Abhisit Lashes Out At Attempted Thaksin Pardon

[OzMick]

Thaksin's death would solve many problems for this country.

[hammered]

Yes, I agree , on the face of it a coup is very unlikely and extremely bad for all.

Notwithstanding that, powerful emotions are being awoken and there are a lot of loonies out there.

One or two salient events and the picture changes again, quickly.

It's probably gone way beyond the Thaksin issue anyway.

I think people are starting to question that what was previously beyond question.

The military must know and dislike that and i think they have to act.

Otherwise their very essence is in question.

Hope I am wrong.

Either way, it has to be accepted that Thaksin is still a player.

Right or wrong he is in the field.

Thaksin is a player and the red villages, and there were apparently thousands of them even under the last government but we werent told about it, and what they symbolise has likley driven those who control the army insane.

This all needs a deal, but a deal is good for Thaksin. His extreme opponents dont want him back but it shared to find many who believe that is a viable option in the country anymore, so I think you are right. If a coup comes along who knows what is coming down the line but it isnt going to be nice. However, there are certainly those who want one. Whether that includes the military brass who have to make sure it goes off, goes off clean, doesnt result in masses of death, doesnt at this point in time get massive international condemnation and loss of investment and doesnt result in a counter coup or a revolution who knows. It is also compounde dby flood recovery needing quick decisions and not a 3-6 month period of change followed by a bunch of old gingers who dont know what they are doing and are too scared to make decisions or by another military installed Abhisit government which is going to cause a massive uprising

Its getting messy

[hammered]

The majority of Thais want Thaksin back.They call that Democracy.The most of you guys never hear about that word.

I must have missed that poll.

Your response: The election blah blah.

a ) 48%

b ) People voting for PTP didn't necessarily want Thaksin back.

People not voting PTP didnt necessarily not want Thaksin back. Even in the Dem party there is a minority that want a deal with him. Masses of the Phalang Chon vote in Chonburi wouldnt mind him back either from my experience

[DrBlakeEdwards]

Thai Politics is like who gets to be the candy king at kindergarden. Whoever has the most Candy!

[whybother]

People not voting PTP didnt necessarily not want Thaksin back. Even in the Dem party there is a minority that want a deal with him. Masses of the Phalang Chon vote in Chonburi wouldnt mind him back either from my experience

There may be a minority of the Democrats that want a deal. That doesn't mean they want him back.

[hammered]

People not voting PTP didnt necessarily not want Thaksin back. Even in the Dem party there is a minority that want a deal with him. Masses of the Phalang Chon vote in Chonburi wouldnt mind him back either from my experience

There may be a minority of the Democrats that want a deal. That doesn't mean they want him back.

The only true way to find out would be run a referendum on it. For some reason I dont think it would be Thaksin who would be finding objections to that idea. A lot of people that dont really like Thaksin including some who went on PAD protests and who supported the coup initiallly would right now form what I see not mind him back if it led to less divisions and it you add those in that category to the true Thaksin supporters you have a big majority over those who dont want him back in my experience. That is the problem his enemies face. All that has happened since the coup has shown his enemies to be as bad as him (paraphrasinbg a Nation journo)

[whybother]

The only true way to find out would be run a referendum on it. For some reason I dont think it would be Thaksin who would be finding objections to that idea. A lot of people that dont really like Thaksin including some who went on PAD protests and who supported the coup initiallly would right now form what I see not mind him back if it led to less divisions and it you add those in that category to the true Thaksin supporters you have a big majority over those who dont want him back in my experience. That is the problem his enemies face. All that has happened since the coup has shown his enemies to be as bad as him (paraphrasinbg a Nation journo)

If the vote was a simple "Do you want him back or not?", I would think the majority would say "No".

Unfortunately, the question would be more along the lines of "Do you want him back because he's not going to shut up or stop causing trouble until he is back?"

[magpie3]

For this amnesty decree, would taksin still need a royal pardon?

can the person giving the pardons say "No"?

Can someone give an informed response to these questions please?

I think they represent the end game in this Machiavellian drama.

I have awful visions of the 'unwashed' intimidating an old gentleman, the future waiting in the wings and the inevitable ultimate sacrifice opening the gates of hell in Thailand.

Who was it said you get the government you deserve?!

Can't say more.

[hammered]

For this amnesty decree, would taksin still need a royal pardon?

can the person giving the pardons say "No"?

Can someone give an informed response to these questions please?

I think they represent the end game in this Machiavellian drama.

I have awful visions of the 'unwashed' intimidating an old gentleman, the future waiting in the wings and the inevitable ultimate sacrifice opening the gates of hell in Thailand.

Who was it said you get the government you deserve?!

Can't say more.

By tradition the pardon works by the cabinet submitting its suggestion and then by prerogative.

An amnesty is a differfent matter. That is when the parliament (legislature, not government) as supreme democratic body by vote grants amnesty for what you have done before or after court decisions. A pardon is after a guilty verdict and it seems is a Royal prerogative and as such we shouldnt comment on it imho

[hammered]

The only true way to find out would be run a referendum on it. For some reason I dont think it would be Thaksin who would be finding objections to that idea. A lot of people that dont really like Thaksin including some who went on PAD protests and who supported the coup initiallly would right now form what I see not mind him back if it led to less divisions and it you add those in that category to the true Thaksin supporters you have a big majority over those who dont want him back in my experience. That is the problem his enemies face. All that has happened since the coup has shown his enemies to be as bad as him (paraphrasinbg a Nation journo)

If the vote was a simple "Do you want him back or not?", I would think the majority would say "No".

Unfortunately, the question would be more along the lines of "Do you want him back because he's not going to shut up or stop causing trouble until he is back?"

I think most people get the second part whether it on there or not. There is the issue of if he comes back would his opponents stop making trouble even after a vote too althopugh most ordinary people know there arent as many of them as supporters although his opponents tend to have more power than his supporters, so that could be an issue

[hyperdimension]

can the person giving the pardons say "No"?

Yes he can.

Edited November 16, 2011 by hyperdimension

[Thaddeus]

what was the question that Yingluck could not be bothered to answer ????

How big are your feet?

My bad, she answered that one.

[sparebox2]

For this amnesty decree, would taksin still need a royal pardon?

can the person giving the pardons say "No"?

Like Nelson Mandela, Thaksin is a convicted terrorist.

Must be stop at all cost, even a the expense of the tax payer.

[letitbe]

I think both of you are right.

The return of Thaksin will probably be a disaster for the country but all we can do is watch from the wings, as a totally selfish agenda unwinds.

The problem is the selfish blindness is on all sides.

Who knows how this will all end, let's just hope commen sense and moderation will win out.

Another coup and some sort of Government of national unity is now an increasing possibility but will not be good for the country and could tip us down an even dirtier road.

If it happens, i think it will be fast.

I don't think there are any winners in the current politics and the loser, sadly, is the ordinary Thai people.

Hope calm heads prevail.

A coup will not be good for the country, and a government of national unity actually needs at least a little bit of unity.

I don't think Thaksin or his supporters will accept anything except having Thaksin or his proxy in power. His opposition might accept a proxy if Thaksin is out of the lime light, but they won't accept him up front.

The majority of Thais want Thaksin back.They call that Democracy.The most of you guys never hear about that word.

ok let saviour return and see chaos unfold and probably war Well done Taksin supporters Ive only got 1/2 our money out so far and just wish I could sell rest of our land (my wifes land) and assets even for 20% off. Any serious offers greatly welcome. 5 Rai prime land in central Chiang Mai was 250 million baht will accept 1/2 now for quick sale OR just let it sit and wait 20 years

[rubl]

Yes, I agree , on the face of it a coup is very unlikely and extremely bad for all.

Notwithstanding that, powerful emotions are being awoken and there are a lot of loonies out there.

One or two salient events and the picture changes again, quickly.

It's probably gone way beyond the Thaksin issue anyway.

I think people are starting to question that what was previously beyond question.

The military must know and dislike that and i think they have to act.

Otherwise their very essence is in question.

Hope I am wrong.

Either way, it has to be accepted that Thaksin is still a player.

Right or wrong he is in the field.

Thaksin is a player and the red villages, and there were apparently thousands of them even under the last government but we werent told about it, and what they symbolise has likley driven those who control the army insane.

This all needs a deal, but a deal is good for Thaksin. His extreme opponents dont want him back but it shared to find many who believe that is a viable option in the country anymore, so I think you are right. If a coup comes along who knows what is coming down the line but it isnt going to be nice. However, there are certainly those who want one. Whether that includes the military brass who have to make sure it goes off, goes off clean, doesnt result in masses of death, doesnt at this point in time get massive international condemnation and loss of investment and doesnt result in a counter coup or a revolution who knows. It is also compounde dby flood recovery needing quick decisions and not a 3-6 month period of change followed by a bunch of old gingers who dont know what they are doing and are too scared to make decisions or by another military installed Abhisit government which is going to cause a massive uprising

Its getting messy

A pardoned, absolved Thaksin may also cause a massive uprising, IMHO.

BTW this topic is on Abhisit speaking out against a 'alleged' pardon move for k. Thaksin. This topic is not about what the military might do, although it's interesting to read some speculation. Sure a coup now by the military would be condemned internationally, it's not the right season for that. On the other hand blatant manipulation of the law by the 'democratically elected' elite in power isn't really appreciated either. Even Berlusconi stepped down, although that's obviously another country, not Thailand with it's unique features foreigners just can't understand

Edited November 16, 2011 by rubl

[galoubet]

can the person giving the pardons say "No"?

Yes he can.

That would be a fitting conclusion. However, would all the other pardons be ditched too? Could one say no to one and not to all? This is something our old friend could do without at the moment. The PM was selfish in her actions. (Sorry, nothing to do with her of course. She wasn't there.)

[nurofiend]

Mr Abhisit urged the government to stop pushing the amnesty move for "only one person" and said the premier still has a chance to review the case to avoid possible chaos.

I think Abhisit forgot to mention that it was his Gov when they were in power, changed the amnesty law to include persons convicted of corruption could not be granted amnesty. This was done for one man then? The pot calling the kettle black.

a valid point

[MAJIC]

Referring to the annual royal pardon for the convicts to be set free Dec 5 as part of the celebrations of the king's birthday, Mr Chalerm said "some 26,000 convicts are eligible to be granted royal pardon this year"

So tell me Pro Thaksinites and Red Shirts,where does this include Thaksin,a known absconder from Justice who has never served a day in Jail,as being eligible for this Pardon?

who up to now has never been a Convict? even though he should have been,according to the Thai Judicial Sentences passed against him,

And please no more B***S*** about the sentences were Politically motivated,and don't count,just keep replies to the issues, i.e pure and simple..... THEFT! & CORRUPTION CONVICTIONS, for which he didn't have the courage to stay and face, and proved his guilt by doing a runner! as cowards are apt to do.

Edited November 16, 2011 by MAJIC

[sscsamui]

Mr Abhisit urged the government to stop pushing the amnesty move for "only one person" and said the premier still has a chance to review the case to avoid possible chaos.

I think Abhisit forgot to mention that it was his Gov when they were in power, changed the amnesty law to include persons convicted of corruption could not be granted amnesty. This was done for one man then? The pot calling the kettle black.

People convicted of cocruption should not be given Amnesty.... I show that anyone and get away with braking the Law.....

[Japhrodisiac]

How do you pardon someone who has not served any time, nor is in the country?

There is a separate legal process to appeal a conviction, but a pardon, with zero time served? I don't know the ins and outs of the Thai legal system but it seems improbable that they could do this legally.

It would be interesting to ask specifically for a list of over 60yr olds with less than 3yr convictions they had in mind when they wrote this at an emergency meeting

[looping]

Mr Abhisit urged the government to stop pushing the amnesty move for "only one person" and said the premier still has a chance to review the case to avoid possible chaos.

I think Abhisit forgot to mention that it was his Gov when they were in power, changed the amnesty law to include persons convicted of corruption could not be granted amnesty. This was done for one man then? The pot calling the kettle black.

a valid point

People underestimate the severity of GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION. This crime can (and frequently does) affect millions of people. IMO it needed to be removed from the amnesty list. And Abhisit is at fault for trying to fight corruption by doing this???

It's quite simple: Is government corruption OK???

Abhisit says "NO"

PT (Thaksin) says "YES" ...

[mca]

It's quite simple: Is government corruption OK???

Abhisit says "NO"

PT (Thaksin) says "YES" ...

Suthep says "Err...I'll get back to you on that one"

[Ricardo]

The majority of Thais want Thaksin back.They call that Democracy.The most of you guys never hear about that word.

I must have missed that poll.

Your response: The election blah blah.

a ) 48%

b ) People voting for PTP didn't necessarily want Thaksin back.

Thanks whybother for posting the facts once more, it's wearying but necessary, so long as people keep trying to exaggerate the election-result into something it wasn't. :jap:

Many of the people who voted for PTP & Ms Yingluck will have been seduced by a series of very-attractive promises, many of which have already been reneged upon, since they voted in July. The election was not just about whether Thaksin should have his slate wiped-clean, and be allowed to return, without having to face his sentence or the several other cases.

I'd say that, far from "most of you guys never hear about that word" Democracy, we do in fact generally support it, but remember the then-PM who said "Democracy is not our aim" and promised to remain in-power for 20 years, and we suspect that in fact he is the one who had undemocratic plans for the country.

Aren't we allowed to think or say things like that ? In a democracy ? Former-PM Abhisit is right to speak out against this back-room deal, which Deputy-PM Chalerm refuses to discuss with the press, another hint about how he & his Cabinet really feel about transparency or democracy.

Edited November 17, 2011 by Ricardo

[sparebox2]

Mark fail maths, I think, when he wrote "over 60yr olds with less than 3yr convictions gets to walk "

[ThaiOats]

The reason why there's an amnesty for convicts on HM's birthday is to "tum boon". People who have felt remorse and want to change their lives are given another chance. This scoundrel Thaksin has felt no remorse, he denies any wrong doings and instead of leaving the country alone, he comes back to stir up a storm.

[lannarebirth]

Mr Abhisit urged the government to stop pushing the amnesty move for "only one person" and said the premier still has a chance to review the case to avoid possible chaos.

I think Abhisit forgot to mention that it was his Gov when they were in power, changed the amnesty law to include persons convicted of corruption could not be granted amnesty. This was done for one man then? The pot calling the kettle black.

a valid point

Not really. While their convictions may not be politically motivated it does happen in the context of their political position. It is not a stretch of the imagination to assume that new governments would look with favor on past convicts of their own political stripe.

[lannarebirth]

Mr Abhisit urged the government to stop pushing the amnesty move for "only one person" and said the premier still has a chance to review the case to avoid possible chaos.

I think Abhisit forgot to mention that it was his Gov when they were in power, changed the amnesty law to include persons convicted of corruption could not be granted amnesty. This was done for one man then? The pot calling the kettle black.

People convicted of cocruption should not be given Amnesty.... I show that anyone and get away with braking the Law.....

In more civilized countries where they have such things as R.I.C.O. Statutes and "under color of law" statutes. Not only would they not be subject to amnesty, their length of incarceration is usually much extended.

[Docno]

Some of you guys are really on-side with Abhisit? This is the same man who is behind the flooding in Bangkok! No joke, that story is really doing the rounds in the red lands. I've heard it from two people who don't know each other. Both of them didn't necessarily believe it, but both said it might be true. Thai politics are never dull...

[nurofiend]

Mr Abhisit urged the government to stop pushing the amnesty move for "only one person" and said the premier still has a chance to review the case to avoid possible chaos.

I think Abhisit forgot to mention that it was his Gov when they were in power, changed the amnesty law to include persons convicted of corruption could not be granted amnesty. This was done for one man then? The pot calling the kettle black.

a valid point

Not really. While their convictions may not be politically motivated it does happen in the context of their political position. It is not a stretch of the imagination to assume that new governments would look with favor on past convicts of their own political stripe.

i think to suggest that the change to the amnesty law highlighted by ozemade (post thaksin coup) was not aimed at thaksin, is very naive...

Edited November 17, 2011 by nurofiend

[nurofiend]

Mr Abhisit urged the government to stop pushing the amnesty move for "only one person" and said the premier still has a chance to review the case to avoid possible chaos.

I think Abhisit forgot to mention that it was his Gov when they were in power, changed the amnesty law to include persons convicted of corruption could not be granted amnesty. This was done for one man then? The pot calling the kettle black.

a valid point

People underestimate the severity of GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION. This crime can (and frequently does) affect millions of people. IMO it needed to be removed from the amnesty list. And Abhisit is at fault for trying to fight corruption by doing this???

It's quite simple: Is government corruption OK???

Abhisit says "NO"

PT (Thaksin) says "YES" ...

i'm not arguing for the pro's of government corruption...lol

i'm saying that the motivation of this law change was obviously a preemptive decision to make sure thaksin couldn't be granted amnesty... if you don't see it that way, fine.