I'll Pick My Own Cabinet: Yingluck

[Buchholz]

Of course, we believe you Yingluck Shinawatra... You and you alone will pick your own cabinet !!!

[cup-O-coffee]

Just my opinion, but I presume he is referring to myself and every other Thai person, the majority that is, who DID NOT vote Pheu Thai. I respect those who voted for them, and they won by a significant margin, but that does not mean that the actual majority of voters in this country did indeed vote for Thaksin. We are also Thai and our opinion also matters. Coups are indeed morally and ethically wrong, as were the shenanigans of Thaksin Shinawatra and his clan. Two wrongs does not make a right. We are now in opposition and our job is to question the government, or do you think that we should all just roll over and let them do whatever they want to do? Come on, this is democracy. When you were in opposition you had every right to criticise and question the government, do we not get the right to do the same? I am getting quite tired of the farang on this forum who declare that the Thais have voted and everyone should shut up. Yes we voted, they won, and we will still question their behaviour if we deem it unfit. Fair nuff?

I for one say absolutely fair enough. I wish you all the best. I hope you do not hurt any people in the process of protesting, though. Good for you for sticking up for your rights.

You are a little confused it is the red shirtPT colition that hurt people in their protest.

I was not here when Thaksin ruled. I have however heard much about him what he had done for the poor. My question is why are they so hard done by today if he did so much for them?

My mother in law now enjoys a peaceful life she is no longer looking to save a cetong. Thaksin had nothing to do with it. It was and is my joyfully given money that has made this difference in her life.

Why? Good question. Ask that same question about any country, where a house divided will always fall. The governments are never really of one mindset, and hence nothing really ever gets done during any administration anymore. It seems the incumbents get halfway through their term and then start campaigning again. And the rest of the time they are fighting and bickering on the floor of Parliament, etc; striking backdoor deals that the people have no idea about, and adding on coat tail deals that the people have no idea about. Most are usually corporate driven. This is a crime, in my mind. It is evil to do that to the people, without their knowledge. People elect human beings to represent them and keep them up to snuff. People do not elect gods to do as they please. Screw trust! I'll take accountability any day. I want to know what they are ratifying, right down to the smallest detail of where the satang goes. Ain't gonna happen. That is a crime! And posters point at Thaksin? On the principles that my opponents embrace, is a billion of more issue than a satang, if a politician is breaking the law? Well, I leave you to answer that. When is too much too much? And why not any amount too much, and dam_n them all for singling out one of their own, and forgetting the people in the row that follows? I am sure you have a fair minded answer if you look around and measure the weight of both sides. You'll get plenty of one side here on TV, and a fair amount of the other elsewhere in the Internet.

I am glad your mother has such a loving and giving daughter. I am certain that Thaksin has nothing to do with that. Why is that important with regard to Mr. Thaksin's achievements? He also had nothing to do with the construction of the Hoover Dam, as well. I make this point respectfully, of course. If we were to air a laundry list of most politicians, then I am certain Mr. Thaksin would have a lot of company. It's simply that for some inane reason, he is the scapegoat, and he is not liking it one bit. Knowing what I know about the nature of the beast here in LO$, I cannot say I blame him for not liking it at this point. Who would? Really! You wouldn't, would you? Ignorant and noble people get the bullets in the chest. Older and wiser people edit history. If you want to survive in this life, you must dispense with the noble behavior and not walk where angels fear to tread.

My main thesis seems to be focusing on the will of the people. They are willing to forgive him, but the media keeps stirring the pot by panning in on the mugs of anti Thaksin personalities. The media keeps typing sardonic and insidious articles about this man. He hurt them in the past, and they are having their day. The media is a waste of time. I am old enough to have seen good news reporting in the past. Today's media is 95% prostituted to the highest bidder. Most articles are biased, brain melting smut and rubbish. That will end soon, I suspect. One can either see the reason of the will of the people, or one can engage in the ignorance and stupidity of Thaksin's peers judging and convicting him over issues that are a bygone issue in the minds of the people. Shooting the wounded brother is not an option for this country! It sends a message much like the criminal GW; "You are either for us or against us!". That is a euphemistic approach to telling the people that "we will end you if you do not do what we say". The pots calling the kettle black is a moot issue. Let's have the pots stop clanging against the wall, and begin making soup for the people, and the kettles stop rattling on the hook, and begin pouring the tea for the people. That's my view anyways, although there's nothing much else I can do about it, except air it our on a fine forum like this.

Edited July 27, 2011 by cup-O-coffee

[hellodolly]

Just my opinion, but I presume he is referring to myself and every other Thai person, the majority that is, who DID NOT vote Pheu Thai. I respect those who voted for them, and they won by a significant margin, but that does not mean that the actual majority of voters in this country did indeed vote for Thaksin. We are also Thai and our opinion also matters. Coups are indeed morally and ethically wrong, as were the shenanigans of Thaksin Shinawatra and his clan. Two wrongs does not make a right. We are now in opposition and our job is to question the government, or do you think that we should all just roll over and let them do whatever they want to do? Come on, this is democracy. When you were in opposition you had every right to criticise and question the government, do we not get the right to do the same? I am getting quite tired of the farang on this forum who declare that the Thais have voted and everyone should shut up. Yes we voted, they won, and we will still question their behaviour if we deem it unfit. Fair nuff?

I for one say absolutely fair enough. I wish you all the best. I hope you do not hurt any people in the process of protesting, though. Good for you for sticking up for your rights.

You are a little confused it is the red shirtPT colition that hurt people in their protest.

I was not here when Thaksin ruled. I have however heard much about him what he had done for the poor. My question is why are they so hard done by today if he did so much for them?

My mother in law now enjoys a peaceful life she is no longer looking to save a cetong. Thaksin had nothing to do with it. It was and is my joyfully given money that has made this difference in her life.

Why? Good question. Ask that same question about any country, where a house divided will always fall. The governments are never really of one mindset, and hence nothing really ever gets done during any administration anymore. It seems the incumbents get halfway through their term and then start campaigning again. And the rest of the time they are fighting and bickering on the floor of Parliament, etc; striking backdoor deals that the people have no idea about, and adding on coat tail deals that the people have no idea about. Most are usually corporate driven. This is a crime, in my mind. It is evil to do that to the people, without their knowledge. People elect human beings to represent them and keep them up to snuff. People do not elect gods to do as they please. Screw trust! I'll take accountability any day. I want to know what they are ratifying, right down to the smallest detail of where the satang goes. Ain't gonna happen. That is a crime! And posters point at Thaksin? On the principles that my opponents embrace, is a billion of more issue than a satang, if a politician is breaking the law? Well, I leave you to answer that. When is too much too much? And why not any amount too much, and dam_n them all for singling out one of their own, and forgetting the people in the row that follows? I am sure you have a fair minded answer if you look around and measure the weight of both sides. You'll get plenty of one side here on TV, and a fair amount of the other elsewhere in the Internet.

I am glad your mother has such a loving and giving daughter. I am certain that Thaksin has nothing to do with that. Why is that important with regard to Mr. Thaksin's achievements? He also had nothing to do with the construction of the Hoover Dam, as well. I make this point respectfully, of course. If we were to air a laundry list of most politicians, then I am certain Mr. Thaksin would have a lot of company. It's simply that for some inane reason, he is the scapegoat, and he is not liking it one bit. Knowing what I know about the nature of the beast here in LO$, I cannot say I blame him for not liking it at this point. Who would? Really! You wouldn't, would you? Ignorant and noble people get the bullets in the chest. Older and wiser people edit history. If you want to survive in this life, you must dispense with the noble behavior and not walk where angels fear to tread.

My main thesis seems to be focusing on the will of the people. They are willing to forgive him, but the media keeps stirring the pot by panning in on the mugs of anti Thaksin personalities. The media keeps typing sardonic and insidious articles about this man. He hurt them in the past, and they are having their day. The media is a waste of time. I am old enough to have seen good news reporting in the past. Today's media is 95% prostituted to the highest bidder. Most articles are biased, brain melting smut and rubbish. That will end soon, I suspect. One can either see the reason of the will of the people, or one can engage in the ignorance and stupidity of Thaksin's peers judging and convicting him over issues that are a bygone issue in the minds of the people. Shooting the wounded brother is not an option for this country! It sends a message much like the criminal GW; "You are either for us or against us!". That is a euphemistic approach to telling the people that "we will end you if you do not do what we say". The pots calling the kettle black is a moot issue. Let's have the pots stop clanging against the wall, and begin making soup for the people, and the kettles stop rattling on the hook, and begin pouring the tea for the people. That's my view anyways, although there's nothing much else I can do about it, except air it our on a fine forum like this.

In other words you have no answer to my question.

[Colin Yai]

I think you misunderstand what I am saying. I have no love for either PTP or the Dems. (that's just comparing sh*t with cr*p)

As a matter of principle it is wrong to allow a criminal to become involved in the formation of the government. For me the government needs to uphold the ideals and principles which it seeks it citizens to have [and respect for the rule of law must be one of those principles]. If (as you suggest) they take advice from criminals on the basis of it being 'good advice' and therefore acceptable you are leading your own people down a very rocky road by setting a very bad example.

Do you think it is a principled, ethical and moral thing to do to take advice from a criminal? If you do think it is acceptable, then at what stage does it become unacceptable? How far down that road must you travel?

For me it seems a no brainer - It's a Yes / No answer.

Any government which throws aside the basic cultural and social values is morally corrupt from the start. Is that the role model we seek for our children?

Edit - Thailand needs a fresh start, but this fingering by taskin is picking at the scab of the past.

At jonclark: Mr. Thaksin is an intelligent human being, who does have a record of progressive improvements to Thailand's economic and social welfare, regardless of whether you wish to focus on that. It seems clear that your contribution to what is a reality would rather take that reality and shove it backwards using a law that also provides the ruling powers to overturn as an eventuality. Add to that any distinct possibility of a pardon and you will be in a tight place and not able to comment against that.

The people have spoken. The PM gets to chose her cabinet. That is the letter of the law. As the newly elected PM, she also gets to use her powers to look into any suspected wrongdoing of the past, and overturn anything through the means of the letter of the law that you righteously quote. That is the beauty of it all, and yet it is also the bane of it all for those who don't like to play nice.

I understand your comments above, but they simply do not make any sense outside of your own personal views. The same goes for me. The current law that you refer to will eventually change. Will you accept that, or will you become a law breaker, or a protestor of the law, much like someone we all describe. And where will your credibility be then?

As I have observed just about every kind of sick and childish remark against Mr. Thaksin, it is my opinion that people need to face up to the facts of the times. As long as you live here, you are condoning the laws of the Kingdom; to abide by them them no matter how they turn, or to nobly depart from this land as a suggestion, and as a form of silent protest.

So I ask the inevitable certainty that haunts all the Thaksin hater's minds; will you in fact obey the laws and respect the laws and cease and desist in your character assassinations of Mr. Thaksin in the event he is vindicated using the very laws you gleefully and childishly ascribe against him at present? Hint: There is only one legally correct answer for anyone, including any who senselessly rage on about this man.

To the mods: I had to delete some quotes from this original post because I couldn't post without doing so. I selected jonclark's post, respectfully. If I did wrong, then I apologize and will delete this post haste.

And to your last question, if Thaksin was indeed innocent of his accused deeds (which of course he is not, he did sign the document, it was illegal of him to do so while in his position of PM, and by signing it, was correctly punished) then of course I obey the letter of the law. Explain to me how he was not wrong? My question to you is why should he be above the law? I don't understand your question, he broke the law, what is there to change? The law itself? I have a deep dislike of Thaksin, have done so for 11 odd years, that is based on my deep dislike of his behaviour and disregard of the law. So, I do find it rather ironic that you are using the law, which he regularly broke, to defend him.

Hmm, a deep dislike for Thaksin eh , it would appear you are pretty shrewd judge of character!!. Edited July 27, 2011 by Colin Yai

[SomTumTiger]

Thailand's new Minister of Culture

[Sao Jiang Mai]

Cup-o-Coffee. Whether the law is an ideal that can not be lived up to or an ass, is irrelevant. It is still the law of the land. And however unsavoury the characters of those who brought him to court were are also irrelevant. And yes, I have read up on what he did. It was pretty clear cut. In his position he had no right to sign that document. If I was caught doing something illegal, which won't happen, as I don't, then I would man up - as it were - and take my punishment. It is the law. If you don't like the law, change it, but at the time the law stood, it was broken by Thaksin. Simple really. I don't think it is at all acceptable for you to say that if he fiddled with the rich's money you wouldn't give a hoot because he helped the poor. So, shall we just throw all laws out of the window and use our guts and insticts to judge people? To run the country? Or does society have to function with in a - flawed - framework? I would rather have law and order, which can at times be misapplied, than none at all. And by the way I don't hate Thaksin, I deeply dislike him. Hate is too strong a word. I don't trust him, I know he is not good for my country as a whole, even though I admit he is good for swathes of it, I don't think anyone else is good for the whole country right now either, but I don't trust Thaksin and his intentions and since he is legally (whatever you say of the case, it is legal) convicted, he doesn't have any right to this country anymore. While I wish he will go away, I know he won't. While I want to support the new Pheu Thai government, and have nothing against Yingluck, I can't do so without deep cynicism, since I know who is lurking around the background. There is nothing black and white about this whole situation we are all in, but the law should be one area in which it is indeed clearly black and white.

[Ricardo]

funny how people here pick on her already, yet not know what she's actually like yet

oh how sour the defeated can be

Equally odd how some here are willing to trust a relatively-unknown & inexperienced person, with the country's top political job, at a time of social upheaval & division, yet not know what she's actually like yet.

I only hope that their, and the 48.4% of the electorate-that-voted's, trust is not misplaced. We shall see.

[maidu]

funny how people here pick on her already, yet not know what she's actually like yet

oh how sour the defeated can be

Few know what she's really like. She may not know herself. She had no problem being labeled a clone of her brother. To most people, being called a 'clone' of someone is denigrating. Let's assume she is just like him. Can we then expect her to profess to take responsibility after a crisis situation (...for any future problems in southern Thailand, as Thaksin claimed after the Krue Say massacre) but not take any responsibility when things go horribly wrong awhile later (as he did after the nearly 100 Krue Sae deaths - all happened while he was in charge of operations.

Will she be expected to continue Thaksin's habit of lying about his assets, and avoiding taxes? Will she be expected to follow her brother's lead, and lie about nearly everything else? Just one of hundreds of examples: When T was being interviewed during the first Red riot in Bkk, 2009, T said unequivically, "many people have been murdered in Bangkok by the soldiers." Of course he was dead wrong on that, as he's been wrong on just about every other emphatic statement he's made in the past nine years. Let's see if the lady can break away from the puppet-strings in her brother's hand and, hopefully, do some tangible good for Thailand.