Abhisit Rejects Thaksin's Attack On Judiciary, Slams ' Greedy Politicians'

[webfact]

POLITICS
Abhisit rejects Thaksin's attack on judiciary, slams 'greedy politicians'
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Democrat Party leader and former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said yesterday he agreed with Thaksin Shinawatra that Thailand's democracy is incomplete. However, he cited greedy politicians as the cause, and not a biased justice system, as cited by Thaksin.

Abhisit was responding to an address by fugitive former PM Thaksin to a red-shirt rally at Sanam Luang via Skype on Wednesday night. Thaksin strongly criticised the courts, accusing them of being unfair to him and the Pheu Thai Party, of which he is considered the de facto leader.

Abhisit said Thaksin was repeating invalid arguments when he accused the courts and attempted to discredit the previous Democrat-led government.

Addressing the red-shirt rally, Thaksin threatened to rouse the public to act against the Constitutional Court if it continued to interfere in the power of the executive and legislative branches. The demonstration was held to commemorate the third anniversary of the April 2010 crackdown on red-shirt protesters.

Thaksin said the Constitutional Court's raising of objections to charter amendment had become a farce. "Initially, the government, MPs and senators wanted to amend the entire charter, but the Constitutional Court would not allow it. That was fine and we accepted the court's decision, but when we wanted to amend certain articles individually, a few persons who are selfish and against democracy filed a complaint, and the court accepted it," Thaksin said.

He said the court should not play games with this important issue.

The Constitutional Court has agreed to consider whether amending Article 68 of the charter would be unconstitutional.

Thaksin said there were three branches of power - the executive, the legislature and the judiciary - and these branches should be separate and subject to checks and balances.

He said the judiciary was violating the power of the executive and legislative branches, and thus damaging the country's credibility and the people's confidence in the system.

"I would like to beg [Constitutional Court judges] to uphold justice and give priority to national interests, or else I will have to use people's power to deal with the judges," Thaksin said. "If the court violates the power of the people, the people will not be able to tolerate it and people's representatives will not tolerate it."

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

He said the Abhisit government's rise to power was enabled by the Constitutional Court and by those who wield power from behind the scenes. He said Abhisit was not accepted in the West, which is why he was not invited by Western governments to visit their countries.

Thaksin said the Supreme Court had also made unfair rulings against him and his party, prompting judges in lower courts to look down upon and laugh at the Supreme Court judges.

He said unfair rulings by the Supreme Court had made reconciliation impossible.

Thaksin said it was okay if he could not return to Thailand as long as the country has a fair system. "The country has been battered severely enough. It's not good for Thais to kill Thais. It's not good to use troops to kill people and to use people to fight troops," Thaksin said.

Abhisit responded to this comment by saying he considered a madman to be someone who cannot get enough wealth, refuses to admit this, and sacrifices his supporters' lives to achieve his goals.


-- The Nation 2013-04-12

[sustento]

[waza]

_{"Abhisit responded to this comment by saying he considered a madman to be someone who cannot get enough wealth, refuses to admit this, and sacrifices his supporters' lives to achieve his goals."}

_{I agree Thaksin is a madman. I also agree with sustento, Thaksin's whole rant against the constitutional court is a massive dummy spit.}

Why cant I get my own way, sniff

Edited April 11, 2013 by waza

[ZhouZhou]

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

Almost true. the good part is Abhisit was ousted by democratic means when the electorate voted him out of office.

the judiciary has to accept the peoples choice who they want them to govern. Abhisit should also learn to accept that he isn't the people choice and never was.

[waza]

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

Almost true. the good part is Abhisit was ousted by democratic means when the electorate voted him out of office.

the judiciary has to accept the peoples choice who they want them to govern. Abhisit should also learn to accept that he isn't the people choice and never was.

I think its a stretch to say that. when you consider that a lots of politicians aren't elected by the people but selected by the party list system. Thereby the cabinet members that governs them may not have the electorates endorsement and therefore their constituents bests interests in mind but the party leader who selected them. This in reality has led to a cabinet governing Thailand not for the interests of the Thai people but for the agenda of a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice.

[dickyknee]

Almost true

so a bit false then?

[waza]

Almost true

so a bit false then?

no it the way a Thaksin lickspittle says completely false

[ianf]

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

Almost true. the good part is Abhisit was ousted by democratic means when the electorate voted him out of office.

the judiciary has to accept the peoples choice who they want them to govern. Abhisit should also learn to accept that he isn't the people choice and never was.

In supporting Thaksin, regular posters will note that ZhouZhou has never responded to my requests asking him to respond to the substantive points I have made.

Edited April 12, 2013 by ianf

[Buchholz]

"I will have to use people's power to deal with the judges," Thaksin said. "If the court violates the power of the people, the people will not be able to tolerate it and people's representatives will not tolerate it."

.

Time again for the Deputy Secretary-General of the Interior Ministry/Red Shirt Leader Jeng Dokjik to release private addresses and phone numbers and incite Red Shirts to intimidate judges and their families in their homes.

.

[reiltin]

"I will have to use people's power to deal with the judges"

This guys going farther and farther into the darkness Münich 1936 anyone...? Abhisit was too busy dealing with a city at war waged by his minions on his bankroll and at his behest , Abhisit had no time to go abroad -as for the constitutional court it serves all the people it's ethos is to protect society-Thaksin like other despots in history cares little for his nation and less for his compatriots.

A THAIRANT.

[whybother]

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

Almost true. the good part is Abhisit was ousted by democratic means when the electorate voted him out of office.

the judiciary has to accept the peoples choice who they want them to govern. Abhisit should also learn to accept that he isn't the people choice and never was.

Are you saying that it's irrelevant if they get there illegally, as long as the people chose them?

[ZhouZhou]

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

Almost true. the good part is Abhisit was ousted by democratic means when the electorate voted him out of office.

the judiciary has to accept the peoples choice who they want them to govern. Abhisit should also learn to accept that he isn't the people choice and never was.

I think its a stretch to say that. when you consider that a lots of politicians aren't elected by the people but selected by the party list system. Thereby the cabinet members that governs them may not have the electorates endorsement and therefore their constituents bests interests in mind but the party leader who selected them. This in reality has led to a cabinet governing Thailand not for the interests of the Thai people but for the agenda of a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice.

there is nothing wrong with the party list system.

and people knew what they will get when they voted for the "thinker".

[OzMick]

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

Almost true. the good part is Abhisit was ousted by democratic means when the electorate voted him out of office.

the judiciary has to accept the peoples choice who they want them to govern. Abhisit should also learn to accept that he isn't the people choice and never was.

I think its a stretch to say that. when you consider that a lots of politicians aren't elected by the people but selected by the party list system. Thereby the cabinet members that governs them may not have the electorates endorsement and therefore their constituents bests interests in mind but the party leader who selected them. This in reality has led to a cabinet governing Thailand not for the interests of the Thai people but for the agenda of a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice.

there is nothing wrong with the party list system.

and people knew what they will get when they voted for the "thinker".

There is everything wrong with the party list system when it is abused as it is here. How can can rich criminal become PM without ever facing the scrutiny of an electorate; how else could unelectable thug cronies like Chalerm achieve unassailable positions of power; and criminals be handed parliamentary immunity for the criminal acts they have carried out by their leader?

[sscsamui]

And when Mr T was in Power there where no checks and balances. He saw to that....To him it's his way or No way... That's not what I call Democracy.

[siampolee]

Thaksin is a despotic megalomaniac intent on revenge at any price and total domination of Thailand, its peoples and of course its coffers.

A self confessed domestic terrorist whose sponsorship of the 2010 civil strife is indeed a shameful comment on a creature that professes to love Thailand and its peoples.

His one aim is to create a Thailand of his own vassal thiefdom fiefdom state nothing more nothing less.

A dedicated assassin of both democracy and the truth and best described as public enemy number one, all of his pronouncements and images should come with a graphic warning stating ''This creature is bad for your life.''

The ongoing personal problem of Thaksin and thus Thailand and its peoples too is of course is Thaksins continued addiction to breathing which in itself is a freedom threatening addiction to all of Thailand and its peoples.

[Buchholz]

.

Thaksin strongly criticised the courts, accusing them of being unfair to him and the Pheu Thai Party

.

.

.

Thaksin sure does like to kick up a fuss.

.

[xkmasada]

LOL as if the Democrats had no "greedy politicians"

[rubl]

It's not good to use troops to kill people and to use people to fight troops

True, true. So why did you do it and had it done?

[HOOD Robin]

_{"Abhisit responded to this comment by saying he considered a madman to be someone who cannot get enough wealth, refuses to admit this, and sacrifices his supporters' lives to achieve his goals."}

_{I agree Thaksin is a madman. I also agree with sustento, Thaksin's whole rant against the constitutional court is a massive dummy spit.}

dummy spit.png

thaksin cries.jpg Why cant I get my own way, sniff

When will Thailand get rid of that Dubai clown ?

[AleG]

It's not good to use troops to kill people and to use people to fight troops

True, true. So why did you do it and had it done?

Rule #1 of the Red Shirt book of rules: It's OK if Thaksin does it.

[Baerboxer]

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

Almost true. the good part is Abhisit was ousted by democratic means when the electorate voted him out of office.

the judiciary has to accept the peoples choice who they want them to govern. Abhisit should also learn to accept that he isn't the people choice and never was.

I think its a stretch to say that. when you consider that a lots of politicians aren't elected by the people but selected by the party list system. Thereby the cabinet members that governs them may not have the electorates endorsement and therefore their constituents bests interests in mind but the party leader who selected them. This in reality has led to a cabinet governing Thailand not for the interests of the Thai people but for the agenda of a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice.

there is nothing wrong with the party list system.

and people knew what they will get when they voted for the "thinker".

THB500 per vote wasn't it - for voting for the "thinker"?

[metisdead]

Posts drifting in an off topic manner have been removed. Stay on the topic.

[juggernaut]

there is nothing wrong with the party list system.

and people knew what they will get when they voted for the "thinker".

I am beginning to suspect ZhouZhou may actually be Chalerm practicing his English skills during parliamentary sessions??

Seriously...........chosen by the people? This guy BOUGHT the people to choose him. The ironical part being he hands them a tiny portion of what he has defrauded from the country so that the people return him to power, and he is able to defraud even more. A very savvy investor indeed. Makes massive return on this investment!

[khunken]

It's not good to use troops to kill people and to use people to fight troops

True, true. So why did you do it and had it done?

Yes - it's only good to use the police to kill people.

[ZhouZhou]

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

Almost true. the good part is Abhisit was ousted by democratic means when the electorate voted him out of office.

the judiciary has to accept the peoples choice who they want them to govern. Abhisit should also learn to accept that he isn't the people choice and never was.

Are you saying that it's irrelevant if they get there illegally, as long as the people chose them?

who got there illegally? elections are legal.

illegal are coups but you probably don't bother about that one.

[rubl]

Legal, illegal, participate or not.

Thaksin didn't participate in the 2011 general elections. As a convicted criminal on the run he couldn't stand according to the constitution (both 1997/2007 version). Having our most popular criminal skyping in to order his cabinet around as to how to run his country for him doesn't really make sense apart from being somewhat hilarious if it wasn't so depressing. Now still going on on how all should behave and be nice to him.

No wonder the Western World can't be bothered to report on this and the RofW is not really interested either unless they can profit somehow. IMHO

[tingtongfarang]

Thaksin told the red shirts that the previous government led by Abhisit did not come to power through democratic means.

Almost true. the good part is Abhisit was ousted by democratic means when the electorate voted him out of office.

the judiciary has to accept the peoples choice who they want them to govern. Abhisit should also learn to accept that he isn't the people choice and never was.

Are you saying that it's irrelevant if they get there illegally, as long as the people chose them?

who got there illegally? elections are legal.

illegal are coups but you probably don't bother about that one.

Coups are considered a necessary form of reset button here, If it was,nt possible for criminals to buy their way into power coups could be avoided.

[whybother]

Are you saying that it's irrelevant if they get there illegally, as long as the people chose them?

who got there illegally? elections are legal.

illegal are coups but you probably don't bother about that one.

Driving is legal. Driving over the speed limit isn't.

Just because elections are legal doesn't mean you can't break the law getting elected.

Are you suggesting that it is OK to break the law to get elected?

Of course coups are illegal.

[ZhouZhou]

Are you saying that it's irrelevant if they get there illegally, as long as the people chose them?

who got there illegally? elections are legal.

illegal are coups but you probably don't bother about that one.

Driving is legal. Driving over the speed limit isn't.

Just because elections are legal doesn't mean you can't break the law getting elected.

Are you suggesting that it is OK to break the law to get elected?

Of course coups are illegal.

you mean illegal stuff like having posters in the wrong size or serving free noodle soup or even having a cooking show?

or even lamer excuses so the judiciary can interfere in the peoples choice and ban all other parties until only your political hero stands there alone and can become PM?

[moe666]

Are you saying that it's irrelevant if they get there illegally, as long as the people chose them?

who got there illegally? elections are legal.

illegal are coups but you probably don't bother about that one.

Driving is legal. Driving over the speed limit isn't.

Just because elections are legal doesn't mean you can't break the law getting elected.

Are you suggesting that it is OK to break the law to get elected?

Of course coups are illegal.

Is a coup illigal when there is no setting government, at the time of the coup Big T was not the PM