, 2010 Share Posted March 22, 2010 I did not bother to read the whole thread, just the first post....it's a joke, right ? I mean, we all know Abhisit was appointed by Tinsulanonda at gunpoint. He is just a puppet put there to take all the blame for the crimes committed by those who really rule the country.An idiot actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anotherpeter Posted March 22, 2010 Author Share Posted March 22, 2010 I did not bother to read the whole thread, just the first post....it's a joke, right ? I mean, we all know Abhisit was appointed by Tinsulanonda at gunpoint. He is just a puppet put there to take all the blame for the crimes committed by those who really rule the country.An idiot actually. No. I didn't know that. At gunpoint?? Really?? What crimes is he taking the blame for? An idiot? Are there a lot of idiots out there with degrees from Oxford? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaihome Posted March 22, 2010 Share Posted March 22, 2010 The coup led to an election that saw a Thaksin backed government installed. There is no link between the coup and the current government, no matter how many times one might proclaim it. Actually, but for the coup, Thailand might well now be controlled by dictator Thaksin. After they were bought by the Military and Ruling Elite the forty Phue Thai Mps crossed the floor and joined Abhisit. They then formed a new party called Bhumjaithai Party. A party that has never stood for election That's a bit of an exaggeration. BJT = Friends of Newin + reincarnated Matchima Thippathai (+ 2 other MPs). And the BJT won the Prachinburi by-election in January. January when? Bhumjaitai party was founded at the end of 2008. Janurary 2010. The Bhumjaithai Party won some 60% of the vote against the Puea Thai candidate TH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonrakers Posted March 22, 2010 Share Posted March 22, 2010 (edited) Of course it was politically motivated, it was a petty little thing and probably would not have happened if it was another PM. However, the man was a un-repenting murderous b@stard who should never been allowed anywhere near the job. It was incredibly irresponsible and provocative of the PPP to appoint him and I wonder how many votes they would have got had the electorate known beforehand that Samak would become PM. Edited March 22, 2010 by Moonrakers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7by7 Posted March 22, 2010 Share Posted March 22, 2010 Two posts discussing moderation removed. No warnings given; this time. If anyone has a problem or question about moderation they should contact either the Mod concerned by PM or support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now