rixalex Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 The point about Samak is that he was PM and as PM you are expected to concentrate all your efforts on one job, that of running the country. It's not really asking too much I don't think. Samak knew about this, but nonetheless decided to continue with his job on the side, and then tried to fudge the facts when he was summoned to court, by lying under oath about payments made to him. A PM lying under oath, in any functioning democracy, would be out on their ear immediately, and unlike Samak, they would not simply be able to restand as PM the next day, as Samak could have done had the puppet master not decided he would prefer someone else running the country on his behalf. But of course, none of that ever gets mentioned by the red brigade, who only ever state "sacked for being on a cooking show", leaving out all the other details. Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantomfiddler Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 so whats new with this scheming bunch of s***tbags that will stoop to any new low to remove a democratically elected PM You really don,t have a clue about what is going on here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernjohn Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Legal experts are calling the Constitutional Court's decision to oust Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra an abuse of judicial power. Of course they are. There goes their holiday money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketnut Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 remove then Prime Minister Samak Sundhornvej from office because of his appearance on a cooking show. How in Hades...is this grounds for removal from office...was he cooking up corruption? Sounds like this bunch of Judicial dictators...are making things up as they go along... He lied about receiving it either under oath or in court, can't remember which. Does it really matter! A cooking show for crying out loud.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Yes it was stupid on both sides if it was just about the show or the amount. However he lied about it, god knows why and he got caught out. If he was prepared to cut corners and lie to pocket petty amounts of money he was clearly unfit for the office he held. come on Blues punk, what politician in any society has not lied? Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Kevin Rudd, Putin, Thatcher, John Howard, Paul Keating, George Bush Snr and Jnr? If you guys want to mince words let's go for it as I'm on neither side really, my main goal is to get people to think and for the first time ever mate, I'm calling you on this post. Re-think it and reply with common sense, as you do with 99percent of your other posts, sorry can't let this one go. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernjohn Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 These slick boys will be happy today. http://www.vice.com/vice-news/driving-ferraris-with-thai-royalists Makes a persom sick Just what are you talking about today. If there is royalists they certainly are not wearing red shirts. Today was not a victory for any one in particular it was a victory for Thailand. Another newbie with the claim that mysterious unnamed elite are ruling Thailand. Thaksin has been ruling Thailand every one knows that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil B Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Just maybe if Thaksin was a law abiding society the judicial system would not be "against" him ... not that it is “[Yingluck] has the unique ability to filter her brother's hot headed thinking, but if she is gone, the situation can change very quickly for the worse,” Mr. Verapat warned. Isn't allowing a convicted criminal/non-elected person rule the country by proxy against the constitution as well ? I thought the reason she has been given the heave ho is because of conflict of interest and one suspects the conflict of interest she got sacked for is minor compared to the conflict of interest going on between her and her brother... "Isn't allowing a convicted criminal/non-elected person rule the country by proxy against the constitution as well ?" Probably when the constitution was drawn up nobody envisaged that a former PM would skip bail to avoid prison and would run the country with stooges... Same must be said that when and if you could legislate for this that it should be unconstitutional for any member of government to associate with, consult on maters of government, or act upon instructions from any person, bared from public office, or imprisoned, or fugitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketnut Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 remove then Prime Minister Samak Sundhornvej from office because of his appearance on a cooking show.How in Hades...is this grounds for removal from office...was he cooking up corruption? Sounds like this bunch of Judicial dictators...are making things up as they go along... He lied about receiving it either under oath or in court, can't remember which. Does it really matter! A cooking show for crying out loud.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Yes it was stupid on both sides if it was just about the show or the amount. However he lied about it, god knows why and he got caught out. If he was prepared to cut corners and lie to pocket petty amounts of money he was clearly unfit for the office he held. His unsuitably amply demonstrated by the half dozen other criminal cases he was mired in, with two of them being convictions that he had under appeal. If he hadn't delayed them all and then croaked, there was the very real possibility he'd have been in prison today. Just like Suthep and Abhisit I suppose.... Crazy.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketnut Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 The point about Samak is that he was PM and as PM you are expected to concentrate all your efforts on one job, that of running the country. It's not really asking too much I don't think. Samak knew about this, but nonetheless decided to continue with his job on the side, and then tried to fudge the facts when he was summoned to court, by lying under oath about payments made to him. A PM lying under oath, in any functioning democracy, would be out on their ear immediately, and unlike Samak, they would not simply be able to restand as PM the next day, as Samak could have done had the puppet master not decided he would prefer someone else running the country on his behalf. But of course, none of that ever gets mentioned by the red brigade, who only ever state "sacked for being on a cooking show", leaving out all the other details. Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Just like Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, George Bush and numerous others. What a post that was. Smoked, next please.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketnut Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 so whats new with this scheming bunch of s***tbags that will stoop to any new low to remove a democratically elected PMYou really don,t have a clue about what is going on here oh I think he does the dems have not been elected in over 20 years. Now, who has a clue. Next.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernjohn Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Does it really matter! A cooking show for crying out loud.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Yes it was stupid on both sides if it was just about the show or the amount. However he lied about it, god knows why and he got caught out. If he was prepared to cut corners and lie to pocket petty amounts of money he was clearly unfit for the office he held.come on Blues punk, what politician in any society has not lied? Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Kevin Rudd, Putin, Thatcher, John Howard, Paul Keating, George Bush Snr and Jnr? If you guys want to mince words let's go for it as I'm on neither side really, my main goal is to get people to think and for the first time ever mate, I'm calling you on this post. Re-think it and reply with common sense, as you do with 99percent of your other posts, sorry can't let this one go. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app They did not lie about some thing that there job hinged on. Big difference. Nixon did and he too got found out and went By By. Why do you think Samak should have been allowed to lie about some thing that the whole nation knew about and his job hinged on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketnut Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Does it really matter! A cooking show for crying out loud.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Yes it was stupid on both sides if it was just about the show or the amount. However he lied about it, god knows why and he got caught out. If he was prepared to cut corners and lie to pocket petty amounts of money he was clearly unfit for the office he held.come on Blues punk, what politician in any society has not lied? Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Kevin Rudd, Putin, Thatcher, John Howard, Paul Keating, George Bush Snr and Jnr? If you guys want to mince words let's go for it as I'm on neither side really, my main goal is to get people to think and for the first time ever mate, I'm calling you on this post. Re-think it and reply with common sense, as you do with 99percent of your other posts, sorry can't let this one go. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app They did not lie about some thing that there job hinged on. Big difference. Nixon did and he too got found out and went By By. Why do you think Samak should have been allowed to lie about some thing that the whole nation knew about and his job hinged on it? Clinton did, Keating did, Bush did, Blair did , Putin has, shall I mention more. Next.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 The point about Samak is that he was PM and as PM you are expected to concentrate all your efforts on one job, that of running the country. It's not really asking too much I don't think. Samak knew about this, but nonetheless decided to continue with his job on the side, and then tried to fudge the facts when he was summoned to court, by lying under oath about payments made to him. A PM lying under oath, in any functioning democracy, would be out on their ear immediately, and unlike Samak, they would not simply be able to restand as PM the next day, as Samak could have done had the puppet master not decided he would prefer someone else running the country on his behalf. But of course, none of that ever gets mentioned by the red brigade, who only ever state "sacked for being on a cooking show", leaving out all the other details. Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Just like Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, George Bush and numerous others. What a post that was. Smoked, next please.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app What? Who of those and "numerous others" were convicted of lying in court whilst running the country, and were allowed to go on running the country in spite of their conviction? Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketnut Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Does it really matter! A cooking show for crying out loud.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Yes it was stupid on both sides if it was just about the show or the amount. However he lied about it, god knows why and he got caught out. If he was prepared to cut corners and lie to pocket petty amounts of money he was clearly unfit for the office he held.come on Blues punk, what politician in any society has not lied? Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Kevin Rudd, Putin, Thatcher, John Howard, Paul Keating, George Bush Snr and Jnr? If you guys want to mince words let's go for it as I'm on neither side really, my main goal is to get people to think and for the first time ever mate, I'm calling you on this post. Re-think it and reply with common sense, as you do with 99percent of your other posts, sorry can't let this one go. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app They did not lie about some thing that there job hinged on. Big difference. Nixon did and he too got found out and went By By. Why do you think Samak should have been allowed to lie about some thing that the whole nation knew about and his job hinged on it? Clinton did, Keating did, Bush did, Blair did , Putin has, shall I mention more. Next.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Oh and I respect Blues punk to be able to respond to his own posts as I respect these and pose a question he may co sided answering... Not an advocate on his behalf.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketnut Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 The point about Samak is that he was PM and as PM you are expected to concentrate all your efforts on one job, that of running the country. It's not really asking too much I don't think. Samak knew about this, but nonetheless decided to continue with his job on the side, and then tried to fudge the facts when he was summoned to court, by lying under oath about payments made to him. A PM lying under oath, in any functioning democracy, would be out on their ear immediately, and unlike Samak, they would not simply be able to restand as PM the next day, as Samak could have done had the puppet master not decided he would prefer someone else running the country on his behalf. But of course, none of that ever gets mentioned by the red brigade, who only ever state "sacked for being on a cooking show", leaving out all the other details. Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Just like Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, George Bush and numerous others. What a post that was. Smoked, next please.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app What? Who of those and "numerous others" were convicted of lying in court whilst running the country, and were allowed to go on running the country in spite of their conviction? Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Well informed, the western governments make it impossible to do so. Does this change anything. Thailand is an Asian country led by money and greed, just like the west except without the same consequences or transparency, NOT. In other words the ministers mentioned had been in Thailand they would have been. Can you imagine Bill getting blown here, lying about it and keeping his job? Next. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) @Cricketnut You said: come on Blues punk, what politician in any society has not lied? Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Kevin Rudd, Putin, Thatcher, John Howard, Paul Keating, George Bush Snr and Jnr? If you guys want to mince words let's go for it as I'm on neither side really, my main goal is to get people to think and for the first time ever mate, I'm calling you on this post. Re-think it and reply with common sense, as you do with 99percent of your other posts, sorry can't let this one go. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Me: As far as I'm concerned any politician caught up in corruption should be punished. None of those politicians you mention are ones I would vote for, at least four of them are guilty of war crimes in my view. Put them on trial. I won't shed a tear if they go down. Edited May 8, 2014 by Bluespunk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Well informed, the western governments make it impossible to do so. Does this change anything. Thailand is an Asian country led by money and greed, just like the west except without the same consequences or transparency, NOT. In other words the ministers mentioned had been in Thailand they would have been. Can you imagine Bill getting blown here, lying about it and keeping his job? Next. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Can't make head nor tail of the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaamBaht Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) Interestingly enough, none fundament their "expert" opinion citing any facts or arguments. Well, they did point out that every government NOT led by the Democratic Party has been ousted by the courts. That's a fact jack. This is supporting the argument that the judiciary has too much power in Thailand. One of the experts said there was no balance among the different branches of government. Edited May 8, 2014 by SaamBaht Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Why do you think Samak should have been allowed to lie about some thing that the whole nation knew about and his job hinged on it? This is indeed the other part of the argument that makes no sense. You have people desperately trying to argue that a PM lying under oath is perfectly acceptable and that numerous PMs do it and keep their jobs. It's not true, and even if it were, why on earth would you argue in favor of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 What? Who of those and "numerous others" were convicted of lying in court whilst running the country, and were allowed to go on running the country in spite of their conviction? Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Well informed, the western governments make it impossible to do so. Does this change anything. Thailand is an Asian country led by money and greed, just like the west except without the same consequences or transparency, NOT. In other words the ministers mentioned had been in Thailand they would have been. Can you imagine Bill getting blown here, lying about it and keeping his job? Next. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app And still waiting for an answer for the below:Who of those and "numerous others" were convicted of lying in court whilst running the country, and were allowed to go on running the country in spite of their conviction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 remove then Prime Minister Samak Sundhornvej from office because of his appearance on a cooking show. How in Hades...is this grounds for removal from office...was he cooking up corruption? Sounds like this bunch of Judicial dictators...are making things up as they go along... He lied about receiving it either under oath or in court, can't remember which. I am glad to hear that Thailand is so moral and where corruption is repugnant that a PM would be removed for lying about being on a cooking show. He lied about receiving payment. That is he proved himself open to corrupt practises and was unable to follow the law. Not ideal in a PM I'd say. 55555 you are a funny man he was so unlike all the other paragons of virtue who convicted him, that had never taken a payment they did not report. If that was the standard that Thai politics operated under, the only noise you would hear in Thai political institutions would be the sound of crickets. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 Interestingly enough, none fundament their "expert" opinion citing any facts or arguments. Well, they did point out that every government NOT led by the Democratic Party has been ousted by the courts. That's a fact jack. This is supporting the argument that the judiciary has too much power in Thailand. One of the experts said there was no balance among the different branches of government. Nope, it means that every government that isn't the Dems wantonly breaks the law..... jack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernjohn Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 They did not lie about some thing that there job hinged on. Big difference. Nixon did and he too got found out and went By By. Why do you think Samak should have been allowed to lie about some thing that the whole nation knew about and his job hinged on it? Clinton did, Keating did, Bush did, Blair did , Putin has, shall I mention more. Next. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app You have not answered my question about some thing their job hinged on. Christ why don't you go back to George Washington and Henry the first. They all lied. That is not the question. The question is did he or did he not receive money for working on a non governmental job which is strictly prohibited. He like Nixon was found out and unlike Nixon was to stupid to resign he continued in the lie. What Question that every one knew the answer to did these other people lie to when asked? Clinton even admitted he had a BJ or two or three or more and came close to loosing his job. But he did admit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted May 8, 2014 Share Posted May 8, 2014 (edited) @sirineou You: 55555 you are a funny man he was so unlike all the other paragons of virtue who convicted him, that had never taken a payment they did not report. If that was the standard that Thai politics operated under, the only noise you would hear in Thai political institutions would be the sound of crickets. Me: Fine by me. Gaol them all. Only way corruption will end is to apply the law to all. Edited May 8, 2014 by Bluespunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangrel Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 His unsuitably amply demonstrated by the half dozen other criminal cases he was mired in, with two of them being convictions that he had under appeal. If he hadn't delayed them all and then croaked, there was the very real possibility he'd have been in prison today. Just like Suthep and Abhisit I suppose.... Crazy.Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Much worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketnut Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 @CricketnutYou said: come on Blues punk, what politician in any society has not lied? Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Kevin Rudd, Putin, Thatcher, John Howard, Paul Keating, George Bush Snr and Jnr? If you guys want to mince words let's go for it as I'm on neither side really, my main goal is to get people to think and for the first time ever mate, I'm calling you on this post. Re-think it and reply with common sense, as you do with 99percent of your other posts, sorry can't let this one go. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Me: As far as I'm concerned any politician caught up in corruption should be punished. None of those politicians you mention are ones I would vote for, at least four of them are guilty of war crimes in my view. Put them on trial. I won't shed a tear if they go down. Cheers for your reply Blues Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketnut Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 They did not lie about some thing that there job hinged on. Big difference.Nixon did and he too got found out and went By By. Why do you think Samak should have been allowed to lie about some thing that the whole nation knew about and his job hinged on it? Clinton did, Keating did, Bush did, Blair did , Putin has, shall I mention more. Next. Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app You have not answered my question about some thing their job hinged on. Christ why don't you go back to George Washington and Henry the first. They all lied. That is not the question. The question is did he or did he not receive money for working on a non governmental job which is strictly prohibited. He like Nixon was found out and unlike Nixon was to stupid to resign he continued in the lie. What Question that every one knew the answer to did these other people lie to when asked? Clinton even admitted he had a BJ or two or three or more and came close to loosing his job. But he did admit it. all be it after lying several times. Case closed. Next Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piichai Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) He lied about receiving it either under oath or in court, can't remember which.I am glad to hear that Thailand is so moral and where corruption is repugnant that a PM would be removed for lying about being on a cooking show.He lied about receiving payment. That is he proved himself open to corrupt practises and was unable to follow the law. Not ideal in a PM I'd say. 55555 you are a funny manhe was so unlike all the other paragons of virtue who convicted him, that had never taken a payment they did not report. If that was the standard that Thai politics operated under, the only noise you would hear in Thai political institutions would be the sound of crickets. IIRC, members of the CC turned down pastry boxes filled with money. People like that should be applauded, and others who violate the public's trust should be banned from politics for life. Edited May 9, 2014 by Piichai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 55555 you are a funny manhe was so unlike all the other paragons of virtue who convicted him, that had never taken a payment they did not report. If that was the standard that Thai politics operated under, the only noise you would hear in Thai political institutions would be the sound of crickets. IIRC, members of the CC turned down pastry boxes filled with money. People like that should be applauded, and others who violate the public's trust should be banned from politics for life. You mean turned down those pastry boxes filled with money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now