Panthongtae Shinawatra Should Talk Amnesty With His Dad, Not Abhisit

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME

Panthongtae should talk amnesty with his dad, not Abhisit

Tulsathit Taptim

BANGKOK: -- Panthongtae Shinawatra was barking up the wrong tree. "Amnesty" is not up to the Democrats or their leader Abhisit Vejjajiva. It's up to the courage, or lack thereof, of the young Shinawatra's own father. Simple mathematics can tell you that.

newsjsThaksin Shinawatra knows that the ruling party can effect any political change it wants by exercising its parliamentary superiority. To blame Abhisit for failures to grant a general amnesty to people involved in Thailand's political turbulence is ironic, coming from the patriarch of a government that rarely heeds the voices of those dreading its controversial policies. The rice price pledging scheme has continued, despite warnings from left, right and centre. The Bt300 minimum wage rise has been implemented with little regard for economists' caution. The government's Thaksin-related acts have bordered on violation of the law.

So, why bother? Laws have been passed by governments despite opposition objection. If Panthongtae's father really believes the government's amnesty plan is good, he shouldn't worry too much about what Abhisit has to say about it. If the plan is sincere and can lead to genuine reconciliation, why not lay it on the table and let Abhisit shoot himself in the foot by stubbornly opposing it?

Panthongtae - writing on Facebook to convey his father's messages - and Abhisit said practically the same thing over the past two days, albeit for different reasons. Abhisit vowed to support an amnesty that benefits ordinary people and leaves out Thaksin, while Panthongtae claimed that what the Democrats want is basically the main goal. Abhisit should stop worrying too much about his father, Panthongtae said.

Shouldn't it be the other way round, in this case? Shouldn't it be that Thaksin should stop worrying too much about Abhisit where amnesty is concerned?

One argument has it that amnesty requires a political consensus, purportedly for reconciliation's sake. This is assuming that if Abhisit says "Yes", it will silence certain others. Truth is, the government's amnesty programme will be scrutinised inside and out by Thai society, with or without Abhisit. "Political consensus" must come from Thais seeing more benefits than drawbacks in the amnesty, not from what an opposition leader writes on Facebook.

So, why is a political party that won a landslide victory in the last election and is poised to take over Bangkok city hall in the upcoming gubernatorial election paying attention to the opposition all of a sudden? There are probably two main reasons. One is that amnesty would really benefit Thaksin, among others, after all, and a "unanimous passage" is needed to cushion the blows from outside Parliament. The other possible reason is that Abhisit's opposition to amnesty is being used as a smokescreen.

Thaksin's conviction, jail sentence and his seized assets are the main complication in this amnesty affair, but they are not the only complication. With the red shirts clamouring for "justice", an amnesty that covers people they blame for "injustice" will be unacceptable. While the government may prefer a blanket amnesty to make the whole thing look politically and internationally good, "amnesty" in the eyes of the red shirts has to be something one-sided.

Now we see Pheu Thai's (or Thaksin's, if you will) dilemma. If a blanket amnesty cleared Abhisit, Suthep Thaugsuban or anybody else blamed for the Ratchaprasong "massacre" and allowed Thaksin to return home triumphantly, the red shirts would start asking, "What do we get?" If Abhisit, Suthep and the like are kept out of an amnesty, it wouldn't lead to reconciliation as claimed by the government. In fact, this latter scenario could be seen internationally as part of a vicious circle of vengeful politics in which "democratic power" is exercised dubiously.

Can Thaksin, or the government, use money to pay off the red shirts and make them accept "two-sided" amnesty? There are two things to consider. First, money speaks differently to different people. Second, throwing money around to solve or ease problems doesn't require serious political manoeuvring, meaning this measure would have been enforced fully a long time ago if it could work.

Thaksin's real problem is clear now. How can both Abhisit and the red shirts be made to accept the same amnesty at the same time? While Pheu Thai's supreme patriarch, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung go on searching for the magic formula for amnesty, why not find one scapegoat to blame for the delay. Abhisit, despite his pitiful number of hands in Parliament, fits the bill.

Instead of criticising Abhisit on Facebook, Panthongtae should ask his father these questions: The last time I checked, Pheu Thai could pass any bill it wanted. Shouldn't we do that again now? And if amnesty will serve reconciliation like you told me, shouldn't we screw "consensus" and be brave enough to push for it? Are we giving Abhisit more credit than he deserves? And for the record here - so I can dismiss all the taunts on the social media - amnesty wouldn't bring you home a free man and give you back all the money, would it?

-- The Nation 2013-02-13

[Locationthailand]

Speechless... the admission the Thaksin related policies are bordering on breaking the law? BS, they outright have breached so many laws it becomes a larger joke than the daily garbage being reported, and all this other who-ha? Politics in this country will be the downfall of the Nation on the passing of the top man and that will be the beginning of the uprising for control.

[HeavyDrinker]

Fair dos....

[ramrod711]

The man from afar has the resources of an entire nation to plunder. Through his sisters and the Pheu Thai party he makes policy, has free rein to use his insider knowledge to enrich himself with no fear of reprisal. Why would he come back? The truth is, as we have seen with Kamnam Poh, he wouldn't serve 10 minutes in jail. The simple answer is that he hasn't yet completed the looting of the treasury. To return would expose his activities and motives to the people of Thailand.

[waza]

And for the record here - so I can dismiss all the taunts on the social media - amnesty wouldn't bring you home a free man and give you back all the money, would it?

Theres the crunch, and amnesty, under present law, wont give Thaksin back his political career or his money. He needs to rewrite history and unconvict himself.

[Nickymaster]

The man from afar has the resources of an entire nation to plunder. Through his sisters and the Pheu Thai party he makes policy, has free rein to use his insider knowledge to enrich himself with no fear of reprisal. Why would he come back? The truth is, as we have seen with Kamnam Poh, he wouldn't serve 10 minutes in jail. The simple answer is that he hasn't yet completed the looting of the treasury. To return would expose his activities and motives to the people of Thailand.

Spot on

[borisloosebrain]

Sounds like Thaksin junior has been told be throw a bit of mud Abhisits way . Bit crass to use your offspring that way.

[Melyn]

It's mud slinging for sure - but a smokescreen as usual with the PTP

What's the cover up here? Blame the Dems when your own side knows it cannot win.

It's like the DSI charges agains Abhisit and Suthep - PTP know they will be harmful to the Dems in the short term but they also know they will be kicked out of court so the Reds can't blame the PTP

It's like the charges at the ICC - PTP makes a fanfare to appease the Reds in a case that will never be supported.

Multi-layered duplicity

[Buchholz]

Panthongtae Shinawatra was barking up the wrong tree. "Amnesty" is not up to the Democrats or their leader Abhisit Vejjajiva. It's up to the courage, or lack thereof, of the young Shinawatra's own father. Simple mathematics can tell you that.

Wasn't that a mathematics exam that Panthongtae cheated on that got him thrown out of Ramkhamhaeng University? That could explain why he struggles with it.

.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Buchholz

[Fozfromoz]

I like the first paragraph reference to simple mathematics. Another simple calculation would be that Thaksin only has 730 days left to serve out his sentence.

[Melyn]

I like the first paragraph reference to simple mathematics. Another simple calculation would be that Thaksin only has 730 days left to serve out his sentence.

The courts should impose a 10% interest rate on his sentence - compounded and back-dated.

[Artisi]

I like the first paragraph reference to simple mathematics. Another simple calculation would be that Thaksin only has 730 days left to serve out his sentence.

He won't be back ever, sentence or no sentence, no backbone and nothing hanging between the big toes.

[intravox]

If you are to slip back into town, having fooled the masses using <deleted> proxies and with more baht-coloured snake oil, and then want the spotlight taken off of you as you settle back into power – you need a scapegoat – the hapless Abhisit.

The bait and switch method of politics and manipulation is how low-lifes gain any ‘substance’ in the public eye –diverting attention and inventing evil spirits for the peasants to fear – Pi Abhi!

Thaksin and his PR mavens are simply muddying the waters in advance of the government inevitably changing the law in Thakreptile’s favour, and as he has the Treasury at his disposal when he assumes power onshore, he has much more than his own fortune to get antsy about.

He’s a fraud, a cheat, a liar, a reptile with a murky, brainless commercial background to prove it.

No change there then, even after all that goat’s milk in the desert.

[Tatsujin]

Actually quite a well-written article for once from the Nation.

[Thai-Aust]

Khun Apisit has no reason to worry about amnesty. He did what he had to do to save innocent lives in the bloodshed fighting. It would have been his failure if he did not act. Every leader would have done exactly the same thing as he did to prevent the country to further plunge into failed state.

[muttley]

The man from afar has the resources of an entire nation to plunder. Through his sisters and the Pheu Thai party he makes policy, has free rein to use his insider knowledge to enrich himself with no fear of reprisal. Why would he come back? The truth is, as we have seen with Kamnam Poh, he wouldn't serve 10 minutes in jail. The simple answer is that he hasn't yet completed the looting of the treasury. To return would expose his activities and motives to the people of Thailand.

But haven't you just exposed his "activities and motives to the people of Thailand?". Don't keep it to yourself, tell the authorities , tell someone!

Thaksin is looting the treasury, Thaksin is looting the treasury!

That sky fallen in yet?

[muttley]

Khun Apisit has no reason to worry about amnesty. He did what he had to do to save innocent lives in the bloodshed fighting. It would have been his failure if he did not act. Every leader would have done exactly the same thing as he did to prevent the country to further plunge into failed state.

Can you tell me what part snipers, live fire zones and shooting unarmed people under extended MOE's had to do with saving innocent lives. Khun Apisit my A. He's got plenty to worry about - how does he sleep at night?

Edited February 13, 2013 by muttley

[thaicbr]

The man from afar has the resources of an entire nation to plunder. Through his sisters and the Pheu Thai party he makes policy, has free rein to use his insider knowledge to enrich himself with no fear of reprisal. Why would he come back? The truth is, as we have seen with Kamnam Poh, he wouldn't serve 10 minutes in jail. The simple answer is that he hasn't yet completed the looting of the treasury. To return would expose his activities and motives to the people of Thailand.

But haven't you just exposed his "activities and motives to the people of Thailand?". Don't keep it to yourself, tell the authorities , tell someone!

Thaksin is looting the treasury, Thaksin is looting the treasury!

That sky fallen in yet?

you do not have an idea yourself.. what you sleep under a bridge or something?

[thaicbr]

Khun Apisit has no reason to worry about amnesty. He did what he had to do to save innocent lives in the bloodshed fighting. It would have been his failure if he did not act. Every leader would have done exactly the same thing as he did to prevent the country to further plunge into failed state.

Can you tell me what part snipers, live fire zones and shooting unarmed people under extended MOE's had to do with saving innocent lives. Khun Apisit my A. He's got plenty to worry about - how does he sleep at night?

probably better than a Thaksin apologist like yourself.. Abhisit was Prime Minister AT THE TIME OF THE WORST demonstrations/riots in Thai history.. he tried negotiating directly with the apparent leaders of said demonstration/ insurrection and was rebuked after a phone call from the real LEADER saying NO..

Thaksin is responsible for what happened.. No one else.. they were just collateral damage to get and end to a means.

Edited February 13, 2013 by thaicbr

[whybother]

Khun Apisit has no reason to worry about amnesty. He did what he had to do to save innocent lives in the bloodshed fighting. It would have been his failure if he did not act. Every leader would have done exactly the same thing as he did to prevent the country to further plunge into failed state.

Can you tell me what part snipers, live fire zones and shooting unarmed people under extended MOE's had to do with saving innocent lives. Khun Apisit my A. He's got plenty to worry about - how does he sleep at night?

Stopping mob rule saves innocent lives.

[Arkady]

Maybe he had extra can of coke before he went on Facebook.

[thaicbr]

Maybe he had extra can of coke before he went on Facebook.

I thought the coke he likes is sold in baggeys.

[waza]

Khun Apisit has no reason to worry about amnesty. He did what he had to do to save innocent lives in the bloodshed fighting. It would have been his failure if he did not act. Every leader would have done exactly the same thing as he did to prevent the country to further plunge into failed state.

Can you tell me what part snipers, live fire zones and shooting unarmed people under extended MOE's had to do with saving innocent lives. Khun Apisit my A. He's got plenty to worry about - how does he sleep at night?

Yes how dare Ahibist stand againsts Red democracy.........

Using snipers? Like the redshirts..........

How dare he interfere with peacefull protestors...........

How dare he create live firezones to keep the redshirts from attacking the Bangkok public............

Shooting at unarmed people.......

under extended MOE's....................

Peacefull protestor who just want democracy..............

How can he sleep at night?...........

[Thai-Aust]

Khun Apisit has no reason to worry about amnesty. He did what he had to do to save innocent lives in the bloodshed fighting. It would have been his failure if he did not act. Every leader would have done exactly the same thing as he did to prevent the country to further plunge into failed state.

Can you tell me what part snipers, live fire zones and shooting unarmed people under extended MOE's had to do with saving innocent lives. Khun Apisit my A. He's got plenty to worry about - how does he sleep at night?

There you go. I no need to answer your rather uninformed question. At least there were some people replied already.

[jaapfries]

If you are to slip back into town, having fooled the masses using <deleted> proxies and with more baht-coloured snake oil, and then want the spotlight taken off of you as you settle back into power – you need a scapegoat – the hapless Abhisit.

The bait and switch method of politics and manipulation is how low-lifes gain any ‘substance’ in the public eye –diverting attention and inventing evil spirits for the peasants to fear – Pi Abhi!

Thaksin and his PR mavens are simply muddying the waters in advance of the government inevitably changing the law in Thakreptile’s favour, and as he has the Treasury at his disposal when he assumes power onshore, he has much more than his own fortune to get antsy about.

He’s a fraud, a cheat, a liar, a reptile with a murky, brainless commercial background to prove it.

No change there then, even after all that goat’s milk in the desert.

I get the impression that you don't really like 'Khun; Police Colonel; Dr. Thaksin' ? ? ? ?