Lessons on democracy to be taught shortly

[jdinasia]

From your last statement I would suggest you have completely missed the plot.

Prayuth is in position to oversee the upcoming, inevitable transition at the very top.

I predict he will be rewarded with head of the next Privy Council and run the country behind the scenes like Prem has.

Kinda depends on who the new boss is.

Not particularly.

Yes particularly.

Why else would they bother to go to all the effort?

It's not a "six of one, half a dozen of the other" situation.

It's an all or nothing gambit by the established elite to deny the rest of the citizenry an equal share in the nation.

Given recent headlines, I guess we'll know how it all pans out soon enough.

Prayuth isn't on the Privy Council.. Thus not in a position to oversee any changes in that direction.

[Robespiere]

From your last statement I would suggest you have completely missed the plot.

Prayuth is in position to oversee the upcoming, inevitable transition at the very top.

I predict he will be rewarded with head of the next Privy Council and run the country behind the scenes like Prem has.

Kinda depends on who the new boss is.

Not particularly.

Yes particularly.

Why else would they bother to go to all the effort?

It's not a "six of one, half a dozen of the other" situation.

It's an all or nothing gambit by the established elite to deny the rest of the citizenry an equal share in the nation.

Given recent headlines, I guess we'll know how it all pans out soon enough.

Prayuth isn't on the Privy Council.. Thus not in a position to oversee any changes in that direction.

Oh...

My mistake.

Prayuth is acting all alone, with no hidden (now public) backers, all solely for the good of the nation.

Please accept my apologies.

[jdinasia]

From your last statement I would suggest you have completely missed the plot.

Prayuth is in position to oversee the upcoming, inevitable transition at the very top.

I predict he will be rewarded with head of the next Privy Council and run the country behind the scenes like Prem has.

Kinda depends on who the new boss is.

Not particularly.

Yes particularly.

Why else would they bother to go to all the effort?

It's not a "six of one, half a dozen of the other" situation.

It's an all or nothing gambit by the established elite to deny the rest of the citizenry an equal share in the nation.

Given recent headlines, I guess we'll know how it all pans out soon enough.

Prayuth isn't on the Privy Council.. Thus not in a position to oversee any changes in that direction.

Oh...

My mistake.

Prayuth is acting all alone, with no hidden (now public) backers, all solely for the good of the nation.

Please accept my apologies.

Accepted even though given sarcastically. I certainly would avoid hinting at collusion at that level.

[AleG]

The 1932 coup was a small group of people that used army and naval units to seize power, which fits perfectly with the definition of a coup.

Your definition of a revolution, is exactly not what happened then, the governed, AKA, the bulk of the population were neither part of the ousting or particularly interested on it. There were no large demonstrations, the masses didn't rise or anything like that leading to the coup.

It's all in the historical record, which has a bit more weight than your Humpty Dumpty routine.

I'm starting to think your continuous references to my lack of reading skills may be some kind of projection.

No one else, except maybe some bizarre royalists and you, calls 1932 a coup.

And yes, in spite of your inaccurate objections, it was a revolution in fact.

So now things have devolved to you not just simply quoting a dictionary, but actually deciding your own quotes to be the exact opposite of what they say. Outstanding.

[heybruce]

...

Regarding whether Thaksin's quote was interesting, I can't say if it's interesting without knowing what the quote is. Why won't you share it with us?

...

Only the first few lines. follow this link for the PDF file http://www.sathukit.com/edu-policy-en.pdf

"Policies of Ministry of Education

Prof. Dr. Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech

Minister of Education

25 January 2012

Philosophy

Police Lieutenant Colonel Dr. Thaksin Shinawatra has said about ... ..."

As I wrote the interesting part is that the quote is from a well known criminal fugitive and comes from an MoE handpicked by PM Yingluck.

Oh, this quote:

"Education will lead to the building of people’s vigour. Vigorous and knowledgeable people are powerful capital to fight with poverty. Emphases must be on distribution of benefits with equity, and on regards of people with difficulties, in order to provide quality education for everyone.

Education is an important key, a starting element that is necessary in making poverty become past."

Shocking stuff! What can you expect from an elected Prime Minister that was toppled by a military coup, charged by a military junta, and convicted under a military installed government. Better to go the with words of the latest coup leader (who has or is in the process of granting himself immunity from the crime of the coup):

The coup leader, Prayuth Chan-ocha, has been unapologetic. He views criticism of the junta as divisive and unhelpful. He said any group that wants to hold such seminars must get approval first, so the content can be screened — because "if it's about democracy or elections, or how the government is today, this they can't discuss." http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/03/junta-suppression-academic-talk-democracy-exposes-cracks-in-thailand-peaceful/

I'm glad we have that cleared up. Much more appropriate for a topic about lessons on democracy.

Apparently you were not in Thailand for Thaksin or his sister's regimes.

I don't know why you think that or what it has to do with my post or the OP.

[rubl]

...

Regarding whether Thaksin's quote was interesting, I can't say if it's interesting without knowing what the quote is. Why won't you share it with us?

...

Only the first few lines. follow this link for the PDF file http://www.sathukit.com/edu-policy-en.pdf

"Policies of Ministry of Education

Prof. Dr. Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech

Minister of Education

25 January 2012

Philosophy

Police Lieutenant Colonel Dr. Thaksin Shinawatra has said about ... ..."

As I wrote the interesting part is that the quote is from a well known criminal fugitive and comes from an MoE handpicked by PM Yingluck.

Oh, this quote:

"Education will lead to the building of people’s vigour. Vigorous and knowledgeable people are powerful capital to fight with poverty. Emphases must be on distribution of benefits with equity, and on regards of people with difficulties, in order to provide quality education for everyone.

Education is an important key, a starting element that is necessary in making poverty become past."

Shocking stuff! What can you expect from an elected Prime Minister that was toppled by a military coup, charged by a military junta, and convicted under a military installed government. Better to go the with words of the latest coup leader (who has or is in the process of granting himself immunity from the crime of the coup):

The coup leader, Prayuth Chan-ocha, has been unapologetic. He views criticism of the junta as divisive and unhelpful. He said any group that wants to hold such seminars must get approval first, so the content can be screened — because "if it's about democracy or elections, or how the government is today, this they can't discuss." http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/03/junta-suppression-academic-talk-democracy-exposes-cracks-in-thailand-peaceful/

I'm glad we have that cleared up. Much more appropriate for a topic about lessons on democracy.

Its not the contents of the quote, as you well know. Its the very fact that a Minister of Education is using the utterings of a criminal fugitive as philosophy behind his new education policy.

Now that's a real lesson in what some think about democracy. Its like an American member of the Presidents cabinet quoting a mafia figure on proper family values.

[tbthailand]

The 1932 coup was a small group of people that used army and naval units to seize power, which fits perfectly with the definition of a coup.

Your definition of a revolution, is exactly not what happened then, the governed, AKA, the bulk of the population were neither part of the ousting or particularly interested on it. There were no large demonstrations, the masses didn't rise or anything like that leading to the coup.

It's all in the historical record, which has a bit more weight than your Humpty Dumpty routine.

I'm starting to think your continuous references to my lack of reading skills may be some kind of projection.

No one else, except maybe some bizarre royalists and you, calls 1932 a coup.

And yes, in spite of your inaccurate objections, it was a revolution in fact.

So now things have devolved to you not just simply quoting a dictionary, but actually deciding your own quotes to be the exact opposite of what they say. Outstanding.

keep working on that comprehension - you'll (maybe) get there some day

[tbthailand]

...

Regarding whether Thaksin's quote was interesting, I can't say if it's interesting without knowing what the quote is. Why won't you share it with us?

...

Only the first few lines. follow this link for the PDF file http://www.sathukit.com/edu-policy-en.pdf

"Policies of Ministry of Education

Prof. Dr. Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech

Minister of Education

25 January 2012

Philosophy

Police Lieutenant Colonel Dr. Thaksin Shinawatra has said about ... ..."

As I wrote the interesting part is that the quote is from a well known criminal fugitive and comes from an MoE handpicked by PM Yingluck.

Oh, this quote:

"Education will lead to the building of people’s vigour. Vigorous and knowledgeable people are powerful capital to fight with poverty. Emphases must be on distribution of benefits with equity, and on regards of people with difficulties, in order to provide quality education for everyone.

Education is an important key, a starting element that is necessary in making poverty become past."

Shocking stuff! What can you expect from an elected Prime Minister that was toppled by a military coup, charged by a military junta, and convicted under a military installed government. Better to go the with words of the latest coup leader (who has or is in the process of granting himself immunity from the crime of the coup):

The coup leader, Prayuth Chan-ocha, has been unapologetic. He views criticism of the junta as divisive and unhelpful. He said any group that wants to hold such seminars must get approval first, so the content can be screened — because "if it's about democracy or elections, or how the government is today, this they can't discuss." http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/03/junta-suppression-academic-talk-democracy-exposes-cracks-in-thailand-peaceful/

I'm glad we have that cleared up. Much more appropriate for a topic about lessons on democracy.

Its not the contents of the quote, as you well know. Its the very fact that a Minister of Education is using the utterings of a criminal fugitive as philosophy behind his new education policy.

Now that's a real lesson in what some think about democracy. Its like an American member of the Presidents cabinet quoting a mafia figure on proper family values.

'not the content'

wow, that's rich. Guess they should have asked a general or someone to write a poem instead.

criminal fugitive = mafia - you do realize that Thaksin was ousted in a military coup and strung up by that junta's AEC and courts?

Maybe you don't.

Lesson in democracy, sham trials are not part of it.

[AleG]

The 1932 coup was a small group of people that used army and naval units to seize power, which fits perfectly with the definition of a coup.

Your definition of a revolution, is exactly not what happened then, the governed, AKA, the bulk of the population were neither part of the ousting or particularly interested on it. There were no large demonstrations, the masses didn't rise or anything like that leading to the coup.

It's all in the historical record, which has a bit more weight than your Humpty Dumpty routine.

I'm starting to think your continuous references to my lack of reading skills may be some kind of projection.

No one else, except maybe some bizarre royalists and you, calls 1932 a coup.

And yes, in spite of your inaccurate objections, it was a revolution in fact.

So now things have devolved to you not just simply quoting a dictionary, but actually deciding your own quotes to be the exact opposite of what they say. Outstanding.

keep working on that comprehension - you'll (maybe) get there some day

Yes, I comprehend, you are arguing that that the use of the army and navy by a small number of people take over power was not a coup because the entire process is historically called the Siamese Revolution of 1932.

It's low order sophistry, like arguing that the Hundred Years War didn't actually last more than 100 years because the common name says Hundred and not more; or that the Boston Tea Party was a friendly get together, or Black Friday was about fashion, etc, etc...

The Siamese Revolution started with a coup, claiming that it was not a coup because the name given to the whole process that took Thailand from an Absolute Monarchy to a Constitutional one is called a revolution is, frankly, stupid.

This is the same definition you linked to:

coup d’état, also called Coup, the sudden, violent overthrow of an existing government by a small group. The chief prerequisite for a coup is control of all or part of the armed forces, the police, and other military elements. Unlike a revolution, which is usually achieved by large numbers of people working for basic social, economic, and political change, a coup is a change in power from the top that merely results in the abrupt replacement of leading government personnel.

It is exactly what happened in 1932, except that there was no explicit violence. After the coup "The first stage was to establish an Assembly nominated by the military controllers of the country -Phya Phahol, Phya Song and Phya Ritthi- who were said to be acting on behalf of the people.", that was the process by which Thailand moved from an Absolute Monarchy to a Constitutional one, you can't argue the facts, that's why you resort to irrelevant sophistry.

Any other ridiculous straw you may want to clutch to?

[tbthailand]

So now things have devolved to you not just simply quoting a dictionary, but actually deciding your own quotes to be the exact opposite of what they say. Outstanding.

keep working on that comprehension - you'll (maybe) get there some day

Yes, I comprehend, you are arguing that that the use of the army and navy by a small number of people take over power was not a coup because the entire process is historically called the Siamese Revolution of 1932.

It's low order sophistry, like arguing that the Hundred Years War didn't actually last more than 100 years because the common name says Hundred and not more; or that the Boston Tea Party was a friendly get together, or Black Friday was about fashion, etc, etc...

The Siamese Revolution started with a coup, claiming that it was not a coup because the name given to the whole process that took Thailand from an Absolute Monarchy to a Constitutional one is called a revolution is, frankly, stupid.

This is the same definition you linked to:

coup d’état, also called Coup, the sudden, violent overthrow of an existing government by a small group. The chief prerequisite for a coup is control of all or part of the armed forces, the police, and other military elements. Unlike a revolution, which is usually achieved by large numbers of people working for basic social, economic, and political change, a coup is a change in power from the top that merely results in the abrupt replacement of leading government personnel.

It is exactly what happened in 1932, except that there was no explicit violence. After the coup "The first stage was to establish an Assembly nominated by the military controllers of the country -Phya Phahol, Phya Song and Phya Ritthi- who were said to be acting on behalf of the people.", that was the process by which Thailand moved from an Absolute Monarchy to a Constitutional one, you can't argue the facts, that's why you resort to irrelevant sophistry.

Any other ridiculous straw you may want to clutch to?

you stumble so hard on the small and large group part that you break your nose on

people working for basic social, economic, and political change, a coup is a change in power from the top that merely results in the abrupt replacement of leading government personnel.

where the events in 1932 must clearly be viewed as a revolution - as every expert recognizes. Small and large groups of people are relative. Check your history books.

[AleG]

Yes, I comprehend, you are arguing that that the use of the army and navy by a small number of people take over power was not a coup because the entire process is historically called the Siamese Revolution of 1932.

It's low order sophistry, like arguing that the Hundred Years War didn't actually last more than 100 years because the common name says Hundred and not more; or that the Boston Tea Party was a friendly get together, or Black Friday was about fashion, etc, etc...

The Siamese Revolution started with a coup, claiming that it was not a coup because the name given to the whole process that took Thailand from an Absolute Monarchy to a Constitutional one is called a revolution is, frankly, stupid.

This is the same definition you linked to:

coup d’état, also called Coup, the sudden, violent overthrow of an existing government by a small group. The chief prerequisite for a coup is control of all or part of the armed forces, the police, and other military elements. Unlike a revolution, which is usually achieved by large numbers of people working for basic social, economic, and political change, a coup is a change in power from the top that merely results in the abrupt replacement of leading government personnel.

It is exactly what happened in 1932, except that there was no explicit violence. After the coup "The first stage was to establish an Assembly nominated by the military controllers of the country -Phya Phahol, Phya Song and Phya Ritthi- who were said to be acting on behalf of the people.", that was the process by which Thailand moved from an Absolute Monarchy to a Constitutional one, you can't argue the facts, that's why you resort to irrelevant sophistry.

Any other ridiculous straw you may want to clutch to?

you stumble so hard on the small and large group part that you break your nose on

people working for basic social, economic, and political change, a coup is a change in power from the top that merely results in the abrupt replacement of leading government personnel.

where the events in 1932 must clearly be viewed as a revolution - as every expert recognizes. Small and large groups of people are relative. Check your history books.

Was there or was there not a coup to achieve those changes?

You know the answer is yes, you won't answer because you lack the intellectual honesty to do so.

[heybruce]

...

Regarding whether Thaksin's quote was interesting, I can't say if it's interesting without knowing what the quote is. Why won't you share it with us?

...

Only the first few lines. follow this link for the PDF file http://www.sathukit.com/edu-policy-en.pdf

"Policies of Ministry of Education

Prof. Dr. Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech

Minister of Education

25 January 2012

Philosophy

Police Lieutenant Colonel Dr. Thaksin Shinawatra has said about ... ..."

As I wrote the interesting part is that the quote is from a well known criminal fugitive and comes from an MoE handpicked by PM Yingluck.

Oh, this quote:

"Education will lead to the building of people’s vigour. Vigorous and knowledgeable people are powerful capital to fight with poverty. Emphases must be on distribution of benefits with equity, and on regards of people with difficulties, in order to provide quality education for everyone.

Education is an important key, a starting element that is necessary in making poverty become past."

Shocking stuff! What can you expect from an elected Prime Minister that was toppled by a military coup, charged by a military junta, and convicted under a military installed government. Better to go the with words of the latest coup leader (who has or is in the process of granting himself immunity from the crime of the coup):

The coup leader, Prayuth Chan-ocha, has been unapologetic. He views criticism of the junta as divisive and unhelpful. He said any group that wants to hold such seminars must get approval first, so the content can be screened — because "if it's about democracy or elections, or how the government is today, this they can't discuss." http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/03/junta-suppression-academic-talk-democracy-exposes-cracks-in-thailand-peaceful/

I'm glad we have that cleared up. Much more appropriate for a topic about lessons on democracy.

Its not the contents of the quote, as you well know. Its the very fact that a Minister of Education is using the utterings of a criminal fugitive as philosophy behind his new education policy.

Now that's a real lesson in what some think about democracy. Its like an American member of the Presidents cabinet quoting a mafia figure on proper family values.

Actually Americans quote the fictional mafia head from the movie "The Godfather" quite often, and no one assumes that by quoting "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer" the speaker endorses organized crime. Perhaps you do. Do you also assume that everyone who watches a Roman Polanski film also endorses child molestation?

Stay on topic rubl. I provided a quote from PM Prayuth that calls into question the junta's commitment to democracy and its qualifications to teach democracy. Any comments?

[tbthailand]

Yes, I comprehend, you are arguing that that the use of the army and navy by a small number of people take over power was not a coup because the entire process is historically called the Siamese Revolution of 1932.

It's low order sophistry, like arguing that the Hundred Years War didn't actually last more than 100 years because the common name says Hundred and not more; or that the Boston Tea Party was a friendly get together, or Black Friday was about fashion, etc, etc...

The Siamese Revolution started with a coup, claiming that it was not a coup because the name given to the whole process that took Thailand from an Absolute Monarchy to a Constitutional one is called a revolution is, frankly, stupid.

This is the same definition you linked to:

coup d’état, also called Coup, the sudden, violent overthrow of an existing government by a small group. The chief prerequisite for a coup is control of all or part of the armed forces, the police, and other military elements. Unlike a revolution, which is usually achieved by large numbers of people working for basic social, economic, and political change, a coup is a change in power from the top that merely results in the abrupt replacement of leading government personnel.

It is exactly what happened in 1932, except that there was no explicit violence. After the coup "The first stage was to establish an Assembly nominated by the military controllers of the country -Phya Phahol, Phya Song and Phya Ritthi- who were said to be acting on behalf of the people.", that was the process by which Thailand moved from an Absolute Monarchy to a Constitutional one, you can't argue the facts, that's why you resort to irrelevant sophistry.

Any other ridiculous straw you may want to clutch to?

you stumble so hard on the small and large group part that you break your nose on

people working for basic social, economic, and political change, a coup is a change in power from the top that merely results in the abrupt replacement of leading government personnel.

where the events in 1932 must clearly be viewed as a revolution - as every expert recognizes. Small and large groups of people are relative. Check your history books.

Was there or was there not a coup to achieve those changes?

You know the answer is yes, you won't answer because you lack the intellectual honesty to do so.

I have already answered - it was a revolution - it was not a coup. The constitution had already been written by Pridi before they arrested the royal family. You cannot redefine a revolution into a coup to suit your argument.

Get off your high-horse about intellectual honesty - you need to find a bit of it yourself. And yeah, from this point out I'll stop answering you. Taking the time to explain the difference between a coup and revolution has been a huge waste of my time - get lost.

[Fred Flinstone]

The lesson the Australian Government teach us on democracy is that Thai Juntas and their entire Non Elected Government, self installed , are not permitted under Australian Law to set foot on their soil.

Its a remarkable education on Justice and social norms - That dictators are at the end of the day as far away from democracy as possible - and its childish to rehash their fanciful whims.

Banning them expresses true currency of their international worth.

Rejection and denial.

Now thats a true lesson.

Thats sadly , even under Junta iron clad darkness is a ray of truth denied to be said on their soil.

[AleG]

Was there or was there not a coup to achieve those changes?

You know the answer is yes, you won't answer because you lack the intellectual honesty to do so.

I have already answered - it was a revolution - it was not a coup. The constitution had already been written by Pridi before they arrested the royal family. You cannot redefine a revolution into a coup to suit your argument.

Get off your high-horse about intellectual honesty - you need to find a bit of it yourself. And yeah, from this point out I'll stop answering you. Taking the time to explain the difference between a coup and revolution has been a huge waste of my time - get lost.

You are trying to rewrite and ignore history to satisfy your own hubris; you cited the Encyclopedia Britannica before to support your point?

Promoters Revolution, also called Revolution of 1932, (June 24, 1932), in the history of Thailand, a bloodless coup that overthrew the Thai king, put an end to absolute monarchy in Thailand, and initiated the so-called Constitutional Era. The coup was headed by a group of men often referred to as the “promoters.”

It's history, you are wrong; you can't face being wrong, you obfuscate, spin and, when there's nothing left, run away.

[rubl]

...

Regarding whether Thaksin's quote was interesting, I can't say if it's interesting without knowing what the quote is. Why won't you share it with us?

...

Only the first few lines. follow this link for the PDF file http://www.sathukit.com/edu-policy-en.pdf

"Policies of Ministry of Education

Prof. Dr. Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech

Minister of Education

25 January 2012

Philosophy

Police Lieutenant Colonel Dr. Thaksin Shinawatra has said about ... ..."

As I wrote the interesting part is that the quote is from a well known criminal fugitive and comes from an MoE handpicked by PM Yingluck.

why not include the actual quote which - maybe - the Minister found to be applicable to education?

“Education will lead to the building of people’s vigour.

Vigorous and knowledgeable people are powerful capital to fight

with poverty.” “Emphases must be on distribution of benefits with equity,

and on regards of people with difficulties, in order to provide quality

education for everyone.” “Education is an important key, a starting

element that is necessary in making poverty become past.”

Instead of even looking into the ravings of a criminal fugitive, let's consider the situation where a Minister of Education in his policy statements write to base that policy on education on the philosophy provided (in whole or part) by a criminal fugitive.

What next? Maybe you telling me history teaches us to listen to criminals ? Democratically of course.

[rubl]

You've obfuscated the devil out of this point, but you've indirectly conceded that no military dictatorship has resulted in democracy, and that it is not the top priority of this dictatorship. Yet you support this dictatorship and accuse those who object to it of not being interested in democracy. It's always amusing debating you rubl.

Let's now get on topic and discuss a dictatorship that doesn't make democracy a top priority and that shuts down democracy discussions at one of Thailand's top university. Do you think this dictatorship is qualified to teach democracy lessons?

Oh come on Brucy, read my posts.

I wrote that there doesn't seem to have been a Military Dictatorship which had democracy as goal. Therefor it shouldn't be a surprise if no one can name a Military Dictatorship which lead to democracy by accident.

BTW doing a bit of reading a was reminded of an interesting coup leader turned PM, turned coup leader, PM and even democratically elected PM. Former PM Jerry Rawlings of Ghana.

Beautiful country and not only because I could read some of the gravestones in Elmina Castle. Had similar problems as Thailand and also 'needed' a few coups.

your claim :

I wrote that there doesn't seem to have been a Military Dictatorship which had democracy as goal. Therefor it shouldn't be a surprise if no one can name a Military Dictatorship which lead to democracy by accident.

ignores recent history, 2006, 1992, and several of the decades prior to that.

That you don know that makes it clear why you might hold out hope that this is the 'good coup'

So tell me, which Military Dictatorships had 'bringing democracy' as goal ?

[rubl]

Actually the Thaksin years were some of the best in Thailand.

Budget surpluses, record stock market, low unemployment, health care, slashing poverty. Things were booming.

Even the busses were even running on time.

That's why the invisible hand got rid of him.

The ten tears prior to Thaksin and the 8 years after have been a disaster.

You sure your name isn't Archie Bunker?

Anyway that criminal genius also managed to bring forward a wordwide, a real global economic boom of a lustre we hadn't seen since the Hoover years.

The ten tears probably refer to the tearful Thaksin telling a court he made an honest mistake. Further more the eight years, which according to some would start on the 19th of September 2006, seem to include even the three and a half years of Thaksin surrogates Samak, Somchai and Yingluck.

Truly amazing

Edited October 10, 2014 by rubl

[rubl]

Its not the contents of the quote, as you well know. Its the very fact that a Minister of Education is using the utterings of a criminal fugitive as philosophy behind his new education policy.

Now that's a real lesson in what some think about democracy. Its like an American member of the Presidents cabinet quoting a mafia figure on proper family values.

'not the content'

wow, that's rich. Guess they should have asked a general or someone to write a poem instead.

criminal fugitive = mafia - you do realize that Thaksin was ousted in a military coup and strung up by that junta's AEC and courts?

Maybe you don't.

Lesson in democracy, sham trials are not part of it.

So, a Minister of Education in presenting his vision, his policy on Education for Thailand uses quotes from a criminal fugitive and you're fine with that.

Following you start to tell your view on history. Thaksin had stepped down and even without proper consent remained on till ousted. His conviction was proper, legal, done when no one needed to be afraid of being sued for billions for saying the truth Thaksin didn't like to here. The other cases, some even more damaging, only didn't conclude as our criminal turned fugitive. Like for instance the 2 billion Baht Thaliand let Myanmar borrow to buy satellites from Shinawatra Holding or one of its subsidiaries.

Of course it maybe with you being American you don't consider Mafia criminals, but never mind, that would be democratic, strictly democratic.

[rubl]

Now to end this lesson in democracy, an article from that truly democratic country called the United Kingdom

"National Crime Agency director general: UK snooping powers are too weak

Exclusive: Crime agency boss says he needs to persuade public to reduce digital freedoms

Britons must accept a greater loss of digital freedoms in return for greater safety from serious criminals and terrorists in the internet age, according to the country’s top law enforcement officer"

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/06/digital-freedoms-terrorism-crime-uk

[rubl]

The USA ever willing to help Military Juntas understand democracy and its limitations have once more gone out of their way for this next lesson

""In any event, even if the FBI had somehow 'hacked' into the SR Server in order to identify its IP address, such an investigative measure would not have run afoul of the Fourth Amendment," Turner wrote. "Because the SR Server was located outside the United States, the Fourth Amendment would not have required a warrant to search the server, whether for its IP address or otherwise.""

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/10/us-says-it-can-hack-into-foreign-based-servers-without-warrants/

[heybruce]

The USA ever willing to help Military Juntas understand democracy and its limitations have once more gone out of their way for this next lesson

""In any event, even if the FBI had somehow 'hacked' into the SR Server in order to identify its IP address, such an investigative measure would not have run afoul of the Fourth Amendment," Turner wrote. "Because the SR Server was located outside the United States, the Fourth Amendment would not have required a warrant to search the server, whether for its IP address or otherwise.""

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/10/us-says-it-can-hack-into-foreign-based-servers-without-warrants/

You get stuff like that in a nation of laws. In other nations you get generals staging coups then granting themselves amnesty. These things are not equivalent.

[khunjamesjohnson]

Actually the Thaksin years were some of the best in Thailand.

Budget surpluses, record stock market, low unemployment, health care, slashing poverty. Things were booming.

Even the busses were even running on time.

That's why the invisible hand got rid of him.

The ten tears prior to Thaksin and the 8 years after have been a disaster.

You sure your name isn't Archie Bunker?

Anyway that criminal genius also managed to bring forward a wordwide, a real global economic boom of a lustre we hadn't seen since the Hoover years.

The ten tears probably refer to the tearful Thaksin telling a court he made an honest mistake. Further more the eight years, which according to some would start on the 19th of September 2006, seem to include even the three and a half years of Thaksin surrogates Samak, Somchai and Yingluck.

Truly amazing

Like I said, the ten tears prior to Thaksin and the 8 years after have been a total disaster.

The Thaksin years were some of the best in Thailand.

Budget surpluses.

Record stock market

Low unemployment.

Health care.

Slashing poverty.

Things were booming. Even the busses were even running on time.

That's why the invisible hand got rid of him.

They didnt want someone that competent and talented in charge of the country with the inevitable power vacuum they are soon to experience.

They couldn't win at the polls so they create chaos, a manufactures crisis so the Army could "rescue' them.

[norstatin]

Actually the Thaksin years were some of the best in Thailand.

Budget surpluses, record stock market, low unemployment, health care, slashing poverty. Things were booming.

Even the busses were even running on time.

That's why the invisible hand got rid of him.

The ten tears prior to Thaksin and the 8 years after have been a disaster.

You sure your name isn't Archie Bunker?

.

[khunjamesjohnson]

Thaksin ran up the debt, hundreds of billions and gave the Army a raise from 80 billion to 160 billion.

Then he created a street mob and artificial crisis so the Army could come in and trample human / civil rights.

O, Wait a second. I got that wrong. That was Abasit.

[rubl]

Thaksin ran up the debt, hundreds of billions and gave the Army a raise from 80 billion to 160 billion.

Then he created a street mob and artificial crisis so the Army could come in and trample human / civil rights.

O, Wait a second. I got that wrong. That was Abasit.

The only thing you've got right is "O, Wait a second. I got that wrong."

Somehow it would seem you live in a different universe than most of us. The alternative would be you're lying, but of course TVF members wouldn't do that, now would they?

[rubl]

The USA ever willing to help Military Juntas understand democracy and its limitations have once more gone out of their way for this next lesson

""In any event, even if the FBI had somehow 'hacked' into the SR Server in order to identify its IP address, such an investigative measure would not have run afoul of the Fourth Amendment," Turner wrote. "Because the SR Server was located outside the United States, the Fourth Amendment would not have required a warrant to search the server, whether for its IP address or otherwise.""

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/10/us-says-it-can-hack-into-foreign-based-servers-without-warrants/

You get stuff like that in a nation of laws. In other nations you get generals staging coups then granting themselves amnesty. These things are not equivalent.

I didn't say these things are equivalent, that's something you bring up to 'broaden the subject' I guess.

Anyway it would seem that in whatever country you are and from whatever device you write your posts, big brother is watching you. Democratically of course, just to protect you from harm and possibly from Dutch uncles

[khunjamesjohnson]

Thaksin ran up the debt, hundreds of billions and gave the Army a raise from 80 billion to 160 billion.

Then he created a street mob and artificial crisis so the Army could come in and trample human / civil rights.

O, Wait a second. I got that wrong. That was Abasit.

The only thing you've got right is "O, Wait a second. I got that wrong."

Somehow it would seem you live in a different universe than most of us. The alternative would be you're lying, but of course TVF members wouldn't do that, now would they?

There are 2 vasty diverging views on the Thai political situation.

The Nation and the fools that read that junk are at war with reality it appears.

Everything I said above is fact yet they deny it?

I would suggest the posters that support a Military Junta have been bamboozled by the controlled Thai press.

Read the stuff they don't want you to read is the only way to form an educated opinion.

Agreed?

[norstatin]

O, Wait a second. I got that wrong.

The only thing you've got right is "O, Wait a second. I got that wrong."

[tbthailand]

Actually the Thaksin years were some of the best in Thailand.

Budget surpluses, record stock market, low unemployment, health care, slashing poverty. Things were booming.

Even the busses were even running on time.

That's why the invisible hand got rid of him.

The ten tears prior to Thaksin and the 8 years after have been a disaster.

You sure your name isn't Archie Bunker?

Anyway that criminal genius also managed to bring forward a wordwide, a real global economic boom of a lustre we hadn't seen since the Hoover years.

The ten tears probably refer to the tearful Thaksin telling a court he made an honest mistake. Further more the eight years, which according to some would start on the 19th of September 2006, seem to include even the three and a half years of Thaksin surrogates Samak, Somchai and Yingluck.

Truly amazing

Like I said, the ten tears prior to Thaksin and the 8 years after have been a total disaster.

The Thaksin years were some of the best in Thailand.

Budget surpluses.

Record stock market

Low unemployment.

Health care.

Slashing poverty.

Things were booming. Even the busses were even running on time.

That's why the invisible hand got rid of him.

They didnt want someone that competent and talented in charge of the country with the inevitable power vacuum they are soon to experience.

They couldn't win at the polls so they create chaos, a manufactures crisis so the Army could "rescue' them.

He understood how to get elected and did highly-visible, high-touch programs that people liked. This made him more and more popular. He played it up, too.

He never had a significant problem with the electorate during his time in office, but he did have a problem with his fellow elites. hence, the boot.

Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals.

people often refer to a 'cult of personality' and Thaksin was clearly developing that.

so is the current 'PM'