webfact Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Yingluck denies linkage between Thaksin and govt Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on Wednesday insisted there was no linkage between her government and her brother Thaksin. Yingluck was reacting to news reports on two issues - charter rewrite and Thaksin's planned visit to Cambodia. "The charter rewrite will be done to heed the voice of the people," she said, pointing to a popular demand to restore the suspended 1997 charter and denying the amendments would help Thaksin elude his conviction and imprisonment. She said her government would leave it to Parliament to take charge of the rewrite. Although the government's policy statement mentioned charter amendments as a top priority to complete in its first year in office, she said her government did not specify a three-month timetable as many had speculated. She said her only stand to amend the charter was to ensure the people's involvement in the rewriting process and that Parliament would decide whether to conduct a referendum on the matter. She urged critics to review the amended provisions before criticising her government for helping Thaksin elude the law. Commenting on Thaksin's upcoming visit to Phnom Penh, she said her brother's trip was private. Thaksin did not represent the Thai government in his talks with Cambodian leaders, she said. -- The Nation 2011-08-17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Why bother lying about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 If there is a problem with the current constitution, then fix it. There is no point going back to a flawed constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 If there is a problem with the current constitution, then fix it. There is no point going back to a flawed constitution. It the popular demand, she said. Brought you in a free election and not with a coup, tanks in the street, emergency laws and undemocratic circumstances. Regardless of how the current constitution came into being, there's no reason to go back to a flawed constitution. Just fix the current one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 If there is a problem with the current constitution, then fix it. There is no point going back to a flawed constitution. It the popular demand, she said. Brought you in a free election and not with a coup, tanks in the street, emergency laws and undemocratic circumstances. Was there a box on the voting form that said 'please change the constitution any way you like it'? Getting elected doesn't mean you have a carte blanche mandate on every issue, particularly when you hadn't got around to publishing your policies. That's just cheap political rhetoric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 If there is a problem with the current constitution, then fix it. There is no point going back to a flawed constitution. It the popular demand, she said. Brought you in a free election and not with a coup, tanks in the street, emergency laws and undemocratic circumstances. Was there a box on the voting form that said 'please change the constitution any way you like it'? Getting elected doesn't mean you have a carte blanche mandate on every issue, particularly when you hadn't got around to publishing your policies. That's just cheap political rhetoric. According to Weng they are going to have two referenda one to ask whether to base the new charter on 1997 or 2007 and one to then put all the proposed changes that a drafting commission come up with to the people. Before doing either they will change a single section to allow the establishment of a drafting commission. This will be the most democratic way the charter has ever been changed if this is followed Lets not forget a constitution was ripped up after a coup and a new one written and then put to referenda with the fall back being the military would select an old one of their choice if it was voted down. Lets not also forget the last government changed a few bits of the current constitution seemingly to allow a system to help them in a vote. Bearing all that in mind and trying to be even handed it is hard to criticise what PTP are proposing as the people will have the say, and they can vote how they want. In the meantime the media, Dems and other interested power players can start putting their arguements forward for what they want in the charter and for what version they prefer. To just say it isnt necessary is to avoid reality of conflict and to deny a government its right to enact its policies which both the coup installed and the opportunist Abhisit government took without any kind of mandate. Lets let conflict be resolved by democracy and not by trying to resist it. When Abhisit said the last election was a let the people decide one he was right and it was even maybe an admirable statement. Now maybe that spirit should be allowed to grow. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I think her pants may be on fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraplung Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Of course there is no connection between the Pheu Thai government and Pheu Thai's de facto leader and bankroller. Whyever would anyone think there was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pi Sek Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 According to Weng they are going to have two referenda one to ask whether to base the new charter on 1997 or 2007 and one to then put all the proposed changes that a drafting commission come up with to the people. Before doing either they will change a single section to allow the establishment of a drafting commission. This will be the most democratic way the charter has ever been changed if this is followed Lets not forget a constitution was ripped up after a coup and a new one written and then put to referenda with the fall back being the military would select an old one of their choice if it was voted down. Lets not also forget the last government changed a few bits of the current constitution seemingly to allow a system to help them in a vote. Bearing all that in mind and trying to be even handed it is hard to criticise what PTP are proposing as the people will have the say, and they can vote how they want. In the meantime the media, Dems and other interested power players can start putting their arguements forward for what they want in the charter and for what version they prefer. To just say it isnt necessary is to avoid reality of conflict and to deny a government its right to enact its policies which both the coup installed and the opportunist Abhisit government took without any kind of mandate. Lets let conflict be resolved by democracy and not by trying to resist it. When Abhisit said the last election was a let the people decide one he was right and it was even maybe an admirable statement. Now maybe that spirit should be allowed to grow. I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. One skepticism I hold, though, is how the referendum will take place. After the event, there was much criticism of the 2007 referendum to change the constitution, and some of it was justified - but there was a public referendum. Will we see the same justified criticism after the referendum to which Mor Weng is referring? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingthedream Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Yingluck denies linkage between Thaksin and govt reuh ? ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 According to Weng they are going to have two referenda one to ask whether to base the new charter on 1997 or 2007 and one to then put all the proposed changes that a drafting commission come up with to the people. Before doing either they will change a single section to allow the establishment of a drafting commission. This will be the most democratic way the charter has ever been changed if this is followed Lets not forget a constitution was ripped up after a coup and a new one written and then put to referenda with the fall back being the military would select an old one of their choice if it was voted down. Lets not also forget the last government changed a few bits of the current constitution seemingly to allow a system to help them in a vote. Bearing all that in mind and trying to be even handed it is hard to criticise what PTP are proposing as the people will have the say, and they can vote how they want. In the meantime the media, Dems and other interested power players can start putting their arguements forward for what they want in the charter and for what version they prefer. To just say it isnt necessary is to avoid reality of conflict and to deny a government its right to enact its policies which both the coup installed and the opportunist Abhisit government took without any kind of mandate. Lets let conflict be resolved by democracy and not by trying to resist it. When Abhisit said the last election was a let the people decide one he was right and it was even maybe an admirable statement. Now maybe that spirit should be allowed to grow. I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. One skepticism I hold, though, is how the referendum will take place. After the event, there was much criticism of the 2007 referendum to change the constitution, and some of it was justified - but there was a public referendum. Will we see the same justified criticism after the referendum to which Mor Weng is referring? Hopefully the questions will be simple: base it on 97 or 07 for one and up or down for the other, or at least with a very few questions. Hopefully too all parties to the democratic process will be allowed state media time too and the independent media can do their thing and canvassers will be unimpeded and state forces not too. Hopefully the drafting commission will also operate independently from interested bodies and involve a variety of people form different persuasions and backgrounds including reps of the extreme yellows and reds. Hopefully we wont see people refusing to cooperate so as to try and later argue it was biased too. And hopefully we will see interested parties actively try and mobilise their support to gain a big tun out too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 If there is a problem with the current constitution, then fix it. There is no point going back to a flawed constitution. It the popular demand, she said. Brought you in a free election and not with a coup, tanks in the street, emergency laws and undemocratic circumstances. Was there a box on the voting form that said 'please change the constitution any way you like it'? Getting elected doesn't mean you have a carte blanche mandate on every issue, particularly when you hadn't got around to publishing your policies. That's just cheap political rhetoric. According to Weng they are going to have two referenda one to ask whether to base the new charter on 1997 or 2007 and one to then put all the proposed changes that a drafting commission come up with to the people. Before doing either they will change a single section to allow the establishment of a drafting commission. This will be the most democratic way the charter has ever been changed if this is followed Lets not forget a constitution was ripped up after a coup and a new one written and then put to referenda with the fall back being the military would select an old one of their choice if it was voted down. Lets not also forget the last government changed a few bits of the current constitution seemingly to allow a system to help them in a vote. Bearing all that in mind and trying to be even handed it is hard to criticise what PTP are proposing as the people will have the say, and they can vote how they want. In the meantime the media, Dems and other interested power players can start putting their arguements forward for what they want in the charter and for what version they prefer. To just say it isnt necessary is to avoid reality of conflict and to deny a government its right to enact its policies which both the coup installed and the opportunist Abhisit government took without any kind of mandate. Lets let conflict be resolved by democracy and not by trying to resist it. When Abhisit said the last election was a let the people decide one he was right and it was even maybe an admirable statement. Now maybe that spirit should be allowed to grow. A referendum is a very good idea. Though my own experience with these is that governments inevitably strap a few things *they* want to the things that the *public* wants, so that they get dragged through with it. It would be nice if the issues of the amnesty and the charter change are dealt with separately on the form but I bet you they won't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pi Sek Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. One skepticism I hold, though, is how the referendum will take place. After the event, there was much criticism of the 2007 referendum to change the constitution, and some of it was justified - but there was a public referendum. Will we see the same justified criticism after the referendum to which Mor Weng is referring? Hopefully the questions will be simple: base it on 97 or 07 for one and up or down for the other, or at least with a very few questions. Hopefully too all parties to the democratic process will be allowed state media time too and the independent media can do their thing and canvassers will be unimpeded and state forces not too. Hopefully the drafting commission will also operate independently from interested bodies and involve a variety of people form different persuasions and backgrounds including reps of the extreme yellows and reds. Hopefully we wont see people refusing to cooperate so as to try and later argue it was biased too. And hopefully we will see interested parties actively try and mobilise their support to gain a big tun out too. Hey - you're being very hopeful! I hope for the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaiChai Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) I think its pretty clear that money controls everything in Thailand. Those wishing for a democratic, more equal and less corrupt society in Thailand are in for a long wait. It must be very frustrating for those who have had a good education and can think for themselves, who are not rich and have to watch the blatent abuses of power funded by large amounts of money. One thing for sure in Thailand; no one can keep a secret! No matter how much they pay! The poor are still really poor here, and it will be interesting to see whether PT can make life better for these people. I suspect it will be the same as before. Edited August 17, 2011 by MaiChai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
givenall Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Why bother lying about it? Can she make her phone bill public Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pib Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 There is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin....there is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin....look into my eyes and say, There is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin. OK, everyone should be hypnotized now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzMick Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) Having seen PTP in action at election time, Iexpect to see: Referendum Question 1/ Should the government give B500 to every adult eligible to vote? and Thaksin an amnesty? Edited August 17, 2011 by metisdead Large font resized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 There is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin....there is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin....look into my eyes and say, There is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin. OK, everyone should be hypnotized now. Surely Yingluck must realize that saying "PTP has no linkage to Thaksin" is tantamount to saying Bill Gates has no linkage to Microsoft. Why can't she just say" Yes, he's my dear brother and I naturally I want to help him, that is what family does, so to all you reporters"Piss off and leave me alone!""? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) hey webFACT where is the actual quote of her saying as what's stated in your title Yingluck denies linkage between Thaksin and govt...? is this a misleading heading or has she actually blatantly said there is no linkage between Thaksin and PTP? oh of course im not saying ye would give false information like that, perish the thought but some clarification would be nice Edited August 17, 2011 by nurofiend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 There is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin....there is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin....look into my eyes and say, There is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin. OK, everyone should be hypnotized now. Surely Yingluck must realize that saying "PTP has no linkage to Thaksin" is tantamount to saying Bill Gates has no linkage to Microsoft. Why can't she just say" Yes, he's my dear brother and I naturally I want to help him, that is what family does, so to all you reporters"Piss off and leave me alone!""? That takes courage and a sympathetic press. Like the Mitterrand case "At a breakfast with senior French journalists in 1984, Mitterrand admitted that he had an illegitimate daughter. “So what?” he challenged the journalists. Not one printed the story." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 hey webFACT where is the actual quote of her saying as what's stated in your title Yingluck denies linkage between Thaksin and govt...? is this a misleading heading or has she actually blatantly said there is no linkage between Thaksin and PTP? oh of course im not saying ye would give false information like that, perish the thought but some clarification would be nice Lost in translation or maybe added. None of the English language newspapers here is really accurate with breakingnews / newsflashes. When in doubt check the original THAI text :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Lost in translation or maybe added. None of the English language newspapers here is really accurate with breakingnews / newsflashes. oh believe me, i've certainly noticed that!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samurai Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 There is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin....there is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin....look into my eyes and say, There is no linkage between the govt and Thaksin. OK, everyone should be hypnotized now. Surely Yingluck must realize that saying "PTP has no linkage to Thaksin" is tantamount to saying Bill Gates has no linkage to Microsoft. Why can't she just say" Yes, he's my dear brother and I naturally I want to help him, that is what family does, so to all you reporters"Piss off and leave me alone!""? That takes courage and a sympathetic press. Like the Mitterrand case "At a breakfast with senior French journalists in 1984, Mitterrand admitted that he had an illegitimate daughter. “So what?” he challenged the journalists. Not one printed the story." Yingluck doesn't keep it secret that she has a brother and no one alleged that Mitterands daughter is involved in the governments work. She just said that her brother trip to Cambodia has nothing to to with her government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianf Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 If there is a problem with the current constitution, then fix it. There is no point going back to a flawed constitution. It the popular demand, she said. Brought you in a free election and not with a coup, tanks in the street, emergency laws and undemocratic circumstances. When did they vote on regressing the constitution? Yingluck can't deny the linkage, it's through blood, and the Thai way, this countries going to hell in a handbag soon, cause of idiots like you. Yes, and I am the original Micky Mouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samurai Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Surely Yingluck must realize that saying "PTP has no linkage to Thaksin" is tantamount to saying Bill Gates has no linkage to Microsoft. Why can't she just say" Yes, he's my dear brother and I naturally I want to help him, that is what family does, so to all you reporters"Piss off and leave me alone!""? That takes courage and a sympathetic press. Like the Mitterrand case "At a breakfast with senior French journalists in 1984, Mitterrand admitted that he had an illegitimate daughter. “So what?” he challenged the journalists. Not one printed the story." Yingluck doesn't keep it secret that she has a brother and no one alleged that Mitterands daughter is involved in the governments work. She just said that her brother trip to Cambodia has nothing to to with her government. Except for the oil deal. Do you believe everything you are spoon fed by The Family? An oil deal for the government? Is that bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 That takes courage and a sympathetic press. Like the Mitterrand case "At a breakfast with senior French journalists in 1984, Mitterrand admitted that he had an illegitimate daughter. “So what?” he challenged the journalists. Not one printed the story." Yingluck doesn't keep it secret that she has a brother and no one alleged that Mitterands daughter is involved in the governments work. She just said that her brother trip to Cambodia has nothing to to with her government. Except for the oil deal. Do you believe everything you are spoon fed by The Family? An oil deal for the government? Is that bad? I thought you said it wasn't a government deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rametindallas Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) According to Weng they are going to have two referenda one to ask whether to base the new charter on 1997 or 2007 and one to then put all the proposed changes that a drafting commission come up with to the people. Before doing either they will change a single section to allow the establishment of a drafting commission. This will be the most democratic way the charter has ever been changed if this is followed Lets not forget a constitution was ripped up after a coup and a new one written and then put to referenda with the fall back being the military would select an old one of their choice if it was voted down. Lets not also forget the last government changed a few bits of the current constitution seemingly to allow a system to help them in a vote. Bearing all that in mind and trying to be even handed it is hard to criticise what PTP are proposing as the people will have the say, and they can vote how they want. In the meantime the media, Dems and other interested power players can start putting their arguements forward for what they want in the charter and for what version they prefer. To just say it isnt necessary is to avoid reality of conflict and to deny a government its right to enact its policies which both the coup installed and the opportunist Abhisit government took without any kind of mandate. Lets let conflict be resolved by democracy and not by trying to resist it. When Abhisit said the last election was a let the people decide one he was right and it was even maybe an admirable statement. Now maybe that spirit should be allowed to grow. I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. One skepticism I hold, though, is how the referendum will take place. After the event, there was much criticism of the 2007 referendum to change the constitution, and some of it was justified - but there was a public referendum. Will we see the same justified criticism after the referendum to which Mor Weng is referring? Hopefully the questions will be simple: base it on 97 or 07 for one and up or down for the other, or at least with a very few questions. Hopefully too all parties to the democratic process will be allowed state media time too and the independent media can do their thing and canvassers will be unimpeded and state forces not too. Hopefully the drafting commission will also operate independently from interested bodies and involve a variety of people form different persuasions and backgrounds including reps of the extreme yellows and reds. Hopefully we wont see people refusing to cooperate so as to try and later argue it was biased too. And hopefully we will see interested parties actively try and mobilise their support to gain a big tun out too. Nothing personal, Hammered, I always like your input but if you hope in one hand and cr*p in the other, which one fills up first? Sorry, but 'Hope' is the worst thing released from Pandora's Box as it prevents action while 'hoping' things get better without your own input. I know this is off topic but either you believe Ms. Yingluck or you don't and there isn't much to discuss past yes or no. Edited August 17, 2011 by rametindallas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAWP Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Some fans of Thaksin here likes to repeat that the election was a 'strong' referendum that the people wanted Thaksin and his party. And on the other hand the current PM tries to deny that she is a proxy PM or that they are controlled by Thaksin. Who is telling lies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misterwhisper Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 My goverment has absolutely no link to my brother, except that my foreign minister on the first day after his appointment lobbied the Japanese government to issue him a visa despite the fact that he maintains the status of a convicted felon. But apart from that, my government has absolutely no link to my brother, except most of my ministers come from a political party whose election campaign slogan was 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai does'. But apart from that my government has absolutely no link to my brother, except we are considering to make him an economic adviser-at-large. But apart from that, my government has absolutely no link to my brother, except that I am his younger sister, who was hand-picked by him to become no.1 party list candidate for the PM post and who he described as his 'clone'. But apart from that, my government has absolutely no link to my brother, except he has cooked up from afar grandiose economic and social development plans for Thailand like a 300 square kilometre land reclamation in the Gulf, a tablet computer for every elementary pupil and a minimum wage increase to 300 Baht. But apart from that, my government has absolutely no link to my brother, except he wants to return by December to attend the wedding of his oldest daughter, so we are going to push for an amnesty for EVERYONE accused of political offenses; not only him, but including him. But apart from that, my government has absolutely no link to my brother, except... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 hey webFACT where is the actual quote of her saying as what's stated in your title Yingluck denies linkage between Thaksin and govt...? is this a misleading heading or has she actually blatantly said there is no linkage between Thaksin and PTP? oh of course im not saying ye would give false information like that, perish the thought but some clarification would be nice Webfact reposts news articles. Go to the Nation and ask why they used that headline. 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