Abhisit Lashes Out At Attempted Thaksin Pardon

[ratcatcher]

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...

Indeed, if Abhisit is responsible for the flooding IN Bangkok, I can only assume that PTP is responsible for the flooding north,west and east of Bangkok.

[bunta71]

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, Mr Thaksin's youngest sister, did not chair Tuesday's cabinet meeting, saying she could not return from Sing Buri province where she visited flood victims as her helicopter had no radar for night flights.

ROFLMAO (sorry)

You don't need radar for night flights. F/W aircraft need a lighted runway for takeoffs and landings at night, helicopters can takeoff and land anywhere during nighttime.

You need radar for: - instrument flying to detect embedded thunderstorms

- airborne radar instrument approaches (military aircraft only at designated airfields with certified and published ARA)

- as a warning against flying into terrain (CFIT) for fast airplanes

And if you do a proper preflight planning you will select a sufficient enroute altitude from your aeronautical charts to prevent any CFIT.

Yingluck's excuse is Bullsh...

I would urgently recommend that the Government put some more brain into their publicity stunts. Right now their fiddling around these subjects is laughable and plain embarrassing.

Yes indeed as a Private pilot with more than a few hours of night flying in Alaska I had to laugh at that but surely did not expect anything different.

[pattayaorganic]

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.

It is funny how you can equate these two issues.

Case 1: Assuring the rule of law and proper and reasonable punishment and deterrent for others planning to use their power for self-enrichment for individuals who chose to break the law. Abhisit.

Case 2: Assuring the criminals can do corrupt acts without fear of punishment and reprisals just due to their position of power. Chalerm.

In addition, Abhisit's government didn't change the law, it merely stated that amnesty is off the table for people convicted of corruption.

[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.

It is funny how you can equate these two issues.

Case 1: Assuring the rule of law and proper and reasonable punishment and deterrent for others planning to use their power for self-enrichment for individuals who chose to break the law. Abhisit.

Case 2: Assuring the criminals can do corrupt acts without fear of punishment and reprisals just due to their position of power. Chalerm.

In addition, Abhisit's government didn't change the law, it merely stated that amnesty is off the table for people convicted of corruption.

In addition, Abhisit's government didn't change the law, it merely stated that amnesty is off the table for people convicted of corruption.

and who do you think that was specifically aimed at?

i'm sure you'll say...everyone, not thaksin

ozemade's point wasn't about defending the morals of this current story in the media, at least imo

it was about abhisit claiming this is about thaksin....and i don't disagree with this

but the point of how abhisit's government "stated that amnesty is off the table for people convicted of corruption"...was clearly about thaksin too, hence the pot calling the kettle black comment.

a valid point

[WinnieTheKhwai]

"This will deepen the rift," Mr Abhisit said.

LOLz! No, not finally resolving the mess since 2006 and moving on will deepen the rift, Mr. Abhisit!

[lannarebirth]

"This will deepen the rift," Mr Abhisit said.

LOLz! No, not finally resolving the mess since 2006 and moving on will deepen the rift, Mr. Abhisit!

I'd place the start of "the mess" in 2001 when the justice system , by their own admission, peverted the law to allow Thaksin to remain in office. If one must use 2006 as the baseline, then that might be when the policy corruption and assests concealment related to the sale of his business took place. The coup of course was subsequent to all of that.

[magpie3]

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.

It is funny how you can equate these two issues.

Case 1: Assuring the rule of law and proper and reasonable punishment and deterrent for others planning to use their power for self-enrichment for individuals who chose to break the law. Abhisit.

Case 2: Assuring the criminals can do corrupt acts without fear of punishment and reprisals just due to their position of power. Chalerm.

In addition, Abhisit's government didn't change the law, it merely stated that amnesty is off the table for people convicted of corruption.

In addition, Abhisit's government didn't change the law, it merely stated that amnesty is off the table for people convicted of corruption.

and who do you think that was specifically aimed at?

i'm sure you'll say...everyone, not thaksin

ozemade's point wasn't about defending the morals of this current story in the media, at least imo

it was about abhisit claiming this is about thaksin....and i don't disagree with this

but the point of how abhisit's government "stated that amnesty is off the table for people convicted of corruption"...was clearly about thaksin too, hence the pot calling the kettle black comment.

a valid point

Tomayto tomahto

If the side effect of Abhisit's change is that ALL government officials now have to fear the rule of law without chance of reprieve - where is the problem??

We should thank Taksin (aaakk - sound of me choking) for being such a megalomaniac that the other megalomaniacs have to put in a firewal to neutralise him - even though they would doubtless have preffered to have another potential legal loophole available for their own benefit.

There should be no crying over the impact on Taksin or anyone else who abuses power in office, they should be convicted as criminals. It is not even a question of degree. A little bit of corruption or a lot gets the same response, because they are not fit to look after the interests of the electorate or to set the height of the 'ethical 'bar'.

The concept of having a 'duty of care' is light years away from Thai politics. Few politicians have any time to fight for the people anymore as they are fighting either for survival or to line their own pockets or both.

The only viable deterrent to those at the top of the power pyramid who are tempted to circumvent the law is, if found out, they MUST pay the price. No backdoor to escape routes allowed.

Be happy that one small but significant step has been taken on the road to a workable democracy and that all those representing the people are ALL effected by it, on ALL sides of the political spectrum.

Edited November 17, 2011 by magpie3

[nurofiend]

Tomayto tomahto

If the side effect of Abhisit's change is that ALL government officials now have to fear the rule of law without chance of reprieve - where is the problem??

We should thank Taksin (aaakk - sound of me choking) for being such a megalomaniac that the other megalomaniacs have to put in a firewal to neutralise him - even though they would doubtless have preffered to have another potential legal loophole available for their own benefit.

There should be no crying over the impact on Taksin or anyone else who abuses power in office, they should be convicted as criminals. It is not even a question of degree. A little bit of corruption or a lot gets the same response, because they are not fit to look after the interests of the electorate or to set the height of the 'ethical 'bar'.

The concept of having a 'duty of care' is light years away from Thai politics. Few politicians have any time to fight for the people anymore as they are fighting either for survival or to line their own pockets or both.

The only viable deterrent to those at the top of the power pyramid who are tempted to circumvent the law is, if found out, they MUST pay the price. No backdoor to escape routes allowed.

Be happy that one small but significant step has been taken on the road to a workable democracy and that all those representing the people are ALL effected by it, on ALL sides of the political spectrum.

again......... i'm not arguing for the pro's of government corruption and suggesting it should be ignored!

I'm not saying a policy towards stomping out corruption is bad

i've already made clear the point i was making about this, read back if you need clarification because i agree with what you are saying...

tho i'm not sure how the Tomayto tomato analogy fits in this instance

[looping]

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"

And apparently the Thai people say "YES" to corruption, as long as they benefit from it. Once again, crappy education is to blame.

If this pardon goes through, it'll in effect be legalizing government corruption, with the worst possible penalty being...

1. Flee the country

2. Come home 'Scott free' for Christmas!

This move by Thaksin is brazen, reminds me of a certain deal with Themesek Holdings, and we all know what that triggered.

[scotbeve]

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

Yep. This reads as "change my law, it doesn't suit anymore"...

[magpie3]

Tomayto tomahto

If the side effect of Abhisit's change is that ALL government officials now have to fear the rule of law without chance of reprieve - where is the problem??

We should thank Taksin (aaakk - sound of me choking) for being such a megalomaniac that the other megalomaniacs have to put in a firewal to neutralise him - even though they would doubtless have preffered to have another potential legal loophole available for their own benefit.

There should be no crying over the impact on Taksin or anyone else who abuses power in office, they should be convicted as criminals. It is not even a question of degree. A little bit of corruption or a lot gets the same response, because they are not fit to look after the interests of the electorate or to set the height of the 'ethical 'bar'.

The concept of having a 'duty of care' is light years away from Thai politics. Few politicians have any time to fight for the people anymore as they are fighting either for survival or to line their own pockets or both.

The only viable deterrent to those at the top of the power pyramid who are tempted to circumvent the law is, if found out, they MUST pay the price. No backdoor to escape routes allowed.

Be happy that one small but significant step has been taken on the road to a workable democracy and that all those representing the people are ALL effected by it, on ALL sides of the political spectrum.

again......... i'm not arguing for the pro's of government corruption and suggesting it should be ignored!

I'm not saying a policy towards stomping out corruption is bad

i've already made clear the point i was making about this, read back if you need clarification because i agree with what you are saying...

tho i'm not sure how the Tomayto tomato analogy fits in this instance

And I am not suggesting you are pro-corruption.

Simply saying the net result of the law as it stands, whether caused by tomayto (desire to nail Taksin) or tomahto (desire to nail everyone), is a net positive addition to the system of control required to minimise abuse of power, Thailand's tacitly condoned bette noir.

[lannarebirth]

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.

Thoughtful post and I agree with all of it. I also agree with another posting you made today:

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.

[Buchholz]

"This will deepen the rift," Mr Abhisit said.

LOLz! No, not finally resolving the mess since 2006 and moving on will deepen the rift, Mr. Abhisit!

I'd place the start of "the mess" in 2001 when the justice system , by their own admission, peverted the law to allow Thaksin to remain in office. If one must use 2006 as the baseline, then that might be when the policy corruption and assests concealment related to the sale of his business took place. The coup of course was subsequent to all of that.

A valid point.

.

[PaulBax]

I agree wholeheartedly. Still, whilst he may have condemned the coup as undemocratic, he could have gone further and refused to work with the Junta at all. But then that wouldn't have helped anyone really.

I suspect that he might have been more damning in his opposition to the coup had the army drawn up the laws needed to absolve the coup-makers before actually executing the coup, as Chalerm did in Yinglak's convenient absence.

It's difficult for Abhisit because his path to power was launched from the barracks.The Junta and the indolent and incompetent quisling government that followed had long gone when Abhisit came to power (quite legitimately I would stress under a parliamentary system).But this was the result the unelected elites had worked toward with the aid of directed judicial interventions, a rigged constitution and military heavy handedness.His problem is that each time the Thai people are asked to endorse the unelected elites' agenda, they just knock it out of the ball park.Someone as bright as Abhisit might hopefully have been expected to get the message.So what we want to know now do the old elites accept the position or not.

For the record I hope Thaksin doesn't get his pardon.If he had as much sensitivity and self awareness as the average bog roll, he should have realised that he has actually already won.Now he should just shut the .... up.

For Thakisin to shut up he has to of said something which he has not!

Which part of "draft" do you people not understand?

I see so much screaming and paranoia on this site with the vast majority supporting anti democratic measures!

It is surprising what being considered rich by poor people will do to someone's ego!

[jayboy]

For Thakisin to shut up he has to of said something which he has not!

Which part of "draft" do you people not understand?

I see so much screaming and paranoia on this site with the vast majority supporting anti democratic measures!

It is surprising what being considered rich by poor people will do to someone's ego!

Wow I'm being taken to task for being unfriendly to Thaksin.That's a new though not unpleasant first.

[mca]

I must say this thread comes as a pleasant surprise with a relieving lack of the usual mud-slinging <deleted> and oft-repeated tedious phrases which infest so many Thasin-related threads they make them as entertaining as open heart surgery. "Opposing" sides are actually agreeing with each other on certain points <deleted>!

[scorecard]

"This will deepen the rift," Mr Abhisit said.

LOLz! No, not finally resolving the mess since 2006 and moving on will deepen the rift, Mr. Abhisit!

I'd place the start of "the mess" in 2001 when the justice system , by their own admission, peverted the law to allow Thaksin to remain in office. If one must use 2006 as the baseline, then that might be when the policy corruption and assests concealment related to the sale of his business took place. The coup of course was subsequent to all of that.

Good point. The start date is more like 2001.

I recall well that several of the judges made comments like 'how could I vote against man who has just won an election'. Never mind due process of the law.

[sparebox2]

"This will deepen the rift," Mr Abhisit said.

LOLz! No, not finally resolving the mess since 2006 and moving on will deepen the rift, Mr. Abhisit!

I'd place the start of "the mess" in 2001 when the justice system , by their own admission, peverted the law to allow Thaksin to remain in office. If one must use 2006 as the baseline, then that might be when the policy corruption and assests concealment related to the sale of his business took place. The coup of course was subsequent to all of that.

Good point. The start date is more like 2001.

I recall well that several of the judges made comments like 'how could I vote against man who has just won an election'. Never mind due process of the law.

The 2006 coup was not a rift. In fact it united the yellow people.

[spectrumisgreen]

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.

No it's not the pot calling the kettle black! More like the usual thing here of the pot pointing out that the kettle isn't one of 'ours' and so all the other kettles shouldn't be ganging up just because they've taken temporary charge of the kitchen, in an effort to bring this particular old and amusing water-carrier/boiler (but still not actually one of us pots, so therefore can sod right off!!) back!!! - just a take!

Edited November 17, 2011 by spectrumisgreen

[YoghurtLX]

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.

So you'r saying only one man in Thailand is convicted about corruption ?

Having such a law is not bad for Thailand where corruption is everywhere.

[QED]

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

It was actually the Dems who introduced the over 60 yrs old with less than 3 yrs conviction in the last (or previous?) year's pardons. And they who changed the legislation to bar anyone convicted of corruption applying for pardon.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your sensationalised bunfight....

[how241]

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, Mr Thaksin's youngest sister, did not chair Tuesday's cabinet meeting, saying she could not return from Sing Buri province where she visited flood victims as her helicopter had no radar for night flights.

ROFLMAO (sorry)

You don't need radar for night flights. F/W aircraft need a lighted runway for takeoffs and landings at night, helicopters can takeoff and land anywhere during nighttime.

You need radar for: - instrument flying to detect embedded thunderstorms

- airborne radar instrument approaches (military aircraft only at designated airfields with certified and published ARA)

- as a warning against flying into terrain (CFIT) for fast airplanes

And if you do a proper preflight planning you will select a sufficient enroute altitude from your aeronautical charts to prevent any CFIT.

Yingluck's excuse is Bullsh...

I would urgently recommend that the Government put some more brain into their publicity stunts. Right now their fiddling around these subjects is laughable and plain embarrassing.

I am not a pilot but that "no radar" story seemed a little strange.

[sparebox2]

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

It was actually the Dems who introduced the over 60 yrs old with less than 3 yrs conviction in the last (or previous?) year's pardons. And they who changed the legislation to bar anyone convicted of corruption applying for pardon.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your sensationalised bunfight....

Really?

I have been told that PT change last years's condition to fit Thaksin. Hence the big cry.

[QED]

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

It was actually the Dems who introduced the over 60 yrs old with less than 3 yrs conviction in the last (or previous?) year's pardons. And they who changed the legislation to bar anyone convicted of corruption applying for pardon.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your sensationalised bunfight....

Really?

I have been told that PT change last years's condition to fit Thaksin. Hence the big cry.

Nope, all the PT are allegedly proposing is that those convicted of corruption be eligible for pardon. But it makes much better headlines to claim they are trying to change to 60yo/3yrs, even though that is the current legislation...

Edit: to add allegedly

Edited November 17, 2011 by QED

[scotbeve]

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"

:cheesy:

[PaulBax]

For Thakisin to shut up he has to of said something which he has not!

Which part of "draft" do you people not understand?

I see so much screaming and paranoia on this site with the vast majority supporting anti democratic measures!

It is surprising what being considered rich by poor people will do to someone's ego!

Wow I'm being taken to task for being unfriendly to Thaksin.That's a new though not unpleasant first.

No! you are being taken to task for being unjust and hypocritical!

For any law to work it has to be applied evenly!

Not just to the side you don't support!

Edited November 17, 2011 by PaulBax

[jayboy]

No! you are being taken to task for being unjust and hypocritical!

For any law to work it has to be applied evenly!

Not just to the side you don't support!

I love it.More!More!

[tragickingdom]

Why should Abhisit lash out? He gave amnesty to a bunch of human rights abusing generals?

[whybother]

Why should Abhisit lash out? He gave amnesty to a bunch of human rights abusing generals?

When did he do that?

[sbk]

I really have no idea what is wrong with you people, but these threads always end up with the same people flinging the same points and same petty attacks over and over and over again. Its like that movie Groundhog Day. Well, I am tired of it. Keep the petty comments, the baiting and the flaming to yourselves. Keep this topic on track or I will just suspend as I go.