Forgive Me Please, I Don't Want To Be A Jailbird: Thai Opinion

[webfact]

Forgive Me Please, I Don't Want to Be A Jailbird

“Forgive me please, I don't want to be a jailbird.” may be what self-exiled former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has been meaning to say though he never did it outright. Judging from his actions, either publicly or secretly, it should not take much effort for anyone to catch the wind of what he is really trying to do. “Forgive and forget” is another feel-good phrase from the convicted politician. He said it after the public found out and reacted angrily towards the government's attempt to sneak pass a royal pardon decree for the ex-premier in a secret Cabinet meeting on November 15.

Most reasonable people agreed that Thaksin was the mastermind behind the secret Cabinet meeting and he was wrong in thinking that the public would never catch up to his plot. When the truth surfaced and the plan faced strong public protest, the Yingluck government had no choice but to back away. Still, many speculated that the government retreated only in order to advance. There was a letter from the deposed former prime minister making pleas to all sides to put an end to the matter as he might have realized that allowing it to prolong will cause more harm than good to him and his proxy government.

The use of the phrase “Forgive and forget” is seen as another political ploy from the convicted politician on the run to ask for sympathy from those who admire him and his regime and to convince them that it is a good thing. Nonetheless, it should be remembered that it can never be applied to the person who is responsible for igniting long-standing political conflicts in Thailand.

How pathetic it is that the ex-premier knows only to ask for forgiveness from others and to excuse himself while he has never done anything for his country. Moreover, he is still lying that he did no wrong or was involved in corruption despite glaring evidence. The thing is if Thaksin thinks he is really innocent, why is he still running away instead of coming back to prove himself?

The convicted politician wants everyone to forgive him while he is never a giver. He is always playing the role of a perpetual taker. Keep a breast of what will be his next move to whitewash himself and avoid prison.

Editorial, Naew Na, Page 3, December 2nd, 2011

Translated and rewritten by Wacharapol Isaranont

Please note that the views expressed in our "Analysis" segment are translated from local newspaper articles and do not reflect the views of the Thai-ASEAN News Network

-- Tan Network 2011-12-02

[Zpete]

Well spoken, never a truer thing printed about the prince of graft.

Edited December 2, 2011 by metisdead
Bold red font removed. Please do not post in all capital letters, bold, unusual fonts, sizes or colors. It can be difficult to read.

[Orac]

Well spoken, never a truer thing printed about the prince of graft.

Are you sure - I would say it misses the mark by a long way.

All this made up waffle about him wanting to be forgiven just does not sound right at all to me - do you really think that Thaksin is now contrite and accepts that he has done wrong???

My guess is that he still believes he has done nothing wrong and there is a politically motivated conspiracy to get at him.

[KRS1]

Well spoken, never a truer thing printed about the prince of graft.

Are you sure - I would say it misses the mark by a long way.

All this made up waffle about him wanting to be forgiven just does not sound right at all to me - do you really think that Thaksin is now contrite and accepts that he has done wrong???

My guess is that he still believes he has done nothing wrong and there is a politically motivated conspiracy to get at him.

You make no sense.

[lannarebirth]

Well spoken, never a truer thing printed about the prince of graft.

Are you sure - I would say it misses the mark by a long way.

All this made up waffle about him wanting to be forgiven just does not sound right at all to me - do you really think that Thaksin is now contrite and accepts that he has done wrong???

My guess is that he still believes he has done nothing wrong and there is a politically motivated conspiracy to get at him.

You make no sense.

You have to get the perspective right. When Thaksin talks about "forgive and forget" he's talking about his being willing to forgive and forget about those who unjustly accused him. He wants no revenge on these people, as he's said so himself. There's no contrition here only his own magnanimity.

[Orac]

Well spoken, never a truer thing printed about the prince of graft.

Are you sure - I would say it misses the mark by a long way.

All this made up waffle about him wanting to be forgiven just does not sound right at all to me - do you really think that Thaksin is now contrite and accepts that he has done wrong???

My guess is that he still believes he has done nothing wrong and there is a politically motivated conspiracy to get at him.

You make no sense.

Having reread the article I might have to agree with you

It could be down to the translation or the way I am reading it but it does seem to make both arguments at the same time, identifying his actions as using forgiveness as a ploy to win over people without actually meaning it and still thinking he has done nothing wrong but it then finishes with "The convicted politician wants everyone to forgive him while he is never a giver" which suggest contrition and acceptance of wrongdoing.

[E1717007]

Well spoken, never a truer thing printed about the prince of graft.

Are you sure - I would say it misses the mark by a long way.

All this made up waffle about him wanting to be forgiven just does not sound right at all to me - do you really think that Thaksin is now contrite and accepts that he has done wrong???

My guess is that he still believes he has done nothing wrong and there is a politically motivated conspiracy to get at him.

his reasoning is "everyone is corrupted in politics and he was the only soul politically prosecuted", it is unacceptable, he lost face!

[MoonRiverOasis]

Forgive me for being so fickle, but as soon as I see the word "moreover" I instantly think that I'm now reading the words of an intellectual wannabe.

Sure, it's a word, but it's used by people who want to appear smart, not be people that actually are...

So another propaganda piece shot in the foot by "Thailectaul English"

Let the flames begin!

[lannarebirth]

Forgive me for being so fickle, but as soon as I see the word "moreover" I instantly think that I'm now reading the words of an intellectual wannabe.

Sure, it's a word, but it's used by people who want to appear smart, not be people that actually are...

So another propaganda piece shot in the foot by "Thailectaul English"

Let the flames begin!

Actually it's a translation of a Thai language Op/Ed that appeared in a Thai publication.

[hearditallbefore]

What a load of pure BULLSH8T!!!!!! MAYBE HE THINKS THAT?????? WRONG ANSWER TRAINEE!!!!!

What he does think though is how silly you are for writing this stupid story. JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZ anything for a storyline. I hope he sues you for slander!!!!

[MoonRiverOasis]

Forgive me for being so fickle, but as soon as I see the word "moreover" I instantly think that I'm now reading the words of an intellectual wannabe.

Sure, it's a word, but it's used by people who want to appear smart, not be people that actually are...

So another propaganda piece shot in the foot by "Thailectaul English"

Let the flames begin!

Actually it's a translation of a Thai language Op/Ed that appeared in a Thai publication.

Sure, it's the semi-educated Thai's translation of "แล้วก็" or "ยิ่งกว่านั้น" - the keyword being "semi"

And that's my point - it's a very clear indicator of a Thai that's only pretending to be proficient at English - but it would appear you agree with me

Edited December 2, 2011 by MoonRiverOasis

[pastitche]

Forgive me for being so fickle, but as soon as I see the word "moreover" I instantly think that I'm now reading the words of an intellectual wannabe.

Sure, it's a word, but it's used by people who want to appear smart, not be people that actually are...

So another propaganda piece shot in the foot by "Thailectaul English"

Let the flames begin!

Actually it's a translation of a Thai language Op/Ed that appeared in a Thai publication.

Sure, it's the semi-educated Thai's translation of "แล้วก็" or "ยิ่งกว่านั้น" - the keyword being "semi"

And that's my point - it's a very clear indicator of a Thai that's only pretending to be proficient at English - but it would appear you agree with me

Looks to me like a transliteration of the usual anti-Thaksin rhetoric usually found on TV

[MoonRiverOasis]

Forgive me for being so fickle, but as soon as I see the word "moreover" I instantly think that I'm now reading the words of an intellectual wannabe.

Sure, it's a word, but it's used by people who want to appear smart, not be people that actually are...

So another propaganda piece shot in the foot by "Thailectaul English"

Let the flames begin!

Actually it's a translation of a Thai language Op/Ed that appeared in a Thai publication.

Sure, it's the semi-educated Thai's translation of "แล้วก็" or "ยิ่งกว่านั้น" - the keyword being "semi"

And that's my point - it's a very clear indicator of a Thai that's only pretending to be proficient at English - but it would appear you agree with me

Looks to me like a transliteration of the usual anti-Thaksin rhetoric usually found on TV

Yep, he uses it too. As I say, a pretty good indicator you're reading propaganda

[Siripon]

Last night I had a nightmare, Thaksin was on TV on the red shirt TV programme 'Truth Today',

This is what he said in my dream-

In 2001 I was in court, accused of hiding large sums of my money in my servants' names for a long period of time. Others speculated this was to manipulate stock with my considerable funds, but I said to the court with a straight face that it was an 'honest mistake' and by the shaky decision 8-7 where some judges admitted they had decided I was not guilty because I had just won an election, I escaped being banned.

I realised after that surprising verdict that I was infallible, with my enormous wealth and MPs under my belt,(now I even have all of their resignation letters in my pocket,never mind my belt,so democratic don't you think?), I could control almost every sector of Thai society.

Therefore there is no need for me to apologise for anything I have done, whether it was lying about my assets, killing 2,500 people without trial,dividing the country by promising the budget to those who voted for me, phoning in to encourage the people to 'surround' provincial halls,changing laws to benefit my companies,etc, etc.-

I must not go to jail because I am the the second most popular person in Thailand,(though the most hated by a long way), and I have a lot of money.

So I must use Mr Chalerm, a man whose son fled Thailand,( like me), but in his case to avoid a charge of murder of a policeman, to help me come back. Isn't it strange that I can't find any decent or respectable people to help me come back?

[champken]

Its not just him that's corrupt though is it. He just happens to be the most high profile one that got exposed as being corrupt. I would guess that every single Thai politician has been involved in some sort of corrupt activity.

[eriksen]

What a load of pure BULLSH8T!!!!!! MAYBE HE THINKS THAT?????? WRONG ANSWER TRAINEE!!!!!

What he does think though is how silly you are for writing this stupid story. JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZ anything for a storyline. I hope he sues you for slander!!!!

sue for slander in LOS? LOL

[eriksen]

wake up.. its always about the money...

[hellodolly]

Its not just him that's corrupt though is it. He just happens to be the most high profile one that got exposed as being corrupt. I would guess that every single Thai politician has been involved in some sort of corrupt activity.

You are right there is a whole lot more who are corrupt.

But that is in no way saying all politicians are corrupt. The honest ones get overlooked for important positions. This was also true with the last government they had their share of corrupt politicians also.

Thaksin's problem is his ego is so big he thinks it is OK for him.

[MrMuddle]

Its not just him that's corrupt though is it. He just happens to be the most high profile one that got exposed as being corrupt. I would guess that every single Thai politician has been involved in some sort of corrupt activity.

I don't know where you're from my friend, but my experience is that every politician, in every country is corrupt, not just in Thailand.

Back to the topic, if Thailand really wants to have democracy, and to be seen to be fighting corruption, then both Thaksin and the yellow shirt leaders responsible for the airport fiasco, should be jailed, preferably in the same cell.

[whybother]

Forgive him for what? He hasn't done anything wrong!

[Ricardo]

Forgive him for what? He hasn't done anything wrong!

They do say that 'confession is good for the soul', but what to do, if you're entirely above-the-law or completely-innocent of any wrongdoing anywhere ever ?

[PaulBax]

You should ask the pertinent questions!

If Thaksin is just one of, which everyone agrees. many corrupt politicians what has he done that isso so bad? there is only one real answer to this. The answer is that he awakened the political consciousness of the rural poor!

the opposition believes if it screams loud and long enough Thaksin will go away and this consciousness will disappear! thus we have the big lie theory!

which is

1.The bigger the lie, the more likely people are to believe it.

Simply put, tell a lie large enough and people will assume that it’s true

because you couldn’t possibly have the audacity to say such a ridiculous thing if it wasn’t true.

2.Never allow the public to cool off. By keeping the public in a frenzy over an issue,

nobody gets a chance to stop and really think about what they’re being told. On the off-chance

that someone does realize what they’re being told, having a frenzied public keeps the person “in-the-know” from being heard.

3.Never leave room for alternatives. By opening the door to the possibility that there might be

another option, you allow for “your enemy” to plan their attacks. If you make it clear that

there are no other options, you reduce the choice to a simple yes or no.

4. Concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong.

5.If you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.

Guess what the genie will not go back into the bottle and the elites will no longer have every word they say taken as truth.

What is even sadder is the allegedly higher educated foreigners also fall for this bull!

I guess this is why in every society there are leaders and followers!

I obviously fall into the former!

[whybother]

<snip>

Guess what the genie will not go back into the bottle and the elites will no longer have every word they say taken as truth.

<snip>

If that is the case, then why the need to bring back Thaksin? The poor are awakened. If they go back to sleep, then that's their own fault.

[lannarebirth]

You should ask the pertinent questions!

If Thaksin is just one of, which everyone agrees. many corrupt politicians what has he done that is so so bad? there is only one real answer to this.

You're right about the corruption Paul, but what seperated Thaksin from prior practitioners was the scale of the corruption and how he changed government policy and federal law to facilitate the corruption. How he did that brings us to the answer to your question Paul. He did it through authoritarian measures which were an offshoot of his dictatorial tendencies. Exactly the opposite of democracy, which is the goal, right? Only it wasn't the goal Paul. In fact he SAID it wasn't the goal but only a tool to be used to help him exercise his dictatorial tendencies.

Hope that helps Paul.

Edited December 3, 2011 by lannarebirth

[PaulBax]

You should ask the pertinent questions!

If Thaksin is just one of, which everyone agrees. many corrupt politicians what has he done that is so so bad? there is only one real answer to this.

You're right about the corruption Paul, but what seperated Thaksin from prior practitioners was the scale of the corruption and how he changed government policy and federal law to facilitate the corruption. How he did that brings us to the answer to your question Paul. He did it through authoritarian measures which were an offshoot of his dictatorial tendencies. Exactly the opposite of democracy, which is the goal, right? Only it wasn't the goal Paul. In fact he SAID it wasn't the goal but only a tool to be used to help him exercise his dictatorial tendencies.

Hope that helps Paul.

again i state what makes him so different?

every military dictator has changed the constitution to protect and enrich themselves yet nobody shouts about them all day long!

oops he must be the worst because he was actually elected!

you really have bought the big lie theory!

for future reference i am not and have never been a supporter of Thaksin, however, I do support Truth, universal suffrage, an independent non corrupt judiciary, absolute equality for all under the law.

Get Thaksin by all means but do it with the truth not lies! get him the same way the yellows and military are dealt with.

I will never support dictatorship no matter who it is by!

[Siripon]

You should ask the pertinent questions!

If Thaksin is just one of, which everyone agrees. many corrupt politicians what has he done that is so so bad? there is only one real answer to this.

You're right about the corruption Paul, but what seperated Thaksin from prior practitioners was the scale of the corruption and how he changed government policy and federal law to facilitate the corruption. How he did that brings us to the answer to your question Paul. He did it through authoritarian measures which were an offshoot of his dictatorial tendencies. Exactly the opposite of democracy, which is the goal, right? Only it wasn't the goal Paul. In fact he SAID it wasn't the goal but only a tool to be used to help him exercise his dictatorial tendencies.

Hope that helps Paul.

again i state what makes him so different?

every military dictator has changed the constitution to protect and enrich themselves yet nobody shouts about them all day long!

oops he must be the worst because he was actually elected!

you really have bought the big lie theory!

for future reference i am not and have never been a supporter of Thaksin, however, I do support Truth, universal suffrage, an independent non corrupt judiciary, absolute equality for all under the law.

Get Thaksin by all means but do it with the truth not lies! get him the same way the yellows and military are dealt with.

I will never support dictatorship no matter who it is by!

There hasn't been a military dictator running Thailand for a long long time, Sujinda tried in 1992 but he only lasted 2 weeks.

The 'green' Constitution of 1996 was a great attempt to move Thai politics forward with checks and balances.

However Thaksin destroyed that with his enormous wealth, implementing his minions and relatives in key positions in every sector except the judiciary.

He realised after buying up every MP in NAP ( over 80) in the north east, that electorally he was untoucheable, no censure motion was possible for the PM(him),and so began the era of policy corruption where he simply changed laws to benefit his companies- it's all legal you see!

He censored all government TV channels, removing any talk shows showing dissent, newspapers were threatened with withdrawal of advertising, both from AIS and government agencies.

His sole defence is he won elections, therefore he is untoucheable, he is unaccountable to the law.

A very dangerous meglomaniac who has managed to convince some Westerners he is for democracy. And yet every Pheua Thai MP had to sign a letter of resignation, undated, and give it to Thaksin before the election. Perhaps Yingluk was excused this humiliation, I don't know!

[PaulBax]

You should ask the pertinent questions!

If Thaksin is just one of, which everyone agrees. many corrupt politicians what has he done that is so so bad? there is only one real answer to this.

You're right about the corruption Paul, but what seperated Thaksin from prior practitioners was the scale of the corruption and how he changed government policy and federal law to facilitate the corruption. How he did that brings us to the answer to your question Paul. He did it through authoritarian measures which were an offshoot of his dictatorial tendencies. Exactly the opposite of democracy, which is the goal, right? Only it wasn't the goal Paul. In fact he SAID it wasn't the goal but only a tool to be used to help him exercise his dictatorial tendencies.

Hope that helps Paul.

again i state what makes him so different?

every military dictator has changed the constitution to protect and enrich themselves yet nobody shouts about them all day long!

oops he must be the worst because he was actually elected!

you really have bought the big lie theory!

for future reference i am not and have never been a supporter of Thaksin, however, I do support Truth, universal suffrage, an independent non corrupt judiciary, absolute equality for all under the law.

Get Thaksin by all means but do it with the truth not lies! get him the same way the yellows and military are dealt with.

I will never support dictatorship no matter who it is by!

There hasn't been a military dictator running Thailand for a long long time, Sujinda tried in 1992 but he only lasted 2 weeks.

The 'green' Constitution of 1996 was a great attempt to move Thai politics forward with checks and balances.

However Thaksin destroyed that with his enormous wealth, implementing his minions and relatives in key positions in every sector except the judiciary.

He realised after buying up every MP in NAP ( over 80) in the north east, that electorally he was untoucheable, no censure motion was possible for the PM(him),and so began the era of policy corruption where he simply changed laws to benefit his companies- it's all legal you see!

He censored all government TV channels, removing any talk shows showing dissent, newspapers were threatened with withdrawal of advertising, both from AIS and government agencies.

His sole defence is he won elections, therefore he is untoucheable, he is unaccountable to the law.

A very dangerous meglomaniac who has managed to convince some Westerners he is for democracy. And yet every Pheua Thai MP had to sign a letter of resignation, undated, and give it to Thaksin before the election. Perhaps Yingluk was excused this humiliation, I don't know!

a load of one sided bull, he was given the right by the people unlike any coup be it military or judicial

just remember in Thailand laws that prevent discussion are designed to hide the truth !

[Buchholz]

i am not and have never been a supporter of Thaksin, however

appreciate the update on the stale, "I'm no fan of Thaksin, but"

.

[rixalex]

There hasn't been a military dictator running Thailand for a long long time, Sujinda tried in 1992 but he only lasted 2 weeks.

The 'green' Constitution of 1996 was a great attempt to move Thai politics forward with checks and balances.

However Thaksin destroyed that with his enormous wealth, implementing his minions and relatives in key positions in every sector except the judiciary.

He realised after buying up every MP in NAP ( over 80) in the north east, that electorally he was untoucheable, no censure motion was possible for the PM(him),and so began the era of policy corruption where he simply changed laws to benefit his companies- it's all legal you see!

He censored all government TV channels, removing any talk shows showing dissent, newspapers were threatened with withdrawal of advertising, both from AIS and government agencies.

His sole defence is he won elections, therefore he is untoucheable, he is unaccountable to the law.

A very dangerous meglomaniac who has managed to convince some Westerners he is for democracy. And yet every Pheua Thai MP had to sign a letter of resignation, undated, and give it to Thaksin before the election. Perhaps Yingluk was excused this humiliation, I don't know!

a load of one sided bull,

What was the bull?

he was given the right by the people unlike any coup be it military or judicial

He was given the right to govern within democratic principles, such as being accountable to the law, such as allowing criticism without intimidating and threatening million baht law suits, such as not changing laws to benefit himself, such as not loaning neighbouring countries Thai tax payers money in order that those countries invest in his own company, but he dismissed those principles as not applying to him, because he thought that popularity had earnt him that right. Some here it would seem, by the way in which they raise his success at the ballot box every five minutes, agree with that thinking.

just remember in Thailand laws that prevent discussion are designed to hide the truth !

They aren't designed to hide the truth they are designed to protect those who do not have the same legal channels as everyone else. Not of course that those laws aren't abused by politicians and those of power, but that is another matter.

[wintermute]

just remember in Thailand laws that prevent discussion are designed to hide the truth !

They aren't designed to hide the truth they are designed to protect those who do not have the same legal channels as everyone else. Not of course that those laws aren't abused by politicians and those of power, but that is another matter.

If you really believe this then I have some prime swampland and a London Bridge to sell to you.